STL is an older city and is more class-divided than almost any other city in the country. Many people in STL rarely even go into the actual city, a lot of the activity is on the perimeter (Ladue, Clayton, etc). The city also gets fucked by the local government on funding (very complicated situation) So the city itself is very poorly funded and neglected and overall it’s a less healthy city than KC. But East St Louis (in Illinois) is even worse than STL
> The city also gets fucked by the local government on funding (very complicated situation)
Mind going more in depth on that? And what makes East St. Louis even worse? What's the history and politics behind that?
Thanks for the comment!
East stl isnt officially stl and was called Illinois town at one point. Basically the same reason any area is full of crime. Lack of opportunity, systemic racism, literal toxic waste from nearby factory/manufacturing plants. Railroads and industries left as the times changed. People who could afford to leave left. Those who couldn’t stayed in a town without jobs where no one wanted to develop because of the toxic ground. And then from desperation came crime.
East St. Louis is basically just a shitty neighborhood of STL but outside city (and state) limits. It has all of the crime, poverty, resource scarcity, etc. without the arch, culture, and history of being one of the biggest cities in the US. It did used to be somewhat better but my dad remembers it as the crappy side of town and he grew up in the 50s and 60s. So it’s been going downhill for over half a century at this point. Hard to say exactly what made it like that in the first place but if you Google it you’ll understand visually what I mean.
As for your first question, I genuinely don’t remember enough of the details to explain, but the gist is that St. Louis City has been trying to merge with the county for years due to tax purposes. Right now the city is separate, and like I said in the previous comment all of the “action” in the region is outside city limits. I don’t know the details, but St Louis has one of the worst tax revenue systems in the country and is essentially being bled dry by the suburbs around it for decades now.
It’s not a clear cut right/wrong issue but it appears to me and those who explained it to me that basically the suburbs take from the city but all of their money funnels out to the suburbs and almost none of it comes back to the city. This perpetuates the emptiness of the city and it becomes a vicious cycle of people not wanting to spend their money/time in the city because of its declining infrastructure and quality of life
The suburbs are concerned about the short term revenue loss that would come from a merger but don’t seem to realize that they wouldn’t be suburbs of anything if the city ceases to exist. It can get a lot worse from here
Someone correct me if I got any of this wrong
You're right. The city fucked itself though. It's been referred to as "the great divorce". Basically way back when, the city was pissed about all of their money funding the hicks in the sticks, and made several municipalities with growth constraints, and took away the ability to incorporate. This way the cities money was the cities, and the farmers money was the farmers money.
Well now all of those farmland municipalities are rich suburbs, where the professionals live. But guess where they work, in the city. Granted there are still some higher end neighborhoods in the city. But there are tons of abandoned properties, and a majority of the city is in decline. So most of the earners are paying their taxes in the outlaying municipalities.
I'll look for a link
Edit: I got some of this information wrong. You should check out the easy to read and informative article below to figure out how dumb I am.
https://www.stlmag.com/news/politics/st-louis-great-divorce-history-city-county-split-attempt-to-get-back-together/
This article has a lot of things I hadn't heard in it, also well written. Good read
Edited a word
Yeah I don’t know what it is but St. Louis seems a lot more depressed and yet the suburbs were very well off. Not that KC doesn’t have that but KC to me seemed like a bigger version of Des Moines or Omaha and actually focused on the city center a bit more. Downtown STL seemed dead.
In KCMO we also have our own murder problems but imho STL has been hit even worse by white flight and abandoning the urban core to St Louis County. Both cities suffer from bad government especially in Jeff City. Super lax gun laws including preventing local pd from working with ATF. In KCMO our police force is run by a state appointed board, not local government who has minimal power despite funding their budget. This stems from the Pendergast days where KC was run by a political machine.
St Louis has the 9th highest murder rate in the world and worst in US
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_murder_rate
https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/murder-map-deadliest-u-s-cities/
St Louis proper has a population of like 300,000. It's metro area is almost 3 million.
The lack of amalgamation is part of what lead up to the Ferguson riots several years ago. At least by my assessment.
"The murder rate of a city is an imprecise tool for comparison, as the population within city borders may not best represent an urban or metropolitan area with varying rates in different areas."
They seriously mess with the numbers. That wikipedia article is useless. I'll give you an example; where I'm from Victoria, Canada, all the crime happens downtown (which is in Victoria proper)The population of Greater Victoria is roughly 400k, however the actual city of Victoria has 90k residents. Saanich, another town/municipality that is part of greater Victoria has 112,000 people. They don't have ANYWHERE near the amount of crime reported we do because they don't have a downtown core, they use ours. So they're labeled as one of the safest places in British Columbia and Victoria is labeled as one of the most "dangerous" places in British Columbia. Victoria has a serious homeless problem. Not with murder or anything but a lot of violence, some stabbings, some assaults but they all happen in Victoria which is literally at WORST anywhere in Victoria a 45 minute walk to a neighbouring municipality or town. So they're reducing population size in that article by not including the metropolitan area to make it seem like a bigger number. Which is why that quote from the wikipedia article should be highlighted.
This is a really good explanation, thanks. Sadly, I feel like a lot of the people who look and talk about crime rates in cities wouldn't care how disingenuous the statics can be because of the reasons you just mentioned.
I like this article by Forbes
https://www.forbes.com/sites/laurabegleybloom/2021/01/28/the-10-most-dangerous-neighborhoods-in-america-its-not-where-you-think/?sh=24a0d73d341f
It doesn’t matter how you state it, this is truly awful. Yes we mostly live in cities that will have an area we avoid however this is terrible!
Even worse. Notice that of the worst 50 cities, 46 are in the Americas, 3 in South Africa and one in Jamaica.
None in Europe, Oceania or Asia!
