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.
Interesting to note that women, people of color and the elderly were more likely to believe that gun crime was up than men, younger adults or white people.
So basically what I read that to state is that men, younger adults and white people tend to be better informed about what's really going on in our country, at least as it pertains to gun violence.
Why are Women, people of color and the elderly so wrong on their perception of gun violence in this country?
Women, people of color, and the elderly wrong about the perception of gun violence? Well, consider this. Who is the most likely to be victims of gun violence? People of color, especially Blacks. Perhaps it's because there are many elderly people who live in rough areas, as well as Blacks. As for the women, I don't know why.
well considering that there has been a huge drop in gun violence since the ending of the Assault weapons ban, you should be very happy with the current gun law in this country.
more guns has in fact equaled less death...
Yah right. Cause in the UK and Australia less guns has equaled less deaths. Only a few dozen in the UK all last year. But according to you there should be tons more.
Perception is sometimes based on reality. Other times it is personal. Someone said that people of color are on the wrong end of the perception. Well, this is what I see. Yes, murder rates might be down nationwide. However, if you're Black and you live in the Lower 9th Ward of New Orleans, South L.A., Southside of Chicago, Detroit, or other rough areas, it isn't going to matter what the national trends say. What is going to matter most to you is what you are seeing in your neck of the woods. What is going to matter most to you is what is happening to you. It is mostly Black men on the streets dying from getting murdered. If you live in a suburban area where crime is a rarity, then of course your perception might be shaped differently.
Yah right. Cause in the UK and Australia less guns has equaled less deaths. Only a few dozen in the UK all last year. But according to you there should be tons more.
you can say Yah right all you want. but the facts are in fact the facts. in the last 10 years, Americans have armed up and at the same time, deaths by firearm, and even crime committed where a firearm was used, but no one died, have declined.
The start of the drop coincides with the expiration of the 1990s assault weapons ban.
your link is not to death it is to firearm related death. (those people who were murdered by other means are equally offended at being dead as those killed by firearm I can assure you).
in fact hand guns were banned in Britan in 1997. The year before there were 679 murders, the next year (year of ban) there were 739 murders. Murders rose to 1047 in 2003. Since then there has been a steep decline with 550 last year.
There is no coorilation between number of guns and murder rate in England.
Yah right. Cause in the UK and Australia less guns has equaled less deaths. Only a few dozen in the UK all last year. But according to you there should be tons more.
you can say Yah right all you want. but the facts are in fact the facts. in the last 10 years, Americans have armed up and at the same time, deaths by firearm, and even crime committed where a firearm was used, but no one died, have declined.
The start of the drop coincides with the expiration of the 1990s assault weapons ban.
your link is not to death it is to firearm related death. (those people who were murdered by other means are equally offended at being dead as those killed by firearm I can assure you).
in fact hand guns were banned in Britan in 1997. The year before there were 679 murders, the next year (year of ban) there were 739 murders. Murders rose to 1047 in 2003. Since then there has been a steep decline with 550 last year.
There is no coorilation between number of guns and murder rate in England.
Wrong. There is a correlation. How can you have gun deaths without a gun?
"Gun-related death rates in the United States are eight times higher than they are in countries that are economically and politically similar to it; however, most countries similar to the United States have a more secure social network. Higher gun-related death rates can be found in developing countries and countries with political instability.[29][33][34] However, developed countries with strict gun laws have essentially eliminated gun violence."
*snip*
Why are Women, people of color and the elderly so wrong on their perception of gun violence in this country?
Part of it could be the threat of violence as it pertains to what they've seen, heard, been told:
Women:
I think women, more so than young men, tend to be more aware of their fragility. There's this threat of the strange man in the bushes jumping out to rape us, or the guy waiting near our car to mug/rape/murder/carjack us. We're often told not to walk by ourselves at night, or walk by ourselves in broad daylight in certain neighborhoods, or walk by ourselves in the parking garage, or that we should leave with a buddy at the end of work or travel in groups. From a young age, women are, in many ways, taught to be scared, and it persists throughout our adult lives as well. Because guns are often used in violent crimes, and because we often hear about violent crimes on the news all the time and keep the information in the back of our minds, I think it makes sense that a lot of women would have the wrong perception.
Elderly:
Aren't the old days always better? I think almost every elderly person I know would say they thought gun crime was up. And compared to fifty years ago, gun crime probably is up. But additionally, it's the sensationalist aspect of the news, nowadays. You live in one state, but can probably turn on the news and hear about horrible things that happened three states over. The news makes it sound like everyone is surrounded by violence at all times. Additionally, we pay much closer attention to the lives of assailants (like James Holmes, for instance) - we dissect everything about them, and we dissect everything about their crime, which means we hear about the violence over and over. I really, really think that most news today does a disservice to the public. I do appreciate things like Amber Alerts, and news when something major happens (like bombings), but the focus we put on the assailants, and the focus we put on violence is a negative, in my opinion. I actually avoid most news services because of this, and try to cherry pick on the Internet (I also really like the magazine, The Week).
People of Color:
I'm not sure about this, but I think because of white flight a lot of suburban areas became more white, and a lot of urban areas housed people of color. Because a lot of crime also happens in urban areas, it could be that people in those areas have a skewed view of gun violence. I'd be interested to know what the numbers would be if, instead of focusing on gender, race, or age, they focused on geographical location. I'd bet that people in urban centers generally thought gun violence was up compared to those who lived in suburban or rural areas. Part of it may also have to do with assumptions and stereotypes. I remember back in school hearing that a study was done about alcoholism amongst different racial groups. Young white men were the demographic who drank the most, and actually, Native Americans were near the bottom of the pack amongst all age groups. But surprisingly, when surveyed, Native Americans themselves thought they had a huge problem within their community. It had just become a pervasive stereotype that Native Americans get drunk, that they started to believe it themselves (although researchers found that most examples by a tribe tended to only point towards one or two individuals). It could be such a pervasive stereotype that people of color are involved in gangs, drugs, etc., that it's assumed among people of color that gun violence is up.
Part of it could be the threat of violence as it pertains to what they've seen, heard, been told:
Women:
I think women, more so than young men, tend to be more aware of their fragility. There's this threat of the strange man in the bushes jumping out to rape us, or the guy waiting near our car to mug/rape/murder/carjack us. We're often told not to walk by ourselves at night, or walk by ourselves in broad daylight in certain neighborhoods, or walk by ourselves in the parking garage, or that we should leave with a buddy at the end of work or travel in groups. From a young age, women are, in many ways, taught to be scared, and it persists throughout our adult lives as well. Because guns are often used in violent crimes, and because we often hear about violent crimes on the news all the time and keep the information in the back of our minds, I think it makes sense that a lot of women would have the wrong perception.
Elderly:
Aren't the old days always better? I think almost every elderly person I know would say they thought gun crime was up. And compared to fifty years ago, gun crime probably is up. But additionally, it's the sensationalist aspect of the news, nowadays. You live in one state, but can probably turn on the news and hear about horrible things that happened three states over. The news makes it sound like everyone is surrounded by violence at all times. Additionally, we pay much closer attention to the lives of assailants (like James Holmes, for instance) - we dissect everything about them, and we dissect everything about their crime, which means we hear about the violence over and over. I really, really think that most news today does a disservice to the public. I do appreciate things like Amber Alerts, and news when something major happens (like bombings), but the focus we put on the assailants, and the focus we put on violence is a negative, in my opinion. I actually avoid most news services because of this, and try to cherry pick on the Internet (I also really like the magazine, The Week).
People of Color:
I'm not sure about this, but I think because of white flight a lot of suburban areas became more white, and a lot of urban areas housed people of color. Because a lot of crime also happens in urban areas, it could be that people in those areas have a skewed view of gun violence. I'd be interested to know what the numbers would be if, instead of focusing on gender, race, or age, they focused on geographical location. I'd bet that people in urban centers generally thought gun violence was up compared to those who lived in suburban or rural areas. Part of it may also have to do with assumptions and stereotypes. I remember back in school hearing that a study was done about alcoholism amongst different racial groups. Young white men were the demographic who drank the most, and actually, Native Americans were near the bottom of the pack amongst all age groups. But surprisingly, when surveyed, Native Americans themselves thought they had a huge problem within their community. It had just become a pervasive stereotype that Native Americans get drunk, that they started to believe it themselves (although researchers found that most examples by a tribe tended to only point towards one or two individuals). It could be such a pervasive stereotype that people of color are involved in gangs, drugs, etc., that it's assumed among people of color that gun violence is up.
This is mostly just me "thinking out loud."
Interesting thoughts. Much more pertinent to the thread than small brains rambling about the UK.
My wife as recently expressed interest in getting a handgun, training, and perhaps even a concealed license, so when I red this article, I was currious why she felt that way. I thought it had to do with wanting to protect our young children.
Our country is like no other country on earth, past or present. There are many differences between the United States and other developed nations, not just guns.
My question is this. If someone believes that the rights our Constitution guarantees are flawed, why don't they move to a country that has a structure more in line with their way of thinking? This isn't a "go live in France if you don't like it" comment; this is a genuine question to those who think that there are that many things that other countries do better than we do.
Our founders had amazing foresight, and put a lot of thought into our Constitution, and in particular, the Bill of Rights. How can someone claim that they had it wrong about what they considered to be second only to free speech, but right about everything else?
These rights which are guaranteed by those amendments aren't stand-alone. They're intertwined. Collectively, they ensure that the government won't turn on its citizenry and subject them to tyranny. The backbone of this ingenious system of defense against a government that would do such things is the right to keep and bear arms. Without it, all the other rights are subject to forfeiture, either voluntarily or by force.
So again, I ask, if you honestly believe that some other country is so much better than the United States, based primarily on their system of government, which might allow for such things as gun bans, socialized medicine, or whatever your primary interests are, why are you still here? Why are you trying to change this country, which was designed specifically to be different than the others, into something that it wasn't meant to be? If there's another place that you feel would suit you better, why aren't you there?
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.
I think almost every elderly person I know would say they thought gun crime was up. And compared to fifty years ago, gun crime probably is up. But additionally, it's the sensationalist aspect of the news, nowadays. You live in one state, but can probably turn on the news and hear about horrible things that happened three states over. The news makes it sound like everyone is surrounded by violence at all times. Additionally, we pay much closer attention to the lives of assailants (like James Holmes, for instance) - we dissect everything about them, and we dissect everything about their crime, which means we hear about the violence over and over. I really, really think that most news today does a disservice to the public. I do appreciate things like Amber Alerts, and news when something major happens (like bombings), but the focus we put on the assailants, and the focus we put on violence is a negative, in my opinion. I actually avoid most news services because of this, and try to cherry pick on the Internet (I also really like the magazine, The Week).
