Also, blacks are far more likely to live in urban areas, and population density is correlated with crime rates (especially when you factor in poverty.)
Where are the metrics about similarly densely populated cities and the racial demographics of those cities and the crime rates of those cities? I'm not saying there is a correlation but I also would not be surprised at all if there was a correlation.
You'd have to account for differences in socioeconomic status within the city.
Most crime in cities tends to be confined to specific areas. It's more so how poverty overlaps with population density. There might be cultural issues too.
Seems like a chicken and egg situation to me. One that can never be truly flushed out as long as the whole genetics/behavior argument is too taboo to even discuss if you are applying it to humans. Are blacks dumb and violent because of their socioeconomic status or is their socioeconomic status a result of being innately dumb and violent?
If you were going to look for causes of socioeconomic problems you'd start with the fact as a people they were denied basic civil rights up into the 1960s in the US and still highly disadvantaged well into the 1980s.
You can't screw over an entire ethnic group for multiple generations and then act shocked when socioeconomic problems still exist.
I don't doubt that that is a big factor but completely ignoring everything else makes that just as bad of an argument as saying that they have lower socioeconomic status because they are innately dumb and violent. Those are the two extreme opposite ends of the argument. One says it's 100% nurture and the other says it's 100% nature. The reality is probably somewhere in the middle. Like you said, it's a complex thing with many factors. To completely discount the genetic factor is one of those science-denying things that pisses me off when I see my fellow libtards do it. It's not controversial at all until you apply it to humans and suddenly it becomes at least taboo or at the most outright lies and bullshit. All of the sudden humans are put on some pedestal and the same evolutionary mechanisms that work on every single living organism on the planet suddenly don't apply to humans. You might as well say that we're special because Jesus put us here to be special.
To be frank: there is not one piece of evidence linking crime rates to genetics.
It's not controversial at all until you apply it to humans and suddenly it becomes at least taboo or at the most outright lies and bullshit.
Because humans are not genetically different enough. Even if you wanted to make a genetic crime argument - you'd have to use IQ, and because we know, for an absolute fact that IQ can be linked to your environment, nutrition, all of those things - it still comes back to the original argument.
To put it into perspective, these results mean that the children of black Africans (or at least West Africans) are not only not scoring below the scores of low-IQ poor white children, as Jensen’s calculations would predict, they are even able to score above children of elite whites too (who go to Eton college etc).
What are the chances of a girl from a small minority group of immigrants whose home country is 2 standard deviations below the host country’s mean IQ achieving the best academic results in the host country? If the average IQ of SubSaharan African adults is equal to 11 year old Europeans, as their IQ scores estimate (Rushton, 2004), what are the chances that an African child of such adults would ever beat all European children in academic achievement? Had the low phenotypic IQ of black Africans truly been biologically caused even to some degree, such feats should be as rare as having the fastest 100 meters runner in the world coming from the slowest running ethnicity in the world. In short, what are the chances of say, an Indian immigrant to Jamaica winning the national 100 meters sprint? Even more incredible, what are the chances that the children of such “super-selected” Indian immigrant athletes would also (on average and on top) beat the children of native Jamaicans and other immigrants known for their superior athleticism?
The academic performance of the African students in the UK is even more remarkable when the well-known fact of higher black involvement in sport and athletics (at any level) is taken into account. Whereas Chinese and Indian students are not exactly expected to lead their schools or colleges to winning athletic championships, many black students are actively involved in athletics even when they have a strong academic focus. For example, a check on the Cambridge web site reveals that Chidera Ota, the UK’s best GCSE student in her cohort, was also the fastest runner in the girls 100 and 200 meters team for Cambridge (she qualified to Cambridge’s premed program after subsequently achieving straight A’s on her A-levels). Since she could not have just become a fast runner in college, it means that she achieved her academic performance in high school while being very active in athletics. It is quite plausible that the higher athletic commitments of black African students probably hinders them from achieving even further than they do in academics; it is especially difficult to develop a deep mastery of a specific academic field since this requires much more intensive focus and time commitments. On the other hand, it is also difficult for them to suppress their natural athletic (or artistic) gifts and interests for an unbalanced academic existence.
Too many people attempt to focus on the US when making these arguments.
To be frank: there is not one piece of evidence linking crime rates to genetics. At least credible evidence.
No shit. If you even thought about doing a real scientific study you would immediately be branded a nazi and your career would be ruined.
