How to reduce violent crime, if that is the actual goal, and it doesn't involve banning guns for normal people.

[2aguy]

Except the numbers I just laid out for you that you clearly didn't understand.

Okay, make it simple for you.

200 justified homicides by civilians with guns according to the FBI.

Expanded Homicide

ucr.fbi.gov

And about half the homicides are done by people who are known to the victim.

Meanwhile, we have 19,500 gun homicides, and 24,000 gun suicides a year. Not to mention 486 accidents. Which means using the above table, all of the suicides and 41% of the homicides were with a gun in the home. So the ratio of guns in the home killing people is 32481 (7995 domestic homicides, and 24,000 suicides and 486 accidents) to 200 homicides. So that number actually comes out to a gun in the home being 162 times more likely to kill a household member or acquaintance than a bad guy.

Guns in the United States — Firearms, gun law and gun control

Gun law, gun control statistics, number of guns in United States, gun deaths, firearm facts and policy, armed violence, public health and development

www.gunpolicy.org

That assumes that of the 49% where relationships between killer and victim are unknown are truly by strangers, which is unlikely.

Yes....criminals, who should be in jail, who are drunk or high murder family members too....you doofus...and the biggest one is unknown, meaning drug gangs...you idiot.

 

[2aguy]

Actually, it really doesn't.

MYTH: Gangs are responsible for most U.S. homicides - GVPedia

FACT: A 2020 study by the CDC found that 9.7% of homicides in 2017 were gang-related.

www.gvpedia.org

Contrary to Lott’s repeated claim that the U.S. has a relatively high homicide rate because of “drug gangs,” most gun homicides are not related to gang activity. According to the National Gang Center, the government agency responsible for cataloging gang violence, there was an average of fewer than 2,000 gang homicides annually from 2007 to 2012. During roughly the same time period (2007 to 2011), the Federal Bureau of Investigation estimated an average of more than 15,500 homicides annually across the United States, indicating that gang-related homicides were approximately 13% total homicides annually. The Bureau of Justice Statistics finds the number of gang-related homicides to be even lower. In 2008, the government agency identified 960 homicides, accounting for 6% of all homicides that year.

According to the Federal Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), there was a 3% increase in the number of gangs between 2010 and 2011, but gang-related homicides decreased 8% during the same period. If gang violence was truly driving the homicide rate, gang membership and gun homicide rates would move in the same direction.

A December 2020 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) report of 34 states, four California counties, and Washington, D.C., found that gang-related attacks were responsible for 11.4% of male homicides and 3.6% of female homicides in 2017, for 9.7% of overall homicides. The previous year, 7.4% of all homicides were gang-related.

A 2012 CDC study examining five cities with the largest gang problems found a total of 856 gang homicides compared to 2,077 non-gang homicides from 2003–2008. Even when examining cities with the largest gang problems, gang homicides only accounted for 29% of homicides. Contrary to Lott’s claim that the illegal drug trade is fueling US gun violence, the study also says “the proportion of gang homicides resulting from drug trade/use or with other crimes in progress was consistently low in the five cities, ranging from zero to 25 percent.”

And as Criminologist Gary Kleck pointed out in my link....you idiot...

Probably the best of a bad lot was the famous Arthur Kellermann study from 1993 in the New England Journal of Medicine. All the rest are even worse, but at least he controlled for a few possible confounding factors. But he withheld one crucial piece of information from his readers. He knew that virtually none of the people who had been murdered while having a gun in their home had actually been killed with the gun that belonged to someone in the home. They were almost always killed by someone from outside the home, presumably using their own gun, brought in from outside the home. So whether the victims had a gun of their own in the house had absolutely nothing to do with the event. And Kellermann withheld that information, and a lot of people noticed the problem right away. There were even letters to the editor of the journal asking “what gives,” and he responded with a very evasive answer in his reply to the letters.
The problem became inadvertently evident a few years later when he did another study with overlapping samples, where it became evident that he did have that information, and he knew perfectly well that people are rarely murdered with a gun belonging to someone in their own household.
It’s not usually domestic violence when people are murdered in their home. Instead, it’s more likely to be something like a crack dealer sells drugs out of his own home, and a customer comes in and kills him because he wants to get the drugs and not pay for them. That’s a little more typical of people killed while having a gun in their own home, but, of course, the customer brought in his own gun to murder the dealer.
-----

Gangs and Violence​

Armstrong: Let’s turn to questions of where crime is coming from in our country. How much violent crime takes place in the subset of the population we would typically associate with the gang culture?
Kleck: In places like Chicago or Los Angeles, it’s a huge fraction of it. It varies enormously from place to place. It may well be that half or more of the gun homicides in those cities are gang related. But in most places in America, it’s a somewhat more modest fraction.


We don’t have national figures that are of any use. For what it’s worth, in the FBI uniform crime reports data, they do have a category for the circumstance in which the crime was committed.

One possible box that local police can check in filling out the homicide reports for the FBI could indeed be for gang-related. But the problem is that the FBI forms require police to check just one circumstance.

So if a guy belongs to a gang, and he was selling drugs, and he has a dispute with his customer over the price, and then they get into an argument and one shoots the other, that could go into any of three or four different categories, only one of which is gang-related. So those data are useless.


What we’re stuck with are local estimates, and, as I say, it varies enormously from one locality to another. It’s a huge percentage in a couple of cities. Chicago and Los Angeles have really bad street-gang problems. On the other hand, in Peoria it’s probably a relatively small fraction, certainly well under half.

Criminologist Gary Kleck on Guns, Crime, and Their Study - Ari Armstrong

Youtube interview.....

Kleck on anti-gun methods in research, talks about finding gun use

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Why would they know each other. Not that it matters, according to the Federal government, only 2000 or so homicides a year are "Gang related out of some 25,000 a year.

More likely scenario

Man shoots wife for burning the pot roast.

Man shoots neighbor for dog shitting on lawn'

Man looses job and annihilates family.

You know, stuff that happens because people who have no business owning guns have them.

How do you loose a job, you illiterate piece of shit?

 

[JoeB131]

Yes....criminals, who should be in jail, who are drunk or high murder family members too....you doofus...and the biggest one is unknown, meaning drug gangs...you idiot.

Okay, then let's make it easy. Let's make it REALLY HARD to get a gun, so that if you have a substance abuse problem or a minor criminal records or your teachers report you were trouble, you can't get one.

When I applied for my Mortgage, they investigated every aspect of my financial life for 30 days and had me fill out a bunch of paperwork, even though I had previously complied with five mortgages or home equity loans, and currently had ZERO credit card debt. They checked out every aspect of my life.

We should do that with gun owners. If you really want a gun, we should talk to your employer, your neighbors and your family, check out everything you did in your life, to make sure you aren't the kind of guy who is going to shoot the neighbor because his dog shit on your lawn.

The problem is, of course, that the hard core ammosexuals make up 50% of gun sales, and they really wouldn't stand up to any kind of psychological scrutiny.

How do you loose a job, you illiterate piece of shit?

Yup, fixate on a typo when you don't have an argument.

 

[alang1216]

My statement stands.
Disagree?
Demonstrate that my exercise of my right to keep and bear arms harms you or places you in a condition of clear, present and immediate danger..

I don't know you. You might be a criminal or a terrorist or a loon. I don't know if you are a threat and I feel I need to to protect my family.

 

[alang1216]

And since normal gun owners don't point their guns at you....

I agree but if I see you walking around with a gun, how do I know you are normal and not about to point a gun at me?

 

[M14 Shooter]

I don't know you. You might be a criminal or a terrorist or a loon. I don't know if you are a threat and I feel I need to to protect my family.

In other words, you cannot demonstrate the harm I cause, or the clear, present, and immediate threa threat I pose.
Thus:
As my exercise of the right to keep and bear arms doesn't affect any of that, we're good.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I agree but if I see you walking around with a gun, how do I know you are normal and not about to point a gun at me?

Is it legal for the citizenry to carry a gun in your state?
Yes?
You have two choices
Act on your irrational fears, or not.

 

[alang1216]

In other words, you cannot demonstrate the harm I cause, or the clear, present, and immediate threa threat I pose.

Neither can you demonstrate that you are mature, rational, law-abiding, and know how to use a gun safely.

Thus:
As my exercise of the right to keep and bear arms doesn't affect any of that, we're good.

EVERY right comes with restrictions. The only point up for debate is what those restrictions should be.

 

[alang1216]

Is it legal for the citizenry to carry a gun in your state?
Yes?
You have two choices
Act on your irrational fears, or not.

I don't agree my fears are irrational. People get killed by guns every day. But I will act on my fears and support rational gun regulations.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I don't agree my fears are irrational. People get killed by guns every day.

<28 firearms were used to murder someone yesterday.
How many were not?
Your fear: Irrational.

But I will act on my fears and support rational gun regulations.

The (D)ishonest prey upon the emotions of the ignorant because they know it works.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Neither can you demonstrate that you are mature, rational, law-abiding, and know how to use a gun safely.

You claim my exercise of the right to keep and bear arms harms you or places you in a condtition of clear, present and immediate danger -- thus, my right should be restricted.
Burden of proof lies with you, and you cannot meet it.

EVERY right comes with restrictions. The only point up for debate is what those restrictions should be.

Restrictions on rights are based on the harm caused to others, or the placement of others in a condition of clear, present and immediate danger. Thus far, you have not made any demonstration to that effect.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Okay, then let's make it easy. Let's make it REALLY HARD to get a gun, so that if you have a substance abuse problem or a minor criminal records or your teachers report you were trouble, you can't get one.

When I applied for my Mortgage, they investigated every aspect of my financial life for 30 days and had me fill out a bunch of paperwork, even though I had previously complied with five mortgages or home equity loans, and currently had ZERO credit card debt. They checked out every aspect of my life.

We should do that with gun owners. If you really want a gun, we should talk to your employer, your neighbors and your family, check out everything you did in your life, to make sure you aren't the kind of guy who is going to shoot the neighbor because his dog shit on your lawn.

The problem is, of course, that the hard core ammosexuals make up 50% of gun sales, and they really wouldn't stand up to any kind of psychological scrutiny.


Yup, fixate on a typo when you don't have an argument.

You consistently make mistakes like that because you are functionally illiterate. Your argument is a violation of the 2nd Amendment.

 

[alang1216]

<28 firearms were used to murder someone yesterday.
How many were not?
Your fear: Irrational.

The (D)ishonest prey upon the emotions of the ignorant because they know it works.

So over the course of my lifetime, I figure I have a 2% chance of having someone in my family killed by a gun. Doesn't seem like an irrational fear to me.

 

[M14 Shooter]

So over the course of my lifetime, I figure I have a 2% chance of having someone in my family killed by a gun.

I can make numbers up, too.

Doesn't seem like an irrational fear to me.

Because your irrational fear does not allow you to process facts to the contrary.

 

[alang1216]

You claim my exercise of the right to keep and bear arms harms you or places you in a condtition of clear, present and immediate danger -- thus, my right should be restricted.
Burden of proof lies with you, and you cannot meet it.

Restrictions on rights are based on the harm caused to others, or the placement of others in a condition of clear, present and immediate danger. Thus far, you have not made any demonstration to that effect.

Firearm homicides​

• Number of deaths: 20,958
• Deaths per 100,000 population: 6.3

 

[M14 Shooter]

Firearm homicides​

• Number of deaths: 20,958
• Deaths per 100,000 population: 6.3

20958 is an imaginary number.
The FBI lists about 10500 firearm related homicides per year.

With regard to the fact that restrictions on rights are based on the harm caused to others, or the placement of others in a condition of clear, present and immediate danger...
What do you think this proves, and why?

 

[alang1216]

20958 is an imaginary number.
The FBI lists about 10500 firearm related homicides per year.

With regard to the fact that restrictions on rights are based on the harm caused to others, or the placement of others in a condition of clear, present and immediate danger...
What do you think this proves, and why?

Guns kill people, I'm a people. Some people should not have guns do you dispute that? Do you have a plan to keep guns away from those that should not have them?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Guns kill people, I'm a people.

How does this demonstrate my exercise of the right to own a gun harms you or places you in a condition of clear, present, and immediate danger?

 

[alang1216]

How does this demonstrate my exercise of the right to own a gun harms you or places you in a condition of clear, present, and immediate danger?

You can't demonstrate my owning a nuclear weapon harms you or places you in a condition of clear, present, and immediate danger, can you?