FBI says Dallas most dangerous large city in 2005

[ProHouston]

FBI says Dallas most dangerous large city in 2005

NEW YORK -- New York remained the safest of the nation's 10 largest cities in 2005, with about one crime reported for every 37 people, according to FBI statistics.

The annual report "shows that our innovative efforts to reduce crime and increase New Yorkers' quality of life are working," Mayor Michael Bloomberg said in a statement Monday after the agency released the figures.

The large city with the highest crime rate was Dallas, with about one crime reported for every 12 people. Los Angeles ranked eighth, with about one crime for every 26 people.

Read the rest of this AP story on the Chronicle's website.

[RedScare]

I thought it was interesting that the Chronicle could not be bothered to state Houston's place on the list. It is likely close to where it has been for the last several years, about halfway between Dallas and LA, but to omit Houston's ranking in a Houston newspaper article is pretty lame.

EDIT: My bad. I read the earlier version, without the list. The update includes it.

[KimberlySayWhat]

I was just fixin' to post that.

:Womp, womp:

[musicman]

I"m sure the Mayor will remain silent.

[feufoma]

This isn't really anything new. Houston's doing very poorly as well. And we shouldn't blame it on Katrina evacuees. The fact of the matter is our police department is a joke. They would rather focus on revenue-generating schemes such as speed traps rather than increase city police beats in areas where the police's presence would be a deterrent to crime. Pathetic... Our tax dollars hard at work!

[texastrill]

This isn't really anything new. Houston's doing very poorly as well. And we shouldn't blame it on Katrina evacuees. The fact of the matter is our police department is a joke. They would rather focus on revenue-generating schemes such as speed traps rather than increase city police beats in areas where the police's presence would be a deterrent to crime. Pathetic... Our tax dollars hard at work!

Some in Dallas think having the kids ,or anybody,pull up thier pants and not sagging will clean up the city.No way its the police dept.Theres been so many firings for misconduct recently,its a shame.

[TexasStar]

Some in Dallas think having the kids ,or anybody,pull up thier pants and not sagging will clean up the city.No way its the police dept.Theres been so many firings for misconduct recently,its a shame.

Some like who? One fruitcake school administrator floated that in front of the Council. It was immediately shot down and everybody keeps bringing it up as if it had a snowflake's chance in hell of being approved.

And I see the firings are a PLUS not a minus. It means the new Police Chief is determined to clean this department up.

[texastrill]

I never said it would happen or work.I bring it up only to make a point that the city has way more problems than "dress codes".

I see the firings as a good thing as well.FW's chief Mendoza should follow in Kunkle's footsteps.FWPD could use some cleaning up of its own.

[Jeebus]

The fact of the matter is our police department is a joke. They would rather focus on revenue-generating schemes such as speed traps rather than increase city police beats in areas where the police's presence would be a deterrent to crime. Pathetic... Our tax dollars hard at work!

Just don't blame the officers, instead blame the administration.

Notice this list only included the ten biggest cities in the nation. I'm sure cities like Detroit, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Oakland, Baltimore, Memphis, St. Louis, Miami and Atlanta have violent crimes that would bump half of those ten biggest cities right off the list.

[Guest danax]

Just don't blame the officers, instead blame the administration.

Notice this list only included the ten biggest cities in the nation. I'm sure cities like Detroit, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Oakland, Baltimore, Memphis, St. Louis, Miami and Atlanta have violent crimes that would bump half of those ten biggest cities right off the list.

The police can only do so much. Is NY's drop in crime due to great policing or more due to less criminals per capita living in NY than in the other cities?

[The Great Hizzy!]

The police can only do so much. Is NY's drop in crime due to great policing or more due to less criminals per capita living in NY than in the other cities?

