THIS DATASET WAS LAST UPDATED AT 2:11 AM EASTERN ON JULY 12

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 table contains data on the rate of violent crime (crimes per 1,000 population) for California, its regions, counties, cities and towns. Crime and population data are from the Federal Bureau of Investigations, Uniform Crime Reports. Rates above the city/town level include data from city, university and college, county, state, tribal, and federal law enforcement agencies. The table is part of a series of indicators in the Healthy Communities Data and Indicators Project of the Office of Health Equity. Ten percent of all deaths in young California adults aged 15-44 years are related to assault and homicide. In 2010, California law enforcement agencies reported 1,809 murders, 8,331 rapes, and over 95,000 aggravated assaults. African Americans in California are 11 times more likely to die of assault and homicide than Whites. More information about the data table and a data dictionary can be found in the About/Attachments section.

In 2023, the violent crime rate in the United States was 363.8 cases per 100,000 of the population. Even though the violent crime rate has been decreasing since 1990, the United States tops the ranking of countries with the most prisoners. In addition, due to the FBI's transition to a new crime reporting system in which law enforcement agencies voluntarily submit crime reports, data may not accurately reflect the total number of crimes committed in recent years. Reported violent crime rate in the United States The United States Federal Bureau of Investigation tracks the rate of reported violent crimes per 100,000 U.S. inhabitants. In the timeline above, rates are shown starting in 1990. The rate of reported violent crime has fallen since a high of 758.20 reported crimes in 1991 to a low of 363.6 reported violent crimes in 2014. In 2023, there were around 1.22 million violent crimes reported to the FBI in the United States. This number can be compared to the total number of property crimes, roughly 6.41 million that year. Of violent crimes in 2023, aggravated assaults were the most common offenses in the United States, while homicide offenses were the least common. Law enforcement officers and crime clearance Though the violent crime rate was down in 2013, the number of law enforcement officers also fell. Between 2005 and 2009, the number of law enforcement officers in the United States rose from around 673,100 to 708,800. However, since 2009, the number of officers fell to a low of 626,900 officers in 2013. The number of law enforcement officers has since grown, reaching 720,652 in 2023. In 2023, the crime clearance rate in the U.S. was highest for murder and non-negligent manslaughter charges, with around 57.8 percent of murders being solved by investigators and a suspect being charged with the crime. Additionally, roughly 46.1 percent of aggravated assaults were cleared in that year. A statistics report on violent crime in the U.S. can be found here.

These data examine the effects on total crime rates of changes in the demographic composition of the population and changes in criminality of specific age and race groups. The collection contains estimates from national data of annual age-by-race specific arrest rates and crime rates for murder, robbery, and burglary over the 21-year period 1965-1985. The data address the following questions: (1) Are the crime rates reported by the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) data series valid indicators of national crime trends? (2) How much of the change between 1965 and 1985 in total crime rates for murder, robbery, and burglary is attributable to changes in the age and race composition of the population, and how much is accounted for by changes in crime rates within age-by-race specific subgroups? (3) What are the effects of age and race on subgroup crime rates for murder, robbery, and burglary? (4) What is the effect of time period on subgroup crime rates for murder, robbery, and burglary? (5) What is the effect of birth cohort, particularly the effect of the very large (baby-boom) cohorts following World War II, on subgroup crime rates for murder, robbery, and burglary? (6) What is the effect of interactions among age, race, time period, and cohort on subgroup crime rates for murder, robbery, and burglary? (7) How do patterns of age-by-race specific crime rates for murder, robbery, and burglary compare for different demographic subgroups? The variables in this study fall into four categories. The first category includes variables that define the race-age cohort of the unit of observation. The values of these variables are directly available from UCR and include year of observation (from 1965-1985), age group, and race. The second category of variables were computed using UCR data pertaining to the first category of variables. These are period, birth cohort of age group in each year, and average cohort size for each single age within each single group. The third category includes variables that describe the annual age-by-race specific arrest rates for the different crime types. These variables were estimated for race, age, group, crime type, and year using data directly available from UCR and population estimates from Census publications. The fourth category includes variables similar to the third group. Data for estimating these variables were derived from available UCR data on the total number of offenses known to the police and total arrests in combination with the age-by-race specific arrest rates for the different crime types.

