Many US Cities Have Had Murder Rates Higher Than Iraq's 2006 'Violent Death' Rate

Photo of Tom Blumer.
By Tom Blumer | January 3, 2007 - 12:10 ET

The Associated Press released an interesting set of statistics (host link stored for future ref) a couple of days ago that I would suppose were designed to suck away any optimism any fools who still support the mission in Iraq might have (bolds are mine):

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Government officials on Monday reported that 16,273 Iraqi civilians, soldiers and police died violent deaths in 2006, a figure larger than an independent Associated Press count for the year by more than 2,500.

The tabulation by the Iraqi ministries of Health, Defense and Interior, showed that 14,298 civilians, 1,348 police and 627 soldiers were killed in the violence that raged in the country last year.

The Associated Press accounting, gleaned from daily news reports from Baghdad, arrived at a total of 13,738 deaths.

Pretty grim, isn't it? And this is for "violence that raged in the (whole) country."

Man, what a downer. I mean, this is an honest-to-goodness Grade A bona fide quagmire.

Oops -- I started digging into US murder statistics, and what I found made me less depressed about Iraq, and more concerned about the US.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Let's put this in perspective. Below are 10 listings for US cities and years. Your mission to accomplish (so to speak), is to guess whether each particular city's murder rate in the year identified was higher or lower than the "violent death rate" in Iraq (which is, from all appearances, all-inclusive). Let's use the Iraqi government's higher number of 16,273 just for the heck of it, even though the Associated Press will "surely" be bothered that I'm exaggerating the level of violence compared to what their records show (somehow, I think they'll get over it). Using the government's figure means that Iraq's violent death rate in 2006 was 56.49 per 100,000 residents (16,273 deaths, and a population per Wiki of 28,807,000).

So here are the US cities and the related years:

1. New York City - 1990
2. Washington, DC - 1991
3. Gary, IN - 2005
4. Detroit, MI - 1991
5. Compton, CA - 2005
6. New Orleans, LA - 2006
7. New Orleans, LA - 2004
8. New Orleans, LA - 2003
9. Atlanta, GA - 1973
10. E. St. Louis, IL - 2004

Try not to peek ahead.

......

......

Done?

SURPRISE -- Every city and year listed had a higher murder rate than Iraq in 2006 -- except (surprise again) New York City in 1990 (Gotham's worst year on record for murder).

The murder rates were as follows (see related graph at UPDATE 2 below):

1. New York City - 1990; 30.7 (2,245 murders; population 7,322,000)
2. Washington, DC - 1991; 83.1 (482 murders; population 598,000 [1])
3. Gary, IN - 2005; 58.0
4. Detroit, MI - 1991; roughly 60
5. Compton, CA - 2005; 67.1
6. New Orleans, LA - 2006; 67.5 (154 murders; population 228,000 [2])
7. New Orleans, LA - 2004; 59.6 (275 murders; population 461,115 [3])
8. New Orleans, LA - 2003; 57.7
9. Atlanta, GA - 1973; 57.7 (271 murders; population 470,000 [1])
10. E. St. Louis, IL - 2004; 63.4

Does this mean Iraq is a walk in the park? Of course not.

Does this mean that Iraq is a hopeless quagmire that cannot be won? It would appear, at a minimum, that anyone who believes that carries a heavy burden of proof.

And to personalize it, dear reader, unless you've gone on record in favor of abandoning the residents of the cities listed above to their own devices at the times they were (or are) extremely dangerous places to be, it would seem that you have no basis for contending that we should do that to the people of Iraq.

Notes:
[1] - interpolated between reported decade-ending populations.
[2] - USAT article reports that New Orleans population is "about half of its pre-Katrina population of 455,000."
[3] - Population per US Census Bureau downloadable spreadsheet found at this link.

(Aside: Yes, I know I didn't excerpt the last paragraph about the UN claiming that "100 die each day." Give me a break -- The UN is winging it with no support. And besides, I thought AP, despite Jamil "Captain Tuttle" Hussein, is the gold standard in reporting. Dear reader, you wouldn't be getting cold feet about AP, would you?)
__________________________

UPDATE: Oh, you say that the deaths are concentrated in just a few areas in Iraq? Fine. That sounds like a concession that the large majority of the country is very safe (which is indeed the case), just as in most of the cities above, a majority of the neighborhoods are, with a couple of exceptions, considered safe.

So ..... what's your point again?

UPDATE 2: Here are the results shown graphically, with the AP's lower Iraq death rate of 47.7 per 100,000 thrown in for good measure –

Cross-posted, with some revisions, at BizzyBlog.com.

—Tom Blumer is president of a training and development company in Mason, Ohio, and is a contributing editor to NewsBusters

Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Channeling moonbat-liberal

Channeling moonbat-liberal answer: So what? Bush still sucks!

"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...

Awww, now you've done it. You

This never gets old baby...Fl

So now we like and trust th

So now we like and trust the Associated Press, do we?

