Oakland, Richmond named among the most dangerous cities (Los Angeles, San Francisco: transplants, private school)

[sonarrat]

Originally Posted by Ultrarunner

I own property there and have since 1985 and it's like night and day better today then it was in the 80's...

So is everywhere in Oakland. The crack epidemic made so many inner cities all over the country crumble in the 80's. Brookfield Village isn't like Havenscourt where you'll have violent crimes happening on every block and in every intersection, but at the least, it's block to block and some are really not nice.

Locals still call Brookfield "Quiet Village"

As a side note... I'm fascinated the the city of Peidment... completely surrounded by Oakland and ONLY accessible through Oakland is and has been highly sought after real estate... and no, one doesn't have to pass checkpoints to enter of leave.

It's #39 on this list: http://www.city-data.com/top2/c536.html

[bayarea-girl]

Gizmo980, I'm not sure if you have read the entire postings from this subject matter? You might understand me better if you started from the beginning of the post (not trying to get personal). But a lot of the posters are saying that crime isn't that bad in Oakland. If a city is in the top 10 for crime in the nation and is top of the list in crime for its state then it is that bad. Every city has crime yes, but Oakland/Richmond is unusual.

If you have only worked in Oakland for a year (have you lived there), you didn't see Oakland when I lived there. It was really bad then. Things have gotten better in some ways but not to a point where I would want to move back. Just because nothing has not happened to you yet doesn't mean that it can't and won't. I use to feel the same way until certain things happened to me. In broad daylight I helped an Asian lady who was being robbed and beat by a young kids in Oakland (they stole her purse and jewlery, I had to drive my car on top of the curb to stop them from beating her this was right by Lake Merrit). I was robbed and had my car stolen. My husband was robbed. Restaurants that I loved going to in Oakland now have armed security. I lived in the same building as a petifile. How many times can one go to Lake Merrit and see condoms and needles with kids? Too many things that had happened to me before I realized Oakland has a huge problem and is not for me.

Can't keep repeating myself but if you haven't lived in a place and make comments about it especially when you have seen one concentrated area it is a level of ignorance for me. I don't think many are speaking from experience they have ideas or thoughts or what they heard about a place but didn't spend too much time to make an accurate statement. I have relatives all over the place and have visited them all over the place but I am not the perfect person to tell them how their area is. For example, people might come and visit me I live lin Roswell GA. They might go back to Cali and say that they visited me in ATL and how boring it was. Well I live in a suburb N. of Atlanta, they are not experts because they visited me once or twice or however long in GA (because they haven't lived here). If you have family in So. Cal and have seen them (2 or 3 times a year for 1 or 2 days, not an expert).

Again, every one is enititled to their opionion. Can't take that away from you and yes your opion is valid. No one said it wasn't. I just disagree with it.

Also, CityBoy sure places have depreciated in value all across the country. This is true. But since I can remember Beverly Hills (for example) properties have been in the millions FOR YEARS. The Oakland Hills not the case. I can remember when homes in Oakland were going for $60K (when I first moved to Oakland). At one time there was this house I fell in love with one year saw it for $70K, then the next year it was $185K, it went all the way up to $900K in less than 10 years. Guess what it is worth today ($210K and it will continue to drop)? In Beverly Hills (for example) you won't see a home loose that much value it just will never happen because that area has always been desireable and the same thing for areas of San Francisco. But areas in Oakland have not always been desireable it is a recent phenomeon and that is why homes are really bottoming out there.

[bayarea-girl]

Also, Piedmont has crime because people from Oakland are committing crimes against people with money. Let's see how long Piedmont stays desirable.

[baybook]

This is silly. Every place is not for everybody.

Obviously, Oakland is not for you. I lived thee 35 years and never experienced the problems you list. Nor have any of my family members. Never! And no, I'm not insulated from life/the city in a multi million dollar Oakland Hills home.

Piedmont existed and was desirable long before you and I were born. And it continues to be.

Originally Posted by bayarea-girl

Also, Piedmont has crime because people from Oakland are committing crimes against people with money. Let's see how long Piedmont stays desirable.

[bayarea-girl]

Baybook, you as many other posters have forgotten the point of the subject matter as it relates to the original post. This is not whether or not Oakland or Richmond is for everyone (or if it is for me). It is about the crime level. If you have not experienced acts of violence Oakland is known for consider yourself very fortunate.

[gizmo980]

Originally Posted by bayarea-girl

Gizmo980, I'm not sure if you have read the entire postings from this subject matter? You might understand me better if you started from the beginning of the post (not trying to get personal). But a lot of the posters are saying that crime isn't that bad in Oakland. If a city is in the top 10 for crime in the nation and is top of the list in crime for its state then it is that bad. Every city has crime yes, but Oakland/Richmond is unusual.

