Yeah but people getting murdered in Chicago isn't news
@Deavas, it's a lifestyle over there.
@Deavas, People getting murdered at all at this point isn't news.
@Deavas, nobody bats an eye, it's all part of the plan....but shoot one itty, bitty mayor...
@Deavas, living in the area I can confirm this. My school goes over the top with the security checkpoint and news at 7 is like bodies raining from the sky
@Deavas, i thought people go to Chicago to be murder or pick up the trade and murder others?
@Deavas, but I should be bigger news than a gorilla getting killed
@Deavas, dodging bullets is a sport here
@Citizen Nappa, Ya but Nappa you never dodged bullets. They just bounced off of you.
@Deavas, have an upvote for fact
@TheOneWhoArrestedYou, eh. I didn't say I participated
@Deavas, people arent an endangered species
Gun free zones are actually known for higher gun violence since it is full of easy prey
@Dephenistrator, shhh your "logic" and "facts" will trigger the regressives
@Dephenistrator, but, I follow the rules... So logically, if we put rules on signs people will act better. They just have to!
@Dephenistrator, Not globally. If the area around it has no border and the outer areas have guns, then yeah. But areas like Canada or the UK have lower gun homicide rates than the US. The reason Chicago's doesn't work is because it's a moronic law for obvious reasons.
@Dephenistrator, of course gun free zones have higher gun violence, it's one small gun free area surrounded by a country full of guns.
@UmActually, but do they have lower homicide rates? Or just lower gun homicide rates? And has the negative percentage due to stopped crime been factored in? Or does stopped crime rise as citizens carry around blackjacks and switchblades?
@Tyrellious, UK and Canada both have lower homicide rates combined.
@UmActually, Higher crime rates though (generally).
@Picture 47040, The UK and Canada have much lower crime rates than the US, about half as much.
@UmActually, Half is a bit of an exaggeration, and false if you account for population differences.
@Picture 47040, Crime RATE is crimes committed/100,000 people. Canada has a crime rate 45% lower than the US. The UK has a crime rate just under 20% less than the US. So, no, it isn't false. I admit I misread the UK number the first time.
@UmActually, Oh sorry, I didn't realize that the crime rate was already rationalized. My bad 🤐.
@Picture 47040, Hey, it's no problem!
@Picture 47040, you. I like you. You didn't refute the information you accepted it and moved on. I don't care what you believe that was just civil and I'm not used to that on this app. Good on you
@The Doctor Horrible, I try to keep an open mind and debate with facts. Problems only arise when people are stubborn and use opinions. I appreciate the appreciation.
@UmActually, nope still really high murder and mugging rates, cause big guys can have knives and still fight but my scrawny ass needs a gun to survive.
@UmActually, yeah but it was lower before they even banned guns in canada.
@BlazingBowman, Not true, Canada's crime rate has been dropping since 1990, when gun ownership and gun carrying was restricted. The UK had a spike in crime when they banned guns, mainly in connection with illegally owned firearms.
@BlazingBowman, The Canadian murder rate is at an all-time low actually.
@UmActually, well Canada is Canada. Alaska though. That's a different story
@UmActually, per capita they sure as hell don't-- in fact they have higher per capita crime rates.
@PB4UGAMER, the UK violent crime per capita rate is nearly five times the rate in the US.
@PB4UGAMER, The UK defines violent crime as any crime against a person. The US only counts murder, non negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery and aggravated assault. Your statistic is misleading.
@UmActually, even if you compare total crime rate, the UK is nearly 3x higher with a rate of 109.6 per 1,000 compare to the US at 41.29
@UmActually, Not to mention, the UK is ranked third in the world for % of population who has been a victim of a crime, at 26.4%.
The US in comparison sits at rank 15, with around 21% of the population having been the victim of a crime.
I don't think there is any reasonable way you can make the claim that there is less crime in the UK than the US unless you talk about one specific form of crime, or talk in aggregate and omit that the US has over 300,000,000 more people living in it.
@PB4UGAMER, Correct, but that's altogether unrelated to gun ownership. Canada, as I said previously, is much lower than the US in every crime category except total crime. Why is that? In both the UK and Canada, the majority of people live in a small area, this naturally boosts crime rate. Also, areas like Toronto, Calgary and Vancouver have populations rivaling Chicago and Miami in density and size. London contains over 1/8th of the population. Their crime stats aren't balanced by rural and suburban areas because there isn't enough population in those areas. In addition to this, the UK and Canada have very few urban areas, so this concentrates the population further.
