Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ medaille said:
Assuming that
15,000 hate crimes is the right number, is this even something we should be
concerned about? The number of violent
crimes in America is 1,247,321 (per The
FBI). That’s over an 83x difference. The amount of people living in poverty is ~43M
and the amount of people living in near poverty is ~100M. 40M people in the US are hungry. Medical errors kill 250,000 people every
year. Cancer kills 590,000. Heart Attacks kill 610,000. How much mental effort should we spend on the
15,000 hate crimes when these other behemoths are sitting right here? 1 in 21.6k people will be affected directly by hate crimes.
Are hate crimes even relevant to any of our lives besides how prominent it is in the media, and how the media makes us feel?
I guess if you believe that hate crimes are no different than disease, poverty and crimes of random violence, then yeah, they would be irrelevant in your mind. How do you feel about terrorism? Terrorism accounts for a miniscule amount of deaths compared with the above. And yet we treat those crimes differently. Do you know why? Also, can you think of ways we're trying to reduce poverty, combat heart disease, cancer, etc?
Terrorism is about the same level of importance to me as
hate crimes are. Neither are something
most of us should spend much time thinking about. Both are vastly over-emphasized in the news,
because they get people to react emotionally, even though they statistically
affect a very small number of people. They
get people separated into two groups which can be played off of each other for
clicks, ratings, votes, or whatever. You
spend all your time worrying about shark attacks and being struck by lightening
that you ignore all the things that are statistically relevant to your
livelihood and well being.
Any amount of extra effort beyond normal policework that is
used to combat hate crimes or terrorism could be better spent solving something
that affects a greater number of people.
If you care about yourself or others, your media intake
should be 1 article about terrorism or hate crimes compared to 100’s of
articles about how to optimize your health.
If you spend 1 minute talking about hate crimes, you should go run for 2
hours to balance your life properly or spend 2 hours making the most healthful
food you can think of.
Quote: @pumpf said:
@ SFVikeFan said:
Which side pushed for gun control and which didn't again?
While Obama was pleading with Congress for help against gun violence, the GOP was hellbent on ensuring gun laws are as lax as possible per their NRA lobbyist masters ... so it's pretty absurd you want to blame Obama for the uptick in cops shot, since gun violence against non-police had also increased thanks to GOP refusing to budge on any efforts to curb gun violence.
Yeah, gun control is doing wonders in Chicago.
That's one I never heard.
Roll eyes now.
Quote: @suncoastvike said:
@ pumpf said:
Yeah, gun control is doing wonders in Chicago.
That's one I never heard.
Roll eyes now.
Well, it's true. Chicago and DC are 2 of the most "gun-controlled" cities in the world... and yet they have the highest gun violence rates. Liberals keep pushing for gun control- but they never seem to be able to explain how new rules are going to save more lives.
Meanwhile, they're voting for "leaders" who are now openly advocating for infanticide. That hardly seems to align with their views about trying to "save the children".
By the way, I'll just leave this here for y'all:
https://www.dailywire.com/news/43930/hat...n-saavedra
Quote: @medaille said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ medaille said:
Assuming that
15,000 hate crimes is the right number, is this even something we should be
concerned about? The number of violent
crimes in America is 1,247,321 (per The
FBI). That’s over an 83x difference. The amount of people living in poverty is ~43M
and the amount of people living in near poverty is ~100M. 40M people in the US are hungry. Medical errors kill 250,000 people every
year. Cancer kills 590,000. Heart Attacks kill 610,000. How much mental effort should we spend on the
15,000 hate crimes when these other behemoths are sitting right here? 1 in 21.6k people will be affected directly by hate crimes.
Are hate crimes even relevant to any of our lives besides how prominent it is in the media, and how the media makes us feel?
I guess if you believe that hate crimes are no different than disease, poverty and crimes of random violence, then yeah, they would be irrelevant in your mind. How do you feel about terrorism? Terrorism accounts for a miniscule amount of deaths compared with the above. And yet we treat those crimes differently. Do you know why? Also, can you think of ways we're trying to reduce poverty, combat heart disease, cancer, etc?
Terrorism is about the same level of importance to me as
hate crimes are. Neither are something
most of us should spend much time thinking about. Both are vastly over-emphasized in the news,
because they get people to react emotionally, even though they statistically
affect a very small number of people. They
get people separated into two groups which can be played off of each other for
clicks, ratings, votes, or whatever. You
spend all your time worrying about shark attacks and being struck by lightening
that you ignore all the things that are statistically relevant to your
livelihood and well being.
Any amount of extra effort beyond normal policework that is
used to combat hate crimes or terrorism could be better spent solving something
that affects a greater number of people.
If you care about yourself or others, your media intake
should be 1 article about terrorism or hate crimes compared to 100’s of
articles about how to optimize your health.
If you spend 1 minute talking about hate crimes, you should go run for 2
hours to balance your life properly or spend 2 hours making the most healthful
food you can think of.
So 25 years ago in the town where I grew up, Billings, MT, a group of Neo-Nazis broke the windows out of the home owned by a Jewish doctor displaying his Menorah. He was actually my personal doctor. Dr. Brian Schnitzer.
The community reacted strongly. The town paper, The Billings Gazette, my employer at the time, printed a huge menorah in the paper and encouraged those opposed to that kind of hate to display it in their windows. It was freaking everywhere. I mean EVERYWHERE. Stores, schools, houses, churches. As you might imagine, Billings, MT is not a place where a lot of Jews reside. So it was a beautiful thing. A town that said no to hate. The little dick Nazis ran for their lives. They even made a movie about it.
I’m guessing, Medaille, if you were Mayor of Billings, you would’ve held a Fun Run because, y’know, heart disease kills more Americans than Nazis.
Quote: @pumpf said:
@ suncoastvike said:
@ pumpf said:
Yeah, gun control is doing wonders in Chicago.
That's one I never heard.
Roll eyes now.
Well, it's true. Chicago and DC are 2 of the most "gun-controlled" cities in the world... and yet they have the highest gun violence rates. Liberals keep pushing for gun control- but they never seem to be able to explain how new rules are going to save more lives.
Meanwhile, they're voting for "leaders" who are now openly advocating for infanticide. That hardly seems to align with their views about trying to "save the children".
By the way, I'll just leave this here for y'all:
https://www.dailywire.com/news/43930/hate-crime-hoax-trans-person-burned-down-own-home-ryan-saavedra
In related news, Ethiopia received more US aid than any other country in the world to combat famine and hunger. And yet hunger remains a problem there. Not that I would expect a conservative evangelical to know the first thing about the least among us.
Quote: @pumpf said:
@ suncoastvike said:
@ pumpf said:
Yeah, gun control is doing wonders in Chicago.
That's one I never heard.
Roll eyes now.
Well, it's true. Chicago and DC are 2 of the most "gun-controlled" cities in the world... and yet they have the highest gun violence rates. Liberals keep pushing for gun control- but they never seem to be able to explain how new rules are going to save more lives.
Meanwhile, they're voting for "leaders" who are now openly advocating for infanticide. That hardly seems to align with their views about trying to "save the children".
By the way, I'll just leave this here for y'all:
https://www.dailywire.com/news/43930/hate-crime-hoax-trans-person-burned-down-own-home-ryan-saavedra
Typical pumpf, repeating tired and inaccurate Fox News talking points. You are aware that Chicago is right by the Indiana border, right? Most of the guns used in crimes in Chicago come from OUT OF STATE where gun laws are much less strict.
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/colu...story.html
The handgun ban made us the primary target of the National Rifle Association and the Second Amendment Foundation, and in 2010 the U.S. Supreme Court forced Chicago to fall into line with the rest of the country.
Since then, the courts have peeled off so many layers of our once stellar gun ordinance that it’s barely recognizable. We’re still maneuvering to keep gun stores and shooting ranges from opening in the city limits. But the courts have ruled against us on that, too, so we know it’s just a matter of time.
Remember that old requirement that gun owners in Chicago register their firearms with the city and obtain a permit? Well, that’s gone too.
And thanks to the Illinois General Assembly, which was pressured by the federal courts to pass a concealed carry law in 2013, people can walk the streets of Chicago with a gun attached to their waist and another strapped to their ankle.
Sorry, gun lovers, your attempts to use Chicago as a prop to bolster your claims that gun control laws do nothing to curb gun violence just don’t hold up.
New York, in fact, has stricter gun laws on the books than Chicago. And guess what? Its homicide numbers are heading toward historic lows. Los Angeles has some pretty tough gun laws too. Its homicide numbers also pale compared with Chicago’s.
Those kinds of details don’t fit the conservative, pro-gun narrative, though. To use New York as a talking point, they’d have to admit that strict gun laws might actually have an impact on homicide rates.
With no gun stores in Chicago and no background check loopholes for private sales, one thing is clear. The guns being used to kill people on the streets aren’t originating in Chicago. They’re coming from someplace else.
When politicians and others repeat that ridiculous statement about Chicago’s gun laws, it shows how out of touch they are with the problems urban areas face when it comes to gun violence.
When it comes to gun laws, big cities are only as strong as the states that border them. And in Chicago’s case, that’s Indiana. Thanks to Vice President Mike Pence, the former governor, Indiana has some of the weakest gun laws in the nation.
While Illinois has gone to great lengths to see that background checks are done for all gun purchases, Indiana has done the opposite. To buy a weapon in Illinois, the owner must have a valid firearms owner’s identification card, issued by the Illinois State Police.
With no permit or license required to purchase a gun in Indiana, it is incredibly easy for a trafficker to drive across the state line, obtain a gun and use it to commit a homicide on the streets of Chicago.
Those with felony convictions commonly use straw purchases, in which they enlist someone with a clean record to purchase multiple guns and bring them into the city.
Law enforcement officials say 60 percent of the guns confiscated on the streets of Chicago come from Indiana, Wisconsin and Mississippi. The other 40 percent come from suburban Cook County and nearby suburbs.
And for medaille since you think 15,000 hate crimes over the last 2 years is so miniscule, care to comment on the crimes/deaths caused by illegal immigrants in comparison? Yet this drumbeat about the influx of crime by illegal immigrants is constantly sounded by Fox News and Trump. So conservatives can't make the argument that one is out of control and the other is barely a blip on the radar.
In other words, spending billions on a wall is basically a complete waste of an investment trying to address an issue that's not as big of an issue as Republicans make it out to be ...
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ medaille said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ medaille said:
Assuming that
15,000 hate crimes is the right number, is this even something we should be
concerned about? The number of violent
crimes in America is 1,247,321 (per The
FBI). That’s over an 83x difference. The amount of people living in poverty is ~43M
and the amount of people living in near poverty is ~100M. 40M people in the US are hungry. Medical errors kill 250,000 people every
year. Cancer kills 590,000. Heart Attacks kill 610,000. How much mental effort should we spend on the
15,000 hate crimes when these other behemoths are sitting right here? 1 in 21.6k people will be affected directly by hate crimes.
Are hate crimes even relevant to any of our lives besides how prominent it is in the media, and how the media makes us feel?
I guess if you believe that hate crimes are no different than disease, poverty and crimes of random violence, then yeah, they would be irrelevant in your mind. How do you feel about terrorism? Terrorism accounts for a miniscule amount of deaths compared with the above. And yet we treat those crimes differently. Do you know why? Also, can you think of ways we're trying to reduce poverty, combat heart disease, cancer, etc?
Terrorism is about the same level of importance to me as
hate crimes are. Neither are something
most of us should spend much time thinking about. Both are vastly over-emphasized in the news,
because they get people to react emotionally, even though they statistically
affect a very small number of people. They
get people separated into two groups which can be played off of each other for
clicks, ratings, votes, or whatever. You
spend all your time worrying about shark attacks and being struck by lightening
that you ignore all the things that are statistically relevant to your
livelihood and well being.
Any amount of extra effort beyond normal policework that is
used to combat hate crimes or terrorism could be better spent solving something
that affects a greater number of people.
If you care about yourself or others, your media intake
should be 1 article about terrorism or hate crimes compared to 100’s of
articles about how to optimize your health.
If you spend 1 minute talking about hate crimes, you should go run for 2
hours to balance your life properly or spend 2 hours making the most healthful
food you can think of.
So 25 years ago in the town where I grew up, Billings, MT, a group of Neo-Nazis broke the windows out of the home owned by a Jewish doctor displaying his Menorah. He was actually my personal doctor. Dr. Brian Schnitzer.
The community reacted strongly. The town paper, The Billings Gazette, my employer at the time, printed a huge menorah in the paper and encouraged those opposed to that kind of hate to display it in their windows. It was freaking everywhere. I mean EVERYWHERE. Stores, schools, houses, churches. As you might imagine, Billings, MT is not a place where a lot of Jews reside. So it was a beautiful thing. A town that said no to hate. The little dick Nazis ran for their lives. They even made a movie about it.
I’m guessing, Medaille, if you were Mayor of Billings, you would’ve held a Fun Run because, y’know, heart disease kills more Americans than Nazis.
The community of Billings is the perfect people to pay attention to that issue, because they are the people it affects and the people that have the power to do something, but do people in Los Angeles or Atlanta or Buffalo need to have their 24 hour news coverage dominated for 3 weeks about in issue that Billings can take care of? Do they need to be getting pissed off and stressed out about something they are so far removed from that they can't do anything anyway that matters? If Billings discovered that their group of neo-nazis liked wearing Levi's and shopping at Sears, should Californians shame people that wear Levi's and try to hold protests in Sears parking lot? Do we need the US senators and representatives creating a department of homeland security and making people take their shoes off at airports over the issue?
Quote: @medaille said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ medaille said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ medaille said:
Assuming that
15,000 hate crimes is the right number, is this even something we should be
concerned about? The number of violent
crimes in America is 1,247,321 (per The
FBI). That’s over an 83x difference. The amount of people living in poverty is ~43M
and the amount of people living in near poverty is ~100M. 40M people in the US are hungry. Medical errors kill 250,000 people every
year. Cancer kills 590,000. Heart Attacks kill 610,000. How much mental effort should we spend on the
15,000 hate crimes when these other behemoths are sitting right here? 1 in 21.6k people will be affected directly by hate crimes.
Are hate crimes even relevant to any of our lives besides how prominent it is in the media, and how the media makes us feel?
I guess if you believe that hate crimes are no different than disease, poverty and crimes of random violence, then yeah, they would be irrelevant in your mind. How do you feel about terrorism? Terrorism accounts for a miniscule amount of deaths compared with the above. And yet we treat those crimes differently. Do you know why? Also, can you think of ways we're trying to reduce poverty, combat heart disease, cancer, etc?
Terrorism is about the same level of importance to me as
hate crimes are. Neither are something
most of us should spend much time thinking about. Both are vastly over-emphasized in the news,
because they get people to react emotionally, even though they statistically
affect a very small number of people. They
get people separated into two groups which can be played off of each other for
clicks, ratings, votes, or whatever. You
spend all your time worrying about shark attacks and being struck by lightening
that you ignore all the things that are statistically relevant to your
livelihood and well being.
Any amount of extra effort beyond normal policework that is
used to combat hate crimes or terrorism could be better spent solving something
that affects a greater number of people.
If you care about yourself or others, your media intake
should be 1 article about terrorism or hate crimes compared to 100’s of
articles about how to optimize your health.
If you spend 1 minute talking about hate crimes, you should go run for 2
hours to balance your life properly or spend 2 hours making the most healthful
food you can think of.
So 25 years ago in the town where I grew up, Billings, MT, a group of Neo-Nazis broke the windows out of the home owned by a Jewish doctor displaying his Menorah. He was actually my personal doctor. Dr. Brian Schnitzer.
The community reacted strongly. The town paper, The Billings Gazette, my employer at the time, printed a huge menorah in the paper and encouraged those opposed to that kind of hate to display it in their windows. It was freaking everywhere. I mean EVERYWHERE. Stores, schools, houses, churches. As you might imagine, Billings, MT is not a place where a lot of Jews reside. So it was a beautiful thing. A town that said no to hate. The little dick Nazis ran for their lives. They even made a movie about it.
I’m guessing, Medaille, if you were Mayor of Billings, you would’ve held a Fun Run because, y’know, heart disease kills more Americans than Nazis.
The community of Billings is the perfect people to pay attention to that issue, because they are the people it affects and the people that have the power to do something, but do people in Los Angeles or Atlanta or Buffalo need to have their 24 hour news coverage dominated for 3 weeks about in issue that Billings can take care of? Do they need to be getting pissed off and stressed out about something they are so far removed from that they can't do anything anyway that matters? If Billings discovered that their group of neo-nazis liked wearing Levi's and shopping at Sears, should Californians shame people that wear Levi's and try to hold protests in Sears parking lot? Do we need the US senators and representatives creating a department of homeland security and making people take their shoes off at airports over the issue?
Oh my. You really have an issue with what dominates yer news coverage, dontcha? I'm sensing you've been inadvertently (I hope) caught up into one of these groups? I'm hoping it's a Levi's group and not a Rustlers group but I won't judge. In either case, maybe you can get radar to let us know when you're approaching a cogent point?
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ pumpf said:
@ suncoastvike said:
@ pumpf said:
Yeah, gun control is doing wonders in Chicago.
That's one I never heard.
Roll eyes now.
Well, it's true. Chicago and DC are 2 of the most "gun-controlled" cities in the world... and yet they have the highest gun violence rates. Liberals keep pushing for gun control- but they never seem to be able to explain how new rules are going to save more lives.
Meanwhile, they're voting for "leaders" who are now openly advocating for infanticide. That hardly seems to align with their views about trying to "save the children".
By the way, I'll just leave this here for y'all:
https://www.dailywire.com/news/43930/hate-crime-hoax-trans-person-burned-down-own-home-ryan-saavedra
In related news, Ethiopia received more US aid than any other country in the world to combat famine and hunger. And yet hunger remains a problem there. Not that I would expect a conservative evangelical to know the first thing about the least among us.
Genuine question, Maroon: why do you so often resort to personal attacks when someone doesn't agree with you?
As for Ethiopia, that's a great talking point. But it really doesn't apply to the gun control debate. It might raise a question about whether or not "welfare" (i.e. "giving people stuff") is the best way to help those who are impoverished. I suppose one could make the case- using your stat- that welfare doesn't work.
Quote: @pumpf said:
@ suncoastvike said:
@ pumpf said:
Yeah, gun control is doing wonders in Chicago.
That's one I never heard.
Roll eyes now.
Well, it's true. Chicago and DC are 2 of the most "gun-controlled" cities in the world... and yet they have the highest gun violence rates. Liberals keep pushing for gun control- but they never seem to be able to explain how new rules are going to save more lives.
Meanwhile, they're voting for "leaders" who are now openly advocating for infanticide. That hardly seems to align with their views about trying to "save the children".
By the way, I'll just leave this here for y'all:
https://www.dailywire.com/news/43930/hat...n-saavedra
Didn't mean anything personal pumpf. I don't dispute that DC, Chicago or any major city has gun violence problems. Is that a symptom of failed gun laws or poverty and the violence that goes with it? That is the real question. That statement is over used and just simplifies real problems people are just trying to survive through. That's why I don't like those sound bites. Wasn't trying to personally attack you. Just the simple funny little message that too many use to joke away lives in danger everyday.
If people want to start actual conversations about how to best deal with the real life issues in these inner-cities. Stop with the tired over used sound bites. However "true" they may be.
|
