Blog powered by Typepad

« We have a new World Champion | Main | Yes, yes but why now? »

Monday, 09 October 2017


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Black lives do matter, as they should, even in Chicago. But in Chicago, white (and part white) lives matter more, especially if they happen to be Democratic big shits shots.

There are more than 33,000 gun deaths in the US every year. Most gun murder victims are men between the ages of 15 and 34. 66% are black. Black children are victims 10 times more often than white and Asian-American children. However, in addition to the 34% of homicide victims, of the over 60% of gun deaths that are suicides, white men make up 79%. What's wrong with white men?

The obvious solution is to raise the black suicide rate up to that of the whites!

Well done, Bob, no uncomfortable point ever knowingly met! You are a Democratic party supporter, don't you think the party owes all those dead and injured blacks a better policy than disarming whites, especially given that blacks kill far more blacks?

David, I have never belonged to a political party and have not been a supporter of either party. Over the years I've voted for members of both. While I do have a minimal political philosophy, I am not an ideologue.

At this point both parties spend more time begging special interests for money than trying to solve the country's problems. Statistics from all sources show gun violence isn't strictly a black or white issue. Attempting to make Chicago a case of special pleading is pointless. Wilmington, Delaware, leads the US in teen shootings and Savannah, Georgia almost equals Chicago:


"Attempting to make Chicago a case of special pleading is pointless."

Maybe so but then there's John Pfaff (a Fordham University law professor) who's put it this way:

"22 percent of the nationwide increase in murders came from Chicago alone."

JK, that might be right, but it would be because Chicago is the only high population, major city to have an increase in murders. As we've already discussed, it's because the "projects" were torn down and their gang members distributed throughout the city. Look at the chart in the article I linked above, or better yet read the whole thing.

Read it Bob.

What jumped out for me was the "teens" methodology targeting-wise - any of a number of our fellow commentors here I'm confident will tell you "spraying gunfire" makes for a lotta collateral shit.

Far as the "spreading out" goes (which I do recall our discussing) where Chicago is concerned ... back to Professor Plaff, "the Chicago shootings remain concentrated, as in the 80s and the 90s, in just five neighborhoods."

For future reference David,

I seem to recall Chicago was a violent place during prohibition, as were many others, and that things improved once prohibition ended.
Perhaps the same remedy would produce the same results.
After all the actual effect of prohibiting the supply of recreational drugs is not to reduce their use. Rather it gives a monopoly to criminals, and an incentive for other forms of criminality- including but not limited to murder.


How does Plaff explain this?

It seems to me that the main culprits for the high murder rates in the USA are:
* welfare dependency which has decimated black families
* drug prohibition which favours gang formation and violence

Let us not forget also that the USA has always had a high murder rate even back in the good old days when every English gentleman carried a revolver.

The point has been made ad nauseam that in other countries with similar rates of possession of firearms, such as Rep Czech, Finland and Swiss, the murder rate is negligible.

This might be due to the USA always having been a more atomised society compared to most parts of Europe.

It is not the guns it's the people, and as we gun nuts like to say, guns don't kill people, people kill people and the facts bear that out.

The comments to this entry are closed.