<p>
For what it’s worth, the Clery statistics’ definition of “forcible sexual assaults” includes actions that would not be considered rape under Massachusetts law, such as sex with an intoxicated person where force is not involved. So how many drunk students had sex off-campus in Cambridge in 2004?</p>
<p>All of the Hyde Park/Kenwood crimes I described upthread were perpetrated by young black men. </p>
<p>On the other hand, in Lewiston or Portland, Maine, the likelihood is that the majority of similar crimes are perpetrated by young white men.</p>
<p>Re #60</p>
<p>Fair enough.</p>
<p>Someone disagreed with my post comparing San Francisco and Chicago.
S/he posted some statistics, but ignored that San Francisco seems to ME less safe than Chicago. I made a point of it being MY perception. This is how it seems to ME.</p>
<p>I did not look up the stats. I do have long experience and knowledge of S.F. (and follow local news closely) and limited experience with Chicago.</p>
<p>Perhaps I went into Chicago with the mindset of it being a “big city” and have been pleasantly surprised at how mild the panhandlers have been, how pleasant my experiences have been on public transportation, etc. I will still be careful. No, I have not ventured into known heavy crime areas - I have no reason to.
On the other hand, I’m not sure I would trust any crime statistics coming out of the city and county of San Francisco. It is a notorious city for being a so-called sanctuary city. There is a sense that government is sympathetic to criminals. District attorney who is weak (there is a new one I have not followed). I am pretty sure though for many years, news reports have noted low conviction rates (and I am guessing, low arrest rates) while there are plenty of unpleasant crimes. Panhandlers are VERY aggressive in San Francisco and they can be super scary.</p>