Why is America such a violent place?

Political assasination in Holland.
Click to expand...

Happened once this year.. It doesn't happen so often it you think so...

Switzerland may have 3 different lanquages, but 99.9995946 pct of the population is 'white' and protestant for the most part.
Click to expand...

False. This is from my reference book: around 48% of population is catholic, 45% protestant. And the population number you mentioned cant be true, because as is said before, Switzerland has taken most refugees per capita in the Western world. That must be one of the reason to why they are getting tired and are getting harder and harder immigration laws evey year...

And that wonderful socialist safety net in Germany at least, is getting close to collapse. tick, tick, tick......
Click to expand...

Ï dont want a safety net like the one in Germany... But at least something...
 
America is LESS violent then Europe as long as you stay out of the inner cities, the crack houses, the "public housing areas" and the strip joints. You are acting under entirely false and prejudiced assumptions if you think otherwise. .
Click to expand...

Same thing with Europe: As long as you stay of the "bad neighborhoods", you are relative safe...
 
And no I am not a socialist, I think if I would live in the US I would call myself a Democrat. Or do you consider the Democrats socialist???
Click to expand...


YES !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


(and the Republicans too, for the most part) :barf:
 
Yes, the average Democrat is a Socialist. However, they are taught Socialist ideas with different terms, so they tend to bristle when called "Socialist," much like you do. The average Republican considers himself much opposed to the average Democrat, but in actuality most share a lot of the same principles. This phenomenon was first noticed many years ago, but it came to a head under George Bush I and Bill Clinton, either of which could have changed parties at any time in his career and been just about as happy. Clinton's strategists called this "triangulation." A politician figures out what is playing best for his opponent today and latches onto it, whether it is counter to his basic principles or not. This not only lets him champion the flavor of the week, but steals all his opponents' best issues from them. Thus the real goal, beating the other team and getting more power for yours, is accomplished by sacrificing the original goal, which was to gain power in order to be able to do what you thought was right.
 
But no one has said: WHY? Why do african americans statisticly commit crimes more often than white people?
Click to expand...

No, the question is WHY do African Americans commit FEWER crimes than Africans in Africa and in the Caribbean nations such as Jamaica and Haiti?

While we are asking we should ask WHY do Mexican Americans commit fewer crimes than Mexicans in Mexico?

You should compare people with those of their own ethnic group rather than trying to compare them against other groups unless you are really into the Democratic (Socialist) numbers shell game.
 
Of course the answer is that in the US some law abiding African American and Mexican American citizens have been able to afford personal self protection despite the best efforts of liberal/progressive/socialist/lefty politicians to keep them in chains.;)
 
Konstantin: "So it is the african americans who commit most of the crimes? This is what most people before have mentioned. But no one has said: WHY? Why do african americans statisticly commit crimes more often than white people?"

No, African Americans do not commit most of the crimes. I hope that's not what others here inferred from what I said. Blacks (I prefer to use that term rather than the hyphenated "African-American") do commit crimes at a disproportionate rate, though. Blacks comprise roughly 12% of the population but commit over 40% of crimes here in the US. In Milwaukee that rate is even higher.

There are a number of reasons for this: drugs, unwed mothers, poverty, welfare, and I'll leave myself open for criticism by saying that the current black leadership has given the criminal element of their communities a "pass."

An example: the rate of single-parent (unwed mothers) homes for blacks in the US is over 60%. In the area of Milwaukee that I cited previously the rate is over 80%. Compare this to the rate for whites of a bit over 30%. Former US Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who is not held in high esteem on TFL, nevertheless was very prescient when in the 1960's he predicted that the rate of single-parent households would climb to the levels we're at now.

In the 1960's the single-parent rate for blacks was just over 30% and for whites it was under 10%, IIRC.

How did this happen? One tremendous contributing factor was President Johnson's "Great Society" program, which created welfare programs that rewarded unwed motherhood, as well as discouraged people from looking for jobs. Why take a minimum-wage entry level job when you can make more money by staying home and collecting welfare? And the more kids you have, the more money you get.

Another factor contributing to unwed mother status (which does translate into the children committing crimes) is the fact that something like three out of every five black men are either in prison or have been in prison. It's an astonishing number.

And (putting on flame suit) there's also a tendency for black males to just take off if the woman gets pregnant. I'm not saying that white or Hispanic males don't do the same thing, but it's far more common for black males. Why, I don't know.

Black leaders like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton refuse to confront these issues head-on, instead opting to blame all the problems of the black community on whites. Until the black community turns to leaders with real solutions, nothing will change.

Disclaimer: I don't have a degree in sociology. If I did, I'd probably be a liberal and wouldn't even be on TFL. ;)
 
Monkeyleg, I think we must have cross posted. I'd like you to take a shot at my reversal of the question if you don't mind. You do pretty durn good for someone who isn't a behavioral scientist. :)
 
TallPine

Are you kidding with me??? I have heard before that both the Democracts and the Republicans stands more right than "The Moderates", in my country. And "The Moderates" are the party stand most right of all parties in Sweden...

If all Democrats and most of the Republicans are socialists, how do you define a socialist?
 
MeekAndMild

Why? Maybe because the USA is so much richer than the African and Caribean countries?

And why do Mexican-Americans commit fewer crimes than Mexicans in Mexico? Maybe because the living conditions in the US is much higher?
 
FWIW, I just looked these up:

The national out-of-wedlock birthrate climbed from 7.7% in 1965 to 31% in 1993.

