And when only the police have guns....and decide the cartels pay better..they kill innocent people..

[Brain357]

......

Don't we want criminals choosing more often not to have a gun? There they choose very infrequently to be armed, that sounds pretty nice. More armed citizens just means more armed criminals.

When you are able to get criminals to make choices based on your opinion, please let me know. The criminal mind works independently of civilized society...including its laws, ethics and sense of acceptable community behavior.

Hey taguy says in countries with fewer guns criminals choose to not use guns. That sounds good to me.

no, not quite what I say.....they have less fun crime because their criminals decide not to use guns......but have as much access to guns as they want....France proves that...as does Puerto Rico, Belgium, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Canada, Britain and Australia...

Because guns can be had doesn't mean it is easy.

 

[JoeB131]

guns aren't a disease...they are outside their skill set....

Oh, is that what you are going with? How dare the CDC study gun death!

 

[2aguy]

And on that lie about the CDC....

Don t believe mainstream media mistruths about firearms research Fox News


Nice story line, but a new report from the Crime Prevention Research Centershows none of this is true. The amendment didn’t ban federal research. Indeed, to the contrary, federal funded research, which was never an important part of the total, actually increased since then.

Besides, the NRA is not the only interest group involved in this battle. Michael Bloomberg, the former New York City mayor who wants to protect you from buying oversized drinks or eating too much salt, is using his $31 billion fortuneto fund anti-gun research through organizations such as Mayors Against Illegal Guns, Moms Demand Action, and the Bloomberg School of Public Health at Johns Hopkins, his Alma Mater. His crusade to protect Americans from guns is only now kicking into high gear.


Of course, academics are always enthusiastic about receiving more government funding for research. Take Professor Mark Rosenberg at Emory University, former head of the CDC’s National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. He described how the cut in federal grants cultivated an atmosphere of fear and “scared people” or “terrorized people.” And Jens Ludwig at the University of Chicago argued that without federal money, “it is very difficult” to conduct research. A number of academics, many from top universities, signed an open letter demanding more federal funding for their research.

And more......

Study aims to shoot down media narrative on frozen firearms research Fox News


The study shows the number of firearms-related journal articles published every year, after hitting 69 in 1996, rarely dipped below 60 and even spiked to 121 last year.

The report challenges not only the media narrative but also the notion that researchers need a constant flow of federal money in order to thrive.


CPRC’s study takes it as a given that researchers always want more funding, but suggests that even without federal funds, academics are spending more time on these projects. It also points to a rise in private research funding.

Federally funded gun research was originally restricted through an amendment to Centers for Disease Control funding in 1996. Lawmakers, and the NRA, at the time voiced concern the money could be used to specifically promote gun control.

It read: “None of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention may be used to advocate or promote gun control.” In 2003, that text was amended to add the words “in whole or in part.”

There is room for argument about what the latest data actually shows.

According to the study, the number of firearms-related articles and pages held relatively steady. Sixty-nine articles were published in 1996 – the number then averaged about 62 articles a year through 2012, before nearly doubling to 121 in 2013. As the study notes, there generally is a three-year lag between funding and publishing research, so the spike in 2013 could not be due to the recent approval of new federal funding.

 

[2aguy]

......

Don't we want criminals choosing more often not to have a gun? There they choose very infrequently to be armed, that sounds pretty nice. More armed citizens just means more armed criminals.

When you are able to get criminals to make choices based on your opinion, please let me know. The criminal mind works independently of civilized society...including its laws, ethics and sense of acceptable community behavior.

Hey taguy says in countries with fewer guns criminals choose to not use guns. That sounds good to me.

no, not quite what I say.....they have less fun crime because their criminals decide not to use guns......but have as much access to guns as they want....France proves that...as does Puerto Rico, Belgium, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Canada, Britain and Australia...

Because guns can be had doesn't mean it is easy.

As easy for their criminals as ours.....since the law doesn't matter to them either.......even in Canada....

 

[2aguy]

guns aren't a disease...they are outside their skill set....

Oh, is that what you are going with? How dare the CDC study gun death!

