Gun culture or parenting culture?

[Pogo]

Women are always less violent than Men, even though they've historically been more likely to be subjected to oppression, or poverty....

But, Women, and Men both come from the same culture, in many cases, do they not?

So, what's your explanation?

Sure, I guess it's just that we treat Men differently.... Yeah, that must be it.

It must be coincidental that even Male babies tend to be more aggressive than Female babies, even though they've not lived long enough to be taught this behavior.

Also, it must be coincidental that Males have lower MAO-A levels linked to criminality, and lower Dopamine levels linked to impulsivity.

I can't tell who you're addressing but for my part I've already noted, here and elsewhere, that our gun fetishism is a masculinity issue. You are correct, you can count the number of female mass shooters on your thumb.

There's a systemic reason for that, just as there's a systemic reason for the gun culture itself. It all has to do with power. And how we view it.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Women are always less violent than Men, even though they've historically been more likely to be subjected to oppression, or poverty....

But, Women, and Men both come from the same culture, in many cases, do they not?

So, what's your explanation?

Sure, I guess it's just that we treat Men differently.... Yeah, that must be it.

It must be coincidental that even Male babies tend to be more aggressive than Female babies, even though they've not lived long enough to be taught this behavior.

Also, it must be coincidental that Males have lower MAO-A levels linked to criminality, and lower Dopamine levels linked to impulsivity.

I can't tell who you're addressing but for my part I've already noted, here and elsewhere, that our gun fetishism is a masculinity issue. You are correct, you can count the number of female mass shooters on your thumb.

There's a systemic reason for that, just as there's a systemic reason for the gun culture itself.

The reason is that women are just naturally less violent than men. But here in Ohio, CCW applications by females surpassed those by males. So I don't think your masculinity assumption holds any water. It's not about masculinity, it's about self-defense.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

If it's cultural why are murderers rare in all cultures?

I didn't say "murder is cultural". I'm saying a propensity for gun violence --- which is the topic here --- is cultural.

This is a good time to repost this old chestnut:

I give you two cities, split by a river, kinda like Minneapolis and St. Paul are but this is a different pair of cities.

Obviously being next to each other, these cities have much in common regionally, climatically, industrially and so on. They are less than a mile apart, connected by a bridge and a tunnel. But the two cities show a stark difference in one area.

The city to the west recorded 377 total homicides in 2011 and 327 in 2010, according to police statistics(1), carrying a homicide rate of around 50 per 100,000 people.

Across the bridge in the same time period, there was a total of one. For both years put together. A rate of 0.30. From September 27, 2009 to November 22, 2011 in that city, there were no murders at all. Zero.

What's going on here?

One of them is in Canada. The cities are Detroit and Windsor.

I haven't determined how many of those homicides were committed by firearm, but for a guide, out of 386 Detroit homicides in 2012, 333 were by firearm. Over 86%. (1)

And the one murder that finally broke the 2011 streak in Windsor? It was a stabbing.

People in his city of about 215,000 have a saying, Blaine said Friday afternoon: "In Windsor, when a 7-Eleven is held up, it usually is a knife. In Detroit, it is an Uzi."

It's not that there's no crime in Windsor, an industrial city that has seen its own economic challenges. "We're no different than any other major metropolitan area," Corey said. (here)

704 to 1 in homicide; several hundred to zero in gun deaths.
Detroit: at or near the highest murder rate in its country; Windsor: lowest in its country.
Less than a mile apart.

What's driving the difference? Gun control? Or gun culture?

Resources/further reading:
(1) 2012 Crime/Homicide Stats

(2) Freep.com 1/3/13

A Tale of Two Cities

Murder-Free Two Years

The fault lies not in our guns but in ourselves. To our values we are underlings.

Uh, Detroit is over 80% Black, while Windsor Canada is nearly 4% Black.

 

[Pogo]

If it's cultural why are murderers rare in all cultures?

I didn't say "murder is cultural". I'm saying a propensity for gun violence --- which is the topic here --- is cultural.

This is a good time to repost this old chestnut:

I give you two cities, split by a river, kinda like Minneapolis and St. Paul are but this is a different pair of cities.

Obviously being next to each other, these cities have much in common regionally, climatically, industrially and so on. They are less than a mile apart, connected by a bridge and a tunnel. But the two cities show a stark difference in one area.

