I am curious about this topic. I read an article recently about the way we feel about our worlds, and how, in general, we are sold things - everything from government policy to shampoo. Much of what is sold to us plays on our fears.

In the discussion below on crime and punishment, there was one line that mentioned this, and it triggered me to ask you all about it.

Pete said (among many other things, and sorry for picking something out of context):

Now, throwing out sentimentality, what are the real choices? We can, one, live in an atmosphere where our life, our person, and our property are in constant danger from two legged vermin that are coddled by the bleeding hearts -- we have that now and it isn't working.

So here is my question:

Do you live in fear of criminals? Do you feel in 'constant danger'? If so, how does it affect your life? How does it affect daily decisions? And, if you don't mind, where do you live and how does that alter your perceptions of your risk from criminals?


To answer my own questions:

I do not live in any kind of fear of criminals. I live in a middle class neighbourhood in a very large city. I do live mere blocks away from a fairly large grouping of income-supplemented high rises where I am told teenage gangs run rampant, but it does not affect my daily life at all. I still forget to lock the door at times. In 20+ years in this neighbourhood, I have had one break-and-enter in my house and one theft from my car (both years ago now). My husband's office, also in this neighbourhood, has also had all of one break-and-enter in all that time. I have no fear of walking my streets, here or in the downtown. My cottage life has been even less disturbed by criminal behaviour.

Now I am aware of people that live in fear. I know women who cannot go to sleep at night when their husbands are not home until they have triple-checked the several alarm systems they feel compelled to own (despite living in the same sort of neighbourhood as me). I have always assumed they were conditioned to paranoia, to be truthful.

So....what about the rest of you? How do you live?

Hi,

Many of us are afraid of "fear". It implies a weakness, a lack of self confidence. We commonly deny our fears. We make fun of the fears of others ("I know women who cannot go to sleep at night when their husbands are not home until they have triple-checked the several alarm systems they feel compelled to own" very much has the feeling of "what fools they are".)

Change the word from "fear" to "awareness" and it becomes possible to discuss this in a rational manner. I live in a reasonably safe neighborhood in a subdivision that has only one entrance (thus no through traffic). The crime rate there is low. I usually keep my doors locked (as the saying goes, to keep honest people out) but anyone wanting to get in would only be deterred for a second. I often leave the doors unlocked when I go out for a walk, and while walking I'll as likely as not be woolgathering and pretty well unaware of my surroundings. Awareness level, very low.

Now, when I'm in downtown Seattle, my awareness level goes up a bit. I keep my eyes on a swivel. I keep track of what is going on around me. I don't expect someone to pick my pocket, but (unlike in my neighborhood walks) I don't totally disregard the possibility either. I'm more likely to run into a drug addict or a mentally unstable person downtown, and the unpredictability of these people's actions adds a degree of tension. Time of day also makes a big difference, with the morning being most relaxed and the tension heightening after dark. So, while I do not avoid downtown at all, I am more aware there than at home.

For about seven years, I worked in one of the worse (i.e., highest crime) neighborhoods in the Seattle area. Driving through it was OK (although my boss did end up spending some time in court as a witness to a shooting he saw while driving home), but it was not the a place that I was comfortable walking through, and even less so at night. Driving through it, I keep very aware, and I avoided being on foot.

And, yet, even that neighborhood was not the worse in Seattle, and Seattle is not the worse city I've lived in or visited. There are some areas where the risk is not worth taking. If I found myself in those areas, I would be very "aware" indeed. Perhaps even to the point of being slightly frightened.

So, yeah, I think those forced to live in such areas either live in fear or to cause fear.

--Pete

I promised myself that this was only going to be an information gathering topic, and that I would not respond to what people identified as their concerns and fears.

But, I just have to respond to this part:

We make fun of the fears of others ("I know women who cannot go to sleep at night when their husbands are not home until they have triple-checked the several alarm systems they feel compelled to own" very much has the feeling of "what fools they are".)


Mea Culpa

My first reaction to that confession from two women in a back-door-of-the-school conversation was exactly as you suggested. My more reflective conclusion later was sympathy. I cannot imagine living with that sort of fear. If a five minute tour to cross-check the defenses mitigates it for them, better that than sleepless nights. I do think it is a product more of conditioning than a realistic assessment of their risk, but, again, we all make our own choices.

Now, throwing out sentimentality, what are the real choices? We can, one, live in an atmosphere where our life, our person, and our property are in constant danger from two legged vermin that are coddled by the bleeding hearts -- we have that now and it isn't working.

So here is my question:

"Do you live in fear of criminals? Do you feel in 'constant danger'? If so, how does it affect your life? How does it affect daily decisions? And, if you don't mind, where do you live and how does that alter your perceptions of your risk from criminals?"

