If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(LA Times)   In the last 20 years, gun murders have dropped almost by half. Fark: Americans believe gun crime is rising. Thanks, American media   (latimes.com) divider line 832
    More: Followup, Americans, Bureau of Justice Statistics, gun murders, spree killers, Pew Research Center, Small Arms Survey  
•       •       •

6213 clicks; posted to Main » on 08 May 2013 at 9:41 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



832 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-08 12:05:16 PM

cman: vpb: Yes, those tough anti gun laws in some parts are starting to pay off.

Now we need to expand on a winning strategy.

/look at where the gun violence is highest

Maine has a shiatton of guns and few gun laws and yet their murder rate is pretty much nearly at the bottom of all states for gun crimes.


If you ignore the city of Portland, Maine is pretty much just small rural towns, especially the more north you go.

/would filter out outliers like Maine, the same with states that are overly crowded for the relative size they are (don't know of any off the top of my head) but of course there would be more accidents/death in those states everyone is on top of each other.
 
2013-05-08 12:05:27 PM

Dimensio: I do not understand why, despite so much data, gun control opponents do not recognize that by implementing strict regulation on civilian firearm ownership, the suicide rate of the United States of America could be reduced to the rates seen in France, Japan, Belgium or New Zealand.


Very, very, nice.  I tip my hat to you sir.

You're going to need a bigger boat to haul in this catch..
 
2013-05-08 12:07:02 PM

Garble: cman: vpb: Yes, those tough anti gun laws in some parts are starting to pay off.
Now we need to expand on a winning strategy.
/look at where the gun violence is highest

Maine has a shiatton of guns and few gun laws and yet their murder rate is pretty much nearly at the bottom of all states for gun crimes.

Maine also has ridiculously low population density.


Maybe we're on to something.  If the entire Chicago metro statistical area had the same homicide rate as the state of Vermont, there would have been around 110 homicides in 2011.

Perhaps it's time to rethink this progressive driven idea of pushing everyone into cities.  Perhaps people aren't meant to live so close to large numbers of people they have no connection to.

It's a bit of a conspiracy theory and certainly a stretch, but I find it fascinating that it's libs/Dems/progressives/whatever that always push for an end to sprawl and want more people to live in smaller areas AND are the same ones to fight things like state preemption on the basis that cities should be allowed to have more restrictive gun laws because it's different in cities than the suburbs or rural areas.

Taking these to an extreme, we would see that the left in this country would do what it could to force us all into dense cities while stripping those in the city of their firearm rights.  Work it a bit and you can really infringe upon most people's right to own guns by basically giving them no choice but to live in a city.
 
2013-05-08 12:07:48 PM

Tomahawk513: pedrop357: Tomahawk513: While those are alternatives to shooting oneself, the fact remains they are far less lethal means of committing suicide. For example, while guns are involved in only 2-5% of all suicide attempts, they are responsible for over 50% of successful attempts. Other methods are much less lethal. There is a strong correlation between ease of firearm access and suicide.

So what does the suicide attempt rate look like in countries like Japan and South Korea, which both have HIGHER suicide rates than we do and incredibly strict gun control?  How about Australia, which has a similar suicide rate and strict gun control?

There must be an unbelievably high number of people injured or permanently disfigured from all the failed suicide attempts.

Well, Japan has a long, storied history of ritualistic suicide, but other than that I don't pretend to be an expert in the societal influences behind suicide in other countries.  However, looking here, The majority of other first-world countries, especially those in Europe, have lower suicide rates which would seem to support the idea that fewer guns equals fewer suicides.  But that's only part of the picture, it doesn't include all the unique societal factors that contribute to suicide rates.  Additionally, I haven't called for fewer guns.  I  have called for a Mental Health check as part of a background check though, I think that could significantly decrease gun deaths both from suicides and from "crazed gunman" scenarios similar to Newtown or Aurora.


Examining several European nations with "lower" suicide rates than that of the United States of America suggests either that the effect of firearm regulation, if any, on rates of suicide is minimal or that the United States of America has implemented substantially more effective suicide prevention measures than have many European nations.
 
2013-05-08 12:07:51 PM

I_C_Weener: [mpe2013.org image 850x525]

Fewer pirates...fewer gun crimes.


