SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for SoyCow8093
State laws that require gun purchasers to obtain a license contingent on passing a background check performed by state or local law enforcement are associated with a 14 percent reduction in firearm homicides in large, urban counties.
Studies have shown that these laws, which are sometimes called permit-to-purchase licensing laws, are associated with fewer firearm homicides at the state level. This is the first study to measure the impact of licensing laws on firearm homicides in large, urban counties, where close to two-thirds of all gun deaths in the U.S. occur.
The study was published online May 22 in the Journal of Urban Health and was written by researchers at the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research, based at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, and the Violence Prevention Research Program at the University of California, Davis.
Handgun licensing laws typically require prospective gun purchasers to apply directly to a state or local law enforcement agency to obtain a purchase permit, which is dependent on passing a background check, prior to approaching a seller. Many state licensing laws also require applicants to submit fingerprints.
The study also found that states that only required so-called comprehensive background checks (CBCs) -- that is, did not include other licensing requirements -- were associated with a 16 percent increase in firearm homicides in the large, urban counties. In states that only require a CBC the gun seller or dealer, not law enforcement, typically carries out the background check.
"Background checks are intended to screen out prohibited individuals, and serve as the foundation upon which other gun laws are built, but they may not be sufficient on their own to decrease gun homicides," said Cassandra Crifasi, PhD, MPH, assistant professor with the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research and the paper's lead author. "This study extends what we know about the beneficial effects of a licensing system on gun homicides to large, urban counties across the United States."
In addition to sending potential purchasers to law enforcement and requiring fingerprints, state licensing laws provide a longer period for law enforcement to conduct background checks. These checks may have access to more records, increasing the likelihood that law enforcement can identify and screen out those with a prohibiting condition. Surveys from the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research find that the majority of both gun owners and non-gun owners support this policy.
[...] For the study, a sample of 136 of the largest, urban counties in the U.S. was created for 1984-2015 and analyses were conducted to assess the effects of changes to the policies over time.
The study also examined the impact of right-to-carry (RTC) and stand- your-ground (SYG) laws. SYG laws give individuals expanded protections for use of lethal force in response to a perceived threat, and RTC laws make it easier for people to carry loaded, concealed firearms in public spaces.
The researchers found that counties in states that adopted SYG laws experienced a seven percent increase in firearm homicide, and counties in states with RTC laws experienced a four percent increase firearm homicide after the state's adoption of the RTC law.
"Our research finds that state laws that encourage more public gun carrying with fewer restrictions on who can carry experience more gun homicides in the state's large, urban counties than would have been expected had the law not been implemented," said Crifasi. "Similarly, stand-your-ground laws appear to make otherwise non-lethal encounters deadly if people who are carrying loaded weapons feel emboldened to use their weapons versus de-escalating a volatile situation."
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday June 06 2018, @01:54AM (7 children)
Let us all remember that those cities with the strictest gun control laws are the leaders in homicides, as well as gun homicides. Yet, we have another "study" proving that gun control laws work.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 4, Informative) by VLM on Wednesday June 06 2018, @02:35PM
This is too laughable to even discuss as serious scholarship. Research who funded it. All six authors get a paycheck from an axe grinding gun grabbing organization.
http://www.joycefdn.org/programs/gun-violence [joycefdn.org]
"includes stronger gun policies"
So let me get this straight, the "unbiased academics" got a paycheck from a gun grabbing organization to produce an article "proving" that gun grabbing is a great idea. Thats the only funding this "study" (aka propaganda piece) received. Holy shit what a surprise that their conclusion agreed with their employer's stated public goals! This is so unlike a tobacco company executive stating smoking is good for you, LOL.
OMG dude, every time, every freaking time...
I'm biased but I'm fair, in a weird way, that in a discussion about a propaganda piece from people paid by a propaganda organization where suspiciously the result just coincidentally happened to match the propaganda organizations goals, I'm not going to post a rebuttal along the lines of "on the other hand, PR people paid by the NRA have stated in opposition that ..." and then try to pass that corporate press release off as legit academic research.
Hold the phone yo, I just heard that some paid employees of the Republican National Committee have shockingly and surprisingly discovered in totally unbiased research that Republican party policies are a good idea. I may need medical attention from falling out of my chair.
(Score: 2) by bobthecimmerian on Wednesday June 06 2018, @07:13PM (5 children)
Louisiana has some of the most lax gun control laws in the country, and New Orleans is pretty bad for homicides. Try again.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday June 07 2018, @12:14AM (3 children)
The whole state of Louisiana can't keep up with Chicago, alone. Per capita, Shreveport has challenged Chicago a couple times in the past, but in raw numbers, they didn't come close.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 2) by bobthecimmerian on Thursday June 07 2018, @11:18AM (2 children)
Where did you get your numbers? According to this site, New Orleans outdoes Chicago on a per-capita basis: https://www.thetrace.org/2016/10/chicago-gun-violence-per-capita-rate/ [thetrace.org]
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday June 07 2018, @02:40PM (1 child)
I guess my numbers are old. The time at which Shreveport/Bossier was challenging Chicago, New Orleans was trailing far behind. Times do change.
