Crime index data for North Carolina and counties.

Graph and download economic data for Combined Violent and Property Crime Offenses Known to Law Enforcement in Caldwell County, NC (DISCONTINUED) (FBITC037027) from 2004 to 2021 about Caldwell County, NC; Hickory; crime; violent crime; property crime; NC; and USA.

Graph and download economic data for Combined Violent and Property Crime Offenses Known to Law Enforcement in Orange County, NC (DISCONTINUED) (FBITC037135) from 2004 to 2021 about Orange County, NC; Durham; crime; violent crime; property crime; NC; and USA.

In 2023, a total of ******* violent crimes were committed in Texas, the most out of any U.S. state. New York followed, with ******* violent crimes committed. California, Illinois, and Michigan rounded out the top five states for violent crimes in that year.

In 2023, the District of Columbia had the highest reported violent crime rate in the United States, with 1,150.9 violent crimes per 100,000 of the population. Maine had the lowest reported violent crime rate, with 102.5 offenses per 100,000 of the population. Life in the District The District of Columbia has seen a fluctuating population over the past few decades. Its population decreased throughout the 1990s, when its crime rate was at its peak, but has been steadily recovering since then. While unemployment in the District has also been falling, it still has had a high poverty rate in recent years. The gentrification of certain areas within Washington, D.C. over the past few years has made the contrast between rich and poor even greater and is also pushing crime out into the Maryland and Virginia suburbs around the District. Law enforcement in the U.S. Crime in the U.S. is trending downwards compared to years past, despite Americans feeling that crime is a problem in their country. In addition, the number of full-time law enforcement officers in the U.S. has increased recently, who, in keeping with the lower rate of crime, have also made fewer arrests than in years past.

Graph and download economic data for Combined Violent and Property Crime Offenses Known to Law Enforcement in New Hanover County, NC (DISCONTINUED) (FBITC037129) from 2004 to 2021 about New Hanover County, NC; Wilmington; crime; violent crime; property crime; NC; and USA.

The Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program has been the starting place for law enforcement executives, students of criminal justice, researchers, members of the media, and the public at large seeking information on crime in the nation. Part I categorizes incidents in two categories: violent and property crimes. Aggravated assault, forcible rape, murder, and robbery are classified as violent crime, while burglary, larceny-theft, and motor vehicle theft are classified as property crimes. This dataset contains FBI Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Part I crime data for the last 40 years in Greensboro, North Carolina. The crime rate or index is calculated on a per 100,000 resident basis.A crime rate describes the number of crimes reported to law enforcement agencies per 100,000 residents. A crime rate is calculated by dividing the number of reported crimes by the total population; the result is multiplied by 100,000. For example, in 2013 there were 496 robberies in Greensboro and the population was 268,176 according to the SBI estimate. This equals a robbery crime rate of 185 per 100,000 general population.496/268,176 = 0.00184953165085615 x 100,000 = 184.95The Greensboro Police Department is comprised of 787 sworn and non-sworn employees dedicated to the mission of partnering to fight crime for a safer Greensboro. We believe that effectively fighting crime requires everyone's effort. With your assistance, we can make our city safer. Wondering what you can do?Take reasonable steps to prevent being victimized. Lock your car and home doors. Be aware of your surroundings. If something or someonefeels out of the ordinary, go to a safe place.Be additional eyes and ears for us. Report suspicious or unusual activity, and provide tips through Crime Stoppers that can help solve crime.Look out for your neighbors. Strong communities with active Neighborhood Watch programs are not attractive to criminals. By taking care of the people around you, you can create safe places to live and work.Get involved! If you have children, teach them how to react to bullying, what the dangers of texting and driving are, and how to safely use the Internet. Talk with your older relatives about scams that target senior citizens.Learn more about GPD. Ride along with us. Participate in the Police Citizens' Academy. Volunteer, apply for an internship, or better yet join us.You may have heard about our philosophy of neighborhood-oriented policing. This is practice in policing that combines data-driven crime analysis with police/citizen partnerships to solve problems.In the spirit of partnership with the community, our goal is to make the Greensboro Police Department as accessible as possible to the people we serve. Policies and procedures, referred to as directives, are rules that all Greensboro Police Department employees must follow in carrying out the mission of the department. We will update the public copy of the directives in a timely manner to remain consistent with new policy and procedure updates.

