How do you stop gun crime? Focus on actual criminals who use guns for crime, yes, it is that simple

[2aguy]

Here we have a Harvard researcher who understands what the actual problem is with guns and crime in the U.S......criminals who use guns. But...because he is an anti-gunner, he goes on to support gun laws he admits don't stop criminals from getting guns or using them to kill each other.......because he hates guns.

As far as his actual solution that he points out before being blinded by his hatred of guns.....he is right on target.....criminals....focus on them, and you stop gun crime.

Democrats are skipping out on the most important gun fight of all - The Boston Globe

First, because urban violence concentrates among a small number of people and places, strategies that target those concentrations tend to work best.

In most medium to large cities, violent crime clusters among a few hundred individuals and a few dozen micro-locations known as “hot spots.” Less than 1 percent of a city’s population and less than 5 percent of its geography will generate the majority of its lethal or near-lethal encounters.

Next, strategies that balance punishment with support work better than either approach in isolation. No city has reduced violence only with law enforcement, or reduced it without law enforcement entirely. In a comprehensive review of over 1,400 anti-crime evaluations, my colleague Christopher Winship and I discovered that the evidence does not favor either “tough” or “soft” approaches; there are numerous examples of both that have worked.

Last, peace in the streets requires cooperation between communities and criminal justice authorities. However, when people see law enforcement as unwilling or unable to help them, they refuse to report crime, testify in court, or serve as jurors. Even worse, they are more likely to take the law into their own hands, using the “code of the street” to violently resolve disputes. By improving relationships with affected residents, police and prosecutors can solve past crimes while preventing violence in the future.

These principles — focus, balance, and fairness — are the clearest guidelines to effective anti-violence policies available. Follow them and success is likely. Disregard them and failure is almost a certainty.

And here......strategies that the author acknowledges do nothing to stop gun violence.....he supports........showing that he is blinded by his dislike, likely hatred, of guns.....

Democrats are partly responsible when they support the same gun violence policies that have been around for decades, such as universal background checks, banning assault weapons, and keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous people.

Although these strategies make good sense, they do little to curb the violence on the streets of our cities.

 

[Taz]

You off your meds again? Or are your gun stocks slipping?

 

[Marion Morrison]

Publicly hang violent robbers/rapists/murderers within 2 days after conviction.

 

[aaronleland]

Publicly hang violent robbers/rapists/murderers within 2 days after conviction.

What about the non-violent rapists?

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Here we have a Harvard researcher who understands what the actual problem is with guns and crime in the U.S......criminals who use guns. But...because he is an anti-gunner, he goes on to support gun laws he admits don't stop criminals from getting guns or using them to kill each other.......because he hates guns.

As far as his actual solution that he points out before being blinded by his hatred of guns.....he is right on target.....criminals....focus on them, and you stop gun crime.

Democrats are skipping out on the most important gun fight of all - The Boston Globe

First, because urban violence concentrates among a small number of people and places, strategies that target those concentrations tend to work best.

In most medium to large cities, violent crime clusters among a few hundred individuals and a few dozen micro-locations known as “hot spots.” Less than 1 percent of a city’s population and less than 5 percent of its geography will generate the majority of its lethal or near-lethal encounters.

Next, strategies that balance punishment with support work better than either approach in isolation. No city has reduced violence only with law enforcement, or reduced it without law enforcement entirely. In a comprehensive review of over 1,400 anti-crime evaluations, my colleague Christopher Winship and I discovered that the evidence does not favor either “tough” or “soft” approaches; there are numerous examples of both that have worked.

Last, peace in the streets requires cooperation between communities and criminal justice authorities. However, when people see law enforcement as unwilling or unable to help them, they refuse to report crime, testify in court, or serve as jurors. Even worse, they are more likely to take the law into their own hands, using the “code of the street” to violently resolve disputes. By improving relationships with affected residents, police and prosecutors can solve past crimes while preventing violence in the future.

These principles — focus, balance, and fairness — are the clearest guidelines to effective anti-violence policies available. Follow them and success is likely. Disregard them and failure is almost a certainty.

And here......strategies that the author acknowledges do nothing to stop gun violence.....he supports........showing that he is blinded by his dislike, likely hatred, of guns.....

Democrats are partly responsible when they support the same gun violence policies that have been around for decades, such as universal background checks, banning assault weapons, and keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous people.

Although these strategies make good sense, they do little to curb the violence on the streets of our cities.

This is how you stop crime, when this movie came out crime in NYC went down 75% because the thugs thought it was for real. If it is real then crime will go down 100% because there wont be any thugs left. No bullshit courts with corrupt attorneys finding a loophole that lets the asshat liberal off the hook. Dead is dead...

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Publicly hang violent robbers/rapists/murderers within 2 days after conviction.

What about the non-violent rapists?

Non violent rapist? You must be a public educated idiot, or just a Democrat (Same thing).

 

[Marion Morrison]

Publicly hang violent robbers/rapists/murderers within 2 days after conviction.

What about the non-violent rapists?

Plenty of room in prison for them after hanging all the egregiously violent ones.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Publicly hang violent robbers/rapists/murderers within 2 days after conviction.

What about the non-violent rapists?

Plenty of room in prison for them after hanging all the egregiously violent ones.

If they are non violent rapists, then we just castrate them, back in the day those Eunuchs that were dickless and ballless yeah they got fat but they didnt rape anyone anymore.

 

[harmonica]

the guns are legal initially...how do the criminals get them?

 

[2aguy]

the guns are legal initially...how do the criminals get them?

The first way.....they get friends and family with clean records to buy the guns for them.....the friends and family can pass Federal Background checks. Next, they steal them. Then you have straw buyers who can pass federal background checks who sell the guns to felons illegally.

After that, those guns are in the criminal underground and get passed around. Studies on the subject show that the average street time of a crime gun is about 11 years before it is captured by police.

And the friends and family? They are the baby mommas, grandmothers, mothers, sisters of the criminals.....who are often intimidated into buying the gun, which is why so many of the straw buyers are not prosecuted.

 

[harmonica]

the guns are legal initially...how do the criminals get them?

The first way.....they get friends and family with clean records to buy the guns for them.....the friends and family can pass Federal Background checks. Next, they steal them. Then you have straw buyers who can pass federal background checks who sell the guns to felons illegally.

After that, those guns are in the criminal underground and get passed around. Studies on the subject show that the average street time of a crime gun is about 11 years before it is captured by police.

And the friends and family? They are the baby mommas, grandmothers, mothers, sisters of the criminals.....who are often intimidated into buying the gun, which is why so many of the straw buyers are not prosecuted.

should be a crime to give your gun away/gift guns/etc
your guns should be in a safe/hard to steal

 

[Wry Catcher]

Here we have a Harvard researcher who understands what the actual problem is with guns and crime in the U.S......criminals who use guns. But...because he is an anti-gunner, he goes on to support gun laws he admits don't stop criminals from getting guns or using them to kill each other.......because he hates guns.

As far as his actual solution that he points out before being blinded by his hatred of guns.....he is right on target.....criminals....focus on them, and you stop gun crime.

Democrats are skipping out on the most important gun fight of all - The Boston Globe

First, because urban violence concentrates among a small number of people and places, strategies that target those concentrations tend to work best.

In most medium to large cities, violent crime clusters among a few hundred individuals and a few dozen micro-locations known as “hot spots.” Less than 1 percent of a city’s population and less than 5 percent of its geography will generate the majority of its lethal or near-lethal encounters.

Next, strategies that balance punishment with support work better than either approach in isolation. No city has reduced violence only with law enforcement, or reduced it without law enforcement entirely. In a comprehensive review of over 1,400 anti-crime evaluations, my colleague Christopher Winship and I discovered that the evidence does not favor either “tough” or “soft” approaches; there are numerous examples of both that have worked.

