Johns Hopkins Study: No Evidence ‘Assault Weapon’ Bans Reduce Mass Shootings

[Fort Fun Indiana]

A study released by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health declares there is no evidence “assault weapon” bans lead to a lower “incidence of fatal mass shootings.”

The push for an “assault weapons” ban is central to the Democrats’ gun control agenda nationally and is front and center for Democrats at the state level in places like Arizona and Virginia.

According to the Johns Hopkins study, researchers”did not find an independent association between assault weapon bans and the incidence of fatal mass shootings.”

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...ce-assault-weapon-bans-reduce-mass-shootings/
I guess the VA Democrats have their "study" - eh?

Everyone - including those who support these bans - already knew this, of course, as 'assault weapons' bans do nothing to reduce access to 'assault weapons' - people still have access to existing weapons as well as new weapons that are modified to not fall under the ban.

And so, you must ask yourself:
Why do people who know bans on 'assault weapons' do not, will not, and can not affect the incidence of mass shootings, still support said bans?

The study found the following:

- "the study did not find an independent association between assault weapon bans and the incidence of fatal mass shootings after controlling for the effects of bans on large-capacity magazines."

Which is a reference to other findings:

- "Firearm purchaser licensing laws that require an in-person application or fingerprinting are associated with an estimated 56 percent fewer fatal mass shootings in states that have them, according to a new study by researchers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health."

And:

-" The researchers also found evidence that laws banning large-capacity magazines, defined as those that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition, were associated with significant reductions in the rate of fatal mass shootings with four or more fatalities and the number killed in those shootings. "

 

[2aguy]

You might want to read the report;
Firearm Purchaser Licensing Laws Linked to Fewer Fatal Mass Shootings

Researchers did claim licensing requirements like those in Connecticut help reduce the number of mass shootings, but their study omitted the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School in which 26 were killed at the school and another victim was killed in a private home.

In other words, a study which claims licensing reduces instances of mass shootings omitted one of the most often cited mass shootings in U.S. history, even though that shooting occurred in a licensing state.

Moreover, John Hopkins’ criteria for licensing laws allowed them to bypass Illinois which, in turn, allowed them to sidestep the never ending gun crime of Chicago.

But the study was clear there is no evidence tying “assault weapons” to a lower incidence of mass shootings.


So... where's your point?

They also did not include the Aurora Theater shooting, and the Sutherland Springs shooting....

Firearm Purchaser Licensing Laws Linked to Fewer Fatal Mass Shootings

Due to voluntary reporting policies, the FBI’s database did not include several high-profile mass shootings, including the 2012 Newtown, Connecticut, school shooting, 2012 Aurora, Colorado, movie theater shooting, and the 2017 Sutherland Springs, Texas, church shooting. The researchers addressed these gaps by using data from Stanford University’s Stanford Mass Shootings in America database and the Gun Violence Archive to identify 33 additional fatal mass shootings.



And then used the Gun Violence Archive......a biased, anti-gun source to fill in that data.....where they call any shooting a mass public shooting, even between gang members over dice games and girlfriends....which is not what the public understands to be a mass public shooting...

So they are lying...again...

This is why you can't trust anti-gun extremists........they have to lie in order to push their agenda...

The reason they left those shootings out? Because the shooters got their guns legally, or stole the gun, in the case of Sandy Hook..........which means they would have had a license for the gun....and still done the shooting....

And in all 3 shootings, magazine capacity had no bearing on the results.......and magazine capacity has no bearing on mass public shootings since the targets are gun free zones.......

And the shooters

and they never mentioned assault weapons, only Briebart did. One should never trust an article from Breibart.

And you are wrong....again.....

From the actual study.......notice how they use the words...."Assault weapon...."

Firearm Purchaser Licensing Laws Linked to Fewer Fatal Mass Shootings

Types of firearm laws examined in the study included regulation of civilian concealed carry; extensions of background check requirements at the point of sale for private transfers; prohibitions for non-felony violence, including restraining orders for domestic violence; assault weapon bans; and large-capacity magazine bans.

--------

In addition, the study did not find an independent association between assault weapon bans and the incidence of fatal mass shootings after controlling for the effects of bans on large-capacity magazines.

“

 

[2aguy]

A study released by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health declares there is no evidence “assault weapon” bans lead to a lower “incidence of fatal mass shootings.”

The push for an “assault weapons” ban is central to the Democrats’ gun control agenda nationally and is front and center for Democrats at the state level in places like Arizona and Virginia.