Na, it just got too dang hot to act all violently
 
2013-05-08 12:10:22 PM

Dimensio: bdub77: scottydoesntknow: It's all video games fault!

[images.huffingtonpost.com image 850x637]

That's because in 1996 a video game cost $20 bucks, now it's $70 bucks plus $30 worth of 'extras' they sell after you've bought the game.

What video games sold in 1996 were $20?


Madden '91
 
2013-05-08 12:11:52 PM

mrshowrules: GoldSpider: mrshowrules: If you don't think the US has a problem with gun violence, good for you I suppose

You understand there's a difference between the statements "the US has a problem with gun violence" and "gun violence in the US is declining", right?

The US has a problem with gun violence despite recent declines.  You won't solve this problem until you tackle gun control

[www.washingtonpost.com image 850x695]


The US has a problem with child pornography despite recent declines.  You won't solve this problem until you tackle camera control
 
2013-05-08 12:13:46 PM
Fear puts the butts in the seats and the ratings on the nielsen box. Fear pays the bills.
 
2013-05-08 12:13:59 PM

Tomahawk513: I have called for a Mental Health check as part of a background check though, I think that could significantly decrease gun deaths both from suicides and from "crazed gunman" scenarios similar to Newtown or Aurora.


Please tell us all what kind of check would have worked to stop Newtown, the incident where the shooter murdered his mother and stole her guns.
Also, what kind of check would have stopped the guy in Aurora?  He hadn't been arrested or committed that I'm aware of.
 
2013-05-08 12:14:05 PM
WHEN WILL WE STOP VICTIMIZING THESE POOR POOR GUN OWNERS?!?
 
2013-05-08 12:14:41 PM

pdee: Tomahawk513: pdee: I thought the left was all for euthanasia.  I would think that would make access to a gun a right they would protect.  Guns are a messy way to go but they fast, painless and relatively sure.

Suicide != Euthanasia

/but you knew that
//but in case you didn't, here

From your link:

2. painless death.
A 12 gauge in the mouth through the brain stem would certainly qualify as 'painless death'.

Yes your wrong again but thanks for playing.


Oh aren't you just the cutest thing!  Look at you, trying to sit at the adult table, so adorable!

From Merriam-Webster:  the act or practice of killing or permitting the death of hopelessly sick or injured individuals (as persons or domestic animals) in a relatively painless way for reasons of mercy

From Dictionary.com:  Also calledthe act of putting to death painlessly or allowing to die,  as by withholdingextreme medical measures, a person or animal sufferin g from an incurable, especially a painful, diseaseor condition.

From Wikipedia:  Euthanasia (from the:  εὐθανασία meaning "good death": εὖ,eu (well or good) + θάνατος,thanatos (death)) refers to the practice of intentionally ending a life in order to relieve pain and suffering.

From Cambridge:  the killing of someone who is very ill to end the person's suffering

I can do this all day.
 
2013-05-08 12:14:51 PM

Dimensio: sammyk: 2) You can mail order guns today so your point is retarded and meaningless.

http://www.davidsonsinc.com/consumers/subsites/inven_search.asp?deal er _id=957577

I took the opportunity to examine the site that you referenced; the site allows customers to arrange firearm purchases for pick-up at a physical store. It in no way allows customers to order firearms for delivery to their homes, and your comparison of that website to such a delivery service is demonstrably false.


Fair enough. Dittyderpers comparison of just about anything is demonstrably false. You see he treadshiats anything that has to do with guns. He desperately does anything he can to derail the conversation.
 
2013-05-08 12:14:54 PM

mrshowrules: You won't solve this problem until you tackle gun control


Lolerskates:

State/ Firearm Homicide Rate/ Brady Score
WY  0.9    8
VT    0.3   6
UT    0.8   0
SD    1.0   4
ND    0.6   4
NH    0.4   6
MT    1.2   2
ME    0.8   9
IA     0.7    7
ID     0.8  2


And on the flipside

PA   3.6  36
NY   2.7  62
NJ   2.8  72
MI   4.2  25
MD  5.1  45
IL    2.8   35
CT   2.7   58
CA  3.4   80
AL   2.8  16

Why don't you run a regression on these numbers and see which way the slop points, mmmmkay?
 
