3 ms·

I think you've missed gp's point of comparison, as well as misunderstood the logical notions of necessity and sufficiency. If the murder rate in place X is low

I think you've missed gp's point of comparison, as well as misunderstood the logical notions of necessity and sufficiency. If the murder rate in place X is lower than in places Y and Z, both of which have (a) disarmed their people and (b) have whatever undefined things "going badly," then it is logical to assume that neither (a) nor (b) is logically necessary or sufficient for a lower murder rate. The comparison suggests that disarmament and having things "go badly," whatever that means, are not causally related to a lower murder rate.

shreyshnaccount 4y ago
expect that's not true because homicide rates don't exist in a vacuum. there's factors like education, poverty, drug use, gangs etc at play and you really can't compare two very big and very different countries with vastly different cultures, temperaments and conditions. its an oversimplification of the world we live in and imo it's better to admit that we don't know.