Cost of living's an issue; the poorest of the poor in New York had been struggling to such outrageous degrees that they've moved on and can't hack it anymore. When poverty starts to abate so does crime. Officers per capita is another (and maybe more significant) reason, and maybe their tactics, given the landscape of New York is working extremely well. The city, as I understand it, greatly increased the sie of its police force during the mid-to-late nineties. Couple that with a large influx of yuppies moving into Manhattan and parts of Brooklyn, and the dynamics of the city has changed.

Remember, New York used to be one of the nation's ten most violent cities during the 70s and 80s.

[TexasStar]

Perhaps the most important problem with these rankings is that every city reports crimes differently. Chief Kunckle gave an example saying that in Dallas if a particular crime directly affects, for example, 4 different individuals, Dallas reports 4 crime incidents. Some other cities in the same situation would report only one crime incident. Therefore, these inter-city comparisons are probably invalid on many levels.

The bottom line is all big cities have too much crime, and we should be focused on how to eliminate it rather than crowing about who may be a few percentage points higher or lower.

[Pumapayam]

Houston's ranking in a Houston newspaper article is pretty lame.

Blame it on the "Katrina People"!

[The Great Hizzy!]

This might be the most hilarious and embarrassing post I've ever seen, and that's saying a lot.

From Aceplace at Dallas Metropolis. This is awesome:

Absolutely correct. Creating arbitrary and irrelevant categories such as "cities over 1 million" makes for meaningless numbers... and nonsensical conclusions.

For example, let's say we want to compare the crime rate of all towns and cities with names that begin with the letters "da". And on that basis we conclude that Dallas is somehow a cesspool of violent danger. Most of us would consider that nonsense.

Likewise, the category of "cities over 1 million" is also irrelevant. Especially when "cities" turns out to mean "municipal governments". Even more than that, why draw the line at exactly 1 million? Is there a good reason to not compare Dallas to Washington DC or Detroit, both of them smaller municipal governments, but representing the center of similarly sized metro areas? What about comparing the likelihood of a tourist being mugged in central Dallas to the likelihood of being mugged in Atlanta? These are realistic questions.

Using crime numbers for municipalities also gives false conclusions, since municipalities of similar sizes have a different mix of good neighborhoods and high crime ghettos. For example, Philadelphia. Its high crime area has been segregated into a separate municipality, Camden, across the river in New Jersey, thus artificially biasing the numbers for municipal Philadelphia. Dallas could also artificially improve its numbers by separately incorporating parts of Oak Cliff... and merging the Park Cities into municipal Dallas... but that would not change the level of danger in Uptown.

One more fallacy... the number for a single municipality obscures the fact that there are extreme variations in danger between one part of a municipality and another. Do you think that people in Turtle Creek or in Preston Hollow have a realistic chance of being killed in a drive-by shooting?

Two things hapening. Some malicious people in Houston and other places are trying to attack Dallas' morale by using misrepresenting stats... and some foolish people in Dallas are believing them.

LOL!!

[RedScare]

Blame it on the "Katrina People"!

Why, no, I don't blame it on the "Katrina people", since the statistics cover ALL of 2005, not just the last few months, and it includes ALL crimes, not just murder.

However, I DO BLAME YOU, for taking my quote out of context. You completely cut off the first half of the sentence, where I commented on the Chronicle's incomplete article, a statement that I later corrected, when the article was edited.

If you want to make uneducated and unsupported comments that show your lack of insight into an issue, feel free, but do not hack my statements into pieces in an attempt to make your ignorant views appear to have my support. They do not.

[The Great Hizzy!]

I'm also tired of the "Katrina people" response to crime in Houston. Yes, I agree that with 100K to 150K people coming all at one into the city, a percentage will include those who will commit the most heinous crimes. However, after a year, and after seeing that there's a very good chance that the majority of these 150K people will remain in Houston, it's time to start looking at their issues as OUR issues, because they'll effect the city for years, both in the positive and the negative.

So, at this point, in my mind, these are Houstonians (who happened to have relocated here due to Katrina) committing these crimes. We have to deal with it. We have to deal with our 500+ officer shortage. We have to stop making broad blanket "the police sucks" or "Harold Hurtt" sucks statements and actually make an effort to fix the problem with solutions. Meaningful ones.

