For Virgil-Police chief accidenlty shoots wife at 4AM

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Statistically, gun accidents don't happen. They're like shark attacks and lightning strikes- we don't need to scrap the Constitution and reorder society to deal with the imaginary scourge of gun accidents.

In fact, when it comes to murder- I've already pointed out that save for one person with a criminal record killing another person with a criminal record, the United States ranks 4th from the bottom in the world in gun homicides.

[weltschmerz]

You're wrong, yet again.

www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list

www.humanosphere.org/science/2014/03/visualizing-gun-deaths-comparing-the-u-s-to-rest-of-the-world/

[billisonboard]

Jan 5, 2015 23:17:03 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

...

In fact, when it comes to murder- I've already pointed out that save for one person with a criminal record killing another person with a criminal record, the United States ranks 4th from the bottom in the world in gun homicides.

Interesting statistic. Do you have a link to support it?

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Sure- have fun. It's in there (along with a lot of really great information on the reality of violence in America):



12 cities in America account for nearly 3,200 dead, or a quarter of all murders in America.

83% of those murdered in Chicago last year (2012) had criminal records.

In Philly-75%, Milwaukee 77%, New Orleans 64%, Baltimore- 91% were felons who had served time.

Not all guns, but crime.

Murders in America are mostly adult males, 18 to 39 years old with criminal records killing other males of that same age and criminal past.

Chicago's murder rate of 15.65 per 100,000 is far greater than the American 4.2 rate- which of course it helps to raise. Chicago's murder rate is actually equivalent to failed states like Rwanda, Sierra Leone, and Zimbabwe.

New Orleans- 72.8 per 100,000 is ten times higher than the national average- which again, it helps to raise. If NO was a country, it would have the 2nd highest murder rate in the world- beating out El Salvador.

[weltschmerz]

Jan 6, 2015 0:04:37 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Sure- have fun. It's in there (along with a lot of really great information on the reality of violence in America):



12 cities in America account for nearly 3,200 dead, or a quarter of all murders in America.

83% of those murdered in Chicago last year (2012) had criminal records.

In Philly-75%, Milwaukee 77%, New Orleans 64%, Baltimore- 91% were felons who had served time.

Not all guns, but crime.

Murders in America are mostly adult males, 18 to 39 years old with criminal records killing other males of that same age and criminal past.

Chicago's murder rate of 15.65 per 100,000 is far greater than the American 4.2 rate- which of course it helps to raise. Chicago's murder rate is actually equivalent to failed states like Rwanda, Sierra Leone, and Zimbabwe.

New Orleans- 72.8 per 100,000 is ten times higher than the national average- which again, it helps to raise. If NO was a country, it would have the 2nd highest murder rate in the world- beating out El Salvador.

So what? It's still gun homicides in America, is it not?

It's like saying the US is the thinnest, most fit country in the world....if you don't count all the fat people.

You want us to watch an hour-long video?  I posted global stats that the US is NOT fourth from the bottom.

Do you have any stats? A table we can look at at a glance to back up that absurd statement, or do we have to yawn through an hour long video?

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Jan 6, 2015 0:17:38 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

Jan 6, 2015 0:04:37 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Sure- have fun. It's in there (along with a lot of really great information on the reality of violence in America):



12 cities in America account for nearly 3,200 dead, or a quarter of all murders in America.

83% of those murdered in Chicago last year (2012) had criminal records.

In Philly-75%, Milwaukee 77%, New Orleans 64%, Baltimore- 91% were felons who had served time.

Not all guns, but crime.

Murders in America are mostly adult males, 18 to 39 years old with criminal records killing other males of that same age and criminal past.

Chicago's murder rate of 15.65 per 100,000 is far greater than the American 4.2 rate- which of course it helps to raise. Chicago's murder rate is actually equivalent to failed states like Rwanda, Sierra Leone, and Zimbabwe.

New Orleans- 72.8 per 100,000 is ten times higher than the national average- which again, it helps to raise. If NO was a country, it would have the 2nd highest murder rate in the world- beating out El Salvador.

So what? It's still gun homicides in America, is it not?

It's like saying the US is the thinnest, most fit country in the world....if you don't count all the fat people.

