Security guard strapped to death at Macy's in Center Philadelphia

[+ WilliamM]

The suspect was stealing man's hats. Another guard was also strapped.

It used to be Wanna maker's

I worked next door for 22 years

 

Not  particularly blaming the crime  rate  in Philadelphia 

[+ nycman]

Ummm….he was Stabbed to death. 

(I kept trying to envision how you could Strap someone to death at a Macy’s)

For the record, downtown Philly is unsafe and has been since at least the mid-90’s.

I was staying in Center City at a 5 star hotel less than a month ago. As I was leaving the hotel to meet friends at a restaurant 3 blocks away for dinner, the hotel security guard asked if I needed a ride. I said "no, it’s cool. I know Philly and it’s only 3 blocks away. I’ll walk". He said, "oh,HELL no" and shoved me into the hotel car. For the record, he was right. It wasn’t safe. 

[samhexum]

1 hour ago, WilliamM said:

The suspect was stealing man's hats. Another guard was also strapped.

 

44 minutes ago, nycman said:

(I kept trying to envision how you could Strap someone to death at a Macy’s)

[+ WilliamM]

Sorry:

 

Should be shot also although he willi live

[+ purplekow]

I guess one could be strapped for cash and wind up being killed by a strapping  thief.  

[+ azdr0710]

Man stabs security guard to death, injures another guard at Center City Macy's, police say

WWW.NBCPHILADELPHIA.COM

---

A man stabbed a security guard to death and injured another guard after trying to steal merchandise from the Macy's store in Center City, Philadelphia police said.

 

[+ Italiano]

Unf*&%ingbelievable

[BSR]

Where is the outcry for knife control?

[+ Pensant]

What a dystopia. Sad, because Philadelphia punches above its weight in many ways, but the violence is now so unpredictable and random. I was born in Bryn Mawr and went to the city all the time for first-run movies, etc. I’m sure there are still safe areas of the city, like Society Hill, Old City, perhaps the area west of Rittenhouse Square. I believe East Falls, Manayunk, parts of South Philly and, certainly, Chestnut Hill are still fine.

[SouthOfTheBorder]

I used to go to Philly frequently for business and stayed in Center City many times 2012 - 2017.  I didn't seem unsafe at all then, day or night.  I had several clients in that area & never heard any concerns about crime or personal safety.

maybe I got lucky or misread the environment. Or, things have changed in last few years.

the stabbings are horrific without question.  these types of crimes generate headlines that go national & then influence the overall perception of safety.

I don't know the Philly crime stats, but similarly in NYC - the subway violence paints NY as crime ridden, when it's actually very safe in context of per capita violent crime in US cities.  NYC isn't even in Top 20. The national media makes it seem different because sensational headlines attract viewers/clicks/readers & that equals money.  It's right to report the crimes of course - but as usual it's always in the details which most people can't process.

[marylander1940]

6 hours ago, BSR said:

Where is the outcry for knife control?

Knives don't kill people; people kill people with knives...

Is too soon to talk about the issue of knife control. No need for politics.

More Americans die of cancer, drug overdose, diabetes, obesity, than by knife. 

 

 

Edited December 5, 2023 by marylander1940

[SouthOfTheBorder]

From Forbes - Philadelphia, is indeed ranked one of the 15 most dangerous US cities.  
NYC is among the safest

https://www.forbes.com/sites/laurabegleybloom/2023/01/31/report-ranks-americas-15-safest-and-most-dangerous-cities-for-2023/

 

Edited December 5, 2023 by SouthOfTheBorder

[+ WilliamM]

Parts of lower Walmart Street are no longer safe,. Especially at night 

[+ WilliamM]

Years ago I  was robbed with a knife to my throat in West Philadelphia, fairly close to the University of Pennsylvanian.

It was in the early 1970s.  Perhaps It woke me up.  After  I retired I audited courses at  that University. Perhaps I was a bit smarter.

[+ Pensant]

2 hours ago, WilliamM said:

Parts of lower Walmart Street

Do you mean Walnut Street?

[+ Charlie]

I lived and worked in Center City Philadelphia for 38 years, and never thought of it as very dangerous, but I've been gone for 20 years.

