Posted by: Adam McCann

With every new headline about a mass shooting, terrorist attack, hate crime or natural disaster, many of us fear for our safety and that of our loved ones. Just in 2017, four hurricanes struck the mainland U.S., killing over 100 people and devastating Texas, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina and Puerto Rico. And Louisiana led the U.S. in the homicide rate, averaging 11.8 per 100,000 people. Each state is safe from some dangers but falls prey to others.

Safety is a basic human need. We require some form of it, such as personal and financial protection, in every part of daily life. But we’re likely to feel more secure in some states than in others.

In order to determine the safest states in America, WalletHub compared the 50 states across 48 key safety indicators grouped into five different categories. Our data set ranges from assaults per capita to unemployment rate to total loss amounts from climate disasters per capita. Read on for our findings, expert insight from a panel of researchers and a full description of our methodology.

1. Main Findings
2. Ask the Experts
3. Methodology

Main Findings Embed on your website<iframe src="//d2e70e9yced57e.cloudfront.net/wallethub/embed/4566/geochart-safest.html" width="556" height="347" frameBorder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe> <div style="width:556px;font-size:12px;color:#888;">Source: <a href="https://ift.tt/2xFxxcZ>

 

Safest States in the U.S.

Overall Rank (1 = Safest)	State	Total Score	‘Personal & Residential Safety’ Rank	‘Financial Safety’ Rank	‘Road Safety’ Rank	‘Workplace Safety’ Rank	‘Emergency Preparedness’ Rank
1	Vermont	66.02	2	3	9	17	9
2	Maine	65.41	4	8	14	11	3
3	Minnesota	61.86	11	7	1	2	22
4	Utah	61.39	21	10	6	4	2
5	New Hampshire	61.37	7	4	20	38	6
6	Connecticut	61.30	1	22	27	22	17
7	Rhode Island	61.12	5	21	3	24	11
8	Hawaii	59.42	12	6	39	19	5
9	Massachusetts	59.21	8	9	7	31	10
10	Washington	58.52	32	12	4	3	7
11	Iowa	56.97	3	11	18	13	43
12	Wisconsin	55.08	15	13	22	29	16
13	Oregon	54.39	39	16	10	14	14
14	Indiana	53.46	18	24	11	16	29
15	Delaware	53.18	16	39	21	33	15
16	Maryland	53.15	22	33	24	10	23
17	North Carolina	52.86	9	27	40	5	40
18	New Jersey	52.67	10	37	30	20	27
19	Virginia	52.54	27	15	26	6	30
20	North Dakota	52.41	6	2	8	49	41
21	Wyoming	51.87	20	25	15	39	21
22	Arizona	51.49	42	32	50	1	8
23	New York	51.46	19	18	17	30	28
24	Colorado	50.16	37	1	33	36	24
25	Nebraska	50.13	14	14	5	42	36
26	West Virginia	50.06	13	43	28	44	20
27	Idaho	49.93	29	19	37	45	18
28	Pennsylvania	49.91	17	35	31	34	26
29	Nevada	49.74	45	47	45	8	4
30	Ohio	49.48	33	34	12	23	25
31	Kentucky	48.82	26	31	35	18	31
32	California	48.29	46	20	41	21	19
33	New Mexico	47.69	38	50	48	15	12
34	Michigan	47.10	48	41	38	7	13
35	Illinois	46.94	35	44	2	25	34
36	Kansas	46.22	23	23	13	37	44
37	Georgia	45.77	25	45	34	26	33
38	South Dakota	45.34	24	5	16	50	42
39	Tennessee	44.71	47	28	19	12	35
40	Montana	44.14	28	17	25	46	38
41	South Carolina	43.65	44	36	49	9	37
42	Alaska	43.33	50	38	29	40	1
43	Missouri	43.05	36	40	42	27	39
44	Alabama	42.28	30	46	32	32	47
45	Arkansas	40.47	49	29	23	35	32
46	Florida	39.38	40	30	47	41	46
47	Texas	39.22	43	26	43	28	48
48	Oklahoma	39.05	34	42	44	47	45
49	Louisiana	35.21	41	49	36	43	49
50	Mississippi	32.90	31	48	46	48	50

