Most racist cities


per capita is more accurate
hatecrimestats.JPG
 

DC is not a state, and is nothing like a state. For this purpose you've got a blatant apples and kumquats.

Compare the population density (e.g. residents per square mile) of your first two entries. Not comparable at all. After that you have pop densities that are so low you get statistical noise, e.g. Vermont (the whitest state in the country) being number 6.

Either of those renders your list ridiculous.
 
Contrary to childish myths and misinformation, all of the cities ranked here are larger cities, including ones in the Northeast (Massachusetts, New York) and the East coast (Los Angeles; Seattle) none of them being located in the so-called "deep South".

10 Most Racist Cities in America Ranked by Hate Crimes - Insider Monkey

This is one of those REALLY annoying sites where you have to click another page for each entry. I did so anyway, suspecting there would be speciousity, also suspecting no one else including the OP would have vetted it.

Turns out to be a smattering of mostly the most populated cities in the nation (NYC, LA, Phoenix, Boston) with the notable exception of Chicago, which doesn't show up, yet with Columbus (never anyone's dream destination) in the number one spot. At #8 is Indianapolis, smack dab in the center of Indiana which was possibly the state most heavily infiltrated with the Klan (estimated one-third of the adult male population was KKK at one point), and in the #7 position is "Kansas", which I'm pretty sure, and I've checked with Dorothy and Toto on this, is a state, not a city. And yet the page seems to think it's a country:

>> and is historically one of the countries that have had a lot of hate crimes. <<​

Then there's Seattle, the blurb of which only talks about a "gay neighborhood" so apparently "gay" is a race now. :dunno:
This entire list is pretty sloppily put together, if a site called "Insider Monkey" wasn't a clue.

Dunno what the OP and the ten-page link was going for here but it kinda didn't get there since there was no there there.
 
you need to source your image. and you need to address the first post in this thread before addressing the second post, eh?
Map of Reported Hate Crimes in the U.S.A

Sooooooo your "safest" entry here is DC with 2, compared with, say, Florida with 654.
And yet your last list had DC in the "most dangerous" position.

See what I mean about statistical noise and cherrypicking?
 
you need to source your image. and you need to address the first post in this thread before addressing the second post, eh?
Map of Reported Hate Crimes in the U.S.A

Sooooooo your "safest" entry here is DC with 2, compared with, say, Florida with 654.
And yet your last list had DC in the "most dangerous" position.

See what I mean about statistical noise and cherrypicking?
yeah, that is why i asked for the source.
if you go to the real source, you will find that the number 2 for DC is the number of agencies participating, not the number of incidents reported.
Table 12

The whole list is wrong.

The calculation of the rate per 100k is correct though.
 

DC is not a state, and is nothing like a state. For this purpose you've got a blatant apples and kumquats.

Compare the population density (e.g. residents per square mile) of your first two entries. Not comparable at all. After that you have pop densities that are so low you get statistical noise, e.g. Vermont (the whitest state in the country) being number 6.

Either of those renders your list ridiculous.
per capita is more accurate
 

Forum List

Back
Top