A bit of satire...
 

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. :-)

A bit of satire...
 

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.

A bit of satire...
 

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.

A bit of satire...
 

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.

A bit of satire...
 

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...

A bit of satire...
 

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. :-)

A bit of satire...
 

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.

A bit of satire...
 

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.

A bit of satire...
 

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.

A bit of satire...
 

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.

A bit of satire...
 

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



Gun death rate changed with the gun confiscations. Death rates did not
really change.

A bit of satire...
 

On 12/4/2014 12:19 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
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.


The density makes a difference because of the limited availability of
resources from shopping to jobs...

A bit of satire...
 

On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:06:37 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/4/2014 10:28 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:12:57 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/4/2014 10:08 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 09:11:46 -0500, Let it snowe
wrote:

On 12/4/2014 8:20 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
Since a city is being compared to a country, the population density is
immaterial.

If that is so try comparing Detroit or Chicago or Washington DC or LA to
all of the Us.

Then Luddite and Toad would call me an ingrained racist. I'd bet that
if you took the homicides in our 8-10 largest cities there would be
more than in the entire rest of the US (and Canada combined).


Putting words in other people's mouths again, huh Clara?

You sure like to gossip.


The 'then' part was out of the question, which made the 'call me' part
not applicable, therefore no words in anyone's mouth.


Cute wiggle.

BTW ... please cite where I have accused you of being a racist?

Where did I say you've done so? Putting words in my mourth again, eh
Dep'ty?

You may be. Or maybe your're not. I don't know and have never
made any accusations.

I think the word 'ingrained' was added to one of Toad's comments.

You're hung up on the "ingrained" thing. You don't think that the way
people think, talk or express themselves isn't due to some ingrained
thought process, learning experience or conditioning?

I absolutely believe that those things 'can' be due to some ingrained
thought processes, etc.

But, that's where education and experience come into play. What may
have been ingrained at age 10 could well be enhanced or deleted by age
70. Or, do you not think that a person's attitudes and behaviors can
be changed?

--

"The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument
with a liberal."

....Peter Brimelow (Author)
(Thanks, Luddite!)

A bit of satire...
 

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. :-)

Would you say guns, wars and violence are 'ingrained' in Toad's, jps',
or your makeup?
--

"The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument
with a liberal."

....Peter Brimelow (Author)
(Thanks, Luddite!)

A bit of satire...
 

On 12/4/2014 3:12 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:06:37 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/4/2014 10:28 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:12:57 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/4/2014 10:08 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 09:11:46 -0500, Let it snowe
wrote:

On 12/4/2014 8:20 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
Since a city is being compared to a country, the population density is
immaterial.

If that is so try comparing Detroit or Chicago or Washington DC or LA to
all of the Us.

Then Luddite and Toad would call me an ingrained racist. I'd bet that
if you took the homicides in our 8-10 largest cities there would be
more than in the entire rest of the US (and Canada combined).


Putting words in other people's mouths again, huh Clara?

You sure like to gossip.


The 'then' part was out of the question, which made the 'call me' part
not applicable, therefore no words in anyone's mouth.


Cute wiggle.

BTW ... please cite where I have accused you of being a racist?

Where did I say you've done so? Putting words in my mourth again, eh
Dep'ty?

You may be. Or maybe your're not. I don't know and have never
made any accusations.

I think the word 'ingrained' was added to one of Toad's comments.

You're hung up on the "ingrained" thing. You don't think that the way
people think, talk or express themselves isn't due to some ingrained
thought process, learning experience or conditioning?

I absolutely believe that those things 'can' be due to some ingrained
thought processes, etc.

But, that's where education and experience come into play. What may
have been ingrained at age 10 could well be enhanced or deleted by age
70. Or, do you not think that a person's attitudes and behaviors can
be changed?



So, are you are saying that you are changing?

A bit of satire...
 

On 12/4/2014 3:28 PM, Poco Loco 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. :-)

Would you say guns, wars and violence are 'ingrained' in Toad's, jps',
or your makeup?

Define "makeup" versus "culture".

A bit of satire...
 

On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 12:19:22 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

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.