So what? It doesn't change the fact that we invaded/occupied a sovereign nation with almost no global support. That's just bad for business any way you slice it.

Michael Moore = Ann Coulter = Rosie O'Donnell = Sean Hannity. Idiocy is not partisan.

a sovereign nationNah -- a

a sovereign nation

Nah -- a made up nation that turned into a thugocracy.

And besides, Germany was a "sovereign" nation when US, UK and USSR forces invaded it in 1944.

Of course, I do see the parrallel, Gemany never having actually attacked the US before FDR committed to killing millions of Germans.

Proud member of the all-powerful and vast militarist/industrialist/capitalist/zionist-bagelist complex

The Iraq/WW2 comparison nee

The Iraq/WW2 comparison needs to be put out to pasture.

Michael Moore = Ann Coulter = Rosie O'Donnell = Sean Hannity. Idiocy is not partisan.

No it doesn't.Proud member

No it doesn't.

Proud member of the all-powerful and vast militarist/industrialist/capitalist/zionist-bagelist complex

...yep, it stays SMACK DAB I

...yep, it stays SMACK DAB IN PASTURE FOR ALL ETERNITY - just where Hussein-lovers here and abroad don't want it...

WW2 cost 62 million lives...if only someone like GWB had been prez back then...we could have "husseined" adolf's ass too before he got out of hand...

The American people in the la

The American people in the late-1930s would NEVER have gone for that.  Most of them remembered the sheer disaster of political lies and propaganda that resulted in the "Great" War.  It took a Pearl Harbor, plain and simple.

Your "Hussein-lovers" comment is offensive and flat-out wrong.

Michael Moore = Ann Coulter = Rosie O'Donnell = Sean Hannity.  Idiocy is not partisan.

It took a Pearl Harbor, pl

It took a Pearl Harbor, plain and simple.

Funny, I seem to remember the MSM comparing 9/11 to Pearl Harbor. Obviously, they must've been wrong, eh?

And now, a message to my fellow NewsBusters:

