Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Soul Crusher on December 30, 2012, 07:02:00 AM
-
http://teapartyorg.ning.com/video/dem-rep-gwen-moore-cracking-down-of-food-stamp-fraud-is-racist
Typical.
-
Calling a person or an idea now a days is pretty much worthless. The term/accusation has been thrown around so much it is meaningless
-
http://teapartyorg.ning.com/video/dem-rep-gwen-moore-cracking-down-of-food-stamp-fraud-is-racist
Typical.
TYpically stupid since the single largest race on food stamps are white and most are working too
-
TYpically stupid since the single largest race on food stamps are white and most are working too
seeing as they make up the largest % by race in our population that would make sense.
minorities make up a disproportionate % of food stamp recepients give the % make up of our population.
Typical liberal looking at numbers and not looking at why they are what they are. I bet you cheered when the unemployment rate went down even though it was bc less ppl were looking for work.
-
seeing as they make up the largest % by race in our population that would make sense.
minorities make up a disproportionate % of food stamp recepients give the % make up of our population.
Typical liberal looking at numbers and not looking at why they are what they are. I bet you cheered when the unemployment rate went down even though it was bc less ppl were looking for work.
wow - you finally realized that higher percentage of minorities live in poverty than white people
congratulations
-
wow - you finally realized that higher percentage of minorities live in poverty than white people
congratulations
I know, I know the white man is keeping them down
-
http://teapartyorg.ning.com/video/dem-rep-gwen-moore-cracking-down-of-food-stamp-fraud-is-racist
Typical.
Where does she say anything about race? Cavuto is the one who injects race into the conversation. What she does say is that it is a typical Republican tactic of creating a boogie man where there isn't one.
-
Where does she say anything about race? Cavuto is the one who injects race into the conversation. What she does say is that it is a typical Republican tactic of creating a boogie man where there isn't one.
says the person wanting to ban guns in response to sociopaths killing others...
BOOGIE BOOGIE!!!!!
-
wow - you finally realized that higher percentage of minorities live in poverty than white people
congratulations
So your previous post was misleading on purpose? ???
-
says the person wanting to ban guns in response to sociopaths killing others...
BOOGIE BOOGIE!!!!!
I've never said I wanted to ban guns. I have repeatedly said I am in support of certain gun control measures. NEVER have I said that my support is solely in response to spree killers.
-
I've never said I wanted to ban guns. I have repeatedly said I am in support of certain gun control measures. NEVER have I said that my support is solely in response to spree killers.
good to know
so you do not support an assault weapons ban then?
-
good to know
so you do not support an assault weapons ban then?
I didn't say that either.
Over the course of the last weeks, I've repeatedly said that most of our nation's gun violence is not due to AWs, but I also think Straw Man has made some really strong points in these threads in support of clip limits. The reason I have rolled my eyes at your constant "address the real problem" mantra (aside from it being insipidly vague) is because very few social problems have one cause. There may be OTHER issues involved with these spree killings, but none of those issues come down to being the REAL issue.
-
I didn't say that either.
Over the course of the last weeks, I've repeatedly said that most of our nation's gun violence is not due to AWs, but I also think Straw Man has made some really strong points in these threads in support of clip limits. The reason I have rolled my eyes at your constant "address the real problem" mantra (aside from it being insipidly vague) is because very few social problems have one cause. There may be OTHER issues involved with these spree killings, but none of those issues come down to being the REAL issue.
the real issue is mental illness in 99% of these incidents, addressing mental illness is the solution that will provide tangible results in this arena.
So youre against banning guns, but youre for an AWB?
yea.........
-
the real issue is mental illness in 99% of these incidents, addressing mental illness is the solution that will provide tangible results in this arena.
So youre against banning guns, but youre for an AWB?
yea.........
Addressing mental illness by "subtracting crazy people". Yea... And I didn't say I was for AWB.
Also, if you could post that link or article, that would be great.
-
Addressing mental illness by "subtracting crazy people". Yea... And I didn't say I was for AWB.
Also, if you could post that link or article, that would be great.
it's so elegant with it's childlike simplicity
I don't understand why know one else have ever thought of this
-
it's so elegant with it's childlike simplicity
I don't understand why know one else have ever thought of this
My gun control proposal: Make people stop killing.
-
Addressing mental illness by "subtracting crazy people". Yea... And I didn't say I was for AWB.
Also, if you could post that link or article, that would be great.
Would addressing mental illness through allowing those with mental illness to be addressed and even institutionlized not address the problem at the root?
