There seems to be some questionable assumptions at work here.
Do you believe other countries do not have “bad guys”? That violent gang members are unique to the US? Or that the number of bad guys in the US are just so insanely high that a shoorting rate of more than 18 000 times other nations is justified?
I wouldn’t use the word “remarkable” about a 1/100 interactions ending in a shooting. “Monstrously high” seems more accurate.
Perhaps some of our international members can give us rates for a few other western nations?
Really? Do you believe other nations don’t have gangs? No Hells Angels, no Bandidos? No drug problem, no one fighting over turf? No illegal immigrants, human trafficers?
High income western nations of millions with no criminals taking advantage?
Why do you believe other countries have a minimal gang presence? On the face of it, it is rather unbelivable. Like 1 % of police interactions involving a shooting. Sounds like a war zone.
Come on, Grim. Stop with the emotional nonsense. Attempt logic, reason or math.
Of the other nations, like Norway, whom you wish to point out as having significantly lower police shootings than the United States, none will have as significant a gang culture. That was very clear. Please follow.
Now, allow me to introduce you to someone else you haven’t met, Mr. Math: Police in the US fires shots more than 18 000 times as often as police in Norway. The notion that Norway does not have gangs, drugs or criminal activity of other sorts is obvious nonsense.
Do you believe that the US has 18 000 time the criminal activity of Norway? Can you give me a cite for this?
This debate is too politically correct. The reason the US has gang problems is because America has a substantial minority population and because Americans have decided to tolerate non-trivial gang violence in return for strong gun rights. Recently, some European countries like Sweden have decided that they too would like to enjoy a permanent criminal underclass leaching off a generous welfare system and have begun importing diversity from the most violent and retrograde places on earth, like Sudan, Syria and Somalia. There shouldn’t be any doubt how this will turn out.
The dead hand of cultural marxism continues to threaten the existence of Western civilization.
You can’t possibly be suggesting that Norway has a gang problem - and thus comparing that gang problem to the United States. It is flat out embarrassing to make any such suggestion.
Seriously, where do you live? How can someone be so disconnected from the gang problems in the United States?
Prolly Japan. Or Mexico. Or the Philippines. Or Guatemala. Or Greece. Or Russia. Or China. Or Thailand. Maybe El Salvador or Colombia. Or England or Scotland. Or Ireland. Or perhaps some other country with, as you put it, “a minimal gang presence”.
I live in Norway. I have lived in the United States.
Do you believe there is no gang activity or criminal activity in Norway? Please answer.
This is simply an issue of logic, reason and maths. Do not despise maths. Embrace it.
You’ve gone on record saying that the vast majority of US polices hideously high rate of shootings are due to the police shooting “Bad guys”. Do you believe there are 18 000 times the density of bad guys in the US?
I am not disputing that the US has a worse problem with criminal activity than Norway. However, there is that logic and reason thing…I seriously question that the crime rate is so high as to explain the massive number of US police shootings.
Can anyone else provide numbers from other western countries?
It’s also worth noting that I’m pretty sure that both Sweden and Norway have problems with human trafficking which certainly would mean an “organized crime” or “gang presence” depending on how it’s defined.
Or you can stop thinking in simplistically blinkered absolutes and, like, start glimpsing at the TRUTH, man !
Of course, your posting history does little to credit you with an ability to recognize a nuance if one punched you in the face before shoving a large blunt object where the sun, thankfully, does not shine.
Tolerance is a pretty simple social concept, akin to a non-aggression pact. It’s not a moral concept, it’s about a social order borne from the realization that you can’t just go out and kill them (whoever they are) to the last. So, a tacit understanding is reached by hook or by crook : you don’t fuck with me, I don’t fuck with you. Tolerance does not involve agreeing with, appreciating or even *respecting *what you tolerate. Simply accepting its continued existence inasmuch as it doesn’t infringe on yours or that of others.
Racist fuckwads, on the other hand, go out and burn ethnic churches (to give a totally random example). Which runs against the notion of tolerance, re-ignites passionate fires and, simply put, fuck with the program, not to mention social order.
Anyone want to step in and comment on the actual OP? Why can’t, or won’t they arrest a Cliven Bundy if they are breaking the law, armed, and contemptuous of authority? He’s a white collar cowboy booted criminal no less than the Enron crooks. Are we still picking up his tab by the way?
Are they not a threat to public safety because they are white, libertarian or something else?
The Bundy people owned their guns legally. They also outnumbered the police. In order to ensure that things did not escalate, and to limit the violence, the police/FBI wisely decided to stand down. It was an excellent decision.
I disagree with the Bundy people. I do not support their actions. But the op’s attempt to race bait by somehow comparing the Bundy event, to the bevy of gang events, is absolutely silly.
The Bundy event is a one-in-a-million event. Gang violence happens every day, multiple times.
I answered your question. Something tells me the reality of my answer failed to suffice your narrative.
True (to an extent), but then the two phenomenons don’t send the same message to the cops/the state at all. Gangs and gangsters commit what crimes they think they can get away with - then they get caught and go to jail (or worse). Bundy committed what crime he thought he could got away with, then when caught posse’d up and practically dared the Law to do something about it.
To all appearances he won that staredown, and *that *sets a thoroughly worse precedent than Little Kevin slinging eightballs on the corner unmolested - which he by and large isn’t, anyway. Black folks in the US, gangster or not, receive rather a lot of police attention, if you weren’t aware. Rather a lot. It’s become something of an issue even, or so I’ve heard.
So they owned the guns legally, which means to you that they are law abiding citizens assembling legally. (On land for all purposes that is owned by the Govt, delinquent taxes paid for by all citizens regardless of race)
But the government stood down because there was a reasonable suspicion that they might become a murderous mob and go to war against the govt.
But there must be a reason why that suspicion does not set in motion the legal detainment of these people, like it does for almost everyone else and everyone of color. What is it?
See there are a lot of situations where the govt won’t stand down. Like they really never do. So what does this say?
If we want to compare the criminal activity in Norway to that in the US, we could compare number of murders per 100 000, hard drug overdose rates (drugs don’t appear ex nihilo), etc.
I’d guess we’d end up with a much lower rate of crime in Norway -but nowhere near low enough to explain the massive difference in police shootings.
Why do you think other rich western nations don’t have crime?
Why don’t you believe that we can compare crime rates between countries?
All it takes is a bit of logic, reason and maths.
You know, you could check my posting history. Its not difficult. Were you implying that I was lying about my residence?
Only someone truly disconnected would think that Norway has a comparable gang epidemic as the United States. I’m done with your silliness.
On to the next guy…
What the Bundy people did was not right. The fact that they legally owned their guns does not make their actions okay. However owning their guns legally, and having legal carry permits did allow them to occupy without being stopped by the police. Once they became a threat–which they were–it was too late. The police did not want to let the situation grow into a violent haze - hence they wisely defused things.
Once again, what happened at Bundy’s ranch was a one-in-a-million event. It never happens.
Further defusing the narrative stealthily hidden in the op’s original post, is the fact that more white people are killed by police officers than black people. You must acknowledge this. When you factor in the disproportionate amount of violent crime among African Americans, along with the disproportionate gang inclusion, it’s a remarkable statistic.