@UmActually You're oversimplifying. There are many more important factors for crime rate than mere population, population density, and urbanization of the area. The biggest issue in the US is poverty. The vast majority of crimes are committed by the poorest members in society. Not to mention, for black males in the US aged 17-54 you know what their leading cause of death is? Being shot by another black make between the ages of 17 and 54. The overwhelming majority of both shooters and victims in said cases are in the bottom 25% of income earners.
@PB4UGAMER, True, but urbanization causes poverty due to higher cost of living, which leads to crime, which causes suburbanization, which leads to higher expendable income, which leads to urbanization eventually. Countries with limited suburban areas or, in Canada's case, limited comfortable suburban/rural areas, there is continuous urbanization, which inherently leads to crime, although I am aware it is not the only thing that leads to crime, it is a huge component.
@UmActually, Interestingly enough, your chain of events is actually rather flawed. Urbanization actually increases income, instead of leading to poverty, and at its on set, when controlled for population levels, decreases crime. However, and this is a big however, gentrification (the physical economic and cultural phenomenon where inner-city neighborhoods are slowly or gradually converted into affluent communities) causes an outflow of poorer residents from affluent hubs, and this process occurring throughout an urban zone generally causes areas of massed, impoverished inhabitants in very close geographical proximity to one another.
It is this concentration of the poor that raises crime rate, mostly in and amongst themselves. Sure, in many cases the effects of gentrification and consolidating the poor into one area will often overwhelm the positive affects in other areas of the city— but this is ultimately a function of economic distribution, rather than an eventuality of urban life
@PB4UGAMER, effects* there needs to be a way to edit comments.
@PB4UGAMER, Of course, I oversimplified. And, while it decreases crime initially, it increases crime in the long run
@UmActually, Yet as my previous comment said, its A, not an eventuality. It *can* increase crime in the long run, primarily due to gentrification and other income distribution issues. But in many cases it simply lowers crime and stays that way.
@PB4UGAMER, and B, only correlation, not causality.
Shot by gorrillas? Dam Chicago.
"Why do we need guns, we have the police"
@Oh so cherry, it's almost like criminals are more afraid to commit crimes when there are more people with guns around that could stop them. Weird
@Oh so cherry, "the police are racist, evil thugs!" - the very same people
A man telephones a law office and says, "I want to speak to my lawyer."
The receptionist replies, "I'm sorry but he died last week."
The next day the same man phones again and asks the same question. The receptionist replies, "I told you yesterday, he died last week."
The next day the man calls again and asks to speak to his lawyer. By this time the receptionist is getting a little annoyed and says, "I keep telling you that your lawyer died last week. Why do you keep calling?"
The man says, "Because I just love hearing it."
Uhh...I had nothing to do with this!
@Gunrilla, giving you an up vote just for your picture
People care about things that don't truly matter. Always have, and most likely always will
It was 69 over the whole month that were shot and killed, like 397ish people shooting victims. Not just over the weekend
There's always two types of people here; the ones who care about the issue and talk about it and the pervs who only care about "69" lol
Hey! Stop talking about real issues! This is a campaign year for Science's sake!
If you're going to make a passive-aggresive caption like that, you need to stop and make a kermittment to what you're saying
Important guys... We are being censored world wide at the moment ... There has been attacks in France, Germany and the USA in the last week by Muslims and no media is getting international coverage??? Wtf is going on
How much entropy do y'all believe there would be, if we were to change kermit's beverage of choice to something else, like alcohol. Would the world accept it, fight it, deny it, welcome it?
He needs some more punctuation...(and 69 😏)
Gun free zones are probably one of the dumbest things our society has come up with. Let's just label possible attack areas.
@ArbyTheGreat, why the fvck was this comment posted on this picture? This was not the comment section I was at originally when typing this comment.
@ArbyTheGreat, ok I'm lost now, just gonna stop. Phones freezing and keeps telling me notification that don't exist.
Guess those 69 people were triggered... eh? Eh?
Yeah, but there are more than 800 people in Chicago.
@Jdrawer, give it till next weekend, they'll be arround the same.
Poop in the toilet makes sense, poop in the kitchen is absurd
What's with all the gorilla references, I don't get it
@benderama, in the Cincinnati zoo some kid fell into a gorilla exhibit. The gorilla grabbed him, drug him around for a second then started to just hover over him. The zoo decided to shoot the gorilla and kill it in order to save the kid because they believed hitting the gorilla with a tranquilizer dart might piss it off enough to were it would just tear the kid in half before the drug kicked in and put it to sleep. Now the internet is in an uproar because every neckbeard with an iPhone thinks they could have handled the situation better. Maybe it could have but who knows? Hindsight is 20/20