And ShatS.T.A.I.N isn’t clever or offensive - really makes no sense - you’re not Trump, you can’t come up with clever nicknames for every little thing because you aren’t intelligent or funny.
OT: Where in FL????
- Thread starter Joey Bacala
- Start date
Everyone is safer in Florida compared to war zones like Chicago , Oakland or San Francisco
I had to go back and see what you are saying on this.
Interesting "stats"...
" chance of becoming a victim of either violent or property crime" - why couple them? I'd suspect the violent crime rate doesn't make for as impactful a headline.
"Bradenton has a crime rate that is higher than 81% of the state's cities and towns of all sizes." - now that one's just beautiful... why compare it to postage-stamp-sized towns at all? Why limit it to Florida? What would Bradenton's rate be in, say, California? or and BLUE state?
So here's some stats direct from the data in the Crime Explorer that uses UCR data.. Uniform Crime Report data...
I looked up Bradenton's population and crime data and listed it.
Then I looked up similar population towns in CA and NJ. I took teh list of cities by population and found the first one.. and the next one. There was no cherry-picking and I have never even heard of the CA towns before. Well, I know Huntington of Huntington Beach name.. heard that before... but had no idea what it was.
The crime data that came in was a year-by-year line chart of reported violent crimes. I took the highest point in the 10 years they showed and then 2020.. which was the last year they had for Bradenton.
What you will see is that Bradenton is more "safe" than New Brunswick NJ or Huntington Park CA but far less safe than Parsippany NJ or Diamond Bar CA (whatever that is).
UCR Crime Explorer
Bradenton 56K pop
data from 2011 to 2020
2018 388 violent crimes 2020 306 violent
2 closest NJ cities/pops
Parsippany/Troy Hills 56K 2012 39 2020 26
New Brunswick 56K 2011 479 2020 285
2 closest CA cities/pops
Huntington Park 2011 487 2020 421
Diamond Bar 2019 72 2020 62
THIS.. is how you discuss stats fairly. You don't use all those weasely wordings that were in your post... not unless you are trying to force a conclusion.
Lol, I’m ducking bullets as I type!
Hahaha, the “weasley wordings” were direct quotes from the National crime statistics. Really trying to read into this what you want…pretty pathetic. You and ProudBoy are triggered by factual statistics. I didn’t create them.
hmmm.. I should have read back further. I just posted something comparing Bradenton's stats to New Brunswick NJ and Huntington Park CA.. both about the same population.
Just for laughs.. I tried to look up the violent crime rate at The Villages. The closest police department seems to be for Wildwood FL.. a population of 17Kish. So that is about 3.3 times less than the 56K pop we are comparing elsewhere.
Their data said they had a high of 64 violent crimes in 2020. Times 3.3 that would be 211 violent crimes in a community of 56K. Not quite "Bradenton" level but more than I'd figure it would be.
Mine own town the rate would be 21 violent crimes for an equivalent 56K-sized population. And I'd only have committed most of them!
show me the source... I hope its not KJP "informing" the public
I have seen these talking heads throwing out how red-state crime is worse than blue-state crime in order to side-step any criticisms of liberal crime policies.. I would be curious if the federal government itself is providing these talking points.
3rd most homeless in the country (another “bogus” stat you can google) Well on your way to paradise!
Sure, I kept the citations handy in case this came up. Took two seconds to google this, has the same “weasely” language verbatim - why I put it in quotes in the original post, you absolute donkey. Feel free to try to pick apart their sourcing and methodology, you seem to have the time to kill.
When you say rest of the city, what areas do you mean?
I don't have a dog in this fight, and I am open-minded on this issue. However, the few people who I know who live in (or very close to San Francisco) say that the city has been steadily declining, with major stores closing and leaving the city (Whole Foods, Walgreens (multiple stores), Old Navy, Nordsrom). I did not ask the people I know about particular areas.
As far as NYC mentioned above, seems to be a lot more homeless people in and around Penn Station than in years past. Went to NYC Saturday for dinner. The stench of weed wafting through the air nearly everywhere in the city (even on a quiet street in the 50s on the East side) is nauseating. IMO, seems like it is spiraling back to the squeegee men days before that guy who everybody ridicules (for good reason) took over as Mayor after Dinkins.