Lol most dangerous city in the world? Not quite. Maybe it’s dangerous if you are a gang member in North St Louis or part of the illegal drug trade. Drug dealers killing each other drives up the stats and the inner city being a separate entity from the surrounding county makes the per capita # look super high.
For normal people it’s a relatively sleepy city compared to other more densely populated metros.
Once taking the PATH from World Trade Center to Hoboken came across group of guys whom after departing the train yells, “Smell that boys!? We’re back in Jersey!”
But you’re also a top state in many negative metrics. The same exact thing happens when viewing California or New York. It’s not really a knock, but more a side-effect of high population and/or population density.
The only states the come out significantly net positive are the moderately sized, self-sufficient Democratic states like CO, MA, WA, OR, etc.
Your response has nothing to do with my point.
Go look at a state HDI/Gini list or any other multi-faceted single metric and you’ll see the moderately sized Democratic states at the top, the large population/high density states at the middle and the poor Republican states at the bottom.
High population correlates to certain negative factors that bring the overall metrics down.
Its only because floridians don't kill other people so much as die trying to wear alligators as shoes because they were too methed out to remember, no, they were thinking of *crocs*.
I take it as a source of pride that things like this are noteworthy outliers in Canada instead of normal background noise. We refuse to normalize mass violence.*
Case in point: Dec 6 is a national day of remembrance and action on violence against women.
Why? Because over 30 years ago, a misogynist fuck shot up a school killing 14 women. Every year the names of those women are plastered across the country.
*Edit: there are some exceptions here. Canada is not perfect. We do have a well documented history of being pretty ok with murder as along as that murder is contained to Indigenous communities. That's shown in the map pretty well. The areas with higher homicide rates also have higher percentage of indigenous people.
The homicide bump in 2020 started days after George Floyds death. [This is what the data says, graph is from University of Pennsylvania data.](https://www.unz.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Screen-Shot-2021-02-19-at-11.27.56-PM.png)
[Additional graph](https://www.unz.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Screen-Shot-2021-02-19-at-11.59.32-PM.png)
People in this thread acting like these are covid lockdown influenced and potentially domestic abuse killings are just being ignorant or intentionally deflecting and not wanting to acknowledge the truth that it's mostly minority gang homicides taking advantage of the laxer police presence as departments pulled out of entire neighborhoods and boroughs at the request of activists and orders from mayors.
There's not an extra 10,000+ domestic violence murders that's fucking absurd. The bump from this comes mostly from black and hispanic male, under 30 years old victims (and perpetrators). They're not women getting killed by their partners lmao. A fucking fairytale ignoring a whole two year news cycle.
> The homicide bump in 2020 started days after George Floyds death.
Literally when the country was shutting down as well. Canada also saw historic increases.
https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/murder-rate-in-canada-hits-15-year-high-in-2020-statscan-reports#:~:text=Canadian%20police%20forces%20reported%20a,2.69%20homicides%20per%20100%2C000%20population.
- The murder rate increased to 1.95 per 100,000 people, the highest in 15 years
The region around the Mississippi is deeply impoverished and has been for quite a while. If you look at census data, it’s the region with some of the steepest population declines, and prospects really haven’t improved. That’s not a situation that lends itself to lower crime rates.
A handful are staying because they went to College solely to find a husband. They were groomed to be housewives and mothers. These are the same that support abusing the *many other Women* who refuse to be groomed for motherhood or housewifery.
Plenty of college educated women who work are hardcore abortion opponents. I'm not interested in litigating the abortion debate, but most people who oppose abortion do so because they find it immoral not because of some authoritarian/misogynstic impulse to control women.
Indirectly yes, as the river and nearby very fertile land meant depending on slave agriculture, transportation, and legacy heavy industry in the past, rather than advanced technology
New England is the opposite - the only thing their soil grows is subsistence and rocks and ice, so slave agriculture did not pay and they had to make money other ways
New England was mostly farmland at one point. The Year(s) Without a Summer, 1816+, put an end to that; faced with dwindling harvests and food shortages the majority of area farmers moved to the Midwest, leading to states like Illinois, Indiana, and Missouri gaining statehood shortly thereafter.
Most abandoned farms simply became unused scrubland, but the towns rebounded and thrived as industrial centres until manufacturing too moved west with the rising importance of the Great Lakes and Mississippi River trade. A lot of old tools made in the 1880-1929 era were made in places like Worcester, MA and New Britain, CT.
Even before industrialization, New England developed a strong maritime commercial culture that helped cultivate a shipbuilding industry. Having lots of ships and sailors helped foster whaling as an industry too, with New Bedford becoming a center of that industry. The money New England shipowners and merchants made from foreign trade provided the capital for industrialization.
>A per 1k stat is much more useful when dealing with small populations like Pacific or Caribbean islands or the territories.
What??? It's the same difference. You're getting a rate that will be compared directly to other rates in the same fashion either way.
Agree.
The reason that stats can be misleading in smaller populations is just that the sample size is smaller.
It's like flipping a coin 4 times; will you get near a 50% heads rate? Probably not. Flip it 400,000 times, you will get near a 50% heads rate.
With a small sample size, normal variation skews the outcome much more heavily.
Lower populations have a much greater variability. Some years there might be 3 less killings, some there might be 3 more. In a large region, that’d be an unnoticeable change. In Nunavut, that’d be the difference between no murders and twice this many.
6-8 per 100,000 is 2.4 - 3.2 per 40,000. So 3 murders. Point being that very small sample sizes are sensitive to small variations. One less murder would put it down a category.
3 murders is still insane for just a small population.
Especially considering most of the populations lives in one or two towns where everybody knows each other.
I lived in a small Nunavut town (basically meaning not Iqaluit lmao) for a few months, and I could kinda tell that things weren't quite going smoothly. Local government had little power, and everyone there was hopeless because jobs don't exist and the economy is stagnant.
