These Are The Most Violent States In America

[Pogo]

Logic is a lost art...

The vast majority of violent crime is perpetrated by blacks and Latino thugs. Your article dances around it by blaming it on "unskilled young men", and other lame ass economic excuses.

If you are unwilling to address the real problem, you're not going to solve it.

The vast majority of violent crime is perpetrated by the poor/lower classes.
Fixed it for ya.
The lower classes are, of course, established by .... the upper classes.

Gee, you do realize that they all have large Democrat-controlled cities, don't you???

So let's do a better comparison and look at actual cities....

The 11 Most Dangerous U.S. Cities - US News

Gee, do you realize virtually all cities are "Democrat-controlled"?
I'm sure it makes a huuuuuge difference at that level. Why those wacko Republicans would prolly be collecting garbage on Thursdays instead of Wednesdays.

What a couple of morons.
If cum hoc fallacies were water molecules, USMB would be the fucking Pacific Ocean.

"The lower classes are, of course, established by .... the upper classes."

Nah, the lower classes are, of course, established by....their own self-destructive culture.

Horseshit.
Only the upper class has the power to establish classes. That's what fucking makes them the upper class.

 

[Dana7360]

al

Click here to see the most violent states in America.

What I find very interesting is that all but one state is red. Missouri is purple.

I guess all those guns in those red states are doing what we in the blue states say they will. Cause more crime.

Meanwhile the states with the least violence are mostly Blue. My Blue state is on that list of the least violent states.

 

[Pogo]

Notice how right wingers want to explain all the violence in their states on blacks and Hispanics. Even when they are in charge, their failure is always someone else s fault.

What cities run by "right wingers" are more violent than those run by so-called liberals?

What cities at this time are run by any right wingers? Are there any?

What a dumb ass question is that?

What's dumbass is the entire mindless premise that a political spectrum has some kind of thing to do with how a city develops socially. That of course is a product of its cultural history and its economy, not left-and-right politics. The idea of attaching some kind of judgment to the letter after the mayor's name is partisan hack insanity. The only reason mayors and city councils have political parties AT ALL (they didn't used to, since left-right political philsophies have no function at that level) is that political party machines were established as a way to organize voting blocs, and thereby acquire power.

Some of the retards on this site don't have a clue in the world what the purpose of a political party is. It ain't to represent an ideology --- it is to acquire power. It happens that the Democratic Party has organized its base in cities far better than the RP has, just as the Republican Party has organized itself far better in suburbs. I have yet to hear anyone essplain to me how a "Republican approach" to which day the trash is picked up differs from a "Democratic approach". Because there isn't one. This cum hoc bullshit gets trotted out again and again, even though it never stopped being the cum hoc fallacy it is. And that's because its proponents aren't listening to reason -- they're listening only to the partisan hack demagogue bloggers who write their script for them, imagining some sort of 'scoreboard' to put points on.

That sort of superficial sound-bite intellectual sloth makes me want to puke my guts out.

 

[Pogo]

The vast majority of violent crime is perpetrated by blacks and Latino thugs. Your article dances around it by blaming it on "unskilled young men", and other lame ass economic excuses.

If you are unwilling to address the real problem, you're not going to solve it.

So.... deflecting off to bigoted bullshit about ethnicities is "addressing the real problem", is it?

Classic squatter comeback. You can't prove me wrong because the facts are on my side, so scream "bigot".

I don't need to scream --- it's right there in your post. You took the initiative to define what is clearly a class issue into an ethnic one, thereby implying yet another cum hoc fallacy.

Your task then becomes to show how, in this case, "blacks and Latinos" perpetrate violent crime on account of their being black or Latino. And if you disagree with my assessment you'll have to do that on the basis of race/ethnicity, and not socioeconomic class.

Good luck with that one.

 

[Dana7360]

Notice how right wingers want to explain all the violence in their states on blacks and Hispanics. Even when they are in charge, their failure is always someone else s fault.

I just found it interesting....and yes, conservatives are nortorious of pointing the blame on minorities.....you do know, to this day, they blame slavery on us?

I think it's funny that they say that the crime is in the big cities of those states and all in the cities are democrats.