2013-05-08 12:15:11 PM

Noticeably F.A.T.: You can argue that to have the right to keep an bear arms requires you to actually be in an active, well-regulated militia (I won't agree with you, but I'll admit that it's not the worst argument I've ever seen), but to then say that militia is supposed to be under control of the government is just ridiculous.


A few months ago I read up some on what exactly the "well-regulated militia" was during the time when the Constitution was written.  Essentially, the "militia" was comprised of everyone who owned a gun, and "well-regulated" meant that they "typically assembled as an entire unit in each town two to four times a year for training during peacetime".

I don't understand where people get the notion that gun ownership or use was ever tied to the active participation in the militia, since such times were few and far between.
 
2013-05-08 12:16:24 PM

dittybopper: CPennypacker: dittybopper: CPennypacker: Because its not the race, its the economic condition.

Actually, it's *NOT* economic condition.  There are more than twice as many whites living below the poverty line than blacks (10 million vs. 4 million).

I did that calculation a while back:

In the United States, there are more than twice as many whites living in the lowest poverty level (50% or lower than the official poverty level) than blacks (10.120 million vs. 4.215 million) Source: US Census Bureau Poverty Tables.

However, there were 5,325 white homicide victims in 2005, and 8,522 black homicide victims.
Source: CDC WISQARS Mortality Reports

That means that there are 52.6 white homicides per 100,000 poor whites, and 202.2 black homicides per 100,000 poor blacks.

So its your contention that the difference is the result of Melanin?

*SIGH*.

Do I really have to go over this *AGAIN*?

Google "dittybopper fark black white homicide culture", and read what I've written in prior Fark threads on the subject.

Hint:  I argue that the effect is entirely due to culture.


I read enough of your BS in these threads. I don't need to go looking for more of your work.
 
2013-05-08 12:17:00 PM

HeadLever: Why don't you run a regression on these numbers and see which way the slope points, mmmmkay?

 
2013-05-08 12:19:21 PM

Tomahawk513: People_are_Idiots: udhq: pdee: But that aside, suicides still count as part of the gun death total because in the absence of the gun, it's substantially less likely the person would have successfully committed suicide.

I thought the left was all for euthanasia. I would think that would make access to a gun a right they would protect. Guns are a messy way to go but they fast, painless and relatively sure.

Euthanasia does not mean treating depression with a bullet to the head.

80% of suicide attempts occur within an hour of initial ideation.  That means their success or failure is often dependent upon finding a convenient means that is immediately available.  Forcing them to go even a little out of their way--such as with a waiting period--is often enough of a deterrent.  Every minute longer you make a suicidal person wait, you increase their chances of survival.

Or they just find another easy method. Hanging is easy, so is slitting the wrists, ODing on OTC medicine, so on so forth. Guns are convenient, but a person willing to off themselves can easily do so with a trip to the drug or hardware store.

I would suggest you read upthread a bit.  While you're correct that a person could use a different method, those methods are significantly, even exponentially less lethal.


If you catch it in time. I had a friend who almost ODed on OTC sleeping meds (he really had trouble sleeping on a ship, soo...), which (in reply to another person) didnot induce vomitting... Also had another that ODed on her meds AS a suicide, and did die within minutes. Typically, even slitting the wrists, if not told about, can be quite fatal in but 10-15 minutes. Still time to rescue, but boy... you better hope 911 doesn't put you on hold.

/did read somewhere typical way out for women was meds, men were guns.
 
2013-05-08 12:19:44 PM

GoldSpider: Noticeably F.A.T.: You can argue that to have the right to keep an bear arms requires you to actually be in an active, well-regulated militia (I won't agree with you, but I'll admit that it's not the worst argument I've ever seen), but to then say that militia is supposed to be under control of the government is just ridiculous.

A few months ago I read up some on what exactly the "well-regulated militia" was during the time when the Constitution was written.  Essentially, the "militia" was comprised of everyone who owned a gun, and "well-regulated" meant that they "typically assembled as an entire unit in each town two to four times a year for training during peacetime".

I don't understand where people get the notion that gun ownership or use was ever tied to the active participation in the militia, since such times were few and far between.


