American Thinker: A Localized Culture of Violence

[QuietDan]

A Localized Culture of Violence

By David Waciski

 

H.L. Mencken once said “For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.” This quote seems applicable to the activists who blame a “culture of violence” for the high rate of firearms-related homicides in the United States and propose restrictions on or elimination of 2nd Amendment rights as the solution. A previous article “Guns Don’t Kill People, Democrats Kill People” examined three diverse states and demonstrated that the majority of firearm homicides in 2013 occurred in the small fraction of the voter precincts that overwhelmingly voted for Democrat candidates. This dataset of homicides will be mapped against socioeconomic Census data to quantify the characteristics of the neighborhoods where firearm homicide is prevalent. The intent is not to generate counterintuitive or surprising results, but to provide data that supports the premise that the United States does not have a systemic firearm violence problem.  Then, by identifying the characteristics of these localized areas, suggest that more effective, albeit more difficult, approach to reducing firearm homicides would be to address the root causes of the “culture of violence” that appears to exist in these neighborhoods.

 

The previous article describes how a dataset containing a year of firearm homicides was compiled for Louisiana (a solidly red state with the highest firearm homicide rate in the country), Virginia (an election battleground state with a homicide rate that is close to the average firearm homicide rate for the country), and Minnesota (a solidly blue state with a low firearm homicide rate).  The location of each firearm homicide was mapped to a voting precinct.  The results indicated that over half of the firearm homicides occurred in the small percentage of voting precincts that gave President Obama more than 70% of the vote in the 2012 election.

 

(more)

 

http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/03/a_localized_culture_of_violence.html

Edited March 31, 2014 by QuietDan

[Jonnin]

This is not news.  Its just that it takes some big old nads to say the truth, which can be summed up in 2 statements:

 

- poor areas have a lot of crime and violence.  This includes inner city ghettos and suburban trashy areas and even rual trailer parks.  The nature of cities being a large population,  the # of shots fired will, therefore, be highest in the city ghettos, even if the %s are similar with rual poor areas.

 

- poor people in these areas are often hooked on government "aid" and therefore vote democrat.

 

Problem is that saying the above gets the idiots to go haywire trying to censor the person saying it with cries of "racism" or "victim blame" or other nonsense.   There is no need for a study and if they do one, the results will be as expected.   Human nature is quite predictable:  humans are generally a sorry lot of mean SOBs that are prone to violence..... this surprises no one.   Take a group of humans with nothing to lose, and much to gain, what you think is gonna happen?

 

Hats off to captain obvious and his well written piece -- I wish him the best as he bucks the censorship machine!

Edited March 31, 2014 by Jonnin

[QuietDan]

A smart police department would concentrate resources in the described census tracts . . .

[Guest semiautots]

A smart police department would concentrate resources in the described census tracts . . .

 

Or stay the hell away and let them kill each other off . . .

[whitewolf001]

Or stay the hell away and let them kill each other off . . .

 

The unfortunate thing is there are good folks living there, should we forsake them for the violence of a few? We'd be as bad as the Libtards whom condemn all gun owners and categorize them with murderers.

[whitewolf001]

Excellent read btw QuietDan, thanks for providing the link.

[Guest semiautots]

The unfortunate thing is there are good folks living there, should we forsake them for the violence of a few? We'd be as bad as the Libtards whom condemn all gun owners and categorize them with murderers.

 

No forsaking.  Police come after crimes have occurred, usually.  Their presence will cause fewer crimes.  Liberals have already tried to take guns away from those that need them by banning guns in project housing, but the hoods don't follow the law. 

 

What would work is forcing anyone standing around during the day to get in a paddy wagon and go to work.  Never happen, but it would work.  Another is to force fathers to pay for their children.  Won't happen, but would work.

 

A lotta things would work to reduce crime and murder, but will never be tried.

[whitewolf001]

No forsaking.  Police come after crimes have occurred, usually.  Their presence will cause fewer crimes.  Liberals have already tried to take guns away from those that need them by banning guns in project housing, but the hoods don't follow the law. 

 

What would work is forcing anyone standing around during the day to get in a paddy wagon and go to work.  Never happen, but it would work.  Another is to force fathers to pay for their children.  Won't happen, but would work.

 

A lotta things would work to reduce crime and murder, but will never be tried.

 

Touché

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Am guessing that the wealthy yuppie liberal obama voting enclaves in many or most cities do not have the high level of gun violence however.

 

Tis not to deny the stats of the study, merely mentioning that po and ignorant are not the only democrat constiuencies.

 

It is just the demographics of the parties. Liberal dems tend to occupy both extremes. Large percentages either po and poorly educated or prosperous with advanced degrees. The conservatives and republicans tend to clump around the middle, high school thru 4 year college. So the reps are on average better educated as far as diplomas go, but there are more highly edumacated dems than there are highly edumacated reps.

 

Perhaps the upstanding hardworking po folk like gun control being afeered of their less civilized neighbors, and the elite dems like gun control being afeered of the bottom echelons of their own party. :)

Edited April 1, 2014 by Lester Weevils

[thundersnow]

So the reps are on average better educated as far as diplomas go, but there are more highly edumacated dems than there are highly edumacated reps.

Mostly because an MBA or masters degree will likely pay for itself over your career. Whereas a doctorate statistically isn't worth the investment financially for the majority or people who go that route.

[TMF]

[quote name="thundersnow" post="1132655" timestamp="1396320203"]Mostly because an MBA or masters degree will likely pay for itself over your career. Whereas a doctorate statistically isn't worth the investment financially for the majority or people who go that route.[/quote] But you get to remind people to refer to you as "doctor". I believe liberals are motivated by pure smarminess. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[QuietDan]

But you get to remind people to refer to you as "doctor". I believe liberals are motivated by pure smarminess. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

The wealthy, educated liberals are, often, firmly convinced that they are members of the elite, and are destined to rule over us all with their superior intellect. It's one of the reasons they often go absolutely ballistic if their intelligence or judgement or ideas are even QUESTIONED. 

 

They are not aware, however, that the truly evil people pushing the communist New World Order will just add the skulls of the "liberal elite" to the pile of skulls they will create.