|
Author
|
Topic: Gun Control Again
|
vimesey
Member (Idle past 103 days) Posts: 1398 From: Birmingham, England Joined: 09-21-2011
(2)
| |
| |
| |
|
Message 721 of 5179 (685322)
12-21-2012 5:31 PM
|
Reply to: Message 720 by kofh2u
12-21-2012 5:21 PM
|
|
Re: OK, liberals, "overwhelming, killers use illegal guns..."
84 percent of those guns were stolen in a burglary; including 4 percent stolen from a relative or a friend. I must have misunderstood what Faith and Crash and other pro-gun advocates were saying - I thought you'd been saying that home owners having guns actually prevented burglaries because the criminals were too terrified to burgle an armed household. Now you're telling me that burgling an armed household is so common that it accounts for fully 84% of illegal guns owned in the US. Which way do you want it ?
Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 720 by kofh2u, posted 12-21-2012 5:21 PM | | kofh2u has not replied |
|
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 314 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: 07-20-2006
|
(2)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 722 of 5179 (685324)
12-21-2012 5:36 PM
|
Reply to: Message 720 by kofh2u
12-21-2012 5:21 PM
|
|
Re: OK, liberals, "overwhelming, killers use illegal guns..."
So what you're saying is that if there were no legal guns, there would consequently be far fewer illegal guns, 'cos criminals would have no-one to steal them from? Yeah, that sounds about right.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 720 by kofh2u, posted 12-21-2012 5:21 PM | | kofh2u has not replied |
|
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3850 days) Posts: 1162 From: phila., PA Joined: 04-05-2004
|
|
|
Message 723 of 5179 (685326)
12-21-2012 5:58 PM
|
|
|
..only the killers will have guns when they are illegal..
Only those people who alreacy overwhelmingly obtain illegal guns for illegal acts, including murder, will have guns when law abiding peple give uo tjeir rights to own guns. So, obviously, the law will not stop the murders, because it is directed at the wrong solution. What DOES seem to work very very evry very well is the same thing the liberal progressive democrats oppose:
|
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 314 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: 07-20-2006
|
(2)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 724 of 5179 (685327)
12-21-2012 6:17 PM
|
Reply to: Message 723 by kofh2u
12-21-2012 5:58 PM
|
|
Re: ..only the killers will have guns when they are illegal..
Only those people who alreacy overwhelmingly obtain illegal guns for illegal acts, including murder, will have guns when law abiding peple give uo tjeir rights to own guns. Except that apparently they won't, 'cos they'll have no-one to steal them from.
What DOES seem to work very very evry very well is the same thing the liberal progressive democrats oppose: ORLY? In a state-by-state analysis, The Times found that during the last 20 years, the homicide rate in states with the death penalty has been 48 percent to 101 percent higher than in states without the death penalty. The study by The Times also found that homicide rates had risen and fallen along roughly symmetrical paths in the states with and without the death penalty, suggesting to many experts that the threat of the death penalty rarely deters criminals.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 723 by kofh2u, posted 12-21-2012 5:58 PM | | kofh2u has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 727 by RAZD, posted 12-21-2012 8:21 PM | | Dr Adequate has replied | | | Message 736 by kofh2u, posted 12-22-2012 10:07 AM | | Dr Adequate has not replied |
|
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 832 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: 08-12-2009
|
|
|
Message 725 of 5179 (685331)
12-21-2012 8:02 PM
|
Reply to: Message 687 by NoNukes
12-21-2012 12:00 PM
|
|
Re: NRA - Still shills for the gun industry
Columbine had an armed deputy and it didn't help them any.
Jefferson County Sheriff’s Deputy Neil Gardner soon would complete his second year as the uniformed community resource officer assigned to Columbine High School. Gardner, a 15-year veteran of the Sheriff’s Office, normally ate his lunch with the students in the cafeteria during first lunch period. His car would have been parked in his normal spot in front of the cafeteria doors - between the junior and senior parking lots. On April 20, however, Deputy Gardner and campus supervisor Andy Marton, an unarmed school security officer employed by the school district, were eating lunch in Gardner’s patrol car. They were monitoring students in the Smokers’ Pit, a spot just to the northwest of campus in Clement Park where the students congregated to smoke cigarettes. ... SNIP ... As Gardner stepped out of his patrol car, Eric Harris turned his attention from shooting into the west doors of the high school to the student parking lot and to the deputy. Gardner, particularly visible in the bright yellow shirt of the community resource officer uniform, was the target of Harris’ bullets. Harris fired about 10 shots from his rifle at Gardner before his gun jammed. Although Gardner’s patrol car was not hit by bullets, two vehicles that he was parked behind were hit by Harris’ gunfire. Investigators later found two bullet holes in each of the cars.
"Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 687 by NoNukes, posted 12-21-2012 12:00 PM | | NoNukes has seen this message but not replied |
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9202 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.4
|
(2)
| |
| |
| |
Re: Harvard Study
The conclusions of this article mean nothing. I believe Panda touched on a couple things already. One important thing is that this is not a peer reviewed study. This was published in university law journal. University law journals are student edited. If this would have stood up to review why was it not published in the journals of the American Society of Criminology. These guys are writing in a law journal. The figures are going to be skewed or cherry picked to make their point. Look at Luxembourg, They claim a murder rate of 9/100,000. According to every other source they have had no other year over 2.5 You can look that up at UNODC.org. Someone has already addressed this on another forum.
quote:
They give a homicide rate of 9.01/100,000 for Luxembourg for 2002. Funny how they picked that year. Re the homicide rates there, they state: The homicide rate data comes from an annually published report, CANADIAN CENTRE FOR JUSTICE STATISTICS, HOMICIDE IN CANADA, JURISTAT, for the years 2001-2004. Each year’s report gives homicide statistics for a dozen or so foreign nations in a section labeled “Homicide Rates for Selected Countries.” This section of the reports gives no explanation of why it selects the various nations whose homicide statistics it covers. Also without explanation, the nations covered differ from year to year. Thus, for instance, murder statistics for Germany and Hungary are given in all four of the pamphlets (2001, 2002, 2003, 2004), for Russia in three years (2001, 2002, and 2004), for France in two years (2001 and 2003), and for Norway and Sweden in only one year (2001). Well fucking duh, Don and Gary. The list is obviously in descending order by homicide rate -- from highest to lowest. The country rankings vary from year to year. Luxembourg just happened to make it into the 2002 edition. Now, let's compare that "9.01/100,000" to the figure I offered in my earlier post for 2002, taken from wiki's list: 0.90/100,000. Hmm. Is anyone suspecting a MISPLACED DECIMAL in the Canadian publication? Does no one think it is just beyond bizarre that in a country with a population somewhere under 450,000 there would have been 40 or more homicides? I know, someone in the US might not think so; but really, do the math for NYC, say. Even the much reviled Washington DC has only hit 9/100,000 once in recorded history. If that little datum were true, nearly one out of every 10,000 people in Luxembourg was murdered in 2002. Does ANYONE believe that? I dunno ... there may have been some sort of epidemic of murder in Luxembourg that year, or a couple of mass murders ... but nobody really seems to have noticed, if so. Do we really believe that Kates and Mauser, highly educated and knowledgable fellows that they are, believed that statistic for an instant? Would anyone else with a shred of intelligence or integrity believe it?
Look at Luxembourg stats for yourself.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.
|
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1435 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: 03-14-2004
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
Re: ..only the killers will have guns when they are illegal..
Hi Dr Adequate, and
quote:
The study by The Times also found that homicide rates had risen and fallen along roughly symmetrical paths in the states with and without the death penalty, suggesting to many experts that the threat of the death penalty rarely deters criminals. ... the prosecuting attorney, Peter Carlisle, said he had changed his views about capital punishment, becoming an opponent, after looking at the crime statistics and finding a correlation between declines in general crimes and in the homicide rates. ''When the smaller crimes go down -- the quality of life crimes -- then the murder rate goes down,'' Mr. Carlisle said.
You also see in Kofh2u's graph that there is essentially no change in homicides - they peak and fall in the same range with death penalty and without penalty. Enjoy
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 728 by Theodoric, posted 12-21-2012 8:27 PM | | RAZD has seen this message but not replied | | | Message 729 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-21-2012 8:30 PM | | RAZD has seen this message but not replied |
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9202 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.4
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 728 of 5179 (685336)
12-21-2012 8:27 PM
|
Reply to: Message 727 by RAZD
12-21-2012 8:21 PM
|
|
Re: ..only the killers will have guns when they are illegal..
You also see in Kofh2u's graph that there is essentially no change in homicides - they peak and fall in the same range with death penalty and without penalty.
And have you noticed that he supplies no source for all of these charts. All the charts are hosted on his own tripod.com site. I suspect the data is all made up.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 727 by RAZD, posted 12-21-2012 8:21 PM | | RAZD has seen this message but not replied |
|
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 314 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: 07-20-2006
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 729 of 5179 (685337)
12-21-2012 8:30 PM
|
Reply to: Message 727 by RAZD
12-21-2012 8:21 PM
|
|
Re: ..only the killers will have guns when they are illegal..