They assembled and trained. I think training and a sense of community would reduce a lot of the problems we have with gun violence. At the very least it would help people in treating guns with the respect they deserve.
 
2013-05-08 12:19:51 PM

Dimensio: For what reason do you not simply link back to a previous posting on the subject?


Because there are so many of them.  I've been saying this for, what, at *LEAST* 5 years now on Fark (one of the threads I found was from 2008).  A little digging would probably find even earlier threads.

It gets really, really tedious to repeat the same things over and over and over.
 
2013-05-08 12:20:40 PM

sammyk: Dimensio: sammyk: 2) You can mail order guns today so your point is retarded and meaningless.

http://www.davidsonsinc.com/consumers/subsites/inven_search.asp?deal er _id=957577

I took the opportunity to examine the site that you referenced; the site allows customers to arrange firearm purchases for pick-up at a physical store. It in no way allows customers to order firearms for delivery to their homes, and your comparison of that website to such a delivery service is demonstrably false.

Fair enough. Dittyderpers comparison of just about anything is demonstrably false. You see he treadshiats anything that has to do with guns. He desperately does anything he can to derail the conversation.


As opposed to your grossly misinformed nonsense?
 
2013-05-08 12:20:51 PM

People_are_Idiots: Tomahawk513: People_are_Idiots: udhq: pdee: But that aside, suicides still count as part of the gun death total because in the absence of the gun, it's substantially less likely the person would have successfully committed suicide.

I thought the left was all for euthanasia. I would think that would make access to a gun a right they would protect. Guns are a messy way to go but they fast, painless and relatively sure.

Euthanasia does not mean treating depression with a bullet to the head.

80% of suicide attempts occur within an hour of initial ideation.  That means their success or failure is often dependent upon finding a convenient means that is immediately available.  Forcing them to go even a little out of their way--such as with a waiting period--is often enough of a deterrent.  Every minute longer you make a suicidal person wait, you increase their chances of survival.

Or they just find another easy method. Hanging is easy, so is slitting the wrists, ODing on OTC medicine, so on so forth. Guns are convenient, but a person willing to off themselves can easily do so with a trip to the drug or hardware store.

I would suggest you read upthread a bit.  While you're correct that a person could use a different method, those methods are significantly, even exponentially less lethal.

If you catch it in time. I had a friend who almost ODed on OTC sleeping meds (he really had trouble sleeping on a ship, soo...), which (in reply to another person) didnot induce vomitting... Also had another that ODed on her meds AS a suicide, and did die within minutes. Typically, even slitting the wrists, if not told about, can be quite fatal in but 10-15 minutes. Still time to rescue, but boy... you better hope 911 doesn't put you on hold.

/did read somewhere typical way out for women was meds, men were guns.


Part of a suicide assessment is access to means, and access to a gun is waaaaaaaaaaaaaay at the top of that list.
 
2013-05-08 12:22:05 PM

CPennypacker: They assembled and trained. I think training and a sense of community would reduce a lot of the problems we have with gun violence. At the very least it would help people in treating guns with the respect they deserve.


 A lot of positive ideas there, all without the need for more ineffectual regulation.
 
2013-05-08 12:23:09 PM

cman: Used to be that a typhoon in the Chinese sea would be like it doesnt exist for us in America.


You have to go back a long time for that. I'm talking the 1800s. Early 1900s newspapers were just filled with various calamities from around the globe.
 
2013-05-08 12:23:16 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: mrshowrules: BraveNewCheneyWorld: mrshowrules: Those examples are all hyphenated.  I don't think it is hyphenated in the actual 2nd Amendment text.

By all means, explain the difference and meanings of well regulated and well-regulated.  I expect citations.

I select the 2nd amendment as my first citation without the hyphen.  I select all your examples as my second series of citations.

You missed that whole part where I asked you to explain the difference.  Also, by citation, you need to cite something that backs your reasoning for differing definitions, not just examples of hyphens in use.


You are the one claiming that a hyphen doesn't change the definition.  I'm not an expert but I believe a hyphen creates one term as opposed to two terms.  One term may put the emphasis on the object of the adjective by the adverb the other may put the emphasis on the external subject.