Here you go joe....FBI table 8 2009-2013.....

I can't copy/paste it...but here are the numbers...

FBI Expanded Homicide Data Table 8

2009...9,199
2010...8874
2011...8653
2012...8897
2013...8,454

See....going down.......not up......

 

[2aguy]

This points out how flawed kellerman was......

Kellermann-Gun Ownership as a Risk Factor for Homicide in the Home

Additional analysis of Kellermann's ICPSR dataset shows that just over 4½ percent of all homicides, in the three counties Kellermann chose to study, involved victims being killed with a gun kept in their own home (see derivation). This supports the conclusion that people murdered with a gun kept in their own home are a small minority of all homicides, precisely the opposite of what an uncritical reader of Kellermann's study would likely conclude.

The mis-citations of Kellermann's study serve as examples: "In homes with guns, a member of the household is almost three times as likely to be the victim of a homicide compared to gun-free homes (source)." Or this page, which attempts a vigorous defense of Kellermann's study, claims, "A gun in the home make [sic] homicide 2.7 times more likely," and "the risk of getting killed was 2.7 times greater in homes with a gun than without them." Perhaps these mis-citations are inadvertent, but Kellermann attempted to identify and measure the risk factors for being murdered in the victim's home as opposed to an overall risk of gun owners or their families being murdered. The risks are different. Stated another way, murders in the home of victim residences are a subset of all murders. Kellermann's study claims a murder is roughly 3 times more likely to occur in this subset (the victim's home) to gunowners rather than non-gunowners. That is quite different from claiming a gun in the home triples one's chances of becoming a homicide victim.

 

[Brain357]

......

Don't we want criminals choosing more often not to have a gun? There they choose very infrequently to be armed, that sounds pretty nice. More armed citizens just means more armed criminals.

When you are able to get criminals to make choices based on your opinion, please let me know. The criminal mind works independently of civilized society...including its laws, ethics and sense of acceptable community behavior.

Hey taguy says in countries with fewer guns criminals choose to not use guns. That sounds good to me.

no, not quite what I say.....they have less fun crime because their criminals decide not to use guns......but have as much access to guns as they want....France proves that...as does Puerto Rico, Belgium, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Canada, Britain and Australia...

Because guns can be had doesn't mean it is easy.

As easy for their criminals as ours.....since the law doesn't matter to them either.......even in Canada....

Have you tried to buy guns as a criminal in all countries have you?

 

[2aguy]

When you are able to get criminals to make choices based on your opinion, please let me know. The criminal mind works independently of civilized society...including its laws, ethics and sense of acceptable community behavior.

Hey taguy says in countries with fewer guns criminals choose to not use guns. That sounds good to me.

no, not quite what I say.....they have less fun crime because their criminals decide not to use guns......but have as much access to guns as they want....France proves that...as does Puerto Rico, Belgium, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Canada, Britain and Australia...

Because guns can be had doesn't mean it is easy.

As easy for their criminals as ours.....since the law doesn't matter to them either.......even in Canada....

Have you tried to buy guns as a criminal in all countries have you?

Not yet....but I know how I would go about it........

 

[JoeB131]

Besides, the NRA is not the only interest group involved in this battle. Michael Bloomberg, the former New York City mayor who wants to protect you from buying oversized drinks or eating too much salt, is using his $31 billion fortuneto fund anti-gun research through organizations such as Mayors Against Illegal Guns, Moms Demand Action, and the Bloomberg School of Public Health at Johns Hopkins, his Alma Mater. His crusade to protect Americans from guns is only now kicking into high gear.

except that's not a government study. As hard as you might find it to believe, I would find a Bloomberg study as questionable as an NRA one.

What we need is a study by someone who is truly neutral.

 

[JoeB131]

Additional analysis of Kellermann's ICPSR dataset shows that just over 4½ percent of all homicides, in the three counties Kellermann chose to study, involved victims being killed with a gun kept in their own home (see derivation). This supports the conclusion that people murdered with a gun kept in their own home are a small minority of all homicides, precisely the opposite of what an uncritical reader of Kellermann's study would likely conclude.

which is irrelvent to what he was studying.

