Whats going on in Chicago?

[BrianFantana]

Which part, the big TV, well maybe not huge ones but TVs and I have no problem with that especially the working poor. They deserve to be helped if they are working and doing the best they can.

Social programs for the poor in the US are, on the whole, lacking those of other countries. There is no minimum living wage. There is presently a class action lawsuit in the works because incarcerated people, many of whom are in jail for non-violent offences like failures to pay overdue fines and are permitted privileges to work during the day (not talking about violent offenders in federal penitentiaries), are not being paid at all for their work. This helps contribute to a cycle whereby they can never pay their debts and will face repeated jailings. It's entirely broken.

 

[Steve-French]

Another thing worth mentioning is that last year police stops have gone down by 90% in those neighborhoods. With all of the BLM protests and negative media coverage the police are getting they basically said fuck em and have decreased their presence in the South side of Chicago. The result is that shootings across the city have gone up by 80%.

I don't blame the police on this one either. They are in a tough spot right now. They never know if they are going to create some sort of national incident by just trying to do their job.

https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/201...down-by-90-percent-as-gun-violence-skyrockets

 

[oldshadow]

Social programs for the poor in the US are, on the whole, lacking those of other countries. There is no minimum living wage. There is presently a class action lawsuit in the works because incarcerated people, many of whom are in jail for non-violent offences like failures to pay overdue fines and are permitted privileges to work during the day (not talking about violent offenders in federal penitentiaries), are not being paid at all for their work. This helps contribute to a cycle whereby they can never pay their debts and will face repeated jailings. It's entirely broken.

Yes it needs some work in some places but it works well in other parts.

 

[Ichibanner]

Some of the most "gun populous" states are Vermont, Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, South Dakota, and Montana. I'm referring to the fact that these states have some of the highest percentages of gun ownership per capita despite having less population than other states. They have a gun culture deeply ingrained in their rural settings. That MUST mean that they have a murder rate somewhat close to that of Chicago right? We all know (sarcasm) that guns = violence so Laramie or Colchester must be scary places to walk around at night. No, it's the exact opposite. Chicago has nearly 3 times the population of Montana yet it has over 20 times the murders. Let that sink in. A bit less than 3x the population and over 20x the murders. Chicago has some of the strictest "gun control" laws in the Nation. Can we not think for ourselves and come to a logical conclusion that the violence in Chicago has little to do with the weapon of choice and more to do with the prevailing culture? Bozeman, Montana has guns galore yet neighbors aren't killing each other.

You either have morals or you don't. They don't cost anything so being poor isn't an excuse. They have to be taught, learned, ingrained, and practiced. A segment of society has decided that morals are inconvenient, irrelevant, or incompatible with their culture. Hence, we have the problem in Chicago where Black Lives simply Do Not Matter to the Blacks taking those lives.

 

[spamking]

Hilarious. The Republican answer, with strong lobbying by the NRA, is, no shit: gun control doesn't work; the people need more guns to stop all the gun violence.

Guns = violence, but guns + guns = less violence.

It's simple calculus, really.

Guns alone don't cause violence . . . so guns + guns doesn't equal anything other than more guns.

Folks need to focus on the criminals causing the issues instead of the guns . . .

 

[spamking]

Odd that it works in pretty much every country that isn't the US.

ETA: you can hardly argue that the current state of gun law purchasing in the US at large is "gun control". I can still get a gun with a criminal record check and a valid driver's licence in about 15 minutes in half the states in the country.

Name another country with the number of guns in circulation like we have in the US . . . if guns alone were the root cause of this issue every city in America should be bathed in blood simply due to the sheer number of guns. Right?

 

[Gervinho]

Name another country with the number of guns in circulation like we have in the US . . . if guns alone were the root cause of this issue every city in America should be bathed in blood simply due to the sheer number of guns. Right?

Americans are by nature more violent than other western countries. Guns or no guns you guys would find a way to kill each other

 

[BrianFantana]

Guns alone don't cause violence . . . so guns + guns doesn't equal anything other than more guns.

Folks need to focus on the criminals causing the issues instead of the guns . . .

Oh man. You really took a piece of rhetorical nonsense to heart, huh.

 

[BrianFantana]

Name another country with the number of guns in circulation like we have in the US . . . if guns alone were the root cause of this issue every city in America should be bathed in blood simply due to the sheer number of guns. Right?

This is, frankly, an absurd and impossible position to either defend or attack:

1. Guns aren't the problem.
2. Name another country with so many guns.
3. America has more gun-related problems than any other country.
4. No other country has so many guns.
5. Guns aren't the problem?

I already posted this, but you may not have been around. Have a long, long read:

Ok, let's look at the facts, shall we:

1. Guns are used in self-defence in approximately 0.9% of gun victimization crimes (in a study of 14,000 gun crimes): http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0091743515001188
2. The number of guns present does not affect overall crime rate. However, the prevalence of gun ownership does correlate directly with the violent crime rate: http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1150&context=law_and_economics; https://www.nap.edu/read/10881/chapter/1#v; https://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/data/table_01.html
3. The rate of gun ownership correlates with an increase of homicide of women by men: http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/vio.2015.0047
4. The current system of background checks is deficient in a number of ways (the "gun show loophole" is not really a thing): https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/html/bcft/2009/bcft09st.pdf; https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/html/bcft/2009/bcft09st.pdf
5. States with more rigorous background checks have lower rates of violent crime and gun violence: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222085810_State_background_checks_and_firearms_homicides
6. Gun buy-back programs have proved ineffective in the past: https://www.researchgate.net/profil...ent_crimes/links/541d58fa0cf203f155bde894.pdf
7. Sweeping gun control measures nation-wide can have a tremendous impact on lowering rates of gun violence and violent crime: http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=2530362
8. The gun homicide rate in the US is 25.2x higher (2,520% higher) than the average developed country: http://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-9343(15)01030-X/pdf

Buried in there are the statistics on gun purchasing. Most gun crimes are committed by people who bought their guns not from a dealer; that doesn't mean the "black market", it means a private sale. Most guns used in crimes were initially purchased legally, then changed hands.

