Reply With Quote
I blame the video games and AR-15's.And mass killings actually reached their peak in 1929
Those who study mass shootings say they are not becoming more common:
http://www.reflector.com/greenville-...common-1565067"There is no pattern, there is no increase," says criminologist James Allen Fox of Boston's Northeastern University, who has been studying the subject since the 1980s, spurred by a rash of mass shootings in post offices.
The random mass shootings that get the most media attention are the rarest, Fox says. Most people who die of bullet wounds knew the iden y of their killer.
Society moves on, he says, because of our ability to distance ourselves from the horror of the day, and because people believe that these tragedies are "one of the unfortunate prices we pay for our freedoms."
Grant Duwe, a criminologist with the Minnesota Department of Corrections who has written a history of mass murders in America, said that while mass shootings rose between the 1960s and the 1990s, they actually dropped in the 2000s. And mass killings actually reached their peak in 1929, according to his data. He estimates that there were 32 in the 1980s, 42 in the 1990s and 26 in the first decade of the century.
Chances of being killed in a mass shooting, he says, are probably no greater than being struck by lightning.
.
I blame the video games and AR-15's.And mass killings actually reached their peak in 1929
Cmon Fuzzy, come and take your Lumps. Show us your internet honor.
It's nice to see that the gun homicides per capita went down significantly following the passage of the Brady Bill in 1993 and the assault ban in 1994. Curious why you didn't go back to 1993 on all the figures.
DOJ
Rate of Homicide per 100,000 People (any method)
ChartIn the United States, the annual rate of homicide by any means per 100,000 population is
2010: 4.67
2009: 4.965
2008: 5.35
2007: 5.61
2006: 5.70
2005: 5.66
2004: 5.51
2003: 5.69
2002: 5.64
2001: 5.63
2000: 5.52
1999: 4.556 7
1998: 5.19
1997: 6.77
1996: 7.3
1995: 8.1
1993: 9.939
Compare
Number of Gun Homicides
ChartIn the United States, annual firearm homicides total
2009: 9,1467
2008: 9,48410 7
2007: 10,129
2006: 10,225
2005: 10,158
2004: 9,385
2003: 9,6597
2002: 9,36911
2001: 8,890
1999: 8,2596
1998: 9,257
Compare
Rate of Gun Homicide per 100,000 People
ChartIn the United States, the annual rate of firearm homicide per 100,000 population is
2009: 2.985 7
2008: 3.12
2007: 3.36
2006: 3.42
2005: 3.43
2004: 3.20
2003: 3.37
2002: 3.2511
2001: 3.12
1999: 2.976
1998: 3.37
1993: 7.0712
gunpolicy.org
http://www.gallup.com/poll/150353/se...hest-1993.aspx
I was watching the game. I am not here at your beck and call, putz.
Lets talk Britain and Australia. First of all bringing up the increase in violence in the UK following the 1920 ban is entertaining. I mean only over half of the male population was abroad fighting. That was the main concern: that all of the servicemen returning would bring their guns home and it would cause problems. It sure did. What I don't see you mention is the significant drop in firearms crimes and deaths over the next 50 years. I mean they only had their cops cease carry guns casue they weren't needed. I would also posit that using raw stats when a third of the population returned is dishonest. More on this regarding the Aussie stats which is deplorable.
And certainly current UK gun violence is concerning. Yet despite the recent e they still have one third of the gun violence that we have here. IOW, they go to yet are still doing 3 times better than us. Now I am sure that DMC wants to blame brown people but racism aside the difference between us and them from a law and gun enforcement policy is they have a much stricter gun control.
They are proactive as all of our other NATO allies. UK is the worst after us and compared to places like Germany and Norway we are 20 times worse. Germany has the strictest gun control laws around. They do it better than we do.
So violence went up overall but gun crime still went down. So the country becomes more violent but gun crimes decreased anyway. I am failing to see how they speak against the effectiveness of a ban. This is misleading. The stats compiled here are not per capita and cherry picking 2008 was a nice touch. This is the type of strategy that the AGW deniers use constantly. Little surprise a similar 'conservative' group uses the same tactic.
In contrast we know that the homicides in Australia have been falling for the past several years thanks to DMC's earlier self ownage. And I would also posit the following:
http://www.salon.com/2012/12/26/bann...weapons_works/Abroad, the data is even more convincing. In Australia, a 1996 mass shooting that left 36 dead led the conservative government to act swiftly to ban semi-automatic assault weapons with a much stronger law. They did not grandfather in old guns and paid to buy back old ones. Gun-related homicide plummeted by 59 percent between 1995 and 2006, with no corresponding increase in non-firearm-related homicides. Meanwhile, gun suicides — which are responsible for most firearm deaths in most developed countries — dropped by a whopping 65 percent. Robberies at gunpoint also dropped significantly. In the decade prior to the ban, there were 18 mass shootings. In the decade following it, there were zero.
Now in fairness there has been a mass hooting since so the reduction of them in Australia was only about 95%. Small sample size I know.
Last edited by FuzzyLumpkins; 01-09-2013 at 11:40 PM.
The stat that must not be mentioned. The brown people in Latin America are killing each other like crazy with strict gun bans, drug wars or not. I've been looking for the non Hispanic white murder rate in America but I can't find anything from the government. Best guess from what I have found is that it's about 1.5 per 100KNow I am sure that DMC wants to blame brown people but racism aside the difference between us and them from a law and gun enforcement policy is they have a much stricter gun control.
http://islandia.law.yale.edu/ayers/A...ue_article.pdf
This is an exhaustive study. Those pesky academics.Over time, a body of empirical research can disentangle
thorny issues of causation and lead toward consensus. We view this Article as
playing a role in this process (not in ending the conversation). On net, we
believe that Lott and Mus ’s efforts made an important contribution to the
literature. They asked the initial question, amassed an important new panel
dataset, and then energetically and creatively analyzed it. (Indeed, their
dataset, which we know from experience was quite costly to construct, has been
used by many researchers to explore this and other questions about crime.)
Nevertheless, their results have not withstood the test of time. When we added
five years of county data and seven years of state data, allowing us to test an
additional fourteen jurisdictions that adopted shall-issue laws, the previous Lott
and Mus findings proved not to be robust. Importantly, we showed that the
Lott and Mus results collapse when the more complete county data is
subjected to less-constrained jurisdiction-specific specifications or when the
more-complete state data is tweaked in plausible ways. No longer can any
plausible case be made on statistical grounds that shall-issue laws are likely to
reduce crime for all or even most states. How much further one can go in
arguing that shall-issue laws likely increase crime across the board or have
heterogeneous effects across states (albeit most commonly pernicious) will be
matters about which various analysts will differ. We conclude with Learned
Hand’s advice that, unlike a policy advocate, an academic must “keep an open
mind to every disconcerting fact, [and] an open ear to the cold voice of doubt.”
Hand admonished: “You may not carry a sword beneath a scholar’s gown.”135
Brown people live in Europe too.
Honduras and Nicaragua have been in or on the border of civil war for 50 years. Columbia and Mexico has a perpetual drug war going on. In all places the government doesn't have the widespread power to enforce such a ban. Quite the contrary, for example, the Mexican army is notorious for its corruption in selling arms and are contributing to the problem.
I want to see a link on the racial breakdowns. What have you found from what source?
Comparing us to third world governments is fun though. Why not bring up South Africa while you are at it. Their government is just like ours.
I want to see a link that shows more guns= more crimes. You must have one Fuzzy, pull the Ace out of your sleeve already.
Also, kudos on not responding to any of the other links you asked for you Internet coward with no Internet honor.
What other links? And you really need to get your own takes.
I just gave you a link stating that more guns less crime is not factually correct as to the premise. You asked me to look it up and found a very detailed and exhaustive analysis.
Sorry for stealing your "Internet coward" and "Internet honor" shtick.
The links you asked for about more guns equal more crime. You said you could prove that, remember?
At a much smaller percentage.
If I can only compare us to other highly developed countries then basically all I can do is compare us to vast majority white countries and Japan.I want to see a link on the racial breakdowns. What have you found from what source?
Comparing us to third world governments is fun though. Why not bring up South Africa while you are at it. Their government is just like ours.
But here's one article on the white rate. There's a bunch of links in the original.
http://www.amren.com/news/2013/01/eu...phics-vs-guns/
European Murder Rates Compared to the United States: Demographics vs Guns
When the subject is gun control, those who demand more for the United States always point to Europe. Europe, they say, has more gun control than the United States, and lower murder rates. Europe, of course, is a diverse place. Some places have lots of guns and low murder rates. Some places have few guns and higher murder rates. The reason that many developed European countries have murder rates much lower than the United States is not guns or gun control. It is demographics.
In 2006 the Department of Justice issued a report on violent felons in large urban counties. It covered the period from 1990 to 2002, and included the 75 most populous counties in the United States. The study accounted for over half of all the murders in the United States in the covered period.
Revealed in the study was a simple breakdown of the demographics of the murderers that is not commonly available. Murderers were divided into three groups. Blacks were the most numerous at 46%. Hispanics were next at 27 percent. Non-Hispanic whites were last at 23 percent.
While the study does not account for all murders in the period studied, it accounts for more than half and almost certainly slightly understates the percentages of Black murderers, because the latest FBI statistics (for 2010) show that when all the murders in the U.S are taken into account, the percentage of Black murderers is over 53 percent.
No one would dispute that there are several distinct cultures among the American black population. No one would dispute that none of these cultures exist in Europe in any statistically significant numbers. Some of the Black American subcultures probably have very low murder rates. We cannot tell because we do not have the data to distinguish between them.
Similarly, there are a number of distinct Hispanic cultures in the United States. These are all derived from cultures in Mexico, Central and South America, and the Caribbean. They are not Spanish or Portuguese. No one would argue that any statistical number of these populations exist in Europe. No doubt, some of these cultures also have very low murder rates, but without data, we cannot separate them out.
Where does that lead us? If we take the 23 percent figure for non-Hispanic whites to be representative for the entire population (remember, it is likely a good bit lower), then the number of murders committed by non-Hispanic and non-black people in the United States for 2010 would be 2989.
The population of non-Hispanic whites for 2010 was 196.8 million. Applying the 2989 murders to this population gives a murder rate of 1.52 per 100,000 population. We cannot get a more precise figure unless we have more demographic data than that given. Asian-Americans, for example, have historically had very low murder rates, but we do not have the data. The 1.52 per 100,000 murder rate is right in the middle of the murder rate of developed European countries. Add the Black and Hispanic numbers back into the mix and apply to the entire United States population, and the murder rate goes up to 4.2 per 100,000. Guns or gun control simply do not correlate to higher murder rates, particularly when you consider that non-Hispanic Whites own guns at much higher rates than do Blacks or Hispanics in the United States.
There are huge numbers of German-Americans, English-Americans, Greek-Americans, Italian-Americans, Scandinavian and Swiss-Americans in the United States. There are no statistically significant numbers of African-American or Hispanic-Americans in Europe.
As a check, you might consider a non-European example. Japan has extreme gun control and extremely low murder rates. The FBI used to track murders by Japanese-Americans before 1980, when access to firearms was relatively easy.
The murder rate of Japanese Americans was less than half that of Japanese in Japan.
Murder rates are driven by cultural background, not by the instrument used.
European murder and gun ownership rates: Link
Department of Justice Study with demographic data: Link
FBI homicide statistics, 2010: Link
Japanese and Japanese American murder rates: Link
Original Article
exactly what do you think my premise is regarding more guns?
American Renaissance
So we another another contestant that blames brown people for crime.
You paid your klan dues?
That guns have increased and crime has gone down but when the statistics are controlled for counties where the guns went crime didn't go down. So I answered your question so I will say again guns have increased overall and but where the guns actually went, crime did not drop.
Right next to the blame racial minorities for crime article is a link for an article on how criticizing the confederate flag is an attack on the white race. Nice find.
Brad, you need to get with WC and DMC to start the Spurstalk Eugenics Society or maybe you can call it the Spurstalk White Supremacist Society. You guys sure like bringing their talking point in here.
I'll need a link for this claim please since this is your NEW argument. Are you really willing and able to break this down county by county? How do you know where all the guns went? You claim the government doesn't even know where the guns go, how'd you get the inside info?
This is fun watching you throw and see what sticks. Try again.
Fuzzy, this is your argument now, show me proof more guns=more gun crime in the USA.
It is a problem that the gun lobby has tried at every turn to prevent the governmnet from collecting data but that has not prevented solid work.
The above is from Yale Law. Thats not a klan site nor a wsj op ed, a south korean evangelical paper, or ing Breitbart. It's from one of the premiere research ins utions in the country.
Read up, Chachi. Further, you asked me to look up whether or not crime has gone down and gun sales have gone down. I did, post my findings and now you complain. You're high maintenance.
The problem is I never said more guns equals less gun crime, not sure why you're posting a 120 page link to something that has nothing to do with my premise. I said more guns does not equal more gun crime. Prove the latter wrong.
quick update bro. i gave a euro girl her first internal orgasm, and im cir sized. there's hope.
I know the Yale Law Review piece is a long read but it's right there. I did find it amusing that you went to WSJ opeds, the Washington Times and their goldenboy for your position. How much Fox News do you watch?
Since you quoted a different article in response: are the Japanese racist for their policy of strictly limiting immigration to keep Japan Japanese? Because it seems to be working pretty well. I would also say that yes, it is true that the only people on earth who largely don't feel a connection to their race are left wing whites.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