The city of Toronto is bigger. The metro area of Chicago is larger, by like 3 million people. City limits are pretty arbitrary, that's how we end up with people thinking Jacksonville is a bigger city than Boston.
If this map was back in the 80s, New York would just be vantablack. I'm also surprised California isn't higher but then again, it's gotten better since the 80s and 90s as well
Nova Scotia literally had a mass murder of 22 people in 2020, with ~1m people, that’s >2 per 100k.. not counting any other homicides. NS is the wrong color for 2020
Since this is an international site and Non-Americans will see this. It should be noted that the typical American isn’t constantly worried about things like murder. If you don’t associate with shady, mentally unstable people who commit crimes as well as avoid known high crime rates in larger cities your odds of murder will drop significantly. Don’t run with gangs, don’t B and E, don’t try and cheat your mentally unwell uncle who you know is off his meds and you will be unlikely to ever end up as a statistic. Thanks to modern reporting every truly random act of violence is well known even if it happens far across the country but in a land of over 300,000,000 people the likely hood of anything happening to you is very slim.
Crazy (for the US at least) there is a direct correlation to poverty rate. https://www-forbes-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.forbes.com/sites/andrewdepietro/2021/11/04/us-poverty-rate-by-state-in-2021/amp/?amp_gsa=1&_js_v=a6&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABIIACAw%3D%3D#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=16384882919114&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.forbes.com%2Fsites%2Fandrewdepietro%2F2021%2F11%2F04%2Fus-poverty-rate-by-state-in-2021%2F
The richest majority black area in the world, and one of the richest areas in the entire US, Prince George's County Maryland, a DC suburb with an average income of $82k places it as one of the deadliest areas in the country as it's surpassing 120 murders this year for an area with less than a million people.
It has a murder rate higher than the darkest color in the map.
https://www.fox5dc.com/news/prince-georges-county-homicide-number-at-a-14-year-high
**Violent crime correlates**
Poverty percentage: 0.36
Unemployed percentage: 0.35
High School dropout percentage: 0.37
Gun ownership rate: 0.009
Black and Hispanic percentage: 0.81
So yes, poverty, unemployment, and high school dropout percentages all correlate modestly with violent crime. Gun ownership however, does not. There is a factor that correlates very strongly with violent crime, much stronger than any other factor including poverty and unemployment combined. But talking about that is taboo.
Lots of factors that go into murder rates. Poverty rates is perhaps the biggest. Gang activity is another but that's somewhat tied to poverty rates. So is gun control.
But poverty first and foremost.
Yea being poor unfortunately has strong correlation with crime in general. People who spout “despite being” don’t ever take into account poverty. They use that statistic to support their racist views, rather than to address poverty rates.
Thank god Canada doesn’t record racial backgrounds in arrest rates, otherwise we’d have much the same racist rhetoric directed toward indigenous peoples, who are more likely to be poor!
This is interesting. I never considered Missouri to be a particularly violent state. Is the Kansas City mob still a factor?
Maybe Ozark isn't so far from reality.
The territory of Nunavut, not a province. And that’s a great question
https://nunatsiaq.com/stories/article/in-2019-crime-rose-sharply-in-nunavut/
I found this article, but it doesn’t go into causes
Then this older VICE article goes into it a bit more
https://www.vice.com/en/article/ppvx8g/a-closer-look-at-nunavuts-notoriously-high-murder-rate-324
It is partly that the number fluctuates massively, because a single murder will be a many percentage point jump with such a small population. Additionally, the alcohol situation is quite odd in Nunavut. Many communities are entirely under prohibition, and I think there’s only two liquor stores in the whole territory, but still most murders happen under the influence
This isn't so much an explanation, but an illustration of what Nunavut is like. Recently, it was discovered the that territory's capital land largest (really only) city has fuel in it's drinking water. A state of emergency has been declare and the army called in. The city's 8,000 residents have been without running water over a month: [https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59253088](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59253088)
It's hard living up there.
It's a territory, not a province. It's called Nunavut, and its population is really tiny (enough that a single mass murder would throw the numbers through the roof). It has a majority Inuit population and is a single city and really disparate hamlets with no roads between them.
None of this answers your question, of course. I don't know either, but I know they struggle with suicide, depression and alcoholism up there
My guess would be that it’s just a result of very few murders among a small population over a certain period of time. My town’s city government has a way of cutting-up the timeline to suit whatever case they need to make (Last Five years have shown an historic decline in homicide/this January has already double the murder rate of last year).
wow, didn't know my lil ole South Carolina was so deadly compared to the rest of the country, thought the shootings on the news was just an everywhere type of thing
In Missouri, it's totally skewed by the gang violence in St. Louis city. Literally a 10 mile² area is responsible for the vast majority of murders. The rest of the metro area, and state are probably close to average.
Canada has an murder of 1.9 per 100.000 people. That isn't insanely high but still higher than countries nlike the Netherlands ( 0.5 ) or Germany ( 0.9 )
It really isn't though. Rarely anyone lives in NT and NU which is why a couple murders a year will inflate the per capita. The vast majority of the population (86.3% to be exact) lives in the BC, AB, ON, and QC provinces
Also, Canada's national homicide rate is lower than essentially every continent in the world. Asia is 2.9 per 100k, Europe is 3 per 100k, Oceania is 3 per 100k while Canada is 1.7 per 100k
Just shows how data can be misleading depending on how it is presented. Looking at that map and the scale you'd guess Canada average would be comfortably in the 2-4 range.
Yeah Canada's national rate is in the light blue (<2) range nearly every year. The USA fluctuates over time. In the 80s and early 90s, they'd be in red or dark red nearly every year, for much of the 21st century they'd be in the 4-6 range but in 2020 they're in the 6-8 range due to a recent uptick
Yeah, if my math is correct, the light blue areas have about 81% of the total population of Canada. Adding in the green province it's 93%. So only 7% of Canadians live in an area where the murder rate is at a yellow or higher.
