Geographic evidence that gun deaths are cultural

[Boboclown]

The leading cause of death: Eating and drinking. Did ya know anyone who eats and/or drinks dies?

 

[bbbass]

The leading cause of death: Eating and drinking. Did ya know anyone who eats and/or drinks dies?

We should sue!!

 

[bbbass]

Do it explain why the whites be shooting themselves?

It's all in the jeans, according to de article. People be wearin blue jeans or black jeans shoot each udder... people be wearing white jeans or red jeans shoot demselves.

 

[revjen45]

One undeniable take away is if you put a dot on the map for each death by gunfire they cluster heavily in the 1-Party Democrat enclaves.
The DNC causes "gun violence" deaths.

 

[bbbass]

TLDR:

Black people shoot eachother, White people shoot themselves.

Problems exist in both cultures.

Just quoting a line from the article.

Okay, this bothered me thru the holiday... I reread the article in its entirety this morning and was unable to find the line supposedly "quoted" anywhere within the article.

#1. You didn't read the article "TLDR"
#2. Yet you must have at least skimmed it, because you commented on a section of it.
#3. The section you commented on is not the main conclusion of the author
#4. "Quotes" belong in quotations... "Paraphrasing" is not the same as quoting.

For those unwilling or unable to read long articles, I'll reprint the actual conclusions of the author here (Italics are an alternative that also show that the words are being "quoted" from an article):

Studies in the academic communities do seem to indicate a link between genes and suicide. How explanatory that genetic link is for firearm suicide rates is, as far as I'm aware, totally unstudied. I categorically refuse to speculate, because the implications of that sort of thing would be vast, and could be seriously misused by political actors with questionable intent.

What I can say, from grinding on these maps for several days, is that "gun deaths" as defined are a deeply cultural problem, and only slightly (if at all) related to gun availability. Not just for homicide, but for suicide as well. Further, the cultural and genetic makeup of our country is so different than other countries, that comparisons between them and us are simply not viable.

Most importantly, in a country where firearms are never going to be magically evaporated, with a guns per capita rate far beyond the saturation point of easy availability, we must seek cultural solutions to cultural problems, and medical solutions to genetic ones.

Handwaving Freakoutery
Culture War Analysis, Media Criticism, and Occasional Esoterica. (also gun math)



)

 

[Geardo]

Okay, this bothered me thru the holiday... I reread the article in its entirety this morning and was unable to find the line supposedly "quoted" anywhere within the article.

#1. You didn't read the article "TLDR"
#2. Yet you must have at least skimmed it, because you commented on a section of it.
#3. The section you commented on is not the main conclusion of the author
#4. "Quotes" belong in quotations... "Paraphrasing" is not the same as quoting.

For those unwilling or unable to read long articles, I'll reprint the actual conclusions of the author here (Italics are an alternative that also show that the words are being "quoted" from an article):

Studies in the academic communities do seem to indicate a link between genes and suicide. How explanatory that genetic link is for firearm suicide rates is, as far as I'm aware, totally unstudied. I categorically refuse to speculate, because the implications of that sort of thing would be vast, and could be seriously misused by political actors with questionable intent.

What I can say, from grinding on these maps for several days, is that "gun deaths" as defined are a deeply cultural problem, and only slightly (if at all) related to gun availability. Not just for homicide, but for suicide as well. Further, the cultural and genetic makeup of our country is so different than other countries, that comparisons between them and us are simply not viable.

Most importantly, in a country where firearms are never going to be magically evaporated, with a guns per capita rate far beyond the saturation point of easy availability, we must seek cultural solutions to cultural problems, and medical solutions to genetic ones.

Handwaving Freakoutery
Culture War Analysis, Media Criticism, and Occasional Esoterica. (also gun math)



)

Seriously?


At this point, we're inclined towards a simple explanation. Poor black folks have a gun homicide problem, while poor white folks have a gun suicide problem. And I think that's generally accurate, but I think we can drill further on that.

 

[bbbass]

Seriously?


At this point, we're inclined towards a simple explanation. Poor black folks have a gun homicide problem, while poor white folks have a gun suicide problem. And I think that's generally accurate, but I think we can drill further on that.

