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.
One thing to keep in mind in understanding the views of Long Islanders at-large:
Although I don't like to make broad-sweeping generalizations (as one can always bring up an exception to a generalization), I will say that I tend to feel that many Long Islanders (especially those who are longer-term or even lifelong residents of Long Island) impress me as having lived very insular and sheltered lives and this will reflect in their outlook or views on judging a town or village or hamlet or other type of municipality on Long Island. This is NOT really meant by myself as a put-down or judgment of them; it is merely meant as a sociological-type observation of their mindset. By and large, they are used to and expect nearly everything to look pristine and pure, well-maintained and manicured; they much prefer low-density development as differs from higher-density development; they much prefer their environment, wherever they go, to exude prosperousness, affluence, and an upscale air, et al; they expect or want most of their fellow residents to be a mirror image of themselves (in dress, in outlook, in behavior patterns, et al). In other words, they want Long Island to function as a soft of protected haven for the well-to-do and those who aspire to be or want to be thought of as such.
What the above paragraph is trying to accomplish is to have you understand that this outlook of theirs shapes how they will perceive areas such a Hempstead Village. For instance, think about GARDEN CITY (especially thinking of the heart of downtown Garden City, such as Franking Ave. and environs) and they will praise this kind of setting (as do I) . . . for even though it has a city-like look and ambience to it rather than a low-density suburban ambience, it is very kempt and well-manicured, very prosperous, upscale, etc. etc. Whereas the heart of downtown Hempstead Village has the same look and feel of a city (just like if you were in parts of Manhattan or parts of Queens such as Flushing or Elmhurst or parts of Brooklyn such as downtown Brooklyn). It doesn’t, per se, look “bad” all-in-all (if one is used to cities at all); it just looks “city-like” (i.e., urban) . . . having urban-like denser development and urban-like hustle- bustle, and an urban-like diverse population. YET, to many of them, they put it down because it isn’t necessarily pristine, very kempt and well-manicured, very prosperous-looking, upscale-looking, and lower-density suburban-looking but instead more urban-looking. And they don’t like this because this is not why they moved to Long Island or why they have stayed here all their lives. They want to get away from and avoid all those city-like trappings as much as they can. To them, this is "bad" (though to me, it is just variety and I like variety in all or nearly all things in life; it makes life interesting). But that is NOT the outlook of many of them.
Or take HUNTINGTON STATION as another example. If you drive or walk along New York Avenue between Hempstead Village on the north (say, from the Big H Shopping Center) to Jericho Turnpike on the south, it doesn’t look like a slum or ghetto TO ME. It just looks “not prosperous-looking” and “not upscale-looking” but just basic and presentable (like many neighborhoods in the five boroughs of New York City). But many Long Islanders will label Huntington Station (New York Avenue between Hempstead Village on the north to Jericho Turnpike on the south) as being a “slum”- or “ghetto”-like environment . . . yet it doesn’t even remotely compare to East New York or Bedford Stuyvesant or the South Bronx or Southside Chicago, etc. etc. (real slums or ghettos) but, to them, it doesn’t look well-manicured, very prosperous, and upscale (like Huntington Village’s New York Ave. or Main Street to its north does) and the majority of its residents are not reflections of them (racially, ethnically, socioeconomically) . . . so they label it a “ghetto” and constantly deride it. To me, New York Avenue between Hempstead Village on the north to Jericho Turnpike on the south still looks “presentable”; it is not a slum or ghetto in its overall look (to me). But to the native Long Islanders, by and large, it is a slum or ghetto to them. It is either not what they have always been used to or it is not what they want any part of Long Island to be.
