• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: tryptakid | Foreigner

The gun thread, reloaded.

LosBlancos said:
What is it compared to the African nations? Oh wait...
Click to expand...

If you're comparing black Americans to subSaharan African nations, the murder rate for black Americans is much lower than some African countries.

Obviously, theories of violence based on racial background with no other factors are demonstrably false.

But if you want to have fun with statistics, in 1980, the murder rate was twice as high in the US as today. Yet whites made up a greater percentage of the population. Therefore, since 1980, there's a rough correlation between the percentage of non-white Americans and declining murder rates. :p
 
Escher's Waterfall said:
If you're comparing black Americans to subSaharan African nations, the murder rate for black Americans is much lower than some African countries.
Click to expand...

That's shocking you would think without racist white police officers gunning down innocent teenagers there would be lower murder rates in Africa. Who knows?

Everything for you needs to be expained by so many factors even when it happens across every country. Compare murder rate of African-Americans to Whites, vast differences. Compare murder rate of Africa to that of Europe. Vast differences. All with the same conclusion. But please bloviate just like you did in the poverty thread about lack of nutrition, unstable homes, illnesses, any other number of factors? Please I'm dying to hear it.
 
Droppersneck said:
I personally think it has way more to do with class and poverty than race alone, but I hate to get into these types of discussions anymore.
Click to expand...

China has far less murder rate than almost every other country. Despite their citizens earning well less than the average American or most of western Europe.

Sample size of over 1.3 billion people disproving the notion poverty and class contributes to murder.
 
LosBlancos said:
That's shocking you would think without racist white police officers gunning down innocent teenagers there would be lower murder rates in Africa. Who knows?
Click to expand...

Did you think that police officers were the major source of murders in the US?

Everything for you needs to be expained by so many factors even when it happens across every country. Compare murder rate of African-Americans to Whites, vast differences. Compare murder rate of Africa to that of Europe. Vast differences. All with the same conclusion. But please bloviate just like you did in the poverty thread about lack of nutrition, unstable homes, illnesses, any other number of factors? Please I'm dying to hear it.
Click to expand...

Are you really having difficulty with the idea of murder rates being tied to other factors? If you are, I'd suggest reading Pinker's "The Better Angels of Our Nature" - it seems like it's a nice introduction to the concept of how society influences the murder rate, and examines why Western Europeans used to have a murder rate 10x to 50x higher than today.
 
Droppersneck said:
I personally think it has way more to do with class and poverty than race alone, but I hate to get into these types of discussions anymore.
Click to expand...

It's just centrists and right wingers of all sorts using the race card. It has far more to do with the Socio-Economic factors involved but the last thing both the centrists and right in America want to admit is that class warfare does actually exist.
 
paranoid android said:
It's just centrists and right wingers of all sorts using the race card. It has far more to do with the Socio-Economic factors involved but the last thing both the centrists and right in America want to admit is that class warfare does actually exist.
Click to expand...

If it's about socio-economics, the Ferguson case, trust me I've never heard it once that a "poor person" was shot. It's all about white cop shooting a black guy.

Why wasn't there large scale riots after the OJ verdict?
 
agreed
I rioted quietly

On another note, I found it interesting the NPR interviewed a black person and they used the term "irrediculous"
It really made that person sound bad
 
The single greatest contributor to the murder rate in the U.S. is gang violence. The easiest way to combat this is to remove their source of income: drug trafficking and illicit drug sales. We remove this source of income by legalizing all drugs, and allow them to be sold in much the same way that alcohol is sold. No other country on Earth has the same problem that the U.S. has with gangs. This is in part because the U.S. has the largest black-market in the world. http://mic.com/articles/98776/the-c...s-in-the-world-in-one-fascinating-interactive If guns were the deciding factor in a nation's murder rate, then Switzerland should be the murder capital of the world.

The main question people should ask themselves is if a problem can be solved by increasing liberties and freedom. If one potential (and deeply flawed) "solution" is to limit personal freedom (i.e., ban all scary guns, and sharp objects) and another potential solution is to INCREASE personal freedom, then you should certainly choose the latter. Choosing otherwise means that you think that all men and women (including yourself) are children, and should not be trusted with anything.
 
LosBlancos said:
If it's about socio-economics, the Ferguson case, trust me I've never heard it once that a "poor person" was shot. It's all about white cop shooting a black guy.

Why wasn't there large scale riots after the OJ verdict?
Click to expand...

Please you can't compare the OJ case of all fucking things to this kid getting shot and killed by the police. Those are 2 totally different circumstances and OJ had more then enough money to afford one of the best lawyers. Not to mention the LAPD did fuck themselves and certainly didn't help the prosecutors case. Also the prosecutor was abit of a fucking moron if i remember right. If anything that just proves that race has little to do with it while class does have everything to do with it. I don't remember many black people sticking up for OJ or anything.

Apostacious said:
The single greatest contributor to the murder rate in the U.S. is gang violence. The easiest way to combat this is to remove their source of income: drug trafficking and illicit drug sales. We remove this source of income by legalizing all drugs, and allow them to be sold in much the same way that alcohol is sold. No other country on Earth has the same problem that the U.S. has with gangs. This is in part because the U.S. has the largest black-market in the world. http://mic.com/articles/98776/the-c...s-in-the-world-in-one-fascinating-interactive If guns were the deciding factor in a nation's murder rate, then Switzerland should be the murder capital of the world.

The main question people should ask themselves is if a problem can be solved by increasing liberties and freedom. If one potential (and deeply flawed) "solution" is to limit personal freedom (i.e., ban all scary guns, and sharp objects) and another potential solution is to INCREASE personal freedom, then you should certainly choose the latter. Choosing otherwise means that you think that all men and women (including yourself) are children, and should not be trusted with anything.
Click to expand...