Here's a list of the top 30 US cities. https://www.neighborhoodscout.com/blog/highest-murder-rate-cities. [neighborhoodscout.com] The most dangerous city according to that list, is East St. Louis, Illinois.
Whichever list we look at, it's interesting to see how many of those cities have crazy gun control laws - that just don't work. Note just how many of them are controlled by which parties, as well.
This list looks very much the same, except, instead of E. St. Louis, it is St. Louis in number one position. https://bismarcktribune.com/news/national/the-cities-with-the-highest-murder-rates-in-the-us/collection_5a789407-4d43-5403-ad56-7c47880bda8e.html [bismarcktribune.com]
A humorous side of our little exchange: Some years back, when I posted in another discussion that Shreveport's per capita murder rate was nearly equal to Chicago, at least a dozen people jumped on the "No way Shreveport has that many murders" bandwagon. I re-emphasized the "per capita" bit, and even more people wanted to argue with me. Today - you're pointing at a different city - New Orleans - and telling me that the per capita is even higher than Chicago.
This is one of the reasons it's so hard to "win a point". Not many of us can agree what a meaningful number is, and those who agree on that want to refute any number given them. :^)
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 2) by bobthecimmerian on Thursday June 07 2018, @04:47PM
The modern internet's favorite hobby is lying with statistics, or just plain lying. It may have surpassed porn.
I think measuring the impact of gun control legislation, good or bad, is incredibly difficult. Most of the cities that pass high level of gun control laws are doing it specifically because there is already a high level of gun-related crime. So a high murder rate already existed, and it's up to the people having the debate to find additional supporting evidence to prove that gun control laws made the problem better or worse or had no effect. I think that Chicago or Los Angeles combined with New Orleans are enough evidence that neither side can claim "gun control always makes crime worse" or "gun control always makes crime better".
I suspect that if anything a more interesting investigation would be the relationship between gun crime and poverty levels. Some of the South American and African countries with much higher rates of gun crime have more permissive gun ownership laws than the US, but what they also have is a lot more poverty. Likewise I suspect the real reason so many other first world countries have less gun ownership and also less violent crime (gun or otherwise) than the US is that they have lower poverty levels. It may be that the relationship strictly between gun ownership and crime is zero or maybe even, as gun rights advocates would argue, negative.
I think the more difficult question about gun ownership is about suicide. The US has on the order of 8,000 gun homicides and 20,000 gun suicides per year. So if you buy a gun, there is on the order of a 99% chance it will never be used to harm a human being. But that 1% chance it will be used to harm a human being includes a greater than two in three risk that you or someone else in your family will use it to kill themselves vs. to stop an intruder. I have friends and family members with impressive firearm collections, but my other is bipolar and there's a risk I'll develop the disease as I get older or some of my kids will have it. For self-defense, we got dogs. It's a bit harder to kill yourself on the spur of the moment with one of those.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday June 07 2018, @03:47AM
Pick a city that doesn't have a long history of Democrat rulership yet insane violence if you want to make an argument in favor supporting Democrats. Oh, wait, there really aren't any, are there?
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Wednesday June 06 2018, @02:04AM (16 children)
Washington State offers Concealed Carry permits but surely my rights would be grossly violated were I to apply for one.
Perhaps I'll present the Supreme Court oral arguments myself; I enjoyed reading the law.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Hyper on Wednesday June 06 2018, @02:42AM
You should try and then make a documentary out of it
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 06 2018, @04:17AM (9 children)
If I recall correctly, you outted yourself as an adjudicated crazy which precludes you from firearms. It's a tough break for you as that seems to be one point that all sides agree upon. Most of the gun grabbers I've seen post here and the green site are howling mad with Trump Derangement Syndrome so I guess that kind of works out for the best too.
(Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Wednesday June 06 2018, @04:41AM (2 children)
whether the court will permit that is up to the judge, but I can make a good case for my being coerced by my alleged "defense" attorney.
There were witnesses. When I called her office one of her fellow attorneys told me that my "counsel" would pay an investigator to interview them.
She didn't. The whole time she made plain that she regarded me as guilty as sin.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by number11 on Wednesday June 06 2018, @05:55AM (1 child)
So, you didn't understand that in the USA, "justice" for those who have the money? If you use a "public" defender, you're obviously guilty.
(Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Wednesday June 06 2018, @06:20AM
There is some law firm that specializes in pointing out to judges that the 14th Amendment's guarantee of equal protection under the law means that defendants who have no money are entitled to be released on their own recognizance.
Had I been able to raise my $50k bail I would have gone all the way to the jury.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday June 06 2018, @05:09AM (5 children)
I don't. I have no problem with crazy people having guns. Darwin will take care of them the same as it takes care of people foolish enough to not have one.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 06 2018, @04:39PM (2 children)
What about the incarcerated? Is it okay to infringe on their 2nd amendment rights? If so, doesn't that mean you are in favor of some degree of gun control and now we're just haggling over price?