Recognizing that violence can be an intractable problem in many communities and that there are numerous approaches to both an immediate violence problem and the range of root causes behind violence, the National Institute of Justice funded an investigation into what factors underlie violence and efforts being implemented to address those factors and potentially reduce violence at the community level. In this mixed methods study, the RAND Corporation drew on data from key informant interviews, community surveys, administrative data, and geographic data to examine specific factors that contribute to violence, as well as a range of anti-violence efforts that have been used to address violence levels in two U.S. communities: the Bullseye area of Durham, North Carolina, and the Northside (North Minneapolis) neighborhood of Minneapolis, Minnesota. Specifically, the research project aimed to answer the following questions: What are community level factors that can contribute to persistent violence? What are the key factors in both cities that distinguish high violent crime areas compared to low violent crime areas? This collection contains final analytic datasets for Durham (DS1) and Minneapolis (DS2), violent crime rate data (DS3), community survey data for Durham (DS4) and Minneapolis (DS5), and multiple datasets containing community-level contextual factors from the American Community Survey (ACS) and geographical data from the U.S. Census Bureau (2009-2018) that were used to build the final analytic datasets (DS6-DS11). Qualitative data from key informant interviews and GIS data are not available for download at this time. Access to Durham and Minneapolis community survey data is restricted.

Graph and download economic data for Combined Violent and Property Crime Offenses Known to Law Enforcement in Halifax County, NC (DISCONTINUED) (FBITC037083) from 2004 to 2021 about Halifax County, NC; crime; violent crime; property crime; NC; and USA.

This dataset contains Crime and Safety data from the Cary Police Department.

This data is extracted by the Town of Cary's Police Department's RMS application. The police incidents will provide data on the Part I crimes of arson, motor vehicle thefts, larcenies, burglaries, aggravated assaults, robberies and homicides. Sexual assaults and crimes involving juveniles will not appear to help protect the identities of victims.

This dataset includes criminal offenses in the Town of Cary for the previous 10 calendar years plus the current year. The data is based on the National Incident Based Reporting System (NIBRS) which includes all victims of person crimes and all crimes within an incident. The data is dynamic, which allows for additions, deletions and/or modifications at any time, resulting in more accurate information in the database. Due to continuous data entry, the number of records in subsequent extractions are subject to change. Crime data is updated daily however, incidents may be up to three days old before they first appear.

About Crime Data

The Cary Police Department strives to make crime data as accurate as possible, but there is no avoiding the introduction of errors into this process, which relies on data furnished by many people and that cannot always be verified. Data on this site are updated daily, adding new incidents and updating existing data with information gathered through the investigative process.

This dynamic nature of crime data means that content provided here today will probably differ from content provided a week from now. Additional, content provided on this site may differ somewhat from crime statistics published elsewhere by other media outlets, even though they draw from the same database.

Withheld Data

In accordance with legal restrictions against identifying sexual assault and child abuse victims and juvenile perpetrators, victims, and witnesses of certain crimes, this site includes the following precautionary measures: (a) Addresses of sexual assaults are not included. (b) Child abuse cases, and other crimes which by their nature involve juveniles, or which the reports indicate involve juveniles as victims, suspects, or witnesses, are not reported at all.

Certain crimes that are under current investigation may be omitted from the results in avoid comprising the investigative process.

Incidents five days old or newer may not be included until the internal audit process has been completed.

This data is updated daily.

This data collection examines the relationship between individual characteristics and recidivism for two cohorts of inmates released from North Carolina prisons in 1978 and 1980. The survey contains questions on the background of the offenders, including their involvement in drugs or alcohol, level of schooling, nature of the crime resulting in the sample conviction, number of prior incarcerations and recidivism following release from the sample incarceration. The data collection also contains information on the length of time until recidivism occurs.