I mean, I can name numerous gorgeous, clean safe neighborhoods - Twin Peaks, Noe Valley, Hayes Valley, Cole Valley, Pac Heights, Upper Market. Sunset, Excelsior all very quiet on the west side of the city. Mission Bay has the most new construction, and has a brand new hotel that was named the best new hotel in the world (Luma).
Yes, a lot of retail is closing - but who is going to miss an Old Navy that took up a city block? A minimal amount of mediocre jobs that can be replaced is the most important piece of their failing. New Whole Foods just opened as another closed.
I don’t deny there are issues - I like almost 150k other residents voted to recall our DA bc of the overly progressive BS and crime issues. New DA has been better - but next election cycle I think you will see even less of the progressives gaining hold.
I’ve been here for almost 11 years. My car is parked in front of my house and has never been broken into. Never had any crazy homeless person attack me. But it does happen. It’s a city. I moved from Manhattan so I guess the usual stuff doesn’t bug me. It could be better, and needs to improve - but still plenty going for it.
Yeah…and I’m the one with a political bias Hahhaha
Those are some pretty high end neighborhoods you listed. I love San Francisco. When we visit clients in the Silicon Valley, I used to love to go to the tourist areas, but what I have seen on news and social media has been concerning. I have not drilled down to see if the tourist areas around the piers are impacted.
But similarly, I mentioned NYC. I doubt the Upper West Side, the Upper East Side and Tribeca are messed up like "touristy" areas around Penn Station and Times Square. We visited in November and again on Saturday, and the biggest turnoff for us was the ever present stench of weed. A colleague from Rio de Janeiro remarked to me that the city was disgusting and reeked of weed when she visited last year.
As far as Florida, same thing. There are pockets where the rich people live in gated communities and don't have to worry about the rampant crime in the areas you cited in the crime statistics. I used to be fairly familiar with that area, having spent time on Anna Maria Island and on Lido Key (Sarasota), and I distinctly remember that once you crossed over the Bay and headed further East, things got dicey fairly quickly and got progressively worse.
So, perhaps the same conclusion could be drawn about San Francisco and parts of Florida. There are pockets of very nice areas that are not far from bad/sketchy areas. Same could be said for many areas of New Jersey (consider the worst parts of New Brunswick, next to say a Piscataway or North Brunswick).
Don't have a link, but I was reading a news item about the purported Presidential candidates from Florida and California (not yet, so purported) are crowing about how their respective stats are least worst than their opponents' states. What a way to run for office--"I run a state that sucks less than (Insert Crappy State)."
I will take none of the above, please, and let anarchy rule.
Seriously, I'm not religious, but may God help us if we are reduced to choosing between the Govs of California and Florida. Or the two current front runners. Is H. Ross Perot still around?
Last edited:
He definitely doesn't have lawyers.
But he called someone to pretend they were lawyers?
I hope that was an offline dispute.
Oh yes, I’ve posted the screenshots from his weird, drunk late night unsolicited messages. Also posted something on the current events board that was removed which was just a post insulting me specifically. Only guy to ever slide in my DMs here, he’s a bit obsessed.
I showed you EXPLICITLY how it was weasel-wording. Do you have a specific objection as to HOW it is shown to be weasel words?
Here's the definition:
"words or statements that are intentionally ambiguous or misleading"
I showed how it was "intentionally ambiguous or misleading".. it was BOTH, in fact.
Okay.. I downloaded the data, formatted it, calculate accurate crime rates and sorted the table to show a bunch of mid-sized Florida towns... Bradenton is in yellow... I don't see how it stands out all that much.
Violent crime rates all less than 1% with some outliers..but what this says to me is that there are a lot of really safe towns in Florida.. so finding a town that has a more national-average rate of crime makes it look bad.. in comparison. But is it "bad" compared to where they plan to leave? "Bad" compared to other choices they can make in other states? Maybe they should just look to see if the Mayor and town council has a D or and R after their name.
I know who did. Just because another poster liked my post, doesn't mean it didn't sail right above his head as to who I was referring to about derailing this thread in his weak attempt to flame you.