Ask the Experts

No place is completely immune to danger of any form. Some areas simply deal with safety issues better than others. For additional insight and advice, we asked a panel of experts to share their thoughts on the following key questions:

1. There are many different potential threats to one’s safety: crime, weather, pollution, dangerous workplaces. In choosing a place to live, how should people weigh the risks?
2. What actions can the Trump administration undertake to reduce crime and improve public safety?
3. Do you agree with President Trump that increased border security will reduce crime?
4. What can state and local policymakers do to reduce crime in their communities?
5. What tips do you have for consumers looking to improve their financial safety?

< >

• Jane Fedorowicz Ph.D., Chester B. Slade Professor of Accounting and Information Systems, Bentley University, Departments of Accountancy and Information & Process Management
• Stan Stojkovic Dean and Professor, Helen Bader School of Social Welfare, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
• Donald Jones Professor of Law at University of Miami School of Law & Author of Dangerous Spaces: Beyond the Racial Profile (Praeger 2016)

Jane Fedorowicz Ph.D., Chester B. Slade Professor of Accounting and Information Systems, Bentley University, Departments of Accountancy and Information & Process Management

There are many different potential threats to one's safety: crime, weather, pollution, dangerous workplaces. In choosing a place to live, how should people weigh the risks?

There is no risk-free place to live - every place exhibits risks of some nature. There are more incidents of some crimes when the weather is nice than when the weather is extremely cold. Other crimes are more likely in hot weather. Hot weather can increase pollution. Workplaces can be more dangerous because of weather extremes or pollution. Risk assessment is relative, involves tradeoffs, and depends on one's personal risk appetite.

Individuals make tradeoffs among the types of risks based on what they can control and what they cannot. Individuals should conduct a personal audit of the risks they are willing to tolerate vs. those they would not. Then evaluate those options over which they hold control vs. those they cannot choose. Unfortunately for many, money is the biggest impediment to choosing the "best" place to live - most of us have to settle for a "good enough" place, based on what risks we can afford to mitigate, and which ones we can't afford to avoid.

What actions can the Trump Administration undertake to reduce crime and improve public safety?

Public safety is the key goal of law enforcement in all levels of government. Police prevent and solve crimes. They are, by and large, doing well in this capacity, but their jobs are complicated by the proliferation of weaponry and distrust among many segments of the population. The Trump Administration, by bad-mouthing its own police agencies, is doing great harm to public safety. So the first thing the Administration needs to do is to revive public confidence in law enforcement by truly backing up its own judicial branch and the thousands of larger and small police departments throughout the country. Next, the administration needs to find a way to reinstitute the balance of armed power away from militant citizens to become, once again, the last resort of public safety officers. This will require a reinterpretation of the second amendment to permit safe and careful individual gun ownership, and reduce access to large stockpiles of high-powered guns that are not intended for individual sport or home protection purposes.

Do you agree with President Trump that increased border security will reduce crime?

It is likely that, by reducing the total number of individuals crossing the border with Mexico, some criminals will be stopped. But criminals have many other ways to enter the country, especially if they have the wherewithal to fly or take a boat, purchase fake documents, or buy their way in via other visa programs (such as the Einstein visa or the investment visa). The cost benefit of a wall is undoubtedly negative.

What can state and local policymakers do to reduce crime in their communities?

Community policing is a great way to offset the bad press police get when something bad happens involving an officer. Law enforcement has adopted several "community policing" programs that increase the trust in police while opening channels of communication. Most departments have active social media accounts on Twitter, Facebook, NextDoor, and elsewhere to share what they do and who they are with the public, to notify the public of events and emergency incidents, and to invite information to solve local crimes. Other community policing events build bridges when the police participate in non-police events such as community picnics or local sports leagues, to put a human face on officers.

What tips do you have for consumers looking to improve their "financial" safety?