I don't see it as all that complicated. There are criminals out there, and plenty of them.

What am I to do?

Not pretend they are not there.
Remain alert.
Not walk around with my head up my arse, making myself an easy target.
Report what looks suspicious to the cops, or mall security, what have you.
Teach my kids intelligent scan and awareness skills. (That last is a work in progress.)
Know where you are, be it a rougher part of town or otherwise, and act accordingly.
Lock the car.
Lock the house.
Keep the pistol where I can get to it when at home. (For some folks, that would be "keep the cell phone with 911 speed dial memorized" handy . . .)

When the dog barks, which in our case means "some one I don't know" be alert before coming to the front door.
Buy Insurance. If away from the house, I can still suffer theft. Minimize the damage.

Insurance is a tax we all pay for the crime rate in our area, no?

"Now I am aware of people that live in fear. I know women who cannot go to sleep at night when their husbands are not home until they have triple-checked the several alarm systems they feel compelled to own (despite living in the same sort of neighbourhood as me). I have always assumed they were conditioned to paranoia, to be truthful."

My wife was assaulted more than once while young, and she is a bit jumpier than I am in general, though we both are pretty realistic about common sense precautions.

After taking those, press on with your life, your number may come up eventually and the predators may target you for their next meal. On that day, like when my apartment got broken into in 1988, "it sucks to be you" (me in this case) so deal with that when it
happens and don't spend you life worrying about it.

The jagoff who broke into my apartment was the son of the Nueces County Duputy sheriff. She called, asking me not to press charges! I gave her a simple reply along these lines: "The kid stole my guns and my class ring, I am pressing charges. Your boy did not do you proud, ma'am." I was one of six houses hit that night.

I went through an anti Terrorism training course some years ago pursuant to overseas assignment. My friends who lived in Athens had it worse than I, what with the 17 November group. My biggest worry was the local organized crime organizationj, La Comorra, but I learned how to avoid getting on their radar screen when in Naples, so that was a non-worry for me. What was left was crime against property, a more common problem in Southern Italy than crimes against persons.

Thus, for 3 years, while living in Italy, and even though the Red Brigade was a memory, I did a security walkaround and inspection of my car every time that I did not park it in my garage over night. I lived out "in the economy" and my best protection against regular crime was that I was good friends with my Italian landlord and our neighbors, and his father in law lived behind us. His uncle, once a coastal battery gunner for Mousolinni in the Otranto straits (203 MM guns), was always around with his dog, and we locked the steel shutters on all windows, without fail.

We did not, in 3 years, ever suffer a break in at the house. Most of my colleagues at work suffered at least one. My German colleague from the submarine service got hit 3 times in five months. (The Carabinieri eventually figured it out: an inside job by the guys who had built the house. They had keys and local "friends.")

My car got broken into once. Most folks I knew who were "stragneri" had at least one or two in a three year period.

I still do the security walkaround now and again, to stay in practice.

I also know my neighbors, and we keep each other informed as to when we will be out of town. We keep an eye out for one another.

There is only so much you can do, and after that, it is a matter of choice by a criminal to act unlawfully.

From New York Times.com

TORONTO (AP) -- Jean Chretien announced Tuesday he will end his 10-year run as prime minister on Dec. 12, giving way to successor Paul Martin. Chretien, who turns 70 in January, previously said he would retire as prime minister by February 2004. Under pressure from Martin, his governing Liberal Party and opposition groups, he now will step aside after attending a Commonwealth summit in Nigeria in early December.

<snip>

Martin, 65, is a fiscal conservative credited with balancing Canada's budget during his nine years as finance minister. The son of a longtime Liberal Cabinet minister, Martin also promises an activist government for social policies.

A top priority will be easing tensions between Canada and the United States following sour relations between Chretien and President Bush. The two countries share the world's biggest trade partnership worth $1.4 billion a day. (Take that, EU! )

Occhinote:

Just out of curiosity, why the hurry to run him out of town? Is two months that important? Is Mr Martin tired of waiting, or have Chretein's long time supporters just gotten tired of him, per Thatcher to Major, for one reason or another? He had a nice long run, and he kept his party in power, passing the reins to Martin.

Ten years is no slouch for a term as PM.

A government in limbo is a Bad Thing™. Chretien announced a long time ago that he was leaving. But certain parts of government policy are dependent on the Prime Minister's direction. Who will be in his Cabinet? What will be the focus of policy?

Paul Martin was annointed as leader in a GLiberal party convention last week. (To no one's surprise, I might add.)

If the government is to get on with governing, the switch needs to be soon.

Hi,

A government in limbo is a Bad Thing™.

If the government is to get on with governing, the switch needs to be soon.

