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.
Off topic but...when I lived in PA we considered Delaware-south of the Mason-Dixon line as southern. However, down here in Mississippi Delaware is not considered to be in the South. Is it or is it not a southern state? What makes a state southern? I always thought it was the Mason-Dixon line?
LOL This is a question, Tama, that will be discussed/debated/disagreed until the end of time! LOL
Here is a pretty good link to maps which "sorta kinda" show various ways the South can be defined and/or deliniated based on multiple criteria and "averaged out".
The bottom line, IMHO, is that this question will just never be settled to everyones satisfaction. I know some in the very Deep South who limit the definition to only 3-4 states. On the other hand, the U.S. Census Bureau expands out it to 16 (and includes Delaware...which almost all Southerners scoff at!). And you'll find opinions all over the place between the two extremes! And different reasons for doing so!
Personally, I tend to define it in historical terms. That is, the 11 Old Confederate States, plus Kentucky (because it could be said to have "joined the Confederacy" after the War) as a "core" South. But yet West Virginia and to a lesser degree, Oklahoma, are much more Southern than not. From a different angle, the states below the Mason-Dixon line I would NOT apply it to are Maryland and especially Delaware.
But anyway, as you say, this is bit OT and there are other threads (oh lord, believe me there are! ) which this topic can be discussed. And never settled either! LOL
Lol I think that while the state is violent, I'm less "street afraid". I'm not afraid walking down a street but we may have a higher murder, etc. rate. I also live in a richer part of the state too though. Still violent, nonetheless.
Lol I think that while the state is violent, I'm less "street afraid". I'm not afraid walking down a street but we may have a higher murder, etc. rate. I also live in a richer part of the state too though. Still violent, nonetheless.
Yes, of course the obvious point is that no one lives equally spread out throughout the entirety of their home state. They live in a small geographic subset of their state. Given the variability in wealth and crime in the US, the "nicest" part of the most violent state is still much safer than the poorest ghetto of the safest state.
Yes, of course the obvious point is that no one lives equally spread out throughout the entirety of their home state. They live in a small geographic subset of their state. Given the variability in wealth and crime in the US, the "nicest" part of the most violent state is still much safer than the poorest ghetto of the safest state.
True. There is still violence here but I agreed with what you said.
The Southern cities tend to have crime spread out more throughout the entire metro areas, while the Northern cities tend to have the crime contained to the inner city limits and the ghetto areas. Cities like Memphis, New Orleans, Nashville, and Miami are good examples of Southern cities with crime throughout their metro areas. Contrast this with cities like Detroit, Cleveland, St. Louis, Kansas City, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, and Minneapolis who generally have the crime contained strictly to the ghetto areas and their inner city limits and are very safe in their suburban areas.
The Southern cities tend to have crime spread out more throughout the entire metro areas, while the Northern cities tend to have the crime contained to the inner city limits and the ghetto areas. Cities like Memphis, New Orleans, Nashville, and Miami are good examples of Southern cities with crime throughout their metro areas. Contrast this with cities like Detroit, Cleveland, St. Louis, Kansas City, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, and Minneapolis who generally have the crime contained strictly to the ghetto areas and their inner city limits and are very safe in their suburban areas.
I don't know about the north vs south in crime. I do know that any state within the same population as Ohio with either two million more, or two million less people has more crime than Ohio. For instance North Carolina, Michigan, New Jersey, Georgia all with lower populations have more crime than Ohio percentage wise. Pennsylvania, Illinois, New York all with higher crime as well. Sometimes the smaller states literally have more crime. Arizona being a much smaller state, but almost comparable in crime. For all the bad rap Ohio gets, one has to look at the actual facts. Ohio has proved its people are not as violent as any state relative to it in size. It also has five major cities all struggling where crime "should" be more heavy.
I think that is somewhat of an amazing thing about Ohio. You hear about violence and such so much in its cities but the reality is Ohio has more cities to account for, and often less crime totals than smaller, and larger states of similar size. So I would think Law Enforcement in Ohio should be grateful for residing in a state that defies the odds. It isn't a violence free state. But it has much less crime than any state relative to its size either by percentage based figures, or literal numbers.
Well, Irishtom, your general disdain and contempt for the South is pretty much a matter of record. The only thing I can say is that you are not terribly missed down here!
But neither here nor there, and not necessarily replying directly to you -- although in some cases it does -- I do want to make a few points directly or indirectly related to the general topic....
For one, the "murder rate" of any given place does not necessarily translate into how dangerous a place is to live. And definitely not how "civilized" it might or might not be.
Sukwoo noted earlier (and correctly) the "honor culture" which had always existed in the South. (Which I am going to define -- for my point -- as generally the Old Confederate states plus Kentucky, West Virginia and Oklahoma.) I hasten to add, by the way, I am NOT implying that Sukwoo will support anything which follows. Almost certainly not in fact. Only that I agree very much with the premise...which might or might not draw opposite conclusions!
Anyway, far as murder rate goes, it is statistically true that the rate is higher in Southern states. The thing is, "murder" has degrees in legal terms. It can range anywhere from voluntary manslaughter to First degree (Capital) murder.
Many of the killings which take place in the Southern states are of the type the average person has little to fear in terms of personal safety as involves the "killer".
Most can be traced to encounters in, say, a bar, in which there is no way to retreat without disgracing oneself. And yeah, lovers triangles. Or where it comes down to where there is little doubt a family member is in danger (i.e. your daughter or wife being stalked) and the law can do nothing about it. Or defend their homes and property. Or etc. etc. It is within an understood social code, so to speak.
Point is, the people who commit THIS type killing are not really to be feared in the sense they are going to harm "you" personally. Almost always most express remorse and wish it had not been the way it was and/or happened. As individuals, they are the type who will help you out on the highway when your car breaks down, or loan you a garden hose.
This very fact is, IMHO, a good reason why stranger on stranger crimes (when taking into account the politically incorrect demographic factors) are, if not actually less, at least no different, in Southern states/cities as compared to the northern/far western counterparts.
To put is another way, "civilized" can mean different things in different cultures. And invariably, it will involve a value judgement to some degree. Down Here, being civilized is just taken for granted. And borne out totally by the fact so many from other regions are moving in droves down here...
The thing I find ironic about this question, is that there are lots of northern cities know for crime, but not really any southern cities. In the north, you have notoriously bad areas of Detroit, Philly, Baltimore, etc.
In the south, I actually had to pause and think to see if I knew of any cities known for crime. Atlanta to an extent, maybe, but that's it.
Are you serious? You think ATl is the only crime ridden southern city? Besides Atlanta try Houston, New Orleans, Baton Rouge, Memphis, Miami, Birmingham, Jackson, Baltimore (which I consider southern), Little Rock, Richmond, and basically any other major southern city. Also Detroit is considered in the midwest not north.
i think the higher population density in northern cities make them easier for police to patrol because it is a smaller land area than the spread out slums that occupy miles and miles of land in southern cities
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.
Are you kidding me? Only Atlanta
