Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I haven’t personally noticed London getting any more dangerous over the past 10 years that I’ve lived here.


You need to go out there, then.

There are areas where people do drugs openly, and overdosing, too, and no one cares. A cop walked past a lady overdosing.

You should watch videos of YouTubers going to these areas if you do not want to do it yourself.

The areas are famous for tourists where most phone snatching is rampant, 18 a day at a minimum, on one famous street alone.

FWIW, I am talking about London.


When we know that peoples perceptions of crime levels are entirely divorced from reality, perhaps you should spend less time watching Youtube, and more time looking at the actual stats.

Crime overall is at a low level historically in the England, per the Crime Survey of England and Wales, which track actual victims through surveys.

That's not to say the UK couldn't do much better, but this fearmongering is basically repeating far-right conspiracy claims pushed by the press that are not supported by data including by peoples actual responses when asked if they have actually been a victim as per the Crime Survey.

From The Guardian reporting on Crime Survey numbers for London relative to the rest:

"According the Crime Survey for England and Wales, someone is actually less likely to be a victim of crime in London than they are across the country as a whole. In the capital, 14.9% of people experienced a crime either to their person or their household in the year ending September 2023, compared with 15.7% nationally. But what about different types of crime?"


> When we know that peoples perceptions of crime levels are entirely divorced from reality, perhaps you should spend less time watching Youtube, and more time looking at the actual stats

When we know that police is understaffed and can't respond to all crime, perhaps you should spend less time blindly trusting the numbers. You, too, can't build an argument on unreliable data. Just like the poster you're replying to.


The numbers I'm referring to are from the Crime Survey for England and Wales which surveys people rather than rely on crime reports, so police staffing is entirely irrelevant to these numbers.

This was literally pointed out in the comment you replied to.


People are inherently unstrustworthy sources of such data.


So if "people's experiences" are an untrustworthy source of data

and "official figures" are an untrustworthy source of data

pray tell us just what could possibly be a trustworthy source of data??

"Go outside and look for yourself" that's people's experiences


> So if "people's experiences" are an untrustworthy source of data

People's experiences are, as yet, an inaccessible source of data.

People's claims about their experiences are an often untrustworthy source of data.

> pray tell us just what could possibly be a trustworthy source of data??

The absence of an trustworthy, accessible source of data does not make untrustworthy or inaccessible sources of data trustworthy or accessible.

> "Go outside and look for yourself" that's people's experiences

No, its not "people's experiences", but its also not a broad, general, representative source of data.


I think the problem here is N = 1..4 or whatever.

The issue is there, they were just there at a time where these people who are snatching weren't there. 18 phone snatching per day on one street, but not at all hours, and not on all streets. It varies. But yeah, we want people's experiences. Maybe some of these people on HN did not experience it. Perhaps they could ask their friends and the friends of their friends.


The Crime Survey carries out large-scale surveys of a sample of 75,000 households. It's not some dinky little opinion poll.

It's not going to be perfect, but it gives a very solid snapshot of peoples experience with crime without the massive distortion we know we get from looking at similar sized samples asked what they think crime levels are.


> The Crime Survey carries out large-scale surveys of a sample of 75,000 households. It's not some dinky little opinion poll.

So? Sample size only addresses sampling error, not nonsampling error, for nonsampling error its exactly as bad as the dinkiest little poll on the same topic (and for sampling error, it's not much better; polls are the sizes they typically are because it doesn't actually take a very large scale to be fairly reliable when you only consider sampling error, and, again, adding more size doesn't help at all against nonsampling error.)


Ok, so what nonsampling errors in the Crime Survey make it unreliable in your view? What would you suggest as an alternative source of information about crime levels in England and Wales?


My point is that we don't really have reliable data.


When they are asked about their firsthand experience as victims of crime, they may still be untrustworthy but they're still going to be far more trustworthy than the alternatives.


> You should watch videos of YouTubers

Oh FFS.

Do you seriously consider this robust evidence?

Instead, have a look at the Crime Survey for England and Wales (HINT: This tracks peoples experience of crime and so includes unreported crime)


No, that was just an example, for people not wanting to go out.

You are free to walk around these areas (just go to Knightsbridge) with an expensive watch to see if it is true or not. Get back to us safely to report.

Also... I literally just saw a cop walk past a lady overdosing as if all is fine, and did nothing to the woman who threw a bottle at the YouTuber. Who cares if it is on YouTube or not? I saw it regardless.


