Ohio cities homicide rates (Columbus, Cleveland: to live in, dangerous, stats)

[jam40jeff]

What's important to me is to stress that Cleveland is a big city with crime problems, but not crime problems unusual to other big cities. Yes, there is too much crime. But this is the case with every big city, Columbus included. I'm not trying to prove Columbus is MORE dangerous than Cleveland, but I believe they are similar. If you live in Beachwood or Westlake, you identify with being from Cleveland. It just so happens that in Columbus these suburban areas are counted as part of the city proper. It doesn't make living in the Columbus area any safer than living in the Cleveland area. If you like urban areas, you will most likely either live in Cleveland proper or an urban area of Columbus, which has a VERY SIMILAR crime rate as Cleveland (for the central city population of 220,000 people). If you enjoy living in suburban areas, you will either live in a suburb of Cleveland, or a suburban area of Columbus proper or a suburb of Columbus, all of which have VERY SIMILAR crime rates. My whole point comes down to boundaries. If Cleveland regionalized, your crime stats would be thrown out the window overnight, with no actual change in safety to any of the residents. That is why we have MSA stats. If you can find me Columbus central city stats (the inner city 220k of population) that prove me wrong, then I will listen. Otherwise, I maintain that the cities are similar with regards to crime. I am really dumbfounded that this is so hard to understand. It's really simple math and analyzing statistics (the meaning of them not just the raw numbers).

And, I have seen the urban areas of both quite extensively, and I can guarantee you Columbus has areas just as bad as the worst parts of Cleveland.

[BelieveInCleve]

This is the part that you dont understand.

Lets say that Cleveland annexed any one of the inner ring suburbs either before they were incorporated and built up, or early on before they built up and situated as suburbs. Do you really think they would be the same suburbs that they are today? Maybe East Cleveland would be, but do you seriously think any of the others would be? Ill give you an obvious example. I believe it was Warrensville or one of the suburbs bordering Cleveland to the SE. On the block of the Cleveland side it was mostly run down houses, vacant lots and abandoned homes with a very high crime rate with murders, and on the suburb side most the homes were in good shape with neat yards with relatively low crime compared to that. If that suburb was part of Cleveland it would be just like the Cleveland side.

Do you understand what Im saying now? Another example like that, Bratenahl. Bratenahl would not be nearly that nice if it had been annexed by Cleveland before it was built up. Right across the highway are some of the worst neighborhoods in the city, Glenville and Forest Hills. Yet another example is Shaker Hts. Look at the map of murders, just 1-2 blocks to the Cleveland side there is murder after murder off of Buckeye and Woodland. Newburgh Hts, Brooklyn, Euclid, and most of the bordering suburbs are in the same situation as that. Even if these areas were annexed today they would go downhill extremely fast, there would be a DRAMATIC change in safety within just a few years.

Even the people from Columbus will admit that there arent any areas as bad as the worst areas in Cleveland. Where at in Columbus then? Uzi alley is gone. Cleveland ave? Livingston? E Main? No. No place in Columbus is as bad as areas in Cleveland from say E30th to say E131st/East Cleveland. Off St.Clair, Superior, Woodland, Kinsman, Harvard, even some areas on the westside. I dont even know why I have to explain this. Cleveland is in much worse shape than Columbus as far as crime. The MSA stats may be similar but the city stats are not any way you look at it. And you say if Columbus was at 220k it would be comparable? Wouldnt that be apples to oranges? The boundaries have been changed for decades, things change, and plus thats not 75% or whatever % you said it was.

[Mr614]

There are places in every major city in Ohio that are as worst as Cleveland places...Crime happens everywhere. The way you talking you would think that Cleveland invented crime. Have you been to some of the places in Columbus that you're talking about, and I don't mean just riding down the street neither?

[BelieveInCleve]

Originally Posted by Mr614

There are places in every major city in Ohio that are as worst as Cleveland places...Crime happens everywhere. The way you talking you would think that Cleveland invented crime. Have you been to some of the places in Columbus that you're talking about, and I don't mean just riding down the street neither?

Ive lived off Cleveland ave. near 26th ave. Ive lived near Lockburne and Whittier. Ive been down Livingston, Miller, E Main, Joyce, etc. Ive been to nearly every major street in Columbus and every "hood" there. Im talking about for months and visited many many times.

None of those areas compare to the worst areas in Cleveland and my friends/family in Columbus know that very well. This should not even be an argument, its well known and thats just the way it is. Im not trying to make Cleveland look worse, if anything its you trying to make Columbus look worse. All Im doing is trying to get people to understand the truth. The only other cities in Ohio that have areas near as bad as the worst in Cleveland/EC are Youngstown, Dayton, possibly Cincinnati and maybe Columbus (not as bad though).

I realize that Columbus has ghettos and am not trying to downplay it at all, but to say that Columbus is worse or comparable to Cleveland city in crime rate, or that its worst areas are worse or comparable to Clevelands is completely ridiculous.

[Buckeye 89]

sheesh

nothing has changed huh...right at the top of the page a thread about crime and cle right in the middle of it....suprising

[BelieveInCleve]

You know what else hasnt changed...

