Re: META: would prefer much less political debating

Michael Lorrey (
Sat, 12 Dec 1998 17:00:14 -0500

Damien Broderick wrote:

> At 04:35 PM 12/11/98 -0500, Han Huang wrote:
> >1 in 160 --
> >the average US risk of being a victim of violent crime in 1997. Using
> >the 1 in 160 figure, over the next 50 years, one has a 27% chance of
> >being a victim of a violent crime.
> Hardly (as Mike would say). Unless there's a rule in the USA that people
> who've been assaulted once are left alone thereafter, your chances remain
> 1/160 to the end of time (all demographics being equal).

Yes, and that is still an average. If you narrow down by passive features like your demographics, geographics, and existing personal habits, you can get the odds to near astronomical levels. Just not having a criminal record reduces your chances at least four fold, if not more. Not living within x miles of an urban center is another good move, as is having a decent income. Neophility does have an evolutionary disadvantage here, a neophilic is more likely to get into dangerous situations than someone more habitual and conservative. The only times I have been a crime victim was when I was in a big city (San Fransisco, Seattle, Burlington).

Mike Lorrey

PS (Damien): You really enjoy goofing on me, don't you?