As clear as the link between new guns and gun violence appears, the difficulty comes in trying to show a connection to the rise in homicides specifically, as the ATF’s data do not enable the sort of precision researchers would need to confirm that link.
The ATF’s data do not specify time to crime for the subset of firearms that were recovered in homicides; everything is grouped together and cannot be disaggregated. As a result, there’s no way to say for certain that newly purchased guns helped fuel the homicide spike.
Less than 3 percent of the guns traced in the 2020 data set were connected to homicides. Moreover, there is no discernible relationship between where the murder rate rose in 2020 and where more new firearms were recovered and traced: States with large increases in firearm recoveries were no more likely to see an increase in murder than states with small increases in firearm recoveries.
Ultimately, more granular data would be needed to answer with perfect confidence the crucial question of whether new guns lead to more homicides, but there is also no reason to suspect that guns used in homicides differ significantly from guns used in other kinds of crimes.
The ATF’s data are kludgy in part because of legal limitations, specifically a law known as the Tiahrt Amendment. “The Tiahrt Amendment is basically a law that says the ATF cannot provide gun-level trace data to anyone other than the police,” says Cassandra Crifasi, a researcher of gun-violence prevention and policy at Johns Hopkins University. “What that means is that researchers are restricted to the sort of high-level reports that ATF puts out. So we have no idea if the guns used in crime were used by the person who purchased it or if it was diverted to someone else.”
In the former case, laws such as waiting periods and stronger licensure requirements may prevent people who commit crimes from being able to purchase guns; in the latter, more organized anti-trafficking efforts may be needed to dissuade gun buyers from funneling weapons into secondary marketplaces. …
Right now, we know that gun sales rose dramatically starting in March 2020, and that murder—driven by gun murders—increased substantially a few months later. We have strong evidence that more people were carrying guns before murder went up in 2020, and the ATF data tell us that newly purchased firearms were used in more crimes than usual. It stands to reason that new guns helped feed 2020’s murder surge, though the data to confirm this conclusion remains agonizingly out of reach. The data aren’t perfect, but they’re strongly suggestive: More guns are behind America’s murder spike.
— Jeff Asher and Rob Arthur in The Data Are Pointing to One Major Driver of America’s Murder Spike
Democrat ran cities are behind the murder spike. Their policies and their enabling of crime is behind the spike.
The only logical conclusion is to ban the democratic party.
The only logical conclusion is to nuke the commiecrat run cities from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure.
Sneaky Gun Control zealots are not the least bit concerned about violence and use violence just like they use moms and kids and anything else for props. If uppity researching Gun Control zealots were concerned about violence they would not be fixated just on guns. Their so called research would include knives, bricks, bats, vehicles, fists, feet and anything else misused by criminals.
Gun Control zealots are allowed to move their football all over the place thanks to far too many gullible do it for me Gun Owners who sit on their butts and allow Gun Control zealots to set the pace. I.E. Where are the articles about any historical research being conducted on Gun Control? Where are the documents of racism and genocide attributed to Gun Control being discussed in congress, on radio, TV or in court cases where the 2A is on the line while the racist and nazi based Gun Control sits there looking like sugar and spice and everything nice?
Do Gun Control zealots have to appear in court wearing sheets, pointed hats, jackboots, swastikas for fools to see where Gun Control zealots and their agenda came from and heads for again?
that’s getting the cart before the horse…the guns are a symptom…not the cause…people are fearful and mistrustful of their govt’s ability or inclination to keep them safe which is supported by their continuing to release violent criminals into our midst…they’re the true cause of increased homicide rates…
Shouldn’t it be ‘the data DOES’ (not do) and ‘the data IS’ (not are)?
Now you will be attacked for being “language police”. 🙂
Control the language and you control the narrative.
Nope, it should be ” Carefully selected bits and pieces do not constitute actual data “
A datum is a single piece of information, data are multiple pieces of information.
Over the past few decades the usage has become sloppy, and most editors seem to have given up, so “data” treated as singular or plural are both usually deemed acceptable.
I think that “data” is singular or plural, so if you are writing about 2 or more different data streams, it would say the “data are”, if you are writing about a single data stream, it would be “data is”.
Like that amounts to a hill o’ beans….
“Data” can be used as both singular and plural, although more often, commonly, it is singular and should be presented as singular for a general audience.
“Data” is better described as being in transition from a plural to singular more than it is being either singular or plural – thus can be used as either depending on the application, for example…
“Data” as singular: “The ATF data is not applicable for this purpose.
“Data” as plural: “Our data shows more gun sales does not mean more gun violence.”
In the early 1900s, “data” was considered a plural word and a person using it as singular was considered “uneducated”. Until that era evolved Latin meaning and influence was the primary foundation of education teachings in terms of language so “data” was the plural of “datum” because in Latin “data” was the plural of “datum”. As times changed and the use of ‘data’ grew the Latin based school teachings changed too and held less influence, and today “datum” now has its own plural of “datums” (before under the Latin influence it did not have its own plural) and “data” has changed its meaning to “information” or a “collection of datums.”
Here in my scientific world, “data” is treated as plural. And in academic writing “data’ is also treated as plural. But there is a change in that sometimes, but its still predominately treated as plural but that use is a little outdated in today’s world in these communities because the meaning of “data” has been separated from “datum” because “datum” now has its own plural.
“Data” is the plural form of “datum”. A datum is a singular bit of information that tells you a thing, whereas data are able to tell you more because they, collectively, contain much more info. Those are the generally more accepted uses in scientific circles, but it is generally acceptable to fudge the plural up a bit in publications for the general public.
This author went to college and wants you to revere him for that. Key evidence to that fact is that he used TWO semicolons in this excerpt. Kurt Vonnegut said about semicolons (among other politically incorrect things), “Do not use semicolons… All they do is show you’ve been to college.”
Data is plural. “Datum” is singular.
Male is male. Female is female. Non-binary is made up shit. Don’t allow the language to be bastardized , or you end up with all kinds of Left of Real.
Why is it that any voice that come out the USA supporting more stringent gun control measures is immediately labelled as being some how a ”COMMIE” [by which I take to mean connected in some way with COMMUNISM] I suspect that few American gun freaks even know what the word COMMIE or COMMUNISM actually means. To call DEMOCRATS
‘COMMUNISTS’ is beyond parody. Democracy is the antithesis of Communism.
Do these people really think that those countries like most of Europe, Canada and the UK, or indeed most of the CIVILISED world, that do have stringent gun control legislation [which is NOT the same as banning gun ownership by the way] are ALL Communists,
I suggest that you get out your passport and visit a few of them before you make judgement. Get an education at the same time!
Stick it in your ear albert hall!
Socialist at least, with soft but increasing and hardening totalitarian streaks. Yes, I have visited, yes, I have worked in a few European countries.
Well Consequence you did not learn much. Many Americans who were sent to work long term in Europe by their American Companies chose NOT to come back to the U.S. when they discovered all the cradle to grave social services, affordable education, longer vacations, more holidays off , less gun homicide and mass murders, and sooner retirement age and the relaxed work atmosphere where some asshole Capitalvanian with a whip was not standing over them every hour of the work day. They found out by comparison the biggest “shit hole” industrialized country of the world is Capitalvania, U.S. of Hay, land of the ignorant Hill Jacks.
dacian the stupid,
Got any citations or numbers on that, Chief??? Didn’t think so. But, even IF your BS statement were true (it isn’t), Samuel Adams already spoke to that: “If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.”
