Most dangerous cities in California (San Diego, San Jose: low crime, neighborhoods, stats)

[Moddedintegra56]

Most Dangerous Cities in California - Graham Donath

[Curmudgeon]

Doesn't help. If people in the most dangerous cities moved elsewhere undoubtedly the crime would just move with them.

[RosieSD]

The trouble with this list is that some of the cities are very large and spread out and all cities have better areas and worse areas. For instance, the city of San Diego encompasses 342 square miles. Only a small percentage of those square miles even come close to being "dangerous."

Tools like crimemapping.com or Trulia.com's safety data, which focus on crime stats for specific neighborhoods within cities are much better tools for people looking at safety in the area where they plan to move.

[CaliRestoration]

Vallejo, Oakland, San Berdoo, Modesto, Stockton. The lineup of death.

[TheGoodUsernamesWereTaken]

Originally Posted by CaliRestoration

Vallejo, Oakland, San Berdoo, Modesto, Stockton. The lineup of death.

Oakland is #6 on this list.

Honestly, Oakland gets an undeserved bad rep. There are some beautiful areas, and nice people in that city, and it's spoken of like it's some slum in a 3rd world country.

[BeauCharles]

Fresno's better than most other large cities save for San Jose and San Diego.

[CaliRestoration]

Originally Posted by TheGoodUsernamesWereTaken

Oakland is #6 on this list.

Honestly, Oakland gets an undeserved bad rep. There are some beautiful areas, and nice people in that city, and it's spoken of like it's some slum in a 3rd world country.

Every city on that list has a "good area" where the criminal element doesn't completely seep through. But stats don't lie, Oakland has the highest violent crime rate in California for cities over 50,000 in population followed by Vallejo. I don't think it's place on the list undeserved at all.

[2sleepy]

Great info, it really illustrates that there is no clear relationship between police spending and the crime rate.

[Malloric]

Originally Posted by RosieSD

The trouble with this list is that some of the cities are very large and spread out and all cities have better areas and worse areas. For instance, the city of San Diego encompasses 342 square miles. Only a small percentage of those square miles even come close to being "dangerous."

Tools like crimemapping.com or Trulia.com's safety data, which focus on crime stats for specific neighborhoods within cities are much better tools for people looking at safety in the area where they plan to move.

Not sure what the trouble is there. San Diego has less crime than San Jose, which isn't exactly known for being crime-ridden. Usually people toss that around with Oakland as in not all of it is bad, true. It's an average. You have some low crime areas of Oakland. It's just the high crime areas have so much crime it's still #1.

[NextStage]

Originally Posted by Malloric

Not sure what the trouble is there. San Diego has less crime than San Jose, which isn't exactly known for being crime-ridden. Usually people toss that around with Oakland as in not all of it is bad, true. It's an average. You have some low crime areas of Oakland. It's just the high crime areas have so much crime it's still #1.

Crime has been on the rise for a few years now in San Jose. San Jose doesn't seem to have the bad rep yet since it historically hadn't been known for being crime ridden. Personally I think a lot of the problem for the increase was the pension and benefit changes voted in 2012. This is based only on the news - but they lost a lot of staff and had problems recruiting new staff. My understanding is that there are new pension reforms and obviously increased plans toward crime reduction.