Last, peace in the streets requires cooperation between communities and criminal justice authorities. However, when people see law enforcement as unwilling or unable to help them, they refuse to report crime, testify in court, or serve as jurors. Even worse, they are more likely to take the law into their own hands, using the “code of the street” to violently resolve disputes. By improving relationships with affected residents, police and prosecutors can solve past crimes while preventing violence in the future.

These principles — focus, balance, and fairness — are the clearest guidelines to effective anti-violence policies available. Follow them and success is likely. Disregard them and failure is almost a certainty.

And here......strategies that the author acknowledges do nothing to stop gun violence.....he supports........showing that he is blinded by his dislike, likely hatred, of guns.....

Democrats are partly responsible when they support the same gun violence policies that have been around for decades, such as universal background checks, banning assault weapons, and keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous people.

Although these strategies make good sense, they do little to curb the violence on the streets of our cities.

How many murders, suicides and accidental deaths occur when the gun is in the hand of someone never arrested? Tell the readers, 2aguy, you're the one who has all the stats (that confirm your biases).

Break it down to murders, and assaults which create serious wounds, and the cost to the investing agency, the Public Hospital and Social Services.

 

[GLASNOST]

"How do you stop gun crime? Focus on actual criminals who use guns for crime, yes, it is that simple"

"Simple"? OK. Two easy steps:

1. Find out if he/she is right-handed or left-handed.
2. Sharpen an axe and use it.

 

[Slade3200]

Here we have a Harvard researcher who understands what the actual problem is with guns and crime in the U.S......criminals who use guns. But...because he is an anti-gunner, he goes on to support gun laws he admits don't stop criminals from getting guns or using them to kill each other.......because he hates guns.

As far as his actual solution that he points out before being blinded by his hatred of guns.....he is right on target.....criminals....focus on them, and you stop gun crime.

Democrats are skipping out on the most important gun fight of all - The Boston Globe

First, because urban violence concentrates among a small number of people and places, strategies that target those concentrations tend to work best.

In most medium to large cities, violent crime clusters among a few hundred individuals and a few dozen micro-locations known as “hot spots.” Less than 1 percent of a city’s population and less than 5 percent of its geography will generate the majority of its lethal or near-lethal encounters.

Next, strategies that balance punishment with support work better than either approach in isolation. No city has reduced violence only with law enforcement, or reduced it without law enforcement entirely. In a comprehensive review of over 1,400 anti-crime evaluations, my colleague Christopher Winship and I discovered that the evidence does not favor either “tough” or “soft” approaches; there are numerous examples of both that have worked.

Last, peace in the streets requires cooperation between communities and criminal justice authorities. However, when people see law enforcement as unwilling or unable to help them, they refuse to report crime, testify in court, or serve as jurors. Even worse, they are more likely to take the law into their own hands, using the “code of the street” to violently resolve disputes. By improving relationships with affected residents, police and prosecutors can solve past crimes while preventing violence in the future.

These principles — focus, balance, and fairness — are the clearest guidelines to effective anti-violence policies available. Follow them and success is likely. Disregard them and failure is almost a certainty.

And here......strategies that the author acknowledges do nothing to stop gun violence.....he supports........showing that he is blinded by his dislike, likely hatred, of guns.....

Democrats are partly responsible when they support the same gun violence policies that have been around for decades, such as universal background checks, banning assault weapons, and keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous people.

Although these strategies make good sense, they do little to curb the violence on the streets of our cities.

I gotta ask... why are you so hell bent on these gun issues? Every post I see from you is about the subject. Are you a paid activist or are you really that obsessed?

 

[2aguy]

the guns are legal initially...how do the criminals get them?

The first way.....they get friends and family with clean records to buy the guns for them.....the friends and family can pass Federal Background checks. Next, they steal them. Then you have straw buyers who can pass federal background checks who sell the guns to felons illegally.

After that, those guns are in the criminal underground and get passed around. Studies on the subject show that the average street time of a crime gun is about 11 years before it is captured by police.

And the friends and family? They are the baby mommas, grandmothers, mothers, sisters of the criminals.....who are often intimidated into buying the gun, which is why so many of the straw buyers are not prosecuted.

should be a crime to give your gun away/gift guns/etc
your guns should be in a safe/hard to steal

It is already a crime to knowingly give a gun to a felon....the problem is that the prosecutors find it hard to prosecute and convict the baby momma and grandmothers who get on the stand and tell the jury they were told, buy the gun or get a beating....

Straw Purchasing Guns: US Needs to Take It Seriously | [site:name] | National Review

Wisconsin isn’t alone in its nonchalance. California normally treats straw purchases as misdemeanors or minor infractions. Even as the people of Baltimore suffer horrific levels of violence, Maryland classifies the crime as a misdemeanor, too.

Straw buying is a felony in progressive Connecticut, albeit one in the second-least-serious order of felonies. It is classified as a serious crime in Illinois (Class 2 felony), but police rarely (meaning “almost never”) go after the nephews and girlfriends with clean records who provide Chicago’s diverse and sundry gangsters with their weapons. In Delaware, it’s a Class F felony, like forging a check. In Oregon, it’s a misdemeanor.

--------

I visited Chicago a few years back to write about the city’s gang-driven murder problem, and a retired police official told me that the nature of the people making straw purchases — young relatives, girlfriends who may or may not have been facing the threat of physical violence, grandmothers, etc. — made prosecuting those cases unattractive.


In most of those cases, the authorities emphatically should put the straw purchasers in prison for as long as possible. Throw a few gangsters’ grandmothers behind bars for 20 years and see if that gets anybody’s attention. In the case of the young women suborned into breaking the law, that should be just another charge to put on the main offender.

 

[2aguy]

Here we have a Harvard researcher who understands what the actual problem is with guns and crime in the U.S......criminals who use guns. But...because he is an anti-gunner, he goes on to support gun laws he admits don't stop criminals from getting guns or using them to kill each other.......because he hates guns.

As far as his actual solution that he points out before being blinded by his hatred of guns.....he is right on target.....criminals....focus on them, and you stop gun crime.

Democrats are skipping out on the most important gun fight of all - The Boston Globe

First, because urban violence concentrates among a small number of people and places, strategies that target those concentrations tend to work best.

In most medium to large cities, violent crime clusters among a few hundred individuals and a few dozen micro-locations known as “hot spots.” Less than 1 percent of a city’s population and less than 5 percent of its geography will generate the majority of its lethal or near-lethal encounters.

Next, strategies that balance punishment with support work better than either approach in isolation. No city has reduced violence only with law enforcement, or reduced it without law enforcement entirely. In a comprehensive review of over 1,400 anti-crime evaluations, my colleague Christopher Winship and I discovered that the evidence does not favor either “tough” or “soft” approaches; there are numerous examples of both that have worked.

Last, peace in the streets requires cooperation between communities and criminal justice authorities. However, when people see law enforcement as unwilling or unable to help them, they refuse to report crime, testify in court, or serve as jurors. Even worse, they are more likely to take the law into their own hands, using the “code of the street” to violently resolve disputes. By improving relationships with affected residents, police and prosecutors can solve past crimes while preventing violence in the future.

These principles — focus, balance, and fairness — are the clearest guidelines to effective anti-violence policies available. Follow them and success is likely. Disregard them and failure is almost a certainty.

And here......strategies that the author acknowledges do nothing to stop gun violence.....he supports........showing that he is blinded by his dislike, likely hatred, of guns.....

Democrats are partly responsible when they support the same gun violence policies that have been around for decades, such as universal background checks, banning assault weapons, and keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous people.

Although these strategies make good sense, they do little to curb the violence on the streets of our cities.

