Originally Posted By Mr X Fair enough, extremely low then? In any case, when I say "statistically nil" it's because of a stat I saw once that claimed only 40 muggings in the city of Tokyo in a year (compared to 10,000 in NYC). Given that sort of number, you could pretty much honestly say that there are NO muggings to speak of in Tokyo (statistically speaking, of course). In any case, you can see that Japan's homicide rate is among the lowest in the world. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...ide_rate</a> Does that coincide with the extremely strict gun control laws? Or is it cultural? The fact that the police force does an excellent job? Other factors. Probably a mix, of course. But the fact remains Japan is extremely safe, crime wise, and along with that has very strict gun control. America, not so much on either point.
Originally Posted By Mr X Anyway, point being that Spokker pulling up some random old news story about a crazed knife wielder and using that to imply that is somehow comparable to the murder-by-guns rate in America is silly.
Originally Posted By Anatole69 ^^ Japan is safe, but it seems to me that they have a disproportionate number of violent crimes: like someone snapping and killing all their family, putting their heads into boxes and throwing the boxes all into the river. I think it goes hand in hand with their also having one of the highest suicide rates in the world, highest in the industrialized nations for sure. I just seem to recall reading more than my fair share of stories about guys going totally bat **** crazy and committing acts of random violence in Japan: like stabbing people in Akihabara for example. - Anatole
Originally Posted By Mr X I dunno about some whacky stories you might have heard Anatole, but the statistics speak for themselves...there's certainly nothing "disproportionate" about Japan's number of violent crimes, unless by disproportionate you mean on the low side. If you're talking about the METHOD, well, maybe so. But then again, since guns aren't available, nutjobs will do with what they can find (as Spokker pointed out)...perhaps someone like the Arizona assassin or that Muslim soldier guy who offed a bunch of people on that military base or that student who gunned down a large number of people at that University a year or two ago would've come up with some more sick and twisted method if strolling down to the gun store hadn't been such a convenient and easy option. *shrug*
Originally Posted By Anatole69 <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_serial_killers_by_country" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L..._country</a> America and Britain dominate the list, South Africa has a large number, but Japan has quite a list for a country so low in crime in all other respects. - Anatole
Originally Posted By Mr X That's certainly true (and disturbing!). Methinks that serial killers are a different animal when you compare overall crime statistics though... I mean, let one loose in say Denmark, and then a few copycats later suddenly Denmark looks like a bloodbath. Insane madmen can be found throughout the globe, that is certain (interesting that so few serial killers are female...also interesting that in that list it seems many of those whackjobs went after prostitutes for whatever sick reason...I think there's a lot of sexual repression and power-lust in serial killers, and that is a whole 'nother kettle of fish as far as Japan is concerned...low in violent crime, for sure, but sexual assault crimes here are horrifically common...).
Originally Posted By fkurucz "The last time I checked the people of Mexico were considered civilized and it seems that a dozen people are being shot there everyday." As a former resident of Mexico I would say that it is NOT a civilized country. In fact, it is a failed state controlled by drug lords. Hardly a nation that I would want to be compared with.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>In any case, when I say "statistically nil" it's because of a stat I saw once that claimed only 40 muggings in the city of Tokyo in a year (compared to 10,000 in NYC).<< Exactly. Most people who are shot do not die. But the chances of being the victim of a violent crime are higher in the US than in other civilized countries where there is a rule of law.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***what are the gun laws in Japan?*** I don't know, precisely, but I know they are extremely strict and prohibitive. It's not *totally* impossible to obtain a firearm for legitimate purposes (hunting, for example), but it's extremely difficult and involves invasive background checks as well as random checks and pop-ins by authorities as long as you have license to possess a weapon. In other words, it's pretty much not an option unless you REALLY care about hunting.
Originally Posted By Labuda "I still think she is smart and sexy" So, you who are a self-professed young female who thinks lesbians aren't "right" find another woman sexy? Interesting! Oh, and if you think Sarah Palin is smart, you're even dumber than I thought. A person as ill-informed as her is a dummy in my book.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder I firmly believe it is entirely appropriate to use this event as a basis for talking about the level of vitriol. Sheriff Dupnik is now catching flak for it, but especially in light of previous things that have happened to Giffords, i.e her office being vandalized after her health care vote, her district being circled with crosshairs by Palin, now is the time. Several people apparently had to die, and people still think it's too early to "point fingers"? What crap. When the Palins and Tea Partiers of the world spread their hate, they're not talking to educated people. They're going after the unsophisticated, dumb redneck vote and they know it. Trouble is, in the wide net they cast, they also will get redneck, "mentally unstable" people like Loughner. Palin and her ilk are smart enough to realize that, because well, those people can vote too, and all evidence points to the fact they have not considered all the possible consequences of their actions, as Giffords herself chillingly said last March. Imagine what she must be thinking. She knew this was coming. What happened on Saturday was a foregone conclusion. I'm just surprised it didn't happen sooner. So spare me lame comparisons to the Beatles, Manson or anything else or talk about no direct links. Admit it- absolutely no one was surprised by what happened. THAT'S the sad part of all this.
