Church goers must take their firearms with them to Church

Yeah....not guns.....violent men. These women are in relationships with criminals, addicts and these men have violence in their histories.....guns aren't the issue, the choices in boyfriends and husbands are the issue.....but thanks for trying.

And gun ownership leads to more death.

Then why do states with the most lax gun laws have lower murder rates than the states with the strictest gun laws?

Have you looked at alaska? Louisiana?


Alaska...really? Where they have lots of crime in Indian controlled areas....and Louisiana...where the biggest cities are controlled by democrats and their lax policies toward violent criminals? Try harder.

Don't have to try harder, both have strong gun ownership, lax laws, and lots of homicide.


Yeah...not so much...

Do Strict Firearm Laws Give States Lower Gun Death Rates?



Once you get past those six states, the hypothesis that low gun death rates go hand in hand with strict gun control starts to break down. New Hampshire, with a gun death rate just a little higher than New Jersey's, has permissive gun policies. Likewise Minnesota, Washington, Vermont, Wisconsin, and South Dakota, all of which have gun death rates of 10 or less per 100,000.

New Hampshire and Minnesota have lower rates than California, Illinois, the District of Columbia, and Maryland, all of which have substantially stricter gun rules.

At the other end of the list, Alaska, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, and Wyoming have both permissive gun policies and high gun death rates, ranging from around 17 to nearly 20 per 100,000. But of these six states, only Louisiana has a very high gun murder rate (based on 2010 data). The rate in Mississippi is fairly high but still lower than in D.C. or Maryland, which have much stricter gun laws.

Alaska, Wyoming, Alabama, and Arkansas have lower gun murder rates than California, which has more gun restrictions.

Although its overall analysis looks at all gun-related deaths, National Journal (after some prodding, judging from the note in italics) focuses on gun homicides in charts that compare states based on three policies: whether they impose a duty to retreat, whether they require background checks for all gun sales, and whether they issue carry permits to anyone who meets a short list of objective criteria. Excluding suicides makes sense for at least two of those comparisons, since you would not expect the rules for self-defense or for carrying guns in public to affect suicide rates. Background checks conceivably could, since among other things they are supposed to prevent gun purchases by people who were forcibly subjected to psychiatric treatment because they were deemed a threat to themselves.

According to the first chart, the average rate of gun-related homicides in states with "some form of 'stand your ground' law" in 2013 was 4.23 per 100,000, compared to 3.08 in the other states. (Oddly, Arkansas is included in the former category, although its "stand your ground" law was not enacted until this year.) States that did not require background checks for private sales also had a higher average gun homicide rate: 4.02 per 100,000, compared to 3.41 for the other states. But the average rates were the same (3.78 per 100,000) regardless of whether states had discretionary or "must issue" carry permit policies, which is consistent with the observation that permit holders rarely commit violent crimes.

Some states were excluded from these analyses, and the reason is revealing. The fine print at the bottom of the charts says "Alaska, Idaho, Maine, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming had too few homicides in 2013 to calculate a reliable rate" (emphasis added).

These are all states with permissive gun laws, and three of them are among the seven states with the highest overall gun death rates, which highlights the importance of distinguishing between suicides and homicides.

Had National Journal's main analysis excluded suicides, some of the states with few gun controls, including Alaska and Wyoming, would have looked much safer.


"The states with the most gun laws see the fewest gun-related deaths," say the headline and subhead over the National Journal post, "but there's still little appetite to talk about more restrictions." The implication is that the data prove a cause-and-effect relationship. But the question of whether stricter gun control policies cause lower gun death rates cannot be addressed by this sort of static analysis. Gun laws obviously are not the only way in which Alaska, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, and Wyoming differ from Hawaii, Massachusetts, New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and New Jersey. Furthermore, while the latter states have both low suicide and low homicide rates, the former states (with the notable exception of Louisiana) are distinguished mainly by high suicide rates.





