hmmmmmmm....... SHOCK: AS AMERICANS BOUGHT 170 MILLION GUNS, VIOLENT CRIME FELL 51% by AWR HAWKINS31 Aug 2015 On August 28, the NRA presented ATF and FBI data showing Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has fallen “51 percent.”
The NRA tweeted, “Since ’91, Americans have acquired over 170 million new firearms and violent crimes have declined by 51%.”
This information squares with the findings of a Congressional Research Service (CRS) study covering the slightly shorter period of time from 1994 to 2009. For those years, CRS found that Americans purchased approximately 118 million firearms, and the 1993 “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide” rate of 6.6 per 100,000 fell to 3.6 per 100,000 by the year 2000. It eventually fell all the way to 3.2 per 100,000 in 2011.
That is more than a 50 percent reduction in “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide.”
Then, in 2009—the year the CRS study ended—Obama took office and gun sales began their climb to record levels, which made covering the gap between the 118 million guns that had been purchased by 2009 and the “170 million new guns” that Americans would own by 2015 an easy gap to bridge.
Breitbart News previously reported that there were 21,093,273 background checks for firearms in 2013 alone. And each of those checks were on buyers who could have legally purchased multiple firearms.
The overarching message is simple—more guns, less crime. Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has decreased as gun ownership has increased.
Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.
Again, no gun in the history of man, has ever been made to defend your home. The intruder doesn't know what you're packing. Basically what you're asking is which gun is more effective at killing quicker. Which is the ak-47, unless you're a marksman and can do a dude between the eyes with a .22
well they make weapons with the specific objective to defend your home. they have shotguns made for hunting and shotguns made specifically for home defense. same with rifles...same with hand guns. and i bought my 9mm to defend my home...not hunt. so i guess I changed history. sweet!
Nope. They are all designed for killing things.
dude you can't just spew out stuff like "no gun history was made for self defence" that's just crazy talk.
Godfather.
'Gun history' is definitely a factor for preparing one's self for defence against guns. If you didn't know what a gun was... you might just walk up to it and peer down the barrel to see what's inside it.
I think I saw that once on YouTube.
"I reckon I dun went an looked down that there barrel."
These people are out there. However, I think gun owners are all thought of that way by some people. There is a definite lack of understanding that we are not all like that.
I imagine some people have a mental image of gun owners as a bunch of hillbilly rednecks that like to blast the hell of of stuff with machine guns and then masturbate all over the pile of spent cartridge casings. Some gun owners might do exactly that, but I assure you, they are the extreme minority.
Again, no gun in the history of man, has ever been made to defend your home. The intruder doesn't know what you're packing. Basically what you're asking is which gun is more effective at killing quicker. Which is the ak-47, unless you're a marksman and can do a dude between the eyes with a .22
well they make weapons with the specific objective to defend your home. they have shotguns made for hunting and shotguns made specifically for home defense. same with rifles...same with hand guns. and i bought my 9mm to defend my home...not hunt. so i guess I changed history. sweet!
Nope. They are all designed for killing things.
dude you can't just spew out stuff like "no gun history was made for self defence" that's just crazy talk.
Godfather.
'Gun history' is definitely a factor for preparing one's self for defence against guns. If you didn't know what a gun was... you might just walk up to it and peer down the barrel to see what's inside it.
I think I saw that once on YouTube.
"I reckon I dun went an looked down that there barrel."
These people are out there. However, I think gun owners are all thought of that way by some people. There is a definite lack of understanding that we are not all like that.
I imagine some people have a mental image of gun owners as a bunch of hillbilly rednecks that like to blast the hell of of stuff with machine guns and then masturbate all over the pile of spent cartridge casings. Some gun owners might do exactly that, but I assure you, they are the extreme minority.
I'm just goofing around. I go that way sometimes.
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Please we can goof around but absolutely no grammar mistakes.
For those that don't want to read the whole report: "Since 2009, only 8 percent of mass public shootings have occurred in places where civilians are allowed to defend themselves."
Thoughts?
Post edited by dudeman on
If hope can grow from dirt like me, it can be done. - EV
hmmmmmmm....... SHOCK: AS AMERICANS BOUGHT 170 MILLION GUNS, VIOLENT CRIME FELL 51% by AWR HAWKINS31 Aug 2015 On August 28, the NRA presented ATF and FBI data showing Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has fallen “51 percent.”
The NRA tweeted, “Since ’91, Americans have acquired over 170 million new firearms and violent crimes have declined by 51%.”
This information squares with the findings of a Congressional Research Service (CRS) study covering the slightly shorter period of time from 1994 to 2009. For those years, CRS found that Americans purchased approximately 118 million firearms, and the 1993 “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide” rate of 6.6 per 100,000 fell to 3.6 per 100,000 by the year 2000. It eventually fell all the way to 3.2 per 100,000 in 2011.
That is more than a 50 percent reduction in “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide.”
Then, in 2009—the year the CRS study ended—Obama took office and gun sales began their climb to record levels, which made covering the gap between the 118 million guns that had been purchased by 2009 and the “170 million new guns” that Americans would own by 2015 an easy gap to bridge.
Breitbart News previously reported that there were 21,093,273 background checks for firearms in 2013 alone. And each of those checks were on buyers who could have legally purchased multiple firearms.
The overarching message is simple—more guns, less crime. Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has decreased as gun ownership has increased.
Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.
hmmmmmmm....... SHOCK: AS AMERICANS BOUGHT 170 MILLION GUNS, VIOLENT CRIME FELL 51% by AWR HAWKINS31 Aug 2015 On August 28, the NRA presented ATF and FBI data showing Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has fallen “51 percent.”
The NRA tweeted, “Since ’91, Americans have acquired over 170 million new firearms and violent crimes have declined by 51%.”
This information squares with the findings of a Congressional Research Service (CRS) study covering the slightly shorter period of time from 1994 to 2009. For those years, CRS found that Americans purchased approximately 118 million firearms, and the 1993 “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide” rate of 6.6 per 100,000 fell to 3.6 per 100,000 by the year 2000. It eventually fell all the way to 3.2 per 100,000 in 2011.
That is more than a 50 percent reduction in “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide.”
Then, in 2009—the year the CRS study ended—Obama took office and gun sales began their climb to record levels, which made covering the gap between the 118 million guns that had been purchased by 2009 and the “170 million new guns” that Americans would own by 2015 an easy gap to bridge.
Breitbart News previously reported that there were 21,093,273 background checks for firearms in 2013 alone. And each of those checks were on buyers who could have legally purchased multiple firearms.
The overarching message is simple—more guns, less crime. Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has decreased as gun ownership has increased.
Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.
One of those instances that prove that you can make almost anything out of statistics. Perhaps the lower crime rate is due to higher cell phone use? Cell phone purchases have clearly significantly increased since 1991.
