E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSFor the first time in 45 years, homicide dropped out of the top 15 causes of death in the United States in 2010, according to a new government analysis of mortality trends.
Crime rates have been falling for decades, fueled by a range of social, demographic and law enforcement factors, but the just-released death figures from the National Center for Health Statistics underscore the decline.
“No one will believe you when you say assault is where it was in the 1960s,” said Gary LaFree, director of the department of criminology and criminal justice at the University of Maryland. “Homicide started to rise in 1963 and peaked in 1975.”
The 4.3 percent drop in assault deaths last year was part of a larger good-news trend that saw a slight increase in U.S. life expectancy -- now 78.7 years -- and declines in the age-adjusted death rates for seven of the 15 leading causes of mortality, including heart disease and cancer, according to preliminary figures.
Overall, the adjusted death rate fell to a record low of 746.2 deaths per 100,000 people, with a total of more than 2.4 million deaths. Hawaii was the state with the lowest mortality, with an adjusted rate of 589.6 deaths per 100,000 people. Mississippi had the highest death rate, 961.9 per 100,000 people.
Rates for five of the top 15 causes of death went up, including increases of 3.3 percent for Alzheimer’s disease and 4.6 percent for Parkinson’s disease.
“It’s the aging population,” said Dr. Roy N. Alcalay, an assistant professor of neurology at Columbia University Medical Center. “They’re not dying of these other diseases, so they’re dying from Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s.”
Deaths from heart disease fell 2.4 percent, cancer deaths were down 0.6 percent, and deaths from chronic lower respiratory disease, stroke and accidents all fell by more than 1 percent.
Deaths from the bloodstream infection called septicemia fell by 3.6 percent and deaths caused by flu and pneumonia dropped a significant 8.5 percent.
“We’re doing a number of things right,” said Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease expert and chair of the department of preventive medicine at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine.
Far fewer people died from influenza -- 494 deaths in 2010 vs. 2,918 in 2009 -- largely because of the impact of the H1N1 swine flu pandemic, which spared older people and led to widespread vaccination and immunity, Schaffner said.
“More people were protected,” he added.
Deaths from pneumonitis, or pneumonia caused by aspiration of bits of food, liquid or other substances, rose to 17,001 in 2010, up from 15,948 in 2009.
It’s not clear why those deaths jumped by 4.1 percent last year, said Dr. Norman H. Edelman, chief medical officer for the American Lung Association. Aspiration can be a complication of medical procedures, but it can be prevented by following basic precautions such as not eating for several hours before an operation.
That troublesome lung condition rose to become the 15th top cause of death in 2010, bumping homicides out of that ranking for the first time since 1965.
LaFree, the Maryland criminologist, said there are several recognized factors that have led to the drop in violent assault deaths, including more people in prison, better law enforcement practices, the end of the crack cocaine drug epidemic of the late 1990s -- and the aging of a large swath of the population made up of the baby boom generation.
“I think that the key factor for crime going up is a legitimacy crisis,” said LaFree. “When people don’t think things are fair, they’re more likely to act out.”
Here are top five causes of death in 2010:
1. Heart disease
2. Cancer
3. Chronic lower respiratory diseases
4. Stroke
5. Accidents
To see the top 15 causes of death and the rest of the report, click here:
Related stories:
Deaths from most cancers drop, report finds
U.S. life expectancy slipped as recession took hold
Leave a Comment:
Numbers dont lie but MSNBC does. Heart Disease is not the "largest" cause of death in the USA. Being Aborted is the largest cause of death in the USA. Look up the numbers yourself, the number of abortions in the USA per year exceeds that that die of heart disease per year. Abortion is just not included as it is not political correct to include in the statistics. So MSNBC willing to lie for the sole sake of political correctness.
It's not included because it's not a cause of death.
To show you how absurd your position is, consider this: If you called an abortion a death, then that fetus would have a death date, but not a birth date. Does that make any sense?
Death depends on ones' definition of life.
Ruken: Well death, in this case, depends on your definition of when a person begins. I can put liquid nitrogen on my skin and kill some of my skin cells, but their death is different from the death described in this article. Death here means the end of a person.