Because humans are not genetically different enough.
Wrong. If you want to get into actual values regarding genetic diversity we can do that but I'm about to go to work right now so it will have to wait a few hours.
Even if you wanted to make a genetic crime argument - you'd have to use IQ
Also wrong. IQ is certainly an aspect of behavior but it is far from the only one.
What a garbage study to cite. It's all about cherry-picked outliers. Of course outliers exist but when you are talking populations you are dealing with distribution curves. The outliers don't define them.
This shit is coming whether you like it or not. Genetics plays a much bigger role than people are willing to admit and just because a truth is uncomfortable doesn't make it untrue. It's a complex thing. There isn't just one gene that makes intelligence or physical characteristics or behavioral characteristics but hundreds if not thousands of them working in concert. The sooner we flush out the reality of the situation the sooner we will be able to get past it.
I read the abstract you posted and it was pretty wack. It's also talking about black vs white which are subjective, non-scientific terms. I'm talking about the actual genes. The environment is a factor but it is limited by the genetics. The potential lies in the genetics. You can malnourish a genius physically and mentally and he might not live up to his genetic potential but you cant take some downs syndrome baby and turn it into a genius by giving it the best food and education.
This is a typical pizza argument. He cherry picks studies that will semi confirm or confirm his view but he has little understanding of the actual facts. He’s one of the types that will say because humans are 99% genetically identical that somehow that means genetics don’t matter. He has little knowledge so he doesn’t realize that even tiny genetic differences (percentage wise) can lead to huge variations.
Yeah I know. He's going to come back with some nonsense from a psychology or social studies journal as opposed to anything resembling actual neuroscience or genetics or biology. And he will definitely ignore the fact that populations can undergo vast changes in only a few generations and when I point out that genetically, humans are much more diverse than dogs and yet nobody has a problem with the idea that dogs' intelligence and behaviours are inexorably linked to their genetics he'll try to make some argument about natural vs unnatural selection ignoring that they are both selections that use the same mechanisms of evolution. Ad nauseam.
He is like the epitome of Reddit debate. So basically someone who took intro to biology and knows how to search pub med for a study to source that can confirm your arguments. But they lack the actual knowledge or anything to actually deeply interpret the study or even see if the study is meaningful.
I see it on Reddit all the time when people argue medical stuff (I am in med school btw). Where a study will have a statistically significant result but that result isn’t meaningful in clinical practice. Also vice versa, discount a study that actually has meaningful impacts in clinical practice.
They can only see a superficial view of the study. Not look at the actual harms and benefits and real life impacts of a study. All they see is a P value because they lack the knowledge. Sorry rant over.
He acts like everyone has the time to sit and read through shit like he acts like he does. I just come on here to act retarded and he acts like this is an academic debate lol.
I've actually had this exact same debate with him like 3 or 4 times. I know he'll never admit he's wrong but I do it for the kids. I didn't even cite any of my academic journal sources or studies this time but I have many of them in my pocket. This is one of the areas where the "we believe in science" crowd will straight up deny science so I always get into this debate. Most scientists won't even touch the subject because they know they are probably going to get some results that people don't want to hear and it will be a death sentence for their career so it's one of the areas that is totally taboo.
oh you believe in science unless it tells you something that makes you uncomfortable.
Africans are so totally incapable of repressing their natural athleticism (genetic of course), that they do shittier in school? There would be hundreds of honest to god African geniuses if they weren't all cursed with being the best at running? You really believe that is the explanation?
On a scale of 1 to 10, how far up your ass is your thumb? Don’t even think about answering below a 7, because that would be a lie. You may have enjoyed Leto’s performance better but everyone else here knows damn well that statistically, evidently, and factually that Heath Ledger’s Joker was better acted, written, and designed, and was in a far better movie. That’s it. If you want to waste your time doing a study to answer a question that we can answer for you, go ahead and prove yourself wrong. If not, then just shut the hell up. If you like to have an opinion although you know most people will disagree then you can keep it to yourself, but since you chose not to, the jokes being made about you being wrong are on you, so cut the shit with criticizing people for joking about your trash opinion.
you don't have any idea what you are talking about. The science behind upvoting lolcows is to embolden them and make them feel welcome in our wholesome community. Pizza will thankfully never leave us so it doesn't matter what people do
There is literally no reason to downvote a lolcow except to pad one's pathetic ego. Downvoting reduces visibility which reduces possible spergout opportunities. You absolute retard.
