As Gun Ownership Rises, Gun Crimes Plummet

[PopeyesPappy]

Nobody, I mean nobody, messes with my family here in Arizona. Dillon Enterprises here in Scottsdale solved my worries: [ Image ]  :shock:  Bring it on MF's.    Solitary

Puny 5.56. Call me when you get one of these.

[aitm]

Nobody, I mean nobody, messes with my family here in Arizona. Dillon Enterprises here in Scottsdale solved my worries: [ Image ]  :shock:  Bring it on MF's.    Solitary

Puny 5.56. Call me when you get one of these.

[ Image ]

Holy fuck..when they start measuring shells in the meters instead of the mili....I mean...holy shit.

[Colanth]

The thing is that Japan has an homogeneous society, for the most part.  So there is less tribalism going on.  Also, they have 99% conviction rate on crimes of all types.

But is that because once you get arrested you get convicted (or made to confess), whether you're guilty or not?  Because they only make an arrest when they know they can get a conviction?  Or some other reason?

In Switzerland, where all adults have guns:

The annual rate of homicide by any means per 100,000 population was 0.70, which is one of the lowest in the world.  The annual rate of homicide by guns per 100,000 population was 0.52.

But is that due to the fact that many (not all, not even most) adults walk around armed?  Or is it due to the fact that Swiss society has a different philosophy, as a whole, than, say, American society?  Or something entirely different?

What all of this, including the OP, boils down to is that correlation isn't causation.  Maybe gun killings have gone down due to the steadily declining average number of sunspots in recent decades.

[LikelyToBreak]

Jmpty wrote in part:

Don't know a lot about Japanese culture, eh?

Nope, just what I learned in my college course on the subject and what I learned while living there for 6 years.

Jmpty wrote in part:

Yeah, because all mass shooting have been stopped by a civilian with a gun. Wait, What?

Not all of them, but several have been.  Google it.

Jmpty wrote in part:

You should really read the details of the Swiss gun policy before using it as an example.

Sorry, I'm not a Swiss lawyer.  But it is easy to Google.

Jmpty wrote in part:

How so? Most C&C permits are issued to suburban white guys.

Come on, I was just advocating for more Blacks to get armed.  But, the sorry fact of the matter is, cities tend to only issue to those people the city feels have a need for CCW's.  Many Blacks live in these city which deny them the right to have a CCW.  In Los Angeles, you can only get a CCW if you are rich. (Read and can contribute to campaign funds.)  Google it.  It was a small scandal there a few years ago.

Bottom line as Mark Twain wrote:

There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.

I don't think we can only go by crime statistics to determine if the American people should be disarmed or not.  I think we need to recognize the reason for 2nd Amendment, which is to keep government agents in-line.  Granted, guns should be our last recourse, but it beats our last recourse of just allowing ourselves to be disappeared.  It also seems prudent to resist crime against our persons.

I realize, many people only know about guns from what they see in the movies and on TV.  If that is what I went by, I would be against private firearm ownership too.  But, 43% to 55% of households in America have a firearm in them.  And people are not dropping dead everyday in every city because someone misuses a gun.  

What I am saying is, try to keep an open mind about private firearm ownership.  It is not as "evil" as many would make it out to be.

[mykcob4]

link

A couple of new studies reveal the gun-control hypesters' worst nightmare...more people are buying firearms, while firearm-related homicides and suicides are steadily diminishing. What crackpots came up with these conclusions? One set of statistics was compiled by the U.S. Department of Justice. The other was reported by the Pew Research Center.

According to DOJ's Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. gun-related homicides dropped 39 percent over the course of 18 years, from 18,253 during 1993, to 11,101 in 2011. During the same period, non-fatal firearm crimes decreased even more, a whopping 69 percent. The majority of those declines in both categories occurred during the first 10 years of that time frame. Firearm homicides declined from 1993 to 1999, rose through 2006, and then declined again through 2011. Non-fatal firearm violence declined from 1993 through 2004, then fluctuated in the mid-to-late 2000s.

And where did the bad people who did the shooting get most of their guns? Were those gun show "loopholes" responsible? Nope. According to surveys DOJ conducted of state prison inmates during 2004 (the most recent year of data available), only two percent who owned a gun at the time of their offense bought it at either a gun show or flea market. About 10 percent said they purchased their gun from a retail shop or pawnshop, 37 percent obtained it from family or friends, and another 40 percent obtained it from an illegal source.

