Hacker News Reader

Comment by dwheeler | Hacker News Reader

I live in northern Virginia, and I have never been a victim of theft. If this poll is correct, that amount of theft is insane. Regardless of the causes, this seems like a pretty serious problem.

View on HN

Half the people in SF can say the same. Anecdotal data doesn't mean much.

Do the 50% who do claim they are victims of theft say it only happened to them a single time? In my experience, the people who admit they are the victims of theft have countless stories of it happening to them.

> In my experience, the people who admit...

Again, one person's anecdote is not a reliable way of measuring these things.

I would suspect that people who have been a victim of theft once are much more likely to be a victim again.

Not even package theft? Maybe it's who I know, but all the nova residents I personally know complain about packages being stolen off their porch. That and theft of bikes or bike parts. Whether these count seems to vary a lot. Most people don't bother to file a police report, so they won't show up in a city/county's theft stats. But if a poll (like this one) asked me if I had ever been a victim of theft (and didn't further specify), I would include that kind of opportunistic theft in my answer.

NoVA is more like Palo Alto than SF. DC proper is a different vibe

My rental car got broken into early evening in Palo Alto last year .. just behind the nice restaurants on University Ave. I think the crime increase may be a bit more defused.

“I live in a wealthy suburb outside a major city and it’s safe here compared to an entire major city” fixed it for you

You seem to be implying that it's right and proper for cities to have high crime. Why is that?

The poster is only saying it is typical that crime in cities is higher than in surrounding suburbs, in the US. They didn't say anything about "right and proper" -- that's your spin.

> You seem to be implying that it's right and proper for cities to have high crime.

That's a really odd reading. From my vantage point it looks more like anecdotal evidence from within an area with usually lower crime rates and attempting to extrapolate to the larger city/ies.

I don't see a value judgment at all.

I'm not the OP but I personally would imply that a wealthy and low density area would have a lower rate of petty theft than a dense and urban environment full of a diverse group of people (with diverse incomes and diverse needs).

Not that it should have, but that it can be expected.

Never? I live in NJ and I have had things stolen from me at least 4 times.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com