This study was conducted in an effort to better understand the circumstances surrounding murder cases in large urban areas. To evaluate the 75 largest counties in the nation, 33 counties were chosen. The ranking of these counties was based on a combination of crime data and population data. The criteria for including a case on a roster from which cases would be sampled was that (1) one or more defendants must have been arrested for murder and (2) the case must have been adjudicated during 1988. These cases were a sample of about half of all those in the 33 counties studied that had a murder charge brought to the prosecutors in 1988, or earlier, and that were disposed during 1988. When statistically weighted, the sample cases represent a total of 9,576 murder defendants in the nation's 75 largest counties. Demographic information on victims and defendants includes sex, date of birth, area of residence, and occupation. Variables are also provided on the circumstances of the crime, including the relationship between the victim and the defendant, the type of weapon used, the time of death, and the number of victims.

United States US: Intentional Homicides: Female: per 100,000 Female data was reported at 2.261 Ratio in 2016. This records an increase from the previous number of 2.062 Ratio for 2015. United States US: Intentional Homicides: Female: per 100,000 Female data is updated yearly, averaging 2.337 Ratio from Dec 2000 (Median) to 2016, with 17 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 3.086 Ratio in 2001 and a record low of 1.983 Ratio in 2014. United States US: Intentional Homicides: Female: per 100,000 Female data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.World Bank: Health Statistics. Intentional homicides, female are estimates of unlawful female homicides purposely inflicted as a result of domestic disputes, interpersonal violence, violent conflicts over land resources, intergang violence over turf or control, and predatory violence and killing by armed groups. Intentional homicide does not include all intentional killing; the difference is usually in the organization of the killing. Individuals or small groups usually commit homicide, whereas killing in armed conflict is usually committed by fairly cohesive groups of up to several hundred members and is thus usually excluded.; ; UN Office on Drugs and Crime's International Homicide Statistics database.; ;

There has been little research on United States homicide rates from a long-term perspective, primarily because there has been no consistent data series on a particular place preceding the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR), which began its first full year in 1931. To fill this research gap, this project created a data series on homicides per capita for New York City that spans two centuries. The goal was to create a site-specific, individual-based data series that could be used to examine major social shifts related to homicide, such as mass immigration, urban growth, war, demographic changes, and changes in laws. Data were also gathered on various other sites, particularly in England, to allow for comparisons on important issues, such as the post-World War II wave of violence. The basic approach to the data collection was to obtain the best possible estimate of annual counts and the most complete information on individual homicides. The annual count data (Parts 1 and 3) were derived from multiple sources, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Uniform Crime Reports and Supplementary Homicide Reports, as well as other official counts from the New York City Police Department and the City Inspector in the early 19th century. The data include a combined count of murder and manslaughter because charge bargaining often blurs this legal distinction. The individual-level data (Part 2) were drawn from coroners' indictments held by the New York City Municipal Archives, and from daily newspapers. Duplication was avoided by keeping a record for each victim. The estimation technique known as "capture-recapture" was used to estimate homicides not listed in either source. Part 1 variables include counts of New York City homicides, arrests, and convictions, as well as the homicide rate, race or ethnicity and gender of victims, type of weapon used, and source of data. Part 2 includes the date of the murder, the age, sex, and race of the offender and victim, and whether the case led to an arrest, trial, conviction, execution, or pardon. Part 3 contains annual homicide counts and rates for various comparison sites including Liverpool, London, Kent, Canada, Baltimore, Los Angeles, Seattle, and San Francisco.

There has been little research on United States homicide rates from a long-term perspective, primarily because there has been no consistent data series on a particular place preceding the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR), which began its first full year in 1931. To fill this research gap, this project created a data series that spans two centuries on homicides per capita for the city of Los Angeles. The goal was to create a site-specific, individual-based data series that could be used to examine major social shifts related to homicide, such as mass immigration, urban growth, war, demographic changes, and changes in laws. The basic approach to the data collection was to obtain the best possible estimate of annual counts and the most complete information on individual homicides. Data were derived from multiple sources, including Los Angeles court records, as well as annual reports of the coroner and daily newspapers. Part 1 (Annual Homicides and Related Data) variables include Los Angeles County annual counts of homicides, counts of female victims, method of killing such as drowning, suffocating, or strangling, and the homicide rate. Part 2 (Individual Homicide Data) variables include the date and place of the murder, the age, sex, race, and place of birth of the offender and victim, type of weapon used, and source of data.

