Red V Blue state: Crime and Safety

[rambot]

In an effort to not pull the California thread away from just California bashing without context, I thought we should have a thread that actually is a comparison between Red and Blue run states in regards to their safety.

Third Way

Wow. 20 years: So it's consistent. 25 states: So it's rampant

Rape rates between states:
https://www.cnn.com/2014/02/03/opinion/sutter-alaska-rape-list/index.html
It has the lists by state

Red States Have Higher Gun Death Rates Than Blue States. Here’s Why
Interesting finding:

A new study published in Journal of the American Medical Association’s Surgery found that firearm deaths are more likely in small rural towns than in major urban cities, adding to research that contradicts common belief that Democratic blue areas have higher incidences of gun-related deaths than do Republican red districts.

This one is comprehensive but quite old.
Red States Have Higher Crime Rates Than Blue States - Smart Politics


I did a search on duckduckgo as well. It gave me a lot of statistic blog analysis (take what you will) but I have not seen anyone come to the conclusion that Red states on the whole do better than Blue. Generally, there is one crime that Republicans have done a bit better than Democrats: Robbery (not sure which type of robbery is being shown). But murder, forcible rape.... these clear indicate Red states are less safe.
Fact Brief : Do red states report higher rates of violent crime than blue states? | Gigafact

I found 6 or 7 posts and they all basically said the same thing.

 

[Fantine]

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know why red states have more gun deaths. But thanks anyway.

 

[rambot]

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know why red states have more gun deaths. But thanks anyway.

I'm not interested in a rocket scientist knowing WHY.
I'm interested in Red people coming to grips the the reality of the situation instead of silly comparisons and attacks.

 

[Vambram]

I'm not interested in a rocket scientist knowing WHY.
I'm interested in Red people coming to grips the the reality of the situation instead of silly comparisons and attacks.

I have a serious question.

In the studies that you have posted, do those studies also give the crime rate in the bigger cities inside the "red states"?

 

[rambot]

I have a serious question.

In the studies that you have posted, do those studies also give the crime rate in the bigger cities inside the "red states"?

Why is that a serious question?
To answer it: One of the sites stated that even when discluding the major cities, the rates were still worse.

In fact, rural and small town America has higher murder rates than some big cities.


Do cities set criminal codes? Do cities have their own justices assigned to them?

Always trying to find an easy out.

Sorry. Your states are demonstrably more dangerous.

 

[Vambram]

Why is that a serious question?
To answer it: One of the sites stated that even when discluding the major cities, the rates were still worse.

In fact, rural and small town America has higher murder rates than some big cities.


Do cities set criminal codes? Do cities have their own justices assigned to them?

Always trying to find an easy out.

Sorry. Your states are demonstrably more dangerous.

Even in red states, the bigger cities are most often blue cities. They usually have Democratic mayors and Democratic district attorneys. The blue cities therefore often follow the predictable pattern of being soft on crime.

For over 16 years, I have been living outside of a small rural town with only about 5,000 inhabitants. I know for a fact that the violent crime and murder rate in my town is very extremely low.

 

[iluvatar5150]

I have a serious question.

In the studies that you have posted, do those studies also give the crime rate in the bigger cities inside the "red states"?

You could try reading the very first link in the OP, the one that says "Third Way".

 

[rambot]

Even in red states, the bigger cities are most often blue cities. They usually have Democratic mayors and Democratic district attorneys. The blue cities therefore often follow the predictable pattern of being soft on crime.

And who makes the criminal statues for those cities?

For over 16 years, I have been living outside of a small rural town with only about 5,000 inhabitants. I know for a fact that the violent crime and murder rate in my town is very extremely low.

Believe it or not, most people don't advertise that they have raped people. Most sexual crime; or hate motivated crimes are underreported in small rural areas. This is a known fact.
So while I'm sure it SEEMS the rates for violent crime are low, just because you haven't heard it, does NOT mean it isn't happenning.

 

[Vambram]

And who makes the criminal statues for those cities?


