Crime Prevention Research Center

Most of the murders are just in a few zip codes[1]. In some cities they are literally concentrated in a few city blocks. So if you move to the U.S don't live in obvious high crime areas and you'll be fine. The best way to tell if an area is high crime is to look for Starbucks. The more comfortable the seating in the Starbucks, the less crime there is. High crime areas have no Starbucks or they have Starbucks without seating or bathrooms. These are known as "Problem" Starbucks and they progressively remove things like outlets, seating, toilets, operating hours until problems stop. If things don't improve, they just close. [1] https://crimeresearch.org/2017/04/number-murders-county-54-us-counties…

America doesn't actually have a greater tendency towards mass shootings. In fact, Norway has the most per capita deaths from mass shootings across the US and Europe. There US is 11th in the rankings for death rate and 12th in frequency. https://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/comparing-death-rates-from-mass-publ…

Seems like there is a consensus among economists who do research on gun violence, and they agree that guns make people safer.[1] I am certain that you have now been persuaded by this evidence, and believe concealed carry should be permitted worldwide... Or maybe you dismissed the result because you dislike the conclusions and conveniently believe John Lott is untrustworthy? I picked this example because I suspect it's an issue you will be extremely reluctant to change your mind on. [1] http://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Survey-of-Economis…

"Also in September, FBI analysis confirmed a double-digit decline in the national murder rate." Was this before or after they added in all the murders that weren't reported to the FBI? https://crimeresearch.org/2024/04/how-reliable-are-the-fbis-report-of-…

The crime research is here: https://crimeresearch.org/2024/10/the-revised-fbi-crime-data-reveals-t…

From the article: 'the death toll now stands at more than 50 people ' (over a few years) https://crimeresearch.org/2015/01/do-more-children-die-of-bathtub-drow… Annual rate of 69 children each year that die from... bathtubs. Seems a bit overblown... However... Anytime you have large numbers of unmarried men, you have social problems. This holds across multiple societies and multiple cultures across millennia.

You admit you need only one study, that you dont even know the name of and obviously havent read. "even more methodologically sound analyses" Link please. Why having access to the underlying data is not optional: https://crimeresearch.org/2018/08/new-cprc-research-how-a-botched-stud… Sorry about the misquote.

Mass shootings are not exceptionally common in the US, contrary to unquantified media portrayal: https://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/comparing-death-rates-from-mass-publ…

Although I don't know, I do know that distance or location matters a lot. Statistically, one can avoid murder easily just by location. Sometimes not even very far away from hotspots. https://crimeresearch.org/2017/04/number-murders-county-54-us-counties…

Comparing urban and rural and using per-capita numbers is a fallacious argument. You must control for land area. For example a square mile that is labeled “urban” vs square mile labeled “rural” the numbers per-capita tilt homicides way in favor of urban areas... and its not even close. https://crimeresearch.org/2017/04/number-murders-county-54-us-counties…

> Whilst in the US, random shootings are.. random.. What you are saying is astonishingly untrue. https://crimeresearch.org/2017/04/number-murders-county-54-us-counties…

I hate guns and I want them banned in America. But, crime goes up after gun bans https://crimeresearch.org/2013/12/murder-and-homicide-rates-before-and… I am okay with that because it spreads the violence but each instance of violence is less deadly. So for the sake of no school schootings, I will accept increase in general violence. Let's repeal the 2A.

nickbauman says>" every other democracy has done that doesn't have the sort of problems with gun violence we have." Statistics don't support what you're saying: https://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/comparing-death-rates-from-mass-publ… nickbauman says>"You're far, far, far more likely to be killed with your own gun than to defend yourself lethally with it." The chance that you need to shoot someone to defend yourself, your family or your property or someone else's property is thankfully minuscule. And it is true that owning a weapon of any kind increases the risk of misuse (hence the need for proper education). But how about cases where a weapon was used to defend oneself or break off the attack? Statistics aren't collected on such encounters.

> why doesn't this happen anywhere else I think this is a misguided perception: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jun/22/barack-… https://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/comparing-death-rates-from-mass-publ… But anyway, thanks for the thoughtful conversation!

