2022 is America's deadliest year for mass shootings.

[disciple Clint]

The harsh reality that many don't want to acknowledge (and in some cases don't want to fathom about themselves, and especially don't want to dare fathom about their kids) is that for a lot people, they're as ethical as their options allow them to be.

There are many people who are in the middle-upper and upper classes who I have no doubt wouldn't hesitate to steal or "do what it takes, even if it's outside the law" if their options are more limited, they just never have to make that choice because they have money in their bank account.

For kids from "well-to-do" families, the thought of "I should steal that toy when no one is looking" doesn't pop into their head as often because they know the process for getting toy only involved asking mom and dad for it.



But, again, this conversation still circumnavigates my original line of inquiry that I never really got a straight answer from anyone on...which was, why do you think the US has so many people people who end up behaving this way vs. other Westernized countries? Even omitting the murder rate, there are other metrics to look at.

For instance, you look at the robbery rate:
View attachment 326063

...and look at where some other countries are at:
View attachment 326064

View attachment 326065

What is Italy, Germany, Ireland, Finland, Poland, and Switzerland doing that we're not? Or what do they have that we don't?

Does being born on one particular patch of soil vs. another cause people to inherently have a few screws loose? (and unlikely theory)

Or are there some things in a person's environment that could be driving some of this?

What those countries have that we do not have is a functioning criminal justice system where criminals receive justice instead of forgiveness. Criminals in those countries understand "dont do the crime if you cant do the time"

 

[disciple Clint]

Anybody can say this kind of thing - anyone can simply assert something based on their "experience". But no reasonable person would be convinced by such a flimsy argument. You are claiming that "criminals want to be criminals". Given many reasons to suspect that this is an oversimplification, are you not going to provide at least some evidence to support your assertion, other than a vague appeal to your "years of experience"?

No I am not, I do not need to validate my experience.

 

[disciple Clint]

I would say where the focus belongs (at least to some degree) is finding ways to make the criminal lifestyle less appealing in the first place by making sure certain needs are met and making it a less enticing choice.

The less desperate people are, the less likely they are to resort to desperate measures.

It would seem as if some other countries have caught on to that and taken certain measures that have had a positive impact in that regard.

If Finland, Germany, Switzerland, and Ireland can find ways to keep robberies below 50 per 100k and keep homicides below 1 per 100k without having to incarcerate people at twice the per capita rate as Russia, certainly we can too, right? Whatever happened to that good old American exceptionalism that dictated that "if another country can do it, we can find a way to do it too...and better"?

Or has that sentiment of exceptionalism been reduced to only apply to the military, and opting to solve every other problem with a handbook out of the 1950's?

We are never going to be able to provide the kind of benefits that crime can provide and since there is no real consequence due to the liberal view that criminals are victims of our unfair society we will continue to have a high crime rate regardless of how much of the money of the hard working people is providing benefits for the criminals.

 

[Whyayeman]

Even in Australia you can own a gun, but we have very strict controls about it. There is no way any man with a history of domestic violence, aggression, unstable mental health issues etc, would be permitted to own a gun. And there's no way someone with a criminal background can own a gun. Lastly, there's controls around why you choose to own a gun - if its for sport then the requirement is that you are a member of a gun club and you secure your weapon there. Now its not infallible, but it helps

All this is just sensible regulation. It obviously works pretty well. We almost never hear of Australian mass shootings. Similar intelligent measures are in place everywhere in the world. Only an idiotic system would not put such laws in place.

Hello America!

 

[Pommer]

We are never going to be able to provide the kind of benefits that crime can provide and since there is no real consequence due to the liberal view that criminals are victims of our unfair society we will continue to have a high crime rate regardless of how much of the money of the hard working people is providing benefits for the criminals.

Nice to see a staunch conservative admit that capitalism is flailing.