You want us to watch an hour-long video?  I posted global stats that the US is NOT fourth from the bottom.

Do you have any stats? A table we can look at at a glance to back up that absurd statement, or do we have to yawn through an hour long video?

Actually, it's the difference between saying gang bangers are representative of the entire US population.  That's the only way you come up with "America is a violent country".  The murder rate in the general white population of the US-- equivalent to Belgium.  The idea that the average person, or tourist in America is subject to the murder rate per 100,000 is just plain absurd.

[djAdvocate]

Jan 6, 2015 0:29:37 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Jan 6, 2015 0:17:38 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

So what? It's still gun homicides in America, is it not?

It's like saying the US is the thinnest, most fit country in the world....if you don't count all the fat people.

You want us to watch an hour-long video?  I posted global stats that the US is NOT fourth from the bottom.

Do you have any stats? A table we can look at at a glance to back up that absurd statement, or do we have to yawn through an hour long video?

Actually, it's the difference between saying gang bangers are representative of the entire US population.  That's the only way you come up with "America is a violent country".  The murder rate in the general white population of the US-- equivalent to Belgium.  The idea that the average person, or tourist in America is subject to the murder rate per 100,000 is just plain absurd.

moreover, do we have any statistics on how many gun homicides are conducted by felons in OTHER countries?  maybe it is 100%, and therefore, their rate is ZERO. 

[weltschmerz]

Heh. It's by Stefan Molyneux...a full-tilt, bat-chit crazy libertarian.

Yeah, you've convinced me, Paul.

rationalwiki.org/wiki/Stefan_Molyneux

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Jan 6, 2015 0:33:47 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

Heh. It's by Stefan Molyneux...a full-tilt, bat-chit crazy libertarian.

Yeah, you've convinced me, Paul.

rationalwiki.org/wiki/Stefan_Molyneux

Do you have a counter to his arguments presented here? No?  OK, then.

[weltschmerz]

Jan 6, 2015 0:31:31 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Jan 6, 2015 0:29:37 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Actually, it's the difference between saying gang bangers are representative of the entire US population.  That's the only way you come up with "America is a violent country".  The murder rate in the general white population of the US-- equivalent to Belgium.  The idea that the average person, or tourist in America is subject to the murder rate per 100,000 is just plain absurd.

moreover, do we have any statistics on how many gun homicides are conducted by felons in OTHER countries?  maybe it is 100%, and therefore, their rate is ZERO. 

Excellent point!

It's like saying if we can eliminate the murder stats of our First Nations people, our homicide rates would be close to zero.

[weltschmerz]

Jan 6, 2015 0:36:05 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Jan 6, 2015 0:33:47 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

Heh. It's by Stefan Molyneux...a full-tilt, bat-chit crazy libertarian.

Yeah, you've convinced me, Paul.

rationalwiki.org/wiki/Stefan_Molyneux

Do you have a counter to his arguments presented here? No?  OK, then.

Again, life is too short to watch a whack-job spout off for an hour.

Do you have anything else to support your silly statement? Anything at all?

[EVT1]

Our healthcare system is the best in the world if you just overlook the sick people

[weltschmerz]

Jan 6, 2015 0:44:54 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Our healthcare system is the best in the world if you just overlook the sick people

Well, there you go! Best in the world!

[EVT1]

Damn- good point

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Jan 6, 2015 0:40:42 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

Jan 6, 2015 0:36:05 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Do you have a counter to his arguments presented here? No?  OK, then.

Again, life is too short to watch a whack-job spout off for an hour.

Do you have anything else to support your silly statement? Anything at all?

I don't have to provide you with anything else- why would I? You haven't addressed, and do not intend to address the source I've already posted.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Jan 6, 2015 0:44:54 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Our healthcare system is the best in the world if you just overlook the sick people

Actually, sick people are a sign of our success.  One of the reasons people are healthier in socialist healthcare systems is that the sick people die on the waiting list.  NHS is famous for letting people die on the waiting list- the system has been called worse than third world.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2802382/untreated-patients-left-die-labour-run-welsh-nhs-wastes-money-bureaucrats-non-jobs-lethally-long-waiting-lists-seriously-ill-shame-world-country.html

[Virgil Showlion]

Jan 6, 2015 0:38:56 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

Jan 6, 2015 0:31:31 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

moreover, do we have any statistics on how many gun homicides are conducted by felons in OTHER countries?  maybe it is 100%, and therefore, their rate is ZERO. 

