Violence in the U.S.

[Gulliamo]

One of the main themes of Bowling for Columbine was the amount of violence in the U.S. compared with other developed countries. Some of the popular beliefs were debunked by M. Moore.

Example:
Because we have a history of violence? No. Other countries (Germany) have a much greater history than us.
Because we have more guns than everyone else? No. Canada has a equal number or guns per capita.
Because of our TV or our violent video games? No. Most countries watch our movies and our games come from Japan.

The question was left inconclusively answered...

Why do we have so much more violence in the U.S. than most other 1st world countries?

[EdipisReks]

economic disparity.

[uruk]

manifest destiny..........think about it.:D

[Cosmo]

Originally posted by EdipisReks
economic disparity.

Indeed. In fact, since the late 1970s, the spread between the average lower class income and the average upper class income has been steadily rising at an increasing rate.

There's probably some sort of connection there, but it is almost assuredly not the only cause.

[Gulliamo]

Originally posted by EdipisReks
economic disparity. Please elaborate. Could simple jealousy really be the root cause of the U.S. murder rate?

[Gulliamo]

Stats
here (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_mur_wit_fir_cap)

[The Don]

I'm sure there are other countries with an even greater level of economic disparity with less violence. Perhaps looking for a single cause in a country and large and disparate as the U.S. is a waste of time. The causes of violence in an inner city drugs war may be fundamentally different to those in a suburb. One thing I did notice is that for each comparison, a different comparison country is offered. Perhaps the U.S. doesn't have such a bad history of violence than Germany (though I think this is a false comparison because we're comparing state violence to individual violence) but the U.S. may be in the top 25% of developed countries in this regard. Likewise for gun ownership, the U.S. may not be number 1 as far as private gun ownership goes, but it may again be in the top 25%.

Add in a whiff of economic disparity together with a basic philosophy which encourages self reliance and improvement, and you may have a set of circumstances which contribute towards the level of violence.

[AWPrime]

Culture?

[Dragonrock]

Sexual repression and frustrated teenage boys.

[AWPrime]

To clearify my point:

I think it is the level of acceptable violence in a culture.

[Dymanic]

It's the 'John Wayne syndrome'.

Above all, we idolize the 'rugged individualist' -- the rebel who refuses to become a cog in the machine, the pioneer who carves out a place for himself in the wilderness. We just ran out of wilderness, is all.

[c4ts]

Originally posted by Gulliamo
One of the main themes of Bowling for Columbine was the amount of violence in the U.S. compared with other developed countries. Some of the popular beliefs were debunked by M. Moore.

Example:
Because we have a history of violence? No. Other countries (Germany) have a much greater history than us.
Because we have more guns than everyone else? No. Canada has a equal number or guns per capita.
Because of our TV or our violent video games? No. Most countries watch our movies and our games come from Japan.

The question was left inconclusively answered...

Why do we have so much more violence in the U.S. than most other 1st world countries?

Because we're bigger and dumber than the rest. At least that is what Moore is trying to imply since he doesn't have the evidence to prove it.

Anyway, the U.S. has relatively little gun violence when compared to developing nations like Columbia and Serbia, but I'd like to point out that Moore never compares us to those countries, probably because the U.S. would look good in comparison, and the whole point of a Michael Moore documentary is to make America look bad.

[uruk]

It's the 'John Wayne syndrome'.

Above all, we idolize the 'rugged individualist' -- the rebel who refuses to become a cog in the machine, the pioneer who carves out a place for himself in the wilderness

....Who feels he has a god given right to posses and defend any territory he may wish to aquire. A type of person who's self image and reputation are as important to him as his life.
And all of this compensating for personal insecurities that a patriarcal society will not allow him to deal with.

Manifest destiny. An ideal that allows the individual to objectify another person as an obstacle in path of his god given right to exercise dominion over everything.

Ok maybe I'm pushing it.

[Dymanic]

Originally posted by uruk

Ok maybe I'm pushing it.Not at all. I think you nailed it.

[H'ethetheth]

Originally posted by Gulliamo
One of the main themes of Bowling for Columbine was the amount of violence in the U.S. compared with other developed countries. Some of the popular beliefs were debunked by M. Moore.

Example:
Because we have a history of violence? No. Other countries (Germany) have a much greater history than us.
Because we have more guns than everyone else? No. Canada has a equal number or guns per capita.
Because of our TV or our violent video games? No. Most countries watch our movies and our games come from Japan.

