Another mass shooting

[fskimospy]

I'm thinking in terms of population and both are very low compared to other cities. I'll ask the question I asked pmv- looking internally at cities that have strict gun laws and access from other areas to firearms, why is there such variation between cities?

I'd love to see some well written analysis of historical comparisons between cities over time over the last century until now. I know of no such work that is of academic quality.

I would have to research the difference in gun laws between NYC and Lansing although I suspect New York's are considerably tougher. That being said, one of the problems with gun laws in the US is that they only apply in the state they're in and it's super easy to transport guns across state lines as you mention.

As for the rest I don't have too many good answers, my gut says that the greater economic opportunities offered in NYC vs. various rust belt towns probably makes it less likely for people to become involved in crime generally, and then shootings specifically.

 

[pmv]

I'm thinking in terms of population and both are very low compared to other cities. I'll ask the question I asked pmv- looking internally at cities that have strict gun laws and access from other areas to firearms, why is there such variation between cities?

I'd love to see some well written analysis of historical comparisons between cities over time over the last century until now. I know of no such work that is of academic quality.

That's a more reasonable question. Though you surely should add the corollary of why NYC's murder rate (and crime rate generally?) is lower now than it used to be (even, as I understand it, allowing for the global fall in violent crime since the '90s, which is it's own puzzle, NYC has fallen even more). I would guess the answer is a complex mixture of social and economic and legal factors.

London, though, has a substantially-lower murder rate than any comparable US city, and personally I think 'guns' is a big part of the reason.

 

[SlowSpyder]

True enough. So why isn't it a headline? Why aren't there candlelight vigils and congress critters calling for more gun laws? What's the difference between people getting shot down in the street every single day or at a garlic festival? Is it simply that in Chicago they're being killed in ones and twos and we have a threshold that has to be met? Tell me why it's different, tell me why it's business as usual in that city and a massacre everywhere else.

561 homicides in Chicago in 2018. They don't care because it was one here, two there. I don't get it either.

 

[Commodus]

I was going to say -- while Chicago's gun violence remains a serious problem, Slow, Luna and others are intentionally deceptive when focusing on it. They want to give the false impression that its violence is inherently the product of gun control when some of the highest per capita gun violence rates are in Republican-dominated states and cities, including particularly gun-friendly places like Texas.

The reality is that some gun violence problems have to be addressed on a federal level, both through tighter regulation and through underlying social issues. That includes greater economic and educational opportunities, not to mention more affordable health care for mental issues. And while people like Slow will never admit it, you need to vote Democrat to make those happen.

 

[fskimospy]

I was going to say -- while Chicago's gun violence remains a serious problem, Slow, Luna and others are intentionally deceptive when focusing on it. They want to give the false impression that its violence is inherently the product of gun control when some of the highest per capita gun violence rates are in Republican-dominated states and cities, including particularly gun-friendly places like Texas.

The reality is that some gun violence problems have to be addressed on a federal level, both through tighter regulation and through underlying social issues. That includes greater economic and educational opportunities, not to mention more affordable health care for mental issues. And while people like Slow will never admit it, you need to vote Democrat to make those happen.

They also dishonestly attempt to argue that liberals don't care about inner city gun violence while simultaneously furiously fighting against any attempt by liberals to combat inner city gun violence.

 

[Victorian Gray]

561 homicides in Chicago in 2018. They don't care because it was one here, two there. I don't get it either.

#fuckofftroll

 

[ch33zw1z]

561 homicides in Chicago in 2018. They don't care because it was one here, two there. I don't get it either.

Dishonest at best. I'm willing to half the War on Drugs asap, which is a main reason for inner city violence. There's two very different ideals at play here, both matter. If you don't get it, it's because you choose to stay ignorant. /shocking

 

[pmv]

True enough. So why isn't it a headline? Why aren't there candlelight vigils and congress critters calling for more gun laws? What's the difference between people getting shot down in the street every single day or at a garlic festival? Is it simply that in Chicago they're being killed in ones and twos and we have a threshold that has to be met? Tell me why it's different, tell me why it's business as usual in that city and a massacre everywhere else.

Same reason, I guess, why millions of individual road-traffic deaths don't get the same attention as a single large plane or train crash. It's more dramatic and probably seems like an easier problem to get a handle on.

But people do call for more gun laws because of the steady statistical accumulation of individual shootings, just as they call for improved road safety (or, in my case, a war on motorists) in response to the steady accumulation of individual road deaths.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Conservatives: violence among black people shows liberals don’t really care about gun violence.

