Small Town Safety: Legitimate or Just a Smokescreen?

How many of us had friends or relatives tell us they prefer living in a small town because they feel safer? Such thinking seems to be ingrained in American culture. But is it true? Are small towns legitimately safer, or is small-town life just a smokescreen?

It is hard to say. You can find crime data supporting both positions. For example, Vivint Home Security recently published two separate posts looking at crime data from 2023. Their data seems to suggest that small towns are no safer than large cities. But their data is just one dataset among many.

Safest Cities During the Holidays

The first of the two posts looked at city safety during the holiday season. Vivint wanted to know which cities were the safest and least safe during the annual holiday season that runs from November through early January. Here are the five safest according to their rankings:

1. Tampa, Florida
2. Boise, Idaho
3. Miami, Florida
4. Gilbert, Arizona
5. Plano, Texas

Vivint looked at three crimes in particular: larceny, robbery, and auto theft. Their numbers were based on crime rates per 100K residents. Although Tampa did not lead in all three crime categories, they were the leader in larceny. During the holiday season, Tampa experiences just 34.3 larcenies per 100K residents. By contrast, the least safe city – Oakland, California – sees nearly 550 larcenies per 100K residents.

Small Town Safety

The second of Vivint's two posts examined safety in America's small towns. They looked at 2023 crime data pertaining to the same three crimes: larceny, robbery, and auto theft. They crunched the numbers and came up with the five safest small towns:

1. Columbus, Indiana
2. Wheaton, Illinois
3. Saratoga Springs, Utah
4. Jacksonville, North Carolina
5. Johns Creek, Georgia

We used larceny as a standard in the previous section; let us use it here too. Columbus, Indiana recorded zero larcenies in 2023. But the second-place city, Wheaten, Illinois, recorded 38.5 larcenies per 10K residents.

Not only is the larceny rate in Wheaten higher than Tampa, but it is also magnitudes higher. Remember that the ratings in the first post were based on 100 residents. The numbers in the second post were based on 10K residents. If we adjust the Wheaten numbers to the 100K standard, it will jump to 385 larcenies. That would make Wheaten less safe than Tampa but still safer than Oakland.

Good for Reference Purposes

The point of this post is not to question Vivint's research or conclusions. Crime rates represent information that is good for reference purposes. But regardless of how cities and towns are ranked, it's up to each property owner to maintain robust security. It is up to each individual to keep himself and his family safe.

Crime data gives us a good idea of what's been happening in recent years. It allows us to gauge the success of our own efforts at reducing crime. To that extent, it is quite helpful. But we should never let low crime rates be an excuse for not remaining vigilant against crime.

The Small-Town Concept

Vivint's research should not be considered the last word on the issue of small-town safety. It is just one data point in a much larger collection. Moreover, the small-town concept does make sense from a safety standpoint. How so? Consider population density.

Irrespective of Vivint's crime rate numbers, it cannot be argued that smaller towns enjoy a lower population density. That's part of their appeal. Likewise, big cities are subject to a higher population density.

There is a well-established correlation between population density and crime volume. But volume and rate are two different things. Crime volume looks at the raw number of crimes committed over a certain amount of time. Crime rate compares that raw number against population, which can be adjusted for a better understanding of what crime data means.

It is generally accepted that smaller towns are subject to lower volumes of crime. But they may not experience lower crime rates due to population adjustments. Therein lies the rub. Unfortunately, crime experts and researchers rarely agree on how to adjust for population density when measuring crime rates. That is how you end up with a higher rate of larceny in Wheaten, Illinois compared to Tampa, Florida.

Zero Is the Best Number of All

We can all obsess over crime rates and volumes without ever doing anything to make ourselves safer. Indeed, that is the whole point of writing this post. The best crime rate of all is zero. And it is achievable on an individual basis.

Crime occurs in my community, just like in yours. But I can take every possible step to minimize my vulnerability. I can keep my house secure. I can equip it with video surveillance cameras and motion sensitive lighting. I can keep my windows and doors locked at all times.

It is true that no amount of security strategies and equipment can completely eliminate all risk. Even the most well-protected citizens fall victim to criminals every now and again. But reducing risk as much as possible gets me closer to a zero crime rate.

The last time I was victimized was some 15 years ago. Back then, someone broke into my garage and stole a couple of bicycles. They also stole a few things out of my car. Since then, I have maintained a zero individual crime rate.

Maintain Your Own Zero Rate

As an individual, you can work to maintain your own zero crime rate as well. If that means leaving the big city and moving to a small town, that's great. You do whatever is necessary to set your mind at ease. But even after you move, be vigilant about security.

There is some evidence suggesting that small towns are safer than big cities. But contrary evidence also exists. In the end, don't rely so much on crime data as your deciding factor. Instead, rely on your own willingness to take whatever steps are necessary to keep you and your family safe.