From the FBI . . .

For the first time in four years, the estimated number of violent crimes in the nation increased when compared with the previous year’s statistics, according to FBI figures released today. In 2020, violent crime was up 5.6 percent from the 2019 number. Property crimes dropped 7.8 percent, marking the 18th consecutive year the collective estimates for these offenses declined.

The 2020 statistics show the estimated rate of violent crime was 387.8 offenses per 100,000 inhabitants, and the estimated rate of property crime was 1,958.2 offenses per 100,000 inhabitants. The violent crime rate rose 5.2 percent when compared with the 2019 rate; the property crime rate declined 8.1 percent.

These and additional data are presented in the 2020 edition of the FBI’s annual report Crime in the United States. This report is available as downloadable spreadsheets and topic pages about offenses, arrests, and police employee data reported by law enforcement agencies voluntarily participating in the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program.

The UCR Program collects information on crimes reported by law enforcement agencies regarding the violent crimes of murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault, as well as the property crimes of burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson. (The FBI classifies arson as a property crime but does not estimate arson data because of variations in the level of participation by the reporting agencies. Consequently, arson data is not included in the property crime estimate.) The program also collects arrest data for the offenses listed above and 20 offenses that include all other crimes except traffic violations.

Of the 18,619 federal, state, county, city, university and college, and tribal agencies eligible to participate in the UCR Program, 15,897 agencies submitted data in 2020. A high-level summary of the statistics submitted, as well as estimates for those agencies that did not report, follows:

    • In 2020, there were an estimated 1,277,696 violent crimes. When compared with the estimates from 2019, the estimated number of robbery offenses fell 9.3 percent and the estimated volume of rape (revised definition) offenses decreased 12.0 percent. The estimated number of aggravated assault offenses rose 12.1 percent, and the volume of murder and nonnegligent manslaughter offenses increased 29.4 percent.
    • Nationwide, there were an estimated 6,452,038 property crimes. The estimated numbers for two of the three property crimes showed declines when compared with the previous year’s estimates. Burglaries dropped 7.4 percent, larceny-thefts decreased 10.6 percent, while motor vehicle thefts rose 11.8 percent.
    • Collectively, victims of property crimes (excluding arson) suffered losses estimated at $17.5 billion in 2020.
    • The FBI estimated law enforcement agencies nationwide made 7.6 million arrests, (excluding those for traffic violations) in 2020.
    • The arrest rate for violent crime was 147.9 per 100,000 inhabitants, and the arrest rate for property crime was 267.3 per 100,000 inhabitants.
    • By violent crime offense, the arrest rate for murder and nonnegligent manslaughter was 3.8 per 100,000 inhabitants; rape (aggregate total using the revised and legacy definition), 6.3; robbery, 21.0; and aggravated assault, 116.8 per 100,000 inhabitants.
    • Of the property crime offenses, the arrest rate for burglary was 45.7 per 100,000 inhabitants; larceny-theft, 193.1; and motor vehicle theft, 25.5. The arrest rate for arson was 3.0 per 100,000 inhabitants.
    • In 2020, 13,377 law enforcement agencies reported their staffing levels to the FBI. These agencies reported that, as of October 31, 2020, they collectively employed 696,644 sworn officers and 309,135 civilians—a rate of 3.4 employees per 1,000 inhabitants.

Caution Against Ranking—Each year when Crime in the United States is published, some entities use the figures to compile rankings of cities and counties. These rough rankings provide no insight into the numerous variables that mold crime in a particular town, city, county, state, tribal area, or region. Consequently, they lead to simplistic and/or incomplete analyses that often create misleading perceptions adversely affecting communities and their residents. Valid assessments are possible only with careful study and analysis of the range of unique conditions affecting each local law enforcement jurisdiction. The data user is, therefore, cautioned against comparing crime data of individual reporting units from cities, metropolitan areas, states, or colleges or universities solely on the basis of their population coverage or student enrollment.

You can explore the full Uniform Crime Report here. Here’s one highlight showing the number of firearms-related homicides jumped 29% in 2020.

H/T Rob Romano

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

45 COMMENTS

    • Just to let you know, Donald Trump was president in 2020 and had held the presidency since January 2017.

