Current Events > Okay so where the fuck are these "no-go zones" in London?

(+) Yeah! (+)

SpiritSephiroth posted...

Abyssea posted...

SpiritSephiroth posted...

I think those courts only apply to civil matters and its pretty limited to what they can rule. Like conveyancing or land law for example.

I think that's outrageous. <.< if you move somewhere you should have to abide by their laws imo. Why are you guys letting them establish their own legal system instead of using the one already in place?

I think its something to do with interest, as in Islamic land law they actually pay more. But I can double check for you with colleagues if you want?

regardless of the reasoning behind it, its silly. It makes you guys look weak. :v Pull it together please.
---

in the imaginations of redhats
---

Abyssea posted...

SpiritSephiroth posted...

Abyssea posted...

SpiritSephiroth posted...

I think those courts only apply to civil matters and its pretty limited to what they can rule. Like conveyancing or land law for example.

I think that's outrageous. <.< if you move somewhere you should have to abide by their laws imo. Why are you guys letting them establish their own legal system instead of using the one already in place?

I think its something to do with interest, as in Islamic land law they actually pay more. But I can double check for you with colleagues if you want?

regardless of the reasoning behind it, its silly. It makes you guys look weak. :v Pull it together please.

Well we are a "melting pot of multicultural faiths and beliefs". Even I think that has its weakness.
---

Oi, you got a loisince for that no-go?
---

SpiritSephiroth posted...

Well we are a "melting pot of multicultural faiths and beliefs". Even I think that has its weakness.

Being a melting pot doesn't mean you have to let other cultures walk all over your own. :v
---

SpiritSephiroth posted...

s0nicfan posted...

SpiritSephiroth posted...

s0nicfan posted...

SpiritSephiroth posted...

s0nicfan posted...

SpiritSephiroth posted...

I meant not just Enfield, but Wesminster and Islington.

Also no it doesn't. Not at all.

Well then why don't you tell US which areas you wouldn't go to since you seem to know quite well.

In general? I'd just say don't look at your phone constantly with headphones on in the night on a empty street like in every other country. I don't apply "zones".

I'm willing to bet you could do that in 99% of suburbs with no risk, unless you're implying you could get mugged anywhere in the UK if caught alone with a phone out.

But you're the expert here.

What? Im just implying common sense.

Common sense is that there are safe and dangerous neighborhoods, and knowing which is which will alter how you act and when you go, because not everywhere is equally dangerous. You yourself have indicated that some areas are shadier than others in this very topic.

Less people, and empty streets compared to crowded areas in front of a well guarded parliament isn't any different for you? Okay.

Apples and oranges. You should compare empty streets at night between districts, then tell me they're equally dangerous. If they're not, then congrats, you use zones too.
---

s0nicfan posted...

Common sense is that there are safe and dangerous neighborhoods, and knowing which is which will alter how you act and when you go, because not everywhere is equally dangerous. You yourself have indicated that some areas are shadier than others in this very topic.

So the empty streets are the no-go zones you've been going on about?
---

SpiritSephiroth posted...

s0nicfan posted...

Common sense is that there are safe and dangerous neighborhoods, and knowing which is which will alter how you act and when you go, because not everywhere is equally dangerous. You yourself have indicated that some areas are shadier than others in this very topic.

So the empty streets are the no-go zones you've been going on about?

"I've been going on about?" I quoted London PD. Take your issue up with them if you take issue with the idea that not all blocks are equally dangerous.
---

i read this whole topic and i STILL don't know where the no go zones are

Uh oh
---

s0nicfan posted...

SpiritSephiroth posted...

s0nicfan posted...

Common sense is that there are safe and dangerous neighborhoods, and knowing which is which will alter how you act and when you go, because not everywhere is equally dangerous. You yourself have indicated that some areas are shadier than others in this very topic.

So the empty streets are the no-go zones you've been going on about?

"I've been going on about?" I quoted London PD. Take your issue up with them if you take issue with the idea that not all blocks are equally dangerous.

You quoted someone then showed me a map that probably has no relevance with the quote.

Abyssea posted...

SpiritSephiroth posted...

Well we are a "melting pot of multicultural faiths and beliefs". Even I think that has its weakness.

Being a melting pot doesn't mean you have to let other cultures walk all over your own. :v

I don't even know which culture is walking over which here.
---

RaulJenkins posted...

i read this whole topic and i STILL don't know where the no go zones are

Uh oh

Dont worry. There still are. Somewhere.
---

SpiritSephiroth posted...

