I have answered this repeatedly allready but what the hell lets take your point as given
London's murder rate is close enough to NYC's that it can exceed it in reporting periods, London has incredibly strict controls on weapons as does the the whole of the country, NY and the USA does not => weapon laws really don't prevent crime
really I am looking at the graph in that post and seeing New Yorks line go way down and London's have a slight uptrend on murder (which is not the whole of violent crime, NYC really doesn't have much in the way of acid attacks)
That's despite gun rights being affirmed and expanded in the U.S. while in the U.K. you have people talking about tougher restrictions on knives.
Having a dog is a fine idea. Choosing the specific dog based on very emotional reasons was unwise. There are many kinds of dogs that can improve your home security significantly. A "great BIG dog" requires physical exertions by the owners and carries the risk of expensive and demanding medical issues -- not an auspicious choice for an elderly couple who do not have family around to lend them a hand.
Your post analyzing why your neighbors got a dog and then poo pooing their reasons is why libertarians are still around. As crazy they may be interfering scolds are far worse.
Your neighbors made it through their longer lives making their own decisions perhaps they just don't need you.
Yeah I mean that Nuclear War we are having with Korea is going real well. The great depression his election caused has been hard though, and the fact the FCC repealed Net Neutrality has destroyed the internet as well, then he rounded up all the gay people and jews and put them into concentrations camps. I really wasn't for any of that.
Net neutrality has nothing to do with companies controlling what is on a particular site (other than the sites owner) but about the connections between those sites and the viewer.
LOL what does it matter if the sites won't get traffic or be able to monetize their content. Net Neutrality was about keeping the net a free place. Seems Google is happy with it being controlled as long as they not Comcast is doing the controlling.
That's not what net neutrality is. You appear to have a terrifying habit of assuming you are correct when you are not, and not bothering to check whether you are correct in the first place. It would explain an awful lot of what you say, such as when you got your climate change science incorrect and went off in a huff.
Uhmm I did ? Dude I have been poking fingers into thermophopes eyes longer than you have been around and I haven't stopped yet.
Yes, that must be it. Answer me this- how the fuck do you hold down a job being so unforgivably stupid? I know that's a crap word to use, but what the hell else do you call someone so incapable of applying even fundamental logic to an argument they're trying to make?
You just made an argument consisting of nothing but name calling and then complained about lack of logic ?
Anyway here's CNN's Chris Cuomo on the air telling people it's illegal for them to download wikileaks but it's OK for CNN to do it.
So yes I may have been wrong. Ancient aliens at least isn't that bad.
I actually used to defend Google on this sort of thing. Given nothing but the evidence of the search results I would certainly have to agree with you.
Google however has made it's bias evident in the way it treats Youtube videos. Taking a site dedicated to teaching Austrian/Chicago school economics down as hate speech is a bit of a strain. Their decision to deplatform people that make firearm instruction/review videos also indicates ideological bias.
Then there is Eric Schmidt, if you know any former Novell employees you might want to talk to them about him. The phrase crapweasel might come up, also his demands to write drivers in java also might.
If even 1/10th of all the bullshit spewed by US conservative media was true, the whole European continent would be utterly bankrupt, over run by barbarians and on fire
A story about cyclist killed in Tajikistan (not London/UK) reported by the some foreign journal (again not London/UK) , as a counter argument about some part of London NOT being "no-go" as conservative pretend ? And YOU wonder why people don't trust your handling at facts ?
The story about the cyclists was to illustrate your idiocy about perceptions of safety. I should have realized I needed to explain in greater detail.
You being poorly educated on this subject does not change the fact that comparisons in homicide rates between first world nations are considered perfectly valid by those who aren't. They control for all of the typical major exasperating factors like major degrees of poverty, wealth inequality, and government corruption to name a few.
In sociology ? You mean a "Science" where studies can't be reliably replicated
Anyway going back to your idiocy. The violent crime rate in Montana a state with very little regulation of gun ownership 281/100k overall violence comparing that to London it's 2200/100k considering strict violence against the person
"So it seems when you control within the same society gun control laws do not correlate with gun crime rate."
No, they do. That's why every single first world country with strict gun control laws has a vastly lower homicide rate than we do.
What is it you don't understand about the words "SAME SOCIETY" ?
Norway's society is not America's and despite having very strict gun control laws, it did little to stop Anders Brevik.
Good for Switzerland (although you're not telling me anything I didn't know. That's why I phrased what I said the way I did). Small countries are often able to buck the statistical trends. In the social sciences they're typically where you find you're outliers.