      Remember how he promised that the “American carnage will stop, right here, right now!”?

      Apparently that will be right after infrastructure week and just before Mexico pays for the wall…

      • Ha Ha, it was the leftist uprising. But nice try, but as usual, your aim is off by a country mile.

      • Miner49er,

        Your comment strongly implies that Trump is to blame for the increase in violent crime during his last year in office: that is disingenuous at best and downright deceitful at worst.

        For people who are not aware, local entities (cities, counties, and states) are almost entirely responsible for the amount of crime in their respective jurisdictions. Why? Because those entities control the local criminal justice systems and local policies which dominate conditions on the ground. While the federal government plays a part for sure, it is quite small compared to the local entities.

        In case you want evidence of this, recall the ridiculously long period of time that Portland, Oregon was in chaos. First of all, the Mayor of Portland and the Governor of Oregon ordered their respective police forces to effectively “stand down”. That was not Trump’s fault since Trump does not direct city and state police forces. Note also that Trump volunteered, on multiple occasions, that he would send in the National Guard to restore order the very instant that Oregon’s Governor requested it. Of course Oregon’s Governor never requested that assistance. And Trump never sent in the National Guard because he lacked the Constitutional authority to do it without the Governor’s formal request. Thus, you cannot ascribe the lion’s share of the blame for crime and mayhem on the President of the United States when the President has no significant influence to make it happen.

      • Hey Miner49er, it was under President Trump. But what you fail to mention is that the areas primarily affect by the increase in crime were liberal cities. You also fail to mention that President Trump did try to do something about it but you liberals lambasted him and stated in no uncertain terms that he wasn’t allowed to do that as he was interfering with states rights. So to blame Trump for the uptick in violence is intellectually dishonest. If you want someone to blame, blame the liberal governors, DA’s, and legislators that allowed this to happen.

  2. When you feel powerless to your situation and at the bottom rung of the ladder due to White Privilege and systemic racism against you, what can you do? Black men are fed up and had to rise up and assault Asian women and elderly as revenge for bringing in corona and ruining their lives.

  3. I’m gonna call BS on property crime dropping in anything but the statistics. You can’t put it into the stats if you make no arrests and take no reports. The cops weren’t doing their jobs.

  4. Imagine how much higher the violent crime rate would have been if almost everyone was known/guaranteed to be unarmed.

    • I don’t know, watching Donald Trump lose time after time has been rather satisfying, a guilty pleasure.

      And the recent Arizona fraudulent ersatz ‘audit’ has been most thrilling, watching the cyber ninjas being forced to admit that Joe Biden indeed won the presidential election was priceless.

      • “I don’t know, watching Donald Trump lose time after time has been rather satisfying, a guilty pleasure.”

        3 conservative SCotUS justices instead of 3 Kagan and Sotomayor clones spells a clear *WIN*, little ‘minor’, and you know it… 😉

        • “Blinder and Watson found that the unemployment rate fell under Democratic Presidents by an average of 0.8 percentage points, while it increased under Republican Presidents by an average of 1.1 percentage points.[1] Journalist Andrew Soergel wrote in U.S. News & World Report in October 2015 that: “The country’s unemployment rate has been lower at the end of every Democrat’s tenure since Kennedy took office in 1961. Ronald Reagan, meanwhile, is the only GOP president since Dwight Eisenhower took office in 1953 who can say the same.”[10] (Soergel’s statement here is mostly, but not completely, accurate since the U.S. unemployment rate was exactly the same–at 7.5%–at both the start and the end of Democrat Jimmy Carter’s Presidency (in January 1977 and January 1981, respectively). Thus, saying that the U.S. unemployment rate was lower at the end of every U.S. President’s tenure since 1961 than it was at the beginning of their tenure is close to being accurate but nevertheless not completely accurate.)[11][12]“

        • Even Donald Trump says America does better under Democrats:

          “The Donald was absolutely right when he told Wolf Blitzer in 2004: “I’ve been around for a long time and it just seems that the economy does better under the Democrats than the Republicans.”

