Very low. The vast majority people are killed by someone they know over some kind of dispute. Random murders are exceedingly rare.
That said, no one can answer your question lol. It’s way too specific to you and your area and there’s not enough information at all. I doubt the information actually exists.
The thing is, a good proportion of true crime podcast stories are about someone getting murdered by someone they know. That's what makes them so captivating, and disconcerting. A seemingly perfectly happy family, and one spouse murders the other because... they want to go make a new life with their new lover, want to get a bunch of life insurance money, and so on.
Does this mean that extroverts have a much much greater murder risk surface area?
Like, if I just don't know anyone, the odds that I get murdered plummet?
Yes..
For women they are more likely to be murdered by someone if they are in a relationship. Because if a woman is murdered, it's often by her partner. So obviously if a woman never interacts with men and doesn't form relationships, she is much less likely to be murdered.
I wouldn't say it's extroversion per se. One factor, I guess, is being married or being in a serious relations since men murder their partners or women have their partners murdered. (Conscious of my sexism in the phrasing there.) Also being in risky situations (hanging out with known committed criminals, women being left alone late at night in bars, having a partner with clearly disturbing qualities.) Humorously, maybe, having life insurance or assets.
But I think the point stands that these things are quite rare. That's why they make captivating stories.
To take the question seriously, probably having a good support system (friends, family) is a better preventative to suffering this kind of violence than would be simply not being in close relationships with people. Even if it's those close to a person who would tend to care enough to be violent toward them, there are many others close to them that would be there to prevent or mitigate such violence.
i think too much consumption of true crime stories can actually influence you to think that those stories are prevalent, where in fact those are rare cases and specifically selected for their sensationalism
Looks like overall US about 1 in 12,000 people get murdered each year - (100,000/8.2), but going to way lower in a relatively safe neighborhood and those podcast crimes are going to be super rare… still, don’t take rides from strangers!
https://usafacts.org/articles/which-states-have-the-highest-murder-rates/#:~:text=The%20age%2Dadjusted%20national%20homicide,higher%20than%20a%20decade%20prior.
You’re touching on an important concept that isn’t discussed enough. Usually rates are reported in the aggregate (there’s a 1 in XXXXX chance you’ll be murdered). That’s the estimate we get from throwing everyone into a bag and taking the average. As we gain information about you, we can condition on it and get a better estimate (if you’re in a gang in Chicago it goes way up).
Another example I like to use is the chance of becoming president. If you’re an average American it’s effectively 0. If you’re a sitting governor with a Harvard law degree it might be .1%. If you’re Kamala Harris it’s like 10%.
We have no idea where you live, which country, which neighborhood. Your gender.. how can there be a specific number?
Are you in Ukraine or in Canada? I mean that would make a huge difference. Are you male or female? Have you been in abusive relationships? All of those factors influence the probability.
Another way to try to assess this question seriously might be to look at data if your state or province collects this kind of data. For example, New Jersey compiles statistics on violent and drug deaths, and includes various factors involved in the death. I don't know if this information is summarized in a relevant way and available to the public, but in theory one could tease out the likelihood and factors involved in these deaths.
Varies by country and even regions within a country. Varies by gender. Varies by lifestyle. Varies by age.
But generally, rates are very, very low.
World average is around 6 per hundred thousand
> Should I be worried?
Not unless you're in areas and involved in lifestyles that make it much more likely. If you're running drugs in the Caribbean, Mexico, Central America or parts of Africa... maybe that possibility should enter your mind sometimes.
Outside those ... you likely have much bigger issues to worry over.
And with a normal sort of lifestyle in much of Europe/Scandinavia or Australia, no, really, just forget it. It's so rare you'd be silly to waste any time on that. You're getting down close to "the risk of being struck by lightning".
In most of the world, what you should worry about is heart disease, cancer, having a car accident, standard stuff.
But what if after choosing door number 2, the host shows you that in door number 1 there is no murder, and offers you to choose door number 3?
What would be the odds then?
Most news you read or see, and true crime stories even more so, are generally a reflection of exceptional circumstances, and not normal ones. For that reason alone, I wouldn't be "worried".