In summary: (1) They want Long Island to be low-density development through-and-through (or else, if you must have a higher-density urban-like setting like downtown Hempstead Village or downtown Garden City or downtown Long Beach of Huntington Village or Bay Shore Village or Babylon Village, they want it to look very kempt and well-manicured, very prosperous, upscale, swanky, etc. etc. or else they label it as “bad” or “undesirable”). (2) They want the populace to be middle-class or upper-class through and through (as much as it can be) and want the populace to behave like them as much as can be (e.g., if someone is standing outside a building or sitting on a bench or otherwise “hanging out” in the streets or in public places like parks or outside stores like people do in cities and municipalities of all types, they consider this loitering and label it as “bad” or “undesirable”). It goes against what they want Long Island to be.
Again, the above text is offered up as a sociological- or social psychological-like commentary or perception of what I perceive to be their overall mindset (not meant as a judgment or condemnation of them for being this way but just a dispassionate observation). I myself would prefer the towns, villages, and other municipalities on Long Island to look more ike Garden City or Huntington Village or Babylon Village rather than like Huntington Station . . . but I am a person who has been exposed to and lived in all types of cities, towns, villages, hamlets, et al around the United States over my nearly six decades of living thus far, so I don’t expect everything everywhere to exude an air of being upscale and rich. The great bulk of Long Island’s populace, it seems, want Long Island to be non-urban-like in nearly every way . . . so this will reflect in their stated views on Hempstead (especially Hempstead Village) as well as Roosevelt, Freeport, et al. They don’t want Long Island to be like this. For instance, I’ve driven through Freeport along the main thoroughfares there and it looks like alot of good shopping, commercial activity, and an overall interesting, lively, and presentable area. And yet you’ll see many Long Islanders otherwise making negative comments about Freeport (as well as Roosevelt, Uniondale, Hempstead, Hicksville, and other urban-like conglomerations), because these areas, by and large, do not look like they want all of Long Island to preferably look like. They are not bad-looking areas by-and-large and have many nice sections and features, but they are too urban-like for their tastes.
In summary, those areas mentioned above (such as Hempstead Village) are not all-in-all “bad” in their look; they are just not very well-manicured, very prosperous and upscale looking THROUGH-AND-THROUGHl and have a city-like look and ambience to them . . . and THAT, in and of itself, makes them label such areas as “bad” (I’m not focusing here on the behavior patterns of the populations living there but on the LOOK-AND-FEEL of the areas).
And there are too many people of color and other ethnicities. To me thats what it sounds like when you say "urban-like"
And there are too many people of color and other ethnicities. To me thats what it sounds like when you say "urban-like"
I wasn’t avoiding the issue of the COMPOSITION of the populations of these urban-like locales on Long Island. I was focused more on the LOOK-AND-FEEL (the visual ambience) of these locales mentioned by me in saying "urban-like" rather than the COMPOSITION of the populations that lived or were seen there. But I did, in my posting, both directly mention and also indirectlyallude to the RACIAL AND ETHNIC COMPOSITION of these areas and that that aspect is also a part of the bigger picture as to why this longer-term or lifelong middle class and upper class resident population of Long Island tends to deem these areas as too “urban-like” for their tastes (such in Hempstead Village, Huntington Station, Roosevelt, Freeport, Uniondale, and Hicksville, for instance). I’d said in my posting:
1) In the second paragraph, I alluded to the racial and ethnic composition of the population in these urban-like locales in saying: “By and large, they are used to and expect nearly everything to look pristine and pure, well-maintained and manicured; they much prefer low-density development as differs from higher-density development; they much prefer their environment, wherever they go, to exude prosperousness, affluence, and an upscale air, et al; they expect or want most of their fellow residents to be a mirror image of themselves (in dress, in outlook, in behavior patterns, et al). In other words, they want Long Island to function as a sort of protected haven for the well-to-do and those who aspire to be or want to be thought of as such.
2) In the third paragraph, I directly mentioned this issue in saying: “. . . Whereas the heart of downtown Hempstead Village has the same look and feel of a city (just like if you were in parts of Manhattan or parts of Queens such as Flushing or Elmhurst or parts of Brooklyn such as downtown Brooklyn). It doesn’t, per se, look “bad” all-in-all (if one is used to cities at all); it just looks “city-like” (i.e., urban) . . . having urban-like denser development and urban-like hustle-bustle, and an urban-like diverse population.”