Last edited:
You thought they were my words, so you deemed them weasel as an insult to me. Then when shown they were a direct quotation from an unbiased statistical based site and not my words, you somehow double down on this baseless assertion. You chose to interpret the demonstrably neutral words in a way to purposely make you feel attacked along political lines. So odd.I showed you EXPLICITLY how it was weasel-wording. Do you have a specific objection as to HOW it is shown to be weasel words?
Here's the definition:
"words or statements that are intentionally ambiguous or misleading"
I showed how it was "intentionally ambiguous or misleading".. it was BOTH, in fact.
Okay.. I downloaded the data, formatted it, calculate accurate crime rates and sorted the table to show a bunch of mid-sized Florida towns... Bradenton is in yellow... I don't see how it stands out all that much.
Violent crime rates all less than 1% with some outliers..but what this says to me is that there are a lot of really safe towns in Florida.. so finding a town that has a more national-average rate of crime makes it look bad.. in comparison. But is it "bad" compared to where they plan to leave? "Bad" compared to other choices they can make in other states? Maybe they should just look to see if the Mayor and town council has a D or and R after their name.
NO.. You used quotes. I knew you were quoting *something*. I just figured that *something* was something using propaganda techniques BECAUSE of the weasel wording. The wording is weasely independent of whoever posted it... for the obvious reasons I stated.
It is a clear case of being misleading OR ambiguous.. I just figured it was intentionally so as I have seen Bakersfield CA mentioned many times on news shows purportedly discussing crime rates... why Bakerfiled? because it has a Republican mayor. And Every time it gets mentioned the weasel words abound! They want to use per-capita when it supports the angle they want to push and then they shift away from per capita when it suits them.
So, in your case.. or rather the source you used.. when they somehow collected violent and property crime together in one "bin".. and said that it ranks Bradenton in the 81st percentile of Florida communities... that just screamed INTENTION. But it may have just been stupidity.
I mean.. how do you do that? What weight do you give the violent crime number compared to the property crime number? Why not just give two rankings? And why compare a town of 56K with 4 colleges (of sorts) to all those tiny rich people towns? Why not limit it to towns over 50K people?
I don't know who pays the bills for that HOME VALUE site you linked... but I showed you how such data should be presented.
BTW.. just realized I could have included SF in the earlier post of data:
San Franciso (pop 815K) 2013 7064 violent crimes 2020 4796 violent crimes wow.. SF has really been cutting violent crime! by not reporting them.. lol.. also Covid hibernation.. probbaly mostly that
SF is roughly 14.5 times larger than Bradenton
So the 2013 peak number 7064 devided by 14.5 yeilds 487 violent crimes in a 56K city.. like Bradenton
And the 2020 violent crime number of 4796 would be 331 in a 56K town.
What were Bradenton's peak and 2020 numbers? 388 peak and 306 in 2020 compared to SF's equivalent 487 and 331
So.. yeah.. maybe Bradenton's almost as bad as San Francisco! Jeepers!
San Francisco Crime Rates and Statistics - NeighborhoodScout
Most accurate 2021 crime rates for San Francisco, CA. Your chance of being a victim of violent crime in San Francisco is 1 in 148 and property crime is 1 in 17. Compare San Francisco crime data to other cities, states, and neighborhoods in the U.S. on NeighborhoodScout.
"With a crime rate of 54 per one thousand residents, San Francisco has one of the highest crime rates in America compared to all communities of all sizes - from the smallest towns to the very largest cities. One's chance of becoming a victim of either violent or property crime here is one in 18. Within California, more than 98% of the communities have a lower crime rate than San Francisco.
Importantly, when you compare San Francisco to other communities of similar population, then San Francisco crime rate (violent and property crimes combined) is quite a bit higher than average. Regardless of how San Francisco does relative to all communities in America of all sizes, when NeighborhoodScout compared it to communities of similar population size, its crime rate per thousand residents stands out as higher than most.
Now let us turn to take a look at how San Francisco does for violent crimes specifically, and then how it does for property crimes. This is important because the overall crime rate can be further illuminated by understanding if violent crime or property crimes (or both) are the major contributors to the general rate of crime in San Francisco.