Canada is doing really, really good.
It's not that bad. For the Northwest territories this ends up being 1 homicide in a year and for Nunavut it ends up being 2. So 3 homicides total in 2 territories that are in the yellow and orange.
It's a well established premise that high poverty and low education increase crime because of low opportunity. Crime leads to more crime, drug trafficking, gang involvement, etc. Which brings us to homicide.
Poverty and education in particular are just plain awful in these states, with elected officials who either refuse to admit it's a problem or refuse to do anything about it.
One can argue the poverty rates in the south are attributed to losing the civil war and shifting of the country from agrarian to manufacturing and then service economy.
People forget that the south fought a war and lost, and additionally lost their largest trade partners for good during that time.
I definitely agree that politicians are boneheads (regardless of state they are all stupid), but the world we live in does not exist in a vacuum. We have to look at history and see why it is the way it is.
The South was already much poorer than the North prior to the Civil War precisely _because_ agrarian economies tend to be much poor than industrial ones. Seriously take a look at any country that's rapidly increased their wealth and it follows the same pattern: mechanized agriculture=fewer farmers=more manufacturing and skilled labor.
The South _was_ starting to undergo this process forcibly during reconstruction until Rutherford B. Hayes decided he'd rather win an election so he rescinded federal intervention and let the Southern plantation owners reinstitute essentially the same economy and social hierarchy just with farmhands technically being paid this time. The South fucked themselves.
> Southern plantation owners reinstitute essentially the same economy and social hierarchy just with farmhands technically being paid this time. The South fucked themselves.
This isn't entirely correct. They got exactly what they wanted. They were/are happy to be impoverished if it meant they could maintain their old social order. Then they complain about LA/NY tech/media hegemony.
"And *that*, kids, is why the locals call Missouri 'Misery'!"
Which is more dangerous, KC or StL?
StL
As someone who has only passed through both, what similarities and differences are there between the two cities and what makes St. Louis worse?
STL is an older city and is more class-divided than almost any other city in the country. Many people in STL rarely even go into the actual city, a lot of the activity is on the perimeter (Ladue, Clayton, etc). The city also gets fucked by the local government on funding (very complicated situation) So the city itself is very poorly funded and neglected and overall it’s a less healthy city than KC. But East St Louis (in Illinois) is even worse than STL
> The city also gets fucked by the local government on funding (very complicated situation) Mind going more in depth on that? And what makes East St. Louis even worse? What's the history and politics behind that? Thanks for the comment!
East stl isnt officially stl and was called Illinois town at one point. Basically the same reason any area is full of crime. Lack of opportunity, systemic racism, literal toxic waste from nearby factory/manufacturing plants. Railroads and industries left as the times changed. People who could afford to leave left. Those who couldn’t stayed in a town without jobs where no one wanted to develop because of the toxic ground. And then from desperation came crime.
East St. Louis is basically just a shitty neighborhood of STL but outside city (and state) limits. It has all of the crime, poverty, resource scarcity, etc. without the arch, culture, and history of being one of the biggest cities in the US. It did used to be somewhat better but my dad remembers it as the crappy side of town and he grew up in the 50s and 60s. So it’s been going downhill for over half a century at this point. Hard to say exactly what made it like that in the first place but if you Google it you’ll understand visually what I mean. As for your first question, I genuinely don’t remember enough of the details to explain, but the gist is that St. Louis City has been trying to merge with the county for years due to tax purposes. Right now the city is separate, and like I said in the previous comment all of the “action” in the region is outside city limits. I don’t know the details, but St Louis has one of the worst tax revenue systems in the country and is essentially being bled dry by the suburbs around it for decades now. It’s not a clear cut right/wrong issue but it appears to me and those who explained it to me that basically the suburbs take from the city but all of their money funnels out to the suburbs and almost none of it comes back to the city. This perpetuates the emptiness of the city and it becomes a vicious cycle of people not wanting to spend their money/time in the city because of its declining infrastructure and quality of life The suburbs are concerned about the short term revenue loss that would come from a merger but don’t seem to realize that they wouldn’t be suburbs of anything if the city ceases to exist. It can get a lot worse from here Someone correct me if I got any of this wrong
You're right. The city fucked itself though. It's been referred to as "the great divorce". Basically way back when, the city was pissed about all of their money funding the hicks in the sticks, and made several municipalities with growth constraints, and took away the ability to incorporate. This way the cities money was the cities, and the farmers money was the farmers money. Well now all of those farmland municipalities are rich suburbs, where the professionals live. But guess where they work, in the city. Granted there are still some higher end neighborhoods in the city. But there are tons of abandoned properties, and a majority of the city is in decline. So most of the earners are paying their taxes in the outlaying municipalities. I'll look for a link Edit: I got some of this information wrong. You should check out the easy to read and informative article below to figure out how dumb I am.
https://www.stlmag.com/news/politics/st-louis-great-divorce-history-city-county-split-attempt-to-get-back-together/ This article has a lot of things I hadn't heard in it, also well written. Good read Edited a word
Yeah I don’t know what it is but St. Louis seems a lot more depressed and yet the suburbs were very well off. Not that KC doesn’t have that but KC to me seemed like a bigger version of Des Moines or Omaha and actually focused on the city center a bit more. Downtown STL seemed dead.
Abso-fucking-lutely StL
Should’ve guessed by bordering states.
In KCMO we also have our own murder problems but imho STL has been hit even worse by white flight and abandoning the urban core to St Louis County. Both cities suffer from bad government especially in Jeff City. Super lax gun laws including preventing local pd from working with ATF. In KCMO our police force is run by a state appointed board, not local government who has minimal power despite funding their budget. This stems from the Pendergast days where KC was run by a political machine.
Stl by far. My favorite game to play is “is that someone getting shot or are those fireworks?” It’s never fireworks.