The city to the west recorded 377 total homicides in 2011 and 327 in 2010, according to police statistics(1), carrying a homicide rate of around 50 per 100,000 people.

Across the bridge in the same time period, there was a total of one. For both years put together. A rate of 0.30. From September 27, 2009 to November 22, 2011 in that city, there were no murders at all. Zero.

What's going on here?

One of them is in Canada. The cities are Detroit and Windsor.

I haven't determined how many of those homicides were committed by firearm, but for a guide, out of 386 Detroit homicides in 2012, 333 were by firearm. Over 86%. (1)

And the one murder that finally broke the 2011 streak in Windsor? It was a stabbing.

People in his city of about 215,000 have a saying, Blaine said Friday afternoon: "In Windsor, when a 7-Eleven is held up, it usually is a knife. In Detroit, it is an Uzi."

It's not that there's no crime in Windsor, an industrial city that has seen its own economic challenges. "We're no different than any other major metropolitan area," Corey said. (here)

704 to 1 in homicide; several hundred to zero in gun deaths.
Detroit: at or near the highest murder rate in its country; Windsor: lowest in its country.
Less than a mile apart.

What's driving the difference? Gun control? Or gun culture?

Resources/further reading:
(1) 2012 Crime/Homicide Stats

(2) Freep.com 1/3/13

A Tale of Two Cities

Murder-Free Two Years

The fault lies not in our guns but in ourselves. To our values we are underlings.

Uh, Detroit is over 80% Black, while Windsor Canada is nearly 4% Black.

Yeah, irrelevant.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Women are always less violent than Men, even though they've historically been more likely to be subjected to oppression, or poverty....

But, Women, and Men both come from the same culture, in many cases, do they not?

So, what's your explanation?

Sure, I guess it's just that we treat Men differently.... Yeah, that must be it.

It must be coincidental that even Male babies tend to be more aggressive than Female babies, even though they've not lived long enough to be taught this behavior.

Also, it must be coincidental that Males have lower MAO-A levels linked to criminality, and lower Dopamine levels linked to impulsivity.

I can't tell who you're addressing but for my part I've already noted, here and elsewhere, that our gun fetishism is a masculinity issue. You are correct, you can count the number of female mass shooters on your thumb.

There's a systemic reason for that, just as there's a systemic reason for the gun culture itself. It all has to do with power. And how we view it.

Actually a disproportionate amount of mass murderers have been Gay, like Omar Manteen, Jeffrey Dahmer, Albert Fish, and John Wayne Gacy etc.

I strongly disagree with mass murder being masculine, a strong disproportionate amount of mass shooters have been Asian, look at Virginia Tech, and I wouldn't call Adam Lanza masculine, either.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

If it's cultural why are murderers rare in all cultures?

I didn't say "murder is cultural". I'm saying a propensity for gun violence --- which is the topic here --- is cultural.

This is a good time to repost this old chestnut:

I give you two cities, split by a river, kinda like Minneapolis and St. Paul are but this is a different pair of cities.

Obviously being next to each other, these cities have much in common regionally, climatically, industrially and so on. They are less than a mile apart, connected by a bridge and a tunnel. But the two cities show a stark difference in one area.

The city to the west recorded 377 total homicides in 2011 and 327 in 2010, according to police statistics(1), carrying a homicide rate of around 50 per 100,000 people.

Across the bridge in the same time period, there was a total of one. For both years put together. A rate of 0.30. From September 27, 2009 to November 22, 2011 in that city, there were no murders at all. Zero.

What's going on here?

One of them is in Canada. The cities are Detroit and Windsor.

I haven't determined how many of those homicides were committed by firearm, but for a guide, out of 386 Detroit homicides in 2012, 333 were by firearm. Over 86%. (1)

And the one murder that finally broke the 2011 streak in Windsor? It was a stabbing.

People in his city of about 215,000 have a saying, Blaine said Friday afternoon: "In Windsor, when a 7-Eleven is held up, it usually is a knife. In Detroit, it is an Uzi."

It's not that there's no crime in Windsor, an industrial city that has seen its own economic challenges. "We're no different than any other major metropolitan area," Corey said. (here)

704 to 1 in homicide; several hundred to zero in gun deaths.
Detroit: at or near the highest murder rate in its country; Windsor: lowest in its country.
Less than a mile apart.

What's driving the difference? Gun control? Or gun culture?

