On 12/4/2014 11:42 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 05:12:18 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/4/2014 12:02 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 03 Dec 2014 13:15:52 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:



Less availability of guns in modern western societies seems to result in
a less violent society, eh?

They are simply less violent. There were more stabbing murders in LA
last year than the total number of murders in Canada all causes.
Maybe it does have to do with our ethnic make up ... but we can't say
that.


Statistics can be very misleading unless you take all factors into account.

You have to come away with the fact that Americans are more violent,
across the board. When you look at Australia where they did do a
massive gun roundup, the people who wanted to kill their fellow man,
simply moved to other weapons. The overall slope of murder rates
didn't really change.



John won't like this but guns, wars and violence are "ingrained" in our
culture. :-)

On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:44:16 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/4/2014 11:42 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 05:12:18 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/4/2014 12:02 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 03 Dec 2014 13:15:52 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:



Less availability of guns in modern western societies seems to result in
a less violent society, eh?

They are simply less violent. There were more stabbing murders in LA
last year than the total number of murders in Canada all causes.
Maybe it does have to do with our ethnic make up ... but we can't say
that.


Statistics can be very misleading unless you take all factors into account.

You have to come away with the fact that Americans are more violent,
across the board. When you look at Australia where they did do a
massive gun roundup, the people who wanted to kill their fellow man,
simply moved to other weapons. The overall slope of murder rates
didn't really change.



John won't like this but guns, wars and violence are "ingrained" in our
culture. :-)


===

I think there's a lot of truth to that and our media folks are doing
everything they can to perpetuate that culture. When I was a little
kid almost everything on television was cowboys shooting each other or
cowboys shooting indians. Starting in the late 50s or so that changed
to detective shows with lots of people shooting each other, and comic
books with soldiers and action heros shooting just about everybody.
Now we are into video games with incredible violence against
everything. Let's not even talk about the Mixed Martial Arts craze
but it's certainly there. And so it goes. Violence is inbred into
the culture as an accepted way of resolving all disputes.

On 12/4/14 11:44 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 12/4/2014 11:42 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 05:12:18 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/4/2014 12:02 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 03 Dec 2014 13:15:52 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:



Less availability of guns in modern western societies seems to
result in
a less violent society, eh?

They are simply less violent. There were more stabbing murders in LA
last year than the total number of murders in Canada all causes.
Maybe it does have to do with our ethnic make up ... but we can't say
that.


Statistics can be very misleading unless you take all factors into
account.

You have to come away with the fact that Americans are more violent,
across the board. When you look at Australia where they did do a
massive gun roundup, the people who wanted to kill their fellow man,
simply moved to other weapons. The overall slope of murder rates
didn't really change.



John won't like this but guns, wars and violence are "ingrained" in our
culture. :-)




Every country is unique, but Australia is more similar to the US than
is, say, Japan or England. We have a frontier history and a strong gun
culture. Each state and territory has its own gun laws, and in 1996
these varied widely between the jurisdictions. At that time Australia's
firearm mortality rate per population was 2.6/100,000 – about
one-quarter the US rate, according to data from the Australian Bureau of
Statistics and the US Center for Disease Control. Today the rate is
under 1/100,000 – less than one-tenth the US rate. Those figures refer
to all gun deaths – homicide, suicide and unintentional. If we focus on
gun homicide rates, the US outstrips Australia 30-fold.

The 1996 reforms made gun laws stronger and uniform across Australia.
Semi-automatic rifles were prohibited (with narrow exceptions), and the
world's biggest buyback saw nearly 700,000 guns removed from circulation
and destroyed. The licensing and registration systems of all states and
territories were harmonised and linked, so that a person barred from
owning guns in one state can no longer acquire them in another. All gun
sales are subject to screening (universal background checks), which
means you cannot buy a gun over the internet or at a garage sale.