Yes, I know that - despite mountains of evidence that Saddam was a key supporter of Islamic terrorism both before and after 9/11 - I have just opened the door for Rupert to predictably wail that Iraq had nothing to do with the events of 9/11 themselves. And for this, I apologize.

~~~
VOTE DEMOCRAT!

(It's easier than thinking)

So, why did we have Operation

So, why did we have Operations Torch and Overlord, among others?  Germany and Italy didn't bomb Pearl Harbor!!!

"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???."  - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)

It needs to be put out to pas

It needs to be put out to pasture becasue it undermines the liberal position.

I heartily disagree gentlem

I heartily disagree gentlemen, but I am on my way to the gym now and haven't the time to elaborate on why Saddam is not quite the same as Hitler. Fortunately for all of us, we can use the past tense in reference to both of them.

Michael Moore = Ann Coulter = Rosie O'Donnell = Sean Hannity. Idiocy is not partisan.

Not the same, but the similar

Not the same, but the similarities are many.  Meglomaniacs. Paranoid.  Blitz advances into neighboring countries.  Mass murder of one's perceived enemies foriegn and domestic, etc. etc.

So what is your point?  The fact that Sadaam wasnt exactly like Hitler, action was not warrented?

I would also suspect that b

I would also suspect that both hitler and saddam had drug usage in common as well.

The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price,
peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of
soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life.

Theodore Roosevelt

Rupert, are you truly as igno

Rupert, are you truly as ignorant as what you type on here?

Did you know that Saddam Hussein loved and adored Hitler?  In fact he tried to model his government after Hitler's government.  Did you know this? 

His methods of torture were taking right of the SS and Ghestapo (sp). 

Hussein, in fact, also created a Ghestapo(sp) type of organization in Iraq 100% modeled after Hitler's secret police. 

It never fails, individuals like Rupert, Balboa, etc, who try to sound none partisan, but come across as the ignorant, uneducated fools that they are. 

and further proof of Rupert's idiocy is his ridiculous comparison of Michael Moore to Sean Hannity or O'Donnell to Sean Hannity. 

I'll like the supposed none partisan Rupert to point out to all of us when Hannity has ever called for the defeat of American troops around the world.  Something which has been done by Moore and Rosie. 

I could go on, but there is nothing more ridiculous than individuals that pretend to be none partisan. 

"...disgusting, unAmerican draft-dodger..." Liberal Zapata/Tom talking about draft-dodgers.  Thus asserting what we have always known about Slicky Willie Clinton

 

Aw, futty...I missed you to

Aw, futty...I missed you too. How was your Christmas?

Thanks a lot balboa - I was

Thanks a lot balboa - I was gone for a while and you didn't miss me. I need to get meaner I guess!

For the record I missed both you and Fut and everyone here - except for the conspiracy nuts.

Sorry, Dee! Didn't mean to

Sorry, Dee! Didn't mean to leave you out! Perhaps if you'd insulted me first, I would have been more quick to welcome you back. :-)

Where ya' been?

Not insulting you Balboa, jus

Not insulting you Balboa, just staing the facts, little one. 

I had a great Christmas, how about you?  did little baby jesus finally bring you a brain and some logic as a Christma present?

 

"...disgusting, unAmerican draft-dodger..." Liberal Zapata/Tom talking about draft-dodgers.  Thus asserting what we have always known about Slicky Willie Clinton

 

See, Dee? THAT's the kind o

See, Dee? THAT's the kind of nuttiness you're lacking.

Balboa, I guess the answer is

Balboa, I guess the answer is no, eh?  Feel bad for you guy.  I would pray for you, kid, but I have prayed for too many Liberals and the second that I start praying they start yelling and screaming...."I AM MELTING!, I AM MELTING! STOP! FUTOBLISGREAT! STOP!"  :)

When will logic and brains be Balboa's strong point?  Maybe if you put it on your Christmas list for next year, you may get it....what do you think?

"...disgusting, unAmerican draft-dodger..." Liberal Zapata/Tom talking about draft-dodgers.  Thus asserting what we have always known about Slicky Willie Clinton

 

Balboa, I guess the answer is

Balboa, I guess the answer is no, eh?  Feel bad for you guy.  I would pray for you, kid, but I have prayed for too many Liberals and the second that I start praying they start yelling and screaming...."I AM MELTING!, I AM MELTING! STOP! FUTOBLISGREAT! STOP!"  :)

When will logic and brains be Balboa's strong point?  Maybe if you put it on your Christmas list for next year, you may get it....what do you think?

"...disgusting, unAmerican draft-dodger..." Liberal Zapata/Tom talking about draft-dodgers.  Thus asserting what we have always known about Slicky Willie Clinton

 

I've just been real busy wi

I've just been real busy with work, Holiday stuff and home remodeling. I have was lurking here and there but didn't have time to comment.

Futbolisgreat et al: Your

Futbolisgreat et al: Your two main criticisms of me can be addressed in similar terms. I'm not saying Hussein was somehow morally better than Hitler (unless we're talking in terms of sheer number of people killed and/or pop culture infamy), and I didn't know, nor would I doubt, that Hitler was something of a role model for Hussein. My point about WWII was simply that Hussein was not sweeping through the Middle East toppling other countries at will. He was contained, he was not threatening us, and what power he did have came in part from us. Gassing the Kurds and fighting with Iran were notorious things he did with our tacit approval. Now I am not sad that he is dead and in many ways I think invading was the right thing, I simply think the WWII-comparison (and the Vietnam one, for that matter) is a little too convenient. And yes, I'm sure you can reply with many reasons why I'm wrong; doesn't mean we can't communicate civilly.

As for my signature, I'm not sure of the exact quotes by Moore and O'Donnell that you're refering to, but my implication that they're "equal" is not based on their respective positions but on the way they conduct themselves. Shrill and inflexible with an over-reliance on ad hominem attacks.  Rosie's Long Island soccer mom/gun control theatrics are no more irritating to me than Ann's guttural, affected cocktail party sententiousness in discussing the latest NYT treason incident. It's not their politics, it's their inane personalities that I find numbingly interchangeable.

