The lesser of two evils?

April 21, 2008 5:06 PM

Is a young woman more likely to get killed/injured in a car crash or a violent crime?

As I mentioned a few weeks ago, I like to hangout downtown and places near there. In my opinion, that's where the best restaurants and bars are. I'm not a big fan of highways, so take back roads.

My parents HATE for me to go down there, especially alone. They are afraid that I will get robbed, raped, carjacked, or have my car shot at. My dad tries to talk me into carpooling with people. There are nights that I recieve up to three text messages from my mother, checking to see if I'm okay.

I'm in my mid-twenties, and I think I have good personal safety skills. Driving alone in sketchy neighborhoods don't scare me too much. I avoid driving residentual areas, choose routes where there's open stores/restaurants/stations in case my car breaks down, and I try to come and leave places with other people even if I don't know them so I won't be alone on parking lots. I make sure that I have my cell phone.

Now, what scares ME is car crashes. Out of all of my friends, I've been in the least amount of accidents. I wouldn't consider them as bad drivers, but the like to drive really really fast. They also prefer highways to back roads. Personally, I think highways tend to be more dangerous. The speed limit is higher, it is loaded with fatigued/sleepy travelers, and the time to react is shorter. I'd rather just drive by myself. As for violent crimes, I think I remember reading several times that women are more likely to be a victim of violent crime from people they know, not just random people out in the streets.

So, do automobiles or "scary streets" pose more danger to young women?

posted by sixcolors to society & culture (15 comments total)

There are far too many variables that would go into even guessing at that.
posted by jerseygirl at 5:08 PM on April 21, 2008

That would be "residential". My spelling has been awful lately.
posted by sixcolors at 5:08 PM on April 21, 2008

Statistically speaking you're more likely to be murdered if you're a man than a woman, so I'm inclined to wonder abut the 'Omg! Girl in trouble!' knee jerk reaction. However the automobile death rate from crashes and accidents is higher than the murder rate. Why don't you carpool and use your savy driving skills to save a friend -and- make mom and pop feel safer?
posted by Phalene at 5:16 PM on April 21, 2008

This is just a data point, but I know people who have died/been injured in auto accidents and I don't know anyone who's been a victim of violent crime. My background is squarely middle class as far as socio-economic status goes, if that helps give an idea of where I 'hang out.' I also witness more auto accidents than violent crimes. Therefore, in the pool of my experience, auto accidents are more prevalent.

However... I would rather be in an auto accident than the victim of a violent crime. Auto accidents come with airbags, and associated pain will be incidental. Violent crimes do not and the pain is intentional, and therefore assumed to be worse, even without taking psychological stress into account.

(And on preview, what Phalene said - drive your friends!)
posted by reebear at 5:30 PM on April 21, 2008

A quick crude search at wonder.cdc.gov reveals that between 1999 and 2004, 7,502 women between the age of 20 and 34 died as a result of "assault" (4,3 per 100k) while 19,126 died as a result of "transportation accident" (10,8 per 100k). So according to this, you are twice as likely to die from a "transportation accident" than from "assault". Now, bear in mind that both categories include way more than the "simple car crash" or "assault by random criminal", but my guess is tha a refined research would probably give similar results in terms of probability.
posted by bluefrog at 5:32 PM on April 21, 2008 [1 favorite]

Are you referring to downtown LA, or downtown St. Paul? Makes a big difference.

As someone who has worked with women learning self-defense, I can tell you that the BIGGEST threat to your safety is your attitude of "xx don't scare me too much". When you stop thinking about the threats to your personal safety in ANY situation, you are setting yourself up to be hurt.

That can be applied to ANYTHING. Driving, walking, firearms, going out, drinking, etc.

If I were you, I would drive on highways because they "scare" you. You seem like a responsible adult, and I'm sure you are a competent driver on the highways. Being scared of things happening on the highways probably insures that you won't be talking/texting on the phone, changing the radio station, not signaling when you are changing lanes, and other sorts of risky behavor.

Remember the danger in places where you aren't scared, and have the courage to try things that scare you.

Good luck.
posted by hal_c_on at 5:34 PM on April 21, 2008

Why don't you carpool and use your savy driving skills to save a friend -and- make mom and pop feel safer?

I do, more than 50% of the time. But, sometimes there's circumstances (like me meeting up somewhere later because of work, while everyone else is already there) that force me to drive alone.

This is just a data point, but I know people who have died/been injured in auto accidents and I don't know anyone who's been a victim of violent crime.

I have the same experience.
posted by sixcolors at 5:37 PM on April 21, 2008

Are you referring to downtown LA, or downtown St. Paul? Makes a big difference.

It is in the top 10 dangerous cities in America. But, the most dangerous parts of my city is concentrated in one area, I almost never go in that area.
posted by sixcolors at 5:39 PM on April 21, 2008

As someone who has worked with women learning self-defense, I can tell you that the BIGGEST threat to your safety is your attitude of "xx don't scare me too much". When you stop thinking about the threats to your personal safety in ANY situation, you are setting yourself up to be hurt.

Oh, I'm scared shitless of the "hood" too. Not just the hood, but being anywhere that's dark and isolated. But, I'm more scared of car crashes, and I think my fear is legitimate. As my title says, they are both "evil", but somehow I feel more in control when I'm driving, even in seedy neighborhoods.
posted by sixcolors at 5:46 PM on April 21, 2008

Do your evening activities involve alcohol? Even with only one drink, you have immediately launched yourself into the highest risk category for car accidents. Other leading causes of car accidents are cellphone use, reaching for something, eating at the wheel, or being tired. And as others have already pointed out, auto-collisions are by far the highest killer of young adults.

