Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't debate the war on drugs as a cash cow that targets the impoverished...and that term is used relatively.
But, some honest analysis is in order here. @ 12% of the population....You can state that a greater % of Blacks comprise the homicide rate by demographic. Also, that Black Americans provide a higher % of those living at the poverty line by demographic. The bait of the drug war is a driver of that percentage. But, the overall total of non-Black Americans at the poverty line eclipse the total of Black Americans at the poverty line significantly.
A human life in America does not have more intrinsic value than one in Sudan.
But those nations are in a very different state than the USA. Many are poor with poorly functioning governments and very unstable societies wracked with civil unrest. The basic phenomenon at play here is that poorer nations closer to anarchy will generally exhibit much more violence. So it is a question of controlling for the evolutionary phase of the nation, not one of fundamental morality.
The USA is not one of those nations; we're among the most prosperous and developed nations on Earth. Therefore, when examining social phenomena such as homicide rates and regulations, it makes sense to begin by comparing us with other nations with similar social and economic viability as us and not ones that are on the edge of anarchy and civil war. When you start with a fairer comparison, you more effectively control the variables you're studying and can reach more effective conclusions. This is the essence of science.
It may be tough to find a nation similar enough to America to make any sort of fair comparison. Diversity, politics, population, geography, economy, religion, family values, etc. There are so many many factors.
You did not do well in your statistics class, I take it... This is why the homicide data is normalized per 100,000 people. It's a rate, not an absolute number. Try again.
It seems to me that republicans and math/science/logic don't mix very well
A human life in America does not have more intrinsic value than one in Sudan.
The only quality we are concerned with is intrinsic. Because anything else and you are arguing your own perception of a humans value.
Quote:
But those nations are in a very different state than the USA. Many are poor with poorly functioning governments and very unstable societies wracked with civil unrest. The basic phenomenon at play here is that poorer nations closer to anarchy will generally exhibit much more violence. So it is a question of controlling for the evolutionary phase of the nation, not one of fundamental morality.
Like I mentioned before, you cannot argue humanely in a vacuum. Your premise that nations closer to Anarchy will exhibit much more violence holds true....give me an example of one nation closer to Anarchy that does?
I will give you one... Somalia...(I already did in a previous post)... Somalia alone (Mogadishu not excluded) has less homicide per capita than the US. Also, controlling the "evolutionary phase of the nation" is a dishonest position because it only addresses violence domestically....is the "evolutionary phase" of all other nations now irrelevant because they aren't compromising humans welfare through firearms?
And when you say "controlling the evolutionary phase of the nation"...That really is double speak for Fascism or Authoritarianism because you are delegating the state to this matter.
Quote:
The USA is not one of those nations; we're among the most prosperous and developed nations on Earth. Therefore, when examining social phenomena such as homicide rates and regulations, it makes sense to begin by comparing us with other nations with similar social and economic viability as us and not ones that are on the edge of anarchy and civil war. When you start with a fairer comparison, you more effectively control the variables you're studying and can reach more effective conclusions. This is the essence of science.
But your premise is this...
"We should ban guns because nations of similar social and economic structure have less guns and as a result have lower homicide rates"
This position automatically assumes that if there were a relative amount of firearms in these countries that they would have a relative amount of incidents as the US.
It also ignores that the examples you might use (which will be the typical ones)...
Switzerland
Norway
Finland
Sweden
Don't have the racial and cultural phenomenon we have here as well. So they aren't honest examples. Generally, in police and welfare states... crime is lower. That's not what people should be "evolving" towards, IMO.
In 2007, 82 percent of African-American homicide victims were killed with guns. In 2007, 80 percent of gun deaths among Whites were from suicide.
About 3% of all gun related deaths are accidental. So, in the case of whites, that means ~17% of white victims of guns come from actual homicide(about 1/6th).
On top of that, many more white people are killed by blacks than blacks by whites. If you statistically removed black people from the United States. Whites have about the same gun homicide rate of most of Europe.
