Most Dangerous Cities... (Los Angeles, San Diego, San Jose: crime rates, stats, safest)

[Hegotsoul831]

Originally Posted by nowincal11

Compton is a separate municipality from the city of Los Angeles and has around 95K people, but it is within Los Angeles County.

Keep in mind that these stats only include hard crimes like homicide, sexual assault, battery, robbert, etc., not narcotics dealing, prostitution, gambling, gang membership, etc.

The perception of crime among residents is also important. I bet if they polled people from Pacoima, they would say that they feel unsafe and the crime rate is higher than it appears on paper because of drug dealing, prostitution, gangs..

Good point. As are Long Beach, Pasadena and Anaheim, home of Disneyland. But shortsighted people lump them together with Los Angeles.

[majoun]

Originally Posted by tceffo

Some body that actually lives in Oakland-
--OR Richmond-
-can you give me a un biased opinion . Offered a position in the area, Im thinking about it- -I live near Newark NJ , and I know that city , while not the safest- get a bad rap -

Thanks

Just like Ironbound in Newark is just fine, many parts of Oakland are just fine. Oakland violence is concentrated in West Oakland and parts of East Oakland. A pretty large part of the city is at least relatively safe. The areas closest to Berkeley are quite safe like Rockridge and Clairmount, even Temescal which at one time had a bad rep is relatively safe. If one compares Oakland with Newark, the areas of Oakland that are at least OK are larger than the areas of Newark that are at least OK.

As for Richmond, there are a couple of OK neighborhoods but most of it is pretty bad -the Iron Triangle is amongst the worst neighborhoods in the state.

[majoun]

Originally Posted by nowincal11

New Orleans
Baton Rouge
Kansas City
Dayton

All those actually have large white populations.

And Buffalo's white majority.

Go up to Palmdale and Lancaster in LA County---the desert ghettos. Overwhemingly white. Same with plenty of the Inland Empire.

Palmdale and Lancaster are no longer "overwhelmingly white", they're pretty mixed now, but there are some very scummy and dangerous whites there who are as just as scummy, dangerous, and crime-prone as any other groups living there.

The stats above only deal with hard crime such as homicide, robbery assault, battery.

If one could quantify narcotics, street prostitution, and the numbers took into account DUIs (which in my opinion are probably second to homicide and sex crimes as the most serious), the cities represented would look vastly different.

Street prostitution and street drug dealing usually affect other crime statistics. Of course, if those lists included drug dealing and prostitution in private, then Beverly Hills would be really, really high on such a list, but it's when it's on the street that other problems are generated....

[West of Encino]

Originally Posted by majoun

And Buffalo's white majority.



Palmdale and Lancaster are no longer "overwhelmingly white", they're pretty mixed now, but there are some very scummy and dangerous whites there who are as just as scummy, dangerous, and crime-prone as any other groups living there.



Street prostitution and street drug dealing usually affect other crime statistics. Of course, if those lists included drug dealing and prostitution in private, then Beverly Hills would be really, really high on such a list, but it's when it's on the street that other problems are generated....

I heard whites can be pretty racist in Antelope Valley. Lancaster is run by the Lowriders gang.

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by tceffo

Some body that actually lives in Oakland-
--OR Richmond-
-can you give me a un biased opinion . Offered a position in the area, Im thinking about it- -I live near Newark NJ , and I know that city , while not the safest- get a bad rap -

Thanks

Both Oakland and Richmond have way more to offer than what their crime rates would imply. I would venture to say that even in the Bay Area, most people are clueless when it comes to Oakland and what the city is about. I dont blame them tho, the local media loves to exploit everything that happens in Oakland.

Oakland

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1369/...8c1650b1_b.jpg

[DynamoLA]

Very interesting. So L.A.'s crime rate is lower than the "paradises" of Seattle, Denver, San Antonio, Charlotte, San Francisco, Salt Lake City, Nashville, Vegas, Orlando, Houston, Dallas, and DC.

In fact, the only "big" cities that appear to have lower crime rates are NYC, San Diego, Portland, San Jose, Honolulu, and El Paso. Not surprised by that list except for El Paso. (And so much for the theory espoused by some posters that only "white" places can have low crime -- El Paso, NYC, and L.A. are not exactly white-washed).

Remind me to bring this up the next time someone says they are moving away from L.A. because it's too "dangerous".

In addition, in the first quarter (Jan-Mar), L.A. recorded a 12.5% drop in homicides and violent crimes from the year earlier (which, last year, as noted previously, was the lowest rate of crime since the 60s).

[durf]

Philly is among the most dangerous city and is a rough town.

[nowincal11]

Originally Posted by durf

Philly is among the most dangerous city and is a rough town.

And half white.

[durf]

I must add Chicago on the list since it's the murder capital of the U.S..

[nowincal11]

Originally Posted by durf

I must add Chicago on the list since it's the murder capital of the U.S..

Chicago is demographically even though. Roughly 33% Black, 30% White, 30% Hispanic, the rest are Asian or other.