DontHaveAUsername
I think I might be in the minority but they have a situation where a person doing X activity is more likely to be attacked than a person not doing X activity, and the police know that no matter how many times they warn criminals not to attack people doing X activity the criminals will still persist in doing it, I could understand the police then advising people not to do X activity.
Which is all perfectly pragmatic. Problem with these sorts of things is that some people think there is a corollory to advising people not to do X that is along the lines of 'if you do do X and something happens then you are to blame for the actions of the criminal'. ie, advising not to do X is automatically one and the same as "victim-blaming". When of course there is no such corollary. Sometimes an individual person saying the former will additionally think the latter, sometimes they won't. But the former isn't the latter.
But are women walking home alone really more prone to being attacked than women in a group? I thought most of the time it was done by someone you know in a place you're familiar/comfortable with, like a partner raping or abusing you, not some random thing in a street.
The woman alone may be more at risk from a certain kind of attacker. Not the domestic abuser perhaps, but that is a different category of these crimes.