Excellent point!

It's like saying if we can eliminate the murder stats of our First Nations people, our homicide rates would be close to zero.

He has a point that a society with a concentrated subclass of ultra-violent people is different from a society with a high, relatively homogeneous propensity for violence.

I understand your skepticism to a degree. Homicides are homicides. Having said that, Paul's argument here is really about the concentration of violence in the US. The implications are that if you or I steer clear of the activities (e.g. crime, drugs) and geographical locations (e.g. inner-city ghettos, Louisiana) where violence is heavily concentrated, we can capably avoid it in the US and wind up safer than compared to a country with better raw numbers.

Conversely, a nation with diffuse, culturally pervasive violence (I don't know of any specific nations, but given the extreme degree of corruption in Mexico, I'm guessing it'd be a likely candidate), violence is a part of life regardless of one's activities, locale, and circumstances. Consider the article I posted not long ago about the Homicidal Queen of Iguala, who decided to have a random group of students executed because their noisiness was impinging on her social functions. These kinds of systemic violence are evidently quite common down in Mexico. It's not banger-on-banger violence confined to a ghetto somewhere, and the implications for citizens and tourists alike are very real.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

The SAFE Act didn't do much to help this guy...

Early Saturday morning, a music video shoot at a Bronx bodega turned violent after one member of a rap duo reportedly opened fire on his partner, wounding him in the head, legs, and chest. According to the bodega's owner, the shooting was triggered by an argument over who was the video's star.

"They were fighting over who's the star, who's better," owner Ali Abdul told the New York Daily News. "They were drunk. They spit at each other then one guy pulled out a gun and shot the other guy five times."

The gunman, who, as Gothamist notes, never lets go of his drink during the shooting, also repeatedly pistol whipped the 37-year-old victim. The video shows several witnesses casually stepping over the victim as he writhed on the floor in pain. The suspect remains at large; the victim is in critical condition at a local hospital and is expected to survive.

Read more at www.liveleak.com/view?i=3ef_1407166663#8DDRAzqGMhpxlSp2.99

But hey- they got that insomniac veteran's gun...

[weltschmerz]

Jan 6, 2015 7:59:44 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Jan 6, 2015 0:40:42 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

Again, life is too short to watch a whack-job spout off for an hour.

Do you have anything else to support your silly statement? Anything at all?

I don't have to provide you with anything else- why would I? You haven't addressed, and do not intend to address the source I've already posted.

Again....give me something besides an hour-long video put out by a whack-job and I will address it.

Evidently, you can't. If it was true that the US is fourth from the bottom, there would be plenty online to support it. You can't find anything except for that lengthy video.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Jan 6, 2015 12:19:43 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

Jan 6, 2015 7:59:44 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

I don't have to provide you with anything else- why would I? You haven't addressed, and do not intend to address the source I've already posted.

Again....give me something besides an hour-long video put out by a whack-job and I will address it.

Evidently, you can't. If it was true that the US is fourth from the bottom, there would be plenty online to support it. You can't find anything except for that lengthy video.

So, you admit you will not watch the video, yet you wish to critique its author via a third party?

[weltschmerz]

Jan 6, 2015 12:57:25 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Jan 6, 2015 12:19:43 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

Again....give me something besides an hour-long video put out by a whack-job and I will address it.

Evidently, you can't. If it was true that the US is fourth from the bottom, there would be plenty online to support it. You can't find anything except for that lengthy video.

So, you admit you will not watch the video, yet you wish to critique its author via a third party?

Why the hell would I waste my time for a solid hour? Just give me a chart or graph to prove your point.

You can't, because it's not true.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Jan 6, 2015 13:12:38 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

Jan 6, 2015 12:57:25 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

So, you admit you will not watch the video, yet you wish to critique its author via a third party?

Why the hell would I waste my time for a solid hour? Just give me a chart or graph to prove your point.

You can't, because it's not true.

Why would you criticize something you admittedly will not give a fair hearing to?  I am not insisting you listen to it, just insisting that if you wish to comment on it, or the author, you do so from the frame of reference of having given it a fair hearing.

[weltschmerz]

Jan 6, 2015 13:15:13 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Jan 6, 2015 13:12:38 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

Why the hell would I waste my time for a solid hour? Just give me a chart or graph to prove your point.

You can't, because it's not true.

Why would you criticize something you admittedly will not give a fair hearing to?  I am not insisting you listen to it, just insisting that if you wish to comment on it, or the author, you do so from the frame of reference of having given it a fair hearing.

Again..it's an HOUR LONG,
Give me something else, or admit you pulled that "fact" out of your behind.
Or Stephan Molyneux's behind.

I already posted links showing how YOU! ARE! WRONG!

[mmhmm]

Does anyone really think it's necessary to watch this particular video in order to know who Stefan Molyneux is and what he stands for? He's one of a number of people, conservative, liberal, and libertarian, I won't bother with. Not worth my time. I already know what's there as I've read enough of these people to know what their opinions are - and I'm not interested. I'm sure I'm not alone in that regard.

[Virgil Showlion]

Jan 6, 2015 15:08:52 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Does anyone really think it's necessary to watch this particular video in order to know who Stefan Molyneux is and what he stands for? He's one of a number of people, conservative, liberal, and libertarian, I won't bother with. Not worth my time. I already know what's there as I've read enough of these people to know what their opinions are - and I'm not interested. I'm sure I'm not alone in that regard.

Is it just me, or are you perhaps overlooking the 20,000+ times you've chastised me and others for "ASSuming" an individual's viewpoint based on an excerpt or a profile.

Don't get me wrong. I happen to agree with your "I've read enough of these people to know what their opinions are" attitude. But be warned in advance that this post is going in the Virgil-o-dex for the next time I say "TL;DR" and you come down on me like a ton of bricks.

[mmhmm]

Jan 6, 2015 16:55:53 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Jan 6, 2015 15:08:52 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Does anyone really think it's necessary to watch this particular video in order to know who Stefan Molyneux is and what he stands for? He's one of a number of people, conservative, liberal, and libertarian, I won't bother with. Not worth my time. I already know what's there as I've read enough of these people to know what their opinions are - and I'm not interested. I'm sure I'm not alone in that regard.

Is it just me, or are you perhaps overlooking the 20,000+ times you've chastised me and others for "ASSuming" an individual's viewpoint based on an excerpt or a profile.

Don't get me wrong. I happen to agree with your "I've read enough of these people to know what their opinions are" attitude. But be warned in advance that this post is going in the Virgil-o-dex for the next time I say "TL;DR" and you come down on me like a ton of bricks.

Ahem. ASSuming based on an excerpt or profile? Apparently, you're ASSuming that's what I've done. You're ASSuming wrongly, I'm afraid. This "gentleman" has written several books, two of which I've read. How about you? You know anything about him - or, about me, for that matter? 

[Virgil Showlion]

Jan 6, 2015 17:08:35 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Jan 6, 2015 16:55:53 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Is it just me, or are you perhaps overlooking the 20,000+ times you've chastised me and others for "ASSuming" an individual's viewpoint based on an excerpt or a profile.

Don't get me wrong. I happen to agree with your "I've read enough of these people to know what their opinions are" attitude. But be warned in advance that this post is going in the Virgil-o-dex for the next time I say "TL;DR" and you come down on me like a ton of bricks.

Ahem. ASSuming based on an excerpt or profile? Apparently, you're ASSuming that's what I've done. You're ASSuming wrongly, I'm afraid. This "gentleman" has written several books, two of which I've read. How about you? You know anything about him - or, about me, for that matter? 

You don't know what he's said in the video, and you're not willing to watch it. You've assumed the contents of 60 minutes' worth of video. That's the start and the end of the issue.

As for what I know about Mr. Molyneux: I know he's a semi-disgraced psychologist. He likes to dabble in trends and statistics. I've watched a few of his videos, and I've read a few articles about him. Throw a few of his books in, it still wouldn't give me license to ignore his arguments. I might not watch his videos, but I wouldn't show up to pat Weltz on the back for ignoring him.