American blacks are, genetically speaking, just white people with dark skin. The problem is their shitty culture which promotes drug use, shooting each other, calling each other names, and throwing rocks at me at the park.
African American culture is solely responsible for this statistic. The aforementioned “culture” includes but is not limited to: dealing drugs, shooting guns, calling me a bitchass white boy, making fun of my shoes, dating my crush Lexi in highschool goDAMMIT
From what I understand, there's a serious amount of research supporting a link between density and overall crime in cities.
That may be true when comparing cities with pop >250k with cities with pop <20, but among cities with a population 100k or larger, the correlation between density and violent crime is insignificant.
I'm not going to think a reddit comment overturns something that has a consensus in criminal justice research.
God damn Jimmy Weston two timed me again! I reckon I'll put a bullet straight through his skull, just have to saddle up for a week straight to hunt 'im down!
Shit is situational, just depends who owns the streets any given decade. White people were shooting the living fuck out of each other when booze was illegal.
apparently it includes suicide by gun as gun violence homicide too i was wondering why austria and finland is so high since they almost never have gun based homicides
105 comments
1 AutoModerator 2019-11-29
do not comment or vote in linked threads
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1 SnapshillBot 2019-11-29
No wonder you have an army of pretentious neckbeard losers following you around
Snapshots:
I am just a simple bot, *not** a moderator of this subreddit* | bot subreddit | contact the maintainers
1 professorshillphd 2019-11-29
I like how misleading that graph that is, as if firearm homicide is the only relevant metric when discussing guns.
1 bebackinanhourorso 2019-11-29
Don't most of them live in the south of America?
1 Kaiser-romulus 2019-11-29
Yeah majority of the blacks in America live in the south
1 bebackinanhourorso 2019-11-29
Isn't the south the poorest? So even if it is more violent wouldnt economic reasons be to blame.
1 Gysinator 2019-11-29
Cope
1 DrunkenRecidivist 2019-11-29
Where are the metrics about similarly densely populated cities and the racial demographics of those cities and the crime rates of those cities? I'm not saying there is a correlation but I also would not be surprised at all if there was a correlation.
1 professorshillphd 2019-11-29
You'd have to account for differences in socioeconomic status within the city.
Most crime in cities tends to be confined to specific areas. It's more so how poverty overlaps with population density. There might be cultural issues too.
1 Gysinator 2019-11-29
Is there something special about those areas or its population that's different to other areas of cities? 🤔 Except socioeconomic factors, of course
1 Gysinator 2019-11-29
Cope
1 EyeseeFN 2019-11-29
Please do go on. I need to hear more of this.
1 DrunkenRecidivist 2019-11-29
Seems like a chicken and egg situation to me. One that can never be truly flushed out as long as the whole genetics/behavior argument is too taboo to even discuss if you are applying it to humans. Are blacks dumb and violent because of their socioeconomic status or is their socioeconomic status a result of being innately dumb and violent?
1 professorshillphd 2019-11-29
If you were going to look for causes of socioeconomic problems you'd start with the fact as a people they were denied basic civil rights up into the 1960s in the US and still highly disadvantaged well into the 1980s.
You can't screw over an entire ethnic group for multiple generations and then act shocked when socioeconomic problems still exist.
1 DrunkenRecidivist 2019-11-29
I don't doubt that that is a big factor but completely ignoring everything else makes that just as bad of an argument as saying that they have lower socioeconomic status because they are innately dumb and violent. Those are the two extreme opposite ends of the argument. One says it's 100% nurture and the other says it's 100% nature. The reality is probably somewhere in the middle. Like you said, it's a complex thing with many factors. To completely discount the genetic factor is one of those science-denying things that pisses me off when I see my fellow libtards do it. It's not controversial at all until you apply it to humans and suddenly it becomes at least taboo or at the most outright lies and bullshit. All of the sudden humans are put on some pedestal and the same evolutionary mechanisms that work on every single living organism on the planet suddenly don't apply to humans. You might as well say that we're special because Jesus put us here to be special.
1 professorshillphd 2019-11-29
To be frank: there is not one piece of evidence linking crime rates to genetics.
Because humans are not genetically different enough. Even if you wanted to make a genetic crime argument - you'd have to use IQ, and because we know, for an absolute fact that IQ can be linked to your environment, nutrition, all of those things - it still comes back to the original argument.
