Is Boston more dangerous than NYC and Los Angeles?

[BostonBornMassMade]

Originally Posted by Mr. Joshua

The South End does not have a lot of shootings and less than 10% is projects. But yes, it is certainly more dangerous than Brookline.

I'm almost certain its 40% of the housing is public housing subsidized or section 8. Pretty frequently I feel like youre talking about the Back Bay. Overall I would say the South End is really nice and I wish I could live there but a lot of it is dangerous and poor. A lot of what people think is Roxbury is the South End. As for the shootings I'm not really going to retract that statement either. There probably a shooting a month, if not that at least a stabbing.

[BostonBornMassMade]

Originally Posted by lrfox

I don't think you understand what's being said about the issue with statistics vs. city limits.

Who said Boston's crime doesn't matter? All I've ever argued is that the crime statistics the OP is referring to are absolutely impacted by the political boundaries of Boston's city limits. Since Boston's city limits are only 49 square miles, the crime data posted here for Boston mostly includes the urban core. LA is 470 square miles (almost 10x larger than Boston). So the crime data includes the urban core, but it also includes a bunch of lower-density, middle class (and some better off) suburbs which offset the higher crime numbers of LA's urban core. LA's overall crime score benefits from the large city limits because that huge land area includes a lot of quieter suburbs which make the the overall score better. Boston's score is mostly based on data from inner-city neighborhoods. It doesn't benefit from a large proportion of lower density, more affluent suburbs like LA does (safer places like Milton, Dedham, Newton, Watertown, Needham, etc. would all be included in the data if all things were equal as they'd fall well within the 470 square mile radius from the city center that LA benefits from). To illustrate the point even further, Metropolitan Boston fares a good deal better than Metropolitan LA in terms of crime.

You don't need to be a rocket scientist to understand that politically boundaries like city limits- especially when they're as radically different as Boston and LA- are going to skew some data comparisons.

I don't think you understand the point im making. Just because Milton, Dedham, Newton whatever would be in Boston if it were like LA whatever they are not because Boston is way smaller than LA because Massachusetts is way smaller than California. In addition to this Boston's inner city neighborhoods are 33% of the city's land mas. Roxbury= 4sq miles, Dorchester+6 sq miles, Mattapan= 3 Square miles, then toss in one other neighborhood of your choice (Roslindale, East Boston, Hyde Park, South End.) and lets say its 3 square miles. That's 16 square miles out of 48.

Idk to me, ii think if you live in those neighborhoods like myself, I think my experience with the city is way way too different than most C-D poster who usually don't live in Boston proper if they do they don't live in one of those neighborhoods and if they do its by choice and temporary. The crime is constant and ongoing in the background of life but its always an issue. For people in inner city Boston the crime stats making us significantly higher than LA and NYC make a lot of sense.

Their bad neighborhoods have more constructive recreation, public transit and policing. They're generally less isolated culturally from the rest of the city thus minimizing the anti social behavior. They also attract lots o private charity and federal money, which Boston definitely does but not to the extent of those cities. MOST of my NYC (and even some of my Chicago) friends I met in college think that Boston's neighborhoods are scary at night. They would literally stay close to me and look around alot. They told me the housing looks old, cramped and rundown. They told me that there "aint sh*t up/out there." They told me that it was dark and sketchy. They noted how no one was outside in these neighborhoods but people who looked like "they were tryna start something." But my Chicago friend (freshmen year roommate, and best friend)after several visits, started to say alot of these inner city neighborhoods are beautiful. But we constantly come across crime scenes, hear about crimes, or witness crime when we move through RDM he always says ("yall mfs in Boston crazy.")

If you dont drive around or walk around the bad neighborhoods of Boston at night you really have no idea. Downtown Boston and its lively neighborhoods with night activity are super. My olde family members tell me the neighborhoods in the heart of the city basically were stripped of their already very limited night life from the late 1980s to the early 2000s in an effort to reduce crime. The gentrified areas on the perimiter of the hood (Mission Hill, Fort Hill, Lower Roxbury, Ashmont, Savin Hill, JFK, JP) at 4pm on Friday in October is not the same as being in 4 Corners/Bowdoin-Geneva/H-Block/Grove Hall/ Franklin Field/Wood Ave-River Street/Codman Square at night..on a weekend...in the summer. Yes, those are specific times and places but that's when the crime happens and it happens in high volume. As the data suggests. But he undercover realtors have a different story to tell. Displacement id their version of crime abatement.

Put it this way about 2 years ago I left my longtime friend a co-worker house on Waverly street in Roxbury to make the 7 minute walk home to Townsend Street at 10/1015 pm and he said "wait whoa whoa whoa, lemme get you something." He jogged upstairs and came back down down stairs 30 seconds later with a Brick....A knife....and a Police Baton. I reached for the baton and he was like "actually naw, take the brick." a few months ago, my friend who lives in Grove Hall messaged our Facebook groupchat and told us how he was walking near RCC and this dude said something (said he mirth have asked for his wallet) and then tried to grab him and reach for his back pack. Luckily my friend had a police Baton and hit the guy on the outside of his knee, scuffled with him a bit and got free. A few months prior there was a shooting on his Street. West Cottage Street. Ive had more encounters with crime myself, and when talking to friends from other cities Ive definitively ha more encounters with crime than people from NYC and LA. Wayy more than people from NYC. Way more. And I was raised in Hyde Park and was never into gangbanging nor were my friends.

Now the experiences of people I've met raised in Philly and Chicago... thats a different story.

[lrfox]

Originally Posted by BostonBornMassMade

I don't think you understand the point im making. Just because Milton, Dedham, Newton whatever would be in Boston if it were like LA whatever they are not because Boston is way smaller than LA because Massachusetts is way smaller than California. In addition to this Boston's inner city neighborhoods are 33% of the city's land mas. Roxbury= 4sq miles, Dorchester+6 sq miles, Mattapan= 3 Square miles, then toss in one other neighborhood of your choice (Roslindale, East Boston, Hyde Park, South End.) and lets say its 3 square miles. That's 16 square miles out of 48.

We're talking about numbers that are determined by imaginary lines (the city limits). LA and Boston's city limits are drawn up very, very differently. The size of California and Massachusetts are completely irrelevant. Yes, those neighborhoods you listed are some of the tougher ones, but even Back Bay, Beacon Hill, North End, South End, South Boston, etc. while safe as far as urban neighborhoods go, are going to have higher crime statistics than places like Dedham. That's why the numbers discussed in this thread are not a fair comparison. It's not a level playing field. LA has the equivalent of a bunch of Dedhams, Newtons, Miltons, and Brooklines counted in their data. It makes the crime numbers seem lower because it off-sets the worst of the worst neighborhoods. And make no mistake about it, the worst neighborhoods in LA are worse than the worst of Boston.

Your anecdotal stories are fascinating. But the statistics in a comparison between Boston's city limits and LAs aren't going to paint a fair picture because they're laid out so differently. Metro Boston is a good deal safer than Metro LA. Period.