For starters, the violent crime rate has been going down over most of the world since 1990, not just in the USA, and in most of those countries there has not been a large increase in gun ownership. The homicide rate in Canada has also decreased by 50% - can you argue that this has occurred due to more guns? Violent crime is also down in most of Europe. It's a larger phenomenon that is not completely explained but likely has nothing to do with more guns in the US.
Next - the population of the US has also increased by close to 100 million since then, which makes the actual increase per capita less compelling. Did they also publish data on guns taken out of circulation? Did they publish data on how many of those new guns went to people purchasing a gun for the first time, compared to people purchasing their 10th? After all, just how many guns can you carry or use at the same time?
Of course the NRA is presenting these statistics. That doesn't mean their correlation has any explanatory value.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
hmmmmmmm....... SHOCK: AS AMERICANS BOUGHT 170 MILLION GUNS, VIOLENT CRIME FELL 51% by AWR HAWKINS31 Aug 2015 On August 28, the NRA presented ATF and FBI data showing Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has fallen “51 percent.”
The NRA tweeted, “Since ’91, Americans have acquired over 170 million new firearms and violent crimes have declined by 51%.”
This information squares with the findings of a Congressional Research Service (CRS) study covering the slightly shorter period of time from 1994 to 2009. For those years, CRS found that Americans purchased approximately 118 million firearms, and the 1993 “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide” rate of 6.6 per 100,000 fell to 3.6 per 100,000 by the year 2000. It eventually fell all the way to 3.2 per 100,000 in 2011.
That is more than a 50 percent reduction in “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide.”
Then, in 2009—the year the CRS study ended—Obama took office and gun sales began their climb to record levels, which made covering the gap between the 118 million guns that had been purchased by 2009 and the “170 million new guns” that Americans would own by 2015 an easy gap to bridge.
Breitbart News previously reported that there were 21,093,273 background checks for firearms in 2013 alone. And each of those checks were on buyers who could have legally purchased multiple firearms.
The overarching message is simple—more guns, less crime. Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has decreased as gun ownership has increased.
Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.
One of those instances that prove that you can make almost anything out of statistics. Perhaps the lower crime rate is due to higher cell phone use? Cell phone purchases have clearly significantly increased since 1991.
For starters, the violent crime rate has been going down over most of the world since 1990, not just in the USA, and in most of those countries there has not been a large increase in gun ownership. The homicide rate in Canada has also decreased by 50% - can you argue that this has occurred due to more guns? Violent crime is also down in most of Europe. It's a larger phenomenon that is not completely explained but likely has nothing to do with more guns in the US.
Next - the population of the US has also increased by close to 100 million since then, which makes the actual increase per capita less compelling. Did they also publish data on guns taken out of circulation? Did they publish data on how many of those new guns went to people purchasing a gun for the first time, compared to people purchasing their 10th? After all, just how many guns can you carry or use at the same time?
Of course the NRA is presenting these statistics. That doesn't mean their correlation has any explanatory value.
Again, no gun in the history of man, has ever been made to defend your home. The intruder doesn't know what you're packing. Basically what you're asking is which gun is more effective at killing quicker. Which is the ak-47, unless you're a marksman and can do a dude between the eyes with a .22
well they make weapons with the specific objective to defend your home. they have shotguns made for hunting and shotguns made specifically for home defense. same with rifles...same with hand guns. and i bought my 9mm to defend my home...not hunt. so i guess I changed history. sweet!
Nope. They are all designed for killing things.
dude you can't just spew out stuff like "no gun history was made for self defence" that's just crazy talk.
Godfather.
'Gun history' is definitely a factor for preparing one's self for defence against guns. If you didn't know what a gun was... you might just walk up to it and peer down the barrel to see what's inside it.
I think I saw that once on YouTube.
"I reckon I dun went an looked down that there barrel."
Again, no gun in the history of man, has ever been made to defend your home. The intruder doesn't know what you're packing. Basically what you're asking is which gun is more effective at killing quicker. Which is the ak-47, unless you're a marksman and can do a dude between the eyes with a .22
well they make weapons with the specific objective to defend your home. they have shotguns made for hunting and shotguns made specifically for home defense. same with rifles...same with hand guns. and i bought my 9mm to defend my home...not hunt. so i guess I changed history. sweet!
Nope. They are all designed for killing things.
dude you can't just spew out stuff like "no gun history was made for self defence" that's just crazy talk.
Godfather.
'Gun history' is definitely a factor for preparing one's self for defence against guns. If you didn't know what a gun was... you might just walk up to it and peer down the barrel to see what's inside it.
I think I saw that once on YouTube.
"I reckon I dun went an looked down that there barrel."
These people are out there. However, I think gun owners are all thought of that way by some people. There is a definite lack of understanding that we are not all like that.
I imagine some people have a mental image of gun owners as a bunch of hillbilly rednecks that like to blast the hell of of stuff with machine guns and then masturbate all over the pile of spent cartridge casings. Some gun owners might do exactly that, but I assure you, they are the extreme minority.
I'm just goofing around. I go that way sometimes.
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Please we can goof around but absolutely no grammar mistakes.
Tried to make a joke using Seinfeld episode quote at thirties expense. Failed.
Again, no gun in the history of man, has ever been made to defend your home. The intruder doesn't know what you're packing. Basically what you're asking is which gun is more effective at killing quicker. Which is the ak-47, unless you're a marksman and can do a dude between the eyes with a .22
well they make weapons with the specific objective to defend your home. they have shotguns made for hunting and shotguns made specifically for home defense. same with rifles...same with hand guns. and i bought my 9mm to defend my home...not hunt. so i guess I changed history. sweet!
Nope. They are all designed for killing things.
dude you can't just spew out stuff like "no gun history was made for self defence" that's just crazy talk.
Godfather.
'Gun history' is definitely a factor for preparing one's self for defence against guns. If you didn't know what a gun was... you might just walk up to it and peer down the barrel to see what's inside it.
I think I saw that once on YouTube.
"I reckon I dun went an looked down that there barrel."
hmmmmmmm....... SHOCK: AS AMERICANS BOUGHT 170 MILLION GUNS, VIOLENT CRIME FELL 51% by AWR HAWKINS31 Aug 2015 On August 28, the NRA presented ATF and FBI data showing Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has fallen “51 percent.”
The NRA tweeted, “Since ’91, Americans have acquired over 170 million new firearms and violent crimes have declined by 51%.”
This information squares with the findings of a Congressional Research Service (CRS) study covering the slightly shorter period of time from 1994 to 2009. For those years, CRS found that Americans purchased approximately 118 million firearms, and the 1993 “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide” rate of 6.6 per 100,000 fell to 3.6 per 100,000 by the year 2000. It eventually fell all the way to 3.2 per 100,000 in 2011.
That is more than a 50 percent reduction in “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide.”
Then, in 2009—the year the CRS study ended—Obama took office and gun sales began their climb to record levels, which made covering the gap between the 118 million guns that had been purchased by 2009 and the “170 million new guns” that Americans would own by 2015 an easy gap to bridge.
Breitbart News previously reported that there were 21,093,273 background checks for firearms in 2013 alone. And each of those checks were on buyers who could have legally purchased multiple firearms.