Avoid those scenarios, and your chances of encountering any kind of bodily harm are almost nil.
posted by randomstriker at 7:00 PM on April 21, 2008

If I were you, I would drive on highways because they "scare" you. You seem like a responsible adult, and I'm sure you are a competent driver on the highways. Being scared of things happening on the highways probably insures that you won't be talking/texting on the phone, changing the radio station, not signaling when you are changing lanes, and other sorts of risky behavor.

That's dreadful advice. The most scary thing about Highways is that there are lots of other cars going very fast around you, and you have precisely zero control over them. Add in frequent lane changes (for everyone involved) and the potential for being involved in someone else's accident ramps considerably. Especially when you consider that nervous drivers are far more dangerous - they can react erratically, unpredictably, and being in a state of nerves is not at all good for your analytical abilities. Stick to the back roads, they ARE safer, especially as you seem to eschew driving fast - they are quieter and your actions become the presiding controlling factor over your own safety. Calm, controlled and relaxed driving is the safest kind in all situations.

Basically, I think people are just telling you that driving/dark places are only as unsafe as you make them, barring random incidents out of your control. It sounds like you are pretty sensible and aware to me, and as long as you continue being like that, you remove any reasonable doubt as to your safety. But once you are in the realms of chance, then anything can happen. The scary streets/automobiles is pretty much moot. Both have dangers, but do all you can to reduce them and you are going to give yourself the best chance.
posted by Brockles at 7:12 PM on April 21, 2008

Bluefrog's CDC numbers match onto my anecdotal experience. Car accidents are more common, and are spread much more evenly across the population; violent crimes are rarer, and are socially and geographically concentrated.

But more than national averages, you need to think about your personal risk. Meaning, like randomstriker points out, that drinking (even moderately) and then driving puts you in a very different category than "all women drivers." Similarly, what is worrying your mother is that by driving through bad neighborhoods, you are increasing your chances of becoming a crime victim.

Of course, by how much is a very different question. Crime is not distributed equally across social groups, genders, or geography. A fair number of women are killed each year... but many of those are killed by acquaintances or family members. You are asking about a subset of a subset -- killings by strangers, when the victim is driving -- which is more than zero, but a lot less than the total numbers of women killed. Even looking at figures for killings of women in the neighborhoods through which you are driving won't answer your question -- you are looking for the very small subset of those in which the victim comes from a demographically very different area.

Lastly, although highways may "feel" more dangerous (because the speeds are higher and they are quite different than the local roads on which you spend more of your time), they are actually much safer:

Contrary to public perception, secondary roads are more dangerous than interstates. In fact, a study by Ford Motor Company revealed that secondary roads have an accident rate nearly twice as high and a fatality rate more than double that of interstate highways. (source)

Highways have to conform to standardized designs, which are quite safe, and have many fewer "interactions" with oncoming and cross-turning vehicles. Secondary roads have whatever random design elements were built at various times, lots of cross traffic and oncoming cars, pedestrians, animals, bicyclists, and other hazards, plus the speeds are often almost the same as on urban highways.
posted by Forktine at 7:26 PM on April 21, 2008

The majority of accidents happen below 40 miles an hour. However, fatal accidents are probably more evenly spread. Still, the increase in probability of fatality when driving fast should be slightly offset by reduced exposure time.

The real question is are highways more likely to cause fatal accidents than the likelihood of being carjacked plus fatal accident likelihood on back streets. Bearing in mind you are around clubs, and bars, and drunks may not be driving the speed limit.

I'd go with the highway, but alertness, personal comfort and confidence are a big factor in safety.
posted by BrotherCaine at 3:11 AM on April 22, 2008

The general statistic of crime per capita is misleadingly low in this case. What you need is what is the rate of crimes against young women traveling alone in sketchy neighborhoods in a crime laden city.

Also, I know many people who've had car wreck who are shaken, but okay. Crime victims deal with both the physical injury and the mental trauma. That mental trauma isn't trivial. If you are comparing highway accidents to crime victimization, then you need to factor this into your equation.

Here is the real answer. Your parents love you and see you engaging in a high risk behavior. Why not take their advice and commit to consistently figuring out a carpool? Sometimes even good parents are a huge PITA, but sometimes they have some reasonable advice.

(Disclaimer: years ago I worked at a counseling center for victims of violent crimes. That experience shapes my opinion.)
posted by 26.2 at 8:28 AM on April 22, 2008

I'm kind of like you, sixcolors, in that I'm terrified of the Interstate but don't really mind driving through sketchy areas. Well, I take that back--I still get nervous in sketchy areas, but my worries there don't compare in the least to my worries on the merge ramp. :)

I think everyone's answers are interesting, so I just wanted to chime in with two caveats:

1) 26.2, it's true that many car wreck survivors don't have mental trauma. But some do--especially highway wreck survivors. Unfortunately, I'm one of them: after being in a really bad wreck (crashed into the concrete median around 60 MPH!), I have a huge fear of the Interstate. I had initial Interstate worries before, but now it's a full-blown phobia. You'd think I'd be over my fear, but...

2) My college is smack-dab in a sketchy area. My friends and I went to Wendys for a late-night drive-thru during freshman year and... it was a very, very scary experience. That said, as long as I keep my wits about me and lock my doors, I don't feel that bad just driving on the main road.

I agree with peoples' ideas to carpool on the back roads. It seems like a really good compromise in this sitaution--especially if you would have driven yourself anyway!
posted by ElectricBlue at 8:48 AM on April 22, 2008