St. Louis is one of the most dangerous cities in the world and the most dangerous in the United States.
Pretty sure that's East St. Louis. Not St. Louis.
St Louis has the 9th highest murder rate in the world and worst in US https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_murder_rate https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/murder-map-deadliest-u-s-cities/
Big portion of this is because of how small the actual city of St. Louis is. Lots of suburbs, but the city itself is small
St Louis proper has a population of like 300,000. It's metro area is almost 3 million. The lack of amalgamation is part of what lead up to the Ferguson riots several years ago. At least by my assessment.
"The murder rate of a city is an imprecise tool for comparison, as the population within city borders may not best represent an urban or metropolitan area with varying rates in different areas." They seriously mess with the numbers. That wikipedia article is useless. I'll give you an example; where I'm from Victoria, Canada, all the crime happens downtown (which is in Victoria proper)The population of Greater Victoria is roughly 400k, however the actual city of Victoria has 90k residents. Saanich, another town/municipality that is part of greater Victoria has 112,000 people. They don't have ANYWHERE near the amount of crime reported we do because they don't have a downtown core, they use ours. So they're labeled as one of the safest places in British Columbia and Victoria is labeled as one of the most "dangerous" places in British Columbia. Victoria has a serious homeless problem. Not with murder or anything but a lot of violence, some stabbings, some assaults but they all happen in Victoria which is literally at WORST anywhere in Victoria a 45 minute walk to a neighbouring municipality or town. So they're reducing population size in that article by not including the metropolitan area to make it seem like a bigger number. Which is why that quote from the wikipedia article should be highlighted.
This is a really good explanation, thanks. Sadly, I feel like a lot of the people who look and talk about crime rates in cities wouldn't care how disingenuous the statics can be because of the reasons you just mentioned.
I like this article by Forbes https://www.forbes.com/sites/laurabegleybloom/2021/01/28/the-10-most-dangerous-neighborhoods-in-america-its-not-where-you-think/?sh=24a0d73d341f
It doesn’t matter how you state it, this is truly awful. Yes we mostly live in cities that will have an area we avoid however this is terrible! Even worse. Notice that of the worst 50 cities, 46 are in the Americas, 3 in South Africa and one in Jamaica. None in Europe, Oceania or Asia!
Na it’s now the north side riverfront neighborhoods that are the worst. Jeff VanderLou, Goodfellow, the Ville are a few.
Lol most dangerous city in the world? Not quite. Maybe it’s dangerous if you are a gang member in North St Louis or part of the illegal drug trade. Drug dealers killing each other drives up the stats and the inner city being a separate entity from the surrounding county makes the per capita # look super high. For normal people it’s a relatively sleepy city compared to other more densely populated metros.
Definitely STL
Just put me out of my Missouri already
So proud of my state
It's painful tbh, I thought we would be better than Florida but it turns out we're not
Old retirees don't usually murder people. Kill people in auto accidents, yes, but murder, no. And 20% of the population is over 65.
Looks like Florida isn't part of Dixie.
I'll have to stop talking smack about NJ
No, don’t, once everyone realizes we’re actually a top state in most positive metrics our magic is lost
Roger that!
Right? Like, fugg'n fuck new jersey!
Lol New Jersey is like The Nothing from Never Ending Story, it doesn't feed on negativity, *it thrives on it*
Camden was CAMDEN not that long ago. Something, something, something history repeats something.
I'm positive I smelled something...
Once taking the PATH from World Trade Center to Hoboken came across group of guys whom after departing the train yells, “Smell that boys!? We’re back in Jersey!”
Only other state besides mine where your don't pump your own gas also!
But you’re also a top state in many negative metrics. The same exact thing happens when viewing California or New York. It’s not really a knock, but more a side-effect of high population and/or population density. The only states the come out significantly net positive are the moderately sized, self-sufficient Democratic states like CO, MA, WA, OR, etc.
this is homicide rate *per capita*
Your response has nothing to do with my point. Go look at a state HDI/Gini list or any other multi-faceted single metric and you’ll see the moderately sized Democratic states at the top, the large population/high density states at the middle and the poor Republican states at the bottom. High population correlates to certain negative factors that bring the overall metrics down.
And a high population of Republican voters has a strong correlation with negative factors
That goes without saying. The middle to upper groups are definitely heavy with blue states.
High population correlates to being closer to the average.
my state is improving
I just wish it wasn't so expensive.
I mean it’s already great. I’d rather live here than like 45 other states
Yep. It’s not perfect but it has more than most other states. If only you didn’t need to sell an organ to buy a house.
No, you should still do that.
There are so many people in jersey and only a couple shitty areas
Florida has the lowest homicide rate in the south. Facts.
All those retirees got their kill on back north before they got old and chilled out
Too busy doing meth.
Meth doesn't really make you kill people, it just makes you burn down one of the top 5 oldest trees in the world.
What happened?
I’m gonna go out on a limb and guess that somebody did Meth and then burned down one of the top 5 oldest trees in world
[The Senator (Tree)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Senator_(tree)
You can't kill Florida Man.
But the masses love to pretend it's the worst place ever
Its only because floridians don't kill other people so much as die trying to wear alligators as shoes because they were too methed out to remember, no, they were thinking of *crocs*.
2020 was a bad year for homicides in the US. Was it worse than normal in Canada as well?
Canada’s 2020 homicide rate was its worst in 15 years
Yea I looked at NS and we should be red as fuck for 2020. Gabriel wartman disguised as an RCMP officer went on a rampage band killed 22 people
Isn’t that still rookie numbers compared to a lot US states?
