he's "just" a scared boy who's tired of being bullied. guarantee it.
how do i know he's not a psychopath? he put the gun down.
how do i know he's not a psychopath? he put the gun down.
It just shows that deaths (including murder, accidents and suicide) correlate to ownership.
Ima take a WILD guess and suggest that outlier is Texas.
he's "just" a scared boy who's tired of being bullied. guarantee it.
how do i know he's not a psychopath? he put the gun down.
It shows that Mother Jones is full of shit. Their source shows that Wyoming has 15.6 gun deaths per 100,000, yet their chart has Wyoming near 19.
Even if the chart were accurate, it would simply be showing a correlation between ownership and suicides. There's a reason that all deaths are grouped together--a chart of homicides doesn't fit the narrative.
Edit: Here's a chart of gun ownership to homicide rate based on this data with DC excluded. The states with low ownership rates don't look particularly appealing.
I read through the rest of the "facts" in that bullshit article. The liars who wrote it consistently distort or outright fabricate the data from the sources they link. For example, "Around 40% of all legal gun sales involve private sellers and don't require background checks. 40% of prison inmates who used guns in their crimes got them this way" links to this study, which never mentions "private sellers" aside from drug dealers and friends/family (table 8).
I guess they're relying on their readers being too lazy or too stupid to actually look at the source data. This is seriously one of the most blatantly dishonest articles I've ever read.
It shows that Mother Jones is full of shit. Their source shows that Wyoming has 15.6 gun deaths per 100,000, yet their chart has Wyoming near 19.
This chart has it at 18.1. I'm guessing the different data are a result of different time frames.
http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/usa/wyoming-firearms-death-rate
Edit: for each data set, the relative positions are about the same.
As I said, even if the chart is accurate, it's simply showing a correlation between gun ownership and the suicides that account for the overwhelming majority of gun deaths. We've seen that there is no correlation between ownership and homicides, so Mother Jones' claim that the chart debunks the "guns don't kill people--people kill people" argument is extremely misleading at best. We all know that the "guns don't kill people" claim is referring to murder, not suicide.
Take away an even 60 percent across the board for suicides and you'd have a similar chart albeit lower.
Including suicides though it debunks the myth that guns make people safer. If there's no gun there's nothing to shoot.
...
I posted the chart of homicides above. It's not even remotely similar.
Suicides are not "an even 60% across the board." Over 90% of Wyoming gun deaths are suicides, whereas fewer than 50% of New Jersey gun deaths are suicides. The suicide rate generally increases with the firearm ownership rate. The homicide rate does not.
Mother Jones explicitly claimed to be debunking the "guns don't kill people--people kill people" claim, which is referring to homicides. Do you seriously not understand why their chart is sleazy and dishonest?
Well maybe we can agree on a couple of things: Put a gun in the hand of a primate and the results are often unpredictable and dangerous. Those same primates can be trained to shoot at targets, but they all don't want to be trained. Gotta shoot at something!
Two new studies confirm gun control's worst nightmare: More guns, less crime
Two new studies released at the beginning of May 2013 have shown that the primary factor in the reduction of the number of gun homicides and violent gun crimes is not gun control, but rather the proliferation of legal gun ownership.
In a study released by Pew Research, violent gun crimes are significantly lower now than they were at their peak during the mid 1990s. Gun homicides declined 49% from 1993 to 2010, despite the fact that population in the United States grew during the same period.
Other violent crimes involving firearms including robberies, assaults, and sex crimes declined 75% in 2011 as compared to 1993. The data also showed that six-in-ten firearms deaths are actually suicides, meaning they are not victims of criminal violence.
According to Bureau of Justice Statistics, there were 31,672 deaths from guns in the U.S. during 2010. Nearly 20,000 of those deaths were gun related suicides.
Unfortunately, the vast majority of Americans are unaware of this decline in firearms violence. The Pew study found that 56% incorrectly perceive that gun crime is actually higher now than it was two decades ago.
The Pew study utilized data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the DOJ National Crime Victimization Survey and the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports.
The same trends are mirrored in a May 2013 Justice Department study from the Bureau of Justice Statistics. According to this study, firearms homicides in 2011 are down 39% since 1993, while non-fatal violent crimes involving firearm declined 69% during the same period.
One interesting aspect of the DOJ study showed that in 2004, state prison inmates were surveyed regarding the source of the firearm they used during the commission of their offense. The survey showed that less than 2% purchased their firearm at a gun show or flea market, 37% obtained a gun from a friend or family member, while 40% obtained their firearm from an illegal source.
There is also clearly no relationship between the number of guns and firearms related violence. In December 2012, the FBI reported a record 2.78 million background checks for firearms purchases. In November 2012, the number of background checks was just over 2 million. The total of FBI background checks for 2012 numbered 19.6 million, an increase of 19% over 2011.
Media attention has not focused on the decline in gun related violence, but rather has emphasized attention on mass shootings like those in Aurora, CO and Newtown, CT. While mass shootings are certainly of great interest and concern to the public, they are a small percentage of all shootings that occur in the United States in a given year.
Fortunately, mass murders, while tragic, are exceeding rare. Mass shootings represent less than 1% of all shooting related homicides.
While many gun control advocates, including Senator Diane Feinstein attempted to use the Newtown tragedy to advance her Assault Weapons Ban proposal, an DOJ analysis of the 1994 ban failed to show that there was a "significant impact" on assault weapons use and failed to support the allegation that large capacity magazines lead to more violent gun crimes.
In all of these studies, there is no data that supports the idea that a reinstatement of any Assault Weapons Ban would have an impact on future tragedies.