Never trust anyone on the phone who asks for money or personal information. If you get a letter from a government agency or bank, look up contact information for them on Google and call to see if it is legitimate. Never send a password or personal information in response to an unsolicited email. Right click on the sender to see if it comes from a legitimate source (and not an inappropriate email) and then use Google to find the real web site for any interaction. Use a well-established financial manager if you need one. There are no get rich schemes on the Internet - if it looks too good to be true, it is.

Stan Stojkovic Dean and Professor, Helen Bader School of Social Welfare, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee

There are many different potential threats to one's safety: crime, weather, pollution, dangerous workplaces. In choosing a place to live, how should people weigh the risks?

Weighing risks associated with life is always problematic. Make sure that however you assess risk it is an accepted method of assessment. Take for example, crime risk. The proper assessment tools involve different measures of crime -- Uniform Crime Reports (FBI), Victimization Surveys (Department of Justice), and National Incident Based Reporting System (Bureau of Justice Statistics). These all offer a risk of criminal victimization, but are also aggregate assessments at one level. Look at how your community addresses crime, weather, pollution, or other similar threats. In some cases you can even find out data at the community or block level. It is this level of analysis that offers the citizen the most reasonable assessment of risk.

What actions can the Trump Administration undertake to reduce crime and improve public safety?

Since crime is mostly a local phenomenon, the federal government has a limited role, but having said this the funding for crime research is abysmal. We spend more money on researching cavities in dogs than we do on crime research. This is terrible. There needs to be a greater commitment to addressing crime in a systematic and uniform way, recognizing variances across communities. Additionally, governments should be encouraged to work with local universities and colleges to address crime issues unique to their communities. In this way, good research works in tandem with local communities to examine crime and proposes reasonable solutions to specific crime problems.

Do you agree with President Trump that increased border security will reduce crime?

Increases in border patrols, and a wall included, will do nothing to address crime in America. The actual rates of criminality among immigrant populations are very low, outside of the "horror story" or celebrated case that hits the media. The border crime issue has been presented as it has been for decades predicated on fear and ignorance with very little evidence to support it. This is a great strategy to garner political votes, but will do nothing to address crime and will harm dis-proportionally communities of color.

What can state and local policymakers do to reduce crime in their communities?

Again, since most traditional crime is local, there is much that can be done to address crime. Most fundamentally, we need to fix our failing public school systems, confront systemic poverty and segregation, and offer more ways to address affordable housing options, particularly in large urban communities. Remember, crime again is largely a local issue, and as such, local communities will have to come up with specific strategies to manage crime. State and local governments can promote differential approaches to crime reduction to get the biggest return on their investments of scarce resources.

Donald Jones Professor of Law at University of Miami School of Law & Author of Dangerous Spaces: Beyond the Racial Profile (Praeger 2016)

Crime is a social problem. When crime occurs it is seen as a discrete event. But in the context of urban areas and more specifically areas in the inner city crime is better understood as the result of a number of factors including socio-economic conditions, urban decay, joblessness and despair.

Take Baltimore for example. In my WIRE class I show a slide depicting the areas where unemployment is most concentrated. Then I show a slid showing where arrests for drug related offenses are concentrated. The two slides virtually overlap.

The problem is not merely that some individuals are jobless and poor but that in some communities poverty is intensely concentrated. In the inner city this concentration of poverty and joblessness leads to social disorganization, a state in which norms of being law abiding, honest, etc. have broken down. Both Elijah Anderson in his book Code of the Street and William Julius Wilson in his book When Work Disappears both develop this basic point.

It wasn't always this way. But the forces of globalization, deindustrialization, and urban renewal have resulted in effect these city areas becoming socially isolated. In a real sense the inner city today, even more so, than fifty years ago is another America in which violence and crime goes hand in hand with urban decay.

Of course these urban areas are often in close proximity to areas of affluence. Overtown in Miami is not far from bustling downtown Miami. What is called the black grove is very near the affluent part of coconut grove with fine restaurants and hyper expensive condominiums.

