Trump's New, More Sophisticated Take on Crime Still Does Not Show 'Homicides Are Skyrocketing'
Although his campaign rejects the FBI's numbers as "garbage," they are broadly consistent with evidence from other sources.

Last week, the Trump campaign falsely asserted that "homicides are skyrocketing in American cities under Kamala Harris." On Tuesday, the campaign offered a more nuanced and sophisticated critique of crime data cited by the Democratic presidential nominee. But it still does not support the earlier claim, which is inconsistent with numbers from several sources.
A "memorandum" headlined "Joe Biden's Lies on Crime" (a title that makes you wonder whether Trump forgot who his opponent is) notes that the FBI changed its crime data collection methods in 2021, switching from the old Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program to the new National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS). The transition, which was aimed at generating "new and better data," resulted in a big decline in the number of participating law enforcement agencies. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the share of the population covered by participating agencies fell from the previous norm of about 95 percent to just 65 percent in 2021.
"The FBI's website reveals that the Q1 2024 data Joe Biden is citing comes from just 71% of the nation's law enforcement agencies," the Trump campaign says. "That means crime data from nearly one third of jurisdictions is missing." The overall NIBRS participation rate, which is relevant in assessing the FBI's final estimates for any given year, is higher: The FBI says 15,724 of 18,884 eligible agencies, or 83 percent, submitted data for 2022. The overall population coverage rate had risen to 85 percent by 2023. Still, the decline in participation since 2020 is a widely recognized problem.
The Trump campaign notes that "the FBI attempts to 'estimate' crime data for non-reporting agencies using a 'statistical weight' from reporting agencies similar in size and type"—a "practice of estimating crime numbers for agencies with missing data" that "has been going on since the 1960s." But historically, the missing data represented around 5 percent of the population, compared to 15 percent in 2023. A bigger gap magnifies the potential for error.
That is a perfectly reasonable point. But does it mean that homicides are, in fact, "skyrocketing"? No.
Nationwide, the FBI's preliminary numbers indicate, murders fell by 26 percent in the first quarter of this year compared to the same period last year. But other sources also report that homicides are falling this year, albeit by smaller percentages.
Based on a sample of 277 cities, AH Datalytics reports a 17.3 percent drop in murders so far this year, which is very large compared to historical trends. Most of these numbers come from "official" sources, meaning they were reported by local police departments or municipal governments. Some were compiled by state governments, and some came from local news outlets that track crime.
The Council on Criminal Justice (CCJ), based on data from 39 cities for the first half of 2024, reports that "most violent crimes," including homicide, "are at or below levels seen in 2019," the year before a huge spike in murders (which, as Trump wants us to forget, happened during his administration). The CCJ says the drop in homicides through June in "the 29 study cities providing data for that crime" was 13 percent.
According to a report from the Major Cities Chiefs Association (MCCA) that covers 69 cities during the same period, the total number of homicides fell by 17.4 percent. That is strikingly similar to the AH Datalytics estimate, although the latter analysis covers a lot more cities—including New York, which was not part of the MCCA sample but saw a 10 percent drop in homicides, according to AH Datalytics.
Instead of trying to defend its recent claim that "homicides are skyrocketing," the Trump campaign widens the focus, arguing that the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which includes crimes that are not reported to police, provides a more accurate picture of what is happening. The NCVS is not relevant in assessing homicide trends, since it does not cover homicides—the most serious violent crime and the one that is hardest to miss. And although the Trump campaign's criticism of the FBI numbers focuses on what happened in the first quarter of 2024, we do not yet have NCVS data for 2023, let alone this year.
The NCVS, like the FBI's system, has both strengths and weaknesses. But the Trump campaign deems it "by far the most credible and reliable barometer of crime nationwide." The NCVS, it says, "reveals that between 2020 and 2022 (the most recent year for which data is available), there was a 43% increase in violent crime, 58% increase in rape, 89% increase in aggravated assault, and a 56% increase in robbery."
Although these numbers omit 2023 and 2024, the Trump campaign wants us to believe they tell the true story of crime during the Biden administration. But the divergence between the NCVS and FBI numbers, especially in 2022, presents a puzzle that cannot be resolved simply by observing that the NCVS includes unreported crimes.