If you want an actual detailed look at this:
Too many people attempt to focus on the US when making these arguments.
1 LongPostBot 2019-11-29
https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/001/038/094/0a1.jpg
I am a bot. Contact for questions
1 DrunkenRecidivist 2019-11-29
No shit. If you even thought about doing a real scientific study you would immediately be branded a nazi and your career would be ruined.
Wrong. If you want to get into actual values regarding genetic diversity we can do that but I'm about to go to work right now so it will have to wait a few hours.
Also wrong. IQ is certainly an aspect of behavior but it is far from the only one.
What a garbage study to cite. It's all about cherry-picked outliers. Of course outliers exist but when you are talking populations you are dealing with distribution curves. The outliers don't define them.
This shit is coming whether you like it or not. Genetics plays a much bigger role than people are willing to admit and just because a truth is uncomfortable doesn't make it untrue. It's a complex thing. There isn't just one gene that makes intelligence or physical characteristics or behavioral characteristics but hundreds if not thousands of them working in concert. The sooner we flush out the reality of the situation the sooner we will be able to get past it.
1 professorshillphd 2019-11-29
You didn't read anything in that article.
1 DrunkenRecidivist 2019-11-29
I read the abstract you posted and it was pretty wack. It's also talking about black vs white which are subjective, non-scientific terms. I'm talking about the actual genes. The environment is a factor but it is limited by the genetics. The potential lies in the genetics. You can malnourish a genius physically and mentally and he might not live up to his genetic potential but you cant take some downs syndrome baby and turn it into a genius by giving it the best food and education.
1 Kaiser-romulus 2019-11-29
This is a typical pizza argument. He cherry picks studies that will semi confirm or confirm his view but he has little understanding of the actual facts. He’s one of the types that will say because humans are 99% genetically identical that somehow that means genetics don’t matter. He has little knowledge so he doesn’t realize that even tiny genetic differences (percentage wise) can lead to huge variations.
1 DrunkenRecidivist 2019-11-29
Yeah I know. He's going to come back with some nonsense from a psychology or social studies journal as opposed to anything resembling actual neuroscience or genetics or biology. And he will definitely ignore the fact that populations can undergo vast changes in only a few generations and when I point out that genetically, humans are much more diverse than dogs and yet nobody has a problem with the idea that dogs' intelligence and behaviours are inexorably linked to their genetics he'll try to make some argument about natural vs unnatural selection ignoring that they are both selections that use the same mechanisms of evolution. Ad nauseam.
1 Kaiser-romulus 2019-11-29
He is like the epitome of Reddit debate. So basically someone who took intro to biology and knows how to search pub med for a study to source that can confirm your arguments. But they lack the actual knowledge or anything to actually deeply interpret the study or even see if the study is meaningful.
I see it on Reddit all the time when people argue medical stuff (I am in med school btw). Where a study will have a statistically significant result but that result isn’t meaningful in clinical practice. Also vice versa, discount a study that actually has meaningful impacts in clinical practice.
They can only see a superficial view of the study. Not look at the actual harms and benefits and real life impacts of a study. All they see is a P value because they lack the knowledge. Sorry rant over.
1 DrunkenRecidivist 2019-11-29
I love when he cites some 50 page study and then retorts
Umm no I didn't and neither did you
1 Kaiser-romulus 2019-11-29
He acts like everyone has the time to sit and read through shit like he acts like he does. I just come on here to act retarded and he acts like this is an academic debate lol.
1 DrunkenRecidivist 2019-11-29
I've actually had this exact same debate with him like 3 or 4 times. I know he'll never admit he's wrong but I do it for the kids. I didn't even cite any of my academic journal sources or studies this time but I have many of them in my pocket. This is one of the areas where the "we believe in science" crowd will straight up deny science so I always get into this debate. Most scientists won't even touch the subject because they know they are probably going to get some results that people don't want to hear and it will be a death sentence for their career so it's one of the areas that is totally taboo.
1 Kat_B0T 2019-11-29
Once you figure out how to defeat pizza, he blocks you. That’s what happened to me
1 Kaiser-romulus 2019-11-29
Yeah he’s blocked me now lol. Once you figure out his deal he’s easy to annoy and piss off lol
1 Kat_B0T 2019-11-29
Yup, it’s actually quite entertaining if you do it right. Just make him spin his wheels and get Cheeto dust smudge all over his keyboard/phone
1 Kaiser-romulus 2019-11-29
His obsession with conservatives is truly getting out of hand these days. He really can’t go ten minutes without mentioning it.
