What do you think started seat belt and helmet laws? You are a gibbering idiot.
The graph talked about overall gun deaths as well as homicides. You suck at reading too.
Compared with the quartile of states with the fewest laws, the quartile with the most laws had a lower firearm suicide rate (absolute rate difference, 6.25 deaths/100 000/y; IRR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.48-0.83) and a lower firearm homicide rate (absolute rate difference, 0.40 deaths/100 000/y; IRR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.38-0.95).
Poorly? You contradicted yourself and showed very clearly that you are talking out of your ass unable to keep up with even your own bull .
You show a graph of violent crime. We are interested in guns here. That is what the topic is about. You fail to address that too. I'm done. Your stupidity is on full display and I am wasting my time.
Are you really so lame that you must bully someone how ever youu think you have an angle to?
Pathetic.
You are ing pathetic.
Seat belt laws... LOL... What about enforcing the basic rule. People violate it all the time. There is no need for 95%+ of the traffic fatalities. If you wish to stop deaths, then isn't the largest contributor of unnecessary deaths the place to start?
Imagine if rigorous gun regulation as a public (interstate) health policy / "promote the general welfare" was Federal rather than state or municipal.
The Myth of the Good Guy with a Gun: How I was Almost Curtis Reeves
http://thedailybanter.com/2014/01/the-myth-of-the-good-guy-with-a-gun-how-i-was-almost-curtis-reeves/
So the guy didn't kill anyone. Cool story bro.
Here are some cool stats to go with your cool story.
General Public .042802 murders per 1,000 citizens per year.
CCW Holders .00425 murders per 1,000 citizens per year.
bull . but, no surprise.
how many gun-dead dead kids, their friends and family in houses with no guns?
What was the point of the story you posted?
There are ~7m CCL in the US. The population is ~350m. That is ~2% of the population with concealed carry. Yet they have 10% of the total murders when if it was the same rate then they would have 2% per capita ie 5 times the rate.
Where is your data coming from? Be sure you are not including CCW suicides in your murder stats.
I have always felt that the Violence Policy Center (VPC) was very aptly named. After all, they do advocate for public policy positions that would certainly result in violence against law abiding citizens if implemented.
Thankfully, their increasingly shrill cries for American citizens to abandon freedom for the nurturing bosom of a totalitarian regime have been generally ignored by one and all.
However, I must give them credit for dogged determination in the face of overwhelming reality. You have to remember that, when they were formed in 1988, there were 15 states where obtaining a concealed carry permit was legally impossible and 25 “may-issue” states where obtaining a permit was uncertain at best.
But now, after 21 years of diligent hand-wringing by the VPC and their ilk, there are only 2 states remaining which do not allow concealed carry and 39 states have passed “shall-issue” laws which require that all citizens who meet the statutory requirements be issued a permit without the nepotism, elitism and cronyism that are the hallmarks of the “may-issue” process.
Talk about a stark image of failure …
But the VPC soldiers on, not allowing two decades of abysmal, abject failure to discourage them from their insidious mission. Their latest attack on the fundamental right of self-defense comes as Senators Thune and Vitter have introduced an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (S. 1390) which would allow an individual who has met the requirements for a carry permit in his home state, or who is otherwise allowed by his home state's law to carry a firearm, to carry a firearm for protection in any other state that issues such permits so long as the laws of the state in which the firearm is carried are observed.
As states such as Maryland, New York, and New Jersey panic over the idea of losing the ability to provide disarmed herds of victims for their criminals, the VPC has sprung to the rescue like a well paid mob lawyer and has released the results of a poorly concocted “study” claiming to illustrate the evils of concealed carry permits.
I use the word “study” loosely in order to not offend the sensibilities of any true statistician who might be reading this article. Their methodology appears to have been to assign a slightly inebriated intern to do a Google news search for “permit holder” and “charged with”.
These results were apparently then pasted into notepad and ultimately compiled into a state by state list by the VPC’s crack technical staff. The resulting PDF file (the creation of which I imagine was a matter of some pride) was dubbed Law Enforcement and Private Citizens Killed by Concealed Handgun Permit Holders: An Analysis of News Reports, May 2007 to April 2009.
On a more serious note
The “study” purports to show that during the strangely arbitrary period from May 2007 until April 2009, permit holders were responsible for the deaths of 7 police officers and 44 citizens.
Now … the loss of a single innocent life is a tragedy that cannot be taken too seriously. And as an ardent supporter of our nation’s law enforcement officers, who are overwhelmingly our brothers and sisters in our struggle to protect and enhance our rights as gun owners, I mourn the loss of these 7 brave officers deeply.
