If you are on OS X, you should also have Python in /usr/bin:
$ which -a python
/usr/local/bin/python
/usr/bin/python
If you are using brew, the first python should be a symlink:
$ ls -hl $(which python)
lrwxr-xr-x  1 user  admin    34B Jun 23 16:53 /usr/local/bin/python -> ../Cellar/python/2.7.11/bin/python
If you are not using brew, you will have to explain to us how you installed a second version of python.
You should also have at least two site-packages:
$ find /usr -name 'site-packages'
/usr/local/Cellar/python/2.7.11/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.7/lib/python2.7/site-packages
/usr/local/lib/python2.7/site-packages
If you installed python using brew, you should also have pip:
$ which pip
/usr/local/bin/pip
You should probably upgrade that to the latest pip:
$ pip install --upgrade pip
It should be safe to install python packages using /usr/local/bin/pip because they will be installed in /usr/local/lib/python2.7/site-packages. The /usr/local path is specifically for local software. Also, brew installs its files to /usr/local, so if you are using brew, you are already installing files there.
I am not sure why some folks say not to install any packages globally. I have never seen a reference that explained why this was a bad idea. If multiple users need the same package, it makes more sense to install it globally.
When I first started using virtualenv, it did not always work the way I expected it to. I had a machine with multiple users that needed requests, and because of problems with virtualenv, I wound up installing it globally using pip.
Both virtualenv and pip have improved a lot since I first started using them and I can see how using them can prevent some problems. If you are developing new software that needs the latest version of a package, virtualenv allows you to install the package without affecting the rest of the system. However, I still do not see why it is a bad idea to install packages globally.