London is cracking down on knives

[mdram]

Of course they mention the societal factors, don’t be silly. It is most certainly a tool problem though, the research is very clear on that.

Have you switched to just pretending the research doesn’t exist now? Why? Again, why are you so threatened by inconvenient facts?

because libs dont care about facts.
as has been posted, rifle homicide is very rare, you have higher odds of being beaten to death. yet rifles are targeted.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

It definitely doesn’t look like that. Are you just extrapolating NYC’s decline from a very high level into infinity?



Increased gun ownership is associated with increased rates of violent crime. The same weapons you want to use for defense are used far more often to attack. If you want your daughter to be safe the answer is fewer guns, not more.

I'm using the same graph you selected. No bait and switch.

You also ignored what I said about my daughter and my concerns here in this state. The implication being, "well it's only rape".

 

[fskimospy]

Here is the problem I see between our perspectives. I think there can be compromises. You don't. Once you eliminate guns I don't think that will be the end. I believe what will happen is the "compromise" of nothing happening because the vast majority of Americans aren't going to put up with extremists on either side.

Deadlock.

We have been compromising for decades to no avail. Why continue to implement ineffective policies just because they are a compromise? I’m interested in what works.

As to what Americans will put up with I can’t control that, I can only control myself. I’m not willing to accept ineffective policies that cost thousands of lives just because they are centrist.

 

[fskimospy]

I'm using the same graph you selected. No bait and switch.

Right. I don’t think you could possibly say that NYC is on track to be safer than London from that. To do so would be to extrapolate a trend into infinity, which is a bad idea.

You also ignored what I said about my daughter and my concerns here in this state. The implication being, "well it's only rape".

I didn’t ignore it, I’m telling you that your daughter is less safe with guns around, not more.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

You have the same approach to statistical analysis as climate-change deniers.

Whatever makes you sleep well at night.

 

[pmv]

Here's another graph for you.

It would appear that NYC is not unique, far from it in terms of homicide rates from guns. NYC is also not an island and as guns are so very easy to get the decline, relying on NYC laws is problematic as the cause because the facts are that NYC is becoming more like the most of the rest of America and crime as a whole is down. Where this is of note is that other highly regulated cities aren't following this trend.

The homicide rate for that period follows a similar pattern across the developed world, though. Variously it seems to peak in the 70's, 80's or (most often) '90s. Maybe it's to do with numbers of young people, maybe it's lead-in-petrol, maybe it's some strange sociological pattern to do with how societies respond to increasing affluence, maybe it's to do with what drugs were in fashion? All of that is separate from the issue of guns though.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Right. I don’t think you could possibly say that NYC is on track to be safer than London from that. To do so would be to extrapolate a trend into infinity, which is a bad idea.

Well if I had extrapolated a trend to infinity then you'd have a point, but I didn't. I used the very same graph you used for supporting your contention and followed the trend line which most surely did not intersect at infinity.

I didn’t ignore it, I’m telling you that your daughter is less safe with guns around, not more.

You didn't ignore. Very well you dismissed.

 

[pmv]

Whatever makes you sleep well at night.

Nothing makes me sleep well at night, but that has nothing to do with this topic and you still suck at stats.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

The homicide rate for that period follows a similar pattern across the developed world, though. Variously it seems to peak in the 70's, 80's or (most often) '90s. Maybe it's to do with numbers of young people, maybe it's lead-in-petrol, maybe it's some strange sociological pattern to do with how societies respond to increasing affluence, maybe it's to do with what drugs were in fashion? All of that is separate from the issue of guns though.

Wait, so one graph us used as evidence for guns and similar trends can't be. No, it could be that other factors play into it INCLUDING NYC. About that statistical analysis expertise...

 

[pmv]

Wait, so one graph us used as evidence for guns and similar trends can't be. No, it could be that other factors play into it INCLUDING NYC. About that statistical analysis expertise...

Dunno what you are talking about. I haven't used one graph for evidence of anything, I've just questioned your non-evidence based assertions.

 

[fskimospy]

Well if I had extrapolated a trend to infinity then you'd have a point, but I didn't. I used the very same graph you used for supporting your contention and followed the trend line which most surely did not intersect at infinity.

If you don’t extrapolate it out then you can’t say NYC is going to be safer than London.

You didn't ignore. Very well you dismissed.

It’s not a dismissal, I’m just saying that your preferred solution for making your daughter safer is more likely to have the opposite effect. That’s what the research says.

 

[cytg111]

source for the following info: i have lived 4 years in London, between 2007 and 2010.