According to the Johns Hopkins study, researchers”did not find an independent association between assault weapon bans and the incidence of fatal mass shootings.”

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...ce-assault-weapon-bans-reduce-mass-shootings/
I guess the VA Democrats have their "study" - eh?

Everyone - including those who support these bans - already knew this, of course, as 'assault weapons' bans do nothing to reduce access to 'assault weapons' - people still have access to existing weapons as well as new weapons that are modified to not fall under the ban.

And so, you must ask yourself:
Why do people who know bans on 'assault weapons' do not, will not, and can not affect the incidence of mass shootings, still support said bans?

The study found the following:

- "the study did not find an independent association between assault weapon bans and the incidence of fatal mass shootings after controlling for the effects of bans on large-capacity magazines."

Which is a reference to other findings:

- "Firearm purchaser licensing laws that require an in-person application or fingerprinting are associated with an estimated 56 percent fewer fatal mass shootings in states that have them, according to a new study by researchers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health."

And:

-" The researchers also found evidence that laws banning large-capacity magazines, defined as those that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition, were associated with significant reductions in the rate of fatal mass shootings with four or more fatalities and the number killed in those shootings. "

And none of those findings pass the smell test........

 

[2aguy]

You might want to read the report;
Firearm Purchaser Licensing Laws Linked to Fewer Fatal Mass Shootings

Researchers did claim licensing requirements like those in Connecticut help reduce the number of mass shootings, but their study omitted the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School in which 26 were killed at the school and another victim was killed in a private home.

In other words, a study which claims licensing reduces instances of mass shootings omitted one of the most often cited mass shootings in U.S. history, even though that shooting occurred in a licensing state.

Moreover, John Hopkins’ criteria for licensing laws allowed them to bypass Illinois which, in turn, allowed them to sidestep the never ending gun crime of Chicago.

But the study was clear there is no evidence tying “assault weapons” to a lower incidence of mass shootings.


So... where's your point?

They also did not include the Aurora Theater shooting, and the Sutherland Springs shooting....

Firearm Purchaser Licensing Laws Linked to Fewer Fatal Mass Shootings

Due to voluntary reporting policies, the FBI’s database did not include several high-profile mass shootings, including the 2012 Newtown, Connecticut, school shooting, 2012 Aurora, Colorado, movie theater shooting, and the 2017 Sutherland Springs, Texas, church shooting. The researchers addressed these gaps by using data from Stanford University’s Stanford Mass Shootings in America database and the Gun Violence Archive to identify 33 additional fatal mass shootings.



And then used the Gun Violence Archive......a biased, anti-gun source to fill in that data.....where they call any shooting a mass public shooting, even between gang members over dice games and girlfriends....which is not what the public understands to be a mass public shooting...

So they are lying...again...

This is why you can't trust anti-gun extremists........they have to lie in order to push their agenda...

The reason they left those shootings out? Because the shooters got their guns legally, or stole the gun, in the case of Sandy Hook..........which means they would have had a license for the gun....and still done the shooting....

And in all 3 shootings, magazine capacity had no bearing on the results.......and magazine capacity has no bearing on mass public shootings since the targets are gun free zones.......

And the shooters

and they never mentioned assault weapons, only Briebart did. One should never trust an article from Breibart.

Hmmmm....the actual study..........you are wrong...again....

Error - Cookies Turned Off

during the years after the federal ban of assault weapons

-----

We found no evidence that concealed carry laws, assault weapons bans, prohibitions for domestic abusers and violent misdemeanants, or point‐of‐sale CBC laws were associated with the incidence of fatal mass shootings.

 

[M14 Shooter]

and they never mentioned assault weapons, only Briebart did.

This is a lie.

 

[2aguy]

You might want to read the report;
Firearm Purchaser Licensing Laws Linked to Fewer Fatal Mass Shootings

but you don't support stop and frisk, which is all this is

“After each horrible mass shooting, there are always policy debates on how they can be prevented,” says lead author Daniel Webster, ScD, MPH, director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research and Bloomberg Professor of American Health in Violence Prevention. “One side often calls for expanding background checks to private purchasers, and the other usually calls for fewer restrictions on civilian gun carrying. Our findings indicate that neither of those prescriptions are associated with lower rates of fatal mass shootings. What does appear to work to reduce mass shootings are licensing laws and laws banning large-capacity magazines.”
from the report.

