Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
1. Only 1/3rd of Boston really has crime. You take Dorchester 120k + Roxbury 60k and that's Providence. Last year Dorchester had 33 homicides.
2. Boston is a very very neighborhood gang heavy/dependent. It's extremely cyclical Boston had 2x this many murders at this point last year.
3. Generally Providence has remarkably low crime for its demographics/poverty. It's in a bad spot the past 2 years.
4. Andrew Lelling's ceaseless zeal for organized crime- including street gangs-made a difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by redplum33
I don't know the neighborhood populations in Providence, but only one section of the East Side has crime. The rest of the East Side is virtually crime free. I'm just saying...you can't compare part of Boston to all of Providence.
I think BBMM's point is that crime is generally more concentrated in Boston vs. Providence. Providence doesn't really have anything with the intensity of Franklin Field/Blue Hill Ave., H-Block, Bowdoin/Geneva, Methadone Mile, etc...but crime is far more evenly distributed across the city in Providence and harder to escape. The "safe" areas you mentioned in Providence are exceptions for the city, while in Boston it's kind of the opposite (you actually have to "look" for the ghetto).
Quote:
Originally Posted by redplum33
Here is massnative's most recent map showing serious violent crimes in Providence. It is color coded by month and is for all of 2021 through July. I don't know which colors represent which months.
Regardless, as you'll see, there's essentially nothing in the East Side neighborhoods. Same with Elmhurst and part of Mt Pleasant (near Rhode Island College). And very little in Downtown.
Getting a little off topic, but orange is for July (most recent month added). August incidents had not been logged yet. And zoomed out to that level, you can't really see but the majority of the incidents "downtown" are concentrated around Kennedy Plaza (a problematic transportation hub). The bulk of Federal Hill also appears pretty free of serious issues, talking the area in between Atwells Ave. and Westminster St. South Providence is one big mess (and a lot has happened there since the start of this month when this map was last updated). The North End is consistent trouble. Olneyville and areas bordering it are a disaster.
I think BBMM's point is that crime is generally more concentrated in Boston vs. Providence. Providence doesn't really have anything with the intensity of Franklin Field/Blue Hill Ave., H-Block, Bowdoin/Geneva, Methadone Mile, etc...but crime is far more evenly distributed across the city in Providence and harder to escape. The "safe" areas you mentioned in Providence are exceptions for the city, while in Boston it's kind of the opposite (you actually have to "look" for the ghetto).
I think BBMM's point is that crime is generally more concentrated in Boston vs. Providence. Providence doesn't really have anything with the intensity of Franklin Field/Blue Hill Ave., H-Block, Bowdoin/Geneva, Methadone Mile, etc...but crime is far more evenly distributed across the city in Providence and harder to escape. The "safe" areas you mentioned in Providence are exceptions for the city, while in Boston it's kind of the opposite (you actually have to "look" for the ghetto).
Quote:
Originally Posted by BostonBornMassMade
Yes, this exactly.
Except it's not really accurate. Boston and Providence are more similar than you may think.
If you're strictly a tourist in either city, you have to look for the ghetto.
Once you get away from the tourist areas and college areas in either city, it's pretty much all ghetto or at least ghettoish.
Saying only Roxbury and Dorchester have crime in Boston is equivalent to saying only South Providence and Olneyville have crime in Providence.
Providence has rough areas very similar to the rough areas in Boston that massnative mentioned. Just on a smaller scale but relative to the size of each city.
The safe areas are the exception in both cities.
The main difference between the cities is the size of the tourist areas. Boston's is far larger than the 4:1 population ratio.
Except it's not really accurate. Boston and Providence are more similar than you may think.
[list][*]Once you get away from the tourist areas and college areas in either city, it's pretty much all ghetto or at least ghettoish.
False. I'm not going to sit here and name off all the areas of Boston that are unattainable to most and outright gorgeous that do not fit into tourist areas or college areas because there are far too many.
Except it's not really accurate. Boston and Providence are more similar than you may think.
If you're strictly a tourist in either city, you have to look for the ghetto.
Once you get away from the tourist areas and college areas in either city, it's pretty much all ghetto or at least ghettoish.
Saying only Roxbury and Dorchester have crime in Boston is equivalent to saying only South Providence and Olneyville have crime in Providence.
Providence has rough areas very similar to the rough areas in Boston that massnative mentioned. Just on a smaller scale but relative to the size of each city.
The safe areas are the exception in both cities.
The main difference between the cities is the size of the tourist areas. Boston's is far larger than the 4:1 population ratio.
When I read this, I keep thinking about which one of the three categories West Roxbury, South Boston, and JP fall in to. They aren't touristy or very dense with college kids, and not very ghetto either. Maybe we're defining this differently, but the way I see it, if there aren't duck boats or trolleys or swarms of Ubers dropping people off in front of the entrance, it's probably not a very touristy area. People visiting Boston for the first time (or even 10th) probably aren't exploring the streets of West Roxbury or JP. I think it's a huge stretch to say Boston has a significantly larger tourist area by percentage of city size.
Rox and Dot aren't small areas (they're the two largest neighborhoods by population) so it's not all that much of a stretch to say they're where most of the crime happens. I'd also say it's a huge stretch to say that safe areas are the exception as way more than half of Boston is no more dangerous than any other city. It's the othe way around -- there's a lot more streets in Boston that I'd comfortably walk at night than streets I wouldn't.
I can't speak to Providence so I'll just have to assume you're right there.
I guess one could say that a lot of Boston is glorified, spiffed up ghetto-ish- just when looking at density, road quality, housing quality, socioeconomic status of the families who inhabit the neighborhoods, lack of dining/entertainment.
