Crime stats are out for 2014. Least violent year in at least two decades.

[KevinNYC]

From a previous thread I posted this
Here's the most recent full year figures.

http://plnami.blob.core.windows.net/media/2014/11/violent-crime.jpg and usual ISH freakout occurred.
You and your charts are so full of shit.

Well the 2014 numbers are out. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/09/29/2014-was-the-least-violent-year-in-decades/?tid=sm_tw)

The FBI's latest crime statistics, released Monday, show that overall violent crime rates fell again in 2014, reaching their lowest level in at least 20 years. "The violent crime rate declined 1.0 percent compared to the 2013 rate, and the property crime rate declined 5.0 percent," the FBI concluded.

[knickballer]

I think alot of people here actually emphasize this point. Thing is the media spurns out stories like every citizen is getting murdered point blank by police or that riots or happening everywhere.

[~primetime~]

^^^ exactly, world is becoming a better place (or the US anyway) but the internet allows for more awareness of violence than previous years so it seems worse.

Now when someone gets shot there is cell phone footage of it.

[Jameerthefear]

Thoughts on this KevinCuck?
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=386398

[ThePhantomCreep]

Thoughts on this KevinCuck?
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=386398

Rent free? You're practically paying the OP to live in your head.

[SpecialQue]

People bitch about the culture getting "soft," but the increased sensitivity is probably a factor in the crime drop. Plus, as was already said, everyone's got a fvcking camera now, so if you jump an old man there's gonna be footage of it. Getting away with fvcking with people is getting harder by the year. That's a good thing.

[TheMan]

If you believed everything you hear and see on rightwing radio/tv, you'd think everything was going to hell, massive unemployment, a race war looming, Mexicans killing and raping everyone in sight and the US getting bitchslapped in evey corner of the world...and it's all Obama's fault!

I bet these stats will get no play on Fox News :rolleyes:

[KevinNYC]

People bitch about the culture getting "soft," but the increased sensitivity is probably a factor in the crime drop. Plus, as was already said, everyone's got a fvcking camera now, so if you jump an old man there's gonna be footage of it. Getting away with fvcking with people is getting harder by the year. That's a good thing.

Even criminologists don't really understand what drives crime numbers.

Demographics plays a big part in it.

[UK2K]

If you believed everything you hear and see on rightwing radio/tv, you'd think everything was going to hell, massive unemployment, a race war looming, Mexicans killing and raping everyone in sight and the US getting bitchslapped in evey corner of the world...and it's all Obama's fault!

I bet these stats will get no play on Fox News :rolleyes:

The numbers have been dropping since the 90's.

[gigantes]

any minor victory is a reason to construct hope, i guess.

[FreezingTsmoove]

Chicago is getting worse

[KevinNYC]

The numbers have been dropping since the 90's.

The Wall Street Journal Editorial page has claimed there's a The New Nationwide Crime Wave due to the "Ferguson effect." Oooh Scary

NY Post was pushing this (http://nypost.com/2015/05/26/youre-45-more-likely-to-be-murdered-in-de-blasios-manhattan/) a little while ago
http://fair.org/new/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/NYPostMurder.png

Forgetting that 2014 was a record low for murders in NYC and that THE SAME GUY was mayor in both years. The two years taken together will stack up against any two years in any mayor's term in my lifetime.

[QUOTE]The Post

[Patrick Chewing]

Damn Kevin is just schooling us here. Making DeBlasio and Obama look like f'n saints, son! Third term for Obama and DeBlasio mayor for life. 4 Life!

[KevinNYC]

This month Chris Christie claimed this about NYC.


“Listen, folks should not be surprised that when they elect folks like Bill de Blasio in New York City, who ran an entire campaign that was anti-police, that now we have a significant increase in crime,” he said. “But worse than that, I’m in here a lot, you all work here, you walk around the city, it’s a different feeling in the city than it was the last 20 years.”

:roll:

To be clear Christie is claiming a noticeable increase in crime at the very end of this chart. A different feeling from the 20 years preceding it.

https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/files/2015/09/NYC-Murder.png

[Coach Eddie]

Thanks Obama

[ThePhantomCreep]

Damn Kevin is just schooling us here. Making DeBlasio and Obama look like f'n saints, son! Third term for Obama and DeBlasio mayor for life. 4 Life!

