[fairity]

You're just arguing semantics at this point.

Sure, the author admits that violent crime rate is under control. But, implicit in his post, is the fact that this is only the case because residents adopt behavioral patterns that remove them from violent crime scenes.

Imagine you live in a neighborhood where walking on the right side of the street results in immediate decapitation. While it's true that you can simply always walk on the left side of the street and be 100% safe, most people would not call that a safe neighborhood.

[ajross]

> But, implicit in his post, is the fact that this is only the case because residents adopt behavioral patterns that remove them from violent crime scenes.

But the same is true everywhere though. You think that Houston or St. Louis or wherever don't "adopt behavioral patterns" to make themselves feel safer too? Only SF residents are smart enough to make life in the wasteland possible?

No, that's silly. SF isn't unsafe, period. SF residents (specifically ones right here[1]) "feel" unsafe because of an out of control meme. And now it's leading this formerly rationalist and clear-thinking demographic into these ridiculous rhetorical holes.

Cities are cities. They've always been like this. If you don't like it that's fine, but please stop pretending that anything happening in SF is new, or unique, or special in any way. It's just what your microcommunity has decided to yell about this year.

[1] Which doesn't include me. I'm in Portland, having lived in SF previously and grown up in the urban northeast. Cities, again, are cities.

[scarmig]

I don't think Houston residents spend much if any time thinking about how to walk home from work to avoid a homeless encampment.

Cities don't have to be like this: by any standard, US cities are much less safe than those in the rest of the developed world. Where it comes to a head in San Francisco in particular is that everything is very heavily mixed together in close proximity, so commuting from a $2M townhouse to work a $300kpa job means you also pass through areas where people are literally dying in the street.

[fairity]

> You think that Houston or St. Louis or wherever don't "adopt behavioral patterns" to make themselves feel safer too?

No, not nearly to the same extent.

Whether that's the case or not is actually besides my point.

My point is that OP isn't simply claiming that he "feels unsafe". He's likely claiming that he IS unsafe. And, the only reason his unsafe environment hasn't resulted in physical harm is due to his altered behavior.

That line of reasoning is cogent and rational, and therefore, your claims of emotionalism are largely uncalled for.