Crime is down, Fox viewers totally unaware

California needs to chill I guess …

"Inaction Is Unacceptable" - California Lawmakers Create First Retail Theft Committee Amid Surging Crime | ZeroHedge

 

Why are you just focusing on property crime?

Total crime went way up 2020/2021

U.S. Crime Rate & Statistics 1990-2023

Murders still up significantly through 2022

Infographic: Violent Crime Rates Fall in the U.S.

 

Do some of you ever form your own opinion from experiences?
Or do you just google to find charts and stats that confirm your belief?
You can charts and stats and articles to back nearly every opinion you wish to have.
Life experiences should not be dismissed by some stats.

 

Are you suggesting personal anecdotes are more informative than larger data sets or broader studies? Because that seems to be what you are saying.

With something like crime stats it doesn’t even make sense, except maybe at a local level (maybe if locally you see crime first hand increasing but reported numbers declining, then you question how the locals are reporting or fudging their own numbers - localized shenanigans can definitely happen - just as certain politicians tried to game COVID numbers). But it’s pretty hard to make that argument against a huge data set or more broad studies.

 

What I am suggesting is millions of people everyday experience life out here in the real world. They are not professors working at some school and reviewing studies from other professors and as long as those professors keep discounting what we actually are experiencing for their "broad studies" then many will never agree on anything. If what they see with their own eyes is crime and pay higher prices at the grocery store, all these "broad studies" don't really mean a thing to them.

 

Overall crime? It would be absurd for me to project my personal experiences on an entire nation. Especially those that are white, middle aged, and male. Most of them (we) have little experiences of what it’s like in a day to day tougher situation.

 

Yes, it would, but it would be equally absurd to reject anyone individual's experiences forming their opinion of crime rate in their surroundings.

 

Yeah, I don't think we should reject peoples' individual experiences, but how much weight do we put on it given the sample size? My experience is that I have not been the victim of a crime in years. That doesn't mean crimes aren't happening, of course.

 

Not directed as you as you generally state your thoughts as your opinion not necessarily the absolute, but the vast majority of leftist posters here refuse to hear the opinion of someone that doesn't agree with them. They go search charts and graphs, a lot of times from some obscure source, then basically say this says what I think so I am right, and your opinion is worthless. No chance for any honest debate when the first thing done is to basically say I'm smart and right and you are dumb and wrong. Typically, the charts and graphs posted are not the whole story. Anyhow I digress!!
Merry Christmas to all!!

 

Yes, it is difficult to argue against data and information. If they don't actually tell the whole story, you can argue that. If they are conducted in manner that is not robust, you can argue that. The objection to data though is not usually really an objection to data, it is an objection to data disputing unsubstantiated opinions from the perspective of unsubstantiated opinions.

 

You can take the results from any study and make them appear to tell whatever story that fits your narrative. Trust me I have been in agricultural input sales for 30 plus years and can create sales flyers to tell whatever story you need told from the data collected from studies. This type of flyer is what many here present as statistics and data. Call any of it in question and you are a data and truth denier, I just choose to not play those games anymore.

 

Except you really can't with total data. So can you choose a non-random subset of the data or engage in other unethical activity to analyze the data? Sure. But that should be called out utilizing the specific methodological issues.

Look at this thread, for example. City posted the FBI total crime data. This is a long-term dataset, which was used to draw the conclusion that crime was increasing in 2020 almost without question. But now, the exact same dataset is being used to show it going down. There is no indication of any substantive change in methods between those two points in time. The simplest explanation of that data is that crime went up in 2020 and is now going down. But people are refusing to believe it. Not because there is any indication of a methodological issue. The concern is that they don't want to see crime going down, as it doesn't fit their preferred narrative.

We utilize datasets like this specifically because they don't always track with a narrative. They are consistent and they show what they show. There are likely some biases, but those biases are consistent. The bigger concern is that when people substitute biased information, heavily driven by their own feelings rather than objective data, it is highly likely to perpetuate false impressions.

 

Crime stats are reported by police departments, I suppose you can say they are telling a story to fit their narrative that they are effective at fighting crime (or I guess ineffective when crime is up). Granted the reporting methods changed a few years a go and I dont know how many departments are participating (so there is certainly missing info), but I dont think cops have to worry about their budgets no matter what data they report.