You lame sarcasm doesn't change the facts, Kochbot.

[dunksby]

Damn, Obama :applause:

[NumberSix]

2014 numbers? Lol. Just wait until the 2015 numbers come out.

[UK2K]

Even criminologists don't really understand what drives crime numbers.

Demographics plays a big part in it.

We discussed this phenomenon in one of my classes.

Many believe a big factor is abortion becoming legal in 1973. No more mini-gangbangers running around. The crime rate began dropping in the 90's, coincidentally, around the same time the mini-gangbangers began to be aborted.

[UK2K]

the y-axis should be starting from 0 and not 1,150,000

that's a foul

op's point still stands but the chart is wrong in terms of scientific honorableness

it's a populist move

It makes the drop look less significant if you do that. Gotta fool the uneducated.

[chips93]

the y-axis should be starting from 0 and not 1,150,000

that's a foul

op's point still stands but the chart is wrong in terms of scientific honorableness

it's a populist move

it makes the chart easier to read

its standard scientific practice

[HitandRun Reggie]

If you look at the historic murder rate in the last 25 years it does not follow a pattern with who's in the Oval Office nearly as much as it does who's in Congress. Violent crime tended stall or rise under a Democrat congress while it tended to drop under a Republican congress

[UK2K]

Yup. You would have 54 rows/bars if we go from 0 to 1,350,000.

They'd also have to trace back the years to where there was single or double digit estimate numbers of offense. That would expand the columns drastically as well.

No you wouldn't :confusedshrug:

[KevinNYC]

2014 numbers? Lol. Just wait until the 2015 numbers come out.

Um, the 2014 numbers were just released this month. They are the last complete dataset we have. so lol?

[UK2K]

not true, you just need to adjust the scale

it's usually used to make small changes look significant

What I said.

You could go by 100,000, but then the change would seem non-existent. Gotta make it look significant.


The FBI report shows a 0.2% decline nationwide in violent crimes in 2014

Nobody cares about .2%. But, when you put it on a graph and ZOOM way the **** in, it looks legit.

[Patrick Chewing]

Violent crime tended stall or rise under a Democrat congress while it tended to drop under a Republican congress


Speak the truth, son!

[UK2K]

The margin between ~1,350,000 to ~1,162,000 is 188,888. Why go by 100,000 when it won't really show much.

Minus 188,000 in 4 years is a good decline, I would say.

1% in four years is a good decline.

[KevinNYC]

We discussed this phenomenon in one of my classes.

Many believe a big factor is abortion becoming legal in 1973. No more mini-gangbangers running around. The crime rate began dropping in the 90's, coincidentally, around the same time the mini-gangbangers began to be aborted.Not "around the same time" but when they would be about to turn 20 or so 1973-1993.

So the crime rate drops when the generation born around 1973 minus those not born starts entering peak criminal years. That's the theory the Freakonomics guy came up with.

There's another theory that it corresponds to the reduction of lead in our environment due to moving to unleaded gas. (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Lead-crime_hypothesis) Childhood exposure to lead supposedly has all sorts of effects that could last until adulthood like ADHD. The CDC report on lead includes this sentence Some researchers have suggested that lead continues to contribute significantly to socio-behavioral problems such as juvenile delinquency and violent crime (Needleman 2002, Nevin 2000).

This article is pretty interesting on the lead theory.
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead-crime-link-gasoline

Because not only the US but the Canada also experienced a drop in crime levels, as did other countries

Meanwhile, Nevin had kept busy as well, and in 2007 he published a new paper looking at crime trends around the world (PDF). This way, he could make sure the close match he'd found between the lead curve and the crime curve wasn't just a coincidence. Sure, maybe the real culprit in the United States was something else happening at the exact same time, but what are the odds of that same something happening at several different times in several different countries?

Nevin collected lead data and crime data for Australia and found a close match. Ditto for Canada. And Great Britain and Finland and France and Italy and New Zealand and West Germany. Every time, the two curves fit each other astonishingly well. When I spoke to Nevin about this, I asked him if he had ever found a country that didn't fit the theory. "No," he replied. "Not one."