For San Francisco, we found that the violent crime rate is one of the highest in the nation, across communities of all sizes (both large and small). Violent offenses tracked included rape, murder and non-negligent manslaughter, armed robbery, and aggravated assault, including assault with a deadly weapon. According to NeighborhoodScout's analysis of FBI reported crime data, your chance of becoming a victim of one of these crimes in San Francisco is one in 186.
In addition, NeighborhoodScout found that a lot of the crime that takes place in San Francisco is property crime. Property crimes that are tracked for this analysis are burglary, larceny over fifty dollars, motor vehicle theft, and arson. In San Francisco, your chance of becoming a victim of a property crime is one in 20, which is a rate of 49 per one thousand population.
Importantly, we found that San Francisco has one of the highest rates of motor vehicle theft in the nation according to our analysis of FBI crime data. This is compared to communities of all sizes, from the smallest to the largest. In fact, your chance of getting your car stolen if you live in San Francisco is one in 127."
You’re missing the part where I never compared Bradenton - favorably or unfavorably- to any place, including SF. That was your pal ProudBoy. You’re arguing against yourself. You’re making comparisons that don’t in any way invalidate anything I posted. You’re odd.NO.. You used quotes. I knew you were quoting *something*. I just figured that *something* was something using propaganda techniques BECAUSE of the weasel wording. The wording is weasely independent of whoever posted it... for the obvious reasons I stated.
It is a clear case of being misleading OR ambiguous.. I just figured it was intentionally so as I have seen Bakersfield CA mentioned many times on news shows purportedly discussing crime rates... why Bakerfiled? because it has a Republican mayor. And Every time it gets mentioned the weasel words abound! They want to use per-capita when it supports the angle they want to push and then they shift away from per capita when it suits them.
So, in your case.. or rather the source you used.. when they somehow collected violent and property crime together in one "bin".. and said that it ranks Bradenton in the 81st percentile of Florida communities... that just screamed INTENTION. But it may have just been stupidity.
I mean.. how do you do that? What weight do you give the violent crime number compared to the property crime number? Why not just give two rankings? And why compare a town of 56K with 4 colleges (of sorts) to all those tiny rich people towns? Why not limit it to towns over 50K people?
I don't know who pays the bills for that HOME VALUE site you linked... but I showed you how such data should be presented.
BTW.. just realized I could have included SF in the earlier post of data:
San Franciso (pop 815K) 2013 7064 violent crimes 2020 4796 violent crimes wow.. SF has really been cutting violent crime! by not reporting them.. lol.. also Covid hibernation.. probbaly mostly that
SF is roughly 14.5 times larger than Bradenton
So the 2013 peak number 7064 devided by 14.5 yeilds 487 violent crimes in a 56K city.. like Bradenton
And the 2020 violent crime number of 4796 would be 331 in a 56K town.
What were Bradenton's peak and 2020 numbers? 388 peak and 306 in 2020 compared to SF's equivalent 487 and 331
So.. yeah.. maybe Bradenton's almost as bad as San Francisco! Jeepers!
San Francisco Crime Rates and Statistics - NeighborhoodScout
Most accurate 2021 crime rates for San Francisco, CA. Your chance of being a victim of violent crime in San Francisco is 1 in 148 and property crime is 1 in 17. Compare San Francisco crime data to other cities, states, and neighborhoods in the U.S. on NeighborhoodScout.www.neighborhoodscout.com
You say that because you assume my purpose was to invalidate what you said (but, yes, I am odd.. and proud of it). I merely knew there was readily available actual FBI crime data that anyone can see. Data that exists as data and not as an "executive summary" style thing.
Clearly, I posted data.. FAIRLY, HONESTLY.. that supported your overall point.. but without the weasel wording apparently generated by some website reading the same data I posted. I did not know if your point would be proven or not. I just knew it probably could be proven or not.. so I did so.
You did not post some government source.. you posted some website's generated paragraphs based on federal data and you did so with all the caveat language it included on the website in the San Francisco example I posted.
It specifically called attention to the idea that the numbers should be compared to towns of a similar profile and size. But that warning and summary of such a comparison was not included by you.
I ask you this.. how much easier would it have been for me to look up the data, see that it was more or less what your copied weasely words said.. and then NOT post it. That's what someone who was trying to prove you wrong would have done... or carefully cherry-pick examples in order to be "intentionally ambiguous or misleading" and make it seem like you were wrong.
