Section Five
INDEX OFFENSE
ANALYSIS
! Population Groups
! Urban-Suburban-Rural Municipalities
! Colleges and Universities
— Index Offense Analysis —
95
CRIME INDEX FOR POPULATION GROUPS - 2012
The presentation of crime statistics by population groups was made for the purpose of projecting, for consideration, the
relative crime experience of communities of varying populations. Although the individual municipalities within the various
groups may be geographically separated, their inclusion into a specific group was predicated by the similarity in population with the other municipalities within the group. Municipalities within the same group may differ widely when all factors
are considered, but they do share the common bond of population size. The grouping of communities in this manner allows recognition of variances in the crime volumes, rates and clearances between the established groups.
'%(#!
%&
'$$'
##
$#
##%&
'&(
(&'(
))($
$)
+
'$)
#)
''
(&
))
$
*
,-.
'!)
*&(#
')
)##)
#
'#
'#%
##(#
'()
%((
#))
+
($
%
'
)%
#(
*
,-.
('!))
*%'&
#%&)
#'
)'
%('
##&
&)$
''##
#)(
+
#
/
&
##
#%
*
,-.
'
($!))
*''$
%
'((#
%
&
(&'
(
#%')
)%(#
&
+
$&
/
)
%
'$
%
*
,-.
'
!))
*&%&%
$
'#)'
)
'#
$%
'%
$&'
'#
'()
+
$%
/
#
$
'$
$
*
,-.
'
&!)
*'%''
'
$&%
(
'#
'
'
&(
)(&
(&
+
%
/
'
%
)
'$
$
*
,-.
'
%!0
*&&#'
##
#$$
&
$%
)%$
$
%
+
($
/
%
('
%'
&
*
,-.
(%
(!
*#&)&
/1
96
#$
"!
%&
!
— Index Offense Analysis —
COMPARATIVE CRIME RATES FOR POPULATION GROUPS
2012
!
"
#!$%&"'()&&$"'* +
) ,!$%&"'()&&$"'-(++
#,) !$%&"'()&&$"'-(++
#,'*!$%&"'()&&$"'-(++
()$. .*!$%&"'()&&$"'-(++
)$. .!$%&"'()&&$"'-(++
/),!$%&"'()&&$"'$. +
%.' -$!","...$ $./
— Index Offense Analysis —
97
URBAN - SUBURBAN - RURAL CRIME
5 YEAR COMPARISON
2008/2012 Summary Analysis
URBAN
OFFENSES
2008
2012
SUBURBAN
Percent
Change
2008
2012
RURAL
Percent
Change
2008
2012
Percent
Change
Murder
314
331
5
43
44
2
19
12
-37
Rape
618
620
0
361
340
-6
111
78
-30
Robbery
10,404
9,574
-8
1,955
1,552
-21
335
258
-23
Aggravated
Assault
9,712
9,523
-2
3,339
2,606
-22
1,070
804
-25
Burglary
22,647
23,657
4
13,533
14,325
6
3,952
4,402
11
Larceny-Theft
68,395
60,074
-12
56,933
50,673
*
13,316
12,023
-10
Motor Vehicle
Theft
15,554
13,188
-15
3,752
2,708
-28
814
575
-29
Total Crime Index 127,644 116,967
-8
79,916
72,248
-10
19,617
18,152
-7
Violent Crime
21,048
20,048
-5
5,698
4,542
-20
1,535
1,152
-25
Nonviolent Crime 106,596
96,919
-9
74,218
67,706
-9
18,082
17,000
-6
*Less than one-half of one percent.
The character of some municipalities has changed due to the updating of Urban, Suburban and Rural
classifications.
••
Comparing 2012 to 2008, Suburban communities experienced the largest percentage change in Index
offenses, a decrease of 10 percent.
••
••
Index crimes in Urban communities decreased 8 percent, while Rural communities decreased 7 percent.
••
Suburban communities experienced a 20 percent decrease in violent crimes, and Urban communities
experienced a 5 percent decrease.
••
Comparing 2012 to 2008, Urban and Suburban communities experienced a 9 percent decrease in nonviolent
crimes.
98
Comparing 2012 to 2008, Rural communities experienced the largest percentage change in violent crimes, a
decrease of 25 percent.
— Index Offense Analysis —
URBAN
NUMBER - RATE - DISTRIBUTION
2011/2012
!"#!$"$
))
%
&'(
&
)
*
&
"
%
%
&'(
&'(
%.%
!!
+,
,+
#/
0
+
/
$+
"$
$
+$
,
,!+/
1
#"#
0
+/
$
/+#
%(%3
0"$0
0
$+!#
$
/+
*%3
'5
$"0
!
