I never strayed from the subject. Those were the quickest numbers I could find to prove a point to you [...].
Compare the Mafia era to today. Dramatic decrease in rampage killings, yet far more effective weaponry available today.
Also note, that the media-framed-panic-propaganda effect I mentioned has been de-cloaked time and again by people who actually think independently.
For example, to borrow a comment from the link I posted...
Here is Richard Whately (1831) on change in media exposure misleading our impressions about crime trends:
"It should be observed also, that in large towns, and in populous districts intersected by roads which furnish a rapid conveyance of intelligence from place to place, and where newspapers are in common use, much more in proportion is known of every enormity that is perpetrated, than in remote country-districts, thinly peopled, where there is less facility of mutual communication, and where the natural appetite for news is compelled to limit itself to the gossip of the nearest hamlet. Much apparent increase of crime (I will not undertake to say how much) consists, I am convinced, in the increase of newspapers. For crimes, especially (be it observed) such as are the most remote from the experience of each individual, and therefore strike him as something strange, always furnish interesting articles of intelligence. I have no doubt that a single murder in Great Britain has often furnished matter for discourse to more than twenty times as many persons as any twenty such murders would in Turkey. We should remember, that there are not more particles of dust in the sunbeam than in any other part of the room; though we see them more where the light is stronger."
That is from Introductory Lecturers on Poltical Economy, which contains many remarkable passages. Available at the Online Library of Liberty.
So, RCADE, are you saying that these things I've stated are false? I'd love to hear your counter-argument rather than the typical non sequitur. [...]