On another blogsite, (Folkbum) there's a discussion of concealed carry. A second blogger, the Shark, kicked in with his own take on the issue.
Clearly, Folkbum's Jay picked a very weak argument--and Tom Sowell tells us why:
The total number of murders in the United States in 1960 was lower than in 1950, 1940, or 1930 -- even though the population was growing and two new states had been added. The murder rate, in proportion to population, in 1960 was half of what it had been in 1934.
Every one of these beneficial trends sharply reversed after liberal notions gained ascendancy during in the 1960s. By 1974, the murder rate had doubled. Even liberal icon Sargent Shriver, head of the agency directing the "war on poverty," admitted that "venereal disease has skyrocketed" even though "we have had more clinics, more pills, and more sex education than ever in history."
While Folkbum argues, in effect, that there is little to fear, thus little which actually requires concealed weapon-carrying, the statistics cited by Sowell would argue differently.
And even though MOST violent crime happens between parties who are acquainted, NOT ALL violent crime happens that way. From today's news (WISN/1130):
A few armed robberies on the east side over the weekend, and police think they are related. Three street robberies happened early Sunday at Fratney and Park Place, Farwell and Bradford, and Oakland and Kenwood. At this point, police do not have a description of the suspects.
and:
A man is in critical condition after being shot on Milwaukee's north side. It happened early Monday near 11th and North. The man was shot in the neck. Police say five or six people tried to rob the man and his friends in the McDonald's parking lot. The suspects sped off on bicycles after the shooting.
One can bet serious money that these incidents were NOT between people 'who knew each other.'
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
You're demonstrating, again, the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy--that two things happening in conjunction or consecutively require that one cause the other.
In the 1960s, people tried to blame increases in crime and other bad behaviors on everything from comic books to desegregation. A lack of fear is a creative and new one, I'll give you that.
No, Jay--perhaps I was not clear.
The "fear" which you 'don't want' (per your blogpost) is justified by the increase in crime since 1960.
In other words, Jay, "fear-less-ness," is, perhaps, just whistling past the graveyard.
And the real cause for the social sturm und drang is the ascendancy of the State as a substitute for God, which lies behind the "welfare state" of the 1960's-to-date.
Post a Comment