If you’re so fond of Europe, stopehead, GO THERE. GTFO. You will not be missed.
You must be some kind of emotional cripple to want a government to take care of you “cradle to grave”.
If the facebook JWM pointed out is him cripple applies somewhere.
to Herr Hauptman Schmitto
quote—————Klaus Von Schmitto January 10, 2022 At 11:02
You must be some kind of emotional cripple to want a government to take care of you “cradle to grave”.————–quote
Like most of the witless Far Right they end up singing a different tune in old age when they go bankrupt over health care costs or die like dogs in the street because they could not even afford an old fashioned drug like Insulin or preventive health care.
Civilized societies do not let their people suffer and die like dogs in the street because health care is a human right except in Capitalvania where money is the only God and the working man’s life is considered cheap and expendable.
The Far Right are so greedy, cheap and ignorant that they would rather save a penny today in taxes and then go bankrupt tomorrow over health care. Every Penney that passes through their hands is squeezed so tightly it screams for mercy.
I ask you dear Genius what do you say to a 5 year old girl that is dying of Cancer? Do you tell her that health care is not a human right and you are not going to get me to pay a few pennies more in taxes to fund universal health care? That is exactly what the Far Right say every day.
“You’ve got to be some kind of emotional cripple . . . ”
Got it in one, Klaus, got it in one. Oh, and a mental cripple, too. dacian the stupid hasn’t had an original thought in his life. An actual thought and a cold drink of water would cause his immediate demise.
Why don’t you get a job over there? Or, anywhere. Just leave us alone.
Gadsden,
In order to get a job, dacian the stupid would have to have a marketable skill. To the best of my knowledge, dick-beating isn’t a marketable skill, even in Europe.
dacian the stupid could probably go on the dole in most European countries, where he would live out his pathetic, miserable life as uselessly as he is living here.
LampOfDiogenes, lil’d is still eating from his “Iron Rice Bowl”. Many in it’s land of origin are discovering the bowl is empty and the server doesn’t care. 4.3 million businesses in China closed in the last year. Nationalist rhetoric and propaganda may feed the soul but it does not fill the belly.
And even in those enlightened European countries have few vacancies for “Social Justice Commissar”.
does seem as though we pay for the guns…and they get the butter…
Whether or not it is “commies” or “nazis” trying to take our God given rights from us, they are Anti-Constitution and BoRs, trying to control us in at best a police state manner, or worse as dictator run. We will NOT comply.
“To call DEMOCRATS
‘COMMUNISTS’ is beyond parody.”
You, AH, are a funny man. Check the DNC Party Planks and you will see that they espouse / endorse increasing government intervention in every facet of your life. They are committed to an overarching central government who makes all decisions regarding the production, distribution and sale of material products and the distribution of services.
Communism : a totalitarian system of government in which a single authoritarian party controls state-owned means of production
– courtesy of Merriam-Webster on-line
BTW, I have lived and traveled extensively in Europe. As well as visiting / working in several of the “ManyStans” and Latin America under both maroon and blue USA passports (never had the black PP).
Old Guy I do not believe you in regards to your travel statement unless it was done while you were in the military which would have taught you zero about how foreign countries and people live. You must have had your eyes closed when traveling.
My eyes close and I start falling asleep every time you start talking. It’s a conditioned reflex at this point.
Ing,
Like John Mellencamp said, “Baby, you ain’t missin’ a thing”. Dacian has never had room in his indoctrinated (but uneducated) brain for an actual thought. dacian is the most unoriginal voice on this site. Gawd, even enuf and MinorIQ SOMETIMES come up with original (if stupid) arguments. dacian? Never. Everything he “knows” he parrots from some other dumbass Leftist/fascist.
You never knew your father.
There are a great many more choices available in life than the limited few your mind and personality are locked into. Most of my foreign travels had nothing to do with the DoD. My eyes were wide open the entire time. At a young age (prior to any foreign travel) I was required by my Dad to read The Ugly American (Burdick and Lederer) in an attempt to understand how to interact with the peoples / countries we visited. His quizzes on policy and local customs were intense.
You are free to believe me or not…however, if I may be so bold, you have demonstrated your intransigence so many times that your posts have assumed the role of entertainment…fictitious humor Liberally mixed with a huge helping of lies.
Excellent reply Albert but you must remember this forum is host to some very deranged and ignorant people. They do not represent the majority of American Gun Owners who by the way would for the most part agree with most of what you stated.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ss2hULhXf04
Albert,
I read your “comment” and all I hear is the voice of Charlie Brown’s teacher. But, by all means, propagandize harder. I’m sure it will convince someone (yourself, perhaps??).
Europeans like Albert are usually better educated and know more about the U.S. than ignorant Hill Jacks like you Lamp That Went Out In His Head.
“Better educated” like your own “educated” self, dacian the stupid??? You are a parody of a caricature of an actually educated person. And I have challenged YOU, repeatedly, to give the details of this alleged “education” you constantly bray about. You are stupid, uneducated, witless, a pathetic writer, and dumb as Baalam’s off ass.
Lamp is extra angry this evening. His estranged wife’s motion to extend the no contact order must have been granted. Good for her and their kids, but bad for us….
No, nameless, brainless troll (and sock puppet of dacian the stupid). Not angry at all. Having too much fun playing “whack-a-mole” with brainless incompetents like you and dacian.
the democrats seem to focus on the collective and its forced implementation…the republicans on individual rights and personal freedom…..
I love how they finally admit what I’ve been saying all along: the pandemic was only responsible for a short surge in 2020 sales. I was watching the gun stores. Things were already headed back to somewhat normal when the Floyd incident happened. Also, keep in mind it was an election year which always increases sales.
“These background checks surged dramatically in 2020, first when coronavirus cases began to appear in the U.S. *AND AGAIN* (the pandemic surge was over) after Floyd’s murder at the end of May.”
“…the data to confirm this conclusion remains agonizingly out of reach.”
But we’re going to do it anyway! Their hypothesis is that more guns sold equals more murder, yet they don’t bother to check if murder increased in proportion to past gun sale surges. And riddle me this, why didn’t the murderers buy up guns in 2019? Guns weren’t any more difficult to buy were they? Actually it was easier prior to 2020 because there was a better selection for less money.
We need to find the one thing that was different in 2020. We already ruled out increased gun sales. I’m just spitballin’ here but maybe, just maybe, it could be the violent, corporate sponsored, politician and media promoted, Burn Loot Murder Cultural Revolution and all of the ramifications from it. This article is yet more propaganda intended to redirect the blame away from the actual people responsible for those extra deaths. Blood is on their hands.
To Dud Brain who’s arch enemies are Science and Educational Institutions.
More Guns more homicides. A Harvard Study
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/
Homicide
1. Where there are more guns there is more homicide (literature review)
Our review of the academic literature found that a broad array of evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide, both in the United States and across high-income countries. Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the U.S., where there are more guns, both men and women are at a higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide.
