This dataset contains aggregate data on violent index victimizations at the quarter level of each year (i.e., January – March, April – June, July – September, October – December), from 2001 to the present (1991 to present for Homicides), with a focus on those related to gun violence. Index crimes are 10 crime types selected by the FBI (codes 1-4) for special focus due to their seriousness and frequency. This dataset includes only those index crimes that involve bodily harm or the threat of bodily harm and are reported to the Chicago Police Department (CPD). Each row is aggregated up to victimization type, age group, sex, race, and whether the victimization was domestic-related. Aggregating at the quarter level provides large enough blocks of incidents to protect anonymity while allowing the end user to observe inter-year and intra-year variation. Any row where there were fewer than three incidents during a given quarter has been deleted to help prevent re-identification of victims. For example, if there were three domestic criminal sexual assaults during January to March 2020, all victims associated with those incidents have been removed from this dataset. Human trafficking victimizations have been aggregated separately due to the extremely small number of victimizations.

This dataset includes a " GUNSHOT_INJURY_I " column to indicate whether the victimization involved a shooting, showing either Yes ("Y"), No ("N"), or Unknown ("UKNOWN.") For homicides, injury descriptions are available dating back to 1991, so the "shooting" column will read either "Y" or "N" to indicate whether the homicide was a fatal shooting or not. For non-fatal shootings, data is only available as of 2010. As a result, for any non-fatal shootings that occurred from 2010 to the present, the shooting column will read as “Y.” Non-fatal shooting victims will not be included in this dataset prior to 2010; they will be included in the authorized dataset, but with "UNKNOWN" in the shooting column.

The dataset is refreshed daily, but excludes the most recent complete day to allow CPD time to gather the best available information. Each time the dataset is refreshed, records can change as CPD learns more about each victimization, especially those victimizations that are most recent. The data on the Mayor's Office Violence Reduction Dashboard is updated daily with an approximately 48-hour lag. As cases are passed from the initial reporting officer to the investigating detectives, some recorded data about incidents and victimizations may change once additional information arises. Regularly updated datasets on the City's public portal may change to reflect new or corrected information.

How does this dataset classify victims?

The methodology by which this dataset classifies victims of violent crime differs by victimization type:

Homicide and non-fatal shooting victims: A victimization is considered a homicide victimization or non-fatal shooting victimization depending on its presence in CPD's homicide victims data table or its shooting victims data table. A victimization is considered a homicide only if it is present in CPD's homicide data table, while a victimization is considered a non-fatal shooting only if it is present in CPD's shooting data tables and absent from CPD's homicide data table.

To determine the IUCR code of homicide and non-fatal shooting victimizations, we defer to the incident IUCR code available in CPD's Crimes, 2001-present dataset (available on the City's open data portal). If the IUCR code in CPD's Crimes dataset is inconsistent with the homicide/non-fatal shooting categorization, we defer to CPD's Victims dataset.

For a criminal homicide, the only sensible IUCR codes are 0110 (first-degree murder) or 0130 (second-degree murder). For a non-fatal shooting, a sensible IUCR code must signify a criminal sexual assault, a robbery, or, most commonly, an aggravated battery. In rare instances, the IUCR code in CPD's Crimes and Victims dataset do not align with the homicide/non-fatal shooting categorization:

1. In instances where a homicide victimization does not correspond to an IUCR code 0110 or 0130, we set the IUCR code to "01XX" to indicate that the victimization was a homicide but we do not know whether it was a first-degree murder (IUCR code = 0110) or a second-degree murder (IUCR code = 0130).
2. When a non-fatal shooting victimization does not correspond to an IUCR code that signifies a criminal sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated battery, we enter “UNK” in the IUCR column, “YES” in the GUNSHOT_I column, and “NON-FATAL” in the PRIMARY column to indicate that the victim was non-fatally shot, but the precise IUCR code is unknown.