Yet those states are red and have been red for a long time. If most of the people of those states are in the cities and most in the cities are democratic then how did those states elect republican majorities for so many years?

Then look at the list of states that are the least violent. Most are Blue. Those states also have large cities with mostly democratic people. The conservatives say that it's democrats who are violent. Yet those Blue states are the least violent.

The republicans twist themselves in knots to point their own blame at everyone else. They NEVER take ANY responsibility for what they do or say.

The bottom line, all those red states with very relaxed gun laws, low taxes so they don't have the proper police force or community services or proper education opportunities for all, are the ones that are the most violent.

 

[Vandalshandle]

I'm really surprised that there is so much violence in Oklahoma, because I did not realize that many blacks where left there, after the white racial riot in Tulsa that burned down both black hospitals and left 10,000 blacks homeless;

Tulsa race riot - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[Obiwan]

Pogo

So you're claiming criminal behavior is caused by socioeconomic class??? Gee, I wonder who all the welfare recipients who want all the free shit vote for???

Thank you for the honesty to admit that the Democrats have all those criminals in their ranks.

 

[Pogo]

Bull SHIT. The sociocultural background of cities is what determines their character -- not the political party machine of who runs it

That's quite the deflection. You are trying to shift the blame towards the "sociocultural background" of a city. Sorry, but cities are run by policies and laws, those policies and laws happen to be enforced by Democratic leadership.

No such "shift" is necessary -- it's how culture fucking works. In order for your insipid cum hoc fallacy to find validity you'd have to show how "Republican mayors" pass city ordinances against violent crime and "Democratic mayors" don't. That of course is as ludicrous as the fallacy itself. Murders, assaults and rapes are not governed by city ordinances.

The mere fact that some city has had Democratic mayors for 100 years (at the same time the definition of both parties has radically changed) demonstrates that what we're looking at is a machine, not a philosophy. And your suggestion that the citizenry will always blindly follow whatever the laws are is beyond inane. Neither criminals, nor people in general, are motivated by what the law allows or doesn't allow. They're motivated by self-interest.

This is quite similar to you arguments on gun control. Blame the gun, not the criminal. Hence "blame the citizens, not the party."

Pa-freaking-thetic.

I've never made an argument like that in my life. Your strawman fallacy fails just as the cum hoc did.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I'm really surprised that there is so much violence in Oklahoma, because I did not realize that many blacks where left there, after the white racial riot in Tulsa that burned down both black hospitals and left 10,000 blacks homeless;

Tulsa race riot - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

You left there in 1921, did you sploogy?

 

[2aguy]

See what I mean? Not only willing to look stupid, but to keep on doing it. Post after post.

Say lightweight, why don't you tell us what makes "violent" cities in other countries. You know, where "Democrats" and "Republicans" don't exist.

Dumbassssss.....

Summa y'all make an excellent argument that the right to vote should be tied to some kind of intelligence test.

That's easy asshole...left wing social, education and law enforcement theories.......our democrats follow them here, and screw up our cities, their left wing equivalent ruins things over seas...moron....

 

[2aguy]

Bull SHIT. The sociocultural background of cities is what determines their character -- not the political party machine of who runs it

That's quite the deflection. You are trying to shift the blame towards the "sociocultural background" of a city. Sorry, but cities are run by policies and laws, those policies and laws happen to be enforced by Democratic leadership.

No such "shift" is necessary -- it's how culture fucking works. In order for your insipid cum hoc fallacy to find validity you'd have to show how "Republican mayors" pass city ordinances against violent crime and "Democratic mayors" don't. That of course is as ludicrous as the fallacy itself. Murders, assaults and rapes are not governed by city ordinances.

The mere fact that some city has had Democratic mayors for 100 years (at the same time the definition of both parties has radically changed) demonstrates that what we're looking at is a machine, not a philosophy. And your suggestion that the citizenry will always blindly follow whatever the laws are is beyond inane. Neither criminals, nor people in general, are motivated by what the law allows or doesn't allow. They're motivated by self-interest.

This is quite similar to you arguments on gun control. Blame the gun, not the criminal. Hence "blame the citizens, not the party."

