The Most Dangerous Cities in the US

This is a discussion on The Most Dangerous Cities in the US within the Off Topic & Humor Discussion forums, part of the The Back Porch category; Originally Posted by walleye That must be some comfort to you. ... Sorry, you're attempt to deflect the positive of increased safety is a failure. ...

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456
Results 76 to 90 of 90
Like Tree30Likes

Thread: The Most Dangerous Cities in the US

  1. #76
    Senior Member Array NH_Esau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    NH
    Posts
    943
    Quote Originally Posted by walleye View Post
    That must be some comfort to you.

    ...

    Sorry, you're attempt to deflect the positive of increased safety is a failure. Guess you'll have to live with the horrible good news.
    Who crapped in your Wheaties this morning?

    Not sure what you're implying, but I don't live in constant fear of attack. My point with the Grossman comment is that attempted murders haven't necessarily dropped in the past few years... we've just gotten better at keeping them from becoming completed murders. And I'm a big fan of that, because it's trickle-down medtech from the front lines which is why we've got kids who are alive today that would've been dead if they were 40 years younger fighting a bit further Southeast.

    Regardless of what the crime rate is today, I'm not happy with the idea of anyone having to live with a 1:27 chance of getting offed in their lifetime. Is it better than a 1:10? Absolutely, but I'll pass on living in some of those places, thankyouverymuch. Been there, got the T-shirts, got an opportunity to move back to the sticks, and did.


  2. Remove Ads

  3. #77
    Ex Member Array walleye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    erie PA
    Posts
    677
    Quote Originally Posted by NH_Esau View Post
    Who crapped in your Wheaties this morning?

    Not sure what you're implying, but I don't live in constant fear of attack. My point with the Grossman comment is that attempted murders haven't necessarily dropped in the past few years... we've just gotten better at keeping them from becoming completed murders. And I'm a big fan of that, because it's trickle-down medtech from the front lines which is why we've got kids who are alive today that would've been dead if they were 40 years younger fighting a bit further Southeast.

    Regardless of what the crime rate is today, I'm not happy with the idea of anyone having to live with a 1:27 chance of getting offed in their lifetime. Is it better than a 1:10? Absolutely, but I'll pass on living in some of those places, thankyouverymuch. Been there, got the T-shirts, got an opportunity to move back to the sticks, and did.
    What? 1 OUT OF 27? The violent crime ratio by 2010 was 1 out of 248 or 0.004%. - four tenths of one percent

    The rate is the number of incidents per 100,000 of the population. The 2010 rate was 403* - 403 violent crimes per 100,000 people. To reduce that to it's simplest ratio divide the population number (100,000) by the crime rate (403) and you have 1:248 .

    To have a 1 out 248 chance of being a victim rather than a 1 out of 27 chance of being a victim is one lulu of a gigantic difference in safety.

    *[Federal Bureau of Investigation, (2010)]

  4. #78
    VIP Member Array Spirit51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    2,248
    Quote Originally Posted by Moops View Post
    Then there's the theory that Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner posit in their book Freakonomics, that the drop in violent crime is due to the rise in abortions in the late 60's and early 70's. Many of those who would otherwise be more likely to commit violent crimes (those on the lower end of the economic spectrum), were instead aborted. ~20 years later, when they would have been committing those crimes, they weren't around.
    That is a really interesting theory.
    A woman must not depend on protection by men. A woman must learn to protect herself.
    Susan B. Anthony
    A armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one has to back it up with his life.
    Robert Heinlein

  5. #79
    VIP Member Array Spirit51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    2,248
    Quote Originally Posted by 357and40 View Post
    Hurray, my city ranks #3.
    Do you get a button or ribbon? Or just a discount on a bullet proof vest.
    A woman must not depend on protection by men. A woman must learn to protect herself.
    Susan B. Anthony
    A armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one has to back it up with his life.
    Robert Heinlein

  6. #80
    VIP Member Array Spirit51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    2,248
    Quote Originally Posted by Chad Rogers View Post
    Are the communities with highest crime rates actually availing themselves of abortions? I wonder what the research into that is....
    I was just thinking the same thing.
    A woman must not depend on protection by men. A woman must learn to protect herself.
    Susan B. Anthony
    A armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one has to back it up with his life.
    Robert Heinlein

  7. #81
    Distinguished Member Array Doghandler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    West Branch
    Posts
    1,946
    I'll have to remember that crappy Wheaties comment for the next time one of my co-workers tries to detour my parade.

