The most dangerous cities in Canada - A Maclean's exclusive
 

Has this been brought up here before?

The most dangerous cities in Canada

Top Ten High Crime Cities:
1. Regina
2. Saskatoon
3. Winnipeg
4. Prince George
5. Edmonton
6. New Westminster
7. Chilliwack
8. Victoria
9. Vancouver
10. Halifax

cime is down 49% in Winnipeg so far this year
www.winnipeg.ca/crimestat

Arthabaska, Que., which sits halfway between Montreal and Quebec City, was Canada's murder city, 2006, but ranked 21st in the overall rankings.

In other words, they had 2 murders in 2006 instead of 0 or 1?

Beyond the actual crime statistics themselves, which you can get directly from Statistics Canada, the Macleans article is mostly worthless.

1. This list does not include Thunder Bay, therefore it is crap.

2. This isn't "a Maclean's exclusive"; this is data publicly available on Statistics Canada's website! :rolleyes:

and I thought Mayor Pat had taken a bite out of crime.

When it is actually national trends in crime rates being reduced. Really, how can Pat Fiacco ( :koko: ) and the Regina Police Service actually claim that crime is going down when Regina is always at or near the top of this list????

When I hear those cities mentioned the first thing that comes to mind is scary, downright sends a shiver up my spine! What a fucking joke, trust Mcleans to come up with shit like that.

WOW Regina is EXTREMELY DANGEROUS, my dad had his ball-point hitch stolen from his truck once and then one time I saw this indian dude emerge from a 7-11 dumpster on Albert, I was like, man this place is crime-ridden.

whatever, Macleans, you can spin this shit all you want.

"A Maclean's exclusive" :rolleyes:

How is this spin?

How can crime stats from the various police forces be spin?

^It's not exactly. It's just that every time MacLean's has something to say about the state of this country , it seems that pretty much everywhere but Central Canada is going to hell in a handbasket. It's not so much the contents of the article but the choice of topics. You can rest assured that this is something that won't get brought up the next time Toronto gets three murders in a day and "Somebody has to stop the insanity !". Then it's a question of what the country needs to do and to get it done quickly...for the sake of all Canadians who have heard of Toronto's crime problems.

It's hard to judge how dangerous a city is today based on two-year-old stats. I don't think most people associate car thefts with danger. They make no mention of how much crime is actually reported in each particular area. They make no mention of how much of this was random acts of violence. I would venture to guess that some cities report at a higher rate than others. Things that get reported one night in any given city may not be reported in another city, or even in that same city the next night. We called the cops one night because there were a couple of drunk teenagers who were going to fight on the street in front of our house one night. Three other neighbors also called the cops. These kids yelled and shoved a bit but not a punch was thrown before one neighbor came out and a couple of their friends held them apart. The cops showed up and took away the kid who started the whole thing. So now you have a reported incident where nothing actually happened. A couple of kids who got drunk at a party and wanted to fight. And never actually did.

I don't care where you are...there are bad people right around the corner. A lot of it is perception. I remember a story a few years back about people on a tour from Winnipeg who refused to leave their hotels because it was so "dangerous". That's ridiculous. I don't think most of this crime is random...a lot of people bring it on themselves. Most of it is about who you associate yourself with. There will always be random acts of violence, and that's too bad. But it happens absolutely everywhere.

I have a friend who was beaten and robbed by 5 guys in Calgary on his way to work after class one day. He made it to the train and another guy tried to rob him. Of course he had nothing left for the guy to take. He had a horrible time in Calgary and had quite a few problems in the two years he was there. Calgary isn't even on that list. A lot of it is who you know but some of it is just crappy luck.

If Maclean's wanted to prove something, they would dig and dig until they found stats that are relevent today.

The top 9 are all in Western Canada.

Vehicle theft is also down.

"According to Manitoba Public Insurance, auto theft in Winnipeg was down 29% in 2007 compared with 2006. " taken from Sun Media Feb 26, 2008

Crime rates are down nationwide and in most western nations. That is why this type of list gives one a true sense of what is being accomplished. If a city, like Regina, is consistently in the top 3 in crimes then local authorities have done very little to actually curb crime, and are riding a national trend. On the flip side, if a city is consistently dropping on the list, then credit should, and can, be given to local authorities and the manner it which it was accomplished.

What this clearly shows is the Regina's Mayor Pat Fiacco is a complete failure at dealing with crime in Regina. Which happens to be one his so-called "accomplishments".

Another pointless survey to make smug asswipes in Toronto feel good about themselves.

This is why I never read MacLeans. It's basically the Ontario digest.

Crime is bad here, but its bad in Toronto too.

I think 1ajs is right about Winnipeg's decreasing crime rate. For the last few years Edmonton has been beating us on the kill count, and I know that Vancouver tops us in drugs.

It isn't even the Ontario Digest. It's the "Area Code 905 Digest". :yuck:

The funny thing is no one has made any legitimate criticism or manage to prove them wrong. That would be because they are right.

Toronto may have more crime in raw numbers but with 5 million people one's chance of being a victim is less then in Regina. That is a statistical fact.

Who you know and what kind of circles you run in actually increases your chances of getting attacked/shot/stabbed/etc more than anything.

A nice guy living on Maryland St. in inner city Winnipeg with no gang ties has less of a chance getting thugged than some part-time high school dope dealer living in North Kildonan.

