Crime in Atlanta - Holy cow what have I gotten myself into? (Washington: foreclosed, neighborhood)

[jurban8]

Originally Posted by rcsteiner

Because 90% or more of the homes in the metro are located outside of the city?

All things being equal, 90% or more of the home invasions should occur in suburbs, not in the city of Atlanta. Not sure of the actual percentages...

True, true. But there are still plenty of homes here that could be victimized. Maybe we don't live in the seething crawling cesspool as some OTP'ers would like to believe.

[rcsteiner]

Originally Posted by jurban8

True, true. But there are still plenty of homes here that could be victimized. Maybe we don't live in the seething crawling cesspool as some OTP'ers would like to believe.

I would much rather see numbers before coming to any conclusions.

How does the City of Atlanta compare to Cobb County, for example? Strictly going by population, Cobb County is larger than the core city, so it should have a higher base number of crimes across the board. Same with Gwinnett.

I have no idea what the actual numbers are, since those counties are fragmented into multiple municipalities with a LOT of unincorporate spaces, but that information would make for a very interesting discussion, I think.

[afonega1]

Originally Posted by Mishap

Atlanta is no more imploding than any other major city listed. Is there a crime problem in parts of the city center? Sure, but it's little different than most urban cities. There is a concentration of poverty within sections of the city proper and that can easily skew stats. The city certainly has major flaws but I'm still betting ATL has a good chance of survival and growth.

I took a look at the Atlanta homicide rate for '09 and it was 80 homicides which is a good bit lower than the 140-150 per year Atlanta experienced in 2001 and 2002. Given the robbery rate was down to 2,725 from over 4,000 in '02 it's also a good sign. The only stat that has increased is the burglary rate from 8,500 to a touch over 9,000. With how much Atlanta has grown in the last decade, holding crime steady is a fairly dramatic improvement. Outside of a repeat of the Franklin years of underreporting crimes, I think ATL police are doing their job despite fairly poor funding. I ran the numbers a while ago and saw that NYC has something like 50% more cops per capita which is a necessity given the popularity of the city as a target and the # of tourists. I definitely think cops could do a better job but given our poor management of the homeless (get rid of Peachtree Pine), they've done an ok job.

Overall stats are much better now than the last 10 yrs so I'm not too sure why you chose now to flee? As for the jobs situation...I've averaged 11% raises each year since I joined the workforce in '05. I had far more luck getting jobs and having a good quality of life compared to my peers that I graduated w/ in NY in '03. Sure a few of them are Wall St masters of the universe but most aren't close to owning a home yet and spend 2k/mon on rent. I've been able to buy a nice condo, start my MBA, buy a luxury car I don't need, spend 5 figures on bicycles, save 15% toward retirement and all w/o racking up any more debt (Ivy schools are expensive) before I turn 30. Even my friends and coworkers that did get laid off all found better jobs within 5-6 months. My sister in law broke into the six figures by getting laid off for five weeks.

Excuse...Did you say 5 figures on a bicycle?lol

[chiatldal]

Originally Posted by tahitiblue

http://os.cqpress.com/citycrime/2009/CityCrime2009_Rank_Rev.pdf
2009 City Crime Rankings
1. Camden, NJ
2. St. Louis, MO
3. Oakland, CA
4. Detroit, MI
5. Flint, MI
6. New Orleans, LA
7. Birmingham, AL
8. Cleveland, OH
...
16. Washington, DC
....
18. Atlanta, GA
....
29. Newark, NJ
...
145. Los Angeles, CA
...
256. New York, NY
According to these numbers, Atlanta is slightly safer than DC and much less safe than LA and NYC.

They're 15 cities that have a worser crime rate than Atlanta, I wonder why no care about them, and that. but yet Atlanta is spotlighted in such a way one would think it was number one, or at least top 5.

Originally Posted by tahitiblue

Here it is by metro area:
http://os.cqpress.com/citycrime/2009/MetroCrime2009_Rank_Rev.pdf
1. Pine Bluff, AR
2. Memphis, TN
3. Saginaw, MI
4. Miami-Dade FL
5. New Orleans, LA
...
70. Atlanta, GA
...
100. Los Angeles (greater), CA
...
130. Washington (greater), DC-VA-MD
...
240. New York (greater) NY
So even by entire metro area, Atlanta is less safe than LA and NYC AND less safe than the DC area.

Then look at this metro Atlanta is 70th

I not saying Atlanta crime rate is low but people are exaggerating it to the point that factual Statistics doesn’t matters. Some people psychologically brand Atlanta as a poster child for crime, regardless of the crime rate and the actual Atlanta crime ranking. So what is so special about Atlanta that yall have to pick it out the hat for the crime rate? When is the last time you even seen a thread about how bad the crime is, in these Metros specifically?

24 San Francisco, CA
32 Charlotte-Gastonia, NC-SC
55 Columbus, OH
62 Winston-Salem, NC
69 Nashville-Davidson, TN

The crime rate is not as low as Minneapolis, but Atlanta is not one of the top worst 10 in crime either. Atlanta as far as crime rate is not the best and not worst it's in the middle.

[afonega1]

Originally Posted by Bullbear

Originally Posted by rcsteiner
Minneapolis - 18
St. Paul - 13

Combined, those two are larger than the City of Atlanta population-wise.

