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.
You know that people can drive across multiple states with a car loaded with handguns, right?
I really sometimes wonder...are people really not capable of understanding thing like this, or is this just some kind "strategy" to win an argument....ignore the most painfully obvious aspects of the discussion.
By that logic, Maine could have a higher violent crime rate. Virginia would have more cities with high violent crime rates. However, Virginia's worst, Richmond, is safer than New Jersey's worst. Safer than the worst of Connecticut.
It isn't the concept of interstate travel of guns that is hard to understand. It is this: criminals don't care. New Jersey has regulations in terms of interstate travel of guns.
Obvious question-of the murders that are solved in Chicago (there has to be some, no matter how hard the hood tries to protect criminals)...just what percentage of them already have a criminal background? How many are either out on parole or had lenient sentences that allowed them back on the street before a maximum sentence was served?
Want to see murders go down? Make JUDGES financially and criminally responsible for any crimes committed by a convict between the time they are released from prison and the time of the maximum sentence they could have served. A released prisoner commits a murder before serving an entire sentence? Put him and the judge in prison for the same murder sentence.
The above bold faced comment is a bogus argument lacking intelligence.
The top ten are filled with significantly smaller cities with no upper/middle class areas of significance. Chicago has a large upper/middle class area with low crime, which lowers the city-wide average. However, half of Chicago has a horrid crime rate as bad as anywhere in the US.
For example, in some years Newark NJ has the highest murder rate, but Chicago is literally 10 times bigger in population and area......nearly half of all Chicago neighborhoods have a murder rate HIGHER than Newark. Meaning, you can carve out an area of Chicago 5 times bigger than Newark with a SIGNIFICANTLY higher murder rate than Newark.
What is the left's fascination with denying reality and facts when it comes to the violence in half of Chicago?
Do they want the violence to continue unabated? You can't solve the problem by denying it/downplaying it.
I trend middle of the road on most issues.
Homicide rates depend on the size of the population, typically measured in units of 100,000.
It gets really interesting when you look at cities with populations less than 100,000, like Gary, Indiana and Camden NJ.
As an aside, the highest lawful gun ownership rates in Chicago are in the pockets of neighborhoods plagued by gun homicides.
Except EVERY DAMN DAY THEY CLEARLY SHOW that black lives DO NOT matter even to black people. Their actions most definitely speak louder than their words when every day there is so much violence, crime and murder among black people around the counry and especially in places like Chicago where so many can be injured or killed nearly every weekend there.
What if for example I told you I was a very friendly person but everytime I saw you I punched you in the face for no particular reason, BUT I kept telling you that I was a friendly person? Would you believe my words or my actions? I'm pretty sure you're going to put more weight on my actions than my words and come to the logical conclusion that I'm NOT as friendly as I say I am.
The same with how blacks continually TELL us that their lives matter, but their ACTIONS and especially with how they treat each other sure as HELL don't match their words. All these years I've been waiting for blacks to show me and everyone else through their behavior as to how much their lives matter and they have YET to do that still and they probably never will at least not enough to stop all this killing among them.
You just don't get it. Not at all. You're still looking at BLM through the prism of your WASP male eyes. The people BLM are protesting against aren't worker bees like you, they are protesting white men who are agents of the State gunning black people down for the smallest of infractions. Black lives matter is ALL about the statement that just because you are whiteand a cop doesn't mean your life has more worth. This isn't about Billy Bob the lumberjack, it's against Officer Palumbo. When a private citizen kills another, it's murder. When an agent of the government kills someone without a trial, it's oppression. THERE'S the difference
Not everything is about YOU. But who can blame you? You've been taught your entire life that you are an individual , the rest of people who don't look like you are all hiveminded monoliths.
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner
Explain New Jersey. New Jersey has strict gun laws, and is in the shadow of NYC/NY state, with also has strict gun laws. Newark has one of the worst murder rates in the nation. Pennsylvania is among the top 10 states with the strictest gun laws.
New Jersey is surrounded by strict gun law states.
Believe me when I say that PA is only on that list because all the other states are more relaxed. If the 9 other states are A grade on gun control, PA would be a D; all the other "less strict" states would be F.
Something else. Washington,DC has alot of spillover in terms of crime. Most of it goes to Maryland, a state with strict gun laws. Virginia, with relatively lax gun laws. Virginia has a lower murder rate than Maryland.
Homicide rates depend on the size of the population, typically measured in units of 100,000.
It gets really interesting when you look at cities with populations less than 100,000, like Gary, Indiana and Camden NJ.
As an aside, the highest lawful gun ownership rates in Chicago are in the pockets of neighborhoods plagued by gun homicides.
Link please.
I suspect "the pockets of neighborhoods plagued by gun homicides" have few residents that can even pass a background check to legally purchase a firearm.
Rather than Chicago why not use Louisiana that has the highest gun crime rate and loose gun laws.
There are around 50 threads a year professing that gun control doesn't work holding up Chicago as a example, of course the logic of that statement makes more sense but here we are yet again.
When Illinois was forced to allow concealed carry, some believed the gun homicide rate would decline.
That's not what happened.
The highest incidence of lawful gun ownership in Chicago are in areas plagued with gang/ gun violence.
When you are the parent or little sister/ brother of someone affiliated with a gang splinter, a passenger in a car, you are at greater risk of being shot by an enemy of your older sibling. It does not help if you are in the car at 3:00AM, returning from someplace.
As I understand it, it is considered a tad wimpy to not disclose your location when tweeting noncense to your enemies in the wee hours.
Reactions to social media fans the fires.
The only thing any of us really control is our own reactions. Many choose not to do so.
By that logic, Maine could have a higher violent crime rate. Virginia would have more cities with high violent crime rates. However, Virginia's worst, Richmond, is safer than New Jersey's worst. Safer than the worst of Connecticut.
It isn't the concept of interstate travel of guns that is hard to understand. It is this: criminals don't care. New Jersey has regulations in terms of interstate travel of guns.
It would be much harder for criminals to get guns if they were not available in other states. They would become prohibitively more expensive. There's a difference between driving to South Carolina to buy guns and driving across the Mexican border to buy them. We have a lot of guns in this country because they are legal, not because they are illegal. State laws in NJ don't change that.
I suspect "the pockets of neighborhoods plagued by gun homicides" have few residents that can even pass a background check to legally purchase a firearm.
So you think all black people are criminals and cannot pass a background check to legally purchase a gun??
Many of you people on here are very naive to believe that black people who live in high crime neighborhoods don't have legally purchased guns. I have in-laws in Chicago, one lives in a neighborhood with a high degree of crime and they have a legally purchased gun.
I personally live in a neighborhood with a high amount of crime and I have a legally purchased gun as well.
Chicago’s highest concentration of permits is in the 60617 ZIP code — in the East Side neighborhood on the city’s Southeast Side — with 538 permits. According to the census, about 55 percent of the residents in 60617 are black, 34 percent are Hispanic and 7 percent white.
Rounding out the top five: Dunning on the Northwest Side; Garfield Ridge near Midway Airport on the Southwest Side; Avalon Park and Chatham on the South Side, which share a ZIP code; and Auburn Gresham, also on the South Side.
Avalon Park, Chatham and Auburn Gresham are minority neighborhoods that have been plagued by gun violence like East Side. Dunning and Garfield Ridge are predominately white neighborhoods with large populations of Chicago Police officers and city workers. Crime is relatively low in those areas.
I have in-laws in both of the bolded neighborhoods.
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.
