To summarize the entire article in one sentence: "Ride sharing is risky, but we decline to evaluate whether it's more or less risky than cabs."<p>This article misses an opportunity to explore the crime rate in Mexican cabs with the crime rate in Mexican ride-shares, and instead beats the same dead horse as every other "scary ride sharing headline to get people to click for ad revenue" writeup over the past few years.<p>Bad things happen. If you don't present how likely they are to happen — relative to a contextually appropriate baseline figure — when you report about them, you're just using scare tactics to drum up views to pay your bills.<p>"Uber rider is hit by lightning. Are ride-shares safe?" is an example of how NOT to report a lightning strike of a rideshare passenger, yet I guarantee you that's what every crappy press agency in the world will lead with given the chance.<p>"Passenger in car-for-hire hit by lightning." is much more accurate, contains no less relevant information — lightning doesn't care if it's Uber or Lyft or a Taxi — and is vastly less interesting for people to click on.<p>Don't get suckered in by these articles.