In 2022, when the FBI reported an overall 2 percent decline in violent crime, the NCVS results indicated a whopping 75 percent increase. Again, the latter number does not include homicide, which according to the FBI fell by 7 percent in 2022. But it does include respondents' reports of rape, which were up 58 percent, compared to the 6 percent drop estimated by the FBI; robbery, which rose by 47 percent according to the NCVS but only 1 percent according to the FBI; and aggravated assault, which more than doubled according to the survey but fell by 2 percent in the FBI's tally.
"Both too much and too little can be made of the divergence between the UCR and NCVS violent crime rates in 2022," the CCJ notes. "Divergent change in a single year should be viewed in the context of the similar long-term trends in the two indicators—and both sources show an appreciable decline in violent crime since the early 1990s." Still, "changes in the UCR and NCVS violent crime rates have rarely differed as much as they did" in 2022.
The 2021 changes in the FBI's reporting system and the concomitant decline in participation do not seem relevant here, since the participation rate was substantially higher in 2022 than it was in 2021. But if crime victims are increasingly disinclined to contact the police, that could help explain the striking 2022 divergence between the NCVS results and the FBI numbers.
According to the NCVS, the CCJ notes, "approximately 52% of serious violent crimes were reported to the police in 2021 and 48% in 2022, a relative decrease of nearly 8%. The decline in reporting crimes to the police was particularly large for aggravated assault, falling from 61% in 2021 to 50% in 2022, a decrease of 18%." But these changes in reporting behavior do not come close to fully accounting for the enormous differences between the NCVS and UCR numbers for 2022.
Beyond the difference between reported and unreported crimes, the NCVS and the FBI's system use different methods and measure somewhat different things. "As a household-based survey," the CCJ notes, "the NCVS does not include people who are homeless or those who live in institutions such as prisons, jails, and nursing homes. It also excludes crimes of violence against persons under 12 years of age. If persons included in the survey have experienced changes in violence that differ from the changes experienced by those excluded from the survey, that could help account for some of the divergence in violence rates."
The Bureau of Justice Statistics notes other possibly relevant differences between the two sources. For example, "the NCVS includes, but the [FBI system] excludes, attempted robberies, simple assault, [and] verbal threats of crime." The FBI system "includes, but the NCVS excludes, homicide, arson, commercial crimes, and human trafficking." The two sources also use different definitions of some crimes.
Another possible factor: While the FBI's 2022 numbers covered the calendar year, the 2022 NCVS asked about crimes experienced from July 1, 2021, through November 30, 2022. "Since the NCVS shows an increase in violent crime," The Marshall Project's Weihua Li and Jamiles Lartey suggest, "it's potentially because violent crime rates were higher in the latter part of 2021." They also note that "the victimization survey is historically much more volatile from one year to the next," suggesting "it may be influenced by statistical noise."
The Trump campaign describes the FBI's quarterly numbers as "garbage" and "fake statistics." But notwithstanding the preliminary nature of those numbers and the challenges associated with the transition to the new reporting system, they are broadly consistent, in direction if not magnitude, with what other sources indicate.
"Right now," Li and Lartey reported in June, "every source points to a decrease in violent crime." They quoted University of Miami criminologist Alex Piquero, an adviser to the CCJ Crime Trends Working Group, who said "the FBI's Q1 2024 data is incomplete, not inaccurate," adding: "There's no fudging of the numbers, and the drop is real. The question, of course, is how big that drop will be, and then how big that drop will be across crime types. That's the thing that we just don't fully grasp yet."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Shorter Reason: if we can say murder isn't rising we can ignore all crime.
This remains hilarious to me given all the articles about costs to consumers from tariffs when retail theft from light hand policies for theft cost consumers 3x as much.
Shorter Reason: if we can say murder isn’t rising we can ignore all crime.
[Grumbling complaint about Reason’s lack of a “Mute
WriterEditor” functionality]Shorter Reason: if we can say [reported] murder isn’t rising we can ignore all [sorts of other unreported violent and property] crime.
(a title that makes you wonder whether Trump forgot who his opponent is)
AFAICT, nobody’s been able to say who Trump’s political opponent is since 2016 and the media is distinctly not asking any questions.
That said, it’s very telling that you think candidate Kamala has been generating the crime stats to which Trump is referring for the last several years you inept fucking retard.
Ha! I came here to say that. I'm not sure if I know who Trump's opponent is.
>who Trump’s opponent is
Jacob Sullum, it seems.
Sullum better hop Trump wins or poor Sullum will have nothing to write about for the next four years.
Trump's opponent is Stalin in a pantsuit. Right? Did I do it right?
Poor sarc.