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Wednesday June 06 2018, @06:12PM
People in prison are by the very nature having their "rights revoked" for bad behavior. Generally for something that's agreed to be a bad thing. Now, if you mean people that used to be incarcerated, that's a different question.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday June 07 2018, @03:49AM
Naw. Let them have guns too, for the same reason.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Thursday June 07 2018, @06:44AM (1 child)
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday June 09 2018, @11:24AM
Exactly. The unfit got shown the door. Everything working as intended.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 06 2018, @05:41PM (4 children)
actually career criminals(not bs drug law felons) and the mentally insane(or whatever exact phrase they used way back when to describe someone who was not competent due to mental illness. note: does not include ODD and other bs. ) were valid exceptions.
(Score: 2) by Hyper on Thursday June 07 2018, @09:52AM (3 children)
Where is the line drawn these days for "not mentally stable enough to be trusted to own a gun"?
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday June 09 2018, @11:26AM (2 children)
It's arbitrarily decided by unelected head shrinkers. As is the diagnosis of stability or the lack thereof.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 13 2018, @08:18AM (1 child)
Ahhhh "experts"
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday June 13 2018, @03:29PM
Anyone claiming to be an expert on the human mind needs their head examined.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 5, Informative) by idiot_king on Wednesday June 06 2018, @02:08AM (56 children)
I'm starting to think SN is putting up stories like this to get clicks.... /s
But seriously, gun legislation (and outright bans) correlates with safety. The fact that this is up for debate shows how braindead most people are.
See: Europe, Asia, Australia, literally any country with sane gun laws, ever.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 06 2018, @02:28AM
The fact that you think your views are not up for debate shows how much an idiot you are.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 06 2018, @02:29AM
You want it at any price. You'll even give up your freedom to live in a nerfed world. You sure are trusting of your new masters.
I thought you were afraid of Trump and cops? You only want them having the guns now?
Regardless, this is how you end up defenseless in something like the Cultural Revolution. No, you won't be safe. It'll be "your team", as it almost always is, but you'll be first against the wall. It always works out that way; for example the soviets killed many of the people who helped put them in power.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 06 2018, @02:29AM (6 children)
their fate will be the same as others
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 06 2018, @02:35AM (5 children)
There's no fate but what we make for ourselves
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday June 06 2018, @02:48AM (4 children)
Yes - that is exactly what my side keeps saying. If we give up our weapons, our fate is likely to be fatal.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by aristarchus on Wednesday June 06 2018, @09:52AM (3 children)
You coward, Runaway2626!
Afraid to die, are we, you pathetic coward! Stand up like a human being! Do not grovel on the ground like some kind of worm! No free person puts their freedom in the possession of weapons. It is only a disguised form of surrender. If you prevail, your freedom is at the mercy of those who have not yet taken your arms from you. If you are defeated, your true nature will be exposed and you will kneel before Zog, or Trump, or really just about anyone who takes your arms from you.
Real free people know that their freedom is unconditional, it depends on nothing but their own character and confidence in their self worth. Even if they are disarmed, they are not defeated. Even if they are killed, they are not defeated. Freedom is not given, so it cannot be taken away. So if you lose your freedom by losing your weapons, I hate to break it to you, but you were never free in the first place. Coward! Slave to a weapon! You truly disgust me.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday June 06 2018, @02:23PM
That's some good advice, right there. Stand up like a Spartan. Don't grovel on some little boy like an Athenian. έλα και να τα πάρεις, or, έλα και να τα πάρεις, or something like that. You need to make a habit of giving good advice. Stop worrying about those alt-right boogeymen.
The rest of that gibberish - maybe you'll translate it for the rest of us? Doesn't it all mean something like, "The difference between a free man and a slave, is the right to keep and bear arms."
You're right again, it seems. Freedom isn't given. One asserts one's freedom, or he is not free.
And, finally, yes, we discussed you, and agreed that you are quite disgusting.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 1, Offtopic) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday June 06 2018, @03:01PM (1 child)
Oh yeah - mutton labia! Almost forgot for a moment that we were discussing Greeks.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 07 2018, @03:58AM
Or, Arkansans? Moron Labia!
(Score: 3, Flamebait) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday June 06 2018, @02:40AM (31 children)
Correlation does not equal causation, amirite? But - let's see this correlation you speak of. Let's analyze it. Did you read that London's murder rate is now admitted to be as high as that of New York City? But, they don't have guns in London, amirite?
Meanwhile, there remains a long list of places where guns were prohibited, only for gubbermint to round people up, and execute them. That doesn't even take into account places like Nanking, where weapons were prohibited, and gubbermint failed to protect the population from invading forces.
In the 20th century, more than 100 million people were killed because they were law-abiding people who obeyed laws forbidding possession of weapons.
BTW - if guns are outlawed, who is going to collect them? The executive? Trump? You hoplophobes are kinda funny. Trump is so very evil, but you want him to take all the guns away from us?
