Violent crime... up in your area?
- Thread starter OVERKILL
- Start date
- Status
I think the stat is highly localized. While most area might have reduced, some spot has sharply increased.
Anyone who believes in the published statistics is ignoring the obvious. Numbers are regularly doctored to reflect the agenda of the publishing entity.
Just look at OMB projections that flex and bend at the whim of whoever is in power.
Just look at OMB projections that flex and bend at the whim of whoever is in power.
^^^
Just like the Governments says the Unemployment number is under 8%.
A person would be a fool to believe that.
Just like the Governments says the Unemployment number is under 8%.
A person would be a fool to believe that.
Statistically my town is one of the worst violent crime areas in our country. However, we have had numerous shootings since just before Christmas (almost one a day for a while). They are all in the same area, all have gang/ drug ties and even the victims who survived will not talk. I don't feel at risk because I don't use/ sell drugs, I am not in a gang (nor is anyone in my family) and I don't walk on the streets at 3am alone. Is my town dangerous? Probably not much more dangerous than being involved in illegal activity anywhere else.
ref
ref
Lots of confirmation bias and protection against cognitive dissonance going on in this thread
JHZR2
Staff member
Originally Posted By: LT4 Vette
^^^
Just like the Governments says the Unemployment number is under 8%.
A person would be a fool to believe that.
What does that have to do with anything? There are like eight unemployment metrics and if the way that they are calculated has changed in the last n years, please cite it. If that hasnt happened, then your point is more moot.
And I assume that youre implying that the FBI stats, the same ones that everyone is hanging their hats on that imply that more guns is equalling less crime, then are doctored?
If so, Im not quite understanding your point, because they are implying that more guns = less crime, clearly against the agenda of the administration that youre trying to undermine with the unemployment commentary.
So I just dont get where youre going here...
^^^
Just like the Governments says the Unemployment number is under 8%.
A person would be a fool to believe that.
What does that have to do with anything? There are like eight unemployment metrics and if the way that they are calculated has changed in the last n years, please cite it. If that hasnt happened, then your point is more moot.
And I assume that youre implying that the FBI stats, the same ones that everyone is hanging their hats on that imply that more guns is equalling less crime, then are doctored?
If so, Im not quite understanding your point, because they are implying that more guns = less crime, clearly against the agenda of the administration that youre trying to undermine with the unemployment commentary.
So I just dont get where youre going here...
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
...
So I just dont get where youre going here...
I told you where in the post before yours
...
So I just dont get where youre going here...
I told you where in the post before yours
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
If we arent to trust the stats, then how can we trust that the claim is that an armed population is a safer one?
Let's apply some common sense here. If you knew (or at least thought) that every person you encounter in a day was armed, would you still be willing to be an a-hole to them knowing that they might just put one between your eyes? Would you be willing to jump them on the street and try to mug them? Would you be eager to flip them off in traffic, or on the flip side cut them off in traffic?
Any intelligent creature will be very polite when they think the opposite behavior may result in mortal danger. This is all assuming that there are no drugs or alcohol involved.
If we arent to trust the stats, then how can we trust that the claim is that an armed population is a safer one?
Let's apply some common sense here. If you knew (or at least thought) that every person you encounter in a day was armed, would you still be willing to be an a-hole to them knowing that they might just put one between your eyes? Would you be willing to jump them on the street and try to mug them? Would you be eager to flip them off in traffic, or on the flip side cut them off in traffic?
Any intelligent creature will be very polite when they think the opposite behavior may result in mortal danger. This is all assuming that there are no drugs or alcohol involved.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: refaller
Worked well in the wild west, didn't it?
ref
It did indeed:
http://www.examiner.com/article/dispelling-the-myth-of-the-wild-west
Worked well in the wild west, didn't it?
ref
It did indeed:
http://www.examiner.com/article/dispelling-the-myth-of-the-wild-west
Law enforcement agencies under report crime as it makes them look bad if the real numbers were published.
