Why is it that back in the 1950’s, one could walk into a hardware store, gun shop or mail order all kinds of firearms with no background checks or waiting period and crime was far less than today?
James
August 7, 2021
Comment to BREAKING: Mexico Blames American Guns For Their Problems, Sues U.S.
[My first hypothesis is criminals were more likely to be prosecuted then. My second hypothesis is that we didn’t have a culture of entitlement and people competing for profit in the victim Olympics. Both could be true as well as false.—Joe]
What’s not to get? Public education, fear-mongering and emotion prompting media are clearly having their intended effects. You will also note a corresponding decline in Biblical teaching during the same period, and if you dig just a little bit you’ll find that the Protestant Reformation has essentially, even officially, given up during that time as well. It’s all part of the excrement show that is the coming, Romanesque, fascist global system.
Perhaps in the final analysis the greater mystery will have been why this coming, global, church-state-“science” disaster was not more clearly predictable starting 120 years ago.
“Why did we not see it clearly back then, and nip it in the bud, when it would have been relatively easy?” many will ask themselves. “Why did so many people fall for such obvious lies?” Well that question has been repeated over and over again all throughout human history, with much weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Why would it be different this time? Seriously, do you believe that, somehow, because we have plastic wrap, aircraft and computers now, that it’s altered our genetics in some way that makes us less susceptible to lies and deceit compared to previous generations of lovers of lies? If anything, the additional years of experience, the better data, and the technology, are making the liars even more effective than in past generations.
Mexico should go all the way and sue the US government for the welfare system.
Since welfare money is where most of the drug business comes from?
And without us buying drugs, All of Mexico’s cartel business would just dry up and blow away, right?
Except that Mexico has been a corrupt shithole since, like, forever. Corruption is a cultural norm in old met-ti-co. You always carried $20-30 bribe money in your shoe when down partying. And the rule of thumb said one should never get caught being a broke gringo in Mexico.
Police buy their jobs and steal whatever they can. Top to bottom. Welcome to the New World Order.
The Mexican government is as controlled as ours is. And none of this would even be a topic if not for that culture of corruption on both sides of the border.
The commies are just scared we can become our own cartels for freedom.
The 1950s were the most economically prosperous and egalitarian time in American history (note that second part, egalitarian. The 19th century was also prosperous, but only for some). Income inequality was low, and work was plentiful. Violence was unnecessary because poverty was uncommon and wages were rising steadily. My dad described it as “idyllic.” (For white people, mind you. Not for others.)
70 years later, the economy has been reformed to benefit only the top 10%. Wages are stagnant, jobs that pay well are hard to find for anyone with less than a post graduate degree, and economic stress is endemic. Add to that the social discord from decades of drug prohibition and its effects, and you have a large portion of the population stressed and angry. It’s little wonder that violence is more common and guns more controversial.
You couldn’t be more wrong, again. Having grown up poor in the 50’s. And having read a little history. There never was a time in history of income equality.
You’ve never heard of the great depression and conspicuous consumption? The robber barons and carpetbaggers?
Some of my first memories were the unshaded light bulbs. And my father throwing things at rats in the middle of the night.
No big deal. That was life.
The sawmill owner and family ate whatever they wanted. And his sons and daughters were going to the best colleges. Guaranteed
That also was part of life.
At our house you always got something to eat. What and how much? The only guarantee was that you weren’t going to complain. The family joke was being thankful it wasn’t polk and grits for dinner. That’s when you polked your feet under the table, gritted your teeth. And wished you had something to eat.
Sometimes my father was absent the dinner table. Even though he had worked all day. That was so his five sons had enough.
No, the effects of today are the same they have always been.
The problems arise in the spoiled-ass bitches that humans have become.
Drug prohibition. Surely you jest? Ask any police officer what his job would be like without drugs and alcohol in it. Boring.
Not because drugs are illegal. Because people are ON them. Doing stupid shit. And killing each other over them.
Why? Because their a bunch of bitches, that’s why.
Guns are not controversial. Tools are never controversial. Unless your a bunch of commie bitches. At which point they would invent a controversy over mash potato’s and gravy if it would fit the narrative.
Your personal experience doesn’t equal universal truth:
https://www.cbpp.org/research/poverty-and-inequality/a-guide-to-statistics-on-historical-trends-in-income-inequality
Neither do statistics, or BS like. “My dad described it as “idyllic”. (For white people mind you. Not for others).”
Was that a personal experience. Or a statistic?
Because I’m about as white ass cracker an Irishman can get.
But hey, if the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, (Sounds legit, rrrright).) says that’s what happened. That must be the universal truth of the matter.
Once again, I’m glad I’m short. This place is about to turn into the Pit of Wonder clown show.
Inner the hall of mirrors to see the warm up act!
I think that the difference is that society was more cohesive, by which I mean that there was much broader agreement about things like what conduct is socially acceptable, what is not acceptable, and what should be done about it when it happens. Not that the process of dealing with it was by any means perfect, or seamless, but more general agreement about it, and more confidence that something resembling justice would result from said process (as compared to now).
Justice is hard enough to define as it is, making it hard to achieve even when people basically are in agreement about it. When we can’t even agree on what justice is, and we can’t agree on whether the process is (basically) sound or not–whether we should more or less keep the current system (possibly with some reforms, or maybe not), or throw it away and start “fresh” (likely modeled off the USSR or East Germany)–how can there be anything other than “a lot of crime”?
Or, it might just have something to do with the fact that in 1950, the USA was still 90% white, with about 95% practicing Christians.
Oh, and the Democrats weren’t openly communist back then, either. And hadn’t had three generations to mind control students in the public schools and universities.
If the demographics were the cause, we’d expect that the 1920’s and 1930’s wouldn’t have been so violent, and the advent of modern gun control so popular. As with today’s situation, that period had prohibition (of alcohol instead of drugs, but basically the same), lots of violence, and then gun control. The similarity to today? Economic disparity, and ultimately the great depression.
Also, viewing the past of the U.S. as “90%” white requires a modern definition of “white.” At the time, Italians were not “white.” The Irish were not “white.” Anybody who wasn’t German, English, or Scandinavian was not “white.” The homogeneity you’re asserting wasn’t really there, and “immigration” was just as much a hot button topic as it is today.
Just how violent were the 1920s and 1930s? As violent as the “wild west”, which really wasn’t all that wild?
Like the McCarthy era (McCarthy was right!), is our opinion of those times a product of the coverage of those times?
I would strongly suspect that those “violent” 20s and 30s were not really all that violent when put into context.
Family destruction accomplished by the Great Society had not yet occurred. Boys with absent fathers are the largest incubator of violent crime.
The 50’s saw fewer “spree shootings” but violent crime did exist. My grandfather was a state trooper from the 30’s to the 50’s. He could tell you that there was plenty of violence. But it DID have boundaries. Most violent people lived in specific known areas and did NOT travel much. Today the same violent people get around….and take their criminality with them. Another factor was 70 years ago America was a much LESS diverse place. And the ugly reality of humanity is that Diversity + Proximity = Violence. Still another factor is the waning of the ethics of Christianity. Believe in God or don’t but the practice of American Christianity DID have an effect on some peoples tendencies to be violent.