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.
A "tough" city is one where the citizens aren't willing to take it, and people who would wish to engage in the above activities are dealt with before the cops have a chance to be called... and when the cops are called, the attitude is often, "looks like you guys sorted out your differences. Heheh."
And what city is this, where citizens always take things into their own hands? Why does that place even need a police force if everyone is such a tough guy who handles all problems? I have a feeling that place only exists in your head. Plus, "street justice" and citizens arrests occur in California too, including SF. Do i need to post some news articles for you?
A "dangerous" city is one where people who have nothing to do with anything - old folks, kids, housewives, working stiffs - are in constant danger of getting robbed, mugged, assaulted, killed, and otherwise victimized.
A "tough" city is one where the citizens aren't willing to take it, and people who would wish to engage in the above activities are dealt with before the cops have a chance to be called... and when the cops are called, the attitude is often, "looks like you guys sorted out your differences. Heheh."
In Philly every guy grows up boxing, which is why it has the richest boxing history in america, and is one of the top boxing cities in the world. Being tough is not an option, it's a neccesary way of life.
As far a as guns, and paper gangsters, we got them too, but so does everyone else.
In my experience, I find Chicago to have a very "tough" attitude. Similarly, Boston, NYC and Philly folks don't mind physically settling disputes. I'm sure there are others, but I think Chicago is particularly tough.
I find it so funny that people equate big with bad automatically. In the mid-atlantic, and mid-west, the small cities are the tougher cities.
Not only do they have higher crime rates in general than the bigger cities, including aggravated assault, but they also don't have this guise of "it's all right to run my mouth," which is what I get especially in New York.
Aggravated Assault would be the best determining factor, because it is the amount of people who actually are confronted and physically assaulted, rather than the people who are "verbally," assaulted. These are the cities where you have to "put up or shut up." These aren't the cities you may think are tough, but the ones that actually are (unless you have some drastically different definition than tough - who will fight ya vs. who won't.)
Aggravated Assault rates over 10 per 100,000 (how many people seriously attack other people.)
These are the ONLY cities over this rate (other than some towns under 40k.)
Saginaw, MI 19.8
Flint, MI 13.8
Detroit, MI 12.39
Camden, NJ 12.91
Pontiac, MI 12.17
St. Louis, MO 11.93
Memphis, TN 11.1
Wilmington, DE 10.50
The "reputably" tough cities *and runners up:
New York, NY 3.15
Irvington, NJ 8.94
Baltimore MD 8.71
Oakland, CA 8.57
Philadelphia, PA 5.7
Boston, MA 5.7
Newark, NJ 4.05
Compton, CA 9.33
Trenton, NJ 7.25
Aggravated Assault:
'Aggravated assault has been defined as an unlawful attack by one person upon another for the purpose of inflicting serious or aggravated bodily injury.'
Although, I will say NYC and Phila have the tougher barks in the country. Good for TV and movies.
We're also often called "the Fighting City of Philadelphia" or "Fight City USA." Golden Gloves is still pretty big in PA too and our fighters typically do well on the national stage. Philly is the only city I know of that has websites dedicated to its local boxing scene.
um no actually it goes back to the first retarded post you made earlier calling me a expert and agreeing that violent cities equal tough. .
and what does posting videos of fights in California prove anyway?
i can give to damns about California but still have seen plenty of fights in California through the internet and tv so i still dont understand what posting videos will prove at all.
im looking up and down the thread to see where exactly did i say that SF had no tough people. hmmmm cant find it.
What exactly did you mean by this post then, where you agreed with 415_s2k and called me out?:
Quote:
Originally Posted by nycjowww
damn this dude is speaking some truth. take that RAH
As for videos, it's to help individuals who only learn visually. I would prefer not to post them. but i will here:
Quote:
Originally Posted by 415_s2k
A "tough" city is one where the citizens aren't willing to take it, and people who would wish to engage in the above activities are dealt with before the cops have a chance to be called... and when the cops are called, the attitude is often, "looks like you guys sorted out your differences. Heheh."
Look, a mob of people in SF savagely beating down a guy who plowed through a crowd with his car...BEFORE THE COPS GOT THERE:
I don't know why you for some reason think fights and unofficial justice are extra rare in SF. SF also has a higher or almost as high aggravated assault rate as a good number of east coast cities, such as New York City, Jersey City, Newark, Providence, Pittsburgh, Boston, Philadelphia, Washington DC...i think there are more than enough "tough guys" here.
I don't know why you for some reason think fights and unofficial justice are extra rare in SF. SF also has a higher or almost as high aggravated assault rate as a good number of east coast cities, such as New York City, Jersey City, Newark, Providence, Pittsburgh, Boston, Philadelphia, Washington DC...i think there are more than enough "tough guys" here.
Rah there's tough guys everywhere, so I'm sure there's toughguys in SanFran, but the overall culture of the place does not revolve around being tough like it does in Philly.
I find it so funny that people equate big with bad automatically. In the mid-atlantic, and mid-west, the small cities are the tougher cities.
Not only do they have higher crime rates in general than the bigger cities, including aggravated assault, but they also don't have this guise of "it's all right to run my mouth," which is what I get especially in New York.
Aggravated Assault would be the best determining factor, because it is the amount of people who actually are confronted and physically assaulted, rather than the people who are "verbally," assaulted. These are the cities where you have to "put up or shut up." These aren't the cities you may think are tough, but the ones that actually are (unless you have some drastically different definition than tough - who will fight ya vs. who won't.)
Aggravated Assault rates over 10 per 100,000 (how many people seriously attack other people.)
These are the ONLY cities over this rate (other than some towns under 40k.)
Saginaw, MI 19.8
Flint, MI 13.8
Detroit, MI 12.39
Camden, NJ 12.91
Pontiac, MI 12.17
St. Louis, MO 11.93
Memphis, TN 11.1
Wilmington, DE 10.50
The "reputably" tough cities *and runners up:
New York, NY 3.15
Irvington, NJ 8.94
Baltimore MD 8.71
Oakland, CA 8.57
Philadelphia, PA 5.7
Boston, MA 5.7
Newark, NJ 4.05
Compton, CA 9.33
Trenton, NJ 7.25
Aggravated Assault:
'Aggravated assault has been defined as an unlawful attack by one person upon another for the purpose of inflicting serious or aggravated bodily injury.'
Although, I will say NYC and Phila have the tougher barks in the country. Good for TV and movies.
what a bs post. Now people are using assault rates for their claims lol.
someone running up to someone and randomly attacking them counts as assault. Doesn't mean their tough though.
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.