Resources/further reading:
(1) 2012 Crime/Homicide Stats

(2) Freep.com 1/3/13

A Tale of Two Cities

Murder-Free Two Years

The fault lies not in our guns but in ourselves. To our values we are underlings.

Uh, Detroit is over 80% Black, while Windsor Canada is nearly 4% Black.

Yeah, irrelevant.

So, it's just some coincidence that 13% of the U.S.A is Black, but commit 52% of the murders?

That doesn't fit with "Poverty"

Because about 1/4th of those in poverty are Black in the U.S.A.

To make things worse for the poverty argument causing Black murders....

Prince George's County, Maryland has a high income, a low poverty rate, a high Black population...... and "Drum roll" a high murder rate.

 

[Pogo]

Women are always less violent than Men, even though they've historically been more likely to be subjected to oppression, or poverty....

But, Women, and Men both come from the same culture, in many cases, do they not?

So, what's your explanation?

Sure, I guess it's just that we treat Men differently.... Yeah, that must be it.

It must be coincidental that even Male babies tend to be more aggressive than Female babies, even though they've not lived long enough to be taught this behavior.

Also, it must be coincidental that Males have lower MAO-A levels linked to criminality, and lower Dopamine levels linked to impulsivity.

I can't tell who you're addressing but for my part I've already noted, here and elsewhere, that our gun fetishism is a masculinity issue. You are correct, you can count the number of female mass shooters on your thumb.

There's a systemic reason for that, just as there's a systemic reason for the gun culture itself.

The reason is that women are just naturally less violent than men. But here in Ohio, CCW applications by females surpassed those by males. So I don't think your masculinity assumption holds any water. It's not about masculinity, it's about self-defense.

Not exactly --- in that case it's about the how of self-defense. Self-defense can take many forms. Why should it be a gun specifically? Moreover you're assuming a reasoning for these women.

I'm far from the first to see the connection to masculinity power issues. Here's one story of many: Toxic Masculinity and Murder

>> Stemming the violence, then, means deconstructing hate. It means considering every element in the creation and enabling of so many psychopaths. And one that tends to be overlooked— widely known but narrowly considered— is the simple fact that almost all mass murderers are men. As of 2014, Time cited the number at 98 percent. That makes masculinity a more common feature than any of the elements that tend to dominate discourse—religion, race, nationality, political affiliation, or any history of mental illness.

In Salon this week, writer Amanda Marcotte argues that the “national attachment to dominance models of manhood is a major reason why we have so much violence.” She points to the Orlando killer’s history of aggression: his 2013 investigation by the FBI for threatening a co-worker, his reported rage at the sight of men kissing, his physical abuse of his wife, who required help from her parents to escape her own home.

This seems a quintessential case of what has come to be known as toxic masculinity, as Marcotte defines it, “a specific model of manhood geared towards dominance and control.” When men seek that control—when we feel it’s our due—and don’t achieve it, we can resent and hate. Toxic masculinity sets expectations that prime us for disappointment. We turn that disappointment on ourselves and others as anger and hatred.

As the psychologist Arie Kruglanski told The Washington Post this week, the most primal act a human being can take to ameliorate self-loathing is “showing one's power over other human beings.” (As a small, non-masculine philosopher once said, “Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.”) <<​

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Women are always less violent than Men, even though they've historically been more likely to be subjected to oppression, or poverty....

But, Women, and Men both come from the same culture, in many cases, do they not?

So, what's your explanation?

Sure, I guess it's just that we treat Men differently.... Yeah, that must be it.

It must be coincidental that even Male babies tend to be more aggressive than Female babies, even though they've not lived long enough to be taught this behavior.

Also, it must be coincidental that Males have lower MAO-A levels linked to criminality, and lower Dopamine levels linked to impulsivity.

I can't tell who you're addressing but for my part I've already noted, here and elsewhere, that our gun fetishism is a masculinity issue. You are correct, you can count the number of female mass shooters on your thumb.

There's a systemic reason for that, just as there's a systemic reason for the gun culture itself. It all has to do with power. And how we view it.

Actually a disproportionate amount of mass murderers have been Gay, like Omar Manteen, Jeffrey Dahmer, Albert Fish, and John Wayne Gacy etc.

I strongly disagree with mass murder being masculine, a strong disproportionate amount of mass shooters have been Asian, look at Virginia Tech, and I wouldn't call Adam Lanza masculine, either.

We are country of 315 million people. Every year or so we get some crack pot that commits mass murder. When you think of the odds, we are not doing too badly.

 

[Pogo]

Women are always less violent than Men, even though they've historically been more likely to be subjected to oppression, or poverty....

But, Women, and Men both come from the same culture, in many cases, do they not?

So, what's your explanation?

Sure, I guess it's just that we treat Men differently.... Yeah, that must be it.

It must be coincidental that even Male babies tend to be more aggressive than Female babies, even though they've not lived long enough to be taught this behavior.

Also, it must be coincidental that Males have lower MAO-A levels linked to criminality, and lower Dopamine levels linked to impulsivity.

I can't tell who you're addressing but for my part I've already noted, here and elsewhere, that our gun fetishism is a masculinity issue. You are correct, you can count the number of female mass shooters on your thumb.

There's a systemic reason for that, just as there's a systemic reason for the gun culture itself. It all has to do with power. And how we view it.

Actually a disproportionate amount of mass murderers have been Gay, like Omar Manteen, Jeffrey Dahmer, Albert Fish, and John Wayne Gacy etc.

I strongly disagree with mass murder being masculine, a strong disproportionate amount of mass shooters have been Asian, look at Virginia Tech, and I wouldn't call Adam Lanza masculine, either.

Actually you're fortifying my point here.

Being a "masculinity issue" doesn't mean the offender is hyper-masculine. More at the opposite.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Women are always less violent than Men, even though they've historically been more likely to be subjected to oppression, or poverty....

But, Women, and Men both come from the same culture, in many cases, do they not?

So, what's your explanation?

Sure, I guess it's just that we treat Men differently.... Yeah, that must be it.

It must be coincidental that even Male babies tend to be more aggressive than Female babies, even though they've not lived long enough to be taught this behavior.

Also, it must be coincidental that Males have lower MAO-A levels linked to criminality, and lower Dopamine levels linked to impulsivity.

I can't tell who you're addressing but for my part I've already noted, here and elsewhere, that our gun fetishism is a masculinity issue. You are correct, you can count the number of female mass shooters on your thumb.

There's a systemic reason for that, just as there's a systemic reason for the gun culture itself. It all has to do with power. And how we view it.

Actually a disproportionate amount of mass murderers have been Gay, like Omar Manteen, Jeffrey Dahmer, Albert Fish, and John Wayne Gacy etc.

I strongly disagree with mass murder being masculine, a strong disproportionate amount of mass shooters have been Asian, look at Virginia Tech, and I wouldn't call Adam Lanza masculine, either.

Actually you're fortifying my point here.

Being a "masculinity issue" doesn't mean the offender is hyper-masculine. More at the opposite.

Testosterone makes for more aggression, however it also grows the amygdala, which the amygdala is smaller in Psychopaths, Schizophrenia, and violent offenders.

So, perhaps this is why the average aggressive guy is Masculine, while the real "Sickos" are actually effeminate.

 

[Pogo]

If it's cultural why are murderers rare in all cultures?

I didn't say "murder is cultural". I'm saying a propensity for gun violence --- which is the topic here --- is cultural.

This is a good time to repost this old chestnut:

I give you two cities, split by a river, kinda like Minneapolis and St. Paul are but this is a different pair of cities.

Obviously being next to each other, these cities have much in common regionally, climatically, industrially and so on. They are less than a mile apart, connected by a bridge and a tunnel. But the two cities show a stark difference in one area.

The city to the west recorded 377 total homicides in 2011 and 327 in 2010, according to police statistics(1), carrying a homicide rate of around 50 per 100,000 people.

Across the bridge in the same time period, there was a total of one. For both years put together. A rate of 0.30. From September 27, 2009 to November 22, 2011 in that city, there were no murders at all. Zero.

What's going on here?

One of them is in Canada. The cities are Detroit and Windsor.

I haven't determined how many of those homicides were committed by firearm, but for a guide, out of 386 Detroit homicides in 2012, 333 were by firearm. Over 86%. (1)

And the one murder that finally broke the 2011 streak in Windsor? It was a stabbing.

People in his city of about 215,000 have a saying, Blaine said Friday afternoon: "In Windsor, when a 7-Eleven is held up, it usually is a knife. In Detroit, it is an Uzi."

