When the truth is much simpler: it's because these societies are armed and homogeneous and not black or latino.
I'm pretty sure the Japanese don't have much guns. The big factor is that, on average, Japanese people are more intelligent and cooperative than blacks or Hispanics. A society with Japanese people and some blacks/Hispanics or the reverse amount would be more livable than an all black/Hispanics soiciety based on the average traits of those groups.
I'm pretty sure the Japanese don't have much guns.
They have deadly katanas, yet they don’t run around killing people like the inbreds in Londonistan, United Kaliphate.
^ this guy has studied the way of the blade
I know 功夫， bitch.
"I'm pretty sure the Japanese don't have much guns"
If that were the factor leading to low violence, then that would mean that societies that are european and lack guns would have a lower crime rate: except we see in places such as Poland, a 'shall issue' nation, (where only half a percentage point of the population own guns), crime rate is still very low.
The common factor is not lack of guns, it's lack or presence of particular minorities. In fact, the presence of weapons only acts as a multiplier of either existing peaceful conditions or prevailing violent conditions, depending on the attitudes of the dominant demographics.
The common factor is not lack of guns, it's lack or presence of particular minorities.
I know. I said that. You made a point that low crime societies are well-armed and homogeneous. I was saying it comes down to the average personality of the Japanese and lack of the presence of Hispanics and blacks.
(post is archived)