The overarching message is simple—more guns, less crime. Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has decreased as gun ownership has increased.
Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.
One of those instances that prove that you can make almost anything out of statistics. Perhaps the lower crime rate is due to higher cell phone use? Cell phone purchases have clearly significantly increased since 1991.
For starters, the violent crime rate has been going down over most of the world since 1990, not just in the USA, and in most of those countries there has not been a large increase in gun ownership. The homicide rate in Canada has also decreased by 50% - can you argue that this has occurred due to more guns? Violent crime is also down in most of Europe. It's a larger phenomenon that is not completely explained but likely has nothing to do with more guns in the US.
Next - the population of the US has also increased by close to 100 million since then, which makes the actual increase per capita less compelling. Did they also publish data on guns taken out of circulation? Did they publish data on how many of those new guns went to people purchasing a gun for the first time, compared to people purchasing their 10th? After all, just how many guns can you carry or use at the same time?
Of course the NRA is presenting these statistics. That doesn't mean their correlation has any explanatory value.
You forget to add, "Nice try, McScruffy!"
Maybe catch him with an autocorrect typo too!
Ha! I now see this was discussed to death in another thread. Sorry; was too busy working yesterday to read any of this.
On a related front, why post the same article in more than one thread? The discussion gets repetitive (as if it wasn't already).
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
Again, no gun in the history of man, has ever been made to defend your home. The intruder doesn't know what you're packing. Basically what you're asking is which gun is more effective at killing quicker. Which is the ak-47, unless you're a marksman and can do a dude between the eyes with a .22
well they make weapons with the specific objective to defend your home. they have shotguns made for hunting and shotguns made specifically for home defense. same with rifles...same with hand guns. and i bought my 9mm to defend my home...not hunt. so i guess I changed history. sweet!
Nope. They are all designed for killing things.
dude you can't just spew out stuff like "no gun history was made for self defence" that's just crazy talk.
Godfather.
'Gun history' is definitely a factor for preparing one's self for defence against guns. If you didn't know what a gun was... you might just walk up to it and peer down the barrel to see what's inside it.
I think I saw that once on YouTube.
"I reckon I dun went an looked down that there barrel."
That's racist
Yah. I'm a hillbillyphobe.
Do you deliberately act this way or is it your true nature?
Again, no gun in the history of man, has ever been made to defend your home. The intruder doesn't know what you're packing. Basically what you're asking is which gun is more effective at killing quicker. Which is the ak-47, unless you're a marksman and can do a dude between the eyes with a .22
well they make weapons with the specific objective to defend your home. they have shotguns made for hunting and shotguns made specifically for home defense. same with rifles...same with hand guns. and i bought my 9mm to defend my home...not hunt. so i guess I changed history. sweet!
Nope. They are all designed for killing things.
dude you can't just spew out stuff like "no gun history was made for self defence" that's just crazy talk.
Godfather.
'Gun history' is definitely a factor for preparing one's self for defence against guns. If you didn't know what a gun was... you might just walk up to it and peer down the barrel to see what's inside it.
I think I saw that once on YouTube.
"I reckon I dun went an looked down that there barrel."
These people are out there. However, I think gun owners are all thought of that way by some people. There is a definite lack of understanding that we are not all like that.
I imagine some people have a mental image of gun owners as a bunch of hillbilly rednecks that like to blast the hell of of stuff with machine guns and then masturbate all over the pile of spent cartridge casings. Some gun owners might do exactly that, but I assure you, they are the extreme minority.
I'm just goofing around. I go that way sometimes.
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Please we can goof around but absolutely no grammar mistakes.
Tried to make a joke using Seinfeld episode quote at thirties expense. Failed.
I'm not familiar with Seinfeld- I'd never catch it.
Again, no gun in the history of man, has ever been made to defend your home. The intruder doesn't know what you're packing. Basically what you're asking is which gun is more effective at killing quicker. Which is the ak-47, unless you're a marksman and can do a dude between the eyes with a .22
well they make weapons with the specific objective to defend your home. they have shotguns made for hunting and shotguns made specifically for home defense. same with rifles...same with hand guns. and i bought my 9mm to defend my home...not hunt. so i guess I changed history. sweet!
Nope. They are all designed for killing things.
dude you can't just spew out stuff like "no gun history was made for self defence" that's just crazy talk.
Godfather.
'Gun history' is definitely a factor for preparing one's self for defence against guns. If you didn't know what a gun was... you might just walk up to it and peer down the barrel to see what's inside it.
I think I saw that once on YouTube.
"I reckon I dun went an looked down that there barrel."
That's racist
Yah. I'm a hillbillyphobe.
Do you deliberately act this way or is it your true nature?
hmmmmmmm....... SHOCK: AS AMERICANS BOUGHT 170 MILLION GUNS, VIOLENT CRIME FELL 51% by AWR HAWKINS31 Aug 2015 On August 28, the NRA presented ATF and FBI data showing Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has fallen “51 percent.”
The NRA tweeted, “Since ’91, Americans have acquired over 170 million new firearms and violent crimes have declined by 51%.”
This information squares with the findings of a Congressional Research Service (CRS) study covering the slightly shorter period of time from 1994 to 2009. For those years, CRS found that Americans purchased approximately 118 million firearms, and the 1993 “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide” rate of 6.6 per 100,000 fell to 3.6 per 100,000 by the year 2000. It eventually fell all the way to 3.2 per 100,000 in 2011.
That is more than a 50 percent reduction in “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide.”
Then, in 2009—the year the CRS study ended—Obama took office and gun sales began their climb to record levels, which made covering the gap between the 118 million guns that had been purchased by 2009 and the “170 million new guns” that Americans would own by 2015 an easy gap to bridge.
Breitbart News previously reported that there were 21,093,273 background checks for firearms in 2013 alone. And each of those checks were on buyers who could have legally purchased multiple firearms.
The overarching message is simple—more guns, less crime. Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has decreased as gun ownership has increased.
Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.
One of those instances that prove that you can make almost anything out of statistics. Perhaps the lower crime rate is due to higher cell phone use? Cell phone purchases have clearly significantly increased since 1991.
For starters, the violent crime rate has been going down over most of the world since 1990, not just in the USA, and in most of those countries there has not been a large increase in gun ownership. The homicide rate in Canada has also decreased by 50% - can you argue that this has occurred due to more guns? Violent crime is also down in most of Europe. It's a larger phenomenon that is not completely explained but likely has nothing to do with more guns in the US.
Next - the population of the US has also increased by close to 100 million since then, which makes the actual increase per capita less compelling. Did they also publish data on guns taken out of circulation? Did they publish data on how many of those new guns went to people purchasing a gun for the first time, compared to people purchasing their 10th? After all, just how many guns can you carry or use at the same time?
Of course the NRA is presenting these statistics. That doesn't mean their correlation has any explanatory value.
You forget to add, "Nice try, McScruffy!"