You’re a sad, morbidly obese bitch.
That's disrespectful to Stalin.
Remember when Reason pointed out issues with the reported crime stats?
https://reason.com/2022/10/06/did-murders-rise-in-2021-no-one-knows/
https://reason.com/2022/10/24/is-crime-getting-better-or-worse-we-dont-really-know/
We don't know! WE DON'T KNOW!11!!!
You might have a point there if anybody actually reads Reason articles. All of the reporting is in the comment section. If Sullum wrote his screeds in pig Latin I probably wouldn't notice for months.
Same.
The entire article was about "issues" with the reported crime stats (PLUS, Trump's lies about them).
And pretending Biden wasn't President in 2021-2022.
Regarding your second link, in the comments on that article from 24 October, I discussed BJS data just out for calendar 2021. I pointed to the significance of the demographic data for the year 2006 - fifteen years BEFORE 2021. The year 2006, the total fertility rate (TFR) was 2.11, which was just above the zero population growth (ZPG) value of 2.1. This was the FIRST TIME in 35 years that the TFR was above the ZPG. This was tied to the beginning of legal abortion in a few states (chiefly NY) in 1970. As I pointed out back then, a reasonable prediction was that violent crime should go up given there were no significant policy changes in welfare and the drug war black market. The TFR in 2007 was 2.12. The key here is that the male cohort starting at age 15 up through 24 is responsible for most crimes and this two-year "bulge" is going to be with us for some time. The TFR has been crashing since. However that cohort from 2006-2007 is going to be with us though 2031 - then it will presumably begin to start to drop off as enough members of that group kill each other or "age out". While socioeconomic factors also come into play, the default assumption should be that no matter how many police are on the street, no matter how many SWAT teams or military AFVs are being driven around, it should have a statistically insignificant impact on crime rates.
The BJS data for 2023 will be out at the beginning of Fiscal 2025, in October of this year. I'm fairly confident that the BJS will show an increase in nearly all categories of violent crime. Now that the Trump people have discovered the BJS, they may be able to use the data to "show" the how awful the Democrats have been on the crime problem just before the November election. Remember where you read it first...
So according to you, an increase of .02 in the birth rate is a "bulge"?
What Trump remembers, an much of the media is trying to make sure most voters never learn, is who the Democrat candidates are.
So, Sullum expends an entire article nitpicking the word "skyrocket" as if nothing else worth reporting on is happening. Get a real job, Jacob.
No widespread murders.
Mostly peaceful murders.
Just like Boehm on the bad Bidem economy. Sure it spiked under him but isn’t as bad since!
It is so unfair to criticize anything Trump says. To criticize Trump is to give ammunition to Pant Suit Stalin and therefore be a co-conspirator in the destruction of America.
More articles on this topic than Kamala...*checking notes*...advocating price controls and taxes on unrealized capital gains.
Yup, EQUAL importance.
This reminds me of some of the whining during BLM about how no one took them seriously when they are protesting over violent thugs, women beaters, and drug dealers. Find better victims to protest over.
If no one takes you seriously, Jeff, it’s because the arguments you use SUCK. Get better ones. If Trump is so bad, better arguments exist.
I wonder how much was in the brown envelope this time?
the year before a huge spike in murders (which, as Trump wants us to forget, happened during his administration)
Which aligns exactly with the George Floyd protests. Exactly. Like draw a line through a ruler between the two points aligned.
The same can be said for arson, I mean fiery peaceful protests.
It's impossible to tell whether the BLM/defund the police or the COVID lockdowns contributed most - except that there was no reason for COVID lockdowns to continue past June 2020, but violent crime continued to skyrocket in 2021-2022 according to everything but the government figures.
Also, the nongovernment figures are only available through 2022, so as far as any reasonable person knows, they could still be skyrocketing, and the FBI just lying harder - or at best ignoring that the large Democrat cities that stopped reporting crimes, even murder, are the places that long had the highest crime rates and would probably be at the forefront of large increases in crime.
What's great is in a couple of years, maybe Reason can point to this V-shaped recovery when violent crime finally returns to pre-2020 levels.
Too local.
What are the chances that Sullum will be infected with HDS when the chosen one is strategically and reluctantly swept into office and starts WW3?
“Not having wars is a threat to our democracy.”
As we comment on this subject.
This is getting to be an increasingly regular feature around here, so much so I'm almost becoming desensitized to it.
