Every now on then you hear about a part of town or specific street or complex that is so crime/gang ridden that ‘even cops won’t go there’, even if there is a legitimate need to do so, and its always sounded like BS to me. I’m not doubting that there are some really really bad parts of really bad cities, of course.
I went with a cop for 10 years and he never once refused to go to the “bad” part of town. I think the statement is more of a brag than fact.
Total UL.
It’s right up there with that stern warning not to wear tie-dyed shirts on the bad side of the tracks because the crack dealers will use you for target practice.
Now, there may be places so dangerous to an individual that a the police will avoid going unless the need presses, and I’m there are parts of some cities that an individual policeman would be foolish to go into alone with no backup, but as a group I can’t imagine anyplace that the police (as a team) “won’t go”.
There was a COPS in Pittsburgh the other night where the cop said that there are people in this particular neighborhood who just open fire when they see a police car- oddly enough I guess, they were sleeping or something that night as no one shot at the car.
It would be a useful cover story for corrupt police who are on somebody’s pay in return for staying out of that part of town. Just speculation.
I wouldn’t say it’s right up there with that… as I’ve never heard that wearing a tie dyed shirt is grounds for target practice.
It might have been true in the 70s-80s. Bad times, crime-wise. Things are better, now.
It is for NRA card carrying Republicans.
Maybe this is a way of expressing that the police respond really really slowly to calls from the area?
Perhaps since they need to respond *en masse * to such areas, they need more time to marshal their resources before “going in”?
Are there parts of town the pizza guy won’t deliver to? I heard that one a few times and thought it strange as no matter how bad this town is I doubt there’s anywhere you can’t get a pizza delivered.
This is definitely true. Most stores I’ve worked at have lists of neighborhoods that either they don’t deliver to or only deliver to during the day.
A friend of mine moved out of state to attend grad school. He moved into what he thought was a decent neighborhood. The first night there he ordered a delivery pizza and was told that they don’t deliver there. He asked why and was shocked when he was told that he had just moved into a dangerous area.
Actually if an area is getting that bad you will most likey see an increased police presence not cops avoiding it. One of the things about heavier patrolling is that you are spooking off the customers not just discouraging the dealers. Being in a vehicle it is often easier to bust the customer who just made the buy rather than busting the dealer who promptly disappears on foot into a 200 unit apartment complex.
Here’s an interesting read about Oniontown, N.Y.
Eliminating the pizza signs on the delivery cars would help- drivers in my not so good after dark area don’t have them. Sure the signs are advertising, but what they’re really advertising is “guy in this car has cash…and food.”
:dubious:
Which neighborhood would that be? I’m a lifelong resident of the 'Burgh, and I’ve never heard of such a thing.
Well most pizza and other delivery vehicles here aren’t branded anyway. It is usually the delivery guy’s own car.
Now that I think about it, one problem, seemingly rather common in the roughest parts of Northern Ireland, is firemen getting attacked while out on calls. At the very least there are television adverts telling people not to do it!
“Tobacco Road” (song written by John D. Loudermilk) is said to be inspired by street in East Durham that was “so rough that the police would not venture there at night” (from here - scroll about halfway down, to “Tobacco Road”) . However, this site points out that “since [it] was private property, the police would not drive down the street…every place on the block was a gambling house, liquor house or a house of prostitutes.” So it appears to have been partially true in this case, though not in a way that really supports the notion questioned in the OP.