[chips93]

not true, you just need to adjust the scale

it's usually used to make small changes look significant

if you look in any scientific journal you'll find charts formatted just like that, its completely standard.

its purpose isnt to trick anybody, its only gonna trick complete morons anyway

[UK2K]

Not "around the same time" but when they would be about to turn 20 or so 1973-1993.

So the crime rate drops when the generation born around 1973 minus those not born starts entering peak criminal years. That's the theory the Freakonomics guy came up with.

There's another theory that it corresponds to the reduction of lead in our environment due to moving to unleaded gas. (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Lead-crime_hypothesis) Childhood exposure to lead supposedly has all sorts of effects that could last until adulthood like ADHD. The CDC report on lead includes this sentence Some researchers have suggested that lead continues to contribute significantly to socio-behavioral problems such as juvenile delinquency and violent crime (Needleman 2002, Nevin 2000).

This article is pretty interesting on the lead theory.
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead-crime-link-gasoline

Because not only the US but the Canada also experienced a drop in crime levels, as did other countries

Nice. We discussed this as well, and initially I dismissed it. I'll give the article a read at lunch, this isn't the first time I've seen this hypothesis proposed, so maybe there is some truth to it.

[KevinNYC]

If you look at the historic murder rate in the last 25 years it does not follow a pattern with who's in the Oval Office nearly as much as it does who's in Congress. Violent crime tended stall or rise under a Democrat congress while it tended to drop under a Republican congress

Is that something you actually believe?

[KevinNYC]

the y-axis should be starting from 0 and not 1,150,000

that's a foul

op's point still stands but the chart is wrong in terms of scientific honorableness

it's a populist moveIt's the only chart I could find that shows the most recent 5 year trend.

It's how the FBI creates their chart. With the new numbers, they put out a new version. Very slight decrease from 2013 to 2014.
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2014/crime-in-the-u.s.-2014/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/violent-crime

[UK2K]

It's the only chart I could find that shows the most recent 5 year trend.

It's how the FBI creates their chart. With the new numbers, they put out a new version. Very slight decrease from 2013 to 2014.
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2014/crime-in-the-u.s.-2014/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/violent-crime

There's your answer. No shit the FBI wants it to look good.

[UK2K]

Let's see a ~188,000 decline for 2009-2013

https://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/data/table_01.html

2005 - ~1,391,000
to
2009 - ~1,318,000
that's roughly a 73,000 decline.

2001 - ~1,439,000
to
2005 - ~1,391,000
that's roughly a 48,000 decline

P.S. I know I'm comparing two different charts but the 2009's 1,350,000 in Kevin's chart seems to be in the ballpark of the 2009's 1,318,000 in my link.

Probably easier to look at violent crime rate, but yeah Im with you.

It's pretty obvious crime in 99% of the country is down, while crime in the inner-cities is way up.


Police in Indianapolis are struggling to contain a surge in murders. Last year police counted 138 homicides – a 44 percent jump from 2012.

If you removed the violent crime from a few cities like Milwaukee, Detroit, Chicago, St. Louis, the US statistically would be one of the safest places on the planet to live. Funny, with all the guns and what not we have here. Doesn't fit the agenda does it?

[Patrick Chewing]

DeBlasio should run for President with crime stats like that! Nevermind the influx of homeless people defecating on the streets. Those are all potential voters!

DeBlasio/Obama ticket.


Conservatives and their goddamn Constitution and their stop and frisk laws that tend to prevent crimes. Stop and Frisk is Unconstitutional!

[UK2K]

So the FBI's data is now somehow bullshit? :roll:
No Im sure its accurate. That just explains why its zoomed way the **** in like it is.

[KevinNYC]

The FBI report shows a 0.2% decline nationwide in violent crimes in 2014

Nobody cares about .2%. But, when you put it on a graph and ZOOM way the **** in, it looks legit.

.2% drop in total crimes
1% drop in crime rate.

So less total crimes overall, but the population increased, so the rate dropped faster. However, your point stands, it's still just 1%

Crime rate of course is why a city like Camden NJ is far more dangerous than New York or Chicago. BTW according the list neighborhoodscout maintains Chicago is not on the list of 100 most dangerous cities. (http://www.neighborhoodscout.com/neighborhoods/crime-rates/top100dangerous/)

[UK2K]

I'm probably sure that was Kevin's point for this thread. The overall crimes in the States as a whole.

