Ganoncrotch said:
You quoted me first with nonsense and every step I bothered to waste time to explain my position to you while each time you close your eyes to numbers and facts and just sling shit and name call. Here's your first interaction with me in this thread, if you don't care about my opinion then don't call it out or question it. http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9041932 Don't really have time for someone asking me a question or questioning my posts and then starting to flip shit about how much they don't care about the reply. |
The nonsense started with your initial failure to understand that broad scope statistics without context are the epitome of ignorance. Let me quote it again--"I was to move from here to the USA my chances of dying to a gun increase nearly 15x, sorry if that fact based on numbers upsets you living in the states, but you are 15 times more likely than me to die to a gun." Now, the obvious ignorance of applying a flat statistic aside, what especially got my attention was the completely insincere "haha sorry if you don't like it" bullshit. That's what really showed me what kind of person you are, someone that would use a tragedy to mock and attack.
What I think of you for saying something like that aside--and I assure you that my respect for you after that is in the gutter--you even went on to explain how silly that kind of statistic is yourself. "MA the death rate there is still 4.25 that of Ireland, taking a trip to the worst states for it of Alaska and Alabama then the probability of death by gun is increased 29.125x"
Now, I mean, you think 4.25 is the same as 29.12? Pardon me, I never say this, but lol.
"Hey, would you rather have this food with a 4% chance of causing cancer or this food with a 29% chance of causing cancer?"
"Oh, you just take the average so it works out to the same thing in the end."
Heh. Even to arrive at that number means that you consider yourself to be someone close to violent or illegal activity.
“If you don’t know the people in the network and you’re not hanging out with them and you’re not engaging in exchanges with them, then you’re probably not at very high risk,” said Tracey Meares, a Yale professor who has studied gun violence. Source
I mean, if that's you, cool, but don't assume everyone else in the United States is hanging out with gang members.
Papachristos’s work relies on a key insight that experts have long known but was rarely discussed publicly: The victims and perpetrators of violence are largely the same people. Reducing gun violence, then, requires focusing on exactly the murders that rarely get attention — murders like Damond Peters’s.
“If you want to shift the discussion about gun violence and if you want a lower homicide rate, that means you need to save the lives of the people getting shot,” Papachristos said. “If you want to drive the rate down, you’ve got to save the lives of young men with felony convictions.” Source
Yeah, I consider your original statement to be blind and ignorant bullshit, though I expect you to keep pretending it's true that somehow, magically, everyone in the US has the same exact risk of being shot. It's a meaningless misuse of statistics that does nothing but highlight the fact that you're talking about a place you know nothing about.
In short, it's just flat-out untrue. Even worse, it distorts the real picture and the real problems.
