Skeptical Libertarian

Murder rate != violent crime rate How is this misleading at best? Do you have a source that suggests it's misleading? It would seem that your comment was the misleading one given that it didn't respond to the claim about violent crime in my comment and instead changed the subject to murder, right? I can't find the original source I saw this in, but #2 in this link from a quick search gives a decent explanation about it. The original source I saw this in put it at about 2x and it was based on reconciling the definitions, not just a "guess" as this one does. https://blog.skepticallibertarian.com/2013/01/12/fact-checking-ben-swa…

OK... drum roll please! I suppose you mean this famous quote: "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power" I have news: this is bullshit. This quote is literally falsely attributed to Mussolini. There is no evidence whatsoever that he said it. It's also somewhat at odds with things he did say (though most of that was pseudointellectual gibberish) and the way he ruled. https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Benito_Mussolini It's simply wrong. It is one of the great falsely-attributed quotations that will not die. https://blog.skepticallibertarian.com/2013/02/07/fake-quote-files-muss… It's central to the 21st century misunderstanding of Fascism and it is the convenient misattribution that will not die. (Also what I was referring to up thread) And what "corporatism" means, in a Fascist context, is not what western readers think it might mean. It is a term talking about collective organisation, not capitalism. It's part of why the word "fascist" is so completely blunted to the point of uselessness in US debate.

While I can't speak for Europe as a whole, I do recall that violent crime comparisons twixt the US and the UK fall afoul of not measuring the same crimes. The definition of "violent crime" in the UK covers much more than it does in the US. Here's an old piece about it: https://blog.skepticallibertarian.com/2013/01/12/fact-checking-ben-swa…

The US actually spends a low amount of money on policing compared to the EU, where police kill fewer people. Further, the US also has a low number of police officers. https://blog.skepticallibertarian.com/2019/01/09/charts-police-vs-pris… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependencies_by_nu… The defund the police narrative isn’t based on any actual examination of US police spending, or general public spending. The key issues are instead police unions, lack of police training in the US, impunity for police abuses, etc Cambridge NJ is often cited as a model of reform. But I am not sure they reduced spending. Instead they disbanded and reformed their police.

https://blog.skepticallibertarian.com/2013/01/12/fact-checking-ben-swa… https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/topic… https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/upl… (section 5.1)

Doesn't your argument basically assume the first company will always be able to hire workers? If wages are so bad, workers would seek other options, like developing a skill or taking a job in a different industry. http://blog.skepticallibertarian.com/2013/02/25/remedial-economics-and…

I remember a speech Christopher Hitchens gave a few times about this, and I generally agree with him. Suggested reading for all: http://blog.skepticallibertarian.com/2014/09/30/christopher-hitchens-f… The real point is that saying "I'm offended" doesn't give anyone the right to shut up anyone else. We have freedom of speech, not freedom from speech. The recent move in the US to push hate speech laws is an egregious attack on our foundational principles of free speech in my opinion.

Christopher Hitchens gave some good speeches in Canada against censorship laws http://blog.skepticallibertarian.com/2014/09/30/christopher-hitchens-f… Robert Jan van Pelt's testimony about the architectural plans of Nazi death camps in the David Irving libel trial is pretty fascinating. There is a documentary about his research, he takes the viewer through multiple plan revisions the Nazis made for these camps and shows how they even tried to hide the camp's true purpose from the people building it. http://documentaryaddict.com/films/auschwitz-the-blueprint-of-genocide

Unfortunately we can't fact check your statistics since you didn't provide sources for them, but it's naive and irresponsible to compare "violent crimes" between the US & UK. The definition varies quite substantially - for example in the UK "violent crimes" encompasses harassment (without any physical injury) which to most lay people would not strike them as especially "violent". The facts are that in 2010, the US had an average murder rate of 4.8 murders per 100,000 people - 4 times higher than the UK’s rate of 1.2 per 100,000. Likelihood of being killed would seem to me to be a more useful indicator of societal violence. For those that are interested you can read more about these statistics here: http://blog.skepticallibertarian.com/2013/01/12/fact-checking-ben-swan…

- Benito Mussolini Probably not him. http://blog.skepticallibertarian.com/2013/02/07/fake-quote-files-musso…

http://blog.skepticallibertarian.com/2013/01/12/fact-checking-ben-swan… 4.8 murders per 100,000 in the US vs 1.2 per 100,000 in the UK. The figures _do_ take size into account.

First off, I wasn't in the least presenting it as an actual alternative. I was putting the spree shooting issue in context (much like the terrorism vs falling TVs statistics). Personally, as someone that's rather data driven, I hate when statistically rare issues get WAY more attention than more prevalent and pressing issues. The gun control issues really shouldn't revolve around mass shootings any more than the issue around national nutrition should revolve around nut allergies. It'd be insane if the country was arguing banning peanuts after someone dies from a nut allergy. But we do the same with guns now. The real discussion is the everyday issue regarding guns. And you're probably correct with your assumptions. Here in the US, we have 4x the homicide rate as, say, the UK, where gun ownership is very low. And our violent crimes is probably only about 60-70% of their rate. BUT, if we look at per capita rates for that, it means here we have about 3 more people killed out of 100,000 each year, but they have about 200-300 people beaten, raped, etc each year out of 100,000. Again, crime rate comparisons are a very inexact and difficult thing to do well, but my numbers for this come from a rebuttal of a pro-gun sound-byte, so I'm hoping they're a bit on the conservative side: http://blog.skepticallibertarian.com/2013/01/12/fact-checking-ben-swan… Personally, I'm lucky to not know anyone who has been shot dead by a…

"They sure are apples to apples." I just told you why they weren't. http://blog.skepticallibertarian.com/2013/01/12/fact-checking-ben-swan… the definitions for “violent crime” are very different in the US and Britain, and the methodologies of the two statistics he cites are also different... First, it should be noted that the figures Swann gives are out of date... Second, and more importantly, the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports defines a “violent crime” as one of four specific offenses: murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. The British Home Office, by contrast, has a substantially different definition of violent crime. The British definition includes all “crimes against the person,” including simple assaults, all robberies, and all “sexual offenses,” as opposed to the FBI, which only counts aggravated assaults and “forcible rapes.” When you look at how this changes the meaning of “violent crime,” it becomes clear how misleading it is to compare rates of violent crime in the US and the UK. You’re simply comparing two different sets of crimes.