But the people work both ways. There is nobody around to *prevent* sick stuff in the country either. I am actually reluctant to embrace this theory, since my ambition is to get someplace as depopulated as possible, but....
Dana On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 09:56:11 -0600, G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'd say no, for the same reason: there are simply more people in a city, and > thus a better chance of "sick" crimes. In fact, I'd argue that these rural > sick crimes stick out so much primarily because of their rarity. > > We're probly arguing relative semantics here anyway though. Bottom line is > there are sick, sick people all over this planet. > > > > > > Anyway, I wonder what the per capita crime rates are between the two. > > That being said I wonder where the sicker crimes happen? Sure, in the > > city you may be more likely to have your wallet or car stolen, but > > what about sick stuff? Maybe you're more likely to have that happen > > to you in the country. > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Silver Sponsor - CFDynamics http://www.cfdynamics.com Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:140757 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
