No, that would be silly. Men are much more likely to be extreme outliers. This can be spree shooters or serial killers, or people who achieve amazingly positive things.
We don’t have much hope of stopping men from being violent criminals or banning guns in the short term. I’m not sure which will be easier in the long term.
There are societal structural reasons why this is a very dumb statement to make (look up the Chinese Exclusion Act for more information on why those areas are chronically underfunded infrastructure-wise) but also, have you heard of the Triads? In the US, Chinatowns tended to have the same close-knit social structures that they had in China/HK/TW, but that means along with them came the same underground gangster shit you see (or rather don’t see, because they handle things quietly when they’re pissed off) here.
But, to be clear, the vast, vast, vast, vast, (cannot repeat that word enough times) majority of mass shootings in the US are done by white men. There is absolutely enough statistical information out there to indicate that while other races (and genders) still have gun violence, it’s far, far, far more often targeted violence (where stray bullets happen to enter the picture), as opposed to the white man with a semi-automatic rifle that has one goal and that’s to kill as many innocent bystanders as possible.
All of that comes down to socialization. Women who come from abusive households who always had to fight to get basic needs met are more likely to be violent than men who come from loving, caring households where they had their needs met.
No shit. If you don’t have a gun in your hands to shoot, you don’t exactly have a statistical likelihood of shooting someone, now do you?
I disagree. I’m sure you believe this strongly, even militantly if you’ll forgive the triple entendre, but human beings are complex biological creatures. I’m sure I can’t convince you otherwise on this, please trust that I have had this discussion several times with very smart people who also passionately believed that there are no such differences between the biological sexes, and they couldn’t persuade me otherwise, either. Edit: I’m not saying women can’t be aggressive, that all men are aggressive, that socialization doesn’t play a role, that there aren’t other biological factors, or that there aren’t further things I haven’t thought of or that we don’t know about #complexity
Congratulations, you got the point.
This is an awfully bitchy way to engage in discussion with someone, don’t you think? do you see what I did there? technically not against the rules, I think, but very borderline and not very nice
It’s also a concern (and danger) as a pedestrian. Crossing the road on a crosswalk legally is tempting fate as lots of drivers and scooter riders make illegal turns and don’t stop for pedestrians. Sidewalks (if exist) are illegally occupied by shops and scooters forcing pedestrians to walk in traffic… Even walking on sidewalks is not safe with scooters roaming past you left and right. Pedestrians basically have no rights here. “Taiwan is a living hell for pedestrians” - very true!
This is an awfully bitchy way to engage in discussion with someone, don’t you think? [spoiler] do you see what I did there? ]
[/quote]
I do not think its dumb since crime is concern when I travel. Some places like where I go a few times a year like Japan, Taiwan, Estonia, Lithuania I know are safe and did check, but USA has safe and unsafe places so with the recent news, trying get feel is getter worse or not.
It’s like asking do recent issues in Europe make you less likely to travel to Europe. There are countries and cities and areas in cities I would never go to in Europe just like the US.
From what I’ve seen in human history through archeological findings. Since humans began war (interestingly enough it seems to really started once we became more agricultural) the warriors we find die in battle are men.
Unless maybe female warriors were like super deadly or something.