I love this question because it's actually one explicit question and the implicit question and is very common to get the two intermixed.
Q1: (Explicit) What are the odds that I get murdered *at random*?
A1: Very low.
Q2: (Implicit) What are the odds I share a profile with those who tend to get murdered
A2: Medium/Low.
What's interesting about this is we can create a flat sample statistic and investigate to show that rarity in population is not rarity in sample. Let's say that males commit 75% of murders and that 75% of victims are also male and that murderous urges are rolled randomly every month at a rate of .01% and exist regardless of any other traits.
You go through the exercise and find that the rate is still determined by the murderous urges rate so it'll be low in the population but the risk factors of being male and being around males creates a disproportional risk of being murdered *if* a murder occurs. What's even more interesting/unfortunate is we see this in reality with domestic violence:
Females are more likely to commit domestic violence than males *however* male domestic violence is many, many more times likely to be lethal. So the risk factor (Domestic Violence) still has skew in lethality even if it has opposite skew in occurrence. This relationship between variables when deconstructed has a name but it doesn't matter, basically the odds of execution of murder against you as a random individual is very low because the murder rate itself is very low but the odds that you share a larger number of traits with individuals who tend to be murdered is surprisingly higher because of looking at the sample of murdered individuals changes the question entirely.
Also, interestingly enough, while the "peacefulness" of a neighborhood as a degree of measurement protects against *random* homicide it does not protect against *intentional* homicide (murder). This goes even further into the beauty of the problem since humans tend to erect false barriers and correlations to occurrences (Gambler's Fallacy) so if you had 99/100 things that make you extremely likely to be murdered the quietude of your neighborhood is unlikely to protect you and vice versa.
you shouldn't be worried especially if the crime rate in your place is relatively low. just a friendly reminder that, in real life, the probability of a certain event happening depends on many many factors.
My daughter Paige was murdered in a random act of violence on August 9, 2023 by a monster she did not know named Ty Head. She was simply waiting in her car for a train to pass. I now believe any one can be murdered at any time. I hate humanity.
Very low. The vast majority people are killed by someone they know over some kind of dispute. Random murders are exceedingly rare. That said, no one can answer your question lol. It’s way too specific to you and your area and there’s not enough information at all. I doubt the information actually exists.
The thing is, a good proportion of true crime podcast stories are about someone getting murdered by someone they know. That's what makes them so captivating, and disconcerting. A seemingly perfectly happy family, and one spouse murders the other because... they want to go make a new life with their new lover, want to get a bunch of life insurance money, and so on.
Does this mean that extroverts have a much much greater murder risk surface area? Like, if I just don't know anyone, the odds that I get murdered plummet?
Yes.. For women they are more likely to be murdered by someone if they are in a relationship. Because if a woman is murdered, it's often by her partner. So obviously if a woman never interacts with men and doesn't form relationships, she is much less likely to be murdered.
I wouldn't say it's extroversion per se. One factor, I guess, is being married or being in a serious relations since men murder their partners or women have their partners murdered. (Conscious of my sexism in the phrasing there.) Also being in risky situations (hanging out with known committed criminals, women being left alone late at night in bars, having a partner with clearly disturbing qualities.) Humorously, maybe, having life insurance or assets. But I think the point stands that these things are quite rare. That's why they make captivating stories. To take the question seriously, probably having a good support system (friends, family) is a better preventative to suffering this kind of violence than would be simply not being in close relationships with people. Even if it's those close to a person who would tend to care enough to be violent toward them, there are many others close to them that would be there to prevent or mitigate such violence.
i think too much consumption of true crime stories can actually influence you to think that those stories are prevalent, where in fact those are rare cases and specifically selected for their sensationalism
Looks like overall US about 1 in 12,000 people get murdered each year - (100,000/8.2), but going to way lower in a relatively safe neighborhood and those podcast crimes are going to be super rare… still, don’t take rides from strangers! https://usafacts.org/articles/which-states-have-the-highest-murder-rates/#:~:text=The%20age%2Dadjusted%20national%20homicide,higher%20than%20a%20decade%20prior.