You're going into inner city this, and inner city that without providing any sources...well, at least provide some datas and stats while saying that shit.

I'll take the FBI's data over your words any day.

I just cited a 44% increase in homicides in Indianapolis.

It's okay, nothing like driving my point home...

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/01/us/murder-rates-rising-sharply-in-many-us-cities.html?_r=0


More than 30 other cities have also reported increases in violence from a year ago. In New Orleans, 120 people had been killed by late August, compared with 98 during the same period a year earlier. In Baltimore, homicides had hit 215, up from 138 at the same point in 2014. In Washington, the toll was 105, compared with 73 people a year ago. And in St. Louis, 136 people had been killed this year, a 60 percent rise from the 85 murders the city had by the same time last year.

Like I said, 99% of the country, the crime is down. In the inner cities, its up. Way up. Not to point out the obvious, but that would be black on black crime. Where ya at #BLM?

[KevinNYC]

If you look at the historic murder rate in the last 25 years it does not follow a pattern with who's in the Oval Office nearly as much as it does who's in Congress. Violent crime tended stall or rise under a Democrat congress while it tended to drop under a Republican congressDMV2 posted the data
https://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/data/table_01.html

please prove your point.

[UK2K]

Gotta go to class in a bit...but I'll add this. Based on the charts we posted from the FBI data.

4 years of Obama saw a ~188,000 drop in crimes, while 8 years of Bush saw about ~121,000 drop in crimes.

Men lie, women lie, UK2K lies, FBI numbers don't. :pimp:

Lol what did I lie about?

[lil jahlil]

Nobody cares about .2%. But, when you put it on a graph and ZOOM way the **** in, it looks legit.

Still the least violent year in 2 decades. Better than an increase.

[UK2K]

Still the least violent year in 2 decades. Better than an increase.
Nobody has once said its not a positive thing.

[KevinNYC]

It's pretty obvious crime in 99% of the country is down, while crime in the inner-cities is way up.
I don't think this is obvious at all.

Certainly during the two decades for which we have full crime stats crime in the inner cities is way down.

We might in 2015 be seeing a rise, when we get the full stats, but that still might not be all inner cities. Some cities like St. Louis and Milwaukee are way up, some are up to 2012 level. That Times report focused on murder rates in 20 cities, cities with a population over 350,000. There's 60 US cities of this size. So what gives us the real picture Baltimore or Boston?

My wife just went to Baltimore and she said there were junkies everywhere. There's seems to be a heroin explosion in recent years. I wonder what the heroin trade looks like in the cities with big increases. They said NYC in late 80's/90's was like the canary in the coal mine, murder spiked there first and began to fall there first and the rest of country caught up two years later. Hopefully we are not seeing the same.

[KevinNYC]

If you removed the violent crime from a few cities like Milwaukee, Detroit, Chicago, St. Louis, the US statistically would be one of the safest places on the planet to live. Funny, with all the guns and what not we have here. Doesn't fit the agenda does it?This is absolutely not true.

I just looked at the murder rate for Wyoming. Not a state with big inner cities. Not known to be a particularly violent state.

It has a higher murder rate than the UK, France, China, Germany, Italy, Spain, and a bunch of others.

One of the safer states in the US and if all of the US was like that state, it still would trail many other nations. The US is a fairly violent place

The murder rate in West Virginia, again not a state with big inner cities is higher than all of Europe and three times or more higher than the countries listed above.

[~primetime~]

^^^ yes I was just in Italy recently. It can be scary running around an unfamiliar country but after doing research I found that it is infinitely safer than the US. No one has a gun there for one.

You'll get you pocket's picked in Italy, or even mugged...but no one is gonna kill you. US cities can be fcking scary, and going to europe really puts it into perspective.

[UK2K]

This is absolutely not true.

I just looked at the murder rate for Wyoming. Not a state with big inner cities. Not known to be a particularly violent state.

It has a higher murder rate than the UK, France, China, Germany, Italy, Spain, and a bunch of others.

