Minneapolis this dangerous? (St. Paul, Bloomington, Brooklyn Park: violent crime, home, transfer)

[Minntoaz]

I mean you have the data in front of you, numbers are numbers. If you're asking if it "feels safe" well then no I've never felt compromised in safety in minneapolis but then again we don't go to places that would pose any risks.

[Mr. In-Between]

Originally Posted by robcynd

This is from 2011 and all

but I've posted here before, and we're really really trying to figure our move out.

this kinda got us spooked.


The 11 Most Dangerous U.S. Cities - US News

just really concerned us. I know most big cities have bad crime rates, but wow 10th?

Don't let that BS slide show "article" worry you. The so-called "survey" is crap, because the author doesn't make even a halfassed attempt to explain what the numbers mean. Probably because she didn't bother making even a halfassed attempt to understand it herself.

How, exactly, does the FBI determine a city's crime risk index? How are crime statistics compiled and collated to generate those numerical rankings? If we don't know that, then the information is worthless - and we don't know that, because the author made no attempt to explain it. Just grabbed some numbers and spent a half hour putting together one of those useless "slide shows" that websites love because it means more page-views and therefore more ad revenue. I'd file it right next to "The 10 Cities Most Likely To Be Hit By An Asteroid."

[RC01]

Originally Posted by Glenfield

People walk alone at night in SW Mpls all the time. It is as safe here as it is in the burbs and safer than some. Criminals tend to operate close to home. They don't really look at a map to see where the city boundaries are.

I realize that there are plenty of safe neighborhoods in the city. Where I live though, walking alone at night is pretty stupid. My area has seen a pretty dramatic increase in crime this fall compared to last year.

[uptown_urbanist]

Originally Posted by golfgal

In all fairness, SW Minneapolis is seeing an uptick in crimes and murder cases so it's not as great at you are making it out to be....

And, you know what, there are some places that you don't really need to worry about locking your doors or crime whether you want to believe it or not. Yes, just like SW Minneapolis, that could change, but until it does, people aren't going to walk around paranoid. That is just something the city dwellers can't seem to grasp.

Where do you get this stuff?!? Are you sure you're familiar with the location of Southwest Minneapolis? Seriously, where are all these mysterious murders (murders, even!!) in locations like Fulton or Southwest?

I recall reading about multiple homicides in Rosemount this past fall; does that mean by your logic that Rosemount is now a dangerous place?

Actually, in my old SW neighborhood residence many of my neighbors never did lock their doors. They were embarrassed about it and admitted that they should, but they didn't, and never had any problems. But why risk it? Basic security precautions aren't paranoid. I know people who have had their homes burglarized in generally very safe suburban Twin Cities locations; burglars someone didn't get this memo that they were supposed to only work within city limits.

[Thedosius]

Originally Posted by robcynd

This is from 2011 and all

but I've posted here before, and we're really really trying to figure our move out.

this kinda got us spooked.


The 11 Most Dangerous U.S. Cities - US News

just really concerned us. I know most big cities have bad crime rates, but wow 10th?

Note that per the article, "These are the 11 U.S. cities with the highest crime rates from 2003 through 2009, according to an analysis of FBI violent and property crime reporting data by Onboard Informatics." Minneapolis did have a crime spike around the years 2004-2006 (I don't recall exact years, so I may be a little off). I would say this information is quite out of date and by most measures Minneapolis is low-crime relative to cities of its size.

I always chuckle at people who are so afraid of crime in cities like Minneapolis. Your actual chance at being the victim of a crime is statistically extremely low in the vast majority of the Twin Cities. Yes, there are areas that are more dangerous than others, but the statistical odds of being a victim of crime are in the vicinity of being in a severe car crash, or slipping on the ice and cracking your head on the pavement. Yes, crime is scary, but the superiority implicit in some of the consistently anti-city posters here in their assessment of crime risks and how stupid we city folk must be is not remotely based on rational thinking: it's based on fear and a willingness to be ruled by it.

I've lived over 20 years in Minneapolis, sometimes in 'borderline' neighborhoods. I had one of my bikes stolen once over that time. I've never once been physically threatened, or seen someone brandish or shoot a gun, or what have you. Living in perpetual fear of crime in Minneapolis is not necessary, nor is it particularly reasonable or sane.

[golfgal]

Originally Posted by uptown_urbanist

Where do you get this stuff?!? Are you sure you're familiar with the location of Southwest Minneapolis? Seriously, where are all these mysterious murders (murders, even!!) in locations like Fulton or Southwest?

I recall reading about multiple homicides in Rosemount this past fall; does that mean by your logic that Rosemount is now a dangerous place?

Actually, in my old SW neighborhood residence many of my neighbors never did lock their doors. They were embarrassed about it and admitted that they should, but they didn't, and never had any problems. But why risk it? Basic security precautions aren't paranoid. I know people who have had their homes burglarized in generally very safe suburban Twin Cities locations; burglars someone didn't get this memo that they were supposed to only work within city limits.

Star Tribune, police reports....

Medical Examiner Identifies Murdered Man - Police & Fire - Southwest Minneapolis, MN Patch

https://raidsonline.com/?rms=Minneap...nneapolis%20MN

you can filter out violent crime on this second link for last year and there are the stats....

[uptown_urbanist]

Originally Posted by golfgal

Star Tribune, police reports....

Medical Examiner Identifies Murdered Man - Police & Fire - Southwest Minneapolis, MN Patch

https://raidsonline.com/?rms=Minneap...nneapolis%20MN

you can filter out violent crime on this second link for last year and there are the stats....

So I did, and I'm still not finding the homicides(s) for SW Minneapolis... because they're just not there!!