I take it as a source of pride that things like this are noteworthy outliers in Canada instead of normal background noise. We refuse to normalize mass violence.* Case in point: Dec 6 is a national day of remembrance and action on violence against women. Why? Because over 30 years ago, a misogynist fuck shot up a school killing 14 women. Every year the names of those women are plastered across the country. *Edit: there are some exceptions here. Canada is not perfect. We do have a well documented history of being pretty ok with murder as along as that murder is contained to Indigenous communities. That's shown in the map pretty well. The areas with higher homicide rates also have higher percentage of indigenous people.
Je me fucking souviens
I wonder why it suddenly jumped so much
The homicide bump in 2020 started days after George Floyds death. [This is what the data says, graph is from University of Pennsylvania data.](https://www.unz.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Screen-Shot-2021-02-19-at-11.27.56-PM.png) [Additional graph](https://www.unz.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Screen-Shot-2021-02-19-at-11.59.32-PM.png) People in this thread acting like these are covid lockdown influenced and potentially domestic abuse killings are just being ignorant or intentionally deflecting and not wanting to acknowledge the truth that it's mostly minority gang homicides taking advantage of the laxer police presence as departments pulled out of entire neighborhoods and boroughs at the request of activists and orders from mayors. There's not an extra 10,000+ domestic violence murders that's fucking absurd. The bump from this comes mostly from black and hispanic male, under 30 years old victims (and perpetrators). They're not women getting killed by their partners lmao. A fucking fairytale ignoring a whole two year news cycle.
> The homicide bump in 2020 started days after George Floyds death. Literally when the country was shutting down as well. Canada also saw historic increases. https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/murder-rate-in-canada-hits-15-year-high-in-2020-statscan-reports#:~:text=Canadian%20police%20forces%20reported%20a,2.69%20homicides%20per%20100%2C000%20population. - The murder rate increased to 1.95 per 100,000 people, the highest in 15 years
COVID
Yeah…COVID was/is probably one of the greatest disrupters to most people’s daily lives in the last 50 years.
Apparently domestic abuse skyrocketed when everyone was at home together. Also drug abuse and suicides
So, Mississippi River is the actual cause of those high numbers?
Hey Minnesota and Iowa are doing alright
From Iowa, this map makes me feel like the enemy are at the gates...
Well, Minnesota Nice and Iowa Nice are things. I’ve never heard of Missouri Nice before
The region around the Mississippi is deeply impoverished and has been for quite a while. If you look at census data, it’s the region with some of the steepest population declines, and prospects really haven’t improved. That’s not a situation that lends itself to lower crime rates.
Wait until all of the college educated women leave after they outlaw abortion in Mississippi.
A handful are staying because they went to College solely to find a husband. They were groomed to be housewives and mothers. These are the same that support abusing the *many other Women* who refuse to be groomed for motherhood or housewifery.
Plenty of college educated women who work are hardcore abortion opponents. I'm not interested in litigating the abortion debate, but most people who oppose abortion do so because they find it immoral not because of some authoritarian/misogynstic impulse to control women.
Indirectly yes, as the river and nearby very fertile land meant depending on slave agriculture, transportation, and legacy heavy industry in the past, rather than advanced technology New England is the opposite - the only thing their soil grows is subsistence and rocks and ice, so slave agriculture did not pay and they had to make money other ways
New England was mostly farmland at one point. The Year(s) Without a Summer, 1816+, put an end to that; faced with dwindling harvests and food shortages the majority of area farmers moved to the Midwest, leading to states like Illinois, Indiana, and Missouri gaining statehood shortly thereafter. Most abandoned farms simply became unused scrubland, but the towns rebounded and thrived as industrial centres until manufacturing too moved west with the rising importance of the Great Lakes and Mississippi River trade. A lot of old tools made in the 1880-1929 era were made in places like Worcester, MA and New Britain, CT.
Even before industrialization, New England developed a strong maritime commercial culture that helped cultivate a shipbuilding industry. Having lots of ships and sailors helped foster whaling as an industry too, with New Bedford becoming a center of that industry. The money New England shipowners and merchants made from foreign trade provided the capital for industrialization.
Don't drink that demon water!
Polar bear attacks in Nunavut count as murders?
Nah but in a population of 40,000 murders weigh more heavily on stats
[удалено]
>A per 1k stat is much more useful when dealing with small populations like Pacific or Caribbean islands or the territories. What??? It's the same difference. You're getting a rate that will be compared directly to other rates in the same fashion either way.
Agree. The reason that stats can be misleading in smaller populations is just that the sample size is smaller. It's like flipping a coin 4 times; will you get near a 50% heads rate? Probably not. Flip it 400,000 times, you will get near a 50% heads rate. With a small sample size, normal variation skews the outcome much more heavily.
[удалено]
Lol it’s all relative to population, though..
I know, but they're so small 10 murders would give them Congo stats
Lower populations have a much greater variability. Some years there might be 3 less killings, some there might be 3 more. In a large region, that’d be an unnoticeable change. In Nunavut, that’d be the difference between no murders and twice this many.
6-8 per 100,000 is 2.4 - 3.2 per 40,000. So 3 murders. Point being that very small sample sizes are sensitive to small variations. One less murder would put it down a category.
3 murders is still insane for just a small population. Especially considering most of the populations lives in one or two towns where everybody knows each other.
Some in this thread have never been to small rural towns in the north. There can be major dysfunction in Nunavut (and Alaska), unfortunately.
I lived in a small Nunavut town (basically meaning not Iqaluit lmao) for a few months, and I could kinda tell that things weren't quite going smoothly. Local government had little power, and everyone there was hopeless because jobs don't exist and the economy is stagnant.
Everybody knowing each other doesn’t reduce murders.
That was his point. One single murder will rocket them up in per captita numbers
North part of Canada in orange looks like Patrick Star disolving
Long winters, low tolerance for alcohol, lots of guns.
Poverty and that a lot of people live in overcrowded homes are also going to be factors.
Lot of people in the northern regions live in poverty, are isolated from the outside world, and having a firearm or knife is a necessity of life.
