But we see this effect in other cases too. People report that crime is up but when asked about crime in their area they report very different things. And crime is down, even for kinds of crime that are universally reported.
How sure are you about those statistics? When police stop responding to calls, when nobody expects stolen property to ever be recovered, when people are afraid they'll be deported if they call the police... crime stops being reported.
Statistics are not worthless, but they can be worse than worthless if you are careless, or in the hands of the unscrupulous.
Good point. It's just frustrating how many people spout the "statistics", and are happy to avoid such nuance in order to take solace in a comfortable narrative.
Car thefts are reported to insurance companies. Murders tend to be reported.
We also have the National Crime Survey, which simply asks people if they have been the victim of various crimes in the last year. No interaction with police whatsoever. This also tracks a huge drop in crime despite people insisting that "crime is up", especially when asked about the country broadly rather than their local region.
What's your argument? That we're always privy to the truth, and that statistics are never in error, and are never crafted by people in service of an agenda? Okay, I guess, that's great for you. No reason to question anything, or think critically for yourself.
We can't really separate crime into "micro crime" and "macro crime". The highest incarcerated state is Louisiana with ~1000 in 100,000 imprisonment. So, 1%. Still feasible enough to never notice or be impacted by any crime as you go through your day to day.