How many murders, suicides and accidental deaths occur when the gun is in the hand of someone never arrested? Tell the readers, 2aguy, you're the one who has all the stats (that confirm your biases).

Break it down to murders, and assaults which create serious wounds, and the cost to the investing agency, the Public Hospital and Social Services.

Why don't you? You are the one who wants to ban and confiscate guns....you should do it.

Here is some information to get you started......moron....

2017 homicide data provide insight into Baltimore's gun wars, police say

About 86 percent of the victims and 85 percent of the 118 suspects identified by police had prior criminal records. And about 46 percent of victims and 44 percent of suspects had previously been arrested for gun crimes, the data show.
----
The average homicide victim in Baltimore in 2017 had 11 previous arrests on his record. About 73 percent had drug arrests, and nearly 50 percent had been arrested for a violent crime. About 30 percent were on parole or probation at the time they were killed, and more than 6 percent were on parole or probation for a gun crime.

Twenty percent of the victims were known members of a gang or drug crew, according to the data.

The average homicide suspect, meanwhile, had 9 previous arrests on his record. About 70 percent had drug arrests, and nearly half had been arrested for a violent crime. Nearly 36 percent were on parole or probation, and 6 percent were on parole or probation for a gun crime, the data show.

Eighteen percent of the suspects were known members of a gang or drug crew, according to the data.

Police did not know the motive behind nearly half of the killings, but at least 20 were related to retaliation, according to the data.


=============

Chicago..


Actual report on shootings in chicago...http://urbanlabs.uchicago.edu/attac...cagoCrimeLab+Gun+Violence+in+Chicago+2016.pdf


1/19/17 Shooters in Chicago criminal record research from U of C






Nearly 40 percent of victims had more than 10 prior arrests, while the share with more than 20 prior arrests rose from 14 to 18 percent in 2016.

The share of victims with a current or prior gang affiliation as recorded by CPD was about the same in both years (53 and 54 percent).

And now the shooters . . .

Individuals arrested for a homicide or shooting in Chicago in 2016 and 2015 had similar prior criminal records: around 90 percent had at least one prior arrest, approximately 50 percent had a prior arrest for a violent crime specifically, and almost 40 percent had a prior gun arrest.



The average person arrested for a homicide or shooting in both years had nearly 12 prior arrests, with almost 45 percent having had more than 10 prior arrests, and almost 20 percent having had more than 20 prior arrests.

Why is anyone in Chicago (or elsewhere) talking about gun control? Clearly, Chicago’s revolving door justice system is a failure that allows dangerous killers to roam the city streets.
============================


12/27/16 Gang shootings in Chicago over christmas..90% gang affiliated


Gang Killers In Chicago Used Christmas Gatherings To Target Their Victims

Gang killers, knowing their targets would be home for Christmas, launched a bloody weekend of shootings in Chicago that left 11 dead and another 37 wounded.

"We now know that the majority of these shootings and homicides were targeted attacks by gangs against potential rivals who were at holiday gatherings. This was followed by several acts of retaliatory gun violence," police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said in a statement Monday.

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

The violence primarily occurred in areas with historical gang conflicts on the South and West Side of Chicago."


And this is what we keep telling you anti gunners and you refuse to believe it....

"Ninety percent of those fatally wounded had gang affiliations, criminal histories and were pre-identified by the department's strategic subject algorithm as being a potential suspect or victim of gun violence," Guglielmi said.
=================

12/3/16


DC Won’t Allow Concealed Carry, But Takes It Easy On Armed, Violent Criminals

The problems stem from the city’s Youth Rehabilitation Act, legislation implemented in the 1980s to provide leniency to criminal offenders under the age of 22, even violent ones, with murder convictions being the only exception. It allows judges to disregard mandatory minimums meant to dissuade criminals, often to disastrous effects. The homicide rate spiked by 54 percent in the District in 2015, and 22 of the murderers were previously sentenced for crimes under the Youth Rehabilitation Act, according to an investigation by The Washington Post.

A man released on probation in 2015 under the law was involved in the July shooting death of Deeniquia Dodds, a transgender man. Just over 120 people previously sentenced under the Youth Rehabilitation Act have subsequently been convicted of murder since 2010.

“I knew they were going to let me off easy,” Tavon Pinkney, an 18-year old convicted of homicide in 2015, told The Washington Post regarding his previous sentencing under the youth law. “Nothing changed … They just gave me the Youth Act and let me go right back out there. They ain’t really care.”



R


9/30/16


This Week In Gun News: Rifle Homicides Drop, Man Arrested 39 Times Commits More Gun Crimes

Just How Many Gun Laws Does a Killer Break?

The Chicago Sun-Times recently released an editorial calling for more gun control. Not surprising there. But their first case calls for a closer look.

Paul Pagan is 32, and the definition of a career criminal. He’s been convicted of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, possession of a stolen car, marijuana possession, two counts of pointing a firearm at someone, and reckless conduct. At the time Pagan allegedly committed a murder, there was a warrant for his arrest.

The Chicago Sun-Times notes Pagan “had been arrested 39 times.”

Mr. Pagan is barred from possessing firearms under federal law for being a fugitive, for his felony convictions, and as a drug user.

By picking up a gun, Pagan hits an 18 USC 922(g) trifecta (the first three items), and can get up to 30 years in the Federal slammer. But wait, there is more. The two counts of pointing a firearm at someone fall under a mandatory sentence enhancement under 18 USC 924(c)(1)(A). The “brandishing” enhancement is a mandatory seven years in the slammer. And now, Pagan also hits the “armed career criminal” and under 18 USC 924(e)(1) and gets a minimum 15-year sentence with no chance of parole or probation.

Is it any wonder why crime is up?

There are tools that could put thugs like Pagan away for a long time, yet they don’t get used.

Then the same folks who refuse to put away the bad guys then blame the NRA and law-abiding gun owners for bad things happening. I suppose that gun-grabbers figure we fit into some “basket of deplorables.”

5/10/16 Chicago gun murder victims...criminals...


Chicago police boss calls weekend gun violence 'completely unacceptable'

At an unrelated news conference Monday on the city's Southwest Side, Johnson brought up the Mother's Day weekend violence himself in his prepared remarks. He focused his remarks on how much of the bloodshed is being driven by about 1,300 individuals on the Police Department's "strategic subject list" — those believed to be most prone to violence as a victim or offender.

About 78 percent of the homicide victims and about 84 percent of the nonfatal shooting victims this weekend were on the list, he said.

"That means essentially we know who they are," he told reporters at 50th Street and South Karlov Avenue, where a Chicago police officer fatally shot a bank robbery suspect on Monday. "Oftentimes, they have gang affiliations, and many have had previous arrests and convictions."
----------
He then ticked off nearly 10 examples of how many arrests these victims had on their records, ranging from 20 each all the way up to 41.
5/7/16 Australian murder report p.20 criminals commit murder...

http://aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/mr/mr01/mr01.pdf

Criminal history Figure 18 shows that in 2006–07, a significant proportion both of homicide offenders and of homicide victims had a criminal history. Nearly two-thirds of male offenders and half of female offenders had a prior criminal history. Half of male victims too had a criminal history, as did a quarter of female victims. These ratios have changed little throughout the years of monitoring. In 2006–07, the most common prior criminal history of offenders constituted ‘other assault’, property, and ‘other’ offences. ‘Other’ encompasses crimes such as fraud and traffic violations. Recidivist homicide offending was very low in 2006–07, with only two percent of offenders having a prior conviction of homicide. The high incidence of a prior criminal history of ‘other assault’ suggests that homicide is often not an isolated incident of violence but part of a longer-term pattern of violent behaviour. Of interest, little difference exists between the sexes of homicide offenders in this respect.