So for Kurt's absurd assertion that abortion is a cause of death to be accurate, you would have to call a fetus a person, which it isn't. Fertilization of an egg by a sperm cell doesn't create a person, it creates a potential person. If fertilization marked the beginning of personhood, identical twins would be one person split into two corporal bodies, because they develop from one fertilization event. Calling a fetus a person is absurd and thus calling abortion a death is equally nonsensical.
Well Kurt, statistics based on your criteria would put miscarriage as the leading cause of death. Far more women miscarry than have abortions. Just saying.
Kurt's comments
Based on your comment I think being clueless is a cause of death.
So abortion is not a cause of death? Would any of us be making comments on MSNBC comments if we were aborted? The child had a heartbeat going into a misnamed "Clinic" and has its limbs torn from its sockets limb by limb, skull crushed with the brain sucked out. No many (actually very few) homocides are as gruesome as this. We can all consider us VERY lucky not to be aborted as it is such a gruesome way to go (do say painful is an understatement), so smile everyone, for you are SO lucky not be be aborted or any of the other statistic that is politically correct enough to list on this MSNBC article :)
Kurt - Check out the Donahue Levitt study. I think everyone agrees that abortion is not a great thing but it is not for me to dictate what another feels is best for them.
The crux of the aforementioned study is that there is very strong correlation between the Roe v Wade ruling and the decrease in most types of crimes in the late 20th and early 21st century. There has been a counter study by Foote and Goetz that rebuts the initial claims but it is an interesting and obviously very touchy subject.
Of course not. Would any of us be making comments on here if our father had worn a condom? Is wearing a condom a cause of death then?
Look, your comments suggest you're a fanatic. There's no point debating this issue with you.
Jesuswillbrb, This is a nation of innocent until proven guilty and the right to pursuit life, liberty and happiness. To kill anyone prematurely because there is a higher % that person "might" commit a crime based on some "thinktank" would be a dangerous road to follow. Of course, many of us here would have be aborted because we are NOT the 1st child as in China, another example of a "dangerous road to follow"
Trip Toe Fan It is your right to debate or not or call me anything you like. I am just glad you are here to have the opportunity to debate for you are so lucky not to have been aborted.
Well I'm glad a meteor didn't fall onto your father's house when he was a kid. If it had, you wouldn't be here to debate with me. See how ridiculous that sentiment is? Yes, we're lucky things happened the way they did so that we're here. But if events had been different and that meant we were never born, we'd be none the wiser, because we wouldn't exist. So express that sentiment all you want, it really doesn't do much to further your argument.
Yep, TripToeFan, I see how riduculous it is to try to compare a premediated act (to get an abortion) causing death with that of natural of no act of mankind (a falling meteor) causing death. I hope you can come up with a better comparison in the future because the "comparision" you made was a lousy one & totally unrelated to one another.
OK then. I'm glad your father didn't shoot himself before meeting your mother. If he had, then you wouldn't be here to make absurd arguments.
There a premeditated act and the example is still ridiculous because it doesn't matter. That act or someone getting abortion doesn't mean abortion is killing a person.
If you have another line of reasoning to explain why personhood begins at fertilization, feel free to present it, because your previous ones are going nowhere.
Since you are clearly a zealot and oppose abortion, I will assume you are a huge supporter of the morning after pill, which does not cause abortions, and education on and access to birth control. You are, aren't you? BTW, how many unwanted children have you adopted or fostered? What's that? Zero?
Strange, never mentioned "fertilization", did however mention "heart beat" which widely known to begin within 12 weeks after conception. If have ever seen a Sonagram and say that the child in there is not living, you are in complete denial.
For an objective story on Sonagram what mother see in their sonagrams http://livingwomb.com/mothers-stories.html
Homicides are down only because people are dying of diseases before anyone can kill them.
So then abortion before 12 weeks isn't murder, in your mind?
Biteme: Do you have evidence to support your claim that disease rates are the reason homicide rates are down? Because, for example, cancer death rates are down.
trip*toe*fan: If you read a post #4 by cms5 you will understand the sarcasm of my comment.
Good point Trip.
Kurt, if you are a dude you really need to stop talking about this. It's not your body to decide what to do with it.
You should be on another board preaching because as others have said, this is not in the top reasons for death.