You picked half a dozen. There are about 220 countries on this planet. The US is #111 right now, at 4.7 homicides per 100,000.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Are you arguing that not including the ghettos across this country (Baltimore, at 33 homicides per 100,000, St. Louis at 49 homicides per 100,000, Detroit at 45 homicides per 100,000), our ranking wouldn't improve?



One of the safer states in the US and if all of the US was like that state, it still would trail many other nations. The US is a fairly violent place

The murder rate in West Virginia, again not a state with big inner cities is higher than all of Europe and three times or more higher than the countries listed above.

I agree, the US is a violent place. But what does the murder rate in WV have to do with the fact that our murder rate would drop significantly if you excluded the few ghettos at the top? The US, as it stands now, is in the upper (better) half of all countries now (#111 out of 218 according to that chart), in terms of homicide rate.

The difference between our homicide rate now and Spain (that you listed) is 4 murders per 100,000. I think the odds are, this is a fairly safe country to live in. Violent, but comparatively safe.

[chips93]

If you cut the comparison down from the whole world, to just developed countries, the countries which should have the resources to fight crime, then the statistics im sure would be far less flattering.

most of the countries below america in murder rate are very poor african and south american nations.

America should have much higher aspirations than to be merely average in terms of murder rates, or merely among the most violent developed countries. america averages 50% more murders than europe, europe being the closest grouping of countries comparable to america in terms of wealth and culture.

[UK2K]

If you cut the comparison down from the whole world, to just developed countries, the countries which should have the resources to fight crime, then the statistics im sure would be far less flattering.

most of the countries below america in murder rate are very poor african and south american nations.
Most developed countries don't have the gang activity we do.

Not sure how influential the Bloods, Crips, GD's, MS-13, Vice Lords, or Mexican Mafia are in France and Belgium...

But yeah, the vast majority of countries with the worst homicide rates are South American and African countries. Even looking at the US vs 'all the white countries', you can argue the homicide rate is FOUR TIMES AS MUCH when in reality, you are talking about one murder per 25,000 people.

EDIT: And as I say that ^^, you use the line "america averages 50% more murders than europe" which sounds a lot scarier than saying 4 per 100,000 as opposed to 2 per 100,000.

[Nanners]

Most developed countries don't have the gang activity we do.

Not sure how influential the Bloods, Crips, GD's, MS-13, Vice Lords, or Mexican Mafia are in France and Belgium...


lots of developed countries have gang activity.

you mentioned the mexican mafia, ever heard of the italian mafia? how about the yakuza? italy and japan are two of the safest countries on the planet.

[ThePhantomCreep]

So the FBI's data is now somehow bullshit? :roll:

For conservatives, facts are always bullshit when they contradict their warped worldview.

Unemployment rate, crime states, deficit spending, etc.

[chips93]

you could look at it that way, or you could look at it as; there were 12,000 murders in america last year, and if america were as safe as europe is there would have only been 8,000

4,000 lives is too big a number to brush off

[ThePhantomCreep]

If you cut the comparison down from the whole world, to just developed countries, the countries which should have the resources to fight crime, then the statistics im sure would be far less flattering.

most of the countries below america in murder rate are very poor african and south american nations.

America should have much higher aspirations than to be merely average in terms of murder rates, or merely among the most violent developed countries. america averages 50% more murders than europe, europe being the closest grouping of countries comparable to america in terms of wealth and culture.

Wealth inequality in the US is probably the worst of any developed nation, which would partially explain why we're more violent than the Englands and Japans of the world.

This has long been the case.

[~primetime~]

lots of developed countries have gang activity.

you mentioned the mexican mafia, ever heard of the italian mafia? how about the yakuza? italy and japan are two of the safest countries on the planet.
eh...a very tiny minority of people are in mob/yakuza...meanwhile US high schools are flooded with crips/bloods/etc

gang activity is an issue in the US

[Nanners]

eh...a very tiny minority of people are in mob/yakuza...meanwhile US high schools are flooded with crips/bloods/etc

gang activity is an issue in the US

im not saying gang activity is not an issue in the us, just pointing out that it exists in other developed countries too.

my buddys father is a location manager for big hollywood films, and he tells me its always a nightmare working in Italy because the mafia always has to be paid off before he is allowed to film anywhere.