$+0
0,+
%6'
'5
!"##
!+$
/
/#+#
1
22%3
((%4.
&%7.8
6 &%7
4 &%7
1 *' '5 5 %+
'%9%$"#$ 55% %.7 5%2'%%.%( "
'%%.% 50% 7%. +
)538% 5.8%7 %.%2%+
6 %7%2 77.%.%. .5 %/,% 5'
: 4 %7+
4 %7%2 77.%.0%. .5 %!% 5'
: 4 %7+
'%7%%2 77.%.$% #+/475 %4%3"
% +
— Index Offense Analysis —
99
SUBURBAN
NUMBER - RATE - DISTRIBUTION
2011/2012
!!"#$$#"
))
%
&'(
PERCENT
OF STATE TOTAL
&)
&#
%
%
&'(
&'(
*
$
+
,
+
-
/
*
+*
/
/+
!11%2
#$*
*
+"
"+*
0
((%3.
#*-
$
+*
,
+
%(%2
#"$
"+$/
$
""+
4%2
'5
#-
-
+*
+
"
#/$
-
+*$
"
$+/
"
%.%
!!%6''5
!&%7.8
6!&%7
!3!&%7
,&%7%!%!..!73!7.%!.(+
'%9%*#!55%!%.7!51%1'%%.%( #
'%%.%!5$%!7%.!%!.+
'%2
8%!5.8%7!%.1%1%+
6!%71%1!77.%.%.!.5!%-%!5
':!3!%7+
!3!%71%1!77.%.$%.!.5!%"*%
!5':!3!%7+
'%7%1%1!77.%.%!/+*375!%3%2#
%!+
100
— Index Offense Analysis —
RURAL
NUMBER - RATE - DISTRIBUTION
2011/2012
!""#$#$%&
++
!'
()*
!(+
(#
!'
!'
()*
()*
,
-
,$
.
&
%
,
%
,%
0
"11'2
&
0
,&
&&
,$
**'3/
0.%
,0$
$
$,$
$
%#
%,
%
.,
#.
, %
.
.,%
%
0
&
,%
&,
.
'/'
'*'2
'2
)4
""'5))4
"('6/7
5"('6
"3"('6
-('6'"'"//"63"6/'"/*,
8 )"
)4"4"',
)'9'0#"44'"'/6"4')''/'* #
)''/'"4'"6'/",
'"4/7'6"'/'',
5"'6'"66/'/&'/"/4"''"4)
:"3"'6,
"3"'6'"66/'/'/"/4"'.'"4)
:""3"'6,
)'6''"66/'/0'"%,& 364"'3'2#
'",
— Index Offense Analysis —
101
UNIVERSITY
AND COLLEGE OFFENSE DATA - 2012
'(
#*
'#
'(
#)
'#
'(
!
"#
%'"
$%&
%&
#
+
-
1-
-
-
-
-
.
/0
-
-
5.
6
$
45
-
-
3
/
-
45
-
9/5
1
/
9/.
-
-
9
/
90
-
99/
-
2
31
9
3/
-
-
-
9
9
3-
9
-
:
01&#
+!,
%01&&
39
-
39
-
-
-
-
6
$
01
-
9
/
#
#
02+!,
+!
941
/
6
96.
-
-
9
9
3
3
9.4
/$
1
/
7
8
:
903
4
916
-
-
.
/
.
996
90
-
03
9
00
-
-
-
9
/
0/
-
9
993
$
0
-
999
-
$
-
9
9
/
93
/
50
/
9-94
$-
-$
-
/
.-
/
534
$
/
-
-
/
-
6
$
-
/
10
/
95
$
/
-
914
-$
/
-
65/
$
/-
-
/
/4
$
-
/
13
9
10
-
-
9
-
-
11
9
-
!,
2
!"#
%#!&
,
7
8
'()#
*+!,
.+!,
:
,
8
7
3)&
*+!,
+!,
#4#4
!&!"#4
'&!"+!,
'+!,
*15"&
!&!"#
&!"+!,
5!+!,
!"#4
:
:
7
8
;
#4#4
!&!"#4
!"#4
5!#4
7
<
*&
*&
%+!,
++0. 67'86+9:#00'3'
1-
69
-
69
-
-
-
-
.
.3
-
-
943
$
$
94
$
9.6
$
-
-
-
6
99
/
939
$
/
90
-
64
/
$-
1
/
63
/
$
-
-
-
1
/
9
60
/
$
-
/=/10
991
/=9/9
-
5
3.
04
/-1
9=430
.0
1
;)4<
,
102
— Index Offense Analysis —