3) In the fourth paragraph, in speaking about Huntington Station, I directly mentioned this issue in saying: “. . . But many Long Islanders will label Huntington Station (New York Avenue between Hempstead Village on the north to Jericho Turnpike on the south) as being a “slum”- or “ghetto”-like environment . . . yet it doesn’t even remotely compare to East New York or Bedford Stuyvesant or the South Bronx or Southside Chicago, etc. etc. (real slums or ghettos) but, to them, it doesn’t look well-manicured, very prosperous, and upscale (like Huntington Village’s New York Ave. or Main Street to its north does) and the majority of its residents are not reflections of them (racially, ethnically, socioeconomically) . . . so they label it a “ghetto” and constantly deride it.
4) In the fifth paragraph, I alluded to this issue in saying: “. . . They want the populace to be middle-class or upper-class through and through (as much as it can be) and want the populace to behave like them as much as can be (e.g., if someone is standing outside a building or sitting on a bench or otherwise “hanging out” in the streets or in public places like parks or outside stores like people do in cities and municipalities of all types, they consider this loitering and label it as “bad” or “undesirable”). It goes against what they want Long Island to be.”
Heck, varied contributors/posters to this CITY-DATA FORUM at-large, in some threads posted over time which speak about HICKSVILLE, will even say less-than-favorable or negative things about Hicksville because Hicksville has a notable Indian (South Asian) population there. Yet that population can be characterized as overall hard-working and conscientious people and families running many businesses there, with their children going to the local schools and excelling in them, with their businesses and other commercial and professional activities bringing revenue and prosperity to Hicksville . . . and yet various persons on the CITY-DATA FORUM (not all, of course, but enough have been noticed by myself over time to leave an impression on me) will mention the Indian/South Asian population’s presence there with a hint (or sometimes more than a hint?) of negativity. As though it is a strike against Hicksville to have a significant population of persons who aren’t Anglo-European/Caucasian in the racial/ethnic makeup and whose native language isn’t a European language. This isn’t a lower-class ghetto-like population we are talking about here, and yet there are those in that longer-term or lifelong middle class and upper class resident population of Long Island who are still less-than-comfortable or ambivalent with having a population in their midst of those who aren’t a mirror image of them (visually- and linguistically-speaking . . . which is another way of saying racially and/or ethnically).
So YES, dnalsI gnoL, for a goodly number of this longer-term or lifelong middle class and upper class resident population of Long Island, I recognize that it appears that this just-mentioned population, by and large, very much prefers the population of Long Island to be rather homogeneous (dictionary definition of “homogeneous”: similar, or the same as something else; having the same composition throughout; uniform).
lifelong middle class and upper class resident population of Long Island tends to deem these areas as too “urban-like” for their tastes (such in Hempstead Village, Huntington Station, Roosevelt, Freeport, Uniondale, and Hicksville, for instance). I’d said in my posting:
3) [/font]In the fourth paragraph, in speaking about Huntington Station, I directly mentioned this issue in saying: “. . . But many Long Islanders will label Huntington Station (New York Avenue between Hempstead Village on the north to Jericho Turnpike on the south) as being a “slum”- or “ghetto”-like environment . . . yet it doesn’t even remotely compare to East New York or Bedford Stuyvesant or the South Bronx or Southside Chicago, etc. etc. (real slums or ghettos) but, to them, it doesn’t look well-manicured, very prosperous, and upscale (like Huntington Village’s New York Ave. or Main Street to its north does) and the majority of its residents are not reflections of them (racially, ethnically, socioeconomically) . . . so they label it a “ghetto” and constantly deride it.
So YES, dnalsI gnoL, for a goodly number of this longer-term or lifelong middle class and upper class resident population of Long Island, I recognize that it appears that this just-mentioned population, by and large, very much prefers the population of Long Island to be rather homogeneous (dictionary definition of “homogeneous”: similar, or the same as something else; having the same composition throughout; uniform).