The proximity between these two Americas much to do with the new policing. Today police have become hyper aggressive in urban areas. We see that in the controversy over New York's stop and frisk. We see it in the fact in Baltimore the City settled a suit at the cost of millions of dollars tacitly conceding in the eyes of many that it routinely yes routinely arrested tens of thousands of young black men without probable cause for low level offenses.

The over policing in my view exacerbates the problem. It makes it worse not better. It shifts the focus away from violent crime. It also targets communities as if the people in the communities are dangerous and bad when it is the conditions that are the problem.

If the goal is to fight fire I say you remove whatever substance it is that is burning. The fire will go out.

What is igniting the problem in our urban areas are things like dilapidated infrastructure, schools were failure is normalized, lack of jobs, opportunity.

Why not develop a program to rebuild the infrastructure of an inner city-Baltimore, Miami would be prime examples. If we spent just a few billion, -the money we spend on arresting people for marijuana possession for example you would create tens of thousands of jobs. The money we spend on a single F-16 would allow us to revamp a school. Re-investing in the inner city would have immediate and resounding impact in places where hope is dying or has died.

We cannot arrest our way to public safety in urban areas. Rather we must re-imagine the inner city as a place where there are jobs for everyone, good schools, opportunity, and beautiful streets instead of urban blight. We could call these Great Cities Programs. Baltimore has started something vaguely like this -- but they are light years away from making a real start.

Until then the search for the safest places will tend to be those in rural areas, gated communities, or condos with layer upon layer of surveillance or security.

Methodology

In order to determine the safest states in which to live, WalletHub compared the 50 states across five key dimensions: 1) Personal & Residential Safety, 2) Financial Safety, 3) Road Safety, 4) Workplace Safety, and 5) Emergency Preparedness.

We evaluated those dimensions using 48 relevant metrics, which are listed below with their corresponding weights. Each metric was graded on a 100-point scale, with a score of 100 representing the highest level of safety.

We then determined each state’s weighted average across all metrics to calculate its overall score and used the resulting scores to rank-order our sample.

Personal & Residential Safety - Total Points: 40

• Presence of Terrorist Attacks: Full Weight (~1.95 Points)Note: This binary metric considers the presence or absence of a terrorist incident or attack in a city.
• Number of Mass Shootings: Full Weight (~1.95 Points)
• Murders & Non-Negligent Manslaughters per Capita: Double Weight (~3.90 Points)
• Forcible Rapes per Capita: Double Weight (~3.90 Points)
• Assaults per Capita: Double Weight (~3.90 Points)
• Thefts per Capita: Full Weight (~1.95 Points)
• Sex Offenders per Capita: Double Weight (~3.90 Points)
• Drug Abuses per Capita: Full Weight (~1.95 Points)
• Law-Enforcement Employees per Capita: Full Weight (~1.95 Points)
• Active Firefighters per Capita: Full Weight (~1.95 Points)
• Emergency Medical Technicians and Paramedics per Capita: Full Weight (~1.95 Points)
• Suicide Rate: Full Weight (~1.95 Points)
• Bullying Incidence Rate: Full Weight (~1.95 Points)
• Share of Elder-Abuse, Gross-Neglect and Exploitation Complaints: Full Weight (~1.95 Points)
• Hate-Crime Incidents per Capita: Full Weight (~1.95 Points)
• Hate Groups per Capita: Full Weight (~1.95 Points)
• Number of Neighborhood Watch Groups: Half Weight (~0.98 Points)

