Cross Town Streets And Bridges (Dayton, Salem: crime, neighborhoods, store)

[CarpathianPeasant]

A little something here that a lot of the comments and people posting messages in here seem to overlook:

If one is in -- say -- Belmont, one can pretty much drive hither and yon which ever way one wants to go, and never have to worry about getting across a river. If one is in -- say -- Old North Dayton and one wants to take a few classes at U.D. or do quite a number of other things, one needs a bridge across the river to get there.

It may come as a shock to some, but the criminal element often knows how to drive a car (indeed, sometimes steals them for said purpose). The criminal element uses the same bridges which sometimes contributes to "problems" for some places.

What comes to mind at the moment (never mind the reason) is the bad stuff that's been happening about two miles out along North Main street and points west of there.

[Ohiogirl81]

What?

[Ohioan58]

Okay, CP. I know my input will be unwelcome as always but I follow your logic.

Rivers are social and economic dividing lines. Bridges are points where a steeply divided social fabric meets.

Criminals cross those bridges.

So you're saying (I think) that bridges are hot spots for crime in otherwise decent neighborhoods. Right?

I agree. In the same way that I-75 was generally chalked up by sociologists as enabling smuggling and black market activities. (That's an old story but the major freeways sort of opened up new criminal frontiers when they were built in the 60s.)

[dxdtdemon]

The two times someone has tried to rob me in Dayton, I was not on a bridge. I've driven or walked on those bridges many times and have not had anyone try to do anything nefarious to me at all while on them or near them. In case you're wondering, the places where people tried to rob me were on Salem Avenue near the art supply store that went out of business a few years ago and in St. Anne's Hill.

[SWOH]

Originally Posted by Ohioan58

Okay, CP. I know my input will be unwelcome as always but I follow your logic.

Rivers are social and economic dividing lines. Bridges are points where a steeply divided social fabric meets.

Criminals cross those bridges.

So you're saying (I think) that bridges are hot spots for crime in otherwise decent neighborhoods. Right?

I agree. In the same way that I-75 was generally chalked up by sociologists as enabling smuggling and black market activities. (That's an old story but the major freeways sort of opened up new criminal frontiers when they were built in the 60s.)

To the OP, sorry but I had no clue what you were talking about until I read Ohioan58's interpretation. Ohioan58, good read of the topic.

My response is that crime has to occur somewhere. The easiest place in general would be a public place with some privacy, like under or around a bridge, a secluded section of a park, etc. Probably the easiest solution would be to make every area of the bridge more visible. How to do this I'm not sure, better design?

Not sure if a discussion forum can do anything about this, but a community can.

[CarpathianPeasant]

Originally Posted by dxdtdemon

The two times someone has tried to rob me in Dayton, I was not on a bridge. I've driven or walked on those bridges many times and have not had anyone try to do anything nefarious to me at all while on them or near them. In case you're wondering, the places where people tried to rob me were on Salem Avenue near the art supply store that went out of business a few years ago and in St. Anne's Hill.

Seems like the art store you are talking about -- I think it was called somethiing like Ken McCallister's -- on Salem avenue was just a block or two north of the bridge there. It was a rather open area partly because the street is wide and it was close to the bridge.

I don't know anything about St. Anne's Hill.