And Idaho has a homicide rate lower than Canada, and Regina has a homicide rate on par with the US average. You're trying to compare a massively unpopulated country with a massively populated country that borders the most violent countries on Earth. If the problem was guns instead of people, the homicide rate in Idaho wouldn't be 1.4
I posted along with the OP a researchers report on the validity of the book. Or amending the Book review. I have not read the book and am not able to constrain the authors research. It would be unfair to the author and wrong by me. When a person is shot, it almost always leads to a report on file with police. But say the woman in question runs off her attacker, she may not report to the police. There is so much animosity when you defend yourself a person simply may believe he or she is now safe since the gun scared the attacker.
According to the FBI arrest figures, 2017: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/topic-pages/tables/table-43 Total: White: 68.9% Black: 27.2% Other: 3.9% Murder: White: 44.2% Black: 53.1% Other: 2.6%
It was mostly in my linked articles. But here are a few of my favorites. 1) no fault divorce 2) subsidized single motherhood 3) incremental substitution of the state as surrogate parents (things like expanding school nutrition programs) 4) the multifaceted attack on the notion of intrinsic value of human life 5) glorification of drug/gang culture 6) the unintended effect on children of the “women need men like fish need a bicycle” mantra 7) the dynamics of gender fluidity and rejection of the historical idea of gender equality coexisting with gender differences. Also rejection of complementary aspects of binary genders in child rearing. 8-. the toxic masculinity dynamic where boys in school must behave like girls or be drugged. Where aggressive nature of men is suppressed or misdirected instead of channeled in positive directions such as protection of families. I’m bored now with this so I’m going to let you figure the rest out but thanks for asking an honest question.
Poor, dumb people. Most criminals, or at least those who end up in jail, tend to be of low intelligence and have a low income background.
Your solution is pure fantasy. None of your prog./lefty buddies are backing you up on this one, and they'll back up eery dumb stupid thing that comes down the toilet drain........but not this one.
US prison population: White: 39% 450 per 100k population Black: 40% 2306 per 100k population https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States#Ethnicity How racist of you.
Whose gun buddies think they can't face a threat without a firearm? Yours? Having a gun doesn't make you invincible, and the only people who promote that idiocy are the people who are most ignorant about firearms. Having a firearm for self protection is nothing more than a step in risk mitigation like having good lights and locks on your house. Again, having a gun doesn't mean you are invincible, however, if you are a 100lb woman who is faced with a 250lb man who is intent on harming her, a gun in her hand, and the knowledge how to use it, is a fantastic advantage. Armed women do not get raped. Armed gays do not get bashed. Do those statements irritate you? If so, why?
Explaining to a lefty that an example or two is not evidence or proof of anything is clearly an act of futility. And I'm not arguing that it's always impossible. My argument has been clear from the beginning and it is supported overwhelmingly by facts and that is when confronting an active shoiter, your chances for survival skyrocket if you're armed. Tjus is an undenisble fact that isn't disproven by your minimsl amount if examples. Now, what part of this are you not clear on?
I agree with most of those, however: What is the problem with this? What is the problem with school nutrition programs? How is this a progressive idea?
The only card you ever play is the puerile ad hom PF VIOLATION since you are incapable of substantiating your allegations.
Anything we subsidize we get more of. We take away the incentive for marriage/commitment which is more advantageous to the woman as it reduced her chance of poverty and more advantageous to the children in innumerable ways we can get into more but have already been stated. I believe we have moved from feeding those who absolutely need it to making the state the responsible party for feeding children. If a deadbeat dad knows his kids will be fed he has no reason to man up. The mother has no reason to pick sexual partners who will. The state gets dependents for life of the mother and children. The entertainment industries are almost exclusively producing content pushing progressive ideology. When was the last time you listened to music or watched a movie glorifying an actual value conducive to stable two parent complementary binary gendered families? I don’t feel like looking it up, but you can find producers, etc on record admitting content is agenda driven.
Sure, but are you proposing zero benefit to single mothers? Can you rephrase this? Sure, the glorification of drug/gang culture is promoted by the entertainment industries, but I don't see how this means that it is a "progressive idea."
No. I’m not claiming to have all the answers. I’m pointing out problems. What do you propose? Can you rephrase this? Because the mother (or parents if there are two) gives up responsibility she also gives up independence. This allows her to be manipulated by the state. Mostly into voting to maintain the symbiotic relationship. The children grow up with the belief dependence on the state is normal or even preferable to other options. Good things (food) come from the state, not from personal responsibility, work, or the family unit. Remember the saying “it takes a village...”? Instant gratification, deriving a sense of belonging from a mob mentality rather than familial relationships, no intrinsic value to human life, subjective morality, and sexual gratification at the expense of others are all progressive ideas.
Although, would you say that people who call themselves "progressives" would glorify drug/gang culture?
New York city Chicago San Francisco Las Angeles's Detroit Flint Shall I name more? Democrat cities suck.
Lol...And I've noticed that many gun nuts are nothing more than cowards with Walter Mitty delusions and puerile grudges against the world.
