- Joined
- Jul 30, 2017
- Messages
- 12,099
- Reaction score
- 3,439
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Conservative
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.
To determine the safest states in America, we looked at violent and property crimes for each FBI reporting year since 2010.
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
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.But how much safer would they be if people didn't have guns ?
But how much safer would they be if people didn't have guns ?
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.
But how much safer would they be if people didn't have guns ?
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?
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
what business is that of yours?
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.But how much safer would they be if people didn't have guns ?
But how much safer would they be if people didn't have guns ?
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?
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.
yes, so what's your point?This is an anonymous forum.
yes, so what's your point?
Yes. Access to firearms has no impact on crime, positively or negatively. Crime is caused by poor socio-economic opportunity and poor healthcare.Are you saying guns are irrelevant to overall safety?
Crime statistics as recorded by the FBI.What are the criteria for the measurement of relative safety?
1. Include all nations and you see it's about socio-economic opportunity, not access to firearms, that is the problem.Why does the US have such a high rate of gun murders, by far the highest in the developed world? ...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?