Crimes Reaches 40 Year Lows Nationally and Statewide –
The 2010 Preliminary Annual Uniform Crime Report, released on Monday, shows a 5.5 percent decrease in the number of reported violent crimes when compared with data from 2009. It also shows a 2.8 percent decline in reported property crimes.
“Property crime dropped in the region’s three largest cities from 2009 to 2010, continuing a years-long pattern, according to FBI figures released Monday. All but Roseville also saw violent crimes decrease,” the Bee report.
The numbers bring the nation’s violent crime rate to a level not seen in four decades.
In a press release from California Attorney General Kamala Harris, she noted that the homicide rate in California continued to fall during 2010, reaching the lowest level since 1966. Preliminary figures gathered by the Department of Justice from the state’s largest jurisdictions show that the number of homicides reported in 2010 declined by 9.6% from the year before.
“The decline in homicides and other violent crimes reflects the tireless efforts of our peace officers,” said Attorney General Harris. “My office is committed to supporting their brave, relentless and selfless work in protecting the people of California from hardened criminals.”
Overall, the number of violent crimes declined 6.4% in 2010, according to statistics compiled from 89 agencies that report about 65% of all crimes committed annually in California. Forcible rape declined 6%. Robbery dropped 8.9%, and aggravated assault fell 4.6%.
Property crimes declined 2.2% in 2010. Burglary dropped 0.9%. Motor vehicle theft declined 7.2%. Arson dropped 15%. Larceny under $400 dropped 4.9%. Only larceny over $400 rose, by 0.7%.
Criminologists cite a number of different factors for the long-term decline including the waning of the crack epidemic, a higher incarceration rate for criminals, and improvements in technology used to fight crime.
Others have cited changes in the population demographics and new policing efforts.
Some reports note that the trend contradicts predictions that crime would rise due to the poor economy, but others, however, suggested that it might be a lagging indicator rather than a leading indicator.
While locally the public and members of city government have worried about a rising crime rate, actual data largely dispels those fears.
The Vanguard requested data from the Davis Police Department related to crime.
The data shows that while burglary and larceny/theft upticked slightly in 2010 as compared to 2009, it was quite a bit lower than previous years.
Violent crime is way down. The city has not had a homicide since 2004. Rapes were down slightly. Robbery nearly fell by half. And aggravated assault fell dramatically from last year, and is way down from 2000 and 2004. Since 2004, the number of aggravated assaults has fallen steadily from 196 down to 52 this year, which is the lowest level since 1996 when the population of the city was nearly a third less.
We can see the overall crime rate upticked in 2010 from 1792 in 2009 to 1823. However, those number are fairly steady and mark the bottom of a lengthy decline.
Moreover the arrest rate is nearly half in 2010 what it was in 2004, among both adults and juveniles.
The bottom line in Davis, as in elsewhere, is that there is little evidence other than the coverage in the local paper that crime is increasing in Davis. People simply become more cognizant of it through media coverage and a few notable incidents.
If the crime rate is falling as the stats seem to indicate, then why are the number of trials for Yolo County so high? Shouldn’t that stat be falling too?
I was happy to see that the County Supervisors were asking this same question of the County Public Defender. The Public Defender remarked that the crime rate was not going up, and the reason there are so many trial is because more cases needed to be settled before going to trial.
The data in this article supports the fact that we do not need to be spending so much tax money on trials. We need to have more people question the policies that lead to so many trials–especially if the crime rate is lower now.
Fight: I agree with what you say. However, keep in mind that a “crime rate” is relative to total population. As such, the number of crimes may be rising and the “crime rate” could be falling at the same time, if the population growth is faster than the increase in the number of crimes.
That said, I doubt this is the case. It probably is the case that we are having more trials due to the DA being less willing to settle cases pre-trial.
This is probably just random coincidence–as opposed to the cops in Davis just making sh!t up–but take a look at the 6 annual numbers for robbery:
57, 57, 45, 45, 30 and 29.
On the surface, it looks like a random number generator was mal-programmed and it got stuck spitting it a non-random pattern.
I noted the Attorney General and others in law enforcement want to site better policing and locking up more people as the reduction in crime. However, in other States they are not locking up more people and have reduced crime.
I think a large reduction in crime can also be the fact that since more people are unemployed they are spending more time with their families and in their communities. Being more involved with your community and being available for your children/families is the largest deterrent to crime. Yet this is not entered into the Bee article or given as a reason for the reduced crime. Maybe because they can’t say they were responsible for that.
Sorry, I meant to say: “I noted the Attorney General and others in law enforcement want to cite better policing and the locking up more people as the reason for the reduction in crime. However, in other States they are not locking up more people and still have reduced crime stats.”