One of the advantages of the parliamentary system. While there are some advantages to elections held at regular times for offices of fixed length (and in some cases of maximum length), it sometimes leads to decisions that are driven by political timetables rather than solid logic. The timing of the US invasion of Iraq, driven by the summer heat and the fall election season is a big example that comes to mind.

As is often the case, there is no ideal solution, just various compromises.

--Pete

I don't talk about this much. Those of you who aren't interested in me rambling about personal stuff probably won't enjoy this post.

I attended a very small college (~300 students) when a shooting took place. This was 1992, so school shootings hadn't become quite as "popular" as they were for a while later on. One student killed another student and a faculty member, and wounded several others. He had the intention, and enough ammo, to take out the whole school, but luckily his gun jammed, and he did not complete the job.

It was a small school, so I knew the perpetrator and the victims. It affected everyone. I was about a mile away from campus at the time. My house on campus was about 20 yards from the first shooting, and my roommates spent the evening on the floor in the dark, not knowing what was happening or anything other than people were getting shot somwehere very close by. Others who were closer to the whole thing certainly had worse experiences. I wasn't directly involved. In that sense, I was lucky.

After that, I became very fearful. I moved out to Oregon a few weeks later, and it took me a few months to stop wondering if the people I passed on the way to class were planning to kill people. Later, it became a more generalized anziety. I was afraid to be alone. I wasn't afraid of crime really, more of a horrible illness or accident happening. When I lived off campus, sometimes I would drive to campus late at night, just to be near other people and hear the sound of voices.

Some of that paranoia was drug induced, but I'd rather not say anything else about that. Suffice it to say, I did not handle things very well for the first year or so.

I've moved past the fear now, for the most part. I had to face it. I took a several month road trip on my own, where I started to learn how to depend on myself. There were some sleepless nights, of course, but I'm that much stronger for having faced the fear and learned to deal with it. I can recognize the irrational feelings when they come, and can let it drop at that. In fact, I think I'm probably less fearful, overall, than many other people that I meet, because I've had a chance to confront those feelings and to deal with them.

I know this probably sounds very strange, but we're all probably very strange in one way or another, right? Anyway, back to the present.

As far as crime, I am vaguely concerned about property crime type stuff. We live close to the town's high school, and have had to deal with some vandalism that started at the high school and headed down the street. Spraypainted cars, broken windows, etc. Every now and then the odd item will turn up missing from my car if I leave it unlocked, and once when it was locked (in that case, the lock was also damaged). Somebody killed my cat, too, probably by throwing a beer bottle at her. That was no fun. There was never any proof, although circumstances pointed to one household. I didn't really fear those people, though, but I was angry.

I don't usually lock the house during the day, but at least the front door will be locked at night. The only people I know who've had their houses broken into in this town have been robbed by somebody they knew as part of an ongoing disagreement. I try to keep my distance from people who tend to have these types of disagreements, and that's worked for me so far. Mostly, I lock it to keep the drunks from wandering in (not out of maliciousness, but because they're lost or something). It's a university town, so we have our share of drunks.

In Bowling for Columbine, Michael Moore claims that people who live in Canada tend to be less afraid of each other than people in the USA, and that's a reason for the lower rate of violent crime. (On that note, I'd better say that I do NOT support or agree with everything in that movie, and I personally find many of Moore's stunts to be in poor taste).

He doesn't support his claim with anything besides anecdotes, of course, but I thought it was interesting nonetheless. I'd like to see any studies that have been done about people's perceptions of crime rates compared to the actual crime rates in the area. Also, I don't know if anyone has looked at a person's perception of crime rates relative to that person's likelihood to commit a crime. That data might be tough to collect, but it could be possible.

-Griselda

Hi,

interesting - the first thing that came to my mind when reading Shadow's post had been Bowling for Columbine. I like his theory that fear is the main reason for the high rate of violent crimes, and I too would like to see studies comparing people's perception and actual crime rates. His theory won't be proven easily, but I think it's an interesting new(?) approach. I also liked how he tried to debunk the other most-heard theories (violent history; easy access to guns; and a third theory I fail to remember at the moment ) even if he could have easily adopted them for his cause.

That he failed to give more support to his theory than anecdotes and common sense (ugh) is sad, but then it's only a movie and not a book and should appeal to the masses which easily get confused by more complicated reasonings. A book going into more detail would be good, though (has he written one on the subject? I've only read "Stupid White Men", which left me with mixed feelings (too polemic, too broad, ...) but which at least had a long appendix with references to support his claims).

What I found downright insulting though were the rare occasions he actually tried to use facts and numbers in the movie, like when he compared the number of victims from guns in different countries by using absolute numbers instead of relative to population. Bah. That, and the polemic style, devalued the movie despite the (for me) new theory that was somewhat thought-provoking.

