Mrs.PatsFanInVa

Blue and Two Purple - and both purple states have Republican administrations.

The ten most violent states in America.


10 Most Violent States In The U.S.: The Institute For Economics And Peace

The Brandon Five

I don't accept the ranking methodology used here:

According to the FBI data from 2009, the states with violent crime rates above the national average (429.2 per 100,000) are:

Washington, D.C. - 1,345.9
Nevada - 702.2
South Carolina - 670.8
Tennessee - 667.7
Delaware - 636.6
Alaska - 633.0
Louisiana - 620.0
New Mexico - 619.0
Florida - 612.5
Maryland - 589.9
Arkansas - 517.7
Oklahoma - 501.1
Illinois - 497.2
Michigan - 497.0
Missouri - 491.8
California - 472.0
Massachusetts - 457.1
Alabama - 449.8
Texas - 490.9

9 Blue
4 Purple
6 Red

What can we conclude from this? Very little, I think. Looking at city and region data might tell you more, but if you are trying to suggest that Republicans are inherently more violent, I think you have failed to demonstrate so. The question I have is: why do you believe in such a thing?

patsfan13

Seems like the number of homicides per 100k and violent crimes per 100k would tell the story. The other criteria is to bias the results to fit the desired conclusion.

__________________
"Some guys play in all-star games, some guys don't. I don't know who picks all those all-star teams. In all honesty, I don't know who picks the combine, for that matter," Belichick said. "How does (Miami-Ohio offensive lineman Brandon) Brooks not get invited to the combine? How did Vollmer not get invited to the combine? I don't know. We can't really worry about that. We just have to try to evaluate them the best we can."

Patriot_in_NY

It's those gangs of angry, violent republicans utes roving our city streets that are causing problem.....

Nikolai

It's pretty shoddy with an obvious agenda. Given that you can be thrown in jail for victimless crimes like smoking the reefer, I'm not so sure using that kind of a stat is very helpful. (By the way, Maryland's presence on the top ten using the methodology is due to the fact that personal freedoms are greatly curtailed and the police presence is very high - http://mercatus.org/sites/default/fi..._50_States.pdf).

More police means more crime? Huh?

Availability of guns causes crime? Vermonters will be shocked.

/thread

__________________
We get what we deserve.

------------------
“On a day when they could have had impact players David Terrell or Koren Robinson..they took Georgia defensive tackle Richard Seymour, who had 1 sacks last season in the pass-happy SEC and is too tall to play tackle at 6-6 and too slow to play defensive end. This genius move was followed by trading out of a spot where they could have gotten the last decent receiver in Robert Ferguson and settled for tackle Matt Light, who will not help any time soon.”

Mrs.PatsFanInVa

I never said I believed anything, did I?

I simply found it interesting. I'm not sure what the correlations might be. Gun control is one, of course, but you're right about Vermont so that could either skew the entire thought or it could be the one exception to the rule.

It could also be that the majority of those states in this study which are deemed the "most violent" could be southern states, too. Or religious ones. Or anti-abortion ones. Or poor ones. Or rich ones. Ot have a large percentage of immigrants. Or Muslims. Or blacks. Or their population is younger than others. Or older.

I don't know enough about any of them to make even an educated guess - and I didn't try. I posted nothing other than the statistics and the "reel 'em in" note that the majority of the states were Red States. Without a "catchy title" many posts don't even get read. (I learned that from Harry Boy.) I was going to title it "Rancid Rabid REPUtiles Wreak Havoc in Red States," but I thought that might be regarded as actually stealing Harry's rhetoric.

Other than that, I just found it interesting - mostly because we always hear about the cities which are deemed most dangerous - and they are big cities for the most part. Chicago, New York, Atlanta, Detroit, DC, etc.

That kind of points out that the pockets of violence found in the big cities obviously don't affect their entire state's propensity for violence, doesn't it?

Nikolai

I'll stick to my guns (pun maybe intended) with the notion that gun control laws are no indicative nor predictive of violent crime. Vermont is a good example of a state with very liberal (as in freedom oriented) gun laws, but crime is low. NYC has uber-strict gun control and low crime. Chicago and DC have similar prohibitions and are murderous free-for-alls, the odd nice neighborhood excluded. Virginia, your state of residence and my home state, has pretty relaxed gun laws an crime across the state is lower than average. It's very low where you live (I'm assuming in Fairfax County or somesuch).

Gun control, or lack thereof, is not the answer. There are other factors at work.

That's the thing. There are so many factors at work that it's pretty tough to point to one thing and say "aha! that's the reason!" A state's political leanings probably have zero real effect on crime.

Sort of. In some states, the crime does have overflow. Maryland comes to mind as a state that suffers from the overflow of crime in large cities. (Baltimore and DC).

__________________
We get what we deserve.

------------------
“On a day when they could have had impact players David Terrell or Koren Robinson..they took Georgia defensive tackle Richard Seymour, who had 1 sacks last season in the pass-happy SEC and is too tall to play tackle at 6-6 and too slow to play defensive end. This genius move was followed by trading out of a spot where they could have gotten the last decent receiver in Robert Ferguson and settled for tackle Matt Light, who will not help any time soon.”

Wolfpack

Ah, yes, the ultimate in gutlessness: "Hey, I'm not saying I believe it, I'm just throwing it out there!"

Wolfpack

+1 +1 +1. According to the idiocy of the poll, having a lot of police officers contributes to being an unsafe area.