Forbes list of "dangerous" cities consists almost entirely of old cities with stagnant or declining populations and little economic growth, while the "safe" cities are mostly places with explosive recent growth in population and economic growth in tech industries rather than in the traditional downtown. It's odd that Mesa, which used to be considered simply a suburb of Phoenix, makes the "safe" list, while Phoenix, which is the fifth largest city in the US in population, doesn't make the lists at all. I have to laugh at the idea of #2 Virginia Beach as a "large city," because my parents moved there when they retired, and it was basically just a large beach town with no center, and was really a residential suburb of Norfolk, which itself is no longer even big enough to qualify as a "large" city. The idea of using only the residential population within municipal boundaries as the definition of a popularly experienced metro area is the kind of arbitrary metric that often makes me question lists by Forbes.

[SouthOfTheBorder]

2 hours ago, Charlie said:

. I have to laugh at the idea of #2 Virginia Beach as a "large city," because my parents moved there when they retired, and it was basically just a large beach town with no center, and was really a residential suburb of Norfolk, which itself is no longer even big enough to qualify as a "large" city. The idea of using only the residential population within municipal boundaries as the definition of a popularly experienced metro area is the kind of arbitrary metric that often makes me question lists by Forbes.

Forbes noted that they used “cities” with populations of 300,000+ and then based on per capita findings.  
There are several ways to compare cities & regions - using an expanded region would pull in suburbs and likely make the numbers look better.  
Most common comparisons are either the municipal boundaries that define an exact city (like NYC, which consists of 5 boroughs only) or a regional term which is DMA (designated market area, which pulls in exact suburban areas and matches the geographic area commonly used to analyze television/radio market coverage). Either way, not everyone will agree on methodology based on their unique knowledge of individual cities & regions.  It’s a standardized process to make things neutral when building data comparisons.  
Making the threshold city low at 300,000 probably pulled small areas into the mix that just have exceptionally high crime. Im not sure that matters tho as I live in NYC, and I don’t mix in area of 8M people, more like several hundred thousand that live in close proximity.  The area I live in is probably much safer than reflected in overall NYC data.

You can cross reference this list to other high crime city lists and likely get very similar results, with a few outliers which are probably the small cities.  The bigger point is the cities you would expect to find on the high crime list are not there at all, like NYC & Los Angeles.  Of course, that doesn’t match the narrative about big cities being the epicenter of violent crime in America.   The truth is it’s the small to mid-sized cities that have exceptionally high violent crime and are dangerous.

You’re much more likely to encounter violent crime in St Louis, Memphis, Cleveland or Baton Rouge than Manhattan - any way you slice it.

Edited December 5, 2023 by SouthOfTheBorder

[+ WilliamM]

55 minutes ago, SouthOfTheBorder said:

Forbes noted that they used “cities” with populations of 300,000+ and then based on per capita findings.  
There are several ways to compare cities & regions - using an expanded region would pull in suburbs and likely make the numbers look better.  
Most common comparisons are either the municipal boundaries that define an exact city (like NYC, which consists of 5 boroughs only) or a regional term which is DMA (designated market area, which pulls in exact suburban areas and matches the geographic area commonly used to analyze television/radio market coverage). Either way, not everyone will agree on methodology based on their unique knowledge of individual cities & regions.  It’s a standardized process to make things neutral when building data comparisons.  
Making the threshold city low at 300,000 probably pulled small areas into the mix that just have exceptionally high crime. Im not sure that matters tho as I live in NYC, and I don’t mix in area of 8M people, more like several hundred thousand that live in close proximity.  The area I live in is probably much safer than reflected in overall NYC data.

You can cross reference this list to other high crime city lists and likely get very similar results, with a few outliers which are probably the small cities.  The bigger point is the cities you would expect to find on the high crime list are not there at all, like NYC & Los Angeles.  Of course, that doesn’t match the narrative about big cities being the epicenter of violent crime in America.   The truth is it’s the small to mid-sized cities that have exceptionally high violent crime and are dangerous.

You’re much more likely to encounter violent crime in St Louis, Memphis, Cleveland or Baton Rouge than Manhattan - any way you slice it.

 

, The mill cities of Lowell   and Lawrence Massachusetts are instructive.

 

My uncle taught latin  at Lawrence High School for many years. When he retired, he was teaching elementary civics.

Where as Lowell successfully sought available federal and state funding.

[Luv2play]

12 hours ago, BSR said:

Where is the outcry for knife control?

Had the perp returned with a semi automatic, many more would have died. The security guards were not armed.