Michael Moore = Ann Coulter = Rosie O'Donnell = Sean Hannity. Idiocy is not partisan.

Rupert did you miss the Iran-

Rupert did you miss the Iran-Iraq War of the 1980s, in which Hussein tried to conquer Iran?  how about his invasion of Kuwait?  did you miss this one too?  it happened in 1990-91.

by your own defense you just proved that Hussein and Hitler in many more ways than one were very similar!

c'mon!

"...disgusting, unAmerican draft-dodger..." Liberal Zapata/Tom talking about draft-dodgers.  Thus asserting what we have always known about Slicky Willie Clinton

 

I did mention Iran. Kuwait

I did mention Iran. Kuwait was a full 12 years before Bush 43 invaded. I know Saddam wasn't exactly behaving himself in 2003 but....

Michael Moore = Ann Coulter = Rosie O'Donnell = Sean Hannity. Idiocy is not partisan.

Rupert, 12 full years in whic

Rupert, 12 full years in which Hussein violated all cease fire agreements made at the end of Gulf War I.  Remember that there was no peace treaty ever signed between Hussein and the United Nations.  Thus, officially, legally the Iraq War is an extension of Gulf War I.

Let us not forget that he kicked out all the UN weapons inspectors, that he was shooting at our jet planes flying over the none fly zone, he was torturing Iraqis....don't forget that Hussein has killed more Muslims than any else (in fact Muslims have killed more Muslims than anyone else during any time of history).  Hussein was also developing Weapons of Mass destructions.  he was building his military thanks to the French, Russian and Germans. (things the MSM won't tell you).  He was supporting terrorist groups in Palestine, he was giving 10s of thousands of dollars to families that had family members kill Jews in suicide bombings. 

The guy wasn't just missbehaving, he was a monster.  We went to war against Germany during WWII for a lot less reasons. 

"...disgusting, unAmerican draft-dodger..." Liberal Zapata/Tom talking about draft-dodgers.  Thus asserting what we have always known about Slicky Willie Clinton

 

All good points. By the wa

All good points. By the way, I found a live stream of Hannity, so I can hear what he's like as compared to what I remember from when I used to watch him with Colmes.

Michael Moore = Ann Coulter = Rosie O'Donnell = Sean Hannity. Idiocy is not partisan.

Ruppert, when has Hannity use

Ruppert, when has Hannity used ad-hominem attacks to get his point across?  I am sorry guy, it is obvious you don't listen to his radio show, that you don't see him on television and that you have never read his books. 

there is no comparison between Rosie, Michael Moore to Sean Hannity.  The latter uses history, facts and logic to get his point across, the first two use insults, emotion and lies to get their point across. 

I do agree that Ann Coulter can be quite crude just like Moore and Rosie, but Hannity, please guy, the man has more class in his pinky finger than Moore or Rosie ever wish to have.

"...disgusting, unAmerican draft-dodger..." Liberal Zapata/Tom talking about draft-dodgers.  Thus asserting what we have always known about Slicky Willie Clinton

 

I'll certainly agree he's n

I'll certainly agree he's not as bad as Coulter. He's just so black-and-white in his neat little conceptions of good and evil. If I had some of his shows on tape I'm sure I could point out some ad hominems. Can you hear his radio show off the web? I would definitely be interested in that.

At least we can agree on this: What semi-conscious person could possibly like Rosie? Her voice makes nails-on-a-chalkboard sound like a lullaby played on a harp.

Michael Moore = Ann Coulter = Rosie O'Donnell = Sean Hannity. Idiocy is not partisan.

Coulter citations

Coulter cites her sources, Moore does not. As a researcher, that says it all. How she says it is provocative, but she can back it up. Moore cannot.

Our real problem, then, is not our strength today; it is rather the vital necessity of action today to ensure our strength tomorrow. Dwight Eisenhower

Interesting that you bring

Interesting that you bring that up since Coulter is regularly criticized for failing to cite correctly, improper research methods, and borderline plaigiarism. And yes, she states many facts, it's the conclusions she draws from them that tend to be laughable. I'm not defending Moore for a second, I know he sucks.

Michael Moore = Ann Coulter = Rosie O'Donnell = Sean Hannity. Idiocy is not partisan.

Rupert - did you have some

Rupert - did you have some links about Coulter? Who regularly criticizes her citations? I know of one time that turned out to be bogus. Coulter is definitely divisive but she doesn't fabricate like Moore. She doesn't take peoples quotes so far out of context as to make them appear to be saying the opposite of what they are saying like Moore and she doesn't make stuff up like him. Comparing her divisiveness to O'donnel is valid, but she is 1,000 times smarter and more accurate than O'donnel.

Would you consider Media Ma

Would you consider Media Matters to be credible? There are others, but they are certainly the most comprehensive. And they tend to take on MsM statements as well, I might add.

Michael Moore = Ann Coulter = Rosie O'Donnell = Sean Hannity. Idiocy is not partisan.

Rupert, Media Matters is as l

Rupert, Media Matters is as left wing as you can get and they have no credibility.  They attack anyone they think is a conservative. 

Media Matters is joke.

You can't claim to be none partisan and believe Media Matters.   

"...disgusting, unAmerican draft-dodger..." Liberal Zapata/Tom talking about draft-dodgers.  Thus asserting what we have always known about Slicky Willie Clinton

 

Rupert, but who are the peopl

Rupert, but who are the people that claim Coulter, or Hannity, or Limbaugh, etc don't cite sources, etc???  Left wing nuts that disagree with them, or the so called main stream media personalities that hate them because conservatives have taken way the monolopy that the MSM had on the news. 

I have seen and checked on my own many of the cites used by Coulter and other consesrvatives use, 99.9% of the time, the citing is right on. 

