Active Shooter Killed At Nashville School

#1,127
#1,127
Vol in Buckeye Land said:
Hell yes I believe your right to own an AR is dog crap compared to the hundreds of innocent kids (and adults) killed in mass shootings so far and the hundreds who will die in the future if something doesn’t change.

“Fear to cause surrender”? What are you even talking about? Surrender of what?
Click to expand...

You do know that "ARs" are not the most commonly used weapons in these mass shootings don't you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, GreveHaller, InVOLuntary and 2 others
#1,128
#1,128
Vol8188 said:
You're missing the point because you're focusing on "why is the black rate higher"? My point is simple and one you can't answer so you just pretend it's "dangerous":

If the white homicide rate is the same as that of Canada and the EU, how can you proclaim the problem is guns?
Click to expand...
It's simple. You are not looking at comparable socio-economic data.
 
#1,129
#1,129
Vol in Buckeye Land said:
Hell yes I believe your right to own an AR is dog crap compared to the hundreds of innocent kids (and adults) killed in mass shootings so far and the hundreds who will die in the future if something doesn’t change.

“Fear to cause surrender”? What are you even talking about? Surrender of what?
Click to expand...

Then you're really upset about handguns which are not just the murder weapon of choice, but used most often in mass shootings, right?
Or do you just save up this fascist angst for school shootings?
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, StarRaider and hog88
#1,131
#1,131
NashVol11 said:
If he’s right that it’s correlated with socioeconomic status, which makes a lot of sense, then the “white homicide rate” is meaningless
Click to expand...

Not at all. If we assume white Americans are on basically equal economic footing as that of Canadians and the EU, then it's a very fair comparison to see if guns really are the problem. So if you hypothesis that "IT's THE GUNS!" is correct, why would the numbers be so close given the US citizens massive access to guns? The answer is obvious, the guns aren't the issue. The same is show on state levels too.

The other thing is that white and black homicide rates are still disproportionate when you factor in economic status. For example the majority of all food stamp recipients are white yet the majority of all homicides are committed by blacks. So you still have a massive disparity that you both want to ignore because the disparity is proof that the issue is not the guns.
 
#1,136
#1,136
Vol8188 said:
Not at all. If we assume white Americans are on basically equal economic footing as that of Canadians and the EU, then it's a very fair comparison to see if guns really are the problem. So if you hypothesis that "IT's THE GUNS!" is correct, why would the numbers be so close given the US citizens massive access to guns? The answer is obvious, the guns aren't the issue. The same is show on state levels too.

The other thing is that white and black homicide rates are still disproportionate when you factor in economic status. For example the majority of all food stamp recipients are white yet the majority of all homicides are committed by blacks. So you still have a massive disparity that you both want to ignore because the disparity is proof that the issue is not the guns.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is. With respect to a crime rate that depends on whether or not you are wealthy, you are cherry-picking a relatively wealthy sub-group in the U.S. and comparing that to the full populations of other countries.

It should be obvious why that is a misleading apples to oranges comparison that doesn’t tell you anything, but if you acknowledged that it would be harder for you to blame black people
 
  • Like
Reactions: TN Ribs
#1,139
#1,139
luthervol said:
You keep bringing this up and I've tried to let is slide because we debated this extensively a while back.
You need to filter your numbers through socio-economic filters instead of lazily and dangerously focusing on race.
If you were to do so, you would learn a lot, chiefly that your whole hypothesis is meaningless.
Click to expand...
Lol. Truth is a hard pill for you folks to swallow..which is ironic.

But I'll play your game. There are more "poor" Whites in the US than "poor" blacks, yet blacks murder more than anyone else. If we factor in per capita they murder at a rate 6 times more than Whites.

So what is the "socio-economic filter" that I need to apply to black folks to make them look less violent?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Caculator, InVOLuntary and 82_VOL_83
#1,141
#1,141
Vol8188 said:
Find it. Let's see your comparable socio-economic data?
Click to expand...
We spent hours on this months, maybe even a couple of years, ago. I provided all of the data. It seems to have had no impact on your understanding. I'm not going through it again. But if you wish to look.....start with crime statistics among the lowest 20% economically. Or find a really poor "white" region in the US and look at their numbers compared to a really poor region from the other countries.
 
