St. Louis' designation as No. 1 Most Dangerous City (Kansas City, Springfield: low crime, neighborhoods)

[midwestmatt]

Hi guys/girls,
So I'm actually living in Kansas City right now, but I'm from Springfield, MO. But I was watching the news last evening, and yes, ANOTHER survey has found St. Louis to be the number 1 most dangerous city in the United States. Not to worry, though...Kansas City made the list, too! We're number 9!! Anyways, I just wanted those of you who live in the St. Louis metro to sound off on this and let everybody know how you feel/what you think about this designation. Personally, I love St. Louis, and while I do feel crime is definately a problem there, is there a metro where it isn't? I've got tons of family scattered throughout the metro, so I'm pretty much there constantly. While on one hand, I feel like numbers don't lie, I also feel that the metro isn't given a fair shake sometimes.
And yes, I do have a hidden agenda... ...I'm trying to research cities close-ish to Springfield in which to start my career once I graduate college.

[Smtchll]

The St. Louis metro area is ranked like 103rd most danerous.

http://os.cqpress.com/citycrime/2009...9_Rank_Rev.pdf

So overall it's a safe place, just has some areas that really bring it down, but apparently not enough to bring the whole metro down.

[rmc01]

Here's a thread on this topic you may find helpful.

https://www.city-data.com/forum/st-lo...icas-most.html

[aragx6]

Sure it's another company who did this analysis, but they're still using the same data from the FBI. You know that data that the FBI explicitly says shouldn't be used to make city to city comparisons.

If you're interested in reading more about this topic there are several long threads about the issue, but there are a couple main points:

1. As stated above, the FBI says not to use the stats this way, and unless they're doing something differently, yet again Chicago isn't included because of the way they report sexual assaults -- and having lived in Chicago, I can tell you: They should be on this list.

2. St. Louis gets an unfair shake because they are looking only at the city limits -- St. Louis is only a teeny tiny 61 sq/mi. Whereas others on this? Much larger -- and hence, less dense (STL's density is 5,760.7/sq mi.)

Atlanta: 131.8 with a density of 4,019.7/sq mi
Birmingham: 149.9 sq mi with a density of 1,510/sq mi
Orlando:93.5 sq mi with a density of 2,282.36/sq mi
Detroit: 138.8 sq mi with a density of 6,370.1/sq mi
Memphis: 313.8 sq mi with a density of 2,327.4/sq mi

And KC is actually the most diluted down of them all!: 318.0 sq mi with a density of 1,538.4/sq mi

The only city I listed above with a density higher than St. Louis is Detroit, but that city has so many problems, it's hard to know where to start. Another notable exception is also Cleveland, their city limits are only 77.4 with a density of 6,166.5/sq mi. Cleveland is a town I really like, but they are struggling more with gentrification than St. Louis is, and they haven't had the recent crime drops St. Louis has been able to make happen. Sadly Ohio (and Michigan for that matter) have such serious poverty issues and they've both been relatively unsuccessful at creating new 21st century industries in their states.

*All stats from Wikipedia

Simply put, if St. Louis City had not split from St. Louis County more than 100 years ago over money and politics, St. Louis would likely have annexed many areas that are now considered the county. St. Louis has some of the most urban suburbs I have ever seen, whereas I'd say KC has some of the most suburban (sometimes bordering on rural!) area I've ever seen in city limits.

3. Crime in St. Louis has been heading downward pretty successfully for more than a decade, and last year major crimes fells 9.2% over 2009 levels (St. Louis called 'most dangerous city' in U.S. again | St. Louis Business Journal). And that's not because of some national trend either.

Cleveland, for example, saw murder and aggravated assault rates grow from 2003 through 2009, though forcible rapes and aggravated assaults on the whole declined. Memphis saw the largest violent crime rate jump of the group, up to 1,806 per 100,000 residents in 2009 from 1,577 in 2003.

The 11 Most Dangerous Cities - Yahoo! Finance (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/The-11-Most-Dangerous-usnews-1262959588.html?x=0 - broken link)

Does St. Louis have crime problems? Absolutely, but I think it's clear these problems are not being ignored and that there has been a movement to affect real change in the city.

4. Anyone who has ever lived in a city can attest to the fact that crime can be vastly different across neighborhoods -- hell across blocks! There are some incredibly safe St. Louis neighborhoods on the south and west sides of the city, but what's probably more important for a 20-something looking at moving to St. Louis: There are many fantastic walkable neighborhoods that offer a great urban living experience with a low crime rate. Simply put, car break ins and the like will happen in every city, but you're very unlikely to be the victim of a random violent crime in all of St. Louis' top-tier urban neighborhoods.

[bobstewart]

Originally Posted by Smtchll

The St. Louis metro area is ranked like 103rd most dangerous.

http://os.cqpress.com/citycrime/2009...9_Rank_Rev.pdf

So overall it's a safe place, just has some areas that really bring it down, but apparently not enough to bring the whole metro down.

Great link! I think the metropolitan figures are a better assessment of the overall rates. This puts St. Louis METRO area below that of many other "safe" cities like Austin, Nashville, Wichita, Tucson and many other places where crime stats aren't ever an issue.

As stated, it's the uniqueness of St. Louis' city limitations and the statistic reporting that create the imbalance. Oddly, I didn't see Kansas City in the stats anywhere. Very odd.

[VietNamNavyVet]

This is why I have ccw permit and carry a Springfield Armory XD .45 at ALL times when I'm out. That way, Murphy's Law insures I'll never run into trouble and need it. Anyplace can be dangerous. Look at Tucson and the Townhall Meeting, for example. Crazy people are among us, grit your teeth and be crazier....exercise a little Darwinism.

[nomoreviolence]

STL is a mess. For the most part, the people need to try more solution, like helping ministries that are geared to breaking crime.

[moorlander]

This has been addressed ad nauseum on this forum and others. Sure the City of St. Louis has issues with crime but by no means is St. Louis that dangerous than most other cities. The FBI specifically suggests that these statistics not be used for city to city comparisons. It's Apples to Oranges.

@navy vet - I fail to see how more guns on the street makes us safer. Unless you're spending considerable time in the worst north StL neighborhoods, no need for a CCW. Most of the city is quite safe.

[kcmo]

Merge the county and city so St Louis will drop completely off these stupid lists. The image these lists create has to create tremendous harm to the city and the list is complete BS because there are too many variables.

KCMO is actually rated very high and it's about 1/3 suburban. Now that is messed up. Can you imagine the crime stats of KCMO if it did not include the suburban Northland?

[aragx6]

Originally Posted by kcmo

Merge the county and city so St Louis will drop completely off these stupid lists. The image these lists create has to create tremendous harm to the city and the list is complete BS because there are too many variables.

KCMO is actually rated very high and it's about 1/3 suburban. Now that is messed up. Can you imagine the crime stats of KCMO if it did not include the suburban Northland?

I have wondered this myself. Like in most places, I chose a place to live in KC where I feel very safe, but as the kind of person not willing to stick my head in the sand and pretend nothing is going on (like a lot of people I have met in Kansas City) it's become clear to me that Kansas City's gangs are less organized than those from Chicago and they spend far less time on the street (I think this is because unlike gangbangers in Chicago, all KC bangers have their own car) but they are still quite active nonetheless. I always tend to feel less unsafe driving through the worst parts of KC than I did in Chicago -- if you ever want a true scare, drive down Pulaski in Chicago. That is some scary scary hood.

It must be so nice that Chciago can just report sexual assaults wrong and not get included on these lists. They'd be right up there too. And yet poor St. Louis gets this rap. Such BS.