---------

5/1/16


As Gun-Related Deaths Increase, Prior Criminal Records Is Common Link Among Shooters, Victims | Wisconsin Public Radio

Almost two-thirds of the fatal shootings in the state have taken place in Milwaukee. The others are scattered around 15 different cities and towns. In almost all cases, however, both victims and alleged perpetrators have criminal records.

Mallory O'Brien, of the Milwaukee Homicide Review Commission, tracks those numbers for the city of Milwaukee.

"(About) 94 percent of our victims have an arrest history and 93 percent of our suspects have an arrest history," O'Brien said.

O'Brien said the same percentage is true for non-fatal shooting incidents. There's been an increase in those numbers as well. By the end of June of last year, there were 204 cases and the count at the six-month mark this year, there have been 248 incidents -- a 21-percent increase. She said there' also been an increase in the number of shooting incidents with multiple victims.

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


4/28/16

breakdown of the 90% of murderers have records..really good...

The Criminology of Firearms

In 2004, the National Academy of Sciences reviewed 253 journal articles, 99 books, 43 government publications and some empirical research of its own about guns. The Academy could not identify any gun restriction that had reduced violent crime, suicide or gun accidents.

Why don't gun bans work? Because they rely on voluntary compliance by gun-using criminals. Prohibitionists never see this absurdity because they deceive themselves into thinking that, as Katherine Christoffel has said: "[M]ost shootings are not committed by felons or mentally ill people, but are acts of passion that are committed using a handgun that is owned for home protection."

Christoffel, et al., are utterly wrong. The whole corpus of criminological research dating back to the 1890'sshows murderers "almost uniformly have a long history of involvement in criminal behavior," and that "[v]irtually all" murderers and other gun criminals have prior felony records — generally long ones.

While only 15 percent of Americans have criminal records, roughly 90 percent of adult murderers have prior adult records — exclusive of their often extensive juvenile records — with crime careers of six or more adult years including four major felonies. Gerald D. Robin, writing for the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences,notes that, unlike ordinary gun owners, "the average murderer turns out to be no less hardened a criminal than the average robber or burglar."

Throughout this essay I highlight dramatic recantations by criminologists who previously endorsed stringent gun control. For example, Professor David Mustard has stated in an article [PDF] for the University of Pennsylvania Law Review:

When I started my research on guns [at the University of Chicago] in 1995, I passionately disliked firearms and fully accepted the conventional wisdom that increasing the gun-ownership rate would necessarily raise violent crime and accidental deaths. My views on this subject were formed primarily by media accounts of firearms, which unknowingly to me systematically emphasized the costs of firearms while virtually ignoring their benefits. I thought it obvious that passing laws that permitted law-abiding citizens to carry concealed weapons would create many problems. It is now over six years since I became convinced otherwise and concluded that shall issue laws — laws that require [gun carry permits] to be granted unless the applicant has a criminal record or a history of significant mental illness — reduce violent crime and have no impact on accidental deaths.Actual research results — as opposed to unsupported opinions — pose a question embarrassed gun prohibitionists invariably try to evade: why ban guns to ordinary owners, i.e., people who never commit gun crimes? (This query does not at all impugn our laws against previously convicted felons having guns).



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

Zimring has nevertheless remained a firm advocate of gun bans. But actual research has produced an unbroken record of recantations by criminologists who once agreed with Zimring. In the late 1970's the US Department of Justice (DOJ) funded and tasked the University of Massachusetts' Social and Demographic Research Institute to review and evaluate the entire extant literature on gun control in the US and elsewhere. The Institute's resulting report observed: "It is commonly hypothesized that much criminal violence, especially homicide, occurs simply because the means of lethal violence (firearms) are readily at hand, and, thus, that much homicide would not occur were firearms generally less available. There is no persuasive evidence that supports this view." (emphasis added)


That evaluation's authors — Professors James Wright, Peter Rossi and Kathleen Daly — subsequently published a commercial version of their report to which they added their personal recantation:

The progressive's indictment of American firearms policy is well known and is one that both the senior authors of this study once shared. This indictment includes the following particulars: (1) Guns are involved in an astonishing number of crimes in this country. (2) In other countries with stricter firearms laws and fewer guns in private hands, gun crime is rare ... (4) Many families acquire a gun because they feel the need to protect themselves; eventually, they end up shooting one another. (5) If there were fewer guns around, there would obviously be less crime ... The more deeply we explored the empirical implications of this indictment, the less plausible it has become. (emphasis, parentheses added)
3/23/16

David Kennedy...

Roy Exum: How We Stop The Bullets

David Kennedy, a renowned criminal justice professor and co-chair of the National Network for Safe Communities, believes that places like the 1500 block of East 50th Street where Deontrey was killed, or Central Avenue where two other Chattanoogans were shot around the same time, aren’t necessarily bad areas. Good people live in those areas, just as the overwhelming numbers of those who live in our inner city are decent and law-abiding citizens.
No, our new focus isn’t on neighborhoods like Alton Park or East Chattanooga but instead on “hot” places” and “hot” people. In an article entitled, “The Story Behind the Nation’s Falling Body Count,” Kennedy writes, “Research on hot spots shows violence to be concentrated in ‘micro’ places, rather than ‘dangerous neighborhoods,’ as the popular idea goes. Blocks, corners, and buildings representing just five or six percent of an entire city will drive half of its serious crime.”
The same is true about people. “We now know that homicide and gun violence are overwhelmingly concentrated among serious offenders operating in groups: gangs, drug crews, and the like representing under half of one percent of a city's population who commit half to three-quarters of all murders.”
Read it once more: “ … under half of one percent … commit half to three-quarters of all murders.”
It is vitally important for us to realize the recent “worst of the worst” roundup had very little to do with race, yet to the uninformed it clearly appeared that only blacks were targeted.
Try to forget that all were black and focus instead on the far greater fact – there is ample evidence that each is alleged to be a serious criminal.
Kennedy writes, “We also know some reliable predictors of risk: individuals who have a history of violence or a close connection with prior victims are far more likely to be involved in violence themselves.
Hot groups and people are so hot that when their offending is statistically abstracted, their neighborhoods cease to be dangerous. Their communities aren't dangerous; (these criminals) are.”

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

part 2 of a review of gun control issues.....includes who actually commits murder...great info.....

Public Health and Gun Control --- A Review (Part II: Gun Violence and Constitutional Issues) | Hacienda Publishing

Another favorite view of the gun control, public health establishment is the myth propounded by Dr. Mark Rosenberg, former head of the NCIPC of the CDC, who has written: "Most of the perpetrators of violence are not criminals by trade or profession. Indeed, in the area of domestic violence, most of the perpetrators are never accused of any crime. The victims and perpetrators are ourselves --- ordinary citizens, students, professionals, and even public health workers."(6)

That statement is contradicted by available data, government data. The fact is that the typical murderer has had a prior criminal history of at least six years with four felony arrests in his record before he finally commits murder.


(17) The FBI statistics reveal that 75 percent of all violent crimes for any locality are committed by six percent of hardened criminals and repeat offenders.(18)


Less than 2 percent of crimes committed with firearms are carried out by licensed (e.g., concealed carry permit holders) law-abiding citizens.(11)

Violent crimes continue to be a problem in the inner cities with gangs involved in the drug trade. Crimes in rural areas for both blacks and whites, despite the preponderance of guns in this setting, remain low.(11,19)



Gun availability does not cause crime. Prohibitionist government policies and gun control (rather than crime control) exacerbates the problem by making it more difficult for law-abiding citizens to defend themselves, their families, and their property. In fact, there was a modest increase in both homicide and suicide after prohibition and passage of the Gun Control Act of 1968.(20)



Brockton man arrested a third time in 15 months on gun charges

For the third time in 15 months, a Brockton man with gang ties is facing gun charges after being arrested for leading officers on a car chase in the city Friday afternoon, police said.

