Are there any specific areas in Lima that are considered high-crime?
Executive summary
Yes—reporting shows specific neighborhoods and districts in both Lima, Ohio and Lima, Peru that are repeatedly described as higher‑crime or higher‑risk: in Lima, Ohio multiple crime‑data aggregators flag concentrated hotspots and an overall crime rate above the U.S. average (NeighborhoodScout, AreaVibes, CrimeGrade, City‑Data) [1][2][3][4]; in Lima, Peru journalists and travel‑security sources name districts and ports such as San Juan de Lurigancho, La Victoria and Callao as areas with elevated street robbery, extortion and organised‑crime activity [5][6][7][8].
1. City confusion matters: two Limas, two crime pictures
Any answer must begin by separating the two Limas frequently conflated online: many of the available sources refer to Lima, Ohio — a U.S. city where several data sites flag unusually high violent and property crime rates for its size — while others discuss Lima, Peru, the South American capital where problems are districtized and linked to organised crime, ports and socioeconomic inequality [1][2][3][5][9].
2. Lima, Ohio — clearly identified high‑crime pockets and above‑average rates
Multiple U.S.-focused crime trackers show Lima, Ohio with a total crime rate well above national averages and with concentrated trouble in certain neighborhoods: NeighborhoodScout reports Lima has one of the highest violent‑crime rates nationally for communities of its size and estimates roughly a one‑in‑24 chance of becoming a victim of violent or property crime there [1], AreaVibes gives Lima a total crime rate 83.5% higher than the national average and warns red zones on its crime heat maps [2], CrimeGrade’s maps highlight violent crime corridors [3], and City‑Data documents recent rises in violent crime and a higher‑than‑average crime index for 2024 [4].
3. Lima, Peru — specific districts and the role of organised crime
Reporting on Lima, Peru shows crime concentrated in particular districts and tied to broader organised‑crime dynamics rather than citywide uniformity: investigative coverage cites San Juan de Lurigancho as Lima’s most populous barrio with high extortion and victimization rates and notes that organised crime surges across regions feeding into Lima’s ports and drug routes [5], while travel and local guides commonly flag La Victoria, Callao and parts of San Juan de Lurigancho for street robbery, markets‑area theft and higher risk for visitors [6][7][8].
4. Maps and numbers can mislead — context and common denominators
Every map and dataset carries caveats: crime rates measured per resident can make airports, parks, markets and transit hubs look disproportionately dangerous because they concentrate victims and visitors even where few people live (CrimeGrade, AreaVibes) [10][2][3], and perception surveys (Numbeo, travel advisories) show safety impressions vary widely by district, by personal experience and over time — Peru’s national indicators also show a longer‑term decline in some crime metrics even as local organised crime spikes in specific regions [9][7].
5. Why certain areas concentrate crime: poverty, transit and ports
The patterns behind hotspot districts are consistent across both countries: economic marginalization, dense informal markets or transit nodes, and proximity to ports or trafficking routes create opportunities for street robbery, drug‑related crime, and organised extortion — for example Callao’s docks are repeatedly named as a crime focal point in public comments and travel security analyses, while researchers point to weak state presence and rising firearms availability as drivers of violence in Peru’s violent regions that feed into Lima’s criminal landscape [7][8][5].
6. Bottom line: specific high‑crime areas exist, but nuance is essential
The plain answer is yes — there are specific neighborhoods and districts in both Lima, Ohio and Lima, Peru that are commonly considered high‑crime by data aggregators, residents and reporters — yet the label “high‑crime” applies unevenly, is shaped by visitor flows and socioeconomic context, and must be read alongside methodological caveats in the maps and perception surveys [1][2][3][5][7].