Hacker News Reader

Comment by orangepurple | Hacker News Reader

I stopped using buses and trams in the US out of fear for my personal safety. I'm not going to wear a bulletproof vest and carrying a handgun concealed just to get around town. Now I drive between safer areas to do things and meet people and don't have to put myself in danger by exposing myself in the in-between areas. A metal box goes a long way to prevent an assault. The whole situation is just pathetic.

View on HN

I just can't imagine living life in this much fear, and I ride transit in LA county. The things I've seen would probably send you to some bubblewrapped environment in the midwest, but at the end of the day they are just things that I've seen and not things that have personally affected me at all. Someone smoking meth on the platform ultimately doesn't affect me. Someone selling loose cigarettes doesn't affect me. Two crazy people getting into a fight over nothing also doesn't affect me. A guy tagging MS-13 on the schedule map similarly doesn't affect me.

You don't make eye contact and keep to yourself, and nothing happens to you. If something does happen, every single train car has an intercom tied to EMS, and every single bus has a driver who is trained on how to deal with these situations when they do inevitably come up (pull over and call EMS). If you got beat up I'm sure you'd have a case against the city and the city attorney would probably be happy to settle and pay you versus deal with a lawsuit and potentially more seriously have to address something. The odds of you getting killed are just too low to even seriously consider, you are probably a lot more likely to die crossing the street to get to the bus stop than you are to die on the bus involved in some situation.

>I just can't imagine living life in this much fear

>You don't make eye contact and keep to yourself, and nothing happens to you.

This sounds like you are living your life in fear.

Oh please. Making eye contact is a surefire way to draw the attention of someone who is acting erratically. If you have the time and will to engage directly with every single one of these people, then be my guest. But to call this living in fear is laughable to anyone who's ever spent an appreciable amount of time commuting via public transit.

If there are people erratic enough to be a source of danger from mere eye contact, thats a good reason to be carrying concealed.

I don't think "danger" is the right word. Sure, you might run into someone who could physically attack you if you act toward them in a way that sets them off, but I think most would either just act out (without actually touching you), or yell at you, or something like that.

No, it's not great, and I wish our elected representatives would actually do things to fix these situations, but the idea of "I need to carry a gun" to solve this "problem" is just bonkers.

Someone mentally unstable yelling at me is not a worry, it's not their fault. I had misunderstood the statement to mean that eye contact was enough to warrant a physical confrontation with violence. I agree with you yelling and such doesn't necessitate a gun.

US is not the place to be if you want to tell others how to live their lives…

I'm not living my life in fear by doing that, I'm just aware of the fact from learned experience that people on meth tend to not react well to the fact that someone might be staring at them, and that there is also a certain type of person in public who tries to draw confrontations. This is being realistic. I don't stare at my feet at everyone who walks into the train, but there are some characters who you are wise to not do anything to draw their conversation, and its often pretty obvious who they are the second they step foot on the transit vehicle (e.g. the one looking for fights will be posturing the minute they are on the train and accosting people).

Isn't that like saying a minefield is the same as any other field as long as you know where the land mines are and step around them? At the end of the day is it that surprising that people choose to walk somewhere else?

You can see where the mines are, it's the guy in the back of the car muttering to himself about Dr. Phil ejaculating in the water supply. Don't step on him.

These "landmines" you speak of aren't stationary targets. They can walk up to you.

Breaking news, man on subway car capable of locomotion.

No, it's more like I am aware that a bear is not a big large cuddly cat, and when one approaches I act appropriately.

It would be quite appropriate to fear a bear.

I take transit a lot and many times of the day and while I've seen all of these things, most of the time you see harmless stuff. Mostly it's teens (kids who can't drive yet), doing dumb things like drawing graffiti on a map or putting silly stickers on things. Occasionally someone smelling like booze and weed ends up on the train. Someone who hasn't showered in... days gets on. Sometimes you notice a person who is obviously not fully there and talks to themselves a lot or mumbles and shouts with no pretext. Occasionally you see a person with untreated visible medical conditions (like an abscess). If you have headphones in or have a book in your face, you probably won't even notice what's happening. The numbers back these up as it's statistically much safer to take transit in most places than drive. I do have friends in the suburbs though, so I know there are folks who find safety and comfort in appearances. And for some folks they find genuine solace in their car which is fine.