On the other hand individuals like Moore, Al Franken, Rosie, etc, not only do not cite much, but they at many times make up numbers and figures when none can be foudn to support their ultra liberal causes. 

Once again, I can agree that Ann Coulter can be quite crude and this destroys her great points and message, but Moore and Rosie are not only crude, but liars, anti-american, anti-christian, anti-anything that is not aligned with the extreme left of the world.

"...disgusting, unAmerican draft-dodger..." Liberal Zapata/Tom talking about draft-dodgers.  Thus asserting what we have always known about Slicky Willie Clinton

 

dagda, I will agree that does

dagda, I will agree that does cite her sources, while Moore and Rosie do not. 

but Coulter is quite crude at times and she destroys her great message by her crudness. 

Rupert, if you find out on what radio station he is on in your city, you can probably listen to it via web.  If you don't live in the USA, i believe you have to become a member on his website to be able to listen to him on the web.

but I stand my ground on the fact that he doesn't use personal attacks on people he disagrees with.  I have listened to him for quite a few years and he doesn't resort to them. 

and yes, Rosie is one poor comedian and her voice is ridiculous!  and she has poop for brains.

"...disgusting, unAmerican draft-dodger..." Liberal Zapata/Tom talking about draft-dodgers.  Thus asserting what we have always known about Slicky Willie Clinton

 

...and her personality is,

...and her personality is, to quote David Foster Wallace, "like death his very own self is takin' a shit." Wait, did I say "personality"?

Michael Moore = Ann Coulter = Rosie O'Donnell = Sean Hannity. Idiocy is not partisan.

It's much easier to attack th

It's much easier to attack the person than the points being made by said person, isn't it?

And this coming from one who really isn't all that impressed with Coulter.  She's not all that.  I read Godless due to all the bitching and moaning it inspired on the Left, and though it has flashes of brilliance, as a whole the book is just poorly written.  I'm not okay with her writing style, it grates on my nerves.  If Leftists would have just bothered to read her work, and see how it is written, I would be willing to bet their fussing would cease, and the spotlight would shift elsewhere.

As for the accusations of plagiarism: she at least has an extensive list of sources at the end of her publications from what I have seen.  To me that is an invitation to backtrack and see what her sources are.  Would a plagiarist do that?

She's not that great a writer, but I'd sooner read her work than the San Antonio Express News, which until yesterday had a plagiarist on its payroll (as an assistant editor, no less!), until she QUIT.  No, she didn't get fired, she QUIT.  AND she was plagiarizing off of Wikipedia!  Not only is that alleged journalist incapable of evaluating her sources, she's a thief and a liar.  Who knows how many more the Express News is infested with?  They can't reach Chapter 11 fast enough...

"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???."  - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)

Unsane, actually my Death's

Unsane, actually my Death's excrement/Personality analogy was actually in reference to Rosie, though I can see how that was unclear. Personality goes a long way. Ann makes the occasional spot-on point, but for the most part her sheer hatred for all things liberal is so amped up that she just slanders people and comes across as a raving lunatic. Hence my putting her in the company of Moore and O'Donnell. I can agree that Hannity is not quite in that camp.

Michael Moore = Ann Coulter = Rosie O'Donnell = Sean Hannity. Idiocy is not partisan.

Iraq

Yeah, because Saddam was actually shooting at our planes before we invaded Iraq. Hitler was just shooting Europeans.

  Ignorance is bliss. It's easier to repeat a mindless slogan than to do some actual research.

Did you ever notice..

...how any comment that makes a decent point "needs to be put out to pasture"?  The left spends all day comparing Iraq to Viet Nam, no problem.  Compare it to WWII?  Oh, you can't do that.  In fact, you can only compare it to itself. 

"WAAAHHH!!! Stop talking about history! I don't know history!"

YOU need it put out to pasture because you are not a student of history.  The ONLY people who cry like that are people who believe history began at 1100 CST on 20 January 2001.

Therefore I say keep bringing it up.  It might be a good education for Leftists.

"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???."  - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)

He probably thinks the US C

He probably thinks the US Constitution is a few vague suggestions written up on the back of a tea packet.

Proud member of the all-powerful and vast militarist/industrialist/capitalist/zionist-bagelist complex

Uh

I used the government's higher numbers as the primary peg, so primary reliance was NOT place on AP. Govt. 16,273. AP 13,738.

If you're wondering, because of the linked source, if I trust the AP to take dictation and read the numbers on a piece of paper or stated at a press conference, yes -- barely.

I have some additional thoughts at the related BizzyBlog post on AP that are of the sarcastic persuasion that I didn't think were appropriate for here, since this isn't my sandbox.

On global permission slips for defense

I sense that you are extremely troubled that we have a military for reasons other than ceremonies and parades (because you'd rather the money be spent on the government spoon-feeding every single American three times a day), but bear with me on this:

If we did not have global support, you may want to explain the 1991 ceasefire.  The moment one of our planes was "illuminated" by SAM radar in the no-fly zone, hostilities could have recommenced right then under the ceasefire terms. 

But then, with your focus on "global support", it seems that you want the United States to beg for the world's permission to protect and defend its interests around the world.  In other words, you love the idea of a radically weakened America subject to the whims of such nations as those that comprise the rotting EU.  I for one would much rather live in an America that stands up for its citizens and interests, and a world where other nations know that to as much as look at America wrong can be done at their own great personal risk. 