I encourage people to root through these for their betterment.

 

[Steve-French]

This is, frankly, an absurd and impossible position to either defend or attack:

1. Guns aren't the problem.
2. Name another country with so many guns.
3. America has more gun-related problems than any other country.
4. No other country has so many guns.
5. Guns aren't the problem?

I already posted this, but you may not have been around. Have a long, long read:

I can agree that Guns don't help, but it's a cultural problem first. The County I live in is around 67,000 people. There is a lot of woods around here and hunting is a very popular pass time. I have also known quite a few people that collect guns just to go out and shoot for fun. So check out the crime rates.

Now check out the demographics

Like I said it's a cultural problem.

 

[BrianFantana]

I can agree that Guns don't help, but it's a cultural problem first. The County I live in is around 67,000 people. There is a lot of woods around here and hunting is a very popular pass time. I have also known quite a few people that collect guns just to go out and shoot for fun. So check out the crime rates.

Like I said it's a cultural problem.

It's a socioeconomic disparity problem, according to decades of academic research. I posted the link earlier and I don't feel like going to search for it.

 

[Steve-French]

It's a socioeconomic disparity problem, according to decades of academic research. I posted the link earlier and I don't feel like going to search for it.

Well that too, but they both go hand in hand.

 

[WorldofWarcraft]

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

Americans are by nature more violent than other western countries. Guns or no guns you guys would find a way to kill each other

And you by your nature, are a fucking idiot.

 

[BrianFantana]

Well that too, but they both go hand in hand.

It's a good debate whether they do.

I view culture as the collective traits of a community, combining the history, art, and traditions. Meanwhile, I view socioeconomic status as removed from the culture. You could theoretically belong to a community with very disparate SESs, or fall into an SES where you are not part of the community culture.

 

[My Spot]

Vermont has one of the highest gun ownership rates and the lowest gun homicide rate (comparable to Canada and Europe). Washington DC has the lowest gun ownership rate but by far the highest gun homicide rate.

 

[The Beevers Revenge]

Quoting your consecutive posts in their entirety: cherry picking. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

You quoted my first and last post out of 5 or 6. How is that quoting all of my consecutive posts in their entirety?

Why did you share FBI statistics that show blacks do commit more violent crime if your actual argument was that it was all for financial reasons? That doesn't make any sense.

I am well aware of the economical argument you are putting forward, and don't deny it plays a factor, but it isn't the whole picture and there are glaring holes in it.

The proportion of a city which is Black is a much better indicator of the crime levels than poverty or family structure.

'Similarly, Kposowa, Breault, and Harrison (1995) analyzed crime variation across 2,078 U.S counties and found that the proportion of the county that was Black continued to predict crime even after controlling for county differences in poverty, divorce rates, income inequality, religiosity, population density, age, and education.

Similarly, in the second analysis data on 231 American cities in the year 2006 was analyzed. Once again, the proportion of a city that was Black continued to predict its crime rate even after controlling for city differences in poverty, education, and family structure (3).'

http://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2016/07/17/re-why-do-black-people-commit-more-crime/

The statistics are right there and - whilst very politically incorrect - undeniable.

 

[My Spot]

I wonder if BrianFantana has read the CDC's gun research Obama commissioned after Sandy Hook that showed defensive use of guns by potential victims are actually more common than offensive use by criminals.

 

[BrianFantana]

You quoted my first and last post out of 5 or 6. How is that quoting all of my consecutive posts in their entirety?

Why did you share FBI statistics that show blacks do commit more violent crime if your actual argument was that it was all for financial reasons? That doesn't make any sense.

I am well aware of the economical argument you are putting forward, and don't deny it plays a factor, but it isn't the whole picture and there are glaring holes in it.

The proportion of a city which is Black is a much better indicator of the crime levels than poverty or family structure.

'Similarly, Kposowa, Breault, and Harrison (1995) analyzed crime variation across 2,078 U.S counties and found that the proportion of the county that was Black continued to predict crime even after controlling for county differences in poverty, divorce rates, income inequality, religiosity, population density, age, and education.

Similarly, in the second analysis data on 231 American cities in the year 2006 was analyzed. Once again, the proportion of a city that was Black continued to predict its crime rate even after controlling for city differences in poverty, education, and family structure (3).'

http://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2016/07/17/re-why-do-black-people-commit-more-crime/

The statistics are right there and - whilst very politically incorrect - undeniable.

I will now ignore decades of academic research in favour of a YouTube video made by user “Sargon of Akkad” and "Sean Last", whose website is dedicated to "modern racism".

This is not valid, peer-reviewed research.

 

[The Beevers Revenge]

I will now ignore decades of academic research in favour of a YouTube video made by user “Sargon of Akkad” and "Sean Last", whose website is dedicated to "modern racism".

This is not valid, peer-reviewed research.

You clearly didn't even read the article.