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.
In other words, you have no evidence to dispute any part of the graph. You can only speculate, guess, and ask vague questions that go nowhere.
I think my questions are valid when it comes to statistics.
Asking what was being counted as a homicide in the 1700s United States which was primarily a rural population is a fair question. Asking if arrows fired from Indians counted as homicides is a fair question.
I've read a bit about how early Americans and settlers lived and it was dangerous. But the danger in rural areas was in a context little to no police forces present, violent Amerindians tribes/nations that would raid, rob, torture, and rape settlers. There were no phones either.
Lynchings were wide scale and accusations of something like murder were probably strong enough to convict you of that crime, as professional policing and forensic science/investigation was non-existent.
Quote:
It's always been hard to hide a dead body.
I've taken a forensic anthropology course, as well as one on medical-legal death investigation. A dead body in and of itself does not mean a murder took place of course. And in a rural area with a small population its probably easier to conceal a corpse. But I presume the homicide numbers actually reflect corpses discovered.
Quote:
Just as it's hard to conceal the fact that someone whose friends see him every now and then, suddenly isn't around any more. Homicides have always been the most reliable indicator of seious criminal activity. And they are homicides, not missing persons or death from snakebites or old folks in failing health dying in bed.
I think you are emotionally and ideologically invested in that graph. I doubt you would accept a graph showing an increase in global warming from the 1700s to 2013. Then you would ask questions. Which is fine. But you're upset I questioned how the statistics were compiled for this graph.
Liberals like cometclear will likely agree with your graph to the extent they claim "gun nuts" are living in the safest period of U.S. history and don't need guns. Then they'll turn right around and create threads like this claiming the U.S. is living in one of its most dangerous periods ever with guns.
I think both conservatives and liberal start with their own beliefs, and then seek out material that supports their beliefs. And I've yet to meet a person on earth--myself included--that has ever said, "You know... most my beliefs about life are wrong."
Guns do kill.
And the people of the United States are in certain respects, and increasingly morally corrupt people that value only money, material possessions, sexual pleasure, power, and fame.
I don't really buy into this "law abiding" vs "criminal" thing. While it has some truth I think the greater truth is that everyone is prone and capable of committing certain crimes or immorality. A husband under certain pressures can just "snap" one day and go into a place of work and gun down a bunch of people, and then commit "suicide by cops."
It's chilling to realize just how little our rights mean to these leftist fanatics intent on pursuing their agenda, and how blithely they would brush them aside if they had the power to do so.
The founding fathers were right: Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom.
Going thru a background check is chilling? Really? Are the gun nuts really that paranoid, thin skinned or do they all have something in their criminal past that they're nervous will come up? I can't think of any other explanation, truly.
Going thru a background check is chilling? Really? Are the gun nuts really that paranoid, thin skinned or do they all have something in their criminal past that they're nervous will come up? I can't think of any other explanation, truly.
He didn't say the background check was chilling. Stop twisting crap around.
Mass shootings are statistical anomalies, they don't follow any trend whatsoever. You hear about mass shootings quicker and from more sources than you would in the 1900's, but they aren't more common.
You would be wrong. The earlier section of the graph needs to be taken with a grain of salt as the data prior to 1960 is relying on estimates. The government did not always keep reliable records and black homicides were not always counted and the offenders were not always prosecuted.
The vast majority of the decline in homicide is related to black Americans killing less. The white American rate hasn't actually changed much.
Well... all those graphs are fine. The 1990s were more violent in Milwaukee with the BOS robbing other members of "Folks" and battling to control the city's drug market.
Nonetheless, things are not much better than they were in the '90s in Milwaukee.
My experience of "America" on the concretes in Milwaukee and not on a line on a sheet of paper or online graphs (not that I'm against graphs or statistical data), is one that is not all that less violent. And certainly it is worse than when I was a kid in grade school during the '70s and early '80s. My childhood neighborhood is also worse in homicides and crimes than then.
And mass shootings do seem to be more frequent today than they were when I was a small child. Even as a teenager during the mid 80s I rare if ever heard of a mass shooting anywhere in the U.S.
No, observing that plus all the other things that gun-rights-haters always do to restrict innocent people's rights, is chilling. As I said, and you tried to pretend I didn't.
Quote:
I can't think
Finally you made a true statement in regard to your approach to crime control.
It will be interesting to see if this guy has record of mental or violent behavior.
He did, he was at least bi-polar, but may have other mental issues, he was a convicted felon, he also did say, while at the school, that he did not want to hurt anybody, that he just wanted to talk to police. He did fire one shot, most likely as an attempt of suicide by cop. The sheriff said they have to assume he wanted to hurt the kids, but that goes against what he and witnesses said. I dont think he wanted to hurt anybody but himself at this point.
Well... all those graphs are fine. The 1990s were more violent in Milwaukee with the BOS robbing other members of "Folks" and battling to control the city's drug market.
Nonetheless, things are not much better than they were in the '90s in Milwaukee.
My experience of "America" on the concretes in Milwaukee and not on a line on a sheet of paper or online graphs (not that I'm against graphs or statistical data), is one that is not all that less violent. And certainly it is worse than when I was a kid in grade school during the '70s and early '80s. My childhood neighborhood is also worse in homicides and crimes than then.
And mass shootings do seem to be more frequent today than they were when I was a small child. Even as a teenager during the mid 80s I rare if ever heard of a mass shooting anywhere in the U.S.
Did you have access to 24 hr news coverage and the internet back then? You hear about mass shootings from more sources and quicker, but they remain an anomaly.
Your article says he fired six shots at approaching police officers outside the school and hurt nobody. And he was asking for a message to be given to the news media. There's no information at all about his politics.
So any reasonable person would conclude this is a disturbed person making a grab for attention.
But you call him a gun nut going on a shooting spree inside a grade school.
When you misrepresent things the way you did, you only end up hurting the point you're trying to make. Strong points don't need spinning the facts to support them.
Well... all those graphs are fine. The 1990s were more violent in Milwaukee with the BOS robbing other members of "Folks" and battling to control the city's drug market.
Nonetheless, things are not much better than they were in the '90s in Milwaukee.
My experience of "America" on the concretes in Milwaukee and not on a line on a sheet of paper or online graphs (not that I'm against graphs or statistical data), is one that is not all that less violent. And certainly it is worse than when I was a kid in grade school during the '70s and early '80s. My childhood neighborhood is also worse in homicides and crimes than then.
And mass shootings do seem to be more frequent today than they were when I was a small child. Even as a teenager during the mid 80s I rare if ever heard of a mass shooting anywhere in the U.S.
That can be attributed to the "if it bleeds it leads" mentality of new organizations and the 24 hour neews cycle over the last couple of decades.
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.
most my beliefs about life are wrong." 