It's not that there's no crime in Windsor, an industrial city that has seen its own economic challenges. "We're no different than any other major metropolitan area," Corey said. (here)

704 to 1 in homicide; several hundred to zero in gun deaths.
Detroit: at or near the highest murder rate in its country; Windsor: lowest in its country.
Less than a mile apart.

What's driving the difference? Gun control? Or gun culture?

Resources/further reading:
(1) 2012 Crime/Homicide Stats

(2) Freep.com 1/3/13

A Tale of Two Cities

Murder-Free Two Years

The fault lies not in our guns but in ourselves. To our values we are underlings.

Uh, Detroit is over 80% Black, while Windsor Canada is nearly 4% Black.

Yeah, irrelevant.

So, it's just some coincidence that 13% of the U.S.A is Black, but commit 52% of the murders?

That doesn't fit with "Poverty"

Because about 1/4th of those in poverty are Black in the U.S.A.

To make things worse for the poverty argument causing Black murders....

Prince George's County, Maryland has a high income, a low poverty rate, a high Black population...... and "Drum roll" a high murder rate.

I know you had your heart set on working eugenics in but no it ain't happening. I put in bold blue the most relevant part there --- "In Windsor, when a 7-Eleven is held up, it usually is a knife. In Detroit, it is an Uzi." Same crime --- different tools. That's the whole point of that comparison --- you start with an equal (holding up a 7/11) and compare apples to apples.

 

[Rigby5]

Violence is hereditary because the male great ape is supposed to hold off the marauding leopard until the females and young get away.
Females are hereditarily less violent because their role is to flee with the young.
That does not make violence good or bad, but usually violence is good because it is necessary and there is a reason for it.

For example, we know Prohibition was ended because it cause a huge amount of violence, because millions of dollars could not be in the normal police/bank protection net. And we repeated the same mistake with the War on Drugs, and yet failed to end it once it was shown to have caused massive violence.

Other valid causes of violence are illegal and immoral wars, ridiculously corrupt tax law, huge and growing disparity between rich and poor, massive reduction in good paying jobs, large reduction in the number of owner occupied homes, immoral job outsourcing, abusive police with things like asset forfeiture, court costs, debtor's prison, lack of health care access, etc.
Obviously society is not as fair, and when that is apparent, violence should not only be expected, but is likely necessary.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Women are always less violent than Men, even though they've historically been more likely to be subjected to oppression, or poverty....

But, Women, and Men both come from the same culture, in many cases, do they not?

So, what's your explanation?

Sure, I guess it's just that we treat Men differently.... Yeah, that must be it.

It must be coincidental that even Male babies tend to be more aggressive than Female babies, even though they've not lived long enough to be taught this behavior.

Also, it must be coincidental that Males have lower MAO-A levels linked to criminality, and lower Dopamine levels linked to impulsivity.

I can't tell who you're addressing but for my part I've already noted, here and elsewhere, that our gun fetishism is a masculinity issue. You are correct, you can count the number of female mass shooters on your thumb.

There's a systemic reason for that, just as there's a systemic reason for the gun culture itself.

The reason is that women are just naturally less violent than men. But here in Ohio, CCW applications by females surpassed those by males. So I don't think your masculinity assumption holds any water. It's not about masculinity, it's about self-defense.

Not exactly --- in that case it's about the how of self-defense. Self-defense can take many forms. Why should it be a gun specifically? Moreover you're assuming a reasoning for these women.

I'm far from the first to see the connection to masculinity power issues. Here's one story of many: Toxic Masculinity and Murder

>> Stemming the violence, then, means deconstructing hate. It means considering every element in the creation and enabling of so many psychopaths. And one that tends to be overlooked— widely known but narrowly considered— is the simple fact that almost all mass murderers are men. As of 2014, Time cited the number at 98 percent. That makes masculinity a more common feature than any of the elements that tend to dominate discourse—religion, race, nationality, political affiliation, or any history of mental illness.

In Salon this week, writer Amanda Marcotte argues that the “national attachment to dominance models of manhood is a major reason why we have so much violence.” She points to the Orlando killer’s history of aggression: his 2013 investigation by the FBI for threatening a co-worker, his reported rage at the sight of men kissing, his physical abuse of his wife, who required help from her parents to escape her own home.

This seems a quintessential case of what has come to be known as toxic masculinity, as Marcotte defines it, “a specific model of manhood geared towards dominance and control.” When men seek that control—when we feel it’s our due—and don’t achieve it, we can resent and hate. Toxic masculinity sets expectations that prime us for disappointment. We turn that disappointment on ourselves and others as anger and hatred.

