New York City

#2,801
#2,801
  • Like
Reactions: PA Vol and NashVol11
#2,802
#2,802
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman, CobbVol and FLVOL_79
#2,805
#2,805
luthervol said:
Good grief, how tiresome.

A 12 year old just got jumped on the playground at Rockwood Middle......what an unsafe, out of control sh!thole that place must be.

And then there is Sneedville...........
The crime rate in Sneedville is considerably higher than the national average across all communities in America from the largest to the smallest, at 15 crimes per one thousand residents.

What's up with these rural poor TN towns?
Click to expand...
There were more violent crimes reported in New York City the week of this report than the entire population of Sneedville.


statistics have a funny way of lying to people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FLVOL_79 and whodeycin85
#2,806
#2,806
#2,807
#2,807
NashVol11 said:
Touting raw numbers for the city with by far the most people is one very common way of doing that
Click to expand...
so is hiding behind 1 murder counting as 1 murder in Sneedville Tennessee, while 1 murder in New York City counts for about 0.0001 murder, when taken per 1000 people.

to me that is the same crime, the same loss of life. but somehow that same loss of life in New York means its safer?
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#2,808
#2,808
LouderVol said:
so is hiding behind 1 murder counting as 1 murder in Sneedville Tennessee, while 1 murder in New York City counts for about 0.0001 murder, when taken per 1000 people.

to me that is the same crime, the same loss of life. but somehow that same loss of life in New York means its safer?
Click to expand...
If there is a city with 100K people including 2 violent criminals, and your house is one or a handful of people but one violent criminal just broke in, where are you in more danger? In the city because there are "more criminals"?
 
#2,809
#2,809
  • Like
Reactions: NashVol11
#2,810
#2,810
LouderVol said:
so is hiding behind 1 murder counting as 1 murder in Sneedville Tennessee, while 1 murder in New York City counts for about 0.0001 murder, when taken per 1000 people.

to me that is the same crime, the same loss of life. but somehow that same loss of life in New York means its safer?
Click to expand...
What you are describing as "hiding" is the way crime rate is calculated almost everywhere, for good reason
 
#2,812
#2,812
NashVol11 said:
If there is a city with 100K people including 2 violent criminals, and your house is one or a handful of people but one violent criminal just broke in, where are you in more danger? In the city because there are "more criminals"?
Click to expand...
to the bolded, yes. the rate of crime has to be applied across the population. as a rate alone its pointless. would you rather face a 1/10 odds once, or 1/1000 odds 1000 times?

I have no idea what you are trying to say with the underlined.
 
#2,813
#2,813
LouderVol said:
to the bolded, yes. the rate of crime has to be applied across the population. as a rate alone its pointless. would you rather face a 1/10 odds once, or 1/1000 odds 1000 times?

I have no idea what you are trying to say with the underlined.
Click to expand...
No, you are not in more danger walking around a city of 100K with 2 violent criminals than you are walking around your house with 1 violent criminal who broke in. What are we doing here
 
#2,815
#2,815
luthervol said:
Why in the world would anyone be moved to start a thread for the sole purpose of making a place look as bad as possible?

I know....do you?

Plus, I have no desire to make Rockwood or Sneedville look bad even though I am aware of their shortcomings.
Only a jealous, bitter, and petty person would feel so moved.
Click to expand...
Or a person warning of the (perhaps?) unintended consequences of an ideology's implementation. Just see this thread as the VN version of:

1733409695358.png

No need to appeal to jealousy, bitterness or pettiness, any more than a historian pointing out that Rome's lead plumbing was bad for them, or a doctor telling you that if you that history shows a correlation between sugar and diabetes. heck, it's probably more like a doctor pointing out your diabetes and asking you to change your diet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman, FLVOL_79 and InVOLuntary
#2,816
#2,816
BigOrangeMojo said:
UHC attempted to deny coverage to my spouse when she had cancer. Thankfully we had the resources to pay for care until they finally paid after lawsuit threats.