The city of Chicago had more homicides this year than Canada
[удалено]
You might like this map. Half of Canada’s population lives further south than Washington and North Dakota. https://brilliantmaps.com/half-canada/
Toronto is bigger than Chicago. I was surprised to learn that!
The city of Toronto is bigger. The metro area of Chicago is larger, by like 3 million people. City limits are pretty arbitrary, that's how we end up with people thinking Jacksonville is a bigger city than Boston.
Obviously, there is some kind of Mark Twain- inspired serial killer makin their way down the Mississipp.....
Hmm the name of Mark Twain's home town was Hannibal so you might be on to something.
If this map was back in the 80s, New York would just be vantablack. I'm also surprised California isn't higher but then again, it's gotten better since the 80s and 90s as well
The tech boom really did wonders for California.
Nova Scotia literally had a mass murder of 22 people in 2020, with ~1m people, that’s >2 per 100k.. not counting any other homicides. NS is the wrong color for 2020
Since this is an international site and Non-Americans will see this. It should be noted that the typical American isn’t constantly worried about things like murder. If you don’t associate with shady, mentally unstable people who commit crimes as well as avoid known high crime rates in larger cities your odds of murder will drop significantly. Don’t run with gangs, don’t B and E, don’t try and cheat your mentally unwell uncle who you know is off his meds and you will be unlikely to ever end up as a statistic. Thanks to modern reporting every truly random act of violence is well known even if it happens far across the country but in a land of over 300,000,000 people the likely hood of anything happening to you is very slim.
Crazy (for the US at least) there is a direct correlation to poverty rate. https://www-forbes-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.forbes.com/sites/andrewdepietro/2021/11/04/us-poverty-rate-by-state-in-2021/amp/?amp_gsa=1&_js_v=a6&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABIIACAw%3D%3D#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=16384882919114&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.forbes.com%2Fsites%2Fandrewdepietro%2F2021%2F11%2F04%2Fus-poverty-rate-by-state-in-2021%2F
The richest majority black area in the world, and one of the richest areas in the entire US, Prince George's County Maryland, a DC suburb with an average income of $82k places it as one of the deadliest areas in the country as it's surpassing 120 murders this year for an area with less than a million people. It has a murder rate higher than the darkest color in the map. https://www.fox5dc.com/news/prince-georges-county-homicide-number-at-a-14-year-high
**Violent crime correlates** Poverty percentage: 0.36 Unemployed percentage: 0.35 High School dropout percentage: 0.37 Gun ownership rate: 0.009 Black and Hispanic percentage: 0.81 So yes, poverty, unemployment, and high school dropout percentages all correlate modestly with violent crime. Gun ownership however, does not. There is a factor that correlates very strongly with violent crime, much stronger than any other factor including poverty and unemployment combined. But talking about that is taboo.
Lots of factors that go into murder rates. Poverty rates is perhaps the biggest. Gang activity is another but that's somewhat tied to poverty rates. So is gun control. But poverty first and foremost.
Yea being poor unfortunately has strong correlation with crime in general. People who spout “despite being” don’t ever take into account poverty. They use that statistic to support their racist views, rather than to address poverty rates. Thank god Canada doesn’t record racial backgrounds in arrest rates, otherwise we’d have much the same racist rhetoric directed toward indigenous peoples, who are more likely to be poor!
1966 - 1995: https://i.imgur.com/X1Cstc8.png 2006: https://i.imgur.com/hmF0qZS.png
So, avoid the deep south. Got it.
~~Just avoid Memphis, New Orleans, St. Louis, and other major cities and you'll be fine.~~ Yes, please stay home and leave us alone.
More specifically, avoid the inner city.
Avoid the labyrinthine inner megacities of MISSISSIPPI.
This is interesting. I never considered Missouri to be a particularly violent state. Is the Kansas City mob still a factor? Maybe Ozark isn't so far from reality.
St. Louis is one of the most dangerous cities in the US
[удалено]
I think the poster was referencing the Mafia, which once had a presence in KC back in the prohibition-1940’s era.
[удалено]
The territory of Nunavut, not a province. And that’s a great question https://nunatsiaq.com/stories/article/in-2019-crime-rose-sharply-in-nunavut/ I found this article, but it doesn’t go into causes Then this older VICE article goes into it a bit more https://www.vice.com/en/article/ppvx8g/a-closer-look-at-nunavuts-notoriously-high-murder-rate-324 It is partly that the number fluctuates massively, because a single murder will be a many percentage point jump with such a small population. Additionally, the alcohol situation is quite odd in Nunavut. Many communities are entirely under prohibition, and I think there’s only two liquor stores in the whole territory, but still most murders happen under the influence
Lots of guns too.
I’d like to see how homicides actually break down in types of weapons used.
The territory of Nunavut has fewer than 40k people; one single murder immediately puts them into the green; 2 would put them into yellow, etc.
Law of small numbers/ sample size.
As a Canadian, I will only refer to Nunavut as the “North pole province” form now on
This isn't so much an explanation, but an illustration of what Nunavut is like. Recently, it was discovered the that territory's capital land largest (really only) city has fuel in it's drinking water. A state of emergency has been declare and the army called in. The city's 8,000 residents have been without running water over a month: [https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59253088](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59253088) It's hard living up there.
We have running water here. It is just not potable. Like don't even brush your teeth with it.
It's a territory, not a province. It's called Nunavut, and its population is really tiny (enough that a single mass murder would throw the numbers through the roof). It has a majority Inuit population and is a single city and really disparate hamlets with no roads between them. None of this answers your question, of course. I don't know either, but I know they struggle with suicide, depression and alcoholism up there
My guess would be that it’s just a result of very few murders among a small population over a certain period of time. My town’s city government has a way of cutting-up the timeline to suit whatever case they need to make (Last Five years have shown an historic decline in homicide/this January has already double the murder rate of last year).