As the psychologist Arie Kruglanski told The Washington Post this week, the most primal act a human being can take to ameliorate self-loathing is “showing one's power over other human beings.” (As a small, non-masculine philosopher once said, “Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.”) <<​

It's the nature of the gender that goes on in both human and animal kingdoms.

Even if your post had any truth to it, then it's worldwide and not an American problem. Males are just naturally more aggressive than females. More importantly, males are naturally the protectors of family from physical violence. We are geared to expect attacks from other males. This is much less likely with females.

 

[Pogo]

Women are always less violent than Men, even though they've historically been more likely to be subjected to oppression, or poverty....

But, Women, and Men both come from the same culture, in many cases, do they not?

So, what's your explanation?

Sure, I guess it's just that we treat Men differently.... Yeah, that must be it.

It must be coincidental that even Male babies tend to be more aggressive than Female babies, even though they've not lived long enough to be taught this behavior.

Also, it must be coincidental that Males have lower MAO-A levels linked to criminality, and lower Dopamine levels linked to impulsivity.

I can't tell who you're addressing but for my part I've already noted, here and elsewhere, that our gun fetishism is a masculinity issue. You are correct, you can count the number of female mass shooters on your thumb.

There's a systemic reason for that, just as there's a systemic reason for the gun culture itself.

The reason is that women are just naturally less violent than men. But here in Ohio, CCW applications by females surpassed those by males. So I don't think your masculinity assumption holds any water. It's not about masculinity, it's about self-defense.

Not exactly --- in that case it's about the how of self-defense. Self-defense can take many forms. Why should it be a gun specifically? Moreover you're assuming a reasoning for these women.

I'm far from the first to see the connection to masculinity power issues. Here's one story of many: Toxic Masculinity and Murder

>> Stemming the violence, then, means deconstructing hate. It means considering every element in the creation and enabling of so many psychopaths. And one that tends to be overlooked— widely known but narrowly considered— is the simple fact that almost all mass murderers are men. As of 2014, Time cited the number at 98 percent. That makes masculinity a more common feature than any of the elements that tend to dominate discourse—religion, race, nationality, political affiliation, or any history of mental illness.

In Salon this week, writer Amanda Marcotte argues that the “national attachment to dominance models of manhood is a major reason why we have so much violence.” She points to the Orlando killer’s history of aggression: his 2013 investigation by the FBI for threatening a co-worker, his reported rage at the sight of men kissing, his physical abuse of his wife, who required help from her parents to escape her own home.

This seems a quintessential case of what has come to be known as toxic masculinity, as Marcotte defines it, “a specific model of manhood geared towards dominance and control.” When men seek that control—when we feel it’s our due—and don’t achieve it, we can resent and hate. Toxic masculinity sets expectations that prime us for disappointment. We turn that disappointment on ourselves and others as anger and hatred.

As the psychologist Arie Kruglanski told The Washington Post this week, the most primal act a human being can take to ameliorate self-loathing is “showing one's power over other human beings.” (As a small, non-masculine philosopher once said, “Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.”) <<​

It's the nature of the gender that goes on in both human and animal kingdoms.

Even if your post had any truth to it, then it's worldwide and not an American problem. Males are just naturally more aggressive than females. More importantly, males are naturally the protectors of family from physical violence. We are geared to expect attacks from other males. This is much less likely with females.

Yes, of course. That's Nature.

But for our purpose here we're translating that nature into what it means in regard to guns. And why what it means in regard to guns is different for us, as compared to, say, a male in Canada. Two different views (on guns) from two different cultural values (on guns).

 

[Rigby5]

The reality is that all assault weapons are used in less than 1% of crimes, and an Uzi is quite rare even in the assault weapon category.

But even though you exaggerated, you are correct that violence is higher in the US than Canada.
But why should you not expect that when the US has no public health care, has poor schools, few job prospects, high taxes to pay for illegal and immoral wars, a hostile and aggressive police force, etc.?
Not only should the US be more violent, but it likely should get far more violent, until things change in the economic and political fascism of the US.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

If it's cultural why are murderers rare in all cultures?

I didn't say "murder is cultural". I'm saying a propensity for gun violence --- which is the topic here --- is cultural.

