Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
Maybe guns are the problem.
Fine, if you're going to quote Wikipedia, then, again, let's be consistent:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gangs_in_the_United_States
So, if you really think that gangs in the US and UK are comparable by any metric, well... no point in arguing. Part of a productive argument (rather than being like dogs pissing on trees) is to admit what common ground there is, and attempt to build understanding from that common ground. And even your cited page states that 65% of gun-murder in the UK is gang-related. I'm not going to dig up the stats, but I've read many times that the figure is higher in the US. Perhaps that higher percentage is after accounting for gun accidents and suicides. Even so, it would put "unaccounted for" gun-caused murders in the country down into the hundreds.
I've already cited stats in this thread showing that after accidents and suicides, the remaining percentage of "homicides" caused by guns is less than 40% of the 12,000 figure you keep citing.
If you say that gangs in the UK and US are neatly comparable, then it's clear from the above that the vast majority of genuine murders in this country (committed with a gun) are gangland in nature.
And if you say that gangs in the UK and US are fundamentally not comparable, then you should stop citing anything about UK statistics to make your points.
Really, the two societies are SO different, on SO many fundamental metrics completely unrelated to the "gun culture," that comparisons between them on the gun issue are really quite specious. I notice that you don't try to compare other developed nations that HAVE a "gun culture" and with ready and quite easy access to guns, because those are counterarguments to your perspective.
And, keep in mind that I keep saying that I personally don't give a rip about what gun-purchase measured get enacted. I think that whole approach is laughable, futile, and pretty much harmless. So, I have no dog in that fight. ALL that bothers me about this nationwide debate is that it takes attention away from what really ARE serious issues that we would better devote our national will to addressing.
We have a GANG problem in this country, and it is far, far out of proportion to that of, say, the UK.
And it's a problem that can be solved, and solved very quickly, if we would devote 1/10 of the national will to it that we presently devote to the ridiculous war on drugs.
|
|
hillrat
Trad climber
reno, nv
|
|
Well, I just put in for big game tags. Got nothing to do with crime, murder (unless you're the vegan type and care to accuse me of that), or whatever some newsweek article had to say about firearms. Funny, it didn't seem to affect my ego either.
Maybe people are the problem?
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
Maybe people are the problem?
Certain ones, obviously.
Good luck with your hunt. Anything edible you don't want, let me know... I've always wanted to try deer heart... elk heart would be interesting too.
From what I gathered hunting in CA is a pain in the ass. I will be sticking to squirrel and rabbit until I move to another state.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
You mean that the FBI is wrong, apparently.
Why would that be what I would "apparently" mean? In your mind are there REALLY no other viable alternatives? (This is exactly what I mean by a lack of philosophical charity.)
The number cited in the article you linked spanned a four-year period, and the numbers do decline year by year. For 2011, the FBI claims 12,664 "murders and non-negligent manslaughters." I'm guessing that this is where you get the "12,000 murders" figure that you state repeatedly on this thread. But the FBI heading is actually a technical term, which I'll get to in a moment.
Further confusing the picture is that many other credible sites do not state the same figures. Some examples....
The Washington Post cites 9960 gun-caused homicides, which includes murders, accidents, and suicides, for the year 2007. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/nation/gun-homicides-ownership/table/
Factcheck reports about 11,000 murders in 2010, which is about 3,000 less than the FBI: http://factcheck.org/2012/12/gun-rhetoric-vs-gun-facts/
Given that gun-violence rates have steadily declined over the last five years (even as gun sales have increased significantly), a figure of 11,000 for 2010 would not correlate well with the FBI figure of over 12,000 for one year later.
As I've cited already up-thread, the CDC’s data show there were 11,078 homicides committed with guns in 2010, and their data includes suicides and accidental deaths. This correlates well with the Factcheck figure for that same year. However, again, this comes widely apart from the FBI figure, AND, unlike the FBI figure, it DOES include accidental and suicide death by gun, making the disconnect from the FBI figure even wider.