Gun ownership requires a license, and every sale is subject to a 28-day
waiting period. The licensing process considers not only the applicant's
age and criminal convictions, but also a range of other factors relevant
to possession of a product that is (a) designed for killing and (b)
highly coveted by people who should not have it. Relevant factors
include the applicant's living circumstances, mental and physical
health, restraining orders or other encounters with the law, type of gun
desired and for what purpose, safety training, storage arrangements, and
the public interest.

http://tinyurl.com/lh4gzcs


--
I feel no need to explain my politics to stupid right-wingers.
After all, I am *not* the Jackass Whisperer.

On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:08:50 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

I heard a stat. We are fourth in the world for murder unless you take
out the four top I think NYC, Detroit, Miami and LA.. we drop to nearly
number 100 in the world for murders...


Well, there you go. I believe it has to do with the behavior of the
population therein, not the availability of guns.


Last I knew, NYC, Detroit, Miami and LA were all part of and located in
the USA.

===

In defense of NYC, they really don't belong in that group. I believe
there are a number of large cities like New Orleans, Baltimore,
Oakland and St Louis that rank as far more dangerous. Surprisingly
NYC and Chicago don't even appear in the top 30 when ranked by murder
rate per thousand residents.

On 12/4/2014 12:12 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:08:50 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

I heard a stat. We are fourth in the world for murder unless you take
out the four top I think NYC, Detroit, Miami and LA.. we drop to nearly
number 100 in the world for murders...


Well, there you go. I believe it has to do with the behavior of the
population therein, not the availability of guns.


Last I knew, NYC, Detroit, Miami and LA were all part of and located in
the USA.

===

In defense of NYC, they really don't belong in that group. I believe
there are a number of large cities like New Orleans, Baltimore,
Oakland and St Louis that rank as far more dangerous. Surprisingly
NYC and Chicago don't even appear in the top 30 when ranked by murder
rate per thousand residents.


Yes, I am not sure if I got the cities correct, it may have been
Detroit, Chicago, N'oleans, and LA now that I think about it more but I
will not swear to it. The point is we are #4 and without the four Dem
run cities, we are like 87...

On 12/4/2014 12:01 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:44:16 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/4/2014 11:42 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 05:12:18 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/4/2014 12:02 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 03 Dec 2014 13:15:52 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:



Less availability of guns in modern western societies seems to result in
a less violent society, eh?

They are simply less violent. There were more stabbing murders in LA
last year than the total number of murders in Canada all causes.
Maybe it does have to do with our ethnic make up ... but we can't say
that.


Statistics can be very misleading unless you take all factors into account.

You have to come away with the fact that Americans are more violent,
across the board. When you look at Australia where they did do a
massive gun roundup, the people who wanted to kill their fellow man,
simply moved to other weapons. The overall slope of murder rates
didn't really change.



John won't like this but guns, wars and violence are "ingrained" in our
culture. :-)


===

I think there's a lot of truth to that and our media folks are doing
everything they can to perpetuate that culture. When I was a little
kid almost everything on television was cowboys shooting each other or
cowboys shooting indians. Starting in the late 50s or so that changed
to detective shows with lots of people shooting each other, and comic
books with soldiers and action heros shooting just about everybody.
Now we are into video games with incredible violence against
everything. Let's not even talk about the Mixed Martial Arts craze
but it's certainly there. And so it goes. Violence is inbred into
the culture as an accepted way of resolving all disputes.


Absolutely. I have the same memories being a little kid when all I
wanted for Christmas was a holster and gun with silver bullets like the
Lone Ranger had.

Funny thing is that back then the TV shows and movies were not anywhere
near as graphic and violent as they are today. It has only become worse
over the past 50-60 years. Wow. 50 or 60 years. I have to let that
sink in for a bit. :-)

On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:46:51 -0500, wrote:

Why would density make any difference? Are you saying the people are
so close together that you can't swing a knife without killing
someone?

===

I believe that if you do a detailed analysis you will find that
density does make a difference. I leave it to the sociologists to
explain that phenomenon but certainly ghetto culture requires a
critical mass of sorts.

On 12/4/2014 12:09 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 12/4/14 11:44 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 12/4/2014 11:42 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 05:12:18 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/4/2014 12:02 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 03 Dec 2014 13:15:52 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:



Less availability of guns in modern western societies seems to
result in
a less violent society, eh?