1 Kat_B0T 2019-11-29
As a centrist, his sperging just makes me want to push right wing memes
1 bweep 2019-11-29
So Africans don't achieve academically because they are too good at sports? That sounds more than a little ridiculous
1 professorshillphd 2019-11-29
No, he's saying it might be one factor - which makes sense. Many African students are expected to be good at sports, too, and often compete.
When some Chinese student shows up at your college you don't expect him to start running track and field.
1 bweep 2019-11-29
Africans are so totally incapable of repressing their natural athleticism (genetic of course), that they do shittier in school? There would be hundreds of honest to god African geniuses if they weren't all cursed with being the best at running? You really believe that is the explanation?
1 200iqBigBrain 2019-11-29
You're not even acknowledging the a major source of the issue which is the "culture"
1 DrunkenRecidivist 2019-11-29
Definitely has a big part to play but I roll that into "environmental factors"
1 Kaiser-romulus 2019-11-29
I love how your need to argue over powers your normal hatred of before
1 rbsh123 2019-11-29
I could swear this is a pasta
1 [deleted] 2019-11-29
[removed]
1 verager 2019-11-29
I'd say all those complications account for maybe like 10% on the outside.
1 Chooseausername454 2019-11-29
pUrElY eCoNoMiC fACtOrS
1 ThinkingOnce 2019-11-29
The data in the graph is also made up.
Finlands homicide rate is 1.2 and not 3.3, Austria is at 0.66, France is at 1.3. Only Canada is right.
1 professorshillphd 2019-11-29
Well, I think when dealing with racial crime stats like this on a sub such as that you expect the data to be inaccurate.
1 ThinkingOnce 2019-11-29
On the other hand the homicide rate for African American is too low, though same goes for White Americans.
1 professorshillphd 2019-11-29
On a scale of 1 to 10, how far up your ass is your thumb? Don’t even think about answering below a 7, because that would be a lie. You may have enjoyed Leto’s performance better but everyone else here knows damn well that statistically, evidently, and factually that Heath Ledger’s Joker was better acted, written, and designed, and was in a far better movie. That’s it. If you want to waste your time doing a study to answer a question that we can answer for you, go ahead and prove yourself wrong. If not, then just shut the hell up. If you like to have an opinion although you know most people will disagree then you can keep it to yourself, but since you chose not to, the jokes being made about you being wrong are on you, so cut the shit with criticizing people for joking about your trash opinion.
1 ThinkingOnce 2019-11-29
You were put down, in the future please refrain from discussing subjects you have no education in.
1 IraqiLobster 2019-11-29
Professor cope
1 Kaiser-romulus 2019-11-29
Professor diddler phd
1 watermark1917 2019-11-29
The average black family had a wealth of 7k
Average white fault has a wealth of over 100k
Why don't we compare black people to other groups with a net wealth of no more than 7k
1 DeliciousPaste 2019-11-29
Like any poor Asian country?
1 EyeseeFN 2019-11-29
What about poor African countries. You know since the ethicity and all.
1 Burnnoticelover 2019-11-29
Why is everybody downvoting the lolsheep?
1 chimpan_z 2019-11-29
-- mdefugee brainlets
1 200iqBigBrain 2019-11-29
you don't have any idea what you are talking about. The science behind upvoting lolcows is to embolden them and make them feel welcome in our wholesome community. Pizza will thankfully never leave us so it doesn't matter what people do
1 chimpan_z 2019-11-29
There is literally no reason to downvote a lolcow except to pad one's pathetic ego. Downvoting reduces visibility which reduces possible spergout opportunities. You absolute retard.
1 retardedjewboy69 2019-11-29
Yikes calm down sweaty
1 Kaiser-romulus 2019-11-29
Because he is a lowcow by definition but he won’t ever leave so he can be downvoted
1 chimpan_z 2019-11-29
Cope
1 Mayos_side 2019-11-29
Their skull shape would say otherwise.
1 911roofer 2019-11-29
American blacks are, genetically speaking, just white people with dark skin. The problem is their shitty culture which promotes drug use, shooting each other, calling each other names, and throwing rocks at me at the park.
