Printable View
Has crime in Detroit improved from the 70s-90s or is it worse now? I seem to hear conflicting reports. It seems as though from some reports if you even park your car on the side of the street there is a good chance it will be gone the same night. Have most neighborhoods become this extreme recently or has it been this bad and/or worse.
I would say worse. Criminals are doing more violent crimes at a much younger age now. And they don't seem to have any code at all. Violence against women, children and the elderly are done without hesitation.
Adjusted for population decline, Detroit is just as dangerous now as it was in the 70s-90s. While the nominal crime rate is lower, the real crime rate hasn't changed.
Difference now? The crime is sparead across the entire city. There really are no safe areas to speak of now, where as there were back in the 70s-90s. The other difference is the crime has shifted from gang-related incidents to random incidents, where people will harm you regardless of where you live and who you are.
I'd say that overall, it's worse. But that's a tricky question. In my day-to-day life, I rarely think about the threat of crime. I live near Michigan and Trumbull, grocery shop at the Honeybee, Meijer in Allen Park, CVS in Midtown, gas in Midtown or at Michigan/Rosa Parks. Since just about everything I do as far as shopping, it's in the daytime, so I've never even felt threatened. My car is safe, but I am in a secured lot. I go for a run a few times a week, carry pepper spray, but only run during the day and have never felt threatened. Nights are spent in downtown bars, sporting events, restaurants, DIA, Eastern Market, etc.
So crime is something I'm concerned about, but it doesn't affect in any day-to-day way anymore than if I was living in, say, Warren. Even though the crime all over the city most likely much worse, my personally experience is better than in the 80s and 90s when I was living near Denby and Finney High.
Corktownyuppie, that's kind of how I've felt, I've been visiting a lot contemplating a move. I spend my time in Corktown, Downtown, Midtown,Lafayette Park and I have been to New Center,Palmer Woods, Boston-Edison, Woodbridge and the Villages. All of these areas have at least "seemed" pretty secure and safe to me. Is it possible that these areas have remained relatively safe or even become safer, while other areas of the city have basically fallen into the pit?
Not only is it possible, but I think that's exactly what's happened. Yes, there's some crime, but I dunno...it's been 3 years of me living here. I just walked to Nemos, took the bus to a Tiger game, came back and went for a run from here to the Dequindre Cut and back. Not once did I feel threatened.
Now would I do that same run at Friday at 10pm? Of course not. But I also wouldn't do it at Friday at 10pm in Mount Clemens, either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by corktownyuppie
I would. That said, I don't think Downtown is too bad at night. It's more eerie than anything.
Crime is better now than it has ever been, from the position of the thief/nar-do-well. Anyone who thinks crime has gone down must be living in Fairytale Subdivision!
Nain Rouge, I agree. I have walked [[or stumbled) downtown at every hour possible and never once felt threatened..I'm just always in awe of how dark it is down there..I wish they would light up more of those beautiful buildings.
It's getting better all the time. BETTER BETTER BETTER
The reason the downtown area "feels safe" is because there's really no one around.
You wouldn't expect an awful lot of petty crimes in an area void of people.
If you don't go looking for trouble, rarely does it find you. I think crime is probably similar to the 70s and 80s, but with the prevalence of 24 hour media we hear of every single incident so it can seem worse. If you go get gas or liquor at midnight or go for a stroll in the dark, then yes you are likely to be a victim. But if you are smart generally you will be just fine. Same way in every city. Chicago is a cool city, as is NYC, but I wouldn't be out jogging Wrigleyville or Brooklyn at midnight. If you are a smart person, chances are nothing will happen to you. Crime will generally always be higher in cities than suburbs, it's just what happens with a higher population density.
Worse.
A lot worse.