Maybe catch him with an autocorrect typo too!
Ha! I now see this was discussed to death in another thread. Sorry; was too busy working yesterday to read any of this.
On a related front, why post the same article in more than one thread? The discussion gets repetitive (as if it wasn't already).
I posted the same article just to make a point in both threads since are discussing the same points. my bad on that.
hmmmmmmm....... SHOCK: AS AMERICANS BOUGHT 170 MILLION GUNS, VIOLENT CRIME FELL 51% by AWR HAWKINS31 Aug 2015 On August 28, the NRA presented ATF and FBI data showing Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has fallen “51 percent.”
The NRA tweeted, “Since ’91, Americans have acquired over 170 million new firearms and violent crimes have declined by 51%.”
This information squares with the findings of a Congressional Research Service (CRS) study covering the slightly shorter period of time from 1994 to 2009. For those years, CRS found that Americans purchased approximately 118 million firearms, and the 1993 “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide” rate of 6.6 per 100,000 fell to 3.6 per 100,000 by the year 2000. It eventually fell all the way to 3.2 per 100,000 in 2011.
That is more than a 50 percent reduction in “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide.”
Then, in 2009—the year the CRS study ended—Obama took office and gun sales began their climb to record levels, which made covering the gap between the 118 million guns that had been purchased by 2009 and the “170 million new guns” that Americans would own by 2015 an easy gap to bridge.
Breitbart News previously reported that there were 21,093,273 background checks for firearms in 2013 alone. And each of those checks were on buyers who could have legally purchased multiple firearms.
The overarching message is simple—more guns, less crime. Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has decreased as gun ownership has increased.
Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.
One of those instances that prove that you can make almost anything out of statistics. Perhaps the lower crime rate is due to higher cell phone use? Cell phone purchases have clearly significantly increased since 1991.
For starters, the violent crime rate has been going down over most of the world since 1990, not just in the USA, and in most of those countries there has not been a large increase in gun ownership. The homicide rate in Canada has also decreased by 50% - can you argue that this has occurred due to more guns? Violent crime is also down in most of Europe. It's a larger phenomenon that is not completely explained but likely has nothing to do with more guns in the US.
Next - the population of the US has also increased by close to 100 million since then, which makes the actual increase per capita less compelling. Did they also publish data on guns taken out of circulation? Did they publish data on how many of those new guns went to people purchasing a gun for the first time, compared to people purchasing their 10th? After all, just how many guns can you carry or use at the same time?
Of course the NRA is presenting these statistics. That doesn't mean their correlation has any explanatory value.
You forget to add, "Nice try, McScruffy!"
Maybe catch him with an autocorrect typo too!
Ha! I now see this was discussed to death in another thread. Sorry; was too busy working yesterday to read any of this.
On a related front, why post the same article in more than one thread? The discussion gets repetitive (as if it wasn't already).
I posted the same article just to make a point in both threads since are discussing the same points. my bad on that.
And it's a syllogistic fallacy in both threads. But, hey, has the NRA ever been logical?
hmmmmmmm....... SHOCK: AS AMERICANS BOUGHT 170 MILLION GUNS, VIOLENT CRIME FELL 51% by AWR HAWKINS31 Aug 2015 On August 28, the NRA presented ATF and FBI data showing Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has fallen “51 percent.”
The NRA tweeted, “Since ’91, Americans have acquired over 170 million new firearms and violent crimes have declined by 51%.”
This information squares with the findings of a Congressional Research Service (CRS) study covering the slightly shorter period of time from 1994 to 2009. For those years, CRS found that Americans purchased approximately 118 million firearms, and the 1993 “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide” rate of 6.6 per 100,000 fell to 3.6 per 100,000 by the year 2000. It eventually fell all the way to 3.2 per 100,000 in 2011.
That is more than a 50 percent reduction in “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide.”
Then, in 2009—the year the CRS study ended—Obama took office and gun sales began their climb to record levels, which made covering the gap between the 118 million guns that had been purchased by 2009 and the “170 million new guns” that Americans would own by 2015 an easy gap to bridge.
Breitbart News previously reported that there were 21,093,273 background checks for firearms in 2013 alone. And each of those checks were on buyers who could have legally purchased multiple firearms.
The overarching message is simple—more guns, less crime. Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has decreased as gun ownership has increased.
Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.
One of those instances that prove that you can make almost anything out of statistics. Perhaps the lower crime rate is due to higher cell phone use? Cell phone purchases have clearly significantly increased since 1991.
For starters, the violent crime rate has been going down over most of the world since 1990, not just in the USA, and in most of those countries there has not been a large increase in gun ownership. The homicide rate in Canada has also decreased by 50% - can you argue that this has occurred due to more guns? Violent crime is also down in most of Europe. It's a larger phenomenon that is not completely explained but likely has nothing to do with more guns in the US.
Next - the population of the US has also increased by close to 100 million since then, which makes the actual increase per capita less compelling. Did they also publish data on guns taken out of circulation? Did they publish data on how many of those new guns went to people purchasing a gun for the first time, compared to people purchasing their 10th? After all, just how many guns can you carry or use at the same time?
Of course the NRA is presenting these statistics. That doesn't mean their correlation has any explanatory value.
You forget to add, "Nice try, McScruffy!"
Maybe catch him with an autocorrect typo too!
Ha! I now see this was discussed to death in another thread. Sorry; was too busy working yesterday to read any of this.
On a related front, why post the same article in more than one thread? The discussion gets repetitive (as if it wasn't already).
I posted the same article just to make a point in both threads since are discussing the same points. my bad on that.
And it's a syllogistic fallacy in both threads. But, hey, has the NRA ever been logical?
The statistics mirror the finding of the congressional research center. So an independent center did the research but the nra is promoting it... And why wouldn t they? It s not like the Brady campaign is going to admit to these numbers. The numbers prove that even though there s more guns crime in fact went down. Where s the dispute?
how's cnn? is that liberal enough for you? please pay attention to the last line of the article and make your own inferences. remember, all you anti gunners constantly say the more guns out there equal more crime.
Study: Gun homicides, violence down sharply in past 20 years By CNN Staff Gun-related homicides and crime are "strikingly" down from 20 years ago, despite the American public's belief that firearm crime is on the upswing, a new study said Wednesday.
Looking back 50 years, a Pew Research Center study found U.S. gun homicides rose in the 1960s, gained in the 1970s, peaked in the 1980s and the early 1990s, and then plunged and leveled out the past 20 years.
"Despite national attention to the issue of firearm violence, most Americans are unaware that gun crime is lower today than it was two decades ago," the researchers say.
A Pew survey of Americans in March found 56% believed gun-related crime is higher than 20 years ago and only 12% said it's lower. The survey said 26% believed it stayed the same and 6% didn't know. The new study found U.S. firearm homicides peaked in 1993 at 7.0 deaths per 100,000 people. But by 2010, the rate was 49% lower, and firearm-related violence -- assaults, robberies, sex crimes -- was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993, the study found.