You quoted someone then showed me a map that probably has no relevance with the quote.

You asked where. I linked to crime statistics. You call that no relevance?
---

s0nicfan posted...

SpiritSephiroth posted...

You quoted someone then showed me a map that probably has no relevance with the quote.

You asked where. I linked to crime statistics. You call that no relevance?

Crime statistics. Okay so Westminster is a no go zone then?
---

SpiritSephiroth posted...

I don't even know which culture is walking over which here.

The muslims are walking over yours. You guys went out of your way to give them citizenship and let them immigrate and they decide they don't need to be accountable to your already established legal system and started their own. I mean, if that isn't a spit in the face I don't know what is.

I guess this is why Brexit happened. :v
---

s0nicfan posted...

I can't say personally, but a London officer has something to say on the matter:
https://www.lbc.co.uk/hot-topics/crime-police/ferrari-trump-is-right-there-are-no-go-areas-in-lo/

"Rob", currently serving in the Met Police, insisted police weren't scared, but admitted bosses had told officers to avoid wearing uniforms in certain places in the capital.

He told Nick Ferrari: "There has been a time when it's been advised not to wear half-blues or uniform to and from work.

"It's like damage limitation. You try to do the most you can to prevent anything bad from happening.

"All intelligence is around you and you do the best with that to essentially stay safe. And if that means taking measures to not identify yourself off-duty too much then so be it.

"It's covering your backs. It's a common sense approach."

Regarding no-go areas in London, Rob added: "With gang crime in London, there are areas which you wouldn't go into as a pair of cops in a car because of the fear of having things thrown at you when you're driving through certain estates - bottles etc.

"There are areas when you have to be a little switched on about what's happening in the world."

Afterwards, Nick Ferrari commented: "Hang on a second, maybe there is something in what Donald Trump said. Police are being advised not to travel to and from work in their uniforms.

Sonicfan, since you seem adept at embarrassing yourself, i would like to point out that no where in this does the officer say there are "no-go" zones. He says there are areas he wouldn't want to go because of higher crime.. Which literally all cities have.
---

Tc you're expecting a lot of the type of idiots we get in here to get the difference between mutually agreed upon means of dealing with civil matters and criminal law.

Also do you work in a big firm or a smaller one
---

glitteringfairy posted...

Unite posted...

There arent any no go zone set up in London.

In USA there are many states and city that are pretty much no go zones.

This. Most importantly middle Tennessee. It's the worst of the worst in the whole country. Tell all your friends and family, tell everyone you know to please stop fucking moving here.

I have a friend who moved there... maybe a year ago? ...then I got her job after she quit to move.
---

Abyssea posted...

SpiritSephiroth posted...

I don't even know which culture is walking over which here.

The muslims are walking over yours. You guys went out of your way to give them citizenship and let them immigrate and they decide they don't need to be accountable to your already established legal system and started their own. I mean, if that isn't a spit in the face I don't know what is.

I guess this is why Brexit happened. :v

Which Muslims are walking all over the UK? All of them? Why are so pissed off that some Muslims actually pay MORE in cases of deeds and leases? What the hell lol.
---

s0nicfan posted...

SpiritSephiroth posted...

s0nicfan posted...

Common sense is that there are safe and dangerous neighborhoods, and knowing which is which will alter how you act and when you go, because not everywhere is equally dangerous. You yourself have indicated that some areas are shadier than others in this very topic.

So the empty streets are the no-go zones you've been going on about?

"I've been going on about?" I quoted London PD. Take your issue up with them if you take issue with the idea that not all blocks are equally dangerous.

I think the issue is that 'no go zones' is universally deployed in a racist manner which directly attributes any issues there to Muslim people there. Im sure nobody would have an issue with somebody stating that certain areas are more or less dangerous than others if it wasn't an extremely loaded statement 99% of the time
---

I thought the no-go zones were in Paris and Sweden.
---

NinjaBreakfast posted...

Tc you're expecting a lot of the type of idiots we get in here to get the difference between mutually agreed upon means of dealing with civil matters and criminal law.

I like to have faith in people :/

NinjaBreakfast posted...

Also do you work in a big firm or a smaller one

Smaller one but I'm planning on moving to a big high street firm soon.
---

Abyssea posted...

they don't need to be accountable to your already established legal system and started their own

This is false. They follow the same laws as everyone else.

