fletcher
Member
I would also say that of the hundreds of places that have strict gun laws, only two or three actually show a decrease in crime?
Culture has 100x more to do with crime than guns.
Culture has 100x more to do with crime than guns.
strict gun laws = less crime
- Thread starter Alan Fud
- Start date
- Status
BergaminoCAV
Member
did a report for college on gun control. i found credited sources and UCRs and found that areas with tighter gun control had a higher violent crime rate. Areas with loser gun control saw a decrease in violent crime. I tried to compare areas with equal population as best I coulf. I am now truely convinced that gun control does absolutly nothing to help crime.
scurtis_34471
Member
Those graphs are misleading. When you look at the data vs the graph, the graph tends to be exaggerated.
http://www.cityrating.com/crimestatistics.asp
Look up any two cities.
You can find cities with high crime and gun restrictions, low crime and gun freedom, and any other combination.
Just pick any two.
Comparing two cities doesn't mean anything, because you can choose them to "support" your argument.
Compare DC with just about anywhere, DC will come out looking worse for crime. Same for Compton.
There are many factors that impact crime statistics for cities. Sometimes it's just how the city limits are drawn.
For example, rates of forcible rape are much higher than the national average in Tacoma, WA, but much lower than average in neighboring Seattle. There's still such thing as "the other side of the tracks."
Another glaring example: Los Angeles has simply refused to incorporate some areas, typically those with very bad crime like "unincorporated Watts" or Willowbrook. These are little bits of County jurisdiction right in the middle of large incorporated cities. This has artificially lowered the crime rate of Los Angeles. So has the incorporation of small cities with high crime rates, like Compton, next to but not part of LA. Incorporated Los Angeles covers a large land area and includes many, many different communities; it just excludes certain pockets of generally minority neighborhoods, the names of which may be familiar to some of us from "gangsta rap" songs.
Look up any two cities.
You can find cities with high crime and gun restrictions, low crime and gun freedom, and any other combination.
Just pick any two.
Comparing two cities doesn't mean anything, because you can choose them to "support" your argument.
Compare DC with just about anywhere, DC will come out looking worse for crime. Same for Compton.
There are many factors that impact crime statistics for cities. Sometimes it's just how the city limits are drawn.
For example, rates of forcible rape are much higher than the national average in Tacoma, WA, but much lower than average in neighboring Seattle. There's still such thing as "the other side of the tracks."
Another glaring example: Los Angeles has simply refused to incorporate some areas, typically those with very bad crime like "unincorporated Watts" or Willowbrook. These are little bits of County jurisdiction right in the middle of large incorporated cities. This has artificially lowered the crime rate of Los Angeles. So has the incorporation of small cities with high crime rates, like Compton, next to but not part of LA. Incorporated Los Angeles covers a large land area and includes many, many different communities; it just excludes certain pockets of generally minority neighborhoods, the names of which may be familiar to some of us from "gangsta rap" songs.
+2
More blacks have embraced the thug, hip hop, gangster lifestyle than the national average. There is problems and criminal elements with all races, but many blacks have come to embrace the hip hop culture as thier own self identity? So through self identity more often embrace a self destructive culture. You see the same downward spiral with any race or neighborhood that embraces this culture. So it is more of a culture thing than a race thing. However this culture follows racial lines.
Demographics also play a role. How many thugs can afford to live in Manhattan? Not many at all. In fact most of New York is getting very expensive. The criminal elements tend to move to Jersey or some other nearby more affordable location.
Taking both criteria if you compare San Francisco and Oakland you will see SF fares far better than Oakland. SF is more affluent, costs more, and has less blacks. Both have very similar politics and opinions regarding gun control, and both are large cities right next to eachother.
However that is not a PC topic. You won't see any politician mention it because they would quickly become synonymous with racist.
James T Thomas
Member
the way it is
This is a real learining thread for all of us pseudo statisticians. I've learned from it.
Another fact taken from history.
During the French Revolution, while the gillotine was in operation, beheading criminals convicted of public crimes, there were pickpockets roaming amoung the crowd of spectators, picking pockets and purses! And that crime was one for which the punishment was death by beheading.
The criminal mind set is one of arrogance, essentially; they do not get caught, most of the time, until a mistake is made, or by chance happening.
There is a deterrent factor that relies upon swift conviction and punishment
but, the severity of the sentence becomes a very sharp curve when correlated to deterrence.
My own state passed laws many years ago doubling the punishment for crimes committed with a handgun, crimes committed in conspiracy with another person, etc. And in PA these categories of crime are flourishing, regardless.
I would like to see the crime rate statistics over time from when the Bible was removed from public school, prayer was banned; Christian that is, and Muslim, Bhuddist and other Eastern philosophies and religions substituted in their place.