[UK2K]

you could look at it that way, or you could look at it as; there were 12,000 murders in america last year, and if america were as safe as europe is there would have only been 8,000

4,000 lives is too big a number to brush off

We had 10x that many commit suicide last year, so no, it really isn't. When you are talking about a country with a population of 330,000,000, 4,000 is a drop in the bucket.

[UK2K]

im not saying gang activity is not an issue in the us, just pointing out that it exists in other developed countries too.

my buddys father is a location manager for big hollywood films, and he tells me its always a nightmare working in Italy because the mafia always has to be paid off before he is allowed to film anywhere.

It existing and it being a factor are two different things.

There are, per the FBI, 1,400,000 gang members in 33,000 gangs in this country, all fighting for the same piece of the pie.


The FBI estimates the size of the four Italian organized crime groups to be approximately 25,000 members and 250,000 affiliates worldwide.

So, kind of the same thing.

That, mixed with poverty, drug abuse, and fatherless homes is probably a big chunk of our crime rate here.

[chips93]

We had 10x that many commit suicide last year, so no, it really isn't. When you are talking about a country with a population of 330,000,000, 4,000 is a drop in the bucket.

they are both big big problems.

the thing is, america's suicide rate compares well with the rest of the world, and the developed world, but its murder rate doesnt.

[UK2K]

they are both big big problems.

the thing is, america's suicide rate compares well with the rest of the world, and the developed world, but its murder rate doesnt.

See above.

You see our murder rate as being TWICE AS MUCH AS EUROPE while I see it as the odds of being murdered America is .00004% while the odds of being murdered in Europe is .00002%.

You can look at it however you want.

[chips93]

ok, so if murders arent worth caring about what is?

[KevinNYC]

You picked half a dozen......
Are you arguing that not including the ghettos across this country (Baltimore, at 33 homicides per 100,000, St. Louis at 49 homicides per 100,000, Detroit at 45 homicides per 100,000), our ranking wouldn't improve?I think you're moving the goalposts. You didn't argue about removing the ghettos across this country. You said a few.
If you removed the violent crime from a few cities like Milwaukee, Detroit, Chicago, St. Louis, the US statistically would be one of the safest places on the planet to live.Yes, our crime rate would drop if we removed the most violent cities, but it still wouldn't put us in top 25% for murder rate. I cited West Virginia because I think you're overestimating how much our ranking would improve.

I don't even think your new standard of "all ghettos in the country" would get us to top 25% so I don't think it would qualify as "one of the safest places to live."

And yes, you are very unlikely to murdered in the United States even though our murder rate is nearly 6 times Spain's. Same applies to places like Mexico, Rwanda, Columbia and Honduras with very high murder rates.
Most people in the world were not murdered last year.

[KevinNYC]

See above.

You see our murder rate as being TWICE AS MUCH AS EUROPE while I see it as the odds of being murdered America is .00004% while the odds of being murdered in Europe is .00002%.

You can look at it however you want. Forgot to move your decimals.

[TheMan]

UK2K shifting blame to everything but the most obvious, that the US is the only nation in the developed world where guns are so readily available. Many factors contribute to the US being much more violent than Europe or Japan but if we're being honest, guns are a major part of it.

I'm not anti gun, I'm a realist. I used to own a firearm until I had a son and saw the stats that showed it was more likely that the gun I owned would be involved in an accidental death than actually stop a robbery in my house...so I got rid of it.

[UK2K]

I think you're moving the goalposts. You didn't argue about removing the ghettos across this country. You said a few.Yes, our crime rate would drop if we removed the most violent cities, but it still wouldn't put us in top 25% for murder rate. I cited West Virginia because I think you're overestimating how much our ranking would improve.

I don't even think your new standard of "all ghettos in the country" would get us to top 25% so I don't think it would qualify as "one of the safest places to live."

And yes, you are very unlikely to murdered in the United States even though our murder rate is nearly 6 times Spain's. Same applies to places like Mexico, Rwanda, Columbia and Honduras with very high murder rates.
Most people in the world were not murdered last year.

You did the same thing, right here: "United States even though our murder rate is nearly 6 times Spain's". Scarrryyyy. Six times higher!! 6 degrees is six times hotter than one degree too.