You don't even _know_ who you're driving next to on a freeway. The driver next to you may be driving home dead tired, "microsleep"ing along the way. They could be very drunk, trying desperately to get home and crawl into bed. Maybe they got fired at their workplace cause they were on meth. Someone driving might have a seizure and lose control of their vehicle. You can just look at traffic crash statistics; the US is the worst developed country for traffic incidents by far. Just because you can't see them doesn't mean their conditions don't actually exist.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see America pay actual attention to the folks with these physical and medical conditions, and the fact that we don't is terrible. But stuffing them into cars or forcing them to an underclass where they can't drive isn't the answer. And it's not particularly unsafe to take transit.

The idea of successfully suing the city over transit crime is almost as laughable as people's overblown fear of being a transit crime victim.

See Lozito v. New York City.

I'm not sure about NYC, but it does happen at least in California.

https://okhovatlawfirm.com/train-accidents/whos-liable-if-yo...

https://hhjtrialattorneys.com/domestic-violence-in-californi...

https://trellis.law/rulings/%22LOS-ANGELES-COUNTY-METROPOLIT...

I'm not a hardcore anti-car person, but realistically you're safer taking buses and trains and so on in the US than you are driving on the highway. Of course, if you're just taking trips across town a car might be safer? Ideally though major cities would police public transit better, but we really reversed course on policing in this country beginning circa 2014 and crime has risen commensurately.

After witnessing how 911 and the police treat my reports I am convinced that crime stats in all major US metro areas are cooked and rife with under-reporting and lies. The crime rate is much higher than the stats show. Imagine my horror when I was put on put on hold for 5 minutes with 911 in the nation's capital after being attacked while jogging and the dispatcher was annoyed at me for bothering her.

That’s a fair point and one I agree with. Police across the country have either pulled back or been pulled back such that proactive policing has been dramatically reduced, which has been driving up crime, but it also means police aren’t looking for crimes like they used to do, which would also contribute to an “underreporting” effect. And homicides and other not-so-easily-overlooked crimes are way, way up so it would be surprising if the forces operating on homicides (“I can get away with murder”, basically) weren’t also operating on other crimes.

Where do you live? As an outsider it’s crazy that anyone in the US can think like this.

Have lived in multiple top 10 US cities by population. It's the same story everywhere. Watch the interviews by charliebo313 to learn the story.

That sounds much more fear-filled than the actual risk you run.

The police in my city in the US (2+ million pop.) are there to document the aftermath of crimes (only if substantial damage was caused or they won't come out) and to take photos of deceased bodies. Your life is purely in your own hands despite the illusion. You simply roll the dice daily. I called the police three times to report crimes in progress and have been blown off, the police responded after a few hours each time, or my police report was "lost". I needed it for an insurance claim when thousands of dollars of my property was stolen.

In another city I have even called 911 and been put on hold for 5 minutes. In the nation's capital after being attacked unprovoked while running at dusk in a large central park but managed to barely slip out of his grip and book it. Thinking back it would have been very easy to make a body disappear there without a trace. Zero follow up or news about attacks occurring there. The 911 dispatcher was annoyed that she had to be bothered by me. I should have known better I guess after seeing a car laying in the middle of Missouri Ave with all four wheels sheared off after a police chase. Thankfully it's easy to protect yourself with a concealed handgun. Just kidding, it's illegal to possess or use weapons in Washington D.C.

I was shot at from a car while walking down the sidewalk. I could hear the ricochets off the pavement near me. I ducked behind a tree and called 911. They took my name/location and hung up. I never saw an officer.

/this was in Dallas Texas about a month ago

Jesus christ. I have heard of similar incidents happening as being part of a gang initiation, especially if the attack was purely unprovoked (i.e., you weren't targeted for political or financial motives). I reckon this kind of stuff is a special kind of behavior usually reserved for areas within a day's drive to the Mexican border.

