The News Thread
- Thread starter Jimmy... Dead.
- Start date
Einherjar86
Active Member
It wasn't a very precise comment. I wasn't specifically saying that stricter gun laws are responsible for the lower body count, only pointing out the fact that a place with the strictest gun laws in the country is safer than Baltimore. Of course, Baltimore's not really a fair comparison when we're discussing the experience of feeling safe in a place. You don't want to live somewhere the mayor says "Well, at least it's not as bad as Baltimore!"
And Maryland has its own strict gun laws, but these tend not to make their way into places where crime is a dimension of life. I know that criminals find their way around regulations; but that's also part of the reason I believe stricter federal regulations are in order. As of right now, all people have to do is strike a deal with someone in a gun-friendly state.
And I agree that stricter gun laws alone won't reduce the violent crime rate overall; but they will reduce the amount of damage caused by individual incidents.
The Ozzman
Melted by feels
>creates a series that takes place in Baltimore and depicts how terrible it is in the city
>slams Trump for saying how terrible it is in Baltimore
TDS
https://www.businessinsider.com/the...on-trump-racist-moron-baltimore-tweets-2019-7
>slams Trump for saying how terrible it is in Baltimore
TDS
https://www.businessinsider.com/the...on-trump-racist-moron-baltimore-tweets-2019-7
rms
Active Member
CiG
Approximately Infinite Universe
Are you familiar with CharlieBo313 on Youtube? He just drives around random areas and gets footage.
Looks like the set of a dystopian movie at times. He has a whole bunch of Baltimore.
The Ozzman
Melted by feels
Einherjar86
Active Member
There are bad places in every city. Quit making it out to be a purely democratic problem--it isn't.
Einherjar86
Active Member
Haha, you deleted/edited that post pretty quick son.
Do you really want to assume the position that there are major metropolitan areas that have no risky neighborhoods?
Well, that would be proving a negative. It should actually fall to you to prove that it is only a democratic issue. In order to bust that theory wide open, all I'd have to do is find one republican-run city that has crime and violent neighborhoods.
Do you really want to assume the position that there are major metropolitan areas that have no risky neighborhoods?
Well, that would be proving a negative. It should actually fall to you to prove that it is only a democratic issue. In order to bust that theory wide open, all I'd have to do is find one republican-run city that has crime and violent neighborhoods.
Dak
mentat
The Ozzman
Melted by feels
I mean, cities exist that aren't major population centers. I live in a city that is within the city of Cincinnati. If you're assuming that major population centers (ie, a population of something like 50k+) are going to have bad areas, then sure because the law of large numbers says it is more likely to be the case. If the city is a smaller population, it may not be the case.
I would amend and say inner cities with major crime problems tend to have Democratic leadership in recent history (ie: Detroit, Baltimore, Chitown and even Cincinnati has had a spike recently)
I would amend and say inner cities with major crime problems tend to have Democratic leadership in recent history (ie: Detroit, Baltimore, Chitown and even Cincinnati has had a spike recently)
Einherjar86
Active Member
Then is it safe to say that your critique doesn't extend to smaller cities with democratic leadership? In which case, we'd only be discussing larger cities. Some of the safest smaller cities in the U.S. have democratic leadership.
Other cities have mayors who aren't affiliated with the democratic or republican party, as elections along party lines happen less when you get to lower levels of government.
Fine, but this is a correlation and not a causation. Many larger cities (i.e. cities large enough to have "inner cities") have had crime issues that precede their democratic leadership, and in some cases crime has been worse under republican leadership than under democratic. I don't think democratic leaders necessarily have the interests of poor neighborhoods in mind, but it's absurd to trace the root cause of violence in American cities to democratic leadership.
Dak
mentat
Here's a list from CBS from some time within the last 2-3 years. Top ten most violent cities:
https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/the-most-dangerous-cities-in-america/32/
1. St Louis: Democratic mayor since 1949.
2. Detroit. Democratic mayor since 1962.
3. Baltimore: Democratic mayor since 1947, with a 4 year break from '63-'67.
4. Memphis: Democratic mayor since 1991.
5. Little Rock: Democratic mayor at least back to 1979, hard to track back farther than that.
6. Milwaukee: Democratic mayor since 1960.
7. Rockford(Ill.): Dem mayor at least back to 1989 (difficult to see farther), although a break for an "independent" from '05-'17. Current mayor Dem.
8. Cleveland: Democratic mayors going back to 1942, with a break from '72-'77 and '80-'89 for Republicans.
9. Stockton: Mix.
10. Albuquerque. Current Dem mayor, Repub mayor from 2009-2017, and then all Dem going back to 1985.
Finding a "Republican run" city at a given year that "has crime" isn't even close to meeting the example of places like Baltimore.
Sure, correlation might not be causation. Wonder what a possible mediating variable is between electing Democratic leadership for a generation or more, and high crime, in major cities?
Einherjar86
Active Member
There are numerous reasons why major cities elect democratic mayors, and the violence tends to predate those elections. Historically speaking, neither democratic nor republican leadership has been effective at curbing urban violence. It's fake news to say that democratic leadership is to blame because "contemporary stats."
Dak
mentat
The violence predated the 40s? The 60s? If so, why? While it's true that electing a Republican tomorrow wouldn't fix these cities, why haven't (nearly) unbroken generation(s) of Democratic mayors been unable to stem or reverse the tide? Why do they continue to be elected against all evidence of effectiveness?
Einherjar86
Active Member
Not being able to fix things isn't an indicator that democratic leadership is causing them.
They continue to be elected for largely partisan reasons spurred on as much by democrats as by republicans. It doesn't help when Trump irresponsibly takes to twitter.
They continue to be elected for largely partisan reasons spurred on as much by democrats as by republicans. It doesn't help when Trump irresponsibly takes to twitter.
Dak
mentat
It doesn't mean they are "causing" them but it means that we have decades of evidence of incompetence at best. Which voters in those cities fail to either understand or care about. Probably a mix of both.
"Spurred on as much by Republicans."
When you have a media and an electorate that rallies around pointing out the literal rats as racist, you can't blame Trump for the rats or those that are willing to live with them in the name of "partisanship."
Einherjar86
Active Member
Dak
mentat
I guess Trump created the problems and the idiots in Baltimore. The rats even. I guess his tweet totally changed the incoming change in the decades long electoral cycle in Baltimore. Do you parkour, by chance?
Einherjar86
Active Member
He's partly responsible, yes. We currently have a racist president. I don't happen to think his comments about Baltimore were particularly racist, but his track record speaks for itself. He supported the imprisonment of five black men even after DNA evidence exonerated them. He thinks AOC came to America from another country because she doesn't look like a WASP. The guy's a racist, even if his Baltimore comments aren't part of the more compelling evidence.
He's president now, and his statements are some of the most divisive being said today. I'm okay with putting some of the blame on him.
He's president now, and his statements are some of the most divisive being said today. I'm okay with putting some of the blame on him.
Dak
mentat
"I don't like some things he said even though he's appointed non-whites to positions, and therefore he's responsible for the fact that Baltimore, an American shithole, is going to elect another Democrat in the next mayoral election, just like the last 50+ years."
Like I said, do you parkour?
Like I said, do you parkour?
