danmand said:What happened in SF? It used to lead the pack.
You're thinking Oakland, different demographic.
OTB
danmand said:What happened in SF? It used to lead the pack.
That is a secondary effect of the absence of a good welfare system.onthebottom said:What's a resonable welfare system?
I think you can trace it all to a breakdown in the family in certain communities.
And if you look at the 10 cities I link above I think you'll find another correlation.danmand said:That is a secondary effect of the absence of a good welfare system.
If you look at the numbers by country, I think you will find
a correlation (inverse proportionality) between rates of violent crime and welfare system.
Given that over half the population of Toronto is classified as “visible minority”, I think there is a problem with your thesis.onthebottom said:So, the more diverse the population the higher the number?
OTB
That was me being a smart ass to a prior post.someone said:Given that over half the population of Toronto is classified as “visible minority”, I think there is a problem with your thesis.
In addition, a little known fact is that crime rates (per 100 000) are often higher in smaller centers (which tend to be more homogeneous) than big cities. I am not sure if the higher general crime statistics also apply to murder but I suspect they do.
BTW, I have not read all four pages of posts so it is possible someone has brought up these issues already.
Put on top of that, HIGH & Growing US crimes rates, the fact the US has the highest percent of their population in Prisons, seems to indicate there is something very wrong in the USA, no????....onthebottom said:That was me being a smart ass to a prior post.
The real problem in the US is black on black violence.
If you look a few posts above you'll see a list of the top 10 cities in the US by murder rate.... all decent size cities.
OTB
I would bring back self supporting prisons.WoodPeckr said:Put on top of that, HIGH & Growing US crimes rates, the fact the US has the highest percent of their population in Prisons, seems to indicate there is something very wrong in the USA, no????....![]()
I would bring back self supporting prisons.WoodPeckr said:Put on top of that, HIGH & Growing US crimes rates, the fact the US has the highest percent of their population in Prisons, seems to indicate there is something very wrong in the USA, no????....![]()
Hey I will not apologize for taking a hard line on crime. Your method has failed.WoodPeckr said:Not surprising at all!....![]()
Am I missing something? I seem to recall editorials (television/newspaper) and comments on TERB about the rising crime rate in Toronto and that the later was tied into the former.someone said:Given that over half the population of Toronto is classified as “visible minority”, I think there is a problem with your thesis.
No, when I lived in the bay area, SF was at the top of the list in homicides per capita.onthebottom said:You're thinking Oakland, different demographic.
The crime rate goes up and down and is actually much lower than in the 1970s. When it comes to serious crimes murders and bank robberies, a small change in absolute numbers can lead to a significant percentage change in a given year due to the small base. I recall one year when a single offender was responsible for something like a 25% increase in bank robberies. Yes, a lot of the murders are black on black but the numbers are still much lower than in the United States. Moreover, the crime rate in Toronto is also lower than a lot of smaller more homogenous communities in Canada. I don't have time to look up the number right now, but I recall unbelievable number of armed robberies when I lived in St. Johns.Aardvark154 said:I'm I missing something? I seem to recall editorials (television/newspaper) and comments on TERB about the rising crime rate in Toronto and that the later was tied into the former.
However, even as you already mentioned I wonder if this is not because smaller numbers of criminals can more easily affect the statistics in places that have a smaller population.someone said:The overall crime rate in small urban areas — home to at least 1,000 people — was 43 per cent higher than in large urban areas with a core of at least 100,000, indicates the Statistics Canada study of 2005 crime rates that was released Thursday. Only in Quebec were crime rates higher in bigger cities.
But you’re talking about crimes per 100 000. I was referring to a greater percentage increase because the total number of crimes were low. E.g. if 70 murders are committed in Toronto, an increase of 7 is 10% even though the total number per 100 000 people has not increased by a lot.Aardvark154 said:However, even as you already mentioned I wonder if this is not because smaller numbers of criminals can more easily affect the statistics in places that have a smaller population.
Yes, I see what you are saying but at the same time 100 burglars in Toronto is a great deal different than 80 burglars in shall we say Kingston or Trenton. Five burglars moving to Toronto has nowhere near the impact it would in Kingston.someone said:But you’re talking about crimes per 100 000. I was referring to a greater percentage increase because the total number of crimes were low. E.g. if 70 murders are committed in Toronto, an increase of 7 is 10% even though the total number per 100 000 people has not increased by a lot.
I can see your point if you are talking about a specific small town. I agree that you would have a good point if the statistics only referred to Trent. However, I am less convinced if we are talking about many such towns grouped together. For example, the article states “Rural areas of Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Alberta had the highest homicide rates in the country”. IAardvark154 said:Yes, I see what you are saying but at the same time 100 burglars in Toronto is a great deal different than 80 burglars in shall we say Kingston or Trenton. Five burglars moving to Toronto has nowhere near the impact it would in Kingston.
It's all in how you look at the statistics. (Lies, damn lies, and statistics - Lord Beaconsfield (B. Disraeli)
I imagine the ban was completely ineffective given that handguns are freely available elsewhere in the United States.onthebottom said:Handguns have been banned in Washington DC for years (although that was just overturned) yet the murder rate was sky high? Why?
OTB
ig-88 said:poverty, drug trade, population density, access to firearms, revolving door justice system