    Carry on.........

  8. #82
    Ex Member Array walleye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    erie PA
    Posts
    677
    Quote Originally Posted by Doghandler View Post
    I'll have to remember that crappy Wheaties comment for the next time one of my co-workers tries to detour my parade.

    Carry on.........
    (I'm the Wheaties man)

    We aren't talking about parades -- we're talking about sense of danger and awareness of actual danger, its level, its pattern of increase or decrease. That discounting the huge decrease in violent crime in the country may make some feel like they're in a parade, ignoring the reality of the positive and basing that on incorrect information is making false statements and perpetuating the myth of constant high threat in this country - (for whatever weird cause needing that mindset may have). Most people are happy to learn of increased safety, from crime, car accidents, diseases - whatever.

  9. #83
    Member Array Moops's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    200
    Quote Originally Posted by Spirit51 View Post
    That is a really interesting theory.
    If you haven't read the book (Freakonomics), I highly recommend it. It deals with a lot of topics other than crime statistics, and the authors have a knack for turning conventional wisdom on its head.

    Quote Originally Posted by walleye View Post
    (I'm the Wheaties man)

    We aren't talking about parades -- we're talking about sense of danger and awareness of actual danger, its level, its pattern of increase or decrease. That discounting the huge decrease in violent crime in the country may make some feel like they're in a parade, ignoring the reality of the positive and basing that on incorrect information is making false statements and perpetuating the myth of constant high threat in this country - (for whatever weird cause needing that mindset may have). Most people are happy to learn of increased safety, from crime, car accidents, diseases - whatever.
    Generally speaking, human beings are really bad at estimating risk. That is why it is so ironic for someone to drive to the airport, weaving in and out of traffic with nary a second thought, and then be terrified to step onto the plane.
    "Your mind is the weapon, all the rest are just tools." --gasmitty

  10. #84
    Senior Member Array Chad Rogers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Metro DC
    Posts
    958
    I maintain that using only the number of homicides per year as an indicator of how things are getting better is a false paradigm. The overwhelming majority of folks getting killed two decades ago were other drug dealers/drug users. The number of good citizens getting caught in that crossfire was only a drop in the bucket in the big picture. The question I would ask is what were the raw nu bers of innocent citizens being murdered then, and what is the raw number of innocent citizens being murdered now?
    "People who take an Internet handle of a great warrior, are usually the first to go fetal when crunch time comes." - Me

  11. #85
    Senior Member Array NH_Esau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    NH
    Posts
    943
    Quote Originally Posted by walleye View Post
    What? 1 OUT OF 27? The violent crime ratio by 2010 was 1 out of 248 or 0.004%. - four tenths of one percent
    Again, I was referring to the reported murder rate of Flint, MI - 0.05%. The cumulative effect of that rate over 75 years, with attrition for those killed, is 3.73%, or 1:27.

    And to correct your typo slightly - 1/248 is 4/10 of 1%, but that would be written "0.4%."

    Over 75 years, that means a 30% chance of being victimized by violent crime. If you're 50 and haven't already been victimized, count yourself lucky - you've only got a 1:10 chance over the next 25...

  12. #86
    Member Array Moops's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    200
    Quote Originally Posted by NH_Esau View Post
    Again, I was referring to the reported murder rate of Flint, MI - 0.05%. The cumulative effect of that rate over 75 years, with attrition for those killed, is 3.73%, or 1:27.

    And to correct your typo slightly - 1/248 is 4/10 of 1%, but that would be written "0.4%."

    Over 75 years, that means a 30% chance of being victimized by violent crime. If you're 50 and haven't already been victimized, count yourself lucky - you've only got a 1:10 chance over the next 25...
    You are talking about the most dangerous city in America, where the majority of violence probably happens in a relatively small area of town. Overall, in most neighborhoods in America (especially where the looney fringe that hangs out on this board lives), the odds are much more in your favor.
    "Your mind is the weapon, all the rest are just tools." --gasmitty

  13. #87
    Ex Member Array walleye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    erie PA
    Posts
    677
    Quote Originally Posted by NH_Esau View Post
    Again, I was referring to the reported murder rate of Flint, MI - 0.05%. The cumulative effect of that rate over 75 years, with attrition for those killed, is 3.73%, or 1:27.

    And to correct your typo slightly - 1/248 is 4/10 of 1%, but that would be written "0.4%."

