Darrkman OP t1_jat1e7p wrote
But but this sub keeps telling me that NYC is a war zone and if you go outside bad things will happen.
Hahahahaha!!!
lupuscapabilis t1_jawog1a wrote
When murders can drop 26% and make news, that usually means there was a problem before.
[deleted] t1_jawrcrj wrote
[deleted]
NetQuarterLatte t1_jaxmhf4 wrote
If you're a black resident in NYC, that's 15.3 homicides per 100,000.
But if you're white, that's 0.8 homicides per 100,000.
If Oklahoma is unsafe at 9 homicides per 100,000, can you articulate why NYC can be considered a safe place for everyone?
[deleted] t1_jaxns1k wrote
[removed]
SakanaToDoubutsu t1_jb0mndz wrote
Criminal activity is very "social", most people won't commit crimes spontaneously but if you're associated with people who do then people can be encouraged to do so. Essentially if you don't know anyone who's been shot, the probability you'll be shot yourself starts to approach zero.
NetQuarterLatte t1_jb0n2z4 wrote
That’s the thing about density.
If a bodega a worker gets shot (like the one who was shot a couple days ago in the UES), there will be a lot more people who know that person, compared to when someone in Oklahoma City gets shot.
The population density in NYC is like 20x bigger.
SakanaToDoubutsu t1_jb0r14c wrote
Eh that's not really what I mean, the vast majority of murder is the result of interpersonal violence (i.e. you've wronged me therefore I'm going to use violence to punish you), rather than resource violence or mass violence. If you're in a social circle where violence is an acceptable means of solving conflicts, then the probability of having violence used against you goes up exponentially, if you don't associate with people that use violence, then you'll basically never see it.
Population density really only affects resource violence, which is fairly minimal & consistent to begin with.
NetQuarterLatte t1_jb0tx18 wrote
>If you're in a social circle where violence is an acceptable means of solving conflicts, then the probability of having violence used against you goes up exponentially, if you don't associate with people that use violence, then you'll basically never see it.
That's true, but that's not the natural human behavior. In particular, children and teens won't follow that unless their are consistently educated on it.
>Population density really only affects resource violence, which is fairly minimal & consistent to begin with.
Population density influences so many things, such that it'd be a really strong claim to say that its impact is limited to resource violence.
To give you a counter-example, exposure-to-violence (e.g. witnessing a violent crime) is a stronger factor than poverty (4.7x stronger) on teenagers becoming first-time violent offenders themselves.
A high density environment amplifies the opportunities of a single violent incident to be exposed to more teens.
So a single violent crime in NYC would have 20x potency on exposing a teen compared to a single violent crime in Oklahoma City. Or another way to look at it: violence can spiral out of control in a higher density environment much faster than in a lower density environment. Not very different than a respiratory virus, right?
>the present study conceptualizes ETV as both the violence that a youth has experienced and the violence that a youth has witnessed.
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=325972017144530636&hl=en&as_sdt=0,33
pddkr1 t1_jaww78i wrote
Density element?*
iv2892 t1_jax8dxc wrote
Fact is nyc is much much safer than Oklahoma
pddkr1 t1_jaxda8m wrote
How did you conclude that?
iv2892 t1_jaxdwff wrote
Based on stats
pddkr1 t1_jaxe2ht wrote
I’m still unclear, which stats and how are you making a conclusion?
[deleted] t1_jaxg8x1 wrote
[deleted]
pddkr1 t1_jaxgtgx wrote
Thank you! So this was for the specific area of OKC rather than Oklahoma? I was a bit confused from other comments. I suspect by area size it’s also more dangerous than NYC. I’d need to look at heat maps on my own to see spread. Thanks for the info!
[deleted] t1_jaxiz1d wrote
[deleted]
pddkr1 t1_jaxjhb2 wrote
No I suppose I’m not being clear. I just had a concept of crime concentration. Oklahoma City might be more spaced out than New York, inadvertently driving down crime, but your stats would suggest the opposite.
Apparently OKC is 2.1 times larger than New York. I was curious to see if NYC/OKC had a way to show concentrations of murder and other violent crime as well. Thanks for talking through it, sorry to aggravate.
[deleted] t1_jaxkpf0 wrote
[deleted]
pddkr1 t1_jaxmbvp wrote
I genuinely appreciated this exchange! Thanks for the illumination!
One of my best friends is an actuary so it’s amusing to me that you approached it in a similar, good faith basis. Thanks for entertaining the convo and sharing so much food for thought*!
iv2892 t1_jayikv0 wrote
Crime per density is such an stupid metric , you cannot have crime in empty areas
pddkr1 t1_jayiwrs wrote
Take it easy guy
PandaJ108 t1_jb3o904 wrote
Crime has dropped compared to pandemic highs. The article you posted also clearly states crime is still “significantly higher” than pre-pandemic levels.
Your free to gloat but realize your gloating over crime simply being lower than pandemic highs. Seems like a low bar to be happy about.
wazzzzah t1_jb8fhyu wrote
It IS an absurd comment to people like you and me who define NYC as Fifth Avenue in the East 60s.
iv2892 t1_jax8bya wrote
The are ny posts readers , give them a break
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments