Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This isn't an exact science...there have to be assumptions about boundary lines, about how often people report crime, about whether 50 people actually live in a building vs the 25 on the lease, and on and on. Let's not get hung up on the minutia because no analysis could ever be relevant.
They did this for no other reason, purpose, but visibility and to produce a conversation about what you may/may not be aware of in your neighborhood. I think when the analysis produced this ranking, they expected people to say the exact thing you did.."unbelievable". And that was sorta the point...
This isn't an exact science...there have to be assumptions about boundary lines, about how often people report crime, about whether 50 people actually live in a building vs the 25 on the lease, and on and on. Let's not get hung up on the minutia because no analysis could ever be relevant.
They did this for no other reason, purpose, but visibility and to produce a conversation about what you may/may not be aware of in your neighborhood. I think when the analysis produced this ranking, they expected people to say the exact thing you did.."unbelievable". And that was sorta the point...
True, when I was googling this specific saftey report, I came upon a case study website that showed how DNA.info utilized this report to gain visibility and become a "known" from being unknown. I guess this report helped them accomplish that.
Bingo! I don't work for them but I did find the information worthy of discussion. On the plus side it gives me the opportunity to see who can take this information and draw conclusions, think deeper and pushback and provide relevant flaws in the data, and otherwise provide thoughtful commentary.
You can then determine who is capable of intelligent thought and conversation, and who should just be ignored.
You're still incorrect! Since there are hundreds of thousands of workers & tourists in Midtown, the actual "crimes per 10,000" stat would be half that of the South Bronx. As for the other precincts, a geographical breakdown of reported crime reveals that it does not occurs in the upscale neighborhoods, rather in the PJs within the precinct. Generalized statistics and your assertions are invalid.
The safety maps in the stickied thread indicate the smaller sections. //www.city-data.com/forum/new-y...fety-maps.html
Times Square is yellow, not the entire precinct. No orange or red.
Crime in the Brooklyn nabes is concentrated in the PJs, not the upscale areas.
The safety maps concentrate on violent crime. Not identify theft or any crap like that.
__________________
"The man who sleeps on the floor, can never fall out of bed." -Martin Lawrence
None of you have had a response to this - and I posted it several times, so now here's the link.
"The most dangerous stations in the New York Subway system are, surprisingly, in many affluent areas of the city. In 2005 and 2006, the largest numbers of reported assaults occurred at the West 4th..."
More inside.
Linear thinking prevails for 2014.
__________________
"The man who sleeps on the floor, can never fall out of bed." -Martin Lawrence
checkmate: The analysis says just that you are more likely to be the victim of a crime...that is all it is saying. It does not say what crime, it just ranks in what neighborhoods you are most/least likely to be the victim of a crime. As for precincts/nabes, they adjusted for that as precincts don't necessarily coincide with nabes. All of this info, their methodology, etc is on the website for those who care to understand.
I'm not seeing anything about the methodology in adjusting for the individual neighborhoods. Right in the report, it talks about how safe "Great Kills & Tottenville" are, even though they are about 7 miles apart, with many neighborhoods in between. (Both neighborhoods are safe, as are the rest of the neighborhoods in the precinct, but my point is that they're taking two geographically distant neighborhoods and talking about them as if they're two bordering neighborhoods).
In any case, if somebody's running some kind of Ponzi scheme or something like that, out of their house, they could be running it out of their home on the UES, while the victims live in areas like Bay Ridge or Bensonhurst.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigjake54
You're still incorrect! Since there are hundreds of thousands of workers & tourists in Midtown, the actual "crimes per 10,000" stat would be half that of the South Bronx. As for the other precincts, a geographical breakdown of reported crime reveals that it does not occurs in the upscale neighborhoods, rather in the PJs within the precinct. Generalized statistics and your assertions are invalid.
The safety maps in the stickied thread indicate the smaller sections. //www.city-data.com/forum/new-y...fety-maps.html
Times Square is yellow, not the entire precinct. No orange or red.
Crime in the Brooklyn nabes is concentrated in the PJs, not the upscale areas.
Actually, even SobroGuy admitted that the stats for Downtown/Midtown are skewed for that reason.
Quote:
Originally Posted by QueensKid
Your argument is like saying there's more crime in downtown L.A. than Compton. The difference is downtown L.A. has millions of people coming and going. The crime isn't committed by locals but rather transients. In Compton, there are no transients, the locals are committing the crimes.
It's not even about that. If I go into Times Square and get robbed, it doesn't matter whether it was by a resident of the neighborhood, or a transient from another neighborhood: I still got robbed. The problem with calculating the stats is that neither me nor the perp are counted in the population stats when figuring out the crime rates. So that crime that took place disproportionately brings up the crime rate.
That problem is prevalent in pretty much any neighborhood in the city, to a certain degree. The thing is that in a residential area like say, Morris Heights, the vast majority of both the victims and perps live in the neighborhood. Is it possible for somebody from Bushwick to go to Morris Heights and rob somebody from Norwood? Of course. But the majority of crime is between residents of the neighborhood. Not to mention that the daytime population is likely lower than the nighttime population (so if everybody was somehow contained to the immediate area they live in, that person from Norwood who was robbed would likely have been replaced by a person from Morris Heights, though in this hypothetical case, the perp would have to be from Morris Heights as well).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henna
Yes, I saw a sentence somewhere about how they had translated the precinct stats in the neighborhood stats, but I found it hard to believe that they plotted every single incident with an address to see which neighborhood it was in, since they never specifically said they did that (did they?) Also, given the disagreements in multiple places, such as on C-D, Google maps and city websites, about where neighborhood boundaries fall, I would have expected a link to show what boundaries they are using to define neighborhoods, and I didn't see that either.
So I'm sorry, the idea that they did this in a trustworthy way is just not believable unless I missed some sort of specific info about this.
I'm pretty sure they just looked and said things like "Well, the 61st precinct covers Sheepshead Bay, so however the crime stats come out, we'll rank Sheepshead Bay accordingly", without considering that the precinct also contains Manhattan Beach, Gerritsen Beach, and parts of Gravesend. Notice how they only rank 69 neighborhoods. There's definitely more than 69 neighborhoods in the city. Heck, there's well over 50 neighborhoods in Staten Island alone.
Great example of why this "study" is flawed. Most ID Thefts are recorded in the resident precinct of the victim. Based on NYPD guidelines, there are a few instances where the report would be classified in another location, but most are recorded in the precinct of residence, even though the perp may live in another country. The precinct/neighborhood, hell the entire city, have no influence on most ID theft crimes, yet in this "study", they count against a particular neighborhood in a mostly arbitrary way.
Great example of why this "study" is flawed. Most ID Thefts are recorded in the resident precinct of the victim. Based on NYPD guidelines, there are a few instances where the report would be classified in another location, but most are recorded in the precinct of residence, even though the perp may live in another country. The precinct/neighborhood, hell the entire city, have no influence on most ID theft crimes, yet in this "study", they count against a particular neighborhood in a mostly arbitrary way.
I was being tongue-in-cheek. How can identity theft happen on the street.
__________________
"The man who sleeps on the floor, can never fall out of bed." -Martin Lawrence
I can't understand how Brooklyn Heights is on that list, where is Harlem, Tremont, Jamaica, East New York, and Washington Heights on this list?
Wash Heights is 24
Harlem is 33
East NY 53
St Albans/S Jamaica 55
I did not see Tremont at all, but Belmont and Bathgate are 56
I did not want to pay for the report, so I did printscreens of the screens in the few seconds before the pay wall appeared.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