Example:  Well-known actress Bette Davis was at the gala.

Versus: Bette Davis was well known by the people at the gala.

In the first sense the adverb-adjective is a qualifier for the subject of the sentence.

In the second sense the adverb adjective expresses a quality of the people.

Consider the idea of well-trained versus well trained.  The first implies the current state of the training - nothing more.  The second puts the emphasis on the actions of the person(s) who did the training.
 
2013-05-08 12:23:37 PM

sammyk: Dimensio: sammyk: 2) You can mail order guns today so your point is retarded and meaningless.

http://www.davidsonsinc.com/consumers/subsites/inven_search.asp?deal er _id=957577

I took the opportunity to examine the site that you referenced; the site allows customers to arrange firearm purchases for pick-up at a physical store. It in no way allows customers to order firearms for delivery to their homes, and your comparison of that website to such a delivery service is demonstrably false.

Fair enough. Dittyderpers comparison of just about anything is demonstrably false. You see he treadshiats anything that has to do with guns. He desperately does anything he can to derail the conversation.


dittybopper's comparison was accurate. Yours was not. Those are objectively verifiable facts.
 
2013-05-08 12:23:43 PM

GoldSpider: CPennypacker: They assembled and trained. I think training and a sense of community would reduce a lot of the problems we have with gun violence. At the very least it would help people in treating guns with the respect they deserve.

 A lot of positive ideas there, all without the need for more ineffectual regulation.


What if the legislation compelled assembly and training as a prerequisite to being considered part of said militia?
 
2013-05-08 12:24:22 PM

CPennypacker: I read enough of your BS in these threads. I don't need to go looking for more of your work


Fine.   Here's what I've said previously, just as a "fark you" to you personally, and I'll let others decide if it's BS.  Links for my sources are available in the original post:

It's not racism to point out the facts. I've actually done the math, and poor blacks have a 2.5 times higher homicide rate than poor whites. My sources were data from the Centers for Disease Control, and the US Census.

Or are you going to argue that math is racist?

Really, violence is largely a cultural phenomenon, and you learn your cultural values largely from your parents and peers, who learned their values from their parents and peers, who learned it from theirs, and so forth back down the line. That's why "European Americans" have a European-like homicide rate, 2.74 per 100,000 in the US vs. 3.5 per 100,000 for Europe*.

It's got nothing to do with melanin content, and everything to do with how cultural values are transmitted. Starting in the 1960's, the traditional black family structure started to shatter. It was noted as far back as 1965 that this trend was a major problem in the black community. All of the traditional values that would normally have been passed from a stable two parent family were essentially abandoned, because out-of-wedlock birth became the norm, not the exception, and single parent homes became the norm, not the exception.

It is interesting to note that after you control for poverty, the increased homicide rate in non-hispanic blacks over non-hispanic whites (2.46 times higher rate) is similar to the born-out-of-wedlock rate (69.5% black non-hispanic births / 25.4% white non-hispanic births = 2.74 times higher).

My theory is that while poverty is a factor, it's totally overwhelmed by the cutting off of traditional cultural values in the black community due to the destruction of the traditional black family in the last 50 years or so. The transmission of cultural values against violence from parent to child are attenuated when only one parent is around to transmit them. That leaves a void where peers can step in, and lacking the control of a strong male father-figure to reign in the worst excesses of testosterone poisoning common in young males, you end up with a homicide rate among young black males that is around 90 per 100,000.

Let me be completely and unequivocally clear: It's got nothing to do with the color of their skin. While I don't have hard numbers, I suspect that blacks who are raised within a traditional, two-parent family structure have a homicide rate closer to that of whites, regardless of economic condition. There is no reason why the black homicide rate *HAS* to be higher, it can and should be changed, but the change must come from within the black community, not imposed on it from the outside, and that change will take decades, just like it took decades for their homicide and bastardy rates to hit where they are now.

*Northern, Western, and Southern Europe all have rates between 1.0 and 1.5, whereas Eastern Europe has a rate of 6.4 per 100,000. It would make sense that the "European Americans" have a rate biased towards lower end, because of all the immigration from Western, Northern, and Southern Europe, but higher because of a significant amount of immigration from Eastern Europe.
 