Then if you stop looking only at murders by guns, and rather look at total murders. White people are safer in the United States than they are in practically every country in Europe.
Then if you look past murders and compare all crime rates in the United States to that of Europe. Even factoring in black people, the United States has about 1/4th the violent crime rate of Britain, and half the violent crime rate of Canada.
I would bet, if you removed blacks from the statistics, the average white person is probably 1/8th as likely to be the victim of a violent crime in America as they are in Britain. A fourth as likely to be a victim of violent crime than in Sweden, and half as likely to be a victim of violent crime than in France.
This is a very straightforward inquiry. All I want is for someone to give me a well-reasoned and evidenced explanation as to why this chart looks the way it does with respect to the USA.
This compares the United States to other developed nations, which is the appropriate comparison, not to nations that have civil unrest or semi-functional/poorly developed social systems. There are nations that have higher rates of gun violence than we do, including Mexico and Brazil. But if you want to include them, go ahead - still, look at how many nations are to the left on the chart.
As you prepare your answer, note several things:
1. Crime in the USA has been on a downward trend, but even so, you can look at any data source on any website, and you will find clear, unmistakeable evidence that tells you that the USA as a huge statistical outlier in the developed world terms of gun deaths. And we've developed a world-wide reputation for the kinds of gun massacres that occurred yesterday.
2. Notice Switzerland, Finland, and Israel on the chart - they all have relatively widespread gun ownership but much lower homicide rates. They also have much tighter gun control laws than we do.
3. Notice, too, that these are many of the "liberal lifestyle" countries that are oftentimes derided for implementing "socialism."
4. The USA is among the top most heavily armed, if not the most heavily armed, nations on the planet. If more guns are the differentiating factor to make us safer, then we should be among the safest countries on the left-hand side of the chart, along with Switzerland, Finland, Israel, and all of the other nations off to the right with increasing bar sizes.
5. Finally, note that the USA has much more liberal gun control laws than all of these nations.
But let's play devil's advocate and start with the premise that gun control is not the primary differentiating factor that explains this chart. Let's be open to other explanations. What other rational, evidence-based reasons are there as to why this chart looks the way it does? Serious answers are appreciated.
Your answer is actually very simple.
Personal responsibility. Many children are no longer taught responsibility for their actions. Everything is explained away, they're poor, bad upbringing, they can't control theselves so we need to give them birth control instead of teaching them how to keep their pants on, yadda yadda yadda, etc ad nauseam..
Instead of being taught responsibility for their actions, how to control themselves, teaching the boys how to be men, to make the world a better place, we make excuses for bad behavior.
I watched a young lady discipline her child in a store recently, the child decided to throw a tantrum, because the woman didn't buy him something. She very quickly told him to stop, or he would get nothing and they would simply leave. He screamed at her, she popped him on the behind, and left. BUT, the 2 women standing to the other side were loud enough that I heard one say, "She should have just bought him the toy, it was only a few dollars.
Excuse me? Reward the child for bad behavior? And we wonder why these shootings happens. MAYBE, if the children are taught respect for others, and responsibility for their actions, MANY of these killings would not happen.
MEXICO CITY – A record 69 people were murdered across Mexico on Saturday, making it the deadliest day since President Felipe Calderon took office just over three years ago, the El Universal newspaper reported.
and
Quote:
Mexico registered 27,199 murders in 2011, or 24 per 100,000 people, three times the murder rate since President Felipe Calderón took office in December 2006, the National Institute of Statistics and Geography, or INEGI, said Monday.
This is another chart...Updated state-by-state national murder rate map for 2010
I think there are many more variables involved. Upper Midwest where there are lots of hunters, and I'll assume gun enthusiasts, has less per capita murders than many other states. To just blame incidents like this recent horrific example and suggest gun control is the solution is short sighted imo
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
said Monday.