London is bad. There are vast areas of London that can only be described as "ghettos", where the population is almost exclusively black and/or otherwise migrants, again almost exclusively from poorer countries. Kids are absolutely awful, just about every kid i spoke with told me "when i grow up i want to be a gangster" or variations of the same. None can speak proper english, they have an absurd view of life, some even want to join al-quaeda because "fight the power". I'm not making this up. The level of ignorance among kids in most London suburbs is shocking, be it Peckham, Croydon, Stratford, Hampsted Heath, it doesn't matter. They are so lost and without guidance that they have "postcode wars", where if you are from one postcode, you automatically hate everyone from the other postcode.

Stabbings are a daily occurrence. Kids of any age will go around carrying knives, because it's what you do in London.

That is so fucking sad.

 

[pmv]

Wait, so one graph us used as evidence for guns and similar trends can't be. No, it could be that other factors play into it INCLUDING NYC. About that statistical analysis expertise...

I would say one thing though, which is that gun-control is easier on a small island nation. And also, if you have gun-control, you still need to do something about those social factors. Knife crime in London hasn't risen because knives have suddenly become more available, clearly there are other things going on.

 

[Kneedragger]

[QUOTE="fskimospy, post: 39379325, member: 191266"]Again, this is pointless anecdotal evidence. You understand why it’s pointless, right? That you have to control for societal factors?

Can you give me a reason why you keep ignoring actual empirical research into the topic and instead rely on blog posts? Can you give me any reason other than they tell you what you want to believe?[/QUOTE]

So what you're saying is in Japan because they have social and cultural differences that it can't be used in comparison?

 

[cytg111]

[QUOTE="fskimospy, post: 39379325, member: 191266"]Again, this is pointless anecdotal evidence. You understand why it’s pointless, right? That you have to control for societal factors?

Can you give me a reason why you keep ignoring actual empirical research into the topic and instead rely on blog posts? Can you give me any reason other than they tell you what you want to believe?

So what you're saying is in Japan because they have social and cultural differences that it can't be used in comparison?

Yes. Basically.

 

[mdram]

Yes. Basically.

interesting.
so what allows a specific society to be ignored in the data?

 

[justoh]

clearly there are other things going on.

Poverty. What does a single unemployed male in the UK get? Job seeker's allowance? 40 pounds a week? They gots to gets paid, so they be robbin or selling drugs. Violence is necessary, really or presumed to be. In the US you get nothing at all, except eventually a $60k a year cell.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

If you don’t extrapolate it out then you can’t say NYC is going to be safer than London.



It’s not a dismissal, I’m just saying that your preferred solution for making your daughter safer is more likely to have the opposite effect. That’s what the research says.

Back up a bit. You just changed your contention a solid graph shows a decrease in homicides supposedly linked to NYC gun laws then have to admit that NYC has access anyway, then change "from infinity" to any extrapolation at all. Can I say with perfect certainty? No, but it seems you have no valid reason to say it cannot be. Things other than guns are not ruled out but you've apparently staked your claim on it. With the access to weapons being substantially unchanged the graph seems more likely to be linked to the general decline overall.

You also didn't mention my preferred solution for my daughter. You focused in on guns, completely ignoring that guns weren't even what I was talking about, so you can now provide a means of safety from rape and other violent crime NOT dependent on guns. To recap or clarify- The UK ended guns. People still get raped BTW. So now they take away knives. Rapes will still happen. Going back to the US, NY in particular you mention guns. I mention that in NY virtually ALL means of self defense are banned. Try ordering pepper spray over the internet or go into Dicks. There are two real world weapons allowed, handguns and try to get one in NYC. Only politicians can hand those out to the famous and favored for the majority of cases. But here are knives, you know those things London has banned.

If Cuomo were to decide that it would look good for him he'd pull the same thing because that's how he operates. He would have support from people who pull up statistics from overseas, who say that they can kill. The very same mentality about guns.

Now if that happened (and you know it could with Three Men in a Room) and Cuomo's history of acting unilaterally when it gets him applauded. What then? This will be a "model" state where women have no effective legal defense against harm and rape. "Well at least it wasn't a gun" will not be a consolation.

"But we're not talking knives"? Look at the thread title. Guns weren't enough. When that is true here then other objects will be next.

 

[pmv]

source for the following info: i have lived 4 years in London, between 2007 and 2010.

London is bad. There are vast areas of London that can only be described as "ghettos", where the population is almost exclusively black and/or otherwise migrants, again almost exclusively from poorer countries. Kids are absolutely awful, just about every kid i spoke with told me "when i grow up i want to be a gangster" or variations of the same. None can speak proper english, they have an absurd view of life, some even want to join al-quaeda because "fight the power". I'm not making this up. The level of ignorance among kids in most London suburbs is shocking, be it Peckham, Croydon, Stratford, Hampsted Heath, it doesn't matter. They are so lost and without guidance that they have "postcode wars", where if you are from one postcode, you automatically hate everyone from the other postcode.

Stabbings are a daily occurrence. Kids of any age will go around carrying knives, because it's what you do in London.