You have a minuscule of a fraction of a percentage point higher chance to get murdered in the US than the countries you mentioned. Is that minuscule fraction of a percentage point is the cut off point between safe and unsafe?

And I didn't say all ghettos, I said the worst. McGoo up there pointed out 4,000 more people were killed, proportionally, here than in Europe...

[QUOTE]In[B] America

[UK2K]

UK2K shifting blame to everything but the most obvious, that the US is the only nation in the developed world where guns are so readily available. Many factors contribute to the US being much more violent than Europe or Japan but if we're being honest, guns are a major part of it.

I'm not anti gun, I'm a realist. I used to own a firearm until I had a son and
Of course gun accessibility is a factor in gun violence. Nobody ever said it wasn't.

But it's certainly not the only factor, like you are trying to claim.


saw the stats that showed it was more likely that the gun I owned would be involved in an accidental death than actually stop a robbery in my house...so I got rid of it.

Not if you treat it like its supposed to be treated. Statistically, I'm more likely to survive a car crash in a tank than my corolla, so lets go get a tank. Statistically, I am more likely to survive a hurricane in an underground bunker.

Statistics can be flawed depending on how you interpret them.

[TheMan]

Of course gun accessibility is a factor in gun violence. Nobody ever said it wasn't.

But it's certainly not the only factor, like you are trying to claim.



Not if you treat it like its supposed to be treated. Statistically, I'm more likely to survive a car crash in a tank than my corolla, so lets go get a tank. Statistically, I am more likely to survive a hurricane in an underground bunker.

Statistics can be flawed depending on how you interpiret them.
I hear what you're saying. I thought long and hard about it but decided on getting rid of it. I just couldn't get comfortable with the idea of a curious little boy running around the house with a gun there. You can take all the precautions you want but those little ****ers will get to your gun, it only takes one slip up...

[KevinNYC]

You did the same thing, right here: "United States even though our murder rate is nearly 6 times Spain's". Scarrryyyy. Six times higher!! 6 degrees is six times hotter than one degree too.

You have a minuscule of a fraction of a percentage point higher chance to get murdered in the US than the countries you mentioned. Is that minuscule fraction of a percentage point is the cut off point between safe and unsafe?

And I didn't say all ghettos, I said the worst. McGoo up there pointed out 4,000 more people were killed, proportionally, here than in Europe...



I would say subtracting the 10 worst ghettos in America puts us pretty far into the 'safe' category, unless you still consider .00002% the cut off point.That's not what moving the goalposts means. Moving the goalposts is changing the standards in the middle of an argument. The comparison I'm making to Spain is an apples to apples argument, comparing the same thing and not shifting the goalposts in anyway. Your point is just pointing out that the things we are comparing are still very rare.

And I didn't say all ghettos, I said the worst. this is what you said
the ghettos across this country

Also, still got to shift that decimal point two places. 1 divided by 100 is .01 which is 1 percent, not .01%

I still think we don't get down to Spain's rate by throwing out a small number of cities. Even if the chance of being murdered in Spain and in the US is a very rare thing.

[Patrick Chewing]

Of course gun accessibility is a factor in gun violence. Nobody ever said it wasn't.

But it's certainly not the only factor, like you are trying to claim.



Not if you treat it like its supposed to be treated. Statistically, I'm more likely to survive a car crash in a tank than my corolla, so lets go get a tank. Statistically, I am more likely to survive a hurricane in an underground bunker.

Statistics can be flawed depending on how you interpret them.


I have a gun safe, and I can tell you it's been over a month since I've handled one of my weapons. The only two reasons I would have to touch them again would be for safety or a trip to the range. It's all about safety.

[~primetime~]

UK2K shifting blame to everything but the most obvious, that the US is the only nation in the developed world where guns are so readily available. Many factors contribute to the US being much more violent than Europe or Japan but if we're being honest, guns are a major part of it.

I'm not anti gun, I'm a realist. I used to own a firearm until I had a son and saw the stats that showed it was more likely that the gun I owned would be involved in an accidental death than actually stop a robbery in my house...so I got rid of it.
Those stats are heavily skewed by suicide and ghetto/white trash drunk morons.