Hepburn, Lisa; Hemenway, David. Firearm availability and homicide: A review of the literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior: A Review Journal. 2004; 9:417-40.
2. Across high-income nations, more guns = more homicide
We analyzed the relationship between homicide and gun availability using data from 26 developed countries from the early 1990s. We found that across developed countries, where guns are more available, there are more homicides. These results often hold even when the United States is excluded.
Hemenway, David; Miller, Matthew. Firearm availability and homicide rates across 26 high income countries. Journal of Trauma. 2000; 49:985-88.
3. Across states, more guns = more homicide
Using a validated proxy for firearm ownership, we analyzed the relationship between firearm availability and homicide across 50 states over a ten-year period (1988-1997).
After controlling for poverty and urbanization, for every age group, people in states with many guns have elevated rates of homicide, particularly firearm homicide.
Miller, Matthew; Azrael, Deborah; Hemenway, David. Household firearm ownership levels and homicide rates across U.S. regions and states, 1988-1997. American Journal of Public Health. 2002; 92:1988-1993.
4. Across states, more guns = more homicide (2)
Using survey data on rates of household gun ownership, we examined the association between gun availability and homicide across states, 2001-2003. We found that states with higher levels of household gun ownership had higher rates of firearm homicide and overall homicide. This relationship held for both genders and all age groups, after accounting for rates of aggravated assault, robbery, unemployment, urbanization, alcohol consumption, and resource deprivation (e.g., poverty). There was no association between gun prevalence and non-firearm homicide.
Miller, Matthew; Azrael, Deborah; Hemenway, David. State-level homicide victimization rates in the U.S. in relation to survey measures of household firearm ownership, 2001-2003. Social Science and Medicine. 2007; 64:656-64.
5. A summary of the evidence on guns and violent death
This book chapter summarizes the scientific literature on the relationship between gun prevalence (levels of household gun ownership) and suicide, homicide and unintentional firearm death and concludes that where there are higher levels of gun ownership, there are more gun suicides and more total suicides, more gun homicides and more total homicides, and more accidental gun deaths.
This is the first chapter in the book and provides and up-to-date and readable summary of the literature on the relationship between guns and death. It also adds to the literature by using the National Violent Death Reporting System data to show where (home or away) the shootings occurred. Suicides for all age groups and homicides for children and aging adults most often occurred in their own home.
Miller M, Azrael D, Hemenway D. Firearms and violence death in the United States. In: Webster DW, Vernick JS, eds. Reducing Gun Violence in America. Baltimore MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2013.
6. More guns = more homicides of police
This article examines homicide rates of Law Enforcement Officers (LEOs) from 1996 to 2010. Differences in rates of homicides of LEOs across states are best explained not by differences in crime, but by differences in household gun ownership. In high gun states, LEOs are 3 times more likely to be murdered than LEOs working in low-gun states.
This article was cited by President Obama in a speech to a police association. This article will hopefully bring police further into the camp of those pushing for sensible gun laws.
Swedler DI, Simmons MM, Dominici F, Hemenway D. Firearm prevalence and homicides of law enforcement officers in the United States. American Journal of Public Health. 2015; 105:2042-48.
dacian the stupid, you pathetic imbecile,
“surveys of academic literature” are not “studies”, you witless buffoon. Using “validated proxies” for actual information is not a valid study. One metric that has been absolutely PROVEN, time and time again, is that murder rates are highest in . . . wait for it . . . large cities. Note, I said murder RATES, not numbers of murders. What do those cities have in common??? Almost all are run by Leftist/fascist, such as yourself. And most ALREADY HAVE most of the gun controls you and your idiot Leftist friends bray about.
dacian, you are too stupid to be consuming oxygen that useful creatures could avail themselves of. But keep being stupid, it makes it fun to slap your stupid behind around.
You are literally
To the Lamp that went out in his head
quote————-One metric that has been absolutely PROVEN, time and time again, is that murder rates are highest in . . . wait for it . . . large cities. ———–quote
You just confirmed the fact you Moron that more guns mean higher murder rates because the most guns are found in high population areas, usually the bigger cities, where poverty, and low paying jobs and low levels of education are found.
Inner city schools too are often inferior in the quality of education given as compared to the rich suburb schools which only adds to the problem of poor people not having an equal opportunity at success in life.
Canadian Schools which are not funded by property taxes have according to a Harvard Study had a much higher percentage of disadvantaged children and immigrant children move up the ladder of economic success than the inferior American system. Immigrant children are assimilated into Canadian society in less than two years. The Harvard Study also proved that if you are part of the lower economic stratum that your chances of success in life are superior in Canada than in the U.S. and many illegal immigrants are now bypassing the Hell Hole of Capitalvania and illegally immigrating into Canada not only from S. America but Europe as well.
The best teachers in Capitalvania are employed in rich suburbs while the worst teachers take what jobs they can get and that is in the places most teachers fear to go and work in which is the bigger cities.
Only a Moron like yourself who flunked out of school would fail to be aware of these problems or in his ignorance deny they exist.
Sorry Dotard try again, you again succeeded in making a complete fool of yourself.
And your chosen moniker belies your level of education by picking “The Lamp Of Diogenes”. Diogenes was a criminal (right up your alley) and was too shiftless and lazy to get a real job so he spent his time sponging off of working people and pretending to be a sophist. No wonder you admired him.
dacian the stupid,
Wow. You really don’t know jack squat about statistics, do you? But, then, you’re an uneducated buffoon, so I should expect no better.
Literally NOTHING you have ever posted on this blog bears even a slight relationship to reality. Your complete misunderstanding of both the history of Diogenes of Sinope, and the actual MEANING behind my handle (much too much for your pathetic excuse for a mind to parse out), proves it.
Still haven’t figured out Baalam’s off ass, have you, dimwit??
Kinda proof that I own your sorry @$$. You can’t even UNDERSTAND, let alone keep up with, the debate. Sucks to be you.
Violent crime, including murder, fell from a peak in the early 90s while gun sales INCREASED. We have been on a downward trend ever since until the powers that be created the Ferguson BLM Effect in 2014 and the Floyd BLM Effect in 2020 (notice the common denominator).
“There is, however, little or no evidence that changes in gun control laws in the 1990s can account for falling crime.”
https://pricetheory.uchicago.edu/levitt/Papers/LevittUnderstandingWhyCrime2004.pdf
one thing the left always forgets..[perhaps deliberately]…is that every attempt to enact and implement new gun laws usually results in a spike in gun sales..case in point: right after Obama’s election I attended a local but large gun show…I’d usually walk right in, plunk my entrance fee down and begin browsing…this time the line extended completely around the building…
Plain data disproves the Harvard study’s contention: http://jpfo.org/images14/firearms-vs-homicides.jpg
How do you explain Jamaica which 6 months after banning all firearms had a higher murder rate than before? The method of murder changed from guns to knives, clubs, and machetes.
Proves even complete elimination of guns does not stop murder.
any place with a large black population will usually have a higher crime rate…simple truth…
“Cassandra Crifasi, a researcher of gun-violence prevention and policy at Johns Hopkins University”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nrnpRbVacw
“ More guns are behind America’s murder spike. “
Wrong, more criminals committing murder are behind the spike. Crime at almost every level is up including crimes that don’t involve guns. Criminals have always had access to guns.