2013-05-08 12:25:04 PM

HeadLever: mrshowrules: You won't solve this problem until you tackle gun control

Lolerskates:

State/ Firearm Homicide Rate/ Brady Score
WY  0.9    8
VT    0.3   6
UT    0.8   0
SD    1.0   4
ND    0.6   4
NH    0.4   6
MT    1.2   2
ME    0.8   9
IA     0.7    7
ID     0.8  2


And on the flipside

PA   3.6  36
NY   2.7  62
NJ   2.8  72
MI   4.2  25
MD  5.1  45
IL    2.8   35
CT   2.7   58
CA  3.4   80
AL   2.8  16

Why don't you run a regression on these numbers and see which way the slop points, mmmmkay?


An honest evaluation and comparison of Brady ratings with violent crime rates analyzes all fifty states. I suspect that doing so will demonstrate no correlation, positive nor negative, at all.
 
2013-05-08 12:25:59 PM

Dimensio: An honest evaluation and comparison of Brady ratings with violent crime rates analyzes all fifty states. I suspect that doing so will demonstrate no correlation, positive nor negative, at all.


Anyway, correlation is not causation.
 
2013-05-08 12:26:15 PM

sammyk: Dittyderpers comparison of just about anything is demonstrably false.


Demonstrably false like mail-order and delivered guns?
 
2013-05-08 12:26:24 PM

CPennypacker: dittybopper: CPennypacker: dittybopper: CPennypacker: Because its not the race, its the economic condition.

Actually, it's *NOT* economic condition.  There are more than twice as many whites living below the poverty line than blacks (10 million vs. 4 million).

I did that calculation a while back:

In the United States, there are more than twice as many whites living in the lowest poverty level (50% or lower than the official poverty level) than blacks (10.120 million vs. 4.215 million) Source: US Census Bureau Poverty Tables.

However, there were 5,325 white homicide victims in 2005, and 8,522 black homicide victims.
Source: CDC WISQARS Mortality Reports

That means that there are 52.6 white homicides per 100,000 poor whites, and 202.2 black homicides per 100,000 poor blacks.

So its your contention that the difference is the result of Melanin?

*SIGH*.

Do I really have to go over this *AGAIN*?

Google "dittybopper fark black white homicide culture", and read what I've written in prior Fark threads on the subject.

Hint:  I argue that the effect is entirely due to culture.

I read enough of your BS in these threads. I don't need to go looking for more of your work.


Your statement is understandable. Actually reading his statements would demonstrate your accusation of racism to be entirely dishonest.
 
2013-05-08 12:27:28 PM

Dimensio: CPennypacker: dittybopper: CPennypacker: dittybopper: CPennypacker: Because its not the race, its the economic condition.

Actually, it's *NOT* economic condition.  There are more than twice as many whites living below the poverty line than blacks (10 million vs. 4 million).

I did that calculation a while back:

In the United States, there are more than twice as many whites living in the lowest poverty level (50% or lower than the official poverty level) than blacks (10.120 million vs. 4.215 million) Source: US Census Bureau Poverty Tables.

However, there were 5,325 white homicide victims in 2005, and 8,522 black homicide victims.
Source: CDC WISQARS Mortality Reports

That means that there are 52.6 white homicides per 100,000 poor whites, and 202.2 black homicides per 100,000 poor blacks.

So its your contention that the difference is the result of Melanin?

*SIGH*.

Do I really have to go over this *AGAIN*?

Google "dittybopper fark black white homicide culture", and read what I've written in prior Fark threads on the subject.

Hint:  I argue that the effect is entirely due to culture.

I read enough of your BS in these threads. I don't need to go looking for more of your work.

Your statement is understandable. Actually reading his statements would demonstrate your accusation of racism to be entirely dishonest.


Where did I say he was racist?
 
2013-05-08 12:28:03 PM

Tomahawk513: Wikipedia: Euthanasia


You picked dictionary.com I just quoted them.  If you disagree with them dont quote them.

M&W lists only 1 def but.

From Wikipedia:Like other terms borrowed from history, "euthanasia" has had different meanings depending on usage.

If you mean by 'I can do this all day' you can sound like a pretentious douche bag I'm sure you can.
 
