Crime Data: Misleading Statistics

Questions are swirling around crime data in the wake of the deployment of National Guard members to the nation's capital. City officials claim murders have declined.  National data suggests all crime has shrunk. But how reliable are the numbers?  There is evidence the data is problematic. 

Pew Research Center analyzed data in an effort to answer the question: "How much crime is there in the U.S." Their answer: "It's difficult to say for certain." The two primary sources of government crime statistics--the FBI and The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS)--paint an incomplete picture.

FBI reports, once the gold standard, is pocked with Swiss cheese holes. In 2019, 89% of municipal police departments submitted crime data to the agency.  To compensate for the incomplete data, the FBI estimated the missing municipalities crime numbers.  

In 2020, the FBI recorded a historic single-year increase in homicides of 30% in the aftermath of the George Floyd nationwide riots. There are some experts who believe the violent crime data that year was actually worse because big city police were swamped and reporting may have suffered as a result. 

The 2021 FBI data failed to improve. The bureau modernized its data collection system. Thousands of police agencies fell through the cracks. Only 63% of police departments submitted crime data, meaning 6,000 municipalities failed to report numbers. The FBI reported crime fell.   

Then in 2022, the FBI under Christopher Wray regrouped to right the data ship.  Pew reports 83% of police agencies participated. Two of the largest police departments in the country--New York and Los Angeles--were missing from the final FBI crime report. Unsurprisingly, crime declined.   

The FBI initially reported an estimated 1.7% decrease in violent crime. Later in 2023, the agency quietly revised the data, reporting a 4.5% increase in crime for 2022.  The FBI failed to include 1,699 murder, 7,780 rapes, 33,459 robberies and 37,091 aggravated assaults--a staggering oversight.

The bureau reported 19,800 homicide victims in 2023.  The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued its cause of death data for the same year, counting 22,830 homicide deaths.  Its records are compiled from the Vital Statistics Cooperative Program provided by 57 jurisdictions. 

Last month the FBI issued its 2024 report from 16,419 police departments, still short of the 18,000 previously reporting crime data. Violent crime decreased 4.5%.  Leaving aside the issue of the veracity of the data, a violent crime occurred on average every 25.9 seconds somewhere in America.  

The Bureau of Justice Statistics National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) is second only to the FBI in perceived importance. It is a national survey of about 240,000 people 12 and older.  Participants are asked if they have been a victim of a crime in the past six months.  The methodology obviously eliminates murder victims, an obvious flaw.

However, the NCVS is recognized as more accurate in capturing the overall picture of violent crime, which includes rape, robbery aggravated assault, robbery and manslaughter.   While the FBI reported decreases in 2021 and 2022, the NCVS data for the same period shows violent victimization rose 75%.    

Data from most sources depends on local police records. And that's another problem.  In Washington, D.C., the flashpoint for crime, the head of the Metropolitan Police Department's top union official claims higher ups are fudging the crime data by directing cops to downgrade felonies to a lesser offense,

The union boss Gregg Pemberton shared his accusations with NBC Washington.  The contention followed the police department's suspension of a commander in mid-May for allegedly changing crime statistics in his local district. No word on how widespread the practice is.  

Even though the nation's capital has recorded a 27% drop in violent crime this year, it still has the fourth highest homicide rate in the country, nearly six times higher than New York City.  The city has recorded 103 fatal shootings this year.  For comparison, there were 105 murders in 2014.

Chicago has been in the spotlight after President Trump threatened to send the National Guard to the Windy City.  Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson has stiff armed any suggestion of federal assistance, pointing out homicides decreased by 7.3% last year, but still higher than pre-pandemic figures.

A University of Chicago Crime Lab report underscores the "persistent challenging patterns" of violence in the city.  Black residents are 22 more times likely to be killed compared to white residents. In some Chicago neighborhoods, a black person is 68 times more likely to be a victim of a fatal shooting.

And, while violent crime is down, the Crime Lab notes it is still higher than the five year average.  The primary contributors are soaring aggravated assaults, aggravated batteries and robberies, according to the Crime Lab. Since 2010, the rate at which shooting victims die from a gunshot has soared 44.9%.

You won't hear those numbers from the mayor, who has overseen the shrinking of the Chicago police force.  There are now fewer officers than the city had in 2018, a decline of nearly 13%.  In addition, Johnson has failed to deliver on a campaign pledge to add 200 more detectives, WGN reported.

The mayor's credibility took another hit Labor Day weekend when 58 Chicagoans were shot, eight fatally.  This underscores the issue in many large cities.  Crime may be down, if you believe the statistics, but it begs the question: How much crime is too much?

In many big cities such as Chicago, too many repeat offenders with long criminal records are arrested and freed without bail.  Failure to address this situation results in career criminals preying on the most vulnerable. Until district attorneys incarcerate thugs, systemic violent crime will continue.  

The credibility of crime data is not some conservative conspiracy as Democrats contend.  The Legal Defense Fund, a liberal group, called crime statistics "unreliable" because many crimes go unreported by victims.  Even reported crimes may not be recorded by police, the group points out.

Another liberal group, the VERA Institute, examined the FBI data and gave this assessment: "The FBI estimates national and state totals, sometimes using a relative small percentage of jurisdictions in a state" to flesh out its data making the numbers "deeply problematic."

VERA performed its own research on the quality of policing data from 94 of the country's largest cities.  Researchers concluded: "The results were, perhaps, predictably underwhelming.  Of the 94 localities included, only 21 scored more than 50 out of 100 on Vera's index, which rates the data's completeness. 