Analysis of ‘Police Killings US’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://www.kaggle.com/azizozmen/police-killings-us on 13 February 2022.

--- Dataset description provided by original source is as follows ---

"In 2015, The Washington Post began to log every fatal shooting by an on-duty police officer in the United States. In that time there have been more than 5,000 such shootings recorded by The Post. After Michael Brown, an unarmed Black man, was killed in 2014 by police in Ferguson, Mo., a Post investigation found that the FBI undercounted fatal police shootings by more than half. This is because reporting by police departments is voluntary and many departments fail to do so. The Washington Post’s data relies primarily on news accounts, social media postings, and police reports. Analysis of more than five years of data reveals that the number and circumstances of fatal shootings and the overall demographics of the victims have remained relatively constant..." SOURCE ==> Washington Post Article

For more information about this story

This dataset has been prepared by The Washington Post (they keep updating it on runtime) with every fatal shooting in the United States by a police officer in the line of duty since Jan. 1, 2015.

2016 PoliceKillingUS DATASET
2017 PoliceKillingUS DATASET
2018 PoliceKillingUS DATASET
2019 PoliceKillingUS DATASET
2020 PoliceKillingUS DATASET

Features at the Dataset:

The file fatal-police-shootings-data.csv contains data about each fatal shooting in CSV format. The file can be downloaded at this URL. Each row has the following variables:

• id: a unique identifier for each victim
• name: the name of the victim
• date: the date of the fatal shooting in YYYY-MM-DD format
• manner_of_death: shot, shot and Tasered
• armed: indicates that the victim was armed with some sort of implement that a police officer believed could inflict harm
  • undetermined: it is not known whether or not the victim had a weapon
  • unknown: the victim was armed, but it is not known what the object was
  • unarmed: the victim was not armed
• age: the age of the victim
• gender: the gender of the victim. The Post identifies victims by the gender they identify with if reports indicate that it differs from their biological sex.
  • M: Male
  • F: Female
  • None: unknown
• race:
  • W: White, non-Hispanic
  • B: Black, non-Hispanic
  • A: Asian
  • N: Native American
  • H: Hispanic
  • O: Other
  • None: unknown
• city: the municipality where the fatal shooting took place. Note that in some cases this field may contain a county name if a more specific municipality is unavailable or unknown.
• state: two-letter postal code abbreviation
• signs of mental illness: News reports have indicated the victim had a history of mental health issues, expressed suicidal intentions or was experiencing mental distress at the time of the shooting.
• threat_level: The threat_level column was used to flag incidents for the story by Amy Brittain in October 2015. http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2015/10/24/on-duty-under-fire/ As described in the story, the general criteria for the attack label was that there was the most direct and immediate threat to life. That would include incidents where officers or others were shot at, threatened with a gun, attacked with other weapons or physical force, etc. The attack category is meant to flag the highest level of threat. The other and undetermined categories represent all remaining cases. Other includes many incidents where officers or others faced significant threats.
• flee: News reports have indicated the victim was moving away from officers
  • Foot
  • Car
  • Not fleeing

The threat column and the fleeing column are not necessarily related. For example, there is an incident in which the suspect is fleeing and at the same time turns to fire at gun at the officer. Also, attacks represent a status immediately before fatal shots by police while fleeing could begin slightly earlier and involve a chase. - body_camera: News reports have indicated an officer was wearing a body camera and it may have recorded some portion of the incident.

SOURCE

--- Original source retains full ownership of the source dataset ---

This collection contains electronic versions of the Uniform Crime Reports publications for the early years of the Uniform Crime Reporting Program in the United States. The reports, which were published monthly from 1930 to 1931, quarterly from 1932 to 1940, and annually from 1941 to 1959, consist of tables showing the number of offenses known to the police as reported to the Federal Bureau of Investigation by contributing police departments. The term "offenses known to the police" includes those crimes designated as Part I classes of the Uniform Classification code occurring within the police jurisdiction, whether they became known to the police through reports of police officers, citizens, prosecuting or court officials, or otherwise. They were confined to the following group of seven classes of grave offenses, historically those offenses most often and most completely reported to the police: felonious homicide, including murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, and manslaughter by negligence, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary -- breaking and entering, and larceny -- theft (including thefts $50 and over, and thefts under $50, and auto theft). The figures also included the number of attempted crimes in the designated classes excepting attempted murders classed as aggravated assaults. In other words, an attempted burglary or robbery, for example, was reported in the same manner as if the crimes had been completed. "Offenses known to the police" included, therefore, all of the above offenses, including attempts, which were reported by the police departments and not merely arrests or cleared cases.