What places were you thinking of? I was trying to find out what the actual statistics were and my cursory search led me to this paper http://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Firearm-Ownership-… Highlight: These analyses do not support the hypothesis that firearm ownership deters violent firearm crime. Instead, this study shows that higher levels of firearm ownership are associated with higher rates of firearm-related violent crime. I looked up the journal and it seems to be reputable (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Journal_of_Preventive_Medicine)… but I don't read medical studies often so I can't really tell.

Disarming the public works so well in Mexico, Belgium, France and other places where shootings happened recently... just like making drugs illegal stopped that ... or alcohol * sarcasm* ... what actually does work is fixing the social problems which cause people to want to shoot others mental health being #1 lil chart for you http://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/comparing-death-rates-from-mass-publi…

Uhm, that graph shows the gun crime rate going up directly after the handgun ban, not down. That doesn't say to me that banning handguns reduced gun crime. Here's another graph showing the same thing, and another one below showing a correlation in the reduction of gun crime to an increase of policing resources. http://crimeresearch.org/2013/12/murder-and-homicide-rates-before-and-… Not to mention that of course "gun crime / illegal possession" went up. We'd just made it all illegal by definition... This is irrelevant. All licence holders were required to hand their weapons in to the police directly after the ban and the guns were counted in.

I don't think it worked out quite the way you said: http://crimeresearch.org/2013/12/murder-and-homicide-rates-before-and-… Obligatory un-zeroed-axis warning, but the point stands.

It seems to be in the goal to further polarize. Comparing Australia to the US is pretty silly on its face. Population wise, Australia wouldn't even be our largest state. Their population isnt as diverse. They dont have to throw so much of their national budget into defense etc. In fact none of the EU or other western countries budgets arent structured the same. Heck there was just a thread yesterday about Ukraine where some were admitting France and Germany realize in the wake of Trumps administration the US may not be the defender in a time of need they expect and probably should budget for increasing their defense. A lot of these EU social programs occur because the US carries the lions share of defense budget for them. And so when skirmishes happen near their borders, in Syria, in Libya, in the Ukraine etc they not only look to us, but push the US to lead these coalitions. The US is a large union of somewhat individually governed states, with some larger Federal body managing some bigger common interest things like defense. Its more apt to compare a country like France to a single state. Even most our federal programs are nothing more than regulatory or budgetary incentives to gets individual states to work together (see: education, infrastructure/roads etc). Comparing the US to a single European Union members and saying "see" the Czech Republic doesnt have this is crazy talk. I am willing to bet Iowa isnt have massive murder inceases. Even in the US, over most…

The FBI did a survey of the 160 'active shooter' incidents between 2000-2013 (PDF download warning): * https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/active-shooter-study-2000-2013-1.p… * https://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/U-_ActiveShooter1… In 5 cases (3.1%) armed civilians stopped the shooter, and in 2 (1.3%) there were off-duty police. Most shootings (90; 56%) ended because the shooter themselves stopped on their own. While having a firearm may be handy, in the majority of cases it was not used, and probably not even "needed". Further, if there is an active shooter, and there is probably some level of chaos going on: how does a 'good guy with a good' (GGWG) distinguish between the attacker and another GGWG? When the police arrive, how do they make the distinction? In the UK 7/7 attacks, an unarmed civilian was killed because the police thought he was one of the attackers: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Jean_Charles_de_Menezes

> The Mass Killings article you post describes mass shootings, which are a specific type of homicide with a narrow definition. Homicides overall are down dramatically since the early 1990s. Mass shootings are aided by poor gun control policies and mass availability of guns in the United States. Mass shootings are not prevalent in developed countries that are not the United States in significant numbers. Homicides are indeed down, and that includes firearm homicides as well. When people mention any recent rise in firearm deaths, what they are are really saying is that firearm suicides are on the rise. As for prevalence, it's not as uneven as you would think. https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2019/aug/05/viral-twe… >In one study by the Crime Prevention Research Center, the United States actually ranked 66th among other world nations when it came to the frequency mass public shootings per capita. >And when just comparing European countries with the United States and Canada, the U.S. ranked 12th in a comparative study between 2009-2015. https://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/comparing-death-rates-from-mass-publ…