Believe it or not, most people don't advertise that they have raped people. Most sexual crime; or hate motivated crimes are underreported in small rural areas. This is a known fact.
So while I'm sure it SEEMS the rates for violent crime are low, just because you haven't heard it, does NOT mean it isn't happenning.

If you have soft on crime mayors and soft on crime district attorneys in blue cities, it doesn't really matter what the criminal statues of the state happens to be.

In small rural areas, rapes are not tolerated at all. Hate motivated crime is not tolerated where I live.
In a small town, everyone seems to know everyone and there ain't a lot of secrets.

 

[keith99]

I decided to look things up for California by County.

California locations by crime rate - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

What bordered on shocking was that none of the 10 highest violent crime rates was in Southern California! Kern County was number 11.

It was no surprise that San Francisco was the worst. But it also highlights the reason. The population density was over 17,500. The second most dense it Orange County with about 3,900. That measure can be deceptive as a county can have a packed like sardines area and also a lot of all but vacant land. But I think it is an accurate reflection between those 2 counties.

I found it very interesting that Orange county was so low. 4th lowest violent crime rate while being the second densest. Historically Orange County was red. But now it is barely blue, so barely that the source I found said there were less than 100 more democrats than republicans.

Perhaps being clearly purple is a wise choice.

 

[iluvatar5150]

In small rural areas, rapes are not tolerated at all. Hate motivated crime is not tolerated where I live.
In a small town, everyone seems to know everyone and there ain't a lot of secrets.

Lol, are you trying to suggest that good-ol-boy networks don't exist in small towns? Come on, some of the worst abuses are committed by big fish in small ponds.

 

[rambot]

If you have soft on crime mayors and soft on crime district attorneys in blue cities, it doesn't really matter what the criminal statues of the state happens to be.

In small rural areas, rapes are not tolerated at all. Hate motivated crime is not tolerated where I live.
In a small town, everyone seems to know everyone and there ain't a lot of secrets.

Haha.
Sure.
And no rumors either.


There's a reason rural crimes go underreported and it has to do with culture

 

[Vambram]

Can you prove that?

 

[rambot]

If you have soft on crime mayors and soft on crime district attorneys in blue cities, it doesn't really matter what the criminal statues of the state happens to be.

Well, of course "soft on crime" would benefit from data to back up the claim a) that it exists, b) that it has an impact and that c) the impact is negative.

Not saying you're wrong, just that subjectivity isn't super convincing.

 

[probinson]

In an effort to not pull the California thread away from just California bashing without context, I thought we should have a thread that actually is a comparison between Red and Blue run states in regards to their safety.

Third Way

Wow. 20 years: So it's consistent. 25 states: So it's rampant

Rape rates between states:
https://www.cnn.com/2014/02/03/opinion/sutter-alaska-rape-list/index.html
It has the lists by state

Red States Have Higher Gun Death Rates Than Blue States. Here’s Why
Interesting finding:


This one is comprehensive but quite old.
Red States Have Higher Crime Rates Than Blue States - Smart Politics


I did a search on duckduckgo as well. It gave me a lot of statistic blog analysis (take what you will) but I have not seen anyone come to the conclusion that Red states on the whole do better than Blue. Generally, there is one crime that Republicans have done a bit better than Democrats: Robbery (not sure which type of robbery is being shown). But murder, forcible rape.... these clear indicate Red states are less safe.
Fact Brief : Do red states report higher rates of violent crime than blue states? | Gigafact

I found 6 or 7 posts and they all basically said the same thing.

I'm always skeptical of these kinds of studies, particularly when nearly all of the above data originates from your first source, "Third Way" which describes itself on its about page as "a national think tank that champions modern center-left ideas." Not exactly an unbiased source.

Then when I looked at their data for "red states", I see that they define a "red state" as "...states that voted for Trump in 2020. Blue states are ones that voted for Biden in 2020", which would explain why they're classifying North Carolina a "red state" despite having a Democrat governor. This in itself considerably muddies the data unnecessarily. If we're trying to determine which style of government results in fewer crimes, then it's far more important if the state has a Democrat or a Republican governor than who they voted for in a single election.

