5 ms·

However, mortality data would disagree. Generally speaking, in cities you are more likely to be the victim of homicide and crime. In suburban and rural environ

However, mortality data would disagree. Generally speaking, in cities you are more likely to be the victim of homicide and crime. In suburban and rural environments you are substantially more likely to be killed/injured in general. http://science.time.com/2013/07/23/in-town-versus-country-it-turns-out-that-cities-are-the-safest-places-to-live/ http://science.time.com/2013/07/23/in-town-versus-country-it...

rhino369 11y ago
That only accounts for city vs rural. It never says where suburbs fall on that scale. If they are going based on US government definitions, suburbs are mostly considered urban (1000 people/sq mile or more).
brightball 11y ago
You've also got to factor in people's perceptions vs just statistics. Take gun homicides for example. The vast majority of people who push for gun control that I've had discussions with (totally anecdotal, I realize) will cite mass shootings as a reason rather than gang violence even though the latter accounts for an astronomically higher percentage than the former. The difference is that, if you're not in a gang you generally don't have to be concerned about dying in a gang shootout. A mass shooting on the other hand, could happen to anybody in a public place regardless of whether or not you've removed yourself from other likely causes. In other words, you have no control over the latter so it creates a higher level of fear even though it's rare. Similarly, flying in an airplane exacts more fear than driving a car because when you're in a car you feel in control. Lastly though, it is about more than just safety. I have 2 kids. I moved to the suburbs. In the suburbs I can have more yard space and house space and room space and quiet for the kids to play than if I were in the city. Safety wasn't really a factor as much as just having space (for me at least).

rhino369 11y ago

That only accounts for city vs rural. It never says where suburbs fall on that scale. If they are going based on US government definitions, suburbs are mostly considered urban (1000 people/sq mile or more).

brightball 11y ago

You've also got to factor in people's perceptions vs just statistics. Take gun homicides for example. The vast majority of people who push for gun control that I've had discussions with (totally anecdotal, I realize) will cite mass shootings as a reason rather than gang violence even though the latter accounts for an astronomically higher percentage than the former. The difference is that, if you're not in a gang you generally don't have to be concerned about dying in a gang shootout. A mass shooting on the other hand, could happen to anybody in a public place regardless of whether or not you've removed yourself from other likely causes. In other words, you have no control over the latter so it creates a higher level of fear even though it's rare. Similarly, flying in an airplane exacts more fear than driving a car because when you're in a car you feel in control. Lastly though, it is about more than just safety. I have 2 kids. I moved to the suburbs. In the suburbs I can have more yard space and house space and room space and quiet for the kids to play than if I were in the city. Safety wasn't really a factor as much as just having space (for me at least).