I already linked it in another thread, either find it or do a google search.
-
My gun control proposal: Make people stop killing.
I've offered a few similar in simplicity to Tony
the first and obvious one is that we simply make sure that these crazy people who have access to guns only kill themselves and no one else
problem solved
you're welcome world
-
So your previous post was misleading on purpose? ???
nope, my previous post pointed out that more white people are on food stamps than any other race
that is a fact
-
it's so elegant with it's childlike simplicity
I don't understand why know one else have ever thought of this
do you not agree that it would be addressing the issue at the root?
My gun control proposal: Make people stop killing.
hahah as opposed to gun control which has been proven to not work in the US?
sorry hoss you need to address the actual problem
-
do you not agree that it would be addressing the issue at the root?
hahah as opposed to gun control which has been proven to not work in the US?
sorry hoss you need to address the actual problem
No, all gun violence is not committed by crazy people
Even some of these mass shooting are not done by"text book definition" crazy people
some of them of them are just angry, mean, desperate mother fuckers
Some of them definitely are crazy but you've proposed no actual way to "subtract them" other than vague generalization at best
do you truly not understand that ?
-
Some of them definitely are crazy but you've proposed no actual way to "subtract them" other than vague generalization at best
Some of them definitely are crazy but you've proposed no actual way to "subtract them" other than vague generalization at best
Some of them definitely are crazy but you've proposed no actual way to "subtract them" other than vague generalization at best
Some of them definitely are crazy but you've proposed no actual way to "subtract them" other than vague generalization at best
-
No, all gun violence is not committed by crazy people
Even some of these mass shooting are not done by"text book definition" crazy people
some of them of them are just angry, mean, desperate mother fuckers
Some of them definitely are crazy but you've proposed no actual way to "subtract them" other than vague generalization at best
do you truly not understand that ?
ahh so now were talking about all gun violence?
the proposed legislation you want is directed at mass killings and you use mass killings to justify it...
addressing mental illness will address the root problem in the vast majority of mass killings, do you disagree?
-
ahh so now were talking about all gun violence?
the proposed legislation you want is directed at mass killings and you use mass killings to justify it...
addressing mental illness will address the root problem in the vast majority of mass killings, do you disagree?
weren't you
you keep bringing up black gun violence as the reason for more gun control
-
ahh so now were talking about all gun violence?
the proposed legislation you want is directed at mass killings and you use mass killings to justify it...
addressing mental illness will address the root problem in the vast majority of mass killings, do you disagree?
The article you linked to about a proposed UK knife ban was not about mass spree killers. It was about random violence, often perpetrated by teenagers. What "root" do you think needs to be addressed there?
-
really, so you think that public awareness of the symptoms and treatment options for mental illness wouldnt help increase the number of ppl who get treatment?
you dont think that educating teachers who spend 5 days a week with kids on how to spot mental illness would help the parents address the issue?
you dont think that allowing family members more leeway in commiting ppl with mental illness to treatment facilities would help take those ppl off the street?
LMFAO no....guns thats what we need to address
-
weren't you
you keep bringing up black gun violence as the reason for more gun control
thats in another thread, try and keep up...
youre reasoning for wanting mag caps is b/c of mass killings, at least thats your justification for it.
So now you want to address all gun violence?
we already know that gun legislation doesnt work very well...
-
nope, my previous post pointed out that more white people are on food stamps than any other race
that is a fact
Yes, but it means absulutly nothing proportionately.
Minority statistics say a lot more, (although I realize the evil white man hasn't given them enough support yet).
-
Yes, but it means absulutly nothing proportionately.
dont you bring facts into this, facts have no place in this conversation
-
Yes, but it means absulutly nothing proportionately.
Minority statistics say a lot more, (although I realize the evil white man hasn't given them enough support yet).
I'm sure that will be a comfort to to the white person on food stamps
-
really, so you think that public awareness of the symptoms and treatment options for mental illness wouldnt help increase the number of ppl who get treatment?
you dont think that educating teachers who spend 5 days a week with kids on how to spot mental illness would help the parents address the issue?
you dont think that allowing family members more leeway in commiting ppl with mental illness to treatment facilities would help take those ppl off the street?
