The US Census Bureau thread

[SIGSEGV]

My wife is the rare person who is scared to live in the suburbs -- she is a really really bad driver and hasn't driven a car in many years now

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Trae

How do you know people don't fear driving but also may live in a suburban area?

Is this all just a big stupid misunderstanding because you thought I was talking about ALL suburbanites?

I thought it was abundantly clear that I was only speaking about the SUBSET of suburbanites who have had their minds so warped by the media that they wouldn't dare take their family into the city for fear of being murdered (irrational fear) and yet think nothing of careening down high speed stroads every single day of their lives (a far more legitimate concern in their situation).

[Trae]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

That's not true. They also compared the rates of different US cities and showed how the ones that are more auto-oriented were strongly correlated with higher fatality rates. Which is comparing the US to itself not just to other countries. If it was just a difference between "American driving" vs people in other Western countries driving there wouldn't be such a big difference between US cities and regions.

Flawed. Even among US cities there is more to it than just being auto dependent. Demographics, educational levels, road design, etc., all play a part. That's why I made the comment about California being more like Canadien cities despite having some of the most auto dependent areas in the country.

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Is this all just a big stupid misunderstanding because you thought I was talking about ALL suburbanites?

I thought it was abundantly clear that I was only speaking about the SUBSET of suburbanites who have had their minds so warped by the media that they wouldn't dare take their family into the city for fear of being murdered (irrational fear) and yet think nothing of careening down high speed stroads every single day of their lives (a far more legitimate concern in their situation).

Yet you fight the analogy I made going the other way even though I clearly wasn't talking about all urban dwellers being afraid of speed racers. Was that just a big stupid misunderstanding too?

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Trae

Yet you fight the analogy I made going the other way even

What analogy?

[Trae]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

What analogy?

The one I referred to in the post you quoted

[Steely Dan]

I haven't seen you make an apt analogy yet.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Well yes we know people view it differently. The whole point is to consider whether or not people should be thinking of it as differently as they do. And whether or not part of it is people assume one of the risks is much higher than it actually is while assuming the other is much lower.

Perhaps but crime is just going to hit people differently, psychologically, than traffic accidents because they are deliberate acts of violence rather than accidents and people are more proactive about traffic safety; seatbelts, defensive driving, taking advantage modern auto safety features and so on where as not a whole lot you can do to avoid being a crime victim short of avoiding high crime areas and being more situationally aware of your surroundings.

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

But you do not viscerally and irrationally fear it the way the proverbial suburbanite who won't set foot in the city fears "crime".

No and I personally think it's irrational because the vast majority of crime is drug/ gang related and in concentrated areas and being fearful would cramp my style of exploring new cities.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by Trae

Flawed. Even among US cities there is more to it than just being auto dependent. Demographics, educational levels, road design, etc., all play a part. That's why I made the comment about California being more like Canadien cities despite having some of the most auto dependent areas in the country.

You didn't need to make that point because the video already mentioned that there are other factors contributing to automobile fatality rates. But don't think I didn't notice how you conveniently swapped the term "car-dominated" that i used in my post for "auto dependent" which isn't the same thing. When I used the term car dominated it was specifically to refer to areas where cars are given unreasonable domination over the public realm in terms of how infrastructure is designed and how driving is regulated and enforced. The video discussed several different elements that contributed to Miami's situation including road and intersection design, bike/pedestrian facilities, average vehicle size and cultural attitudes.

Yes California may be quite an auto dependent state in the sense of having high rates of car use and less transit and active transportation, and that's reflected in LA's as the largest city being behind the traditionally urban east coast cities and Chicago. But metro LA is also densest and second largest metro in the US, and SF is the second densest major city in the US with both being much less auto-dominated than Miami. Every state that contains suburbs has highly auto-dependent and car-dominated areas. But not every state has the urban parts that California has.

[austlar1]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

But you do not viscerally and irrationally fear it the way the proverbial suburbanite who won't set foot in the city fears "crime".

I think the surburb dweller who cites a fear of crime as a reason to avoid going into the city is frequently being a bit disingenuous. Claiming to fear crime in the big bad city is often a form of "virtue signaling" wherein that person is actually signalling allegiance with people who hold similar political views or racial/cultural prejudices.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by JManc

Perhaps but crime is just going to hit people differently, psychologically, than traffic accidents because they are deliberate acts of violence rather than accidents and people are more proactive about traffic safety; seatbelts, defensive driving, taking advantage modern auto safety features and so on where as not a whole lot you can do to avoid being a crime victim short of avoiding high crime areas and being more situationally aware of your surroundings.

Yes I think that perception is a big part of it. The idea that traffic safety is within one's control while crime isn't. I suspect it's correlated with the fact that the vast majority of drivers consider themselves to be better than average. It might also be party why a fear of flying seems to be more common than a fear of driving despite the opposite being overwhelmingly the case.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by austlar1

I think the surburb dweller who cites a fear of crime as a reason to avoid going into the city is frequently being a bit disingenuous. Claiming to fear crime in the big bad city is often a form of "virtue signaling" wherein that person is actually signalling allegiance with people who hold similar political views or racial/cultural prejudices.

