Dr. John Lott coauthored an op-ed in Australia with an Australian federal senator, Malcolm Roberts.
.
Australia faces a serious crime problem. Many Australians believe our crime rate is low compared with countries like the United States, yet sadly that myth stems from misunderstanding statistics about how crime is measured.
.
Media coverage reinforces the myth and the real questions are why that misunderstanding persists and what can be done about it.
.
Consider a simple example. The Australian Bureau of Statistics reportsthat only about 19 per cent of rapes and sexual assaults are reported to police, while in the United States about 45 per cent are reported. Obviously, simply comparing reported crimes therefore dramatically understates the extent of the problem in Australia.
.
Both countries try to address this gap using large-scale surveys that estimate total crime, not just crimes reported to police. The Australian Bureau of Statistics runs such a survey annually. In the United States, the Bureau of Justice Statistics conducts the National Crime Victimisation Survey, which surveys about 240,000 people each year.
.
When we compare these broader estimates, Australia’s rape and sexual assault rate is roughly three times higher than that of the United States. Australia’s assault rate is about twice as high, and its burglary rate is about 2.5 times higher. Robbery is the only category where the two countries report similar rates.
.
Whether people report crimes depends a lot on whether people think the criminals will be caught and punished.
.
Although, key methodological differences still affect these comparisons. Australian data count the proportion of people or households victimised at least once during the year, while US data count the total number of crimes. If someone in Australia is robbed twice in a year, the survey records only one victimisation. In the US, the survey counts two. This difference means the figures still understate how much higher Australia’s crime rates may be.
.
Earlier international comparisons reinforce this pattern. The International Crime Victimisation Survey used consistent definitions and methods across countries. Even in 2000, it found Australia’s violent crime rate (including robbery, sexual incidents, assaults, and threats) was 104 per cent higher than in the United States. Robbery was 150 per cent higher, sexual assaults 167.9 per cent higher, and assaults and threats 72.3 per cent higher.
.
Australia is clearly safer in one area: homicide. Latest data show Australia’s homicide rate at about 2 per 100,000 people in 2024, compared with roughly 4 per 100,000 in the United States in 2025. But homicides make up a tiny share of overall violent crime – less than 0.1 per cent in Australia and about 0.3 per cent in the United States – so they do not reflect most people’s risk of victimisation.
.
In the United States, murders concentrate heavily in very small geographic areas. Just 2 per cent of counties account for about 56 per cent of all murders, and within those counties, roughly two-thirds of killings occur within areas spanning about ten city blocks. Gangs drive most of these murders, and about 90 per cent of offenders already have prior violent criminal records.
.
In contrast, 52 per cent of counties report zero murders, and another 15 per cent report just one.
.
Reducing crime is straightforward: policymakers must raise the risks criminals face. Three ways that can be done are to increase arrest and conviction rates, to lengthen prison sentences and to allow victims to defend themselves.
.
Yet the Australian Bureau of Statistics does not collect data on arrest or conviction rates for specific crime types. This glaring omission prevents direct comparisons with the United States.
.
Another major difference separates the two countries. In practice, Australians cannot use guns for self-defence. In the United States, in contrast, people use guns defensively far more often – roughly five times more frequently to stop crimes than criminals use guns to commit them.
.
Those who benefit most from owning guns are often the most vulnerable – people who are physically weaker, such as women and the elderly, and those who face the highest risks of violent crime. In the United States, that risk falls disproportionately on poorer Black residents in high-crime urban areas.
.
The National Crime Victimisation Survey provides detailed breakdowns that highlight these patterns, unlike the more limited data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics. In most cases, a man commits the crime, and when a man attacks a woman, the strength disparity is typically greater than when a man attacks another man. A firearm can significantly offset that imbalance and increase a woman’s ability to defend herself.
.
Additionally, research shows that women who respond passively face much higher risks. Women who do not resist are about 2.4 times more likely to suffer serious injury than those who defend themselves with a gun.
.
The issue goes beyond guns. Outside of Western Australia, Australian law prohibits people from carrying pepper spray or mace for protection. It also bars individuals from carrying knives for self-defence – and in any case, knives offer limited help to women, since using one requires close contact, where a male attacker can more easily overpower them.
.
Australians cannot address crime effectively if they underestimate its scale or ignore how measurement differences distort comparisons. Policymakers should focus on raising the risks to criminals – through higher arrest and conviction rates – and on giving law-abiding citizens more ability to protect themselves.
.
Until Australia confronts these realities, it will continue to misdiagnose the problem and fall short on solutions. Australian lives will continue to be endangered more so than in the USA.
.
Australian and American data point to the solution needed to reduce Australian crime rates and improve Australians’ safety.
.
Senator Malcolm Roberts represents Queensland state in Australia’s Federal Parliament. He has been elected in three successive elections: 2016, 2019, 2025
Dr. John R. Lott, Jr. is an economist and a world-recognised expert on crime. He is president of the Crime Prevention Research Center in the United States. During the Trump administration, he served as the Senior Advisor for Research and Statistics in the Office of Justice Programs and then the Office of Legal Policy in the US Department of Justice. Lott has held research or teaching positions at various academic institutions, including the University of Chicago, Yale University, the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, Stanford University, UCLA, and Rice University. He was the chief economist at the United States Sentencing Commission during 1988-1989. He holds a Ph.D. in economics from UCLA.
0 Comments