Yes the criminals and nut cases have access to guns and even a retarded toad would know they get them with no paperwork from second hand gun sales, at bars, flea markets, internet chat rooms, gun shows, news paper adds, building ghost guns and from acquaintances because we have no Federal Law outlawing such sales with no paperwork.
Citation, you witless toad????
To the Lamp that went out in his head.
You make this too easy. You are not even a challenge in a debate but it is fun making a complete fool of you.
A PARTIAL LIST OF LUNATICS AND CRIMINALS WHO BUILT GHOST GUNS AND USED THEM IN CRIME OR MASS MURDERS.
Are ghost guns frequently used in violent crime?????????????????????????
Yes, ghost guns are increasing being used in shootings across the country.
In July 2020, an individual who was prohibited from possessing guns allegedly murdered two people in Pennsylvania using a homemade 9mm handgun.9
In November 2019, a 16-year-old shot five of his classmates at Saugus High School in California—two of them fatally—using a homemade handgun, before fatally shooting himself.10
In August 2019, a shooter used a homemade gun kit to build a .223-caliber firearm that he later used to fire 41 shots in 32 seconds in a bar in Dayton, Ohio, shooting 26 people and killing nine.11
In 2017, in Northern California, a man prohibited from possessing firearms ordered kits to build AR-15-style rifles. On November 13, he initiated a series of shootings that began with fatally shooting his wife at home, followed by a rampage the next day during which he fired at multiple people in several different locations, including an elementary school, killing five people and injuring dozens more.12
In 2013, a shooter opened fire in Santa Monica, California, shooting 100 rounds, killing five people, and injuring several others at a community college using a homemade AR-15 rifle. Reporting indicates the shooter had previously tried to purchase a firearm from a licensed gun dealer and failed a background check, potentially indicating why he opted to order parts to build a gun instead.13
Law enforcement officials around the country are sounding the alarm about the dramatic increase in the recovery of ghost guns at crime scenes in their communities. ATF reported that approximately 10,000 ghost guns were recovered across the country in 2019.14 Ghost guns have also been illegally trafficked to Mexico.15 In addition:
In 2019, Washington, D.C., police recovered 115 ghost guns, a 360 percent increase from 2018, when they recovered 25 ghost guns, and a 3,733 percent increase from 2017, when only three such firearms were recovered.16
In 2019, ATF reported recovering 117 ghost guns in Maryland with almost 25 percent recovered from Baltimore alone. Ghost gun recoveries in the state then tripled in 2020.17
According to law enforcement in Philadelphia, ghost gun recoveries in that city rose 152 percent from 2019 to 2020.18
The special agent in charge of the ATF Los Angeles Field Division reported in January 2021 that 41 percent of the division’s cases involve ghost guns, and a May 2019 statewide analysis in California found that 30 percent of all guns recovered in connection with a crime in the state did not have serial numbers.19
In addition, an investigation by The Trace found that ghost guns are increasingly becoming the weapon of choice for violent white supremacists and anti-government extremists.20
In conclusion the ATF is a law unto itself and as in the past it rules at 8:00 AM and it is then a new “regulation” (disingenuous term for new law) is now the law of the land at 5:00 PM.
No Judge Conservative or Liberal will declare the ATF ruling illegal or Unconstitutional because ghost guns are a danger to the people of the country and even the much ballyhooed Scalia decision with the usual double talk and smoke and mirrors declared “The Courts had the right to regulate firearms” (slick disingenuous term for ban or restrict firearms).
In conclusion your right to own a weapon rests with the rulings of the courts, not the Constitution, and history has proven this reality like it or not.
No sane person would want ghost guns legal and no other civilized nation tolerates them.
So ghost guns are a good thing, cool.
dacian the stupid,
Yes, you are a master debater. Constantly. Must make it difficult to type.
Once again, you witless moron, the plural of “anecdote” is NOT “evidence”. Care to cite some ACTUAL studies (NOT “surveys of academic writing” or BS “studies” based on “proxies” for actual data, you witless buffoon)?
Nah, didn’t think so.
The cable says she misses you.
which they wouldn’t obey anyway…laws are only effective for the law-abiding….not someone selling out of their car trunk…and private sales among the law-abiding are not much of a factor in the crime rate as these people have no sinister intent..simple hobbyists, collectors and sportsmen who pose no threat…
…and let’s not confuse “ghost guns” with weapons that have just had their serial # removed…although there is some evidence illegal gun traffickers have discovered this as a new source of untraceable weapons…
Can it be pinpointed when “stands to reason” became a stand in for “muh feelings make me feel this should be true”?
✔️
My guess would be Lyndon Johnson, 1964 Civil Rights Act which categorized and authorized officially described modes / means / manner of discrimination. The Act has allowed countless millions to determine just how “special” they were under an encoded Government definition…and to exploit that “specialness” on behalf of themselves and their progeny. In other words, people now had “official” excuses for their behavior.
This era marks the beginning of the Democrat-sponsored “Low Expectations” brand of racism and inequality.
On a different subject, The Gun Feed is “suspended”. Is this some MSM action or has the author gone offline? Anybody know?
How long before the lump “justifiable defensive shootings” with “murder(or attempted murder) by firearm”?
The majority of murders are done by inner city gangs and the target is usually a rival gang member.
We should work on those reasons, not on people that buy firearms for self defense(since to police are even a longer time away?
Just put a very large fence around the deep blue cities and let them fight it out amongst themselves. Let them deal with the issues that they themselves created. It’s always going to be about the gun and not about the individual. The problem is nt the guns, it’s hearts without God, homes without discipline, schools without proper education and guidance and courtrooms without justice. Just saying.
suggested viewing:…”The Wire”…[if you haven’t seen it already]…..
Scientific method? What’s that? I don’t have any supporting data… just believe us! Guns are bad, m’kay!
progressives live in a bubble where everything appears as they think it does and want it to be. They ignore the simple fact of all aspects of life, science, stats, physics, and just about everything that: correlation does not equal causality.
This is not the only fundamental fact they ignore.
They ignore these fundamental facts because when applied it will show them to be wrong and that nice comfortable warm-n-cozy bubble they live in where they vent their ‘outrage’ that makes them feel ‘justified’ and ‘sanctified’ and they build their self-worth on – that bubble will burst and they will be left with the realization of how wrong they have been.
A bubble example > in November 2021, Sarah Beth Burwick on Twitter > https://twitter.com/sarahbeth345/status/1458593872557133825
“I am highly educated and reasonably perceptive, and it was only today that I learned the Kyle Rittenhouse victims were white.
My progressive bubble made this seem like a very different case than it is.”
This article by Jeff Asher and Rob Arthur is just another part of the agenda to feed progressives the lies that maintain their bubble. But there are progressives beginning to realize this bubble they live in is based on lies.
No matter the causes, numbers of guns, where they come from, or how many are on the streets, it will always come down to the person behind the gun. Wouldn’t matter if somehow guns disappeared today, criminals will always take advantage of the situation and legal system to commit their crimes. We always hear that it’s the guns, but the anti gun folks claiming how bad the hardware may be ignore the fact that it is a human being using that gun. A gun has no ability to choose what it will be used for. But, the person behind it does. Go after and prosecute the person, not the hardware used.
