Violence generally is down about 50% from its peak in the late 1970’s early 1980’s. This includes gun violence.
Mass shootings (depending on how you define the term) are up despite a general reduction in gun ownership rates. I don’t know if this is result of more mental instability, greater media attention, or what but its not because more people have guns.
America had a genocide too.
In the last few decades there has been a trend (from what I can tell) for more guns into the hands of anyone and everyone in the US. In my view, the “right hands” people (i.e. those who have taken the time and effort to practice and train themselves and don’t wish any group harm) probably already have guns and have for decades… but the “wrong hands” people is a much, much larger group.
I don’t see how it’s possible to only get guns into the right hands, and take them away from the wrong hands, without significant changes in gun laws.
The problem of mass shootings are frequently tied to mental health issues. Making fun of the mentally ill might not be as effective as trying to address mental illness issues.
The problem of 3 gang members being killed in a drive by shooting is different than the problem of a mentally ill person locking the doors and shooting a college class or an elementary school or movie theater.
[QUOTE=iiandyiiii]
In the last few decades there has been a trend (from what I can tell) for more guns into the hands of anyone and everyone in the US.
[/QUOTE]
Cite? My understanding is that fewer and fewer households report actually having a gun today than even 10 years, and the trend is generally down.
Probably not, but that’s what background checks and wait lists presumably are supposed to do and why we have them.
I think you might be right overall. I should have said “years”, not “decades”, since I was thinking about the big spike in gun sales since Obama took office, but that doesn’t seem to even show up in this poll, at least.
I agree – I’m for such police changes, and perhaps more.
I assume you’re just summarizing an incredibly stupid video about which a few astute comments have already been made, and you already know that each one of those points is such utterly misleading bullshit that it’s practically a parody of the most inane of the gun nut talking points. Please don’t tell me that I actually have to explain why.
[QUOTE=iiandyiiii]
I think you might be right overall. I should have said “years”, not “decades”, since I was thinking about the big spike in gun sales since Obama took office, but that doesn’t seem to even show up in this poll, at least.
[/QUOTE]
It’s less of a downward trend than I though it was though, and looks like it’s gone up recently, though not a lot. It’s been fairly stable and probably within whatever error bars they are using for their survey.
Not sure if this is the place to discuss the shooting itself (I don’t see another thread in GD on it), but here is the latest from CNN:
Studies pretty consistently demonstrate that US states or regions with higher gun prevalence have higher rates of violent crime, gun crime and homicides. See, just for example:
Duggan, M. (2000). More guns, more crime (No. w7967). National Bureau of Economic Research.
Miller, M., Azrael, D., & Hemenway, D. (2002). Rates of household firearm ownership and homicide across US regions and states, 1988-1997. American journal of public health, 92(12), 1988-1993.
Monuteaux, M. C., Lee, L. K., Hemenway, D., Mannix, R., & Fleegler, E. W. (2015). Firearm ownership and violent crime in the US: an ecologic study.American journal of preventive medicine, 49(2), 207-214.
I don’t think most of the people that compare us to the U.K., Norway, Australia, Canada, etc realize that even if you eliminated all the guns from American society, and all the gun homicides (meaning not a single homicidal maniac said, “no guns? I’ll just use a knife”), we’d still have a murder rate a good bit higher than countries like the U.K… Americans, on the whole, are particularly homicidal. Those homicides tend to cluster around a few subjects / demographics, but murder happens a LOT in this country, even without guns.
No, what’s irrelevant is bringing up completely baseless assertions that monstrosities like those of Stalin and Hitler could have and would have reasonably been stopped by an armed populace. It’s not well-supported on its face, it has nothing to do with the situation in the USA (the fascist candidate is the one the gun nuts like, in case you missed the memo), and it’s a fundamentally weak response to the issue at hand. Appealing to hitler is completely irrelevant to the topic of gun control in the USA. It has no relevance whatsoever.
So you’re saying that, without guns, the US murder rate would go down significantly? Just not quite as low as those other countries?
Riiight… because shit is so much better in Somalia.
The chances of a tyrannical government in a western style democracy is negligible. You would have to tear down so many institutions and safeguards we have in place.
With that said, I thought I was the shadow of tyranny on the horizon when we passed the Patriot Act. And I think a reasonably well armed populace can in fact defy a tyranny that has to rely on a volunteer army.
No, I think you misunderstood me. I don’t know what effect getting rid of all guns would have. I was simply pointing out that, aside from guns, we Americans still kill each other a LOT.
I suspect that if you had a magic wand that you could wave and instantly make all guns disappear from within the borders of the United States, we’d still have an atrocious murder rate. And I suspect some people that want to kill their fellow man would still do so, they’d just find a different tool to use. How many is “some”? I don’t know. Maybe it’s half. Maybe it’s 90%. Maybe it’s 10%.
There would also be “some” people who currently choose not to engage in crime / murder because they don’t want to get shot by their would-be victims, the police, or other bystanders that might choose to do so once that deterrence is gone. How many is that? Again, I don’t know and I don’t think it’s really knowable. Overall would these two effects leave us with fewer or more murders after the magic wand-wave? I don’t know that either.
But, no such magic wand exists, and it’s not politically feasible to eliminate all guns from the US, so wasting time trying to concoct accurate guesses at the effects it would have seems like a pointless waste of time to me.
Way to go Democratic Republic of the Congo ! Despite all their advantages you are still ahead of the Yanks !
I didn’t realise American food was so dangerous.
Best comment evah.
http://www.pewresearch.org/files/old-assets/pdf/gun-control-2011.pdf
It only covers whites/blacks/Hispanics but whites seem to support gun rights at much higher levels than blacks and Hispanics. White women support gun rights more than blacks or Hispanics. White Democrats support gun rights more than blacks or Hispanics, there is literally no subcategory of whites that support gun rights less than blacks or Hispanics.
So the support of gun rights is not really equal across races. Asians tend to be even more supportive of gun control (my experience is that the gender gap is even more significant on this issue than what the poll indicate for other races).
You have people who, for whatever reason, have decided to murder people.
These psychopathic monsters should not have access to bomb making materials, or firearms, or knives, or axes, or poisons, or rope.
Inanimate objects do not kill people, psychopathic monsters kill people. You need to identify and control these psychopathic monsters.
We have gone over this before. The NRA makes about $1,000,000 in political donations every campaign cycle.
The NRA isn’t influential because it passes money out to the politicians. It is influential because the NRA represents a lot of voters. Those voters may not agree with everything the NRA says but they generally support gun rights.
No comment.
I appreciate the research. We agree.
So, madsircool, are you conceding your assertion that black and Hispanic Americans are as supportive of gun rights as whites? I can give you all the time you need.
Its not that the Newtown shootings COULDN’T have resulted in reform. Its that the reform that the gun control side chose to push was an assault weapons ban and the assault weapons ban was shown to be so ineffective and all around retarded that the gun control side lost all momentum and credibility by continuing to push the one of the worst gun control ideas in their arsenal of gun control ideas.
Almost any one thing else had a better chance of passage.
The Manchin Toomey Bill? Definitely.
Magazine caps? Most probably.
Universal background checks? I think so.
Licensing and registration? Probably not but at least its not a retarded idea, and it would introduce the concept to the public.
A ban on weapons based on cosmetic and ergonomic features that account for a ridiculously slim minority of gun deaths? No frakking way.
The gun rights side didn’t win that fight, the gun control side lost it.