eddhead Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 In a previous thread, a post indicated that crime rates in NYC were above the national average. In fact, NYC has the lowest violent crime rate among the 10 most populated cities in the US, and is ranked 18th best out of the top 240. Sorry to be so anal about this but it is a very sore point of contention with me. p.s. "don't look now" indeed. This from the New Yorker: "On a list of two hundred and forty cities in the United States with a population of a hundred thousand or more, New York City now ranks two hundred-and-twenty-second in crime, down near the bottom with Fontana, California, and Port St. Lucie, Florida" And these from usa today, and msnbc.com http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-0...rimerates_x.htm http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14910822/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HauteHippie Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 Just compare the national averages for muder, robbery, and assault to the rates in NYC and you'll see what I mean. NYC exceeds the national average in those categories. We are not talking about populated cities, we're talking about crime on a per capita basis across the country. Now, yes, NYC crime has been on the decline, but that has also been a nationwide trend so we can't chalk that up to local politics - although guys like Rudy are high on my wishlist for becoming future Presidents of this great nation! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 Just to compare, in NYC a crime is reported for every 37 people. On average in Norway its reported one crime per 63 people. If we look at the non-western immigrants in Oslo, the figure is one per 19 people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Everythingape Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 In my part of norway it's just one guy doing it all.. His name is Vidar, and he is responsible for 19 crimes. So it's like 19 crimes per 1 people.. So in a way, my part of norway has more crime than NYC ;P To quote former Aberdeen and Brøndby manager Ebbe Skovdhal, a genuine Scandinavian coaching legend (cough); "Statistics are like miniskirts, they reveal everything except what's most important." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 (cough); "Statistics are like miniskirts, they reveal everything except what's most important." Brilliant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetsons Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 Keep in mind that NYC is comprised of five very different burroughs. Some are far safer than others. It would be more accurate to look at statics by burrough. Manhattan: Very safe, IMO. Yours truly, family or friends have never had any safety issues in Manhattan at any time of day or night. Harlem: Improving big time in no small part due to the real estate boom of the past several years, restoration of buldings and substantial new development. The economic delopment and rediscovery of Harlem has been amazing and continues. Certain sections are now considered as an attractive alternative as Harlem is home to some wonderful architecture. Bronx: Same as above for Harlem. Queens: Same as above. Brooklyn: Substantial turn around in the past few years. The better neighborhood are now considered to be desireable and have become rather pricey. Areas such as Brooklyn Heights are now seen as extensions of Manhattan. Staten Island: Not too familiar with SI but do not hear of too many safety issues. Taken as a whole, NYC crime trends have been very positive in the past decade or so. Most tourists will visit Manhattan and not much else, which is the safest. I suspect that with the continued trends of restoration and development of previously abandoned areas, NYC will continue on its path of significantly lower crime rates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Everythingape Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 I've used statistics and the rule of averages myself from time to time when I need to prove a point to someone.. But in reality it does not do much for you when you stand there with a gun pointed to your head, asked to hand over your 'norwegian gold'.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HauteHippie Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 In my part of norway it's just one guy doing it all.. His name is Vidar, and he is responsible for 19 crimes. So it's like 19 crimes per 1 people.. So in a way, my part of norway has more crime than NYC ;P To quote former Aberdeen and Brøndby manager Ebbe Skovdhal, a genuine Scandinavian coaching legend (cough); "Statistics are like miniskirts, they reveal everything except what's most important." hehehehe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 Can you post a pic of Vidar? Maybe I know him Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OiRogers Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 A wise man once said "There are three types of lies: Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics". If you read up a bit on the use of statistics and how the data can be manipulated you can find whatever "trend" you seek in any set of numbers relating to your search. Personally I think its a bit foolish to compare crime rates per capita of a major city (i.e. densly populated) to the country as a whole... Of course NYC or *insert city of choice here* is going to have a higher crime rate than say... The entire state of North Dakota or *or insert area of lower population density here*... population density plays a big role in crime rates... If you have to drive 4 miles to your neighbors house and 35 miles to a store your much much less likely to experience a street robbery... I'm guessing that Nanuq or *insert name of remote board member here* isn't too worried about street robberys from meth-addicted junkies... Either way statistics don't tell the entire story and many researchers have shown that the person doing a statistical study will unconsciously sway his outcome to fit his preconsieved notions. I guess my point is this: Crime is pretty rare now. It was pretty rare in the "Wild West" days. The US is no more dangerous ON THE WHOLE than any other civilized nation. Your chances of being a victim of serious crime in any 1st world nation these days is pretty slim... and statistically (man I hated using that word there)... the offender is going to be someone your related too or know in some other way.... Look at your family and friends closely now.... those are the people most likely to commit a serious crime upon your happy a$$. Anyone here read "Freakonomics" by Levitt and Dubner?... interesting read to say the least and they make an interesting arguement that legalized abortion is partly responsible for the declining crime rates we see now... the argument boiled down for this post is: Unwanted children tend to be raised badly and then tend to become criminals, legalized abortion has given those [censored]-poor mothers-to-be the chance to not have the child that they don't want and would in turn raise badly. This was only a page or two of the book and not its central theme by any means... just an interesting food for thought type thing that stuck in my mind. I DON"T INTEND THIS TO BECOME AN ABORTION DEBATE. Just got a kick out of the arguement... agree or not, its a unique point. I'd heavily recomend tracking down and reading this book. I'm going to run for cover now... I can feel the incoming fire already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Everythingape Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 This is Vidar: Here he's telling his friends about the time he stole a garden chair from that dumb Mickey Rat. Interestingly, he was an unwanted child... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddhead Posted October 21, 2006 Author Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 Just compare the national averages for muder, robbery, and assault to the rates in NYC and you'll see what I mean. NYC exceeds the national average in those categories. We are not talking about populated cities, we're talking about crime on a per capita basis across the country. Now, yes, NYC crime has been on the decline, but that has also been a nationwide trend so we can't chalk that up to local politics - although guys like Rudy are high on my wishlist for becoming future Presidents of this great nation! 1. What is the source of your data? I cannot find anything on the web to validate thos nos, except antecdotal writings from the NRA which are published without back-up or statitical evidence. 2. Even if it is true, comparing large cities to rural areas is kind of like comparing apples to oranges. There are no inner cities, fewer impvoerished areas, less steet gangs, etc... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddhead Posted October 21, 2006 Author Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 Just to compare, in NYC a crime is reported for every 37 people. On average in Norway its reported one crime per 63 people. If we look at the non-western immigrants in Oslo, the figure is one per 19 people. according to FBI statistics, 7.5 violent crimes in NYC per 100,000 residents. This translates to 1 crime for every 1333 people. Of course this is violent crime not all crime... A wise man once said "There are three types of lies: Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics". If you read up a bit on the use of statistics and how the data can be manipulated you can find whatever "trend" you seek in any set of numbers relating to your search. Personally I think its a bit foolish to compare crime rates per capita of a major city (i.e. densly populated) to the country as a whole... Of course NYC or *insert city of choice here* is going to have a higher crime rate than say... The entire state of North Dakota or *or insert area of lower population density here*... population density plays a big role in crime rates... If you have to drive 4 miles to your neighbors house and 35 miles to a store your much much less likely to experience a street robbery... I'm guessing that Nanuq or *insert name of remote board member here* isn't too worried about street robberys from meth-addicted junkies... Either way statistics don't tell the entire story and many researchers have shown that the person doing a statistical study will unconsciously sway his outcome to fit his preconsieved notions. I guess my point is this: Crime is pretty rare now. It was pretty rare in the "Wild West" days. The US is no more dangerous ON THE WHOLE than any other civilized nation. Your chances of being a victim of serious crime in any 1st world nation these days is pretty slim... and statistically (man I hated using that word there)... the offender is going to be someone your related too or know in some other way.... Look at your family and friends closely now.... those are the people most likely to commit a serious crime upon your happy a$$. Anyone here read "Freakonomics" by Levitt and Dubner?... interesting read to say the least and they make an interesting arguement that legalized abortion is partly responsible for the declining crime rates we see now... the argument boiled down for this post is: Unwanted children tend to be raised badly and then tend to become criminals, legalized abortion has given those [censored]-poor mothers-to-be the chance to not have the child that they don't want and would in turn raise badly. This was only a page or two of the book and not its central theme by any means... just an interesting food for thought type thing that stuck in my mind. I DON"T INTEND THIS TO BECOME AN ABORTION DEBATE. Just got a kick out of the arguement... agree or not, its a unique point. I'd heavily recomend tracking down and reading this book. I'm going to run for cover now... I can feel the incoming fire already. I read the book.. not sure i buy the theory, but it sure is thought provoking Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lionsandtigers Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 nyc is nothing, trust me.....i live here, grew up here, etc. I live in the lower east side which is, or at least used to be a tough part of the city. now washington d.c.!!!! thats a tought city. come to nyc everyone, its dandy :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Padge Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 Interesting indeed. Here is a website with some information regarding crime rates in different countries etc.... http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_...ders-per-capita Cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OiRogers Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 I read the book.. not sure i buy the theory, but it sure is thought provoking I'm not sure if I buy the theory either... but it is thought provoking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchmeister Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 I do have to say New York has changed quite a bit. In 1979 I lived in a walk-up directly above a whore house. Today I live a couple of blocks away in a house and couldn't feel safer. IMHO, truly one of the safest cities in the world to visit. And this is coming from a person who visted three continents and 20 cities or so in the last year. In fact NYC has become so much like Disney World that half the time when they want to film a nitty gritty old school NYC scene they have to go to a different borough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HauteHippie Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 In 1979 I lived in a walk-up directly above a [censored] house. Certainly you must have some good stories to tell.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchmeister Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 Yes. But a bad one as well. I was robbed. But it was a worthwhile tradeoff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HauteHippie Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 Yes. But a bad one as well. I was robbed. But it was a worthwhile tradeoff. I was looking for the good stories. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slay Posted October 22, 2006 Report Share Posted October 22, 2006 washington dc is said to be real bad. I didnt notice anything when I was there, it looked like a pretty safe place to me, a lot safer than where I live now! They just showed on the news that some 15 year old guy got beat up really bad by 16 others at his school because of a chic he was dating. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddhead Posted October 23, 2006 Author Report Share Posted October 23, 2006 nyc is nothing, trust me.....i live here, grew up here, etc. I live in the lower east side which is, or at least used to be a tough part of the city. now washington d.c.!!!! thats a tought city. come to nyc everyone, its dandy :) Exactly my point. I currently live in Hell's Kitchen.. you could not walk down the street I live in 20 years ago without a serious weapon. Today it is safe, diverse, hip and really an exciting place to live. Pretty analogous to the tranisition that took place along the lower east side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.