[+ Charlie]

4 hours ago, SouthOfTheBorder said:

Forbes noted that they used “cities” with populations of 300,000+ and then based on per capita findings.  
There are several ways to compare cities & regions - using an expanded region would pull in suburbs and likely make the numbers look better.  
Most common comparisons are either the municipal boundaries that define an exact city (like NYC, which consists of 5 boroughs only) or a regional term which is DMA (designated market area, which pulls in exact suburban areas and matches the geographic area commonly used to analyze television/radio market coverage). Either way, not everyone will agree on methodology based on their unique knowledge of individual cities & regions.  It’s a standardized process to make things neutral when building data comparisons.  
Making the threshold city low at 300,000 probably pulled small areas into the mix that just have exceptionally high crime. Im not sure that matters tho as I live in NYC, and I don’t mix in area of 8M people, more like several hundred thousand that live in close proximity.  The area I live in is probably much safer than reflected in overall NYC data.

You can cross reference this list to other high crime city lists and likely get very similar results, with a few outliers which are probably the small cities.  The bigger point is the cities you would expect to find on the high crime list are not there at all, like NYC & Los Angeles.  Of course, that doesn’t match the narrative about big cities being the epicenter of violent crime in America.   The truth is it’s the small to mid-sized cities that have exceptionally high violent crime and are dangerous.

You’re much more likely to encounter violent crime in St Louis, Memphis, Cleveland or Baton Rouge than Manhattan - any way you slice it.

My point was that defining "cities" solely based on an arbitrary population minimum leads Forbes (or anyone else making this kind of list) to an apples to oranges kind of comparison, since regardless of the number of people who live within the boundaries of a municipality, most people's image of a "city" would not put Mesa or Virginia Beach in the same category with New York. A better comparison would be between cities with obvious similarities, such as NYC vs. LA, or Raleigh vs. Birmingham. (BTW, some of the cities included on their lists don't actually meet the "over 300,000" population that Forbes claims, and Birmingham is one of them.)

[BSR]

2 hours ago, Luv2play said:

Had the perp returned with a semi automatic, many more would have died. The security guards were not armed.

Yeah, too bad the security guard wasn't armed.  He'd still be alive today, regardless of what weapon his attacker wielded.

[+ purplekow]

18 hours ago, BSR said:

Where is the outcry for knife control?

Probably when some one can stand on a rooftop and stab 50 people to death or when 2000 children are stabbed to death, most of them accidentally in any calendar year.  Or perhaps when cleaning one's knife one accidentally kills oneself when they thought the blade wasn't sharp.  Need I go one?  Probably not because all those bullets flying have left gun advocates seaf to the desire of the majority of the people in the US and their gun lobbies continue to buy government officials.  The Nation Knife Association does not have that much pull or money.  

[+ purplekow]

2 hours ago, BSR said:

Yeah, too bad the security guard wasn't armed.  He'd still be alive today, regardless of what weapon his attacker wielded.

More gun owners die accidentally from their own gun then people who defend themselves by shooting someone else, so chances are he may have already been dead.  Deaths in the US years. Guns 50000.  knives 1500.   so about 150 people a day in US killed with guns, about 5 a day with knives.  Fatalities from drunk driving, about 37 per day.  

Edited December 6, 2023 by purplekow

[SouthOfTheBorder]

5 hours ago, Charlie said:

(BTW, some of the cities included on their lists don't actually meet the "over 300,000" population that Forbes claims, and Birmingham is one of them.)

actually, the dangerous list used a threshold of 100,000 for “city” population.  The safest list used 300,000 as threshold.  The methodology is all described on the link in previous post.  

As mentioned- you can use different sources and get essentially the same lists with St Louis, Memphis, Detroit, Cleveland among the most dangerous.  NYC as an example, is never on those lists because it’s extremely safe by any measure - and that is the exact opposite of what most people think due to the reporting of NYC crime.

Crimes in NYC are routinely sensationalized because it’s the largest US city &  the center of national media.  Those type stories will always get people to read it.  A random knife attack in St Louis, Detroit or Memphis will not be reported nationally because no cares about those cities.  And that’s how perceptions about big cities are manipulated by the media.  A knife attack in Philadelphia at Macys will  absolutely be reported nationally because people will read the story and talk about it - which is exactly what happened in this forum.

When is the last time you read about individual violent murders in St Louis ?  Even tho that city ranks more dangerous than several violent cities in Mexico & Brazil. You won’t read about St Louis because nobody cares about it.  That’s the point. 
 

[Cooper]

Administrator’s Message

Gentlemen, Let’s return to the topic and not turn this into a gun debate.