• 🛑Hello, this board in now turned off and no new posting.
    Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community! 💪
  • 💪Muscle Gelz® 30% Off Easter Sale👉www.musclegelz.com Coupon code: EASTER30🐰

Harvard Study: No Correlation Between Gun Control and Less Violent Crime

bio-chem

Registered User
Registered
Joined
Dec 15, 2004
Messages
9,212
Reaction score
629
Points
113
Location
Utah
Nothing........really? What happened to to all the guns = crimes guys out there?
 
violent crime is higher in places with high rates of concentrated urban poverty, higher in places with high rates of inequality and social justice.

more guns doesn't stop the US from turning into Mexico 2
 
violent crimes are highest where there are lots of blacks (not racist, because it's true)
 
violent crimes are highest where there are lots of blacks (not racist, because it's true)

violent crime is highest anywhere in the world were there is concentrated urban poverty. as income goes up the level of violent crimes go down.
 
Nothing........really? What happened to to all the guns = crimes guys out there?

They only share their opinion, they don't actually know anything about the subject.
 
I think all you have to do is look at the correlation between gun laws in the top 20 highest crime areas versus the violent crime rate. That seems to me to be a pretty solid indicator if "gun control" does anything at all.
 
violent crime is highest anywhere in the world were there is concentrated urban poverty. as income goes up the level of violent crimes go down.

Even in white populations? Serious question.
 
more guns doesn't stop the US from turning into Mexico 2

It does if you use the guns to kill the Mexicans.
 
It does if you use the guns to kill the Mexicans.

according to the economic reports from the global think-tank the Club of Rome the avg US autoworker in 2052 will be earning wages equal to those in 1960 once adjusted for inflation.

that has nothing at all to do with illegals/immigrants as they are not causing cumulative inflation on the USD at 25% a decade. since 1913 cumulative inflation on the USD is 2300%, that is thanks to the FED and it's monetary policy.
 
IML Gear Cream!
according to the economic reports from the global think-tank the Club of Rome the avg US autoworker in 2052 will be earning wages equal to those in 1960 once adjusted for inflation.

that has nothing at all to do with illegals/immigrants as they are not causing cumulative inflation on the USD at 25% a decade. since 1913 cumulative inflation on the USD is 2300%, that is thanks to the FED and it's monetary policy.

Nothing? You mean that supply and demand has no effect on wages? Someone should have told that the British during the Black Plague.
 
Nothing? You mean that supply and demand has no effect on wages? Someone should have told that the British during the Black Plague.

your trying to use 1800's economic "theory" in the year 2013. wage price mechanisms no longer follow "economic theory" models of growth/deflation not when you have fiat currency's and artificially low interest rates out of the central bank.

the monetization of the US economy has changed all of the fundamentals. business use their own form of money which is credit, it is only denominated in USDs. the primary form of money used by labor to purchase goods and service is currency money which loses it's purchasing power steadily over time as the monetary base expands.
 
Pretty much everybody here knows I'm a very hard core 2nd Amendment supporter and I'm a big fan of Breitbart too but, I'd caution against putting too much stock in that "study". In the first place it wasn't conducted by Harvard, it was simply published in one of their journals. In the second place, it's not so much of a formal study as it is an opinion piece by two highly educated and experienced criminologists. I definitely like thier opinion but, that doesn't give the paper any more credibility. Lastly, is the careful use of the word "corrolate". Some on my side of the argument have mistakenly tried to use this Breitbart article and refernced paper to assert that stricter gun control laws CAUSE more crime. That's not what the paper says. You have to remember that "cause" and "corrolate" are not synonyms.

The bottom line is that I agree with the opinions put forth in the paper and I like how well they're backed up with hard statistics but, they're still just opinions.
 
And there is the rub. It's backed by hard statistics. No, I don't think stricter gun control causes crime. I'll even concede to Lam the correlation between poverty and crime, however poverty isn't going anywhere. Poverty has been a fact of life regardless of economic model throughout the history of time. With that, knowing there will always be poverty, i'd rather a population be armed, and have the correlated fall in crime, than have an unarmed population where the criminals have free reign to exploit those most impoverished.

My disagreement with LAM is that just because someone is poor it doesn't mean they have to play a victim.
 
The bottom line is that I agree with the opinions put forth in the paper and I like how well they're backed up with hard statistics but, they're still just opinions.

I didn't read the entire paper so I'm not sure what opinions you are referring to but statistical correlation is not opinion. A literature review stating previous research has failed to show a correlation is also not an opinion, it's an objective statement that is either true or not. In the case of something like gun control if it does cause less violent crime then there should be a correlation and therefore it is meaningful that this correlation has not been found. In other words, if gun control has a significant effect then it should be possible to find it.
 
it's an objective statement that is either true or not.

the very nature of the objective (vs subjective) is that a statement or argument is true and factual and mind independent and not opinion. it it true regardless if a person knows it or acknowledges it to be true, that is the very nature of the objective vs the subjective.

example: Wars bankrupt nations but make capitalists wealthy. that is a completely objective statement as it is supported by empirical data.

E = I x R - objective

E=mc^2 - objective
 
Even in white populations? Serious question.

Is there even such a thing as homogeneous white urban poverty? I wonder if anyone has tried to control for racial influence and what about rural poverty? The only really large U.S. city that I can think of that is mostly white and asian is San Francisco and it has a low violent crime rate but I bet not much poverty either.
 
your trying to use 1800's economic "theory" in the year 2013. wage price mechanisms no longer follow "economic theory" models of growth/deflation not when you have fiat currency's and artificially low interest rates out of the central bank.

the monetization of the US economy has changed all of the fundamentals. business use their own form of money which is credit, it is only denominated in USDs. the primary form of money used by labor to purchase goods and service is currency money which loses it's purchasing power steadily over time as the monetary base expands.

So if 25% of the labor pool disappeared today it would have no effect?
 
the very nature of the objective (vs subjective) is that a statement or argument is true and factual and mind independent and not opinion.

I have google. What is your point?
 
IML Gear Cream!
So if 25% of the labor pool disappeared today it would have no effect?

a smaller population would put "some" upward pressure on wages but nothing significant. according to the ILO global wage reports the US because of it's low union density rate and no nationwide system to put upward pressure on wages has the highest percentage of low paid workers out of all the wealthy industrialized country's in the OECD at 25% of the total labor force. then there is also the 15-20% of the US labor force that is underemployed.

there are dozens of long term problems with the US economy and the belief that there are just a handful of easy 1-step fixes to restoring some degree of sustainability is not not based on reality.
 
I have google. What is your point?

misdirection. of course the only recourse of action he has when data goes against him is nothing but misdirection and getting one bogged down in the minutia, as if it mattered.
 
My disagreement with LAM is that just because someone is poor it doesn't mean they have to play a victim.

I never stated that there were necessarily "victims' but choice is an illusion, everybody is limited to the choices then can make in reality based on their socioeconomic status and their own person experiences in life which shape "their reality".

you try to put your "current self" in their place with your family, values and level of understanding and experiences in the world but do you honestly think you can do with with a person who's own reality and choices are the exact opposite of yours?
 
a smaller population would put "some" upward pressure on wages but nothing significant. according to the ILO global wage reports the US because of it's low union density rate and no nationwide system to put upward pressure on wages has the highest percentage of low paid workers out of all the wealthy industrialized country's in the OECD at 25% of the total labor force. then there is also the 15-20% of the US labor force that is underemployed.

there are dozens of long term problems with the US economy and the belief that there are just a handful of easy 1-step fixes to restoring some degree of sustainability is not not based on reality.

I'm not saying that it's some great fix, but the idea that getting rid of illegal, who mostly take up low wage jobs, wouldn't have an appreciable effect on wages doesn't jive with reality.

The single best thing the US could do is stop the needless wars. It's not an panacea, but it's a great first step.
 
I never stated that there were necessarily "victims' but choice is an illusion, everybody is limited to the choices then can make in reality based on their socioeconomic status and their own person experiences in life which shape "their reality".

you try to put your "current self" in their place with your family, values and level of understanding and experiences in the world but do you honestly think you can do with with a person who's own reality and choices are the exact opposite of yours?

bwahahhaha. That is the victim mentality.
 
I never stated that there were necessarily "victims' but choice is an illusion, everybody is limited to the choices then can make in reality based on their socioeconomic status and their own person experiences in life which shape "their reality".

you try to put your "current self" in their place with your family, values and level of understanding and experiences in the world but do you honestly think you can do with with a person who's own reality and choices are the exact opposite of yours?

Have you ever been poor?
 
Have you ever been poor?

I know nothing first hand about living in that type of economic state. but I do know that I was born in raised in an environment that is the exact opposite of those born into poverty. so from that I think about a person whose life experiences and environment was the polar opposite of mine and that gives me some insight.
 
I know nothing first hand about living in that type of economic state. but I do know that I was born in raised in an environment that is the exact opposite of those born into poverty. so from that I think about a person whose life experiences and environment was the polar opposite of mine and that gives me some insight.

I'm not sure I buy into that. What I can tell you is that I did grow up rock-bottom poor. The idea that being poor is an excuse to do any crimes is wrong.

It doesn't matter if you're poor, middle class or rich, everyone makes their own choices. I don't mean choices like "What car should I buy?", I mean choices like, "Will I steal?"

Saying that you're stealing because you're poor is just a rationalization, at best.
 
increase in money supply causes inflation, poverty doesn't always cause crime there are poor peaceful countries, there are peaceful people ( tribes ) who live without being part of the world economy or have a monetary system. I think crime is a deeper problem with a more complex solution. I blame rap music
 
Back
Top