Europe more dangerouse than USA? (gunshots vs terror threat)

Ref. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101003/ap_on_bi_ge/europe_terror_threat
and many others..

I find this so strange.
How can US authorities think it's more dangerous for Americans to visit Europe than to stay at home??

Being in the USA is about 10 times as dangerous as being in Canada and 20 times as dangerous as being in Europe (regarding gun shots that's a much more probable threat than terrorism).

Colombia again is 10 times more dangerous than USA.
So, should Europeans be warned about the gunshot threat in USA in the same way as US citizens are warned about Colombia?
Ref. http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/tw/tw_941.html

See for example,
http://www.gun-control-network.org/GF01.htm

And:
(http://www.gun-control-network.org/GF10.htm)

 

It all makes work for the working man to do ,and safeguards an anti terrorist industry and it's budget, or am I being cynical ?

 

RT, you are opening a Pandora's box there...

 

Well, you are in Italy, more dangerous than Canada
Spain, I don't know, but I always feel completely safe there.
Maybe it's just to keep the Americans at home and spend their money there?

 

Some more numbers..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...iolent_events_by_death_toll#Terrorist_attacks

Compare this list to 12.000 or 16.000 (as I read a few years ago) Americans shot by Americans every year!

 

I'm wondering... is Japan so low in the list because they prefer swords and karate-blows?

 

Hmm, I just think the Japanese are non violent.

Here is "Homicide statistics" in general, darker is worse..

(From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate)

 

One thing people don't understand is that the risk of being shot in America is not spread evenly across the population. Most shootings are criminal on criminal: gang-related shootings, drug deals gone sour, etc.

For example, if you're an average citizen in Los Angeles who's keeping his nose clean and staying out of trouble, your chances of being shot are almost nil. That isn't the impression you get from the news, where shootings of innocent victims are reported regularly. But you have to remember that there are well over 300 million people here; a rare case here and a rare case there across the country can give the impression it's happening all over and all the time.

Also keep in mind that shooting someone is hardly the only way to murder them. It's much more relevant to look at a country's overall murder rate, instead of just the shootings.

Raggi Thor, if you had read the statistics on the website your graphic came from, you would have seen that forty five countries in the world have a higher murder rate than the United States. You would also have noticed that last year the OVERALL murder rate in Europe was actually a little higher than in the United States: 5.4 per thousand, as compared to 5.0 per thousand.

You're also somewhat misstating the purpose of the warning. American authorities were telling people that the risk of terrorist attacks has risen somewhat in Europe, not that Europeans as a whole have suddenly turned into a bunch of murderers....

What does a change in the situation in Europe have to do with Colombia's ongoing problems? Nothing at all. And although I haven't researched it, I'm willing to bet that there are all kinds of warnings already in place concerning Columbia anyway....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Tell me: when the American government receives information that terrorists are trying to mount a series of attacks in Europe, do you really think it should keep its mouth shut so as not to bruise Europeans' tender feelings? Why are you sounding so insulted? You're the potential target in the warning, not the reason for it.

 

Raggi Thor:

As a dual EU and USA citizen, let me bridge this cultural gap for you...

You are misunderstanding the intent and the wording of the terror warning put out by the States.

The warning is specifically worded (on the radio, etc...) to say that Americans should be more aware of their surroundings while traveling in Europe due to increased threats to areas such as: airports, train stations and places such as the Eiffel Tower. This is the same inside the United States. We need to be more aware of terror when standing outside the NY Stock Exchange or in a subway station in Manhattan (NYC).

The wording (on the radio in the States) also says that they "in no way want to discourage travel to Europe." The man who is responsible for generating the warning was on the radio show I was listening to and he said he himself is traveling to Europe and going through airports and train stations. He just plans not to linger in them, to move along and look less like an American. (No cowboy hats, no trainers/sneakers walking around town and no shorts/short pants)

Obviously, this has nothing to do with Norway (did I mention I'm Norwegian?) because Norway is not the sensational target terrorists love. Any increased risk will be in places like London, Paris, Rome, etc... major tourist destinations.

Does that make more sense?

The warning isn't saying Europe is more dangerous. The warning is saying that Americans need to step up their awareness while in major tourist areas and not linger around to decrease chances of being involved in a possible attack. Not really a big deal, not a very serious warning. Just a message of awareness.

If they said nothing, they would be faulted in the event of an attack. It is their job to present credible information. They did this in a very fair and even handed way (for once!) this time.

I might add: When was the last time you know of a European tourist killed by gunfire in the USA? As Troy said above, murders are usually committed between two people who know each other. Even some of the sensational workplace killings we have (and Germany has) are a case of a worker killing other workers they know. A tourist has virtually no chance of being killed by non-terrorist violence because nobody knows them.

 

what's the use in having a second amendment if you can't shoot at people

 

A completely snide, pointless remark. I own a couple of dozen guns - and I haven't shot anyone since I got out of the service, so don't get snotty.

I'd hate to break my perfect record....

 

LOL, every now and again you are funny troy-boy!

...but, maybe you weren't kidding...

Dangerous is relative.

Do you feel safe? Are you safe? Define "safe".

-Tom

 

Dead...?
Dead means 100% sure nothing can hurt you, so you're definitely safe then. Can't imagine any other situation or place in this world which can be defined as safe.
So, a healthy amount of unsafety is better.

 

Well, I think I'm reasonably safe. Hopefully, people who would want to do me harm consider me somewhat dangerous....

 

Thanks all, had to read this very fast
Saying "USA" and "Europe" is of course not very precise..
We could compare DC Washington and England for example (24 to 1).

I still find it strange that we (the media) talks so much about terror risk when other risks are many times higher. Isn't that strange?
What's the probability?