Crime level in Nigeria

[fw12]

[quote="XSi"]

@fw12
I retain my statement. If you have the rights to say Naija is unsafe, i can equally tell you Yankee is unsafe, My points are there for you to cancel out.
As for me, I'm yet to find a completely safe place (devoid of natural disasters at least) so I won't tell you don't go to Nairobi (bla bla bla) what's all that?[/quote]

Well, I gave you another chance to redeem yourself, but once again you refused to answer the question. I take that as a defeat.

As for your point about natural disasters, let's examine it.

[b]Earthquakes[/b]: Only California is susceptible, because it is siting on a fault. That leaves 49 states in America where you could move to.

[b]Tsunami, huricane, avalange, tornado, wild fires[/b], etc: Again, only a few states are prone to these. Unless you have a compelling reason to stay in a particular state, move.

Also, don't forget that buildings in places like California are fortified to withstand earthquakes. Furthermore, if your home is damaged in an eathquake, insurance will pay for it. Also, with new technology, there are early warning systems in place for iminent major disasters.

Natural disasters also exist in Nigeria. Mainly flooding that wash away people's homes and businesses; strong winds that level houses, and strip live electric wires off their poles, leading to live electrocution; hailstorms that severely injure or kill people.

[b]Asteroids[/b]: Without a doubt, the most ominous threat to planet earth are asteroids. It's not a matter of if, but when it will happen. Unfortunately, an asteroid could land anywhere at anytime. So, Nigeria is no safer than any place else on earth. In fact, if a large enough asteroid hits our planet, it could wipe mankind out of existence.

At the end of the day, the major catastrophes that Nigeria has witnessed thus far is man-made, a cankerworm that has eaten deep into the national fiber. The depth of this disease stems from decades of neglect and incompetence and incoherent policies by successive crass governments.

XSi, I respect your opinions, but with all due respect, they're very wrong.

[XSi]

@ Admin and fw12.

I agree with you both to a level. But I will Never, i reapeat EVER concede to this statement.

[b][size=200]Best not go at present unless you know people there who you are close too and can `hide` you![/size] [/b]

The crime level is high quite alright with the government having very little to reduce it, but that does not rule out the country as a place to return to or to visit. This statement in itself holds some kind of beef I don't understand and for someone who stays in Nigeria, it's not true. So if someone can cancel Nigeria out indirectly all because of the crime level, then there has to be a receiver at the other end too.

Full stop.

[Richard Akindele]

[quote="XSi"]@ Admin and fw12.

I agree with you both to a level. But I will Never, i reapeat EVER concede to this statement.

[b][size=200]Best not go at present unless you know people there who you are close too and can `hide` you![/size] [/b]
[/quote]

Everything in this world is relative. In other words, you measure the severity of one thing relative to something else.

So, when people are advised not to visit Nigeria, it's a sound advice, compared to other safer places around the world. Nigeria is not a place to visit for a casual traveller who does not know anybody there. Such traveller, especially of a different race would stick out like a sore thumb, and be a prime target for crime.

I have travelled far and wide (alone), including to Asia and the middle east. Never once have I ever wandered into dangerous territories where I know crime or war is rife. That is the whole idea of having somebody warn you before hand, which is what the USA is doing.

You live in Nigeria. You know your way around. You know what areas to avoid. You probably speak the local language. So, you couldn't possibly know the reality a lone traveller faces.

Perhaps the statement: [b]Best not go at present unless you know people there who you are close too and can `hide` you![/b] is a little extreme, but it's true nevertheless. I think the word [b]hide[/b] can be more appropriately replaced with [b]assist[/b] or [b]chaperon[/b].