The Division of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS) collects crime reports from more than 500 New York State police and sheriffs' departments. DCJS compiles these reports as New York's official crime statistics and submits them to the FBI under the National Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program. UCR uses standard offense definitions to count crime in localities across America regardless of variations in crime laws from state to state. In New York State, law enforcement agencies use the UCR system to report their monthly crime totals to DCJS. The UCR reporting system collects information on seven crimes classified as Index offenses which are most commonly used to gauge overall crime volume. These include the violent crimes of murder/non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault; and the property crimes of burglary, larceny, and motor vehicle theft. Police agencies may experience reporting problems that preclude accurate or complete reporting. The counts represent only crimes reported to the police but not total crimes that occurred. DCJS posts preliminary data in the spring and final data in the fall.

The dataset contains year-, state-, type-of-crime- and gender-wise compiled data on the number of different types of crimes which were committed against children and the number of victims who were affected by the same crimes. The different types of crimes covered in the dataset include kidnapping and abduction crimes such as kidanapping and abduction for the purpose of murder, begging, ransom, compelling for marriage, procuration of minor girls, importation of girls from foreign countries, missing deemed as kidnapped, etc., fatal crimes such as murder, attempt to commit murder, muder with rape, abetment of suicide of child, infanticide, foeticide, trafficking and sexual crimes such buying and selling of minors for prostitution, use of children for pornography, transmiting sexual content and material involving children in sexually explicit acts, sexual assualt, penetrative sexual assault, rape, and other crimes such as child labour, child marriage, exposure, abandaonment, simple hurt, grievous hurt, insult and assualt of damage modesty, crimes under juvenile justice act and transplantation of organs act, etc.

Analysis of ‘🚓 Fatal Police Shootings’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://www.kaggle.com/yamqwe/fatal-police-shootingse on 13 February 2022.

--- Dataset description provided by original source is as follows ---

About this dataset

The Washington Post has tracked fatal police shootings in the US since 2015, using news and police reports as well as social media and databases like Killed by Police and Fatal Encounters.

The collected data include the race, gender, and age of the deceased, the circumstances of the shooting, and whether the person was armed or experiencing a mental-health crisis.

The Washington Post updates visualizations of the data and provides more information about methodology on the Fatal Force page.

Source: https://github.com/washingtonpost/data-police-shootings
Updated: synced daily
License: CC BY-NC-SA

This dataset was created by Data Society and contains around 7000 samples along with Is Geocoding Exact, Armed, technical information and other features such as: - Body Camera - State - and more.

How to use this dataset

• Analyze Latitude in relation to Manner Of Death
• Study the influence of Name on Age
• More datasets

Acknowledgements

If you use this dataset in your research, please credit Data Society

Start A New Notebook!

--- Original source retains full ownership of the source dataset ---

Victims of gang-related homicides (total number of homicide victims; number of homicide victims - unknown gang-relation; number of homicide victims - known gang relation; number of gang-related homicide victims; percentage of gang-related homicide victims; rate (per 100,000 population) of gang-related homicide victims), Canada and regions, 1999 to 2023.

This dataset contains data and analysis from the article Do State Department Travel Warnings Reflect Real Danger?

Key findings

• On the whole, there is a significant relationship between the number of American deaths abroad per capita and the number of travel warnings a country receives
• Mexico, Mali, and Israel have been targeted by the most travel warnings in recent years, but Americans are more likely to be killed in Thailand, Pakistan, and the Philippines
• Several countries with relatively high rates of American death have not been issued a single travel warning in ~7 years, including Belize, Guyana, and Guatemala
• Several countries with relatively low rates of American death have been issued a relatively high number of travel warnings in ~7 years, including Israel, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia
• Overall, countries subject to travel warnings do not see notable declines in American visitors in the 6 months after a warning is issued

Data sources

• BTSOriginUS_10_09_to_06_16.csv Air Carrier Statistics Database export, Bureau of Transportation Statistics
• SDamerican_deaths_abroad_10_09_to_06_16.csv U.S. State Department
• SDwarnings_10_09to06_16.csv U.S. State Department via Internet Archive