Last I heard people have the right to state their opinion lisa. Remember, if a man has to step up and be a man when he fathers a child, then who the hell are you to tell ANY man that he cant have an opinion about abortions?!
You are right Lisa, it is not my body nor yours, it is the babies' bodies. I am sure if a law was made to make it ok to tear you limb by limb and crush your skull, you would be (rightfully so) against it. Also, just because you happen to disagree with someone, it does not mean that person is "preaching". I could just turn around and say "your preaching". The "preaching" card is just a way to avoid the real issue about the real living person that you see on Sonagrams. Saw one sucking his thumb, so cute!!! :)
@Lisa - Kurt's opinion on this matter is just as valid as your opinion concerning anyone else. You are free to choose what you do with your body what you want, not anyone elses. As a female I am against abortion, does having a uterus really make my opinion anymore pertinent to your personal decisions than Kurt's?
As Biteme said, or at least along the lines of what he/she said, unless you are willing to allow men to walk away and "abort" themselves from a child's life, their opinions are every bit as pertinent to their future childrens lives.
I stand corrected and apologize. We do all have the right to our opinions.
I think Lisa's point is that this is not the appropriate forum for this discussion, but....since we're on it, I do think there is some hypocrisy when declaring whether or not abortion is the killing of life. If a woman 8 or 9 months pregnant is stabbed in the belly by a stranger on the street, and the fetus died, I think most would consider that murder (as opposed to attempted murder or assault). So if it's done by a doctor, why is it not murder?
I'm not taking a stance on whether abortion should be legal or illegal, I just think people who are pro-choice should be honest about what is actually happening during the procedure.
lisa: I commend you on your 1.23 post in regards to your apology. I realize that we all have passion for what we believe in and it sometimes gets a little heated out here, and I want to thank you for showing people that it's ok to apologize and show that you are a very intelligent and reasonable person. Cudos to you.
the LARGEST factor in the decrease of murders seems to coincide with the legalization of abortion. true story, kids. i know this won't make those ultra-religious types happy, but...
If you don't consider abortion a death than why is the murder of a pregnant woman considered double homicide?
Thanks Biteme. I do appreciate others views and opinions even if they don't mirror mine and that is what makes these forums interesting. I have been known to change my mind or at least consider other options.
Thanks Lisa for the apology, I commend you on your honesty, as many of us that post may have said thing, including me,that was at was attack on the other person rather than the issue at hand.
Jackie, if you were right, China would have almost no crime as almost all children after the first are mandatory aborted. So by this logic, if we kill off enough 2nd graders, there will be less 3rd graders cheating on test and stealing candy at the store.
globadyne - A woman can not legally get an abortion at 8 or 9 months. If a woman gets stabbed at say 3 months it would likely not be considered a murder (there isnt a case that I am aware of).
I dont understand why people debate this. I dont understand why people even care! I find abortion to be a horrific thing, but I also know people are sometimes put into circumstances where they may feel it is necessary (rape), and of course it is sometimes medically necessary. The part I dont get is why people care? When was the last time a baby walked up to a pro-life demonstration and said "Hey guys, thanks for what you have done. My mom was going to abort me, but you saved my life!". It doesnt happen. You know why? Because it is a private dealing. Sure, you may not agree with it, but I assume you also dont agree with meth users, so why arent you out harassing the meth dealers of the world?
Say 592, I'm not talking legality, I'm talking about those who say it isn't life if it isn't born. And that just simply isn't the case.
And as far as your "I don't care" attitude, well sure, you can extrapolate that out to include anything that doesn't directly affect you ('I don't care if that kid gets beaten at home', etc.) The point is some people do care, and not so someone can thank them later.
It's a complicated issue, and just saying 'it's a private dealing' doesn't cover the whole thing. (and people do harass meth dealers!)
Kurt I'm curious on your reaction to the two statements above:
1) More miscarriages than abortions, but you don't include miscarriage as a top cause of death.
2) You imply life begins at heartbeat (12 weeks), so you would not consider an abortion prior to 12 weeks murder?
Not trying to be a jerk, those just sound like legitimate critiques of your position/opinion, and you are accusing everyone of supporting murder.
Kurt...you IGNORRANT SLUT! You are a man, so until you can carry a fetus in your body...then SHUT THE HELL UP!!! If men could get pregnant they would have DRIVE-THRU ABORTIONS at McDonald's!!!
