Good place to repeat this since Sapper doesn't seem to get it.Rongagin71 said:This is where I resort to the old Nortex happy crier - if you really think crime rates from out of control, often anti-police cities, are valid as compared to cities that actually collect crime data at a much higher rate of competency than the poorly run Dem-monopolized cities.Sapper Redux said:
Chicago is always the boogeyman. Funny that. Can't imagine why. It's violent crime rates are far better than many cities and counties in red states.
And Chicago has gone way beyond boogeyman in certain areas of the city.
America
20,831 Views |
410 Replies |
Last: 2 yr ago by Zobel
Sapper Redux said:Chicago has a lower per capita crime rate than Nashville, Anchorage, Little Rock, St. Louis, Springfield, MO, Cleveland, and 13 other American cities.chap said:Sapper Redux said:
Chicago is always the boogeyman. Funny that. Can't imagine why. It's violent crime rates are far better than many cities and counties in red states.
Holy crap. I've been on vacation and off texags. But what is this? And I assume the five likes are jokesters??
By all means, provide evidence of this.Rongagin71 said:Good place to repeat this since Sapper doesn't seem to get it.Rongagin71 said:This is where I resort to the old Nortex happy crier - if you really think crime rates from out of control, often anti-police cities, are valid as compared to cities that actually collect crime data at a much higher rate of competency than the poorly run Dem-monopolized cities.Sapper Redux said:
Chicago is always the boogeyman. Funny that. Can't imagine why. It's violent crime rates are far better than many cities and counties in red states.
And Chicago has gone way beyond boogeyman in certain areas of the city.
Again I've got him on ignore for a reason, but DGU (Defensive Gun Use) is skyrocketing in Chicago. No, they don't keep a lot of good stats on crime there of course, but it is interesting that blacks in Dem plantations where BLM riots/anti-police governments have destroyed law enforcement and encouraged violence/shootings is leading to a renewal of armed citizenry.Rongagin71 said:Good place to repeat this since Sapper doesn't seem to get it.Rongagin71 said:This is where I resort to the old Nortex happy crier - if you really think crime rates from out of control, often anti-police cities, are valid as compared to cities that actually collect crime data at a much higher rate of competency than the poorly run Dem-monopolized cities.Sapper Redux said:
Chicago is always the boogeyman. Funny that. Can't imagine why. It's violent crime rates are far better than many cities and counties in red states.
And Chicago has gone way beyond boogeyman in certain areas of the city.
People are not as dumb as their overlords think; they know they can't count on the police to show up when a bad guy with a gun yet again appears quickly/repeatedly. The right answer to the lawlessness the American left has embraced isn't to confiscate guns from the law abiding, but to increase gun ownership, and then fix the policies/change the wannabe-rulers (like beetlejuice) in office via elections.
I think that is what has many so panicked about 'gun control' policies (though some on this thread have admitted to having no concern at all for inner city violence, only being worried about demonic attacks on schools in whiter areas). They know they are losing some of their key dependent true believers/voters.
I look forward to the day when you use an actual source.
You said "Your odds in the US are much higher than zero." If you look at it as the entire general population of the US, your odds are about the same as being struck by lightning. "Much higher than zero" is hard to parse, but for me 0.000004 doesn't get there. And again, you say "your odds" - who is you? Me? My odds of being in a mass shooting are probably two orders of magnitude less than even that tiny number because I don't involve myself in gang or drug related activity. One in a million is a rounding error. I'm much more concerned about a car wreck, or choking while eating. Which is to say, not very much as I still drive 50+ miles a day and talk while chewing sometimes.
It's stupid to say that 2 in 500,000 is much higher than zero, when that number itself is subject to an order of magnitude range within our own statistics because we don't have a common definition of mass shootings. So what is the comparative figure in "every other developed nation" and how did you deal with that?
It's kind of funny to whine about engagement. You provided an argument with no backing, I provided sourced statistical framework to evaluate the incident rate, and you go off on a non-sequitur about intimate partner violence and suicide - neither of which contribute to mass shootings. Focus please.
It's stupid to say that 2 in 500,000 is much higher than zero, when that number itself is subject to an order of magnitude range within our own statistics because we don't have a common definition of mass shootings. So what is the comparative figure in "every other developed nation" and how did you deal with that?