You also see in Kofh2u's graph that there is essentially no change in homicides - they peak and fall in the same range with death penalty and without penalty. The other problem with it is that in the US there's an enormous time-lag between sentencing and execution. What we'd need to see is a graph of murders against death sentences, not executions.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 727 by RAZD, posted 12-21-2012 8:21 PM | | RAZD has seen this message but not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 733 by NoNukes, posted 12-22-2012 1:42 AM | | Dr Adequate has not replied |
|
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1497 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: 03-20-2003
|
|
|
Message 730 of 5179 (685339)
12-21-2012 9:34 PM
|
Reply to: Message 715 by NoNukes
12-21-2012 3:50 PM
|
|
Re: NRA - Still shills for the gun industry
That's all very interesting but it doesn't lend support to the position.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 715 by NoNukes, posted 12-21-2012 3:50 PM | | NoNukes has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 737 by NoNukes, posted 12-22-2012 10:48 AM | | crashfrog has replied |
|
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1497 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: 03-20-2003
|
Re: Would this be enough?
Self-defense isn't murder.
|
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 314 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: 07-20-2006
|
|
|
Message 732 of 5179 (685341)
12-21-2012 10:29 PM
|
Reply to: Message 731 by crashfrog
12-21-2012 9:35 PM
|
|
Re: Would this be enough?
Self-defense isn't murder. I know. Why do you mention it?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 731 by crashfrog, posted 12-21-2012 9:35 PM | | crashfrog has not replied |
|
NoNukes
Inactive Member
|
Re: ..only the killers will have guns when they are illegal..
The other problem with it is that in the US there's an enormous time-lag between sentencing and execution. Just to back this up with a data point. North Carolina has over 150 inmate on death row. Not one of the inmates was executed in 2011. The two inmates died of natural causes after being on death row for more than 13 years. WordPress.com — Get a Free Blog Here
Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
Tangle
Member Posts: 9516 From: UK Joined: 10-07-2011 Member Rating: 5.1
|
|
|
Message 734 of 5179 (685355)
12-22-2012 3:28 AM
|
|
|
The New Scientist is reminding us that the NRA uses its political influence to block research into gun ownership and gun deaths:
Such research suggests that restrictions on the availability of guns in the US could bring down the death toll. But correlation does not prove causation, and there are many reasons why homicide rates may vary from country to country. Unfortunately, good data at the individual level on gun ownership in the US — who has them and how that relates to violence — is seriously lacking, in large part because the National Rifle Association has used its political influence to curtail research. Research restrictions The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has faced particularly onerous restrictions. Back in the 1990s, Congress slashed its budget for studying gun violence and passed language preventing funds from being used to promote gun control. Questions on gun ownership have also been stripped from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, the survey used by the CDC to investigate how risky behaviours lead to death, disease and injury. "There's a limit to what you can achieve if you can't do original data collection," says Philip Cook of Duke University in Durham, North Carolina, one of the leading researchers in the field.
How to reduce the toll from US gun violence | New Scientist Now why would the NRA do this, I mean they are convinced that gun ownership is a good thing, why wouldn't they actually fund the research to prove it? Is anybody here reminded of the tobacco industry?
Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 738 by NoNukes, posted 12-22-2012 11:00 AM | | Tangle has not replied |
|
Percy
Member Posts: 22505 From: New Hampshire Joined: 12-23-2000 Member Rating: 5.4
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 735 of 5179 (685376)
12-22-2012 8:19 AM
|
Reply to: Message 689 by crashfrog
12-21-2012 12:15 PM
|
|
Re: Would this be enough?
crashfrog writes: Sure, I think it makes sense to everyone that the rate of gun homicides is higher in a country with more guns. And the statistics support this view. So reducing the prevalence of guns will reduce the homicide rate. In the absence of guns some potential murderers will simply shift to other means, but only some, and in the aggregate these other means are far less certain than guns. Here's the abstract from a 2004 paper titled Guns in the Home and Risk of a Violent Death in the Home: Findings from a National Study:
Data from a US mortality follow-back survey were analyzed to determine whether having a firearm in the home increases the risk of a violent death in the home and whether risk varies by storage practice, type of gun, or number of guns in the home. Those persons with guns in the home were at greater risk than those without guns in the home of dying from a homicide in the home (adjusted odds ratio = 1.9, 95% confidence interval: 1.1, 3.4). They were also at greater risk of dying from a firearm homicide, but risk varied by age and whether the person was living with others at the time of death. The risk of dying from a suicide in the home was greater for males in homes with guns than for males without guns in the home (adjusted odds ratio = 10.4, 95% confidence interval: 5.8, 18.9). Persons with guns in the home were also more likely to have died from suicide committed with a firearm than from one committed by using a different method (adjusted odds ratio = 31.1, 95% confidence interval: 19.5, 49.6). Results show that regardless of storage practice, type of gun, or number of firearms in the home, having a gun in the home was associated with an increased risk of firearm homicide and firearm suicide in the home. In other words, having a gun in the house makes you less safe, not more safe. The fewer guns in American homes the fewer gun deaths there will be, and that's a good thing. --Percy
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 689 by crashfrog, posted 12-21-2012 12:15 PM | | crashfrog has replied |
|
™ Version 4.2