Pa-freaking-thetic.

I've never made an argument like that in my life. Your strawman fallacy fails just as the cum hoc did.

so asshole.....there is no difference in how Rudy Guiliani handled crime vs. the mayors before him did? Or deblasio is handling it now? You are pretty fucking stupid....

 

[2aguy]

Brooklyn is currently enjoying essentially it's lowest crime rate in almost 50 years.

And is still only safer than 37 percent of all the cities in the US. The lower third. Meaning that 63% of America is safer than Brooklyn. It also doesn't mean much when the crime rate in Brooklyn is twice the rate of the rest of New York State. Also, according to the NYPD as of March of this year, murders in NYC have risen 20%. Last I checked, Brooklyn is one of the five boroughs that make up New York City. Therefore, all of this comes under the leadership of a Democratic Mayor.

My point is that the crime rate notwithstanding, Brooklyn is one of the most sought-after places to live in the entire world.

Condos in Brooklyn sell for 8 figures.

I already pointed out over several posts that rich, white democrats always make sure the parts of cities where they live have plenty of police protection........they just fail to spend the money on police for the poor parts of their cities...another democrat policy.

 

[Pogo]

See what I mean? Not only willing to look stupid, but to keep on doing it. Post after post.

Say lightweight, why don't you tell us what makes "violent" cities in other countries. You know, where "Democrats" and "Republicans" don't exist.

Dumbassssss.....

Summa y'all make an excellent argument that the right to vote should be tied to some kind of intelligence test.

That's easy asshole...left wing social, education and law enforcement theories.......our democrats follow them here, and screw up our cities, their left wing equivalent ruins things over seas...moron....

​

It's hot outside. We need more pirates.

 

[2aguy]

al

Click here to see the most violent states in America.

What I find very interesting is that all but one state is red. Missouri is purple.

I guess all those guns in those red states are doing what we in the blue states say they will. Cause more crime.

Meanwhile the states with the least violence are mostly Blue. My Blue state is on that list of the least violent states.

Again...the crime cities are all run by democrats...Tenessee is a red state, but it's 6 largest cities are all run by democrats...and two of them...Memphis and Nashville are always on the most violent lists.......and of course some of those red states are border states or states with ports........that is where we have all of our drug violence....

and port cities in Australia, and France are where they have major gun crime too....

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Brooklyn is currently enjoying essentially it's lowest crime rate in almost 50 years.

And is still only safer than 37 percent of all the cities in the US. The lower third. Meaning that 63% of America is safer than Brooklyn. It also doesn't mean much when the crime rate in Brooklyn is twice the rate of the rest of New York State. Also, according to the NYPD as of March of this year, murders in NYC have risen 20%. Last I checked, Brooklyn is one of the five boroughs that make up New York City. Therefore, all of this comes under the leadership of a Democratic Mayor.

My point is that the crime rate notwithstanding, Brooklyn is one of the most sought-after places to live in the entire world.

Condos in Brooklyn sell for 8 figures.

I already pointed out over several posts that rich, white democrats always make sure the parts of cities where they live have plenty of police protection........they just fail to spend the money on police for the poor parts of their cities...another democrat policy.

The NYPD is basically an army, there's something like 20,000 cops in NYC.

And a house in the worst neighborhood in Brooklyn is still half a million bucks.

 

[2aguy]

See....at least you understand the myth of man made global warming....why don't you understand anything else?

 

[2aguy]

Brooklyn is currently enjoying essentially it's lowest crime rate in almost 50 years.

And is still only safer than 37 percent of all the cities in the US. The lower third. Meaning that 63% of America is safer than Brooklyn. It also doesn't mean much when the crime rate in Brooklyn is twice the rate of the rest of New York State. Also, according to the NYPD as of March of this year, murders in NYC have risen 20%. Last I checked, Brooklyn is one of the five boroughs that make up New York City. Therefore, all of this comes under the leadership of a Democratic Mayor.

My point is that the crime rate notwithstanding, Brooklyn is one of the most sought-after places to live in the entire world.

Condos in Brooklyn sell for 8 figures.