They aren't saying that crime doesn't exist, it's down compared to previously. You see how you and others can still experience crime even if it's down?

I'm guessing your solutions involve more police and anti immigration. While more social services and better prospects in life is what actually does something about the problem.


You’re acting like an old man who shakes fist at clouds, using their own anecdotal experiences over data in order to confirm your own pre conceived notions. Tale as old as time. What’s sad is you won’t recognise it.


I am 30 years old.

> using their own anecdotal experiences over data in order to confirm your own pre conceived notions

I am not doing this, at all, in fact, you are dead wrong. You think I am not aware of any of these fallacies / biases? I am self-aware enough.

Address this, tired of repeating myself: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44905149.

> I consumed https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-...

Official sources.

> And I consumed many people's "unsafe" experiences, similar to YOUR "safe" experiences.

I am considering both sides here.

> As I said, N = ~4 saying "it's safe" means fuck all, just like N = ~4 saying the opposite.

This should alone should strengthen the claim that I am considering both sides, and it means jack shit.

> So... you appear to be another person who invalidates and completely disregards other people's experiences (and your own Government's publishing) in favor of yours, because somehow yours is more valid. It is not.

---

Next time please do it without any personal attacks, that does not favor your case (wait, do you actually have any?) that is already standing on weak legs. If you have no case apart from personal attacks, then yeah, I am in the wrong here, with regarding to you.

If you are not interested in actually doing your research, do not even bother, I am tired of the old story that "but muh experiences matter more!!11!". They DO NOT. Your experiences are not the universal truth, and it goes both ways.


Is an £800 watch sufficiently expensive enough? I've been for a walk and nothing happened.


It does not happen at all hours, or on all streets.


I’m just honestly reporting my personal experience. Why would I want to deliberately go to a dangerous area that I have no reason to go to? Is that normal behavior for people who live in large cities?

People doing drugs isn’t a danger to me.


It isn't, but the crimes do not happen only in these areas.

Crimes (like phone, expensive items in a bag snatching) happen in rich areas, too.[1]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eP6tygFIQq0

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eP6tygFIQq0&t=1794s


I know that there is a lot of media reporting of knife crime and phone theft. However, I am contributing my personal experience to the thread. You could search YouTube for videos of people complaining about crime in any major city. This is a popular trope that gets a lot of views and engagement.


The point is that it happens not only in particularly shit areas of London, it happens in rich areas too, or where there are lots of tourists, areas that are supposed to be safe, but they are not.

And UK is doing fuck-all about it, they care more about who said what online. It is absurd.

As for your personal experience, sure, that is valid. It really depends on when you go out or what you are wearing.


I mean phone thefts can happen anywhere, but I imagine that’s also true of other places. If you’re a phone thief you’re going to go to the areas where people have nice phones, I assume.


> If you’re a phone thief you’re going to go to the areas where people have nice phones, I assume.

Yes, and they are doing it, and it is a major issue in London. We are not talking about other places right now. It is a huge issue in London.


Have you considered that you live in a bubble?


I live in London (Tower Hamlets to be specific). Your profile says that you live in Munich.


Of course, no one who lives in Munich ever dares to venture into London. Silly me!


What makes you so confident that you have a more accurate perception of life in London than its inhabitants? You were very confidently dismissive of my report of my own personal experience, so I was a little surprised to find out that you don't even live here!

Let this be a salutary warning to HN readers that a huge amount of baseless nonsense gets written about crime in London.


I wasn't dismissive at all. I'm just noting that maybe the common HN visitor, which is most likely an academic with the means to live in suburbia or nicer districts, may live in a bubble. I haven't written anything about crime in london.

Let this be a salutary warning to HN readers that people get needlessly pissy when you question them about the backgrounds of their experiences.


Ok, to your question: no, I do not live in some kind of upscale zero crime bubble. I live near Mile End station.

(And also, where on Earth did you get the idea that academics in London can afford to live in the nice districts, or that most HNers are academics?)


> I haven’t personally noticed London getting any more dangerous over the past 10 years that I’ve lived here.

I've been here 26 years this time (and a couple of years before that) and similarly not noticed it getting noticeably more dangerous.

(on the caveat side, I am a fairly hefty white bloke who apparently "looks scary" which might explain things.)




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: