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.
Does Kansas just "steal" other big city names instead of coming up with their own ideas?
Well, you do know that they named (renamed) Wyandotte, KS to Kansas City (after kcmo) because they thought it would help them get some of the growth and prosperity that kcmo was having at the time. .
As far as the topic, I think Minneapolis is one of the safer cities, despite crime stats.
You simply can not compare crime stats alone. Stats are far too based on political lines etc.
I've never been to Pittsburgh, but Minneapolis isn't that bad. Out of the entire city there are a few small areas where I'll feel a little edgy or that look pretty rough aesthetically, but that's about it. The only crime you really see around here is minor property crime and the occasional theft. Lock your doors and don't leave your car parked on the street overnight and you'll have very little else to worry about.
Sure serious crimes do happen but very rarely does it happen at random. I live pretty close to the heart of south Minneapolis and I never see gang members walking around or anything. It's fairly tame here.
Location: Cleveland bound with MPLS in the rear-view
5,509 posts, read 11,874,502 times
Reputation: 2501
I agree, but it's not what you see....it's what it IS. And it IS a reasonably high crime rate, and higher than Pittsburgh on average. Maybe it's just much more isolated and it feels like it doesn't exist because you are hardly in the ghetto (me neither), and Pittsburgh it's more widespread. It can be a variety of things that do not discredit the fact that both cities have moderately high crime.
I agree, but it's not what you see....it's what it IS. And it IS a reasonably high crime rate, and higher than Pittsburgh on average. Maybe it's just much more isolated and it feels like it doesn't exist because you are hardly in the ghetto (me neither), and Pittsburgh it's more widespread. It can be a variety of things that do not discredit the fact that both cities have moderately high crime.
The topic isn't about crime rates though, it's about which city is more dangerous. To me, it is like the philosophical argument if a trees falls and nobody is there to see it. Crime happening where I can't see or experience it has no bearing on my sense of safety of the area. To me that doesn't make the place any more dangerous. I don't know, maybe I should be more paranoid?
Location: Cleveland bound with MPLS in the rear-view
5,509 posts, read 11,874,502 times
Reputation: 2501
You can measure danger though....if you said which "seems more dangerous", then I agree, Pittsburgh seems more dangerous. Danger = crime to me and since you can measure crime I say danger is measurable. Why are we getting into semantics here? I guess this topic was more "gray" than I thought.
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.
.