Other violent crime victims: For other violent crime types, we refer to the IUCR classification that exists in CPD's victim table, with only one exception:

1. When there is an incident that is associated with no victim with a matching IUCR code, we assume that this is an error. Every crime should have at least 1 victim with a matching IUCR code. In these cases, we change the IUCR code to reflect the incident IUCR code because CPD's incident table is considered to be more reliable than the victim table.

Note: All businesses identified as victims in CPD data have been removed from this dataset.

Note: The definition of “homicide” (shooting or otherwise) does not include justifiable homicide or involuntary manslaughter. This dataset also excludes any cases that CPD considers to be “unfounded” or “noncriminal.”

Note: In some instances, the police department's raw incident-level data and victim-level data that were inputs into this dataset do not align on the type of crime that occurred. In those instances, this dataset attempts to correct mismatches between incident and victim specific crime types. When it is not possible to determine which victims are associated with the most recent crime determination, the dataset will show empty cells in the respective demographic fields (age, sex, race, etc.).

Note: The initial reporting officer usually asks victims to report demographic data. If victims are unable to recall, the reporting officer will use their best judgment. “Unknown” can be reported if it is truly unknown.

***Starting on March 7th, 2024, the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) will adopt a new Records Management System for reporting crimes and arrests. This new system is being implemented to comply with the FBI's mandate to collect NIBRS-only data (NIBRS — FBI - https://www.fbi.gov/how-we-can-help-you/more-fbi-services-and-information/ucr/nibrs). During this transition, users will temporarily see only incidents reported in the retiring system. However, the LAPD is actively working on generating new NIBRS datasets to ensure a smoother and more efficient reporting system. *** **Update 1/18/2024 - LAPD is facing issues with posting the Crime data, but we are taking immediate action to resolve the problem. We understand the importance of providing reliable and up-to-date information and are committed to delivering it. As we work through the issues, we have temporarily reduced our updates from weekly to bi-weekly to ensure that we provide accurate information. Our team is actively working to identify and resolve these issues promptly. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause and appreciate your understanding. Rest assured, we are doing everything we can to fix the problem and get back to providing weekly updates as soon as possible. ** This dataset reflects incidents of crime in the City of Los Angeles dating back to 2020. This data is transcribed from original crime reports that are typed on paper and therefore there may be some inaccuracies within the data. Some location fields with missing data are noted as (0°, 0°). Address fields are only provided to the nearest hundred block in order to maintain privacy. This data is as accurate as the data in the database. Please note questions or concerns in the comments.

The UNIFORM CRIME REPORTING PROGRAM DATA: OFFENSES KNOWN AND CLEARANCES BY ARREST, 2010 dataset is a compilation of offenses reported to law enforcement agencies in the United States. Due to the vast number of categories of crime committed in the United States, the FBI has limited the type of crimes included in this compilation to those crimes which people are most likely to report to police and those crimes which occur frequently enough to be analyzed across time. Crimes included are criminal homicide, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny-theft, and motor vehicle theft. Much information about these crimes is provided in this dataset. The number of times an offense has been reported, the number of reported offenses that have been cleared by arrests, and the number of cleared offenses which involved offenders under the age of 18 are the major items of information collected.

Number, percentage and rate (per 100,000 population) of homicide victims, by racialized identity group (total, by racialized identity group; racialized identity group; South Asian; Chinese; Black; Filipino; Arab; Latin American; Southeast Asian; West Asian; Korean; Japanese; other racialized identity group; multiple racialized identity; racialized identity, but racialized identity group is unknown; rest of the population; unknown racialized identity group), gender (all genders; male; female; gender unknown) and region (Canada; Atlantic region; Quebec; Ontario; Prairies region; British Columbia; territories), 2019 to 2024.

This table contains data on registered suspects of a crime recorded in the reporting year, distinguished by crime group, age, gender and municipality of residence.

