Guns in the USA (and the world?): Now Printable!

[Honey Badger]

The dude is just a young guy in his twenties making a political statement. Bombs and legal weapons would cause much more mayhem than this Liberator gun. He freely admits this and chose the WWII liberation weapon just to make a point. He wanted people to talk about this subject, and he's succeeded.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

PK,

In terms of knives, there's not a presumption that you as an individual can't be trusted to carry it.

There is absolutely such a presumption. Otherwise it wouldn't be illegal to carry one.

[Guest]

I got exhausted with this debate long ago, but I thought that this piece on a recent report was great.

Basically, this report has major findings, and they really cut both ways:

1. The United States has an indisputable gun violence problem. According to the report, “the U.S. rate of firearm-related homicide is higher than that of any other industrialized country: 19.5 times higher than the rates in other high-income countries.”

2. Most indices of crime and gun violence are getting better, not worse. “Overall crime rates have declined in the past decade, and violent crimes, including homicides specifically, have declined in the past 5 years,” the report notes. “Between 2005 and 2010, the percentage of firearm-related violent victimizations remained generally stable.” Meanwhile, “firearm-related death rates for youth ages 15 to 19 declined from 1994 to 2009.” Accidents are down, too: “Unintentional firearm-related deaths have steadily declined during the past century. The number of unintentional deaths due to firearm-related incidents accounted for less than 1 percent of all unintentional fatalities in 2010.”

3. We have 300 million firearms, but only 100 million are handguns. According to the report, “In 2007, one estimate placed the total number of firearms in the country at 294 million: ‘106 million handguns, 105 million rifles, and 83 million shotguns.’ ” This translates to nearly nine guns for every 10 people, a per capita ownership rate nearly 50 percent higher than the next most armed country. But American gun ownership is concentrated, not universal: In a December 2012 Gallup poll, “43 percent of those surveyed reported having a gun in the home.”

4. Handguns are the problem. Despite being outnumbered by long guns, “Handguns are used in more than 87 percent of violent crimes,” the report notes. In 2011, “handguns comprised 72.5 percent of the firearms used in murder and non-negligent manslaughter incidents.” Why do criminals prefer handguns? One reason, according to surveys of felons, is that they’re “easily concealable.”

5. Mass shootings aren’t the problem. “The number of public mass shootings of the type that occurred at Sandy Hook Elementary School accounted for a very small fraction of all firearm-related deaths,” says the report. “Since 1983 there have been 78 events in which 4 or more individuals were killed by a single perpetrator in 1 day in the United States, resulting in 547 victims and 476 injured persons.” Compare that with the 335,000 gun deaths between 2000 and 2010 alone.

6. Gun suicide is a bigger killer than gun homicide. From 2000 to 2010, “firearm-related suicides significantly outnumbered homicides for all age groups, annually accounting for 61 percent of the more than 335,600 people who died from firearm-related violence in the United States,” says the report. Firearm sales are often a warning: Two studies found that “a small but significant fraction of gun suicides are committed within days to weeks after the purchase of a handgun, and both also indicate that gun purchasers have an elevated risk of suicide for many years after the purchase of the gun.”

7. Guns are used for self-defense often and effectively. “Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year … in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008,” says the report. The three million figure is probably high, “based on an extrapolation from a small number of responses taken from more than 19 national surveys.” But a much lower estimate of 108,000 also seems fishy, “because respondents were not asked specifically about defensive gun use.” Furthermore, “Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was 'used' by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies.”

8. Carrying guns for self-defense is an arms race. The prevalence of firearm violence near “drug markets … could be a consequence of drug dealers carrying guns for self-defense against thieves or other adversaries who are likely to be armed,” says the report. In these communities, “individuals not involved in the drug markets have similar incentives for possessing guns.” According to a Pew Foundation report, “the vast majority of gun owners say that having a gun makes them feel safer. And far more today than in 1999 cite protection—rather than hunting or other activities—as the major reason for why they own guns.”

9. Denying guns to people under restraining orders saves lives. “Two-thirds of homicides of ex- and current spouses were committed [with] firearms,” the report observes. “In locations where individuals under restraining orders to stay away from current or ex-partners are prohibited from access to firearms, female partner homicide is reduced by 7 percent.”