His study found that for every BAD GUY killed with a household gun, there were 39 suicides, 3 homicides and one accidental death. (roughly).

Guns don't make people safer.

 

[2aguy]

This explains exactly why the CDC can't study gun violence....it is filled with people who hate guns and it corrupts their research....

Public Health Pot Shots - Reason.com

Contrary to this picture of dispassionate scientists under assault by the Neanderthal NRA and its know-nothing allies in Congress, serious scholars have been criticizing the CDC's "public health" approach to gun research for years. In a presentation at the American Society of Criminology's 1994 meeting, for example, University of Illinois sociologist David Bordua and epidemiologist David Cowan called the public health literature on guns "advocacy based on political beliefs rather than scientific fact." Bordua and Cowan noted that The New England Journal of Medicine and the Journal of the American Medical Association, the main outlets for CDC-funded studies of firearms, are consistent supporters of strict gun control. They found that "reports with findings not supporting the position of the journal are rarely cited," "little is cited from the criminological or sociological field," and the articles that are cited "are almost always by medical or public health researchers."

Further, Bordua and Cowan said, "assumptions are presented as fact: that there is a causal association between gun ownership and the risk of violence, that this association is consistent across all demographic categories, and that additional legislation will reduce the prevalence of firearms and consequently reduce the incidence of violence." They concluded that "ncestuous and selective literature citations may be acceptable for political tracts, but they introduce an artificial bias into scientific publications. Stating as fact associations which may be demonstrably false is not just unscientific, it is unprincipled." In a 1994 presentation to the Western Economics Association, State University of New York at Buffalo criminologist Lawrence Southwick compared public health firearm studies to popular articles produced by the gun lobby: "Generally the level of analysis done on each side is of a low quality. The papers published in the medical literature (which are uniformly anti-gun) are particularly poor science."

 

[2aguy]

and as to the hack kellerman....

But that's not the story told by Dr. Arthur Kellermann, director of Emory University's Center for Injury Control and the CDC's favorite gun researcher. In a 1988 New England Journal of Medicine article, Kellermann and his co-authors cite Wright and Rossi's book Under the Gun to support the notion that "restricting access to handguns could substantially reduce our annual rate of homicide." What they actually said was: "There is no persuasive evidence that supports this view." In a 1992 New England Journal of Medicine article, Kellermann cites an American Journal of Psychiatry study to back up the claim "that limiting access to firearms could prevent many suicides." But the study actually found just the opposite--i.e., that people who don't have guns find other ways to kill themselves.

At the same time that he misuses other people's work, Kellermann refuses to provide the full data for any of his studies so that scholars can evaluate his findings. His critics therefore can judge his results only from the partial data he chooses to publish. Consider a 1993 New England Journal of Medicinestudy that, according to press reports, "showed that keeping a gun in the home nearly triples the likelihood that someone in the household will be slain there." This claim cannot be verified because Kellerman will not release the data. Relying on independent sources to fill gaps in the published data, SUNY-Buffalo's Lawrence Southwick has speculated that Kellermann's full data set would actually vindicate defensive gun ownership. Such issues cannot be resolved without Kellermann's cooperation, but the CDC has refused to require its researchers to part with their data as a condition for taxpayer funding.

 

[2aguy]

Guns make 1.6 million people a year safer.....

 

[2aguy]

and how do the victims know each other...

Contrary to the impression fostered by Rosenberg and other opponents of gun ownership, the term "acquaintance homicide" does not mean killings that stem from ordinary family or neighborhood arguments. Typical acquaintance homicides include: an abusive man eventually killing a woman he has repeatedly assaulted; a drug user killing a dealer (or vice versa) in a robbery attempt; and gang members, drug dealers, and other criminals killing each other for reasons of economic rivalry or personal pique. According to a 1993 article in the Journal of Trauma, 80 percent of murders in Washington, D.C., are related to the drug trade, while "84% of [Philadelphia murder] victims in 1990 had antemortem drug use or criminal history." A 1994 article in The New England Journal of Medicinereported that 71 percent of Los Angeles children and adolescents injured in drive-by shootings "were documented members of violent street gangs." And University of North Carolina-Charlotte criminal justice scholars Richard Lumb and Paul C. Friday report that 71 percent of adult gunshot wound victims in Charlotte have criminal records.

and here we finally find the 70-80% of gun murders are gang related..