I could go on and on with this.
So, are ALL these credible sites (including the CDC!) saying that the FBI figures are wrong? Well, not so fast.
Perhaps some of the disconnect comes in the form of definitions. The FBI's tables refer to "murder and non-negligent manslaughter," which is a technical term meaning: "The willful (non-negligent) killing of one human being by another."
This definition is EXTREMELY open-ended, and the definition is further muddied by the FBI's own caveat: "The classification of this offense is based solely on police investigation as opposed to the determination of a court, medical examiner, coroner, jury, or other judicial body."
Uhhh... HOLD the presses (and superficial conclusions)!
PLEASE NOTE: the FBI figures are published pre-review by other authorities, including (most notably) judges and juries. What this means is that the police/FBI may "investigate" (and thereby add to the FBI "murder" statistics) a killing that is later ruled a "justifiable homicide," accident, suicide, or other non-murder.
The point is that it is very, very difficult to arrive at THE FIGURE that accurately represents exactly how many MURDERS (and murders ONLY) that are committed with a gun.
So, perhaps better than suggesting (or claiming that others are suggesting) that "The FBI is wrong," it would be better to actually delve into (rather than take a typically simplistic and superficial view) what all of the cited "murder" figures really represent. As in the case of this whole debate, "the facts" require some careful, thoughtful, and even complex analysis.
Even a pretty superficial analysis, however, indicates that the FBI statistics contain significantly inflated values for "murder," as these statistics (by the FBI's own definition) are pre-review and therefore "raw." And the FBI does NOT go back in time as these "investigation figures" are later vetted by courts and other agencies in order to correct the figures to properly reflect the final determination. So, the FBI figures are (and always will be) indeed RAW and thereby necessarily inflated.
I haven't taken the time to look into the many other studies, as I have better things to do with my life than a deep scholarly analysis of the research on gun-crime.
That's not a punt. Notice that in just this very brief overview I have shown what COULD be done to properly understand the figures various credible sites report. That's all I need to know to be confident that the figure of "12,000 murders" that you float all over this thread is entirely unreliable and certainly significantly inflated.
Your use of that figure reflects, yet again, a very superficial and over-simplified view of the data. The CDC figures are likely MUCH more reliable, and they cite a lower figure than does the FBI. Furthermore, their figure includes accidents and suicides by gun that the FBI's does not. So, the CDC reports a lower figure EVEN INCLUDING accidents and suicides by gun.
Furthermore, in 2009, the CDC reported that only 36.7% of gun-caused deaths were homicides (what the FBI would classify as "murder and non-negligent manslaughter"). Contrasting the FBI and CDC data produces a distant corollary of about 11,000 to 14,000 "homicides" by gun in 2009 or 2010. The BIG difference, however, is that the FBI figures are RAW, while the CDC figures are "cooked."
In short, according to the CDC, there were about 4000 ACTUAL "murders" by gun in 2009 or 2010 (the figures vary only slightly between these years). The rest of the about 11,000 (not 12,000) gun deaths were accidents or suicides.
I don't know, but to ME, 4000 murders by gun per year in a nation of 1/3 of a billion people just isn't something to get all worked up about. It's not NOTHING, but it's also not a NATIONAL crisis. As a NATION (rather than as state and local law enforcement agencies), we've got FAR bigger fish to fry!
(And don't ask me for more statistical analysis, because I've got better things to do than offer you a more thoughtful analysis of the data than you are willing to do for yourself. YOU have an ax to grind here, which I do not. So YOU are determined that the data must fit your view, which I am not. But if you would actually dig a bit into the figures, you would see pretty quickly (as I've just shown) that the numbers are not all slam-dunk up in da hood!)
My point remains constant: make any gun-sales laws you want. More power to you. I honestly, and I mean that, don't care. Such laws are pretty harmless (imho) and will prove to be as useless as they are harmless.
ALL I care about in this debate is what a tempest in a teapot it is, which diverts national attention away from the really pressing issues that face us as a NATION.