But sure, keep pointing me to the Santa Monica police website which shows property crime way, way down amid unprecedented closed storefronts because of high theft and crime, and a police force that literally tells business owners to call 911 to report thefts "better to just report this to your insurer".
But sure, your dry GDP graph shows that it's just a vibecession...
Violent crime goes way up at the same time property crime mysteriously goes down. Huh.
Remember when the flu disappeared during the Covid panic? And then came back? Truth is, as they say, stranger than fiction. Even when they are one and the same.
As we comment on this subject.
Fun news from the realm of "Gen Z/Alpha rejects your school lockdown/gun control narrative and substitutes their own."
So, a suspect in a homicide, believed to be armed, was involved in a rear end collision just North of the local High School causing the local schools to enact their "Secure and Teach" protocols.
Supposedly, within 30 min. his Instagram account gained some 300 followers. The majority of them being HS students commenting that he should give up and turn himself in so that they can get out of school on time.
Sullum wrote homicides are not rising.
But you would have to expect that preposterous statement coming from a Harris cheerleader.
It looks like he hasn't been to NYC or Chicago since 2019.
Sullum wrote homicides are not rising.
But you would have to expect that preposterous statement coming from a Harris cheerleader.
Only Harris cheerleaders would use statistics to criticize Trump.
Poor sarc.
Did Jeffy eat Sarc?
How about *shootings*, as opposed to *homicides*?
All the statistics are lies and garbage. We know this because Rick James posted a couple of anecdotes.
We get it, you all have to inflate the "skyrocketing crime" narrative because it tends to be a good issue for Team Red. Whatever it takes to drag Trump across the finish line, even if it means lying and ignoring the truth.
You’re so pathetic. You’re just flailing lately. Growing ever so shrill.
C'mon, Mr. Sullum, you have to get with the plan. It's your job to shill for Team Red. You have to find whatever flimsy pretext you can to justify Trump's statements because everyone knows Kamalalamama will mean THE END OF AMERICA and we can't have that. It's our job to lie on behalf of Trump to prevent the pure destruction that Team Blue would unleash upon the entire universe. Truth and facts don't matter, only pure power and stopping the evil.
Statistics are just numbers to be manipulated on behalf of an agenda. They don't tell us anything real about the world, they only tell us how far we have to go to twist them to serve our agenda. And our agenda is, of course, not the pursuit of truth, but the pursuit of power. Power to stop the other team and therefore to help Team Red win. So all statistics on violent crime, or immigration, or taxes and spending, must be manipulated to benefit Team Red.
Statistics are just numbers to be manipulated on behalf of an agenda
Like the employment numbers? (Going to be revised down tomorrow by about a million, I understand.)
But sarc said all the economists he reads says the economy is great!
Like this?
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/americans-think-theyll-be-out-of-work-and-are-looking-for-jobs-at-highest-rate-in-10-years-ny-fed-survey-181754789.html
There is no objective reality, there are no facts, there are no real data that are free from bias. Everything is manipulated and nothing is real. Therefore the quest to discover truth is hopeless, and we had best get used to that. We should instead fight to obtain power so that we may do what we wish. If we cannot know the truth, at least we can be free of its limitations.
And because there is no such thing as truth or facts, those that demand that we should pursue truth and facts, are really instead pushing an agenda designed to strip us of power. "Seek the truth" is really code for "Seek a hopeless distraction to derail you from obtaining power". The people who demand truth and facts are the enemy, as they want to mislead and dilute our strength and turn us away from the goal of pursuing power at all costs.
Poor sarc.
Trump's past victory permanently broke you, his future victory might kill you.
Heart attack or TDS? 50/50 odds.
Heart attack brought on due to TDS related stress.
And have you noticed how much more bitchy, shrill and nasty Fatfuck has become lately? We really need to to ramp up our efforts to push him harder.
The people who are broken are the people who really do believe what I wrote above. That truth is a myth and power is all that matters.
Of course most if not all politicians are like this, but it also includes about half of the commenters here. I genuinely believe that there’s a good number of people around here who actually believe Trump is speaking “the truth” when he says that violent crime is “skyrocketing”. Because, honestly, who gives a shit if he’s right or wrong? Amirite? Because IT DOESN’T MATTER if he’s right or wrong. All that matters is that he wins.
The objective facts about violent crime are, in fact, irrelevant. What is most relevant is that Trump wins and Team Blue loses.
I genuinely believe that there’s a good number of people around here who actually believe Trump is a more reliable source of truth than anyone else.