Charts / data visualizations

https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/800/1*moPQYbzXW0Jx6AFhY8VKWQ.png" alt="alt text">

https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/800/1*s1OX6ke8wlHhK4VubpVWcg.png" alt="alt text">

https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/800/1*JwvpqE4YIuYfx2UEqCp9nA.png" alt="alt text">

https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/800/1*LHLsJ0IzLsSlNl0UN8XrAw.png" alt="alt text">

https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/800/1*l0sqn7voWyMCbwoQ2OKGfg.png" alt="alt text">

This dataset reflects reported incidents of crime (with the exception of murders where data exists for each victim) that occurred in the City of Chicago from 2001 to present, minus the most recent seven days.

Data is extracted from the Chicago Police Department's CLEAR (Citizen Law Enforcement Analysis and Reporting) system.

“This site provides applications using data that has been modified for use from its original source, www.cityofchicago.org, the official website of the City of Chicago. The City of Chicago makes no claims as to the content, accuracy, timeliness, or completeness of any of the data provided at this site. The data provided at this site is subject to change at any time. It is understood that the data provided at this site is being used at one’s own risk.”

Columns: Column Name, Description,Type ID,Unique identifier for the record.,Number

Case Number,The Chicago Police Department RD Number (Records Division Number), which is unique to the incident.,Plain Text

Date,Date when the incident occurred. this is sometimes a best estimate.,Date & Time

Block,The partially redacted address where the incident occurred, placing it on the same block as the actual address.,Plain Text

IUCR,The Illinois Unifrom Crime Reporting code. This is directly linked to the Primary Type and Description. See the list of IUCR codes at https://data.cityofchicago.org/d/c7ck-438e., Plain Text

Primary Type,The primary description of the IUCR code.,Plain Text

primary_type,Description,The secondary description of the IUCR code, a subcategory of the primary description.,Plain Text

description,Location Description,Description of the location where the incident occurred.,Plain Text

Arrest,Indicates whether an arrest was made.,Checkbox

Domestic,Indicates whether the incident was domestic-related as defined by the Illinois Domestic Violence Act.,Checkbox

Beat,Indicates the beat where the incident occurred. A beat is the smallest police geographic area – each beat has a dedicated police beat car. Three to five beats make up a police sector, and three sectors make up a police district. The Chicago Police Department has 22 police districts. See the beats at https://data.cityofchicago.org/d/aerh-rz74.,Plain Text

District,Indicates the police district where the incident occurred. See the districts at https://data.cityofchicago.org/d/fthy-xz3r.,Plain Text

district,Ward,The ward (City Council district) where the incident occurred. See the wards at https://data.cityofchicago.org/d/sp34-6z76.,Number

Community Area,Indicates the community area where the incident occurred. Chicago has 77 community areas. See the community areas at https://data.cityofchicago.org/d/cauq-8yn6.,Plain Text

FBI Code,Indicates the crime classification as outlined in the FBI's National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS). See the Chicago Police Department listing of these classifications at http://gis.chicagopolice.org/clearmap_crime_sums/crime_types.html.,Plain Text

X Coordinate, The x coordinate of the location where the incident occurred in State Plane Illinois East NAD 1983 projection. This location is shifted from the actual location for partial redaction but falls on the same block.,Number

Y Coordinate,The y coordinate of the location where the incident occurred in State Plane Illinois East NAD 1983 projection. This location is shifted from the actual location for partial redaction but falls on the same block.,Number

Year ,Year the incident occurred.,Number

Updated On,Date and time the record was last updated.,Date & Time

Latitude,The latitude of the location where the incident occurred. This location is shifted from the actual location for partial redaction but falls on the same block.,Number

Longitude,The longitude of the location where the incident occurred. This location is shifted from the actual location for partial redaction but falls on the same block., Number

Location,The location where the incident occurred in a format that allows for creation of maps and other geographic operations on this data portal. This location is shifted from the actual location for partial redaction but falls on the same block.,Location

Context

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. The program was conceived in 1929 by the International Association of Chiefs of Police to meet the need for reliable uniform crime statistics for the nation. In 1930, the FBI was tasked with collecting, publishing, and archiving those statistics.

Today, four annual publications, Crime in the United States, National Incident-Based Reporting System, Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted, and Hate Crime Statistics are produced from data received from over 18,000 city, university/college, county, state, tribal, and federal law enforcement agencies voluntarily participating in the program. The crime data are submitted either through a state UCR Program or directly to the FBI’s UCR Program.