But does this “study” hold water as it attempts to capitalize on these deaths politically? Ted Deeds, Chief Operating Officer of the Law Enforcement Alliance of America (LEAA) doesn’t think so.
“I've only just started looking at it and, no surprise, I think there will be lots of holes in it. As always, one cop injured or killed, one good guy injured or killed is too many. But I suspect that there are A LOT more significant mechanisms of injury/death than what this so-called 'report' hopes to conclude.”
Let’s examine the many, many flaws that render their data virtually meaningless and reduces their “study” to nothing more than the ideological propaganda that is the normal grist of the VPC mill.
Flaw #1: How did they identify permit holders?
The report makes it clear that they have no idea whether or not they are accurately identifying these parties as permit holders. In the study, they admit as much, “Because of the secretive nature of concealed handgun permit laws, the VPC relied primarily on news accounts.”
Wait … what? The very premise upon which the “study” is based is the fact that these shooters are permit holders. And this key, threshold issue was determined by relying upon news reports? I cannot remember the last time that I read a news report involving a firearm that did not contain a serious mistake of fact that was glaringly evident to anyone with even a modi of firearms knowledge.
But wait … surely this lack of verifiable facts can be remedied. After all, the presence or absence of a carry permit would be entered into evidence in the trial and thus available to the VPC for verification.
Except … this leads us to flaw #2.
Flaw #2: Charged with a crime does not equal conviction
Many of the alleged permit holders noted in this report are described as having been charged with a crime but no further information is provided as to the disposition of the charge. This is an important and glaring attempt to cloud the issue.
In many states and jurisdictions, a citizen who properly and legally defends themselves from an attack may well expect to be initially charged with a crime. The charges may later be dropped or may be no-true-billed at the grand jury level. A charge does NOT equal a conviction and yet the VPC, an organization that promotes itself as a public policy think-tank on legal and cons utional issues, treats them as synonymous.
It should come as no surprise that the VPC does not support the concepts of “due process” or “innocent until proven guilty” any more than they do the right to defend one’s self or one’s family.
Perhaps I could suggest a new VPC motto. “Individual rights are like potato chips, you can’t destroy just one!”
Flaw #3: Does my permit allow me to carry a strangling cord?
Another blatant attempt to pad the data was brought to my attention by Mr. Deeds. It comes in the form of several data points involving non-handgun related killings by “permit holders” (see Flaw #1).
Carry permits allow a person to carry a handgun for personal protection. In cases where rifles or other weapons are used to commit a crime, the fact that the person may or may not have been a permit holder is a moot point and not germane to the issue at hand.
Flaw #4: Who is more dangerous?
The VPC concludes their report by stating that these examples illustrate clearly that concealed carry laws are not good public policy because permit holders are dangerous. Furthermore, there is a clear implication that they are more dangerous than the general public.
Let’s take a closer look at the statistics to refute this wild inaccuracy. According to the FBI Uniform Crime Report, across the general public in the United States, there are an average of .042802 murders per 1,000 citizens per year.
Now … even if we concede all 51 deaths detailed in the VPC report as wrongful deaths, averaging them across the over 6 MILLION permit holders in the United States and taking into account the two year timeframe, we get an average of .00425 per 1,000 per year.
In other words, even if they are 100% correct in their wildly flawed report, they have simply proven that permit holders commit murders at a rate that is 1/10th of the general public.
The VPC report also makes much of the fact that 7 of the victims in these news reports were police officers. They go out of their way to imply that as concealed carry has swept across the nation, law enforcement deaths have risen alarmingly. The only problem with this? It, like so much else that comes from the VPC, is blatantly untrue.
In a report released last week, the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund released data that soundly refutes this claim. Chairman of the Memorial Fund, Craig Floyd said it best, "There are three-times more officers on our streets than in the 1970s, and we have half the number of fatalities."
As a matter of fact, since this is supposed to be a debate over statistics, let’s map the killing of officers with firearms against the rise in shall issue states. The data for officer deaths comes from the FBI Uniform Crime Reports and the Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (See VPC … that is what we call citing to actual authority).
http://www.examiner.com/article/lies...vpc-statistics
Really?
What we should ask is where your numbers come from. Damn, if you aren't one of the most blatant sophist I have seen.
There is one stat that is better than all stats, but it must not be named.
namely?
Yes. Where are you getting that CCL's are responsible for 10% of all murders? Also, are you including justified cides?
John Pierce via the FBI Uniform Crime Report.What we should ask is where your numbers come from. Damn, if you aren't one of the most blatant sophist I have seen.
How would you classify this one Fuzzy?
http://m.wistv.com/#!/newsDetail/24527798
Police: Attempted jewelry store robbery ends in suspect shooting himself
Updated: 01/23/2014 9:03 am PST
Police in Sumter are investigating the attempted armed robbery of a jewelry store that ended with the suspect shooting himself in the head.
Sumter Police say officers were called to Galloway and Moseley Fine Jewelers on North Guigard Drive for an attempted armed robbery Thursday morning. Police say just before 8 a.m., the man tried to rob two employees as they opened the store.
Chief Russell Roark says one of the store employees holds a concealed weapons permit and was armed. Roark says the employee drew his gun in self-defense and pointed it toward the suspect. Roark says the suspect turned his own weapon to his head and shot himself.
The suspect died at the scene. His name will not be released until his family is notified.
It's murder rate. The ratio of CCL to the total population. 2 out of every 100 people have one. If the national average is x then you should expect .02*x as your outcome if the were at the same rate as the national average. if x is .0428 then the value should be .0009 or 2% of the aggregate.
Instead we see it is in reality .0042 or over 8 times the expected rate of .0009.
It's algebra and critical thinking so I doubt youll get this either.
Again, where are you getting the amount of murders CCL holders commit yearly. Sources please.
Best of luck backing up the claim that CCL holders are responsible for 10% of all murders. Don't forget your sources
*snip*
The State of North Carolina is home to roughly 9.38 million people as of 2009. Of those residents only 228,072 hold a valid concealed carry permit according to the latest figures released by the North Carolina Department of Justice, figures which reflect the applications since December 1995 when the state began issuing permits. That equates to roughly 2.4% of the population that is legally allowed to carry a concealed firearm. As an interesting side note, those 228,072 permit holders come from an applicant pool of 399,268 which indicates that only about 57% of applications result in a permit.
In the year 2009 the FBI reported that murder and manslaughter (illegal acts where a person died) was committed at a rate of approximately 5.3 deaths for every 100,000 people in the state of North Carolina. This works out to about 497 deaths per year (using the population for 2009). Statistically the population of concealed carry permit holders should fall in line with this criminal death rate, and so we should expect no less than 12 criminal deaths in the year 2009 alone. However, the New York Times was only able to dredge up 10 such deaths (murders and manslaughter combined), and that was only accomplished by combining the last five years together. While we would expect 2% of the population to be responsible for 60 deaths over 5 years, in reality they are only responsible for 10.
Well whatever I framed it as, my point is that they are much more likely to commit murders according to the numbers you gave. I made the denominators the same so you can compare apples to apples. Then you can search for the unknown. It's this crazy thing called math. I explained it above.Best of luck backing up the claim that CCL holders are responsible for 10% of all murders. Don't forget your sources
*snip*
The State of North Carolina is home to roughly 9.38 million people as of 2009. Of those residents only 228,072 hold a valid concealed carry permit according to the latest figures released by the North Carolina Department of Justice, figures which reflect the applications since December 1995 when the state began issuing permits. That equates to roughly 2.4% of the population that is legally allowed to carry a concealed firearm. As an interesting side note, those 228,072 permit holders come from an applicant pool of 399,268 which indicates that only about 57% of applications result in a permit.
In the year 2009 the FBI reported that murder and manslaughter (illegal acts where a person died) was committed at a rate of approximately 5.3 deaths for every 100,000 people in the state of North Carolina. This works out to about 497 deaths per year (using the population for 2009). Statistically the population of concealed carry permit holders should fall in line with this criminal death rate, and so we should expect no less than 12 criminal deaths in the year 2009 alone. However, the New York Times was only able to dredge up 10 such deaths (murders and manslaughter combined), and that was only accomplished by combining the last five years together. While we would expect 2% of the population to be responsible for 60 deaths over 5 years, in reality they are only responsible for 10.
What happened to critical thinking Fuzzy?Well whatever I framed it as, my point is that they are much more likely to commit murders according to the numbers you gaveI made the denominators the same so you can compare apples to apples. Then you can search for the unknown. It's this crazy thing called math. I explained it above.
So you are admitting to taking the numbers I gave you a la "John Pierce" and using that to form your argument?
Do you even know how "John Pierce" got his data? If I were the one countering said argument I'd be sure to at least look in to it.
Did you do any of your own research regarding CCL holder's murder rate? No?
The only thing you have explained is that you obviously haven't done your own research regarding CCL holders and their murder rate compared to the general public. I didn't think you'd take the bait so easily.
Still waiting for CCL holders commit 10% of the murders stats.............source it!
I take two things from this.
1) You have no credibility.
2) You claim trolling anytime you say stupid .
You failed to answer a single question.
The stage is yours CCL murder rate expert.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote