Violent Crime - The Pressures Of Density

Violent Victimization and Homicide Rates by Population Density, 1993-1998

The likelihood of being the victim of a violent crime is lowest if you live in a rural area, followed by the more populous areas, suburbs. It is highest in our most densely populated areas, urban centers. The same pattern is visible when it comes to the likelihood of being murdered.

The graph presents data on both violent victimization rates (curves) and homicide rates (bars) for urban centers, suburbs and rural areas. The six-year period presented, 1993-1998, was one of declining crime rates as we have seen throughout this chapter and is again visible here in all six rates charted. All the rates are down by between 25% and 37% except for one, the rural homicide rate which, although down, is only down 7.5%.

The observable pattern in the graph is one of overwhelmingly higher rates of victimization in urban areas versus suburban and rural areas. This is nothing new. It is the pattern observed in all industrialized countries and to some extent in human societies throughout history. Where people congregate in large numbers they interact more often in both positive and negative ways. Crime is, of course, one of the negative ways.

The graph depicts trends that are, for the most part, very positive. Violent victimizations are on the decline, as are murders. Of particular interest is the fact that homicide rates in rural areas have declined far less than in either of the other geographic categories presented. The percent at which each rate of violent victimization declined over the period 1993-1998 is shown in the table on the next page.

Percentage Declines in Violent Victimization Rates, 1993-98

There are several possible reasons for why the homicide rate in rural America dropped least over this time period. The rural homicide rate started off at the lowest rate of the three, 3.88 per 100,000 people age 12 years or older, compared with 28.97 and 4.95 for urban areas and suburbs respectively. Some criminologists believe that there is a sort of irreducible minimum level of crime, although it is never specifically quantified. Perhaps the homicide rate in rural areas is near that minimum level and has very little downward flexibility.

Intimate Murders as Percent of All Murders by Type of Residential Area, 1976-1999

The percentage of rural homicides that are committed by those with an intimate connection to the victim is much higher than in urban and suburban areas. This fact may support the minimum level of crime theory and suggest that rural areas are nearer the theoretical minimum.

One other trend affecting rural communities is worth noting. During the 1990s illicit drug manufacturing (primarily the manufacture of methamphetamines) began to spread into rural areas and youth gangs began to appear in small rural towns. Both of these newcomers to the rural landscape bring with them increased criminal activity. This fact very likely contributed to the more modest drop in homicide rates seen in rural areas as compared with suburbs and urban centers during the late 1990s. For more on the prevalence of methamphetamines in rural America, see Chapter Six, Drugs.

In the last panel we mentioned rape pointing out that it is equally prevalent in all regions of density. This is true at a summary level. Violent crime overall is twice as common in central cities than it is in the country. Assaults of both kinds, simple and aggravated, are twice as likely to occur in the city. Robbery is three times more prevalent. But rape is equivalent. Small differences do appear. In central cities the rate was 1.8 per 1,000 population, 1.4 in suburbs, 1.3 in rural areas. This category, however, showed the smallest differences between geographies of increasing population density.

The pattern of higher rates of crime in more populated areas has not changed. Crime is down across all types of communities. The greatest declines were experienced in those areas that had the highest rates during recent periods of peak crime, urban centers. This has caused a slight reduction in the differential rates of crime experienced in urban, suburban, and rural areas. Nonetheless, where more people live together in densely packed areas there is more crime, a situation that is unlikely to change anytime soon.

Source: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, Urban, Suburban, and Rural Victimization, 1993-1998, October 2000, pp. 3 and 11. Homicide Trends in the U.S., "Homicides by Location Types," January 2001, available online at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/tables/urbantab.htm and "Percent Intimate Homicide Victims by Location," available online at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/tables/int_urbtab.htm.