I think these findings smell of "PUSH POLL" since reviewing the DOJ findings it was conducted during the Bush Admin and ONLY in Virginia. Heres an article that used MANY sources and cites the sources that states the opposite of the OP:
http://blogs.rgj.com/factchecker/2012/1 ... ess-crime/

[Fidel_Castronaut]

Wouldn't have happens If gunz.

[LikelyToBreak]

Sorry Colanth, I missed your post earlier.

Colanth wrote in part:

But is that because once you get arrested you get convicted (or made to confess), whether you're guilty or not? Because they only make an arrest when they know they can get a conviction? Or some other reason?

My amateur studies of Japanese culture would lead me to its' mostly "Because they only make an arrest when they know they can get a conviction?"  Maybe some of the other too.  

The thing is, they are tough of crime.  I was watching a national news program and they had about 5 minutes about a kid stealing change out of people's parked cars.  Slow news day, but can you imagine that here in the US?  

Colanth also wrote in part:

But is that due to the fact that many (not all, not even most) adults walk around armed? Or is it due to the fact that Swiss society has a different philosophy, as a whole, than, say, American society? Or something entirely different?

Have to admit that I don't know much about the Swiss.  It might be because they all have to go in for military training.  Kind of levels things out for everyone.  But, the point I was trying to make was, that almost all adults have easy access to firearms.  And we are talking about military weapons. And they are not shooting each other down just because they have guns to do it with.

Colanth also wrote in part:

What all of this, including the OP, boils down to is that correlation isn't causation.

That is very true.  But, I think it is safe to say that there is no correlation with more people having guns and violence with guns goes up either.  As there is no real correlation showing that to be the case.

mykcob4, polls can be very accurate when done correctly.  But, you are probably right on this particular poll.

[rickcopeland648]

Weird... then shouldn't places like Japan be rampant in gun-crime, since they have less guns?

And wouldn't the safest occupation one could have be involvement in the drug trade?

[Seabear]

So when some of these quoted studies use the broad term "guns" in drawing their conclusions, does that mean any gun, or handguns? Because I am willing to guess they mean handguns. I find it difficult to believe that people who have a shotgun or rifle in their home are 3x or 5x or whatever more likely to be victims of gun violence or being shot etc.

I am willimg to bet the studies are conducted specifically on the effects of handguns, but the results are applied generically to all "guns". In spite of high profile mass shootings like Newtown or Aurora, very few shootings involve rifles or shotguns.

The problem is with the proliferation of handguns, not guns in general. Handguns are relatively cheap, plentiful, easy to obtain, concealable, and require little skill to use at close range. So lets focus on the biggest problem, and avoid broad-brush fallacies.

[Jack89]

It's amazing how people ignore demographics when it comes to violent crime, even when they're mentioned in the OP's link.  Why is that?  Half of all homicides in the U.S. are young black men killing young black men,  then it's young Hispanic men killing young Hispanic men, whites come in third, and Asians are down right civilized.  Considering that blacks make up about 13% of the population, Hispanics about 17%, whites at 63% and Asians about 5%, there's something going on here.  

Sure, gun ownership may have something to do with it.  Maybe.  But the demographic data suggest cultural and socioeconomic factors play a much bigger role.  

Think about it.  50% of all homicides are committed by a small fraction of an ethnic group that makes up 13% of the population.  According to the DOJ, this is a trend that has been occurring for at least 28 years.  Ask yourself why.  Hell, look at the OP's link again to get some ideas.

[Poison Tree]

Colanth also wrote in part:

But is that due to the fact that many (not all, not even most) adults walk around armed? Or is it due to the fact that Swiss society has a different philosophy, as a whole, than, say, American society? Or something entirely different?

Have to admit that I don't know much about the Swiss.  It might be because they all have to go in for military training.  Kind of levels things out for everyone.  But, the point I was trying to make was, that almost all adults have easy access to firearms.  And we are talking about military weapons. And they are not shooting each other down just because they have guns to do it with.

