Let me avoid the word "extreme" then - it doesn't make any difference to the core of the argument. One will be happy to live in a place with "very high" safety

Let me avoid the word "extreme" then - it doesn't make any difference to the core of the argument. One will be happy to live in a place with "very high" safety levels instead of "extreme". I don't agree with your characterization of overall safety based on ranking positions. The US, as a few other countries, has very localized violence and that sharply skews averages. This means that it's quite possible to live in a safe area even within notoriously violent cities (which often have high violence numbers in relatively small areas). Also, by international standards, the US has very accurate reporting and crime statistics. So while you can see a few countries with surprisingly lower violence numbers, don't assume you are comparing apples to apples in terms of how accurate these countries' statistics are. So while it's true that in aggregate the US doesn't sit well in safety rankings, this doesn't mean that a clear majority of the country isn't extremely safe - as in the chances of you suffering violent crime being very low by international standards. By the way - I'm not saying it's okay to have localized violence. However, it's quite possible, and easy, to enjoy very high safety levels in the US even if you are not rich (while this isn't necessarily the case if you are poor due to limitations on where you can live).