Now you're getting into the cause of the problem, which wasn't part of
Greg's mini-analysis.
--

"The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument
with a liberal."

....Peter Brimelow (Author)
(Thanks, Luddite!)

A bit of satire...
 

KC wrote:
On 12/4/2014 12:19 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
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.


The density makes a difference because of the limited availability of
resources from shopping to jobs...

I think the density means the social misfits have nowhere to go. No Little
House on The Prairie these days.

A bit of satire...
 

On 12/4/14 2:02 PM, Califbill wrote:
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



Gun death rate changed with the gun confiscations. Death rates did not
really change.


Oh, you fellas are citing the pro-gun sites, the ones that play fun and
games with statistics. Good show.

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

A bit of satire...
 

On 12/4/14 3:12 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:06:37 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/4/2014 10:28 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:12:57 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/4/2014 10:08 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 09:11:46 -0500, Let it snowe
wrote:

On 12/4/2014 8:20 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
Since a city is being compared to a country, the population density is
immaterial.

If that is so try comparing Detroit or Chicago or Washington DC or LA to
all of the Us.

Then Luddite and Toad would call me an ingrained racist. I'd bet that
if you took the homicides in our 8-10 largest cities there would be
more than in the entire rest of the US (and Canada combined).


Putting words in other people's mouths again, huh Clara?

You sure like to gossip.


The 'then' part was out of the question, which made the 'call me' part
not applicable, therefore no words in anyone's mouth.


Cute wiggle.

BTW ... please cite where I have accused you of being a racist?

Where did I say you've done so? Putting words in my mourth again, eh
Dep'ty?

You may be. Or maybe your're not. I don't know and have never
made any accusations.

I think the word 'ingrained' was added to one of Toad's comments.

You're hung up on the "ingrained" thing. You don't think that the way
people think, talk or express themselves isn't due to some ingrained
thought process, learning experience or conditioning?

I absolutely believe that those things 'can' be due to some ingrained
thought processes, etc.

But, that's where education and experience come into play. What may
have been ingrained at age 10 could well be enhanced or deleted by age
70. Or, do you not think that a person's attitudes and behaviors can
be changed?


So you weren't a right-wing racist piece of **** when you were 10?

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

A bit of satire...
 

On 12/4/2014 3:28 PM, Poco Loco 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. :-)

In your opinion. But we know you have lived from the Ghetto to the
Desert so of course you know all about those other folks who are not
packed on the east coast commuter living down long driveways, or on the
water.... :)

Would you say guns, wars and violence are 'ingrained' in Toad's, jps',
or your makeup?
--

"The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument
with a liberal."

...Peter Brimelow (Author)
(Thanks, Luddite!)

A bit of satire...
 

On 12/4/2014 6:56 PM, KC wrote:
On 12/4/2014 3:28 PM, Poco Loco 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. :-)

In your opinion. But we know you have lived from the Ghetto to the
Desert so of course you know all about those other folks who are not
packed on the east coast commuter living down long driveways, or on the
water.... :)


How do you know where I've lived since I went out on my own in 1967?

Scott, if you were a baseball player your batting average would
be about .010 (I'll give you one hit that you got swinging with your
eyes closed).

A bit of satire...
 

A bit of satire...
 

A bit of satire...
 

F*O*A*D wrote:
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?


Why did you bring up race? You must be racist.

A bit of satire...
 

On 12/4/2014 8:10 PM, Roger wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:18:22 -0500, KC wrote:

On 12/4/2014 10:08 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 09:11:46 -0500, Let it snowe
wrote:

On 12/4/2014 8:20 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
Since a city is being compared to a country, the population
density is
immaterial.
If that is so try comparing Detroit or Chicago or Washington DC or
LA to
all of the Us.
Then Luddite and Toad would call me an ingrained racist. I'd bet that
if you took the homicides in our 8-10 largest cities there would be
more than in the entire rest of the US (and Canada combined).
--

"The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument
with a liberal."

...Peter Brimelow (Author)
(Thanks, Luddite!)

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...
Actually NYC is not murder city anymore. They are way down the list at
about 5 per 100,000, Detroit and New Orleans are 10 times that.
Miami has slid down in the ratings too since the cocaine wars ended.