10. It isn’t true that most gun acquisitions by criminals can be blamed on a few bad dealers. The report concedes that in 1998, “1,020 of 83,272 federally licensed retailers (1.2 percent) accounted for 57.4 percent of all guns traced by the ATF.” However, “Gun sales are also relatively concentrated; approximately 15 percent of retailers request 80 percent of background checks on gun buyers conducted by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.” Researchers have found that “the share of crime gun traces attributed to these few dealers only slightly exceeded their share of handgun sales, which are almost equally concentrated among a few dealers.” Volume, not laxity, drives the number of ill-fated sales.

[Seli]

You're neglecting all the impoverished, oppressed people who don't turn to crime, and all of the rich, entitled people who do. Criminality is not a consequence of poverty, criminality is a choice or a moral deficit. Healthcare reform isn't going to lower rates of robbery, unless they start giving away hard drugs.

If you don't stand up for yourself and instead embrace the victim mentality- you are to blame for your misfortunes.

I am not an idiot, I don't think it is possible to stop crime. The point I was making that as a society we have a duty to make sure that the criminals that do exist are not so desperate or unhinged that they will kill in the random way some people here seem to fear so much.

Because I realize that is the superior defense. I cannot watch my own back all the time, or be sure I am not tired, distracted, or otherwise unable to react quickly when robbed. Nor do I think the stress of being afraid all the time is healthy, PTSD is a recognized issue for a reason. So I protect myself using a voting boot.

[thecryptile]

I am not an idiot, I don't think it is possible to stop crime. The point I was making that as a society we have a duty to make sure that the criminals that do exist are not so desperate or unhinged that they will kill in the random way some people here seem to fear so much.

So we should reward criminals by making it easier for them to prey on us? Or just coddle them and hope that they are appeased? That attitude won't win an election the US. Statistically, your approach doesn't work as well mine- that's why home invasion robberies are more common in the UK than the US. Criminals aren't idiots either, for the most part. They will moderate their behavior when failing to do so might result in their deaths.

Because I realize that is the superior defense. I cannot watch my own back all the time, or be sure I am not tired, distracted, or otherwise unable to react quickly when robbed. Nor do I think the stress of being afraid all the time is healthy, PTSD is a recognized issue for a reason. So I protect myself using a voting boot.

Gun-owners and permit holders aren't walking around terrified of criminals all the time. Criminals are the ones terrified of us. Private citizens such as myself shoot more than twice the number of criminals that police do, and our error rate is much lower. I'm not going to get PTSD from carrying my pistol. It's just another accessory, like my cellphone, wallet and knife. Gun-owners fear well-meaning liberals who wish to strip us of our rights far more than muggers.

I vote, and so do millions of other NRA members. That's why we are more powerful than Mike Bloomberg and the billions he's spent demonizing us. I write my Congressman and Senator to let them know that I oppose efforts to restrict my freedoms, and they listen. I protect myself with both the ballot and the bullet.

Gun control group counts Boston Marathon bomber Tsarnaev as 'victim'

A gun control group that sought to raise awareness to their cause at a New Hampshire rally by reading off the names of 4,500 people killed by firearms since the Connecticut school shootings drew jeers when they included the name of Boston Marathon bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev, according to a report.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.c.../#ixzz2XDMSYYwj

Tsarnaev isn't the only violent criminal counted as "a victim" by gun-grabbers, just the most egregious. Makes you wonder how many other "victims" are really violent criminals.

[Isalie]

Gun control group counts Boston Marathon bomber Tsarnaev as 'victim'

Read more: http://www.foxnews.c.../#ixzz2XDMSYYwj

Tsarnaev isn't the only violent criminal counted as "a victim" by gun-grabbers, just the most egregious. Makes you wonder how many other "victims" are really violent criminals.

Hihi, the guy who proof read their list must've been fired, had he existed.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Triskele,

A very fair and interesting article.

[Penguin king]

PK,

There is absolutely such a presumption. Otherwise it wouldn't be illegal to carry one.

That's not how laws work. No law maker has sat down and thought " Ser Scot A Ellison can't be trusted with a 4" blade". MP's are aware that most people are reasonable and rational enough to be trusted with such a tool, however they also know that x% of people can't be trusted, and would like to use their blades for violence. Since they know those people exist, but not who they are, then the easiest way to deter them from doing so is to put restrictions on the use of certain blades for everybody.