This is a good time to repost this old chestnut:

I give you two cities, split by a river, kinda like Minneapolis and St. Paul are but this is a different pair of cities.

Obviously being next to each other, these cities have much in common regionally, climatically, industrially and so on. They are less than a mile apart, connected by a bridge and a tunnel. But the two cities show a stark difference in one area.

The city to the west recorded 377 total homicides in 2011 and 327 in 2010, according to police statistics(1), carrying a homicide rate of around 50 per 100,000 people.

Across the bridge in the same time period, there was a total of one. For both years put together. A rate of 0.30. From September 27, 2009 to November 22, 2011 in that city, there were no murders at all. Zero.

What's going on here?

One of them is in Canada. The cities are Detroit and Windsor.

I haven't determined how many of those homicides were committed by firearm, but for a guide, out of 386 Detroit homicides in 2012, 333 were by firearm. Over 86%. (1)

And the one murder that finally broke the 2011 streak in Windsor? It was a stabbing.

People in his city of about 215,000 have a saying, Blaine said Friday afternoon: "In Windsor, when a 7-Eleven is held up, it usually is a knife. In Detroit, it is an Uzi."

It's not that there's no crime in Windsor, an industrial city that has seen its own economic challenges. "We're no different than any other major metropolitan area," Corey said. (here)

704 to 1 in homicide; several hundred to zero in gun deaths.
Detroit: at or near the highest murder rate in its country; Windsor: lowest in its country.
Less than a mile apart.

What's driving the difference? Gun control? Or gun culture?

Resources/further reading:
(1) 2012 Crime/Homicide Stats

(2) Freep.com 1/3/13

A Tale of Two Cities

Murder-Free Two Years

The fault lies not in our guns but in ourselves. To our values we are underlings.

Uh, Detroit is over 80% Black, while Windsor Canada is nearly 4% Black.

Yeah, irrelevant.

So, it's just some coincidence that 13% of the U.S.A is Black, but commit 52% of the murders?

That doesn't fit with "Poverty"

Because about 1/4th of those in poverty are Black in the U.S.A.

To make things worse for the poverty argument causing Black murders....

Prince George's County, Maryland has a high income, a low poverty rate, a high Black population...... and "Drum roll" a high murder rate.

I know you had your heart set on working eugenics in but no it ain't happening. I put in bold blue the most relevant part there --- "In Windsor, when a 7-Eleven is held up, it usually is a knife. In Detroit, it is an Uzi." Same crime --- different tools. That's the whole point of that comparison --- you start with an equal (holding up a 7/11) and compare apples to apples.

Tell me which other map correlates the closest with the murder rate map by state, and which map correlates the furthest from the murder rate map by state?

Murder rate by state.

White percentage by state.

Poverty rate by state.

Gun ownership percentage rate by state.

 

[Pogo]

Violence is hereditary because the male great ape is supposed to hold off the marauding leopard until the females and young get away.
Females are hereditarily less violent because their role is to flee with the young.
That does not make violence good or bad, but usually violence is good because it is necessary and there is a reason for it.

For example, we know Prohibition was ended because it cause a huge amount of violence, because millions of dollars could not be in the normal police/bank protection net. And we repeated the same mistake with the War on Drugs, and yet failed to end it once it was shown to have caused massive violence.

Other valid causes of violence are illegal and immoral wars, ridiculously corrupt tax law, huge and growing disparity between rich and poor, massive reduction in good paying jobs, large reduction in the number of owner occupied homes, immoral job outsourcing, abusive police with things like asset forfeiture, court costs, debtor's prison, lack of health care access, etc.
Obviously society is not as fair, and when that is apparent, violence should not only be expected, but is likely necessary.

Welcome to USMB Rigby. Worthy first post, jumping right into the fray.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Women are always less violent than Men, even though they've historically been more likely to be subjected to oppression, or poverty....

But, Women, and Men both come from the same culture, in many cases, do they not?

So, what's your explanation?

Sure, I guess it's just that we treat Men differently.... Yeah, that must be it.

It must be coincidental that even Male babies tend to be more aggressive than Female babies, even though they've not lived long enough to be taught this behavior.

Also, it must be coincidental that Males have lower MAO-A levels linked to criminality, and lower Dopamine levels linked to impulsivity.

I can't tell who you're addressing but for my part I've already noted, here and elsewhere, that our gun fetishism is a masculinity issue. You are correct, you can count the number of female mass shooters on your thumb.

