zlacker

More precisely, certain areas of the US (parts of certain large cities) are a big outlier in violent crime compared to any other large 1st world country. The rest of the US is not.

>>pdonis+(OP)
This is a pretty nebulous statement, but I don't think there's a lot of truth here. "Certain areas" makes it seem like the discrepancy is contained, but it's not. Pretty much every decent sized city in the US has a murder rate at least several times greater than any major European city.

If you compare a rich suburb to Europe's average then yeah, it's probably comparable. But any sort of apples to apples comparison will show that the U.S. has a much higher violent crime rate.

>>treis+j5
> Pretty much every decent sized city in the US has a murder rate at least several times greater than any major European city

Nope. As a poster elsewhere in this thread noted, it's less than the top 100 cities in the US. There are a lot more than 100 "decent sized" cities in the US.

>>pdonis+Hd
That was me, and again "decent sized" is nebulous. Either way, you said:

>certain areas of the US (parts of certain large cities)

So unless we're counting Boise at 220k and ~100 others like it as "parts of certain large cities" then your statement isn't accurate.

>>treis+6l
> unless we're counting Boise at 220k and ~100 others like it as "parts of certain large cities"

Yes. There are a lot more than 100 cities in the US, and a lot of places where people are that aren't cities. My point is that citing one single "crime rate" for the US misrepresents what's actually going on; there are basically two crime rates, the "cities" one (or however you want to label it) and the "everywhere else" one, and only the former is significantly larger than other developed countries.