The sex, age and place of residence of a suspect is determined on the last Friday of September of the year under review. This data comes from the Basic Registration Persons (BRP) or, if the person is not registered in the BRP, from the registration system of the police. The table shows the number of suspects of crime in absolute and relative figures. The relative figure is calculated per 10000 persons of the selected population. Individuals who do not appear in the Basic Registration Persons (BRP) often lack personal data. These individuals are counted in the absolute figures, but not in the relatives.

Because the number of suspects per type of crime is presented per year, the number of suspects per type of crime is increased to more than the total number of unique suspects. A person who has been registered more than once within a reporting year is counted only once in the total number of suspects. In addition, for each offence he is suspected of, he is counted once in the main group of offences. Example: a suspect of 10 burglaries and 2 violent crimes is counted once in Total number of suspects, 1 in Power Offences and 1 in Violence Offences.

Data available from: 2010

Status of the figures: The figures up to 2020 are final. The figures for 2021 and 2022 are provisional. Preliminary figures give an underestimation of the final number of suspects. The preliminary number of suspects in the most recent year is a few percent lower than the final number.

Changes as of 16 February 2024: None, this is a new table.

When new figures will be available: Figures on registered suspects 2023 will be available in March 2024.

Police recorded crime figures by Police Force Area and Community Safety Partnership areas (which equate in the majority of instances, to local authorities).

Prison Inmates in India

Demographics, Age, Education, Caste, Wages, Rehabilitation, Technical Info

By Rajanand Ilangovan [source]

About this dataset

This dataset provides a detailed view of prison inmates in India, including their age, caste, and educational background. It includes information on inmates from all states/union territories for the year 2019 such as the number of male and female inmates aged 16-18 years, 18-30 year old inmates and those above 50 years old. The data also covers total number of penalized prisoners sentenced to death sentence, life imprisonment or executed by the state authorities. Additionally, it provides information regarding the crimehead (type) committed by an inmate along with its grand total across different age groups. This dataset not only sheds light on India’s criminal justice system but also highlights prevelance of crimes in different states and union territories as well as providing insight into crime trends across Indian states over time

More Datasets

For more datasets, click here.

Featured Notebooks

• 🚨 Your notebook can be here! 🚨!

How to use the dataset

This dataset provides a comprehensive look at the demographics, crimes and sentences of Indian prison inmates in 2019. The data is broken down by state/union territory, year, crime head, age groups and gender.

This dataset can be used to understand the demographic composition of the prison population in India as well as the types of crimes committed. It can also be used to gain insight into any changes or trends related to sentencing patterns in India over time. Furthermore, this data can provide valuable insight into potential correlations between different demographic factors (such as gender and caste) and specific types of crimes or length of sentences handed out.

To use this dataset effectively there are a few important things to keep in mind: •State/UT - This column refers to individual states or union territories in India where prisons are located •Year – This column indicates which year(s) the data relates to •Both genders - Female columns refer only to female prisoners while male columns refers only to male prisoners •Age Groups – 16-18 years old = 21-30 years old = 31-50 years old = 50+ years old •Crime Head – A broad definition for each type of crime that inmates have been convicted for •No Capital Punishment – The total number sentenced with capital punishment No Life Imprisonment – The total number sentenced with life imprisonment No Executed– The total number executed from death sentence Grand Total–The overall totals for each category

By using this information it is possible to answer questions regarding topics such as sentencing trends, types of crimes committed by different age groups or genders and state-by-state variation amongst other potential queries

Research Ideas

• Using the age and gender information to develop targeted outreach strategies for prisons in order to reduce recidivism rates.
• Creating an AI-based predictive model to predict crime trends by analyzing crime head data from a particular region/state and correlating it with population demographics, economic activity, etc.
• Analyzing the caste of inmates across different states in India in order to understand patterns of discrimination within the criminal justice system

Acknowledgements

If you use this dataset in your research, please credit the original authors. Data Source

License

License: Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0) - You are free to: - Share - copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially. - Adapt - remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially. - You must: - Give appropriate credit - Provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. - ShareAlike - You must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.

