If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
The must be spanking more - Violent crimes jump in first half of2006
WASHINGTON - Murders, robberies and other violent crimes reported in the United States jumped 3.7 percent in the first half of the year, continuing a troubling upswing that began in 2005, the FBI said Monday. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11497293/ Remember the claim by anti-spanking zealotS like Kane, who said that violent crimes have been declining steadily for the last 40 years because of parents are spanking less? Using that logic, parents must be spanking more now. Logic and the anti-spanking zealotS, are they mutually exclusive? ;-) Doan |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
The must be spanking more - Violent crimes jump in first halfof 2006
Doan wrote:
WASHINGTON - Murders, robberies and other violent crimes reported in the United States jumped 3.7 percent in the first half of the year, continuing a troubling upswing that began in 2005, the FBI said Monday. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11497293/ I understand it would not have served your little rant below, or you were too tired from public wanking, or buddy wanking with Greg, but really, you should have included this: "Department officials have cited as possible reasons a surge in gang-related violence, spreading use of the illegal drug methamphetamine and demographics, with children of the baby-boom generation entering the years when individuals are most likely to commit crimes." Remember the claim by anti-spanking zealotS like Kane, who said that violent crimes have been declining steadily for the last 40 years because of parents are spanking less? A correlation possibility was pointed out. Seems we were wrong about the spanking reduction...butt then it could just be the numbers, represented by percentage of the total population as well. That's too simple a logic for you? Using that logic, parents must be spanking more now. Using your lack of logic, there could be other factors involved. A percent increase would and could relate to a number of variables, such as population increase, and second generation immigrant populations which are often disaffected youth who do turn to crime. At one time in this country you'd be hard pressed to find Asian violent criminals. Now we have a great many of them. Second generation, born in this country, or came as very small children, and their families are working to assimilate but have not moved forward very quickly because of bigotry and economics. The children have lost the connection to their culture and have not as yet fully assimilated. Also we have a ten year upsurge in violent crime related to drugs, specifically meth. The drug of choice for the violent. Logic and the anti-spanking zealotS, are they mutually exclusive? ;-) Truth and Doan, forever estranged. 0;-] You aren't aware we have a population that just passed 300 million? 300,423,906, as of a few minutes ago, according to the population clock at: http://www.census.gov/ In fact, the 2000 census showed a 13.2% increase in population in just ONE decade. That would make the percentage of "Murders, robberies and other violent crimes reported in the United States jumped 3.7 percent" as an increase over the previous year kind of wimpy by comparison. And likely pretty much a normal curve over the decade...considering the other variables you just sort of kinda maybe forgot to include....R R R R R R R Are you aware that those populations with the highest crime figures are traditionally spanking societies? And that they are the fastest growing population segment? I guess I was wrong, by the way, as according to Straus the population that is the most vulnerable are still being spanked, toddlers: http://www.law.emory.edu/cslr/pressr...paretherod.htm Oct. 6, 2004 "Yet prevalence of spanking has remained high: nearly all children have been spanked in their lives because 94 percent of parents spank toddlers." Tell us about logic again, Doan. It's to laugh. Or possibly you wish to argue with me about "bad file" versus "corrupted file instead?" Find something to divert attention, Doan. Quick! R R R R R RR RR ... Doan |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
The must be spanking more - Violent crimes jump in first halfof 2006
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, 0:- wrote:
You aren't aware we have a population that just passed 300 million? 300,423,906, as of a few minutes ago, according to the population clock at: http://www.census.gov/ In fact, the 2000 census showed a 13.2% increase in population in just ONE decade. That would make the percentage of "Murders, robberies and other violent crimes reported in the United States jumped 3.7 percent" as an increase over the previous year kind of wimpy by comparison. And likely pretty much a normal curve over the decade...considering the other variables you just sort of kinda maybe forgot to include....R R R R R R R Hahaha! Once again, you exposed your STUPIDITY in public! It doesn't matter what the population is, Kane. Since the rate computed is ALWAYS per 100,000! GOT IT, STUPID Kane? How is it that you are so stupid? That just makes your claim that you are "published", researcher... HILARIOUS!!! Doan |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
The must be spanking more - Violent crimes jump in first half of 2006