Exactly it's not the guns that are causing the violence but rather the culture and Socio-Economic conditions. Gangs would indeed take a very heavy hit in the pocket book if drugs where legalized but there are always ways to make money with 2 old standbyes being trafficking in guns and prostitution. We could stop the latter causing any problems by legalizing Prostitution as well but as for the gun trade which is worth a pretty penny globally i really don't see a easy solution for that. Gun laws hardly stop anyone from buying them if they really want them. Gun laws only stop legal gun owners from bothering with getting one if it's too much of a hassle. Though id have to say that in Canada despite what many Canadians think it's not that hard to legally own anything from a handgun to semi auto Assault rifle. Actually most Canadians probably don't even know they can buy one.
 
Last edited:
paranoid android said:
Please you can't compare the OJ case of all fucking things to this kid getting shot and killed by the police. Those are 2 totally different circumstances and OJ had more then enough money to afford one of the best lawyers. Not to mention the LAPD did fuck themselves and certainly didn't help the prosecutors case. Also the prosecutor was abit of a fucking moron if i remember right. If anything that just proves that race has little to do with it while class does have everything to do with it. I don't remember many black people sticking up for.
Click to expand...

At the end of the day an unarmed white woman was killed by a black man and he received no consequence. If you remember the trial his defense team pulled the race card several times alleging OJ was targeted for prosecution because he was black.
 
n a paper titled 'Criminal Violence of NFL Players Compared to the General Population,' they compared arrest data for NFL players and other men for a variety of crimes, including assault (non-domestic), domestic violence, rape, kidnapping, homicide, DUI, drugs, and property offenses. Blumstein and Benedict found that of the 342 black players in their sample, 97 of them, or 28%, had an arrest for one of these crimes.

"There were 77 whites in the sample; seven of them, or 9%, had an arrest[.] Those numbers appear high until we compare them with arrest numbers for the general population. The FBI's Uniform Crime Reports provided the arrest data. For the general population, the arrest rate for assault for black men was 6,990 per 100,00, and for whites, 2,209. The corresponding rate for NFL players, black and white, was less than half the rate for the general population."

I thought crime disparities were caused by socioeconomic circumstances why is there a notable difference in the NFL were the typical player is on a multi-million dollar salary.
 
LosBlancos said:
At the end of the day an unarmed white woman was killed by a black man and he received no consequence. If you remember the trial his defense team pulled the race card several times alleging OJ was targeted for prosecution because he was black.
Click to expand...

You may also want to remember that he had the best legal team money can buy so of course he's going to pull every card he can including using race as a excuse. I certainly am not saying i agree with the verdict (really who doesn't think he killed her?) but that's how our shitty justice system works.
 
LosBlancos said:
n a paper titled 'Criminal Violence of NFL Players Compared to the General Population,' they compared arrest data for NFL players and other men for a variety of crimes, including assault (non-domestic), domestic violence, rape, kidnapping, homicide, DUI, drugs, and property offenses. Blumstein and Benedict found that of the 342 black players in their sample, 97 of them, or 28%, had an arrest for one of these crimes.

"There were 77 whites in the sample; seven of them, or 9%, had an arrest[.] Those numbers appear high until we compare them with arrest numbers for the general population. The FBI's Uniform Crime Reports provided the arrest data. For the general population, the arrest rate for assault for black men was 6,990 per 100,00, and for whites, 2,209. The corresponding rate for NFL players, black and white, was less than half the rate for the general population."

I thought crime disparities were caused by socioeconomic circumstances why is there a notable difference in the NFL were the typical player is on a multi-million dollar salary.
Click to expand...

You may want to read the damn paper - it's online.

I'll quote: "We find two striking observations. First, we note that the NFL rates are less than half the general population rates for both whites and blacks. Second, we find that the NFL fraction is strikingly close for the two racial groups. Thus, even though our initial assessment was that the NFL rates looked very high, we find them well below the rates for the general population."

This group of richer people have lower rates of assault, even though they are rich due to a sport which basically awards and glorifies physical aggression.

You're also ignoring other factors which lead to physical violence, especially domestic violence, and that's a family history of violence. Domestic violence correlates with poverty - which means you need to take the background of these players into effect to draw a meaningful conclusion.
 
^ Oh my fucking jesus he owned himself 8( . Good job there Los Cojones saves other people the trouble ;) . Granted id have never picked up on it cause i kinda hate football no offense meant or anything. Id say that it has to do with the high level of concussions that people in the NFL get. People with brain damage due to concussion can sometimes act violently just like how Alzheimer's patients sometimes act out. But most Alzheimer patients aren't a good 250lbs of muscle or can afford a gun so someone suffering from brain damage from concussions that resemble dementia would actually be dangerous.

The Canadian wrestler Chris Benoit killed his wife and son before killing himself and the doctors think it was the concussions as opposed to the drugs in his system Xanax, Hydrocodone, Testosterone, alcohol and probably a few others i am forgetting. So most likely he would not have been held mentally competent if he hadn't of hung himself after he had killed them. Another shocking fact is that this guy was white 8o
 
Escher's Waterfall said:
You may want to read the damn paper - it's online.

I'll quote: "We find two striking observations. First, we note that the NFL rates are less than half the general population rates for both whites and blacks. Second, we find that the NFL fraction is strikingly close for the two racial groups. Thus, even though our initial assessment was that the NFL rates looked very high, we find them well below the rates for the general population."
Click to expand...

9% is "strikingly close" to 28%? I would personally say that difference is statistically significant.

I guess it's all semantics just like when Murdoch owns a "sizable chunk" of Vice News which turns out to be 5%.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top