LMFAO no....guns thats what we need to address
So, instead of rational gun control measures, locking everyone up will cut gun crime to 0? I mean, it isn't like Lanza was reportedly set off because his mom was considering having him committed. ::) It isn't like Spengler had spent 20 years in jail and stayed under the radar long enough to act out. ::) I'm not even going to go into the flaws with the teacher suggestion. Teachers usually have upwards of 20 kids in their classrooms, some have several classes a day. If it gets to the point where a teacher is noticing a kid's mental problems before the parents, how exactly is a teacher supposed to proceed? Aside from a recommendation that the kid see a counselor?
-
dont you bring facts into this, facts have no place in this conversation
the fact that there are more white people on food stamps than any other race is also a FACT
-
I'm sure that will be a comfort to to the white person on food stamps
You're doing it garebear style here... I like it... ;D
-
the fact that there are more white people on food stamps than any other race is also a FACT
I'm sorry to tell you this, but you're Beach Bum (on the other end of the spectrum).
-
So, instead of rational gun control measures, locking everyone up will cut gun crime to 0? I mean, it isn't like Lanza was reportedly set off because his mom was considering having him committed. ::) It isn't like Spengler had spent 20 years in jail and stayed under the radar long enough to act out. ::) I'm not even going to go into the flaws with the teacher suggestion. Teachers usually have upwards of 20 kids in their classrooms, some have several classes a day. If it gets to the point where a teacher is noticing a kid's mental problems before the parents, how exactly is a teacher supposed to proceed? Aside from a recommendation that the kid see a counselor?
where did I say it would cut it to zero?
I said it would address the problem at the root, instead of irrational ideas like guns being the problem.
AGAIN WHAT GUN LAWS????? ANSWER THAT QUESTION, Ive heard one...high cap mag bans which we already know dont work......
of course there are flaws b/c nothing we do will eliminate the problem 100%. There are however better ways to go about addressing the issue and gun control laws which DONT ADDRESS THE ROOT PROBLEM and DONT WORK is legislative masturbation.
The teachers often times spend more time with their kids than parents do. They see them interact socially in their peer group alot. Yea seeing a therapist would be a good step in the right direction for addressing the actual problem.
Do you disagree that mental illness plays a big role in the mass killings>
-
I'm sorry to tell you this, but you're Beach Bum (on the other end of the spectrum).
explain to me what point you are trying to make regarding the % of blacks on food stamps (relative to their population) and why that is important
I just don't understand what you point is?
-
explain to me what point you are trying to make regarding the % of blacks on food stamps (relative to their population) and why that is important
I just don't understand what you point is?
Explain to us the point youre trying to make here?
TYpically stupid since the single largest race on food stamps are white and most are working too
-
Explain to us the point youre trying to make here?
do you dispute anything in my statement?
-
do you dispute anything in my statement?
do you dispute that blacks make up a greater % of welfare and food stamp receipients than their demographic population %?
-
do you dispute that blacks make up a greater % of welfare and food stamp receipients than their demographic population %?
show me where I disputed that?
-
show me where I disputed that?
show me where I disputed your statement...LMFAO youre losing it man
-
show me where I disputed your statement...LMFAO youre losing it man
so let's review
I've said there are more white people on food stamps than any other race and you agree
You said that as a % of their specific population there are more black people on food stamps and I never disagreed with that
what was the point of this nonsense ?
-
so let's review
I've said there are more white people on food stamps than any other race and you agree
You said that as a % of their specific population there are more black people on food stamps and I never disagreed with that
what was the point of this nonsense ?
LOL what was the point of your first post in this thread?
-
LOL what was the point of your first post in this thread?
that more white people are on food stamps than any other reason
you agree with that
remember
-
that more white people are on food stamps than any other reason
you agree with that
remember
and mine was that shoud be expected as they make up the biggest % of race in the country and that blacks make up a greater % of welfare and food stamp receipients than they do in % of their population make up
you agree with that...
Remember?
-
and mine was that shoud be expected as they make up the biggest % of race in the country and that blacks make up a greater % of welfare and food stamp receipients than they do in % of their population make up
you agree with that...
Remember?
He won't admit it. Look at the wordage he used. He said he never "disagreed" , not that he agreed with you. It's the Nick Nailer school of debate.
-
He won't admit it. Look at the wordage he used. He said he never "disagreed" , not that he agreed with you. It's the Nick Nailer school of debate.
here is me agreeing on the first page
still no explanation from anyone as to the significance
maybe you'd like to offer an explanation
wow - you finally realized that higher percentage of minorities live in poverty than white people
congratulations
-
here is me agreeing on the first page
still no explanation from anyone as to the significance
maybe you'd like to offer an explanation
same signifigance as your first post in the thread...
as far as an explanition, white man is keeping them down...