 

[Missourian]

Let's get real. 250,000 guns cross the border every year, and 90% of guns in Mexico start in the US. While the ATF's attempts to track it was clumsy, the real problem is that gun stores will sell to anyone.

Total debunked B.S.

​

If gun grabbers have such a strong case...why do they lie so much?

America has caught on to their bullcrap.

 

[JoeB131]

Contrary to this picture of dispassionate scientists under assault by the Neanderthal NRA and its know-nothing allies in Congress, serious scholars have been criticizing the CDC's "public health" approach to gun research for years. In a presentation at the American Society of Criminology's 1994 meeting, for example, University of Illinois sociologist David Bordua and epidemiologist David Cowan called the public health literature on guns "advocacy based on political beliefs rather than scientific fact."

We have 32,000 gun deaths a year, 3000 of them children.

I'd call that a pretty serious health crisis.

 

[Missourian]

Contrary to this picture of dispassionate scientists under assault by the Neanderthal NRA and its know-nothing allies in Congress, serious scholars have been criticizing the CDC's "public health" approach to gun research for years. In a presentation at the American Society of Criminology's 1994 meeting, for example, University of Illinois sociologist David Bordua and epidemiologist David Cowan called the public health literature on guns "advocacy based on political beliefs rather than scientific fact."

We have 32,000 gun deaths a year, 3000 of them children.

I'd call that a pretty serious health crisis.

How many of those are suicides, how many are justifiable homicides, how many are police shootings?

More falsehoods and misleading stats. Do you have a cure for suicide?

10,000 Americans per year commit suicide by suffocation...is there a plastic bag crisis, a rope crisis?

 

[Brain357]

Guns make 1.6 million people a year safer.....

You quoted a study earlier that said 1.5.

 

[Brain357]

and how do the victims know each other...

Contrary to the impression fostered by Rosenberg and other opponents of gun ownership, the term "acquaintance homicide" does not mean killings that stem from ordinary family or neighborhood arguments. Typical acquaintance homicides include: an abusive man eventually killing a woman he has repeatedly assaulted; a drug user killing a dealer (or vice versa) in a robbery attempt; and gang members, drug dealers, and other criminals killing each other for reasons of economic rivalry or personal pique. According to a 1993 article in the Journal of Trauma, 80 percent of murders in Washington, D.C., are related to the drug trade, while "84% of [Philadelphia murder] victims in 1990 had antemortem drug use or criminal history." A 1994 article in The New England Journal of Medicinereported that 71 percent of Los Angeles children and adolescents injured in drive-by shootings "were documented members of violent street gangs." And University of North Carolina-Charlotte criminal justice scholars Richard Lumb and Paul C. Friday report that 71 percent of adult gunshot wound victims in Charlotte have criminal records.

and here we finally find the 70-80% of gun murders are gang related..

So then if most are thug on thug crime the majority of defenses must also be thug on thug. And if you aren't involved in criminal activity you are very safe and do not need a gun.

 

[JoeB131]

How many of those are suicides, how many are justifiable homicides, how many are police shootings?

19,000 are sucides. Suicides are really a bad thing.

Only 201 justifiable homicides by civilians a year. Not enough to justify gun usage.

For Police Shootings, (which I don't consider "justifiable" in most cases. Not after that film of a cop shooting a man in the back, you have to wonder how often that goes on.) no one really knows because most police departments don't report them. It's estimated to be 1200 a year or so.

More falsehoods and misleading stats. Do you have a cure for suicide?

Sure I do. It's called, "Not having guns lying around the house". That would reduce the suicide rate by about 50%.

10,000 Americans per year commit suicide by suffocation...is there a plastic bag crisis, a rope crisis?

since plastic bags and ropes aren't designed for that purpose, no. Guns are specifically designed to kill people.