Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alighieri who wrote (690062)	12/25/2012 5:28:37 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574056

>> What I posted is Aussie government data...not media anything. Just simple, undeniable facts... Undeniably incomplete. This is direct from the Australian Institute of Criminology website: Recorded assault increased again in 2007, to 840 per 100,000, compared with 623 per 100,000 in 1996. The 2007 rate was the highest recorded since 1996. The rate for robbery peaked in 2001. Rates have declined by 38 percent since 2001, to 86 per 100,000 per year. T he rate of kidnapping remained between three and four per 100,000 per year from 1996 to 2007. The homicide rate was 1.9 per 100,000 in 1996 (which includes the 35 victims of the Port Arthur massacre) and was at its highest in 1999, at 2.0 per 100,000. In 2007, the rate was 1.3 per 100,000, the lowest recorded (since 1996). The rate of recorded sexual assault increased between 1997 and 2007, from 78 to 94 persons per 100,000 per year. So, while there is been a reduction of homicides from 1.9 to 1.3 -- at least for the most recent year, there have been dramatically more people assaulted and sexually assaulted in the same period. Which was the point I was trying to make: That you are just getting the statistics that would seem to support your case, and ignoring those that flatly prove it wrong. But the Australian example is but one; if you look at other nations like England, Norway, and South Africa, the evidence is even more damning. You can't just say, "Oh, there are fewer homicides than there once were" and assume that gun bans are a good idea. You have to look at the number of crimes that MIGHT have been avoided. ======== As to your refusal to read the article because you disagree with the viewpoint, I"m not really surprised. You wouldn't want to actually learn anything, would you?