So you understood what the words "Same Society" meant you just deliberately ignored the meaning.
If you want to make your point, you have to show that gun ownership rates and degree of restriction on owning guns (NOTE THE AND) have a high correlation to the crime rate and (NOTE THAT AND AGAIN) there aren't other factors that have higher correlation.
Oddly enough the Jacksonville shooting were in a NO GUN ZONE.
Chicago, DC, Baltimore have some of the strictest gun laws in the country yet have amongst the highest gun crime rates.
So it seems when you control within the same society gun control laws do not correlate with gun crime rate.
First world countries with guns ? Switzerland which has universal gun ownership for males up to the age of 30, and the lowest crime rate in the world, destroys the idea that guns cause crime.
you do realize that trump's bad behavior has consequences right? The fact that a conservative fish bowl of news won't say the obvious does not change that fact.
Hey you do realize Google using it's presence to manipulate elections has consequences right ?
The fact that they enjoy legal immunities for being a common carrier can change in a heartbeat
Slashdot Mirror
I have answered this repeatedly allready but what the hell lets take your point as given
London's murder rate is close enough to NYC's that it can exceed it in reporting periods, London has incredibly strict controls on weapons as does the the whole of the country, NY and the USA does not => weapon laws really don't prevent crime
really I am looking at the graph in that post and seeing New Yorks line go way down and London's have a slight uptrend on murder (which is not the whole of violent crime, NYC really doesn't have much in the way of acid attacks)
That's despite gun rights being affirmed and expanded in the U.S. while in the U.K. you have people talking about tougher restrictions on knives.
Having a dog is a fine idea. Choosing the specific dog based on very emotional reasons was unwise. There are many kinds of dogs that can improve your home security significantly. A "great BIG dog" requires physical exertions by the owners and carries the risk of expensive and demanding medical issues -- not an auspicious choice for an elderly couple who do not have family around to lend them a hand.
Your post analyzing why your neighbors got a dog and then poo pooing their reasons is why libertarians are still around. As crazy they may be interfering scolds are far worse.
Your neighbors made it through their longer lives making their own decisions perhaps they just don't need you.
Remember what Reid said about that when challenged ?
Well it worked
Or as I like to point out, Trump says the media is biased against him, 300 newspapers coordinate to write editorials attacking him to prove his point.
Yeah I mean that Nuclear War we are having with Korea is going real well.
The great depression his election caused has been hard though, and the fact the FCC repealed Net Neutrality has destroyed the internet as well, then he rounded up all the gay people and jews and put them into concentrations camps. I really wasn't for any of that.
Net neutrality has nothing to do with companies controlling what is on a particular site (other than the sites owner) but about the connections between those sites and the viewer.
LOL what does it matter if the sites won't get traffic or be able to monetize their content. Net Neutrality was about keeping the net a free place. Seems Google is happy with it being controlled as long as they not Comcast is doing the controlling.
That's not what net neutrality is. You appear to have a terrifying habit of assuming you are correct when you are not, and not bothering to check whether you are correct in the first place. It would explain an awful lot of what you say, such as when you got your climate change science incorrect and went off in a huff.
Uhmm I did ? Dude I have been poking fingers into thermophopes eyes longer than you have been around and I haven't stopped yet.
Oops forgot the link
https://www.realclearpolitics....
Yes, that must be it.
Answer me this- how the fuck do you hold down a job being so unforgivably stupid? I know that's a crap word to use, but what the hell else do you call someone so incapable of applying even fundamental logic to an argument they're trying to make?
You just made an argument consisting of nothing but name calling and then complained about lack of logic ?
Anyway here's CNN's Chris Cuomo on the air telling people it's illegal for them to download wikileaks but it's OK for CNN to do it.
So yes I may have been wrong. Ancient aliens at least isn't that bad.
I actually used to defend Google on this sort of thing. Given nothing but the evidence of the search results I would certainly have to agree with you.
Google however has made it's bias evident in the way it treats Youtube videos. Taking a site dedicated to teaching Austrian/Chicago school economics down as hate speech is a bit of a strain. Their decision to deplatform people that make firearm instruction/review videos also indicates ideological bias.
Then there is Eric Schmidt, if you know any former Novell employees you might want to talk to them about him. The phrase crapweasel might come up, also his demands to write drivers in java also might.
