This is true. Looking at that report shows a clear economic demographic (the poor) and certain neighborhoods.
But again, you’re line of reasoning doesn’t hold water. Yes there are people who are falsely arrested, or arrested for minor crimes others might get a pass on. But most of them are not also committing murder as well. This study focuses on just the murders. Are we to believe that most of these people are other wise law abiding people who just got caught up in a biased system against them, and then one day decided to commit murder? Or the more likely event that they were involved in illicit activities and things escalated over time?
Perhaps you have lost track of the thread. I was asking why victims arrest history is relevant. I still haven’t heard an answer. Most victims are not “committing murder as well.” Geez.
OH, ok. I think it is relevant because while they aren’t committing murder, they are also involved in illicit activities. If you are involved with thieves, drug dealers, and other violent people, you are definitely more likely to get mixed up in something like getting killed for what ever reason. Something is going on within that circle of people that begets violence. Certainly it isn’t EVERY victim, especially from like domestic violence. But I think the numbers are significant.
That is a brilliant business idea. C4, thermite, fertilizer, etc. Don’t give out techniques or formulas, but let people responsible set off explosions. I am sure the ‘sodium lake’ will be a huge draw. We could even just market it as Civil Engineering School.
Flash-type and concussive bombs would also likely be popular. And while I don’t want to advocate for munitions that are too big… Igniting compressed hydrogen and burning a small amount of the atmosphere would look amazing.
I am sure there are places in Nevada we could pull this off. And the sand that turns into glass would make great souvenirs.
Totally serious. I don’t protect my home with an ar-15, I protect it with insane oxidizers and unstable chemicals. And tiger traps .
Without guns how will we threaten the lives of, or murder, people for our own safety?
Gun are obviously keeping everyone safer, it isn’t like all the countries with the most violent crimes have more guns or anything…errr…well it is too late now…errrr…people can make their own guns…shutup…pow pow pow…argument solved, see guns are a solution!
I cannot help but think that history will look back on this notion as absolutely barbaric and shortsighted. Violence isn’t the correct answer to violence, it almost always makes the problem worse not better.
Or the responsible gun owner who, while changing clothes at a Macy’s store, left his fanny pack with hand gun in the changing room? And retrieved it five hours later?
Or the responsible gun owner that left loaded .22 rifles next to the door with two young but curious children?
Or the responsible gun owner with an unsecured hand gun at his waist that walked into a baskin Robbins in Arizona?
Or the dozens of responsible gun owners I know that take old TVs and junk into the mountains, shoot them up,and leave them there?
Or the responsible gun owners I’ve met that illegally hunt in a mushroom grove with mushroom hunters?
Or the responsible gun owner who, when I was helping him move, found a loaded hand gun in a desk that he, and I quote, “wow, forgot about that one”?
Andecdata, sure. But most gun owners I know and have observed, in Oregon, California, Washington, and Arizona aren’t what I would deem responsible.
Call me emotional. The murder rate in the United States is off the hook. And what gun control laws we have are a joke. If easy access to guns isn’t at least partly responsible then why are we so murderous?
First off, what do you consider “easy access”? What is the law now that you would see altered?
Second, that is a great question, and one I don’t have the answer to, other than perhaps it is a cultural thing? If you look at other developed countries with high gun ownership, their murder rate isn’t as bad as ours. At the same time, compared to less developed nations with high gun ownership, our murder rate should be much, much higher if weapons access were the main correlation to murders.
Even if we magically removed all guns in the US tomorrow, the reasons for the crime would still exist. Deaths might even go down some as knives and clubs aren’t as effective tools. But criminals would also be emboldened. Right now I stand a chance in hell against an attacker in my home. With my gammy leg and no equalizer, I would have little to no chance. Or I’d have to take sword lessons.
Sure you can. The US has more firearms in circulation than [every other comparable country in the world] and- not coincidentally - has more firearms carnage than [every other comparable country in the world].
I mean, the US is doing great, gun deaths wise, compared to Syria and Somalia, but that’s not really a comparison that flatters anyone.
Correlation does not imply causation, but it does waggle its eyebrows suggestively and gesture furtively while mouthing “look over there.”