-Kylearan

There are a number of theories about how strangers are dealt with. The better you know folks, in my experience, the lower the crime rate, but crime rates are still greater than zero in most places. It is just a matter of how much greater.

Stealing from strangers and stealing from friends, or the worse case, shooting someone you don't know versus someone you know, are two different emotional and decision processes, however much it stinks to be the someone on the receiving end.

I wonder if Mr Moore confuses fear and hate. He confuses a great deal else in his various and sundry presentations. There is a certain relationship there, or can be, but I don't see fear as being the prime motivator for crime.

Hi,

coincidentally, after writing my posting about Moore I went to read the newspaper and found there was a long article about him. He is touring Europe at the moment to promote the translation of one of his books, and what I've read has lowered my opinion about him considerably.

I knew that he was somewhat weak with his facts, but since I could identify with some (not all) of his goals I somehow thought this could be accepted if his style can reach the masses - maybe he can improve now he's well-known. But from what I've read now, it just got worse. He seems to have thrown the facts out of the window completely now, and instead just preaches what his audience wants to hear - it didn't seem to worry the audience that he got most of the facts about our country completely wrong as well.

In addition, he has published an open letter to the Germans in another newspaper. In it, he congratulates us for being the most important opposition of America's current administration, and that we should continue to oppose the US. While I don't like a lot of the decision of the Bush administration myself, that letter was just a polemic piece of crap full of platitudes and unfounded accusations. I really had thought he could do better, but what has Kurt Tucholsky once said?

"The advantage of being intelligent is that you can pretend to be stupid. The opposite, however, is not possible."

I thought he could be in the first category, but now I believe he's just a fool trying to look intelligent.


Anyway, back to the topic: At least his theory from Bowling for Columbine is still appealing to me. Of course I agree with you that the crime rate never will be zero, and that hate plays a big part in that, too. Also, that there's a relationship between knowledge, hate, and fear; see racism (you don't know their culture -> you tend to fear what you don't know -> you begin to hate them for the fear they induce in you -> your readyness for aggression increases because of the hate).

But, if I recall correctly (it has been some time ago I watched BfC), Moore mainly focuses on victims of gunfights, and that includes potential victims of crimes shooting their predators. If you live in constant fear of becoming victim of a crime, magnified, for example, by the media, this higher level of emotion involved may make your reactions more drastic, aggressive, and lethal. When we still lived in Bonn downtown (see my other post on this thread for more details) and my wife was still taking lessons in self-defense, her level of tension and fear was so high when coming home late at night that I feared for those people who might address her just for getting the time - she would have jumped and attacked them. (She freely admitted that, arguing that men should be aware of that risk when addressing lone women at night. She would, for her own safety, assume they wanted to attack/rape her.) Now if she had been armed, as Ozy's wife seems to be...

Gee, look, now I'm doing the same as Moore, using anecdotes to support my claim.

Anyway, I won't dismiss the line of thought that fear raises the level of emotions involved, which in turn can make your actions more drastic and somewhat hinders your ability to assess certain situations or evaluate the adequacy of your response correctly.

I would like to see some studies on this, but I guess we won't see anything from Moore about that.

-Kylearan

But, if I recall correctly (it has been some time ago I watched BfC), Moore mainly focuses on victims of gunfights, and that includes potential victims of crimes shooting their predators. If you live in constant fear of becoming victim of a crime, magnified, for example, by the media, this higher level of emotion involved may make your reactions more drastic, aggressive, and lethal. When we still lived in Bonn downtown (see my other post on this thread for more details) and my wife was still taking lessons in self-defense, her level of tension and fear was so high when coming home late at night that I feared for those people who might address her just for getting the time - she would have jumped and attacked them. (She freely admitted that, arguing that men should be aware of that risk when addressing lone women at night. She would, for her own safety, assume they wanted to attack/rape her.) Now if she had been armed, as Ozy's wife seems to be...

Careful, you're treading dangerously close to the "guns kill people" argument, which is stupid in that a gun, if left alone, will sit on the table, in the drawer, where ever for eternity until it rusts apart if not picked up and used.

Back on topic, I was picked on a little at school, and had ample opportunity to pack a gun in my vehicle and take it to school and "even the score." It should be evident that I never did so, even though I had ample opportunity and motive. Why not? Because I was raised to never point a weapon at someone unless I meant to use it to ill them, but eve more than that I was treated to respect others and some how killing or even shooting them, seems to fail in the "respect others" thing.

Why do I think kids shoot others? Because they have lousy parents, who don't teach their kids what they should about respecting the lives and property of others. Also a failure of the parents to find out what their kids are doing, where they are going, who they are with. Mix this failure of the parents with a severe lack of gun safety lessons, and the general "he's got a gun, and even though there are 100 of us, we'll lie here and die" thing that seems to happen in these situations, and you can have a handful of people subduing more than 10 times their number which wouldn't work if people thought about the situation a little.