 

[Whyayeman]

What those countries have that we do not have is a functioning criminal justice system where criminals receive justice instead of forgiveness. Criminals in those countries understand "dont do the crime if you cant do the time"

This flies in the face of the facts.

America has more people per capita in prison than any other. It has among the highest murder rates in the world and a very high rate of criminality. America locks people up for longer than almost any other country.

America is one of the least forgiving countries when it comes to its policies on imprisonment.

 

[driewerf]

What those countries have that we do not have is a functioning criminal justice system where criminals receive justice instead of forgiveness. Criminals in those countries understand "dont do the crime if you cant do the time"

Max security prison in Norway:

Max security prison USA (Oregon)

I am glad to read that you consider treating inmates harshly is failing (Oregon), while treating them humanly (Norway) works.
Now apply that in practice.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

We are never going to be able to provide the kind of benefits that crime can provide and since there is no real consequence due to the liberal view that criminals are victims of our unfair society we will continue to have a high crime rate regardless of how much of the money of the hard working people is providing benefits for the criminals.

Each of the nations I listed are arguably all more liberal than we are economically with regards to social safety nets and the Scandinavian countries in particular have a much softer view on criminal justice than we do, yet can produce lower numbers of murder, robbery, drug use, and lower recidivism rates for violent crime.

So, again, what's different about those countries? Clearly they're doing something we aren't. If it's not the social safety nets and the focus on rehabilitation over punishment, then what exactly is that "magic bullet" that they've found than we evidently haven't? I'm open to theories...

Is there something unique about the US (that doesn't apply to those other countries) that's causing a higher propensity for bad behavior that's consistent with the argument that "criminals just wanna be bad"? (IE: given Switzerland and Finland are more liberal than we are, "liberal policies" can't be the scapegoat)

With regards to your assertion, "we can never provide the benefits that crime can" is a bit misleading. While that may be true, legislatively, given the political makeup of our country (where half the country is cool with massive military spending, but money for social safety nets is considered "socialism")

But in a purely logistical sense, it's not so much that we "can't", it's that we "won't".

 

[ThatRobGuy]

What those countries have that we do not have is a functioning criminal justice system where criminals receive justice instead of forgiveness. Criminals in those countries understand "dont do the crime if you cant do the time"

That only touches on what happens after the crime is committed, and per the other poster's recent response, "prison" is a very different environment in many of those countries.

But it still doesn't address why fewer people in those countries are caving to that kind of lifestyle in the first place.

We can have conversations all day long about the court system and criminal justice system...I'd like to know why they have fewer people per capita who end up deciding to commit robbery and murder in the first place.

Courts & Jails aside, figuring out why we have a higher percentage of people deciding go from "law abiding" to "criminal" in the first place is puzzle that needs to be solved.

This is a problem that pre-dates the issues you mentioned of "soft on crime" policies that have been implemented over the past 15 years so clearly those aren't the smoking gun. The robbery & murder rates were technically higher during the Reagan era than they are now when we had harsh drug laws, mandatory minimum sentencing, a conservative senate, and a supreme court that was mostly Eisenhower, Nixon, and Reagan appointees.

 

[Kent M]

Gang violence accounts for most US mass shootings. And it's hard to tell groups of low income people to cut it out with the gangs. They don't seem to want to listen.

...I don't know if it's because there's not enough opportunities to gain wealth in the USA..? Or if that's just the style of life that's preferred by some.

 

[Kent M]

When the Anti-gun lobby talk about deaths from "gun violence" they leave out the fact that 60% of those deaths are from suicides. And they leave out the deaths that unfortunately came from someone forced to shoot in self defense. Be prepared to protect yourself and your loved ones. Because, when seconds count, the police are minutes away.

 

[Whyayeman]

When the Anti-gun lobby talk about deaths from "gun violence" they leave out the fact that 60% of those deaths are from suicides. And they leave out the deaths that unfortunately came from someone forced to shoot in self defense. Be prepared to protect yourself and your loved ones. Because, when seconds count, the police are minutes away.

