The Travel Safety Paradox

A while back on a Reddit travel forum, a commenter asked for the worst piece of travel advice people had ever received. I didn’t answer it directly, but I wrote that you should never listen to someone’s safety advice about a destination unless they have been there.

I think this is a good rule of thumb. For some reason, people like to warn others from traveling to places they have never been, using the threat of crime as a deterrent. 

I have been to many places that people have warned me not to go to, including Brazil, Costa Rica, Mexico, and South Africa. I have had incredible experiences in these places, and keeping my eyes open, I have never run into any trouble. 

In fact, in all of my travels, the place I feel least safe visiting is Washington, D.C. 

I know my experiences in these foreign countries are not reflective of the safety of the country as a whole. I stay in nice accommodations in tourist areas, and these aren’t representative of the country at large. But they are representative of what a tourist would experience, and it would seem misguided to warn someone off of a destination because of the crime that occurs in areas outside of where they are going. 

After all, the U.S. is a big country with very different regions. It would be a mistake to tell someone not to visit Boulder, CO, because of the crime that occurs in Atlanta, GA. Furthermore, knowing how dangerous many areas of the U.S. are, it’s perplexing to me why the folks who are most outspoken about dangers in foreign countries never warn me away from U.S. destinations. They tend to encourage and invite me to visit these U.S. cities. 

I am planning an international trip right now. I texted a friend to see if he was interested in joining me on this adventure, and he humorously replied, “Watch your back. It’s too early in the year for me to have to avenge anyone.” 

Now, this is a friend I trust with travel matters. But it still reinforces the ingrained narrative about the danger of foreign countries, and it sent me researching, looking at murder rates between the U.S. and other places. Specifically, between our nation’s capital and “violent” countries I have traveled to or plan to visit. 

The most recent homicide rate I see for Washington, D.C. is from 2021. In that year, D.C. had a homicide rate of 32.78 per 100,000 residents. Since that time, homicides have become more frequent. 

In 2023, there were 272 homicides in the District of Columbia. Divided across a population of 712,816, that gives us a homicide rate of about 38 per 100,000 people. 

Comparing against foreign countries isn’t exact, as stats might differ by year and the reliability of data is questionable (in the U.S. as well). But this Wikipedia chart is useful. Only five countries have a higher murder rate than Washington, D.C.: Jamaica, the U.S. Virgin Islands, South Africa, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and Trinidad and Tobago. 

I choose Washington, D.C. as a reference not only because it is the U.S. Capital and a major tourist destination, but because it has personal significance. I lived there for many years and still return frequently for work. I recently read that a wine bar I like to visit is closing down because they were broken into five times last year. No one has ever warned me off of these visits to D.C. though.

This is an imperfect comparison for many reasons, including comparing a city to various countries and cherry-picking which ones at that. I also know that women face more threats than men, though these threats exist in our home country as well. But it still highlights a problem with the way people think about the dangers of travel.

The most common crime I hear people complain about during travel is having their iPhone stolen. To me, this is a nuisance, and not worth avoiding a trip over. You can also lose your phone at home. And having my phone lost in an exotic location sounds relaxing to some extent, while also enhancing the sense of adventure. 

I’m not a psychologist, but I wonder if the tendency to label “other” places as more dangerous is an egotistical manifestation. People like to think of themselves as smart, rational, practical, etc. People believe that the decisions they make are better decisions than others. When people hear about crime that happens in other countries, it reassures them that they are making smart, practical decisions about where they choose to live and visit. The reality of this is questionable.

Crime happens everywhere, and it might happen more here at home than in places we want to label as dangerous. While I am cherry-picking my data for comparison, it is also cherry-picking to compare your home situation with foreign countries. Maybe a foreign country is more dangerous than the gated suburb you live in. But 1) you can also visit a foreign country and find a gated suburb to stay in if that’s your preference, and 2) that speaks more to a personal desire to stay within a comfort zone than it does to legitimate safety concerns. 

There are plenty of reasons not to visit some of the wonderful places that I love, but fear of safety shouldn’t be one of them unless you also decline to visit cities ranging from St. Louis to Chicago to New Orleans. 

I have two flights booked in the next couple of months. One a work trip to Washington, D.C., and one a surf trip to El Salvador, which has a homicide rate of 8 per 100,000 residents. 

One of these trips people will warn me against, and I will respond with a grin, a shoulder shrug, and play into the persona of a rugged, death-defying adventurer.

The other trip gives me pause, and I will watch my back accordingly.