Most blades aren't outlawed, you can still use them in the home, at work or at the site of a legitimate activity. You may carry them between one place and another as long as they are securely stored. That alone should show you that people are generally trusted to use their knives in a sensible manner. It's only when people are walking around with restricted blades for no reason at all that it becomes a crime.

[Penguin king]

So we should reward criminals by making it easier for them to prey on us? Or just coddle them and hope that they are appeased? That attitude won't win an election the US. Statistically, your approach doesn't work as well mine- that's why home invasion robberies are more common in the UK than the US. Criminals aren't idiots either, for the most part. They will moderate their behavior when failing to do so might result in their deaths.

Gun-owners and permit holders aren't walking around terrified of criminals all the time. Criminals are the ones terrified of us. Private citizens such as myself shoot more than twice the number of criminals that police do, and our error rate is much lower. I'm not going to get PTSD from carrying my pistol. It's just another accessory, like my cellphone, wallet and knife. Gun-owners fear well-meaning liberals who wish to strip us of our rights far more than muggers.

I'd like to see your stats comparing burglaries in the UK and the US, and any acompanying stats on what percentage of such roberies end in fatalites in each country. You seem to make the assumption that the honest citizen will always be quicker on the draw, and that in a confrontation the criminal will always lose. It seems to me however that by violently resisting a robbery you're greatly increasing the risk to your own life. Is your life worth less than the contents of your wallet, or the Flat screen TV on your wall? Would you rather end up dead than see someone make off with your hard earned cash?

[Sturn]

I got exhausted with this debate long ago, but I thought that this piece on a recent report was great.

Basically, this report has major findings, and they really cut both ways:

Great list that appears to be neutral at first glance. I'm going to keep this one.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

PK,

What do you think of Triskele's linked article? It think it is a fair view of both sides of the equation.

BTW, I wasn't saying the law is about me I'm saying the law is about not trusting the average person to have a 4" locking blade pocket knife. To have one you have an affirmative duty to show "need". That said I do see what you are saying it is similar to my view on the NSA. While the power may not be abused now I don't want government to have the power because it may be abused. My disagreement with you stems from the fact that you empower the government side of the equation while I prefer to empower the individual side of the equation.

[Penguin king]

PK,

What do you think of Triskele's linked article? It think it is a fair view of both sides of the equation.

BTW, I wasn't saying the law is about me I'm saying the law is about not trusting the average person to have a 4" locking blade pocket knife. To have one you have an affirmative duty to show "need". That said I do see what you are saying it is similar to my view on the NSA. While the power may not be abused now I don't want government to have the power because it may be abused. My disagreement with you stems from the fact that you empower the government side of the equation while I prefer to empower the individual side of the equation.

Triskele's article sounds very reasonable for the most part. I think a lot more research needs to be done on the topic of guns and crime prevention though. The estimates for uses of a gun in defence range from 500,000 to over 3 million per year, which is a huge margin of error.

In terms of the NSA, I find the covert surveillance that's been going on in the US and the UK to be a much bigger infringement on civil liberties than the UK knife restrictions. The motives are a lot more sinister, and the repercussions could be far wider reaching.

[Merentha]

So we should reward criminals by making it easier for them to prey on us? Or just coddle them and hope that they are appeased? That attitude won't win an election the US. Statistically, your approach doesn't work as well mine- that's why home invasion robberies are more common in the UK than the US. Criminals aren't idiots either, for the most part. They will moderate their behavior when failing to do so might result in their deaths.

So? Depending on where you are, its impossible to win an election without paying lip service to the religious right, but that doesn't make it right. Everywhere in the US, you can't get elected without fellating large businesses, but that also doesn't make it right.

And, uh, you'll forgive me if I don't think that "private gun owners shooting twice as many people as the police" is a great stat. Okay though, keep imagining yourself as some kind of revolver-toting sheriff if it makes you feel better. Personally, I'd respect the gun lobby if some reasonable restrictions (like not being able to buy a gun if you have a restraining order against you, holy shit) and eliminating the ability to buy a gun without background checks were implemented, and not really anything else. The assault weapons ban, I'm convinced, won't work to actually prevent deaths in an effective way. Its the fanaticism about it, especially since the NRA seems more designed to protect the gun manufacturers than gun owners, that really gets me irritated.