Baghdad is Safer than Washington, DC?

[Fritz]

http://www.strategypage.com//fyeo/qndguide/default.asp?target=IRAQ.HTM

IRAQ: Baghdad is Safer than Washington, DC

June 21, 2004: The anti-government violence in Iraq is causing a annualized death rate of 15 per 100,000 population for terrorist activities alone. That compares to a murder rate in the United States of 5.6 per 100,000. European nations have an average rate of about four per 100,000 (although some West European nations are below two per 100,000, while Russia is 20 per 100,000.) Some nations are particularly violent. South Africa has a murder rate of 59, and neighboring Namibia is 45. Colombia, in South America, was over 50 a few years ago, but is now down to the 30s because a crackdown on armed militias. The Middle East tends of have low murder rates, with Turkey having a rate of 2.3. Israel also had a rate of 2.3, until the Palestinians began their terrorism campaign in late 2000. The deaths from suicide bombings and other attacks doubled Israel's murder rate to about 4 per 100,000, although that has been coming down in the past year.

But Iraq has become accustomed to a high murder rate. Saddam's police forces were the cause of many murders, and as far back as the 1970s, the official murder rate was 12 per 100,000. The coalition forces and Iraqi security forces have gotten the non-terrorist murder rate down to about five per 100,000. This, combined with the deaths caused by terrorists, produces a rate of about 20 per year. The murder rate in Washington, DC, is over 60 per 100,000.

[Samdari]

http://www.strategypage.com//fyeo/qndguide/default.asp?target=IRAQ.HTM

IRAQ: Baghdad is Safer than Washington, DC

June 21, 2004: The anti-government violence in Iraq is causing a annualized death rate of 15 per 100,000 population for terrorist activities alone. That compares to a murder rate in the United States of 5.6 per 100,000. European nations have an average rate of about four per 100,000 (although some West European nations are below two per 100,000, while Russia is 20 per 100,000.) Some nations are particularly violent. South Africa has a murder rate of 59, and neighboring Namibia is 45. Colombia, in South America, was over 50 a few years ago, but is now down to the 30s because a crackdown on armed militias. The Middle East tends of have low murder rates, with Turkey having a rate of 2.3. Israel also had a rate of 2.3, until the Palestinians began their terrorism campaign in late 2000. The deaths from suicide bombings and other attacks doubled Israel's murder rate to about 4 per 100,000, although that has been coming down in the past year.

But Iraq has become accustomed to a high murder rate. Saddam's police forces were the cause of many murders, and as far back as the 1970s, the official murder rate was 12 per 100,000. The coalition forces and Iraqi security forces have gotten the non-terrorist murder rate down to about five per 100,000. This, combined with the deaths caused by terrorists, produces a rate of about 20 per year. The murder rate in Washington, DC, is over 60 per 100,000.

Wow, you people will swallow any kind of propaganda. The murder rate in the DC area is 9.4 per 100,000 (http://www.bestplaces.net/crime02/crime_study3.asp). Way too high, yes, but nowhere near the ludicrous 60 claimed there. Perhaps if they were going to make up a number, they should not have chosen one that was 3-4 times as high as any ever recorded.

[henry296]

Wow, you people will swallow any kind of propaganda. The murder rate in the DC area is 9.4 per 100,000 (http://www.bestplaces.net/crime02/crime_study3.asp). Way too high, yes, but nowhere near the ludicrous 60 claimed there. Perhaps if they were going to make up a number, they should not have chosen one that was 3-4 times as high as any ever recorded.

Just to show how statistics can be manipulated, the 9.4 you site includes the entire Washington, DC Metro Area which includes the suburbs in Maryland and Virginia. I would assume the 60 rate would only be for the District of Columbia which is the city of Washington, DC.

Todd

[Fritz]

Well, send a note to strategy page.

[Samdari]

Just to show how statistics can be manipulated, the 9.4 you site includes the entire Washington, DC Metro Area which includes the suburbs in Maryland and Virginia. I would assume the 60 rate would only be for the District of Columbia which is the city of Washington, DC.

Todd

It would change yes, but still get nowhere near 60. That number remains imaginary.

EDIT: WOW, was I way off. The rate in DC itself did peak at over 80. However, in 2000 it was 40, and is probably around 30-35 for 2003. So, their invented number is around twice the actual current rate, rather than the 3-4 times the highest in history I initially claimed.

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/dccrime.htm

[henry296]

According to the bureau of justice statistic the 1997 homicide rate in DC was 301.

http://bjsdata.ojp.usdoj.gov/dataonline/Search/Homicide/Local/RunHomTrendsInOneVar.cfm

The current population is 570,000 which is 52 per 100,000. I realize the timing of the data does not corresond but in order for DC's rate to be the same as Bagdad's the murder rate needed to drop to 86 per year.

Todd

[henry296]

Samdari,

I think our data agrees and you found more recent data than I. I have sent a note asking for a source.

[Bee]

I wonder what the death rate of Americans in Iraq is...

[Samdari]

in order for DC's rate to be the same as Bagdad's the murder rate needed to drop to 86 per year.

Well, I would not believe their "death rate in Baghdad" numbers anyway. A rate of 15/100000 means that 840 out of 5.6 million would be killed there in 2004. Haven't hundreds of US soldiers died there in less than half the year? That number is quite suspect, and they make no attempt to back it up, simply stating numbers as fact.