Columns

File: SLL_Crime_headwise_distribution_of_inmates_who_convicted.csv | Column name | Description | |:--------------------------|:---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | STATE/UT | Name of the state or union territory where the jail is located. (String) | | YEAR | Year when the inmate population data was collected. (Integer) ...

This dataset includes all criminal offenses reported to the Colorado Springs Police Department. Each case report (incident) may have several offenses. Each offense may have multiple suspects and/or victims.

Important: This dataset provided by CSPD does not apply the same counting rules as official data reported to the Colorado Bureau of Investigations and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. This means comparisons to those datasets would be inaccurate.

Police-reported hate crime, by type of motivation (race or ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, language, disability, sex, age), selected regions and Canada (selected police services), 2014 to 2024.

Content

Under New York State’s Hate Crime Law (Penal Law Article 485), a person commits a hate crime when one of a specified set of offenses is committed targeting a victim because of a perception or belief about their race, color, national origin, ancestry, gender, religion, religious practice, age, disability, or sexual orientation, or when such an act is committed as a result of that type of perception or belief. These types of crimes can target an individual, a group of individuals, or public or private property. DCJS submits hate crime incident data to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program. Information collected includes number of victims, number of offenders, type of bias motivation, and type of victim.

Context

This is a dataset hosted by the State of New York. The state has an open data platform found here and they update their information according the amount of data that is brought in. Explore New York State using Kaggle and all of the data sources available through the State of New York organization page!

• Update Frequency: This dataset is updated annually.

Acknowledgements

This dataset is maintained using Socrata's API and Kaggle's API. Socrata has assisted countless organizations with hosting their open data and has been an integral part of the process of bringing more data to the public.

Crime severity index (violent, non-violent, youth) and weighted clearance rates (violent, non-violent), Canada, provinces, territories and Census Metropolitan Areas, 1998 to 2024.

THIS DATASET WAS LAST UPDATED AT 8:11 AM EASTERN ON SEPT. 22

OVERVIEW

2019 had the most mass killings since at least the 1970s, according to the Associated Press/USA TODAY/Northeastern University Mass Killings Database.

In all, there were 45 mass killings, defined as when four or more people are killed excluding the perpetrator. Of those, 33 were mass shootings . This summer was especially violent, with three high-profile public mass shootings occurring in the span of just four weeks, leaving 38 killed and 66 injured.

A total of 229 people died in mass killings in 2019.

The AP's analysis found that more than 50% of the incidents were family annihilations, which is similar to prior years. Although they are far less common, the 9 public mass shootings during the year were the most deadly type of mass murder, resulting in 73 people's deaths, not including the assailants.

One-third of the offenders died at the scene of the killing or soon after, half from suicides.

About this Dataset

The Associated Press/USA TODAY/Northeastern University Mass Killings database tracks all U.S. homicides since 2006 involving four or more people killed (not including the offender) over a short period of time (24 hours) regardless of weapon, location, victim-offender relationship or motive. The database includes information on these and other characteristics concerning the incidents, offenders, and victims.

The AP/USA TODAY/Northeastern database represents the most complete tracking of mass murders by the above definition currently available. Other efforts, such as the Gun Violence Archive or Everytown for Gun Safety may include events that do not meet our criteria, but a review of these sites and others indicates that this database contains every event that matches the definition, including some not tracked by other organizations.

This data will be updated periodically and can be used as an ongoing resource to help cover these events.

Using this Dataset

To get basic counts of incidents of mass killings and mass shootings by year nationwide, use these queries:

Mass killings by year

Mass shootings by year

To get these counts just for your state:

Filter killings by state

Definition of "mass murder"

Mass murder is defined as the intentional killing of four or more victims by any means within a 24-hour period, excluding the deaths of unborn children and the offender(s). The standard of four or more dead was initially set by the FBI.

