Most Dangerous/Safest State Award 2005

2005 SAFEST STATE
ALPHA ORDER					RANK ORDER
2005 RANK	STATE	SUM	2004 RANK	CHANGE	2005 RANK	STATE	SUM	2004 RANK	CHANGE
32	Alabama	2.76	33	1	1	North Dakota	-65.23	1	0
43	Alaska	25.57	39	-4	2	Vermont	-62.80	2	0
48	Arizona	38.25	48	0	3	Maine	-60.92	3	0
29	Arkansas	-6.56	26	-3	4	New Hampshire	-56.28	4	0
41	California	17.72	41	0	5	South Dakota	-51.38	5	0
27	Colorado	-9.89	27	0	6	Wyoming	-45.75	8	2
12	Connecticut	-35.85	12	0	7	West Virginia	-45.23	6	-1
36	Delaware	5.77	31	-5	8	Iowa	-44.99	9	1
45	Florida	27.25	44	-1	9	Wisconsin	-43.48	10	1
38	Georgia	8.83	34	-4	10	Idaho	-42.65	11	1
26	Hawaii	-10.79	28	2	11	Montana	-38.42	7	-4
10	Idaho	-42.65	11	1	12	Connecticut	-35.85	12	0
35	Illinois	5.09	38	3	13	Virginia	-33.64	14	1
24	Indiana	-17.16	25	1	14	Kentucky	-31.60	15	1
8	Iowa	-44.99	9	1	15	Minnesota	-31.48	16	1
25	Kansas	-12.95	20	-5	16	Nebraska	-30.68	17	1
14	Kentucky	-31.60	15	1	17	Utah	-29.27	13	-4
49	Louisiana	41.83	49	0	18	Rhode Island	-23.66	22	4
3	Maine	-60.92	3	0	19	New Jersey	-22.68	18	-1
47	Maryland	34.30	47	0	20	New York	-21.33	23	3
22	Massachusetts	-19.33	24	2	21	Pennsylvania	-19.94	21	0
39	Michigan	13.93	40	1	22	Massachusetts	-19.33	24	2
15	Minnesota	-31.48	16	1	23	Oregon	-18.56	19	-4
34	Mississippi	3.99	37	3	24	Indiana	-17.16	25	1
30	Missouri	-5.63	32	2	25	Kansas	-12.95	20	-5
11	Montana	-38.42	7	-4	26	Hawaii	-10.79	28	2
16	Nebraska	-30.68	17	1	27	Colorado	-9.89	27	0
50	Nevada	49.78	50	0	28	Ohio	-8.00	29	1
4	New Hampshire	-56.28	4	0	29	Arkansas	-6.56	26	-3
19	New Jersey	-22.68	18	-1	30	Missouri	-5.63	32	2
42	New Mexico	22.20	45	3	31	Washington	2.35	30	-1
20	New York	-21.33	23	3	32	Alabama	2.76	33	1
33	North Carolina	3.05	36	3	33	North Carolina	3.05	36	3
1	North Dakota	-65.23	1	0	34	Mississippi	3.99	37	3
28	Ohio	-8.00	29	1	35	Illinois	5.09	38	3
37	Oklahoma	7.33	35	-2	36	Delaware	5.77	31	-5
23	Oregon	-18.56	19	-4	37	Oklahoma	7.33	35	-2
21	Pennsylvania	-19.94	21	0	38	Georgia	8.83	34	-4
18	Rhode Island	-23.66	22	4	39	Michigan	13.93	40	1
46	South Carolina	32.60	46	0	40	Texas	15.92	42	2
5	South Dakota	-51.38	5	0	41	California	17.72	41	0
44	Tennessee	26.36	43	-1	42	New Mexico	22.20	45	3
40	Texas	15.92	42	2	43	Alaska	25.57	39	-4
17	Utah	-29.27	13	-4	44	Tennessee	26.36	43	-1
2	Vermont	-62.80	2	0	45	Florida	27.25	44	-1
13	Virginia	-33.64	14	1	46	South Carolina	32.60	46	0
31	Washington	2.35	30	-1	47	Maryland	34.30	47	0
7	West Virginia	-45.23	6	-1	48	Arizona	38.25	48	0
9	Wisconsin	-43.48	10	1	49	Louisiana	41.83	49	0
6	Wyoming	-45.75	8	2	50	Nevada	49.78	50	0

METHODOLOGY: The Safest State 2005 rankings are simply the reverse order of the Most Dangerous State rankings. The rankings are determined by the same four step process. First, rates for six crime categories — murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary and motor vehicle theft — are plugged into a formula that measures how a state compares to the national average for a given crime category.

Second, the outcome of this equation is then multiplied by a weight assigned to each crime category. For this year’s award, we again gave each crime category equal weight. Thus state comparisons are based purely on crime rates and how these rates stack up to the national average for a given crime category.

Third, the weighted numbers are added together to achieve state’s score ("SUM.") In the fourth and final step, these composite scores are ranked from highest to lowest to determine which states are the most dangerous and safest. Thus the farther below the national average a state’s crime rate is, the lower (and safer) it ranks. The farther above the national average, the higher (and more dangerous) a state ranks in the final list.

A Word About Crime Rankings

Morgan Quitno’s annual rankings of crime in states, metro areas and cities are considered by some in the law enforcement community as controversial. The FBI and many criminologists caution against rankings according to crime rates. They correctly point out that crime levels are affected by many different factors, such as population density, composition of the population (particularly the concentration of youth), climate, economic conditions, strength of local law enforcement agencies, citizen’s attitudes toward crime, cultural factors, education levels, crime reporting practices of citizens and family cohesiveness. Accordingly, crime rankings often are deemed “simplistic” or “incomplete.”

However, this criticism is largely based on the fact that there are reasons for the differences in crime rates, not that the rates are incompatible. This would be somewhat akin to deciding not to compare athletes on their speed in the 100-yard dash because of physical or training differences. Such differences help explain the different speeds but do not invalidate the comparisons.

To be sure, crime-ranking information must be considered carefully. However the rankings tell not only an interesting, but also very important story regarding the incidence of crime in the United States. Furthermore, annual rankings not only allow for comparisons among different states and cities, but also enable leaders to track their communities’ crime trends from one year to the next.

We certainly do not want to be irresponsible in our presentation of state and city crime data. Our publications help concerned Americans learn how their communities fare in the fight against crime. The first step in making our cities and states safer is to understand the true magnitude of their crime problems. This will only be achieved through straightforward data that all of us can use and understand.

THE EDITORS

Which State Is The Most Dangerous?

Which State Is The Safest?

"1" is Safest, "50" is Most Dangerous