nice , thanks . Approx how many camera feeds are there including non televised CCTV ? <| sep |> Reylo ? Totally . FinnTran ? Totally . We finally agree about something . <| sep |> Area ? How common is that price ? One guy or everybody ? <| sep |> The point was twofold 1 . What actually matters is the amount of crimes committed , not the crimes committed after controlling for income . The victim of a crime couldn ' t care less that the crime statistically wouldn ' t have been committed if you controlled for income , because the real world is not controlled for income . 2 . The fact that the higher crime rate disappears if you control for income doesn ' t tell you much of value . If crime is caused by low income then it ' s going to disappear after controlling for income , but if crime is caused by something else then it ' s most likely also going to disappear . Example suppose crime is caused by bad childhood upbringing . Bad childhood upbringing also causes low income . If you now correct for low income the crime rate is going to disappear too . But what a normal person hears when you say the higher crime rate disappears if you correct for low income is that statistics shows that people are committing crimes because they have low income , which is not true in this scenario crime is caused by bad childhood upbringing .