1 yeetsaucepeteross 2019-11-29
African American culture is solely responsible for this statistic. The aforementioned “culture” includes but is not limited to: dealing drugs, shooting guns, calling me a bitchass white boy, making fun of my shoes, dating my crush Lexi in highschool goDAMMIT
1 jaredschaffer27 2019-11-29
Of all cities in the US with population >100k, the correlation between density and violent crime is .0783 aka nothing.
The correlation between violent crime and the simple area of the city is .175.
White population % correlation: -.273.
Black population % correlation: .655.
Hispanic population % correlation: -.107.
Asian population % correlation: -.287
1 professorshillphd 2019-11-29
Yeah, this reddit comment has overturned a pretty serious amount of research:
1 professorshillphd 2019-11-29
From what I understand, there's a serious amount of research supporting a link between density and overall crime in cities.
I can go dig up those papers, but I'm not going to think a reddit comment overturns something that has a consensus in criminal justice research.
1 jaredschaffer27 2019-11-29
That may be true when comparing cities with pop >250k with cities with pop <20, but among cities with a population 100k or larger, the correlation between density and violent crime is insignificant.
I can upload the entire thing which relies on The Census and the FBI as its sole sources.
1 ineedmorealts 2019-11-29
Oh one hand this is factually acculturate, on the other hand C O P E H A R D E R
1 _B1_ 2019-11-29
We need to make weed completely illegal again and legalize heroin
1 bebackinanhourorso 2019-11-29
I will only treat myself to #4 straight off the brick so it looks like chipped white marble.
1 hyledog 2019-11-29
We can go back to the Wild West times when cough syrup was just morphine mixed with liquid cocaine
1 rbsh123 2019-11-29
Wild West had ridiculously low gun violence rates
1 2Manadeal2btw 2019-11-29
because everyone had guns.
1 somestupidname1 2019-11-29
God damn Jimmy Weston two timed me again! I reckon I'll put a bullet straight through his skull, just have to saddle up for a week straight to hunt 'im down!
1 Kellere31 2019-11-29
DUGHHHH
1 southy1995 2019-11-29
We should sell cases of laudanum at CVS and Costco.
1 Lehk 2019-11-29
And methamphetamine
1 tHeSiD 2019-11-29
free weed and subsidized heroin/cocaine
1 BroughtToYouBySprite 2019-11-29
Inshallah!
1 Lehk 2019-11-29
But only heroin with carfentanil hot spots
1 BannedAccountNumber6 2019-11-29
Not only legalize heroin but make it mandatory
1 Kaiser-romulus 2019-11-29
Dude nigger lmao
1 imadethistoshitpostt 2019-11-29
Where can I read your thesis, Dr?
1 Kaiser-romulus 2019-11-29
Infowars.com
1 sup3r_hero 2019-11-29
inhale
1 BroughtToYouBySprite 2019-11-29
1 911roofer 2019-11-29
Twelve
1 self_safety_advocate 2019-11-29
Days
1 dabb710 2019-11-29
Away
1 Costanzas_Wallet 2019-11-29
Of Christmas
1 Kaiser-romulus 2019-11-29
35%
1 look_up_the_NAP 2019-11-29
Of children
1 2Manadeal2btw 2019-11-29
burn coal.
1 HodorTheDoorHolder_ 2019-11-29
For warmth
1 Kaiser-romulus 2019-11-29
Pizza has diddled
1 CommissarCletus 2019-11-29
Have become
1 ClubbinGuido 2019-11-29
Niggers sure do love thier cocaine and weed.
1 Kaiser-romulus 2019-11-29
Wow really??? Next you are gonna tell me they like shooting each other and being single mothers
1 CommissarCletus 2019-11-29
bro
1 Kaiser-romulus 2019-11-29
Yes?
1 CommissarCletus 2019-11-29
w/roooosh
1 collectijism 2019-11-29
Lol the cartels sell avocados like making shit legal will slow them down
1 Mrtheliger 2019-11-29
Yo what the fuck why are they being so civil in there. It actually makes me want to join in the conversation
1 kermit_was_wrong 2019-11-29
Shit is situational, just depends who owns the streets any given decade. White people were shooting the living fuck out of each other when booze was illegal.
1 Iwanttobefree27 2019-11-29
is that graph real?
1 searingsky 2019-11-29
of course not
1 Iwanttobefree27 2019-11-29
apparently it includes suicide by gun as gun violence homicide too i was wondering why austria and finland is so high since they almost never have gun based homicides