          That’s right. Trump said out loud the same thing that Hillary Clinton has asserted—and top academics and journalists have confirmed. The same thing I’ve been compiling cold, hard government data on since 1980: By crucial metrics like GDP, job creation, business investment and avoiding recessions, the economy does a lot better with Democrats in the White House than with Republicans. Just one eye-opening example: Nine of the last 10 recessions have been under Republicans.“

          https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2016/11/07/trump-is-right-about-one-thing-the-economy-does-better-under-the-democrats/amp/

  6. Didn’t this cycle happen in the 70’s through 90’s?
    Democrats fuck everything up.
    Republicans win on running on cleaning things up followed by Democrats winning by calling Republicans meanies for locking people up.
    Democrats proceed to fuck it all up again.

    • “Democrats fuck everything up.”

      Corporal Hicks said it best –

      “It’s what they do! It’s ALL THEY DO!!!”…

      • “Both the stock market and the real economy tend to do better when Democrats, not Republicans, are in charge.
        Since 1945, the S&P 500 has averaged an annual gain of 11.2% during years when Democrats controlled the White House, according to CFRA Research. That’s well ahead of the 6.9% average gain under Republicans.
        “The market does do better under Democratic presidential control,” said Sam Stovall, chief investment strategist at CFRA Research.“

        https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/23/investing/stock-market-election-trump-biden/index.html

      • “The Republican Party claims to be “the party of maximum economic freedom and the prosperity that freedom makes possible.” However, an analysis of economic performance since World War II under Democratic versus Republican presidents strongly suggests that claims that Republicans are better at managing the economy are simply not true. While the reasons are neither fully understood nor completely attributable to policy choices, data show that the economy has performed much better during
        Democratic administrations. Economic growth, job creation and industrial production have all been stronger.
        In fact, a recent paper by economists Alan Blinder and Mark Watson states: “The superiority of economic performance under Democrats rather than Republicans is nearly ubiquitous; it holds almost regardless of how you define success.” Fact-checking groups have investigated similar statements and have found time and time again that they are true. Moreover, past research shows that stock market returns are also higher under Democrats.“

        https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/309cc8e1-b971-45c6-ab52-29ffb1da9bf5/jec-fact-sheet—the-economy-under-democratic-vs.-republican-presidents-june-2016.pdf

    • “Historically, the United States economy has performed better on average under the administration of Democratic presidents than Republican presidents since World War II. The reasons for this are debated, and the observation applies to economic variables including job creation, GDP growth, and stock market returns. The unemployment rate has fallen on average under Democratic presidents, while it has risen on average under Republican presidents. Budget deficits relative to the size of the economy were lower on average for Democratic presidents.[1][2] Ten of the 11 U.S. recessions between 1953 and 2020 began under Republican presidents.[3]”

    • “Job creation refers to the number of net jobs added, which is reported monthly by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.[4] Journalist Glenn Kessler of The Washington Post summarized the total job creation by president. For the 13 presidents beginning with Truman, total job creation was about 70.5 million for the 7 Democratic presidents and 29.1 million for the 6 Republican presidents. The Democratic presidents were in office for a total of 429 months, with 164,000 jobs per month added on average, while the Republicans were in office for 475 months, with a 61,000 jobs added per month average. This monthly average rate was 2.4 times faster under Democratic presidents.[5]”

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._economic_performance_under_Democratic_and_Republican_presidents

    • Yes because violent crime was actually down for the first half of the year. It’s crazy how much ground they made up. It turns out corporate sponsored terrorism was a bad idea. Who knew?

      Other countries that weren’t pushing a cultural revolution like us had less violent crime last year.

    • It is called a lack of education. Jr High science knowledge is all you need to make explosives. Keeping people fat, dumb and happy at least kept them from blowing things up. On the other hand had we kept them educated, fit and ethically driven we would not of had thos peaceful protests last year.

  9. When gasoline goes up to $15 a gallon, and it is, and farmers start paying $10 for diesel. 100,000 illegal immigrants a week, China rising.
    You ain’t seen nothing yet, No No No Baby, you ain’t seen nothing yet.

  10. Handguns….8017
    Rifles….454
    Firearms, type not stated….4834
    With a total firearms of 13620

    Whats going on here? Type not stated? This looks significant enough to state quite clearly. This also looks like plenty of real proof that the AR15 is not at issue.

Comments are closed.