21 November 2007

Metropolitan Crime

Based on the FBI’s September 24 crime statistics report, the 14th annual City Crime Rankings: Crime in Metropolitan America was published by CQ Press, a unit of Congressional Quarterly Inc.

I’d like to go “controversial” with these findings and paint a comparative racial demographical picture for you. The data I’m using comes from the US Census 2000, so you can double-check for yourself if you’d like. The reason I do this is because the crime data has an obvious racial correlation, and if social taboo glosses over this fact, or ignores it completely (which seems all too prevalent in the popular media), there is great risk of denying the reality of the situation, which blocks us from solving actual problems.

Below will be listed the top five most dangerous and safest American cities and their corresponding three largest racial demographics. Note: “other races” includes all other responses not included in the "White", "Black or African American", "American Indian and Alaska Native", "Asian" and "Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander" race categories. This category was intended to capture responses such as Mulatto, Creole, and Mestizo. Nine out of ten respondents in this category are Hispanic.

Ranked Most Dangerous

1. Detroit, Michigan:
Black, 82.70%
White, 12.26%
Hispanic or Latino, 4.96%

2. St. Louis, Missouri:
Black, 51.20%
White, 43.85%
Hispanic or Latino, 2.02%

3. Flint, Michigan:
Black, 53.27%
White, 41.39%
3.14% from two or more races.

4. Oakland, California:
Black, 35.66
White, 23.52
Hispanic or Latino, 21.89.

5. Camden, New Jersey:
Black, 53.35%
Hispanic or Latino, 38.82%
22.83% from other races.

Ranked Safest

1. Mission Viejo, California:
White, 83.15%
Hispanic or Latino, 12.10%
Asian, 7.73%.

2. Clarkstown, New York:
White, 79.97%
Asian, 7.90%
Black, 7.87%.

3. Brick Township, New Jersey:
White, 95.81%
Hispanic or Latino, 3.85%
Asian, 1.19%.

4. Amherst, New York:
White, 89.28%
Asian, 5.22%
Black, 3.90%.

5. Sugar Land, Texas:
White, 56.00%
Asian, 33.80%
Hispanic or Latino, 7.98%.

The division is clear if you’re willing to see it. I have not altered any data in any way: this is the statistical reality.

The question is: are we more serious about crime or taboo? Do we care more about protecting or offending people? Is social image more important that safety? Whenever you hear subjects of this sort discussed on the media, ask yourself these questions then judge what’s being said.

It’s obvious that representatives care more about image than reality:
"Every year this organization sends out a press release with big, bold lettering that labels a certain city as Most Dangerous, USA," Police Chief Ella Bully-Cummings (Detroit) said in the release.

"It really makes you wonder if the organization is truly concerned with evaluating crime or increasing their profit," said Bully-Cummings, who noted the complete report is available only by purchase.
It really makes you wonder if the police chief of the most dangerous city in America is truly concerned with crime or blaming others for his failures !
The mayor of 30th-ranked Rochester, New York -- an ex-police chief himself -- said the study's authors should consider the harm that the report causes.

Notice how only the people from dangerous places are criticizing the report with emotionally moralized arguments? I wonder what the mayor of Sugar Land, Texas has to say.

The only valuable criticism in the above article came from the FBI, which said: "These rough rankings provide no insight into the numerous variables that mold crime in a particular town, city, county, state, or region." And they’re right, findings such as this should be taken seriously and all variables considered, so solutions to problems can be found and implemented successfully.


No comments: