Quantcast
More Americans died in Chicago than in the Iraq & Afghanistan wars combined

Forums - Politics Discussion - More Americans died in Chicago than in the Iraq & Afghanistan wars combined

Eagle367 said:
JWeinCom said:

Stupid?  So... you are suggesting that we should expect more Americans to die in Afghanistan and Iraq than Chicago?  The population of US citizens in those countries was like 200,000 at its peak.  And those were mostly young men in good physical shape, that weren't likely to die.

On the contrary, Chicago has over 2 million people.  I'm assuming age distribution is fairly typical, so we'd expect a lot of elderly and infants who are at an increased risk of dying.  If only half of one percent of the people of Chicago die per year, then we would still expect the number of deaths in Chicago to exceed the  American death toll of the Iraq and Afghan wars.

Just basic math man.

The title is a little misleading. It's not death rate its murder rate that means age is not of relevence. The old and young dying due to illnesses and other natural causes  and accidents are not part of the figures so that argument is gone. So more Chicagoans are have been killed than in Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined is the true story here

Yeah, that was my point.  That the title was dumb.



Around the Network

The point is if it was mostly white people being killed it be Martial law by now



Is the Ferguson effect the cause of crime spike (based on the false narrative arround 'hands up don't shoot' and the following retreat of the police from the inner cities).

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/15/ferguson-effect-homicide-rates-us-crime-study

 

There are surprisingly few Police shootings in Chicago compared to the overall violence and the numbers are declining in 2016

2016: 11 shoot&killed by police
2011: 23 shoot&killed by police

http://heyjackass.com/2016-police-involved-shootings/

 



think-man said:
Get rid of guns and crimes will drop ten fold.

Chicago has some of the strongest gun control laws in the US. If anything, it shows how strong gun control fails in the US.



sc94597 said:

End drug prohibition, destroying the drug cartels which fuel gang warfare then Chicago and the rest of the U.S will find the homicide rate likely halved. There is no need to ban guns. That is as effective as banning drugs. Vermont and New Hampshire have the most liberal (as in free) gun laws in the country, but the lowest homicide rates and violent crime overall. I wonder why. 

Regulating gun ownership isn't the same as banning guns, and correlation is not the same as causation. I could say "Norway has very strict laws when it comes to owning guns, yet our murder and crime rates are way lower than in the US." and that would in the same way not prove that strict gun laws means less crime.



Around the Network
Teeqoz said:
sc94597 said:

End drug prohibition, destroying the drug cartels which fuel gang warfare then Chicago and the rest of the U.S will find the homicide rate likely halved. There is no need to ban guns. That is as effective as banning drugs. Vermont and New Hampshire have the most liberal (as in free) gun laws in the country, but the lowest homicide rates and violent crime overall. I wonder why. 

Regulating gun ownership isn't the same as banning guns, and correlation is not the same as causation. I could say "Norway has very strict laws when it comes to owning guns, yet our murder and crime rates are way lower than in the US." and that would in the same way not prove that strict gun laws means less crime.

Most of the proposed regulations that are intended to do anything signficant are defacto bans on certain types of weapons. So yes, they are gun bans in all but the literal sense. 

And the bolded was my point, certain places in the United States have obtained low crime rates without gun control, there is nothing preventing other areas from achieving the same by targetting causes of the crime rather than means by which the crime manifests. 




sc94597 said:
Teeqoz said:

Regulating gun ownership isn't the same as banning guns, and correlation is not the same as causation. I could say "Norway has very strict laws when it comes to owning guns, yet our murder and crime rates are way lower than in the US." and that would in the same way not prove that strict gun laws means less crime.

Most of the proposed regulations that are intended to do anything signficant are defacto bans on certain types of weapons. So yes, they are gun bans in all but the literal sense. 

And the bolded was my point, certain places in the United States have obtained low crime rates without gun control, there is nothing preventing other areas from achieving the same by targetting causes of the crime rather than means by which the crime manifests. 


I don't live in the US, so I haven't delved too deep into the issue, I am just aware of this case here:

HJRes 40: Providing for Congressional Disapproval under Chapter 8 of Title 5, United States Code, of The Rule Submitted by The Social Security Administration Relating to Implementation of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007
What It Will Do: This is the 115th Congress's third application of the Congressional Review Act, axing an Obama-era rule. That rule, phrased as a realization of the provisions of a 2007 law, essentially prohibited people who 1. receive disability payments from the Social Security Administration and 2. have been judged to need someone to handle their financial affairs because they are mentally ill or disabled from owning guns, although it also created an avenue to appeal that prohibition on a case-by-case basis.

Which, well, I can't say I agree with the decision of the Tump administration to revoke this...

However in general, I don't have anything against gun ownership, but I don't think there's anything wrong with somewhat limiting that types of guns you can get. But I also don't think gun regulations are the core of solving America's issue with violent crime.



No brakes in Chicago on Easter

28 people shot in less than 18 hours in Chicago

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-chicago-shootings-violence-20170415-story.html



Chicago is a pretty dangerous place to live it seems. On the top side usually drug gangs and maffia kill eachother in most cases, so not being active in those circuits is pretty good for your life expectations.



Please excuse my (probally) poor grammar

The USA is a fair, democratic country, the envy of the world. There are no major drug issues, no violent crime rates in the USA and the average American is highly educated. To say negative things about the USA and to reveal the truth is unpatriotic. American society issues are not discussed and the problems are swept under the carpet. The heroes that die in wars are honoured with medals and their names are read and memorial services.