White illegitimacy rates increased from 4% of all births in 1965 to 24% in 1993.

For black births, the numbers leaped from 25% to 69% over the same period.

More than 1.2 million children are born out of wedlock each year.

Sources: Matthew Robinson, "Can the U.S. Afford Illegitimacy?" Investor's Business Daily, October 16, 1995; Robert Rector (Heritage Foundation), "Welfare Reform and the Death of Marriage," Washington Times, February 23, 1996.
---------------

I never thought Americans were violent...I thought Europeans were the sissies that stayed at home when the leaky boats left for America. ;)

Refugees? Refugees? We're ALL refugees, even the ones that walked here from Asia a long time ago.
 
And no I am not a socialist, I think if I would live in the US I would call myself a Democrat. Or do you consider the Democrats socialist???
Click to expand...

Yes, without a doubt.

Are you kidding with me??? I have heard before that both the Democracts and the Republicans stands more right than "The Moderates", in my country. And "The Moderates" are the party stand most right of all parties in Sweden...
Click to expand...

You are correct to think that our US liberals are to the right of your system. It's true, Democrats are conservative in Europe and that say a lot about Europe socialism. Nonetheless they are socialist.

If all Democrats and most of the Republicans are socialists, how do you define a socialist?
Click to expand...

A person that wants high tax, welfare, government controls industries, socialist medical system, typical spineless politician, etc.

I always think of socialism as a pyramid scheme. More victims have to come in in order for a pyramid scheme to work. Socialism works the same way by raising taxes. It will fail when the government can’t tax its citizens anymore. In other words the middle class got tax into poverty, i.e former Soviet Union.

I think you come up with a smart point. The reason why people all over the world think the US is violent may not be because they read surveys stating that, but instead because they look at American movies and tv-series all the time and get the impression that America is exactly like that....

Do anyone agree with me on that?
Click to expand...

Yes I have to agree with you on that. I mean, if I am a European and watched Cop, I would think that American is very violent.

Why? Maybe because the USA is so much richer than the African and Caribean countries?

And why do Mexican-Americans commit fewer crimes than Mexicans in Mexico? Maybe because the living conditions in the US is much higher?
Click to expand...

Well I can point to a number of countries that are dirt poor and yet have very little crime rate. Some countries in Latin America and Pacific Islanders come to mind.
 
Last edited:
And why do Mexican-Americans commit fewer crimes than Mexicans in Mexico? Maybe because the living conditions in the US is much higher?
Click to expand...
Nope. Compare Mexico with Costa Rica and what do you see?

Middle class and poor Mexicans are not allowed to own handguns, unable to defend against armed criminals. On the other hand they can come to the US and arm themselves. So the violent crime rate and murder rate go down.

You've been watching too much TV.
 
You guys are giving up too easily on the point that Switzerland is diverse. It is a very diverse place, just not in the same way the United States. The Swiss have had several civil wars in modern times over religion, many very severe constitutional struggles over the town-rural split, and the country nearly came apart in WWI due to the French-German division. The Swiss don't like to talk about divisions in their country or their bloody past, but it's there.

The Swiss solution encourages diverse people to co-exist through local autonomy. The federal government in Switzerland is very weak by modern standards. Most real decisions are made at the village or canton levels. Switzerland is for the most part homogenous at the local level, and decentralization means that people make their own decisions, and the decisions are seen to be made locally by people who like the people who will have to live with them. For example, if you are a French-speaking Protestant you are a minority in the country, but you probably live in a town in which almost everyone is a French-speaking Protestant, the schools are French-speaking Protestant, the churches are almost all French-speaking Protestant, and all the politicians are French-speaking Protestant.

This solution has some relevance to the United States, but it is not a complete solution because we are more diverse at the local level than Switzerland is, and as Switzerland becomes more urban this traditional accomodation will start to break down.

If you want real information about Switzerland, I suggest a Cambridge Press book, Why Switzerland?, by Steinberg.
 
Take the gang-bangers and drug dealers out of the equation and our homicide rate is about the same as any other Western country.


So why is there more "criminal-on-criminal" murders? Are american criminals special?
 
Well I can point to a number of countries that are dirt poor and yet have very little crime rate. Some countries in Latin America and Pacific Islanders come to mind


Ad that is proof that poverty is not linked to crime?
 
Ad that is proof that poverty is not linked to crime?
Click to expand...
I guess that it would depend on what one means by linked.

As a general rule - speaking from my own experience mind you - I have seen people with little more than a shack and an outhouse who lived very pious lives with very little in terms of worldy goods who wouldn't so much as hurt a fly. Is their poverty "linked" to their abhorance of violence?

Conversely I have known walking, talking, oxygen thieves who buy into the socialist/marxist/call-it-what-you-will notion that the world "owes" them. They grew up on welfare, worked relentlessly to obtain ZERO in terms of skills that would be of use to anyone, and yet they feel that the world still "owes" them some more. They would anihilate their own grandmother if it made them a buck. Is their poverty "linked"?


BTW both of my examples are of people that I not only knew/know, but they are members of my family.

My great grandmother and great grandfather lacked worldly goods, but never considered themselves impoverished. They counted and cherished each blessing that came their way, and would give even when they had nothing.

Some of my cousins have welfare purchased apartments, cars, TVs, VCRs, Computers, ad nauseam, ad infinitum. They consider themselves to be in poverty.

Given that they are dupes of the marxist nanny-state, and violent souless ghouls into the bargain, I'd say yes, they are impoverished, but not in the way they think they are. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top