Ok then, leave the NYC murders in the count and point still stands lol, which actually furthers said point. A few cities with rampant drug trade and gang activity make up a majority of US murders
I feel like you can make that statement about most places, gangs aren't a purely American invention. In fact gangs and drugs are the primary things being blamed for the London spike in crime.
The rest of this post doesn't apply to anyone, just me ranting about the media in general.
Part of me bringing New York up is that it is the primary comparison being used to London in a lot of these stories. Like London is seeing higher crime than normal and NYC is seeing much lower crime than normal. And even if you look in the numbers in the fox article, you see how London had less than half the number of homicides New York did(130 vs 290). So London at it's worst is comparable to NYC at it's best if I am being very nice to NYC.
But all the right seems to be getting worked up about London having crime and are pointing at it primarily as a means to argue against gun control. Like yeah there is a certain amount of crime that will never be able to be stopped and cities generally have more crime than rural areas but London is easily safer than many cities in the U.S. Like when was the last time London had a higher homicide rate than New York? Or Chicago? Or LA? It is kinda silly all these places are championing London around as an example of gun control not solving everything but fail to realize that London is generally a much safer place.
Would be like saying Aaron Rodgers is not as good as Deshone Kizer because Kizer had more passing yards last year. And yeah Rodgers was injured last year, that is the point. Any actual research to compare these cities will tell you London is the safer place on average.
And then you have the left who are championing this hurricane season already as above average with a likely impact from a major hurricane. Like do I think that has a decent chance at happening? Maybe, but there is a heck of a lot of certainty and after the year we had last year, it is just going to get people's expectations sky high. And then if nothing happens, people just discredit it all and won't take it seriously until the next storm hits.
Contrary to what the media often puts out, weather is far from a certain topic even a few days out in time. Part of it is just that we can't sample the atmosphere perfectly and any errors in the data put into weather models compounds on itself quite rapidly until you get 10 days out and don't know what will happen. There were model runs of hurricane Irma 10 days out that had it going out to sea, or into NYC, far from where the actual storm ended up. Granted this was way out in time and the NHC did a fantastic job forecasting Irma overall(They aren't dumb, their cone only goes 5 days out and has gotten a lot more accurate over the years), the amount of uncertainty when forecasting these types of storms has definitely gone down.
But I say this to illustrate that we don't know what things will be like that far into the future. If El Nino forms in the pacific, that could cause things to quiet down like in years past(at least before 2017) as El Nino has a history of suppressing hurricanes in the Atlantic. Or maybe things get a lot more favorable and we have a season like last year. We don't know this far out, even the people putting out the official predictions don't and would probably tell you that. That is why they update their predictions a couple times as time moves forward in June and in August.
But to the media none of that matters, the only thing that matters is pushing their narrative and getting clicks. And then if it looks like there is going to be a bad season, no one pays attention like last year until the big one hits because the media ends up crying wolf every other year.
TLDR: I am not a fan of the media in general and encourage people to find the facts themselves and come to their own conclusions as opposed to trusting a handful of people on only one side of the political spectrum.
