Is London too dangerous for tourists?

Take a break from playing the game and chat here about real-world transportation issues!
User avatar
acs121
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 1900
Joined: 03 Nov 2017 18:57
Location: Courbevoie, near Paris, France

Re: Is London too dangerous for tourists?

Post by acs121 » 04 Apr 2018 12:33

As of what i learned in english in France (it may be different in Sweden), a city is a large town.
A municipality is a city or town which is governed by its own locally-appointed officials.

User avatar
Redirect Left
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 6532
Joined: 22 Jan 2005 19:31
Location: Wakefield, West Yorkshire

Re: Is London too dangerous for tourists?

Post by Redirect Left » 04 Apr 2018 16:07

acs121 wrote:I'm not talking about downtown, but the city itself. Brixton isn't downtown London, but it is London.
It would be part of Greater London, not the city. The British don't use the term 'downtown'. When one is referring to London, we would generally refer to it as The City of, or Greater London. I know someone who lives in Chessington, and refer to themselves as living in Greater London.

As i noted and badly drew in my previous post, the City of London is tiny, it is infact the third smallest city in the UK by population, it's also only 1.12 square miles in area (2.9 square km). The only cities with smaller populations are 'St Davids' & 'St Asaph', both in Wales.

When one visits London, you are visiting Greater London, not the city of. If you did only visit the city, it'd be a very short trip, with not much to do.
Image
Worst Behaved IRC Member of 2008, 2009 & 2010 - Go Me!

User avatar
acs121
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 1900
Joined: 03 Nov 2017 18:57
Location: Courbevoie, near Paris, France

Re: Is London too dangerous for tourists?

Post by acs121 » 04 Apr 2018 17:08

Actually, a Londoner or Google Maps will tell me that Brixton is actually part of London. How to explain that ?

User avatar
Redirect Left
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 6532
Joined: 22 Jan 2005 19:31
Location: Wakefield, West Yorkshire

Re: Is London too dangerous for tourists?

Post by Redirect Left » 04 Apr 2018 17:19

Because they are referring to Greater London, and are not accurate with their words.
Brixton is 100% not part of the City of London. The most geographical indication is that it is at the wrong side of the river Thames, plus another 4 or 5km south of the City limits.

Greater London is a region of England, and the administrative boundaries for London, which again is not the same as the City of London. It encompasses a very large area, with over 8 million inhabitants, compared to the less than 10k of the City of London.

This is also now entirely off topic, the answer to the question has been covered quite well by now. You're entirely safe in London, unless you explicitly ignore advice and go looking for trouble.
Image
Worst Behaved IRC Member of 2008, 2009 & 2010 - Go Me!

User avatar
acs121
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 1900
Joined: 03 Nov 2017 18:57
Location: Courbevoie, near Paris, France

Re: Is London too dangerous for tourists?

Post by acs121 » 04 Apr 2018 17:29

I've ever thought London (or at least, Greater London) counted more inhabitants than Paris, it seems wrong. Paris counts 3 million inhabitants, and in Île-de-France (Greater Paris) we're 12 million ! That's more than only the city of New York though.

User avatar
Dave
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 17195
Joined: 26 Dec 2005 20:19
Location: Harringay, North London
Contact:

Re: Is London too dangerous for tourists?

Post by Dave » 04 Apr 2018 22:41

Some confusion between the city of London, which Leftie refers to as “Greater London”, and the City of London, which is a very small part of town but was the first part of the city.

For reference, “Central London” is probably 7 or 8 times the size of the City of London. As for Brixton, it’s zone 2, which is the first band of areas outside of Central, and is now one of the quickest gentrifying areas in the whole city. Peckham isn’t far behind. Harlesden I shan’t comment on... it’s not great. You might go to Brixton, you wouldn’t go to Harlesden. In either case, you’re probably alright, although I’d keep a close eye on my belongings (as I would everywhere)

London, like every super metropolis, swings wildly from small area to small area. Where I live is fairly recently gentrified from a rather less than salubrious area. Many of the areas to the east of here still retain such a reputation.

In the last 24 hours people have been killed in Northumberland Park, Walthamstow and Hackney. All of these are within a few miles. Whilst tragic these will likely prove to be somewhat gang related. The threat to the general public (including tourists) is obscenely low.

Americans seem to have latched on to London having “no go areas”, peddled by the likes of Farage and Hopkins, who inexplicably get serious airtime on Fox et al. They conveniently ignore the ghettoised state of some of their major cities. Would I go to South Central LA? No but that’s because it’s dangerous.