The 'sharia courts' that are often mentioned are simply religious communities dealing with marriage/divorce and things like that (but ultimately British law is supreme). There are equivalents for Jews and Christians.

It's like when you get married and the church recognizes it.

luigi13579 posted...

Abyssea posted...

they don't need to be accountable to your already established legal system and started their own

This is false. They follow the same laws as everyone else.

The 'sharia courts' that are often mentioned are simply religious communities dealing with marriage/divorce and things like that (but ultimately British law is supreme). There are equivalents for Jews and Christians.

It's like when you get married and the church recognizes it.

then why do they call them courts? :v
---

NinjaBreakfast posted...

I think the issue is that 'no go zones' is universally deployed in a racist manner which directly attributes any issues there to Muslim people there. Im sure nobody would have an issue with somebody stating that certain areas are more or less dangerous than others if it wasn't an extremely loaded statement 99% of the time

That's a fair point. I've explicitly avoided mentioning religion because the TC seemed intent on being a shit about the idea that no go zones exist when we have quotes from police effectively saying they do. The TC should have just said what he really thinks, which is "muslim neighborhoods are not inherently more dangerous than other neighborhoods in the UK" which is a totally reasonable and not veiled comment. That's also a nice clean statement we can actually analyze by looking at regional demographics and matching them to crime statistics to determine objectively whether there's any truth to that statement.
---

luigi13579 posted...

Abyssea posted...

they don't need to be accountable to your already established legal system and started their own

This is false. They follow the same laws as everyone else.

The 'sharia courts' that are often mentioned are simply religious communities dealing with marriage/divorce and things like that (but ultimately British law is supreme). There are equivalents for Jews and Christians.

It's like when you get married and the church recognizes it.

n-no, s-shut up, don't destroy my fantasy of the muslims taking over white countries
---

s0nicfan posted...

SpiritSephiroth posted...

s0nicfan posted...

Common sense is that there are safe and dangerous neighborhoods, and knowing which is which will alter how you act and when you go, because not everywhere is equally dangerous. You yourself have indicated that some areas are shadier than others in this very topic.

So the empty streets are the no-go zones you've been going on about?

"I've been going on about?" I quoted London PD. Take your issue up with them if you take issue with the idea that not all blocks are equally dangerous.

Yeah but they didnt say there are no go zones, youre the one whos been saying there are
---

s0nicfan posted...

That's a fair point. I've explicitly avoided mentioning religion because the TC seemed intent on being a shit about the idea that no go zones exist when we have quotes from police effectively saying they do. The TC should have just said what he really thinks, which is "muslim neighborhoods are not inherently more dangerous than other neighborhoods in the UK" which is a totally reasonable and not veiled comment.

Here you're just fucking assuming things. I was legitimately wondering where these zones are and if they even existed. You substantiated your claim with something that has nothing to do with a description of a no go zone. Just a crime statistic.
---

A crime statistic that apparently you thought has a relevance.
---

King_Hellebuyck posted...

s0nicfan posted...

SpiritSephiroth posted...

s0nicfan posted...

Common sense is that there are safe and dangerous neighborhoods, and knowing which is which will alter how you act and when you go, because not everywhere is equally dangerous. You yourself have indicated that some areas are shadier than others in this very topic.

So the empty streets are the no-go zones you've been going on about?

"I've been going on about?" I quoted London PD. Take your issue up with them if you take issue with the idea that not all blocks are equally dangerous.

Yeah but they didnt say there are no go zones, youre the one whos been saying there are

A London police office was explicitly asked about Trump's no go comment and the article ends with him saying he has a point. Are you really going to make the "he didn't use the word so it doesn't count!" argument here? This isn't the exit row of an airplane where you need to explicitly say "yes" or it doesn't count. Use some common sense.
---

No go zones might have existed somewhere, but it seems like the right wants to invoke that image while getting people to admit it's "technically true" because the term is so vague.
---

s0nicfan posted...

King_Hellebuyck posted...

s0nicfan posted...

SpiritSephiroth posted...

s0nicfan posted...

Common sense is that there are safe and dangerous neighborhoods, and knowing which is which will alter how you act and when you go, because not everywhere is equally dangerous. You yourself have indicated that some areas are shadier than others in this very topic.

So the empty streets are the no-go zones you've been going on about?

"I've been going on about?" I quoted London PD. Take your issue up with them if you take issue with the idea that not all blocks are equally dangerous.

