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.
Seems you are distorting with your generalizations.
Moderator cut: link removed, linking to competitor sites is not allowed
The most dangerous spots in America do tend to be over represented by inner cities and inner cities exist down south...
Memphis
Atlanta
New Orleans
Bessemer - Birmingham
Miami
Houston
Baltimore
Nashville
Look at Michigan. 2 cities of Detroit and Flint make up less than 10% of the state's population. You can't in my lifetime find a year where the 2 cities do NOT have a majority of the murders in the state of Michigan. Typically between 60 to 70% of the state's murders.
Pick any state...the odds are you can pull of similar stats.
Your post is oxymoronic. You claim one thing then provide a qualifier that refutes it.
The gun problem currently making the news is not the inner-city gang shootings. How will the "publicly perceived" gun problem be solved if you eliminate that portion nobody shives-a-git about, or is even completely unaware of?
You're right, what we really need to do is to get rid of the media bias that blows some incidents way out of proportion and runs the story 24x7 for week and ignores others. How about they run stories about the 4,900+ defensive firearm uses in the first 204 days of 2015? Of course not, that doesn't support the liberal medias anti gun bias.
204 "mass shootings", when you include any injury at all to the shooter to get to the arbitrary number for "mass".
I seriously question the sanity of many of the people in this country.
As anyone who has ever spent time studying the issue. There is no evidence whatsoever that the ownership of guns has absolutely anything to do with crime rates, especially murders.
We have had higher rates of gun ownership in the past, and had less crime. We have had higher rates of gun ownership in the past and had more crime.
Since the 90's, almost every state has begun issuing concealed-carry permits, and many have even gone to open carry. But crime rates continue to drop.
The states with the most guns don't have the most crimes, and the states with the fewest guns don't have the least crime. Some states with a very permissive gun culture have very low crime-rates(such as Vermont). While other states with very strict gun laws have very high crime rates.
There is no evidence that if you banned guns that crime rates would fall(if anything, there is more evidence to the contrary).
The reason why people want to ban guns, is that they fixate on the few times where a crime wouldn't have been committed had there not been a gun. Because those are easy to see. But its more difficult to see the number of times a crime didn't occur because guns exist.
On top of that, we need to understand that the political elite tends to be terrified of guns. Especially politicians and celebrities. These people aren't surrounded by crime in their expensive, mostly-white, gated communities. They don't see the need in arming themselves to defend themselves going to work, or walking down the street(in many cases, they aren't even allowed to). I mean, Obama and Bush aren't going to be carrying AR-15's into cabinet meetings. The same thing goes for Congress.
Thus to them, they see no practical value in individuals owning guns. And they also don't want to be left defenseless to people who might target them with guns. Can you imagine being a politician or a billionaire walking down a street? I would be absolutely terrified of people with guns.
This control of the media and the political narrative by political elites, is also why the media tends to obsess about planes, but ignores buses. Rich people don't ride buses, they fly in planes. They want a guarantee that their plane won't be hijacked. And they'll pay almost any cost for it.
The truth is, this country is a plutocracy. And a plutocracy has no interest in arming the peasants. That would be a threat to their rule.
[quote=Redshadowz;40550665]I seriously question the sanity of many of the people in this country.
[B]As anyone who has ever spent time studying the issue. There is no evidence whatsoever that the ownership of guns has absolutely anything to do with crime rates, especially murders.
(Boston) — A new study from the American Journal of Public Health shows that U.S. states with higher estimated rates of gun ownership experience a higher number of firearms-related homicides.
The study, led by a Boston University School of Public Health researcher, examines the National Rifle Association’s (NRA) claim that increased gun ownership does not lead to increased gun violence. It is the largest study conducted to date into the correlation between gun ownership and firearms violence, and the first to comprehensively examine the issue since the tragic shooting last December of 20 children and 7 adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut.
The study, covering 30 years (1981-2010) in all 50 states, found a “robust correlation” between estimated levels of gun ownership and actual gun homicides at the state level, even when controlling for factors typically associated with homicides. For each 1 percentage point increase in the prevalence of gun ownership, the state firearm homicide rate increases by 0.9 percent, the authors found.
I seriously question the sanity of many of the people in this country.
[B]As anyone who has ever spent time studying the issue. There is no evidence whatsoever that the ownership of guns has absolutely anything to do with crime rates, especially murders.
(Boston) — A new study from the American Journal of Public Health shows that U.S. states with higher estimated rates of gun ownership experience a higher number of firearms-related homicides.
The study, led by a Boston University School of Public Health researcher, examines the National Rifle Association’s (NRA) claim that increased gun ownership does not lead to increased gun violence. It is the largest study conducted to date into the correlation between gun ownership and firearms violence, and the first to comprehensively examine the issue since the tragic shooting last December of 20 children and 7 adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut.
The study, covering 30 years (1981-2010) in all 50 states, found a “robust correlation” between estimated levels of gun ownership and actual gun homicides at the state level, even when controlling for factors typically associated with homicides. For each 1 percentage point increase in the prevalence of gun ownership, the state firearm homicide rate increases by 0.9 percent, the authors found.
More guns provides for a safer, more civilized population. Consider the homicide rate by firearm of some jurisdictions (CA, NJ, IL, New York City if not NY) which have gun laws which are quite strict. They break out as below juxtaposed with those of TX. Figures are from 2011 FBI, and 2010 U.S. Census, numbers:
CA:
pop. 37,253,956
1220 by all firearms
3.27 per 100,000
NJ:
pop. 8,791,894
269 by all firearms
3.06 per 100,000
IL:
pop. 12,830,632
377 by all firearms
2.94 per 100,000
TX:
pop. 25,145,561
699 by all firearms
2.78 per 100,000
NY:
pop. 19,378,102
445 by all firearms
2.3 per 100,000
New York State outside of NYC has a high firearms ownership rate.
The most prominent item included in TheWiseWino's post never even happened. There was a lot of event prep work and exercise and drill, and not a little foreknowledge.
And the stories don't add up. Web archival dates that don't match the official timeline; the site time stamps from the day before as evidenced by search engine and Wayback don't add up. Robbie Parker's curious extemporaneous entrance at the news conference didn't add up. Noah Pozner even died again in Peshawar:
Legislation introduced in CT that prohibits the release of *any* homicide pictures; snacks busted out on the hood of a cruiser during what looks like a drill; conspicuously aimless milling around at fire house up the street--along with a long line of them directed from the back and rentering into the front; glaring discrepancies in Gene Rosen's stories, curious employee anomalies....
(What kind of Connecticut Yankee enclave has a street named 'Yoga Nanda,' anyway?)
Even if you eliminated all the gang related killings whats left would still be more than 50 times higher than in other First World countries. Give me a break. No other developed country has as much gun violence as the U.S. Thugs killing thugs accounts for HALF of the murders in America. The other half is still orders of magnitude higher than all of Europe. But... who am I. I'm not likely to wind up a victim of a mass shooting. I'm not close to my family and neither I or my spouse are gun owners. We're good. The rest of you make your own luck.
People don't care if black people are getting murdered unless it is by a police officer or a white person.
It is very unfortunate.
They care alot. What are they supposed to do? It is blacks killing blacks. Any suggestions?
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.