Yes that's probably the case with some people. Well, perhaps less virtue-signaling and more conveying status as in, "I'm much too proper and posh to hob-knob with the unwashed masses. Why I'm so detached from the plebs that even their mere presence is alarming!"

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by austlar1

I think the surburb dweller who cites a fear of crime as a reason to avoid going into the city is frequently being a bit disingenuous. Claiming to fear crime in the big bad city is often a form of "virtue signaling" wherein that person is actually signalling allegiance with people who hold similar political views or racial/cultural prejudices.

I think it's also often not really fear of violent crime, but perhaps a euphemism for not wanting to see unhoused or disregulated people.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

I think it's also often not really fear of violent crime, but perhaps a euphemism for not wanting to see unhoused or disregulated people.

Yes. General discomfort with unruly or disorganized urban street scenes and other outliers from the suburban worldview.

Hence all the noise about Tenderloin in SF, where murders and violent crime are uncommon, when you barely hear anything about the shooting galleries in Memphis or St. Louis.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Yes I think that perception is a big part of it. The idea that traffic safety is within one's control while crime isn't.

Which is weird, bc it seems much harder to avoid a traffic fatality/injury than a violent crime fatality/injury. Traffic accidents are broadly dispersed, and it's quite easy to be killed/injured even if you do nothing wrong. If someone runs a red light, your family might die.

Violent crime is geographically highly concentrated and the vast majority of victims know their assailant. Extremely unlikely that beefing idiot teens start shooting at you if you aren't in a rival crew or otherwise linked.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Crawford

when you barely hear anything about the shooting galleries in Memphis or St. Louis.

But there's PLENTY of national media noise about the shooting galleries of Chicago.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Which is weird, bc it seems much harder to avoid a traffic fatality/injury than a violent crime fatality/injury. Traffic accidents are broadly dispersed, and it's quite easy to be killed/injured even if you do nothing wrong. If someone runs a red light, your family might die.

Violent crime is geographically highly concentrated and the vast majority of victims know their assailant. Extremely unlikely that beefing idiot teens start shooting at you if you aren't in a rival crew or otherwise linked.

People are much more likely to be irrationally afraid of flying than driving as well, despite airline travel being much, much safer.

IIRC, studies have suggested that fear is not based on how risky something is but the degree to which you perceive that you have lost control of a situation. When people get behind the wheel, they're under the false impression they are in control of their own destiny, hence they feel safe.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by eschaton

People are much more likely to be irrationally afraid of flying than driving as well, despite airline travel being much, much safer.

IIRC, studies have suggested that fear is not based on how risky something is but the degree to which you perceive that you have lost control of a situation. When people get behind the wheel, they're under the false impression they are in control of their own destiny, hence they feel safe.

Another factor is that, partly due to how infrequently they occur, commercial airliner accidents dominate news cycles even when there aren't any fatalities. For instance, the Singapore Airlines flight that hit severe turbulence has been in the news cycle for a couple of days already, and it wasn't even an accident. I can't recall hearing about any fatal car accidents since that story broke, but I know there have been plenty.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by eschaton

IIRC, studies have suggested that fear is not based on how risky something is but the degree to which you perceive that you have lost control of a situation. When people get behind the wheel, they're under the false impression they are in control of their own destiny, hence they feel safe.

And another part of that perception of "control" is based on familiarity.

The soccer mom who shuttles her kids around on dangerous stroads everyday feels more "in control" of that situation because it's extremely familiar to her. It's literally part of her daily life.

But taking the family down into the big bad old city, and encountering God only knows what, is WAY more outside her wheelhouse, and thus is going to have her feeling like that situation is well outside of her control, and therefore FAR more fear-inducing.


In any event, the person in the taxi cab going to the airport on an expressway who is riddled with anxiety about their upcoming flight is a very apt analogy to the crime-phobic soccer mom. Worried about the relatively safer thing while ignoring the relatively more dangerous thing.

[moorhosj1]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

I think it's also often not really fear of violent crime, but perhaps a euphemism for not wanting to see unhoused or disregulated people.

I believe there is some deeper truth in this comment.

I have witnessed it when suburban dwellers pass an unhoused person or panhandler in the city. It could be that the visual of how some people are forced to live shatters their self-created bubble. Maybe there is some level of internal guilt they feel and want to avoid it?

[badrunner]

For a lot of people, especially women, driving around in a 3 ton SUV simply feels safer than walking around city streets totally exposed to the world. It might be irrational in a strictly mathematical sense, in the same way that the fear of flying is irrational, but feeling fearful and stressed can also impose a physical and psychological cost, so the math isn't actually that clear cut. It's easy to dismiss for us life-long urban dwellers because these are just the normal stresses of urban living, things that are supposed to toughen you up, but not everyone sees it that way.