In the name of "secular" education that is.
This is a real learining thread for all of us pseudo statisticians. I've learned from it.
Another fact taken from history.
During the French Revolution, while the gillotine was in operation, beheading criminals convicted of public crimes, there were pickpockets roaming amoung the crowd of spectators, picking pockets and purses! And that crime was one for which the punishment was death by beheading.
The criminal mind set is one of arrogance, essentially; they do not get caught, most of the time, until a mistake is made, or by chance happening.
There is a deterrent factor that relies upon swift conviction and punishment
but, the severity of the sentence becomes a very sharp curve when correlated to deterrence.
My own state passed laws many years ago doubling the punishment for crimes committed with a handgun, crimes committed in conspiracy with another person, etc. And in PA these categories of crime are flourishing, regardless.
I would like to see the crime rate statistics over time from when the Bible was removed from public school, prayer was banned; Christian that is, and Muslim, Bhuddist and other Eastern philosophies and religions substituted in their place.
In the name of "secular" education that is.
from "the Lutheran"
In the gun-saturated states of Iowa, Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, South Dakota and North Dakota, the murder rate was only 1.7 per 100,000 people in 1998. This is about as low as that rate gets anywhere in the world. The murder rates in these states have remained about the same each year since 1943.
Yet in Washington, D.C., and some other large cities, our murder rates are up to 75 per 100,000 per year. The reason for the vast difference between these two areas is family configuration and little else.
If we control family configuration, all correlations between race and crime and between low income and crime disappear. Seventy percent of all prison and reform school inmates come from fatherless homes. The majority of both the murderers and the victims have previous criminal records. That is why high violent-- crime rates can only be found in areas that have had a high prolonged rate of out-of-wedlock births.
Guns also have little to do with a nation's suicide rate. The gun-saturated United States had a suicide rate of 11.3 per 100,000 in 1998. Nearly gun-less Japan's suicide rate was 15.1. Canada's was 13.0. We also had the fourth lowest suicide rate out of 19 western European countries. Their rates varied from 26.1 in Finland to 7.2 in Italy.
Gun accidents killed 1,134 people in 1996. Motor vehicle accidents killed 43,649; accidental falls killed 14,786-perhaps stairs should be outlawed. Accidental drownings killed 3,488-should we ban swimming and pour concrete over the pools? Fires killed 3,741; drugs and medicines, 8,431; and the list goes on.
The last thing the gun-control people say is that control of guns reduces murder and violent crime. Wrong again. People living in England and Australia where guns are banned have violent-crime rates (rape and assault) twice as high as the gun-saturated United States. Car theft is three times higher in those countries than ours. Burglary is also 30 percent higher.
I could say more but this shows some of the social ramifications caused when people turn from God and the family structure collapses.
By: Anthony Rust
Article obtained from the link @:
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...09/ai_n8957191
To go to the latest U.S. statistical abstract:
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/
In the gun-saturated states of Iowa, Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, South Dakota and North Dakota, the murder rate was only 1.7 per 100,000 people in 1998. This is about as low as that rate gets anywhere in the world. The murder rates in these states have remained about the same each year since 1943.
Yet in Washington, D.C., and some other large cities, our murder rates are up to 75 per 100,000 per year. The reason for the vast difference between these two areas is family configuration and little else.
If we control family configuration, all correlations between race and crime and between low income and crime disappear. Seventy percent of all prison and reform school inmates come from fatherless homes. The majority of both the murderers and the victims have previous criminal records. That is why high violent-- crime rates can only be found in areas that have had a high prolonged rate of out-of-wedlock births.
Guns also have little to do with a nation's suicide rate. The gun-saturated United States had a suicide rate of 11.3 per 100,000 in 1998. Nearly gun-less Japan's suicide rate was 15.1. Canada's was 13.0. We also had the fourth lowest suicide rate out of 19 western European countries. Their rates varied from 26.1 in Finland to 7.2 in Italy.
Gun accidents killed 1,134 people in 1996. Motor vehicle accidents killed 43,649; accidental falls killed 14,786-perhaps stairs should be outlawed. Accidental drownings killed 3,488-should we ban swimming and pour concrete over the pools? Fires killed 3,741; drugs and medicines, 8,431; and the list goes on.
The last thing the gun-control people say is that control of guns reduces murder and violent crime. Wrong again. People living in England and Australia where guns are banned have violent-crime rates (rape and assault) twice as high as the gun-saturated United States. Car theft is three times higher in those countries than ours. Burglary is also 30 percent higher.
I could say more but this shows some of the social ramifications caused when people turn from God and the family structure collapses.
By: Anthony Rust
Article obtained from the link @:
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...09/ai_n8957191
To go to the latest U.S. statistical abstract:
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
