|
|
Post by Emblematic Wolfblade on Aug 16, 2019 11:44:57 GMT -5
1. We don't see violence at the same level in other countries unless you want to point to war-torn countries, which have problems beyond cellphones making the people violent. Yes we do. You seem to think that we're seeing a lot of violence, but in reality it's just the media amplifying it. Excluding war zones, in sheer numbers we're actually number 7, but per capita we're barely in the top 100. Putting us actually rather close to the middle of the pack. I'll let you read the rest of the conclusion, but we really don't see similar numbers in other developed countries. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2019 15:21:21 GMT -5
I'll let you read the rest of the conclusion, but we really don't see similar numbers in other developed countries.
You can sort it by whatever metric you like. It is, however, overall homicides, rather than specifically gun homicide.
Mexico and up at least *double* the US murder rate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Emblematic Wolfblade on Aug 16, 2019 15:30:56 GMT -5
I'll let you read the rest of the conclusion, but we really don't see similar numbers in other developed countries. You can sort it by whatever metric you like. It is, however, overall homicides, rather than specifically gun homicide. Mexico and up at least *double* the US murder rate.
Yes, and if you read the study, it's comparing first world/high income nations, not nations currently fighting wars, rebels, and/or cartels. Most of those in the "lead" don't even have a stable government iirc. Furthermore, it wasn't comparing gun homicide, which you'd know if you'd bother to look at the source. It was comparing violent deaths per 100,000 people. It's disingenuous to compare those to the US, and you know that. |
|
dusa
Ye Olde King of OT
Posts: 555
|
Post by dusa on Aug 16, 2019 15:32:42 GMT -5
Considering this thread can’t even agree on or use a single definition for what constitutes “violence”, it’s hard to compare violence rates between countries that also don’t agree on their definitions for violence in their statistics.
|
|
|
|
Post by whemblycthulhu on Aug 16, 2019 15:39:57 GMT -5
Considering this thread can’t even agree on or use a single definition for what constitutes “violence”, it’s hard to compare violence rates between countries that also don’t agree on their definitions for violence in their statistics. Well... lets at least acknowledge that every country....down to the podunk government offices, document things differently across all enitites. It's always going to be a challenge to compare countries, when you don't know how the underlining data is normalized. |
|
|
|
Post by A Town Called Malus on Aug 16, 2019 16:24:18 GMT -5
Considering this thread can’t even agree on or use a single definition for what constitutes “violence”, it’s hard to compare violence rates between countries that also don’t agree on their definitions for violence in their statistics. That is true but that study just cited was examining homicide rates, not all violent crime rates. Homicide is homicide all over. It isn't like the differences in what types of assault are included. Murder is murder. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2019 16:41:45 GMT -5
Yes, and if you read the study, it's comparing first world/high income nations, not nations currently fighting wars, rebels, and/or cartels. Most of those in the "lead" don't even have a stable government iirc. Really? Tell me what wars or rebel movements are trying to overthrow, say, The Bahamas, which came in at 11 when we were at 89, in the highest per capita race. How about Puerto Rico, which has a murder rate at 18 per 100k when the rest of the US is at about 5 per 100k.
And, having found the list of nations they used.... I'm not surprised. Slovakia is not what I'd call a high income developed nation. All of the ones they used come from the bottom hundred countries for violence world wide. Russia, in the meanwhile, scores much higher on the list than we do, at 51, and a per capita murder rate almost twice the US.
Your report uses WHO estimates. But that's what those are, estimates. And they're from 2010. The numbers I posted are, generally, the most recent available, mostly within the last 5 years.
|
|
dusa
Ye Olde King of OT
Posts: 555
|
Post by dusa on Aug 16, 2019 17:04:48 GMT -5
Considering this thread can’t even agree on or use a single definition for what constitutes “violence”, it’s hard to compare violence rates between countries that also don’t agree on their definitions for violence in their statistics. That is true but that study just cited was examining homicide rates, not all violent crime rates. Homicide is homicide all over. It isn't like the differences in what types of assault are included. Murder is murder. They haven’t hashed out an international standardized definition for homicide either. www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/statistics/Homicide/homicide2013/Intentional_homicide_standardized_definition_English.pdfAnd before switching to “homicide” the discussion was about “violence”. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2019 17:46:45 GMT -5
What is considered violence isn't even uniform across a given country, let alone internationally. |
|
|
|
Post by Emblematic Wolfblade on Aug 16, 2019 18:10:19 GMT -5
Yes, and if you read the study, it's comparing first world/high income nations, not nations currently fighting wars, rebels, and/or cartels. Most of those in the "lead" don't even have a stable government iirc. Really? Tell me what wars or rebel movements are trying to overthrow, say, The Bahamas, which came in at 11 when we were at 89, in the highest per capita race. How about Puerto Rico, which has a murder rate at 18 per 100k when the rest of the US is at about 5 per 100k. And, having found the list of nations they used.... I'm not surprised. Slovakia is not what I'd call a high income developed nation. All of the ones they used come from the bottom hundred countries for violence world wide. Russia, in the meanwhile, scores much higher on the list than we do, at 51, and a per capita murder rate almost twice the US.