BTW, why is your wife so aggressive? Your comment on that reminds me of the commercial where a guy just walks up to a lady, in broad daylight, and starts to ask her for the time, when she pepper-sprays him. Not funny at all, IMHO, and some folks wonder why others are less willing to lend a helping hand now. Yeah let me offer to help and get gassed, or attacked or sued or something stupid; I think not.

Hi,

BTW, why is your wife so aggressive?

Normally she isn't, just the contrary - a bit more aggressiveness would do her good IMHO, for example when defending herself against stupid parents attacking her verbally at school when one of their kids had done something wrong and not she. It's only in the alone-in-the-night situation described above where she's somewhat aggressive (although the word "aggression" doesn't fit very well there).

It has something to do with what her trainer has told her: If you let your opponent get too close, the battle is half lost already. I'm exaggerating here, but when you think there's a rapist behind every bush and every guy walking towards you is about to abduct you, it's their fault if they try to come too close to you - better safe than sorry.

Since we moved away, that won't happen anymore. Why? Because her fear is nearly gone now (not only because we moved but for various other reasons as well). I don't want to imply she would have shot anyone if she had a gun. But in other, more ambiguous situations maybe, for example when someone would have "simply" tried to rob her. I chose the situation to illustrate my point that fear (probably most strong emotions) can lead to strong and irrational reactions. And yes, I prefer an irrational reaction from someone with pepper spray than with a gun, because as you have pointed out, it's the people who kill and not the tool they use.

-Kylearan

Why do I think kids shoot others? Because they have lousy parents, who don't teach their kids what they should about respecting the lives and property of others. Also a failure of the parents to find out what their kids are doing, where they are going, who they are with.

You can teach a kid all you want, but sometimes they will ignore the teachings and go their own way.

Look at the Reagan kids.

And as for "knowing where they are, who they are with", etc. look at the Bush girls.

No parents are perfect, no kids are perfect, no schools are perfect.

My point? Good parents provide a platform, kids choose to build on it or to dive off to sink or swim.

In the case of Columbine, I don't think Eddie Eagle and "gun safety" classes would have changed a thing. It would have been just another "teaching" that they ignored to fulfill their own selfish fantasy.

-Van

(Note on the title: For a long time, many police in the country associate Dungeons and Dragons with mental instability and therefore criminal behavior. I'm surprised there hasn't been as much of a tie to Diablo. Anyway, whenever I see blame placed overmuch on one factor, it reminds me of the "D&D aHA!".)

and the general "he's got a gun, and even though there are 100 of us, we'll lie here and die" thing that seems to happen in these situations

The "let the gunmen have their way" attitude in most situations is better than a "let's jump the gunman". Killing sprees excluded, and now hijackings excluded. If a armed robbery is in progress at a bank or convenience store, you're much more likely to survive if NO shooting occurs, which is the most likely outcome for a robbery. I'm not saying that an armed and well-trained bystander or guard shouldn't take any action if lives are in danger, I just don't want a would-be vigilante to make the situation go south. Yer right in that if there is a good opportunity to subdue the criminal(s) before they can kill anyone, yes, do it, but don't get me killed just trying to be Hero of the Day.

If your "100 of us" comment was about Columbine specifically, argh I don't have time... off to work. Just that I don't think there was ever a time that there was a group large enough and positioned well enough to overpower the shooters. IIRC.

Some years ago, a couple of people decided that it would be a great to rob a bank.

The bank was in Washington DC. They set about there plan to pull the heist.

They pulled up to the bank and walked inside. Wrote up a note at the deposit/withdrawl slip counter on a slip and got in line. They then got to the teller and handed over the slip. The teller then read what was written out loud, "this is a hold up, put all the money in a bag." From behind the two would-be robbers were the sounds of multiple hammers being cocked.

Seems the two would-be robbers decided that a Friday at noon would be a great time to rob a bank and that the bank they choose happened to be just 3 blocks from FBI head quarters at which a lot of FBI agents had accounts and this Friday happened to be payday...

Got two towers dropped down onto Battery Park. That is, 30 years of appeasing hijackers so as not to endanger the sheep.

Easy on your conclusions, however, a lot of cops do find that in the nut with a gun scenario, they frequently can work, using time, to defuse the situation.

Risk-reward. If you risk and take that twit down, you save a few lives, but you risk your own in the process.

Risk-reward, and "do you feel lucky today?"

"Let the gunmen have their way" Got two towers dropped down onto Battery Park. That is, 30 years of appeasing hijackers so as not to endanger the sheep.

That's why I said "Excluding... hijackings." A hijacking is no longer a sidetrip, now it's killing everyone on board, so action is completely justified.

