Gun control vs Entrpreneurialism

I believe one of the reasons given for our high prison population is non-violent crimes like weed possession. I think we could be a little smarter about realizing that someone has violent tendencies and put them away for longer terms. Instead, we develop things like Obama's Promise Program that appears to have been instrumental in this Parkland shooting.

 

Australia. England. One thing you have to be aware of when tracking crime numbers from those countries and places like Chicago, they altered the way they report crime. I've read a couple of reports in past years that described programs defining deviancy down in order to make it appear that violent crime had gone down when it did not. What I read showed that both Chicago and England had done that. It is somewhat similar to Obama's Promise Program that allowed Cruz to attain his fame.

 

I'm asking this out of genuine curiosity and not to be argumentative; but why do you think the United States would NOT qualify as a first-world, developed nation? What nations today DO meet your standard to qualify as such?

 

That's drivel! There have been changes to the method of collecting official crime, but that reflects improvements in methodogy (e.g. some police authorities would include false calls).

Official stats aren't used for time series analysis. Britain uses the Crime Survey of England and Wales (previously called the British Crime Survey)

 

Saying it's "drivel" don't make it so. It's just your best Liberal rebuttal.

 

I didn't just say that it was drivel (although that's true). I also informed you what data is actually used. That data utilises consistent victimisation definition

 

Widespread corruption at every level of government, thus ensuring that it can never be eliminated. Crippling national debt that can never hope to be repaid. Widespread unemployment, illiteracy, homelessness, and families living below the poverty line. Unchecked illegal immigration and no border control. Widespread disregard for basic rule of law, both on the part of those who enforce the law, and those who are supposed to abide by the law.

It is not the standard of myself that is being utilized. Rather it is being explained why the united states cannot accurately be compared with other, various nations when the argument comes down to firearm-related restrictions, and whether or not they work as described. Whenever other nations are pointed out as examples of firearm-related being abject failures, it is often claimed that the nations are not first world, developed, or have no rule of law. Firearm-related restrictions do not work in the united states, therefore it is improper to compare it to other supposed first-world nations.

 

Thanks for taking the time to explain it for me. You bring up some interesting points, that's for sure!

 

Chortle, chortle!

 

Did you not just read my post.

It is a myth perpetuated by morons that our violent crime is going up.

 

So in my post showing you that our crime rates have been trending down, you mention us as a country?

Quoting the same post.

Did you even read the whole post or are you that mentally blocked by your own bias that you literally ignore everything that doesn't fit your narrative.

Honestly, it is a myth perpetuated by useless morons that we are becoming a more violent place.

 

Oh I think you've made that pretty obvious.

 

You get less rational all the time.

 

Sorry, couldn't help but laugh when someone treats a comment "the US isn't a developed country" as serious.

Will you also thank him when he mentions pigs flying?

 

He brings up compelling points. I don't necessarily agree with him, but I can see the merits of some of what he says.

You clearly are incapable of wrapping your brain about anything but that which you have already decided is real, regardless of its actual validity.

 

In honesty to suggest the US is not a developed country and is rife with corruption speaks of a very poor knowledge of where we rank in comparison to the rest of the world. Its really hard to take that seriously

 

You're here and being tolerated. That's all the proof I need.

 

Thank you for your opinion

 

If you want to make effective laws to prevent violence, learn about the people who commit violence acts and how they became violent. Its the people that are the critical item, not the tool.

 

Yes we need to find ways to keep these people away from the tool

 

I've spent over three decades doing that. How do you think we get people to listen to specifics, go on the offense, quit being defensive players on the issue, and get something positive done?

 

The reports I read said, in fact, that definitions were changed which made it difficult to assess crime rates in England. Chicago did the same thing. I believe they tended to describe murders with guns as "shootings" in some cases.

There is a program on TV about Russian prisons that I found very interesting. In that program, someone says the homicide rate in Russia is 5 times higher than the U.S. Well, I thought that was rather high and surprising, so I looked online. The numbers I found says the homicide rate in Russia is close to twice that of the U.S. Russia has less than half the population of the U.S. and is not known for its volume of firearms in civilian hands. When it comes to humans, guns are only a convenience to murder, not a requirement.

 

So, moron, where did I say OUR crime rate was going up? The violent crime rate in OTHER countries that impose heavy-handed gun control is going up. Liberal attempts in the U.S. to redefine crime and limit reporting are intended to make it appear that crime rates are going down in areas where they are not, like Chicago and other Liberal centers of enlightenment.

Check out the numbers on Russia: Half the population, almost twice the homicides, and no second amendment.

 

Okay, I lost track. Where are you morons located?

 

Are you in Australia?

https://winteryknight.com/2017/10/0...iolent-crime-rates-and-lower-suicide-rates-2/

"In fact, according to the Australian government’s own statistics, a number of serious crimes peaked in the years after the ban. Manslaughter, sexual assault, kidnapping, armed robbery, and unarmed robbery all saw peaks in the years following the ban, and most remain near or above pre-ban rates. The effects of the 1996 ban on violent crime are, frankly, unimpressive at best."

Are you in England?

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42815768

"The number of violent crimes and sex offences recorded by police in England and Wales has risen sharply over the past year, figures suggest."