While researchers have been unable to reach a clear consensus on exactly why crime rates have declined so dramatically, advocates of gun control have used the events in Newtown to redouble their efforts to pass more limiting legislation, despite compelling evidence that draconian gun laws do not result in a reduction of violent crime.
The City of Chicago has some of the toughest gun laws in America, yet in 2012 there were 512 gun related homicides, an increase of 15% over 2011. The murder rate in Chicago three times the murder rate in the rest of Illinois. Law enforcement also reports that 80% of the murders and shootings in Chicago are gang-related. It would appear that the 'gun problem' in Chicago is really more of a 'gang problem'.
Despite the efforts of gun control advocates and much of the mainstream media to convince the American people that they must surrender some of their Second Amendment rights to reduce gun violence, the data simply does not support that conclusion.
Perhaps these revelations will help the American people recognize the wisdom of Ben Franklin's words when he said "Those who would give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty or safety."
APA Report on Gun Violence Identifies Precursors and Promising Solutions
Behavioral threat assessment identified as most effective prevention strategy
WASHINGTON There is no single personality profile that can reliably predict who will use a gun in a violent act but individual prediction is not necessary for violence prevention, according to a comprehensive report on gun violence released today by the American Psychological Association.
The report summarizes the psychological research that has helped develop evidence-based programs that can prevent violence through both primary and secondary interventions. Primary prevention programs can reduce risk factors for violence in the general population. Secondary prevention programs can help individuals who are experiencing emotional difficulties or interpersonal conflicts before they escalate into violence.
"In making predictions about the risk for mass shootings, there is no consistent psychological profile or set of warning signs that can be used reliably to identify such individuals in the general population," according to the report, entitled Gun Violence: Prediction, Prevention, and Policy.
For this reason, primary violence prevention programs are critical. In addition, at the individual level, a promising approach is the strategy of behavioral threat assessment, which involves identifying and intervening with individuals who have communicated threats of violence or engaged in behavior that indicates preparation to commit a violent act.
In addition, the vast majority of people suffering from a mental illness are not violent, and despite decades of research, "there is only a moderate ability to identify individuals most likely to commit serious acts of violence," the report notes. When a person does resort to violence, that behavior is typically associated with a confluence of "individual, family, school, peer, community and sociocultural factors that interact over time," and appropriate access to mental health treatment can reduce gun violence, the report says. However, the availability of such mental health care remains "woefully insufficient," it adds.
Written by a task force composed of psychologists and other researchers, the report synthesizes the available science on the complex underpinnings of gun violence, from gender and culture to gun policies and prevention strategies. APA commissioned the report in response to the shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., last December and at a movie theater in Aurora, Colo., in July 2012.
The report is divided into two major areas: antecedents to gun violence and what works i.e., tactics and policies that have proven effective in gun violence prediction and prevention. Among its other major conclusions:
- Behavioral threat assessment teams composed of trained experts who gather information and determine whether a person is on a path to violence are the most effective tool currently available to prevent episodes of mass violence like those in Newtown, Conn., Fort Hood, Texas, and the Washington, D.C., Navy Yard.
- For those at risk for violence, access to mental health care can help prevent acts of violence, but exclusive focus on mental health issues will not solve the problem of gun violence.
- Because a propensity for violence can begin early in life, there needs to be a focus on family and community environments that promote healthy development and a continuum of care for troubled individuals.
- Research has shown that early intervention with at-risk families can improve parenting skills and disrupt the pathway from early-onset aggression to violence.
- To reduce gun violence at the community level there must be a comprehensive, coordinated approach taking advantage of the training and skills of law enforcement, educators and mental health providers.
More stuff.
All I know is that my guns haven't killed anybody yet (and aren't likely to unless certain meth addicts break into my house and I catch them in the act). This might be in part because I'm neither a criminal nor a psychopathic murderer, and I am not suicidal.
That shows overall violence not just guns. Change that line to school shootings and you'd see two parallel lines.
I didn't see that chart at the link, but the list of states looks to be similar to the Mother Jones chart (and the list in the link below). They show that in STATES where there is a higher ownership rate, murders are more likely.
Thanks, I admit I didn't check that. But here's data for just murders by state. The same states occupy very similar positions as on my chart from Mother Jones:
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murd...ally-and-state
All I know is that my guns haven't killed anybody yet (and aren't likely to unless certain meth addicts break into my house and I catch them in the act). This might be in part because I'm neither a criminal nor a psychopathic murderer, and I am not suicidal.
When facts don't support your cause, just make shit up instead.Take away an even 60 percent across the board for suicides and you'd have a similar chart albeit lower.
Including suicides though it debunks the myth that guns make people safer. If there's no gun there's nothing to shoot.
This is the same data I charted, except this is all homicides instead of just gun homicides. It's from the FBI Uniform Crime Report. The data looks nothing like the Mother Jones chart. There is no correlation between gun ownership and murder rate.
That's good, but you know many people are those things. To protect the rights of the sane, should we make it so easy for the criminals and insane to get guns? To me the trade-off isn't worth it.
Knives can be dangerous and used for suicide or murder. To me that trade off is acceptable because of the utility of knives (not to mention that you can't kill 10 people at 300yd with a knife). Same goes for fire. Guns are designed and used for violence and target shooting. I don't see a lot of utility.
False dilemma (false dichotomy, fallacy of bifurcation, black-or-white fallacy) two alternative statements are held to be the only possible options, when in reality there are more.
Q: Did gun control in Australia lead to more murders there last year?
A: This Gun History Lesson is recycled bunk from a decade ago. Murders in Australia actually are down to record lows.