Originally Posted By Anatole69 ^^ Call it lame if you want to, it doesn't invalidate it as argument. He had a history of mental illness, and was asked to leave his college because the other students felt threatened by him... so he had a history of imbalanced and maladjusted behavior. It doesn't really work to use his actions as an argument against the rhetoric of the Republican party... this guy would have gone off sooner or later, and it could have been anything to set him off. 10 years ago we would have blamed the violence in video games, 20 years ago rap music, 30 years ago Heavy Metal, 40 years ago The Beatles. With a schizophrenic personality, or a paranoid one, they will take whatever is in the culture and use it the justify their mental illness. You would have a better case if he had been a sane person acting out of political hatred, but that ain't the case here. - Anatole
Originally Posted By ecdc Sarah Palin is now saying that those weren't crosshairs on that map. No siree, they were survey markers. Got that? Survey markers.
Originally Posted By Daannzzz This is interesting and something I was pondering before reading it. Clinical psychologist and writer Vaughan Bell has written a powerful piece, Crazy Talk, for Slate. Jared Lee Lougher, the suspect in the shooting of Representative Gabrielle Giffords in Arizona. As Dr. Bell points out, many media sources and comments online are already focusing on the idea that Loughner is schizophrenic, and that explains what he did, end of story. This is wrong. It is wrong scientifically, where excellent research shows that the link between mental illness and violence is minimal, and it is wrong socially, where naming a person as mentally ill then closes off a deeper explanation of what happened and why. He writes: For many, the investigation will stop there. No need to explore personal motives, out-of-control grievances or distorted political anger. The mere mention of mental illness is explanation enough. This presumed link between psychiatric disorders and violence has become so entrenched in the public consciousness that the entire weight of the medical evidence is unable to shift it. Severe mental illness, on its own, is not an explanation for violence, but don’t expect to hear that from the media in the coming weeks. The fact that mental illness is so often used to explain violent acts despite the evidence to the contrary almost certainly flows from how such cases are handled in the media. Numerous studies show that crimes by people with psychiatric problems are over-reported, usually with gross inaccuracies that give a false impression of risk. With this constant misrepresentation, it’s not surprising that the public sees mental illness as an easy explanation for heartbreaking events. We haven’t yet learned all the details of the tragic shooting in Arizona, but I suspect mental illness will be falsely accused many times over. More: <a href="http://blogs.plos.org/neuroanthropology/2011/01/09/jared-lee-loughner-is-mental-illness-the-explanation-for-what-he-did/" target="_blank">http://blogs.plos.org/neuroant...-he-did/</a>
Originally Posted By ecdc Absolutely fantastic article and link, thanks! I'd actually forgotten about an article I read a few years ago that discussed this very thing. The link between violence and mental illness is tenuous at best, and most likely non-existent. The mentally ill can be violent, of course, but so can Disney fans - their fandom has nothing to do with their violence and tells you nothing about their propensity for violence. It's a shame, as the author notes, that his mental illness will be the end of the discussion for most - especially those with guilty consciences. It will also be unfair to those with mental illness who are not violent at all.
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 Thank you for post 135, it's pretty enlightening. I think he's right, despite medical evidence, it's an uphill battle to disassociate mental illness with violence for most of the public. Personally, my wish, well, wishes are...I hope Mrs. Giffords makes a recovery, as fully as she can. Also, I hope that somehow, this will register with people and maybe, just maybe the political rhetoric can be ratcheted down and we can be a bit more civilized? I made a vow to myself this year, that I would pay less attention to politics to reduce my stress level. I won't ignore it, but these past few years of increasing divisiveness have just made me so stressed out. America could use a break from the crazy...I sure hope that this tragic shooting in Arizona can at least bring some people to their senses.
Originally Posted By Labuda "Sarah Palin is now saying that those weren't crosshairs on that map. No siree, they were survey markers. Got that? Survey markers." So, anyone got Photoshop? If so, please take a survey marker off her map and blow it up then super impose it on a pic of her, please!
Originally Posted By mele <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/10/gabrielle-giffords-email-centrism-moderation_n_806791.html" target="_blank">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...791.html</a>