Public safety and crime are key issues with voters.  A recent national poll commissioned by the Associated Press (AP) found that 81% of Americans believe crime is a major problem in big cities.  Those running America's largest cities often seem out of touch with local concerns.    

It's time for Congress to standardize crime reporting methodology for local and state police organizations, while ending voluntary participation, and instead mandating records be furnished to the FBI. The agency also should be required to overhaul its processes in the interest of accuracy.

Crime data is not an academic exercise.  The numbers are essential to understanding the resources--both funding and manpower--needed to make all Americans safer.    

Mass Shootings Solutions: Facts Over Emotion

Mass shootings traumatize the American soul.  The nation's emotions run the gamut from sorrow to moral outrage to steely resolve to stop the killings.  But before the last ambulance departed the latest scene of a slaughter, politicians weaponized the crisis to wage war on guns and the president.

The belligerent rhetoric and ugly name-calling on both sides of the issue of gun rights conflates a complicated problem.  Before a solution can offer hope of halting violence, there must be a reckoning of the root causes driving often troubled young people (males) to commit wanton murders.

While it's natural for raw emotions to surface after such a tragedy, no one should use victims as political pawns in a legislative chess game to pass hastily thought-out laws.  Solutions require a close examination of the facts and a clear-eyed focus on keeping Americans as safe as possible.

Since guns are often seen as the culprit instead of the shooter, let's start with some firearm facts from the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Centers for Disease Control:

In 2017, the most recent statistics, there were 39,773 deaths by firearms, the highest annual total in decades.  You likely have read this headline in the news.  But do you know the reason for the hike? Sixty percent of gun deaths were self-inflicted.  Gun suicides are rising faster than firearm murders.

Yet no politician seems to care about the alarming rise of suicides.  Why are so many people killing themselves in a society with advantages few countries enjoy?  Why haven't we done more to find the answer?  Perhaps, it is because a single loss of life doesn't generate inflammatory political rhetoric.

In any massacre involving a rifle, the drumbeat for a ban on "assault" weapons is deafening.  Before entertaining this idea, politicians should consider that FBI data shows that five times more people are killed by "knives and cutting instruments" than rifles.  Should we consider outlawing knives?

Prior to plunging headlong into solutions, Congress needs more data on what motivates mass killings by young males.  The Parkland High School shooter was 19-years-old. The El Paso killer was 21.  The Dayton gunman was 24.  Unfortunately, not much data exists on young shooters.

However, a project funded by the National Institute of Justice, a research arm of the Justice Department, has been cataloguing the life histories of all mass shooters.  The work has produced a database of information going back to 1966 on every mass shooting in the United States.

The study found that the vast majority of mass shooters experienced early childhood trauma and exposure to violence at a young age.  That violence may have been physical or sexual abuse, parental suicide or severe bullying, often leading to depression, anxiety and other mental health issues.

In virtually every mass shooting there often is a trigger point, usually a identifiable crisis in the months and weeks leading up to the killing spree.  Another factor that motivates these heinous crimes is the perpetrators' fascination with the celebrityhood conferred by the media's coverage of shootings.

That's one reason mass shootings tend to come in clusters because the publicity often spurs others to act.  Their evil deeds are, if not celebrated, at least magnified on social media.  The prospect of notoriety in death appeals to young people who feel neglected, unimportant and isolated from society.

The mainstream media as well as the raw sewage posing as social media are never held accountable for their roles in contributing to the violence.  They hide behind freedom of the press but media platforms must be more responsible, reigning in their lurid coverage of shootings and the triggerman.

Studies such as the one cited earlier should serve as a starting point for dealing with the issue of mass shootings. Restricting or banning weapons will not end the killing if the nation fails to address the early warning signs of disturbing and often bellicose behavior of young males.

Turning to proposals, Pew Research found there are sharp divisions among Americans who identify as Republican or Democrat on gun policy.  However, there is some common ground among the groups.  That should be a starting point for Congress to make a bipartisan push for legislation.

There is near unanimous agreement that people with mental illnesses should be prevented from buying guns.  Most Americans concur that people on federal no-fly or watch lists should be barred from purchasing weapons.  Majorities favor background checks for sales at gun shows.

Although there general but not majority support for tightening background checks, there should be a way for politicians to hammer out a balanced approach that will make it less likely that someone unstable or emotionally disturbed with be able to legally acquire a firearm.

There is also budding support for so-called Red Flag laws that would allow local police or family members to petition a state court to order the temporary removal of firearms from a person who may present danger to himself or others.  Currently, 13 states have passed some form of Red Flag law.

After the temporary removal of the weapons(s),  there is a court hearing.  The gun owner is allowed an opportunity to appear in court and contest the order.  A judge decides if the weapon will be permanently confiscated or returned. This due process ensures a fair and open proceeding.

Despite these common sense suggestions, some politicians and special interest groups will champion laws banning firearm ownership.  If only, killings were that easy to stop.  Illinois and California have two of the country's strictest gun control regimes, but the results show little or no impact.

In fact, although Illinois and California are home to about 16 percent of the nation's population, those two states account for more than 20 percent of the nation's handgun murders, according to FBI data. Those figures offer a sober assessment about the effectiveness of stricter gun laws.

The bloodshed of mass shootings sickens every American.  But it is no excuse to turn the gun debate into a bloodsport marked by a focus on gaining political power.  Americans want solutions not a rancorous sideshow of grandstanding and finger-pointing.  Victims and their families deserve better.