The mere 40% which are not suicides is still a significantly higher rate than almost everywhere else. Self defence accounts for a tiny number in comparison. The pro-gun lobby loves to obfuscate with these dodgy statistics. (As for the last sentence above; there is a slogan for every occasion.)

Don't you think America has a problem with mass shootings occurring so frequently?

 

[Kent M]

The mere 40% which are not suicides is still a significantly higher rate than almost everywhere else. Self defence accounts for a tiny number in comparison. The pro-gun lobby loves to obfuscate with these dodgy statistics. (As for the last sentence above; there is a slogan for every occasion.)

Don't you think America has a problem with mass shootings occurring so frequently?

A non right to self defense site that I googled admitted an average 70,040 cases of a gun being used for self defense or in the defense of others, in America, per year! These are rarely reported by the Mainstream Media! Getting rid of guns is an impossible, not to mention simplistic, answer to gun killings. You are far more likely to die from a knife wound than from a gun wound. Should we ban all knives? Thousands die every year from car crashes so..ban cars? Guns are not evil beings. The good or evil intent lies within the heart of the gun owner! We need better background checks to weed out more of the nut cases that use guns for evil. I sign one every time I buy a gun. One question in the background check - "Are you Hispanic?" ..What??.. But srill more restrictive laws will not stop the criminals..for the one reason that Anti-gunners can not seem to understand.. Criminals will not obey any gun laws because they are..CRIMINALS!

 

[expos4ever]

No I am not, I do not need to validate my experience.

You are, of course, not required to validate your experience. But then no reasonable person has any basis on which to believe your claim.

 

[expos4ever]

You are far more likely to die from a knife wound than from a gun wound. Should we ban all knives? Thousands die every year from car crashes so..ban cars?

This is a common, but invalid, line of reasoning.

Knives and cars have great utility in other respects than injuring or killing.

Can a gun get you from home to the grocery store?

Can a gun carve the Thanksgiving turkey?

 

[expos4ever]

Guns are not evil beings. The good or evil intent lies within the heart of the gun owner!

Not convincing.

The gun is a tool that empowers evil intents to be actualized.

 

[expos4ever]

When the Anti-gun lobby talk about deaths from "gun violence" they leave out the fact that 60% of those deaths are from suicides.

How does this help the case for gun rights? People who kill themselves from guns are just as dead as people who are killed by others with guns.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Can a gun get you from home to the grocery store?

Can a gun carve the Thanksgiving turkey?

That sounds like a challenge. ...Hold my beer.

/s

 

[Kent M]

Oh please. Are people who want to commit suicide unable to do so because they do not own a gun? If they use a rope to commit suicide should we ban those evil ropes? And..YES. Silly. If a criminal tries to take my car by threatening me and my family with a gun, I most certainly can use a gun to get us home from the grocery store to carve the Thanksgiving turkey!

 

[expos4ever]

Oh please. Are people who want to commit suicide unable to do so because they do not own a gun?

As a matter of fact, the evidence shows that access to guns does indeed increase the risk of suicide - the "they will use a rope if a gun is not available" is not supported by the evidence. To wit:

From a Study published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2008 (authors = Miller and Hemenway) (https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp0805923)

The empirical evidence linking suicide risk in the United States to the presence of firearms in the home is compelling. There are at least a dozen U.S. case–control studies in the peer-reviewed literature, all of which have found that a gun in the home is associated with an increased risk of suicide. The increase in risk is large, typically 2 to 10 times that in homes without guns, depending on the sample population (e.g., adolescents vs. older adults) and on the way in which the firearms were stored. The association between guns in the home and the risk of suicide is due entirely to a large increase in the risk of suicide by firearm that is not counterbalanced by a reduced risk of nonfirearm suicide. Moreover, the increased risk of suicide is not explained by increased psychopathologic characteristics, suicidal ideation, or suicide attempts among members of gun-owning households.