Bottom line: you talked about Bradenton because OP mentioned it. I missed that.. I saw the back-and-forth afterward and scrolled back to find your Bradenton comment. I suspected a guy from SF would be aware of Bradenton crime stats in just the same way I have seen the Bakersfield CA example been used. The weasely wording of it confirmed it to my mind. So I was mistaken in that.. but the methodology I used to respond was what I typically do to find out if my suspicions were correct... and I was wrong and the stats I posted prove me wrong. These TLDNR posts with stats and actual research (not just "reading" - a call-back to another thread).. served my purpose.. which was to find the truth.
Last edited:
IgnoranceThose are some pretty high end neighborhoods you listed. I love San Francisco. When we visit clients in the Silicon Valley, I used to love to go to the tourist areas, but what I have seen on news and social media has been concerning. I have not drilled down to see if the tourist areas around the piers are impacted.
But similarly, I mentioned NYC. I doubt the Upper West Side, the Upper East Side and Tribeca are messed up like "touristy" areas around Penn Station and Times Square. We visited in November and again on Saturday, and the biggest turnoff for us was the ever present stench of weed. A colleague from Rio de Janeiro remarked to me that the city was disgusting and reeked of weed when she visited last year.
As far as Florida, same thing. There are pockets where the rich people live in gated communities and don't have to worry about the rampant crime in the areas you cited in the crime statistics. I used to be fairly familiar with that area, having spent time on Anna Maria Island and on Lido Key (Sarasota), and I distinctly remember that once you crossed over the Bay and headed further East, things got dicey fairly quickly and got progressively worse.
So, perhaps the same conclusion could be drawn about San Francisco and parts of Florida. There are pockets of very nice areas that are not far from bad/sketchy areas. Same could be said for many areas of New Jersey (consider the worst parts of New Brunswick, next to say a Piscataway or North Brunswick).
Don't have a link, but I was reading a news item about the purported Presidential candidates from Florida and California (not yet, so purported) are crowing about how their respective stats are least worst than their opponents' states. What a way to run for office--"I run a state that sucks less than (Insert Crappy State)."
I will take none of the above, please, and let anarchy rule.
Seriously, I'm not religious, but may God help us if we are reduced to choosing between the Govs of California and Florida. Or the two current front runners. Is H. Ross Perot still around?
Nordstrom also closed in the Freehold Mall. I wouldn't say Freehold is a declining area. I would say though that more people shop online- especially in a younger, tech savvy town like SF.
As to NYC, it's still among the safest big cities in the world and the US and much less dangerous than the FL "big" cities like Miami and Jacksonville. Miami has double the murder rate, and Jacksonville triple.
I do think NYC has a bigger issue w homelessness and subway crime. But it begs the question why we don't here in NJ- we had bail reform. We had weed legalization. The politics at the national level are identical. Yet NJ is #47 in violent crime. There's a lot of answers to those questions I can think of but they will upset the people who are falsely claiming FL is safer than NY or CA, never mind NJ.
Your favorite NYPost from this morning - DeSantis’ Warzone
Weird I was at the Jersey Shore this weekend and didn't notice any shootings.
It's almost like letting people have books, bodily autonomy, AP class, and weed rather than guns and bashing the state's largest employer because you don't like its opinion works?
Since Florida was mentioned:
53 shot 11 killed this weekend in… Chicago
Marines jumped and beat up by gang of teens in…. Cali. On Memorial Day!
53 shot 11 killed this weekend in… Chicago
Marines jumped and beat up by gang of teens in…. Cali. On Memorial Day!
We're in NYC at least once a month and I've yet to notice any stench of weed and we typically walk around quite a bit on any visit.Those are some pretty high end neighborhoods you listed. I love San Francisco. When we visit clients in the Silicon Valley, I used to love to go to the tourist areas, but what I have seen on news and social media has been concerning. I have not drilled down to see if the tourist areas around the piers are impacted.
But similarly, I mentioned NYC. I doubt the Upper West Side, the Upper East Side and Tribeca are messed up like "touristy" areas around Penn Station and Times Square. We visited in November and again on Saturday, and the biggest turnoff for us was the ever present stench of weed. A colleague from Rio de Janeiro remarked to me that the city was disgusting and reeked of weed when she visited last year.