Doan wrote: On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, 0:- wrote: You aren't aware we have a population that just passed 300 million? 300,423,906, as of a few minutes ago, according to the population clock at: http://www.census.gov/ In fact, the 2000 census showed a 13.2% increase in population in just ONE decade. That would make the percentage of "Murders, robberies and other violent crimes reported in the United States jumped 3.7 percent" as an increase over the previous year kind of wimpy by comparison. And likely pretty much a normal curve over the decade...considering the other variables you just sort of kinda maybe forgot to include....R R R R R R R Hahaha! Once again, you exposed your STUPIDITY in public! It doesn't matter what the population is, Kane. Since the rate computed is ALWAYS per 100,000! Yes, and it's a percentage, which matters how? Crime tends to go up in crowded surroundings, bright boy. Go and look at the cities and towns data. GOT IT, STUPID Kane? How is it that you are so stupid? About what? That just makes your claim that you are "published", researcher... HILARIOUS!!! You cherry picked again, Doan, leaving out all the other information I posted. Why is that? It's stupid, if you are going to cherry pick to leave this item in, Doan: "considering the other variables you just sort of kinda maybe forgot to include" And I see you deliberately snipped the variables comments from the report that I posted. Why is that, Doan? They were the reason, other than spanking, that might have been the reason for the increase. Your usual dishonorable method of posting and attacking in one area to hide from the information in another that confounds your claim. You are a liar by your act of omission, Doan. This is common for you. Doan Kane |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
The must be spanking more - Violent crimes jump in first halfof 2006
On 18 Dec 2006, 0:- wrote:
Doan wrote: On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, 0:- wrote: You aren't aware we have a population that just passed 300 million? 300,423,906, as of a few minutes ago, according to the population clock at: http://www.census.gov/ In fact, the 2000 census showed a 13.2% increase in population in just ONE decade. That would make the percentage of "Murders, robberies and other violent crimes reported in the United States jumped 3.7 percent" as an increase over the previous year kind of wimpy by comparison. And likely pretty much a normal curve over the decade...considering the other variables you just sort of kinda maybe forgot to include....R R R R R R R Hahaha! Once again, you exposed your STUPIDITY in public! It doesn't matter what the population is, Kane. Since the rate computed is ALWAYS per 100,000! Yes, and it's a percentage, which matters how? Crime tends to go up in crowded surroundings, bright boy. Go and look at the cities and towns data. Hahaha! Still exposing your stupidity, Kane? According to you, until recently, crime has been declining for the past 40 years! Remember that, Kane? So was the population declining or increasing during that 40 years? YOU ARE STUPID and so is your claim that you are "published"!!! Doan |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
The must be spanking more - Violent crimes jump in first halfof 2006
Doan wrote:
On 18 Dec 2006, 0:- wrote: Doan wrote: On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, 0:- wrote: You aren't aware we have a population that just passed 300 million? 300,423,906, as of a few minutes ago, according to the population clock at: http://www.census.gov/ In fact, the 2000 census showed a 13.2% increase in population in just ONE decade. That would make the percentage of "Murders, robberies and other violent crimes reported in the United States jumped 3.7 percent" as an increase over the previous year kind of wimpy by comparison. And likely pretty much a normal curve over the decade...considering the other variables you just sort of kinda maybe forgot to include....R R R R R R R Hahaha! Once again, you exposed your STUPIDITY in public! It doesn't matter what the population is, Kane. Since the rate computed is ALWAYS per 100,000! Yes, and it's a percentage, which matters how? Crime tends to go up in crowded surroundings, bright boy. Go and look at the cities and towns data. Hahaha! Still exposing your stupidity, Kane? According to you, until recently, crime has been declining for the past 40 years! Nope. Never said that. Quote me exactly by link to the post, and see what I actually said. Remember that, Kane? Sure. I remember that's not what I said. What I said recently does compute though. YOU see what YOU want to see, and then make YOUR arguments on your delusional reconstruction of the actual thing the other person said. So was the population declining or increasing during that 40 years? Increasing, of course. But I made no such claim that "crime has been declining for the past 40 years.' I did mention 40 years or so, though. YOU ARE STUPID and so is your claim that you are "published"!!! I am published. And I didn't make the claim you say I did. Let's cut to the chase, liar. An increase over last year of 3.7 percent in violent crimes is not significant when one considers all the possible variables ... and in fact isn't much of an increase at all. You are barking again. Yell some more. It's cute. Here's your post, Doan. Let me explain how stupid it was to make your claim. "WASHINGTON - Murders, robberies and other violent crimes reported in the United States jumped 3.7 percent in the first half of the year, continuing a troubling upswing that began in 2005, the FBI said Monday. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11497293/ Remember the claim by anti-spanking zealotS like Kane, who said that violent crimes have been declining steadily for the last 40 years because of parents are spanking less? Using that logic, parents must be spanking more now. Logic and the anti-spanking zealotS, are they mutually exclusive? ;-) Doan " What would a 3.7 percent change have to do with a 40 year trend? See how simple that was? I suspect you have, as you boys that think you are more intelligent than others will do, is shoot yourself in the foot. Notice the upswing didn't start until ONE YEAR AGO. Now go get that smoking hole in your foot fixed, little fool. You still don't know how to play chess, and how to feint or protect yourself from one. I knew you'd bury yourself pretty quickly. Your opening was so unbelievably stupid. The trend in violent crime (a little clue there as to what YOU got wrong about MY claim) for 30 years, up to 2003, had one hump in it, and overall is far far lower than in 1973. It will take a long time for an increase of 3.7 percent a year to bring it back up to anywhere near where it was in 73, bright boy. Thus, I believe my claim still stands. According to Straus the spanking rate has dropped, not in numbers of children spanked, but in the amount of spanking that goes on. And for how long in a child's life. I'd say there is going to be a correlation found eventually. The homicide rate in particular has decreased over 42% between its record high point in 1991 and 2005. Interestingly, as more and more states banned paddling in schools. Hmmm..I wonder? You will see, if you care to look, that our most interesting population, youth, had some amazing changes in arrest rates, for violent crime, midway from 1970 to 2003. A peak half to two thirds of the way along over the years, roughly across the all the youth age groups, then steady, and then dramatic drops in rate to a much lower rate during that last half to third. Now this is even with burgeoning gang activity throughout those years, Doan. One reason for the peak, I'd guess. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/data/violarr.wk1 MS Office or clones will display this spreadsheet. Or the old "Works" obviously. Are they still selling that crippled thing? And if you actually look at the charted data for the span from 1960 to 2006, 46 years, you'll find the following: http://bjsdata.ojp.usdoj.gov/dataonl...cfm?stateid=52 Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter rate 1960 - 5.1, 2006 - 5.6, but with a major hump at that 1980 - 10.2, just 26 years ago. Almost three decades. Get the picture yet, brilliant one? So we have a high, 26 years ago of 10.2, with a 2006 drop to 5.6. Not bad, eh? For a drop in the number one violent crime statistic? The 0verall numbers are high, but they lump some property crime in there, and please remember my little hint about your stupid claim about my claim. When I say violent crime I mean person to person violent. Look at the other person to person ones. Forcible Rape had a comparatively similar high, same year, but did not drop as low as from the 1960 figure. Can you guess why the reports would be such a low rate in 1960, and so much higher than that (but still lower than the 1980 rate) in 2006? Think hard about the nature of the crime. We are seeing truly dramatic decreases over all in violent crime in this country, Doan. The assault rate is nearly half now what it was in 1992. Yet another decade measure. Like all person to person violent crime, it's dropping steadily. A tic of 3.7 is hardly significant over all. We say much bigger ones than that in the past. Those three categories of violent person to person crime have DROPPED, even in the past year, Doan. Look at the categories of violent crime that do not show contact with another person that were included to get that 3.7% increase. You, stupid, can't even read a chart...or won't. That's the stupid thing, Doan. To make your claims and NOT have reviewed the data. And in fact, my brilliant little friend, the aggregate violent crime rate, including those non person-to-person rates has been dropping steadily from 1991 high of 758.1 to last year's 463.2. Not a single year, throughout, until this one, did the rate have any increase. None. QED Now you are exposed again for both a liar AND a fool. Unless of course you just made an honest mistake about my claim, and what this current FBI report really means in terms of one tiny increase this year after more than a decade of dropping rates. Doan Spanking? Who knows. There are many variables, but as I recall this all came out of claims by a cop that wrote a book about the need for more beating of kids to stop the rising crime rate...that didn't even actually exist when he wrote the book. That burned your little bunnies when Chris kicked his butt all over the Web. Didn't it, Doan? Kane |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Gag | 0:-> | Spanking | 29 | December 7th 06 01:17 AM |
Kids should work... | bobb | General | 108 | December 15th 03 03:23 PM |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | General | 13 | December 10th 03 02:30 AM |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | Foster Parents | 3 | December 8th 03 11:53 PM |
| Kids should work... | Kane | General | 1 | December 6th 03 08:11 PM |