As for policemen, off-duty and otherwise, they certainly can use their judgment, I wasn't suggesting that shooting was their only perogative. But no one who isn't "well-trained" (not just in hitting a target, but also in what happens to bullets that either miss or go through the target) shouldn't be starting the shooting, and no one should pull a gun unless they are capable of incapacitating the culprit(s) or unless it's a certainty that shots are going to be fired. Okay, that's a lot of unlesses.

If there's just one gunman, an overwhelming surprise attack could work. Just make sure you take the guy out.

You can create paralysis through analysis, and convince yourself not to leave the house in the morning.

I disagree with trying to make life 100% risk free, and an attitude of complete risk averseness. (Hmm, is that last even a word?)

So this goes back to some "do you feel lucky today?"

In that quote I meant once the shooting started. Ninety-nine percent of the people in a situation before someone started shooting would try not to do anything to get the shooting started, I agree.

I was referring to what happens after someone starts shooting, than before, because once someone starts shooting lying there and doing nothing is just waiting to die.

no trigger

Fear raising emotional tension and creating a higher emotional energy state, a higher potential for a violent act.

I see where you are coming from, thankee. Not an unreasonable premise, from what little I understand about violent behaviour.

You've just hit the main problem with Moore in a nutshell: he isn't interested so much in facts, and showing logical, relevant evidence to back up his claims, he's too busy pursuing his own political and personal agenda.

He tries to make "movies" focused entirely through the lens of his perception, and anyone who is not him is bound to see things differently than he does. This leads to his books and movies seeming to be too "broad" or generic or biased for any real study or intrepretation.

But I find his movies, if occasionally long winded to be interesting watching and seasoned by some rare wit. I'll take a "Spike Lee Joint" over anything with Michael Moore's name on it any day of the week.

The jury is still out on Oliver Stone.

I grew up in a fairly rural area south of Toledo. I was far more afraid of stray dogs than criminals (actually this has not changed; it makes me very nervous to see people walking/jogging large dogs without a leash). As a latchkey kid, I locked the door only if I was leaving the property. Interaction with strangers was almost unheard of.

I now live in Columbus, in a much more urban setting with much more crime (by volume if not by proportion). A walk down the block may mean passing 50 people I've never met before. I don't think it makes me afraid, but it can make me a bit nervous at times. It doesn't prevent me from walking around or going for a jog in the middle of the night. It doesn't change my behavior much at all, really. But it does make me feel uneasy at times.

In some ways, I may actually be much safer now than I was as a child. I've lived in Columbus for nearly a third of my life without being the victim of any crime. That rural house I grew up in, back off the road with no neighbors to keep an eye on it, was robbed at least 3 times during my childhood. But then, nobody came door to door posting bulletins about serial rapists like they do here.

I have found that awareness and distraction are your two greatest allies. For the greatest part, distractions like alarm systems serve little use in keeping you safe, as do door locks, loud barking dogs, and everything else one could afford in a suburbian lifestyle. What each of these things do offer is a difficulty factor to unskilled thieves. The idea is to consistently make the person scouting out your place or car as "A little more trouble than the house over there."

In my mostly insubstantial life I have seen a fair number of incidents. I have experienced a shooting in my classroom by a person I had spoken to on several occasions. I have seen a group of my friends get drunk and crash to their deaths after I did not take their keys. I have sat down in my car to notice my stereo stolen, shrugged and started using my CD Player instead. Heck, I sleep with my blowdryer running all night long. Inversely my girlfriend suffers from General Anxiety Disorder, and several subclasses of this. I have seen her cringe in fear at the very thought of travelling during the night.

Literally last week she was mugged at gunpoint, and had all of her purse and the $15 dollars inside stolen. She has since been practically crippled from travelling outside, and I often console her over her fears of all the terrible things that could have happened to her. Being shot. Raped. The thief becomming angry at the lack of cash. Etc. My internal reaction? "That was a rather nice mugger, all things considered." To me, it is a matter of rules to be followed to minimize risk, and when it happens regardless, it's barely a blip on the radar.

Hi,

I'm aware of the fact that crime exists, but I have decided that besides standard safety measures (like locking the door when we are not at home) I won't do anything to protect me/my property that would interfere with my everyday life too much and thus lower the quality of it. Triple-checking the alarm system every night or even installing one would fall under that category - I believe that the chances of me becoming subject to a serious crime are not high enough to waste my energy to try to lower them.

My wife, on the other hand, is full of fears. Because of her, we lock our appartment door every night, she locks the doors of the car from the inside when driving at night, she took lessons in self-defense for women to be able to defend herself against rapists and she leaves the light on in our appartment when we're not at home to scare off potential burglars.

