boy they knew what they were doing when they made that graph. I understand a 4% decrease is definitely a positive but the way they constructed that graph makes it look much more dramatic of a decrease from quick glance.
Why would you create a graph differently? You take the high end, the low end and go one more data point. Seems pretty typical to me.
or you could make it look more like it's the 4% decrease that it is. Most graphs I see aren't made so zoomed in on the Y-axis that there is such a dramatic effect from A to B.. unless of course I was trying make the numbers look like they have decreased a lot. What would happen if violent crime decreased 15%?? there wouldn't be room on the graph for it! What if it increased 2%?? I'm guessing the graph they presented to the public would be a little more zoomed out on the y-axis... Look I'm not trying to make a political statement or anything I am just poking fun at it. When I first got out of college my first job was to manipulate company graphs from our statistics for my boss to present to the public, the board, other departments.. etc to make him look good. You can embellish statistics in graphs to work wonders any number of ways. It looks like the FBI has got a pretty good little new intern..that's all Im sayin
So you think the FBI is trying to make itself look good or has some other ulterior motive? I don't think the FBI itself would be credited with any decrease. I'm not saying that's unreasonable, just that I don't know why they'd do it. If it were a 15% decrease I assume there'd be bigger data points so the graph would fit just fine.
The violent crime rate has decreased over 15% between 2008 and 2012, also it decreased 18.7% between 2003 and 2012. Over 4% drop in one year is a pretty decent drop since it was already at a low point for the last 20 years or so. Years .......Violent crime...Violent crime rate 2012/2011 .......+0.7 ............................* 2012/2008...... -12.9........................ -15.6 2012/2003..... -12.2........................ -18.7
