ANOTHER mass shooting? TIme to grow up folks; HOW do we address this?

[Dick Tuck]

I'm not talking about self-defense, justifiable homicide. I'm talking about illegal handgun murders. The murder rates I used, come from the FBI Uniform Crime Statistics. Mississippi, Louisiana, and South Carolina lead the nation in handgun murder rates. Those three states, also have among the highest percentage of handgun ownership.

Here's another bit of news for you. Most murders are the result of domestic arguments, and not in the commission of other crimes.

I doubt MS, LA, and SC lead the nation in handgun murders. Flint and Detroit can probably beat each of them. I think you are referring to a percentage rate. You also switched from illegal handgun murders to handgun murder rate. Not the same. Try again?

They do lead the country in murder RATES, which is what I said. Totals make no sense, when talking about crime.

The murder rate in Louisiana is 7.75 per 100,000, while New York is 2.64. As for cities, how can we compare them in any reasonable way. I'm sure that cities have higher homicide rates. I'm also sure that criminal on criminal murder is the most dominant form in cities.

In any case, the argument that handgun ownership reduces or deters crime is bullshit. The armed robbery rate in Texas, for example, is 64.57 per 100,000 while in New York it's 12.97. That's almost a 5 to 1 difference.

 

[saveliberty]

Don't suppose distance to a crime ridden country has ANY part in that?

 

[Dick Tuck]

Don't suppose distance to a crime ridden country has ANY part in that?

It may, yet New Mexico has half the rate of armed robberies than Texas and a much lower rate than South Carolina. In any case, one can't discount easy access to handguns being a significant factor. But the argument remains that the contention that being more armed makes us safer is a myth.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Don't suppose distance to a crime ridden country has ANY part in that?

It may, yet New Mexico has half the rate of armed robberies than Texas and a much lower rate than South Carolina. In any case, one can't discount easy access to handguns being a significant factor. But the argument remains that the contention that being more armed makes us safer is a myth.

I'd rather be armed when some asshole breaks into my house than unarmed.

 

[Dick Tuck]

Don't suppose distance to a crime ridden country has ANY part in that?

It may, yet New Mexico has half the rate of armed robberies than Texas and a much lower rate than South Carolina. In any case, one can't discount easy access to handguns being a significant factor. But the argument remains that the contention that being more armed makes us safer is a myth.

I'd rather be armed when some asshole breaks into my house than unarmed.

So would I, but the facts show that it doesn't make me really safer.

 

[bripat9643]

Don't suppose distance to a crime ridden country has ANY part in that?

It may, yet New Mexico has half the rate of armed robberies than Texas and a much lower rate than South Carolina. In any case, one can't discount easy access to handguns being a significant factor. But the argument remains that the contention that being more armed makes us safer is a myth.

The fact is that in every state where shall-issue concealed carry permit laws have been passed, the crime rate has gone down dramatically.

Current rates for armed robbery and other crimes in various states are the result of historical societal factors, not the presence of guns.

 

[bripat9643]

It may, yet New Mexico has half the rate of armed robberies than Texas and a much lower rate than South Carolina. In any case, one can't discount easy access to handguns being a significant factor. But the argument remains that the contention that being more armed makes us safer is a myth.

I'd rather be armed when some asshole breaks into my house than unarmed.

So would I, but the facts show that it doesn't make me really safer.

The facts show precisely the opposite. 2 million crimes are prevented every year by people with guns

 

[Dick Tuck]

Don't suppose distance to a crime ridden country has ANY part in that?

It may, yet New Mexico has half the rate of armed robberies than Texas and a much lower rate than South Carolina. In any case, one can't discount easy access to handguns being a significant factor. But the argument remains that the contention that being more armed makes us safer is a myth.

The fact is that in every state where shall-issue concealed carry permit laws have been passed, the crime rate has gone down dramatically.

Current rates for armed robbery and other crimes in various states are the result of historical societal factors, not the presence of guns.

Proof? The fact remains that states which have higher rates of handgun ownership also have higher rates of armed robberies and murders.

You are aware that over half of gun deaths in the US are suicides?

 

[bripat9643]

It may, yet New Mexico has half the rate of armed robberies than Texas and a much lower rate than South Carolina. In any case, one can't discount easy access to handguns being a significant factor. But the argument remains that the contention that being more armed makes us safer is a myth.

The fact is that in every state where shall-issue concealed carry permit laws have been passed, the crime rate has gone down dramatically.

Current rates for armed robbery and other crimes in various states are the result of historical societal factors, not the presence of guns.

Proof? The fact remains that states which have higher rates of handgun ownership also have higher rates of armed robberies and murders.