Why is it so? Well everyone right of centre blames immigration, but London has been a melting pot of cultures and nationalities since it was established as a port in Roman times (and indeed before that). What they like to ignore is the swingeing cuts imposed by this government on police budgets, especially those in London, which have reduced community policing to a pointless plastic badged volunteer operation.

As for our murder rate being higher than New York’s, well... that may be the case for individual months. Over a larger sample (2017), there were about 130 murders in London (including terror attacks) - last year was the first year on record that New York’s homicide rate fell below three hundred. So is London less safe than New York? Is it boat...

(Seems Chrill made this point first... meh)

So to answer your question - I’ve been living here five and a half years. I’ve never felt actively scared. Do I avoid some places? Yes. Does that make them “no go areas” - absolutely not.

EDIT: I mean I’m surprised this has even come up. If you’re a tourist you’re unlucky if you have your wallet lifted, really unlucky if you get properly mugged, and downright wretched if you’re caught up in an incident which threatens your life. This probably mirrors most cities of many sizes.
Official TT-Dave Fan Club

Dave's Screenshot Thread! - Albion: A fictional Britain
Flickr


Why be a song when you can be a symphony? r is a...

User avatar
Redirect Left
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 6532
Joined: 22 Jan 2005 19:31
Location: Wakefield, West Yorkshire

Re: Is London too dangerous for tourists?

Post by Redirect Left » 04 Apr 2018 23:48

Dave wrote:Some confusion between the city of London, which Leftie refers to as “Greater London”, and the City of London, which is a very small part of town but was the first part of the city.
I'm just reciting what I learnt at school.
The only part that is actually termed a city, is roughly between Whitechapel & Covent Garden on the north side of the Thames, and no higher than the start of Bethnal Green & Clerkenwell. The rest is named (termed?) 'Greater London', which under varying definitions could be a county or an authoritive area. Split up into 32(?) distinct areas (ie: Hammersmith, Hackney, Kingston). However non of them are a cities, or part of the city.
Perhaps that definition i was taught has changed since 2000-2005, or the teached dumbed it down incase 13-17 year olds couldn't learn that much information, and i've known a lie for nearly two decades :P

and now im off to cry myself to sleep having realised i left high school now 13 years ago
Image
Worst Behaved IRC Member of 2008, 2009 & 2010 - Go Me!

User avatar
YNM
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 3535
Joined: 22 Mar 2012 11:10
Location: West Java

Re: Is London too dangerous for tourists?

Post by YNM » 05 Apr 2018 00:23

Some terms perhaps fellow Americans could agree in the slightest sense (this is near-specific to London) :

- City ~ Core/Downtown (arguably it goes farther than that, but for all good reasons it might as well be)

- Greater London ~ City/Urban (I know there are urban census in the US)

- London "commuter" ~ Metro (so this could involve Guildford being counted under "London, work only"; Metro involves anything and everything that has connections to the city mentioned)

While the last two are entirely modernly defined, the first one is a relic of Roman history.

YNM = yoursNotMine - Don't get it ?

User avatar
supermop
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 1042
Joined: 21 Feb 2010 00:15
Location: Fitzroy North - 96

Re: Is London too dangerous for tourists?

Post by supermop » 05 Apr 2018 01:36

Dave wrote:Some confusion between the city of London, which Leftie refers to as “Greater London”, and the City of London, which is a very small part of town but was the first part of the city.
For the purpose of this discussion, I think it would be in good faith to assume that when we talk about London, we mean the whole part that has the mayor of London as its elected mayor, rather than the capital C city or whatever was inside the old wall (roughly the same area in my recollection?), just as we would no longer split hairs between New Amsterdam within the wall and the villages of Greenwich or Haarlem etc on Manhattan Island.
Chrill wrote:However, from January to March 2018 there have been more London murders than New York murders.
New York is reasonably safe, so it may be the case that it is currently safer than London (we'd have to look at all violent crimes for the period), but it may also be that 47 over a few months is a statistical anomaly or a fluke uptick in gang violence. It's probably best to say that both cities are decently safe, and safer than they have been in the past.

User avatar
YNM
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 3535
Joined: 22 Mar 2012 11:10
Location: West Java

Re: Is London too dangerous for tourists?

