That sounds as though the biggest problem is "gun murders by Black-on-Black",
(or Hispanic-on-Hispanic, or just a "local" issue.)

What about other categories of "gun death", "gun injury", "gun intimidation" and/or "gun accident" ?
Maybe our problems will go away if we can keep taking out categories,
such as the Native Americans from the statistics of "suicide by race"

Attachment 53769

Should we adopt the NRA position of: Above all esle, Do Nothing ?

.

The high suicide rate for Indians stems from lingering guilt over their forbearer's predidation on the poor peace loving white Europeans passing by.

Hold on there, oxB. Nobody predid-ted anyone... it was all consentual.

Be sure to pick the set of numbers that support your argument

only those numbers are important everything else is 100% irrelevant

Non-informative and sarcastic. You can do better.

LL, are you trying to say: the people who live in the ghetto are us; we are all in this together; and therefore, the matter that the rate of gun murders is ten times higher than it is in non-ghetto neighborhoods is entirely irrelevant.

~ or if that is not the point, please make your point ~

Of course we don’t all live in the “ghetto”… and the states identified
in my correlation of data on “gun murders” vs “population density”
are not 100% “ghetto” everywhere in the state.
That should be obvious from my facetious question in a subsequent post.
Likewise obviously, higher rates of “gun murders” among Black youth are not irrelevant.

At issue is your prefacing statement about “manipulating statistics
for one’s own use” - followed by your use of the term “ghetto”.
Separating out "gun murders” along with the attribution:
“None [no states] in permanent ghetto underclass country
where the gun murders take place.” is an example of exactly that.
Taken together, they convey an image that “gun murders”
are what occur in a “ghetto”, and “gun deaths” are what occur elsewhere.

Why your need to even use the term “ghetto” ?
Gun murders also occur elsewhere, and gun deaths, gun injuries,
and gun intimidations occur throughout our cities and states.
This has been one of my points in subsequent postings.

,

All those things happen everywhere, and the higher the population the more often it will happen.

You refiguring using the population density of the state, then pointing out the northeast is high on the list, caused UT's shorthand explanation, ghettos.
Then I went into it further, explaining the number of ghettos in the northeast is higher, and that number skews the, gun-trouble vs state-density, graph.

I don't understand your objection to ghetto, it's a perfectly cromulent word. It's shorthand that people understand. While the reasons may vary why the ghetto they're familiar with may exist, they'll know the result.

Perhaps it's the inherently racist connotations of the word.

Perhaps.

What do I know....

Perhaps he'd like the old south. nigger quarters.

Much better stated LL thank you

First we have to decide on murders versus deaths. I think murders is the thing we really care about. We are not trying to work out the detail of all the bad things that might go wrong in the world. The deaths number includes suicides and accidents and criminals killed by cops. Intimidations is a strange one, since a lot of criminals are generally not intimidated by anything but force. Often the mere possibility of presence of a gun undermines criminal behavior. The gun doesn't actually have to be there.

As far as ghetto goes, it is not a manipulation. The number of gun murders in the ghetto is at least 10 times higher than in your worst Walmart Texan nightmare. Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight breaks it down for us. He rudely breaks it down by black homicide victims in the US (19.4 per 100,000) versus white homicide victims (2.5 per 100,000). That's not exactly it, because that's not exactly the ghetto. And black non-ghetto neighborhoods are not a problem anyway. This is not a racial thing. It is a ghetto thing.

This particular line of argument is my pet peeve. Not all gun murders happen in the ghetto. Fine, although most do. So where are we now? If cancer rates were 90% higher in some area of town, wouldn't that be where you try to address the problem first?

It's not even a pro- or anti- gun argument. Maybe different or stricter gun control would help solve the ghetto! But as long as we aren't talking about it, how's anything going to get solved?

UT, that completely misses what is generally meant by "gun intimidation".
It has nothing to do with intimidating criminals.
It is used within discussions of spousal- and/or child-abuse where, usually a man,
is abusing or intimidating his wife/S.O./children/neighbor, and a gun is involved.

Within such households, such intimidation becomes very intense,and
sometimes progresses to murder, suicide, injury, or concealed physical abuse.

Attachment 53798

This pie chart is from here

ETA: I will reply later to your other issues.

That chart shows who not where.

UT:
xoB:
Of course not, it is a simple, visual rebuttal to UT's contention
that "gun-murder in the "ghetto" is the only/biggest problem.