As far as Florida, same thing. There are pockets where the rich people live in gated communities and don't have to worry about the rampant crime in the areas you cited in the crime statistics. I used to be fairly familiar with that area, having spent time on Anna Maria Island and on Lido Key (Sarasota), and I distinctly remember that once you crossed over the Bay and headed further East, things got dicey fairly quickly and got progressively worse.
So, perhaps the same conclusion could be drawn about San Francisco and parts of Florida. There are pockets of very nice areas that are not far from bad/sketchy areas. Same could be said for many areas of New Jersey (consider the worst parts of New Brunswick, next to say a Piscataway or North Brunswick).
Don't have a link, but I was reading a news item about the purported Presidential candidates from Florida and California (not yet, so purported) are crowing about how their respective stats are least worst than their opponents' states. What a way to run for office--"I run a state that sucks less than (Insert Crappy State)."
I will take none of the above, please, and let anarchy rule.
Seriously, I'm not religious, but may God help us if we are reduced to choosing between the Govs of California and Florida. Or the two current front runners. Is H. Ross Perot still around?
Well, it was not my imagination, nor the imagination of the other 3 people in our party, one a native of Queens, who was disgusted by it. It was omnipresent this past Saturday, like snow in Metuchen.
Truth, I commute to the city 3 times a week and every morning and night I smell weed. Every day I'm there without fail.Well, it was not my imagination, nor the imagination of the other 3 people in our party, one a native of Queens, who was disgusted by it. It was omnipresent this past Saturday, like snow in Metuchen.
Same thing in November when we went to a concert at Sony Theatre. Same thing numerous people have said to me, including visitors from various countries.
I'm sure you smelled it, but it's just strange that we haven't - are you only talking about trains/train stations or in the City, in general? We typically drive in/out (avoding rush hour) and pick a neigborhood/attraction and visit, walk around, shop, eat, etc. and simply haven't noticed - and my wife hates the smell of weed. In the recent past that has included the High Line (no pun intended), the Village, UWS/UES, and the East Village.Well, it was not my imagination, nor the imagination of the other 3 people in our party, one a native of Queens, who was disgusted by it. It was omnipresent this past Saturday, like snow in Metuchen.
My fam has been in palm beach county for about 70 years. 1 mile from the beach and never had a Penny's worth of hurricane damage. Palm beach county has a great natural dune system. Palm beach is expensive but a mile inland is affordable. I would checkout west palm, Delray and Boynton.
Train and train station (NY Penn)-Yes.
Walk up 7th through Times Square- Yes--a lot.
At Restaurant on W 55th at 6 1/2 Ave- nicer area, we ate outside-- we asked to move away from sidewalk because we were getting wafted by weed smoke. Maybe it was the weekend crowd and it being a holiday weekend?
But we experienced the same thing in November around Time Square, which I supposed should be expected. Have come to accept that it is legal, but should not have to accept being buried in weed smoke, although I do love this tune by Down.Well, I guess some areas might smell like weed considering NYC is 302 square miles. NYC is really a big city. All this talk about bad cities, I lived near SF(47 sq miles) and Seattle(84 sq miles), which are also huge and there has always been bad section you don’t walk around.
Pot‘s legal in NY I believe.
Last edited:
I also smell weed here in NJ plenty. Who cares?
Smelling weed here versus being shot on the boardwalk in Florida? Not a tough call, but maybe I just value life.
Since Florida was mentioned:
53 shot 11 killed this weekend in… Chicago
Marines jumped and beat up by gang of teens in…. Cali. On Memorial Day!
Chicago not even in the top 10 of most dangerous American cities. CA not even close to one of the most dangerous states.
Most dangerous states are
AK
NM
TN
AR
AZ
LA
MO
SC
SD
MI
They seem to have a common theme, really hard to put a finger on it.
In Arizona men have to lift their shirt and turn around to see if they have a gun in their waistband before they walk into a lot of bars, and some are sick enough to want that here.
It was a great deal for people that moved down to Florida a couple of years ago but house prices have risen so much that they are almost as much as NJ houses. The property taxes, insurance and HOA offsets the NJ property taxes.
Florida houses have doubled over the last few years.
Last edited: