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.
There had to be way more shootings than that. Detroit, LA, STL, Baltimore, Houston, etc there's no way they went a day without a shooting. If survival rates are 20%, there has to be at least 1,000 shooting victims a year in most of these cities. That's at least 3 wounded a day. And if someone is hit in even 40% of shots fired calls then there should be at least 2,500 shootings in most of these cities a year (6-7 a day).
And if we expanded it to metro area these numbers are even higher (they would about double for NY and LA). But I see 3 shootings in Maine but none in the whole LA area, Detroit, etc.
Well I can't speak for everyone else but things are definitely starting to heat up in our fine Nation's Capital. We are now at 57 and the summer just got started. Well at least the President is safe. Or is he??
I live in St Louis city and dont feel unsafe. A good percent of the homicides happen in less than 1/3 of the city. Is it bad? Yes. Is it a war zone? If you make it that. There are plenty of decent areas to live in within St Louis city.
Your kidding right ? 1/3rd of the city? The North side is already almost half of the city and there's no safe spot up here for murder. The west part of the northside which covers even more space has murders frequently. And the south neighborhoods such as dutchtown gravois park and bevo mill have murder problems as well. 1/3rd ? Lol funny.
Hmmm, all of your posts are about this topic... Who doesn't know about St. Louis and its high murder rates? It has gotten the joke of a headline "most dangerous" multiple times, and sorry but I totally disagree with you because I think crime in St. Louis, despite being a major problem, is actually overplayed by media.
The "rate" that is calculated uses only around 15% of the region's population (ballparking this for now), as St. Louis, an independent city not in St. Louis county, has tiny city limits (62 sq miles of land) that make comparing it to other cities that can have 10x as much land area and include tons of their suburbs (thus hiding/diluting the states) completely apples to oranges and worthless. The fact that you mention and shrug off Memphis clearly shows that you don't get this. Memphis is the exact opposite, it has huge city limits that includes tons of suburbs and it still has a super high murder rate. If you do the same for St. Louis and add its suburbs it results in dozens upon dozens of cities coming out as "more dangerous" than St. Louis... yet St. Louis (and when people say St. Louis, they're thinking of the region of almost 3 million people, not just the tiny city limits) always gets trashed for this.
There are advantages to the tiny city limits, per capita stats show St. Louis performing exceptionally in tons of categories: I think it comes in 2nd behind DC for museums, things like libraries, green space, other cultural measures, etc. (from memory) Does St. Louis get credit for this??? No! People see St. Louis up near the top in the US and immediately attack the number since it just uses meaningless city limits, then turn around and forget all that when posting crime stats, because hey, it's St. Louis... St. Louis gets screwed on both sides.
A poster in this thread even commented about KC's super high crime rate (another city with massive, suburb filled limits) and asked if it was becaue of gangs coming from St. Louis! Lol, are people serious? KC also has a huge crime and abandonment problem, and its MSA often comes out as more dangerous than St. Louis, but St. Louis catches all the flack...
How many times have I heard this one. Smh... let's see. I suppose since St. Louis is like the only city with this small city limit area (sarcasm). We should include every suburb of every city. Becasue if you throw in our metro then every city needs there metro thrown in too. I don't care if a city limit was 2 Sq miles. If in those 2 sq miles there are 20 murders then that place is bad. Just how the "small area" of the REAL St. Louis is bad. If you're from a suburb of stl let it be Clayton, Ferguson, Kirkwood? Guess what.. you're not from St. Louis 😃. You're from a suburb and a different city.
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.
Detroit, LA, STL, Baltimore, Houston, etc there's no way they went a day without a shooting. If survival rates are 20%, there has to be at least 1,000 shooting victims a year in most of these cities. That's at least 3 wounded a day. And if someone is hit in even 40% of shots fired calls then there should be at least 2,500 shootings in most of these cities a year (6-7 a day).
R.I.P.