Looking at crime rate rankings [0], SF is pretty low compared to other US cities both in terms or violant crimes and property crimes. What am I missing?
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_b...
The issue with San Francisco is that, like this author reported, you see so much brazen property crime, in broad daylight with tons of people around, in otherwise upscale and/or touristy areas. Most of the crime in other cities is concentrated in bad neighborhoods (that is pretty much what makes a bad neighborhood bad).
Years ago I was in a packed Starbucks in a somewhat touristy area of SoMa, when a guy came in and pulled a gun on someone working on a laptop closest to the door, just grabbed his laptop (ripping the plug out of the wall socket) and ran, and there were tons of people on the street.
This is, in fact, the problem: that crime in SF isn’t as concentrated on the disenfranchised underclass as the elites prefer it to be.
This is referred to as the "dark figure of crime" by sociologists (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_figure_of_crime) which sounds a bit like a description of Batman.
A) more likely to report crimes, or
B) less likely?
How does this affect crime statistics?
It's a fairly safe city and even safer than most American cities.
This isn't the city of the 90's Pablo Escobar anymore.