Yes, our country needs more guns.
Yes, our country needs more guns.
Since statistics are doctored today so often depending on whatever the current agenda is, a more accurate way to determine if crime is up or not would be to ask many people throughout the USA if they feel crime is up in their area. We could do that right here at bitgo. If thousands of people were interviewed and the majority said that crime was up in the area where they live, I would assume that crime is up.
Statistical information is doctored and invented all the time today. People have become experts at doctoring statistics. Heck, they may teach college level classes somewhere on that.
Would you believe automatically anything an advertising firm said? Look beyond any statistics they produce and it might be a very different story.
Before I believed any statistical information today I would have to know something about who produced the statistics, their goals (agendas), etc.
People in some big fancy California university might receive a grant to do a study of crime in the USA. We have no idea how they do their research. Do they do any actual field research, even in 'Fly Over' areas of the USA? Or do they sit in rooms at that university and use statistical information that somebody else came up with? What are their goals (agendas)? Maybe the governmental people who produced the grant money would like to see that crime has declined.
I have seen for myself how grant money is sometimes spent. The granting of governmental money can be very political. Is that surprising?
The one thing I know for a fact is that the area where I live in has seen an increase in crime, including violent crime. I have no doubt about that at all. And if my area of the USA, which is hardly a high population urban area, has seen an increase in crime, it would not surprise me that crime has increased throughout the USA.
And common sense is common sense. How likely is it that a criminal will attack you if he thinks you may have a concealed handgun? The criminal, if he has any sense, will go for the soft target. The criminal picks the house that is easy to break into. The criminal attacks the most defenseless potential victim.
Statistical information is doctored and invented all the time today. People have become experts at doctoring statistics. Heck, they may teach college level classes somewhere on that.
Would you believe automatically anything an advertising firm said? Look beyond any statistics they produce and it might be a very different story.
Before I believed any statistical information today I would have to know something about who produced the statistics, their goals (agendas), etc.
People in some big fancy California university might receive a grant to do a study of crime in the USA. We have no idea how they do their research. Do they do any actual field research, even in 'Fly Over' areas of the USA? Or do they sit in rooms at that university and use statistical information that somebody else came up with? What are their goals (agendas)? Maybe the governmental people who produced the grant money would like to see that crime has declined.
I have seen for myself how grant money is sometimes spent. The granting of governmental money can be very political. Is that surprising?
The one thing I know for a fact is that the area where I live in has seen an increase in crime, including violent crime. I have no doubt about that at all. And if my area of the USA, which is hardly a high population urban area, has seen an increase in crime, it would not surprise me that crime has increased throughout the USA.
And common sense is common sense. How likely is it that a criminal will attack you if he thinks you may have a concealed handgun? The criminal, if he has any sense, will go for the soft target. The criminal picks the house that is easy to break into. The criminal attacks the most defenseless potential victim.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Crime actually IS up in my area. The Police had (IIRC) 512 more calls in 2012 than they did in 2011. Lovely.......
To be fair some area (i.e. East Palo Alto, East San Jose) was down in the last couple decades, South San Francisco is also down but those has a lot to do with gentrification. I'm sure Halem, NYC is the same.
When the former slum dweller moved out and into another neighborhood, the numbers move with them.
When the former slum dweller moved out and into another neighborhood, the numbers move with them.
A drunk guy was caught for swerving and pulled a shottie on the sherriff then ran away into a corn field half naked squealing like a piggie.
That's about all we hear about in these parts.
That's about all we hear about in these parts.
Originally Posted By: LT4 Vette
Law enforcement agencies under report crime as it makes them look bad if the real numbers were published.
Or over-report crime if it can lead to increased budgets (including manpower)....
In Canada, complaints are classed, and each class has a different number of man-hours involved. Crimes are generally reportable to Statistics Canada, whereas the cat in the tree or the loud neighbour isn't. If you have a drunk trying to break into his own house because he lost his keys, and the police mark it as an unfounded Break & Enter, that's more man hours than reporting it as a noise violation or a drunk in public or a general assistance.