#1,142
#1,142
NashVol11 said:
Yes, it is. With respect to a crime rate that depends on whether or not you are wealthy, you are cherry-picking a relatively wealthy sub-group in the U.S. and comparing that to the full populations of other countries.

It should be obvious why that is a misleading apples to oranges comparison that doesn’t tell you anything, but if you acknowledged that it would be harder for you to blame black people
Click to expand...

You believe the US white population on average is far wealthier than Canada or the EU? Once again the majority of food stamp recipients in this country are white, yet the majority of homicides in this country are committed by blacks. Obviously there is more going on there than just poverty.

It tells you a lot. It tells you that guns are not the problem. If guns were the problem white Americans (the ones who statistically own the most guns and live where gun laws are the most relaxed) would be the ones doing all the killing. If the issue was poverty white Americans (the majority of people living in poverty in the US) would be leading the country in homicides.

Canadian median income: 74K US white median income: 74k That's not vastly different and is a fair comparison.
 
#1,143
#1,143
Vol in Buckeye Land said:
Hell yes I believe your right to own an AR is dog crap compared to the hundreds of innocent kids (and adults) killed in mass shootings so far and the hundreds who will die in the future if something doesn’t change.

“Fear to cause surrender”? What are you even talking about? Surrender of what?
Click to expand...
Surrender of your rights and those of everyone else thru an emotional choice. It's how we got things like the Patriot act because govt pounced when the citizens showed fear. This just proves terrorism absolutely works in the US
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, 825VOL, InVOLuntary and 6 others
#1,144
#1,144
luthervol said:
We spent hours on this months, maybe even a couple of years, ago. I provided all of the data. It seems to have had no impact on your understanding. I'm not going through it again. But if you wish to look.....start with crime statistics among the lowest 20% economically. Or find a really poor "white" region in the US and look at their numbers compared to a really poor region from the other countries.
Click to expand...

You've provided no data. Let's see it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: screenthis, InVOLuntary and FLVOL_79
#1,145
#1,145
GroverCleveland said:
If only there were some way to protect the schools. <<taps head in frustration as the answer seems to be right in front of us, but just cannot see it>>

Saw some idiot last night in an interview saying armed security around the schools would traumatize kids and rob them of their childhood. And I thought back to my days in school when at least 20%-30% of the boys had guns in their vehicles. I guess it is possible, but I do not know of anyone robbed of their childhood because I had a deer rifle in my vehicle or any number of my buddies had those or shotguns or .22s. We really just didn't think about it being an issue. Different times and attitudes.

If someone had attacked our school, probably a decent chance they get shot by one of the high school boys or one of the male teachers/coaches with one of the boys' guns.
Click to expand...

"I'm a prohibitionist; a few more dead kids furthers my goal."
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland and InVOLuntary
#1,146
#1,146
Vol8188 said:
You've provided no data. Let's see it.
Click to expand...
Luther is right but confused. He got destroyed on here (by me and others) with actual data that disproved every point he tried to make. I remember it well because I sat down and did the math while chilling at work. Thats when I realized democrats don't like math and it then made sense why they think its racist.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, InVOLuntary, BennesseeVols and 2 others
#1,149
#1,149
Vol737 said:
Glad you brought this up because I’ve run through some rough calculations after several of these school shootings. There are about 95,000 public schools in the US. If there was a block grant to states, mandated to distribute funds equally and directly to each individual public school for armed security officers and other security measures ONLY, it would cost about $19.3B annually OR just over $200K per year per school. Here’s how…

The defense budget in 2022 was $772B. It’s even higher in 2023. If we peeled off just 2.5% of that budget ($19.3B), it would fund those measures at just over $200K for each school. Or, as you astutely mentioned, we could have easily paid for it out of monies that went to Ukraine. At 3%, approx $240K would go to each school for armed security officers and other security measures. Just a rough sketch for discussion and plenty of other bloated bureaucracies to pull funds from to make these numbers work.
Click to expand...
I like your line of thought here.

95,000 schools to harden.

What went in to your $240k per school per year?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top