------------------------------------------------
I have no issue with stop and frisk, but the cops got carried away as usual, and concentrated on the blacks and Hispanics.

Yeah.....and on the magazine capacity...they didn't actually say what you posted....

Error - Cookies Turned Off

and the point estimate for LCM bans suggests a large protective effect albeit with a wide confidence interval (IRR = 0.30, 95% CI .08, 1.10) that make inferences less certain.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

and they never mentioned assault weapons, only Briebart did.

This is a lie.

As is the Breitbart headline, via intentional half truth taken out of context.

 

[2aguy]

I want to know where it says assault weapons??

------------------------------------------ from the report:

In their analyses, researchers identified 604 mass shootings involving four or more victim fatalities; a total of 2,976 victims were killed in these incidents. Approximately 28 percent (842) of victim fatalities were from domestic-related shootings, 61 percent (2,057) were from non-domestic related shootings, and it was unclear among the remaining 11 percent (77) of victims whether the shooting was domestic-related. Most mass shootings had four to six victim fatalities.

Here.....more words arranged to spell...."Assault Weapons," in the actual study....

2.1 Sensitivity Analyses
The models that assumed gradual effects for bans of assault weapons and large capacity magazines produced somewhat different results (Tables A2–A4). The negative association between LCM bans and total fatal mass shootings (IRR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.42, 1.31) and the number of victims killed in mass shootings (IRR = 0.38, 95% CI 0.10, 1.44) was no longer statistically significant in the full model,

 

[2aguy]

A study released by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health declares there is no evidence “assault weapon” bans lead to a lower “incidence of fatal mass shootings.”

The push for an “assault weapons” ban is central to the Democrats’ gun control agenda nationally and is front and center for Democrats at the state level in places like Arizona and Virginia.

According to the Johns Hopkins study, researchers”did not find an independent association between assault weapon bans and the incidence of fatal mass shootings.”

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...ce-assault-weapon-bans-reduce-mass-shootings/
I guess the VA Democrats have their "study" - eh?

Everyone - including those who support these bans - already knew this, of course, as 'assault weapons' bans do nothing to reduce access to 'assault weapons' - people still have access to existing weapons as well as new weapons that are modified to not fall under the ban.

And so, you must ask yourself:
Why do people who know bans on 'assault weapons' do not, will not, and can not affect the incidence of mass shootings, still support said bans?

The study found the following:

- "the study did not find an independent association between assault weapon bans and the incidence of fatal mass shootings after controlling for the effects of bans on large-capacity magazines."

Which is a reference to other findings:

- "Firearm purchaser licensing laws that require an in-person application or fingerprinting are associated with an estimated 56 percent fewer fatal mass shootings in states that have them, according to a new study by researchers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health."

And:

-" The researchers also found evidence that laws banning large-capacity magazines, defined as those that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition, were associated with significant reductions in the rate of fatal mass shootings with four or more fatalities and the number killed in those shootings. "

Yeah...not so much...

the confidence intervals for the estimates expanded and the association between LCM bans and the incidence (.56, 95% CI .27, 1.16) and fatalities for all mass shootings (IRR = .37, 95% CI .11, 1.31) were no longer statistically significant at the .05 level (Table A5).

 

[2aguy]

You might want to read the report;
Firearm Purchaser Licensing Laws Linked to Fewer Fatal Mass Shootings

Researchers did claim licensing requirements like those in Connecticut help reduce the number of mass shootings, but their study omitted the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School in which 26 were killed at the school and another victim was killed in a private home.

In other words, a study which claims licensing reduces instances of mass shootings omitted one of the most often cited mass shootings in U.S. history, even though that shooting occurred in a licensing state.

Moreover, John Hopkins’ criteria for licensing laws allowed them to bypass Illinois which, in turn, allowed them to sidestep the never ending gun crime of Chicago.

But the study was clear there is no evidence tying “assault weapons” to a lower incidence of mass shootings.


So... where's your point?

It never said what type of weapon, but only talked about large capacity magazines.

Penelope :"It never said what type of weapon, but only talked about large capacity magazines."


And again, you are wrong......more from the actual study......

Error - Cookies Turned Off
Assault rifles are commonly used in mass shootings

-----

but that bans on assault weapons had no clear effects on either the incidence of mass shootings or on the incidence of victim fatalities from mass shootings.

 

[2aguy]

and they never mentioned assault weapons, only Briebart did.

This is a lie.

As is the Breitbart headline, via intentional half truth taken out of context.

