Tyler Cowen cites “the new and interesting” Unforgiving Places: The Unexpected Origins of American Gun Violence, by Jens Ludwig:
An estimated 80 percent [of U.S.gun shootings] seem to instead be crimes of passion — including rage. They’re arguments that could be defused but aren’t, then end in tragedy because someone has a gun. Most violent crimes are the result of human behavior gone temporarily haywire, not premeditated acts for financial benefit.
I can’t be sure if his surprise is feigned or sincere.
Does the author mention the 13% responsible for 50% of the violence?
Can somebody help me out here, please?
I’m familiar with the 13:50 statistic, but isn’t it even worse than that? If you accept that violent crime skews roughly 80:20 male:female, then far fewer of the offending demographic are responsible for that 50% of homicides?
There are probably only a few hundred thousand young black males who commit most of the violent crime. That is a solvale problem. Lock them up until they are 40. Older blacks aren’t as violent.
The same demographic commits most of the violent crime wherever they are found. They are not Homo sapiens.
Any look at violence that ignores race is risible garbage.
If American men still had balls they would passionately shoot each other much more often, to such an extent that it should happen even on the floor of the Congress, as it did in the days of old.
https://www.history.com/articles/charles-sumner-caning-cilley-duel-congressional-violence