Those drops parallel an overall decline in violent non-fatal crime, with or without a gun, the study said.
In fact, gun-related homicide rates in the late 2000s were "equal to those not seen since the early 1960s," the study found.
Explanations for the drops the past 20 years aren't clear, the study said.
"Researchers have studied the decline in firearm crime and violent crime for many years, and though there are theories to explain the decline, there is no consensus among those who study the issue as to why it happened," the researchers say in a summary.
Despite the decline, the United States still has a higher rate of homicide than other developed countries, the study says. But America doesn't have a higher rate for all other crimes.
The United States also has a higher rate of gun ownership than any other developed country, the study said.
hmmmmmmm....... SHOCK: AS AMERICANS BOUGHT 170 MILLION GUNS, VIOLENT CRIME FELL 51% by AWR HAWKINS31 Aug 2015 On August 28, the NRA presented ATF and FBI data showing Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has fallen “51 percent.”
The NRA tweeted, “Since ’91, Americans have acquired over 170 million new firearms and violent crimes have declined by 51%.”
This information squares with the findings of a Congressional Research Service (CRS) study covering the slightly shorter period of time from 1994 to 2009. For those years, CRS found that Americans purchased approximately 118 million firearms, and the 1993 “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide” rate of 6.6 per 100,000 fell to 3.6 per 100,000 by the year 2000. It eventually fell all the way to 3.2 per 100,000 in 2011.
That is more than a 50 percent reduction in “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide.”
Then, in 2009—the year the CRS study ended—Obama took office and gun sales began their climb to record levels, which made covering the gap between the 118 million guns that had been purchased by 2009 and the “170 million new guns” that Americans would own by 2015 an easy gap to bridge.
Breitbart News previously reported that there were 21,093,273 background checks for firearms in 2013 alone. And each of those checks were on buyers who could have legally purchased multiple firearms.
The overarching message is simple—more guns, less crime. Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has decreased as gun ownership has increased.
Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.
One of those instances that prove that you can make almost anything out of statistics. Perhaps the lower crime rate is due to higher cell phone use? Cell phone purchases have clearly significantly increased since 1991.
For starters, the violent crime rate has been going down over most of the world since 1990, not just in the USA, and in most of those countries there has not been a large increase in gun ownership. The homicide rate in Canada has also decreased by 50% - can you argue that this has occurred due to more guns? Violent crime is also down in most of Europe. It's a larger phenomenon that is not completely explained but likely has nothing to do with more guns in the US.
Next - the population of the US has also increased by close to 100 million since then, which makes the actual increase per capita less compelling. Did they also publish data on guns taken out of circulation? Did they publish data on how many of those new guns went to people purchasing a gun for the first time, compared to people purchasing their 10th? After all, just how many guns can you carry or use at the same time?
Of course the NRA is presenting these statistics. That doesn't mean their correlation has any explanatory value.
You forget to add, "Nice try, McScruffy!"
Maybe catch him with an autocorrect typo too!
Ha! I now see this was discussed to death in another thread. Sorry; was too busy working yesterday to read any of this.
On a related front, why post the same article in more than one thread? The discussion gets repetitive (as if it wasn't already).
I posted the same article just to make a point in both threads since are discussing the same points. my bad on that.
And it's a syllogistic fallacy in both threads. But, hey, has the NRA ever been logical?
The statistics mirror the finding of the congressional research center. So an independent center did the research but the nra is promoting it... And why wouldn t they? It s not like the Brady campaign is going to admit to these numbers. The numbers prove that even though there s more guns crime in fact went down. Where s the dispute?
your dealing with the train...they don't care what the numbers are, all they no know is guns are bad, republicans are evil and Obama is here to save the world and once you've gone outside those guide lines you've become a racist biggot gun nut yehaa American with no real contrubtion value, I can't wait to see this place light up if Trump gets elected (probably not) but boy would it be fun to watch and read the comments here LOL !
hmmmmmmm....... SHOCK: AS AMERICANS BOUGHT 170 MILLION GUNS, VIOLENT CRIME FELL 51% by AWR HAWKINS31 Aug 2015 On August 28, the NRA presented ATF and FBI data showing Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has fallen “51 percent.”
The NRA tweeted, “Since ’91, Americans have acquired over 170 million new firearms and violent crimes have declined by 51%.”
This information squares with the findings of a Congressional Research Service (CRS) study covering the slightly shorter period of time from 1994 to 2009. For those years, CRS found that Americans purchased approximately 118 million firearms, and the 1993 “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide” rate of 6.6 per 100,000 fell to 3.6 per 100,000 by the year 2000. It eventually fell all the way to 3.2 per 100,000 in 2011.
That is more than a 50 percent reduction in “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide.”
Then, in 2009—the year the CRS study ended—Obama took office and gun sales began their climb to record levels, which made covering the gap between the 118 million guns that had been purchased by 2009 and the “170 million new guns” that Americans would own by 2015 an easy gap to bridge.
Breitbart News previously reported that there were 21,093,273 background checks for firearms in 2013 alone. And each of those checks were on buyers who could have legally purchased multiple firearms.
The overarching message is simple—more guns, less crime. Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has decreased as gun ownership has increased.
Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.
One of those instances that prove that you can make almost anything out of statistics. Perhaps the lower crime rate is due to higher cell phone use? Cell phone purchases have clearly significantly increased since 1991.
For starters, the violent crime rate has been going down over most of the world since 1990, not just in the USA, and in most of those countries there has not been a large increase in gun ownership. The homicide rate in Canada has also decreased by 50% - can you argue that this has occurred due to more guns? Violent crime is also down in most of Europe. It's a larger phenomenon that is not completely explained but likely has nothing to do with more guns in the US.
Next - the population of the US has also increased by close to 100 million since then, which makes the actual increase per capita less compelling. Did they also publish data on guns taken out of circulation? Did they publish data on how many of those new guns went to people purchasing a gun for the first time, compared to people purchasing their 10th? After all, just how many guns can you carry or use at the same time?
Of course the NRA is presenting these statistics. That doesn't mean their correlation has any explanatory value.
You forget to add, "Nice try, McScruffy!"
Maybe catch him with an autocorrect typo too!
Ha! I now see this was discussed to death in another thread. Sorry; was too busy working yesterday to read any of this.
On a related front, why post the same article in more than one thread? The discussion gets repetitive (as if it wasn't already).
I posted the same article just to make a point in both threads since are discussing the same points. my bad on that.
And it's a syllogistic fallacy in both threads. But, hey, has the NRA ever been logical?
The statistics mirror the finding of the congressional research center. So an independent center did the research but the nra is promoting it... And why wouldn t they? It s not like the Brady campaign is going to admit to these numbers. The numbers prove that even though there s more guns crime in fact went down. Where s the dispute?
your dealing with the train...they don't care what the numbers are, all they no know is guns are bad, republicans are evil and Obama is here to save the world and once you've gone outside those guide lines you've become a racist biggot gun nut yehaa American with no real contrubtion value, I can't wait to see this place light up if Trump gets elected (probably not) but boy would it be fun to watch and read the comments here LOL !