Questions:

How do we make inroads in not only making up for the 500+ officer shortage? Furthermore, how do we THEN come up with the monies to hire even more officers because even with 500+ officers, our officer to civilian ratio is subpar.

How do we hold apartment complex owners responsible for reporting and patroling crime in their complex? If reported crimes are high at particular complex and there is no identifiable effort provided by the owners to increase patrol there, do we then charge the complex the amount of money per day it would take to have an officer patroling the grounds of this complex?

Just a couple of questions to consider. I don't have a fullproof plan of attack but I would love to see meaningful suggestions.

[RedScare]

This might be the most hilarious and embarrassing post I've ever seen, and that's saying a lot.

From Aceplace at Dallas Metropolis. This is awesome:

Two things hapening. Some malicious people in Houston and other places are trying to attack Dallas' morale by using misrepresenting stats... and some foolish people in Dallas are believing them.

LOL!!

I thought Jason DFW said Aceplace's whereabouts were unknown. He's all over that thread. And, he, along with all of the other DFW posters, missed the source of the article. It is an AP article. The Chronicle merely reprinted it.

Those lists ARE worthless ways to calculate a city's dangerousness, though Aceplace never could explain why. The FBI has guidelines for reporting crime, so that the comparisons are useful. However, theft and other property crimes make up 80% or more of the the total number of crimes reported. So, this list really only gives an idea of the general level of cleptomania in each of the cities. I found that the majority of the cities at the top of the list were southern or western, and linked by their sprawl characteristics. Does this mean Southerners are bigger thieves? Does sprawl make theft easier? Auto theft is always higher in auto dependent cities. Does that make the rate higher?

Things to ponder, along with why Houstonians are so malicious.

[JasonDFW]

I thought Jason DFW said Aceplace's whereabouts were unknown. He's all over that thread. And, he, along with all of the other DFW posters, missed the source of the article. It is an AP article. The Chronicle merely reprinted it.

No, I didn't say that. He's about as easy to find as you. I think most people on that forum are smart enough to know the AP was the source. I assume he said "other places" and specifically called out Houston was because it was the Houston reprint of the article that was being discussed. Maybe you could ask him?

Jason

[RedScare]

No, I didn't say that. He's about as easy to find as you. I think most people on that forum are smart enough to know the AP was the source. I assume he said "other places" and specifically called out Houston was because it was the Houston reprint of the article that was being discussed. Maybe you could ask him?

Jason

My bad, Jason. It was TexasStar, in this thread...

http://www.houstonarchitecture.info/haif/i...mp;#entry114984

You merely made a comment.

[musicman]

Questions:

How do we make inroads in not only making up for the 500+ officer shortage? Furthermore, how do we THEN come up with the monies to hire even more officers because even with 500+ officers, our officer to civilian ratio is subpar.

First the morale problem needs to be resolved otherwise retirements will continue to increase. There are more people retiring than classes being held.

How do we hold apartment complex owners responsible for reporting and patroling crime in their complex? If reported crimes are high at particular complex and there is no identifiable effort provided by the owners to increase patrol there, do we then charge the complex the amount of money per day it would take to have an officer patroling the grounds of this complex?

I believe the city council has been discussing requiring complexes to provide security but as of now, nothing has been done.

[texastrill]

I found that the majority of the cities at the top of the list were southern or western, and linked by their sprawl characteristics. Does this mean Southerners are bigger thieves? Does sprawl make theft easier? Auto theft is always higher in auto dependent cities. Does that make the rate higher?

Someone at an another forum mentioned Texas' education rankings.Would the southern states educational systems be to blame here?

[The Great Hizzy!]

First the morale problem needs to be resolved otherwise retirements will continue to increase. There are more people retiring than classes being held.

I believe the city council has been discussing requiring complexes to provide security but as of now, nothing has been done.

