Fundamentalsof Crime Mapping 6

1,051 views
979 views

Published on

Fundamentals of crime mapping chapter 6

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,051
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Fundamentalsof Crime Mapping 6

  1. 1. Often difficult with crime data  If your analysis or crime map seeks to  understand robbery motivated homicides within city limits for a given time period, all known robbery-motivated homicides must be included in the analysis If any are excluded, the analysis will be  limited in its power to explain or predict these crimes.
  2. 2. Fixing the problems in your data that can be  done without diminishing the data quality or inserting error Repair errors due to “commission”  ◦ Error upon entry of data element Repair errors due to “omission”  ◦ This committed by lack of entry for a field or fields Something most analysts do daily  Being “intimate” with your data helps to  correct these issues
  3. 3. Kind of the “Big Picture” of crime mapping  Large scale analysis (citywide), yields large scale  assumptions and cannot be reduced to say a block level and vice versa Will control the accuracy needed in the data, both  spatial and attribute accuracy ◦ Eg; If we wanted to do an analysis of tornado damage along the coast, the coast line graphic would not need to include every single cove and jut of the coastline, but if our analysis was of one small bay, then each rock, pier, and beach area might need to be drawn. Units of analysis should be useful in the analysis being  performed
  4. 4. Official Crime Data  ◦ Persons  Arrestees  Parolees  Traffic units ◦ Places  Schools  Businesses ◦ Things  Evidence  Vehicles ◦ Incidents  Calls for service  Reported crimes  Traffic crashes
  5. 5. FBI (http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm)  Weaknesses:  Only reports most serious crime at a location ◦ Definitions may not be the same as state statutes ◦ Voluntary compliance and reporting ◦ UCR counts some crimes by number of victims instead of incidents ◦ Was developed in 1930 ◦ Only crime reported to police are captured – self reporting not included ◦ Strengths:  ◦ Most states do report ◦ Allows comparison with like-sized agencies across the country ◦ Provides a general picture of crime reported to police
  6. 6. FBI (http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm)  Weaknesses:  ◦ Reports all crimes occurring at location ◦ Only a few states report NIBRS data Strengths:  ◦ Reports all crimes occurring at location ◦ More robust definitions
  7. 7. Citizen generated requests for police services  Officer initiated activity  ◦ Location citizen gave for call, may not be where incident actually happened ◦ Location may be an intersection and not a specific address ◦ Depending on how it is captured it may not geocode and can thus, not be mapped ◦ What the call came in as, may not be what the officer determines was the real problem ◦ Not necessarily a picture of “crime” but of citizen desire for police presence only
  8. 8. Official Crime Data  ◦ Persons  Arrestees, or persons listed in police reports (victim, witnesses, suspects)  Parolees/probationers  Traffic units/passengers ◦ Places  Schools, hotels, police stations, massage parlors  Businesses, etc ◦ Things  Evidence  Vehicles, guns, etc ◦ Incidents  Calls for service  Reported crimes  Traffic crashes
  9. 9. Can capture crime data not reported to police  (much is not) ◦ There is no way to verify if a respondent is providing truthful and accurate information ◦ Information on homicides is not collected. (“Dead men can tell no tales”) ◦ Crime victims under the age of 12 years are unaccounted for Victimless crime is unaccounted for
  10. 10. Data not collected by police departments, but  that can be used for crime mapping US Census ◦ City sales tax and licensing ◦ Google, Yahoo, US West Dex Yellow Pages ◦ Political boundaries from local, county and state ◦ Local social agencies like Department of Economic ◦ Security ◦ GIS data at local universities ◦ Other city departments ◦ Etc.
  11. 11. Microsoft  Access – database ◦ Excel – spreadsheet ◦ Word – word processor ◦ Powerpoint – presentation of information ◦ Statistical Packages  ◦ Excel add-in Analysis toolpak ◦ SPSS ◦ SAS CrimeStat III  ◦ Spatial statistics
  12. 12. Off the shelf additional programs  Crime View ◦ Crime Analysis Tools ◦ Hawthe’s Tools ◦ Curve expert (regression curve analysis software) ◦ Coplink ◦ Oracle spatial ◦ SQL Server ◦ ATAC ◦ Etc ◦
  13. 13. Criminals do not care about imaginary borders  along the roads dividing adjacent cities – why should we? Data sharing has increased since 911, but still  have a way to go Biggest problem is politics not technology right  now Data sharing systems are inter-agency and can  be expensive We need more privacy impact assessments on all  the data that is being shared Movement toward NIEM  ◦ http://www.niem.gov/
  14. 14. Knowing which data sources to use and how  to share the completed analysis (whether in report or map form) is diverse and complex. Understanding and clearly articulating the  limitations of the data used is also necessary Understanding the legal and ethical issues  involved with distributing crime maps, data, and analysis is imperative for crime analysts

×