The four safest states are very gun friendly

[DebateChallenge]

Here is a video on the ten safest states, the top four safest states are very gun friendly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIUkKMNol2M

 

[Manc Skipper]

What are the criteria for the measurement of relative safety?

 

[Harshaw]

What are the criteria for the measurement of relative safety?

Gosh, you could have just watched the first 45 seconds of the video to find that out, but of course, you didn't, because this was never a serious question. This was just a drive-by dismissal, not really caring what the answer is.

 

[Mycroft]

Gosh, you could have just watched the first 45 seconds of the video to find that out, but of course, you didn't, because this was never a serious question. This was just a drive-by dismissal, not really caring what the answer is.

He didn't even have to watch the video. The uploader's comments told us...in it's first sentence.

To determine the safest states in America, we looked at violent and property crimes for each FBI reporting year since 2010.

 

[HumblePi]

There's so many factors to be added to the equation when presenting a list of 'safest' or 'most dangerous' cities in the U.S. Population, density and degree of urbanization is one very big factor that must be considered. Another is economic conditions and income level, poverty level and job availability. Then there's other considerations such as cultural factors and educational, recreational, and religious characteristics.

Violent crimes committed by use of firearms is a whole other thing. Why does the US have such a high rate of gun murders, by far the highest in the developed world? Is it because of guns, or is there something else going on? Maybe America is just more prone to crime, say, because of income inequality or cultural differences? America doesn't really have a significantly higher rate of crime compared to similar countries. But that crime is much likelier to be lethal. American criminals just kill more people than do their counterparts in other developed countries. And guns appear to be a big part of what makes this difference. The United States compares with other industrial countries in crime rates, but the U.S. is head and shoulders above the rest in violent death.

A preference for crimes of personal force and the willingness and ability to use guns in robbery make similar levels of property crime fifty-four times as deadly in New York City as in London. Western Europe, for example, has a major problem with drug use as does the United States. Canadian cities have "very high" rates of property crime like car theft. And yet, the US still stands out on murders. Comparing Kentucky and Wyoming to a small state like Rhode Island isn't comparing apples to apples.

The fact is that the U.S. is infatuated with guns and the more guns, the more deaths can be attributed to guns. It's just common logic. New York's recent tightening enforcement of gun laws serves as a good example. New York didn't effectively reduce its heroin use rate or solve underlying problems such as poverty, the things that gun rights advocates often claim actually contribute to gun violence. But New York did tighten gun restrictions, which coincided with less violence. Comparing Wyoming to a state like Rhode Island isn't comparing apples to apples.

America has a uniquely terrible crime problem, one without any parallel in other developed democracies. Rates of common property crimes in the United States are comparable to those reported in many other Western industrial nations, but rates of lethal violence in the United States are much higher. The proliferation of off-the-shelf handguns is really our problem, if we regulated guns the way that other countries regulate guns, we would certainly have a much lower homicide rate.

 

[Rich2018]

Here is a video on the ten safest states, the top four safest states are very gun friendly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIUkKMNol2M

But how much safer would they be if people didn't have guns ?

 

[DebateChallenge]

But how much safer would they be if people didn't have guns ?

Well lets say, in the four safest states, Iowa, Maine, Vermont, and New Hampshire, owning guns is common. They all beat out the state of New Jersey in safety and in New Jersey there are not that many guns or gun ownership. They are very strict with gun laws in NJ and yet those four states beat it out. That being the case, if those four states were more like NJ in terms of gun restrictions they would be more like NJ in terms of being safe, another words, they would be less safe.

 

[TurtleDude]

But how much safer would they be if people didn't have guns ?

an irrelevant bit of nonsense.

 

[spud_meister]

an irrelevant bit of nonsense.

Are you saying guns are irrelevant to overall safety?

Unless someone in this thread wants to show causation, it's just as easy to say those 4 states are the safest because they're amongst the whitest.

 

[TurtleDude]

Are you saying guns are irrelevant to overall safety?

Unless someone in this thread wants to show causation, it's just as easy to say those 4 states are the safest because they're amongst the whitest.

nice try at an attempted trolling (perhaps) but its silly for him to suggest there wouldn't be guns. And like it or not-white areas tend to have less violent crime than black areas. that is undeniable in terms of statistics but the reasons for that are many and complex

 

[PleasantValley]

But how much safer would they be if people didn't have guns ?

The below is not written to be adversarial or snarky. I wrote it as an effort to help you understand my personal need for a gun and why others need them too. I used to be quite healthy, now, due to an unexpected illness, I had to go on disability, sell my house in Deer Park, and move out to the country where i know I will be safer. (knock on wood).

How much safer would they be if we all have individual force fields surrounding us everywhere we went?
My question is equally as unrealistic as yours.
Guns are here to stay. it is unrealistic to wish them away.
There are no laws or draconian measures that will ever make guns disappear.
This is reality.
You have to deal with this reality and quit posting questions like that.

What if.....nothing. Stay in the real world if you would like your questions to be taken seriously.

My sister-in-law asked me in a recent visit, why I don't just use a mortar for self-defense instead of a shotgun.
That question was equally silly and proved she knew nothing about mortars or shotguns.

But, to give you respect and answer your question, " What if there were not guns"?

OK, if there were no guns, then the strong and the fit, and those that travel in groups will prey on the old, infirm, and weak.
Predators would form groups and prey on everyone else unless the prey also formed groups to fight them, but even those groups would have to be as fit, and better led than the predators.