Are you a responsible and sober adult who doesn't suffer extreme depression? If so you can ignore those stats.

[NumberSix]

Those stats are heavily skewed by suicide and ghetto/white trash drunk morons.

Are you a responsible and sober adult who doesn't suffer extreme depression? If so you can ignore those stats.
You also have to pay very close attention to exactly how the stats are worded. Anti-gun groups like to be extremely deceptive with the way they word things with real stats to make you think the stats say something they actually don't.

A common one is "statistically, a gun is more likely to kill someone who lives in your house than..." which is true. The majority of American gun deaths are suicides. So yeah, technically, your gun is statistically more like to kill "someone" who lives in your house (you, via suicide).

[ThePhantomCreep]

UK2K shifting blame to everything but the most obvious, that the US is the only nation in the developed world where guns are so readily available. Many factors contribute to the US being much more violent than Europe or Japan but if we're being honest, guns are a major part of it.

I'm not anti gun, I'm a realist. I used to own a firearm until I had a son and saw the stats that showed it was more likely that the gun I owned would be involved in an accidental death than actually stop a robbery in my house...so I got rid of it.

So much this.

High poverty rates + historically tense racial conditions + 300 million guns = above average crime rates

[TheMan]

I understand what you guys are saying but I was an avid gun enthusiast as a single guy and I always practiced gun safety.

Then I had a son (I have two now) and I've read all those stories of families that lost a child because he was able to get to the gun. Now you can have it locked up and take all the safety precautions but just one mistake where you leave the key laying around, or you forget to lock up the safety box, whatever...I just didn't feel comfortable with a gun in my house.

Anyways, I live in a pretty safe side of town. I have a pretty impenetrable fence, all the windows are barred up, a dog stays outside and one inside (we alternate) and a security alarm system. Everytime someone gets anywhere near my house, my dogs start barking, they're big dogs so their bark is pretty loud and intimidating. No one has ever tried breaking in. We feel safe in our house so a gun wasn't really needed.

[NBAplayoffs2001]

This month Chris Christie claimed this about NYC.



:roll:

To be clear Christie is claiming a noticeable increase in crime at the very end of this chart. A different feeling from the 20 years preceding it.

https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/files/2015/09/NYC-Murder.png

Damn, it's still really hard to believe NYC changed that much safety wise from 1993 to 1997.

Also, I think there are still cities out there in America that are still struggling a lot with their crime rate. Detroit and Baltimore come to mind but both cities seem to have heavy racial segregation (Detroit is the most segregated I believe). My friend often visits Detroit and goes to the "good side" of town and said it really isn't bad at all until you get up near the ghetto where it gets really bad really quick.

[UK2K]

I hear what you're saying. I thought long and hard about it but decided on getting rid of it. I just couldn't get comfortable with the idea of a curious little boy running around the house with a gun there. You can take all the precautions you want but those little ****ers will get to your gun, it only takes one slip up...
Hey I'm with you my man. To each his own.

I would suggest a trigger guard, but I am not a parent either. I, of course, knew from a young age not to touch my father's shit, because he would beat my ass if I did. Can't do that anymore so, what can ya do.

Invest in a home alarm system and sleep soundly.

[UK2K]

I have a gun safe, and I can tell you it's been over a month since I've handled one of my weapons. The only two reasons I would have to touch them again would be for safety or a trip to the range. It's all about safety.

Yep and as I pointed out, to each his own. I don't necessarily live in a bad area, but I know how quickly a routine day can turn into a life or death situation. The thought of someone kicking my door in, pointing a gun in my girlfriend's (or any family member) face, and me sitting there with no way to do anything about it except beg is something from my worst nightmares. The chances are slim, but its better to have and not need than to need and not have.

I don't want to have to rely on someone else to come help me. That's just not how I roll.

**************************************************
^^Off topic but... That's why I have so much disgust for the military aged males running from ISIS. I'd never let someone steamroll my neighborhood and slaughter my neighbors while I ran. It's crazy how cowardly the Afghan and Iraqi armies can be, I've seen it first hand. You can't teach someone to have a backbone though.

Not saying if you don't own a gun you are a coward (to the people in this thread, because I am 100% positive someone will read that and hit the reply button before reading on), but at some point, you have to stick up for yourself.