Again, I say...SHUT THE HELL UP!!!
I never understood why right wingers are so against abortion AND welfare. One sure way to reduce tax credits and welfare, because most abortions based on not being able to take care of your kids. And don't give me this adopt not abort crap, because it's the same thing. In the state I live in, foster parents get $1500/month from the state. I'm thinking about taking on a few of the little bastards just so I can better take care of my own kid!
akavir, while I don't agree with your tone, I'll give you one more layer of messed-upedness. The social conservativse (such as Santorum recently) justify opposing same-sex marriage because state-sanctioned marriage is meant incentivize families with a mom and a dad. (Right off the bat, this makes sterile couples second class btw.) But what about the many stable, long-term, same sex couples who would gladly adopt and raise a child--children who are put up for adoption as an alternative to abortion by mothers/fathers who cannot care for them, which the same right-wingers advocate?
While I disagree on all fronts, for f's sake... choose compatible demands. Either favor increasing adoption demand by being for same sex couples having stable state-sanctioned marriages, or be against gay marriage and allow women their reproductive choices. Being against both just means more abandoned children all around, which is *supposedly* the whole point..
Kurt - One could with equal logic ask, would any of us be discussing this issue if our parents had never met, or if we had been born to an unwed mother, grown up on the streets and died in shoot-out with police at 15?
The point is that you define life as beginning at conception. The law in this country defines it differently. MSNBC did not make up this rule; it is the law of the land. You may not like it or agree with it, but there it is.
So, lets have the pro and anti-abortion debate on another thread and on an other day, and let's stop blaming MSNBC for something which they did not do; it is not lie not to report the news from personal view point of one person, such as yourself, or to implicitly acknowledge that abortion has been legal for over 40 years now.
Don't know why I'm writing this since no one will ever see this thread again, but I saw an ad on New York television about how we have aborted 50 million possible americans. You tell me that there are 50 million families out there that need to adopt. I just don't believe it! 1 million get adopted, 49 million get some form of welfare.
So... we're just killing ourselves now?
I expect cancer to spike to number one thanks to fracking and environmental disasters like the Gulf Oil Spill.
Cancer death rates have been dropping in recent years and continue to do so in the last year: http://news.yahoo.com/cancer-rates-u-keep-falling-american-cancer-society-151619307.html
The biggest reason why more people get cancer today than they did say 100 years ago is that people live longer now. The longer you live, the higher risk you have of developing cancer.
We've been killing ourselves for a long time, ever since modern medicine got infectious disease under control (in this country anyhow). The rates of death from chronic disease are falling because we have better chronic disease management, we have better education and awareness. No, we don't have a magic bullet "cure" as the condition is chronic, but the trends show the advancements we make are in fact working. We really need to place more importance on prevention
So does this have anything to do with conceal and carry laws?
Seems logical to me.
Concealed carry has definitely prevented a few homicides.
An armed society is a polite society.
Number of killings goes down in the US, and goes up everywhere else because of us.
You can expect it all you want. Your worry over what will happen because of fracing will be more harmful to you than any actual effects from fracing techniques.
Can't afford the ammo maybe ........LOL and what are the chances that if you robbed someone they had any money, slim to none .....Thats why crime is going down ...
While the now common knowledge on the streets that some people are armed with a concealed weapon and certified proficient in its use has no doubt deterred some violent crimes, I think there's something that is far more significant.
For years, I have worked with people being treated for addictions to various substances, both lawful as well as illicit. These people do, as a whole, exhibit certain personality traits that you don't see so much with the general public. Now, they're not under the influence of anything when I'm around them, of course, as they're in a treatment facility. Sober, they tend to be much more emotionally outgoing than the average man or woman. They're more expressive, verbally and physically. They do tend to be very 'touchy-feely' and they hug and pat each other much more than you'll see anywhere else.
There are a LOT of people incarcerated for various drug offenses as well as for crimes committed while they were in pursuit of or under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol.
