Just as the rest of our lives are inherently guided by social structure, so is crime. In particular, homicide. The social factors that guide rural vs. urban environments are vastly different and therefore offer a different rate of prevalence and different motives for crime. One strong misconception is that rural environments are much safer, as most homicides occur in urban environments. However, the information provided in RALPH A. WEISHEIT’s and L. EDWARD WELLS study titled “Deadly Violence in the Heartland” contradicts this point.
The study reports that the notion that homicide is less prevalent in rural communities is false. Specifically, the study reports that, “Although homicide rates are on average lower in nonmetropolitan areas, most (19 of 30) of the counties with the highest homicide rates were in nonmetropolitan areas and most of those were in the most rural category” (20). That is, although the number of murders are higher in urban environments, the county’s with the highest rate of homicide in relation to population included a significant number of rural areas.…show more content… For example, interpersonal conflict related to the “density of acquaintanceship” was a significant motive of homicide in rural areas. While, “economic inequality, for example, was a predictor of homicide in urban counties, [but] it failed to be related to homicide in rural areas” (3). These factors contest to the differing social structures and concerns of rural and urban environments. That is, motives in rural environments seem to be more personal in nature, while motives in urban environments tend to be more impersonal and “are more likely to be committed in conjunction with other crimes” (12). However, interestingly enough, “poverty appears to be a universally important causal factor in accounting for homicide rates” (18). As there is a consistent positive correlation between poverty and