Or, even better, two drunks being noisy and obnoxious on the street can be Causing a Disturbance (a criminal offence up here) or just drunk in public. The former allocates more man hours and is reportable to Statistics Canada, whereas the latter is not.
Law enforcement agencies under report crime as it makes them look bad if the real numbers were published.
Or over-report crime if it can lead to increased budgets (including manpower)....
In Canada, complaints are classed, and each class has a different number of man-hours involved. Crimes are generally reportable to Statistics Canada, whereas the cat in the tree or the loud neighbour isn't. If you have a drunk trying to break into his own house because he lost his keys, and the police mark it as an unfounded Break & Enter, that's more man hours than reporting it as a noise violation or a drunk in public or a general assistance.
Or, even better, two drunks being noisy and obnoxious on the street can be Causing a Disturbance (a criminal offence up here) or just drunk in public. The former allocates more man hours and is reportable to Statistics Canada, whereas the latter is not.
Originally Posted By: greenjp
Lots of confirmation bias and protection against cognitive dissonance going on in this thread
I agree, good, old fashioned.... denial.
Lots of confirmation bias and protection against cognitive dissonance going on in this thread
I agree, good, old fashioned.... denial.
JHZR2
Staff member
Originally Posted By: PandaBear
To be fair some area (i.e. East Palo Alto, East San Jose) was down in the last couple decades, South San Francisco is also down but those has a lot to do with gentrification. I'm sure Halem, NYC is the same.
When the former slum dweller moved out and into another neighborhood, the numbers move with them.
Absolutely true. Have seen it here too. NE PA has become the sixth boro of NYC.
To be fair some area (i.e. East Palo Alto, East San Jose) was down in the last couple decades, South San Francisco is also down but those has a lot to do with gentrification. I'm sure Halem, NYC is the same.
When the former slum dweller moved out and into another neighborhood, the numbers move with them.
Absolutely true. Have seen it here too. NE PA has become the sixth boro of NYC.
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
What does that have to do with anything? There are like eight unemployment metrics and if the way that they are calculated has changed in the last n years, please cite it. If that hasnt happened, then your point is more moot.
And I assume that youre implying that the FBI stats, the same ones that everyone is hanging their hats on that imply that more guns is equalling less crime, then are doctored?
If so, Im not quite understanding your point, because they are implying that more guns = less crime, clearly against the agenda of the administration that youre trying to undermine with the unemployment commentary.
So I just dont get where youre going here...
I can't speak to the comments you replied to, but I can definitely tell you that unemployment is regularly trumpeted in a headline and then quietly revised later. The stats would seem at least quite flexible to any impartial observer,and downright biased to many.
Note that I actually worked in law Enforcement as a kid and saw many instances where reports were "edited" after submission. Our Chief definitely looked at them and would have them altered if they portrayed anything in a manner he did not agree with. One of our patrolmen actually resigned over one incident.
What does that have to do with anything? There are like eight unemployment metrics and if the way that they are calculated has changed in the last n years, please cite it. If that hasnt happened, then your point is more moot.
And I assume that youre implying that the FBI stats, the same ones that everyone is hanging their hats on that imply that more guns is equalling less crime, then are doctored?
If so, Im not quite understanding your point, because they are implying that more guns = less crime, clearly against the agenda of the administration that youre trying to undermine with the unemployment commentary.
So I just dont get where youre going here...
I can't speak to the comments you replied to, but I can definitely tell you that unemployment is regularly trumpeted in a headline and then quietly revised later. The stats would seem at least quite flexible to any impartial observer,and downright biased to many.
Note that I actually worked in law Enforcement as a kid and saw many instances where reports were "edited" after submission. Our Chief definitely looked at them and would have them altered if they portrayed anything in a manner he did not agree with. One of our patrolmen actually resigned over one incident.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked