Nation's Safest And Most Dangerous Cities
30 October 2006 - 2:00pm
A list of the least and most dangerous cities in the United States as ranked by the research and publishing company Morgan Quitno Press.
" A list of the safest and most dangerous cities overall, as compiled by Morgan Quitno Press, which bases the rankings on FBI figures released in June. The list starts with the safest cities and ends with the most dangerous.
Only cities that reported crime rates were included in the list. For example, New Orleans was not included this year because its police department did not report figures."
Full Story:
The Most, Least Dangerous U.S. Cities
Source:
FOX News, October 30, 2006
Related links:
»
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
- How Prisoners Skew the Census - Mar 15, 2010
- Cities Take Reins in Census Marketing - Mar 11, 2010
- Can Cities "Remix" America? - Mar 10, 2010
- Infrastructure Spending, Policy Benefit Suburbs and not Cities - Mar 09, 2010
- Federal Government Redefines Poverty - Mar 04, 2010
“
One major problem with the current focus is that parking demand is tricky to pin down, since demand itself is a function of supply, especially in urban places.
”





















Morgan Quitno Press
Besides research methods that would get Morgan Quitno Press kicked out of any high school statistics class, they rely on data from only the City of St. Louis - not the metropolitan region as a whole. Data for the City of St. Louis are typically and often misrepresented since the city is separate from the County of St. Louis and operates as an independent city. MSA data would provide a far more accurate picture of the St. Louis region's health and overall stability.
As a snarky aside, I suspect Morgan Quitno Press knows better, but since they're in Kansas City, they enjoy the press they get from poking a rhetorical finger in St. Louis' rhetorical eye.
---
Hilary E. H. Perkins, AICP, GISP
Morgan Quitno may be flawed but not for this reason
First of all, Morgan Quitno DOES rank MSAs as well as cities
http://www.morganquitno.com/met05a.pdf
But unlike Ms. Perkins, I do not think this is so useful.
The problem with city crime data isn't that it samples too small a piece of St. Louis's crime, but that it takes too big a piece. Using MSA data, as Ms. Perkins advocates, really tells you nothing about an area's safety because an large MSA ALWAYS contains an incredibly wide range of neighborhoods, from highly dangerous to very safe.
City data is SOMEWHAT better because at least you can compare like to like sometimes: to be fair, you can't easily compare St. Louis to a city like Jacksonville which has annexed most of its suburbs, but at least you can fairly compare St. Louis to other cities with smaller boundaries- not just by comparing St. Louis city to (for example) Washington, DC, but by comparing St. Louis's inner suburbs to those of other cities (e.g. Clayton and University City near St Louis vs. Arlington and Alexandria near DC).
But even city data is flawed because cities contain safe areas and very unsafe ones: for example, most of the north side of St. Louis city is dangerous, but I suspect St. Louis Hills at the city's southern tip would probably compare favorably with much of suburbia.
This flaw could be remedied if crime statistics compared individual neighborhoods; unfortuately, police departments rarely release such data, and often (I suspect) do not even tabulate them in formats that would be useful for someone trying to calculate crime rates.
Morgan Quitno's analysis is also flawed for an entirely different reason. Morgan Quitno ranks cities by overall violent crime. But not all violent crime is of equal public concern.
St. Louis was only 12th in murders. Murders matter because they are the most heavily reported crime; reported rates of other violent crimes are more likely to involve underreporting.
Robberies also matter because they are the most likely to involve strangers.
But a third common category of violent crime, assault, is usually a large part of a city's overall violent crime rate, but is of less concern to the overall public because assaults are more likely than other crimes to involve friends and relatives. So if you are trying to decide where to live, a neighborhood's robbery and murder rates are probably far more useful than overall violent crime rates.
The reason MSA-level data is
The reason MSA-level data is more appropriate is exactly because it provides a more accurate description of over all conditions within the metropolitian area. Most people who are not familiar with the area will see "St. Louis" and believe it refers to the entire metropolitan area. They won't know that Clayton is different than Ballwin which is different than Afton - they'll assume that there's crime rampant throughout the area. Just about any core urban area of the same size is going to have similar conditions to just about any other core urban area.
MQ is about *marketing* - that's what they do. They use catchy titles and "rankings" (which the media eat up) to get press to ratchet up their book sales. Providing an accurate picture of realistic conditions is at best secondary to that.
In fact, the City does release more detailed crime information - http://64.218.68.50/stlouis/newslmpd/viewer.htm
Also - St. Louis Hills isn't at the City's southern tip, it's in the southwest.
---
Hilary E. H. Perkins, AICP, GISP
Morgan Quitno survey badly flawed
The Morgan Quitno survey only looks at six crime categories when defining "safe" and "dangerous" communities...there is much more to safety and danger than crime. Amazingly, this survey--which gets so much press attention--includes motor vehicle THEFT but not motor vehicle ACCIDENTS when gauging safety and danger in American communities.
The University of Virginia's William Lucy has used a much different formula: he looked at fatal motor vehicle accidents and "stranger homicides", because these homicides prey most on people's imaginations, when in reality the overwhelming majority of homicides are committed on people known to the assailant. Based on this formula, the rural areas of the regions he studied are more dangerous, because the rate of fatal motor vehicle accidents is much higher than it is in the cities. Sure, if you live in a city and are involved in illegal drugs, gangs, or are in a violent relationship, you are at risk. (Of course, these risks are hardly confined to the cities.) But ironically, people fearful of being attacked by someone they don't know move to places where they are at much higher risk for automobile accidents. 77% of fatal auto accidents in this country occur on rural roads. Auto accidents are the number one killer of this children in this country, yet we move our kids to places where the rates of crashes are higher, in order to make them "safer."
The Morgan Quitno survey does not define "danger" comprehensively or fairly and therefore does a huge disservice to cities and all those working to revitalize them.