I already pointed out over several posts that rich, white democrats always make sure the parts of cities where they live have plenty of police protection........they just fail to spend the money on police for the poor parts of their cities...another democrat policy.

The NYPD is basically an army, there's something like 20,000 cops in NYC.

And a house in the worst neighborhood in Brooklyn is still half a million bucks.

yeah......again...they make sure the police protect the rich democrats...right?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Brooklyn is currently enjoying essentially it's lowest crime rate in almost 50 years.

And is still only safer than 37 percent of all the cities in the US. The lower third. Meaning that 63% of America is safer than Brooklyn. It also doesn't mean much when the crime rate in Brooklyn is twice the rate of the rest of New York State. Also, according to the NYPD as of March of this year, murders in NYC have risen 20%. Last I checked, Brooklyn is one of the five boroughs that make up New York City. Therefore, all of this comes under the leadership of a Democratic Mayor.

My point is that the crime rate notwithstanding, Brooklyn is one of the most sought-after places to live in the entire world.

Condos in Brooklyn sell for 8 figures.

I already pointed out over several posts that rich, white democrats always make sure the parts of cities where they live have plenty of police protection........they just fail to spend the money on police for the poor parts of their cities...another democrat policy.

The NYPD is basically an army, there's something like 20,000 cops in NYC.

And a house in the worst neighborhood in Brooklyn is still half a million bucks.

yeah......again...they make sure the police protect the rich democrats...right?

No, the police spend most of their time "stopping and frisking" in the hood.

You rarely ever see a cop in the nice neighborhoods.

 

[2aguy]

And is still only safer than 37 percent of all the cities in the US. The lower third. Meaning that 63% of America is safer than Brooklyn. It also doesn't mean much when the crime rate in Brooklyn is twice the rate of the rest of New York State. Also, according to the NYPD as of March of this year, murders in NYC have risen 20%. Last I checked, Brooklyn is one of the five boroughs that make up New York City. Therefore, all of this comes under the leadership of a Democratic Mayor.

My point is that the crime rate notwithstanding, Brooklyn is one of the most sought-after places to live in the entire world.

Condos in Brooklyn sell for 8 figures.

I already pointed out over several posts that rich, white democrats always make sure the parts of cities where they live have plenty of police protection........they just fail to spend the money on police for the poor parts of their cities...another democrat policy.

The NYPD is basically an army, there's something like 20,000 cops in NYC.

And a house in the worst neighborhood in Brooklyn is still half a million bucks.

yeah......again...they make sure the police protect the rich democrats...right?

No, the police spend most of their time "stopping and frisking" in the hood.

You rarely ever see a cop in the nice neighborhoods.

That was Guiliani.....deblasio stopped that.....remember......?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Bull SHIT. The sociocultural background of cities is what determines their character -- not the political party machine of who runs it

That's quite the deflection. You are trying to shift the blame towards the "sociocultural background" of a city. Sorry, but cities are run by policies and laws, those policies and laws happen to be enforced by Democratic leadership.

No such "shift" is necessary -- it's how culture fucking works. In order for your insipid cum hoc fallacy to find validity you'd have to show how "Republican mayors" pass city ordinances against violent crime and "Democratic mayors" don't. That of course is as ludicrous as the fallacy itself. Murders, assaults and rapes are not governed by city ordinances.

The mere fact that some city has had Democratic mayors for 100 years (at the same time the definition of both parties has radically changed) demonstrates that what we're looking at is a machine, not a philosophy. And your suggestion that the citizenry will always blindly follow whatever the laws are is beyond inane. Neither criminals, nor people in general, are motivated by what the law allows or doesn't allow. They're motivated by self-interest.

This is quite similar to you arguments on gun control. Blame the gun, not the criminal. Hence "blame the citizens, not the party."

Pa-freaking-thetic.

I've never made an argument like that in my life. Your strawman fallacy fails just as the cum hoc did.

so asshole.....there is no difference in how Rudy Guiliani handled crime vs. the mayors before him did? Or deblasio is handling it now? You are pretty fucking stupid....

Rudy hasn't been mayor of NYC for 15 years, and the crime rate has kept dropping.

The crime rate now under DeBlasio is a lot lower than it ever was under Giuliani.