There's a systemic reason for that, just as there's a systemic reason for the gun culture itself.

The reason is that women are just naturally less violent than men. But here in Ohio, CCW applications by females surpassed those by males. So I don't think your masculinity assumption holds any water. It's not about masculinity, it's about self-defense.

Not exactly --- in that case it's about the how of self-defense. Self-defense can take many forms. Why should it be a gun specifically? Moreover you're assuming a reasoning for these women.

I'm far from the first to see the connection to masculinity power issues. Here's one story of many: Toxic Masculinity and Murder

>> Stemming the violence, then, means deconstructing hate. It means considering every element in the creation and enabling of so many psychopaths. And one that tends to be overlooked— widely known but narrowly considered— is the simple fact that almost all mass murderers are men. As of 2014, Time cited the number at 98 percent. That makes masculinity a more common feature than any of the elements that tend to dominate discourse—religion, race, nationality, political affiliation, or any history of mental illness.

In Salon this week, writer Amanda Marcotte argues that the “national attachment to dominance models of manhood is a major reason why we have so much violence.” She points to the Orlando killer’s history of aggression: his 2013 investigation by the FBI for threatening a co-worker, his reported rage at the sight of men kissing, his physical abuse of his wife, who required help from her parents to escape her own home.

This seems a quintessential case of what has come to be known as toxic masculinity, as Marcotte defines it, “a specific model of manhood geared towards dominance and control.” When men seek that control—when we feel it’s our due—and don’t achieve it, we can resent and hate. Toxic masculinity sets expectations that prime us for disappointment. We turn that disappointment on ourselves and others as anger and hatred.

As the psychologist Arie Kruglanski told The Washington Post this week, the most primal act a human being can take to ameliorate self-loathing is “showing one's power over other human beings.” (As a small, non-masculine philosopher once said, “Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.”) <<​

It's the nature of the gender that goes on in both human and animal kingdoms.

Even if your post had any truth to it, then it's worldwide and not an American problem. Males are just naturally more aggressive than females. More importantly, males are naturally the protectors of family from physical violence. We are geared to expect attacks from other males. This is much less likely with females.

Yes, of course. That's Nature.

But for our purpose here we're translating that nature into what it means in regard to guns. And why what it means in regard to guns is different for us, as compared to, say, a male in Canada. Two different views (on guns) from two different cultural values (on guns).

What happened to Nunavut, Canada?

Nunavut, Canada has a murder rate comparable to Mexico.....

Could it have something to do with Nunavut, and Mexico both having a strong Native American background?

 

[Pogo]

The reality is that all assault weapons are used in less than 1% of crimes, and an Uzi is quite rare even in the assault weapon category.

But even though you exaggerated, you are correct that violence is higher in the US than Canada.
But why should you not expect that when the US has no public health care, has poor schools, few job prospects, high taxes to pay for illegal and immoral wars, a hostile and aggressive police force, etc.?
Not only should the US be more violent, but it likely should get far more violent, until things change in the economic and political fascism of the US.

And a worthy second post too --- you've touched on some background circumstances that are actually relevant, as opposed to the eugenicists continually trying to spin off on "race" so they can avoid being involved in the responsibility.

The übermilitarization of police example is an especially good one. US police culture has become untenably adversarial. And not limited to actual police, as the recent assault on an airline passenger attests. That's getting to the roots of Authority, Masculinity, and the whole "might makes right" dead end.

Endless war is another salient point. When a populace is presented with death as an everyday triviality, both in real life as well as those aforementioned cultural entertainments, that populace can't help being desensitized.

 

[Thinker101]

The reality is that all assault weapons are used in less than 1% of crimes, and an Uzi is quite rare even in the assault weapon category.

But even though you exaggerated, you are correct that violence is higher in the US than Canada.
But why should you not expect that when the US has no public health care, has poor schools, few job prospects, high taxes to pay for illegal and immoral wars, a hostile and aggressive police force, etc.?
Not only should the US be more violent, but it likely should get far more violent, until things change in the economic and political fascism of the US.

Any idea why? How about crime being less in Canada because the U.S. has ten times more people. Canada does have a public health care, but it’s very expensive and the wait time to see a doctor can be months. Taxes do go to paying for the military, keep in mind how much it costs to give so many freebies to illegal immigrants and those that don’t mind living at someone else’s expense.