Is Columbus a scary place to live? (Cleveland, Cincinnati: 2014, low crime)

[motorman]

^ (1) Links? (2) Don't despair--Indy's even worse.

[w113mrl]

Click the link. It breaks the cities down from under 75,000 people, under 500,000 people, ie Cleveland, Cincy and over 500,000 people

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by motorman

^ (1) Links? (2) Don't despair--Indy's even worse.

So you're saying that an FBI link is trumped by a ranking site that doesn't even use current or accurate information? Now you're just being way too obvious.

[motorman]

^ Actually I'm not saying much of anything, especially since it's really you who's doing all the talking and making all the conclusions.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by motorman

^ Actually I'm not saying much of anything, especially since it's really you who's doing all the talking and making all the conclusions.

So how about for once just making a commitment to an opinion? Do you find the ranking site more credible or do you find the FBI more credible, which actually does the collection of crime data from cities?

Simple question with a simple answer.

[motorman]

^ Simple reply? You're doing all the questioning and the answering...so, by all means, please carry on.

[ohioaninsc]

Originally Posted by unusualfire

What? This does not make sense. Chicago had 40+ shooting but only 5 died. And Cincinnati had over 80 one time for a whole year needless to say a weekend.

For Cincy and Cleveland...I meant to add rates to the end of that...when you have 80 murders in a city of 300,000 vs 90 in a city of 800,000...the 1 w/ 90 in a larger city is much more safe.

Easter weekend Chicago had 40+ shootings...maybe not murders but shootings are scary enough...but of course most were contained in one small area their.

[jkskristine]

I work for the local school district in 6 different schools, so I travel in the worst parts of the city 5 days a week during the school year. I have never felt threatened.

Having said all that, there are major freeways that cross in every direction throughout the city so you don't have to drive far on most side streets. There are pockets of 'good areas' all over the city, so when you're driving you can quickly be back in a better area once you know where you're going. I am aware of my surroundings, keep my doors locked, and do not take any unnecessary risks. I also travel during the day.

I feel very safe in the suburbs. I wouldn't hesitate to walk alone to a friend's house in Worthington, Powell, UA, Dublin, Hilliard, Gahanna, etc.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by motorman

^ Simple reply? You're doing all the questioning and the answering...so, by all means, please carry on.

I'm asking for your viewpoint. Which do you find to be more credible and why?

[jbcmh81]

ohioaninsc;35091961]For Cincy and Cleveland...I meant to add rates to the end
of that...when you have 80 murders in a city of 300,000 vs 90 in a city of
800,000...the 1 w/ 90 in a larger city is much more safe.

Easter weekend Chicago had 40+ shootings...maybe not murders but shootings
are scary enough...but of course most were contained in one small area
their.

Yep. I'm not going to argue that Columbus is the safest large city in the US, because it obviously isn't. But if you know how crime statistics work, you would know that Columbus is clearly not the city in Ohio where you'd be most likely to be a victim of violent crime. It's the least likely. And it's not even in the top 100 of all cities nationally. Crime rates are determined by the proportion of crimes committed to the size of the population. That's why, again, Flint, Michigan is considered to be the most dangerous city in America of any size, yet it has less total murders and other violent crimes than cities much larger.