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/
Homicide | Harvard Injury Control Research Center | Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health
1. Where there are more guns there is more homicide (literature review). Our review of the academic literature found that a broad array of evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide, both in the United States and across high-income countries.
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu
1. Where there are more guns there is more homicide (literature review)
Our review of the academic literature found that a broad array of evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide, both in the United States and across high-income countries. Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the U.S., where there are more guns, both men and women are at a higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide.
Hepburn, Lisa; Hemenway, David. Firearm availability and homicide: A review of the literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior: A Review Journal. 2004; 9:417-40.
2. Across high-income nations, more guns = more homicide
We analyzed the relationship between homicide and gun availability using data from 26 developed countries from the early 1990s. We found that across developed countries, where guns are more available, there are more homicides. These results often hold even when the United States is excluded.
Hemenway, David; Miller, Matthew. Firearm availability and homicide rates across 26 high income countries. Journal of Trauma. 2000; 49:985-88.
3. Across states, more guns = more homicide
Using a validated proxy for firearm ownership, we analyzed the relationship between firearm availability and homicide across 50 states over a ten-year period (1988-1997).
After controlling for poverty and urbanization, for every age group, people in states with many guns have elevated rates of homicide, particularly firearm homicide.
Miller, Matthew; Azrael, Deborah; Hemenway, David. Household firearm ownership levels and homicide rates across U.S. regions and states, 1988-1997. American Journal of Public Health. 2002; 92:1988-1993.
4. Across states, more guns = more homicide (2)
Using survey data on rates of household gun ownership, we examined the association between gun availability and homicide across states, 2001-2003. We found that states with higher levels of household gun ownership had higher rates of firearm homicide and overall homicide. This relationship held for both genders and all age groups, after accounting for rates of aggravated assault, robbery, unemployment, urbanization, alcohol consumption, and resource deprivation (e.g., poverty). There was no association between gun prevalence and non-firearm homicide.
Miller, Matthew; Azrael, Deborah; Hemenway, David. State-level homicide victimization rates in the U.S. in relation to survey measures of household firearm ownership, 2001-2003. Social Science and Medicine. 2007; 64:656-64.
5. A summary of the evidence on guns and violent death
This book chapter summarizes the scientific literature on the relationship between gun prevalence (levels of household gun ownership) and suicide, homicide and unintentional firearm death and concludes that where there are higher levels of gun ownership, there are more gun suicides and more total suicides, more gun homicides and more total homicides, and more accidental gun deaths.
This is the first chapter in the book and provides and up-to-date and readable summary of the literature on the relationship between guns and death. It also adds to the literature by using the National Violent Death Reporting System data to show where (home or away) the shootings occurred. Suicides for all age groups and homicides for children and aging adults most often occurred in their own home.
Miller M, Azrael D, Hemenway D. Firearms and violence death in the United States. In: Webster DW, Vernick JS, eds. Reducing Gun Violence in America. Baltimore MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2013.
6. More guns = more homicides of police
This article examines homicide rates of Law Enforcement Officers (LEOs) from 1996 to 2010. Differences in rates of homicides of LEOs across states are best explained not by differences in crime, but by differences in household gun ownership. In high gun states, LEOs are 3 times more likely to be murdered than LEOs working in low-gun states.
This article was cited by President Obama in a speech to a police association. This article will hopefully bring police further into the camp of those pushing for sensible gun laws.
Swedler DI, Simmons MM, Dominici F, Hemenway D. Firearm prevalence and homicides of law enforcement officers in the United States. American Journal of Public Health. 2015; 105:2042-48.
dacian the stupid,
Citing the same fake “studies” (using “reviews of literature” in lieu of actual studies, and using “proxies” for actual data) over and over again makes you look even stupider than usual. I would suggest you do better, but that is beyond your VERY meager ability.
Tell me, dacian the stupid, what do ALL of the cities in the US with the highest murder RATES have in common? We’ll wait while you go figure that out. Hopefully, given your non-existent intellectual abilities, we’ll be waiting a long damn time. Other than the joy of punting your worthless, brainless butt around the place, we could do with a vacation from your idiocy.
to The Lamp that went out in his head
Rejection of Science, University studies, surveys, statistics, government records, just to name a few, are all a hallmark of the ignorance of the Far Right. They say “Do not confuse me with the facts I have already made up my mind”.
That was supposed to be a response?? Dayum, boy, that’s weak sauce, even for you. A “university study” based on “reviews of academic literature” is professorial dick-beating, in lieu of actual research (which you would know, if you’d ever ACTUALLY been educated). Ignorance is belief in the self-frocked “elite” who spew ideological bullcrap as opposed to doing actual research. And you even cherry-pick those, to find the ones that most support your own biases and delusions (study up on “confirmation bias” and “Krueger-Dunning”, you witless fool).
apparently you don’t understand what the words ‘biased’ and ‘without basis’ means. In the absence of correlating foundation your ‘studies’ researchers ‘invented’ stats from thin air. They created a ‘correlation equals causation’ study, the main thing to avoid in research and stats is ‘correlation equals causation’ because ‘correlation does not equal causation’ and never has and can’t.
Your studies are emotional crap dressed up to look ‘official’. They are a scientific sham. Its the infamous Harvard ‘apocalypse’ study where based upon their methods and numbers the population of the United States would have been zero by 2007 – 2008 time frame.
For example, “We found that states with higher levels of household gun ownership had higher rates of firearm homicide and overall homicide.” – that is a linear ‘correlation equals causation’ statement. it supposes that as rates of gun ownership rise so would firearm homicide but it doesn’t hold true because the reverse would need to be true as well and it isn’t so it can’t be linear and correlation does not equal causation. For it to be true it would mean that for every gun sold there was one firearm homicide which would be over 300,000,000 firearms homicides, because it can only go up in their study and never decrease, which would mean the population of the United States reached zero in 2017 – 2018 time frame.
Of course I don’t expect you to understand this. But here we are with an article here at TTAG that says the basis of the correlation can not be determined because the real data simply does not exist. So where did your researchers get their data? They invented it by picking data to support their ‘correlation equals causation’ when it doesn’t.
“…reached zero in 2017 – 2018 time frame.
should have been “…reached zero in 2017 – 2018 time frame using today’s numbers and linear progression in their study.”
addition: But obviously the population did not reach zero in 2007 – 2008 time frame or 2017 – 2018 time frame and will not reach zero 2027 – 2028 time frame etc… . And also their study doesn’t hold true based upon today’s numbers either if they were to conduct the same study today because firearms buys have exponentially increased nationwide while firearms homicides have only linearly progressed in certain areas where there is lower gun legal ownership and fewer people carry.
probably should qualify that with “where there are more guns illegally possessed”…..
licensing and waiting periods have no impact on people who commit crimes.
Because people who commit crimes do not purchase their firearms through legal channels.
The recent study found Massachusetts gun control had 0 impact on violent crime. It only made life harder for law abiding citizens.