There is something to that. I have looked at recent years this way in my time living here: if you're in an established neighborhood, you're going to deal with crime on a level on par with most major [[not devastated) cities. I live in East English Village and that's basically the situation. However, if you're [[still) living in the 'hood, you're going to deal with violent crime on an almost daily basis.Quote:
Originally Posted by jpbollma
It's not just limited to the city, though. I can tell you I'd rather be in Detroit where I am now than in Harper Woods, south Warren, or Eastpointe. Scary stuff. All this talk of gas stations is splitting hairs. It's all coming to a city near you...
This is pretty much the rationalization, but it isn't true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flintoid
Detroit isn't dangerous because it's a big city, because it isn't a suburb, or because it has higher population density [[is that even true nowadays?). It's dangerous because of a variety of intractable structural issues, and very different from most major cities [[excepting New Orleans and a handful of others).
There are high crime suburbs, low crime cities, and everything in between.
The crime rate in NYC, BTW, is right at the national average. NYC in 2012 has a lower per capita crime rate than Des Moines.
Crime [[per capita) has gown down significantly since then, following the national trend. It's even lower now than it was just 10 years ago.
While your statement is true as far as the NCIC statistics for most crimes go, there is some room for doubt. In particular, per capita homicide hasn't gone down much at all. One possible explanation is that Detroit has a significant subgroup of people who are especially murder-prone independent of their other possible criminal activities, and the murder rate stays high because of that. The other explanation is that there is a continuing high level of criminal activity, but the lack of any effective police response causes many crimes other than homicide to go unreported.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason
I don't know if there are victimization surveys specifically covering the city, but comparing those over a period of time might shed some light on this.
Crime [[theft of personal property, home invasions, arson, kidnapping, robberies-armed and otherwise, break-ins, murder, car-jacking, assaults, etc) is higher in Detroit now, this year, thru yesterday this week.Quote:
Originally Posted by jpbollma
I wanted to hold off on responding this so I could really let it sink in. I think it points to an interesting perspective on "worldview" and life experience from another thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by 313WX
I've always felt safer in big cities rather than rural areas, to the amusement of some of my friends in small towns who very rarely experience the kinds of crime they hear about on the news or in the media in the city. When they ask why, my response is... "Well look around at how desolate this place is. If someone were to show up and jump me right now, I'm 2 minutes away from being tied to a tree with the chainsaw not too far behind and no one would be here to help."
It's also amusing to me to hear some of the perceptions from the suburbs when they talk about downtown after not having been there in 30 years. "Well, look at the neighborhoods...if it's this dangerous in the neighborhoods, I can't imagine how scary it must be downtown."
It's as if these perceptions are in direct contrast to my experience and yours. What's interesting is that you're essentially stating "Of course there's no crime, there's very few people." Whereas I associate being around people with safety and community.
Certainly, this is all anecdotal, and I'm not a social scientist. But it really makes me wonder if there is a "mental poison" in the communities of Detroit. It's the first place I've ever heard of or experienced where people experience more danger being around people vs. being isolated and alone.
And, if so, what does that say about who we are and the social ills filling our city?
I do think downtown and environs are relatively safe, though, and not because "there's nobody around" but because the demographic responsible for most of the crime [[16-30 yr old, poor, dropout, usually troubled AA males) doesn't live or hang out there in large numbers.
Well Detroit certainly isn't a normal big city, far from it in fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by corktownyuppie
Usually, the worst crimes and the higher frequency of crimes tend to occur where there's a higher desnity of poor people [[I.E. zip code 48205 and the South Side of Chicago). The thing with Detroit is half the city has declined to the point where it seems as if you're somewhere in the cornfields of Iowa versus one of America's largest cities. Thus, if there are very few people around to commit crimes and very few victims to target, the probability of a crime happening decreases. That's why, in one way, I can see why the folks who live on in that one neatly-kept home on an otherwise empty block filled with weeds would rather just remain where they're yet, flaws and all, versus being forced by the Detroit Works project to move into more densely packed areas surrounded by more people, many of which are poor and desperate and will target the right victim for a crime, in an attempt to shrink the city.
