From the neighborhood to the nation, crime statistics are published frequently and are readily available to the public. Most often these statistics are used by lawmakers to shape public policy and by criminal justice system administrators to develop strategic crime deterrent programs. But what, if any, value do theses statistics hold for the average citizen?
If you get all of your relevant news information from most major media outlets, including newspapers, magazines, television and the internet, you will likely have a skewed perception of crime in the United States. Why? Because most media outlets have a formula they use in choosing which stories they will cover.
James Hamilton is a professor of Public Policy, Economics, and Political Science at Duke University. In his excellent book, All the News That's Fit to Sell: How the Market Transforms Information into News, he makes several powerful assertions.
His book examines how economic forces shape the media. Professor Hamilton discovered when evaluating the continued decline in interest for hard news, that if the demand for hard news is not present, media outlets will focus on other subjects.
“As the demand for hard news coverage decreases, profit-driven broadcasters and news media will not want to invest their money in these types of stories. Network evening news is extremely market driven, and networks usually focus on attracting marginal viewers, which make up about 40 percent of the market. So even if the average loyal network news viewer enjoys having hard news coverage, networks are not focused in keeping them, but instead working diligently to capture those casual viewers.”
The old adage; “You are what you eat”, is applicable. Although there are a number of influences which drive news coverage, suffice it to say that most Americans being fed information by major media outlets will not get accurate and detailed knowledge regarding the subjects that are covered. This is not to say that all Americans are uninformed, but those who are well informed frequently use sources from several media outlets or conduct some limited research on their own.
Perception is most people’s reality. Let’s examine one example of this.
Perception: most people in the United States perceive gang members to be very dangerous and potentially a great risk to their personal safety. Since most people do not have personal experience with gang members to draw from, they believe the sensational stories regarding gang-related homicides and violence presented by the media.
Reality: according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (2005) National Crime Victimization Survey, in the 1970’s, nineteen states (201 American cities) reported gang problems. By the 1990’s, all states (1,487 communities) reported gang problems. This represents a 640% increase in about 25 years. This startling increase in gang activity provides a reason for the sensationalized media coverage.
Reality: Although gangs have grown, between 1998 and 2003 victims perceived their perpetrators to be gang members in 6% of violent victimizations. This has fallen from the peak in 1996, when gang members where perceived to be responsible for 10% of all violent crime.
The Net Result: the public walks around in fear of gang members, when there is a far greater chance they will be assaulted by someone else.
Let’s assume for a moment that these figures are accurate and not just the victim’s reported perception. If gang members are responsible for 6% of violent crime, who is responsible for the remaining 94%? Logic dictates the public would have a keen interest in who represents the greatest percentile of threat in violent crime, and the natural expectation is that media outlets would have an interest as well. But logic, or common sense for that matter, does not fit the formula many media outlets use in choosing what they cover.
Let’s take a look at the realities of some crime statistics.
There are several categories of crime. The category of Violent Crime is defined as murder, rape and sexual assault, robbery, and assault.
The statistics related to Violent Crime generally take several years to get collected and analyzed. The information presented here is from the Bureau of Justice Statistics (2005) National Crime Victimization Survey.
Consider the following, and check these realities against your perceptions. The statistics are from the source indicated above. The conclusions are mine, and some of them would not be easy to implement.
In 2005, U.S. residents age 12 or older experienced approximately 23 million crimes.
- 77% (18.0 million) were property crimes.
- 22% (5.2 million) were crimes of violence.
- 1% (227,000) was personal thefts.
*Conclusion: You are far more likely to be the victim of a property crime than a crime of violence.
In 2005 for every 1,000 persons age 12 or older there occurred:
- 1 rape or sexual assault
- 1 assault with injury
- 3 robberies.
*Conclusions: You are far more likely to be the victim of a robbery than an assault with injury or sexual assault. However, robberies have violent characteristics.
Murders were the least frequent violent victimization; with about 6 murder victims per 100,000 persons in 2005.
*Conclusions: There is a .006% risk of being a murder victim.
Since 1994, violent crime rates have declined, reaching the lowest level ever recorded in 2005.
*Conclusion: You are far safer than you have been led to believe.
Males were more likely to be violently victimized by a stranger than a non-stranger, and females were more likely to be victimized by a friend, an acquaintance, or an intimate. Males experienced higher victimization rates than females for all types of violent crime except rape/sexual assault.
*Conclusion: Males should be wary of strangers. Females should be careful of their choice in friends, acquaintances, and intimate relationships.
Fifty-three percent of violent crime occurred during the day between 6a.m. and 6 p.m.
*Conclusion: This is a useless statistic, except it may challenge perceptions that the majority of crime occurs in the evening.
The location of about a quarter of incidents of violent crime was at or near the victim's home. Among common locales for violent crimes were on streets other than those near the victim's home (19%), at school (12%), or at a commercial establishment (8%).
*Conclusion: If you stay away from home, school and commercial establishments – you can avoid 64% of risk. This, of course, is unlikely.
For violent crime, about half occurred within a mile from home and 76% within five miles. Only 4% of victims of violent crime reported that the crime took place more than fifty miles from their home.
*Conclusion: You are safer away from home – far away. How often are you that far away from home?
Of the victims of violent crime, 22% were involved in some form of leisure activity away from home at the time of their victimization, 22% said they were at home, and another 20% mentioned they were at work or traveling to or from work when the crime occurred.
*Conclusion: Avoiding leisure activity, home and work will reduce risk by 64%. This, of course, is also unlikely.
Six urban residents, four suburban residents and four rural residents per 1,000 were victims of an aggravated assault.
*Conclusion: Move to the suburbs or rural areas.
In 24% of the incidents of violent crime, a weapon was present.
*Conclusion: Clearly, a weapon is not always present. Therefore, a handgun is not always the solution.
Teens and young adults experience the highest rates of violent crime. Beginning with the 25-34 age categories, the rate at which persons were victims declined significantly as the age category increased.
*Conclusion: The older you get, the safer you become.
Per every 1,000 persons in that racial group, 27 blacks, 20 whites and 14 persons of other races sustained a violent crime.
*Conclusion: Race is a factor, but when all the racial data is reviewed, it is insignificant in relation to how people might prepare for the risk of violence.
Don’t believe everything you see or hear from media outlets. You may end up with a perception that is far removed from reality. Within crime statistics, there is valuable information that can be applied to personal choices that will directly affect you or your loved ones. Use them to begin to build your own model of personal safety.
© 2008 Terry Hipp
Return to AssaultPrevention
Tuesday, April 1, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