    Over 75 years, that means a 30% chance of being victimized by violent crime. If you're 50 and haven't already been victimized, count yourself lucky - you've only got a 1:10 chance over the next 25...
    1) Your major error: Statistical probability for a certain period of time is only for that period of time. You don't have an 8% risk of a heart attack for the next decade at the age of 60 because you had a 4% chance of having one the next decade at the age of 50. In reality, for the same very healthy man, at age 50: 4% risk over next decade. Age 60: 6% risk over next decade. Same with violent crime, (unless you're being given, as stated, chances over a lifetime).

    2) Rates are usually expressed as one number in reference to another, not as a percent - and rates for crime, accidents etc usually are expressed as the number of violent crimes, murders, accidents, suicides, etc as part of a population unit. For the US it's 100,000 people usually- for a city, don't know what they'd use, maybe 10000. So, in 2010 in the US there were 403 violent crimes per 100,000 people. (Think it was 403). And then you can reduce the ratio to 1 (one violent crime) per such and such number of people, in this example: think it was 248 people. So, putting that into common language you could say, in 2010 there was 1 violent crime for every 248 people. And therefore each of those persons, had a 1 out of 288 chance of having the violent crime happen to them.

    And you're right: to get specific info for your life you'd have to use numbers for your area where you live your life, could be way more dangerous than the national figures or way more safe. But check the ratio for the .05, make sure it expresses what you want it to. I know Flint is dangerous, Pontiac worse I think

  14. #88
    Member Array Moops's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    200
    Quote Originally Posted by walleye View Post
    1) Your major error: Statistical probability for a certain period of time is only for that period of time. You don't have an 8% risk of a heart attack for the next decade at the age of 60 because you had a 4% chance of having one the next decade at the age of 50. In reality, for the same very healthy man, at age 50: 4% risk over next decade. Age 60: 6% risk over next decade. Same with violent crime, (unless you're being given, as stated, chances over a lifetime).
    Actually, it wouldn't be cumulative. For one to calculate the risk of being murdered over one's lifetime, you would have to average the risk of being murdered each year (or each day, or each minute, etc) of one's life. If we were to assume, for example, that the average lifetime was 75 years, and the murder rate in Flint, MI was relatively steady over those 75 years at 0.05%, then the odds of being murdered in your lifetime would be roughly 0.05% (.0005 x 75/75).

    Then again, I've never been great at statistics.
    Last edited by Moops; June 20th, 2012 at 03:37 PM. Reason: Math correction
    "Your mind is the weapon, all the rest are just tools." --gasmitty

  15. #89
    Ex Member Array walleye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    erie PA
    Posts
    677
    Quote Originally Posted by Moops View Post
    Actually, it wouldn't be cumulative. For one to calculate the risk of being murdered over one's lifetime, you would have to average the risk of being murdered each year (or each day, or each minute, etc) of one's life. If we were to assume, for example, that the average lifetime was 75 years, and the murder rate in Flint, MI was relatively steady over those 75 years at 0.05%, then the odds of being murdered in your lifetime would be roughly 0.05% (.0005 x 75/75).

    Then again, I've never been great at statistics.
    There likely is not any reliable statistics for "lifetimes" for this kind of social phenomena, and I know that's true for medical information, diseases etc. In the latter they mostly don't like to go beyond 5 years - in fact that one stat I gave for 10 years in regard to heart attacks is unusual. Beyond 5 years there are so many things that could happen, and that in both crime and medicine + a lot of other areas - can't be accounted for now in any data, that it's beyond estimates what will be beyond 5 years. I mean you could have a statistic but it would be meaningless.

  16. #90
    Distinguished Member Array DefConGun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    1,670
    I always heard that Washington D.C. was very dangerous, I'm surprised it didn't make the list. Perhaps because they're not counting it because its a district? I also heard that certain parts of Miami are very dangerous and it didn't make the list.

    I'm kind of surprised there are so many cities in southern states that made the list. I guess that might be playing into the socioeconomic quotient?

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

how many murders in lansing mi 2012

,
how many murders where committed in lansing mi in 2012 .
,
impact dangerous crimes have on large cities
,
impact dangerous crimes have on large cities and on our daily lives
,
impact dangerous crimes have on large cities and our daily lives
,
impact of dangerous crimes on large cities
,
is chicago one of the most dangerous city
,
is durham nc dangerous
,
most dangerous cities durham
,
number of homicides in dallas so far in 2012
,
number of homicides lansing mi 2012
,
the impact dangerous crimes have on large cities and on our daily lives
Click on a term to search for related topics.