It's kind of funny to whine about engagement. You provided an argument with no backing, I provided sourced statistical framework to evaluate the incident rate, and you go off on a non-sequitur about intimate partner violence and suicide - neither of which contribute to mass shootings. Focus please.
Here's a fun "more than zero" way to look at it. The US has had 129 mass shootings since 1982, according to Mother Jones.
These resulted in 2526 casualties (killed + injured). Over that period of time the US population went from 237 million to 332 million for a naiive average of 285 million people. The average rate is then 4.4 per 500,000.
In Norway there have been exactly two mass shootings since 1982, resulting in 141 casualties. Over that period of time Norway's population went from 4.1 million to 5.5 million, for a naiive average of 4.8 million people. The average rate is then 14.7 per 500,000.
So over the last forty years you're 3 times more likely to have been wounded or killed in a mass shooting incident in Norway than in the US.
Oh but that's just one really bad outlier? Ok fine, what about the rate?
Over the same period those 129 mass shootings average out to 3.2 per year per 285 million people, or 0.011 mass shooting per million people per year. In Norway those two mass shootings average out to 0.05 per year per 4.8 million people, or 0.010 mass shootings per million people per year. So we could say over the same period you're 8% more likely to be in a mass shooting in the US, but 3x more likely to be injured or killed in Norway.
From this my takeaway is that Norwegian mass shooters are slightly less frequent but significantly more effective than US mass shooters.
These resulted in 2526 casualties (killed + injured). Over that period of time the US population went from 237 million to 332 million for a naiive average of 285 million people. The average rate is then 4.4 per 500,000.
In Norway there have been exactly two mass shootings since 1982, resulting in 141 casualties. Over that period of time Norway's population went from 4.1 million to 5.5 million, for a naiive average of 4.8 million people. The average rate is then 14.7 per 500,000.
So over the last forty years you're 3 times more likely to have been wounded or killed in a mass shooting incident in Norway than in the US.
Oh but that's just one really bad outlier? Ok fine, what about the rate?
Over the same period those 129 mass shootings average out to 3.2 per year per 285 million people, or 0.011 mass shooting per million people per year. In Norway those two mass shootings average out to 0.05 per year per 4.8 million people, or 0.010 mass shootings per million people per year. So we could say over the same period you're 8% more likely to be in a mass shooting in the US, but 3x more likely to be injured or killed in Norway.
From this my takeaway is that Norwegian mass shooters are slightly less frequent but significantly more effective than US mass shooters.
Swimmerbabe's twitter thread up above is a good discussion of mass killings. It's just not convenient to some so they ignore it all.
We can attribute it to ignorance just as easily. It's very difficult, I think, to live in the media environment we do today and not come away with the "obvious" conclusion.
But what is less obvious, I think, is that mass shootings are already extremely infrequent... we just live in a very large country. Even with the Norway thing the temptation is to say, well they've only had two in forty years. Yes, but their entire country is smaller than any of our top 9 metropolitan areas. If you take their 2 events in forty years per 5 million and multiply it to match our country population of 330 million you get.. 130 vs our 129.
When something is so small as to only happen less than one per hundred million people per year things get pretty dicey statistically. That means Norway should have one event every twenty years, and they're on pace. But if you think about this in a much more complex way they could have a handful of events back to back, then none for a very long time. Sort of how randomness impacts baseball homeruns - statistically many people can hit 50+ home runs per season, practically few do because to a large extent it is random. You need a run of what amounts to luck... good luck to break a record in baseball, bad luck to have a mean-breaking mass shooting event.
In the US we have the unfortunate luxury of a much, much larger sample size. So things which are so infrequent as to appear to be complete statistical outliers in other countries - and therefore reasonable to remove from the sample - are more regular here. Again we can refer back to baseball, though: even in a sport with a very large sample size, some 750,000 pitches per season, we still see this streaky statistical performance vs flat odds. Norway could bust their 40 year trend with only one or two events "out of time" and it still wouldn't seem like they have the same problem as we do.
And yet none of this even considers their 90s mass killing with a crazy person wielding swords / knives and a bow and arrow.