Godfather.
Godfather: Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has fallen “51 percent.” How can you argue statistical facts and still counter with more guns equal more crime? oh and let's ban certain guns and tax the hell out of ammo? what the hell? I have another article for you godfather.
Chicago crime rate drops as concealed carry applications surge City sees fewer homicides, robberies, burglaries, car thefts as Illinois residents take arms By Kelly Riddell - The Washington Times - Sunday, August 24, 2014 An 86-year-old Illinois man with a concealed carry permit fired his weapon at an armed robbery suspect fleeing police last month, stopping the man in his tracks and allowing the police to make an arrest.
Law enforcement authorities described the man as “a model citizen” who “helped others avoid being victims” at an AT&T store outside Chicago where he witnessed the holdup. The man, whose identity was withheld from the press, prevented others from entering the store during the theft. Since Illinois started granting concealed carry permits this year, the number of robberies that have led to arrests in Chicago has declined 20 percent from last year, according to police department statistics. Reports of burglary and motor vehicle theft are down 20 percent and 26 percent, respectively. In the first quarter, the city’s homicide rate was at a 56-year low.
“It isn’t any coincidence crime rates started to go down when concealed carry was permitted. Just the idea that the criminals don’t know who’s armed and who isn’t has a deterrence effect,” said Richard Pearson, executive director of the Illinois State Rifle Association. “The police department hasn’t changed a single tactic — they haven’t announced a shift in policy or of course — and yet you have these incredible numbers.”
As of July 29 the state had 83,183 applications for concealed carry and had issued 68,549 licenses. By the end of the year, Mr. Pearson estimates, 100,000 Illinois citizens will be packing. When Illinois began processing requests in January, gun training and shooting classes — which are required for the application — were filling up before the rifle association was able to schedule them, Mr. Pearson said. The demand has slowed this summer, but Mr. Pearson expects the state to issue about 300,000 concealed carry permits when all is said and done.
Illinois became the 50th state in the nation to issue concealed weapons permits. An individual permit costs about $600 and requires at least 16 hours of classes. A July study by the Crime Prevention Research Center found that 11.1 million Americans have permits to carry concealed weapons, a 147 percent increase from 4.5 million seven years ago. Meanwhile, homicide and other violent crime rates have dropped by 22 percent.
hmmmmmmm....... SHOCK: AS AMERICANS BOUGHT 170 MILLION GUNS, VIOLENT CRIME FELL 51% by AWR HAWKINS31 Aug 2015 On August 28, the NRA presented ATF and FBI data showing Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has fallen “51 percent.”
The NRA tweeted, “Since ’91, Americans have acquired over 170 million new firearms and violent crimes have declined by 51%.”
This information squares with the findings of a Congressional Research Service (CRS) study covering the slightly shorter period of time from 1994 to 2009. For those years, CRS found that Americans purchased approximately 118 million firearms, and the 1993 “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide” rate of 6.6 per 100,000 fell to 3.6 per 100,000 by the year 2000. It eventually fell all the way to 3.2 per 100,000 in 2011.
That is more than a 50 percent reduction in “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide.”
Then, in 2009—the year the CRS study ended—Obama took office and gun sales began their climb to record levels, which made covering the gap between the 118 million guns that had been purchased by 2009 and the “170 million new guns” that Americans would own by 2015 an easy gap to bridge.
Breitbart News previously reported that there were 21,093,273 background checks for firearms in 2013 alone. And each of those checks were on buyers who could have legally purchased multiple firearms.
The overarching message is simple—more guns, less crime. Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has decreased as gun ownership has increased.
Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.
One of those instances that prove that you can make almost anything out of statistics. Perhaps the lower crime rate is due to higher cell phone use? Cell phone purchases have clearly significantly increased since 1991.
For starters, the violent crime rate has been going down over most of the world since 1990, not just in the USA, and in most of those countries there has not been a large increase in gun ownership. The homicide rate in Canada has also decreased by 50% - can you argue that this has occurred due to more guns? Violent crime is also down in most of Europe. It's a larger phenomenon that is not completely explained but likely has nothing to do with more guns in the US.
Next - the population of the US has also increased by close to 100 million since then, which makes the actual increase per capita less compelling. Did they also publish data on guns taken out of circulation? Did they publish data on how many of those new guns went to people purchasing a gun for the first time, compared to people purchasing their 10th? After all, just how many guns can you carry or use at the same time?
Of course the NRA is presenting these statistics. That doesn't mean their correlation has any explanatory value.
You forget to add, "Nice try, McScruffy!"
Maybe catch him with an autocorrect typo too!
Ha! I now see this was discussed to death in another thread. Sorry; was too busy working yesterday to read any of this.
On a related front, why post the same article in more than one thread? The discussion gets repetitive (as if it wasn't already).
I posted the same article just to make a point in both threads since are discussing the same points. my bad on that.
And it's a syllogistic fallacy in both threads. But, hey, has the NRA ever been logical?
The statistics mirror the finding of the congressional research center. So an independent center did the research but the nra is promoting it... And why wouldn t they? It s not like the Brady campaign is going to admit to these numbers. The numbers prove that even though there s more guns crime in fact went down. Where s the dispute?
your dealing with the train...they don't care what the numbers are, all they no know is guns are bad, republicans are evil and Obama is here to save the world and once you've gone outside those guide lines you've become a racist biggot gun nut yehaa American with no real contrubtion value, I can't wait to see this place light up if Trump gets elected (probably not) but boy would it be fun to watch and read the comments here LOL !
Godfather.
Godfather: Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has fallen “51 percent.” How can you argue statistical facts and still counter with more guns equal more crime? oh and let's ban certain guns and tax the hell out of ammo? what the hell? I have another article for you godfather.
awesome !!! shoot me a link...no pun intended LOL !!!
The numbers are supported and are fine as separate data sets, and I especially love that violent crime is down -- that's great to read. My problem is not one of politics but one of logic (or lack thereof, in this case). There is nothing to connect point A (more guns) and point B (less crime) to equal C (more guns means less crime). It's a conclusion drawn on confirmational bias and no real research.
But, hey, believe what you want. Who needs logic when we've got guns?
The FBI released Crime in the United States, 2013 today, which shows that the estimated number of violent crimes in 2013 decreased 4.4 percent when compared with 2012 figures, and the estimated number of property crimes decreased 4.1 percent. There were an estimated 1,163,146 violent crimes reported to law enforcement last year, along with an estimated 8,632,512 property crimes.
The crime statistics report, issued by the Bureau’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program, contains voluntarily submitted data from 18,415 city, county, state, tribal, campus, and federal law enforcement agencies on specific crimes brought to their attention. They include the violent crimes of murder, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault, and the property crimes of burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson.
The numbers are supported and are fine as separate data sets, and I especially love that violent crime is down -- that's great to read. My problem is not one of politics but one of logic (or lack thereof, in this case). There is nothing to connect point A (more guns) and point B (less crime) to equal C (more guns means less crime). It's a conclusion drawn on confirmational bias and no real research.
