Riders I meet

On Mar 21, 3:59*am, John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 22:46:33 -0700 (PDT), Jay Beattie

wrote:
*If you live in a city
where crime is the norm, then people stop reporting. * Not saying that
is the case with NY, but I suspect a person in small town USA would be
more likely to report a minor property crime -- a car break in, for
example -- than someone in a high crime city.

This is circular reasoning. If someone lives in a small town where
crime is the norm, are they going to report it? *Nothing is being done
- what's the use.

O.K, small safe town USA.

Really, my point is that where law enforcement is stretched thin or
considered ineffective or even corrosive, then people quit reporting
crimes. Where populations are exposed to constant minor crimes, they
quit reporting minor crimes. Low reported crime does not necessarily
mean low crime. I think you have to look carefully at how a particular
populations views crime and crime reporting.-- Jay Beattie.

On Mar 21, 6:56*am, John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 20:25:03 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski



wrote:
On Mar 20, 5:32*pm, John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:12:03 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski

wrote:
On Mar 20, 5:04*pm, John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote:
On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 08:33:44 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski

wrote:
But I believe that in general, the larger the
metro area, the larger such neighborhoods are likely to be, and the
worse conditions might be within them.

Any evidence of this other than pop culture and stereotyping?

Mostly, just my anecdotal experience. *Philly and Cleveland and Los
Angeles come to mind. *I'm sure there are exceptions, which is why I
said "in general."

I wonder if you have contrary evidence?

Particularly in relation to NYC?

I've looked up stats for violent crimes in cities in the US in
general, and NYC is one of the biggest cities and had lower violent
crime rates per person than many smaller cities.

But I don't really know, which is way I don't go around talking about
places I don't know about as dangerous, or proposing theories like
yours w/o evidence.

John, I've learned a lot in my life. *Sometimes I don't remember the
sources of what I've learned. *Sometimes I'm not positive about what
I've learned, but I state my impressions anyway, prefacing them
with something like "I believe." *I think most people do that.

Look athttp://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007/data/table_16.html

Good evidence.

Thanks.

So I guess you can diss specific big cities now too.

No, I stated my general impression of large vs. small cities, then I
found data to prove my impression was correct. That's all I needed to
do.

- Frank Krygowski

Jay Beattie wrote:
If you live in a city
where crime is the norm, then people stop reporting. Not saying that
is the case with NY, but I suspect a person in small town USA would be
more likely to report a minor property crime -- a car break in, for
example -- than someone in a high crime city.

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
This is circular reasoning. If someone lives in a small town where
crime is the norm, are they going to report it? Nothing is being done
- what's the use.

Jay Beattie wrote:
O.K, small safe town USA.
Really, my point is that where law enforcement is stretched thin or
considered ineffective or even corrosive, then people quit reporting
crimes. Where populations are exposed to constant minor crimes, they
quit reporting minor crimes. Low reported crime does not necessarily
mean low crime. I think you have to look carefully at how a particular
populations views crime and crime reporting.-- Jay Beattie.

When the process for no-bloodshed crimes is a 'telephone
self report' with tedious multi-level menu and then zero
follow-up, why bother?

But that neglect of minor crime reports can just drive some
people to distraction. Or mayhem:
http://www.nytimes.com/1988/09/29/us...in-prison.html

When he reported a theft, the cops laughed at him. 'Course
that was way back when cops actually took crime reports.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Andrew Muzi wrote:
Jay Beattie wrote:
If you live in a city
where crime is the norm, then people stop reporting. Not saying that
is the case with NY, but I suspect a person in small town USA would be
more likely to report a minor property crime -- a car break in, for
example -- than someone in a high crime city.

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
This is circular reasoning. If someone lives in a small town where
crime is the norm, are they going to report it? Nothing is being done
- what's the use.

Jay Beattie wrote:
O.K, small safe town USA.
Really, my point is that where law enforcement is stretched thin or
considered ineffective or even corrosive, then people quit reporting
crimes. Where populations are exposed to constant minor crimes, they
quit reporting minor crimes. Low reported crime does not necessarily
mean low crime. I think you have to look carefully at how a particular
populations views crime and crime reporting.-- Jay Beattie.

When the process for no-bloodshed crimes is a 'telephone self report'
with tedious multi-level menu and then zero follow-up, why bother?
[...]

Well, I do know of one case of a stolen bicycle in the City of Madison
being recovered this way.

But Andrew is right, the police will not actively pursue the crime of a
single stolen bicycle, but merely check serial numbers if they come
across it in the process of other investigations.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
LOCAL CACTUS EATS CYCLIST - datakoll