Graph and download economic data for Combined Violent and Property Crime Offenses Known to Law Enforcement in Harnett County, NC (DISCONTINUED) (FBITC037085) from 2004 to 2021 about Harnett County, NC; crime; violent crime; property crime; NC; and USA.

In anticipation of the FBI transitioning to NIBRS by January 2021, the Raleigh Police Department was one of the first agencies in North Carolina to convert from the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program Summary Reporting System (SRS) to the UCR - National Incident Based Reporting System (NIBRS) in June 2014.NIBRS now collects each offense, victim, offender, property, and arrestee information on 52 unique offenses and up to 10 offenses per incident. These new categories can be more defined and increasingly vary at the local level. As a result, these differences can make it difficult to compare statistics.For more information about NIBRS, go to FBI website: https://ucr.fbi.gov/nibrs-overviewUpdate Frequency: DailyTime Period: June 2014-Present

Effective October 1, 1994, the state of North Carolina implemented a new structured sentencing law that applied to all felony and misdemeanor crimes (except for driving while impaired) committed on or after October 1, 1994. Under the new structured sentencing law parole was eliminated, and a sentencing commission developed recommended ranges of punishment for offense and offender categories, set priorities for the use of correctional resources, and developed a model to estimate correctional populations. This study sought to investigate sentencing reforms by looking at the effects of structured sentencing on multiple aspects of the adjudication process in North Carolina. A further objective was to determine whether there were differences in the commission of institutional infractions between inmates sentenced to North Carolina prisons under the pre-structured versus structured sentencing laws. Researchers hoped that the results of this study may help North Carolina and jurisdictions around the country (1) anticipate the likely effects of structured sentencing laws, (2) design new laws that might better achieve the jurisdictions' goals, and (3) improve the potential of sentencing legislation in order to enhance public safety in an effective and equitable way. Administrative records data were collected from two sources. First, in order to examine the effects of structured sentencing on the adjudication process in North Carolina, criminal case data were obtained from the North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts (Parts 1 and 2). The pre-structured sentencing and structured sentencing samples were selected at the case level, and each record in Parts 1 and 2 represents a charged offense processed in either the North Carolina Superior or District Court. Second, inmate records data were collected from administrative records provided by the North Carolina Department of Correction (Part 3). These data were used to compare the involvement in infractions of inmates sentenced under both pre-structured and structured sentencing. The data for Part 3 focused on inmates entering the prison system between June 1, 1995, and January 31, 1998. Variables for Parts 1 and 2 include type of charge, charged offense date, method of disposition (e.g., dismissal, withdrawal, jury trial), defendant's plea, verdict for the offense, and whether the offense was processed through the North Carolina Superior or District Court. Structured sentencing offense class and modified Uniform Crime Reporting code for both charged and convicted offenses are presented for Parts 1 and 2. There are also county, prosecutorial district, and defendant episode identifiers in both parts. Variables related to defendant episodes include types of offenses within episode, total number of charges and convictions, whether all charges were dismissed, whether any felony charge resulted in a jury trial, and the adjudication time for all charges. Demographic variables for Parts 1 and 2 include the defendant's age, race, and gender. Part 3 variables include the date of prison admission, sentence type, number of prior incarcerations, number of years served during prior incarcerations, maximum sentence length for current incarceration, jail credit in years, count of all infractions during current and prior incarcerations, reason for incarceration, infraction rate, the risk for alcohol and drug dependency based on alcohol and chemical dependency screening scores, and the number of assault, drug/alcohol, profanity/disobedience, work absence, and money/property infractions during an inmate's current incarceration. Demographic variables for Part 3 include race, gender, and age at the time of each inmate's prison admission.