Thanks. I wasn't sure how the city has responded to this. This, as much as anything, seems to be a source of concern with regard to violent crime. There was a special report on KTRK news about a particular complex in SE Houston where both residents and HPD felt the management of the complex was lax in not only providing security but alerting police of ongoing criminal behavior that was in full view of anyone on the grounds (drug deals, prostitution, gang initiations, etc).

As for improving morale, that's a touchy one. Is it more money? Less overtime? Lieutenants and captains who are more supportive? Better equipment? All of the above? Police work is stressful and even with the most supportive administrations, it's hard to turn down a full pension after 22 or so years if it's available. I think the problem here is that the potential for mass retirements (in lieu of the mid-Eighties hiring boom) was never properly addressed by previous administrations. Further, in an era in which Houston's population has gone from 1,594,000 in 1990 to it's current (post-Katrina) estimate of 2,146,000, there seems to have been years of not pushing the growth of the force's # of officers.

A city our size probably should have a force between 6,500 and 7,000 instead of our current estimate of 4,900. I have heard that a handful of New Orleans police officers have left the NOPD for other agencies in Louisiana, Texas and Georgia, which includes a handful in Houston. Not that that's helpful in a real terrms.

[musicman]

Thanks. I wasn't sure how the city has responded to this. This, as much as anything, seems to be a source of concern with regard to violent crime. There was a special report on KTRK news about a particular complex in SE Houston where both residents and HPD felt the management of the complex was lax in not only providing security but alerting police of ongoing criminal behavior that was in full view of anyone on the grounds (drug deals, prostitution, gang initiations, etc).

Stuff like this is happening all over town and not going noticed unless someone is killed. When someone is killed, the police are visible for a month or so until the next "hot spot" develops.

As for improving morale, that's a touchy one. Is it more money? Less overtime? Lieutenants and captains who are more supportive? Better equipment? All of the above? Police work is stressful and even with the most supportive administrations, it's hard to turn down a full pension after 22 or so years if it's available. I think the problem here is that the potential for mass retirements (in lieu of the mid-Eighties hiring boom) was never properly addressed by previous administrations. Further, in an era in which Houston's population has gone from 1,594,000 in 1990 to it's current (post-Katrina) estimate of 2,146,000, there seems to have been years of not pushing the growth of the force's # of officers.

IMO, morale could be improved by management (chief) who is more supportive. The overtime situation has made it worse because hours are too long for someone in a stressful job. Past administrations have used overtime as a stopgap measure when crime increases, however we have less officers per person now so the officers are really overburdened.

Thanks. I wasn't sure how the city has responded to this. This, as much as anything, seems to be a source of concern with regard to violent crime. There was a special report on KTRK news about a particular complex in SE Houston where both residents and HPD felt the management of the complex was lax in not only providing security but alerting police of ongoing criminal behavior that was in full view of anyone on the grounds (drug deals, prostitution, gang initiations, etc).

Stuff like this is happening all over town and not going noticed unless someone is killed. When someone is killed, the police are visible for a month or so until the next "hot spot" develops.

As for improving morale, that's a touchy one. Is it more money? Less overtime? Lieutenants and captains who are more supportive? Better equipment? All of the above? Police work is stressful and even with the most supportive administrations, it's hard to turn down a full pension after 22 or so years if it's available. I think the problem here is that the potential for mass retirements (in lieu of the mid-Eighties hiring boom) was never properly addressed by previous administrations. Further, in an era in which Houston's population has gone from 1,594,000 in 1990 to it's current (post-Katrina) estimate of 2,146,000, there seems to have been years of not pushing the growth of the force's # of officers.

IMO, morale could be improved by management (chief) who is more supportive. The overtime situation has made it worse because hours are too long for someone in a stressful job. Past administrations have used overtime as a stopgap measure when crime increases, however we have less officers per person now so the officers are really overburdened.

[TxDave]

This might be the most hilarious and embarrassing post I've ever seen, and that's saying a lot.