Your premise is wrong. Mass shootings and killings happen across the globe at rates comparable to America. America is exceptional only in its population, which obviously increases the number of events without increasing their prevalence, and in its proximity to you personally, which increases how much you hear about American events versus other events. Even Polifact has fact-checked this and found that America is not particularly exceptional [0]. By this study, it's not even in the top 10. [1] And just off the top of my head, there were two mass killings recently in Japan. A guy burned down an animation studio and killed 35 people. Before that, a guy stabbed a bunch of kids to death near a subway station in Tokyo a few months ago. [0] https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jun/22/barack… [1a] https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/sorry-despite-gun-contro… [1b] https://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/comparing-death-rates-from-mass-publ…

> 5. They live in the US. This is not factual. The Lankford study generally cited has been shown to ignore most non-US mass shootings. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3238736 Lankford’s study reported that from 1966 to 2012, there were 90 public mass shooters in the United States and 202 in the rest of world. We find that Lankford’s data represent a gross undercount of foreign attacks. Our list contains 1,448 attacks and at least 3,081 shooters outside the United States over just the last 15 years of the period that Lankford examined." Data available: https://crimeresearch.org/data/ Yes, the US has a problem with gun violence, mass shootings, and suicides. No, it isn't unique to the US, and gun ownership isn't correlated (at least with the murders and mass shootings). "The US ranks 58th in attack rate and 62st in murder rate. Norway, Finland, Switzerland and Russia are major European countries with at least 45% higher rates of murder from mass public shootings than the United States. The rates in Pakistan and India are respectively 555% and 76% higher than the US rate." > The solution is to ban guns, full stop. Similarly inaccurate: "Lankford’s claim that higher rates of gun ownership are associated with more mass public shooters completely disappears when this more complete data on mass public shooters is used"

1. I didn't see her dual citizenship status. I'll hazard a guess that she's using her U.S. passport though. I mentioned central America because she mentioned Honduras, among other places before settling in Europe at some point.. It's my understanding that one of the benefits of the new tax code abomination recently signed was making it less painful to renounce citizenship tax free. I'll wager that she won't though.. 2. I've lived in Germany for 8 years, Czech republic for 3, and a few shorter stints in several other countries. That experience or lack thereof doesn't preclude one from being able to make sound judgments or understand people. I find that people who tend to sandbox someone in like that usually have a deference to authority or to the "experts". 3. The only speech that needs protecting is hate and offensive speech. If you don't protect that, why bother with anything else, your safe so long as you don't commit a thoughtcrime.. 4. I do think police brutality is starting to become an issue in the U.S. and it's unfortunate because groups like antifa and BLM distract from a very real issue that for many years, exacerbated under Bush, put on steroids under Obama, and I can't imagine Cheeto Jesus actually helping this problem. When you train cops like marines, dress them as marines, give them MRAPS and other equipment from the wars in the middle East, I'm not sure how ppl can believe they won't act as marines. On top of that, add in things like civil asset forfeiture…

I'm not familiar with that institution so I might be committing a blunder here, but their reporting seems incredibly biased for a "research" institution, and I can't help but wonder what methodology they're using to classify their data. E.g. take this article: http://crimeresearch.org/2016/01/compared-to-europe-the-us-falls-in-ra… . They're mentioning: - 303 deaths in the EU. This is simply an incorrect result, it counts victims from Norway, which is not an EU member. - Only 4 mass shootings in the US in 2015. I don't live in the US and I can name at least 6 that made the headlines over here in Europe (e.g. the Harris County mass shooting isn't included). - Hundreds of victims in France -- which is correct in terms of numbers, but most of them were victims of terrorist attacks, not mentally-deranged students who bought a rifle one sunny morning and started firing around. Most of those incidents barely match their own definition: "four or more people killed in a public place, and not in the course of committing another crime, and not involving struggles over sovereignty". - A high number of victims for Norway, all of which are due to the Breivik incident. Limiting the debate to the Obama administration has the convenient consequence of keeping Norway's figures high. It would literally be twice as low if it were to include the Bush administration as well; I suspect…