Switzerland is an aberration. They have high gun-ownership rates and a gun crime rate that is low by American standards and high by European standards, which creates an odd situation where pro-gun Americans and anti-gun Europeans both point to Switzerland as proof. Switzerland's gun ownership rate is high, but significantly lower than American: 45.7 guns per 100 people compared to 94.3; 29% of houses with guns (10% with handguns) against roughly 40% [depending on year] (18% for handguns)* [since America has higher gun ownership and so many more guns, yet more gun crimes and vastly more crime in general, it seems we should expect other influences to play a major part]. As you mentioned, most/many of the guns owned are a result of military service, but everyone entering service needs to pass a mental health screening--can you imagine the outcry if one were suggested in America before a person could buy a gun?. Swiss guns tend to be long, not hand. Permits to carry weapons are only given if you demonstrate a need, otherwise guns can only be transported for a specific reason, unloaded.

Some other places to start looking to explain Switzerland's low crime rate is its low income inequality, it has a high quality of life score (although America's is not low), a higher happiness index (however much value you put in that stat) and a good social safety net.

*Swiss numbers are fairly reliable statistics, largely basses on the government knowing who kept their modified-military weapon and who applied to buy guns, while us numbers tend to be less reliable and basses off surveys.

[Johan]

Statistics. Was there ever a better example of a love/hate relationship? So useful and hard to ignore when they support your argument. And yet so easy to apply to questions which they in fact never intended to try to answer.

[Seabear]

It's amazing how people ignore demographics when it comes to violent crime, even when they're mentioned in the OP's link.  Why is that?  Half of all homicides in the U.S. are young black men killing young black men,  then it's young Hispanic men killing young Hispanic men, whites come in third, and Asians are down right civilized.  Considering that blacks make up about 13% of the population, Hispanics about 17%, whites at 63% and Asians about 5%, there's something going on here.  

Sure, gun ownership may have something to do with it.  Maybe.  But the demographic data suggest cultural and socioeconomic factors play a much bigger role.  

Think about it.  50% of all homicides are committed by a small fraction of an ethnic group that makes up 13% of the population.  According to the DOJ, this is a trend that has been occurring for at least 28 years.  Ask yourself why.  Hell, look at the OP's link again to get some ideas.

Good point. Perhaps there are more variables at work here than simply the existence or non-existence of guns.

@FrankDK: this is why most gun owners are "religious" about taking away guns... be we aren't the ones committing the crimes!

Drunk driving kills a lot of people, so we are taking YOUR car to fix the problem. You know, just to be safe. And please, no arguments that YOU never drink and drive... the statistics speak for themselves: no cars result in lower instances of drunk driving deaths. Don't be one of those people who tries to "religiously" hang on to their car simply because you aren't part of the problem. Just give it up now, please. You'll be safer.

[Cocoa Beware]

I don't get it.

The claim is that having more guns decreases the amount of gun crime?

That's kind of like making the claim that fewer guns will increase the amount of gun crime (once you do a bit of deduction) That would make about as much sense too.

There are myriad ways to manipulate these kinds of statistics I suppose.

[Jmpty]

It's amazing how people ignore demographics when it comes to violent crime, even when they're mentioned in the OP's link.  Why is that?  Half of all homicides in the U.S. are young black men killing young black men,  then it's young Hispanic men killing young Hispanic men, whites come in third, and Asians are down right civilized.  Considering that blacks make up about 13% of the population, Hispanics about 17%, whites at 63% and Asians about 5%, there's something going on here.  

Sure, gun ownership may have something to do with it.  Maybe.  But the demographic data suggest cultural and socioeconomic factors play a much bigger role.  

Think about it.  50% of all homicides are committed by a small fraction of an ethnic group that makes up 13% of the population.  According to the DOJ, this is a trend that has been occurring for at least 28 years.  Ask yourself why.  Hell, look at the OP's link again to get some ideas.

Good point. Perhaps there are more variables at work here than simply the existence or non-existence of guns.

@FrankDK: this is why most gun owners are "religious" about taking away guns... be we aren't the ones committing the crimes!

Drunk driving kills a lot of people, so we are taking YOUR car to fix the problem. You know, just to be safe. And please, no arguments that YOU never drink and drive... the statistics speak for themselves: no cars result in lower instances of drunk driving deaths. Don't be one of those people who tries to "religiously" hang on to their car simply because you aren't part of the problem. Just give it up now, please. You'll be safer.

No, no, no, less cars mean MORE drunk driving deaths. We need more cars.