How do you not see that "three of four major cities" having a problem does not mean we have a national problem? We're literally talking about major portions of our population. When you judge a city's murder rate do you only judge the parts that are doing well or do you judge the whole city? When we measure civilian casualities in Iraq do we only measure the south east where the IS has minimal presence? Why not? Those are the "normal" zones. No, we measure the whole country because otherwise the data would only fulfill wishfull delusion
All you want to do is cut major pieces of data out so the data magically becomes what you so want it to be. Four major urban areas with gun violence so severe they sku our national statistics is a major NATIONAL problem. How do you now see that?
If you actually read my whole post rather then just a single sentence i literally address the car issue. It was literally the primary point of the post. Comparing car deaths and gun deaths is rediculous. Not only are 99.9% of car deaths accidents but cars see infinitly more day to day use then firearms.
None of those other countries are in a fucking drug war..."
Hahahaha. Am i debating a child here?
one of those other countries are in a fucking drug war with the rest of their combined continents. 2/3rds of all "gun violence" "95% of the rest are drug-related.
So gun violence doesnt count when it involves drugs? That's preposterous.
"More people are killed, in America, with hammers than with rifles. More people are killed, in America, be getting punched/kicked to death than with rifles."
We're talking about gun violence not rifle violence. You might as well compare statistics to specific models of gun and get even more imoressive statisitcs. "More people in America are killed by kangaroos each year then they are by WW2 era German Lugars! Guns are safe!"
"Except the FBI reports that the number of people killed with beatings by bats, pipes, and bare hands wildly eclipses the murders committed by any sort of rifle, shotgun, or other "long gun" (including things that look like military assault rifles)."
I'm going to have to ask you to site your source as when I did a quick search on US gun homicides i came across this on a wikipedia page on the topic
"In 2010, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 67% of all homicides in the U.S. were conducted using a firearm."
"We've had multiple murders in our area just in the last couple of weeks. Stabbings, all of them."
Homicides, violent crime, and gun violence all happen disproportionally in major urban areas. For the life of me i dont understand how you think cutting out four of them is cutting out outliers (and not even adjusting other country's data) when major cities are exactly where these sorts of problems happen. So other countries major urban areas dont have hyper violent cities like we do? The whole point of a country by country comparison of homicide rates is to see that. If you cut out the worst of the urban areas in one and only one country then the statistic is worthless.
Cutting out outliers would be cutting out a town of 20 people where 10 people were murdered in a year. Half the population of that town was killed! That is an outlier. Cutting out 4 of Americas largest urban areas out of a statistic and then claiming the resulting statistic relevent to anything is rediculous.
No, you're not getting it. There are places in EVERY country that are "far far more violent". Generally speaking they are called "major urban areas". Not only is a major urban area not a statistical outlier virtually by deffinition but AGAIN, you can't cut data out of one country's statistics and not others when comparing countries. It's literally the very deffinition of the phrase "cherry picking".
Also, to address your side issue, regional gun laws (particularly in the case of individual cities) in the US are worthless.The guns just come in from outside the region.
When did I apply good or evil identifiers to anything? Those are your words, not mine.
And guns, while not the best, are quite good at killing people. That's why militaries use them. At close range they are essentially point and click devices.
So it's an "emotional arguement" when i point out we have 4 times the homicide rate of other Western countries and a gun violence rate that's through the roof? Shoot, all your statistc does is point out just how awash we are in guns and coupled with mine clearly details how guns are making us less safe, not more.
No, all you've done is pointed out some outlier information. If somebody uses meth to treat a low energy medical condition it doesnt all of a sudden make meth a constructive substance
You cant cut out some of our largest population centers and leave other countries ones in and not call that cherry picking. ALL countries have more violent regions then others.
Is that true of homicide rates? Violent crime rates are very comparible between the US and the rest of the West. Homicide rates on the other hand are through the roof because it's so much easier to kill some one with a gun.
I'm well aware of the downward trend of violent crime happening in the West, thankyou very much. That does nothing to change the fact that we have a homicide rate 4 times that of any other Western nation. Some third world countries have better homicide rates then us.
How about addressing the root problem of our excessive gun violence, there's too many guns!
People are going to do violent things. Other Western nations dohave very comparible violent crime rates. We have such a higher homicide rate because we are literally awash in guns. When criminal elements or the mentally unstable types commit violent acts (which happens everywhere) they are so much more likely to do it with a gun here because guns are everywhere in this country. This then ends with far more death then you would see otherwise because firearms are so effective at what they do. Kill people.
As for "violating the rights" of US citizens, we restrict ownership on all sorts of dangerous items. Is the US government oppressing us because we cant legally own an AA gun? It's a form of arms isnt it?
"The show doesn't have intellectual humor - it just makes you think it does..."
I think you just hit the nail on the head in regards to why I've never liked the show. When Homer goes "Doh" the Simpsons are clearly appealling to my "inner dummy". When I've watched Big Bang Theory I feel like the show is trying to appeal to my "inner intellectual" but is really just dumb jokes. That change up doesnt work for me at all. It feels like the show is insulting me.
Also I find every character I've seen on the show to be whiney, pathetic, and completely unlikable but that's a side issue.
Watney is hit by debris and whisked away. An astronaut asks how long he could survive if his suit was breached (or something like that). A) That question would not be asked, they would know...
This is a very standard movie technique used to inform the viewer. Sure, an astronaut would most likely already know that but the point of is to convey the information to the viewer while keeping the story going rather then creating a scene specifically to convey this little bit of info. If this technique bothers you... well you're just going to be bothered by modern cinema.
We have murder rates and mass shootings far beyond that of any other Western nation. The Left (and many moderates to give due credit) say "maybe we should do more to reign back these problems" and suggest a variety of possible solutions. Meanwhile the NRA backing portion of the Right suggests flooding even more and more powerfull guns onto the market in the hopes that even more guns will reverse the trend of gun violence in this country.
A) Teenagers use their parents cars at far greater rates then they use their guns so gross number comparisons are irrelevant B) Cars are tools whose intended purpose is to move people about. Guns, aside from hunting rifles, are tools designed first and foremost for killing people. Sure, cars can and do kill people but so can just about anything. Guns are singled out because they dont have any other use and they do it so much better then anything else.
Well they live in third world countries, it's to be expected. Only when the West gained afluence for the masses did it ditch the sort of extremism you see in the rest of the world and it doesnt matter what religion they are. Just look up what was happening in CAR last year with Christian militias getting doped up out of their heads and literally hacking up muslim villagers with machetes.
Raising them selves out of this status is doubly hard for the Middle East (and Africa too) because they lack the common ethnic bonds that European countries obtained through hundreds of years of war and slaughter. Having your boarders drawn for colonial convenience rather then along ethnic lines is a real drag.
In the context of the arrest of this kid, we have a nerdy suburban kid with a clock getting arrested. It's not much of a stretch of the imagination that there could have been other issues such as his ethnicity playing a part in his arrest. In other words, suburban nerdy kid with a clock doesnt seem like a good reason to call the cops.
Slashdot Mirror
"Severe cultural problem" Like a hang up on guns?
How do you not see that "three of four major cities" having a problem does not mean we have a national problem? We're literally talking about major portions of our population. When you judge a city's murder rate do you only judge the parts that are doing well or do you judge the whole city? When we measure civilian casualities in Iraq do we only measure the south east where the IS has minimal presence? Why not? Those are the "normal" zones. No, we measure the whole country because otherwise the data would only fulfill wishfull delusion
All you want to do is cut major pieces of data out so the data magically becomes what you so want it to be. Four major urban areas with gun violence so severe they sku our national statistics is a major NATIONAL problem. How do you now see that?
No, I completely understand what a long gun is versus a handgun. I, however, am talking about gun violence, not "long gun violence".
If you actually read my whole post rather then just a single sentence i literally address the car issue. It was literally the primary point of the post. Comparing car deaths and gun deaths is rediculous. Not only are 99.9% of car deaths accidents but cars see infinitly more day to day use then firearms.
Yeah, I'm the stupid one...
"Huhr duhr western countries! I am a retard!
None of those other countries are in a fucking drug war..."
Hahahaha. Am i debating a child here?
one of those other countries are in a fucking drug war with the rest of their combined continents. 2/3rds of all "gun violence"
"95% of the rest are drug-related.
So gun violence doesnt count when it involves drugs? That's preposterous.
"More people are killed, in America, with hammers than with rifles.
More people are killed, in America, be getting punched/kicked to death than with rifles."
We're talking about gun violence not rifle violence. You might as well compare statistics to specific models of gun and get even more imoressive statisitcs. "More people in America are killed by kangaroos each year then they are by WW2 era German Lugars! Guns are safe!"
"Except the FBI reports that the number of people killed with beatings by bats, pipes, and bare hands wildly eclipses the murders committed by any sort of rifle, shotgun, or other "long gun" (including things that look like military assault rifles)."
I'm going to have to ask you to site your source as when I did a quick search on US gun homicides i came across this on a wikipedia page on the topic
"In 2010, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 67% of all homicides in the U.S. were conducted using a firearm."
"We've had multiple murders in our area just in the last couple of weeks. Stabbings, all of them."
Anecdotal data. Irrelevant.
Homicides, violent crime, and gun violence all happen disproportionally in major urban areas. For the life of me i dont understand how you think cutting out four of them is cutting out outliers (and not even adjusting other country's data) when major cities are exactly where these sorts of problems happen. So other countries major urban areas dont have hyper violent cities like we do? The whole point of a country by country comparison of homicide rates is to see that. If you cut out the worst of the urban areas in one and only one country then the statistic is worthless.
Cutting out outliers would be cutting out a town of 20 people where 10 people were murdered in a year. Half the population of that town was killed! That is an outlier. Cutting out 4 of Americas largest urban areas out of a statistic and then claiming the resulting statistic relevent to anything is rediculous.
No, you're not getting it. There are places in EVERY country that are "far far more violent". Generally speaking they are called "major urban areas". Not only is a major urban area not a statistical outlier virtually by deffinition but AGAIN, you can't cut data out of one country's statistics and not others when comparing countries. It's literally the very deffinition of the phrase "cherry picking".
Also, to address your side issue, regional gun laws (particularly in the case of individual cities) in the US are worthless.The guns just come in from outside the region.
When did I apply good or evil identifiers to anything? Those are your words, not mine.
And guns, while not the best, are quite good at killing people. That's why militaries use them. At close range they are essentially point and click devices.
You dont understand how numbers work, do you?
So it's an "emotional arguement" when i point out we have 4 times the homicide rate of other Western countries and a gun violence rate that's through the roof? Shoot, all your statistc does is point out just how awash we are in guns and coupled with mine clearly details how guns are making us less safe, not more.
No, all you've done is pointed out some outlier information. If somebody uses meth to treat a low energy medical condition it doesnt all of a sudden make meth a constructive substance
You cant cut out some of our largest population centers and leave other countries ones in and not call that cherry picking. ALL countries have more violent regions then others.
So talking about guns when we're talking about gun violence is strictly forbidden?
Is that true of homicide rates? Violent crime rates are very comparible between the US and the rest of the West. Homicide rates on the other hand are through the roof because it's so much easier to kill some one with a gun.
So suicide is alright then?
I'm well aware of the downward trend of violent crime happening in the West, thankyou very much. That does nothing to change the fact that we have a homicide rate 4 times that of any other Western nation. Some third world countries have better homicide rates then us.
How about addressing the root problem of our excessive gun violence, there's too many guns!
People are going to do violent things. Other Western nations dohave very comparible violent crime rates. We have such a higher homicide rate because we are literally awash in guns. When criminal elements or the mentally unstable types commit violent acts (which happens everywhere) they are so much more likely to do it with a gun here because guns are everywhere in this country. This then ends with far more death then you would see otherwise because firearms are so effective at what they do. Kill people.
As for "violating the rights" of US citizens, we restrict ownership on all sorts of dangerous items. Is the US government oppressing us because we cant legally own an AA gun? It's a form of arms isnt it?
So if we cherry pick our data then we're awesome? That's not very insitefull.
Hahaha. Oh god some one please up vote this.
"The show doesn't have intellectual humor - it just makes you think it does..."
I think you just hit the nail on the head in regards to why I've never liked the show. When Homer goes "Doh" the Simpsons are clearly appealling to my "inner dummy". When I've watched Big Bang Theory I feel like the show is trying to appeal to my "inner intellectual" but is really just dumb jokes. That change up doesnt work for me at all. It feels like the show is insulting me.
Also I find every character I've seen on the show to be whiney, pathetic, and completely unlikable but that's a side issue.
Plenty of fair points but in regards to this one
Watney is hit by debris and whisked away. An astronaut asks how long he could survive if his suit was breached (or something like that). A) That question would not be asked, they would know...
This is a very standard movie technique used to inform the viewer. Sure, an astronaut would most likely already know that but the point of is to convey the information to the viewer while keeping the story going rather then creating a scene specifically to convey this little bit of info. If this technique bothers you... well you're just going to be bothered by modern cinema.
"Guns, aside from hunting rifles, are tools designed first and foremost for killing people."
So .01 of Americans have a side use for them. What's your point?
Right, the Left is the problem.
We have murder rates and mass shootings far beyond that of any other Western nation. The Left (and many moderates to give due credit) say "maybe we should do more to reign back these problems" and suggest a variety of possible solutions. Meanwhile the NRA backing portion of the Right suggests flooding even more and more powerfull guns onto the market in the hopes that even more guns will reverse the trend of gun violence in this country.
That's not a terribly strong comparison because
A) Teenagers use their parents cars at far greater rates then they use their guns so gross number comparisons are irrelevant
B) Cars are tools whose intended purpose is to move people about. Guns, aside from hunting rifles, are tools designed first and foremost for killing people. Sure, cars can and do kill people but so can just about anything. Guns are singled out because they dont have any other use and they do it so much better then anything else.
Well they live in third world countries, it's to be expected. Only when the West gained afluence for the masses did it ditch the sort of extremism you see in the rest of the world and it doesnt matter what religion they are. Just look up what was happening in CAR last year with Christian militias getting doped up out of their heads and literally hacking up muslim villagers with machetes.
Raising them selves out of this status is doubly hard for the Middle East (and Africa too) because they lack the common ethnic bonds that European countries obtained through hundreds of years of war and slaughter. Having your boarders drawn for colonial convenience rather then along ethnic lines is a real drag.
In the context of the arrest of this kid, we have a nerdy suburban kid with a clock getting arrested. It's not much of a stretch of the imagination that there could have been other issues such as his ethnicity playing a part in his arrest. In other words, suburban nerdy kid with a clock doesnt seem like a good reason to call the cops.