Or at all part of the solution to it apparently.
Said many times it's part of the solution. Your statement here is a lie.
Provided we diminish how much guns have to do with violence first, of course!
I never said people have to believe specific things. I expressed my personal belief. So your statement here is also a lie.
I think we spend all our time ignoring gun control issues and when another mass killing comes along, we go back to sweeping it under the rug as an unavoidable tragedy that's part of life in America. Apple pie, baseball, hotdogs, and blood stained classrooms!
I don't ignore gun control issues. I support gun control. As I've said. Your statement here is also a lie.
Those proposals never go anywhere precisely because of people like you who handwave them and say "no, let's focus on this!" This is the same as dismissing racism and sexism and ssying the issue is "classism".
I have never expressed opposition to a specific gun control measure. I've merely stated there is more to it than you're saying. I said several times we should also do gun control. Making this statement of yours also a lie.
It makes you a bad person to say doing something isn't worthwhile because it doesn't cause enough of an impact; it boils down horrific tragedies into "insignificant" numbers. I guess Stalin put it best, "One death is tragic, a million is a statistic".
I didn't say gun control isn't worthwhile. I said I supported it. I said focusing on one type of violence won't solve the problem and may complicate matters. Sensing a pattern, you're also lying here.
Then it shouldn't bother you to have strong gun control since it's nothing but net gain.
It doesn't, like I've friggin said, I just don't think it will solve any problems.
You have data that says Universal healthcare reduces gun violence more than gun control? And none of uts circumstabtial or using correlation = causation? I look forward to the proof.
Not just universal healthcare. Addressing the root causes of violence, health care is one vector yes. Having a strong social safety net, better education, more accessible post-secondary education, reducing inequality, ending the war on drugs and the like.
Sampson, Raudenbush, and Earls, in their 1997 study of neighborhoods and violent crime, examined race and class segregation in poor Chicago neighborhoods and its impact on “collective efficacy,” or social cohesion among neighbors. They found that “alienation, exploitation, and dependency wrought by resource deprivation acts as a centrifugal force that stymies collective efficacy.” The greater the effect of this resource deprivation — a phenomenon the authors called the “concentrated disadvantage” factor — the stronger the correlation to the level of violence.7
We find that schooling significantly reduces the probability of incarceration. Differences in educational attainment between black and white men explain 23% of the black white gap in male incarceration rates. We corroborate our findings on incarceration using FBI data on arrests that distinguish among different types of crimes. The biggest impacts of education are associated with murder, assault, and motor vehicle theft
[...]
The OLS estimates suggest that a one-year increase in average education levels is estimated to reduce arrest rates by 11%.
[...]
A one year increase in average years of schooling reduces murder and assault by almost 30%, motor vehicle theft by 20%, arson by 13%, and burglary and larceny by about 6%
[...]
The estimates for detailed arrests imply that a ten percentage point increase in graduation rates would reduce murder and assault arrest rates by about 20%
Source 20% reduction.
Income inequality correlated with murder and source
I can keep grabbing more but I'm in a crunch for time right now, I'll be back later to post more but I wanted to get this up before I had to leave for the evening.
Unless you died in columbine, aurora, sandy hook, VA Tech, the Navy Yard, etc. Then you're just distracting.
Unless I died then talking about these issues is distracting?
Tone policing gets you nowhere.
If you would like to play this game, fine, expect no more civility.
Saying murder victims are a red herring does, as does having a double stabdard, as does using NRA talking points.
I didn't say murder victims are a red herring. I said making mass killing into this tremendously large all-encompassing issue is a red herring. I also have never heard the NRA support comprehensive social program reform, in conjunction with gun control, to reduce gun crime rates. But I guess that just continues our pattern of misrepresenting facts.
You're not sorry that you show zero concern; you show disdain, rather
I'm showing disdain towards you for continually attacking me personally!
If you don't care about a tragedy, the respectful thing to do is not to talk about it, instead of marginalizing it. You police my alleged tone than complain about policibg responses.
If you think you know what I think and feel better than I do, what's the point of discussion? I refuse to consider calling out someone who is flinging personal insults tone policing. I didn't say 'you sound angry' I said you're deliberately antagonizing me and calling me names. Which is ALWAYS unacceptable.
To use your own words and implications against you is logical, even if they are disgusting words and implications
Well, to use the words that you like to pretend I said against me is lying, so there's that.
I'm so sick of privliged, selfish people trying to dictate to everyone else what to really care about when, from someone else's perspective, your own concerns could be seen as petty and the symptom of someone lacking in adversity. Ironically, all your "alternative" proposals sound like red herrings from discussing gun control.
Don't you dare tell me what I have faced in life. I have faced a lot of adversity in life and it is ridiculous that you can come up here and pretend I haven't. I never said you can't support gun control. I never said you can't support measures to reduce mass killings. I said what I thought would be more effective. You're allowed to think what you want to think and I'm allowed to say I think you're mistaken. That's not dictating what other's care about, that's expressing my opinions. If you disagree with me I respect your right to do so.
You chose to respond to me, just as an FYI; you pick a fight and whine about being responded to unfavorably.
You actually chose to respond to me first, just as an FYI. I merely continued that discussion. I never picked a fight, I intended to have a discussion it seemed you were initiating.