From Aceplace at Dallas Metropolis. This is awesome:

Absolutely correct. Creating arbitrary and irrelevant categories such as "cities over 1 million" makes for meaningless numbers... and nonsensical conclusions.

For example, let's say we want to compare the crime rate of all towns and cities with names that begin with the letters "da". And on that basis we conclude that Dallas is somehow a cesspool of violent danger. Most of us would consider that nonsense.

Likewise, the category of "cities over 1 million" is also irrelevant. Especially when "cities" turns out to mean "municipal governments". Even more than that, why draw the line at exactly 1 million? Is there a good reason to not compare Dallas to Washington DC or Detroit, both of them smaller municipal governments, but representing the center of similarly sized metro areas? What about comparing the likelihood of a tourist being mugged in central Dallas to the likelihood of being mugged in Atlanta? These are realistic questions.

Using crime numbers for municipalities also gives false conclusions, since municipalities of similar sizes have a different mix of good neighborhoods and high crime ghettos. For example, Philadelphia. Its high crime area has been segregated into a separate municipality, Camden, across the river in New Jersey, thus artificially biasing the numbers for municipal Philadelphia. Dallas could also artificially improve its numbers by separately incorporating parts of Oak Cliff... and merging the Park Cities into municipal Dallas... but that would not change the level of danger in Uptown.

One more fallacy... the number for a single municipality obscures the fact that there are extreme variations in danger between one part of a municipality and another. Do you think that people in Turtle Creek or in Preston Hollow have a realistic chance of being killed in a drive-by shooting?

Two things hapening. Some malicious people in Houston and other places are trying to attack Dallas' morale by using misrepresenting stats... and some foolish people in Dallas are believing them.

LOL!!

Aside from the emotional final comment (in bold), the original post does make sense - - if you read it objectively

[The Great Hizzy!]

How do you know I didn't read objectively? What bias(es) do you believe I have? This is bordering on fascinating.

[Pumapayam]

However, I DO BLAME YOU, for taking my quote out of context. You completely cut off the first half of the sentence, where I commented on the Chronicle's incomplete article, a statement that I later corrected, when the article was edited.

Creative editing on my part, I apologize.

I still state my claim and blame them (even though, yes, it was a few months), since there has been plenty of news reports and that zip code in Westchase is just flooded with Katrina People. ( I guess I am generalizing it beyond 2005)

I feel for them, I do, but they really need to just get a job and live a respectable life and quit hating other people. :closedeyes:

[The Great Hizzy!]

I feel for them, I do, but they really need to just get a job and live a respectable life and quit hating other people.

Humor and irony.

[feufoma]

Houstonians didn't create this study: the FBI did! How is simply posting notice of the study taking pot-shots at Dallas??? The fact of the matter is this particular study presents findings that Dallas is, per capita, the most dangerous of the 10 largest municipalities in the United States. Dallasites should just face up to it and try to solve the problem(s). I realize it must be a giant blow to Dallas's super-inflated (and unjustified) ego, but lump it. (And, as I said before, Houstonians certainly don't have anything to feel good about in relation to the study either.)

[Pumapayam]

I was just watching CNN HLN's about this, and Jim Pruitt, who is a talk show host, and a gun store owner, is asking Houstonians to arm themselves against Katrina Evacuees.

He is basically saying that once the FEMA money runs out, the crime levels will increase.

True statement?

[Original Timmy Chan's]

I was just watching CNN HLN's about this, and Jim Pruitt, who is a talk show host, and a gun store owner, is asking Houstonians to arm themselves against Katrina Evacuees.

He is basically saying that once the FEMA money runs out, the crime levels will increase.

True statement?

Not to discount the impacts of some Katrina evacuees, because there were obviously some bad people that came to Houston from NOLA, but...

...how do the multitudes explain the increase in violent crime across the nation? Is it ALL due to Katrina?

Or is there some other underlying cause?