Sure because States with lax gun laws funnel in thousands of second hand guns into states with tough gun laws. They ship in thousands of guns up the “Iron Pipe Line”. Its not rocket science.
So, dacian the stupid, IF your unsupported assertion WERE true (it isn’t; the so-called “studies” supporting that assertion have been repeatedly debunked as errant nonsense), ALL it would prove is that all those “gun control” measures you and your fellow hoplophobes tout are completely ineffectual. Sucks to be you, dunnit???
to the Lamp that went out in his head”
Even a retarded Dotard can understand that without a Federal Law guns get shipped into states with tough laws from states with lax laws. Study after study proves it. Law Enforcement tracings prove it. But the Far Right Dotards reject all science, studies, facts and evidence.
Citation, or it didn’t happen. You are too stupid to breathe, dacian the stupid.
There are already laws that criminalize straw purchasing firearms and shipping them across state lines. Also, if the guns were the problem, why are there not higher crimes in those lax gun law states? Indiana has lower crime than Illinois.
Dacian, trying to have a conversation with people on the other side of the political aisle from you will never go well if you insult them.
This reply is to be read as a conversation without maliciousness behind my words.
dacian, who is in love with the “civilized” nations, is incapable of civil, adult conversation when he disagrees with you. Ask me how I know.
to Forp
The answer is easy. Higher Populations i.e. the big cities and populous states have higher gun ownership and often higher poverty levels and lower educational levels giving them less opportunity for advancement up the economic ladder. A Harvard Study proved that Canada with its superior educational system that is not funded by property taxes and therefore more equal in the level of education given to all citizens was proven to have enabled a much higher percentage of the lower working classes to move up the economic ladder. Immigrant children also assimilated in less than two years and scored very high in scholastic testing. They have tougher gun laws and much lower crime with them.
I think too that the explosion of road rage murders and mass murders shows that when there is no vetting of gun purchases that too many of the wrong people are permitted to buy firearms. In Japan to get a weapon you have 3 interviews with the police, your background is checked, you are given a psychological test, there are interviews with your neighbors and co-workers and there is mandatory safe storage of firearms. Their system works very well and they have the lowest homicide rate with firearms and lowest level of mass murder. Europeans have similar laws although not quite as draconian and again they have less homicide and mass murders with firearms.
Gee, dacian the dipshit, care to do a demographic comparison between your beloved, “enlightened” European democracies (which they largely are, which is why they are so effed up), and most large U.S. cities?? No. Quelle surprise!
You have NO explanation for the actual FACT (learn what those are; you might not sound so stupid) that crime RATES and “gun violence” are MORE prevalent where guns are SEVERELY restricted. You offer excuses (poverty, low education). You like making fun of all us “rednecks” (I was born in San Francisco, you gormless t**t), so riddle me this: What is the average education, and average income, of white hillbillies in Appalachia, as compared to folks on the South Side of Chicago? Or is that just too much information for a witless dolt such as yourself??? Now, compare crime rates. Go ahead, we’ll wait.
The most education, job, and welfare opportunities are found in the big cities, which is why people moved there.
to the Lamp that went out in his head
quote————-What is the average education, and average income, of white hillbillies in Appalachia, as compared to folks on the South Side of Chicago? Or is that just too much information for a witless dolt such as yourself??? Now, compare crime rates. Go ahead, we’ll wait.———–quote
If you were a product of higher education you would never have made such an idiotic comparison. Southern Appalachia is not a city like Chicago and covers more than one state (you flunked geography ).
Even looking at just West Virginia it has not always been a poor state and much of it is a rural country. The population was not always poor either as a Moron like yourself believes. After the advent of the Unionization of the Mines West Virginia had high incomes in many cities and towns and the satellite business that fed off the mines and minor’s incomes also provided many jobs to the people. In fact some areas were as prosperous as Ohio during that time period.
Chicago is not an an entire state ( you flunked geography) and its population very dense. When the high paying jobs were all shipped overseas we now have had over 4 generations of people that never had a decent paying job and some have not had any jobs.
Population density has an effect on the crime rate as opposed to a rural population density, often where many people know each other. Again if you had not flunked sociology you would have be aware of this. I could quote some famous studies but what would be the use as you would dismiss any science with the wave of your hand.
Crime and poverty are complex issues and time and space here does not give one the opportunity to even scratch such a complex subject but it would be way over your head which always gravitates toward simplistic solutions to very complex societal problems. The hallmark of the uneducated.
Lamp that went out in your head, you are out of your league. Educational flunk outs always are.
I might add before closing your constant attacks on minorities are as sickening as they are uneducated but to be expected from the uneducated, the racist, the biased, and the xenophobic. Again no one who is a product of higher education would consistently make the outrageous statements that keep insinuating that the majority of minorities are all rapists, criminals and murders.
To Dacian, to say that the USA doesn’t spend a lot on social programs is incorrect. 2019 numbers show that 23% of the federal budget went to social security, 25% went to medical programs and 9% went to safety net programs. School budgeting was roughly 4% when adding state and federal budgeting together. Those numbers are massive when taking into account the differences in USA and Canading budgets (USA roughly 5 times higher than Canada). Canada also taxes their people at a higher rate, even low income people pay more. Canada does spend more per student per year ~$14k vs ~$12.5k in USA, I don’t believe a $1.5k a year difference is going to matter.
As far as European countries having less gun crime, yes individually they each have less gun crime. When you expand to the entire European union, then the numbers (population and crime) get close to equal. The interesting thing is Americans own firearms at an almost 1 gun to person ratio vs the European unions 1 to every 10 people (and sometimes less). Per your argument, this discrepancy in firearm ownership would indicate the USA would dwarf the EU in murder rates, but it doesn’t.
to Forp
quote————-To Dacian, to say that the USA doesn’t spend a lot on social programs is incorrect.————-quote
Lets not argue numbers let us speak of results. In Europe people do not die in the streets like dogs because they could not afford life saving drugs or operations. Even old fashioned drugs like insulin have skyrocketed in price from $50 a vile to over $550 a vile with zero justification in Capitalvania. European countries have drug review boards to prevent such rape of its citizens and Drugs are cheaper and are paid for by Social Programs. When I was in an East European Country I needed medication, I walked into a Pharmacy and purchased drugs for $2.50 which would have cost me several hundred dollars in the U.S. and I was not even using their insurance but paid for it in cash. I did not need a doctors prescription which again saved me a ton of money.
150,000 people die from lack of preventive health care each year in the U.S. Many die because they have to chose between buying food and paying utilities which leaves little for medication. This is rampant among the elderly.
Many people go bankrupt after life saving operations and some never get those operations because they put it off because they know they cannot afford it and then they die. Its paid for in Europe.
Social programs in European countries often give rent subsides, petrol subsidies, heating subsidies, education tutoring , free higher education, technical training and re-training. Germany matches private enterprise with retraining money and programs. Again something that in Capitalvania has almost become extinct.
In France in the Paris area Sunday work at a labor’s job pays triple time of $33.00 an hour. Something almost extinct in Capitalvania.
Many European Countries give 4 weeks vacation just to start and with seniority 3 months vacation plus another month of holidays. France literally shuts down for summer vacations. In the hell hole of Capitalvania most people these days get no vacations, no holidays, no family leave, no health insurance and no retirement. Social Security payments are an obscene joke.