Seriously.

You wrote: "Black people shoot each other. White people shoot themselves." And then when I said that was only one conclusion, you wrote: "Only quoting a line from the article."

#1. That is NOT a quote from the article... it is paraphrasing a section of the article... there is a BIG difference. Words mean things.
#2. The author prefaced the section you quoted above by saying "At this point"... if I had not read the article and read only your comment about black vs white problems, I would not have wanted to read the article because I would have thought it racially biased. The article is about more than ethnicity and if you had read it in it's entirety, you would understand that.
#3. The "simple explanation hypothecized by the author above cites POOR blacks, and POOR whites... a big factor that may lie outside of ethnicity, or not... it is something not further delved into by the author.
#4. The author then goes on to "drill further" and comes up with conclusions that expand or even modify the stated "simple explanation". What you wrote is therefore, out of context and IMO an unfair treatment of the article as a whole.
#5. For reading comprehension, it is important to actually read the article, in it's entirety, as many times as needed, before commenting, or one may be left with the wrong impressions or conclusions.

 

[Geardo]

Seriously.

You wrote: "Black people shoot each other. White people shoot themselves." And then when I said that was only one conclusion, you wrote: "Only quoting a line from the article."

#1. That is NOT a quote from the article... it is paraphrasing a section of the article... there is a BIG difference. Words mean things.
#2. The author prefaced the section you quoted above by saying "At this point"... if I had not read the article and read only your comment about black vs white problems, I would not have wanted to read the article because I would have thought it racially biased. The article is about more than ethnicity and if you had read it in it's entirety, you would understand that.
#3. The "simple explanation hypothecized by the author above cites POOR blacks, and POOR whites... a big factor that may lie outside of ethnicity, or not... it is something not further delved into by the author.
#4. The author then goes on to "drill further" and comes up with conclusions that expand or even modify the stated "simple explanation".
#5. For reading comprehension, it is important to actually read the article, in it's entirety, as many times as needed, before commenting, or one may be left with the wrong impressions or conclusions.

Sorry I was not more precise.

I read the article.

TLDR is for people who don't want to read the article.

I am not a grammer oriented person.

I felt that line was the pertinant part, and the following paragraphs sounded like handwaving by the author to sugarcoat his opinion. Maybe some of my personal bias there, but that is what it sounded like to me.

Saying that will probably get me chastised/banned as a third strike, and I am honestly suprised that article and this thread have remained up as long as they have.

 

[bbbass]

Sorry I was not more precise.

I read the article.

TLDR is for people who don't want to read the article.

I am not a grammer oriented person.

I felt that line was the pertinant part, and the following paragraphs sounded like handwaving by the author to sugarcoat his opinion. Maybe some of my personal bias there, but that is what it sounded like to me.

Saying that will probably get me chastised/banned as a third strike, and I am honestly suprised that article and this thread have remained up as long as they have.

I had to look up TLDR. For those that also don't know what it means it is "Too Long, Didn't Read". When one posts that at the beginning, how does it not mean that you didn't read the article? I don't get it. I conclude that you are back into "guiding" people... As if to say "Too Long, Don't Read". I prefer that one lets people go there and draw their own conclusions.

For those, like me, that don't know what "handwaving" is... it is the use of "insubstantial language to influence or convince others".

So okay, the important part of the article to you was Black vs White. I get it. You got triggered by your own cultural bias. No problemo. I still think that's an unfair treatment of the article as a whole. You missed the point, but I can see how that would happen.

As for the thread remaining up... if mods see it as Black vs White w/o reading it for further context, and also believe the rest is sugarcoating that conclusion, then I would be surprised it is still up also.

 

[Geardo]

I had to look up TLDR. For those that also don't know what it means it is "Too Long, Didn't Read". When one posts that at the beginning, how does it not mean that you didn't read the article? I don't get it. I conclude that you are back into "guiding" people... As if to say "Too Long, Don't Read". I prefer that one lets people go there and draw their own conclusions.

For those, like me, that don't know what "handwaving" is... it is the use of "insubstantial language to influence or convince others".

So okay, the important part of the article to you was Black vs White. I get it. You got triggered by your own cultural bias. No problemo. I still think that's an unfair treatment of the article as a whole. You missed the point, but I can see how that would happen.