They go

Detroit (54.6)
New Orleans
big gap
Baltimore (35.5)
Newark
Oakland
Stockton
Kansas City
Philadelphia
Cleveland
Memphis
Atlanta
Chicago
Buffalo
Miami (16.7)

Per the FBI UCR 2012

It is interesting that 8 out of the 14 listed have very strict gun
control.


I wouldn't expect to see Buffalo on a list like this. Evidently they
are littered with losers, too.


Check out a list of which are run by dems, and which by repubs....

A bit of satire...
 

On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 15:31:37 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/4/2014 3:12 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:06:37 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/4/2014 10:28 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:12:57 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/4/2014 10:08 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 09:11:46 -0500, Let it snowe
wrote:

On 12/4/2014 8:20 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
Since a city is being compared to a country, the population density is
immaterial.

If that is so try comparing Detroit or Chicago or Washington DC or LA to
all of the Us.

Then Luddite and Toad would call me an ingrained racist. I'd bet that
if you took the homicides in our 8-10 largest cities there would be
more than in the entire rest of the US (and Canada combined).


Putting words in other people's mouths again, huh Clara?

You sure like to gossip.


The 'then' part was out of the question, which made the 'call me' part
not applicable, therefore no words in anyone's mouth.


Cute wiggle.

BTW ... please cite where I have accused you of being a racist?

Where did I say you've done so? Putting words in my mourth again, eh
Dep'ty?

You may be. Or maybe your're not. I don't know and have never
made any accusations.

I think the word 'ingrained' was added to one of Toad's comments.

You're hung up on the "ingrained" thing. You don't think that the way
people think, talk or express themselves isn't due to some ingrained
thought process, learning experience or conditioning?

I absolutely believe that those things 'can' be due to some ingrained
thought processes, etc.

But, that's where education and experience come into play. What may
have been ingrained at age 10 could well be enhanced or deleted by age
70. Or, do you not think that a person's attitudes and behaviors can
be changed?



So, are you are saying that you are changing?


No. Luckily, racism was never an 'ingrained' behavior. It was simply a
false accusation.

--

"The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument
with a liberal."

....Peter Brimelow (Author)
(Thanks, Luddite!)

A bit of satire...
 

On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 15:32:39 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/4/2014 3:28 PM, Poco Loco 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. :-)

Would you say guns, wars and violence are 'ingrained' in Toad's, jps',
or your makeup?

Define "makeup" versus "culture".


Your makeup - Your 'individual 'psyche', your 'individual mental and
moral character'.
--

"The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument
with a liberal."

....Peter Brimelow (Author)
(Thanks, Luddite!)

A bit of satire...
 

On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 15:51:47 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 12/4/14 2:02 PM, Califbill wrote:
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



Gun death rate changed with the gun confiscations. Death rates did not
really change.


Oh, you fellas are citing the pro-gun sites, the ones that play fun and
games with statistics. Good show.

Like the LA Times, eh?

What a f'ing joke, Toad.
--

"The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument
with a liberal."

....Peter Brimelow (Author)
(Thanks, Luddite!)

A bit of satire...
 

On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 20:01:57 -0500, Roger wrote:

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.


The statistics certainly can.

Then the FBI must be racist.
--

"The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument
with a liberal."

....Peter Brimelow (Author)
(Thanks, Luddite!)

A bit of satire...
 

On 12/4/14 9:10 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 15:31:37 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"


No. Luckily, racism was never an 'ingrained' behavior. It was simply a
false accusation.

--


Your years of racist posts here indicate you are a racist.

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

A bit of satire...
 

On 12/4/2014 10:03 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
Your years of racist posts here indicate you are a racist.

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

What racist posts?

A bit of satire...
 

On 12/4/2014 10:26 PM, Let it snowe wrote:
On 12/4/2014 10:03 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
Your years of racist posts here indicate you are a racist.

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

What racist posts?

They got caught today being overtly racist when talking about a fake
news story... now they are attacking.

A bit of satire...
 

On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 22:48:31 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 12:19:22 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

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.

