Besides knowing the city, society, and what's safe and what isn't, there are various safety statistics, such as
homicide rate.
Singapore has the world's lowest homicide rate, excluding a handful of countries with tiny populations ranging from ~1k to ~100k, like Vatican City and Monaco. Japan is #2.
Although I haven't spent enough time in Singapore to know the full extent of it, I don't believe the freedom of speech issues in Singapore are that bad. It seems like the idea behind it is to prevent public unrest. Here's what
Wikipedia says:
The government has restricted
freedom of speech and
freedom of the press and has limited other
civil and political rights.
[18] The right to freedom of speech and association guaranteed by
Article 14(1) of the Constitution of Singapore is restricted by the subsequent subsection (2) of the same Article.
The only place in Singapore where outdoor public assemblies do not require police permits (for citizens) is at the
Speakers' Corner which is loosely modelled on
Hyde Park, London. However, foreigners still require a permit to speak at the park, and one must still register one's personal details with the National Parks Board online before speaking or protesting at the Speakers' corner, and there are also many
surveillance cameras in the park, a situation that some Singaporeans and Singaporean MPs have commented on.
[19][20]
Police permits are also not granted to events that are deemed to have a "significant risk of public disorder" and those that could "incite feelings of hostility between different racial and religious groups" in Singapore.
[21]
According to Amnesty International, laws were tightened in 2010 to limit the freedom of expression and assembly, and to stifle critics and activists. Lawsuits were taken out by the authorities against dissidents. Government critics and human rights defenders nevertheless held public gatherings.
[22]
Censorship of political and racially or religiously sensitive content is also extensive, and is imposed in the form of stringent media regulations and criminal laws,
[23] and indirect approaches through
OB markers on local journalists and withdrawal of public arts funding.
[24] Press freedom has been curtailed over the years through various national security laws, such as the
Internal Security Act, the
Sedition Act and the Official Secrets Act.
[25] Government pressure to conform has resulted in the practice of
self-censorship by journalists.
It seems to me that, just like everything else the SG government does, the intentions are good in wanting to protect public peace. I think an argument can be made for banning racism, and limiting freedom of speech in cases where it is designed to cause public unrest. A lot of the COVID-19 misinformation, such as the 5G and Bill Gates conspiracy theories, are not good for society, and are now also being banned from social media.
However, it's an extremely dangerous thing. As long as the Singaporean government is doing such a great job, it's not that big of a deal that you can't criticize them, but if that ever changes, it obviously becomes very problematic very quick.
Overall, I'm against limiting (most) freedom of speech, because negative feedback is extremely valuable and should be welcomed, however, I can see how it can be a good thing in certain cases, such as racism and harmful conspiracy theories.
Singapore nor its government are perfect, but to my (limited) knowledge they're the best the world has to offer.