Serious question...

Serious question, why is it that it seems that all the pro-fun states (and some countries) have a higher crime rate than the no-fun ones? You know, Alaska vs California, shit even Tennessee is higher than Massachusetts or Hawaii. The argument "yes but there are other influencing factors other than gun laws" always seems like a cop-out argument.
Pic unrelated

Attached: 1528080981785.jpg (1728x1541, 328K)

Other urls found in this thread:

chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1150&context=law_and_economics
law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

it's a recent phenomenon related to the rural meth epidemic, if you look at the historical data it's not there before 2000.

You have no power here.

Non-whites.

Do your pro fun states include
>angry natives
>poor people
>or large populations of niggers?
(If so you may be entitled to financial compensation)

But seriously, these anti gun state are populated by faggots, liberals, pussies and retards. These kind of people dont commit crimes nearly as much as the people mentioned above.

Mexico has incredibly strict gun control laws which is why violent crime in Mexico is so amazingly rare compared to the US

Poor people are more likely to commit crime

>these anti gun states

In larger cities might fudge statistics or not accurately report crimes to make it look like there has being a reduction in crime is taking place to get more city money for dem programs. Number fudging official numbers on crime is nothing new.

Like when NYPD threw a tantrum and stopped working for a few days because the mayor said something they didn't like. Crime went down dramatically because they weren't out looking for it. Life went on.

Ok this stuff about poor rurals, meth and fudged statistics makes a lot of sense
Sorry for the shit thread but my faith was wavering

Although race is *usually* a large factor, there's a statistical explanation for Alaska (and Nevada, which is also commonly brought up). Alaska is basically one city surrounded by a whole lot of uninhabited land, and cities are basically always higher-crime areas. Whereas a state like Illinois has a large enough rural population to somewhat offset the murder rate of the Democratic Republic of Chicongo, Alaska has no such rural population. So the murder rate of Alaska is essentially the murder rate of Anchorage.

That isn't even true.

chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1150&context=law_and_economics

>cities are basically always higher-crime areas
Was it always the case? If not, what has changed and made cities less safe?

This is a good argument.

I couldn't tell you for sure, though I'd suspect so. Higher population density typically means more resources to fight over and lower social cohesion (think: millions of faceless people in NYC vs. the small town where everyone knows each other). There are rare exceptions like Tokyo, though, so it's hard to really pin it down to only a few variables.

most of the world is no fun, or very restrictive. And when people cherry pick their data to support their narrative, they'll focus on the ones with a low crime rate(Japan, UK, the Netherlands), if they're anti gun. Or they'll focus on the ones with a high crime rate, (Brazil, Russia, Mexico) if they're pro guns.

Both are wrong though. Guns are not really an indicator in any way of the actual crime rate.

fuck off shill.

Please don't bully my faith wavered but I'm okay now

Attached: 1526519169455.jpg (992x1305, 477K)

I'll give you one guess.

Attached: hNco1aX_d(2).jpg (640x409, 28K)

>Guns are not really an indicator in any way of the actual crime rate.
It's like everything points to race, as in brown and black people being more prone to violent crime. Why do we need to dance around the obvious issue?

Idaho yo

sauce? would save if sauce

Reported & catalogued crime. Common man you're smarter then this.

ethnicity is part of it. But that's not all. The gini coefficiency is another, equally important part.

It's always the case. At least so far as crimes against other people.

We are not meant to live on top of one another.

Nigs flock to cities for easier gibs and infrastructure, as they cannot create small towns of their own

More guns equals more gun violence.

Because pro-gun states tend to be further on the right in the political spectrum and right-wing economics like "trickle-down economics" don't work and just result in mass poverty with a few very rich people.

Attached: eL7_BFQW3XfTroeyzv9KqX8CaaWStPn-xjKF44qqHxY.png (640x427, 323K)

law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

Attached: Capture2.png (429x380, 71K)

Alaska here. Fuck off shitlib OP, The murder rate is low as fuck here and as much as the newsMiner tries to play it up we don’t have California style gangster wars. We have lots of drunk cunts that do drunk cunt things like drive around at 2am and pop a few rounds off. Lots of cousin rape from the villages and meth is spreading like a zombie movie. We have problems but if you think it’s more dangerous here than California your completely fucked in the head.

Attached: D981F4DF-A643-491E-BC25-4572A22E7BF4.jpg (1024x768, 140K)

Non-whites.

Poverty. Availability of firearms is entirely irrelevant.

Violent crime rate of 804/100k compared to Californias 445/100k
Muder at 7/100k vs Californias 5/100k.
In just about every category Alaska has higher crime than the average.

Gun crime is pejoratively a social issue, not a gun issue. Red states have gun crime because of a slumping rural economy and drug epidemic, just like how inner cities in blue states have rampant drug crime due to similar socioeconomic issues and are cramped so close together that crime is rampant.

Also niggers.

Attached: 1368198567457.gif (390x293, 2.95M)

The sources are listed right in the image, user.

Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine are basically the safest states in the country, despite permissive gun laws.

Fuck off shareblue.

You guys actually have mosquitoes? I grew up in northern IL near chicago and we did. Moved to vastly superior southern IL and no mosquitoes

Dafuk are you smoking? If you look at a list of high crime areas in the US you will see a smattering of pro and anti gun places, because gun ownership does not correlate to criminal activity.

Alaska is rough. Men go there to get away from trouble and end up bringing it with them.

New Hampshire and Vermont both have some of the lowest crime rates in the country even lower than the majority of europe. Checkmate faggot

Attached: 1498952759899.jpg (226x223, 12K)

Attached: Safest Nation on the Planet.jpg (494x495, 57K)

>white USA
>2.5 per 100k murder rate

Ask me how I know they're lumping beaners in with whites.

alaska has horrible mosquitoes. even the wildlife are driven insane by them.

They're horrific, the running joke is that they're the state bird of Alaska. It's all the snow melt and low forests that creates vast quantities of marshland.

>poverty
>poverty
>poverty
>poverty

Oh yeah, and

>addiction, drugs, and shitty lives

Fixed and improved that for you.

*Self induced poverty and perpetuating there shitty culture of violence and broken homes

Fixed it for you

Also states that are intertwined with prosperity brought in from Massachusetts and Canada. Border prosperity, how does it work?

It's really not. In colonial and post-revolution america, there wasn't really anything we'd recognize as a police force. The british system used the army for a lot of law enforcement, which is exactly why the founders were so concerned about not having a standing army. But with no military oppression, law enforcement at every level naturally took over that niche, and became incredibly intrusive compared to its earlier role.
If the founders could see our law enforcement today, from Brailsford and company to the Sheriff of Broward County to the ATF, they'd scratch their heads trying to figure out why we worked so hard to create our own breed of lobsterbacks after they kicked the English ones out.

It's a ________ people problem...

Huh. I visited alaska many years ago and i didnt notice them but it was early spring and still pretty cold

Pretty sure user was being sarcastic

Attached: 03947b38-f7fc-4de5-b708-9f57331d3f09_text.gif (400x168, 380K)

Cause places that care more about fun than safety care more about fun than safety.

I’m sure it’s totally unrelated to the fact that southern states have significantly more blacks than the northern states.

Speaking of cop outs

>The argument "yes but there are other influencing factors other than gun laws" always seems like a cop-out argument.
So basically you want to know why noncommie states have higher crime, but saying the actual answer won't do for you. You want the fucking weapons board of Jow Forums to say weapons are the problem? Why the fuck do you post here?

Gee population density sure is a funny thing aint it