This is total codswallop. You _are_ making most of it up. You aren't a Londoner, that's pretty obvious, just an outsider who visited the place for a bit without knowing anything about it. Maybe you believed the shit some clueless middle-class provincials (briefly here between graduating and going back to the home counties to spawn), or some wanna-be 'gangsta' youth who wanted to sound 'street' told you?

There are dimwit kids, there are stabbings, obviously, like any big city, and there's a tiny element of truth in the 'postcode' thing (but it's still exaggerated, gangs don't exist in the nearly-formal, structured way they have done in some US cities) but, really 'vast areas' 'where the population is almost exclusively black'? 'ghettos'? You give yourself away there. You _have_ got to be some white middle-class provincial or foreigner who sees London as a place fully of scary dark-skinned folk and people with funny accents.

Don't speak as if you are an 'expert' on somewhere you clearly don't know at all.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I would say one thing though, which is that gun-control is easier on a small island nation. And also, if you have gun-control, you still need to do something about those social factors. Knife crime in London hasn't risen because knives have suddenly become more available, clearly there are other things going on.

At last a common point of discussion. We're arguing largely about a mean, not causes. I'd suggest the very most important and perhaps hardest (and most ignored) is WHY, and what can and should be done. If I have a nuke (I don't) and could kill millions, I'm a safer person than someone who would pick up a rock and bash your head in. Perhaps that should be at least as marched on DC for as anything else.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

This is total codswallop. You _are_ making most of it up. You aren't a Londoner, that's pretty obvious, just an outsider who visited the place for a bit without knowing anything about it. Maybe you believed the shit some clueless middle-class provincials (briefly here between graduating and going back to the home counties to spawn), or some wanna-be 'gangsta' youth who wanted to sound 'street' told you?

There are dimwit kids, there are stabbings, obviously, like any big city, and there's a tiny element of truth in the 'postcode' thing (but it's still exaggerated, gangs don't exist in the nearly-formal, structured way they have done in some US cities) but, really 'vast areas' 'where the population is almost exclusively black'? 'ghettos'? You give yourself away there. You _have_ got to be some white middle-class provincial or foreigner who sees London as a place fully of scary dark-skinned folk and people with funny accents.

Don't speak as if you are an 'expert' on somewhere you clearly don't know at all.

You live in London I take it?

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

This is total codswallop. You _are_ making most of it up. You aren't a Londoner, that's pretty obvious, just an outsider who visited the place for a bit without knowing anything about it. Maybe you believed the shit some clueless middle-class provincials (briefly here between graduating and going back to the home counties to spawn), or some wanna-be 'gangsta' youth who wanted to sound 'street' told you?

There are dimwit kids, there are stabbings, obviously, like any big city, and there's a tiny element of truth in the 'postcode' thing (but it's still exaggerated, gangs don't exist in the nearly-formal, structured way they have done in some US cities) but, really 'vast areas' 'where the population is almost exclusively black'? 'ghettos'? You give yourself away there. You _have_ got to be some white middle-class provincial or foreigner who sees London as a place fully of scary dark-skinned folk and people with funny accents.

Don't speak as if you are an 'expert' on somewhere you clearly don't know at all.

This sounds like the conversation between any two people that describe a city. One (likely a visitor) states that it's horrifying, the other (likely a resident) states that they're full of crap. Love it.

Except Detroit, that place is a dumpster fire.

 

[cytg111]

interesting.
so what allows a specific society to be ignored in the data?

"I only believe in statistics that I doctored myself"
- Churchill

The point is that there are too many foreign variables muddying the data. You know the saying that 'correlation does not imply causation'? That is sorta what we are dealing with here.

 

[bshole]

London, banning knives. Wow where does lt end.

London has a higher murder rate than NYC. Acid attacks (nonexistent in the past) are now a thing and rising rapidly (500+).

The demographics of England have changed more rapidly in the past 20 years than at any time in its history. Around 40% of Britons no longer feel at home because of immigration, 47% of French and 44% of Germany feel the same way. I suspect extreme and horrible violence in Europe's future. Integration does not appear to be happening at all. There has been a massive rise of the authoritarian alt-right which I would place 100% on the massive influx of immigrants/refugees. All the hallmarks of genocide are flaring up.

https://www.newstatesman.com/world/europe/2017/03/rise-nationalists-guide-europe-s-far-right-parties

https://www.europenowjournal.org/2018/01/31/the-rise-of-the-european-far-right-in-the-internet-age/

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/20995...rts-of-uk-as-country-becomes-more-segregated/

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4016850/acid-attacks-uk-treatment-victims-burns-sufferers/

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-43640475

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...untries-italy-france-germany-uk-a7460301.html

 

[Kneedragger]

So wait... You can push your graph and facts but once they don't work you can pull the "social and cultural differences" for an argument... Hahaha I can't wait to use this for a PR 2A argument when facts aren't accept. Oh wait...

That just made my day..