What's even funnier is, Trump doesn't want our guns. Trump is no danger to me. He just doesn't WANT my guns. The real danger to me, are those people who want my guns. They are the same people who would like to lock me up for failing to approve of gay marriages. Or, lock me up for observing that a lot of black people are killed - mostly by black people. They might even want to lock me up for being sympathetic to the Russians in Crimea. Those same people would love to see me summarily executed for failure to obey an unjust order from a TSA agent.
But, yeah, you guys go ahead and pass a law that Trump should come get all of our weapons. I think that Trump and I will both thumb our noses at you.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by idiot_king on Wednesday June 06 2018, @02:57AM (27 children)
First off, Trump is no danger to you because you're clearly not in a minority position. You'd be singing a different birdsong if the shoe were on the other foot.
What you also fail to take into account is inequality - which correlates with violence to an extraordinary degree, even moreso than guns.
Get rid of that, and you have your beloved Whitopias in places like Montana and so on.
Get rid of guns, you'd have Japan, Taiwan, SKorea, Sweden, Denmark, Australia, etc etc. And who wouldn't want to live in those places? Well, gun nuts for one. But there's a reason those places are held up so high - because they understand that some things are just too dangerous for the populace to have. People should be focusing on creating art and stuff like that, not worshiping objects of destruction.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 06 2018, @04:27AM (4 children)
So, you want everyone to give up guns for a minority of people to *feel* safe.
I question your definition of equality by removing equalizers.
Why do people keep immigrating to the US instead of gun-free countries again?
Are you sure it's not because they trust their better funded police force?
And we have a critic trying to define what art is, typical.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 06 2018, @05:32AM
Letting aside that immigration in other countries does happen, I challenge you to demonstrate the is it gun regime is the main factor that determines the migration decision.
Without such a demonstration, your argument is to be discarded as irrelevant.
Are you making the argument that the other countries are safer because a better funded police force?
Or is this only a (mis)direction on a wild goose chase?
If it is the first, how about you present some evidence. I don't know, like some links that demonstrate a better paid police is a good substitute for strictly controlled gun ownership?
And here we have an argument attacking the person, not the argument. Typical.
(Score: 2) by number11 on Wednesday June 06 2018, @06:02AM (1 child)
"Get rid of guns, you'd have Japan, Taiwan, SKorea, Sweden, Denmark, Australia, etc etc. And who wouldn't want to live in those places?
Why do people keep immigrating to the US instead of gun-free countries again?"
Do paople from those countries "keep immirating" to the US? In enough numbers so that one can believe causality?
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Wednesday June 06 2018, @11:46PM
For Japan, Taiwan, SKorea, and Australia, the answer is obvious: It's a lot harder to walk there.
For Sweden and Denmark, there actually have been increases in immigration to both those countries as of late. The modern-day Know-Nothings in those countries are just as mad about it as the American nativists are.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by VLM on Wednesday June 06 2018, @02:41PM
Access to white people and their economies has been discovered to be a UN declared human right. As for the white people themselves, official policy is fuck them. Rape in Europe, literally. And if they complain, throw em in jail for complaining.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday June 06 2018, @04:32AM (1 child)
And if the shoe were on the other foot, Mr. Runaway would clearly want to sacrifice his gun ownership to someone that is such a danger? Hmmm, the argument needs some work.
And why should Mr. Runaway take that into account? We already have mechanisms, such as a police force and prison, to make sure everyone doesn't exceed their fair share of shooting, murder, and mayhem.
Or the less pleasant places that have also done that. I somehow don't buy that merely taking away firearms will fix the many problems of the US that can't be tied to firearms no matter how tenuously.
Like freedom, amirite?
There's only so many wool-knit Pokemon, the absolute be-all, end-all of art, that humanity could make or need. What's the rest of humanity going to do? Killing each other solves this thorny problem. I can't see why the rest of the internet just doesn't get this. Am I the only smart one in the room???
(Score: 4, Insightful) by MostCynical on Wednesday June 06 2018, @09:14AM
Well, you're certainly not the only person in the room who thinks he is the smart one.
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 06 2018, @04:39AM
CNN ran a story this morning about a man who was confronted and interrogated by police looking for an armed robbery suspect while moving in to his new apartment. He made the claim he was profiled because he was black. Does anyone really think police were told an armed robber was loose and immediately began looking for a black guy to blame? No, someone reported an armed robber and described him as black. This man was angry at the police for profiling him but his anger is misplaced. He should instead focus his anger on the hordes of black men who are criminals that reflect badly on black men in general. There is a reason that the "horribly racist" police do not "hassle" Asian men. They cause much fewer problems.
In my mostly white, Indian, and Chinese demographic town, nearly all the violent crime is committed by the small black male population. If black men want the profiling to stop, they need to stop the root cause of the profiling. Asking people to turn a blind eye to the obvious will never work.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by coolgopher on Wednesday June 06 2018, @04:45AM (10 children)
As someone who grew up in Sweden and now lives in Australia, my view is it's not the absence of guns that makes the difference. It's the mindset that makes the difference. In Sweden, if you own a firearm and aren't an active hunter/farmer (acceptable firearms being longarms, shotguns) or sports shooter (acceptable firearm being whatever you compete in), then you're considered weird, nonconforming, and probably dangerous. After all, in Sweden those are the only [socially] valid reasons for having guns. Oh, and heirlooms. Heirloom guns are fine and may be displayed in the home in a place of pride.