Sorry, not sorry....
Click to expand...
They've been probably the best medical coverage my wife and I have ever had. Sorry for your experience; hope we don't find that out for ourselves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol since 77, GroverCleveland and InVOLuntary
#2,817
#2,817
Orange_Crush said:
Or a person warning of the (perhaps?) unintended consequences of an ideology's implementation. Just see this thread as the VN version of:



No need to appeal to jealousy, bitterness or pettiness, any more than a historian pointing out that Rome's lead plumbing was bad for them, or a doctor telling you that if you that history shows a correlation between sugar and diabetes. heck, it's probably more like a doctor pointing out your diabetes and asking you to change your diet.
Click to expand...
Nah it's just conservatives being scared of cities again, good effort though
 
#2,819
#2,819
LouderVol said:
so is hiding behind 1 murder counting as 1 murder in Sneedville Tennessee, while 1 murder in New York City counts for about 0.0001 murder, when taken per 1000 people.

to me that is the same crime, the same loss of life. but somehow that same loss of life in New York means its safer?
Click to expand...
In a per-capita statistic, I would assume that the murder rate stat indicates how likely you are to experience a murder, so as the population goes down, the statistic still indicates how likely you are to come across a murderer.

If you are in a room with 1000 people, and one murderer, you're theoretically just as likely as being in a town of 1000 people. Except that this doesn't account for proximity. If those 1000 people are in a civic auditorium, you're probably more likely to come across that murderer than if those same 1000 people were spread across an area of 20 SQ miles.

So, if the population is denser in NY, you're probably more likely to meet the murderers than you are in a small TN town.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol and whodeycin85
#2,821
#2,821
NashVol11 said:
No, you are not in more danger walking around a city of 100K with 2 violent criminals than you are walking around your house with 1 violent criminal who broke in. What are we doing here
Click to expand...
am I out of ammo or something?

the fact that you are having to go to that extreme of one violent criminal per household shows how bad your argument is. that is not analogous to what we are facing. my analogy was much better. its not a 1/10 vs 1/1000 argument, that ignores half of the equation. how often you face those odds tells you how worried you should be about each.

you face a higher risk less often in small city. you face a lower risk more often in a big city. the only way the place with more actual crime is safer is to say that those crimes count for less just because there are more potential victims. its non-sensical herd mentality that ignores the individual experience.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland
#2,823
#2,823
Orangeslice13 said:
One state dumping on another should not be the answer to a federal problem. It gets us nowhere and creates division.
It’s pretty clear at this point that the “sanctuary city “ efforts were an absolute failure but regardless of that, illegals crashing the boarders were not the fault of the people of New York any more that it’s the fault of the people of Florida
Click to expand...

It kinda is their fault since the vast majority of "sanctuary city" residents are deep blue voters who installed their local leadership which designated their city as a sanctuary. Not to mention that they are in states which voted for Biden and his policies. So yeah they hold some fault.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol since 77, 85SugarVol, InVOLuntary and 1 other person
#2,825
#2,825
LouderVol said:
am I out of ammo or something?

the fact that you are having to go to that extreme of one violent criminal per household shows how bad your argument is. that is not analogous to what we are facing. my analogy was much better. its not a 1/10 vs 1/1000 argument, that ignores half of the equation. how often you face those odds tells you how worried you should be about each.

you face a higher risk less often in small city. you face a lower risk more often in a big city. the only way the place with more actual crime is safer is to say that those crimes count for less just because there are more potential victims. its non-sensical herd mentality that ignores the individual experience.
Click to expand...
No it doesn't, at all. If you are making the argument that raw totals matter and rates don't, you have to defend those extremes too. You have to defend the notion that a city with 20 murders among 100K people is "more dangerous" than a city with 15 murders among 1,000 people. I think that's clearly silly, but you do you
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top