-
same signifigance as your first post in the thread...
as far as an explanition, white man is keeping them down...
this
TYpically stupid since the single largest race on food stamps are white and most are working too
-
This....
seeing as they make up the largest % by race in our population that would make sense.
minorities make up a disproportionate % of food stamp recepients give the % make up of our population.
Typical liberal looking at numbers and not looking at why they are what they are. I bet you cheered when the unemployment rate went down even though it was bc less ppl were looking for work.
-
here is me agreeing on the first page
still no explanation from anyone as to the significance
maybe you'd like to offer an explanation
So you agree that blacks are disproportionally to there population numbers, higher recipients of welfare. Good. That said, my reasoning behind it, is that culturally they seem to know no better, that it is a cycle that they are raised to be in. Learning and getting a job is being an Uncle Tom. I don't need a chart to show me that, I've seen it with interactions I've had with black people. I know two guys who say the same thing, who are black, and are embarrassed by it. That said, I think the whites who are poor welfare monkeys, and hate blacks, are just as fucking bad. They have no idea that they are the same in most successful people's eyes as the very groups they despise. I think the whole lot of them are dispicable and should be put on work farms, or put to work on highway projects, so that they may learn a trade. Just my two cents.
-
same signifigance as your first post in the thread...
as far as an explanition, white man is keeping them down...
McTones, how can you have this much difficulty following a conversation? The thread was started by the Patron Loon of Getbig, claiming that a rep made a claim of racism when she didn't. The entire bill addresses a problem that doesn't exist. The woman never said anything about race- she did say that the bill is an attempt to debase and scapegoat welfare recipients, most of whom , not incidentally, are WHITE.
-
I already linked it in another thread, either find it or do a google search.
Translated: "These stats either don't exist or I am misinterpreting what they actually said."
-
McTones, how can you have this much difficulty following a conversation? The thread was started by the Patron Loon of Getbig, claiming that a rep made a claim of racism when she didn't. The entire bill addresses a problem that doesn't exist. The woman never said anything about race- she did say that the bill is an attempt to debase and scapegoat welfare recipients, most of whom , not incidentally, are WHITE.
agreed and I simply pointed out that its to be expected that majority of ppl on welfare and food stamps are white b/c white make up the biggest % of race in our population.
I also pointed out that blacks make up a disproportionately larger % of welfare and food stamp receipients compared to their total population %
what part do you not understand?
-
Translated: "These stats either don't exist or I am misinterpreting what they actually said."
LOL go search albert, I already educated one libtard today maybe tomorrow will be your day.
-
agreed and I simply pointed out that its to be expected that majority of ppl on welfare and food stamps are white b/c white make up the biggest % of race in our population.
I also pointed out that blacks make up a disproportionately larger % of welfare and food stamp receipients compared to their total population %
what part do you not understand?
What I don't understand is your confusion over what his initial post meant. There really wasn't much room for ambiguity.
LOL go search albert, I already educated one libtard today maybe tomorrow will be your day.
The stats you claim don't exist. There's nothing to search for. You're the one claiming they do. If they existed, you'd post a link.
-
What I don't understand is your confusion over what his initial post meant. There really wasn't much room for ambiguity.
The stats you claim don't exist. There's nothing to search for. You're the one claiming they do. If they existed, you'd post a link.
LOL what confusion? the reason I asked is b/c he asked about the significance of mine and I said it held the same significance as his...
I asked the question to get him to think about it, not b/c I was actually confused.
LOL again, did you search the threads about gun control?
if you had youd have found it champ
-
LOL what confusion? the reason I asked is b/c he asked about the significance of mine and I said it held the same significance as his...
I asked the question to get him to think about it, not b/c I was actually confused.
Really? So, you were arguing that cracking down of food stamp fraud is racist? ::)
LOL again, did you search the threads about gun control?
if you had youd have found it champ
There are about 20 active gun control threads on the first page. You have a history of posting stats that say the exact opposite of what you think they say and then trying to hide behind an info dump. I've never heard anyone else claim that states with stricter gun control have 1/3 the homicide rate, so if you actually had a legit stat on that, I'd love to see it. As of right now, I'm positive you completely misunderstood whatever it was you posted (if you actually posted anything.)
-
Really? So, you were arguing that cracking down of food stamp fraud is racist? ::)
There are about 20 active gun control threads on the first page. You have a history of posting stats that say the exact opposite of what you think they say and then trying to hide behind an info dump. I've never heard anyone else claim that states with stricter gun control have 1/3 the homicide rate, so if you actually had a legit stat on that, I'd love to see it. As of right now, I'm positive you completely misunderstood whatever it was you posted (if you actually posted anything.)
LMFAO what stats have I posted that say the opposite Albert?
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00127-011-0450-0/fulltext.html
"Broader ICC-criteria were associated with 1.42 less homicides per 100,000. Less access to psychiatric inpatient-beds and more poorly rated mental health systems were associated with increases in the homicide rates of 1.08 and 0.26 per 100,000, respectively."
now wouldnt addressing mental illness address the problem at the root?
-
"While social-economic-demographic-geographic-and-political indicators show the strongest association with homicide rate variation, the results show the importance and potentially preventive utility of broader ICC criteria, increased psychiatric inpatient-bed access, and better performing mental health systems as factors contributing to homicide rate variation."
-
Your quote from another thread, that I've been asking for data on:
hey you know that states with looser commitment laws have 1/3 the homocide rate as those without?
Your support:
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00127-011-0450-0/fulltext.html
"Broader ICC-criteria were associated with 1.42 less homicides per 100,000. Less access to psychiatric inpatient-beds and more poorly rated mental health systems were associated with increases in the homicide rates of 1.08 and 0.26 per 100,000, respectively."
When you read the second quote, do you actually think that actually means these states have 1/3 the homicide rate. As I said, you clearly did not understand what you were quoting.
-
"While social-economic-demographic-geographic-and-political indicators show the strongest association with homicide rate variation,
-
Your quote from another thread, that I've been asking for data on:
Your support:
When you read the second quote, do you actually think that actually means these states have 1/3 the homicide rate. As I said, you clearly did not understand what you were quoting.
That quote doesnt say anything about the % it decreases homicides that was simply to show you that stronger mental health attention ACTUALLY ADDRESSES THE PROBLEM!!!!
unlike gun laws which HAVE BEEN PROVEN TO NOT WORK!!!!!!
so do you admit now that my suggestions of stronger mental health laws and more education/awareness will help address the actual problem?
-
"Broader ICC-criteria were associated with 1.42 less homicides per 100,000. Less access to psychiatric inpatient-beds and more poorly rated mental health systems were associated with increases in the homicide rates of 1.08 and 0.26 per 100,000, respectively."
-
That quote doesnt say anything about the % it decreases homicides that was simply to show you that stronger mental health attention ACTUALLY ADDRESSES THE PROBLEM!!!!
LOL McTones, you claimed that you had stats that showed that states with "looser commitment laws" had 1/3 the homicide rate. I knew that was hogwash and asked you to post a simple link. You could have posted anything you wanted. If those stats exist and you have the link, you can still post them,. But they don't exist.
-
LOL McTones, you claimed that you had stats that showed that states with "looser commitment laws" had 1/3 the homicide rate. I knew that was hogwash and asked you to post a simple link. You could have posted anything you wanted. If those stats exist and you have the link, you can still post them,. But they don't exist.
hahaha that link shows it there champ...
also it shows that addressing mental illness lowers the homocide rate even(even if you want to quibble about the amount)
so do you now agree that addressing mental illness and more education/awareness will address the problem at the root?
answer the question albert...
-
hahaha that link shows it there champ...
also it shows that addressing mental illness lowers the homocide rate even(even if you want to quibble about the amount)
so do you now agree that addressing mental illness and more education/awareness will address the problem at the root?
answer the question albert...
The link does not show it and four posts above this one you admit that. ::) 1/3 homicide rate vs. a decrease of 0.26 murders/per 100,000 is not "quibbling". I have said in other threads that American mental health policy could use a lot of improvement, but nothing you've posted has proven that improved policy is a sound alternative to gun control. All you're proven is that you misunderstood what you posted, like I assumed had to be the case.
-
The link does not show it and four posts above this one you admit that. ::) 1/3 homicide rate vs. a decrease of 0.26 murders/per 100,000 is not "quibbling". I have said in other threads that American mental health policy could use a lot of improvement, but nothing you've posted has proven that improved policy is a sound alternative to gun control. All you're proven is that you misunderstood what you posted, like I assumed had to be the case.
LOL whats the average rate of murders per 100,000?
"Broader ICC-criteria were associated with 1.42 less homicides per 100,000"
seeing as gun control has been proven time and time again to be ineffective at stopping gun crimes...Id say this is a great alternative.
