Gotta pull themselves up by their bootstraps.

A rising tide lifts all boats.

 

Yeah, I see nobody in this thread saying that except you.

Extract the poor, mostly minority zip codes - and we are not. The sad fact, or fortunate fact depending on where you live, is that most 'gun violence' is highly concentrated and is minority on minority. The vast majority of the US is no more 'violent' that other countries.

Re: Cherry-picking ZIP codes to prove a point: That argument goes out the window every time someone from Ft. Thomas attends a concert at Cincinnati Music Hall.

Re: Cherry-picking ZIP codes to prove a point: That argument goes out the window every time someone from Ft. Thomas attends a concert at Cincinnati Music Hall.

 

So you're saying shootings happen as frequently in say, Fort Thomas as it does in Cincinnati's OTR?

What you are not ready to admit is there may be something we can do to lower the cost of this epidemic that doesn't take away from responsible people.

Maybe you didn't click on this link I posted earlier...gun violence and crime is at an all-time low. If it was an epidemic it would be spiraling out of control upwards, not trending the way that is has since 1993...Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware | Pew Research Center

Extract the poor, mostly minority zip codes - and we are not. The sad fact, or fortunate fact depending on where you live, is that most 'gun violence' is highly concentrated and is minority on minority. The vast majority of the US is no more 'violent' that other countries.

 

I watched an interesting video where the commentator believed that poverty by itself does not encourage violence but more so poverty in diverse areas. In other words, he would say the poorest areas of Eastern KY do not have much gun crime due to it being a homogenous population i.e. people of the same race, same culture, very similar religious views, etc.. But, when you mix diversity in with poverty, violence tends to flare up. You only have to look at the poor areas of Louisville to see that. Most of Louisville low income areas tend to be pretty diverse and those are the areas with the most frequent crime.

 

This person also used Europe as an example. Until recent flood of immigrants into Europe in the past ten years I would guess, many European countries were pretty homogenous and if you look at the countries will the lowest violence like Norway, Norway is almost the best example of a homogenous population. You could dump guns into Norway and probably not the slightest problem would happen. However, you are starting to see violence pop up in certain areas and he felt it was no coincidence that those are the areas Middle Eastern and North African immigrants are settling in and in no way was he blaming the immigrants because some of the natives sparking violence too. He just pointed out that you now have people of different race, different culture, different religion, different views of what women can do in society, etc. and those differences are causing clashes.

So you're saying shootings happen as frequently in say, Fort Thomas as it does in Cincinnati's OTR?

No. What I'm saying is this: If someone wants to find satisfaction and safety by living in a "non-violent" ZIP code, that means nothing unless that person is a hermit. Every time that person ventures into areas where crime is higher -- downtown Cincinnati or OTR for instance -- it no longer matters whether or not that person lives in a "cloistered" community.

I watched an interesting video where the commentator believed that poverty by itself does not encourage violence but more so poverty in diverse areas. In other words, he would say the poorest areas of Eastern KY do not have much gun crime due to it being a homogenous population i.e. people of the same race, same culture, very similar religious views, etc.. But, when you mix diversity in with poverty, violence tends to flare up. You only have to look at the poor areas of Louisville to see that. Most of Louisville low income areas tend to be pretty diverse and those are the areas with the most frequent crime.

 

This person also used Europe as an example. Until recent flood of immigrants into Europe in the past ten years I would guess, many European countries were pretty homogenous and if you look at the countries will the lowest violence like Norway, Norway is almost the best example of a homogenous population. You could dump guns into Norway and probably not the slightest problem would happen. However, you are starting to see violence pop up in certain areas and he felt it was no coincidence that those are the areas Middle Eastern and North African immigrants are settling in and in no way was he blaming the immigrants because some of the natives sparking violence too. He just pointed out that you now have people of different race, different culture, different religion, different views of what women can do in society, etc. and those differences are causing clashes.

 

You might be labeled a racist....

No. What I'm saying is this: If someone wants to find satisfaction and safety by living in a "non-violent" ZIP code, that means nothing unless that person is a hermit. Every time that person ventures into areas where crime is higher -- downtown Cincinnati or OTR for instance -- it no longer matters whether or not that person lives in a "cloistered" community.

 

We're in agreement on that. I think what Bert touched on in post 155 makes more sense as to what the cause of violence in those inner city areas are, that and drugs. Much more so than guns.

You might be labeled a racist....

 

Maybe but when you look at the black and white facts, they do tend to support his assertion and again, he is blaming the majority as much as the minorities for such violence.

 

I have often wondered if humans are hard wired to unconsciously hold suspicion, fear, distrust to those different than them (which can lead to racism) and to get over such unconscious ways require conscious action by all in society which is easier said than done but by all means, needs to be done.

Maybe you didn't click on this link I posted earlier...gun violence and crime is at an all-time low. If it was an epidemic it would be spiraling out of control upwards, not trending the way that is has since 1993...Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware | Pew Research Center

 

Yes we covered this in another thread and it's a wonderful fact, but we still have the facts we have of 30,000 killed and 100,000 plus fellow Americans injured every year. Still seems like an epidemic to me. Ebola, SARS, or any other disease would be concerning. One thing is for sure is this isn't a pandemic because a good number of other nations have figured out a treatment/cure.

Yes we covered this in another thread and it's a wonderful fact, but we still have the facts we have of 30,000 killed and 100,000 plus fellow Americans injured every year. Still seems like an epidemic to me. Ebola, SARS, or any other disease would be concerning. One thing is for sure is this isn't a pandemic because a good number of other nations have figured out a treatment/cure.

Nearly 20,000 of the deaths are suicides...leaving 10,000 which is still a lot but much much less than 20 years ago

 

Gun violence is a problem, but the it is a Violence issue more than a gun issue. Guns are just the instrument used. If guns weren't there something else would be used, after all, Cain used a rock.

Cain beat himself in the head with a rock? I missed that part. :jump:

 

Yay winning !!! :ylsuper:

[ATTACH]52142[/ATTACH]

 

Yay winning !!! :ylsuper:

You continue to blame the gun, yet claim to be pro-gun. You've been presented with plenty of reasons for violence, but you seem hellbent on parroting the anti-gun message that it's the gun. Pardon me for doubting your "pro-gun" claim.