Yeah but they didnt say there are no go zones, youre the one whos been saying there are

A London police office was explicitly asked about Trump's no go comment and the article ends with him saying he has a point. Are you really going to make the "he didn't use the word so it doesn't count!" argument here? This isn't the exit row of an airplane where you need to explicitly say "yes" or it doesn't count. Use some common sense.

Youre taking a real big leap there, bud.
---

SpiritSephiroth posted...

s0nicfan posted...

That's a fair point. I've explicitly avoided mentioning religion because the TC seemed intent on being a shit about the idea that no go zones exist when we have quotes from police effectively saying they do. The TC should have just said what he really thinks, which is "muslim neighborhoods are not inherently more dangerous than other neighborhoods in the UK" which is a totally reasonable and not veiled comment.

Here you're just fucking assuming things. I was legitimately wondering where these zones are and if they even existed. You substantiated your claim with something that has nothing to do with a description of a no go zone. Just a crime statistic.

What do you think people mean when they use the phrase "no go zone" since you seem so fucking ruffled at the idea that I think you're talking about Islam? Are you really "legitimately wondering" where these zones are, or did you already have an opinion on the matter and made this topic to troll?
---

s0nicfan posted...

SpiritSephiroth posted...

s0nicfan posted...

That's a fair point. I've explicitly avoided mentioning religion because the TC seemed intent on being a shit about the idea that no go zones exist when we have quotes from police effectively saying they do. The TC should have just said what he really thinks, which is "muslim neighborhoods are not inherently more dangerous than other neighborhoods in the UK" which is a totally reasonable and not veiled comment.

Here you're just fucking assuming things. I was legitimately wondering where these zones are and if they even existed. You substantiated your claim with something that has nothing to do with a description of a no go zone. Just a crime statistic.

What do you think people mean when they use the phrase "no go zone" since you seem so fucking ruffled at the idea that I think you're talking about Islam?

I dont think i brought up Islam even once in this topic except when replying to others who seem to have a raging hardon for it.
---

Abyssea posted...

then why do they call them courts? :v

You'd need to ask them. Maybe it's because they actually are/were courts in Muslim countries and the term has stuck. Or maybe it's just an English approximation of the Arabic name. I don't know to be honest.

SpiritSephiroth posted...

From what you quoted does he go into detail of where these certain estates are?

If he did they would probably be able to identify him and charge him for islamphobia.
---

SpiritSephiroth posted...

s0nicfan posted...

SpiritSephiroth posted...

s0nicfan posted...

That's a fair point. I've explicitly avoided mentioning religion because the TC seemed intent on being a shit about the idea that no go zones exist when we have quotes from police effectively saying they do. The TC should have just said what he really thinks, which is "muslim neighborhoods are not inherently more dangerous than other neighborhoods in the UK" which is a totally reasonable and not veiled comment.

Here you're just fucking assuming things. I was legitimately wondering where these zones are and if they even existed. You substantiated your claim with something that has nothing to do with a description of a no go zone. Just a crime statistic.

What do you think people mean when they use the phrase "no go zone" since you seem so fucking ruffled at the idea that I think you're talking about Islam?

I dont think i brought up Islam even once in this topic except when replying to others who seem to have a raging hardon for it.

So then I ask again since you chose not to answer: What do you think people mean when they use the phrase "no go zone"? Define the term in your own words so people know what you're talking about.
---

still waiting for the specific locations of those no go zones as per TC's request. i must brush up on my knowledge
---

s0nicfan posted...

SpiritSephiroth posted...

s0nicfan posted...

SpiritSephiroth posted...

s0nicfan posted...

That's a fair point. I've explicitly avoided mentioning religion because the TC seemed intent on being a shit about the idea that no go zones exist when we have quotes from police effectively saying they do. The TC should have just said what he really thinks, which is "muslim neighborhoods are not inherently more dangerous than other neighborhoods in the UK" which is a totally reasonable and not veiled comment.

Here you're just fucking assuming things. I was legitimately wondering where these zones are and if they even existed. You substantiated your claim with something that has nothing to do with a description of a no go zone. Just a crime statistic.

What do you think people mean when they use the phrase "no go zone" since you seem so fucking ruffled at the idea that I think you're talking about Islam?

I dont think i brought up Islam even once in this topic except when replying to others who seem to have a raging hardon for it.

