A Relationship Between Transparency and Dangerous Cities
We find it unfair sometimes to compare cities using the FBI UCR reports because some agencies report on crimes differently. However, LawStreetMedia ranked the top 10 most dangerous cities under 200,000 in population and we thought it would be interesting to see if the cities with higher crime rates were open with their crime data.
The FBI reports for 2013 have been released only for January-June 2013, so those are the percentages being used. And the rankings are based on the 2012 FBI crime rate per 100,000 people.
In the article, LawStreetMedia noted a few of the agencies were strapped tight with their budget. Which surprises us because a few of those agencies are paying for crime mapping by contracting with proprietary systems like Omega.
If all of these police agencies would release the information openly, crime mapping companies including SpotCrime would map the information for free.
Out of the list below, only one agency is releasing crime information that can be used and shared by anyone. Three of the agencies contract with a proprietary vendor. This means the data is restricted and the press has limited access.
We believe all of these agencies have the ability and resources to make the data open.
What is clear from this list is that all of these cities have significant crime rates and little transparency. Our recommendation is to open the data to help turn this tide. It is unlikely that opening the data could do any worse for each city's image, and very likely that crime data transparency would improve the situation.
For the three cities that are using a public facing crime map, our recommendation is to use an open format to reach more citizens and lower costs. With the existing crime rates, this is no time to be holding back on who can and can not share crime information.
The FBI reports for 2013 have been released only for January-June 2013, so those are the percentages being used. And the rankings are based on the 2012 FBI crime rate per 100,000 people.
In the article, LawStreetMedia noted a few of the agencies were strapped tight with their budget. Which surprises us because a few of those agencies are paying for crime mapping by contracting with proprietary systems like Omega.
If all of these police agencies would release the information openly, crime mapping companies including SpotCrime would map the information for free.
Out of the list below, only one agency is releasing crime information that can be used and shared by anyone. Three of the agencies contract with a proprietary vendor. This means the data is restricted and the press has limited access.
We believe all of these agencies have the ability and resources to make the data open.
| City and Rank | 2012 Crime rate | Jan-June 2013 Preliminary update | Open Crime data feed |
| Flint, MI | 1,021 per 100,000 people | Violent crime was down 26.38% | None |
| New Haven, CT | 1,439.19 per 100,000 people | Violent crime was down 8.11% | None |
| Rockford, IL | 1,367.76 per 100,000 people | Violent crime was down 6.37%, but murders rose by 25% | None (proprietary vendor with restricted access). We’ve reached out extensively to the PD and city to help them open up their crime data. |
| Hartford, CT | 1,321.85 per 100,00 people | Violent crime was down 8.96%, robbery was up 4.47% | None |
Little Rock, AR
| 1,314.45 per 100,000 people | Violent crime was up 2.03%, aggravated assaults are down 2.63% | Email list |
| Bridgeport, CT | 1,205.23 per 100,000 people | Violent crime was down 11.73% | None |
| Richmond, CA | 1,092.55 per 100,000 people | Violent crime was up 19.53% | None (proprietary vendor with restricted access) |
| Odessa, TX | 1,064.31 per 100,000 | Violent crime was down .7%, however robbery was up 42.37% |
None (proprietary vendor with restricted access)
|
| Paterson, NJ | 1054.72 per 100,000 people | Overall crime decreased 2.95% |
None
|
| Springfield, MA | 1039.36 per 100,000 people | Overall, violent crime jumped 6% with Robberies up 32.39% and murders up 83.33% | Their public log is no longer available. |
What is clear from this list is that all of these cities have significant crime rates and little transparency. Our recommendation is to open the data to help turn this tide. It is unlikely that opening the data could do any worse for each city's image, and very likely that crime data transparency would improve the situation.
For the three cities that are using a public facing crime map, our recommendation is to use an open format to reach more citizens and lower costs. With the existing crime rates, this is no time to be holding back on who can and can not share crime information.
Comments