[weltschmerz]

Jan 6, 2015 17:20:43 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Jan 6, 2015 17:08:35 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Ahem. ASSuming based on an excerpt or profile? Apparently, you're ASSuming that's what I've done. You're ASSuming wrongly, I'm afraid. This "gentleman" has written several books, two of which I've read. How about you? You know anything about him - or, about me, for that matter? 

You don't know what he's said in the video, and you're not willing to watch it. You've assumed the contents of 60 minutes' worth of video. That's the start and the end of the issue.

As for what I know about Mr. Molyneux: I know he's a semi-disgraced psychologist. He likes to dabble in trends and statistics. I've watched a few of his videos, and I've read a few articles about him. Throw a few of his books in, it still wouldn't give me license to ignore his arguments. I might not watch his videos, but I wouldn't show up to pat Weltz on the back for ignoring him.

You certainly seem to be ignoring the stats in the links I put up, showing you to be wrong. Why don't you address that issue?

[mmhmm]

Jan 6, 2015 17:20:43 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Jan 6, 2015 17:08:35 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Ahem. ASSuming based on an excerpt or profile? Apparently, you're ASSuming that's what I've done. You're ASSuming wrongly, I'm afraid. This "gentleman" has written several books, two of which I've read. How about you? You know anything about him - or, about me, for that matter? 

You don't know what he's said in the video, and you're not willing to watch it. You've assumed the contents of 60 minutes' worth of video. That's the start and the end of the issue.

As for what I know about Mr. Molyneux: I know he's a semi-disgraced psychologist. He likes to dabble in trends and statistics. I've watched a few of his videos, and I've read a few articles about him. Throw a few of his books in, it still wouldn't give me license to ignore his arguments. I might not watch his videos, but I wouldn't show up to pat Weltz on the back for ignoring him.

No, that is not the start and the end of the issue. Your edicts don't apply to me, as I don't accept their validity.

I won't watch the video because I don't choose to bother myself with the pronouncements of fools, Virgil. The man is a fool as far as I'm concerned, and a waste of my time. That gives me all the license I need to ignore his arguments. I don't need your permission, believe me.

Nowhere did I pat Weltz, or anyone else on the back. I'm afraid you're projecting, Virgil. Get over yourself and stop assuming you know what I'm thinking, how I arrived at my conclusions, or anything else about me.  You don't.

[Virgil Showlion]

Jan 6, 2015 17:24:03 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

Jan 6, 2015 17:20:43 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

You don't know what he's said in the video, and you're not willing to watch it. You've assumed the contents of 60 minutes' worth of video. That's the start and the end of the issue.

As for what I know about Mr. Molyneux: I know he's a semi-disgraced psychologist. He likes to dabble in trends and statistics. I've watched a few of his videos, and I've read a few articles about him. Throw a few of his books in, it still wouldn't give me license to ignore his arguments. I might not watch his videos, but I wouldn't show up to pat Weltz on the back for ignoring him.

You certainly seem to be ignoring the stats in the links I put up, showing you to be wrong. Why don't you address that issue?

First of all, it's not my argument.

Secondly, Paul's specific claim is "In fact, when it comes to murder- I've already pointed out that save for one person with a criminal record killing another person with a criminal record, the United States ranks 4th from the bottom in the world in gun homicides."

The only stats you've posted are those in Reply #31, which are raw homicide rates. There's nothing anywhere to indicate they pertain to rates absent "one person with a criminal record killing another person with a criminal record", which is Paul's assertion.

You've attacked the stat on the basis of cherry picking data, which is fine. I do think Paul still has a point, for the reasons I give in Reply #46.

It would be nice if Paul gave us a table with his data, but the data is evidently embedded in the video you're unwilling to watch. Since it's quite possible that Mr. Molyneux provides the source of his data in the video, I should think the bare minimum of what you'd need to do to assert it's "wrong" is actually see what the data is and where it comes from.

Personally I don't care enough about the statistic to dig through an hour-long video to find it, but I also haven't gone on for a page trying to debunk it by proxy. If you're genuinely interested, do your own research on the subject to find out whether it's true or not.