"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???"  - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)

Violent cities

Not only are these listed cities Democratic duchies but they also have large minority (African-American) populations.

Of course the cultural Marxists in America would all label me a racist and a bigot for making this obvious observation.  It's easier than trying to repair the damage done to these people by the welfare state created by the progressives (socialists) in our government.

Hell, the race panderers even attacked Bill Cosby for making the same observation.

Awww, now you've done it. You

Awww, now you've done it. You're gonna get the Teacher's Union all mad at you. Shame, using numbers. Some smart person is going to understand this, but others (i.e., Public School Graduates) won't, and it just isn't fair. Don't you know that it's better to use your imagination and be creative.

I'm from the MSM, and I'm here to help you be creative. Bush sucks. Iraq is a quagmire. Listen to us at 6:30 tonight.

There. Now, don't you feel much, much better, knowing that those numbers don't really mean anything, and anyway -- they're hard to understand.

MSM

those numbers don't really mean anything, and anyway -- they're hard to understand.

That's why I just added a pretty graph at Update 2. :-->

Tom -- the graph looks good.

Tom -- the graph looks good. You think like an old-time newspaper reporter. Hear a story; do some investigation; gather some facts; perform a bit of analysis; and then present the entire mixture in an easy-to-understand format that can be discussed and debated.

Wouldn't it be nice if the MSM started doing that, again? But then, pigs would fly and lead would be converted to gold. On second thought, naw -- would never happen.

thx

Thx -- this is one of the rare instances where I'm OK with somebody saying "old time" about me.

Old School, the great compliment

Mr. Blumer - Take it from me, if nothing else, as one who has repeatedly been called "old school" - there is NOTHING wrong with being called "old school", or "old time".

(I still remember fondly how my fellow college students would look upon me with horror as I hand wrote ALL of my papers, and THEN typed them on Word.  As you can tell, that's a habit I picked up in the days I used a typewriter.)

"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???."  - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)

ThisnThat & Tom

ThisnThat & Tom - Absolutley! The chart is what is so often needed to get the picture across (a picture is worth a thousand words - and all that). Well done post Tom.

Thinking of buying a vacation home at the juncture of the Tigres and Euphrates Rivers - What a historic place to be - and could be safer than Washington DC. Wow!

those numbers don't really me

those numbers don't really mean anything, and anyway

They don't mean anything because.......I did a poll, and those numbers show........

I'm so glad you posted this

I'm so glad you posted this Tom. I had the exact same thought when I read this the other day. It aslo kind of proves that the 500,000 or what ever figure was completely absurd doesn't it?

Why doesn't this blog appea

Why doesn't this blog appear on the Home Page? This is a good one for the lurking MSM and other lurking liberals to see

blog

To answer your question -- the default position for all but a few of us is to our within-NB blogs.

The folks who run NB review the blog posts to see which ones should also be displayed on the front ("home") page.

This particular post might get there, but it will require a fair amount of fact-checking of the linked info first.

So it could get there, just wait and see. In my obviously biased opinion, this post has important info.

Must be gun control is not

Must be gun control is not working in DC.

RedJeep...that aint all that

RedJeep...that aint all that aint working in DC.

Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!

I would say the opposite ab

I would say the opposite about gun control in DC. Judging from the numbers, it looks like some people are using very good gun control and hitting their targets.

The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price,
peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of
soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life.

Theodore Roosevelt

That's quite a disingenuous

That's quite a disingenuous use of statistics. You don't mention the death rate prior to the war, which it should be compared to, NOT american crime rates.

Rush Limbaugh did the same last year when he completely disrespected our troops by saying that the US casualties in Iraq were inconsequential when compared to the number of smoking deaths or auto fatalities.

When you start abusing statistics like that, what's to keep one from pointing out that in the history of the US there have been fewer than 3500 deaths to terrorism but over 3000 people die EACH YEAR from fires. Statistically, shouldn't we be spending billions more in fire prevention rather than terrorism?

Numbers can say what you want them to.

What is disingenuous about

What is disingenuous about it? This isn't a before and after story for the Lancet, it is a story comparing the murder rate in Iraq for the year 2006 to the murder rate in some American cities from years gone by. Since we have the claimed number of deaths and the high number was used plus a good guess of the population of the country and it equals 56.49 per 100,000 residents, you could take those numbers and compare them to any place in the world with the same population. Doing so I suspect that you would discover that there are many places in the world that are much more violent than Iraq was in 2006.

I wish that the so called "liberals of peace" would compare these numbers to those in countries like Venezuela, Sudan, Zimbabwe, Somalia, Ethiopia and even Cuba.

The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price,
peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of
soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life.

Theodore Roosevelt

Of course it is more import

Of course it is more important to do a before and after. If the death toll has, say, doubled or tripled, then that would be something even if it were less than Washington DC.

Second, the story refers to all of Iraq compared to cities in the US. That factors in rural areas of Iraq and cities where there may be no strife whatsoever.