------------------------
For Patrick Brandao, Friday’s arrest was one of three times he has been charged with gun crimes since October 2014.

On April 15 last year, 18 Brockton police officers responded to a car chase that led to the arrest of Brandao and another man.

Police observed a vehicle, with Brandao inside, on Winthrop Street that appeared to be circling around the neighborhood.

After a motor vehicle infraction, officers attempted pull the vehicle over and they took off.

About a mile away on Linnea Avenue, Brandao and the other man jumped out of the car and fled on foot. The car continued down the road for another 100 feet and struck a fire hydrant, police said.

The two were arrested and a .40 caliber Smith & Wesson handgun was seized.

In Stoughton on Oct. 17, 2014, Brandao was arrested during a raid by the State Police Gang Unit.

Officers executed a search warrant at 97 Pratts Court and found a .40 caliber Glock and 9mm Ruger. Both guns were loaded and equipped with high-capacity magazines. Also seized was 10 grams of heroin and $4,500 cash.

In addition, at age 18, in 2011, Brandao was arrested by the Brockton Police Gang Unit after a traffic stop for speeding that led to detectives finding a .22 caliber handgun under a seat in the vehicle, police said.
888888888888888888

85 percent of shooting suspects and victims in Milwaukee have

Non-fatal shootings:

In non-fatal shootings in 2011, 97 percent of the 177 suspects and 86 percent of the 473 victims had at least one prior arrest. The report doesn’t say how many.

However, O’Brien said a closer analysis of non-fatal shootings during a six-week period in July and August 2011, when non-fatal shootings increased, found that suspects had an average of 7.5 prior arrests and victims had an average of about six. O’Brien said that based on her past studies, she would expect that the rest of the suspects and victims in the non-fatal shootings in 2011 had a similar number of prior arrests.

So, more than 85 percent of the people involved in non-fatal shootings had at least one prior arrest. And there’s a strong indication, though not complete numbers, that most people involved in the non-fatal shootings had at least several prior arrests.

Homicides:

For all homicides in 2011 -- those involving guns and those that didn’t -- 57 percent of the 72 suspects and 62 percent of the 66 homicide victims had at least six prior arrests.

O’Brien said that based on past studies she has done, most homicides involve guns and it’s unlikely that arrest records would vary greatly between the people involved in shooting homicides versus non-shooting homicides.

So, a clear majority, but less than 85 percent, of the people involved in fatal shootings likely had at least six prior arrests; although, again, the study doesn’t provide hard numbers on that point.

We asked James Alan Fox, a criminology, law and public policy professor at Northeastern University in Boston, about Flynn’s claim. He said from a national perspective, most shootings involve people with an arrest history, although he couldn’t say how extensive that history is for the typical shooting suspect or victim.

Our rating

Flynn said 85 percent of Milwaukee shootings "are people with extensive criminal records shooting other people with extensive criminal records."

The thrust of his statement -- that the vast majority of shooting suspects and victims have a criminal history, is accurate. But he made a specific statistical claim that isn’t fully supported by the study he cites. And as compared with charges or convictions, prior arrests as a measure of a person’s criminal record is on the lower end of the scale.




Houston.....most shooters criminals

Houston murder rate skyrockets in early 2015

McClelland said the majority of murders in the city are committed by people with criminal records against people with criminal records.


-----
When Gun Violence Felt Like a Disease, a City in Delaware Turned to the C.D.C.



When epidemiologists from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention came to this city, they were not here to track an outbreak of meningitis or study the effectiveness of a particular vaccine.

They were here to examine gun violence.

This city of about 70,000 had a 45 percent jump in shootings from 2011 to 2013, and the violence has remained stubbornly high; 25 shooting deaths have been reported this year, slightly more than last year, according to the mayor’s office
.-------



The final report, which has been submitted to the state, reached a conclusion that many here said they already knew: that there are certain patterns in the lives of many who commit gun violence.

“The majority of individuals involved in urban firearm violence are young men with substantial violence involvement preceding the more serious offense of a firearm crime,”


the report said. “Our findings suggest that integrating data systems could help these individuals better receive the early, comprehensive help that they need to prevent violence involvement.”

Researchers analyzed data on 569 people charged with firearm crimes from 2009 to May 21, 2014, and looked for certain risk factors in their lives, such as whether they had been unemployed, had received help from assistance programs, had been possible victims of child abuse, or had been shot or stabbed. The idea was to show that linking such data could create a better understanding of who might need help before becoming involved in violence.

http://www.guns.com/2015/12/16/nearly-half-of-nycs-shootings-gang-related/

Of the more than 300 homicides so far this year in New York City, almost half of those – 40 percent – were determined to be gang-related, with 49 percent of the city’s nearly 1,100 shootings tied to gangs as well.

-----

Data obtained by the Daily News from the NYPD’s Gang and Juvenile Justice divisions indicate that gang members may be as young as 10 years old, with most members in their teens and early twenties. Those who survive the lifestyle long enough often have extensive criminal records by their 30s.



----
---From an article on Operation Ceasefire...it cites the number of criminals in Oakland California who actually shoot people and who get shot, and there criminal backgrounds...

https://newrepublic.com/article/124445/beyond-gun-control

Lost in the debate is that even in high-crime cities, the risk of gun violence is mostly concentrated among a small number of men. In Oakland, for instance, crime experts working with the police department a few years ago found that about 1,000 active members of a few dozen street groups drove most homicides. That’s .3 percent of Oakland’s population. And even within this subgroup, risk fluctuated according to feuds and other beefs. In practical terms, the experts found that over a given stretch of several months only about 50 to 100 men are at the highest risk of shooting someone or getting shot.

Most of these men have criminal records. But it’s not drug deals or turf wars that drives most of the shootings.

Instead, the violence often starts with what seems to outsiders like trivial stuff—“a fight over a girlfriend, a couple of words, a dispute over a dice game,” said Vaughn Crandall, a senior strategist at the California Partnership for Safe Communities, which did the homicide analysis for Oakland.

http://www.wnd.com/2013/03/most-murder-victims-in-big-cities-have-criminal-record/

A review of murder statistics across America shows that in many large cities, up to 90 percent of the victims have criminal records.
-------
The report concludes that “of the 2011 homicide victims, 77 percent (66) had a least one prior arrest and of the known 2011 homicide suspects 90 percent (74) had at least one prior arrest.”
----------
In early 2012, after pressure put on the police by murder victims’ families in New Orleans, the police department stopped revealing whether or not the murder victim had a prior record.

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

Though data is no longer published in Baltimore, USA Today reported in 2007 that 91 percent of the then-205 murder victims in the city between Jan. 1 and Aug. 31, 2007, had criminal records.

---------
A WND review of the Philadelphia Police Department Murder and Shooting Analysis for 2011 shows a similar pattern to that of other large cities in America – a majority of the murder victims have prior records.



--------
In Philadelphia in 2011, of 324 murders, 81 percent (263) of the victims had at least one prior arrest; 62 percent (164) had been arrested for a violent crime prior to their murder.

----------

In Newark, N.J., long considered one of America’s most dangerous cities, 85 percent of the 165 murder victims between 2009 and 2010 had serious arrest histories.

Anthony Braga, a professor with the Rutgers-Newark School of Criminal Justice, told the Newark Star-Ledger that 85 percent of 165 murder victims in Newark between 2009 and 2010 had been arrested at least once before they were killed.

Those victims, he said, had, on average, 10 prior arrests on their criminal records.

A WND review of the Chicago Police Department Murder Analysis reports from 2003 to 2011 provides a statistical breakdown of the demographics of both the victims and offenders in the 4,265 murders in Chicago over that time period.

