Father shoots/kills daughter's boyfriendFollow

How much can anything change in only thirty years?

How much domestic abuse goes unreported and how much child abuse never sees the light of day. Theft with in families goes unreported as well since it is family, you may not tolerate being rob by your family but many people do and will keep covering for the black sheep till they go up state for another crime.

I can almost always find a contrary statistic to anything 100% of the time, 50% of the time.

How much domestic abuse goes unreported and how much child abuse never sees the light of day. Theft with in families goes unreported as well since it is family, you may not tolerate being rob by your family but many people do and will keep covering for the black sheep till they go up state for another crime.

Who cares. Really. How many people don't report car breaks? Someone broke a window of our car and stole a laptop once. I didn't report it. Why would I. "Hello, Boston PD?" "Yes." "Someone stole a laptop out of my car." "Ok. Did you call us for some reason or.....?"

Some people don't report crimes, some people report crimes. All we can work with is what we know. Statistic about rapes not being reported or any other crime having a giant "secret victim" base are ********* They're an emotional appeal for money when actual statistics aren't sensational enough.

I would also point out that the 80s in particular saw an upsurge in gang activity with the advent of crack cocaine. By definition, that would increase stranger and acquaintance crime, bloating those stats for that period of time. As Smash pointed out, violent crime has been on a steady decline since then.

Kinky.

Saints Row, best of all worlds.

Also, as I attempted to point out earlier, some of this is methodology changes. I'd have to go back and look at the methodology for the older data, but the new data lists as "non-stranger" anyone who is a "neighbor". Depending on how loosely that's interpreted, that could mean that the gang banger who lives on your block counts as an acquaintance rather than a stranger, where in the older data set, he may not have been.

In any case, let's not forget the original context. The claim made was about the likelihood of a firearm being used by someone you know against you versus you using it to defend yourself. The argument was that since most violent crime is committed against family or acquaintances, that those people would just use your gun against you. The problem is that even if we can make an argument for this when looking at "all violent crimes", this doesn't hold true if we limit things to gun crimes, and when we limit the "friend and family" to people who would have physical access to your firearm, the numbers slant even more.

It's easy to get lost in the stats, but at the end of the day, the claim that by buying a gun you're only arming those most likely to commit a crime against you is clearly not true.

You tend to be Exhibit A of that claim.

Do forums count as "knowing" someone?

*cough* Read more than the abstract. They make a distinction between "strangers" and "total strangers".

Yeah, I saw. You didn't though, thus it proves you completely and utterly wrong. Unequivocally wrong.

Dead.
Fucking.
Wrong.

The study you cited to support your own point proved you wrong. How amazing, that only happens around 1 time in 1.

And... once again we have Smash just ignoring facts. The study I cited showed 8% of violent crimes were committed by a member of the victims family. Did you flunk grade school when they taught greater than and less than?