Crime rates per capita are significantly lower in urban areas than suburban and rural areas. This further goes down in societies that treat the cause of crime instead of just shooting black people and enslaving kids like the US exclusively does as their criminal justice system.
Can I get numbers on that? Last time I looked up crime rate statistics on rural vs urban I found the opposite, that urban areas have higher crime rate per capita thanks to a number of compounding factors. I still think proper, high density design is better, but those were the numbers I saw.
Too hard to present real numbers without breaking it down by income, types of crime, city, state, county, population density, etc. Hell, even geography plays a role. Liberals love to bang the “cities safer!” drum, and of course conservative rural people feel safer, but there are far too many factors to make a facile comparison.
Country people tend to know each other personally, makes 'em feel safer when all they see in the city is an endless sea of monkey. Some find comfort in minding their own business, just a face in the crowd, and that’s fine for them, freaks me out a bit. (I’ve lived both sides.) OTOH, the Hatfields might hold a grudge against the McCoy clan, and shit goes down now and again, including murder and baby mommas throwing down. And BTW, Cooter got drunk again and beat the shit out of Clem. Again. OTOOH, Crips vs. Bloods ring a bell? Poverty begets crime, and that can be a hood by hood thing. Yet higher income areas report more crime, in general. LOL, does that make sense?
Too many factors to say one is safer than the other. City and rural both cover a lot of demographic ground. For example, it’d be ridiculous to say South Chicago is safer than Evergreen, AL. Look at crime reports for your city. I’d bet the higher income areas report more crimes, despite being seen as “nice”. Maybe those people report more, maybe it’s simple theft, whatever, get complicated doesn’t it? Living in a meth infested trailer park in Evergreen though, yikes.
In any case, my semi-rural place is theft free. It’s upper-lower-class to lower-middle-class. Not broke enough to steal from one another, not rich enough that thieves cruise the hood. But in my experience, more people = bad.
I’d be stunned if a single thing was ever stolen from my porch.
Lemmy: Live in a walkable city, packed in like rats, never mind the crime and no one needs a gun!
Hard. No.
Crime rates per capita are significantly lower in urban areas than suburban and rural areas. This further goes down in societies that treat the cause of crime instead of just shooting black people and enslaving kids like the US exclusively does as their criminal justice system.
Can I get numbers on that? Last time I looked up crime rate statistics on rural vs urban I found the opposite, that urban areas have higher crime rate per capita thanks to a number of compounding factors. I still think proper, high density design is better, but those were the numbers I saw.
Too hard to present real numbers without breaking it down by income, types of crime, city, state, county, population density, etc. Hell, even geography plays a role. Liberals love to bang the “cities safer!” drum, and of course conservative rural people feel safer, but there are far too many factors to make a facile comparison.
Country people tend to know each other personally, makes 'em feel safer when all they see in the city is an endless sea of monkey. Some find comfort in minding their own business, just a face in the crowd, and that’s fine for them, freaks me out a bit. (I’ve lived both sides.) OTOH, the Hatfields might hold a grudge against the McCoy clan, and shit goes down now and again, including murder and baby mommas throwing down. And BTW, Cooter got drunk again and beat the shit out of Clem. Again. OTOOH, Crips vs. Bloods ring a bell? Poverty begets crime, and that can be a hood by hood thing. Yet higher income areas report more crime, in general. LOL, does that make sense?
See my comment that only touches the surface.
https://old.lemmy.world/comment/16733617
Too many factors to say one is safer than the other. City and rural both cover a lot of demographic ground. For example, it’d be ridiculous to say South Chicago is safer than Evergreen, AL. Look at crime reports for your city. I’d bet the higher income areas report more crimes, despite being seen as “nice”. Maybe those people report more, maybe it’s simple theft, whatever, get complicated doesn’t it? Living in a meth infested trailer park in Evergreen though, yikes.
In any case, my semi-rural place is theft free. It’s upper-lower-class to lower-middle-class. Not broke enough to steal from one another, not rich enough that thieves cruise the hood. But in my experience, more people = bad.
I’ve lived in major cities for my whole life and I’ve never had a package stolen.