>Considering what happenned in the Wild West and any
>number of remote places around the world (where there
>would be hunters) that doesn't stand up.
Perhaps not. I didn't live in such a world, so I can't know. I do know that crime concentrates in "civilized" places more than in hunter-gatherer societies.
>After hunters, things tend to develop. Are none of the
>changes from hunting to an urban environment (where
>most of the crime is, at least in total) to be
>counted?
Regardless of how much we count, the violence continues.
Cheers,
--J. R.