And whose fault might that be?
Could it be the press, who repeatedly lie for the benefit of the party of the state?
Could it be the “experts”, who lie repeatedly for the benefit of the party of the state?
Could it be the state, who repeatedly lie for the benefit of their party?
Gosh darn it, Trump, stop not playing the game.
I genuinely believe that there’s a good number of people around here who actually believe Trump is a more reliable source of truth than anyone else.
I wrote that initially, but then I edited it because it didn't quite fit with the message I wrote initially.
But since you chose to respond to it:
None of that is true. Because it relies on this overly simplistic, overly reductionist way of viewing the world that just so happens to put your team as the "heroes" and their team as the "villains".
I think you choose to see what you want to see. You see an opinion writer writing something crazy and stupid about Trump, and you use that as an excuse to write off the entire press as an enemy of Trump. You see some experts who come to conclusions that disagree with Trump, for very valid and justifiable reasons, and you use that to write off ALL "so-called experts", who are supposedly biased for invalid and partisan reasons.
And it is not because you are dumb, it is because you literally don't care about the truth. Does it honestly matter to you what the real, correct violent crime statistics are? No, because there's a chance that if you did know what they were, that they wouldn't support Trump's cause. So you throw out truth, in service of power.
I wrote that initially, but then I edited it because it didn’t quite fit with the message I wrote initially.
The rest of us can read the other posts you wrote elsewhere.
It was a 100% admission of your true beliefs, and you're upset that I didn't let it slide.
Oh I do think it is true. But it is a topic for a different day.
And, answer the question. Be honest: do you actually care what the true, correct violent crime statistics are? Do you think public policy should be informed by the true, correct statistics, even if they do not support Trump's policy agenda?
They do support his agenda. People like you are trying to manipulate the numbers. Just like your kind do with employment and inflation statistics. You're a liar and propagandist. A sophist one at that.
You should go away forever. You have negative credibility here. That will never change.
They do support his agenda.
What if they didn't?
Would you change your mind, or would you change the statistics?
do you actually care what the true, correct violent crime statistics are?
If those tasked with reporting them intend on defining down crime, it is immaterial what I believe or care about.
right, so you will change the statistics
You keep saying "politics is not a noble pursuit".
Okay, so if it's not a noble pursuit, then acquisition of objective facts, in order to better inform rational public policy, is a totally pointless task. Politics, then, is about constructing narratives, which distort and otherwise ignore the truth, in order to acquire and maintain power. Isn't this closer to what you actually believe?
Isn’t this closer to what you actually believe?
Politics is the imposition of one's will, knowing that without such imposition, volunteerism of law is impossible.
It must hurt someone, thus it forfeits it's nobility.
Sorry but I have a hard time taking you at face value, since you have elsewhere described your hostility to voting and democracy generally.
Instead I think you view politics as not "noble" because it sacrifices truth in favor of power.
Sorry but I have a hard time taking you at face value, since you have elsewhere described your hostility to voting and democracy generally.
Why?
That would fully consistent with what I wrote.
Imposition must, necessarily, be authoritarian.
Because you are in favor of authoritarian forms of government which give even less power to individuals.
Pedo Jeffy is lying, sophist shitweasel. No honest discussion can be had with it. Just tedious, disingenuous parsing.
Fire Woodchipper guy doesn't want honesty, he wants narrative.
No Pedo Jeffy, you’re the liar. I’m completely honest. You keep getting beaten down day after day here because we call out your lies. This is why you’ve become so shrill and nasty.
Can’t wait to see what happens when Trump is president again.
Sullum still shows he IS a TDS-addled steaming pile of shit.
FOAD, asshole.
Only the FBI Stats on Murders have been valid over the years. The UCR underreports all other crimes. Back when I first studied Criminology as an undergraduate in the late 60's, this was known as the "phenomenological" problem. The victimization survey methodology was developed to deal with this problem and generally speaking, the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) data is the gold standard. I've had a complaint of decades that the two parties never have a clue about crime rates because they've always used the FBI UCR. Libertarians seem to have been doing the same thing. As far as I'm concerned, the Trump campaign is to be commended for finally looking at this.
While Sullum is right - the Trump campaign really has no data to support its murder claims - the wider claims are largely correct. When I was a board member of the state ACLU affiliate, focusing on the civil liberties implications of the Drug War, the BJS has been an invaluable source of data on the nexus between the criminal black market and crime rates.