The question was left inconclusively answered...

Why do we have so much more violence in the U.S. than most other 1st world countries?

I think it was answered, but very elaborately by the use of many examples, parables etc. I remember a long part about fear mongering, relentless TV about black and latin Americans committing crimes and Canadians not locking their doors, because the lack of such fear.
This seems to me a reasonable but probably incomplete explanation.

[H'ethetheth]

Originally posted by c4ts
Because we're bigger and dumber than the rest. At least that is what Moore is trying to imply since he doesn't have the evidence to prove it.

Anyway, the U.S. has relatively little gun violence when compared to developing nations like Columbia and Serbia, but I'd like to point out that Moore never compares us to those countries, probably because the U.S. would look good in comparison, and the whole point of a Michael Moore documentary is to make America look bad.

Hmmm, it wouldn't be a fair comparison then would it? I mean there hasn't been a civil war in the US for some time, nor is half of the country run by drug lords and paramilitary factions. No doubt life in the US is safer than in some parts of the world, but I must agree with Michael Moore when he says the difference between the US and otherwise comparable 1st world countries is amazingly huge.
It puzzles me as well, but I'm relatively safe here in Holland. Just this month two policemen were shot, one died. Then the news showed some statistics on killed policemen. It was 2 policemen per decade over the last 3 decades in all of the Netherlands (over 15 million people).

Edited to insert missing 'n'.

[Flaherty]

Originally posted by EdipisReks
economic disparity.

I don't think that washes, either. Many countries, most of them much poorer than us, have a far greater degree of income inequality than we do and yet have less violent crime. Plus, the US income distribution was more equal in the 1970s when the amount of violent crime per capita was higher than it is now.

[Gulliamo]

Originally posted by AWPrime
I think it is the level of acceptable violence in a culture. I believe that is a common misconception. The opposite example being Japan who, if you've ever watched Japanimation, has a MUCH higher level of socially acceptable violence than we do.

[Gulliamo]

Originally posted by c4ts
Anyway, the U.S. has relatively little gun violence when compared to developing nations like Columbia and Serbia, but I'd like to point out that Moore never compares us to those countries, probably because the U.S. would look good in comparison, and the whole point of a Michael Moore documentary is to make America look bad. Right, but I'm not comparing us to Columbia even though we do not rank much better. I am not even asking, "Why are we not better than similarly developed countries?" I am asking, "Why we are not even close to the same level?"

[Gulliamo]

Originally posted by The Don
I'm sure there are other countries with an even greater level of economic disparity with less violence. Perhaps looking for a single cause in a country and large and disparate as the U.S. is a waste of time. The causes of violence in an inner city drugs war may be fundamentally different to those in a suburb. One thing I did notice is that for each comparison, a different comparison country is offered. Perhaps the U.S. doesn't have such a bad history of violence than Germany (though I think this is a false comparison because we're comparing state violence to individual violence) No, he was rebutting the violent history excuse -"Well, what do you expect from a country that was founded on war?! Revolutionary, French / Indian, Civil and World Wars! "Originally posted by The Don
but the U.S. may be in the top 25% of developed countries in this regard. Likewise for gun ownership, the U.S. may not be number 1 as far as private gun ownership goes, but it may again be in the top 25%.

Add in a whiff of economic disparity together with a basic philosophy which encourages self reliance and improvement, and you may have a set of circumstances which contribute towards the level of violence. If you are correct in that it might be our combination of history, attitude, our diversity, gun ownership, etc. has hit the magic formula for 1st world violence to flourish, then what can we do as a people to improve the situation?

[gnome]

Originally posted by Gulliamo
The question was left inconclusively answered...

Why do we have so much more violence in the U.S. than most other 1st world countries?

I believe he did answer it... the message I took from the movie was that America's sensationalist media generates a culture of fear.

This was a powerful observation, and I wish he'd ended the movie once he established it, instead of spending the rest of it attacking Charlton Heston... it was anti-climactic and muddled the better parts of the movie.

[AWPrime]

Originally posted by Gulliamo
I believe that is a common misconception. The opposite example being Japan who, if you've ever watched Japanimation, has a MUCH higher level of socially acceptable violence than we do.

That is a misinterpetation.