There were two on the very far edge of Kingfield (right by 35W), in an area where honestly, I don't think a lot of posters here are even considering SW Minneapolis. And the incident you cited was really unusual; that's why it got press coverage (unfortunately in this metro area there are neighborhoods where serious crime IS a bigger part of everyday life, and events in those areas often don't get much coverage). I didn't follow it too closely, but the victim didn't live in the neighborhood, and I don't know if they ever figured out why he was found in Kingfield.

But if you're using news stories -- like the one cited above -- to "prove" that SW Minneapolis is a dangerous place, than I submit the following murders from your neighborhood this past fall:

Rosemount shooting ruled a murder-suicide - TwinCities.com

Missing U student Anarae Schunk

Given that the population is a whole lot lower in Rosemount than it is in SW Minneapolis, does that mean that, because your per capita homicide rate is much higher, that you and your neighborhoods should be quaking in your boots? No, I assume not -- because presumably people realize that the area is generally very safe, and that, unfortunately, bad things can happen anywhere. In most of these cases, the victims knew the person who killed them; it doesn't make it any less horrible, but the statistical odds are that someone walking their dog in Rosemount is highly unlikely to be killed (by a stranger or otherwise) just as it's highly unlikely that someone walking their dog around Lake Harriet is going to be a victim.

[golfgal]

Originally Posted by uptown_urbanist

So I did, and I'm still not finding the homicides(s) for SW Minneapolis... because they're just not there!!

There were two on the very far edge of Kingfield (right by 35W), in an area where honestly, I don't think a lot of posters here are even considering SW Minneapolis. And the incident you cited was really unusual; that's why it got press coverage (unfortunately in this metro area there are neighborhoods where serious crime IS a bigger part of everyday life, and events in those areas often don't get much coverage). I didn't follow it too closely, but the victim didn't live in the neighborhood, and I don't know if they ever figured out why he was found in Kingfield.

But if you're using news stories -- like the one cited above -- to "prove" that SW Minneapolis is a dangerous place, than I submit the following murders from your neighborhood this past fall:

Rosemount shooting ruled a murder-suicide - TwinCities.com

Missing U student Anarae Schunk

Given that the population is a whole lot lower in Rosemount than it is in SW Minneapolis, does that mean that, because your per capita homicide rate is much higher, that you and your neighborhoods should be quaking in your boots? No, I assume not -- because presumably people realize that the area is generally very safe, and that, unfortunately, bad things can happen anywhere. In most of these cases, the victims knew the person who killed them; it doesn't make it any less horrible, but the statistical odds are that someone walking their dog in Rosemount is highly unlikely to be killed (by a stranger or otherwise) just as it's highly unlikely that someone walking their dog around Lake Harriet is going to be a victim.

Whatever.....Burnsville is not Rosemount...but whatever...

also, not just murder, violent crime.....

and if you read what I said earlier......

[wamer27]

Originally Posted by robcynd

Not quite sure... we're thinking of these areas... we're starting to really really dig in with research before we make a 2 day trip up there in March sometime.

St. Cloud, Brooklyn Park, Edina, Eden Prairie, Minnetonka, Northfield.

Northfield seems affordable, and it's still pretty close it looks like.

We would ideally like to move to 10-15 miles away from downtown, so our options are really good. Northfield looks extremely safe, and affordable...

We also looked into Bloomington. We liked what we found out, but it's expensive. All the "nice" safe areas are obviously expensive.

With 2 young children and being new to the area... we just want a stable community where people don't mess with you. Ya know. I mean we have guns, swords, ninja weapons... so its not like we wouldn't be armed or anything... but I never even want to be in a position to use self defense.

You guys have been very helpful. This means a lot to me and my family. Getting first hand accounts of what is happening.

The west side of Minneapolis looks just awful with crime though.

Northfield isn't even a part of the twin cities, it's off in Sticksville. Some people might drive from there for jobs in the cities, but you must love sitting in a car for a long time twice a day during the week. What's your budget?

[northsub]

Here's the confusing reality of these situations:

1) The Twin Cities as a whole has low crime statistics for a metropolitan area.
2) Minneapolis and St. Paul as cities have above average crime rates for cities. They're not amongst the worst (Detroit, Memphis, etc.), but they're also not at all amongst the safest or even close to Seattle or Denver, etc.

So, people see a national report that says something like "Minneapolis one of the safest cities in the U.S.". But, that data is always based on metro data. So, people are confused when they see the relatively high crime rates of Minneapolis. Further, folks in Minneapolis proper defend the city's safety with comments like "crime is higher in Detroit (or some other city)", "the city seems safe to me", "crime is higher in some parts of Minneapolis than others (as if that isn't the case in every city)".

Another point that seems to not mesh with reality is the perception that some parts of Minneapolis are just as safe as the majority of the suburbs. It doesn't take much data to call this into question. The first check I did was Coon Rapids vs. Linden Hills.

Linden Hills gets the following number of burglaries per 100,000 population (using the Minneapolis website population figure of 7,370 from 2000, but population looks to be roughly the same in 2010 anyway):
2013: 773.41
2012: 461.33
2011: 366.35
2010: 407.06
2009: 637.72
2008: 814.11

Coon Rapids gets the following number of burglaries per 100,000 population (from city-data.com):
2011: 410.0
2010: 298.0
2009: 405.9
2008: 336.7
2007: 508.8
2006: 487.0

Averaging those (yeah, they aren't the same years. feel free to do the work to get the data for the missing years and compare) we get Linden Hills at 576.66 and Coon Rapids at 407.73. So, the burglary rate in Linden Hills looks to be something like 40% higher than in a suburb that is sometimes considered slightly "sketchy".