So then I ask again since you chose not to answer: What do you think people mean when they use the phrase "no go zone"? Define the term in your own words so people know what you're talking about.

Areas that are too dangerous for people to travel in. Where crime is hugely rampant.
---

SpiritSephiroth posted...

s0nicfan posted...

SpiritSephiroth posted...

s0nicfan posted...

SpiritSephiroth posted...

s0nicfan posted...

That's a fair point. I've explicitly avoided mentioning religion because the TC seemed intent on being a shit about the idea that no go zones exist when we have quotes from police effectively saying they do. The TC should have just said what he really thinks, which is "muslim neighborhoods are not inherently more dangerous than other neighborhoods in the UK" which is a totally reasonable and not veiled comment.

Here you're just fucking assuming things. I was legitimately wondering where these zones are and if they even existed. You substantiated your claim with something that has nothing to do with a description of a no go zone. Just a crime statistic.

What do you think people mean when they use the phrase "no go zone" since you seem so fucking ruffled at the idea that I think you're talking about Islam?

I dont think i brought up Islam even once in this topic except when replying to others who seem to have a raging hardon for it.

So then I ask again since you chose not to answer: What do you think people mean when they use the phrase "no go zone"? Define the term in your own words so people know what you're talking about.

Areas that are too dangerous for people to travel in. Where crime is hugely rampant.

So your question is "Does the UK have areas that are too dangerous for people to travel in?" We've already acknowledged that there are areas of low and high crime, and you yourself have said you'd be at risk of being mugged if you were out alone at night with headphones. So if your question about "no go" zones has literally nothing to do with religion, then the areas with the highest crime rates and gang activity that police themselves admit are risky to enter in-uniform would be no-go zones, which puts us BACK at crime statistics. If the map I presented (that you said has "no relevance") isn't specific enough, try this one then, which was generated using the crime map that exists at police.co.uk:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8294418/Most-dangerous-neighbourhood-identified-by-crime-map.html
---

Abyssea posted...

then why do they call them courts? :v

Who's "they"? The people who run them don't call them courts. Racists call them courts an attempt to mislead people they are speaking to.

s0nicfan posted...

SpiritSephiroth posted...

s0nicfan posted...

SpiritSephiroth posted...

s0nicfan posted...

SpiritSephiroth posted...

s0nicfan posted...

That's a fair point. I've explicitly avoided mentioning religion because the TC seemed intent on being a shit about the idea that no go zones exist when we have quotes from police effectively saying they do. The TC should have just said what he really thinks, which is "muslim neighborhoods are not inherently more dangerous than other neighborhoods in the UK" which is a totally reasonable and not veiled comment.

Here you're just fucking assuming things. I was legitimately wondering where these zones are and if they even existed. You substantiated your claim with something that has nothing to do with a description of a no go zone. Just a crime statistic.

What do you think people mean when they use the phrase "no go zone" since you seem so fucking ruffled at the idea that I think you're talking about Islam?

I dont think i brought up Islam even once in this topic except when replying to others who seem to have a raging hardon for it.

So then I ask again since you chose not to answer: What do you think people mean when they use the phrase "no go zone"? Define the term in your own words so people know what you're talking about.

Areas that are too dangerous for people to travel in. Where crime is hugely rampant.

So your question is "Does the UK have areas that are too dangerous for people to travel in?" We've already acknowledged that there are areas of low and high crime, and you yourself have said you'd be at risk of being mugged if you were out alone at night with headphones. So if your question about "no go" zones has literally nothing to do with religion, then the areas with the highest crime rates and gang activity that police themselves admit are risky to enter in-uniform would be no-go zones, which puts us BACK at crime statistics. If the map I presented (that you said has "no relevance") isn't specific enough, try this one then, which was generated using the crime map that exists at police.co.uk:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8294418/Most-dangerous-neighbourhood-identified-by-crime-map.html

So you're giving me this point because i said im not looking for islamic related incidents? So basically the way the phrase is being thrown around just proves its a term used as a derogative one?
---

Basically "the crime was made by a muslim so it attributes to a no go zone." If not then it isnt.
---

SpiritSephiroth posted...

So you're giving me this point because i said im not looking for islamic related incidents? So basically the way the phrase is being thrown around just proves its a term used as a derogative one?

I'm not "giving" you anything. By your definition of no go zones, they objectively do exist, and they exist as areas of high gang activity, as defined by the map generated from UK police data. So if your point had nothing to do with religion, then objectively I've answered both questions.