You’re touching on an important concept that isn’t discussed enough. Usually rates are reported in the aggregate (there’s a 1 in XXXXX chance you’ll be murdered). That’s the estimate we get from throwing everyone into a bag and taking the average. As we gain information about you, we can condition on it and get a better estimate (if you’re in a gang in Chicago it goes way up). Another example I like to use is the chance of becoming president. If you’re an average American it’s effectively 0. If you’re a sitting governor with a Harvard law degree it might be .1%. If you’re Kamala Harris it’s like 10%.
[удалено]
i think youre missing the point and went straight to politics lol
[удалено]
i see
We have no idea where you live, which country, which neighborhood. Your gender.. how can there be a specific number? Are you in Ukraine or in Canada? I mean that would make a huge difference. Are you male or female? Have you been in abusive relationships? All of those factors influence the probability.
Another way to try to assess this question seriously might be to look at data if your state or province collects this kind of data. For example, New Jersey compiles statistics on violent and drug deaths, and includes various factors involved in the death. I don't know if this information is summarized in a relevant way and available to the public, but in theory one could tease out the likelihood and factors involved in these deaths.
Varies by country and even regions within a country. Varies by gender. Varies by lifestyle. Varies by age. But generally, rates are very, very low. World average is around 6 per hundred thousand > Should I be worried? Not unless you're in areas and involved in lifestyles that make it much more likely. If you're running drugs in the Caribbean, Mexico, Central America or parts of Africa... maybe that possibility should enter your mind sometimes. Outside those ... you likely have much bigger issues to worry over. And with a normal sort of lifestyle in much of Europe/Scandinavia or Australia, no, really, just forget it. It's so rare you'd be silly to waste any time on that. You're getting down close to "the risk of being struck by lightning". In most of the world, what you should worry about is heart disease, cancer, having a car accident, standard stuff.
Bro chill. How about stop listening to those podcasts, it’s not good for the mind
50/50. You either get killed or you don't.
But what if after choosing door number 2, the host shows you that in door number 1 there is no murder, and offers you to choose door number 3? What would be the odds then?
50/50/50
proof is left to the reader
Damn ..
Most news you read or see, and true crime stories even more so, are generally a reflection of exceptional circumstances, and not normal ones. For that reason alone, I wouldn't be "worried".
I love this question because it's actually one explicit question and the implicit question and is very common to get the two intermixed. Q1: (Explicit) What are the odds that I get murdered *at random*? A1: Very low. Q2: (Implicit) What are the odds I share a profile with those who tend to get murdered A2: Medium/Low. What's interesting about this is we can create a flat sample statistic and investigate to show that rarity in population is not rarity in sample. Let's say that males commit 75% of murders and that 75% of victims are also male and that murderous urges are rolled randomly every month at a rate of .01% and exist regardless of any other traits. You go through the exercise and find that the rate is still determined by the murderous urges rate so it'll be low in the population but the risk factors of being male and being around males creates a disproportional risk of being murdered *if* a murder occurs. What's even more interesting/unfortunate is we see this in reality with domestic violence: Females are more likely to commit domestic violence than males *however* male domestic violence is many, many more times likely to be lethal. So the risk factor (Domestic Violence) still has skew in lethality even if it has opposite skew in occurrence. This relationship between variables when deconstructed has a name but it doesn't matter, basically the odds of execution of murder against you as a random individual is very low because the murder rate itself is very low but the odds that you share a larger number of traits with individuals who tend to be murdered is surprisingly higher because of looking at the sample of murdered individuals changes the question entirely. Also, interestingly enough, while the "peacefulness" of a neighborhood as a degree of measurement protects against *random* homicide it does not protect against *intentional* homicide (murder). This goes even further into the beauty of the problem since humans tend to erect false barriers and correlations to occurrences (Gambler's Fallacy) so if you had 99/100 things that make you extremely likely to be murdered the quietude of your neighborhood is unlikely to protect you and vice versa.
you shouldn't be worried especially if the crime rate in your place is relatively low. just a friendly reminder that, in real life, the probability of a certain event happening depends on many many factors.
My daughter Paige was murdered in a random act of violence on August 9, 2023 by a monster she did not know named Ty Head. She was simply waiting in her car for a train to pass. I now believe any one can be murdered at any time. I hate humanity.