4 ms·

> Crime as at generational (multi-generational?) lows. People are solving a problem that no longer exists. Crime rates are decreasing, but they're still very h

by 80386 8y ago

> Crime as at generational (multi-generational?) lows. People are solving a problem that no longer exists. Crime rates are decreasing, but they're still very high. Glasgow at its worst had a homicide rate of 63 per million.[1] In America, homicide rates are generally reported per 100k - so that's 6.3 per 100k. In 2015, San Francisco had a homicide rate of 6.1 per 100k. Pittsburgh, which I hear is trying to become a tech hub, was at 18.6 per 100k. Pittsburgh! We don't think of Pittsburgh as a hotbed of crime. But Glasgow was notorious - with a third the homicide rate! [1] https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/12447424.Murder_rates_at_10-year_high__Has_nothing_changed_since_razor_gangs_/ https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/12447424.Murder_rates_at... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_crime_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_b...

astrodust 8y ago
American cities are astonishingly dangerous compared to their European and even Canadian counterparts. This isn't just a big city problem. Many small towns are absolutely rife with violent crime. Suburban areas are, per-capita, not exactly safe either. It's vastly more dangerous to be in suburban Alabama than in pretty much any European city. It's like Americans prefer to solve their problems with guns and guns alone. You can get shot at for simply passing someone in some states, road rage all too often ends with shots fired.
ip26 8y ago
Wait a minute, 18.6 per 100k is a per-year statement. So if you lived in Pittsburgh all your life, you have something like a 1.5% lifetime chance of being murdered? Is that right? One in sixty-ish?
- newen 8y ago
  Usually people kill people that they already know. So you would have to condition the probability on people you know and where you usually are.
- MagnumOpus 8y ago
  That is correct, though it would be more correct to observe that this rate is only about 0.3% for white Pittsburgers but nearly 10% for black men. (Black males make up 12% of the population but about 80% of murder victims.)

by 80386 8y ago

astrodust 8y ago

American cities are astonishingly dangerous compared to their European and even Canadian counterparts. This isn't just a big city problem. Many small towns are absolutely rife with violent crime. Suburban areas are, per-capita, not exactly safe either. It's vastly more dangerous to be in suburban Alabama than in pretty much any European city. It's like Americans prefer to solve their problems with guns and guns alone. You can get shot at for simply passing someone in some states, road rage all too often ends with shots fired.

ip26 8y ago

Wait a minute, 18.6 per 100k is a per-year statement. So if you lived in Pittsburgh all your life, you have something like a 1.5% lifetime chance of being murdered? Is that right? One in sixty-ish?

newen 8y ago
Usually people kill people that they already know. So you would have to condition the probability on people you know and where you usually are.
MagnumOpus 8y ago
That is correct, though it would be more correct to observe that this rate is only about 0.3% for white Pittsburgers but nearly 10% for black men. (Black males make up 12% of the population but about 80% of murder victims.)