Automatic Monkey said:
Unfortunately I'm not aware of many casino venues that are really safe, are you? It's not obvious on its surface but Las Vegas is as dangerous as hell. Biloxi is bad, Reno is bad, the only major venues I've been to that I would consider safe neighborhoods would be Laughlin and Wendover.
Overall I'd rate Atlantic City as average, for destinations with casinos. Check out Shreveport sometime, you'll wish you were back in AC! The beach could be worse, the accommodations and food are acceptable, there is shopping, there are legitimate acts at the casinos.
What would be nice to see is the states getting away from that silly "riverboat" business and put casinos in pleasant destinations like Memphis or Asheville. Or perhaps send the Orioles down to San Juan and replace them with casinos in Baltimore.
You're judging from your own above-average experience, not the public's general perception. Few people probably ever get far from the strip in Vegas, and when they do it is by car, in buses, or in large groups. The general perception by travelers to Vegas is that it is a great vacation destination, with lots of fun things to do, and a safe enough environment. When they walk between casinos it is with a throng of other vacationers. That is not the public's general perception of AC. If you stay at the finest in AC, which my ploppy friends unanimously declare is the Borgata, you are pretty much confined to the premises. You are isolated from the beachfront casinos where walking is the preferred mode of transportation. It is definitely not a family place, although not bad for a couple for a night or two, although my wife, not being a night-clubber, is bored by day two.
The boardwalk casinos are much more appealing to the family, only the beach is not so hot, and off the boardwalk, the surrounding environment does not "feel" as safe as walking across the street on the Vegas strip-- of course there, both sides of the street are filled with casinos, fun shops (like M&M), any-priced foods, and amusements, amidst elbow-to-elbow crowds of people. AC just doesn't get there, and they have not tried that hard to make it get there. Ideally, the casinos should own both sides of the street, but they don't. The buffer zone afforded by the casino properties themselves in Las Vegas is an important feature. The only feel-safe walking areas in AC are the outlet area and the boardwalk when there are crowds of people.
The real case for Las Vegas is that people continue to flock there for vacations (and conventions), singles, couples, groups, and families. They do not flock to AC with the same enthusiasm and for the same week and two-week vacations.
One last thing. Nearly everyone knows someone who lives in Vegas. Las Vegas is similar in most features to other middle-sized cities throughout the US. If you drive away from the strip, there are many, many neighborhoods where you would feel right at home. The same is not true of AC. Vegas has it's bad parts; AC seems to have only bad parts.
No other US casino spot that I have visited comes even close to Vegas. It's the only place I can take my wife and leave her to her own devices. From shopping to friends, to various things to do, she loves her Vegas vacation, while I peacefully visit the tables at any number of fine casinos.
I truly wish AC had the vision of what it could be, but it seems fragmented and disjointed, unable to put its best foot forward. The city seems too poor itself to contribute much to the overall dynamic. Just cleaning up the beach and rezoning the surrounding area would go a long way. AC needs a large buffer zone, more so than even Vegas, between the casinos and the rest of the city. Maybe Newark, New Jersey, can provide some guidelines-- businessmen can move safely around the city via connections between buildings. The streets are dangerous (has that changed since the 1980's?), but no one has to set foot on them.