3 ms·
> I'm not saying crime is going up. I'm saying the stats are useless. Then why did you add an anecdote about crimes you heard about? > Or they could shave off
by smt88 6y ago
> I'm not saying crime is going up. I'm saying the stats are useless.
Then why did you add an anecdote about crimes you heard about?
> Or they could shave off enough to make crime go down slightly every year, which is what I'd do if I were a chief who had to answer to a mayor, and didn't really care about statistical fidelity.
It seems implausible that thousands of chiefs and mayors are doing exactly this, all across the country. You would also expect to see downward jumps when new mayors came into office, which anyone fudging the numbers would do to make sure they stayed in office.
You're talking about, essentially, a conspiracy that runs from the bottom of local police departments all the way to the FBI (who also collect these stats).
- tarboreus 6y agoThe FBI largely collects the stats they are sent. I've made no claims about the rest of the country. The story of this instance of crime is that they're not collecting data the way they should. The way they opted not to collect it shows that it's part of their standard MO. They could be making up crimes they're not solving, but there's no incentive for them to do that. And it's impossible to see that in action, it would just look like someone entering things into a spreadsheet. You should respond to claims people are making, instead of responding to claims you want people to have made because they're easier to argue against. It makes discussion a waste of time.