Two things would have made this story better:

- compare all of Iraq to all of the US (rural, suburban, and urban).

- compare the worst cities in Iraq to the worst in the US

Well if you want to do that

Well if you want to do that it is really going to make you look silly because the number of violent deaths in America for 2003 was 49,693, taken from the CDC using their new National Violent Death Reporting System, then you figure the population of America in 2003 was 295 million which I suspect is a little high and you get 17.13 deaths per 100,000 for a country not at war verses 56.49 per 100,000 for one that is. This leads to the conclusion that William Tecumseh Sherman was not talking about modern war when he made the statement, "war is hell". I am not going to but if you went back in time to a period of time when America was at war and fighting an external foe, I suspect that you would find the number to be quite higher than the one today in Iraq.

The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price,
peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of
soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life.

Theodore Roosevelt

Looked at your site http://ww

Looked at your site http://www.cdc.gov/MMWR/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5526a1.htm for 2003.

It stated "

Homicide

The age-adjusted homicide rate§ for the seven states collecting both 2003 and 2004 data was 5.6 per 100,000 population in 2003 and 5.1 in 2004. The 2003 and 2004 rates for the United States overall in NVSS were 6.1 and 5.6 per 100,000 population, respectively (6,7). For the seven states,..."

Notice they only had info for SEVEN states(Alaska, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Oregon, South Carolina, and Virginia).

And this is what they look at

"NVDRS is an active, state-based surveillance system that collects information on homicides, suicides, deaths of undetermined intent (i.e., those for which available information is insufficient to enable a medical or legal authority to make a distinction among unintentional injury, self-harm, or assault*), deaths from legal intervention (e.g., involving a person killed by an on-duty police officer), and unintentional firearm deaths."

I may be wrong but I thought we were talking about homicide.

You have been talking homic

You have been talking homicide and murder, I have tried to point out that the story was comparing VIOLENT DEATH across the entire country of Iraq to MURDERS from selected cities in America from years past. Also from the very link you posted in your reply to me, you cherry picked the information you used to make your point, I guess you were hoping I hadn't read it all,

NVDRS is an active, state-based surveillance system that collects
information on homicides, suicides, deaths of undetermined intent
(i.e., those for which available information is insufficient to enable
a medical or legal authority to make a distinction among unintentional
injury, self-harm, or assault*), deaths from legal intervention (e.g.,
involving a person killed by an on-duty police officer), and
unintentional firearm deaths. Seven states provided data in 2003
(Alaska, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Oregon, South Carolina,
and Virginia), and six additional states contributed in 2004 (Colorado,
Georgia, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, and Wisconsin). NVDRS
uses a multisource approach (i.e., death certificates, coroner/medical
examiner reports, law enforcement records, and crime laboratory data)
for analysis of violent deaths. Using information from all of these
sources, data abstractors in each state assign a manner of death (i.e.,
suicide, homicide, unintentional firearm deaths, legal interventions,
and undetermined deaths)

Or this,

The findings in this report are subject to at least three limitations.
First, data for 2003 and 2004 are only available from a small
proportion of U.S. states, although the intent of NVDRS is to include
all U.S. states. Therefore, these data might not be generalizable to
the entire U.S. population. Second, processes for classifying of the
manner of death differed by jurisdiction. These differences might be
attributed to laws governing death investigations or medical
examiner/coroner practices. For example, although NVDRS attempts to
capture all suicides by investigating cases and collecting data from
multiple sources, certain suicides might not be identified as such
(e.g., when no evidence of suicidal intent such as a suicide note is
present). Finally, circumstance information is collected through
medical examiner/coroner and law enforcement reports. Families,
friends, and other witnesses might not reveal all the precipitating
circumstances to the investigative agencies, possibly resulting in
inaccurate or incomplete reports.

Meaning that while there was 49,639 violent deaths reported in America in 2003, only 7 states were part of the CDC reporting system.

I also tried to make the observation that one of these countries is a war zone and one of them is not, and that the numbers of violent deaths in America is about 17 per 100,000 verses 56 per 100,000 in Iraq. Also if you had bothered to read my other posting above on this subject, you would also find I included this disclaimer from the CDC about their NVDRS,

Current data do not provide all the information
needed to accurately assess the factors surrounding violent deaths.
Death certificates, for example, cannot link victim and suspect
information.

So once again I think you are comparing apples and oranges.

The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price,
peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of
soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life.

Theodore Roosevelt

Well, the title of the articl

Well, the title of the article we are discussing is the murder rate in US cities, not violent deaths.

The parts I quoted were sufficient to show that the site you posted does not address the issue. You included the entire paragraphs, I included the pertinent stuff.

However, you did include the sentence "[T]he findings of this report are subject to at least three limitations..."

I guess I was being too wordy, but that was my point. This report is basically useless. The ultimate goal of the NVDRS is grand. When they get reporting from all 50 states, it will be a valuable tool. Until then....

300 million?

