Do you seriously believe that?Do you think there has been any time in history where more black kids have experienced violent death than what they are experiencing today?
I think you missed the satiric edge.I dont know about the cold hard odds but I do know that this is preventable and it reflects very poorly on our society that we are willing to accept it.
Yes, I could be wrong, do you have any facts to indicate that I am wrong?Do you seriously believe that?
There should be a recapitulation right in here somewhere.Yes, I could be wrong, do you have any facts to indicate that I am wrong?
You seem to be totally consumed with the race issue, we are talking about teens and children here and the dangers they face today. There is no comparison.
If we go back to my original thought, I believe that it was safer and better of all when we treated each other with more respect and less hate and violence. I understand the position of the people of color that it was not a safe world for them in many ways in the mid 50's and that is true in some respects but then again we did not have, drug overdose, suicide, school shootings or the gun violence then that endangers children of all colors today. We can find some facts that indicate that the number of deaths per 100,000 teens in 1954 was lower than it is today but it is difficult to find statistics on that period of time for some of the other issues. We cannot dispute the fact that we have children particularity black children in Chicago that are in fear every day.There should be a recapitulation right in here somewhere.
Clint, is it your contention that children of color are “less-safe”?
Because “the other side” is just saying that, “overall, a person of color, is better off being a child NOW than in the 1950’s
We should take an honest look at the other side of an earlier American civilization. It was the civilized side of American (Christian) society that wanted to kill the Indian, but save the man.
View attachment 250487
You don't even remember the same 60s that I do.Yes there were problems but we recognized those problems and worked to correct them and we did that without the division and hate that we see in our nation today.
I know what you are talking about and yes, we had protests, and violence but we also had the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Even with all that happened in the 60's with civil disobedience and protests it was not like the wide spread hate that we see now. It is almost impossible to have a difference of opinion that does not evolve into a personal attack today and if someone is not happy with the way you drive or the color of the clothes you have on they just might shoot you without giving it a thought.You don't even remember the same 60s that I do.
That number seemed very high to me, considering all gun related deaths and injuries have been on the decline, so I did a little digging and found this.You know... that's actually kind of comforting. Of the 74 million children that live in the US, only 14,500 on average are injured by a gun every year. Those are pretty good odds.
IF you are talking about gun violence there are at least nine US cities that are more dangerous than Chicago.We cannot dispute the fact that we have children particularity black children in Chicago that are in fear every day.
That is a little misleading did you notice those statistics are based on population specifically deaths per 100,000 of population. If you look at just the number of deaths Chicago is well ahead. check the graph in this article. Cities With the Most Gun ViolenceIF you are talking about gun violence there are at least nine US cities that are more dangerous than Chicago.
When comes to feelings of safety though, the rate is what's important, not the total number.That is a little misleading did you notice those statistics are based on population specifically deaths per 100,000 of population. If you look at just the number of deaths Chicago is well ahead. check the graph in this article. Cities With the Most Gun Violence
I am not certain why you say that. I would not feel safe in Chicago if i lived in the areas that experience a high incidence of gun fatalities. It would mean little or nothing to me that the rest of the city might be nearly without risk. That would be of no comfort to those who live in the combat zone and are at risk every day.When comes to feelings of safety though, the rate is what's important, not the total number.
I dont know about the cold hard odds but I do know that this is preventable and it reflects very poorly on our society that we are willing to accept it.
Because the rate of violence in the population you live in is what matters. Living in a community of a 100 people, 50 of whom get robbed every month is more dangerous than living in a community of 1000 people, 100 of whom get robbed every month.I am not certain why you say that.
Now you're narrowing down the scope of the population, and focusing on areas where crime is high, if you are making a comparison with other cities you would have to do the same thing there too. Nobody is saying Chicago doesn't have a violence problem in certain neighborhoods, but it's all too common to take the number of violent incidents in those neighborhoods and act like those crimes are rampant across the entire city and/or try to compare the violence to other cities without considering population.I would not feel safe in Chicago if i lived in the areas that experience a high incidence of gun fatalities.
I dont know about the cold hard odds but I do know that this is preventable and it reflects very poorly on our society that we are willing to accept it.
You seem to be totally consumed with the race issue, we are talking about teens and children here and the dangers they face today. There is no comparison.
You speak about risk. That is exactly why it matters to think in terms of incidents per population.I am not certain why you say that. I would not feel safe in Chicago if i lived in the areas that experience a high incidence of gun fatalities. It would mean little or nothing to me that the rest of the city might be nearly without risk. That would be of no comfort to those who live in the combat zone and are at risk every day.
Minority children also get to use the same facilities as White children.I agree. Children are much safer now then in the past.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?