I have argued this for years, that guns don't people, cities kill people...and the concept bubbled to the surface once again in an article from liberal leaning Vox...that 60% of gun homicides occur in just 50 major US cities.
According to Pew Research, 58% of rural households have legal guns (and 75% of those more than one) while urban household gun ownership is at 29% (mostly consisting of just one gun per household).
Here are your links:
A gun debate compromise: let cities and rural areas pass different laws ,
Rural and urban gun owners have different experiences, views on gun policy
So, here's the two part question...if gun control is the answer...
1] Why do cities, despite a deficit of legal gun owners, represent far and away the highest threat of gun violence to their citizenry. (And, for the record, the answer it isn't poverty...both urban and rural citizens face equal poverty levels.)
2] Why are rural areas where guns are prevalent significantly safer from gun violence?
Keep in mind, this is a correlation, not a conclusion...if we are going to reduce gun violence, we must understand it's root causes. Obviously more legal guns does not equate to more gun violence, and less guns with more regulation does not equate to less gun violence...so what forces are actually at work here?
Interesting question, although I wouldn't go so far as to jump to your final conclusion.
Not sure it is a leap.
We have two groups, one has more legally owned guns, less regulation and more space, the other has less legally owned guns, more regulation and less space. The group with by far the most gun violence is the one with less legally owned guns, more regulation and less space.
Although I did not specify 'less legally owned' guns ...that was and oversight. Thank you for pointing that out.
The conclussion should read "Obviously more legal guns does not equate to more gun violence, and less legally owned guns with more regulation does not equate to less gun violence...
As you folks tend to like to say, guns don't kill people; people kill people. So if we are looking at living conditions as a possible factor, I just don't see how your gun factors are immediately being pulled in as causal. It could have nothing to do with who owns a gun legally or how many there are per square foot. What is different in the cities that compels people to murder one another?
As you folks tend to like to say, guns don't kill people; people kill people.
It could have nothing to do with who owns a gun legally or how many there are per square foot.
It doesn't have anything to do with it
What is different in the cities that compels people to murder one another
City, suburbs, country...who cares
No matter where you go, you take yourself with you
What compels people to kill?
A total disregard for life and/or being evil
What kind of person abducts a child,
decapitates him and discards his head and body like trash?
What kind of person takes a 3 month old infant,
and bashes their head, repeatedly, against the wall,
or on the floor, because they won't stop crying?
What kind of person, lies in wait for their victim,
terrorizes and tortures them, before they kill them?
What kind of person straps their kids,
in the backseat of their car, and sees and hears,
her oldest child, panicking, calling out for her,
from the back window, as the lake swallows the car?
How can
2 boys, ages 10 and 11,
dangle a 5 year old boy, by his ankles,
out of a window, on the 14th floor of a housing project,
and let him fall to his death, after letting go...
because he wouldn't steal candy for them?
What kind of man beats a boy to death,
for getting a B, instead of an A, on his report card,
and what kind of woman would watch her boyfriend,
beat her son to death then, help him to cover it up?
Why are kids, shooting other kids,
over colors, gym shoes and turf?
How can the segment of people,
who are at a loss, over senseless murders,
be the same people who define murder as a woman's right?
What kind of justice system, allows a women,
in a vegetative state, to be starved to death,
but has feed and kept alive, prisoners, on death row,
who were never put to death but, died of natural causes?
I think the question and answer, are obvious
