Is Toronto a dangerous city? And is it getting worse? This week for Metrocide, Torontoist is examining a sea of homicide data and trying to come up with conclusions based not in fear or fantasy but fact.

In her introduction to August's Toronto Life, Editor Sarah Fulford writes that "numbers alone can't communicate the impact of gun violence—on the families of the victims or on the city itself. We hope that our cover, which commemorates the people killed by guns since the spring of 2007, will do what statistics can't."
Setting aside that cover—which, with a few dozen bullets representing a few dozen murder victims, is by definition dehumanizing—Fulford's logic might explain why John Lorinc's feature on guns and death in Toronto inside the issue is so light on statistics and so heavy on anecdotes. As Toronto Life contributor (and former blogger) Doug Bell wrote in a piece critical of the article, Lorinc's story "does a good job of reporting the facts on the ground but fails in even one instance to place this 'trend' in any sort of context."
Statistics provide the context. They do what anecdotes can't, providing a broader view of an issue. They can be used and misused, but in and of themselves they have no intentions at all; they simply convey facts, emotionlessly and objectively. And as far as they extend to homicides in Toronto, statistics are largely ignored unless they can be bent to justify two central theses: that Toronto is a dangerous city, and that it's getting worse.
But do either of those claims hold water? We've pored over ten years of data from the Toronto Police and twenty-six years of crime data from Statistics Canada (including those released last week) to find out. We've chosen to focus only on homicides—admittedly only one measure for determining how safe or dangerous Toronto is or isn't—because homicides are by far the most talked about, most reported on, and most campaigned against crime in our city. As far as statistics go, homicide numbers are also reliable (for Toronto and many other cities, the numbers are thoroughly fact-checked), clear (the definition of homicide is specific, unambiguous, and consistent), accurate (few homicides go unreported or undiscovered), and accessible (statistics not available online are easily found at most libraries).
This week for a series we're dubbing Metrocide, Torontoist will be taking a look at what we've found, eschewing the anecdotal for the statistical and trying to come up with conclusions based not in fear or fantasy but fact. Every evening at 6 p.m., we'll have a new article framing the data we've gathered in a different way: on Tuesday, we'll look at the historical data, and see how it has changed; on Wednesday, we'll look at central and downtown homicides specifically; on Thursday, we'll step back from Toronto to look at dozens of other cities in the United States and Canada to see where we stand in relation to them; and on Friday, we'll try to summarize the whole thing, and look at where 2008 will fit. Our goal this week is to neither trivialize nor sensationalize homicides in Toronto, but to honestly convey and examine the truth around them. It is undeniably true that "numbers alone" can't encompass or explain a human problem. But that does not mean they ought to be ignored.
Photo by darkthroness from the Torontoist Flickr Pool.

Toronto Will Host 2015 Pan American Games
The Star, much? StatsCan even more?
Here's also an idea: aggregation and analysis of all reported, violence-related incidents, broken down into all forms of how that activity transpired (e.g., no weapon v. weapon; domestic v. unknown v. acquaintance; apparent motive; death or survival; etc.). From a criminological bent, I doubt cherry-picking only "gun violence" is going to reveal a statistically-sound pattern pointing at a neat and tidy conclusion.
It also misses the bigger point: what is the genesis (cause) of what is basically a headline-worthy effect (e.g., "Killed Last Night by Gunfire")? Unless that question is central to the analysis, then this is no better than finding where in the house one finds termites, rather than how and why they got into the house.
Statistics provide the context. They do what anecdotes can't
That's right, because the plural of anecdotes is not "data"...
Looking forward to this! I hate pseudoscience and fearmongering and love real statistics.
i'm curious as to what qualifies as "central and downtown".
I bet the homicide rate not overly high in Rosedale, but are big in Regent Park. one can argue that one, both or neither are part of "central" Toronto.
I also believe that violent crime is another marker. Most murders that take place usually aren't random - people tend to murder people they know. Whereas violent crime - beatings, muggings, etc - would be more random.
I am looking forward to the Toronto Star's traffic accident map as a good antidote to police and media-led hysteria about gun crime.
http://thestar.blogs.com/maps/2008/07/map-of-the-we-2.html
I am sure many many more people are killed and injured by motorized vehicles than by guns in Toronto.
The police do not seem to read the studies which show Toronto's violent crime is decreasing, as that would not serve their requests to increase their budgets ....
Thanks for doing this study Torontoist!
I think the numbers will show what often gets missed by the media and the rest of Canada, which is that Toronto is still a very safe city.
When Maclean's Magazine released it's findings on safety in Canadian cities Toronto was 26TH. Nine of the top 10 most Dangerous cities are out west, with Halifax being the only eastern exception. And of course it is still much safer than most American cities
The hysterical media creates the image of Toronto as a dangerous lawless city. Toronto makes an easy target because of our high profile, plus the rest of the country is willing to assume the worst because they hate T.O.. Bunch of crybay hicks.
"on Thursday, we'll step back from Toronto to look at dozens of other cities in the United States and Canada"... and Europe and elsewhere I trust?
If we're only comparing ourselves to North American cities, we're not raising the bar high enough. One of the reasons why there is a concern about gun violence in Ontario is because so many of us, like myself, don't come from here and find even the local level of violence disturbing - and don't find the notion of "at least we're not Washington or Atlanta or Chicago or Detroit" in any way consoling.
Stats contextualize anecdotes.
Anecdotes can clarify stats.
There's a difference between using stats to make a point and using the science of statistics to make a point.
It can't be a bad thing to examine this issue, so I'm delighted when Torontoist, The Star, and Toronto Life all seem to be aligned.
And statistics can be very helpful in giving an accurate picture of what goes on.
But society and culture are not statistical trends, surely; they're reflections of the thoughts and feelings of the people.
The people seem to feel that it's sickening and wrong for six people to be murdered around here in a week, and I agree.
I don't care what's happening in Philadelphia or London, except to hope people are happy and healthy there. I'd like the same for my town.
Sure it could be worse. That doesn't mean it's alright, and we only need our gut feelings to tell us that.