As for the thread remaining up... if mods see it as Black vs White w/o reading it for further context, and also believe the rest is sugarcoating that conclusion, then I would be surprised it is still up also.

TLDR + a summary is a standard phrase/action on the internet. To be honest I have never seen anyone delve into it as deeply as you, so I haven't thought of it one way or another.

I was not trying to guide anyone. I thought it was a fairly interesting article, but pretty long winded, hence the TLDR. Its just the internet, this is just a forum, I didn't put that much thought into it.

However, I still think my summary is fair, even after rereading it.

 

[bbbass]

TLDR + a summary is a standard phrase/action on the internet. To be honest I have never seen anyone delve into it as deeply as you, so I haven't thought of it one way or another.

I was not trying to guide anyone. I thought it was a fairly interesting article, but pretty long winded, hence the TLDR. Its just the internet, this is just a forum, I didn't put that much thought into it.

However, I still think my summary is fair, even after rereading it.

I always delve into things/jargon/trendy terminology when I don't know what it means. I'm not all over the internet so I have no idea if that is a standard phrase/action. I only have the definition result. Too Long Didn't Read, followed by a summary does not make logical sense to me. Too Long Don't Read and a summary does make sense, but I find it offensive.

"I didn't put that much thought into it"... Seriously? You post things w/o putting much thought into it? That gives me even more reason to see it as a "triggered" response.

I'm not saying that you are not allowed to express your opinion/interpretation of the article. Just as I am allowed to disagree with you. IMO we should leave it there. God Bless, Merry Christmas, Happy New Year!

 

[Geardo]

I'm not saying that you are not allowed to express your opinion/interpretation of the article. Just as I am allowed to disagree with you. IMO we should leave it there. God Bless, Merry Christmas, Happy New Year

You too! Sorry I degraded your Christmas experience.

 

[bbbass]

You too! Sorry I degraded your Christmas experience.

Not at all! I obsess over things people do or say and that is on me!!! Thanx for contributing your take/opinion and giving me incentive to learn new terminology.

 

[albin25]

…, Sooo….. Does this article come to any actual conclusions as to exactly what form of "culture" is responsible?
My bet is that "Musical Theater" or "Interpretive Dance" would cause more men to blow their brains out and more women to shoot their husbands, than say.... an "Art in Park" event or a "Couples Cooking Class".

 

[bbbass]

…, Sooo….. Does this article come to any actual conclusions as to exactly what form of "culture" is responsible?
My bet is that "Musical Theater" or "Interpretive Dance" would cause more men to blow their brains out and more women to shoot their husbands, than say.... an "Art in Park" event or a "Couples Cooking Class".

I love Musical Theater and have been involved in it off and on since my early 20s.. and no, I'm not gay. (I don't handle other people's guns. ) Interpretive Dance would cause me to blow my brains out if it were not for some of the babes in leotards. Art is nice, but not in the park. Couples Cooking Class, would have me shooting somebody, anybody, maybe everybody! ... And I like to cook. Just not with the wife... "Stay our of my kitchen!!!" So mine is an eclectic response to your query.

 

[2DaMtns]

"West Virginia is kind of a mess."

Tell me about it. I am from there originally. I can't even remember all the people I know from there who have died at the end of a gun, whether they pointed it at themselves or someone else, but it's a lot. Dozens probably. More murders than suicides, but it is a hot mess.

 

[ma96782]

I can just imagine.....that the "new" study that we taxpayers will be paying for will probably gloss over the "cultural" truths.

Aloha, Mark

 

[Goosebrown]

Every culture knows Death....

Death knows no difference in :
Politics...
Gender...
Location...
Social status...
Bank Account Statements...
Job title...
How we viewed ourselves...
Whether you were "good" or "bad" in life...
How we meet Death may be different ...but Death comes to us all.

Live your live well...work both for yourself and your fellow man...
Andy

True but death BY one or another cause DOES know groups.

I think the study is very interesting and points to crime and suicide differently.

I think one way to reduce murders is to work on economic opportunity in places with high murder rates. Poor or poor and black are where a lot of the issue lies.