I don't have any credible statistics right at hand, but a majority of common homicides I've studied, where someone became angry at someone else and killed them - intentionally or not - were committed by a person who had a drug or alcohol habit. For every premeditated, first degree 'CSI worthy' murder where an elaborate scheme was employed and great lengths were gone to in order to conceal the crime and the identity of the perpetrator, there are many more where somebody, on the spur of the moment, just killed someone...pulled a knife and stabbed or slashed them, beat them to death with whatever was handy, strangled them, retrieved an available firearm from on their person or nearby and shot their victim, etc.
Most of us, when upset by something somebody else did, will simmer about it for a bit, but we won't lose control of ourselves and do something rash. Most homicides happen because someone who couldn't keep their temper in check became upset and lashed out. Coincidentally or otherwise, if a lot of these people also happen to be abusers of alcohol or illicit drugs and are already imprisoned because of violations of drug laws or because of lesser crimes they'd committed as a result of their substance abuse, the odds that they're going to be killing anybody decrease sharply!
It certainly gets expensive to keep putting people in prison for minor drug law violations, and it does seem to be carried to a ridiculous extent in many cases, but this could be a possible upside to it. It would be interesting to see the findings of some legitimate research on this.
It is interesting that the CDCP not only does not break out "medical misadventure" as a cause of death, leaving what is arguably the 5th or 6th leading cause of death to be absorbed by the other categories. People would be horrified to see how many deaths were caused by improper treatment or things like hospital-acquired infection. But the way they count it, if a surgeon sets you afire while removing your appendix, you were killed by an accident, not medical malpractice.
It is interesting to note how little progress we have made in lifespan (natal life expectancy.) The Bible recorded it at 70 years 3,500 years ago. Not really a lot of progress, all considered.
Chriiiiiis, they might also be astonished by the number of deaths resulting from police entering the wrong address to execute search warrants. the Tigor also makes some good points.
In the book On Combat, authors Lt. Col. Dave Grossman and Loren Christensen point out that lower murder rates are the result of modern medical response and trauma treatment and without the improvements in same since the 1950s the rate would be five times higher than it is.
Now if we can stop cops from beating and shooting innocent people maybe we can lower it those rates even farther.
The main cause of death in the U.S. is the slow suicide of our unhealthy lifestyle, our poor diet and lack of exercise--both of which contribute to heart disease, cancer, and stroke.
We can only change that by ourselves. We don't need the medical establishment to make us healthier. In fact, the medical community thrives off our bad lifestyle choices. They have no incentive to promote preventative healthcare...quite the opposite.
The UN, EU and US should be put on trial for all those who have lost their jobs, homes, and families because of the "new world order" take over of the planet. God has a special present for you decievers, just wait and see, I obviously don't know what it is, but it's coming, soon to a neighborhood near you and it isn't going to be "prosperity".
Tin foil on sale in aisle 3.
Homicide is a manner of death...not a cause of death.
Manner of death is one of the following five categories; Natural, Accident, Suicide, Homicide, and Undetermined.
Cause of death is the physical condition that directly contributed to the person’s death. This may include specific diseases, heart attack, seizure, etc. On the violent side of the aisle it may include gunshot wound, sharp force injury (knife), blunt trauma, asphyxia, etc.
That is the most pertinent piece of information on this entire vine. Bravo cms5 for pointing out how the writer of this article has missed the mark entirely. Excellent post.
Good point! Reporters are so dumb!
Chuck Norris can be a cause of death right? lol
Chuck Norris makes a cause of death afraid to be a cause of death unless it is Chuck Norris being that cause of death!!! Figure that one out! lol!
Chuck also qualifies as his own "Time Machine". He can knock your ass into next week!
Sirlafalot
Rather be knocked into LAST week and remember the winning lottery numbers.
Birth is just a transition from one environment to another. The person is no more different after this even then before. We also no this is true as well. So why are we still using this archaic method to define a person?
Basing it on fertilization would make more sense because that is one point that really goes into making a person. Before that event, you can prove that there is an egg and there is sperm. After that event you get evidence that there is a person (DNA, Physical body, Able to distinguish the person from everyone else).
Well there is DNA before the fertilization event. Fertilization doesn't immediately create a physical body. Also what do you count as a physical body?
Finally, a fertilization event doesn't allow you to distinguish a person from everyone else. In the case of identical twins a fertilized egg could represent two people. So to say fertilization makes a unique person is incorrect.
Also many fertilized eggs never become a fetus, because they fail to implant. And even after implantation, some embryos naturally abort without the mother knowing.