But, hey, believe what you want. Who needs logic when we've got guns?
By Steve Annear | Boston Daily | August 30, 2013, 4:17 p.m.
As Boston—and the country as a whole—looks for ways to reduce gun-related deaths and violence, a study from 2007 published in a Harvard University journal is suddenly regaining increased attention for its claims that more control over firearms doesn’t necessarily mean their will be a dip in serious crimes.
In an independent research paper titled “Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?,” first published in Harvard’s Journal of Public Law and Policy, Don B. Kates, a criminologist and constitutional lawyer, and Gary Mauser, Ph.D., a Canadian criminologist and professor at Simon Fraser University, examined the correlation between gun laws and death rates. While not new, as gun debates nationwide heat up, the paper has resurfaced in recent days, specifically with firearm advocates.“International evidence and comparisons have long been offered as proof of the mantra that more guns mean more deaths and that fewer guns, therefore, mean fewer deaths. Unfortunately, such discussions [have] all too often been afflicted by misconceptions and factual error and focus on comparisons that are unrepresentative,” the researchers wrote in their introduction of their findings.
In the 46-page study, which can be read in its entirety here, Kates and Mauser looked at and compared data from the U.S. and parts of Europe to show that stricter laws don’t mean there is less crime. As an example, when looking at “intentional deaths,” or murder, on an international scope, the U.S. falls behind Russia, Estonia, and four other countries, ranking it seventh. More specifically, data shows that in Russia, where guns are banned, the murder rate is significantly higher than in the U.S in comparison. “There is a compound assertion that guns are uniquely available in the United States compared with other modern developed nations, which is why the United States has by far the highest murder rate. Though these assertions have been endlessly repeated, [the latter] is, in fact, false and [the former] is substantially so,” the authors point out, based on their research.
Kates and Mauser clarify that they are not suggesting that gun control causes nations to have higher murder rates, rather, they “observed correlations that nations with stringent gun controls tend to have much higher murder rates than nations that allow guns.”
The study goes on to say:
…the burden of proof rests on the proponents of the more guns equal more death and fewer guns equal less death mantra, especially since they argue public policy ought to be based on that mantra. To bear that burden would at the very least require showing that a large number of nations with more guns have more death and that nations that have imposed stringent gun controls have achieved substantial reductions in criminal violence (or suicide). But those correlations are not observed when a large number of nations are compared across the world. ....... But when it comes to examining nations as a whole, the Harvard study suggests otherwise. “If more guns equal more death and fewer guns equal less death, areas within nations with higher gun ownership should in general have more murders than those with less gun ownership in a similar area. But, in fact, the reverse pattern prevails,” the authors wrote.
Again, no gun in the history of man, has ever been made to defend your home. The intruder doesn't know what you're packing. Basically what you're asking is which gun is more effective at killing quicker. Which is the ak-47, unless you're a marksman and can do a dude between the eyes with a .22
well they make weapons with the specific objective to defend your home. they have shotguns made for hunting and shotguns made specifically for home defense. same with rifles...same with hand guns. and i bought my 9mm to defend my home...not hunt. so i guess I changed history. sweet!
Nope. They are all designed for killing things.
dude you can't just spew out stuff like "no gun history was made for self defence" that's just crazy talk.
Godfather.
'Gun history' is definitely a factor for preparing one's self for defence against guns. If you didn't know what a gun was... you might just walk up to it and peer down the barrel to see what's inside it.
I think I saw that once on YouTube.
"I reckon I dun went an looked down that there barrel."
That's racist
Yah. I'm a hillbillyphobe.
Do you deliberately act this way or is it your true nature?
I'm glad someone asked that. I've been curious.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
The numbers are supported and are fine as separate data sets, and I especially love that violent crime is down -- that's great to read. My problem is not one of politics but one of logic (or lack thereof, in this case). There is nothing to connect point A (more guns) and point B (less crime) to equal C (more guns means less crime). It's a conclusion drawn on confirmational bias and no real research.
But, hey, believe what you want. Who needs logic when we've got guns?
Comments
SHOCK: AS AMERICANS BOUGHT 170 MILLION GUNS, VIOLENT CRIME FELL 51%
by AWR HAWKINS31 Aug 2015
On August 28, the NRA presented ATF and FBI data showing Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has fallen “51 percent.”
The NRA tweeted, “Since ’91, Americans have acquired over 170 million new firearms and violent crimes have declined by 51%.”
This information squares with the findings of a Congressional Research Service (CRS) study covering the slightly shorter period of time from 1994 to 2009. For those years, CRS found that Americans purchased approximately 118 million firearms, and the 1993 “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide” rate of 6.6 per 100,000 fell to 3.6 per 100,000 by the year 2000. It eventually fell all the way to 3.2 per 100,000 in 2011.
That is more than a 50 percent reduction in “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide.”
Then, in 2009—the year the CRS study ended—Obama took office and gun sales began their climb to record levels, which made covering the gap between the 118 million guns that had been purchased by 2009 and the “170 million new guns” that Americans would own by 2015 an easy gap to bridge.
Breitbart News previously reported that there were 21,093,273 background checks for firearms in 2013 alone. And each of those checks were on buyers who could have legally purchased multiple firearms.
The overarching message is simple—more guns, less crime. Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has decreased as gun ownership has increased.
Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.
http://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/CPRC-Mass-Shooting-Analysis-Bloomberg2.pdf
For those that don't want to read the whole report: "Since 2009, only 8 percent of mass public shootings have occurred in places where civilians are allowed to defend themselves."
Thoughts?
170 million 'new' guns since 1991.
For starters, the violent crime rate has been going down over most of the world since 1990, not just in the USA, and in most of those countries there has not been a large increase in gun ownership. The homicide rate in Canada has also decreased by 50% - can you argue that this has occurred due to more guns? Violent crime is also down in most of Europe. It's a larger phenomenon that is not completely explained but likely has nothing to do with more guns in the US.
Next - the population of the US has also increased by close to 100 million since then, which makes the actual increase per capita less compelling. Did they also publish data on guns taken out of circulation? Did they publish data on how many of those new guns went to people purchasing a gun for the first time, compared to people purchasing their 10th? After all, just how many guns can you carry or use at the same time?
Of course the NRA is presenting these statistics. That doesn't mean their correlation has any explanatory value.
Maybe catch him with an autocorrect typo too!
On a related front, why post the same article in more than one thread? The discussion gets repetitive (as if it wasn't already).
Do you deliberately act this way or is it your true nature?
Godfather.
Study: Gun homicides, violence down sharply in past 20 years
By CNN Staff
Gun-related homicides and crime are "strikingly" down from 20 years ago, despite the American public's belief that firearm crime is on the upswing, a new study said Wednesday.
Looking back 50 years, a Pew Research Center study found U.S. gun homicides rose in the 1960s, gained in the 1970s, peaked in the 1980s and the early 1990s, and then plunged and leveled out the past 20 years.
