Is San Francisco a safe city? (Oakland, Richmond: city hall, crime rates, home)

[ambient]

Originally Posted by rah

SF Has a significantly higher violent crime rate than NYC, and has been higher than Newark at least a couple times in the past decade. Its also has had a robbery rate not too far behind Chicago pretty consistently, and was pretty close to Chicago for murder rate a few times too. And it has to have one of the largest deranged homeless people problems in the nation on top of it. So calling SF a tea party compared to those cities isn't really accurate. It's just like them in that it has truly bad areas, really nice areas and areas in between. But SF does have a lot of nice areas compared to most big cities, and it definitely has a smaller proportion of bad areas compared to those mentioned, aside from NYC maybe. SF has had an amazing 50% drop in its murder rate over the past few years too.

And in case you want to ask me If I've been to many cities, yes I have, including NYC and Philly, among those you mentioned.

Edit: As for personal experience, I've seen and heard of a lot of crime, as have plenty of my family and friends. Car break ins, robberies, burglaries, vandalism, gunshots, car break ins, crazy people, fights, crack smoking, drug deals, murdered acquaintances and friends, street shrines for murder victims, childhood friends who got involved in gangs...all stuff I've experienced living in SF, and it's not like I live a life of crime, or in the ghetto. If SF is a tea party, I must be really unlucky or something. To be fair I have lived in SF most of my life, and have been basically everywhere in the city(including plenty of time in bad areas where I worked/visited friends/went to school), so I've had a lot more exposure to SF than your typical transplant that makes up 50% of the city's population, but my point stands. A good amount of stuff I've seen has happened in nicer areas too.

OK, ok..NYC I'll give you... Yes, I fully admitted that SF has its share of crime. But I still see it as pretty much a middle-of-the-road crime spot compared to a lot of big US cities.

If you peruse city data's stats, you'll see that NYC is surprisingly good. So I should have excluded that one.

Boston is pretty similar, actually.

But Chicago...no way - a good bit worse.

Newark..forget it.

Philly...worse.

Houston...worse.

New Orleans... worse.

Oakland...way worse.

Detroit...post-apocalyptic disaster.

Even Cleveland and Cincinnati where I spent time as a kid...generally look a good bit worse.


So...it could be better here in SF; could also be a lot worse.

[California Vagabond]

I'll contribute my almost daily plug for the crimemapping.com site:

CrimeMapping.com - National Map

[rkwalton]

Originally Posted by California Vagabond

I'll contribute my almost daily plug for the crimemapping.com site:

CrimeMapping.com - National Map

Love this site. Thanks! I've been plugging in old addresses and, so far, it looks like I'm moving up in the world in terms of nearby crime. (Meaning there is less crime near me than at the address where I grew up or my old San Francisco address.)

They don't have data for NYC though or amazingly there is no crime in Williamsburg, Brooklyn or Harlem, Manhattan and I seriously doubt that.

[California Vagabond]

Glad you liked it, rkwalton!

My impression is that they provide data only for agencies that have signed up with them. That's why nothing appears for Williamsburg, Brooklyn, etc.

[Deconstrukt]

Originally Posted by rah

SF Has a significantly higher violent crime rate than NYC, and has been higher than Newark at least a couple times in the past decade. Its also has had a robbery rate not too far behind Chicago pretty consistently, and was pretty close to Chicago for murder rate a few times too. And it has to have one of the largest deranged homeless people problems in the nation on top of it. So calling SF a tea party compared to those cities isn't really accurate. It's just like them in that it has truly bad areas, really nice areas and areas in between. But SF does have a lot of nice areas compared to most big cities, and it definitely has a smaller proportion of bad areas compared to those mentioned, aside from NYC maybe. SF has had an amazing 50% drop in its murder rate over the past few years too.

And in case you want to ask me If I've been to many cities, yes I have, including NYC and Philly, among those you mentioned.

Edit: As for personal experience, I've seen and heard of a lot of crime, as have plenty of my family and friends. Car break ins, robberies, burglaries, vandalism, gunshots, car break ins, crazy people, fights, crack smoking, drug deals, murdered acquaintances and friends, street shrines for murder victims, childhood friends who got involved in gangs...all stuff I've experienced living in SF, and it's not like I live a life of crime, or in the ghetto. If SF is a tea party, I must be really unlucky or something. To be fair I have lived in SF most of my life, and have been basically everywhere in the city(including plenty of time in bad areas where I worked/visited friends/went to school), so I've had a lot more exposure to SF than your typical transplant that makes up 50% of the city's population, but my point stands. A good amount of stuff I've seen has happened in nicer areas too.

Too bad the stats prove you're wrong.

[80skeys]

Originally Posted by HappyinCali

However, I have realized that San Francisco is a dangerous city. I have lived in Huntsville, Atlanta and NYC and I only knew one person who was a victim of a crime. In my four years in San Francisco, I have known four people including myself, who have been victims of a crime. My north beach apartment was broken into while I was sleeping, my friend had someone literally expose his attributes to her, in her face, while she was sitting on a crowded bus in the sunset, another friend got attacked in the mission and two others had their cars broken into in Soma and the Marina. I literally have never had that much direct knowledge of crime.

Here's my opinion, as someone who worked in San Francisco but doesn't live there.

There's quite a bit of homeless people and quite of bit of property crime and theft. This seems spread out over many areas, even in the more expensive neighborhoods. This much is true, although I don't consider this type of crime particularly "dangerous." At least it's not physically threatening.

As far as the person exposing their private parts to you.... well, chalk that up to San Francisco's history of being liberal and tolerating or even encouraging public events where nudity and sexual behavior occurs. Whether this is "wrong" or "bad", that's up to each individual person. As for it being dangerous, I don't consider it dangerous until it crosses the line of being a physical assault.

So in conclusion I don't consider most of San Francisoc dangerous, except of course for a few neighborhoods that are well known for being violent.

[jade408]

Originally Posted by 80skeys

Here's my opinion, as someone who worked in San Francisco but doesn't live there.

There's quite a bit of homeless people and quite of bit of property crime and theft. This seems spread out over many areas, even in the more expensive neighborhoods.

This is why SF feels more dangerous than other places. In most cities in the US, if you are rich enough, you get to live in a crime-free bubble. In SF, you still have people peeing on your doorstep.

[bigdumbgod]

Originally Posted by 80skeys

There's quite a bit of homeless people and quite of bit of property crime and theft. This seems spread out over many areas, even in the more expensive neighborhoods.

Crackheads and junkies aren't scared of going to jail. Car break-ins happen in broad daylight in full view of people frequently (like my car) - the brazen nature belies the need for a fix, and the "don't give a ****" attitude about getting busted. Just part of the life, and for those who are addicts and/or crazy, in their minds, there's not much choice.

[dragontales]

and you get free meals in jail

[jade408]

Originally Posted by dragontales

and you get free meals in jail

And better health care.