If even 1/10th of all the bullshit spewed by US conservative media was true, the whole European continent would be utterly bankrupt, over run by barbarians and on fire
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://www.independent.co.uk/...
Overrun by barbarians is in progress, how long you think it will be before bankrupt and on fire ? (don't answer that's rhetorical)
Well in this case you are choosing to have none, while your neighbors have a dog.
A story about cyclist killed in Tajikistan (not London/UK) reported by the some foreign journal (again not London/UK) , as a counter argument about some part of London NOT being "no-go" as conservative pretend ? And YOU wonder why people don't trust your handling at facts ?
The story about the cyclists was to illustrate your idiocy about perceptions of safety. I should have realized I needed to explain in greater detail.
I am sorry when was the last time you heard of conservatives pulling a fire alarm to stop libs from speaking ?
Staging a riot to prevent someone visiting a campus ?
Phoning in a bomb threat ?
Shooting a congressman at a baseball game ?
Not me on the cross but a pattern just the same.
LOL you know something like 95% of the country is urban or suburban.
80.7%, actually. As of 2016.
Rural doesn't equal yokel so close enough for government work.
Yes that way California and New York can decide everything.
No need to note that over half of California by territory wants gone from the other half already, from just the system you propose.
That does not remotely prove your point.
"Something like 95% of the country" may not be farmers, but that does not make them urban or suburban, either.
You're just full of bad logic today, aren't you?
Maybe, but I'm not the idiot that is deliberately misinterpreting yokel or trying to say half the country is yokels.
I am also not one of the idiots trying to argue Google doesn't have an ideological bias
You think you are a real American, lets see.
Do you support regulating hate speech ?
Do you think deplatforming is a legitimate response ?
Does the world or the country owe you a living ?
Do you consider yourself a victim of large interests ?
If you answered yes to any of the above you probably aren't a real American, or at the very least you don't believe in the country's social contract.
You being poorly educated on this subject does not change the fact that comparisons in homicide rates between first world nations are considered perfectly valid by those who aren't. They control for all of the typical major exasperating factors like major degrees of poverty, wealth inequality, and government corruption to name a few.
In sociology ? You mean a "Science" where studies can't be reliably replicated
https://www.sciencedaily.com/r...
Anyway going back to your idiocy. The violent crime rate in Montana a state with very little regulation of gun ownership 281/100k overall violence comparing that to London it's 2200/100k considering strict violence against the person
https://www.statista.com/stati...
https://www.bozemandailychroni...
So are you an idiot or just not as well educated as you think you are ?
Oh just going back to the within the same society
Maryland has a violent crime rate of 457/100k
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
But has much stricter gun laws.
Geee It seems the predictive power of your proposition is near zero.
Don't go there man Trump Derangement Syndrome knows no limits.
"So it seems when you control within the same society gun control laws do not correlate with gun crime rate."
No, they do. That's why every single first world country with strict gun control laws has a vastly lower homicide rate than we do.
What is it you don't understand about the words "SAME SOCIETY" ?
Norway's society is not America's and despite having very strict gun control laws, it did little to stop Anders Brevik.
Good for Switzerland (although you're not telling me anything I didn't know. That's why I phrased what I said the way I did). Small countries are often able to buck the statistical trends. In the social sciences they're typically where you find you're outliers.
So you understood what the words "Same Society" meant you just deliberately ignored the meaning.
If you want to make your point, you have to show that gun ownership rates and degree of restriction on owning guns (NOTE THE AND) have a high correlation to the crime rate and (NOTE THAT AND AGAIN) there aren't other factors that have higher correlation.
Apart from murder, crime has actually been moderately worse in England and Wales than in the U.S. for quite a while.
https://www.bloomberg.com/view...
You really need to get your news from a service that makes its living off of being accurate.
Oddly enough the Jacksonville shooting were in a NO GUN ZONE.
Chicago, DC, Baltimore have some of the strictest gun laws in the country yet have amongst the highest gun crime rates.
So it seems when you control within the same society gun control laws do not correlate with gun crime rate.
First world countries with guns ? Switzerland which has universal gun ownership for males up to the age of 30, and the lowest crime rate in the world, destroys the idea that guns cause crime.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://www.usatoday.com/story...
you do realize that trump's bad behavior has consequences right? The fact that a conservative fish bowl of news won't say the obvious does not change that fact.
Hey you do realize Google using it's presence to manipulate elections has consequences right ?
The fact that they enjoy legal immunities for being a common carrier can change in a heartbeat