Let state and local law enforcement do what they do; gun control is a states-rights issue anyway (unless EVERYTHING suddenly falls under the interstate-commerce clause).
As a NATION this issue is statistically insignificant, and as a NATION we should be focused on other things. So, let's get the President and congress-critters back to work on some things that REALLY do matter to the NATION, such as the debt and the fact that it's about to make the dollar lose its place as the world's reserve currency.
These folks have MORE than enough to occupy their time just resolving that one. Let's not divert their attention away from it.
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
fuk, I just sat on my left nut.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
Okey-dokey then. It's clear what we're dealing with on this thread.
Cozy... if you're Hannibal Lecter.
... no signs of rational life, but I'm going to find it. If I have to tear this universe another black hole, I'm going to find it. I've... GOT TO, MISTER.
If I'm not back in five minutes... just wait longer.
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
... no signs of rational life
hahaha... you mean "rational" as in...
... cigarettes kill more people than guns so we shouldn't spend any effort regulating machines designed to kill dozens of people in minutes. In fact, we should let anyone who isn't a convicted felon buy 2 guns a week and unlimited ammo without arousing any suspicion...even if they have been recently described as a homicidal maniac by a mental health professional... then rant about a conspiracy when a government agency openly orders a reasonable amount of ammo for years of training. I know a gun owner whose guns have never been used in a crime... so gun owners are responsible and there is no need for any kind of regulation whatsoever. Everyone knows any increased regulation is just the first step to a tyrannical government... just like it was(n't) when Ronny Raygun did it.
Someone was smoking a cigarette at the crag the other day. I didn't feel threatened AT ALL... and simply walked down wind. I didn't even feel the need to report them for attempted murder.
|
|
TGT
Social climber
So Cal
|
|
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
So not surprised that batman shooter Holmes was drugged into acting out.
killer Eric Harris was on... and 2nd... Clonazepam... considered one of the most potent, highly hypnotic, and longest lasting (4days+) drugs on the market.
Gee, if only we had the technology to cross-reference potential gun buyers with people on prescription drugs that have serious mindfuk potential. I'm sure it is POSSIBLE... should we try? Whaddaya think?
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
there is no reason to have traffic lights because the bad guys will ignore them anyway
there is no reason to have any laws against murder because the bad guys will ignore them anyway
all laws do is inconvenience the good people and take away their rights
some countries got it figured out right
like Somalia, the Congo, Syria
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
Finally... a rational discussion.
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
Actress Joan Collins says she prefers life in New York
Oh golly, Joan Collins... well, there's a statistically valid professional opinion based on a sample size of 1.
69-year-old actress... ha, that was written 10 years ago... bitch be 79 now dumb ass.
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
What do you expect from someone who thinks the Pie Shop is a good place to climb?
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
5,000.... 10,000... who the fuk cares.
hahahaaaaaaa
According to the National Crime
Victimization Survey (NCVS), almost
43.6 million criminal victimizations oc-
curred in 1993, including 4.4 million
violent crimes of rape and sexual as-
sault, robbery, and aggravated assault.
Of the victims of these violent crimes,
**1.3 million (29%) stated that they faced
an offender with a firearm.**
Since you aren't very good at math... 1.3 million is a LOT higher than 10,000... even considering the US has 5x the population.
And especially considering the UK has 3x higher violent crime rate... which is expected because they have 3x higher population density.
Ron, I like to think you are a nice enough guy... but you are CLEARLY FLAT OUT WRONG and being a complete fuking moran about it. Get a fuking clue.
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
YES Ron, very good... it does (sort of) "equal out"!
So now, everyone can agree... higher population density leads to higher violent crime rate.
Now compare the MURDER rates...
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
Cragman... get a brain!
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
ER, if you haven't noticed it Cragman, moran is a deliberate local spelling here, a takeoff on that pic.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
Anderson calling someone else a gnat. Priceless.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!