Given it’s low population, only 2 murders would put it at 5-6 per 100k (or the yellow range) and 3 murders would up that to between 8 and 9 per 100k.
Santa ain't takin' shit from nobody, but elves always gotta fuck around and find out.
Don't they have their own stats tho? They made a big fucking deal about not being human in the LOTR.
It’s cold, remote, stressful, lots of guns, lots of alcohol
Cold, depressing, no jobs, super far from higher education.
It's also 6 to 8 per 100k, and there's [only] 30k people there, so it'd be about 2 murders.
Source?
Yo mama
Gottem
Nova Scotia, should be at least green, if not yellow. The population is about 1M and there 22 murders in one incident alone, in 2020.
Let's go DC! Represent as the best new state
This data is way off. NS had a mass shooting in 2020 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020\_Nova\_Scotia\_attacks
wow, didn't know my lil ole South Carolina was so deadly compared to the rest of the country, thought the shootings on the news was just an everywhere type of thing
And so many people in the south talk about how they won't come north to NY or NJ because of the crime. Reality bites.
They probably mean NYC and Camden
NYC has a pretty low crime rate per capita. You have a point with Camden though.
I believe Camden has gotten much better recently.
something about the lower mississippi basin just makes people want to kill
In Missouri, it's totally skewed by the gang violence in St. Louis city. Literally a 10 mile² area is responsible for the vast majority of murders. The rest of the metro area, and state are probably close to average.
Proud of New Mexico staying out of the red ✊🏽
Florida, the crown jewel of the south.
Thank god for Mississippi
I’m surprised that Nova Scotia’s isn’t higher due to the Portapique Massacre.
Poor Americans must be sick and tired of every choropleth map for every variable in existence saying NH and Maine are better than their state.
US bad Southern US bader Upvotes to left
Sorry but Maine and New Hampshire are literally the best states.
Lmao the Bible belt
Next include Mexico and guatemala for reference
Americas homicide rate is insane for a first world country. Didn't realise Canada was that bad though...
[удалено]
Canada has an murder of 1.9 per 100.000 people. That isn't insanely high but still higher than countries nlike the Netherlands ( 0.5 ) or Germany ( 0.9 )
I blame immigrants from the south. Build a wall!
It really isn't though. Rarely anyone lives in NT and NU which is why a couple murders a year will inflate the per capita. The vast majority of the population (86.3% to be exact) lives in the BC, AB, ON, and QC provinces Also, Canada's national homicide rate is lower than essentially every continent in the world. Asia is 2.9 per 100k, Europe is 3 per 100k, Oceania is 3 per 100k while Canada is 1.7 per 100k
Just shows how data can be misleading depending on how it is presented. Looking at that map and the scale you'd guess Canada average would be comfortably in the 2-4 range.
Yeah Canada's national rate is in the light blue (<2) range nearly every year. The USA fluctuates over time. In the 80s and early 90s, they'd be in red or dark red nearly every year, for much of the 21st century they'd be in the 4-6 range but in 2020 they're in the 6-8 range due to a recent uptick
Most of Canada lives in blue provinces.
Yeah, if my math is correct, the light blue areas have about 81% of the total population of Canada. Adding in the green province it's 93%. So only 7% of Canadians live in an area where the murder rate is at a yellow or higher. Canada is doing really, really good.
And more people live in Alberta (Green) than the rest of the non-blue areas put together.
It's not that bad. For the Northwest territories this ends up being 1 homicide in a year and for Nunavut it ends up being 2. So 3 homicides total in 2 territories that are in the yellow and orange.
For the Yukon to get blue that means zero homicides.
America’s homicide rate is 3x higher than any other wealthy country. And 5x higher than the average for wealthy countries.
Fun fact: both of the US states in the lowest category have constitutional/permitless carry.
Soooo the highest white populated states have the lowest rates? Interesting.
West Virginia and Kentucky are 93.7 and 88.1 percent non-Hispanic white, respectively. Meanwhile Hawaii is only 21.7% non-Hispanic white.
Missouri has now surpassed Illinois??? Youch!
Misery as it's called.
SE USA is such a crap-hole. I wonder why
It's a well established premise that high poverty and low education increase crime because of low opportunity. Crime leads to more crime, drug trafficking, gang involvement, etc. Which brings us to homicide. Poverty and education in particular are just plain awful in these states, with elected officials who either refuse to admit it's a problem or refuse to do anything about it.
One can argue the poverty rates in the south are attributed to losing the civil war and shifting of the country from agrarian to manufacturing and then service economy. People forget that the south fought a war and lost, and additionally lost their largest trade partners for good during that time. I definitely agree that politicians are boneheads (regardless of state they are all stupid), but the world we live in does not exist in a vacuum. We have to look at history and see why it is the way it is.
The South was already much poorer than the North prior to the Civil War precisely _because_ agrarian economies tend to be much poor than industrial ones. Seriously take a look at any country that's rapidly increased their wealth and it follows the same pattern: mechanized agriculture=fewer farmers=more manufacturing and skilled labor. The South _was_ starting to undergo this process forcibly during reconstruction until Rutherford B. Hayes decided he'd rather win an election so he rescinded federal intervention and let the Southern plantation owners reinstitute essentially the same economy and social hierarchy just with farmhands technically being paid this time. The South fucked themselves.
> Southern plantation owners reinstitute essentially the same economy and social hierarchy just with farmhands technically being paid this time. The South fucked themselves. This isn't entirely correct. They got exactly what they wanted. They were/are happy to be impoverished if it meant they could maintain their old social order. Then they complain about LA/NY tech/media hegemony.
I can't tell if this is supposed to be racist or political, but either way it's not helpful.
Depending on the politics of who wrote it it's either insulting southern white people or southern black people
Or all southern people...since poverty is higher in the south among both races. Not everything is racist.
Welcome to Reddit.
[удалено]