This dataset focuses on the crime rates and law enforcement employment data in the state of California.

Content

Crime and law enforcement employment rates are separated into individual files, focusing on offenses by enforcement agency, college/university campus, county, and city. Categories of crimes reported include violent crime, murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, property crime, burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle damage, and arson. In the case of rape, data is collected for both revised and legacy definitions. In some cases, a small number of enforcement agencies switched definition collection sometime within the same year.

Acknowledgements

This dataset originates from the FBI UCR project, and the complete dataset for all 2015 crime reports can be found here.

Inspiration

• What are the most common types of crimes in California? Are there certain crimes that are more common in a particular place category, such as a college/university campus, compared to the rest of the state?
• How does the number of law enforcement officers compare to the crime rates of a particular area? Is the ratio similar throughout the state, or do certain campuses, counties, or cities have a differing rate?
• How does the legacy vs. refined definition of rape differ, and how do the rape counts compare? If you pulled the same data from FBI datasets for previous years, can you see a difference in rape rates over time?

Investigator(s): Federal Bureau of Investigation Since 1930, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has compiled the Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) to serve as periodic nationwide assessments of reported crimes not available elsewhere in the criminal justice system. With the 1977 data, the title was expanded to Uniform Crime Reporting Program Data. Each year, participating law enforcement agencies contribute reports to the FBI either directly or through their state reporting programs. ICPSR archives the UCR data as five separate components: (1) summary data, (2) county-level data, (3) incident-level data (National Incident-Based Reporting System [NIBRS]), (4) hate crime data, and (5) various, mostly nonrecurring, data collections. Summary data are reported in four types of files: (a) Offenses Known and Clearances by Arrest, (b) Property Stolen and Recovered, (c) Supplementary Homicide Reports (SHR), and (d) Police Employee (LEOKA) Data (Law Enforcement Officers Killed or Assaulted). The county-level data provide counts of arrests and offenses aggregated to the county level. County populations are also reported. In the late 1970s, new ways to look at crime were studied. The UCR program was subsequently expanded to capture incident-level data with the implementation of the National Incident-Based Reporting System. The NIBRS data focus on various aspects of a crime incident. The gathering of hate crime data by the UCR program was begun in 1990. Hate crimes are defined as crimes that manifest evidence of prejudice based on race, religion, sexual orientation, or ethnicity. In September 1994, disabilities, both physical and mental, were added to the list. The fifth component of ICPSR's UCR holdings is comprised of various collections, many of which are nonrecurring and prepared by individual researchers. These collections go beyond the scope of the standard UCR collections provided by the FBI, either by including data for a range of years or by focusing on other aspects of analysis. NACJD has produced resource guides on UCR and on NIBRS data.

The data are provided are the Maryland Statistical Analysis Center (MSAC), within the Governor's Office of Crime Control and Prevention (GOCCP). MSAC, in turn, receives these data from the Maryland State Police's annual Uniform Crime Reports.

The Washington Post is compiling a database of every fatal shooting in the United States by a police officer in the line of duty since January 1, 2015.

In 2015, The Post began tracking more than a dozen details about each killing — including the race of the deceased, the circumstances of the shooting, whether the person was armed and whether the victim was experiencing a mental-health crisis — by culling local news reports, law enforcement websites and social media and by monitoring independent databases such as Killed by Police and Fatal Encounters.

The Post is documenting only those shootings in which a police officer, in the line of duty, shot and killed a civilian — the circumstances that most closely parallel the 2014 killing of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, which began the protest movement culminating in Black Lives Matter and an increased focus on police accountability nationwide. The Post is not tracking deaths of people in police custody, fatal shootings by off-duty officers or non-shooting deaths.

The FBI and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention log fatal shootings by police, but officials acknowledge that their data is incomplete. In 2015, The Post documented more than two times more fatal shootings by police than had been recorded by the FBI.

The Post’s database is updated regularly as fatal shootings are reported and as facts emerge about individual cases. The Post is seeking assistance in making the database as comprehensive as possible. To provide information about fatal police shootings, send us an email at policeshootingsfeedback@washpost.com.

CREDITS
Research and Reporting: Julie Tate, Jennifer Jenkins and Steven Rich
Production and Presentation: John Muyskens, Kennedy Elliott and Ted Mellnik