This paper replicates the Cornwell and Trumbull (1994) estimation of a crime model using panel data on 90 counties in North Carolina over the period 1981-1987. While the Between and Within estimates are replicated, the fixed effects 2SLS as well as the 2SLS estimates are not. In fact, the fixed effects 2SLS estimates turn out to be insignificant for all important deterrent variables as well as legal opportunity variables. We argue that the usual Hausman test, based on the difference between fixed effects and random effects, may lead to misleading inference when endogenous variables of the conventional simultaneous equation type are among the regressors. We estimate the model using random effects 2SLS and perform a Hausman test based on the difference between fixed effects 2SLS and random effects 2SLS. We cannot reject the consistency of the random effects 2SLS estimator and this estimator yields plausible and significant estimates of the crime model. This result should be tempered by the legitimacy of the chosen instruments.

Graph and download economic data for Combined Violent and Property Crime Offenses Known to Law Enforcement in Jones County, NC (DISCONTINUED) (FBITC037103) from 2006 to 2007 about Jones County, NC; crime; violent crime; property crime; NC; and USA.

In anticipation of the FBI transitioning to NIBRS by January 2021, the Raleigh Police Department was one of the first agencies in North Carolina to convert from the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program Summary Reporting System (SRS) to the UCR - National Incident Based Reporting System (NIBRS) in June 2014.NIBRS now collects each offense, victim, offender, property, and arrestee information on 52 unique offenses and up to 10 offenses per incident. These new categories can be more defined and increasingly vary at the local level. As a result, these differences can make it difficult to compare statistics.For more information about NIBRS, go to FBI website: https://ucr.fbi.gov/nibrs-overviewUpdate Frequency: DailyTime Period: Previous Day

California reported the largest number of homicides to the FBI in 2023, at 1,929 for the year. Texas recorded the second-highest number of murders, with 1,845 for the year. Homicide victim demographics There were a total of 19,252 reported homicide cases in the U.S. in 2023. When looking at murder victims by gender and ethnicity, the vast majority were male, while just over half of the victims were Black or African American. In addition, homicide victims in the United States were found most likely to be between the ages of 20 and 34 years old, with the majority of victims aged between 17 to 54 years old. Are murders up? In short, no – since the 1990s the number of murders in the U.S. has decreased significantly. In 1990, the murder rate per 100,000 people stood at 9.4, and stood at 5.7 in 2023. It should be noted though that the number of homicides increased slightly from 2014 to 2017, although figures declined again in 2018 and 2019, before ticking up once more in 2020 and 2021. Despite this decline, when viewed in international comparison, the U.S. murder rate is still notably high. For example, the Canadian homicide rate stood at 1.94 in 2023, while the homicide rate in England and Wales was even lower.

In 2023, the District of Columbia had the highest rate of murder and non-negligent manslaughter in the United States with a rate of 39 murders or non-negligent manslaughters per 100,000 inhabitants. Louisiana, New Mexico, Alabama, and Tennessee rounded out the top five states with the highest murder rates.

For this study, convenience store robbery victims and offenders in five states (Georgia, Massachusetts, Maryland, Michigan, and South Carolina) were interviewed. Robbery victims were identified by canvassing convenience stores in high-crime areas, while a sample of unrelated offenders was obtained from state prison rolls. The aims of the survey were to address questions of injury, to examine store characteristics that might influence the rate of robbery and injury, to compare how both victims and offenders perceived the robbery event (including their assessment of what could be done to prevent convenience store robberies in the future), and to identify ways in which the number of convenience store robberies might be reduced. Variables unique to Part 1, the Victim Data file, provide information on how the victim was injured, whether hospitalization was required for the injury, if the victim used any type of self-protection, and whether the victim had been trained to handle a robbery. Part 2, the Offender Data file, presents variables describing offenders' history of prior convenience store robberies, whether there had been an accomplice, motive for robbing the store, and whether various factors mattered in choosing the store to rob (e.g., cashier location, exit locations, lighting conditions, parking lot size, the number of clerks working, weather conditions, the time of day, and the number of customers in the store). Found in both files are variables detailing whether a victim injury occurred, use of a weapon, how each participant behaved, perceptions of why the store was targeted, what could have been done to prevent the robbery, and ratings by the researchers on the completeness, honesty, and cooperativeness of each participant during the interview. Demographic variables found in both the victim and offender files include age, gender, race, and ethnicity.