The best evidence is that demographics and government social/welfare polices has given us increasing crime rates. Contra Trump, the policies of BOTH parties are at fault. For the rest of my response, check out my FB post on this subject at:
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=pfbid0SCRdbPi9XHihY7Gvn7navmPrYxb2vLr8PXcRwnyn8dECg1U98PFQyLDfLj6dqo9rl&id=100077207396200
In this post I refer to my "White Privilege" series, which I recommend as an example of what's going on in University Education Departments, based upon my experience as a History Grad student back in 2019.
Paul, excellent post, and your FB post was excellent as well. This confirms what I have been saying for decades: poverty programs helped to break the inner city family. It's largely a cultural/behavioral issue, although concentrated in black sectors or in some cases Hispanic sectors, aided and abetted by Uncle Sam.
It was discussed very well in "Please Stop Helping Us: How Liberals Make It Harder for Blacks to Succeed" by Jason L. Riley
BigT - thanks. You and I are in complete agreement. In the "White Privilege" series, which originated in a "Forum" set up by the prof of an education seminar I referred to, I point to the failed Great Society programs and their counterproductive effects on exactly the people they were supposed to help. The prof set the forum up to function as a latter day "struggle session" to put the old white boomer (i.e., me) in my place for having the temerity to comment in class that the idea of "White Privilege" was, itself, racist. I think I presented a very good argument in defense of my assertion, though, sadly, I never really got any sort of meaningful feedback.
The UCR also underreports murder now that the biggest cities aren't participating.
You’d think Democrats would be worried about homicides, since they are more frequent in cities they run.
They feel safe in their all-white gated communities.
They also push for stricter gun control laws.
As long as their police and security guards are unaffected.
Trump’s New, More Sophisticated Take on Crime Still Does Not Show ‘Homicides Are Skyrocketing’
Absolutely true. But change ‘are Skyrocketing’ to “Skyrocketed under Biden’ and you have the real problem. Sullum, of course, doesn’t understand that Trump is referring to Biden/Harris entire term. He thinks that since there are not more murders on Tuesday than on Monday crime is under control. Idiot.
Eat shit and die, Sullum.
Doubtless murders are down from the recent high, but it seems that a lot of crime may look to be coming down, but really it is the reporting that has fallen off-
https://midnightcrier.com/2024/07/11/city-of-sacramento-threatens-to-fine-target-store-for-calling-cops-on-shoplifters/
"I know statistics. Statistics is a friend of mine, and you, Sir, are NO STATISTIC!"
Statistical analysis NEVER results in a definite answer. Almost all statistics are reported as a central number and a range (usually a confidence interval) that says that the central number is the most probable and that it would be highly surprising to find the actual number (if you could determine it) outside of that 95% range. The confidence interval is wider if a lot of fudging had to be done to fill in the missing information; and very narrow if the data needed very little massaging. Trump may know something about accounting, but he clearly knows nothing about statistics - or doesn't want to let facts interfere with his bloviating.
Statistics are only as good as the underlying data and statistics can be used to say whatever the hell they want, doubly so in a numerically illiterate society.
The best evidence of a crime problem exists where people’s livelihoods depend on accurate numbers. That isn’t politicians and journalists.
lol Reason is in the bag for Flowers By Irene where am I?
So far during the democrat Party's week of joy in Chicago the totals so far are this:
All non demonized
Shot and killed: 10
Shot and wounded: 39
Total shot:49
Total homicides: 11
Will check in tomorrow/Friday for Thursday's totals of joy and stupid decisions.
Can't wait to see Saturday's totals
I wonder how many of the Democrats took a moment of silence and remembrance for as they acknowledged the Democrat city mayhem.
They made a (hilarious) land acknowledgement (without returning the land) - think they made a victims of crime acknowledgement too?
Nitpicking over whether the homicides have gone up or down in any given year is a lot of fun. But what doesn't change -- and hasn't changed in the last 30-40 years, as far as I can tell -- is who most of the dead people are and who most of the murderers are. The American Slaughter in our cities has killed, roughly, 150,000 young black males since 1994. That's about 5,000 a year, for the math challenged. And the people who did most of the killing were young black males. I don't know about most folks, but I've never seen any black leader, white leader, Chicago mayor, celebrity, sports star or major media outfit point out that tragic 150,000 number and call on the country's 'leaders' to mount a crusade to do anything about it. That's why I wrote https://clips.substack.com/p/2023-another-year-of-slaughter-for?utm_source=publication-search