Monday, January 18, 2010

Updated by request

An update of this graph, by request from a comment on Friday's blog post:

Posted by Tom Casady at 1:18 PM

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

Chief,

What's your take on the trend in business robberies? Mostly a function of population increasing, or something else?

January 18, 2010 at 2:06 PM
Anonymous said...

Speaking of robberies, specifically home invasion robberies, this one and this one sure don't smell right. My Magic 8-ball says that the victims in both incidents likely both have prior drug arrests/contacts. Should I get my 8-Ball tuned-up, or is it working just fine?

January 18, 2010 at 5:29 PM
Anonymous said...

Shouldn't that be "premises"?

January 19, 2010 at 12:18 PM
Tom Casady said...

2:06-

Hard to say. Could just be the small number phenomenon, bouncing around without a real trend. Now that I think about it, that graph would be showing robberies AT businesses, not robberies OF businesses. These aren't necessarily the same (think about someone being accosted in the parking lot of a closed business, for instance). I should run OF and see what that trend shows....

5:29-

No need for a tuneup.

January 19, 2010 at 12:34 PM
Anonymous said...

Now, would robbing an employee, in the parking lot, for the night deposit bag cash, be considered a robbery OF a business, or just a robbery AT a biz? I'd say that would be an OF, but that's just my impression. Robbing them for their personal cash, phone, etc, in the parking lot, while they're on-shift, but out back dumping the trash, seems to be an AT, and robbing them for their wallet after they get off work and are walking to their car would seem to be a street robbery. Splitting hairs, but it could sway rates, depending how one qualifies the incidents.

BTW, thanks for the remote 8-Ball inspection. It's a remarkably good little indicator. I hope ARGHHHH never discovers the 8-ball clone that some fast food chain put into a pirate skull (lift the eyepatch to see the answers. It was a Pirates of the Caribbean promo toy).

January 19, 2010 at 1:10 PM
Tom Casady said...

1:10-

You are correct: I agree with those distinctions, but as these examples demonstrate, there is a human element in how those hairs get split.

January 20, 2010 at 6:23 AM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)