Of the victims of murder in Chicago from 2003 to 2011, an average of 77 percent had a prior arrest history, with a high of 79 percent of the 436 murdered in Chicago in 2010 having arrest histories.




***************
*****************
http://reason.com/archives/1997/04/01/public-health-pot-shots

this article goes at kellerman extensively and his crap research.....and here is some work on who actually kills people...


These and other studies funded by the CDC focus on the presence or absence of guns, rather than the characteristics of the people who use them. Indeed, the CDC's Rosenberg claims in the journalEducational Horizons that murderers are "ourselves--ordinary citizens, professionals, even health care workers": people who kill only because a gun happens to be available. Yet if there is one fact that has been incontestably established by homicide studies, it's that murderers are not ordinary gun owners but extreme aberrants whose life histories include drug abuse, serious accidents, felonies, and irrational violence.



Unlike "ourselves," roughly 90 percent of adult murderers have significant criminal records, averaging an adult criminal career of six or more years with four major felonies.

Access to juvenile records would almost certainly show that the criminal careers of murderers stretch back into their adolescence. In Murder in America (1994), the criminologists Ronald W. Holmes and Stephen T. Holmes report that murderers generally "have histories of committing personal violence in childhood, against other children, siblings, and small animals." Murderers who don't have criminal records usually have histories of psychiatric treatment or domestic violence that did not lead to arrest.

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.



-------As the English gun control analyst Colin Greenwood has noted, in any society there are always enough guns available, legally or illegally, to arm the violent. The true determinant of violence is the number of violent people, not the availability of a particular weapon. Guns contribute to murder in the trivial sense that they help violent people kill. But owning guns does not turn responsible, law-abiding people into killers. If the general availability of guns were as important a factor in violence as the CDC implies, the vast increase in firearm ownership during the past two decades should have led to a vast increase in homicide. The CDC suggested just that in a 1989 report to Congress, where it asserted that "ince the early 1970s the year-to-year fluctuations in firearm availability has [sic] paralleled the numbers of homicides."



Gangs in Fort Meyers Florida...



http://www.nbc-2.com/story/22079660/nbc2-investigates-southwest-florida-gangs#.ViPdQrQRakg



The City of Fort Myers has been plagued with violence and murder. NBC2 Investigator Dave Elias dug deeper and found that drugs, crime and gangs are the common elements between those killings.

Lee County Sheriff Mike Scott says the three go hand-in-hand and all appear to be playing a big role in the city's crime problem.

"They're punks. They're criminals. And in most cases – cowards," said Sheriff Scott.

He also explained that gang members live by a much different set of rules.

"We're at a more violent time right now than at any time I recall," said Sheriff Scott. "You're talking about an area that - per capita - is on par with Detroit Michigan, in terms of homicides."

There were 25 murders in Fort Myers alone last year. And Sheriff Scott says all of the killings have those three things in common – drugs, crime and gangs.

"In most every case this is criminal killing criminal. This is bad guy on bad guy," he said.



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

The Kate and Mauser study.......



http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

I. VIOLENCE: THE DECISIVENESS OF SOCIAL FACTORS
One reason the extent of gun ownership in a society does not spur the murder rate is that murderers are not spread evenly throughout the population. Analysis of perpetrator studies shows that violent criminals—especially murderers—“almost uniformly have a long history of involvement in criminal behav‐ ior.”37 So it would not appreciably raise violence if all law‐ abiding, responsible people had firearms because they are not the ones who rape, rob, or murder.38 By the same token, violent crime would not fall if guns were totally banned to civilians. As the respective examples of Luxembourg and Russia suggest,39 individuals who commit violent crimes will either find guns despite severe controls or will find other weapons to use. 40
--------------------------



III. DO ORDINARY PEOPLE MURDER?

The “more guns equal more death” mantra seems plausible only when viewed through the rubric that murders mostly in‐ volve ordinary people who kill because they have access to a firearm when they get angry. If this were true, murder might well increase where people have ready access to firearms, but the available data provides no such correlation. Nations and


areas with more guns per capita do not have higher murder rates than those with fewer guns per capita.53

Nevertheless, critics of gun ownership often argue that a “gun in the closet to protect against burglars will most likely be used to shoot a spouse in a moment of rage . . . . The problem is you and me—law‐abiding folks;”54 that banning handgun posses‐ sion only for those with criminal records will “fail to protect us from the most likely source of handgun murder: ordinary citi‐ zens;”55 that “most gun‐related homicides . . . are the result of impulsive actions taken by individuals who have little or no criminal background or who are known to the victims;”56 that “the majority of firearm homicide[s occur] . . . not as the result of criminal activity, but because of arguments between people who know each other;”57 that each year there are thousands of gun murders “by law‐abiding citizens who might have stayed law‐abiding if they had not possessed firearms.”58

These comments appear to rest on no evidence and actually con‐ tradict facts that have so uniformly been established by homicide studies dating back to the 1890s that they have become “crimino‐ logical axioms.”59 Insofar as studies focus on perpetrators, they show that neither a majority, nor many, nor virtually any murder‐ ers are ordinary “law‐abiding citizens.”60

Rather, almost all mur‐ derers are extremely aberrant individuals with life histories of violence, psychopathology, substance abuse, and other dangerous behaviors. “The vast majority of persons involved in life‐ threatening violence have a long criminal record with many prior contacts with the justice system.”61 “Thus homicide—[whether] of a

stranger or [of] someone known to the offender—‘is usually part of a pattern of violence, engaged in by people who are known . . . as violence prone.’”62
Though only 15% of Americans over the age of 15 have arrest records,63 approximately 90 percent of “adult mur‐ derers have adult records, with an average adult criminal career [involving crimes committed as an adult rather than a child] of six or more years, including four major adult felony arrests.”64
These national statistics dovetail with data from local nineteenth and twentieth century studies. For example: victims as well as offenders [in 1950s and 1960s Philadelphia murders] . . . tended to be people with prior police records, usually for violent crimes such as as‐ sault.”65
“The great majority of both perpetrators and victims of [1970s Harlem] assaults and murders had previous [adult] arrests, probably over 80% or more.”66 Boston police and probation officers in the 1990s agreed that of those juvenile‐perpetrated murders where all the facts were known, virtually all were committed by gang members, though the killing was not necessarily gang‐ directed. 67 One example would be a gang member who stabs his girlfriend to death in a fit of anger.68 Regardless of their arrests for other crimes, 80% of 1997 Atlanta murder arrestees had at least one earlier drug offense with 70% having 3 or more prior drug of‐ fenses.69
A New York Times study of the 1,662 murders committed in that city in the years 2003–2005 found that “[m]ore than 90 percent of the killers had criminal records.”70 Baltimore police figures show that “92 percent of murder suspects had [prior] criminal records in 2006.”71 Several of the more recent homicide studies just reviewed


********


http://extranosalley.com/?p=82996

WIBW reports the man who murdered Utah Police Officer Douglas Barney was a typical cop-killer, with anextensive criminal record that barred lawful gun possession or purchase.
Briefly quoting the WIBW report linked above:
Cory Henderson, 31, faced multiple state and federal charges going back more than 10 years, according CNN affiliate KUTV.
Henderson pleaded guilty to possessing an unregistered sawed-off rifle in 2005, and in 2010 pleaded guilty to felony possession of a firearm, KUTV reported. Both were federal charges.
Henderson also pleaded not guilty to federal drug and gun charges just last month, KUTV said.
Just another career criminal, on the streets because a lenient, and truly criminal, justice system let him run free. Cory Henderson was not some moke caught with a roach, he had a record dating back at least ten years, and probably twenty.