In Japan its not socially acceptable to act out the violence, only view/think it.

[The Don]

Originally posted by Gulliamo
"If you are correct in that it might be our combination of history, attitude, our diversity, gun ownership, etc. has hit the magic formula for 1st world violence to flourish, then what can we do as a people to improve the situation? [/B]
Absolutely nothing active. If it is truly a combination of tangible (gun ownership, economic disparity) and cultural (history, attitude) factors then some of these need to change. For example passing legislation to prohibit gun ownership would, like as not, fail because a number of people would refuse to give up their guns or would be happy to own illegal guns.

I think that you just have to wait until enough people are sick of the situation to change the way that they behave. This may of course never happen and the U.S. may always have a relatively high level of violent crime (in the same way that the U.K. seems destined always to have a high level of drink related violent disorder).

[TragicMonkey]

We're over-civilized. Our instincts include the urge to violence, but there are few acceptable outlets for it in the modern era. Those who can control themselves either suppress it and become passive-aggressive, or take it out in video games or sports. Those who cannot curb their desire for violence become professional boxers or commit violent crimes (or both). Road rage, domestic assault, animal abuse, even the popularity of "extreme sports" (which seem designed to obtain self-violence) are all manifestation of the same thing: that inherited monkey rage passed down for millions of years.

Civilization requires us to curb and control those instincts that would threaten civilization. But it's not easy, and it's getting harder. I'm only surprised there isn't a great deal more violence.

[H'ethetheth]

Originally posted by TragicMonkey
We're over-civilized. Our instincts include the urge to violence, but there are few acceptable outlets for it in the modern era. Those who can control themselves either suppress it and become passive-aggressive, or take it out in video games or sports. Those who cannot curb their desire for violence become professional boxers or commit violent crimes (or both). Road rage, domestic assault, animal abuse, even the popularity of "extreme sports" (which seem designed to obtain self-violence) are all manifestation of the same thing: that inherited monkey rage passed down for millions of years.

Civilization requires us to curb and control those instincts that would threaten civilization. But it's not easy, and it's getting harder. I'm only surprised there isn't a great deal more violence.

Perhaps, but this does not explain the difference between the US and other 1st world countries.

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by H'ethetheth
Perhaps, but this does not explain the difference between the US and other 1st world countries.

Well, the US develops the cultural trend first, then exports it. Enjoy!

[AWPrime]

I would not call the US overcivilized. Just a few moments of viewing Fox has proven that to me.;)

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by AWPrime
I would not call the US overcivilized. Just a few moments of viewing Fox has proven that to me.;)

Oh! You must have seen the "Married in America" that's costing Fox 1.2 million in FCC fines. I agree, it sounded dreadful. Why the heck would they show a guy in his underwear being spanked by two female strippers, on prime time television when children are watching?

There's simply no point in a public spanking if you're going to leave the underwear on.


(edited for correction: apparently the spankee wasn't a stripper himself, but instead a lucky guest.)

[The GM]

Originally posted by Gulliamo
"If you are correct in that it might be our combination of history, attitude, our diversity, gun ownership, etc. has hit the magic formula for 1st world violence to flourish, then what can we do as a people to improve the situation?

Well, I think you know the simple answer...start at home. Display and teach those around you about the type of respect for human life that you've come to develop. Champion causes that support that view. Get others around you involved. Mow your own backyard first before you attempt to landscape everyone else's. Maybe I oversimplify the 'cure', but ya gotta start somewhere.

[crimresearch]

Originally posted by Gulliamo
One of the main themes of Bowling for Columbine was the amount of violence in the U.S. compared with other developed countries. Some of the popular beliefs were debunked by M. Moore. <SNIP>
The question was left inconclusively answered...
Why do we have so much more violence in the U.S. than most other 1st world countries?

Some of the reasons given above, no doubt contribute to the end result, but there is no magic causal connection, and more certainly, nothing that seems likely to directly and easily reduce violence..it is another rung bell.

Some other factors to consider...Otnow-Lewis' research on closed head injuries...the thin line between socially encouraged risk taking behavior, and violent outcomes....trends in education and childhood environments that promote what some are calling 'partial psychopathy'.

[TragicMonkey]

Maybe it's just due to population size and density, and the resulting competition for space and resources. Yes, I know there are bigger and denser populations like India and China...but Americans still expect plenty of space and resources as entitlements, and resent not getting it.