Your report uses WHO estimates. But that's what those are, estimates. And they're from 2010. The numbers I posted are, generally, the most recent available, mostly within the last 5 years.
Well, for starters, the US is closer to 6 per capita than 5 per capita, again, disingenuous to frame it that way. Murders in the Bahamas are mostly related to organized crime/gangs (around 70% iirc): thenassauguardian.com/2019/07/11/bahamas-murder-rate-sixth-highest-in-the-americas/www.insightcrime.org/news/brief/authorities-blame-gangs-for-the-bahamas-bloody-start-to-2017/ As for Puerto Rico, it seems similar: periodismoinvestigativo.com/2018/04/rising-crime-and-a-shrinking-police-force-stunt-puerto-ricos-recovery/And before you complain this is after 2017 and how the country can't as easily respond to crime since it was devastated, I suggest you look at when the data on wikipedia is from (hint, it's 2017), then some of the history of its murder rate. Furthermore, you can go and see what criteria they used to pick the countries, but I'll save you the time since you seem uninterested in actually checking it for yourself. They used the World Bank's list of "High Income Countries", the narrowed it down to those with more than a million people. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Bank_high-income_economyI'll let you cross reference the two between the murder rates, but I can already tell you most of the countries there have a lower murder rate per capita. But, on an offhand search through most of them, Only Barbados, The Bahamas, Antigua/Barbuda, and Uruguay have a higher murder rate than the US. I already explained the Bahamas and Puerto Rico, and Antigua and Barbuda only had 10 murders. (however, like I said, I did not search all of them, but I assume Uruguay's problem also stems from organized crime/cartels). Now that I've covered that, how about you explain why Canada, or Finland, or Japan, or South Korea, or Poland, or the Netherlands have such low murder rates for starters. Why are all of these countries below average for murder rate per capita? What makes them so special? Why is the US more similar to a cartel battling/controlled country in this regard? You can dismiss the study I cited all you want, but the US is in the top 40% for highest murder rates by your own source. It actually backs up what the study I cited. Instead, you attack it and refuse to actually look at the study or the parameters they used it seems. Basically, no matter how you cut, the US has a problem the rest of the first world by and large does not. For the most part, high income countries have lower murder rates than average, and those that don't usually have problems with organized crime of some sort it seems. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2019 19:08:09 GMT -5
Basically, no matter how you cut, the US has a problem the rest of the first world by and large does not. For the most part, high income countries have lower murder rates than average, and those that don't usually have problems with organized crime of some sort it seems.
80% of US homicides are gang related, according to CDC. Granted, the Data is from 2010-11, but I'm willing to bet it hasn't changed much. So, no, by your own admission, it's a problem the rest of the world has too.
|
|
|
|
Post by whemblycthulhu on Aug 16, 2019 19:11:51 GMT -5
Basically, no matter how you cut, the US has a problem the rest of the first world by and large does not. For the most part, high income countries have lower murder rates than average, and those that don't usually have problems with organized crime of some sort it seems.
80% of US homicides are gang related, according to CDC. Granted, the Data is from 2010-11, but I'm willing to bet it hasn't changed much. So, no, by your own admission, it's a problem the rest of the world has too.
A better question: why do we have such problems with gang/organized crime compared to the rest of the world? Easiest answer? Money. |
|
|
|
Post by Emblematic Wolfblade on Aug 16, 2019 19:13:16 GMT -5
Basically, no matter how you cut, the US has a problem the rest of the first world by and large does not. For the most part, high income countries have lower murder rates than average, and those that don't usually have problems with organized crime of some sort it seems. 80% of US homicides are gang related, according to CDC. Granted, the Data is from 2010-11, but I'm willing to bet it hasn't changed much. So, no, by your own admission, it's a problem the rest of the world has too.
A problem which very few other high-income countries have apparently. Also, according to this the National Gang Center, gang homicides only accounted for 13% of all homicides annually, from 2007 to 2011. www.nationalgangcenter.gov/survey-analysis/measuring-the-extent-of-gang-problemsWhy do you only cherry-pick things to answer by the way? There was quite a lot there, including questions for you. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2019 19:51:46 GMT -5
A better question: why do we have such problems with gang/organized crime compared to the rest of the world? Easiest answer? Money. Not as simple as that, actually. I'd say because they're entrenched in various places. They own the police, the officials, etc. When the Strollo's finally got busted by the FBI, they arrested everyone from the beat cops to the Congressman. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2019 19:55:56 GMT -5
Why do you only cherry-pick things to answer by the way? There was quite a lot there, including questions for you. Because the quote doesn't work right here. also, frankly, I'm multitasking while responding to these. |
|