To the OP, yes, Hempstead overall is not a safe area... It's not an East New York or Brownsville (but it's not too far off those either).
Hempstead crime per 100k pop. is about 1/3rd that of E Ny and about 1/2 that of Brownsville. It compares closer to the 77th precinct (Crown Heights/Prospect Hts)
to USAll,
I'm not sure exactly what you're saying? You're saying that these areas of Hempstead Village, Roosevelt, Huntington Station, Wyandanch, Freeport et al, are not dangerous areas? Usually people do associate "seedy" with "dangerous", because the two normally go hand n hand. But I think you're off on the opinion that all LI'ers see "Urban" as bad.
Compared to LI standards, you are exponentially more likely to be a victim of a crime in these areas than you are in your avg LI town. Just because some place is urban-looking, doesn't mean people will label it a ghetto. Mineola & Garden City have somewhat urban looking sections... I feel very safe in both those areas and would never label them as such. I don't feel safe in Hempstead and have actually been a victim of a few crimes there and at the same time know relatives and friends that have had knifes pulled on them, mugged, and purses snatched in A&S parking lot back in the day.
That area's cleaned up a bit where the Home Depot and shopping complex opened up (old A&S), but Hempstead's gang problems are probably worse now than they were back then. Hempstead overall is still not a safe area...it's NOT an image problem either.
So, I don't think people are wrong to label a dangerous-seedy area, as a crime filled ghetto. That's what they are on LI. Hicksville is mostly okay, the downtown RR section is seedy and they do have issues there I'm sure.
Compare these LI Ghettos (hempstead, Roosevelt, Freeport, Hunt Station, Wyandanch, Brentwood, Shirley/Mastic etc) to most of LI and it's night-n-day. Almost like comparing the danger of smoking vs not smoking. Or an alligator filled pond vs a crocodile filled pond.
Quote:
4)
Quote:
In the fifth paragraph, I alluded to this issue in saying: “. . . They want the populace to be middle-class or upper-class through and through (as much as it can be) and want the populace to behave like them as much as can be (e.g., if someone is standing outside a building or sitting on a bench or otherwise “hanging out” in the streets or in public places like parks or outside stores like people do in cities and municipalities of all types, they consider this loitering and label it as “bad” or “undesirable”). It goes against what they want Long Island to be.”
I'm not sure who says "hanging around", but JohninWestbury comes to mind. I hope you don't think that all LI'ers are like him. I agree with some of his positions on Illegals and controlling those numbers, but he thinks everyone that's a shade darker than himself or that's standing outside or on a bike, is an illegal. It's ridiculous actually and funny. But he is FAR out there vs your regular LI citizen.
I was looking on this forum and from the way people are describing Hempstead, you'd think they were talking about Compton, LA. Is it really as bad as people say?
Hempstead (village) is not as nice by Long Island suburban standards but some parts of the village look okay to me. I think we also have outdated racial sterotypes to deal with here.
Hempstead (village) is not as nice by Long Island suburban standards but some parts of the village look okay to me. I think we also have outdated racial sterotypes to deal with here.
That may be the case. The north end of the village is where the majority of the action is. Around the train station, bus depot, Terrace Ave. The south end of the village is 95% single family homes, most are owner occupied and kept in decent to nice shape. The roads are wide and the center medians have flower gardens tended by the residents of the village. The fact is that almost everyone who makes negative statements about Hempstead has never spent any time here at all, as they tend to state they refuse to even drive through.
Yes. It's really that bad. In some parts of Hempstead you see drug dealings happening on broad daylgiht. People jaywalk in front of incoming traffic as it they want to get run over. In the winter the snow was not really plowed, and the potholes remain put for the most part since then. Hempstead is pretty darn bad.
I had the displeasure of working in hempstead half of last week and let me tell you, its not only disgusting, but its scary. Ive seen the most disgusting homes, it would actually make your stomach turn. Yes, some even smoked pot right in front of me as if it was a cigarette.
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.