[jam40jeff]

Originally Posted by Cle440

Ill give you an obvious example. I believe it was Warrensville or one of the suburbs bordering Cleveland to the SE. On the block of the Cleveland side it was mostly run down houses, vacant lots and abandoned homes with a very high crime rate with murders, and on the suburb side most the homes were in good shape with neat yards with relatively low crime compared to that. If that suburb was part of Cleveland it would be just like the Cleveland side.

Huh? Warrensville Heights is one of the highest crime suburbs behind East Cleveland. Garfield Heights is also close. These places would most likely be no better or worse off if they were part of Cleveland. For a counter example, how about Edgewater, West Park, Old Brooklyn, Shaker Square, and University Circle? Those are all neighborhoods on the outer edges of Cleveland which have always been maintained well and safe places to live. Shouldn't those have gone to pot as a part of this magical "Cleveland effect" you speak of?

Originally Posted by Cle440

Another example like that, Bratenahl. Bratenahl would not be nearly that nice if it had been annexed by Cleveland before it was built up. Right across the highway are some of the worst neighborhoods in the city, Glenville and Forest Hills.

How do you know this? Bratenahl is full of $10 million mansions on the lake. It is a richer version of Edgewater, which is in Cleveland and has remained beautiful. Plus, it has a freeway and railroad tracks serving as a buffer between it and the struggling inner city neighborhoods to the south. There is nothing that proves to me this neighborhood wouldn't be just the same as it is now if it was part of the city of Cleveland. (Did you know that Bratenahl is in the Cleveland Metropolitan School District? Although I'm sure very little or zero of the residents use the public schools).

Originally Posted by Cle440

Yet another example is Shaker Hts. Look at the map of murders, just 1-2 blocks to the Cleveland side there is murder after murder off of Buckeye and Woodland.

The history of Shaker Heights is that it is a garden suburb built as a planned streetcar and rail (rapid transit) development by the Van Sweringens. It was built for the wealthy, whereas the older areas to the west were not. It is pretty hard to say what this area would be like if it were simply part of teh city of Cleveland rather than its own city.

Originally Posted by Cle440

Even the people from Columbus will admit that there arent any areas as bad as the worst areas in Cleveland.

So it is a competition to you to be able to say how "tough" you are to be from a bad city? Wouldn't most people want to dispell a notion that their city is really bad if they thought someone was giving it a bad name unnecessarily? Of course Columbus people would be less willing to admit this. That's like saying Cleveland people are more likely to root for the Indians than New Yorkers.

Originally Posted by Cle440

Where at in Columbus then? Uzi alley is gone. Cleveland ave? Livingston? E Main?

I know the area south and east of German Village is pretty bad. Also, around 5th Ave. east of I-71 and the area just east of Capital University (south of Bexley). If anything, Cleveland may have some dense pockets of crime, whereas in Columbus it's spread a little more evenly. I think this actually makes Columbus feel MORE dangerous to the average person, as you don't really know which neighborhoods to avoid.

Originally Posted by Cle440

The boundaries have been changed for decades, things change, and plus thats not 75% or whatever % you said it was.

I don't even really know what that sentence means. But my last argument before I give up on this is that Columbus and Cleveland are two regions. In Columbus the central city has annexed more land, so that some people living in "suburbia" are still technically part of the city proper. In Cleveland, people living in "suburbia" are always part of a suburb. However, these people still identify themselves as being from Cleveland. Does it really matter where the boundaries happen to be drawn today? As you said, these boundaries can change, but what is much more static is that there is a region encompassing the local economies of these two places (which the census defines as an MSA). Yes, the city of Cleveland has a much higher crime rate than Columbus. However, you are much more liekly to have the opportunity to live relatively close to downtown in a suburban or even an urban area (many inner-rings) and NOT be within the city limits of Cleveland than you are in Columbus. Thus, it IS comparing apples to oranges and simply makes for some good Forbes lists about what a terrible place Cleveland is. Those of us that have been around the country and actually live here (I know you live in Lorain County) know that there are many crime problems that need to be improved, but that Cleveland surely isn't far and away the most dangerous place in the country or a war zone everywhere you look like some would have you believe.

[scoob]

Youngstown (9) homicides pop: 70,000

http://www.mapbuilder.net/users/mprelee/70263

Still high but still down from last year...............

[Beavercreek33]

You know whats funny. I realize this is the Ohio forum, but people pin-point Ohio's cities as being these terrible cities with horrible crime rates, and yes, the crime is bad, but its bad everywhere. Ohio has a lot of big cities, and in big cities you will face crime problems. I don't see anyone in this thread talking about the crime down in Miami, Phoenix, Philadelphia, Detroit, Chicago, St. Louis, Baltimore, or New Orleans. All these cities have worse crime probelms than Cleveland, Cincinnati, or Columbus.

Just an observation...

[BelieveInCleve]

Miami, Phoenix, Philadelphia, and Chicago all have lower crime rates than Youngstown and Cleveland. Cincinnati and Dayton have higher crime rates than most of those as well.

http://os.cqpress.com/citycrime/City...8_Rank_Rev.pdf
Or even the City-Data rankings.

Just saying.