Seeing as the ppl that commit mass murders in the past have generally been mentally ill to some degree...Id say this is a great alternative.
-
average rate of homocides in the US is 3.7 according to wiki(not the most reliable source I know)
1.42 less.....
-
average rate of homocides in the US is 3.7 according to wiki(not the most reliable source I know)
1.42 less.....
So, half, not a third? ;D
-
The link does not show it and four posts above this one you admit that. ::) 1/3 homicide rate vs. a decrease of 0.26 murders/per 100,000 is not "quibbling".
PS...the .26 was in regards to an increase in gun homocides related to poorly rated mental health systems alone...
"Broader ICC-criteria were associated with 1.42 less homicides per 100,000. Less access to psychiatric inpatient-beds and more poorly rated mental health systems were associated with increases in the homicide rates of 1.08 and 0.26 per 100,000, respectively."
-
average rate of GUN homocides in the US is 3.7 according to wiki(not the most reliable source I know)
1.42 less.....
I should rephrase my statement as I know albert doesnt quite comprehend all that well.
-
So, half, not a third? ;D
Not even... the findings are WEIGHTED, which is why the researcher says the figures are "associated" with certain findings rather than "attributed to". Both McTones and I have already posted that the study calims socio/economic/polital factors are stronger indicators. You can click on the study and see the equation the researcher used. Simply put, it's not half or 1/3.
I should rephrase my statement as I know albert doesnt quite comprehend all that well.
::) sure.
-
Not even... the findings are WEIGHTED, which is why the researcher says the figures are "associated" with certain finding rather than "attributed to". Both McTones and I have already posted that the study calims socio/economic/polital factors are stronger indicators. You can click on the study and see the equation the researcher used. Simply put, it's not half or 1/3.
::) sure.
LOL my assertion that states with looser commitment laws have 1/3 less gun homocides isnt correct?
really??? LMFAO
so the average is 3.7 and as the study states "Broader ICC-criteria were associated with 1.42 less homicides per 100,000."
3.7 - 1.42 = 2.28
2.28/3.7 = 61.62%
sorry champ...
you can pick and silverline all you want, facts are facts...
-
LOL my assertion that states with looser commitment laws have 1/3 less gun homocides isnt correct?
really??? LMFAO
so the average is 3.4 and as the study states "Broader ICC-criteria were associated with 1.42 less homicides per 100,000."
3.7 - 1.42 = 2.28
2.28/3.7 = 61.62%
sorry champ...
you can pick and silverline all you want, facts are facts...
Yes, facts are facts, that study very clearly states that the biggest contributing factors are socio-economic.
-
Yes, facts are facts, that study very clearly states that the biggest contributing factors are socio-economic.
no it says that the biggest associated factors...
it also states that those states with broader ICC criteria have 1/3 less gun homocides than average...
It also states that access to mental health and the quality of care help decrease gun homocide rates...
addressing the problem at the source ;)
gun control what?
LMFAO
-
no it says that the biggest associated factors...
it also states that those states with broader ICC criteria have 1/3 less gun homocides than average...
It also states that access to mental health and the quality of care help decrease gun homocide rates...
No, it says this:
OLS results indicate that social-economic-demographic-geographic-and-political indicators accounted for 25% of homicide rate variation. Broader ICC-criteria were associated with 1.42 less homicides per 100,000.
It specifically says "accounted" when referring to socio-economic factors and "associated" when referreing to icc-criteria.
gun control what?
Every model in the study uses firearms restrictiveness as a covariate with a negative impact on the murder rate, so I'm not sure why you posted this.
-
Wow, I can't believe this thread has acually gone on for 4 pages over a non-issue!!!
Classic example of main stream media brainwashing in your face, ye no one is spotting it.
3 little words from a talking suit "Neil, that's racist" and the comprehension of what was actually said goes right out the window by all parties... her point is lost, ...and people start arguing black & white and trotting out the stats to support their own stupid non-arguments. :o
If this wasn't so pathetic, ...it might have actually been funny. :'(
-
Where does she say anything about race? Cavuto is the one who injects race into the conversation. What she does say is that it is a typical Republican tactic of creating a boogie man where there isn't one.
BINGO!!!
-
no it says that the biggest associated factors...
it also states that those states with broader ICC criteria have 1/3 less gun homocides than average...
It also states that access to mental health and the quality of care help decrease gun homocide rates...
addressing the problem at the source ;)
gun control what?
LMFAO
So you want to spend more money on mental health and healthcare?
And you always cry the US should cut spending.
Explain.