She often accuses me to be too careless about this issue, to be too naive, and I often wonder if she's right, and where our different assessments come from. We have lived for over six years in Bonn downtown, in the old part of the town where most of the pubs are, and where many students and immigrants live. A lot of drunks had been there (sometimes me, too ) and some drug addicts, too - but somehow, I never felt threatened, and in fact very much enhjoyed the atmosphere the pubs provided. My wife was very worried, though, and so last year we moved to the outskirts of Bonn into an older, wealthier, quieter and more homogeneous neighbourhood. My wife's fears have somewhat lessened now but are still there, but we have to pay a price for that: We no longer can walk downtown but have to use the car, and when I go to a pub it's either don't drink and drive, or using public transportation. Don't ask my wife about how safe she thinks it is to use the train at night after having drunk several beers, though...

I have my own theory about why she is so full of fears and I am not. She grew up in the outskirts of a quiet village, living in a house and being protected by her family at all times. She went to a catholic girl-only school with pupils only from wealthy parents, and only very late learned about the existance of bad people and crimes, and that mostly from TV only. So when we moved to Bonn to live together, she was under the impression that she was leaving a safe harbor and now was entering the rough and evil world she knew from TV.

I, on the other hand, have lived my youth in an appartment in a 10-story building in a part of Bonn where a decade ago a social experiment had been tried that utterly failed. They had built a lot of appartments there for all the civil/public servants our town had (we were the German capital at that time) and had mixed that with lots of sponsored appartments for welfare recipients and immigrants, thus trying to mix the lower and higher social levels of society to prevent the building of ghettos. Well, the public servants didn't like being neighbour to a lot of turks and moroccans that had no work, and moved away - making that part of Bonn a ghetto of the lower social level. I remember when I was a kid that I went to the bus stop once and had to witness a man lying in his own blood there, victim of a gang fight - scary. But I also learned that most crimes there happened between gangs, and if you stayed out of their politics, you were safe. And I learned that not every immigrant without work and dependant on welfare is a bad person and a criminal, as lots of people in this country seem to believe. I became friend with several, actually, and still get snide remarks from my lawyer and doctor friends about that from time to time.

I also got a trained eye when it comes to assess situations and people - is it better to cross the street now because the group ahead is at the brink of a fight? Is this drunk dangerous or harmless? My wife still jumps when she's addressed by strangers, although most of the time they just want to ask what time it is.

Bottom line: I believe it's not always a good thing when parents try to raise their kids in a quiet and completely protected environment, letting them get distorted information about bad people and crimes only from TV. They could become full of unrealistic(?) fear later when exposed the "real world".

That of course can backfire, as seen in Gris' vita.

-Kylearan

Hrmpf, somehow I got logged out when hitting the respond button and now cannot edit my post.

The last sentence should be, "Of course, raising your kids in a more 'realistic' enironment can backfire, as can be seen in Gris' vita."

-Kylearan

Do you live in fear of criminals? Do you feel in 'constant danger'? If so, how does it affect your life? How does it affect daily decisions? And, if you don't mind, where do you live and how does that alter your perceptions of your risk from criminals?

Do I live in fear of criminals? For myself, no, for my wife, yes I do.

A little background history would probably explain this better.

I grew up in the extremely rural part of Northern Florida. I could literally walk out the back door and take a leak without anyone ever knowing. If people came down our 'road' we knew they were either lost or coming to see us, there was no "just driving by" when we lived over .5 miles from the "paved road"!

I grew up handling guns, walking the woods, and generally checking out my surroundings. That time probably formed the foundation of my confidence of being able to handle things well. The true test of self-confidence and the "purging" of most of my fears for my future came on a cold winters day in 1991.

See I had been the Army for about a year and a half at this point and this was the time of Desert Storm. Our unit had not been activated, and by Christmas we had all heard the rumor that if we made it past that time we'd not go. Everything was fine until January 22, when our company First Sergeant called some of us into his office and asked if we wanted to volunteer to go to Saudi and help with Desert Storm. I, and others, said "umm, thanks but no thanks."

The next morning, right after PT and morning formation, all of us were called to the battalion classroom and told we were going to Saudi, and leaving in three days. Needless to say quite a few of us were shocked, although not totally surprised after the conversations the night before with the First Sergeant. So I called my folks and they caught a flight up the next day, Thursday, so they could get my car and all of my stuff.

That was a tough phone call.

Anywho, over the next three days I had to deal with quite a few things, not the least of which concerned my own mortality, the possibility of beimg maimed for life, having to shoot someone, and all of the other myriad of things that I hadn't until that time, really thought much aout even though I was in the military.

I'd like to think that those three days, and the subsequent three months I spent in Saudi/Iraq made me not fear so much for my own safety as I might have otherwise even with my "self reliance" formed from wandering around the woods and learning about firearms early on.