This is the case with much of the downtown area as well, recent developments and all. There hasn't been a significant level of critical mass down there since the 1970s. The Cass Corridor, with was the epicenter of Detroit's impoverished population [[which was much smaller than it is now), in the 1970s was considered Detroit's skid row [[where the worst and highestr frequency of crimes took place), with density levels easily apporaching 20,000-30,000 per square mile. Meanwhile, the outskirts of the city were fairly crime free with a sizable middle/working class population still around [[thanks somewhat to the residency requirement, which I still think was the final nail on the coffin for much of the city). Now fast forward to the 2010s, and you're probably statisically and presumably safer in the Cass Corridor than you are in a lot of NE and NW Detroit. With the exception of Corktown [[Lafayette Park doesn't count, given its suburban-esque development), which even it has declined quite a bit through the years, most if not all of the areas immediately downtown are literal ghost towns with urban praries lining the blocks.
And even with the worker population and small/growing population in the downtown core/around WSU/DMC, the folks living/conducting business down there are, for the most part, are not the poor and desperate types that occupy zip code 48205 [[they have incomes to put a roof over their head and food over their table without taking what someone else has), and rarely do they have to leave the buildings they work in and walk the streets for much of anything, thus lessening their chance of being the victim of a crime. This is what you see in cities such as Chicago and NYC as well, but to a much greater extent.
As for the suburbanites, perception is reality. They realize Detroit is a 143 sq. mi. city, and downtown only makes up a very small part of it. Many of them are coming around to realizing that downtown isn't as dangerous as the rest of the city, but it's what's happening [[or not happening) in the rest of the city that overshadow any progress in Detroit, because again, downtown only makes up a very small part of Detroit.
I disagree because not every crime gets reported to the police. Whether it's that the police won't show up, people don't want to bother going to a precinct to file a report, people think it's pointless to report it as nothing will happen, etc. You can't totally judge it based on reported stats for this area. You need to rely on word of mouth, hear stories from your neighbors, co-workers, church members to get the true picture.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason
^^^^ That's correct. Many crimes and deaths go unreported. And EMT person will confirm that.
In my view, crime in downtown and midtown is better, crime in the rest of the city is worse.
Downtown's daytime population is something like 90,000 people.Quote:
Originally Posted by 313WX
I don't think year to year numbers are good to go by. One month crime has suddenly been reduced, it's proof of the effectiveness of the police, and the police and the politicians have a big press conference. A few months later the year to year number shows a crime wave and then on the news the sky is falling. So I think it's better to look at longer term trends.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zacha341
Yeah I don't doubt that there's tons of unreported crime. On the flip side though, does that mean if there's an increase in the crime stats, does it mean that citizens have more faith in the police [[because actual crime is going down because of effective policing) so they're actually reporting crimes [[meaning the stats go up)?Quote:
Originally Posted by mwilbert
But other cities have the same issues with reporting that Detroit does, and if perfectly correct graphs and lists were made, I think Detroit would still be one of the highest crime cities [[the rank wouldn't really change). And while crime would turn out to be much higher today, I think it would turn out to be even higher in the past.
I also don't think perception about the police responding has changed much. That's been the perception for decades, and before that there were a lot of race/police brutality/race kinds of issues.
This is all just speculation though. I agree that this is something that should be studied.
See my subsequent post...Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason
The crime rates in Detroit are absolutely better today that they were 20 years ago... If we're comparing just the numbers for Detroit today versus Detroit 20 years ago and nothing else. Now if you compare Detroit today relative to other major cities then no Detroit hasn't gotten better because many other large cities had better improvements in their reported crime stats.
Now whether the reported crime stats say a damn thing about how safe a city is is probably a really good discussion to have. I'm not any more inclined to believe that New York is safer than Des Moines than I am to believe that Russia has an corruption-free electoral process.
I also have serious reservations about how standardized the method of reporting stats to the FBI is between major cities. And if that isn't completely apples-to-apples then comparing city crime stats is meaningless.
Let's see, an ex police chief and a well known pastor get robbed this week in broad daylight.
Oh yeah, things are getting much better!!