You are aware that over half of gun deaths in the US are suicides?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=6499951

* A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 0.5% of households had members who had used a gun for defense during a situation in which they thought someone "almost certainly would have been killed" if they "had not used a gun for protection." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 162,000 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard."[12]

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

* A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 3.5% of households had members who had used a gun "for self-protection or for the protection of property at home, work, or elsewhere." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 1,029,615 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard."[19]

* A 1994 survey conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that Americans use guns to frighten away intruders who are breaking into their homes about 498,000 times per year.[20]

* A 1982 survey of male felons in 11 state prisons dispersed across the U.S. found:[21]

• 34% had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"
• 40% had decided not to commit a crime because they "knew or believed that the victim was carrying a gun"
• 69% personally knew other criminals who had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"[22]

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

I'm not talking about self-defense, justifiable homicide. I'm talking about illegal handgun murders. The murder rates I used, come from the FBI Uniform Crime Statistics. Mississippi, Louisiana, and South Carolina lead the nation in handgun murder rates. Those three states, also have among the highest percentage of handgun ownership.

Here's another bit of news for you. Most murders are the result of domestic arguments, and not in the commission of other crimes.

I doubt MS, LA, and SC lead the nation in handgun murders. Flint and Detroit can probably beat each of them. I think you are referring to a percentage rate. You also switched from illegal handgun murders to handgun murder rate. Not the same. Try again?

They do lead the country in murder RATES, which is what I said. Totals make no sense, when talking about crime.

The murder rate in Louisiana is 7.75 per 100,000, while New York is 2.64. As for cities, how can we compare them in any reasonable way. I'm sure that cities have higher homicide rates. I'm also sure that criminal on criminal murder is the most dominant form in cities.

In any case, the argument that handgun ownership reduces or deters crime is bullshit. The armed robbery rate in Texas, for example, is 64.57 per 100,000 while in New York it's 12.97. That's almost a 5 to 1 difference.

The murder rate here in LA is due primarily to the murder rate in New Orleans wich in turn is due primarily to a few low income areas like Central City, the Lower Nine, etc. and in turn, almost all of the weapons used were illegally obtained and/or held by persons who cannot legally possess a firearm.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Why do people NEED guns? Hunting and sport are wants, not needs. Not in this day and age.

We don't need cars either. Certainly not cars that do 120 mph. But you support that. THINK

But cars are needed. You said it yourself. Now try and answer why anyone NEEDS a gun.

Would the anyone who needs a gun include police? How about the woman whose boyfriend is beating her up, has threatened to kill her, and the police cannot afford to sit outside her bedroom 24/7 to protect her, does she need a gun? Does the fact that you think you are Batman somehow justify your argument that no one else on the planet needs a gun?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Why do people NEED guns? Hunting and sport are wants, not needs. Not in this day and age.

No one has to hunt anymore? Seriously?

Is that the best you can come up with? That only reinforces my point that we can easily restrict gun ownership much more tightly to those who need a weapon for hunting.

That was far from the best I could do, it was also far more serious than your question deserved.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

But cars are needed. You said it yourself. Now try and answer why anyone NEEDS a gun.

Why do you need a TV? Computer? Dishwasher? Knives?

Seriously? You don't know the function of those devices? I wasn't aware that dishwashers were used to easily murder people. This is obviously a conversation that is a bit beyond your capabilities.

What we need is a moral base in this country that has definitely been eroded over the last 3 decades or so. As America moves away from a belief in God we become morally corrupt and wonder why.

LOL, right, because no one has ever been killed in the name of god.

Jesus, you are the bottom of the barrel, aren't you.

You only want to ban objects that you think make it easy to murder people, that is so much less stupid than I thought. All we have to do is get rid of TVs, because they can watch shows that show how to murder people, computers, because they can look up ways to murder people, and knives, because they can actually be used to murder people, but we can still keep dishwashers, because you are too stupid to figure out placing a supply of sodium inside a dishwasher and setting the timer makes it pretty easy to use a dishwasher to commit murder.

 

[Dick Tuck]

The fact is that in every state where shall-issue concealed carry permit laws have been passed, the crime rate has gone down dramatically.

Current rates for armed robbery and other crimes in various states are the result of historical societal factors, not the presence of guns.

Proof? The fact remains that states which have higher rates of handgun ownership also have higher rates of armed robberies and murders.

