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.
Location: Metro Atlanta (Sandy Springs), by way of Macon, GA
2,014 posts, read 5,096,883 times
Reputation: 2089
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColdAilment
Very interesting question. I'm glad you asked.
Honestly, Chicago gets way more hate than it deserves. That 500 murders was only one year, and when put on paper as murders per capita it was actually much lower than several other cities, namely Detroit and New Orleans who had a murder rate THREE times higher than Chicago in 2012.
It is primarily Chicago's south side that hosts all of the violence, you won't hear about a shooting insde of the Loop, but you will hear about a shooting on Bourbon Street in New Orleans. They've had at least one shooting on Bourbon street every year for the past THREE years.
If New Orleans doesn't have a reputation for a dangerous city, it deserves it. However, the city is probably a lot better now than what it was pre-Katrina. Such a disgusting cesspool. Never had I seen such a huge separation in wealth, the haves and the have nots, people living without a care in the world right next to the people who had nothing in this world. It really was a sickening city in many ways, and the crime only intensified because of this major divide.
New Orleans, Memphis, and Little Rock are probably all underrated in how serious their crime problem is. The only cities you really hear about are Chicago and Detroit, when Chicago is not that bad.
That's very true about Chicago. I always point out Chicago's per capita murder rate when people start acting like it's the most dangerous city around.
I still think Flint sucks more than Gary and ESTL because at least those two towns are part of two major metros and have more potential. Flint is not even part of the Detroit metro.
On the first link for East St. Louis, if you simply turn the view slightly there's a stop sign with "GD" (Gangster Disciples) tagged on it. Wow, and that's a GOOD part of East St. Louis?
Even with this talk of reputations and yada yada, I want to establish something here:
America is still a nation with a higher violent crime rate than the rest of the industrialized/first world. That crime rate nationally has been slashed by more than half since 1980, despite what the media might have you believe, but the rate is still 2-4x the rates found in the Netherlands, France, Germany, Canada, etc. That's the bottom line.
The only major metropolitan regions in this county with murder and violent crime rates on Canadian, Dutch, etc. levels are Orange County, CA, Westchester County, NY, and Fairfax County, VA. These are suburban counties near major cities.
The Boston and San Jose regions might qualify also (I can't say definitively and I'm almost in bed, so I won't look tonight), but even those cities have pockets of higher crime and the suburbs help balance out the cities. Not even Greater New York technically qualifies yet; even with much safer Westchester, North NJ (not including Newark) and Long Island factored in, and even with NYC's massive plummet in crime considered, the murder rate for the region is still around 2.8 per 100,000 residents.
I will be willing to consider America truly safe once our violent crime levels approach those in Europe. We actually might have or almost have our property crime rates under control for the most part (yes, yes, unless you live in east Oakland, Detroit, or Birmingham, I get that...) And, not to get too political, but I am a firm believer in the Second Amendment; states' expansions of our accessibility to use that right have played a big role in our country's gradually dropping crime rate. We can more easily defend ourselves again. Of course, reinvestment and "breath of fresh air" leadership in many cities has also been very instrumental in reducing crime.
Last edited by EclecticEars; 07-02-2014 at 12:31 AM..
That second picture you posted of East St. Louis is government subsidized housing, hope you realize that. They are nice houses, but the people living in them are dirt poor, and the crime rate in the area is probably still relatively high.
Not saying by a broad stroke or anything, but I'm betting Gary has nice neighborhoods overall.
The Gary images actually don't look too bad.
The first ESTL image, you still wouldn't catch me walking around during the daytime. The second, clearly subsidized/government-owned housing.
Great, thanks for the links. Now address the fact that the violent crime rate is seven times the national average, please.
Maybe you're choosing to ignore the actual forum post and question or maybe you're forgetting what it is. Let me copy the question so you know what is it:
**** Cities with worse reputations for Crime than they deserve Vs. Cities with seemingly worse crime than stats suggest****
Just like any city, Flint has nicer areas and more dangerous areas. DESPITE THE CRIME STATS, Flint isn't all out bad. Some parts are nice and don't look that bad, one of the most important of all that, the downtown, which looks like it has plenty of redevelopment coming under way. Some residential areas also look good.
Last edited by CCrest182; 07-02-2014 at 03:30 AM..
The first ESTL image, you still wouldn't catch me walking around during the daytime. The second, clearly subsidized/government-owned housing.
The only thing keeping Gary from looking like part of Iraq are a few redeveloped buildings. Other than that, it's pretty bad. Remember, this is *downtown* Gary, not just any ordinary street.