The thing about Sweden is that from the outside it seems to be this liberal haven. It's not until you're fully immersed that you discover the huge social pressures that exist. You do not rock the boat. You do not talk back. You do not talk yourself up. You do not draw attention to yourself by being different. You do not try to amass power in whatever form. Do any of those things and doors will close and you'll find yourself cast out further and further. Nobody sane would care more about gun ownership than their place in society. So, the system works quite well over there. I think the social cohesion is slowly coming apart, and what has worked in the past will cease to work, and what the new solution will be then I do not know. And to comment on the art side - my experience is that creativity is actively not valued, as it too easily steps into the no-go zones of societal norms.
In Australia, the story seems slightly different, but also quite similar. While there's a ridiculous strong sentiment of tall-poppy syndrome, the social aspects are a lot more chilled. It's just, you know, you'd be a bloody drongo to naff around with guns around people. Better to just have another pint. And if the choice between easier access to guns (and here in Victoria it's still _very_ easy to get a license), and having to put up with nutters like at Port Arthur, the collective sentiment is that Port Arthur is by far the greater evil. So, on the whole we have another pint instead. While I vehemently disagreed with many of Howard's political decisions, the strengthened gun laws I have to give him significant credit for. They have served the country very well.
The situation in the US appears very different. Not that I've ever actually been to the US (nor do I plan to now - I'd feel safer traveling to China ffs, and I'm not talking about the gun culture here). I honestly do not believe much can change in this generation on the gun front. Given all the mass shootings, my view is that things *should* change, but I don't think the mindset is there that would allow any effective change. It's going to take the young generation who've grown up with the terror of school shootings to achieve a change. Yet at the same time, seeing how the elites have entrenched themselves in the political system, that change could in fact be what prevents a correction to the political system. Which is what the older(?) generation seems to be concerned about, even if they don't express it too well when they voice their proponency of gun rights. I have no solution to propose for the US. I don't think copying Australia or Sweden would work - the circumstances are too different. Maybe stop treating guns as the problem, and address the deeper causes, such as social inequality and poverty? But that's a whole 'nother fraught topic...
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday June 06 2018, @09:22AM (4 children)
Reaching this point so fast, it should be already evident that you are better ordering the beer by the jug. Just saying...
Cheers, mate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 2) by coolgopher on Thursday June 07 2018, @12:58AM (3 children)
Hah, 'strewth!
Do you disagree with my analysis though?
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday June 07 2018, @01:28AM (2 children)
Not at all.
I guess I was only trying to improve on your approach to the traditional strategy of coping with the everyday life downunder.
You know? No matter how "joyful" those "strains", they do remain strains and that "toiling with hearth and hands" does ask an efficient strategy to unwind.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 3, Insightful) by coolgopher on Thursday June 07 2018, @02:17AM (1 child)
Aye, "girt by beer" alright!
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday June 07 2018, @03:16AM
Ah, I missed that one. So true! Thanks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday June 06 2018, @02:43PM (1 child)
Awesome post. You see past the bullshit. I touched on what you call "social cohesion" recently. Yes, China has it. I call it "conformity". Being the nonconformist that I am, I would consider China, and some other countries as well, to be a living hell. The fact that every neighbor within ten miles is doing $thing today, doesn't mean that I should do $thing as well. I'm gonna do whatever it is that I'm going to do, and I see zero reason to do the same thing that all of my neighbors are doing. But, your way of stating it is probably better. Social cohesion.
I'll have to disagree, though, that poverty causes crime. A poor person can have extremely high morals and ethics, if only he was raised by a moral and ethical parent. Being poor helps an unethical person to justify his crime, but being poor doesn't cause crime, in and of itself. Inequality? Hmmmm - yes, and no. We might agree that Whitey shoved Blacks into the mud, years ago. But, times have changed. Blacks need not stay in the mud, wallowing in self pity, any more.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by coolgopher on Thursday June 07 2018, @12:56AM
Fair call on my use of the word poverty. I agree that many who fall into the poor category are Really Good People(tm), often far kinder and more generous than those who have never known hardship.
A better word for what I was getting at is destitution, or hopelessness. When people see no other option for their survival, or they've been ground into the dirt so hard they see no way out, that's when people will resort to crime.
The equality I referenced was meant as social equality over all. Reducing the gap the top and the bottom of the social spectrum. Whether that genuinely reflects skin color divisions I have insufficient data to comment on.
And thanks for the response, I was hoping you'd chime in, because we're often at polar opposites on topics like this.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday June 06 2018, @02:46PM (2 children)
Its the people and culture, not the magic dirt. And they're replacing the people with extremely violent immigrants. Is the magic dirt making them behave? Seems not. That paragraph about culture in Sweden doesn't read at all like modern no-go zones and the dark and violent future of Sweden. Where's the the "huge social pressure" not to rape and kill today, LOL? It seems to be missing from some areas, kinda like the white people that used to live there, huh, its almost like people and culture are more tightly related than magic dirt and culture... nah that would be political incorrect thought, so must not be true, LOL?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by coolgopher on Thursday June 07 2018, @01:33AM (1 child)
I can't tell if you're trolling or have been drinking the Russian coolaid too much...
