Someone sent this in to be posted. We had this or something similar sent in a few weeks ago. I have a real issue with it. Data can be used to show more than what it is, if people dont stop to think. For instance, it says: 2. Columbus, Ind. > 5-year increase in violent crime rate: 70.1% > Violent crime per 100,000 (2007): 101.6 > Violent crime per 100,000 (2012): 172.8 > Murders per 100,000: 1.3 There were just 76 violent crimes committed in Columbus in 2007, lower than in all but one other metro area where data was available. Although the violent crime rate remained relatively low when compared with most metro areas in 2012, the rate increased by more than 70% from 2007. Motor vehicle crime was up by nearly 50% in the area between 2007 and 2012, versus a 37% decline in auto theft nationwide. The area is also home to a number of major auto parts manufacturing operations, which are critical to the area’s economy. Okay. All facts. 1.3 people murdered per 100,000 in a year. What do we have, 50,000 people in Columbus? Thats less than a person a year murdered. Lets look at, say, Gnaw Bone...... 40 people? One murder would really make them look bad. Then look at percentages. If you have one, then you have two, 100% increase. If you have 10, then have 11, 10% increase. 100, then 101, only 1%. All only one more murder. So, percentages can be deceiving. He wanted it posted, so its posted. Please keep what I said in mind as you read. Now, if we took all the suicides our coroner has declared and sorted out how many were actually murders, this could be a new Chain Saw Massacre movie.... time/6729/10-cities-where-violent-crime-is-soaring/
Posted on: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 09:01:13 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015