^This would include Roxbury, Dorchester, Mattapan, South Boston, East Boston, Charlestown, Allston, Hyde Park, Roslindale, Chinatown, and Mission Hill.
South End, North End, Back Bay, and Beacon hill I would exclude even though South End was once a ghetto it didn't start of that way. Brighton and West Roxbury are too high-quality in their build, layout, demography, and history. I also think by and large Jamaica Plain has a level of architectural quality that is special. But it might be included with those above areas.
But the reality is they've been improving so hard and so consistently for 25 years it's sort of hard to call them ghetto. Had Boston not really turned around in a major way starting ~1995 it would be very similar to Providence now but bigger.
Overall- I'd have been more comfortable with that assessment back in 2010 than 2021. The grit is harder to see now.
The main difference between the cities is the size of the tourist areas. Boston's is far larger than the 4:1 population ratio.
^I think you are downplaying the importance of this part. As one example, it's possible to be in the downtown/tourist areas and walk for literally miles without coming across anything ghetto. Brushing shoulders with the bad areas would require going far out of your way and beyond where any tourist has a reason to go. Boston very effectively "tucks away" its crime and blight to where a tourist or suburbanite can be totally unaware of their existence.
Providence on the other hand, you have some of the worst areas of the city literally right across the highway from downtown. It's not unheard of at all for a downtown visitor to end up stopping for gas on Broad St. before getting back on 95, of which immediately becomes a war zone once you exit the downtown area. Or likewise, you could be dining out on Federal Hill and from what I recall the first gas station you come to outbound on Atwells is in Olneyville (again, bad bad area). I just can't think of anything comparable in Boston. And using the walking example, starting in Downtown if you walk for a couple of miles in ANY direction other than east, you are GOING to hit ghetto regardless.
Another notable difference between the two cities (that's already been touched upon), is the concentration of crime in Boston vs. Providence to pretty much one side of town. You are correct to note that there are ghetto or ghettoish neighborhoods outside of Roxbury, Dorchester and Mattapan; but reality is most of them are at least somewhat connected. The ghettoish parts of Hyde Park mostly border Mattapan. The ghetto/ghettoish parts of JP, Mission Hill and the South End, are basically the sides bordering Roxbury. As far as Southie, Back Bay/Beacon Hill, West Roxbury, Roslindale, Charlestown, Allston/Brighton, etc. go, at this point what's "left" of the ghetto is mostly restricted to isolated projects. East Boston is a bit of an exception to all of this, but that is separated from the rest of the city by water so...But Providence as is demonstrated by my map you attached, with the exception of the East Side there just isn't that same level of consistency. It's more like a "checkerboard".
And lastly, where you hit on the Providence ghettos being "similar" but "smaller in scale", that very much plays a role in the intensity and vibe of each. Providence's smaller ghettos have that feeling of possible "escape" that the worst ares of DRM just don't allow (and the latter are probably nothing like the South Side of Chicago, for that matter), South Providence might be somewhat of an exception. But the importance of that, cannot be emphasized enough imho.
And lastly, where you hit on the Providence ghettos being "similar" but "smaller in scale", that very much plays a role in the intensity and vibe of each. Providence's smaller ghettos have that feeling of possible "escape" that the worst ares of DRM just don't allow (and the latter are probably nothing like the South Side of Chicago, for that matter), South Providence might be somewhat of an exception. But the importance of that, cannot be emphasized enough imho.
Roslindale has ghetto feeling areas long Hyde Park Ave and Cummins Highway.
You have to be deep in the center of Boston's ghetto to feel it's not escapable. The major difference is the longevity of the gangs and the numerous gangs in those areas. The gang situation in Boston is only comparable to Hartford in New England. Gangs make it hard to solve crimes and they ensure crime will remain despite a ton of other improvements.
Roslindale has ghetto feeling areas long Hyde Park Ave and Cummins Highway.
True, I always forget Hyde Park Ave. (near Cummins) is Roslindale. But if you are talking further down by Forest Hills, that has actually cleaned up considerably over the years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BostonBornMassMade
You have to be deep in the center of Boston's ghetto to feel it's not escapable. The major difference is the longevity of the gangs and the numerous gangs in those areas. The gang situation in Boston is only comparable to Hartford in New England. Gangs make it hard to solve crimes and they ensure crime will remain despite a ton of other improvements.
But doesn't that kind of come with the territory though? I can't speak for Hartford, but from my understanding the larger/older cities generally have a more entrenched/organized gang infrastructure. A lot of the gang presence/tradition in Providence is "relatively" new (talking 90s). Probably more comparable to the North Shore (East Boston/Chelsea/Revere/Lynn) in characteristics, than Roxbury/Dorchester. Also, less organized gangs does not necessarily mean fewer people getting killed (see a lot of Southern cities and lately, Providence...).
True, I always forget Hyde Park Ave. (near Cummins) is Roslindale. But if you are talking further down by Forest Hills, that has actually cleaned up considerably over the years.
But doesn't that kind of come with the territory though? I can't speak for Hartford, but from my understanding the larger/older cities generally have a more entrenched/organized gang infrastructure. A lot of the gang presence/tradition in Providence is "relatively" new (talking 90s). Probably more comparable to the North Shore (East Boston/Chelsea/Revere/Lynn) in characteristics, than Roxbury/Dorchester. Also, less organized gangs does not necessarily mean fewer people getting killed (see a lot of Southern cities and lately, Providence...).
Agree with both points youre entirely right.
All I can add is the difference with southern cities is everybody has a gun legally or illegally, and they use them-frequently. It's just the culture.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