But what is less obvious, I think, is that mass shootings are already extremely infrequent... we just live in a very large country. Even with the Norway thing the temptation is to say, well they've only had two in forty years. Yes, but their entire country is smaller than any of our top 9 metropolitan areas. If you take their 2 events in forty years per 5 million and multiply it to match our country population of 330 million you get.. 130 vs our 129.
When something is so small as to only happen less than one per hundred million people per year things get pretty dicey statistically. That means Norway should have one event every twenty years, and they're on pace. But if you think about this in a much more complex way they could have a handful of events back to back, then none for a very long time. Sort of how randomness impacts baseball homeruns - statistically many people can hit 50+ home runs per season, practically few do because to a large extent it is random. You need a run of what amounts to luck... good luck to break a record in baseball, bad luck to have a mean-breaking mass shooting event.
In the US we have the unfortunate luxury of a much, much larger sample size. So things which are so infrequent as to appear to be complete statistical outliers in other countries - and therefore reasonable to remove from the sample - are more regular here. Again we can refer back to baseball, though: even in a sport with a very large sample size, some 750,000 pitches per season, we still see this streaky statistical performance vs flat odds. Norway could bust their 40 year trend with only one or two events "out of time" and it still wouldn't seem like they have the same problem as we do.
And yet none of this even considers their 90s mass killing with a crazy person wielding swords / knives and a bow and arrow.
map it out??? There were many resistance groups formed issue with the Jewish ones is they couldn't get arms no one would give to them, you don't think they could have been an effective resistance with proper arms.? LOLSapper Redux said:Charles Coghlan said:Wonder if Jews in Germany wish they had guns circa ww2...What about Cambodians during POL POTS reign ...Is this a serious argument?larry culpepper said:
The whole idea of "I have muh guns to fight the tyrannical gubbment" is nothing more than a stupid fantasy, almost as stupid as Texas seceding.
It made sense in the 18th century when we were being harassed by a British monarch. But it's such a silly idea now. You have every right to protect yourself and your family but please stop it with this fantasy about you and your well armed friends overthrowing the democrats or something.
And a bunch of kids being murdered in a classroom isn't an acceptable price to pay for this fantasy.
Map out for us how Jewish resistance to the Nazis would have actually worked when every one of their neighbors were also armed and were murderously antisemitic?
now do St Louis who controls that city from a political aspect..Ill hang up and listenSapper Redux said:Chicago has a lower per capita crime rate than Nashville, Anchorage, Little Rock, St. Louis, Springfield, MO, Cleveland, and 13 other American cities.chap said:Sapper Redux said:
Chicago is always the boogeyman. Funny that. Can't imagine why. It's violent crime rates are far better than many cities and counties in red states.
Holy crap. I've been on vacation and off texags. But what is this? And I assume the five likes are jokesters??
All of the major US cities with enormous crime rates are run by the communists, oops, I mean democrats.Charles Coghlan said:now do St Louis who controls that city from a political aspect..Ill hang up and listenSapper Redux said:Chicago has a lower per capita crime rate than Nashville, Anchorage, Little Rock, St. Louis, Springfield, MO, Cleveland, and 13 other American cities.chap said:Sapper Redux said:
Chicago is always the boogeyman. Funny that. Can't imagine why. It's violent crime rates are far better than many cities and counties in red states.
Holy crap. I've been on vacation and off texags. But what is this? And I assume the five likes are jokesters??
https://www.safehome.org/resources/crime-statistics-by-state/
The exception, because it's a smaller city/weird in a number of ways, is Anchorage. Temporary summer job seekers, people flocking there to run away from problems in the lower 48, etc., and it's just not a real big place (73rd or so largest US city).
For any number of reasons, it would thus be logically thrown out as an outlier, but it's unsurprising a historically ignorant/dishonest leftist poster on an internet message board looking to make a political point in a philosophy forum would seek to include it as a comparator somehow with the large US metropolitan areas.
Also, not a lot of mass shootings in Anchorage. LOL. Probably a small coincidence that Alaska is the third most armed state in the union.
Do cities have walls around them? Or are they subject to the laws of the states around them? You seem to imagine cities are completely separate from the influence of state laws around them. That's as asinine as assuming dry counties won't have any alcohol despite the massive package store at the county line.
Oh, and Anchorage has few mass shootings but has PER CAPITA, horrendously high levels of gun violence. In other words, all those arms aren't making things safer, are they?