If it secretly DID have something to do with religion, and you don't actually mean it when you say that "no go zones" just mean areas of high crime, that gets back to another question I asked:
s0nicfan posted...

What do you think people mean when they use the phrase "no go zone" since you seem so fucking ruffled at the idea that I think you're talking about Islam? Are you really "legitimately wondering" where these zones are, or did you already have an opinion on the matter and made this topic to troll?

EDIT: And even then, from the part of my post you conveniently cut when you quoted it:
s0nicfan posted...

The TC should have just said what he really thinks, which is "muslim neighborhoods are not inherently more dangerous than other neighborhoods in the UK" which is a totally reasonable and not veiled comment.That's also a nice clean statement we can actually analyze by looking at regional demographics and matching them to crime statistics to determine objectively whether there's any truth to that statement.

---

s0nicfan posted...

I'm not "giving" you anything. By your definition of no go zones, they objectively do exist, and they exist as areas of high gang activity, as defined by the map generated from UK police data. So if your point had nothing to do with religion, then objectively I've answered both questions.

No they dont? What did i say. I said rampant crime to the point where its extemely dangerous as we see people constantly state. That would probably constitute as a no go zone. You've literally just thrown me crime statistics. Huge leap there.

s0nicfan posted...

If it secretly DID have something to do with religion, and you don't actually mean it when you say that "no go zones" just mean areas of high crime, that gets back to another question I asked:

Again, refer to my statement. We're basically to the point where you cant actually prove anything. I dont think i actually asked you personally. Do you think they exist?
---

So there arent any Muslim no go zones or really any other ones just some normal city crime?
---

King_Hellebuyck posted...

So there arent any Muslim no go zones or really any other ones just some normal city crime?

Seems like it.
---

SpiritSephiroth posted...

No they dont? What did i say. I said rampant crime to the point where its extemely dangerous as we see people constantly state. That would probably constitute as a no go zone. You've literally just thrown me crime statistics. Huge leap there.

So then let me ask a simple question: Do you think neighborhoods with gang hubs would be considered extremely dangerous?

EDIT: And by your definition I absolutely do think they exist. Gangs are a real thing, and there are absolutely places you couldn't wander alone without significant risk of assault. That's just common sense.
---

s0nicfan posted...

So then let me ask a simple question: Do you think neighborhoods with gang hubs would be considered extremely dangerous?

What areas? Specifically in London.

s0nicfan posted...

EDIT: And by your definition I absolutely do think they exist. Gangs are a real thing, and there are absolutely places you couldn't wander alone without significant risk of assault. That's just common sense.

Fair enough if you believe that. But again, where?
---

s0nicfan posted...

NinjaBreakfast posted...

I think the issue is that 'no go zones' is universally deployed in a racist manner which directly attributes any issues there to Muslim people there. Im sure nobody would have an issue with somebody stating that certain areas are more or less dangerous than others if it wasn't an extremely loaded statement 99% of the time

That's a fair point. I've explicitly avoided mentioning religion because the TC seemed intent on being a shit about the idea that no go zones exist when we have quotes from police effectively saying they do. The TC should have just said what he really thinks, which is "muslim neighborhoods are not inherently more dangerous than other neighborhoods in the UK" which is a totally reasonable and not veiled comment. That's also a nice clean statement we can actually analyze by looking at regional demographics and matching them to crime statistics to determine objectively whether there's any truth to that statement.

There are no quotes from police officers saying they exist. What you posted as a source doesn't even back you up, lol. That's why you had to put the bullshit qualifier "police *effectively* saying they do".
---

SpiritSephiroth posted...

What areas? Specifically in London.

I would guess the ones in the link I posted that you clearly didn't visit. Here is the top 10 by crime by street using actual police data since clearly asking you to actually look at the evidence I've provided is too hard. I've even cut it down to the top 3 worst streets for the top 3 most relevant crimes to spoon feed it.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8294418/Most-dangerous-neighbourhood-identified-by-crime-map.html

Worst streets for total crime in December
Glover's Court, Preston (152 incidents)
Wind Street, Swansea (148)
Surrey Street, Portsmouth (136)

Burglary
Fairfield Drive, Bury (10 incidents)
Kingswood Close, Egham (10)
Davies Street, Oldham (9)

Violence
Guildhall Walk, Portsmouth (38 incidents)
Lower Twelfth Street, Milton Keynes (35)
Wind Street, Swansea (34)

---