2013-05-08 12:28:15 PM

evil saltine: Dimensio: An honest evaluation and comparison of Brady ratings with violent crime rates analyzes all fifty states. I suspect that doing so will demonstrate no correlation, positive nor negative, at all.

Anyway, correlation is not causation.


Does that mean that no correlation is causation? I am confused.
 
2013-05-08 12:28:48 PM

sammyk: Dimensio: sammyk: 2) You can mail order guns today so your point is retarded and meaningless.

http://www.davidsonsinc.com/consumers/subsites/inven_search.asp?deal er _id=957577

I took the opportunity to examine the site that you referenced; the site allows customers to arrange firearm purchases for pick-up at a physical store. It in no way allows customers to order firearms for delivery to their homes, and your comparison of that website to such a delivery service is demonstrably false.

Fair enough. Dittyderpers comparison of just about anything is demonstrably false. You see he treadshiats anything that has to do with guns. He desperately does anything he can to derail the conversation.


Wait:  What I said is true, what you said is false, but I'm the one at fault?

*REALLY*?
 
2013-05-08 12:29:13 PM
 
2013-05-08 12:29:32 PM

Dimensio: An honest evaluation and comparison of Brady ratings with violent crime rates analyzes all fifty states. I suspect that doing so will demonstrate no correlation, positive nor negative, at all.


Which is why I provided the link to the source data.  Just ran the linear regression and here are the particulars:

Trendline equation:  Gun Homicide = 0.0034(Brady Score) + 2.44
R^2 = 0.0022
 
2013-05-08 12:29:43 PM

hasty ambush: sammyk: Interesting thing about background checks. 20 years ago the Brady act was signed into law implementing actual background checks. Lo and behold 20 years later gun violence is cut in half. But I am sure there will be someone here shortly to tell us the 2 things are in no way connected.

The ban on "Assault Weapons" and high capacity magazines expired so I can claim that more people being able to arm and defend themselves with previously banned weapons contributed. to the decline.

I think it would be smarter to look at the decline in gang turf wars and drug violence during that time than gun laws or lack there of. It won't serve your agenda but it is closer to the truth.

Most "gun control" legislation is nothing more than polticians jerking off a particular constituency(If we just get rid fo those guns with flash suppressors, bayonet lugs and pistol grip stocks we will all be safer nonsense). Normally that constituency is the soccer mom for the children crowd or those who also need government to protect them from the evils of large soft drinks and trans fats is also afraid the 80 million lawful gun owners.

[24.media.tumblr.com image 403x401]


You want some respect?  Start publicly policing your own and stop fetishizing lethal weapons.

As a military academy grad we had some bad apples that the rest of us suffered for (sexual assault, regular assault).  We bore the stigma because that's part of the deal.  We also addressed any shortcomings internally far more harshly than the courts.

Man up and admit that the current situation is a bastardization of it's original intent or keep being irrational and continue to be marginalized.
 
2013-05-08 12:29:50 PM

Dimensio: Your statement is understandable. Actually reading his statements would demonstrate your accusation of racism to be entirely dishonest.


Some details of our gun violence problem make people uncomfortable, so we should avoid discussing those topics.
 
2013-05-08 12:30:17 PM

Endive Wombat: Since there is no other place to say this:

I wish that folks would stop lumping suicide by gun into gun death stats.  My reason is this: If someone is determined to kill themselves, they are going to use whatever means necessary, and all the gun laws in the world will not stop someone who has decided to off themselves.

I understand why the left likes to keep those numbers in the stat, because it bolsters their message, but it is disingenuous.

\That's all I have to say about that


Your claim is blatantly false. The availability of guns makes the suicide that much easier to conduct. The lack of a gun will make the person contemplate more rigorously on how to off him or herself. During that time, the person might decide not to do the deed. Others might try drugs and fail because they don't know what is the large enough dosage. Others might try jumping from a high place and is talked out of it. The ease of pulling a trigger is what allows many suicidal people to succeed.
 
2013-05-08 12:30:20 PM

mrshowrules: The U.S. firearm homicide rate is 20 times higher than the combined rates of 22 countries that are our peers in wealth and population.