With a gun, I alone can take on and wipe out any unarmed or armed group of six or less if i have adequate warning.
With a gun it requires just as much skill and swords and axes, but it isa different skill.
With a gun you need to be gentle on the trigger to inflict damage down-range.

So, in short, it is guns that keep the weak, old, infirm, and not-so-skilled safe from predators.

ie...I have a five shot revolver in my desk drawer as i write this that I call my " 90 year old gun ", because when i am 90 years old, I will still be able to fire it because it is very light but shoots a .44 Special round. If i am weak at 90, it does not have any slides to rack back, no springs to get weakened over time. it is a revolver and is ready 100%of the time with all its parts at rest.

One day when you are very old and weak, and your neighbor gets beaten to a pulp and robbed by young, healthy and fit teenagers, I hope you will remember my words here.

 

[apdst]

There's so many factors to be added to the equation when presenting a list of 'safest' or 'most dangerous' cities in the U.S. Population, density and degree of urbanization is one very big factor that must be considered. Another is economic conditions and income level, poverty level and job availability. Then there's other considerations such as cultural factors and educational, recreational, and religious characteristics.

Violent crimes committed by use of firearms is a whole other thing. Why does the US have such a high rate of gun murders, by far the highest in the developed world? Is it because of guns, or is there something else going on? Maybe America is just more prone to crime, say, because of income inequality or cultural differences? America doesn't really have a significantly higher rate of crime compared to similar countries. But that crime is much likelier to be lethal. American criminals just kill more people than do their counterparts in other developed countries. And guns appear to be a big part of what makes this difference. The United States compares with other industrial countries in crime rates, but the U.S. is head and shoulders above the rest in violent death.

A preference for crimes of personal force and the willingness and ability to use guns in robbery make similar levels of property crime fifty-four times as deadly in New York City as in London. Western Europe, for example, has a major problem with drug use as does the United States. Canadian cities have "very high" rates of property crime like car theft. And yet, the US still stands out on murders. Comparing Kentucky and Wyoming to a small state like Rhode Island isn't comparing apples to apples.

The fact is that the U.S. is infatuated with guns and the more guns, the more deaths can be attributed to guns. It's just common logic. New York's recent tightening enforcement of gun laws serves as a good example. New York didn't effectively reduce its heroin use rate or solve underlying problems such as poverty, the things that gun rights advocates often claim actually contribute to gun violence. But New York did tighten gun restrictions, which coincided with less violence. Comparing Wyoming to a state like Rhode Island isn't comparing apples to apples.

America has a uniquely terrible crime problem, one without any parallel in other developed democracies. Rates of common property crimes in the United States are comparable to those reported in many other Western industrial nations, but rates of lethal violence in the United States are much higher. The proliferation of off-the-shelf handguns is really our problem, if we regulated guns the way that other countries regulate guns, we would certainly have a much lower homicide rate.

Do you carry a gun?

 

[HumblePi]

Do you carry a gun?

what business is that of yours?

 

[lwf]

Here is a video on the ten safest states, the top four safest states are very gun friendly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIUkKMNol2M

If correlation implies causation, shouldn't all 10 be very gun friendly?

 

[apdst]

what business is that of yours?

If The United States is so dangerous, surely you're totin a gun. Right?

 

[RaleBulgarian]

But how much safer would they be if people didn't have guns ?

An unknowable hypothetical. The causations of violence (with or without any weapon) is far more complex than any one tool used in the process, and promoting a solution in the form of banning all firearms is fantasy.

 

[Bum]

But how much safer would they be if people didn't have guns ?

Lets ask the people that couldn't defend themselves and were murdered....oh, wait....

 

[TurtleDude]

what business is that of yours?

It is a legitimate question in a gun forum where the defensive use of weapons is a major issue. This is an anonymous forum. Are you worried some mope will read this thread, figure out who you are, and plan accordingly?

 

[HumblePi]

It is a legitimate question in a gun forum where the defensive use of weapons is a major issue. This is an anonymous forum. Are you worried some mope will read this thread, figure out who you are, and plan accordingly?

No, it's not a legitimate question at all. I commented on the topic of the thread, that's all I had to do. I am under no obligation to answer him, you or anyone else when it comes to a personal question.

Just curious, what are you referring to by your comment "and plan accordingly"?

 

[TurtleDude]

No, it's not a legitimate question at all. I commented on the topic of the thread, that's all I had to do. I am under no obligation to answer him, you or anyone else when it comes to a personal question.

This is an anonymous forum.

 

[HumblePi]

This is an anonymous forum.

yes, so what's your point?

 

[TurtleDude]

yes, so what's your point?

Do you carry a firearm given you seem worried that the USA is a violent place?

 

[Wayne Jr]

Are you saying guns are irrelevant to overall safety?

Yes. Access to firearms has no impact on crime, positively or negatively. Crime is caused by poor socio-economic opportunity and poor healthcare.

 

[Wayne Jr]

What are the criteria for the measurement of relative safety?

Crime statistics as recorded by the FBI.

 

[Wayne Jr]

Why does the US have such a high rate of gun murders, by far the highest in the developed world? ...

1. Include all nations and you see it's about socio-economic opportunity, not access to firearms, that is the problem.
2. America is the 10th, not the highest.