No, I haven't read every post in the thread... so I apologize if my comments weren't accurate, but I am just going on what I've read recently. I'd be surprised if people denied any crime problems exist in these cities, since clearly they have some issues. I just don't think it's as bad as you make it out to be, and obviously lots of folks are happy living there. Oakland in particular has improved a lot, and I don't even feel that unsafe in the worst parts. But hey, that's just me!

If you have only worked in Oakland for a year (have you lived there), you didn't see Oakland when I lived there. It was really bad then. Things have gotten better in some ways but not to a point where I would want to move back.

I haven't lived in Oakland, but I did grow up around here... so I know all about how it used to be. Still, people lived there and liked it back then - right?

Just because nothing has not happened to you yet doesn't mean that it can't and won't. I use to feel the same way until certain things happened to me.

Of course it doesn't mean I'm 100% safe, and I am street-smart enough to keep my wits about me (no matter what neighborhood I'm in). Sorry you had bad experiences, but I don't let fear keep me from living life. Attitude plays a big part too, and I think my demeanor keeps me from getting messed with... I'm friendly but tough, and you can tell I ain't no tourist. I do get hit on a lot in Richmond & Oakland, but know how to smile and keep walking - good for the ego though, LOL.

Too many things that had happened to me before I realized Oakland has a huge problem and is not for me.

That's fine... not every place is right for everyone! But we all have valid experiences, so if you want respect for yours you must give us respect in turn.

[baybook]

I'm aware of the original topic. But this is getting silly.

Originally Posted by bayarea-girl

Baybook, you as many other posters have forgotten the point of the subject matter as it relates to the original post. This is not whether or not Oakland or Richmond is for everyone (or if it is for me). It is about the crime level. If you have not experienced acts of violence Oakland is known for consider yourself very fortunate.

[bayarea-girl]

Gizmo980, again respect your views but don't agree with them and think my point has been proven. Also, no matter how street smart you look (and it is a shame to have to be "street smart") that when some one has a gun it doesn't matter how big, tall, or the way you look. It is ok for people to like Oakland that is not the subject, if people like it that is their view point. I have friends that grew up there and like it (we actually have a lot of heated debates, but they often give in when it comes to the crime part).

Baybook, not sure which part is getting silly? Is it silly to have your opinion of a place? Is it silly for people who have never lived in a place to make comments about a place? Is it silly that I have had my own experiences with Oakland and am communicating them? Is it silly for people to ignore public reports and statistics on Oakland/Richmond crime and compare it to other places that didn't make the top 10? Is it silly to say because something hasn't happened to them that a place doesn't have a problem? Whether you still want to keep saying that communicating on an open forum that ones view points are silly?

[Taboo2]

Originally Posted by bayarea-girl

CityBoy, you don't have to address me. I was only stating my opinion after all this is a free country right?

ACTUALLY this is a private message board with TOS and rules and if they are violated by talking smack to another poster than you are going to get kicked off of here. Pretty sure that is how it works.

A world traveler I am have lived in other countries as well as other cities across the nation (I've lived in NJ, NY, LA, GA (currently), Berkeley, San Rafael, SF, Oakland, Pinole, countries in So. America, Africa, Europe, and Japan to name a few).

Love the net, can say anything you want. How would we know it is true?

It always amazed me how often when I asked people from Oakland where have they been or even if they have been to SF and most likely they haven't been any where more surspringly they never visited SanFran.

That is a completely ignorant blanket statement. Who have you asked from Oakland? I cannot fathom anyone from that town purposefully speaking to someone who hates that town.

That is the most absurd thing i have heard. People from Oakland don't go to SF? Sure they don't. Because you know every resident of Oakland personally right?????

[bayarea-girl]

Taboo2, you are right you can get kicked off of this post for I guess talking "Smack" which I believe you are doing. If you don't like other people's opinion or point of view it surprises me that you live in the Bay Area since it is supposed to be a liberal environment. Didn't realize everyone had to think like you.

Unlike people who have posted I don't make things up. My life experiences of where I lived and or traveled might bore some and inspire others but this is subject is not about me. It is about crime in Oakland/Richmond. Also, never said I spoke to everyone in Oakland but a lot of the people I did come into contact with had never been to SanFran and I thought that was strange. Just like the same people never went to Napa, again thought that was strange. That is my view point and my experience it doesn't have to be the same as yours. If it bothers you or others that Oakland/Richmond has problems and people like me write about it really is your problem and not mine (or you should take it up with the OP). I believe the OP brought it up to be a discussion point and not entertaining or wishful thinking about a place. Why does this subject have to be so personal? It really doesn't make sense.