****************
 
What happens regularly here is extremely rare in countries with gun control:
One police officer killed, other wounded in Georgia shooting

Another one of our best lost.


and another thing that doesn't happen in countries that take guns away from normal people...those normal people saving themselves from criminals

Self defense with a gun......40 years of actual research...first is the name of the group that conducted the research, then the year, then the number of defensive gun uses and finally wether the research contained police or military defensive gun uses....

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, military)

DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)

L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)

Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops, military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million ( the bill clinton study)

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."

(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])

Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer


-------------------------------------------


Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..

*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....

Yes and countries with strong gun control have much lower crime rates and we see what is happening with increased carry:
FBI: Violent crime increases for second straight year


No....Chicago, Baltimore, D.C...have extreme gun control and they are the reason the violent crime rate went up.....it has nothing to do with guns, it has everything with people like you attacking the police.

I'm not attacking police, I'm trying to help them. We lose over 50 a year, this is unheard of in countries with gun control.

City gun control doesn't stop guns from coming in. Cities have no walls. You should understand that.


It isn't gun control...it is criminal control. Tell our criminals to stop shooting police.....that is how they do it in those other countries...since their criminals also have guns.....lots of guns....they just don't shoot police over there...yet. That is changing, as the welfare states are losing their ability to civilize their young males.
 
And gun ownership leads to more death.

Then why do states with the most lax gun laws have lower murder rates than the states with the strictest gun laws?

Have you looked at alaska? Louisiana?


Alaska...really? Where they have lots of crime in Indian controlled areas....and Louisiana...where the biggest cities are controlled by democrats and their lax policies toward violent criminals? Try harder.

Don't have to try harder, both have strong gun ownership, lax laws, and lots of homicide.


Yeah...not so much...

Do Strict Firearm Laws Give States Lower Gun Death Rates?



Once you get past those six states, the hypothesis that low gun death rates go hand in hand with strict gun control starts to break down. New Hampshire, with a gun death rate just a little higher than New Jersey's, has permissive gun policies. Likewise Minnesota, Washington, Vermont, Wisconsin, and South Dakota, all of which have gun death rates of 10 or less per 100,000.

New Hampshire and Minnesota have lower rates than California, Illinois, the District of Columbia, and Maryland, all of which have substantially stricter gun rules.

At the other end of the list, Alaska, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, and Wyoming have both permissive gun policies and high gun death rates, ranging from around 17 to nearly 20 per 100,000. But of these six states, only Louisiana has a very high gun murder rate (based on 2010 data). The rate in Mississippi is fairly high but still lower than in D.C. or Maryland, which have much stricter gun laws.

Alaska, Wyoming, Alabama, and Arkansas have lower gun murder rates than California, which has more gun restrictions.

Although its overall analysis looks at all gun-related deaths, National Journal (after some prodding, judging from the note in italics) focuses on gun homicides in charts that compare states based on three policies: whether they impose a duty to retreat, whether they require background checks for all gun sales, and whether they issue carry permits to anyone who meets a short list of objective criteria. Excluding suicides makes sense for at least two of those comparisons, since you would not expect the rules for self-defense or for carrying guns in public to affect suicide rates. Background checks conceivably could, since among other things they are supposed to prevent gun purchases by people who were forcibly subjected to psychiatric treatment because they were deemed a threat to themselves.

According to the first chart, the average rate of gun-related homicides in states with "some form of 'stand your ground' law" in 2013 was 4.23 per 100,000, compared to 3.08 in the other states. (Oddly, Arkansas is included in the former category, although its "stand your ground" law was not enacted until this year.) States that did not require background checks for private sales also had a higher average gun homicide rate: 4.02 per 100,000, compared to 3.41 for the other states. But the average rates were the same (3.78 per 100,000) regardless of whether states had discretionary or "must issue" carry permit policies, which is consistent with the observation that permit holders rarely commit violent crimes.

Some states were excluded from these analyses, and the reason is revealing. The fine print at the bottom of the charts says "Alaska, Idaho, Maine, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming had too few homicides in 2013 to calculate a reliable rate" (emphasis added).

