America is a violent country

Why does it matter? It's about how many kill vs. get killed, if you want to find out what's working better... You'd as might as well ask how many killers murder while wearing a blue shirt.

 

People who purchase guns for self defense are not the problem. They are docile.

People who have acquired black market guns are using them with increasing frequency. They are not docile.

 

how did the guns get on the black market?

 

You're welcome. Farewell.

 

My opinion? Poster A condemning Poster B for doing what Poster A does proudly would best be described as "hypocricy".

 

you'll be back

 

America has become a homogenous pile of (*)(*)(*)(*). We should get rid of all non-white, non Christian people, but we do not have the guts to do so.

 

This whole thread was started because some people got shot at a rap singer's concert.

It's rap music. What do you expect? Civility?

 

We can't get rid of them all. The past can never be restored. The best we can do is to make life a living hell for them so they let us go.

 

There's a fair amount of fail teachers, but that's not the real reason for America's failing publication. A lot of these teachers have policies placed over them where they are restricted in what they teach and how they teach. This also varies from region to region and is impacted by a variety of factors. For instance, in the South, they make it clear that they won't accept any curriculum that pries to deep into the Civil War. They opt for a general description of the event which serves to "preserve the dignity of the South".

In schools everywhere, things like history, writing, art, and sciences are taking a beating because of the funding involved in stronger educational methods, as well as the increasing regimentation of school curriculum's to pump out people that can fit slots in corporate-industrial America. Teacher's are really over-worked and under-compensated. They are much a prisoner of the education system as the students.

In some ways, yes. But in a Democratic nation, the failure to change a failing policy that has been failing for a long time is really every citizens. Unless that ideal no longer works today...

You probably wouldn't know the extent and the finances that go into the huge campaign against Unions in America. I must say, they've succeeded well enough. Union's have taken a nose dive over the last few decades, and income-disparity has taken an almost proportional rise. But, as i said, the problem with education- while a convenient cop-out (not that it's you who came up with the idea)- cannot be placed at the feet of teachers and Unions. It's a systemic problem and the decline is another one of those things that have been happening for a while and have come to slap us in the face in the very recent.

It's bad when Bill Gates lobbies Congress to allow foreign student-technicians from India and China to remain living in the US with indefinite visa's rather than hiring US native technicians.

 

I'm not sure it will be the coming of a paradise you might be predicting. For instance...Non-white people in America do a lot of the lower-class work in the country- for whatever reasons or circumstances. This is what's known as the underclass. It's pitiable, but necessary. If you remove them all, then you just the remaining White population who like things like fair and adequate wages and a preferably dignified career. Not that non-white's don't want this also, but their situations give them little room for improvement.

So what happens is that the remaining White's would be made to fill that economic bracket, and then you would have a new underclass of White citizens. In Europe, before slavery, the northern nations were fairly exclusively white. This did not spark a Utopian existence. About 2 - 5% of the population where either wealthy or well-off (middle-class). The rest were peasants. Crime, war, poverty, abuse... These things were problems then, and they will continue to be, whether the nation is a rainbow or a bed sheet. A teacher once put it to me very well, "If there were only White people in the world, they would be divided on almost everything else but the color of there skin. Trying to solve the problems of the world by combating race is like trying to pay an overdue mortgage by painting your house.

 

You are an individual I take seriously so I will discuss this matter without rancor. America is in pretty bad shape because it has a cascading series of problems. Analogize it to a series of system failures in a complicated piece of hardware.

I know the public schools aren't solely at fault, however, they are Very Culpable for contributing to America's cascading systems failures.

The only parents who are really guiding their children proactively from what I can see are rich white people, East Asians and South Asians in the US. Almost all other parents have failed their children.

The culture has failed the children. Feminism is good, but it has a duality like everything else in life. Part of that duality has been that there's no one around to nurture children as they were nurtured in past generations.

School, parents, the culture. Most American kids don't stand a chance against the kids being graduated in New Delhi, Beijing, Singapore, and Shanghai. If American kids lack social capital and human capital, they sure as hell will never have investment capital.

 

I live in Santa Cruz, California. I think what has happened here will happen to the rest of America. The demographics here are rich old white people and poor Mexicans and their children.

White people who live here and aren't wealthy are most likely homeless. The Mexicans live in third world conditions. They work so hard they are busy all the time.

Unfortunately, they don't have time to raise their children. That's how the gangs get hold of their kids. The kids almost invariably become vatos or putas.

The kids of the Mexicans are now the majority in local schools. They were born here. They are Second Generation. Almost half of them drop out of high school and the other half have the same academic proficiency as Mestizo kids in Mexico. In other words, the Second Generation lacks social capital, human capital, and investment capital. California has been dumbed down.

 

Well, I can't really blame the public for not being more aware of the things going on around them, or being more proactive. I mean, when you consider it, even people directly involved in the legislative process- Senators and Legislatures- drag their feet and drag a problem out over weeks and months. In our modern society, ordinary people are spread thin over a variety of priorities and I expecting them to devote a third of their day to a job, another third to themselves or family, and another third to a constant vigil over an opportunist government is asking too much. It's impossible.

As for feminism, well, it's more like necessity. Often, both parents have to work to pull the weight of a mortgage or remain a relatively comfortable distance above the poverty line. I don't see females in the workplace or feminine rise in our social system as anything more or less bad then a male dominated one. Given, some tasks are just obviously better handled by males, like heavy lifting and the like, but it should be performance that determines this rather than prejudice. Females haven't really "become" a strong social force, they always were.

Rich people have the means to support their children's education. Average people can't hope to get the same level of education their money can by. I'm not really demonizing the rich here, but it is a crime that good and bad education is determined by how much money one has. Usually, I find that those of us who were educated in Public Schools and exhibit a considerable degree of education beyond that of the public curriculum or that related to their profession are often self-taught. In a sense, those children who succeed well had done so despite the education system rather than because of it.

I've always admired the focus of immigrants in America. I don't even really know the exact reason behind their achievement, but, productivity wise, they tend to excel.

.

 

Let do some math shall we? (Using your statistic) 85 deaths per day by gun (no matter what the reason)
85*365=31025
(31025 / 315717850)*100= 0.009% chance of getting killed by a gun
(443000 / 315717850)*100= 0.14% chance of getting killed by cigarettes
If your stat is correct you and Piers Morgan should be focused on tobacco companies not guns. Far more people are killed by tobacco companies every day.
I can also calculate the odds of being killed by hooligans at a soccer game in England if you want as well just say the word there is quite a bit of info on that actually. Such violence over a game girls play here at recess. What a shame.

 

they should be focused on BOTH

 

oh and odds of someone who doesnt smoke being killed by a cigarette smokers second hand smoke
50000 deaths anually = .015% still higher than gun deaths in the USA.
Are you sure your 85 is correct? Thats seems rather low considering the person next to you smoking is more dangerous than gun owners. Using actual statistics of course.

 

lol yeah the point is you lefties arent focused on both. You are only focused on guns even though I have just proven to you smoking is by a staggering number more dangerous than guns, even guns in the hands of criminals. (using your lefty stats of course)
So why are you only focused on the least dangerous of the two? Is it because you are politically motivated? I mean if your stated goal was to make things safer, then logically speaking you lefties should be going after the tobacco companies.

 

feel free to provide links showing liberals are not concerned with tobacco use rates and are not introducing measures to curb them??

 

Dumb comparison. See, people don't generally volunteer to be killed by a gun. Smokers have the option of not smoking; someone getting shot doesn't have the option of not dying. Try again.

 

You want me to provide a link showing you arent concerned with something? Since I cant prove a negative lets see you prove a positive. Over the last month how many speeches has Obama given on gun control? Then post how many speeches he gave on the dangers of cigarettes.
LOL Havent seen Obama on TV talking about smoking deaths, havent seen obama showing up to any towns giving speeches on the deaths from cigarettes. Havent seen Obama give a speech the day after a terrorist attack about cigarettes. He and the leftist media have and continue to absolutely plaster the airwaves with the dangers of guns. Shall I post some more PF stats showing the number of lefties complaining about guns versus the number of lefties complaining about cigarettes? Do I really need to do that an embarrass you?

 

That's a good point, actually. You know what would really be news? A rap concert where NO ONE gets shot!

 

Hey RIF, did you really think I didnt have that covered? LOL I figured you lefties would say that so I then calculated the death rate by second hand smoke. You didnt read it?
Not a dumb comparison at all. Its a fact.

 

nobody's gonna get a rise outta anybody posting on here about cigarettes. and Obama is obviously way ahead of you on the cigarette thing

http://www.fda.gov/TobaccoProducts/Labeling/ucm259214.htm

 

hhhahahahhahaha omg.....oh no a warning label! That ought to....actually forget it...you know what, if you equate that to the same fervor as what Obama is doing to strip people of their second then you are seriously seriously clouded by leftist ideology. So can we put a warning label on guns then? I mean using YOUR idea thats should suffice right? Obamas got it covered... a warning label.