Any basic understanding of biology and medicine would suggest that fertilization is an absurd event to mark as the beginning of personhood.
At fertilization we are no more recognizable as human than a fish or dog (many embryos look, well, the exact same) this is cell/developmental biology....not evidence of a "person." We also all start out female at fertilization...so yes, a person is much different after birth than while developing in the womb.
Defining "life" beings at fertilization means that any woman with a miscarriage has committed infanticide.
If that is true, do I have to give my zygote's social security number back? You made my zygote cry.
The "Failure to develop" argument is absurd, because even after birth we can still fail to fully develop. I highly doubt that you would denounce a 2 year old as being a person if they died. So that argument is invalid.
I am just saying that fertilization is just one piece of evidence that would state the persons individuality. The visual evidence would be another. Behavioral evidence is yet another. Then you have finger prints and other methods of determining a person are there well before birth as well.
Really all I am doing is applying the same methods we use to identify a person from another. DNA, Visual Characteristics, Behavior, Finger Prints and more all all used to determine a person and determine a persons uniqueness. These methods are accepted both Scientifically and Legally as means to ID a unique person. All of which you can apply to the fetus to see if it is a person before birth which results in a yes.
That's true, but I disagree with that comparison as there is a difference between a cell (or cluster of cells) not developing and an already formed human not developing. To explain further, A human can fail to develop lungs or brain or stomach etc but he still has the major body-structure, or components of a human. With a cluster of cells, if the DNA is damaged, for example, it may not even be "programmed" to become a human being. Meaning the creation of a human being is not even viable.
Yikes!!! I never expected fertilization to become the topic of discussion from an article on cause of death percentages. But very interesting. Hmmm Sounds a little like a discussion of which came first - the chicken or the egg.
Damn....there's goes the Brady Bunch's argument about guns. More states than ever have concealed carry, gun sales have gone through the roof...especially amongst women, and instead of people having shootouts on every street corner....less crime (according to the FBI) and less homocides. C'mon antis....get hyper now...spit it out, but wipe that foam off your mouth first....spaz...c'mon...
I agree armed citizen's definitely alter the playing field and give pause to many two bit assailants looking for easy marks. I also believe the key reason the author mentions but does not elaborate on is more felons including gun criminals put behind bars. One thing even the pinheads on the left who favor gun control laws can agree on is once the bad guys and repeat offenders are removed from the street they cannot continue to committ crimes including murder.How many cold blooded killers and criminals who kill during commision of felonies are after the fact discovered to have extensive criminal records including assault, domestic violence, rape and even attemted murder and finally murder. These individuals are never given the proper prison sentence and are allowed to walk free in relatively short time to resume what they do best..committing crimes including homicide. Bleeding heart lawyers and judges play god instead of defenders of civilization and hand out "joke level" sentences for very violent crimes. Taking the truely bad guys off the street is the best way to reduce crime.Its proven to work.
A spurious correlation.
I watched a very interesting documentary that asserted the reason for the our declining crime rate was due to legal abortion. If one reads the the information listed, homicide rates began to decline after abortion was legalized. Unwanted kids grow up to become criminals, I believe the abortion correlation has some validity.
However "hunting Accidents" way up
and to the abortion argument a fetus cant post either you religious nut bag
im surprised suicide isnt on the list. there seemed to be alot of murder-SUICIDES last year
I believe (in the attached CDC report) it is ranked #10.
Trip Toe Fan.... I would call you an idiot but your remarks have already made that point abundantly clear to everyone on here.
Point out my idiotic remarks. Or are you just one of those cowardly posters who lobs insults and runs?
I don't get what he said that was idiotic? Trip toe fan, I didn't think your post was idiotic at all.
is trip the name of your camel?
trip*toe*fan is a play on tryptophan--an amino acid, a structure of which is my profile pic.
is that because you put people to sleep?
Tryptophan doesn't put people to sleep. It's an amino acid that's in the bulk of your body's proteins. You're probably thinking about the hormone melatonin.
sorry for thinking it was a reference to a camel toe.
Sorry I implied you were boring, clearly you are nozzzzzzz.
I thought melatonin is what gave my skin its vibrant purple color, and my eyes a fluorescent green sheen?