These are all states with permissive gun laws, and three of them are among the seven states with the highest overall gun death rates, which highlights the importance of distinguishing between suicides and homicides.

Had National Journal's main analysis excluded suicides, some of the states with few gun controls, including Alaska and Wyoming, would have looked much safer.


"The states with the most gun laws see the fewest gun-related deaths," say the headline and subhead over the National Journal post, "but there's still little appetite to talk about more restrictions." The implication is that the data prove a cause-and-effect relationship. But the question of whether stricter gun control policies cause lower gun death rates cannot be addressed by this sort of static analysis. Gun laws obviously are not the only way in which Alaska, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, and Wyoming differ from Hawaii, Massachusetts, New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and New Jersey. Furthermore, while the latter states have both low suicide and low homicide rates, the former states (with the notable exception of Louisiana) are distinguished mainly by high suicide rates.





****************

States don't have walls either. You should understand that.
 
What happens regularly here is extremely rare in countries with gun control:
One police officer killed, other wounded in Georgia shooting

Another one of our best lost.


and another thing that doesn't happen in countries that take guns away from normal people...those normal people saving themselves from criminals

Self defense with a gun......40 years of actual research...first is the name of the group that conducted the research, then the year, then the number of defensive gun uses and finally wether the research contained police or military defensive gun uses....

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, military)

DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)

L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)

Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops, military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million ( the bill clinton study)

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."

(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])

Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer


-------------------------------------------


Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..

*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....

Yes and countries with strong gun control have much lower crime rates and we see what is happening with increased carry:
FBI: Violent crime increases for second straight year


No....Chicago, Baltimore, D.C...have extreme gun control and they are the reason the violent crime rate went up.....it has nothing to do with guns, it has everything with people like you attacking the police.

I'm not attacking police, I'm trying to help them. We lose over 50 a year, this is unheard of in countries with gun control.

City gun control doesn't stop guns from coming in. Cities have no walls. You should understand that.


It isn't gun control...it is criminal control. Tell our criminals to stop shooting police.....that is how they do it in those other countries...since their criminals also have guns.....lots of guns....they just don't shoot police over there...yet. That is changing, as the welfare states are losing their ability to civilize their young males.

Relative to here they certainly do not have lots of guns. We are the gun violence capital of the world. No other civilized country has cops being shot and killed regularly. Too many guns.
 


Only in America, law abiding people stop violent criminls.....in those other countries...the rapists, robbers and killers, do what they want to innocent people...

Self defense with a gun......40 years of actual research...first is the name of the group that conducted the research, then the year, then the number of defensive gun uses and finally wether the research contained police or military defensive gun uses....

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, military)

DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)

L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)

Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops, military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million ( the bill clinton study)

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."

(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])

Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer


-------------------------------------------


Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..

*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....
 


Only in America, law abiding people stop violent criminls.....in those other countries...the rapists, robbers and killers, do what they want to innocent people...

Self defense with a gun......40 years of actual research...first is the name of the group that conducted the research, then the year, then the number of defensive gun uses and finally wether the research contained police or military defensive gun uses....

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, military)

DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)

L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)

Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops, military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million ( the bill clinton study)

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."

(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])

Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer


-------------------------------------------


Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..

*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....

Yes we see how that is working
FBI: Violent crime increases for second straight year

Police are regularly shot and killed. Our police shoot lots of people damaging trust with the community and leading to riots. Hundreds killed in accidents. Regular mass shootings...
 
Recent stat that caught my eye was ... in past two years, the number of black murder victims (and black perps) rose by over 2000.
 
And yet those strict gun laws don't reduce the murder rate do they?

Now tell me why the murder rate in those strict gun law states is higher than Utah the state with the most lax gun laws in the country.

And tell me why despite all the gun laws bans and confiscations in the UK since the 60's the murder rate is actually higher than it was in 1950.

Link Between Gun Ownership Rates and Murders of Women | SPH | Boston University
The study found that for every 10 percentage point increase in state-level gun ownership, the female gun-related homicide rate increased by 10.2 percent. That suggests, the authors said, that if the proportion of gun ownership in Wyoming was to fall from 73 percent (the average level between 1981 and 2013) to 40 percent, its female homicide rate could be predicted to drop by about 33 percent.