Students do not go bankrupt for life in European countries when they attend a university.
Many countries give 2 hours for lunch. The work atmosphere is not hostile and threatening.
Many cancer causing chemicals have long ago been outlawed in Europe while in Capitalvania the people get cancer and die like flies.
There are some African Countries today that have lower infant mortality than in West Virginia. When Trump pointed his finger and called African countries “shit hole countries’ he had 3 fingers pointed right back at his own country of Capitalvania
None of these obscenities happen in Socialist Europe and many of the industrialized Far Eastern Countries.
to Forp
When I was in Eastern Europe which has a higher crime rate than the richer Western Europe the first thing I noticed is that even late at night women were not terrorized to be out and about and constantly look over their shoulders. It was because their crime rate (which was in a city with 8 million) was far lower than Cleveland Ohio that has only 385,000 people.
I posted a run down on the benefits of European Social programs v/s the lack of and often inadequately funded U.S. programs but it is awaiting moderation but it is a real eye opener on the difference in living in a civilized country and trying to exist in Capitalvania.
to Forp
Europe does not have the almost daily mass murders we have because of there very thorough vetting system to buy a gun. All gun sales must be vetted. Last year one nut case in Germany tried to make his own single shot gun to commit mass murder with and he did kill 1 person but the gun jammed up so many time the cops got there and arrested him. In Capitalvania he would have gunned down a large amount of people in only seconds. It happens every day in Capitalvania. So tell me that their gun laws do not work.
The French night club massacre that occurred several years ago was State sponsored terrorism by a Mid-Eastern State which was an act of war something that domestic laws cannot prevent. In Capitalvania since that time we have had hundreds of such massacres and none was from a foreign country.
dacian the nazi. You’ve never been to europe. Or much anywhere out of Ohio.
That kind of travel requires funds and you are not employable.
@dacian
“When I was in Eastern Europe which has a higher crime rate than the richer Western Europe the first thing I noticed is that even late at night women were not terrorized to be out and about and constantly look over their shoulders. It was because their crime rate (which was in a city with 8 million) was far lower than Cleveland Ohio that has only 385,000 people.”
another damn lie from you. Europe overall reports, basically annually, over 380 thousand female victims of rape and those are only the ones reported. 90% of those happen in Western Europe. But despite the reporting only 23% make it into stats because of the way its defined in those countries. For example, spousal rape is not included in stats from most areas in the Europe because its not considered rape in those areas, but it is considered rape in the U.S. so its reported in stats in the U.S. Rape is almost like its an organized sport in Europe. Sweden is rife with sexual child abuse and incest, but its not reported in their stats but in the U.S. its reported as sexual abuse and child abuse. France only reports in stats 1 in 3 cases of of what we consider child rape in U.S. stats.
England and Wales has the highest rate of rape in Europe. 10% of them are reported in stats.
Europe as a whole, eastern and western, is rife with far more crime than we have in the U.S.
In the U.S. we report any crime in stats. In Europe they have different definitions than we do for what is reported in stats so their stats can’t be compared directly to U.S. stats like you always try to do. If the definitions used by the U.S. were applied to the EU or Europe as a whole for their stats reporting their homicide rate is almost 20% higher than that of the U.S., Canada, Mexico combined.
Some truth there and partial relevance, now explain why there is enough criminal demand of these evil firearms in democratic paradises.
the last I checked states were free to enact what gun laws that they felt necessary and sufficient for their populace…and not someone else’s…”lax” is a subjective term that usually translates into “normal” in most places….
I would say yes more gunms equal more homicides. More cars equal more car wrecks.
More car wrecks happen in car races, more homicides happen in gangland.
Build more racetracks, build more ganglands.
The logic is to quit building, since that cant be done its stupid to disarm the law abiding. But that’s their fix to the problem.
possum,
Yeah, it’s kinda simple, when you actually think about it. There is, unfortunately, less information about it than I would like, but . . . check out the crime rates for LEGAL gun owners, vs. illegal gun owners. Then take a look at the crime rates for holder of concealed carry permits, vs. the crime rate for COPS. Kinda interesting, innit??
But uneducated dolts like dacian the stupid and MinorIQ persist in blamind the instrument for the crime, and proposing yet more futile “legislative solutions” to an improperly-defined problem. Yes, IF I could get illegal firearms out of the hands of gangbangers, I could reduce the crime rate substantially. Not possible.
So, instead, total tapioca-brained nitwits, like dacian the stupid, decide to punish the law-abiding, to root out crime among the criminals, and no amount of facts, statistics or research are going to change their . . . narrative (they have no minds).
But, their just going to keep forcibly copulating that chicken.
he’s not stupid…just here for a purpose….
Data proving that more guns in the hands of legal gun owners leads to lower crime cannot be proven either. In both cases the best that can be claimed is “correlation” (and hope?). There are simply too many variables influencing crime, or lack of crime.
It isn’t complicated. After it peaked in the early 90s, violent crime, including homicides, declined until BLM, politicians and the media began pushing racial grievance narratives on us. The police pulled back, and we got the Ferguson Effect. Homicides began increasing again, mostly in urban areas. The 2020 Marxist BLM Cultural Revolution, brought to you by Fortune 500 companies, was the Ferguson Effect on steroids. Obviously the media, and their preferred political party, aren’t going to admit their guilt in the matter. We’re left with endless amounts of propaganda to distract you from the truth while pushing their political narratives (guns bad).
“It isn’t complicated.”
And with amazing amounts of new gun purchases, the number of criminal acts rose.
The elements you identified certainly contributed, but all of it combined does not explain the overall rise in violent crime. It is impossible to directly associate the decline in violent crime beginning in 1993, with the purchase of a single firearm, or mass of firearms.
How many succeeding years have we heard that the number of firearms legally purchased exceeded the record set the year before? Yet, incidents of crime continue to rise. Just the numbers of new gun purchases since Jan 2020 should have already resulted in a reportable decrease in violent crime.
Playing the game of data comparisons is a losing proposition. We should be focusing on the number of successful DGUs, and pointing out that gun control mobs would have been responsible for that many more deaths…and that they would be proud of it.
“Yet, incidents of crime continue to rise.”
Why didn’t it rise in 2000, 2005, or 2010 as firearm sales rose? Violent crime increased when the media and politicians shoved BLM down the country’s throat. We know exactly what works and what doesn’t. They intentionally went down the road of what didn’t work. They continue to go down that path. Or maybe, it does work (for them)? It isn’t the elites getting gunned down in the street. They were and are fine with the increase in homicide. They’re only pretending like it’s a mystery.
The solution is NOT to take anyone’s rights way or their guns. The SOULTION is to get the Naked Apes of the Far Right to submit to a minor inconvenience of selling all guns through a Federally Licensed Dealer and to have guns locked up to prevent needless child deaths and smash and grab robberies.
None of this is rocket science but the Far Right do not want to be inconvenienced and to them “losses can never be too high” even if they succeed in accidentally killing their own children. They are more concerned with losing a few bucks in a license fee, being inconvenienced with a vetting system, or inconvenienced in being forced to lock up unattended loaded firearms because they will tell you “No tragedy will never happen to me or my family so who cares what happens to other people”.