[H'ethetheth]

Originally posted by TragicMonkey
Well, the US develops the cultural trend first, then exports it. Enjoy!
Touché. :g1:

[AWPrime]

To add to my old point:

I think that the 'I want and therefore I get' is stronger in US culture.

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by AWPrime
To add to my old point:

I think that the 'I want and therefore I get' is stronger in US culture.


It's more like "Gimme! Gimme! I wanna! Wah! Wah! Wah!"

Makes you feel comfy, that we have all these nukes and stuff with that attitude, eh? Lol. :arrow:

[shecky]

Originally posted by AWPrime
To add to my old point:

I think that the 'I want and therefore I get' is stronger in US culture.

I think you may be onto something here.

Perhaps when the concept of inherited status was cast aside and replaced with the notion that status could be bought/earned, paving the way for the American mythos of "rugged individualism", ambition and even manifest destiny, can reinforce itself to rather extreme ends. The democracy rejected even divinely ordained monarchs in favor of self governing by men. Perhaps the "trickle down" notion of self reliance and self governance can lead to justification of more extreme measures in exercising these ideas on a personal level?


All spoken out of my a$$, no doubt. ;)

[Gulliamo]

Originally posted by AWPrime
In Japan its not socially acceptable to act out the violence, only view/think it. Then how does one explain the number of martial arts tournaments in Japan?

[Gulliamo]

Originally posted by TragicMonkey
We're over-civilized. Our instincts include the urge to violence, but there are few acceptable outlets for it in the modern era. Those who can control themselves either suppress it and become passive-aggressive, or take it out in video games or sports. Those who cannot curb their desire for violence become professional boxers or commit violent crimes (or both). Road rage, domestic assault, animal abuse, even the popularity of "extreme sports" (which seem designed to obtain self-violence) are all manifestation of the same thing: that inherited monkey rage passed down for millions of years.

Civilization requires us to curb and control those instincts that would threaten civilization. But it's not easy, and it's getting harder. I'm only surprised there isn't a great deal more violence. I believe it is ok to enjoy competition or even to indulge in an occasional bout of fisticuffs. But how do we, as a society, keep that from escalating into a murder rate? Or, are the two intrinsically tied? If I watch Rocky and getting the urge to box with my brother does this automatically translate into a propensity for violence?

[Gulliamo]

Originally posted by gnome
I believe he did answer it... the message I took from the movie was that America's sensationalist media generates a culture of fear. Is it as simple as that? I think our murder rate demonstrates that we have something to legitimately fear. Does that mean we should run out and buy guns to protect us? Probably not. But will a simple change in media propaganda reduce our overall propensity for violence?

[TragicMonkey]

Originally posted by Gulliamo
I believe it is ok to enjoy competition or even to indulge in an occasional bout of fisticuffs. But how do we, as a society, keep that from escalating into a murder rate? Or, are the two intrinsically tied? If I watch Rocky and getting the urge to box with my brother does this automatically translate into a propensity for violence?

I think we've all already got a propensity for violence; outside stimuli may encourage it to come out, but doesn't create it. My own opinion is that we need outlets for the natural urge to violence. The problem is that many of what I see as outlets, such as violent video games, are considered encouragment to violence by others. So they try to get rid of the outlets, which I see is equivalent to eliminating steam by stopping up the kettle which is still on the boil.

We can suppress and redirect only so much of our violent tendencies into sharply-worded debate in online messageboards. Sooner or later everyone needs to smack something. I'd rather someone run over pixel people in "Vice City" than run over real ones in my home town.

[punchdrunk]

Originally posted by Gulliamo
If you are correct in that it might be our combination of history, attitude, our diversity, gun ownership, etc. has hit the magic formula for 1st world violence to flourish, then what can we do as a people to improve the situation?

It Takes A Village

;)

[AWPrime]

Originally posted by Gulliamo
Then how does one explain the number of martial arts tournaments in Japan?

Maybe because it a native sport!?!

And don't try to twist the context of violence that I have used.

[Kitty Chan]

First of all I live in Canada and I lock my doors!! I even have a security alarm system. So there Michael ! :D


I would put the violence down to the fact that people figure the world owes them
and they are gonna squish anyone who gets in their way and especially squish anyone who gets it before they do.