Since when did Iraq have 300 million people?

"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???."  - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)

hi

If you're talking about me, I didn't use that link. And I am definitely talking about murders.

Please excuse me if I didn't

Please excuse me if I didn't smell the sarcasm in your posting...

That's quite a disingenuous use of statistics. You don't mention the death rate prior to the war, which it should be compared to, NOT american crime rates.

And the MSM isn't being disingenous about their number reporting? I feel that if Iraq's death rates are lower in WARTIME than DC's death rates are in PEACETIME, it speaks volumes about the disservice the MSM provides our lemming-based population. Is it possible that if Saddam's death squads were still on the loose, their peacetime rates might be higher than they are now?

When you start abusing statistics like that, what's to keep one from pointing out that in the history of the US there have been fewer than 3500 deaths to terrorism but over 3000 people die EACH YEAR from fires. Statistically, shouldn't we be spending billions more in fire prevention rather than terrorism?

Spend billions on fire prevention? I suppose we may already do that, but I'd rather spend that kind of money elsewhere... Hmmm... Maybe we should spend it on our national borders? Read this GAO report (PDF, new window) for some scary numbers - 55K illegal immigrants in federal prisons, 8 arrests each, 13 crimes each (I believe all within the year 2003). Perhaps 3,000 die annually to fires in our country, but to see how many Americans have been murdered by illegals, you'll have to read page 22 of the report. Put down the matches, and do the math.

And thanks, Tom, for posting this. I plan to share it with many of my MSM-brainwashed friends...

You're absolutely correct..

You're absolutely correct... you didn't smell the sarcasm in my comments. If you did, you'd have realized I was illustrating how statistics can be missused. By pointing out how fires are deadlier than terrorism, I was hoping to show how any conclusion can be reached based on the framing of the numbers.  In my example, death toll was the sole basis for my conclusion.  In reality, there are many more factors - global economy, regional stability, etc. that are influenced by terrorism that make it worth spending billions to fight. 

I apologize for not smelling

I apologize for not smelling that up-front... My sniffer hasn't been working at 100% since my 2-year-old nephew gave me a cold for Christmas...

I agree with you that statistics are like play-doh and can be arranged in whatever way seen fit by whomever is pushing their point...

Blog you said “When you sta

Blog you said “When you start abusing statistics like that, what's to keep one from pointing out that in the history of the US there have been fewer than 3500 deaths to terrorism but over 3000 people die EACH YEAR from fires. Statistically, shouldn't we be spending billions more in fire prevention rather than terrorism?  Fires don’t have a mushroom cloud…

America is best described by one word, freedom... Dwight D. Eisenhower

most dishonest and stupid post on this website

I think you have done the service of providing the most dishonest and stupid post on this website for a long time.

To compare the murder rate of a whole country to that of selected cities in the U.S. is just nonsense. If you want to put it in context compare the murderrate of the whole U.S. to that of the whole Iraq (this would respect the actual differences in crime between rural and urban areas). Wikipedia states that in 2006 the U.S. had a murderrate of roundabout 6.0 per 100.000 people. So the Iraqi figures are 10 times higher than the U.S.'
BTW None of those countries listed by wikipedia has a higher murderrate than Iraq.

If you want to do it the other way around, you can compare the murderrates of U.S. cities to that of Iraqi cities. I don't know the actual figures about bagdad but an estimate of around 6,000 (officially dead, probably much more) would suffice. The (rapidly decreasing) population of Bagdad is round about 7 million. That would make a murderrate of 86 per 100.000 people. Now you can try to make some comparisons. But still this won't serve your purpose. If you take into account other crimes as kidnapping and such things as the "ethnic" cleansing of neighborhoods this city is one of the most dangerous in the world.

BTW if American cities are so dangerous (the most dangerous in the developed world) why isn't the president sending more troops into these cities?

"Hegel says somewhere all great events and personalities in world history reappear in one fashion or another. He forgot to add: the first time as tragedy, the second as farce."
The Eighteeenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte (1852) sect. 1, Cf.

Well, the War on Poverty is a quagmire and millions have died.

Well, the War on Poverty is a quagmire and millions have died.

We're trying to 'redeploy' to a blank spot in New Mexico or Utah.

But, you hang in there.  Any attempt to provide some perspective on the silliness of the Left's unchallenged assertions about Iraq probably gives you some heartburn.

Regardless of the numbers and their sources.

Numbers are kinda hard if one's system is basically...

1      2     3    Many

ACA

...

Acaiguana says:  "Which city is next?"

Flawed analysis = perspecti

Flawed analysis = perspective? Seems to be the standard procedure here if things look bleak and reality has to be distorted. Stats are only as good as the brains analyzing them.

"Hegel says somewhere all great events and personalities in world history reappear in one fashion or another. He forgot to add: the first time as tragedy, the second as farce."
The Eighteeenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte (1852) sect. 1, Cf.

Good to see you agree with me about the Democrat Perspective.

Good to see you agree with me about the Democrat Perspective.

 :-)

 ACA

...

Acaiguana says:  "Which city is next?"

Sorry, kafkakaefer, I basical

Sorry, kafkakaefer, I basically repeated what you said below. Should have read all the posts before going off.

"To compare the murder

"To compare the murder rate of a whole country to that of selected cities in the U.S. is just nonsense"

Exactly Kaf!!!! There's a FREAKING WAR going on in Iraq. The numbers for Iraq should DWARF those of our LI