You are Wrong....as I have just posted from the actual study that shows exactly that....

The Breitbart Headline.....

Johns Hopkins Study: No Evidence ‘Assault Weapon’ Bans Reduce Mass Shootings

From the actual study...

Evidence concerning the regulation of firearms design, sale, and carrying on fatal mass shootings in the United States
Daniel W. Webster

Alexander D. McCourt

Cassandra K. Crifasi

Marisa D. Booty

Elizabeth A. Stuart


but that bans on assault weapons had no clear effects on either the incidence of mass shootings or on the incidence of victim fatalities from mass shootings.

 

[Mac-7]

You might want to read the report;
Firearm Purchaser Licensing Laws Linked to Fewer Fatal Mass Shootings

Has anyone done a study on the relationship to a womans right to choose and fetal deaths i.e. children who die before birth?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You might want to read the report;
Firearm Purchaser Licensing Laws Linked to Fewer Fatal Mass Shootings

Has anyone done a study on the relationship to a womans right to choose and fetal deaths i.e. children who die before birth?

Try to focus, shaman.

 

[Mac-7]

You might want to read the report;
Firearm Purchaser Licensing Laws Linked to Fewer Fatal Mass Shootings

Has anyone done a study on the relationship to a womans right to choose and fetal deaths i.e. children who die before birth?

Try to focus, shaman.

There is a relationship

this topic is about preventing innocent deaths and the willingness of liberals to ignore constitutional rights

So who is more innocent than a unborn child?

 

[Penelope]

You might want to read the report;
Firearm Purchaser Licensing Laws Linked to Fewer Fatal Mass Shootings

Researchers did claim licensing requirements like those in Connecticut help reduce the number of mass shootings, but their study omitted the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School in which 26 were killed at the school and another victim was killed in a private home.

In other words, a study which claims licensing reduces instances of mass shootings omitted one of the most often cited mass shootings in U.S. history, even though that shooting occurred in a licensing state.

Moreover, John Hopkins’ criteria for licensing laws allowed them to bypass Illinois which, in turn, allowed them to sidestep the never ending gun crime of Chicago.

But the study was clear there is no evidence tying “assault weapons” to a lower incidence of mass shootings.


So... where's your point?

It never said what type of weapon, but only talked about large capacity magazines.

Penelope :"It never said what type of weapon, but only talked about large capacity magazines."


And again, you are wrong......more from the actual study......

Error - Cookies Turned Off
Assault rifles are commonly used in mass shootings

-----

but that bans on assault weapons had no clear effects on either the incidence of mass shootings or on the incidence of victim fatalities from mass shootings.

Not mass shootings of 4-6 people as said in the report. The report said nothing about assault weapons.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The report said nothing about assault weapons.

It does not matter how many times you repeat this lie, it remains a lie.

 

[2aguy]

You might want to read the report;
Firearm Purchaser Licensing Laws Linked to Fewer Fatal Mass Shootings

Researchers did claim licensing requirements like those in Connecticut help reduce the number of mass shootings, but their study omitted the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School in which 26 were killed at the school and another victim was killed in a private home.

In other words, a study which claims licensing reduces instances of mass shootings omitted one of the most often cited mass shootings in U.S. history, even though that shooting occurred in a licensing state.

Moreover, John Hopkins’ criteria for licensing laws allowed them to bypass Illinois which, in turn, allowed them to sidestep the never ending gun crime of Chicago.

But the study was clear there is no evidence tying “assault weapons” to a lower incidence of mass shootings.


So... where's your point?

It never said what type of weapon, but only talked about large capacity magazines.

Penelope :"It never said what type of weapon, but only talked about large capacity magazines."


And again, you are wrong......more from the actual study......

Error - Cookies Turned Off
Assault rifles are commonly used in mass shootings

-----

but that bans on assault weapons had no clear effects on either the incidence of mass shootings or on the incidence of victim fatalities from mass shootings.

Not mass shootings of 4-6 people as said in the report. The report said nothing about assault weapons.

Moron......I just quoted directly from the actual report..........are you this dumb?



From the actual study...

Evidence concerning the regulation of firearms design, sale, and carrying on fatal mass shootings in the United States
Daniel W. Webster

Alexander D. McCourt

Cassandra K. Crifasi

Marisa D. Booty

Elizabeth A. Stuart


but that bans on assault weapons had no clear effects on either the incidence of mass shootings or on the incidence of victim fatalities from mass shootings.

 

[Penelope]

You might want to read the report;
Firearm Purchaser Licensing Laws Linked to Fewer Fatal Mass Shootings

Researchers did claim licensing requirements like those in Connecticut help reduce the number of mass shootings, but their study omitted the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School in which 26 were killed at the school and another victim was killed in a private home.

In other words, a study which claims licensing reduces instances of mass shootings omitted one of the most often cited mass shootings in U.S. history, even though that shooting occurred in a licensing state.

Moreover, John Hopkins’ criteria for licensing laws allowed them to bypass Illinois which, in turn, allowed them to sidestep the never ending gun crime of Chicago.

But the study was clear there is no evidence tying “assault weapons” to a lower incidence of mass shootings.


So... where's your point?

It never said what type of weapon, but only talked about large capacity magazines.

Penelope :"It never said what type of weapon, but only talked about large capacity magazines."


And again, you are wrong......more from the actual study......

Error - Cookies Turned Off
Assault rifles are commonly used in mass shootings

-----

but that bans on assault weapons had no clear effects on either the incidence of mass shootings or on the incidence of victim fatalities from mass shootings.

Not mass shootings of 4-6 people as said in the report. The report said nothing about assault weapons.

Moron......I just quoted directly from the actual report..........are you this dumb?



From the actual study...

Evidence concerning the regulation of firearms design, sale, and carrying on fatal mass shootings in the United States
Daniel W. Webster

Alexander D. McCourt

Cassandra K. Crifasi

Marisa D. Booty

Elizabeth A. Stuart


but that bans on assault weapons had no clear effects on either the incidence of mass shootings or on the incidence of victim fatalities from mass shootings.

Well the report never said "assault weapons". It didn't even mention what type of gun, only the magazine.

Previous research shows that firearm purchaser licensing laws are associated with reductions in rates of firearm homicides and suicides.

------------------------------------
Now if you are a law abiding citizen it shouldn't be an issue any regulations. its false the Democrats want to take your gun away, the republicans always say this.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Now if you are a law abiding citizen it shouldn't be an issue any regulations.

And you should be OK with the government wiretapping your prone and searching your house w/o a warrant

its false the Democrats want to take your gun away, the republicans always say this.

And yet, there are innumerable examples of Democrats saying they want to do just that.

 

[2aguy]

Researchers did claim licensing requirements like those in Connecticut help reduce the number of mass shootings, but their study omitted the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School in which 26 were killed at the school and another victim was killed in a private home.

In other words, a study which claims licensing reduces instances of mass shootings omitted one of the most often cited mass shootings in U.S. history, even though that shooting occurred in a licensing state.

Moreover, John Hopkins’ criteria for licensing laws allowed them to bypass Illinois which, in turn, allowed them to sidestep the never ending gun crime of Chicago.

But the study was clear there is no evidence tying “assault weapons” to a lower incidence of mass shootings.


So... where's your point?

It never said what type of weapon, but only talked about large capacity magazines.

Penelope :"It never said what type of weapon, but only talked about large capacity magazines."


And again, you are wrong......more from the actual study......

Error - Cookies Turned Off
Assault rifles are commonly used in mass shootings

-----

but that bans on assault weapons had no clear effects on either the incidence of mass shootings or on the incidence of victim fatalities from mass shootings.

Not mass shootings of 4-6 people as said in the report. The report said nothing about assault weapons.

Moron......I just quoted directly from the actual report..........are you this dumb?



From the actual study...

Evidence concerning the regulation of firearms design, sale, and carrying on fatal mass shootings in the United States
Daniel W. Webster

Alexander D. McCourt

Cassandra K. Crifasi

Marisa D. Booty

Elizabeth A. Stuart


but that bans on assault weapons had no clear effects on either the incidence of mass shootings or on the incidence of victim fatalities from mass shootings.

Well the report never said "assault weapons". It didn't even mention what type of gun, only the magazine.

Previous research shows that firearm purchaser licensing laws are associated with reductions in rates of firearm homicides and suicides.

------------------------------------
Now if you are a law abiding citizen it shouldn't be an issue any regulations. its false the Democrats want to take your gun away, the republicans always say this.

Again....I went and found the actual report.........and quoted directly from that report.....it used "Assault Weapon," all over the place, as you can see from the quotes....

The democrats have stated they want to ban all semi-automatic weapons.....they did so in public at the CNN townhall.......and their candidates are saying it.....as are the democrats in Virginia.