Ignoring the hyperbole (the only no-go zone for me would be way north in late summer, because of the mosquito swarms; most serious violence can be linked to the eastern mafia, which got the foot in when we gutted the police force), you are in many ways correct. The social pressures are still there, but the cohesion has been noticeably slipping for over a decade. The problem isn't immigration, it's integration, it rather the lack thereof. When I grew up, my best friend was of Spanish descent, the grand parents being the immigrants. They were as Swedish as any of us.
It's the recent unmanaged waves of immigration that have caused the creaking and cracking. The people see it, the politicians refuse to, because you have to be seen Doing The Good Thing. Which is why the Sweden Democrats are the third(?) largest party now and still rising, originally being the ultra nationalistic, neonazi flirting hard right, but having by now polished their image, policies and membership list into a serious political force. A decade ago I would not have been caught dead even thinking about voting for them. If I was living in Sweden now they'd have my vote. For all of their issues, past or present, they are the only ones who recognize the problem and are willing to speak and act on it.
There's no mercy in allowing everyone in, only to have the supposed sanctuary turn into locust ravaged wasteland (see, I can do hyperbole too). Provide as much help as you can without leaving yourself too short, then stop. That's basic advice that applies across life, and should be common sense. Alas, politics and common sense...
Denmark copped a lot of flak for closing their border when they did, but to my mind they did the only sane thing in an insane situation. And those who are so quick to judge Denmark fail to acknowledge that at the same time they're possibly the one country who successfully reintegrate jihadi fighters back into civilized society.
(Score: 1) by lars_stefan_axelsson on Thursday June 07 2018, @08:50AM
And this interesting in context in that it adds one point of data to the old adage that "If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns".
While the overall murder rate in Sweden has been in decline for a long time, and still is given even the current increase in gang related shootings, its the first time in Swedish discourse that no big squeeze has been put to legal gun ownership.
This is because no-one, even the most hard core hoplophobes, could argue that the AKs and com-bloc pistols (and F1 hand grenades...) that are being used were ever in Sweden lawfully. It is impossible to make the argument that restricting legal gun ownership would make one iota of difference in this case. Back in the day criminals used, mainly, stolen military weapons (as they were, for reasons of defence, easily accessible), or a stolen cut off double barrel. But these days its all, without exception, imports from the Balkans. Modern day criminals do not use Swedish supply channels to get their ordinance.
Now there is a cloud on the horizon in the EU "gun ban", but that seems to have been neutralised for the time being. We'll see.
Now, it should be pointed out that perceptions are misleading. Sweden actually has quite a lot of civilian firearms ownership, mainly for hunting. And I'm the last generation where every male underwent military training as a part of national service (some 50000 young men each year).
Stefan Axelsson
(Score: 3, Insightful) by unauthorized on Wednesday June 06 2018, @04:49AM (1 child)
Oh, you mean like all the all the black people who voted for Trump?
You know, for someone being presented as the second coming of fucking Hitler, Trump hasn't really done... well anything of note. Trump's greatest claim to fame is running his mouth off on twitter. Think about it. Your Trump paranoia is an irrational frenzy fueled by manipulative media, the guy is a harmless buffoon.
No it doesn't. China has a massive income disparity gap, and yet they don't have a murder epidemic.
I have the sneaking suspicion that the root cause for increased violence in the west is the lack of impulse control ingrained through childhood. Sometimes you have to face hardship with a certain degree of stoicism, and western children don't really learn that through out their formative years, which is why you end up with 20-something year olds having theatric breakdowns that a 10 year old would find embarrassing.
Man, fuck living in Japan and South Korea. Their soul-crushing workaholic culture makes Renaissance Prussia seem appealing.
Also, you are conveniently ignoring Switzerland which has private gun ownership rates second only to the US and one of the lowest homicide ratios in the world. It's not the guns that kill people, it's your culture of violence. If you ban guns, people will stab and beat each other instead.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 06 2018, @09:28AM
It's that entitlement mindset that's groomed into them.
Without it to drown the common sense, one can't grow antisocial enough to hope they'll get out of the 'temporary embarrassed billionaire' state they think themselves to be in.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 06 2018, @04:59AM
I'm minority.
I prefer having guns.
I like having the option of a country of residence where I can do so - so how about instead of trying to turn the US into Australia, we suggest to the nice people who don't want nasty guns that they seek out a jurisdiction that accords more with their worldview? Leave the US to nasty, greasy, evil gun-hugging nutcases. Leave - before the crazy rubs off on you!
Gun madness, it's contagious! Think of your children! Go to Australia and Canada!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 06 2018, @06:28AM
Sweden has a huge problem with grenade attacks. This is some crazy shit. WTF Sweden! There is also the trouble with trucks running into crowds of people. It's the usual people of course. Denmark and Australia are also facing lots of Islam-associated killing.