Nope. A gang initiation happened in Cincinnati Ohio in front of a Target. Random young man was accosted on trying to enter the store. He didn't bite on their attempt to goad him into a fight and they shot him when he left the store. There was a girl taking video of the whole thing. She jumped in the car with the shooter. Still at large.

Totally innocent student shot dead on a trip to a very busy store in a very "nice" (expensive) area.

I pay attention to the get-away situation of areas now to assess risk of criminal activity spawning.

Sounds hellish. Is the money really worth living in such a place?

Maybe it’s a form of the Stockholm syndrome? I can’t make heads or tails why someone would want to live in that environment either.

It's difficult for Americans to change anything because all changes are potentially racist and they can't escape either because immigration to safe foreign countries is only feasible for those that can claim and prove unbroken ancestry or exceptional talent. The only solution Americans have is to universally liberalize handgun concealed carry and make bodycams in public ubiquitous so you can exonerate yourself after defending yourself. Americans are swimming in an ocean of criminals if they decide to be out in public. It can't be fixed at this point because all changes are perceived as harming some minorities or racist. Nevermind that in the places where most life threatening crimes occur, minorities are not the minority. Americans' mindset is so warped that it will take generations of suffering and unnecessary death to sufficiently correct the cultural zeitgeist. This is why concealed carry and bodycams are so essential to normal Americans today. You can't fix society so you have to protect yourself and exonerate yourself with video footage.

This is the craziest thing I’ve read this week. Yes, we have too much violent crime, but it’s not worse than it was in the 90s. That’s a lot of regression in a short period of time, and we don’t want to continue on this trajectory, but it’s not nearly as extreme as you suggest.

I suspect you’re making a couple of errant assumptions:

1. Looking at the sheer number of homicides in the US without accounting for the US’s very large population (our rates are still high for a 1st world country, but not as much as they seem without the population adjustment)

2. Assuming that crime is evenly distributed across our country. Most of the violent crime in the US happens in so-called “inner cities”. Most of the country is very safe, but a few places are very unsafe.

Basically the US is a biiiigggg and diverse country by 1st world standards.

US crime is only "low" because such a huge number of people can live dispersed. And it's a terrible way to live. To make a meaningful safety comparison between interesting places low population density areas need to be excluded.

If you look around you and see only criminals, then the only answers you will come up with involve rounding them up, and moving them elsewhere.

Those people on the streets that you're 'swimming in' - the homeless, the untreated mental health cases, the drug addicts, the ex cons, the unemployed, the slum dwellers - they are not criminals. Except where catch-22 laws make their existence criminal.

They are the marginalized, and made so by the day-to-day actions and inactions of their fellow citizens who look down on them, block them from participating in society at every opportunity.

There are well known solutions to these problems: economic, social, and humane. But as long as the voting public can keep coming up with reasons these people do not deserve a proper solution to their problems, you're all going to have to live with the consequences.

Pray tell what are these well known solutions? My personal solution is a Glock 9, a body cam, and praying that I can away run fast enough to never have to use either.

While many of these problems are never going to go away, they are absolutely manageable in a humane way. If you look at cities around the world there are many examples that are as large and diverse as an American city, but much safer and cleaner.

Why is that? It's not like they don't have their share of unemployment, mental health or drug addiction.

In most cases nothing surprising - just well funded and unhobbled versions of things most North Americans already know about but vote against. Just listen to your local Social Workers and Nurses, they usually have a very good idea of what's missing or critically underfunded. Here are some examples:

Homelessness and unemployment: Various social safety nets, affordable housing, back to work and education programs, well funded social work programs

Mental health: Treatment, accessibility, in- and outpatient programs, well funded social work programs

Drug addiction: Decriminalization, access to safe use, needle exchanges and treatment programs, well funded social work programs

Ex cons: Stop giving people lifelong records for drug offenses. Re-entry education and training programs. etc. etc.

Maybe you live in a war zone, and a glock really is necessary for you to make it from your condo to your armored car. But until you start looking beyond just helping yourself, things are just going to get worse.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com