Now for my wife. She is younger than I, and has been through some rough times with her old boyfriend and his "friend." This includes assault from both of them at seperate times. She doesn't know anything about guns, or really how to defend herself, but she is finally becomming more confident and self-assured with me around, which I am sure doesn't surprise anyone. :P

I have high hopes for her, especially once we get to go to the shooting range a few times and I buy her a nice shotgun for home defense. Hopefully she'll never need it and our alarm system would scare any one who breaks into the house, off, but if not, shotguns are much easier to aim and shoot than pistols.

Now then for the rest of the questions:

Live in a new, to us at least, house in a nice quiet neighborhood. We have an alarm system, as previously mentioned, that we use religiously, even though there currently is no monitoring service attached to it. I do not worry about criminals much because of the reasons described above, and the pistol I keep beside the bed. I am more concerned with the idiot drivers that I deal with daily while driving from home to work and back again.

I have had a vehicle stolen from me and both my wife and I have had our vehicles broken into in the past 3 years, both in apartment complex's where we no longer live.

I don't live in "constant fear" but as others who posted have mentioned I can understand why some people do. I was lucky to have been raised where I was, although I didn't always like the isolation. Now I an just trying to get my wife to be more assertive and self-confident I think we'll be fine. I don't like for anyone to allow themselves to be treated like a doormat regardless of who they are dealing with at the time (parential guilt trips are the worst for her to deal with now.)

Hope this helps.

Hi,

interesting - we have a similar situation concerning the fear of our wives, but address it in a completely different way. You arm your wife, while I try to persuade mine that the risk is lower than she perceives. I hope I'm not too naive in that regard.

But I also see a danger in your way: Any weapon one has can become a weapon of your attacker, especially if you're not self-confident or not familiar enough with the weapon. Actually, I know of two women who carry pepper spray with them all the time who where attacked (by unarmed people) and ended up being incapacitated from their own weapon that the attacker managed to wrestle away from them.

What really helped my wife were the lessons in self-defense for women she took. These courses are offered by our police for a very low price, and serve two purposes: To show women how to escape (they learn, for example, what they can do if a man sits on them - how to wriggle out of his grasp, and then hit him where it hurts long enough to safely get away), and to help with their self-confidence. It was very surprising to see how many women have problems with simple things like shouting out loud, or really trying to hit someone with all their might and not stopping before the hit.

At the end of these courses, every woman has to go through a set up course at night, usually through a park. She knows in advance that she will meet three men: Two harmless, maybe just asking for the time, and one who will try to attack her. And even after the course, some women still are paralyzed in fear when attacked, unable even to scream for help - even though they know that the man only pretends.

But I know a lot of women who, after that course, now walk with a lot less fear. And the more steady, self-assured composure alone scares off a lot of men.

Just a thought.

I don't like for anyone to allow themselves to be treated like a doormat

Yes, and good luck.

-Kylearan

interesting - we have a similar situation concerning the fear of our wives, but address it in a completely different way. You arm your wife, while I try to persuade mine that the risk is lower than she perceives. I hope I'm not too naive in that regard.

But I also see a danger in your way: Any weapon one has can become a weapon of your attacker, especially if you're not self-confident or not familiar enough with the weapon. Actually, I know of two women who carry pepper spray with them all the time who where attacked (by unarmed people) and ended up being incapacitated from their own weapon that the attacker managed to wrestle away from them.

Actually I didn't try, and indeed haven't really pursued arming her. I have a pistol that I keep around the house just in case. Loaded, in a holster, beside the bed, s previously mentioned. I got it a few years ago from my dad, and hadn't even done much except clean and main tain it until we moved into our new house.

One night there was a 'weird' noise so I unpacked the pistol before headin downstairs. My wife followed me around as I slowly fliped on every light, I had her open the doors, while I covered the entrance, etc.

It was after this that she told me that she wanted to learn to shoot and get a weapon, which surprised me mainly because she had not mentioned it before. I know she has or had pepper spray, but having been through CS gas in the military myself I sprayed a little of that once outside and let it sort of blow over her, she didn't like that much.

Hence my mention of shotgun instead of a pistol for her, they take much less time to learn to shoot, are easier to aim for people not used to guns, and can put a hurting on anything they hit. At least with a shotgun you don't necessarily have to worry about the pistol round going through your house and 1/2 way through the neighbors house either.

I hope to have my wife shoot a little when we get down to my parents house, just to get her used to the idea, then maybe find a gun range up near our home so she can become more familiar with weapons without cowering at the sight of them like quite a few people do (which I don't understand, it's not like a gun is a snake that will spring up and chase after you??)

You are correct in that any weapon can be used against you, but hence becomming familiar with the weapon and actually using it before the emergency situation occurs. Besides, a gun is the best "equalizer" I know.