I'll grant that Japan is nice. They do not accept refugees. They almost don't accept immigrants. If you somehow managed to get permanent residency, which is unlikely, you'd still never fit in. You will never be Japanese. You will never be fully accepted, and you will never feel fully at home. Japan is nice because Japanese people are nice. You can leave valuable stuff out and it doesn't get stolen. Nobody leaves trash around. Given how nice the Japanese are in so many ways that are unrelated to violence, it is clear that the government could hand out every sort of weapon and there would be very little change in the level of violence.
South Korea and Taiwan are less-extreme versions of Japan.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 06 2018, @08:52AM
Sweden is not a gun free country. There are lots of guns there. As is in Germany, Finland and others. Access is more restricted, too restricted imho, but there are lots anyway.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday June 06 2018, @02:48PM (1 child)
Well, none of them speaks a civilized language. I have no time to learn Japanese, Chinese, Korean, Danish, or Strayan. Now, if they were to all adopt 'Murican as their official languages, I'd consider moving more favorably.
Except - well - uhhh - I'm not much into constant surveillance by police states. That's also part of the reason I don't live in New York City, or some other US cities. If I want to be on camera, I'll just buy a camera, and sit on it while I drive.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 06 2018, @06:39PM
I hope you were joking
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 06 2018, @05:58PM
"because they understand that some things are just too dangerous for the populace to have."
sure, if one group is over another why not limit their clients' liability. i reject that the government is over me. it's really that simple.
(Score: 2) by ilPapa on Wednesday June 06 2018, @03:55PM
It's not though.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/london-murder-rate-new-york-compare-worse-stabbings-knife-crime-teenagers-statistics-figures-a8286866.html [independent.co.uk]
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Thursday June 07 2018, @06:55AM (1 child)
Oh, christ, this well-debunked old chestnut. Yes it is true that for two months a peak in London overlapped with a dip in NY. But outliers a statistic do not make. London's yearly murder rate is averaging 1.8/100k, to NY's 3.4/100k. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p063jr97
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 3, Funny) by Runaway1956 on Thursday June 07 2018, @02:10PM
And, you're happy with that 1.8? Do you have no standards? Think of the children!
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by khallow on Wednesday June 06 2018, @04:07AM
Good sign! Tell us how that works for you.
(Score: 3, Touché) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday June 06 2018, @05:10AM
Gotta get those clicks up for the ad revenue!
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by mhajicek on Wednesday June 06 2018, @05:40AM (6 children)
Then why is violent crime skyrocketing in England and Australia?
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 3, Touché) by c0lo on Wednesday June 06 2018, @08:11AM (2 children)
Care to support this with evidence in regards with Australia?
'Cause I'm living here, I don't see any sign of skyrocketing crime.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 07 2018, @01:29PM (1 child)
The Melbourne African gang problems? Google it. Muslim related problems? Cars being driven through people issue (a disease thought to have been caught from the middle east)? Haven't noticed the bollards going up around the place? It's a powder keg. The news can be light and fluffy, but like the million+ rapes 800+ victims in Rotherham it can be hard to tell what is going on. Look around you. Get out once in a while. Visit Western Sydney. Travel to Adelaide. No. Wait. Don't. It's a hole. Visit Alice Springs and learn what the Original People are really like. Just don't leave your wallet in your car. Go to canberra to see the flithy squalor the tent Embassy has become. Walk around Sydney at night. Pack a rape whistle especially if you are male. Some of the new arrivals prefer young boys but won't say no if they are a bit older. The place has gone downhill. It's only getting worse. Open your eyes.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday June 07 2018, @11:38PM
You are delusional, mate. I'm living in the thick of it, I don't see any powder keg around, just people getting on with their life and having a good time in the Melbourne CBD at evening.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 2) by MostCynical on Wednesday June 06 2018, @10:07AM
https://aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/tandi359 [aic.gov.au]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Australia [wikipedia.org]
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 06 2018, @06:42PM
Because you're a sucker for propaganda?
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Thursday June 07 2018, @07:00AM
If you want to colour vertical bands by political party, that would be of added value. Not that I'm saying that Labour were any good, just that May and the Conservatives generally (Hunt, rhymes with...) have completely butt-raped essential public services since they got into power.
They say a little information is a dangerous thing. You're in danger. Educate yourself a bit more.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 5, Informative) by janrinok on Wednesday June 06 2018, @08:23AM (5 children)
I chose this story for several reasons - but 'for clicks' isn't one of them.
Firstly, it was submitted by one of our community, it was well written and supported by a link from a reputable source, and it is among a small number worth printing from many others in the submission queue which are, frankly, not worth printing IMHO. Other editors might view them differently so they will remain in the queue until we have all had a chance to decide.
Secondly, it has promoted an intelligent discussion. True, there are some individuals that make childish comments but that will always be the case as everyone here has a right to express their opinion. It might not be a discussion that appeals to you but again, that is not a problem, another story will be along shortly.