That's melanin.
Melanin? I thought that was a city in Italy.
No, stoopid, that's Milan.
I would say Homocide has gone down because gun ownership and CCW license carriers have gone up. When Good people have guns, bad people think twice.
When good people have guns, it increases the chances that they become bad people.
So what is the "chance" that someone can spontaneously become a "bad person"? How do you measure that?
@Pluto - please, provide some proof of your statement. A persons owning or not owning a gun is as likely to affect them becoming a bad person, as does one owning a baseball bat, a steak knife, or a car.
Pluto................stupidest post I have seen all week.
@usa1967 oh grow up its true thts exactly what happened to my sister except it was drugs.... u don't have to be to damn mean and judgemental over what people post
Maybe all the murderers left when SB1070 took effect?
It's not just homicide that's down, it's all violent crime. Another possible reason the article carefully didn't mention is increased gun ownership. Crime is more risky than it used to be.
A spurious correlation.
There is less animosity and more emphasis on value of life. People have more respect and bully less than ever before. I've noticed in my kid's school that the students are better behaved in many ways toward each other than when I was in school. Early respect leads to later respect.
Law enforcement has also been improved. Criminally inclined think twice when they know the detail of modern forensics.
I would have to disagree on some basis, kids still get bullied at my school, and sometimes it gets swept under the rug, if the person doing the bullying is a football player, or some other "Role model" athlete. Also if you were to look at my school, you would see that behavior is a constant problem, some kids act out to get attention, others because they want to prove something, but this is just at my school, a small piece of the puzzle if you will
enjoy it while it lasts. if nobama gets re-elected, the country is going to continue into a downward spiral. expect to see rioting like you saw in the 60s as the economy erodes and the unemployment entitlements run out.
Making a new foil hat tonight. Thanks for the warning.
Another example of how President Obama has the ship turning around!
Obama 2012
Simply... WOW!
Can I please have a hit off of your pipe dude? I to want to be as far out in left field as you are.
Wow, really? You are crediting Obama for a trend that has been happening for 35 years?
I really like what he's done for the weather!
"Deaths from heart disease fell 2.4 percent, cancer deaths were down 0.6 percent, and deaths from chronic lower respiratory disease, stroke and accidents all fell by more than 1 percent."
Looks like the EPA was full of *^%$ when it dreamed up the justification for its new pollution regulations. The old ones were doing just fine. I guess libs will never pass on a chance to increase the bloated and useless federal gov.
For the past 20 years there has been a trend to have lengthy prison terms for violent people. The more of them that are in jail, and for a long time, the less likely they will be out on the streets to kill people.
I hope this trend continues and that if prisons are getting too crowded, those with low level non-violent crimes (like small amounts of personal use MJ) will be the one's let loose.
Tell that to the fool Hallie Barbour who just let a bunch of killers out of jail in Miss. Total idiocy.
usa1967
Total idiocy is actually a rather low key comment- it's beyond that!
Homicide rates could change now that Mississppi's governor pardoned all those convicted murders.
Hilarious! :)
Not here in sunny Orlando. Up 40-60% depending on who's statistics you use. either way, way up. Come on down to WDW.
What ever happened to that connection between homicides and all those guns that Americans own. Nothing but BS coming from the liberals as always.
Really who can afford ammo the way the economy is these days?
More guns equals less crime. With the relaxing of concealed carry laws, more of us are totin' iron. Criminals are beginning to undersatnd that lots of men and women are carrying and they never know who may be able to defend themselves. Therefore, they don't bother breaking into our homes, mugging us on the street or picking a fight. Sorry Brady bunch.
Gun sales are at an all time high. How is it even possible that homicide rates are at an all time low?
Because the argument that more guns means more criminals makes as much sense as more fire detectors means more fires.
What a horrible comparison.
Guns cause and can prevent violence.
Fire detectors can prevent fire-related deaths, but how do they cause them?
Shorting out and causing a spark? Meh, very unlikely.
@Ryan, guns are inanimate objects, completely incapable of causing or preventing violence, just as fire detectors are inanimate objects completely incapable of causing or preventing fires, yet people often purchase both to feel more secure in their homes. But either way, it was an intentional ridiculous comparison because it is a ridiculous belief that guns cause crime.