This definition does not exclude cases based on method (e.g., shootings only), type or motivation (e.g., public only), victim-offender relationship (e.g., strangers only), or number of locations (e.g., one). The time frame of 24 hours was chosen to eliminate conflation with spree killers, who kill multiple victims in quick succession in different locations or incidents, and to satisfy the traditional requirement of occurring in a “single incident.”

Offenders who commit mass murder during a spree (before or after committing additional homicides) are included in the database, and all victims within seven days of the mass murder are included in the victim count. Negligent homicides related to driving under the influence or accidental fires are excluded due to the lack of offender intent. Only incidents occurring within the 50 states and Washington D.C. are considered.

Methodology

Project researchers first identified potential incidents using the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Supplementary Homicide Reports (SHR). Homicide incidents in the SHR were flagged as potential mass murder cases if four or more victims were reported on the same record, and the type of death was murder or non-negligent manslaughter.

Cases were subsequently verified utilizing media accounts, court documents, academic journal articles, books, and local law enforcement records obtained through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. Each data point was corroborated by multiple sources, which were compiled into a single document to assess the quality of information.

In case(s) of contradiction among sources, official law enforcement or court records were used, when available, followed by the most recent media or academic source.

Case information was subsequently compared with every other known mass murder database to ensure reliability and validity. Incidents listed in the SHR that could not be independently verified were excluded from the database.

Project researchers also conducted extensive searches for incidents not reported in the SHR during the time period, utilizing internet search engines, Lexis-Nexis, and Newspapers.com. Search terms include: [number] dead, [number] killed, [number] slain, [number] murdered, [number] homicide, mass murder, mass shooting, massacre, rampage, family killing, familicide, and arson murder. Offender, victim, and location names were also directly searched when available.

This project started at USA TODAY in 2012.

Contacts

Contact AP Data Editor Justin Myers with questions, suggestions or comments about this dataset at jmyers@ap.org. The Northeastern University researcher working with AP and USA TODAY is Professor James Alan Fox, who can be reached at j.fox@northeastern.edu or 617-416-4400.

This dataset shows City level data for all over the United States, and has various attributes for different crimes. Cities are shown as Latitude and longitude points. Attributes include murder, manslaughter, violent crimes, arson, motor vehicle theft, property crimes, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny, theft, and rape. Data was provided by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Source: FBI URL: http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_08.html

This dataset was retrieved from the U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation Criminal Justice Information Services Division website on February 29, 2008. "This table provides arrest data for 29 separate UCR offenses for each state for 2006. The table provides arrests of juveniles (persons under the age of 18)", by class of crime. "The FBI collects these data through the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program". Please see the Data Declaration for further information on the data set. Values of -1 represent no value.

This dataset was retrieved from the U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation Criminal Justice Information Services Division website on February 29, 2008. "This table provides the estimated number of offenses and the actual number of offenses reported in the Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA), cities outside metropolitan areas, and nonmetropolitan counties, and the rate (per 100,000 inhabitants) for each grouping, and the estimated population for each state" however to simplify the dataset, I only included the state total and the rate for each state. Data for Puerto Rico was not included. "The FBI collects these data through the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program". Please see the Data Declaration for further information on the data set. Values of -1 represent no value.