Yeah....not guns.....violent men. These women are in relationships with criminals, addicts and these men have violence in their histories.....guns aren't the issue, the choices in boyfriends and husbands are the issue.....but thanks for trying.

And gun ownership leads to more death.

Then why do states with the most lax gun laws have lower murder rates than the states with the strictest gun laws?

That isn't true as I have already pointed out in several ways.
No you haven't.

And you haven't explained why the UK murder rate is higher since the passing of all their strict gun laws in the 60's and beyond than it was in 1950 before all those laws were passed
 


Only in America, law abiding people stop violent criminls.....in those other countries...the rapists, robbers and killers, do what they want to innocent people...

Self defense with a gun......40 years of actual research...first is the name of the group that conducted the research, then the year, then the number of defensive gun uses and finally wether the research contained police or military defensive gun uses....

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, military)

DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)

L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)

Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops, military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million ( the bill clinton study)

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."

(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])

Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer


-------------------------------------------


Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..

*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....

Yes we see how that is working
FBI: Violent crime increases for second straight year

Police are regularly shot and killed. Our police shoot lots of people damaging trust with the community and leading to riots. Hundreds killed in accidents. Regular mass shootings...
You keep posting that same shit and I'll keep posting that the SLIGHT increase over the past 2 years is insignificant as compared to the decrease over the past 2 decades.
 
And yet those strict gun laws don't reduce the murder rate do they?

Now tell me why the murder rate in those strict gun law states is higher than Utah the state with the most lax gun laws in the country.

And tell me why despite all the gun laws bans and confiscations in the UK since the 60's the murder rate is actually higher than it was in 1950.

Link Between Gun Ownership Rates and Murders of Women | SPH | Boston University
The study found that for every 10 percentage point increase in state-level gun ownership, the female gun-related homicide rate increased by 10.2 percent. That suggests, the authors said, that if the proportion of gun ownership in Wyoming was to fall from 73 percent (the average level between 1981 and 2013) to 40 percent, its female homicide rate could be predicted to drop by about 33 percent.


Yeah....not guns.....violent men. These women are in relationships with criminals, addicts and these men have violence in their histories.....guns aren't the issue, the choices in boyfriends and husbands are the issue.....but thanks for trying.

And gun ownership leads to more death.

Then why do states with the most lax gun laws have lower murder rates than the states with the strictest gun laws?

Have you looked at alaska? Louisiana?

Utah is the state with the most lax gun laws. California is the state with the strictest gun laws

The murder rate of CA is 4 times higher than that of Utah

If stricter gun laws lower the murder rate how do you explain that?
 
And yet those strict gun laws don't reduce the murder rate do they?

Now tell me why the murder rate in those strict gun law states is higher than Utah the state with the most lax gun laws in the country.

And tell me why despite all the gun laws bans and confiscations in the UK since the 60's the murder rate is actually higher than it was in 1950.

The Relationship Between Gun Ownership and Firearm Homicide Rates in the United States, 1981–2010
The correlation of gun ownership with firearm homicide rates was substantial. Results from our model showed that a 1-SD difference in the gun ownership proxy measure, FS/S, was associated with a 12.9% difference in firearm homicide rates. All other factors being equal, our model would predict that if the FS/S in Mississippi were 57.7% (the average for all states) instead of 76.8% (the highest of all states), its firearm homicide rate would be 17% lower.


Sorry....actual facts show this is wrong...

We went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 16.3 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2017...guess what happened...
-- gun murder down 49%
--gun crime down 75%
--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

FBI: Violent crime increases for second straight year
Wow still trying?

That increase is insignificant as compared to the drop in violent crimes over the past 20 years

The drop following the Bill Clinton crime bill and strengthened gun control? After years of weakening gun control and increased carry we get this:
FBI: Violent crime increases for second straight year
What specific gun control is Blow Job Billy responsible for?
 

Forum List

Back
Top