I bet the demographic differences be more significant than population
density.
Maybe you could compare Staten Island with Queens.
(and I have no idea what the answer would be, just guessing)

Americans are 10 times more violent than Canadians and black Americans
are 4 times more violent than white Americans.

That is not opinion or racism, it is what you see when you read the
UCR. (just murders)

===

Why go where brave men fear to tread. A lot of it is drug related.

A bit of satire...
 

On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 22:41:35 -0500, wrote:

When Paladin shot someone, they just
fell down.

===

If anything that was even more desensitizing than the really gory
stuff.

A bit of satire...
 

On 12/4/2014 11:14 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 20:23:52 -0500, KC wrote:

On 12/4/2014 8:10 PM, Roger wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 10:18:22 -0500, KC wrote:

On 12/4/2014 10:08 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 09:11:46 -0500, Let it snowe
wrote:

On 12/4/2014 8:20 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
Since a city is being compared to a country, the population
density is
immaterial.
If that is so try comparing Detroit or Chicago or Washington DC or
LA to
all of the Us.
Then Luddite and Toad would call me an ingrained racist. I'd bet that
if you took the homicides in our 8-10 largest cities there would be
more than in the entire rest of the US (and Canada combined).
--

"The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument
with a liberal."

...Peter Brimelow (Author)
(Thanks, Luddite!)

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...
Actually NYC is not murder city anymore. They are way down the list at
about 5 per 100,000, Detroit and New Orleans are 10 times that.
Miami has slid down in the ratings too since the cocaine wars ended.

They go

Detroit (54.6)
New Orleans
big gap
Baltimore (35.5)
Newark
Oakland
Stockton
Kansas City
Philadelphia
Cleveland
Memphis
Atlanta
Chicago
Buffalo
Miami (16.7)

Per the FBI UCR 2012

It is interesting that 8 out of the 14 listed have very strict gun
control.


I wouldn't expect to see Buffalo on a list like this. Evidently they
are littered with losers, too.


Check out a list of which are run by dems, and which by repubs....

I doubt any of those cities are run by Republicans.
Maybe Buffalo?

The big major city run by a republican mayor for the last 20 years?.
New York City and they went from being murder city to one of the
safest in the country ... with the highest population density.
Every burroughs and CDP out strips any other city in the US for
population density, diversity or just about any other metric you want
to use.
Their secret? They enforced the laws, all of them. Cracking down on
little crimes eliminated big crimes.


And stop and frisk.. but the dems can't hold blacks down without the
crime and violence so with the new dem in power they are stopping as
many of the effective policies as they can..

A bit of satire...
 

F*O*A*D wrote:
On 12/4/14 9:10 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 15:31:37 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"


No. Luckily, racism was never an 'ingrained' behavior. It was simply a
false accusation.

--


Your years of racist posts here indicate you are a racist.


Your years of citing race prove your racism.

A bit of satire...
 

F*O*A*D wrote:
On 12/4/14 2:02 PM, Califbill wrote:
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



Gun death rate changed with the gun confiscations. Death rates did not
really change.


Oh, you fellas are citing the pro-gun sites, the ones that play fun and
games with statistics. Good show.


You give a cite then!

A bit of satire...
 

On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 22:38:00 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 12:09:51 -0500, 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

I suppose I could dig up the article I posted here before that had the
graph of the Australian murder rate and getting rid of those guns did
not make any significant blip in the slope. Just like us, their murder
rate was dropping and the gun confiscation really had little effect.
It continued to drop at about the same rate. People just found another
way to off their mother in law and criminals were not really affected
at all.

Remember, facts are irrelevant.
--

"The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument
with a liberal."

....Peter Brimelow (Author)
(Thanks, Luddite!)

A bit of satire...
 

On 12/5/2014 12:24 AM, Califbill wrote:
F*O*A*D wrote:
On 12/4/14 9:10 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 15:31:37 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"


No. Luckily, racism was never an 'ingrained' behavior. It was simply a
false accusation.

--


Your years of racist posts here indicate you are a racist.


Your years of citing race prove your racism.

He doesn't cite much but he sure does accuse folks of being racist, A
LOT. What's up with that?