There is no denying that is a fact, but these stats don't say that isn't true. What they do say is that a pt hs dope dealer has a better chance of getting rolled in Winnipeg then Toronto, and a average citizen has more chance of being mugged in Regina then Vancouver.

Don't read more into then is there, and don't argue apples and oranges.

What I think it's saying is that Winnipeg's and Regina's urban underclasses constitute a larger proportion of those cities' total populations than Toronto's urban underclass does. My impression is that there are (proportionately) far more gangland-style shooting deaths in Toronto, while the murders in Winnipeg tend to be knifings that occur when fights break out at drunken parties.

I think that it is questionable that they included "auto theft" as one of the basis points of declaring the "most" dangerous cities in Canada.

These stats alone would automatically place Winnipeg, Regina and Saskatoon in the top 10. The conspiracy theorist in me might point out that the auto theft stats could have been cherry picked in order to suit some editors pre-conceived notions of dangerous cities in Canada.

Far fetched? Maybe, but it doesn't dispute the fact in my mind that auto theft and danger are certainly not directly related.

I used to agree until people started trying to run down pedestrians.

Anti theft devices should be legislated. Standard equipment. If every car came with one from the factory the price would decrease substantially. Unfortunately car companies make money off every car stolen.

The average person may well be more likely to be killed by joyriding stoned teens than by their mugger pals in a dark alley. Don't know for sure but the dangers associated with kids stealing cars are probably fairly significant.

Let's not forget car jacking falls into that category as well.

Does it really matter, how one gets murdered?

I would think that it would to the murderee, yes. Also, where killings occur in a way that is inherently dangerous to "innocent" parties, that is a concern. In Toronto, bullets are whizzing around all over the place; two innocent bystanders have been killed this way on major (non-"dangerous") downtown streets in the last couple of months. In Winnipeg, the staggering drunks knifing each other at some party on [select one: Spence/Home/Langside] at 3AM on Sunday morning aren't really an equivalent public menace.

It is all how you look at this.
You can't compare raw numbers. If lets say a city of 1 million has 10000 cars stolen while a city of 100,000 has 2000 cars stolen. You go, that big city is dangerous, yet stats show you are twice as likely to get your car stolen in the smaller then the bigger one.

However rates are deceiving. In my dad's village in India of 2000 people, 2 people were murdered over a dispute of land. That makes the murder rate 50/per 100,000. Truth was that was the first murder since my great uncle murdered someone almost 50 years before. Yes he murdered someone and served 7 years...

The average person is more likely to be killed or injured just driving to work, whether there are joy riding teens around or not.

There are "dangerous" aspects of car theft to be sure, but the crime itself does not a dangerous city make.

I don't know about Regina, but "jacking cars" happens so rarely in Winnipeg, I can't even remember the last time it happened.

The top 5 cities all have large native populations. Enough said.

whens that issue coming out apparently theres a thing on my neighborhood in there the 4th poorest neighborhood in canada

Have there been any studies conducted to show that cities with large aborigional populations do indeed have higher crime rates?

No, it's the Greeks and the Italians causing all the trouble with their mafias, no wait its the Asians and there triads, no its the blacks and there street gangs. Ah hell, let's just blame the Dutch.
:koko:

Can you prove that there is no correlation between high aborigional populations and high crime rates? Of course it isn't just aborigionals that cause crime, but I would bet that these top five cities do have issues with aborigionals and crime rates. I would tend to think there might be, as I live in one of those top five crime ridden cities.

No way it's the Dutch.:haha:

You do understand that you are not a funny person, right? You are just making yourself out to be a real idiot.

Ok, but people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

You have to be careful about confounding variables. While I won't deny that crime rate might correlate with aboriginal population, that doesn't mean that there is a high crime rate because of aboriginals. I suspect that poverty, alcoholism, and drug addiction are probably large factors affecting the crime rate, all of which have higher incidence within aboriginal communities. Maybe it seems like a minor detail, but it's an important difference.

I going to go out on a limb and guess that you are native. My apologies if I have offended you, however people are allowed to express their points of view.

DING DING DING DING !!!!!

We have a winner, someone got my point.

Yes, and people are allowed to criticize it, dissect it, ridicule it and reject it.

As for the other stuff, my ethnicity, or lack of one, has no bearing on anything. I am Canadian, born and raised here.

I think that most people have come to the conclusion that he is aborigional, or at least Metis. The way he jumps down someone elses throat for not agreeing with Aborigional's points of view is unbelievable. He is always playing the race card here. Non-aborigionals would not get as worked up and call everyone a bigot for disagreeing with natives opinions or demands; that mentality would most likely come from a native person.

Wow that is a broad generalization. It seems your part of the problem not the solution.

Actually, I think he is bang on and I fully agree with him.

You are a fool, and are also a part of the problem, not the solution.

You must be Dutch. Those damn Dutch always up to no good.

Look who is grasping now.

More Dutch, see they are ruining the country.

.

So then would you care to explain to the rest of us how you are such a great part of the solution?

Do you think jumping down others throats about their opinions that differ from yours is a positive way of communicating your beliefs and opinions?

Do you think blaming it on one ethnic group is a positive way to solve the issue?

And, if rejecting a posts main thesis as ridiculous hurts your feelings because it isn't "positive". Then you should desensitize yourself, or getting off the pedestal and extracting that silver spoon from your mouth, just might help.

I now realize why no one on the Regina thread takes you seriously.