The same is happening with the Far Right Naked Apes who cry the blues when their spouse or children die of Covid because they were too idiotic to get vaccinated. Only too late does the dim light bulb go on in their tiny Neanderthal Brains when it happens to them or their family. The Far Right are always their own worst enemies.
obtaining guns only through dealers provides an instant bottleneck or chokepoint…eliminate the dealers and you’ve accomplished your objective…which was tried in the nineties…FFL’s went from well over 250,000 to less than 50,000…mine among them…and all by design as an ATF agent admitted to me…eliminating private sales has an ulterior motive…
The vaccines dont work.
Dont even start that sht
How do you determine who is far right? What if you hate both the right and the left?
Also, by name calling people who respond to you, aren’t you projecting on yourself your own deficits?
@Dude
“Why didn’t it rise in 2000, 2005, or 2010 as firearm sales rose? ”
There can be no answer to that question, which is my point.
A key variable in trying to prove more guns equals less crime is that information about a dramatic rise in gun sales, and a dramatic increase in firearms in the hands of the public, not to mention the increased risk to criminals, requires that such information needs to be in the minds of actual and potential criminals.
For privately held guns to be determined a deterrent to crime, the enemy must have knowledge that the deterrent exists. Just how many of the criminal element actually read anything at all, much less an aggregate of DGUs, or accounting of the number of guns that might be deployed against a criminal act?
According to what we read here, the CDC has grudgingly accepted that there are somewhere between 2000 and 2,000,000 DGUs each year. Surely a figure as large as just 2000 DGUs should be on the MSM nightly news (the most likely source of “news” for the criminal element…requires no reading). Thus, information about a deterrent does not get to the audience that should be taking such risk into account.
No, we continue to do what the anti-gun mafia does: equate correlation with causation.
Undeniable is the fact that with record gun sales over the last three years, violent crime is on the rise. If the number of guns sold is breaking records, the number of violent crimes should be decreasing. If the collapse of law enforcement over the last three years was almost immediately reflected in the rise in crime, then the rise in legal gun sales should also have such direct result.
“trying to prove more guns equals less crime”
But that isn’t what I’ve been doing. I don’t think we’re on the same page. We got less violent crime after it peaked decades ago because we increased the number of police as well as the prison population. Increasing the prison population serves as both a deterrent as well as a way to physically remove the criminals from the streets. That worked. We have the data. Now, we have the brain dead progressive ideology that says both of those things are racist. We have progressive DAs and judges that are letting criminals go with a slap on the wrist. We have progressive mayors that are holding their police back.
“We should be focusing on the number of successful DGUs”
What if you live in an area without many or any of those? They would ask why do you need a gun? I think we need to focus on making them acknowledge reality. Things were getting better and they intentionally f’d it up. It’s important to inform people of such things as DGU, but we have to make people understand that we need criminal control. Then we need to honestly assess why we have so many violent criminals. We know it isn’t because we don’t spend enough on social programs. How much money is being spent on social programs in the “safe” neighborhoods? Hmm…Then why are some areas safer than others? They’ll never approach the issue in an honest manner because it doesn’t fit their narratives.
” We got less violent crime after it peaked decades ago because we increased the number of police as well as the prison population. Increasing the prison population serves as both a deterrent as well as a way to physically remove the criminals from the streets. That worked. We have the data. ”
Agree, however….nowhere in that litany is private gun ownership identified as having a measurable effect on crime reduction. Indeed, “criminal control” can be improved without private ownership of guns. Which is my point. We are foolishly focused on trying to use “data” to “prove” that private ownership of guns is a significant factor in reducing violent crime overall.
We are the mirror image of gun grabbers who try to prove that “more guns equals more crime”. In both cases, the data cannot “prove” anything. Why? Because we cannot identify a means to remove every other factor involved in violent crime in order to establish a direct and single cause (of any kind) of overall violent crime. We cannot eliminate all the known unknowns, much less any of the unknown unknowns that cause crime. A direct cause and effect relationship cannot ever be established.
I’m just saying we shouldn’t be mimicking the totalitarians. Legal private gun ownership is a good thing, even if nothing in society changes at all. Trying to “prove” gun ownership is productive as a societal response is merely putting a new label on the argument that the Second Amendment is subject to a “needs” test.
“We are foolishly focused on trying to use “data” to “prove” that private ownership of guns is a significant factor in reducing violent crime overall.”
Once again, I’m not trying to prove that. You brought that up, not me. I literally listed other reasons that reduced violent crime. Are you still misunderstanding me?
“We are the mirror image…”
Do you have a mouse in your pocket?
“In both cases, the data cannot “prove” anything.”
This is false. We know when we fail to arrest, prosecute, and jail criminals, we have more crime. We know what worked in the past and we know what failed when we had criminal spikes that corresponded to the BLM movements. It really isn’t complicated.
“trying to prove more guns equals less crime”
I think I see why you thought that. I was proving that more guns do not equal more crime. That doesn’t automatically mean that more guns equals less crime. See the above comment for an explanation of why we ended up with less crime.
“Once again, I’m not trying to prove that. I literally listed other reasons that reduced violent crime. Are you still misunderstanding me?”
Not at all. We are having two different conversations over the same subject: crime reduction. I used the anti-gun argument (more guns = more crime) to launch into a comparison of how both sides have glomed onto an unprovable theory/claim, essentially agreeing with you that other means of reducing crime can be more effectively shown to be a more direct cause of crime reduction than arguing over what a count of guns can ever do.
all in all a pointless debate…if people feel the need to own a gun they should be able to acquire one with as little hinderince as possible…those are the current trends in most of the country and the courts are supporting that view more and more as well…the left never stops trying but they appear to be slowly losing on this issue…
“if people feel the need to own a gun they should be able to acquire one with as little hinderince as possible”
Agree, however, the article is about trying to find data to prove that more guns = more crime. My comment was that the pro-gun (2A defenders) cannot find data to “prove” more guns = less crime. The thrust of my comment is that spending time trying to “prove” anything with data that isn’t there is a useless effort, and pro-gun people who insist that more guns means less crime are the opposite face of the same coin. The claims of either side will not change crime stats. As @Dude points out, there are other means to address crime that are more likely to be “provable”.
…it’s almost like gun ownership and violent crime rates are not highly correlated, and other factors play a more significant role…
Sure are a lot of long winded people here with very little to say of consequence. I say more gun and equipment reviews.
“I say more gun and equipment reviews.”
I think TTAG would take a look at a review you conduct on a firearm, or accessory. Might even get published. Give it a go.
Correlation is not causation. Example:
Studies show that purchases of Kleenex tissues are associated with colds and the flu. By the logic of the authors of the anti-gun article, this would mean that Kleenex tissues cause colds and flu!
“By the logic of the authors of the anti-gun article, this would mean that Kleenex tissues cause colds and flu!”
My take would be that prohibiting the sale and use of facial tissues will stop Covid-19 in its tracks.
“There are three kinds of lies–lies, damned lies, and statistics”.
“There are three kinds of lies–lies, damned lies, and statistics”
… and dacian
Comments are closed.