This. I’ve walked all over San Francisco and haven’t really felt unsafe.
For violent crime, Oakland is number 11 and SF is number 37. They’re both higher for total crime and property crime, but I don’t imagine you care as much about property crime if you’re just a tourist.
You can see the list here: List of United States cities by crime rate - Wikipedia
Sort by the total in the violent crime section. It’s less dangerous than Cleveland, Milwaukee, or Indianapolis, but somehow those cities never show up in threads here about how the world is falling apart. Weird.
Physically its identical. IIRC the bay area and DC are the only places to have that system. The big difference for me is the DC Metro does tend to go most places you want to go around the DC area, whereas the BART absolutely does not, there is a thin ribbon in the east bay (where the Coliseum stadium is conveniently for the OP) but outside that (most conspicuously the entirety of Silicon Valley) you are SOL.
Safety wise its about the same, if you are in or near a station in one of the sketchier areas after dark, you should take care and be aware of your surroundings. But that goes for any big city on the planet. I would say the homelessness situation is worse around the downtown SF stations. But that’s not a safety issue, though it is extremely disturbing.
Yeah 100% if you are going to a baseball game, surrounded by people, Coliseum BART is entirely safe (there is a walkway directly to the stadium from the BART station)
I wouldn’t go and try to find dinner near the station at night, but that’s mainly because there isn’t much there (as well being a sketchy area). The other downtown Oakland stations are worth stopping at, there is a good range of restaurants and breweries around them.
Yeah this is the key point, San Francisco is a genuinely beautiful city, and really worth visiting. Not just by US standards, by world standards too. It has its issues, but its not remotely unsafe. It would be real shame if the OPer misses out on it because of overblown media scare stories.
These statistics are for reported crime. People are more like to report a crime when there is an effective police/criminal justice system–something San Francisco doesn’t have.
I don’t know about that, it depends where you want to go. In my own case, I live very close to a BART station in the East Bay, and I go to Oakland and San Francisco a lot (as I mentioned in this thread). I take BART a lot to get to those cities, it’s practically a direct route from my house to the downtowns of those cities.
It’s less useful to get to San Jose or Silicon Valley, as you say, but I personally don’t go there that much. Even there, the recent BART extension has been helpful. Now you can take BART to Milpitas and transfer directly to the VTA light rail. I’ve done this, and it works for certain trips.
I just want to make sure I understand your claim – you’re claiming that SF and Oakland have lower reported violent crime rates than other cities like Cleveland and Milwaukee because the police/criminal justice system don’t work? And, that difference is enough to move it up or down on the list of cities?
I’m dubious. Does that under-reporting including murder and non-negligent manslaughter, where they show up as 23 and 66 on the list? Your claim is that murder is routinely not reported in Oakland and SF?
As I said there is a thin ribbon of places that are well served (I lived in Hayward for a few years, and it was OK as means of commute), but as a percentage of the population its convenient for (and particularly of the daily commuter journeys) its noticeably poor. Its not that DC has super amazing public transit compared to say London or Paris, or any other world city, but moving here from SF its really noticeable how better served it is by Metro than the Bay Area is by BART (and don’t get me started on the antiquated throw back to the 1950s that is Caltrain 
).
It seems that the car break in problem is in tourist areas. I saw big signs at Lands End about it the last time I went there. However I almost always take BART into the city because parking is such a pain. And I have a geezer Clipper Card, which makes it cheap.
Are catalytic converter thefts still a problem there? They busted a big ring in the South Bay, and I haven’t heard much about it for a while.
Plus that’s the same BART station for Oakland Airport (there is a nice automated train that takes you there) and so there are almost always people around.
I haven’t been into the city for a while, but before Covid I did a bunch of self-guided walking tours all over, and never felt the slightest bit unsafe.
Hey, Caltrain is being electrified, in fact it’s almost done. That means it’s joining the 20th century!
I’d like to see some evidence reporting is less in SF than other big cities (I mean I’ve never lived in a city where I was confident the police would get their top team right on that car break-in case I just reported). Particularly for the violent crime @RitterSport mentioned, that is the thing that makes a city dangerous, I don’t believe SF folks are gonna go “Well I just got stabbed but I know the SFPD are basically on strike so I’m just gonna go home and whinge about it on Nextdoor” (plus any time you need to file an insurance claim you need a police report number)
It’s a standard RW talking harping point that the justice system doesn’t function in D-controlled areas because the Ds actively favor Anarchy over Law and Order. Just ignore any such fact-free harping.
The original plan was for BART to circle the bay but the southern counties balked at the cost. The East Bay’s south end has been creeping closer since then. When I left San Jose in 1992 it ended in Fremont. Now it reaches Berryessa. The blue line to Pleasanton. didn’t even exist.
CalTrain runs up the Peninsula from south of San Jose up to the city but annoyingly, doesn’t directly connect to BART at either end. You can use Muni and VTA for that which is why they came up with Clipper – you can shift easily from one authority to the other waving the same card (or your phone) at the gate.
My understanding is this wasn’t a matter of cost but was a lawsuit by the rich denizens of the South (Atherton specifically IIRC) and North Bay who didn’t want trains full of poor people in their town. I think the one exception to Metro coverage in the DC metro, Georgetown may be a similar situation.
Caltrain is a joke IMO. At least BART is a reasonable means of commuting if you live close to it, but Caltrain is a antiquated throw back to the 1950s. I used it on one of my recent-ish trips back to the bay area (as I was in the south bay), and the timetable has got even worse than it was in the 2000s when I last used it to commute (and it was embarrassingly bad back then)
Given that fewer people were commuting to work during the pandemic and this continues, perhaps the number of trains was reduced?
Heh. When cell phone networks were being established back in the '80s the good folk of Los Gatos didn’t want any of those ugly towers in their town so as a result, it was a hole in the network for some time afterward.
Yeah, I beleive this was the reason. Its still a joke though IMO. Even post-Covid a lot of people still live in SF and work in Silicon Valley, its got to be one of the main commuter routes in the US. Yet Caltrain has the service you’d expect from a small European regional train line connecting two small-ish towns.
Also they’ve been reducing the number of trains while they do the construction work to electrify the line.
They’ve been promising that once the line is electrified, Caltrain will have BART type frequency. We’ll see.