"Despite national attention to the issue of firearm violence, most Americans are unaware that gun crime is lower today than it was two decades ago," the researchers say.
A Pew survey of Americans in March found 56% believed gun-related crime is higher than 20 years ago and only 12% said it's lower. The survey said 26% believed it stayed the same and 6% didn't know.
The new study found U.S. firearm homicides peaked in 1993 at 7.0 deaths per 100,000 people. But by 2010, the rate was 49% lower, and firearm-related violence -- assaults, robberies, sex crimes -- was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993, the study found.
Those drops parallel an overall decline in violent non-fatal crime, with or without a gun, the study said.
In fact, gun-related homicide rates in the late 2000s were "equal to those not seen since the early 1960s," the study found.
Explanations for the drops the past 20 years aren't clear, the study said.
"Researchers have studied the decline in firearm crime and violent crime for many years, and though there are theories to explain the decline, there is no consensus among those who study the issue as to why it happened," the researchers say in a summary.
Despite the decline, the United States still has a higher rate of homicide than other developed countries, the study says. But America doesn't have a higher rate for all other crimes.
The United States also has a higher rate of gun ownership than any other developed country, the study said.
Godfather.
City sees fewer homicides, robberies, burglaries, car thefts as Illinois residents take arms
By Kelly Riddell - The Washington Times - Sunday, August 24, 2014
An 86-year-old Illinois man with a concealed carry permit fired his weapon at an armed robbery suspect fleeing police last month, stopping the man in his tracks and allowing the police to make an arrest.
Law enforcement authorities described the man as “a model citizen” who “helped others avoid being victims” at an AT&T store outside Chicago where he witnessed the holdup. The man, whose identity was withheld from the press, prevented others from entering the store during the theft.
Since Illinois started granting concealed carry permits this year, the number of robberies that have led to arrests in Chicago has declined 20 percent from last year, according to police department statistics. Reports of burglary and motor vehicle theft are down 20 percent and 26 percent, respectively. In the first quarter, the city’s homicide rate was at a 56-year low.
“It isn’t any coincidence crime rates started to go down when concealed carry was permitted. Just the idea that the criminals don’t know who’s armed and who isn’t has a deterrence effect,” said Richard Pearson, executive director of the Illinois State Rifle Association. “The police department hasn’t changed a single tactic — they haven’t announced a shift in policy or of course — and yet you have these incredible numbers.”
As of July 29 the state had 83,183 applications for concealed carry and had issued 68,549 licenses. By the end of the year, Mr. Pearson estimates, 100,000 Illinois citizens will be packing. When Illinois began processing requests in January, gun training and shooting classes — which are required for the application — were filling up before the rifle association was able to schedule them, Mr. Pearson said.
The demand has slowed this summer, but Mr. Pearson expects the state to issue about 300,000 concealed carry permits when all is said and done.
Illinois became the 50th state in the nation to issue concealed weapons permits. An individual permit costs about $600 and requires at least 16 hours of classes.
A July study by the Crime Prevention Research Center found that 11.1 million Americans have permits to carry concealed weapons, a 147 percent increase from 4.5 million seven years ago. Meanwhile, homicide and other violent crime rates have dropped by 22 percent.
Godfather.
But, hey, believe what you want. Who needs logic when we've got guns?
https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2014/november/crime-statistics-for-2013-released/crime-statistics-for-2013-released
11/10/14
The FBI released Crime in the United States, 2013 today, which shows that the estimated number of violent crimes in 2013 decreased 4.4 percent when compared with 2012 figures, and the estimated number of property crimes decreased 4.1 percent. There were an estimated 1,163,146 violent crimes reported to law enforcement last year, along with an estimated 8,632,512 property crimes.
The crime statistics report, issued by the Bureau’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program, contains voluntarily submitted data from 18,415 city, county, state, tribal, campus, and federal law enforcement agencies on specific crimes brought to their attention. They include the violent crimes of murder, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault, and the property crimes of burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson.
i think carry permits in chicago definitely helped deter crime.
however no matter what you say it totally kills your argument that more guns equals more crime.
http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/blog/2013/08/30/harvard-gun-study-no-decrease-in-violence-with-ban/
Harvard Publication On Gun Laws Resurfaces As Talks About Firearms Continue
A study comparing international gun laws shows that getting rid of firearms might not be the solution to reducing overall violence.
By Steve Annear | Boston Daily | August 30, 2013, 4:17 p.m.
As Boston—and the country as a whole—looks for ways to reduce gun-related deaths and violence, a study from 2007 published in a Harvard University journal is suddenly regaining increased attention for its claims that more control over firearms doesn’t necessarily mean their will be a dip in serious crimes.
In an independent research paper titled “Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?,” first published in Harvard’s Journal of Public Law and Policy, Don B. Kates, a criminologist and constitutional lawyer, and Gary Mauser, Ph.D., a Canadian criminologist and professor at Simon Fraser University, examined the correlation between gun laws and death rates. While not new, as gun debates nationwide heat up, the paper has resurfaced in recent days, specifically with firearm advocates.“International evidence and comparisons have long been offered as proof of the mantra that more guns mean more deaths and that fewer guns, therefore, mean fewer deaths. Unfortunately, such discussions [have] all too often been afflicted by misconceptions and factual error and focus on comparisons that are unrepresentative,” the researchers wrote in their introduction of their findings.
In the 46-page study, which can be read in its entirety here, Kates and Mauser looked at and compared data from the U.S. and parts of Europe to show that stricter laws don’t mean there is less crime. As an example, when looking at “intentional deaths,” or murder, on an international scope, the U.S. falls behind Russia, Estonia, and four other countries, ranking it seventh. More specifically, data shows that in Russia, where guns are banned, the murder rate is significantly higher than in the U.S in comparison. “There is a compound assertion that guns are uniquely available in the United States compared with other modern developed nations, which is why the United States has by far the highest murder rate. Though these assertions have been endlessly repeated, [the latter] is, in fact, false and [the former] is substantially so,” the authors point out, based on their research.
Kates and Mauser clarify that they are not suggesting that gun control causes nations to have higher murder rates, rather, they “observed correlations that nations with stringent gun controls tend to have much higher murder rates than nations that allow guns.”
The study goes on to say:
…the burden of proof rests on the proponents of the more guns equal more death and fewer guns equal less death mantra, especially since they argue public policy ought to be based on that mantra. To bear that burden would at the very least require showing that a large number of nations with more guns have more death and that nations that have imposed stringent gun controls have achieved substantial reductions in criminal violence (or suicide). But those correlations are not observed when a large number of nations are compared across the world.
.......
But when it comes to examining nations as a whole, the Harvard study suggests otherwise. “If more guns equal more death and fewer guns equal less death, areas within nations with higher gun ownership should in general have more murders than those with less gun ownership in a similar area. But, in fact, the reverse pattern prevails,” the authors wrote.
Godfather.