---------------8888888888888888

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data

Sooooo....


US Mass Shootings, 1982-2015: Data From Mother Jones' Investigation

US Mass Shootings, 1982-2015: Data From Mother Jones' Investigation



How many deaths on average according to Mother Jones...anti gun, uber left wing Mother Jones.......each year, well less than 100.

2014..... 9
2013..... 36
2012..... 72
2011..... 19
2010....9
2009...39
2008...18
2007...54
2006...21
2005...17
2004...5
2003...7
2002...not listed by mother jones
2001...5
2000...7

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_02.pdf

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_02.pdf


Cars, Accidental deaths 2013......35,369

Poisons...accidental deaths 2013....38,851

Alcohol...accidental deaths 2013...29,001

gravity....accidental falling deaths 2013...30,208

Accidental drowning.....3,391

Accidental exposure to smoke, fire and flames.....2,760

Accidental gun deaths 2013......505


Those are the numbers of deaths from mass shootings in the United States.....and even in the big year, 2012, they didn't break 100 deaths by criminals.

How many guns are there in American hands....320 million.

How many people carry guns for self defense...over 13 million.

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

9/1/16


Man with history of violence kills estranged wife while out on bail

At the time of Tierne’s death, Kevin was out of jail on bond following a similar, violent encounter. Police say on June 26, Kevin kidnapped Tierne and held her against her will for two weeks. During that time, Tierne said she was beaten and pistol-whipped. Kevin spit on her while she was being held captive, bound her hands with wire, wrapped cord around her neck, and kept her in a closet. Additionally, he branded the woman on her legs with a piece of hot metal.

The nightmare came to an end–at least temporarily–when Kevin sent Tierne into a credit union to collect cash. Tierne informed the teller she was being held against her will and fearing for her life. The teller contacted the police, who swiftly arrived on the scene.

Kevin was found sitting in his truck outside of the bank. In his possession were two loaded guns. He was apprehended and charged with kidnapping, aggravated assault, carrying a gun without a license, terroristic threats, unlawful restraint, false imprisonment and reckless endangerment.

Authorities found Tierne inside the bank. She had barricaded herself in an interior room of the business and was fearfully telling officers, “I don’t want to die.” Officers noted the woman was suffering from significant bruising, deep cuts to her throat and a concussion.

After his arrest, Kevin’s bond was set at $100,000, despite arguments from prosecutors asking it be higher. Prosecutors said the severity of his crimes warranted a higher bond, but Judge Gary Gilman disagreed.

Kevin was released from jail on July 11 after posting bail and was required to wear an ankle monitor. However, the monitor was not equipped with GPS and only alerted authorities if he left his home.

But on Tuesday, Kevin simply cut the monitor from his ankle before he left his home and once again abducted Tierne. Only this time, instead of just torturing her, Kevin successfully murdered her.

The woman’s family said he never should have been released from jail.

 

[2aguy]

Here we have a Harvard researcher who understands what the actual problem is with guns and crime in the U.S......criminals who use guns. But...because he is an anti-gunner, he goes on to support gun laws he admits don't stop criminals from getting guns or using them to kill each other.......because he hates guns.

As far as his actual solution that he points out before being blinded by his hatred of guns.....he is right on target.....criminals....focus on them, and you stop gun crime.

Democrats are skipping out on the most important gun fight of all - The Boston Globe

First, because urban violence concentrates among a small number of people and places, strategies that target those concentrations tend to work best.

In most medium to large cities, violent crime clusters among a few hundred individuals and a few dozen micro-locations known as “hot spots.” Less than 1 percent of a city’s population and less than 5 percent of its geography will generate the majority of its lethal or near-lethal encounters.

Next, strategies that balance punishment with support work better than either approach in isolation. No city has reduced violence only with law enforcement, or reduced it without law enforcement entirely. In a comprehensive review of over 1,400 anti-crime evaluations, my colleague Christopher Winship and I discovered that the evidence does not favor either “tough” or “soft” approaches; there are numerous examples of both that have worked.

Last, peace in the streets requires cooperation between communities and criminal justice authorities. However, when people see law enforcement as unwilling or unable to help them, they refuse to report crime, testify in court, or serve as jurors. Even worse, they are more likely to take the law into their own hands, using the “code of the street” to violently resolve disputes. By improving relationships with affected residents, police and prosecutors can solve past crimes while preventing violence in the future.

These principles — focus, balance, and fairness — are the clearest guidelines to effective anti-violence policies available. Follow them and success is likely. Disregard them and failure is almost a certainty.

And here......strategies that the author acknowledges do nothing to stop gun violence.....he supports........showing that he is blinded by his dislike, likely hatred, of guns.....

Democrats are partly responsible when they support the same gun violence policies that have been around for decades, such as universal background checks, banning assault weapons, and keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous people.

Although these strategies make good sense, they do little to curb the violence on the streets of our cities.

How many murders, suicides and accidental deaths occur when the gun is in the hand of someone never arrested? Tell the readers, 2aguy, you're the one who has all the stats (that confirm your biases).

Break it down to murders, and assaults which create serious wounds, and the cost to the investing agency, the Public Hospital and Social Services.

Here, a quick look....

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

I. VIOLENCE: THE DECISIVENESS OF SOCIAL FACTORS
One reason the extent of gun ownership in a society does not spur the murder rate is that murderers are not spread evenly throughout the population. Analysis of perpetrator studies shows that violent criminals—especially murderers—“almost uniformly have a long history of involvement in criminal behav‐ ior.”37 So it would not appreciably raise violence if all law‐ abiding, responsible people had firearms because they are not the ones who rape, rob, or murder.38 By the same token, violent crime would not fall if guns were totally banned to civilians. As the respective examples of Luxembourg and Russia suggest,39 individuals who commit violent crimes will either find guns despite severe controls or will find other weapons to use. 40
--------------------------



III. DO ORDINARY PEOPLE MURDER?

The “more guns equal more death” mantra seems plausible only when viewed through the rubric that murders mostly in‐ volve ordinary people who kill because they have access to a firearm when they get angry. If this were true, murder might well increase where people have ready access to firearms, but the available data provides no such correlation. Nations and


areas with more guns per capita do not have higher murder rates than those with fewer guns per capita.53

Nevertheless, critics of gun ownership often argue that a “gun in the closet to protect against burglars will most likely be used to shoot a spouse in a moment of rage . . . . The problem is you and me—law‐abiding folks;”54 that banning handgun posses‐ sion only for those with criminal records will “fail to protect us from the most likely source of handgun murder: ordinary citi‐ zens;”55 that “most gun‐related homicides . . . are the result of impulsive actions taken by individuals who have little or no criminal background or who are known to the victims;”56 that “the majority of firearm homicide[s occur] . . . not as the result of criminal activity, but because of arguments between people who know each other;”57 that each year there are thousands of gun murders “by law‐abiding citizens who might have stayed law‐abiding if they had not possessed firearms.”58

These comments appear to rest on no evidence and actually con‐ tradict facts that have so uniformly been established by homicide studies dating back to the 1890s that they have become “crimino‐ logical axioms.”59 Insofar as studies focus on perpetrators, they show that neither a majority, nor many, nor virtually any murder‐ ers are ordinary “law‐abiding citizens.”60

Rather, almost all mur‐ derers are extremely aberrant individuals with life histories of violence, psychopathology, substance abuse, and other dangerous behaviors. “The vast majority of persons involved in life‐ threatening violence have a long criminal record with many prior contacts with the justice system.”61 “Thus homicide—[whether] of a

stranger or [of] someone known to the offender—‘is usually part of a pattern of violence, engaged in by people who are known . . . as violence prone.’”62
Though only 15% of Americans over the age of 15 have arrest records,63 approximately 90 percent of “adult mur‐ derers have adult records, with an average adult criminal career [involving crimes committed as an adult rather than a child] of six or more years, including four major adult felony arrests.”64
These national statistics dovetail with data from local nineteenth and twentieth century studies. For example: victims as well as offenders [in 1950s and 1960s Philadelphia murders] . . . tended to be people with prior police records, usually for violent crimes such as as‐ sault.”65
“The great majority of both perpetrators and victims of [1970s Harlem] assaults and murders had previous [adult] arrests, probably over 80% or more.”66 Boston police and probation officers in the 1990s agreed that of those juvenile‐perpetrated murders where all the facts were known, virtually all were committed by gang members, though the killing was not necessarily gang‐ directed. 67 One example would be a gang member who stabs his girlfriend to death in a fit of anger.68 Regardless of their arrests for other crimes, 80% of 1997 Atlanta murder arrestees had at least one earlier drug offense with 70% having 3 or more prior drug of‐ fenses.69
A New York Times study of the 1,662 murders committed in that city in the years 2003–2005 found that “[m]ore than 90 percent of the killers had criminal records.”70 Baltimore police figures show that “92 percent of murder suspects had [prior] criminal records in 2006.”71 Several of the more recent homicide studies just reviewed

 

[2aguy]

Here we have a Harvard researcher who understands what the actual problem is with guns and crime in the U.S......criminals who use guns. But...because he is an anti-gunner, he goes on to support gun laws he admits don't stop criminals from getting guns or using them to kill each other.......because he hates guns.

As far as his actual solution that he points out before being blinded by his hatred of guns.....he is right on target.....criminals....focus on them, and you stop gun crime.

Democrats are skipping out on the most important gun fight of all - The Boston Globe

First, because urban violence concentrates among a small number of people and places, strategies that target those concentrations tend to work best.

In most medium to large cities, violent crime clusters among a few hundred individuals and a few dozen micro-locations known as “hot spots.” Less than 1 percent of a city’s population and less than 5 percent of its geography will generate the majority of its lethal or near-lethal encounters.

Next, strategies that balance punishment with support work better than either approach in isolation. No city has reduced violence only with law enforcement, or reduced it without law enforcement entirely. In a comprehensive review of over 1,400 anti-crime evaluations, my colleague Christopher Winship and I discovered that the evidence does not favor either “tough” or “soft” approaches; there are numerous examples of both that have worked.

Last, peace in the streets requires cooperation between communities and criminal justice authorities. However, when people see law enforcement as unwilling or unable to help them, they refuse to report crime, testify in court, or serve as jurors. Even worse, they are more likely to take the law into their own hands, using the “code of the street” to violently resolve disputes. By improving relationships with affected residents, police and prosecutors can solve past crimes while preventing violence in the future.

These principles — focus, balance, and fairness — are the clearest guidelines to effective anti-violence policies available. Follow them and success is likely. Disregard them and failure is almost a certainty.

And here......strategies that the author acknowledges do nothing to stop gun violence.....he supports........showing that he is blinded by his dislike, likely hatred, of guns.....

Democrats are partly responsible when they support the same gun violence policies that have been around for decades, such as universal background checks, banning assault weapons, and keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous people.

Although these strategies make good sense, they do little to curb the violence on the streets of our cities.

I gotta ask... why are you so hell bent on these gun issues? Every post I see from you is about the subject. Are you a paid activist or are you really that obsessed?

I am an American Conservative as far as political leanings go.....I have also studied history as part of my formal education. I also used to teach self defense. Because of these things I have studied human nature throughout history. Freedom is important to me, as well as good vs. evil, right v. wrong. The one common thread throughout human history is violence against innocent people...in the course of human history, those who were unable to protect themselves were the slaves, or victims of those stronger than they are. The one thing that ended that....guns. Guns in the hands of good people changed the world, civilized the world. Until guns came along, the strong were able to use primitive weapons to enslave, rape, murder, torture those who were weaker and less physically powerful....this is one of the reasons that small elites were able to subjugate masses of humans. Guns allowed non-professional warriors the chance and the ability to fight back, with little to no training......you didn't have to win the genetic strength lottery, or train hours every day to be able to shoot and kill a violent attacker.

Throughout history, freedom was only gained through fighting off those who would enslave people...guns made success more likely.

And then you have crime. Have you ever been a victim of a crime? Ever had anyone you know raped, robbed or murdered? Having taught self defense, having studied violence and how predators choose victims, it becomes obvious that the best tool for the average to less than average person to stop one or more criminals, whether they are armed or not, is a gun. No amount of empty hand training will help you against violent criminals whose entire job is to find you at your weakest time and attack you. Yes....some people do manage to fight off attackers with their bare hands, but that is rare, and the odds are stacked against them

When people like you demand that people give up their guns, you are demanding that they become victims of anyone who wants to abuse them......either governments or criminals.....

History, human nature, show that guns are the best, most efficient way for women, men, the old, the weak to protect themselves from other human predators......that is why I focus on the 2nd Amendment.

Also, I support the Bill of Rights, as a student of history....but there are already people who defend the 1st Amendment...it is the 2nd Amendment that doesn't get the love it deserves...and you can see that from the people who post against it here on USMB...

 

[Blues Man]

Virginia Project Exile

Firearm Homicide Rates, Project Exile
Rosenfeld and colleagues (2005) found a statistically significant intervention effect for Project Exile. Firearm homicides in Richmond exhibited a 22 percent yearly decline, compared with the average reduction of about 10 percent per year for other large U.S. cities. The difference is statistically significant.

 

[alang1216]

Here we have a Harvard researcher who understands what the actual problem is with guns and crime in the U.S......criminals who use guns. But...because he is an anti-gunner, he goes on to support gun laws he admits don't stop criminals from getting guns or using them to kill each other.......because he hates guns.

As far as his actual solution that he points out before being blinded by his hatred of guns.....he is right on target.....criminals....focus on them, and you stop gun crime.

Democrats are skipping out on the most important gun fight of all - The Boston Globe

First, because urban violence concentrates among a small number of people and places, strategies that target those concentrations tend to work best.

In most medium to large cities, violent crime clusters among a few hundred individuals and a few dozen micro-locations known as “hot spots.” Less than 1 percent of a city’s population and less than 5 percent of its geography will generate the majority of its lethal or near-lethal encounters.

Next, strategies that balance punishment with support work better than either approach in isolation. No city has reduced violence only with law enforcement, or reduced it without law enforcement entirely. In a comprehensive review of over 1,400 anti-crime evaluations, my colleague Christopher Winship and I discovered that the evidence does not favor either “tough” or “soft” approaches; there are numerous examples of both that have worked.

Last, peace in the streets requires cooperation between communities and criminal justice authorities. However, when people see law enforcement as unwilling or unable to help them, they refuse to report crime, testify in court, or serve as jurors. Even worse, they are more likely to take the law into their own hands, using the “code of the street” to violently resolve disputes. By improving relationships with affected residents, police and prosecutors can solve past crimes while preventing violence in the future.

These principles — focus, balance, and fairness — are the clearest guidelines to effective anti-violence policies available. Follow them and success is likely. Disregard them and failure is almost a certainty.

And here......strategies that the author acknowledges do nothing to stop gun violence.....he supports........showing that he is blinded by his dislike, likely hatred, of guns.....

Democrats are partly responsible when they support the same gun violence policies that have been around for decades, such as universal background checks, banning assault weapons, and keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous people.

Although these strategies make good sense, they do little to curb the violence on the streets of our cities.

No it is never that simple. There is no simple answer to a complex problem, period. I have no problem coming down hard on anyone using a gun to commit a crime. I also have no illusion that that will solve the problem. It is just one of many actions that should be adapted.