The 5.6 million number sounds like an MSA anyway - that or the city is the size of the DC MSA. Either way, there were likely always pockets of wealth and pockets of poverty. If you drew a strict line around the pockets of poverty in Baghdad, you would get a much higher crime rate than overall. That's just how the lines happened to be drawn in DC, which is why the MSA numbers are considered more valid statistically. In any case, this comparison is hardly apples to apples. Lets see, take crime data from DC circa 1996, look at it in the worst possible light, and then compare it to hand-chosen numbers (I am betting their number only looks at Iraqis killed) from a different population dynamic of US-invaded Baghdad in 2004. They are so far from a fair comparison, it is hard to take seriously any of their conclusions - even if a fair comparison would have provided eye opening numbers (they certainly did to me).

This is why the internet needs a peer review board.

[rkmsuf]

what is the point anyway? bfd even if it is.

[Samdari]

what is the point anyway? bfd even if it is.

I get annoyed when people invent statistics to try to prove their opinion is fact. Just a pet peeve of mine.

Except when I do it of course, then it does not bother me so much.

[QuikSand]

IRAQ: Baghdad is Safer than Washington, DC

June 21, 2004: The anti-government violence in Iraq is causing a annualized death rate of 15 per 100,000 population for terrorist activities alone.

That compares to a murder rate in the United States of 5.6 per 100,000. (snip) The murder rate in Washington, DC, is over 60 per 100,000.

(my emphasis added above - Q)


The first one (so carefully worded, as highlighted above) doesn't sound to me like it's a comprehensive murder rate like the others - it sounds like it's a terrorism rate, which theoretically would be added to whatever other non-terrorism crimes might be happening there otherwise.

Isn't this comparing apples and oranges?

[rkmsuf]

I get annoyed when people invent statistics to try to prove their opinion is fact. Just a pet peeve of mine.

Except when I do it of course, then it does not bother me so much.

I have an arsenal of quality stats right at my fingertips. Name a topic...I'll drop some knowledge on you.

For example did you know during his legendary hitting streak Joe Dimaggio ate oatmeal for breakfast 74% of time?

[Rizon]

DC Statistics:

Population (year 2000): 572,059, Est. population in July 2002: 570,898 (-0.2% change)
Males: 269,366 (47.1%), Females: 302,693 (52.9%)
County: District of Col
Land area: 61.4 square miles


Crime in Washington (2002):
264 murders (46.2 per 100,000)
262 rapes (45.9 per 100,000)
3,731 robberies (653.5 per 100,000)
4,854 assaults (850.2 per 100,000)
5,167 burglaries (905.1 per 100,000)
20,903 larceny counts (3661.4 per 100,000)
9,168 auto thefts (1605.9 per 100,000)
City-data.com crime index = 767.4 (higher means more crime, US average = 330.6)


Crime in Washington (2001):
232 murders (40.6 per 100,000)
188 rapes (32.9 per 100,000)
3,940 robberies (689.0 per 100,000)
5,568 assaults (973.7 per 100,000)
5,009 burglaries (876.0 per 100,000)
21,434 larceny counts (3748.4 per 100,000)
7,670 auto thefts (1341.3 per 100,000)
City-data.com crime index = 773.4 (higher means more crime)

[Fonzie]

The first one (so carefully worded, as highlighted above) doesn't sound to me like it's a comprehensive murder rate like the others - it sounds like it's a terrorism rate, which theoretically would be added to whatever other non-terrorism crimes might be happening there otherwise.

Isn't this comparing apples and oranges?

Bingo.

[henry296]

Here is the response I got:

Just google for US crime stats. Actually, DC is 69.


Can you please send the me the site to confirm the 60 homicides per
100,000 in DC quoted in the article that Bagdad is safer than Washington,
DC. I have not been able to validate that data.

[JPhillips]

Quiksand beat me to it, but the number for Baghdad is highly suspect. Using the word annualized implies that they took deaths from a shorter time period and extrapolated a yearly total based on that number. Obviously the time period on which the annualized number was taken is critical. Was it a week or six months? If it was a short time period how does it stack up with the average taken from the same time period at other points?

It also states that the death rate is "for terrorist activities alone". My guess is that number doesn't include murder and probably doesn't include civilians killed by Coalition troops. Also, given the state of the Iraqi government how do we have any verifiable numbers?

[judicial clerk]

DiMaggio was a dunker

[QuikSand]

And another thing...

I have to think that the "murder rate" isn't exactly a pure indicator of how "safe" a place is to an ordinary person, minding his business.

In American cities with high murder rates (like DC), I have to think that a sizable share of those murders are things affecting people who are murdered for a reason -- drug-related conflicts, domestic distubances gotten out of hand, that sort of thing. We know that these represent a large share of murders, all told.

If you're the type to be walking down the street, middle of day, minding your own business... the overall murder rate doesn't really affect you too much, but the rate of terrorist incidents certainly does.

[Dutch]

I would imagine that walking down a city street in Washington D.C. is about a billion times more safe for a white/black/Asian/hispanic American than it is in Baghdad.

So I would throw that stat right out the window. Make no illusions about it, Baghdad is a dangerous place filled with anti-American terrorists that would love nothing more than the American Military (the guys with the guns) to go home, so they can do what they do best, kill innocent civilians.

[rkmsuf]

DiMaggio was a dunker

He had great concentration. I was making these yelping noises and he didn't even flinch.

[Samdari]

Here is the response I got:

Just google for US crime stats. Actually, DC is 69.


Can you please send the me the site to confirm the 60 homicides per
100,000 in DC quoted in the article that Bagdad is safer than Washington,
DC. I have not been able to validate that data.

Funny how they did not provide you with a link showing that 69 figure. Based on stats everyone collected, that number is accurate for about 1990. In the last five years or so it is clearly the low 40's (note - I find this figure staggeringly high, but at least accurate).

Any chance you would reply asking for a link to stats showing it to be 69, and including a link to real numbers?