If you don't like the stories that we do print, then please submit something that you do like. You stand a much better chance of being accepted if you concentrate on the topics that the site promotes (mainly STEM) but we do cover other topics, such as this one, from time to time.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by aristarchus on Wednesday June 06 2018, @10:04AM (1 child)
Righty-O! I'm on it! I was going to say, "we could have had an aristarchus submission, instead", but now it looks like we will!
(Oh, and janrinok, I really appreciate your attempts to up the level of discourse around here, and combat some of the wacko far-righters. But you have to realize that American ammosexuals are beyond reason, beyond sanity, and usually beyond range. Best just to avoid all and any gun-control submissions, if we want a chance of intelligent dialogue. )
(Score: 3, Touché) by janrinok on Wednesday June 06 2018, @11:15AM
Right, OK. So for your submission, try to keep it to a reasonable length, you know, about the same size as all the other stories that we print. 'Eleventeen' pages of anti-alt-right rant interspersed with your own personal views does not a submission make. In fact, try not to write about the alt-right - we have discussed it to death. And your personal views should go in the comments, not into the story summary itself. Other than that, any STEM topic would be welcome. Look forward to receiving it from you!
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday June 06 2018, @02:54PM (2 children)
You forgot to mention financially supported entirely by a grant from an organization with explicitly public gun grabbing goals, which makes the article a wee bit suspect. Huh, our conclusion matches the goal of the guy who writes our only paycheck, shocker...
No man, just no. Nobody wants to read how cigarette company execs think smoking is great, or chemical producers think using chemicals in industrial scale agriculture is great for the environment, or oil companies think oil is a really nice thing for everyone. Thats what this story is, paid political propaganda masquerading as an academic research paper.
Based on the funding model, I wouldn't trust any number in the linked article, heck even the page numbers are suspect at this point.
Maybe we can agree to rephrase that to something like "please submit better stories", that would be universally appreciated across political boundaries.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Wednesday June 06 2018, @04:21PM
As a Brit, I wouldn't know about this.
You say tomato, I say tomato... each individual has a different view of what 'better' means. Ask Aristarchus, realDonaldTrump, MDC and Runaway what better means and I reckon that you will get very different answers. I can see what you are getting at but it isn't as straightforward as you suggest, in my opinion. However, I think anyone reading this thread will understand what we both mean so perhaps we should leave it at that?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 06 2018, @06:48PM
And I bet the majority of people who read SN would be happier without your dog whistling bullshit everywhere, but such is life eh?
(Score: 2, Insightful) by unauthorized on Wednesday June 06 2018, @04:24AM (7 children)
Oh look, another politically-motivated study that confirms the biases of the authors. In related news, Global Warming isn't anthropogenic, Vaccinations cause autism, the George Soros Illuminati are trying to replace the white race and one in five college-age girls in the US are raped. I have the neatly formatted documents written in academic jargon to prove it!
(Score: 4, Insightful) by ElizabethGreene on Wednesday June 06 2018, @04:33AM (6 children)
If you are going to cast stones at someones science, do so scientifically. Get a copy of the paper, pull the data, and find where they tweaked it. Anything less is committing the same sin, only lazier.
(Score: 1, Troll) by unauthorized on Wednesday June 06 2018, @05:12AM (1 child)
It is objectively physically impossible for someone to verify every single controversial "scientific" claim that crosses the way, there are simply far too many papers out there and even a preliminary verification of one (assuming it's not easily debunked outright drivel) takes a lot more time and effort than most people realize.
Your standard for criticism is unreasonable. Heuristic reasoning is not optional - humans need it in order to be able to function normally.
(Score: 1, Redundant) by unauthorized on Wednesday June 06 2018, @07:53AM
I'm Geth Infiltration Forces Troll Division now!
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday June 06 2018, @05:13AM (2 children)
Sometimes you feel like refuting and sometimes it's not worth the bother and you just drop some snark and move on. I know it's weird to think of anyone here having a life outside the computer but most of us have better things to do than school noobs at least once in a while.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 06 2018, @09:42AM (1 child)
If it's not worth for you to refute, the sensible reaction is to do nothing instead of 'dropping a snark'.
Sensible in the sense:
- rational - time and effort wasted for something that doesn't worth it
- society morals - didn't your mother teach you the value of being polite?
- image self-preservation - I can't count how many times you've been wrong in public.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday June 06 2018, @10:19AM
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday June 06 2018, @02:57PM
Waste of time, look at the funding. You don't have to run your own medical study to suspect a tobacco company exec claiming cig smoking is healthy. Or a whitepaper funded entirely by Monsanto merely coincidentally surprisingly discovering Round Up (tm) is healthier to drink than mothers milk.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by ElizabethGreene on Wednesday June 06 2018, @04:31AM (1 child)
There is an epidemic problem of cherry picking from both pro- and anti- gun groups. This study, like all studies on the topic, should be viewed skeptically until it checks out.
Two specific warning flags from the abstract are:
I'll see if I can get a copy and run a sensitivity analysis on the source year and population selections.
(Score: 2) by Entropy on Wednesday June 06 2018, @11:26AM
See if Chicago is on there.