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.The Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) asks a sole adult in a random sample of households about their, or their household's, experience of crime victimisation in the previous 12 months. These are recorded in the victim form data file (VF). A wide range of questions are then asked, covering demographics and crime-related subjects such as attitudes to the police and the criminal justice system (CJS). These variables are contained within the non-victim form (NVF) data file. In 2009, the survey was extended to children aged 10-15 years old; one resident of that age range was also selected from the household and asked about their experience of crime and other related topics. The first set of children's data covered January-December 2009 and is held separately under SN 6601. From 2009-2010, the children's data cover the same period as the adult data and are included with the main study.The Telephone-operated Crime Survey for England and Wales (TCSEW) became operational on 20 May 2020. It was a replacement for the face-to-face CSEW, which was suspended on 17 March 2020 because of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. It was set up with the intention of measuring the level of crime during the pandemic. As the pandemic continued throughout the 2020/21 survey year, questions have been raised as to whether the year ending March 2021 TCSEW is comparable with estimates produced in earlier years by the face-to-face CSEW. The ONS Comparability between the Telephone-operated Crime Survey for England and Wales and the face-to-face Crime Survey for England and Wales report explores those factors that may have a bearing on the comparability of estimates between the TCSEW and the former CSEW. These include survey design, sample design, questionnaire changes and modal changes.More general information about the CSEW may be found on the ONS Crime Survey for England and Wales web page and for the previous BCS, from the GOV.UK BCS Methodology web page.History - the British Crime SurveyThe CSEW was formerly known as the British Crime Survey (BCS), and has been in existence since 1981. The 1982 and 1988 BCS waves were also conducted in Scotland (data held separately under SNs 4368 and 4599). Since 1993, separate Scottish Crime and Justice Surveys have been conducted. Up to 2001, the BCS was conducted biennially. From April 2001, the Office for National Statistics took over the survey and it became the CSEW. Interviewing was then carried out continually and reported on in financial year cycles. The crime reference period was altered to accommodate this. Secure Access CSEW dataIn addition to the main survey, a series of questions covering drinking behaviour, drug use, self-offending, gangs and personal security, and intimate personal violence (IPV) (including stalking and sexual victimisation) are asked of adults via a laptop-based self-completion module (questions may vary over the years). Children aged 10-15 years also complete a separate self-completion questionnaire. The questionnaires are included in the main documentation, but the data are only available under Secure Access conditions (see SN 7280), not with the main study. In addition, from 2011 onwards, lower-level geographic variables are also available under Secure Access conditions (see SN 7311).New methodology for capping the number of incidents from 2017-18The CSEW datasets available from 2017-18 onwards are based on a new methodology of capping the number of incidents at the 98th percentile. Incidence variables names have remained consistent with previously supplied data but due to the fact they are based on the new 98th percentile cap, and old datasets are not, comparability has been lost with years prior to 2012-2013. More information can be found in the 2017-18 User Guide (see SN 8464) and the article ‘Improving victimisation estimates derived from the Crime Survey for England and Wales’. The sixth British Crime Survey in the series aimed to: provide estimates of the numbers of crimes committed against individuals and their property in England and Wales during 1995provide details of the nature and circumstances of crime and the factors associated with the risk of crimeprovide national measures of the fear of crime, illicit drug use, contact with and attitudes to the police, knowledge of and attitudes to sentencing and punishmentThe 1996 study included an ethnic boost sample in addition to the main sample. For the fifth edition of the study (January 2007), the core sample drugs self-completion data file was replaced with a new version that includes further derived variables. The ethnic boost sample drugs data file has not been replaced.

This dataset was retrieved from the U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation Criminal Justice Information Services Division website on February 29, 2008. "This table provides arrest data for 29 separate UCR offenses for each state for 2006". The table provides data for total arrests by class of crime. "The FBI collects these data through the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program". Estimated population was added for each state for 2006 that appeared on Table 5 of the data from 2006. Please see the Data Declaration for further information on the data set. Values of -1 represent no value.

Incident-based crime statistics (actual incidents, rate per 100,000 population, percentage change in rate, unfounded incidents, percent unfounded, total cleared, cleared by charge, cleared otherwise, persons charged, adults charged, youth charged / not charged), by detailed violations (violent, property, traffic, drugs, other Federal Statutes), police services in Ontario, 1998 to 2024.

Incident-based crime statistics (actual incidents, rate per 100,000 population, percentage change in rate, unfounded incidents, percent unfounded, total cleared, cleared by charge, cleared otherwise, persons charged, adults charged, youth charged / not charged), by detailed violations (violent, property, traffic, drugs, other Federal Statutes), police services in British Columbia, 1998 to 2024.