You are aware that over half of gun deaths in the US are suicides?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=6499951

* A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 0.5% of households had members who had used a gun for defense during a situation in which they thought someone "almost certainly would have been killed" if they "had not used a gun for protection." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 162,000 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard."[12]

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

* A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 3.5% of households had members who had used a gun "for self-protection or for the protection of property at home, work, or elsewhere." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 1,029,615 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard."[19]

* A 1994 survey conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that Americans use guns to frighten away intruders who are breaking into their homes about 498,000 times per year.[20]

* A 1982 survey of male felons in 11 state prisons dispersed across the U.S. found:[21]

• 34% had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"
• 40% had decided not to commit a crime because they "knew or believed that the victim was carrying a gun"
• 69% personally knew other criminals who had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"[22]

The Kleck Study, aside from being 17 years old, is deeply flawed. His oversampling of the Southeast, and extrapolating the unweighted numbers for the entire population is it's major flaw. In many cases, he did not distinguish whether the other gun was being carried by law enforcement or an individual. He also had flawed questions, which made it easier for an interviewee to claim they stopped a crime, when they were the likely aggressor.

Two other studies looked at Kleck's study and came up with completely different results, once his bias was removed.

You claimed that those states which reduced requirements for conceal laws showed a drop in violent gun related crime. I can see that New York had a 11.2% drop in murders, while your own state showed no reduction between 2010 and 2011. So yes, you're pointing to an old flawed study, does not prove the claim you made, and the facts dispute it. I think you're full of shit.

Source: FBI — Table 4

 

[Quantum Windbag]

People who want to own firearms should undergo a thorough background check. Noone should be able to buy firearms at gun shows, auctions only at a licensed dealership and never without a background check.

Anyone who owns a gun now should have to submit to a background check and be licensed. Either that or give up their guns. If they resist, they should be fined heavily and then give up their guns.

If you live with someone who is mentally ill, no guns.

Can we also wet it up that people who live with mentally ill relatives also lose their cars and knives? After all, we need to make sure that no mentally ill person gets behind the wheel of a car and uses it to mow down a bunch of kids on a playground, and we all know that crazy people can use a knife to kill people.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Sarah G is repeating a myth
Here in North Carolina we do back ground checks for purchase permits, and even for gun shows so shut the fuck up.
If you live with someone who is mentally ill the person should be in a mental institution. Why do you support allowing mentally ill people out on the streets?

40% of all gun purchases in the US have no background checks. They're mostly from private sales.

As for your suggestion that we involuntarily incarcerate anyone with a mental illness shows what a pathetic little Nazi you are.

Private sales are fine because no one is going to sale a gun to someone they don't know, unless the gun is sold on the street and chance are the gun was stolen is the first place which would make it illegal to have.
So all in all back ground checks are still done if I sale a gun to someone I already know their background and the government doesn't need to know.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

So shithead...when you ban all gun sales, then every gun sale after that won't involve a single background check....and odds are the criminals will buy more weapons than good people.

Maybe you do want the criminals to overpower innocent people....

40% of all gun purchases in the US have no background checks. They're mostly from private sales.

As for your suggestion that we involuntarily incarcerate anyone with a mental illness shows what a pathetic little Nazi you are.

Sorry, you lying little ass suck, but nowhere did I suggest banning guns. And thousands of "good people" every day go through background checks, when they purchase from a licensed dealer. And I'm sure thousands of criminals also purchase firearms from "good people" without having to go through a background check.

You are a fucking loon.

Wrong
I already explained it too you.

 

[Freewill]

I would think that in my area a lot of home break ins are deterred because most everyone hunts or did hunt thus they owe a gun. At least break ins when people are home. How one would measure that deterrence factor would be any one's guess.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

People who want to own firearms should undergo a thorough background check. Noone should be able to buy firearms at gun shows, auctions only at a licensed dealership and never without a background check.

Anyone who owns a gun now should have to submit to a background check and be licensed. Either that or give up their guns. If they resist, they should be fined heavily and then give up their guns.

If you live with someone who is mentally ill, no guns.

Sarah G is repeating a myth
Here in North Carolina we do back ground checks for purchase permits, and even for gun shows so shut the fuck up.
If you live with someone who is mentally ill the person should be in a mental institution. Why do you support allowing mentally ill people out on the streets?

Most states require background checks for all licensed dealers no matter where they sell their guns, the so called gun show loophole applies only private citizens that sell their guns. The reason for that is rather simple, no one wants to give every Tom, Dick, and Harry access to law enforcement databases so they can use them to look up the addresses of people they are obsessed with.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Well, now we have it. The 'Conservatives' on this board are just fine with twenty little children being gunned down. Just don't breath a word that the availability of the weopons might be part of the problem. And the sick psychology of the worship of guns by the far right.

They're always on the wrong side of the issues Americans care about.

Just because they are on a different side than you does not make them wrong.