Read the article :o)
Neither the author of the article nor I claimed that lead poisoning was THE sole cause of crime.....merely a statistical correlation in the rise and fall of both. OBVIOUSLY, crime rates bear on numerous factors.
Norminn wrote in news:S9Gdndw4CuCX237NnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.com:
Why won't you answer the question?
But that's not true. OBVIOUSLY. Since crime fell dramatically in NYC, and did not do so in Chicago, DC, Detroit, or any number of other cities, there is OBVIOUSLY NOT a "statistical correlation."
So why won't you answer the question? Why did crime go way down in NYC but is still sky- high in Chicago and DC?
Don't be so hard on the left hand wing nut. You know they never answer direct questions but instead dance as fast as they can.
I'll bet you a beer he never does answer the question. OK?
About 10 years ago, I saw of about 30 years of statistics from the FBI and others. The ONLY thing they found that was consistently correlated to the rise and fall of violent crime was the number of 15-25 males in the population. The kids do the crimes and either burn out or get caught.
Gordon Shumway wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:
I won't take that bet. BTW, "Norminn" is a woman.
all the more reason *she* won't answer
Well, how about that!! The 15-25 y/o growing up with lead poisoning and brain damage probably aren't working on MBA's :o)
not do so in
"statistical
Since you know all of the answers, why not enlighten us all? I haven't made a major study of crime in Chicago and NYC. Have you?
still sky-
Oh, that explains a lot of it.
Norminn wrote in news:TZudnd5FRMaG4n7NnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.com:
How come crime went way down in NYC and is still sky-high in Chicago and DC?
And why won't you answer that question?
I don't know. I do not pretend to know. Perhaps they have more jails in NYC. The crime stats, alone, were not the reason I mentioned the article. If you get off your high horse and quit demanding answers to obtuse questions, you might learn something besides calling names and making judgemental arguments that are completely out of context.
PMS?
I bet that question goes unanswered too.
Norminn wrote in news:grqdnfijLsMXB37NnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.com:
Oh, bullsh*t. You pretended to "explain" the drop in crime in NYC by the disappearance of leaded gasoline.
Garbage. You mentioned it *in a discussion on crime*.
Bottom line: you posted a bullsh*t statement that you *know* was bullsh*t, got caught, and now you're backpedaling away from it as fast as you can.
I haven't done any name-calling in this thread.
Not until now, anyway: now I'm calling you a liar.
That still doesn't explain the difference between Chicago and NYC. Want to try again? No, I didn't think so. You're stuck on the lie.
disappearance of
caught, and
I can almost laugh at your idiotic interpretations and replies. Almost. You are really, really pathetic.
You and Dough in the same juvie jail? Chewing on a lot of lead paint? Always accuse people of lying when you don't understand what is written? I will repeat....I found the article interesting in the comparison of lead pollution levels and following changes in crime rates. The article discusses other factors affecting crime, of course, and one would have to be an idiot to attribute all violent crime to lead poisoning. That wasn't the point of the article. Keep calling names...I'm sure you will go far in life. Down the toilet.
BIG SNIP
Norminn (aka DW)
Try again... scroll down & click on the link that says....
Download Mother Jones - January/February 2013
Read & follow the logic path. it leads to a free download.
Come on back if you need more help.
You don't find it interesting that a person can be smart enough to write an article, yet make you wonder whether he can find the floor?
HUGE SNIP
Doug & T4-
The article is 72 pages...I've only read 1/2, it ain't all that easy to digest.
Upon a first of the first half, the argument seems to have merit.
But your questions about NYC vs DC vs Chicago are valid and I have not gleaned the answer from what I've read. The aritcle does speak about permanently contaminated soil that provides high levels of current residents to despite the end to leaded gas use. Perhaps the means of exposure?
I'll admit, I was skeptical about lead being the culprit but the lowering of lead use (leaded gas), lowering of level blood levels & the lower of crime do seem to correlate (with a ~20 year offset).... causation? thats another question.
Poverty, lead exposure, bad parenting, bad role models and crime can be all intertwined, hard to tease out the causation from mere correlation.
Note that the timing of the leaded gas phase out varied from state to state.
here is a timeline for lead usage
http://66.147.244.135/~enviror4/about/ethyl-leaded-gasoline/lead-history-ti=meline/
I dont have all the answers but this lead thing appears plausible
cheers Bob
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.