They are simply less violent. There were more stabbing murders in LA
last year than the total number of murders in Canada all causes.
Maybe it does have to do with our ethnic make up ... but we can't say
that.


Statistics can be very misleading unless you take all factors into
account.

You have to come away with the fact that Americans are more violent,
across the board. When you look at Australia where they did do a
massive gun roundup, the people who wanted to kill their fellow man,
simply moved to other weapons. The overall slope of murder rates
didn't really change.



John won't like this but guns, wars and violence are "ingrained" in our
culture. :-)




Every country is unique, but Australia is more similar to the US than
is, say, Japan or England. We have a frontier history and a strong gun
culture. Each state and territory has its own gun laws, and in 1996
these varied widely between the jurisdictions. At that time Australia's
firearm mortality rate per population was 2.6/100,000 – about
one-quarter the US rate, according to data from the Australian Bureau of
Statistics and the US Center for Disease Control. Today the rate is
under 1/100,000 – less than one-tenth the US rate. Those figures refer
to all gun deaths – homicide, suicide and unintentional. If we focus on
gun homicide rates, the US outstrips Australia 30-fold.

The 1996 reforms made gun laws stronger and uniform across Australia.
Semi-automatic rifles were prohibited (with narrow exceptions), and the
world's biggest buyback saw nearly 700,000 guns removed from circulation
and destroyed. The licensing and registration systems of all states and
territories were harmonised and linked, so that a person barred from
owning guns in one state can no longer acquire them in another. All gun
sales are subject to screening (universal background checks), which
means you cannot buy a gun over the internet or at a garage sale.

Gun ownership requires a license, and every sale is subject to a 28-day
waiting period. The licensing process considers not only the applicant's
age and criminal convictions, but also a range of other factors relevant
to possession of a product that is (a) designed for killing and (b)
highly coveted by people who should not have it. Relevant factors
include the applicant's living circumstances, mental and physical
health, restraining orders or other encounters with the law, type of gun
desired and for what purpose, safety training, storage arrangements, and
the public interest.

http://tinyurl.com/lh4gzcs




Probably a bit more restricting than anything that would ever be
accepted in the USA (including me) but I could live with it if it
applied to everyone.

On 12/4/2014 12:12 PM, Wayne.B wrote:

On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:08:50 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

I heard a stat. We are fourth in the world for murder unless you take
out the four top I think NYC, Detroit, Miami and LA.. we drop to nearly
number 100 in the world for murders...


Well, there you go. I believe it has to do with the behavior of the
population therein, not the availability of guns.


Last I knew, NYC, Detroit, Miami and LA were all part of and located in
the USA.

===

In defense of NYC, they really don't belong in that group. I believe
there are a number of large cities like New Orleans, Baltimore,
Oakland and St Louis that rank as far more dangerous. Surprisingly
NYC and Chicago don't even appear in the top 30 when ranked by murder
rate per thousand residents.



Although accurate (except for NYC) I did not provide or post the stat
(above). Scott posted it.

On 12/4/14 12:36 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 12/4/2014 12:12 PM, Wayne.B wrote:

On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:08:50 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

I heard a stat. We are fourth in the world for murder unless you take
out the four top I think NYC, Detroit, Miami and LA.. we drop to
nearly
number 100 in the world for murders...


Well, there you go. I believe it has to do with the behavior of the
population therein, not the availability of guns.


Last I knew, NYC, Detroit, Miami and LA were all part of and located in
the USA.

===

In defense of NYC, they really don't belong in that group. I believe
there are a number of large cities like New Orleans, Baltimore,
Oakland and St Louis that rank as far more dangerous. Surprisingly
NYC and Chicago don't even appear in the top 30 when ranked by murder
rate per thousand residents.



Although accurate (except for NYC) I did not provide or post the stat
(above). Scott posted it.



I wonder what percentage of school, shopping center, movie theater and
office building mass murders are committed by whites in generally
suburban or small town/city/rural areas...and would it be ok to include
the slaughter by whites of the indigenous populations here?

--
I feel no need to explain my politics to stupid right-wingers.
After all, I am *not* the Jackass Whisperer.