Isn't picking numbers selectively a neat exercise?



As an Atlanta native who lived for three years in Minneapolis, I can categorically reject this assertion as utter bunk. The Twin Cities are wonderful places to live. They are economically dynamic, with an educated citizenry, and by and by and large are well run municipalities.
The natural environment, with the intown lakes and natural trails, is unsurpassed anywhere I know of in the world. People who have never been there or lived there make remarks about the weather because that is as deep as their knowledge goes.

I have to agree with you.I love Atlanta but there is plenty to love about he Twin Cities.Some of the nicest people that are mannerly, open- minded, and educated live there.While I do agree its too cold.Climate does have a lot to do with crime.Better weather does bring the criminals out.I suppose that is why most of the cities with higher crime rates are in cities with decent weather year round.

[tahitiblue]

Originally Posted by chiatldal

So what is so special about Atlanta that yall have to pick it out the hat for the crime rate?

Because this is the Atlanta forum and Atlanta is where most of us live. It's natural that we'd be more concerned about crime here than crime in other places. "Not the worst" is not a particularly ringing endorsement.

[Indentured Servant]

I have to mention that those statistics from Minneapolis are anomolies. 18 murders in 2009 and 94 murders in 199x (can't remember the year). Both of those numbers were extremes. I would say 50 is about the 10 year rolling average for Minneapolis. A lot of murder VICTIMS in Minneapolis are people from Chicago, Gary, Detroit and the like, as well as the perpetrators. The violence is really compartmentalized...which is typical of northern metros.

Again...I want to stress the point that POVERTY is widespread across city and suburbs in the South. Suburban rates of povery are relatively low in the North and is concentrated mostly in the cities. Thus, the difference maybe how crime is disbursed. For example, there are 5 million people in Metro Detroit and about 5 million people in Metro Atlanta. Metro Detroit may have 450 murders...with 360 taking place in the city of Detroit proper. In Atlanta, there might be 450 murders (hypothetical) in the metro...but only 100 in the city of Atlanta proper. Up north....the vast majority of violent crime is concentrated in the city proper, which is not as true as in the South. Iits not that criminal are driving to the suburbs from the city....its that criminal live in a lot of these suburban counties in the south.

One last point...whats rather unique about Atlanta is that ONLY about 10% of the metro population is represented by the core city. The norm is probably 20-25%. So most crime in Metro Atlanta will likely manifest outside the city limits. I think that this makes many transplants feel uncomfortable, if they come from areas where violence is concentrated in the city proper. In those places they felt safe because they felt no need to go to the city. Hence, I think that it is the difference in the suburban safety that makes many people feel that crime in Atlanta is so much worse. They are not comparing city to city...but suburbs to suburbs...

[jurban8]

Originally Posted by rcsteiner

I would much rather see numbers before coming to any conclusions.

How does the City of Atlanta compare to Cobb County, for example? Strictly going by population, Cobb County is larger than the core city, so it should have a higher base number of crimes across the board. Same with Gwinnett.

I have no idea what the actual numbers are, since those counties are fragmented into multiple municipalities with a LOT of unincorporate spaces, but that information would make for a very interesting discussion, I think.

Agreed

[waronxmas]

Originally Posted by chiatldal

The crime rate is not as low as Minneapolis, but Atlanta is not one of the top worst 10 in crime either. Atlanta as far as crime rate is not the best and not worst it's in the middle.

Which is a miracle and something that is a good thing. People want to act like we're trying to ignore reality, but I grew up in Southwest during the 80s and 90s: Atlanta today is like the garden of eden in comparison.

[sonofstarwars74]

Originally Posted by Indentured Servant

I think that I understand what the original OP was saying. In many places the “poor” are compartmentalized, isolated, segregated to certain areas. That is true for many Northern Cities and out West as well. The South is different because metro area expansion encompassed many poor rural areas. So in other words, there are large pockets of poor people all over the south, from the city to the suburbs. Hence, its harder to “feel safe” in a metro area like Atlanta, than a Metro area like Detroit, if you are a person who can afford to live where they want. In Metro Detroit, because it is so segregated by race and class, you can avoid a lot of crime by simply staying out of the city of Detroit. You cannot do that in Metro Atlanta, because poverty and crime plagues the suburb and city. That is true for most Southern Metros. Hence, people who move from say Troy Michigan, a suburb of Detroit, to Cobb County Georgia will feel a lot less safe than they did in the Detroit area, even though the City of Detroit’s crime rate is extremely high. Now, on the other hand, if you take a person who lived in the city of Detroit and they moved to the city of Atlanta, they will generally feel a little safer in Atlanta. It’s even more granular than that. You can live in a low crime rate city but live in a very high crime rate neighborhood or you can live in a high crime rate city in a low crime rate neighborhood.

I tend to think that if you grew up around crime….that you pretty much can live anywhere without being totally taken back by crime. However, if you grew up in the comfort of a low crime area….you will have a hard time adjusting to a place like Atlanta….because it really does not offer the type of isolation that would allow you to live “in comfort”.

These are great points actually and I think a really important perspective for folks like me who have lived in NYC/LA (and the other cities you mention above) to hear. As silly as it sounds, I never really considered that cities could be different from region to region (e.g. a big city is a big city is a big city). Very interesting stuff and you're right - it challenges my core assumptions of what "urban" living even is.