Last edited by CCrest182; 07-02-2014 at 03:29 AM..
I still think Flint sucks more than Gary and ESTL because at least those two towns are part of two major metros and have more potential. Flint is not even part of the Detroit metro.
Of course there are nicer parts of both cities. I was referring to the downtown though, which basically shows the true colors and reflects off of a city as a whole, for the most part. A thriving downtown is good. Downtown Flint looks almost IMO better than Downtown Detroit, it has multiple restaurants and businesses operating, and I don't mean the type you'd find in the ghetto. I mean real middle to upscale casual restaurants, as well as new apartment buildings. Downtown Gary has almost no businesses except for that resource center, a couple of boarded up hair salons and a small old diner, and the convention center (which is also boarded up, might I remind you).
BTW, I certainly wouldn't call the first plot you put in East St Louis a "nice pocket" . The houses look small, the lawns look terribly treated, and there appears to be graffiti on the stop sign. The second plot looks fine, though these aren't residences where rich people or middle class families live. These are newly gentrified housing payed for by the government, and these could be found in any 'hood in America really, that doesn't say much, especially given these are only a few blocks out of several others that truly are terrible. Gary does also have some nicer areas, but these areas are normally right across the street from another area that looks like hell. The only true nice "part" of Gary is the far northeast corner, known as "Miller Beach". The section along the lake is almost a vacation spot for some Chicagoans, but still, even here there is lots of crime.
Another tid bit, Gary is around 83% black and East St Louis is 97% black, which means both cities have witnessed massive amounts of white flight, and on top of that, the black population too is fleeing there. The current pop in Gary is around 77k and East St Louis is 26k, both populations have been dropping for decades and continue to drop. Flint has around 100k people living there.
Flint on the other hand certainly is more diverse, with 53% being black, and 41% being white. It's very bad if a big city is almost entirely one race, regardless of that race, and if there's one thing the stats show they show that it is diverse, and has not experienced "white flight".
Last edited by CCrest182; 07-02-2014 at 04:06 AM..
Honestly, Chicago gets way more hate than it deserves. That 500 murders was only one year, and when put on paper as murders per capita it was actually much lower than several other cities, namely Detroit and New Orleans who had a murder rate THREE times higher than Chicago in 2012.
It is primarily Chicago's south side that hosts all of the violence, you won't hear about a shooting insde of the Loop, but you will hear about a shooting on Bourbon Street in New Orleans. They've had at least one shooting on Bourbon street every year for the past THREE years.
If New Orleans doesn't have a reputation for a dangerous city, it deserves it. However, the city is probably a lot better now than what it was pre-Katrina. Such a disgusting cesspool. Never had I seen such a huge separation in wealth, the haves and the have nots, people living without a care in the world right next to the people who had nothing in this world. It really was a sickening city in many ways, and the crime only intensified because of this major divide.
New Orleans, Memphis, and Little Rock are probably all underrated in how serious their crime problem is. The only cities you really hear about are Chicago and Detroit, when Chicago is not that bad.
Chicago obviously is not as bad as the media says it is, crime # over all, it's bad, but per capita rate, it's REALLY low. But, Detroit is actually really bad. Much lower pop, but still very high crime rate.
Maybe you're choosing to ignore the actual forum post and question or maybe you're forgetting what it is. Let me copy the question so you know what is it:
**** Cities with worse reputations for Crime than they deserve Vs. Cities with seemingly worse crime than stats suggest****
Just like any city, Flint has nicer areas and more dangerous areas. DESPITE THE CRIME STATS, Flint isn't all out bad. Some parts are nice and don't look that bad, one of the most important of all that, the downtown, which looks like it has plenty of redevelopment coming under way. Some residential areas also look good.
Blah blah blah. You said this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by CCrest182
Flint MI is all hype by that a hole Michael Moore. It doesn't even have that high of a crime rate. I'd also say Compton gets a much worse rep than it really is.
The reality is this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DtX4415
Violent crime rate is seven times the national average.
Admit you were wrong and move on. That's what adults do.
Here I am, addressing the OP directly: Flint doesn't qualify for this thread, considering it's known as one of the most crime-ridden communities in the entire country, and it also is one of the most crime-ridden communities in the entire country. Have you been there? I have. It's bad. All over town, it is not a nice place to live. I have a friend who grew up there. Very depressed city, very violent, regardless of your "point" that it's less black than ESL or Gary.
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.