Liberals: okay, let’s pass tighter gun laws to make these shootings less likely.

Conservatives: no.

Because that's a stupid way to go about the problem, to take away long standing rights. We could save hundreds of thousand of children a year by outlawing abortion, are you for that? Or do you understand that sometimes things are more complicated then your inane purposely dumb post above? How about the left stops fooling minorities in large into believing their path forward is non-existent, that they cannot achieve because of the evil racist colonial white man holding them back. Instead of exploiting minorities for fear votes would be a great step to making things better in minority communities, but that isn't useful to the Democrats.

 

[fskimospy]

Because that's a stupid way to go about the problem, to take away long standing rights. We could save hundreds of thousand of children a year by outlawing abortion, are you for that? Or do you understand that sometimes things are more complicated then your inane purposely dumb post above?

The empirical research shows gun control is effective at reducing homicide and suicide. I know this fact hurts your feelings but facts don’t care about your feelings.

The rest of this relies upon me assuming your made up, non-legal definition of what a child is. I decline!

How about the left stops fooling minorities in large into believing their path forward is non-existent, that they cannot achieve because of the evil racist colonial white man holding them back. Instead of exploiting minorities for fear votes would be a great step to making things better in minority communities, but that isn't useful to the Democrats.

Oh good, another crazed George Wallace style rant from the guy who supports a lifelong racist.

Yes though, I’m sure black people are terribly confused and don’t understand that the guy supported by the Nazis and the KKK is really the one who has their best interests at heart. Lol.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Because that's a stupid way to go about the problem, to take away long standing rights. We could save hundreds of thousand of children a year by outlawing abortion, are you for that? Or do you understand that sometimes things are more complicated then your inane purposely dumb post above? How about the left stops fooling minorities in large into believing their path forward is non-existent, that they cannot achieve because of the evil racist colonial white man holding them back. Instead of exploiting minorities for fear votes would be a great step to making things better in minority communities, but that isn't useful to the Democrats.

#fuckofftroll

 

[SlowSpyder]

The empirical research shows gun control is effective at reducing homicide and suicide. I know this fact hurts your feelings but facts don’t care about your feelings.

The rest of this relies upon me assuming your made up, non-legal definition of what a child is. I decline!



Oh good, another crazed George Wallace style rant from the guy who supports a lifelong racist.

Yes though, I’m sure black people are terribly confused and don’t understand that the guy supported by the Nazis and the KKK is really the one who has their best interests at heart. Lol.

Sure, if we ban guns there will be less harm caused by them. That doesn't mean it is the right way to go about the problem. If there were less mean things said there could be less suicide, but that doesn't mean we should take away rights.

KKK and Nazis? No, that isn't what the vast majority of us on the right are about. I'm as against them as you are. The Democrats have done a stellar job in pulling the wool over the eyes of minorities. Keep them on the plantation, right? Siding with the right would certainly lead to a more prosperous future than being told they can't, don't bother, be a victim, the white man is evil, you need the government to provide.

 

[fskimospy]

Sure, if we ban guns there will be less harm caused by them. That doesn't mean it is the right way to go about the problem. If there were less mean things said there could be less suicide, but that doesn't mean we should take away rights.

KKK and Nazis? No, that isn't what the vast majority of us on the right are about. I'm as against them as you are. The Democrats have done a stellar job in pulling the wool over the eyes of minorities. Keep them on the plantation, right? Siding with the right would certainly lead to a more prosperous future than being told they can't, don't bother, be a victim, the white man is evil, you need the government to provide.

Got it, you're saying that siding with a lifelong racist supported by the Nazis and the KKK is the best thing for black people.

I'm totally shocked they disagree with you. lol.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Sure, if we ban guns there will be less harm caused by them. That doesn't mean it is the right way to go about the problem. If there were less mean things said there could be less suicide, but that doesn't mean we should take away rights.

KKK and Nazis? No, that isn't what the vast majority of us on the right are about. I'm as against them as you are. The Democrats have done a stellar job in pulling the wool over the eyes of minorities. Keep them on the plantation, right? Siding with the right would certainly lead to a more prosperous future than being told they can't, don't bother, be a victim, the white man is evil, you need the government to provide.

Lying propaganda monkey needs some new scripts. Talk to your boss. But don't worry, eventually you'll earn that silver shirt.