Post by YNM » 05 Apr 2018 04:01

supermop wrote:For the purpose of this discussion, I think it would be in good faith to assume that when we talk about London, we mean the whole part that has the mayor of London as its elected mayor, rather than the capital C city or whatever was inside the old wall (roughly the same area in my recollection?), just as we would no longer split hairs between New Amsterdam within the wall and the villages of Greenwich or Haarlem etc on Manhattan Island.
Thing is, if you could call the entirety of Long Island as part of NYC, Brighton could conceivably be called part of London.
YNM = yoursNotMine - Don't get it ?

User avatar
Dave
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 17195
Joined: 26 Dec 2005 20:19
Location: Harringay, North London
Contact:

Re: Is London too dangerous for tourists?

Post by Dave » 05 Apr 2018 07:51

Live within the M25? You live in London. Live within a London Borough? You live in London. There are many distinctions but simply, people will tell you they are a Londoner. I live in zone 2 North, I work in "Town" (Central London) - I am a Londoner.

London is a city. There is indeed the confusion of the actual City of London (now a Borough itself but a separate county also) and the City of Westminster (also a Borough but not a county). But by every definition of "city", London (or Greater London), is one.

The overall view of this thread is that London may be a fairly unsafe place to live depending on your background, your neighbourhood and your personal experience. This doesn't extend to American tourists who will come over and spew their dollars on tourist tat in zone 1 and - at a stretch - go to zone 2 for the museums and Camden.

Once you get to the outskirts of zone 2, London is a city for the people living in it, not for the horrors who infest zone 1 gesticulating wildly at, e.g., the Walkie Talkie (genuinely the ugliest building in town)
Official TT-Dave Fan Club

Dave's Screenshot Thread! - Albion: A fictional Britain
Flickr


Why be a song when you can be a symphony? r is a...

User avatar
Train<In>Vain
Transport Coordinator
Transport Coordinator
Posts: 289
Joined: 24 Nov 2004 22:16
Location: SF Bay

Re: Is London too dangerous for tourists?

Post by Train<In>Vain » 05 Apr 2018 11:06

Forget London. Tehran is the new party capital.
Rookie of the Year: 2004, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 & 2016

User avatar
YNM
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 3535
Joined: 22 Mar 2012 11:10
Location: West Java

Re: Is London too dangerous for tourists?

Post by YNM » 05 Apr 2018 12:03

Well, you could've tried YouTube HQ.
YNM = yoursNotMine - Don't get it ?

User avatar
Redirect Left
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 6532
Joined: 22 Jan 2005 19:31
Location: Wakefield, West Yorkshire

Re: Is London too dangerous for tourists?

Post by Redirect Left » 05 Apr 2018 12:54

Dave wrote:This doesn't extend to American tourists who will come over and spew their dollars on tourist tat in zone 1 and - at a stretch - go to zone 2 for the museums and Camden.
At least I was accurate with where tourists go then. I haven't been to London since the last TT-F meet there, and I didn't do any touristy things. Shall have to visit in a tourist manner at some point. I've never seen the Shard in person since it was completed, for example.

I'll be sure to fire off an email to Fartown High School expressing my displeasure at their half bottomed attempt at teaching London :p
Image
Worst Behaved IRC Member of 2008, 2009 & 2010 - Go Me!

User avatar
kamnet
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6614
Joined: 28 Sep 2009 17:15
Location: Eastern KY
Contact:

Re: Is London too dangerous for tourists?

Post by kamnet » 11 Apr 2018 05:34

Thank you to everybody who participated. I appreciate your responses!

User avatar
JamieLei
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 7431
Joined: 10 Jan 2007 18:42
Location: Stratford, London

Re: Is London too dangerous for tourists?

Post by JamieLei » 11 Apr 2018 08:01

I think one more thing to add as someone who has lived in London for 5 years, is that I feel that tourists are far less likely to fall victim to any sort of crime compared to any other cities. The level of pickpocketing in Central London, while high for British standards, is actually quite low compared to Paris, Athens, Barcelona, etc.

I wouldn't consider any area of London a 'no-go area' for tourists, genuinely. There are areas that might make tourists a bit uncomfortable, but I don't think anyone would have trouble dragging a suitcase through any part of London during the day. And I live in a bit of London that's often considered a crime hotspot.

Of course, the comparison with New York also shows the wonderful progress that New York has made. I won't play down however how worrying London's recent murder rise has been for us residents (although the US national average is still 4 times as much!).
Any opinions expressed are purely mine and not that of any employer, past or present.

Post Reply

Return to “Real-World Transport Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest