Gun Control Debate thread

[backstop13]

Originally Posted by Bones

NOT TRUE!

The handgun ban in Washington DC (called the murder capital at the time) caused a 25% drop in the homicide by gun rate and about the same in the suicide by gun rate. Homicide and suicide rates by means other than guns remained relatively unchanged during the same period.

Not only did the ban work, it also put paid to the NRA's argument that murderers would simply choose another method to kill.

Looks to me like the homicide rates from 1986 to 2005 remain unchanged. In fact, they increased through the 2000's

Filechomicidechart.svg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Not only that, but the reasons for less crime isn't solely related to gun laws as everyone would like to believe:

"As Washington neighborhoods undergo gentrification, crime has been displaced further east. Crime in Prince George's County, Maryland, has remained steady (even slightly increasing in some areas) as poorer residents move out of the city into the nearby suburbs because of rising housing costs"

[ThunderChunky]

Yea I don't know where he was getting his info from. Literally every case of weapons ban in the U.S. has had no affect. The assault weapons ban of 94, the Chicago and D.C. bans. Did nothing.

[ThunderChunky]

Originally Posted by scrotumphillips

It is much easier to go on a rampage with a gun than it is to go on one with a bow and arrows or a knife. Guns do increase aggression and more often than not are used against their own owner. Guns also make it much much easier to kill a lot of people quickly.

So let's ban guns. Then someone will blow up a school with fucking Clorox and Draino. Now let's ban them.

You know what else makes it a lot easier to kill a lot of people. One person with a gun and a bunch of people without them. If everyone had guns it wouldn't be as easy. If you are trying to make it harder then that would be the better option. I however am not trying to simply put a damper on things. I want the problem fixed. So why take away our rights in order to unsuccessfully patch a problem.

Stop trying to put band aids on a bleeding artery. Fix the problem.

[Bones]

Originally Posted by ThunderChunky

Yea I don't know where he was getting his info from. Literally every case of weapons ban in the U.S. has had no affect. The assault weapons ban of 94, the Chicago and D.C. bans. Did nothing.

Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review

59 Law and Contemporary Problems 1996 Linking Gun Availability to Youth Gun Violence Kids, Guns, and Public Policy: I. The Problem

https://www.ncjrs.gov/txtfiles1/nij/188741.txt



The Crime Drop in America - Google Books

https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publicatio...ct.aspx?ID=769

The impact of gun control and gun ownership levels on violence rates - Springer

Reducing Gun Violence:



Measures of Gun Ownership Levels for Macro-Level Crime and Violence Research

https://www.ncjrs.gov/txtfiles/fireviol.txt

Evaluating Gun Policy: Effects on Crime and Violence - Jens Ludwig, Philip J. Cook - Google Books

The Concentration and Stability of Gun Violence at Micro Places in Boston, 1980

PsychiatryOnline | American Journal of Psychiatry | Violence and Mental Disorders: Data and Public Policy

http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/AbstractDB/...aspx?id=188740

http://www.ncjrs.gov/txtfiles/172857.txt


So where are you getting your information from? The NRA?

[slyder]

Originally Posted by ShredLife

its not about laws, its not really about guns - its about our society. we do not give a fuck about one another. far too many people are left by the wayside of society. i don't have the answer to all of this bullshit but we absolutely need to show compassion to one another. we need to take better care of our neighbors, we need to be more invested in each others lives and in our communities.

This is a good view

Originally Posted by ThunderChunky

You know what else makes it a lot easier to kill a lot of people. One person with a gun and a bunch of people without them. If everyone had guns it wouldn't be as easy. If you are trying to make it harder then that would be the better option.
Stop trying to put band aids on a bleeding artery. Fix the problem.

I like this view. We won't influence the minds of anyone on this point. I truly believe it would be a deterrent. Why do muggers not mug a 6'6" 250 lb guy, girls are easier targets. Criminals take the path of least resistance, elderly, girls traveling alone, approaching a man in a group or gang of thugs. You don't see a mugger trying to rob 2 - 4 guys, why he'll get his ass kicked DETERRENT!!! Civilians that can defend themselves Deterrent !!!

[Bones]

Originally Posted by backstop13

Looks to me like the homicide rates from 1986 to 2005 remain unchanged. In fact, they increased through the 2000's

Yes, the handgun ban ended in 1984? and the University of Maryland study covered the period of the ban (1970 to 84?) It did note that rates increased after the ban ended.

[Bones]

Originally Posted by slyder

I like this view. We won't influence the minds of anyone on this point. I truly believe it would be a deterrent. Civilians that can defend themselves Deterrent !!!

So you would fully endorse an independent study concerning the existence (enhancement effect) or lack thereof (deterrent effect) of a link between gun availability and gun violence?

[backstop13]

Originally Posted by Bones

Yes, the handgun ban ended in 1984? and the University of Maryland study covered the period of the ban (1970 to 84?) It did note that rates increased after the ban ended.

The ban was in effect through 2007 before it was struck down by the Supreme Court.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distric...mbia_v._Heller

Gun crime increased through the 90's despite the ban on guns due to Columbian drug cartels smuggling cocaine into the area.

And there's plenty of evidence from sources other than the NRa that show the ineffectiveness of the gun ban. I'll try and pull them up tomorrow when I'm at a computer.

[ThunderChunky]

Holy shit you won't quit. Crime rates went up during both the Chicago ban and the ban on assault weapons in 94. This is straight from the FBI. Not the NRA. There is a reason these are no longer in law.

The very premise of taking away guns to deter crime is hypocritical, ignorant, arrogant, and down right retarded.

You are going to stop someone from doing something illegal, by making it illegal to do it? Do you realize how retarded that sounds. It sounds retarded and has been proven to be.

Here you go or is the Chicago Police department biased too?
https://portal.chicagopolice.org/por...ports/MA11.pdf

[ThunderChunky]

[130] Paper: "Estimating intruder-related firearm retrievals in U.S. households, 1994." By Robin M. Ikeda and others. Violence and Victims, Winter 1997. Estimating intruder-related firearm retrievals... [Violence Vict. 1997] - PubMed - NCBI



Page 363:



To estimate the frequency of firearm retrieval because of a known or presumed intruder, the authors analyzed data from a 1994 national random digit dialing telephone survey (n = 5,238 interviews). ... National projections based on these self-reports reveal an estimated 1,896,842 (95% CI [confidence interval] = 1,480,647-2,313,035) incidents in which a firearm was retrieved, but no intruder was seen; 503,481 (95% CI = 305,093-701,870) incidents occurred in which an intruder was seen, and 497,646 (95% CI = 266,060-729,231) incidents occurred in which the intruder was seen and reportedly scared away by the firearm.