The only surprises here are how well Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Hawaii ranked. These are particularly oppressive states for gun owners.
Some jurisdictions, like Chicago, do not supply complete numbers to the FBI UCR. I wonder if this is why the oppressive states show up in this table.
Related–Map shows most dangerous US states – and where’s best to raise a family:
Of particular interest to me:
Eight categories of crime, including homicide, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, arson, burglary, larceny theft, and motor vehicle theft, were considered in the analysis.
Washington and Colorado were identified as the second and third most dangerous states, respectively.
New Hampshire emerged as the safest state, boasting a violent crime rate of just one-third of the national average and significantly lower crime rates than other US states.
Idaho also has the lowest rate of motor vehicle theft and the second-lowest rate of aggravated assault.
Idaho was ranked the second safest state for families, followed closely by Maine, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island.
I knew that WA was deteriorating, but didn’t realize it was that bad. Now the second-most crime-ridden state. Sad. Used to be such a great place. I wonder if this has anything to do with it? https://gab.com/Matt_Bracken/posts/113997324216885546
Change the population, change the behavior.
I’m sure that’s not the only thing, of course.
Lies, damn lies and statistics….
It would be even more useful, if figures could be had, to break out the stats by county and/or zipcode, in rates per 1000 of population.
Kurt
There exists a map which shows criminal assaults with a firearm by county, and another by city block.
IIRC, it showed that +90% of gun violence occurs in 9 (?) counties, and mostly within a total area of about 30 square miles.
On Chicago not submitting crime data, I sure wonder if the same is true for other hotbeds of crime like Boston and NYC.
The low crime numbers for MA and NJ don’t really feel plausible. NY maybe not quite so bad given the large area that is “upstate”.
Agreed.
Also, the way cases gets charged. A straight up pre-meditated murder by a black muslim may only get charged as assault. No bail. (Thank you, Soros.)
We’ve all seen the mugshots of black people listed as white to “pack the stats”. So, use your imagination.
As affirmative action hires doing the UCR reporting don’t have any problem with doing it.
My wife was a police secretary and court clerk for 20+ years. It’s amazing the ways administrators manipulate stats to make thing look the way they want.
For grants and graft.
And for comparison. Mexico is at 25 per 100,000. And that’s probably not counting those that have just “disappeared”. We have to remember homicides are the bodies they find, and list that way.
Those maps are of little use in deciding where to live.
For example, TN ranks pretty high in crime, but most of that is Memphis. If you live in the middle of the state or the eastern mountains, you’re way safer than a big city in one of the states listed as low crime.
Virginia is the same color as Illinois, but if you live in Chicago, you’re in a much higher crime city than, say, Virginia Beach.
And realistically, it’s even more granular than that…it’s only certain areas of Chicago that are really bad, there are other parts and suburbs that have pretty low rates.
Something that showed relative crime rates by county would be much more useful in deciding where to live.