Oh, and Anchorage has few mass shootings but has PER CAPITA, horrendously high levels of gun violence. In other words, all those arms aren't making things safer, are they?
They were armed.Charles Coghlan said:map it out??? There were many resistance groups formed issue with the Jewish ones is they couldn't get arms no one would give to them, you don't think they could have been an effective resistance with proper arms.? LOLSapper Redux said:Charles Coghlan said:Wonder if Jews in Germany wish they had guns circa ww2...What about Cambodians during POL POTS reign ...Is this a serious argument?larry culpepper said:
The whole idea of "I have muh guns to fight the tyrannical gubbment" is nothing more than a stupid fantasy, almost as stupid as Texas seceding.
It made sense in the 18th century when we were being harassed by a British monarch. But it's such a silly idea now. You have every right to protect yourself and your family but please stop it with this fantasy about you and your well armed friends overthrowing the democrats or something.
And a bunch of kids being murdered in a classroom isn't an acceptable price to pay for this fantasy.
Map out for us how Jewish resistance to the Nazis would have actually worked when every one of their neighbors were also armed and were murderously antisemitic?
Now, why is your username the name of a known antisemite and fascist?
Why is your username a reference to a perma banned poster/troll?
Back to the OP...Merica!
I am not over the fact that a gun company made a gun named the Crusader, stamped Psalm 144:1 on it, it's in such high demand that there's a 12-18 month waiting period, and we don't treat it as a call for religious terrorism.
— Thomas Lecaque (@tlecaque) June 6, 2022
That's good stuff.
LOL.
Yeah, this guy has no fear of the history of the crusades/christianity vs. islam etc.
A lovely, tolerant fella...
LOL.
Yeah, this guy has no fear of the history of the crusades/christianity vs. islam etc.
*sighs, prepares to write more pieces* https://t.co/fZGCe2I5WP
— Thomas Lecaque (@tlecaque) June 6, 2022
A lovely, tolerant fella...
You are so God damned hateful and scared of a minority group being allowed to exist, you absolute monsters.
— Thomas Lecaque (@tlecaque) June 6, 2022
Ugh. Christian nationalism really is one the great evils of our country today. Just encourages division, hatred, fear, and violence. Nothing remotely virtuous about it.Macarthur said:
Back to the OP...Merica!I am not over the fact that a gun company made a gun named the Crusader, stamped Psalm 144:1 on it, it's in such high demand that there's a 12-18 month waiting period, and we don't treat it as a call for religious terrorism.
— Thomas Lecaque (@tlecaque) June 6, 2022
I'd bet that there is a massive negative correlation between the number of firearms you own with bible verses printed on them and the likelihood you are to commit a felony.
Okay so its got an automatic fire selector on the trigger. He's got three settings. God Wills It, War, and Peace.nortex97 said:
That's good stuff.
Is it:
God Wills It: Safe
War: Fire
Peace: Multi shot
or
God Wills It: Multi Shot
War: Fire
Peace: Safety
Answers will help me update the spreadsheet on your knowledge of both AR-15s and religion.
Quote:
When they might say, "Peace and Safety," then sudden destruction will come upon them as labor pains come upon a pregnant woman, and they will not escape.
LOL, the fake multi-selector wording on AR-pattern rifles around a 'full auto' is to trigger the crazies.
Chicago real safe huh lapper Redux>?Quote:
Wealthiest Man In Illinois Moves His Business From Chicago To Miami Amid Feud With Democratic Leadership | The Daily Wire
There are nations with far higher Christian percentages by population that have far lower mass shooting percentages my population. Our biggest issue isn't religion, it's that we began to embrace stupidity. We are lost as a country because the stupid people no longer hide in shame. But rather, they get to stay at the head of the table because they were granted a seat the table to begin with...
I believe I was saying….?
4stringAg
Jim Schlossnagle set to leave Texas A&M for Texas head coaching job
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
332
CreekBottom
Jim Schlossnagle set to leave Texas A&M for Texas head coaching job
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
271
Thunder18
Jim Schlossnagle set to leave Texas A&M for Texas head coaching job
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
266
PJYoung
McClain: Schloss lost all credibility outside of Austin
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
191