Conspicuously absent from the Third Way analysis is Washington DC, and if you look at DC's crime statistics, it's not hard to see why. Washington DC, a veritable bastion of Democrats, just recorded its deadliest year in over two decades in 2023. Some might argue that DC is not included because it's not a state, but it is run by Democrats and has an overwhelmingly Democratic population. Additionally, DC's population is larger than that of both the states of Wyoming and Vermont, and is on-par with the population of Alaska. So it would make sense to include it in any objective analysis of the effect of Democrat vs. Republican politics on crime statistics.

For these reasons, these studies rarely tell us anything useful. They are usually nothing more than cherry-picked, p-hacked nonsense masquerading as objective data to push a narrative, and both the Republicans and Democrats are equally guilty of this.

 

[rambot]

I'm always skeptical of these kinds of studies, particularly when nearly all of the above data originates from your first source, "Third Way" which describes itself on its about page as "a national think tank that champions modern center-left ideas." Not exactly an unbiased source.

Then when I looked at their data for "red states", I see that they define a "red state" as "...states that voted for Trump in 2020. Blue states are ones that voted for Biden in 2020", which would explain why they're classifying North Carolina a "red state" despite having a Democrat governor. This in itself considerably muddies the data unnecessarily. If we're trying to determine which style of government results in fewer crimes, then it's far more important if the state has a Democrat or a Republican governor than who they voted for in a single election.

Conspicuously absent from the Third Way analysis is Washington DC, and if you look at DC's crime statistics, it's not hard to see why. Washington DC, a veritable bastion of Democrats, just recorded its deadliest year in over two decades in 2023. Some might argue that DC is not included because it's not a state, but it is run by Democrats and has an overwhelmingly Democratic population. Additionally, DC's population is larger than that of both the states of Wyoming and Vermont, and is on-par with the population of Alaska. So it would make sense to include it in any objective analysis of the effect of Democrat vs. Republican politics on crime statistics.

For these reasons, these studies rarely tell us anything useful. They are usually nothing more than cherry-picked, p-hacked nonsense masquerading as objective data to push a narrative, and both the Republicans and Democrats are equally guilty of this.

Ah.
Ad hominem. Check.

Comparing a city state to full states is both fair and unreasonable.

 

[rambot]

FYI...

2 used fbi stats
2 used Third Way (1 of which I acknowledge as old anyway)
1 journal of American medical's surgery

 

[probinson]

Ah.
Ad hominem. Check.

I'm convinced that people just say things but don't really understand what they mean. Nothing about the post I made was "ad hominem". It directly addressed the data you presented and explained why it was nothing more than p-hacked propaganda.

Comparing a city state to full states is both fair and unreasonable.

If your primary purpose is to prove that Democrat-run areas fare better in crime statistics than in Republican-run areas, then it makes perfect sense to exclude DC and pretend like it doesn't exist. But if your purpose is to objectively determine whether Democrat- or Republican-run areas fare better in crime statistics, then you would absolutely include it.

 

[probinson]

FYI...

2 used fbi stats

You might also note that in your link that references FBI data, it states this:

The FBI cautions against using any one demographic marker to draw conclusions about the causes of crime, which they describe as manifold, complex and often “not readily measurable.” ​

 

[probinson]

If you believe that comparing a city state with an incredibly dense population (11,000/m2) with a state with 6/m2 is a reasonable and rational act, I can't really help you.

You're doing a great job of illustrating my point.

There are FAR too many confounders to simply say, RED state = more crime, BLUE state = less crime. To quote the FBI, the causes of crime are MANIFOLD, COMPLEX and NOT READILY MEASURABLE.

In this post, you've just suggested that population density has more to do with crime than whether Republicans or Democrats are in control. That's just one confounder of many.

The point is, this is all just propaganda dressed up as data. To reiterate what the FBI said, these things are "not readily measurable", and any attempt to correlate "red" states with more crime, or worse, trying to imply some causation, is nothing more than an exercise in p-hacking and confirmation bias.