Financial Safety - Total Points: 15

• Share of Uninsured Population: Full Weight (~0.75 Points)
• Unemployment Rate: Double Weight (~1.50 Points)
• Underemployment Rate: Full Weight (~0.75 Points)
• Foreclosure Rate: Full Weight (~0.75 Points)
• Median Credit Score: Full Weight (~0.75 Points)
• Debt per Income: Full Weight (~0.75 Points)
• Poverty Rate: Full Weight (~0.75 Points)
• Share of Adults with Rainy-Day Funds: Full Weight (~0.75 Points)
• Fraud & Other Complaints per Capita: Full Weight (~0.75 Points)Note: “Other” includes both financial and nonfinancial complaints.
• Identity-Theft Complaints per Capita: Full Weight (~0.75 Points)
• Share of Unbanked Households: Full Weight (~0.75 Points)
• Job Security: Full Weight (~0.75 Points)Note: This metric was calculated as follows: (Total Workers in 2017 – Total Workers in 2016) / Total Workers in 2016.
• New Unemployment Claims per Total Civilian Labor Force: Full Weight (~0.75 Points)Note: “New Unemployment Claims” refers to the number of people making an initial claim for unemployment insurance benefits.
• Employment Growth (2017 vs. 2016): Full Weight (~0.75 Points)Note: This metric was adjusted for the working-age population growth.
• Share of Households with Emergency Fund: Full Weight (~0.75 Points)Note: This metric refers to the share of households who saved for unexpected expenses or emergencies in the past 12 months.
• Share of People Not Saving Money for Children’s College: Full Weight (~0.75 Points)
• Share of Households Behind on Bills in Past 12 Months: Full Weight (~0.75 Points)
• Personal Bankruptcy Filings per Capita: Full Weight (~0.75 Points)
• Share of Homes Underwater (with negative equity): Full Weight (~0.75 Points)

Road Safety - Total Points: 15

• Traffic Indiscipline (composite metric): Full Weight (~1.88 Points)Note: This is a composite metric that measures incidents due to poor behavior: phone use, speeding, aggressive acceleration, harsh braking, and poor turning.
• Fatalities per 100 Million Vehicle Miles of Travel: Double Weight (~3.75 Points)
• DUIs per Capita: Full Weight (~1.88 Points)
• Pedestrian & Pedalcyclist Fatality Rate per Capita: Double Weight (~3.75 Points)
• Road Quality: Full Weight (~1.88 Points)
• Driving Laws Rating: Full Weight (~1.88 Points)Note: This metric is based on the Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety’s Roadmap Report of State Highway Safety Law. In order to achieve the highest rating, according to the organization, “States must have 11 to 15 laws including both primary enforcement seat belt laws, or 9 or more laws including both primary enforcement seat belt laws and an all-rider helmet law.”

Workplace Safety - Total Points: 15

• Fatal Occupational Injuries per 100,000 Full-Time Workers: Double Weight (~6.00 Points)
• Injuries & Illnesses per 10,000 Full-Time Workers: Full Weight (~3.00 Points)
• Median Days Lost Due to Occupational Injuries & Illnesses: Full Weight (~3.00 Points)
• Presence of Occupational Safety & Health Act Plans: Full Weight (~3.00 Points)Note: According to the U.S. Department of Labor, “Under the [Occupational Safety and Health] Act, employers are responsible for providing a safe and healthful workplace. OSHA's mission is to assure safe and healthful workplaces by setting and enforcing standards, and by providing training, outreach, education and assistance.”

Emergency Preparedness - Total Points: 15

• Number of Climate Disasters Causing $1 Billion+ in Damages in Past Decades: Full Weight (~7.50 Points)Note: “Past Decades” refers to the period between 1980 and 2018.
• Loss Amount from Climate Disasters Causing $1 Billion+ in Damages per Capita: Full Weight (~7.50 Points)Note: This metric refers to the period between 1980 and 2018.

 

Sources: Data used to create this ranking were collected from the U.S. Census Bureau, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Federal Bureau of Investigation, TransUnion, National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, U.S. Fire Administration, Administration for Community Living - AGing Integrated Database, United Health Foundation, Federal Trade Commission, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, U.S. Department of Labor - Employment and Training Administration, Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, The Road Information Program, Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, U.S. Department of Labor - Occupational Safety and Health Administration, National Centers for Environmental Information, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, FINRA Investor Education Foundation, Wm. Robert Johnston, Gun Violence Archive, Southern Poverty Law Center, National Sheriffs’ Association, Renwood RealtyTrac, Zillow, EverQuote and CoreLogic.

from Wallet HubWallet Hub


via Finance Xpress