A declining rate doesn't mean jack shiat.


I suspect our rate of fatal alligator encounters is 20 times higher than the combined rates of 22 countries that are our peers in wealth and population, as well. What of it?
 
2013-05-08 12:30:36 PM

dittybopper: sammyk: Dimensio: sammyk: 2) You can mail order guns today so your point is retarded and meaningless.

http://www.davidsonsinc.com/consumers/subsites/inven_search.asp?deal er _id=957577

I took the opportunity to examine the site that you referenced; the site allows customers to arrange firearm purchases for pick-up at a physical store. It in no way allows customers to order firearms for delivery to their homes, and your comparison of that website to such a delivery service is demonstrably false.

Fair enough. Dittyderpers comparison of just about anything is demonstrably false. You see he treadshiats anything that has to do with guns. He desperately does anything he can to derail the conversation.

Wait:  What I said is true, what you said is false, but I'm the one at fault?

*REALLY*?


If you did not advocate a position that he opposes, he would not have had to issue poorly researched claims that were easily disproved.
 
2013-05-08 12:30:37 PM

CPennypacker: Dimensio: CPennypacker: dittybopper: CPennypacker: dittybopper: CPennypacker: Because its not the race, its the economic condition.

Actually, it's *NOT* economic condition.  There are more than twice as many whites living below the poverty line than blacks (10 million vs. 4 million).

I did that calculation a while back:

In the United States, there are more than twice as many whites living in the lowest poverty level (50% or lower than the official poverty level) than blacks (10.120 million vs. 4.215 million) Source: US Census Bureau Poverty Tables.

However, there were 5,325 white homicide victims in 2005, and 8,522 black homicide victims.
Source: CDC WISQARS Mortality Reports

That means that there are 52.6 white homicides per 100,000 poor whites, and 202.2 black homicides per 100,000 poor blacks.

So its your contention that the difference is the result of Melanin?

*SIGH*.

Do I really have to go over this *AGAIN*?

Google "dittybopper fark black white homicide culture", and read what I've written in prior Fark threads on the subject.

Hint:  I argue that the effect is entirely due to culture.

I read enough of your BS in these threads. I don't need to go looking for more of your work.

Your statement is understandable. Actually reading his statements would demonstrate your accusation of racism to be entirely dishonest.

Where did I say he was racist?


I bolded the part where you inferred that I was a racist by asking a loaded question, for your reading convenience.
 
2013-05-08 12:30:48 PM

Dimensio: CPennypacker: Where did I say he was racist?

"So its your contention that the difference is the result of Melanin?"


That's a fancy way of calling someone a racist
 
2013-05-08 12:31:30 PM
I got to page 7 of this thread before I had to stop reading because my brain hurt. So much derp going on.

I've added three people to my ignore list for their high levels of derp.
 
2013-05-08 12:32:21 PM

nekom: scottydoesntknow: It's all video games fault!

[images.huffingtonpost.com image 850x637]

Yes, but just the other day there was an article about a pickaxe murder.  Gun violence on the decline, pickaxe violence on the rise.  I blame minecraft.


And don't forget the creeper-inspired rash of suicide bombings.
 
2013-05-08 12:32:48 PM

GoldSpider: Lady Beryl Ersatz-Wendigo: Do we have an acceptable threshold of gun murders?

Good question.  Do we have an acceptable threshold of any other kind of unnatural death?


The threshold should always be 0. It's unattainable, but that's always the goal. If we have the Firestone Tire company's "ok, if only 4 in a million die, we can afford to pay the settlements" mentality, then we can choose any other number and that's not acceptable.
 
2013-05-08 12:32:53 PM

pedrop357: Tomahawk513: I have called for a Mental Health check as part of a background check though, I think that could significantly decrease gun deaths both from suicides and from "crazed gunman" scenarios similar to Newtown or Aurora.

Please tell us all what kind of check would have worked to stop Newtown, the incident where the shooter murdered his mother and stole her guns.
Also, what kind of check would have stopped the guy in Aurora?  He hadn't been arrested or committed that I'm aware of.


To clarify, "scenarios similar to Newtown or Aurora" was meant to say, "scenarios in which a mentally unstable person kills other people," not necessarily those exact scenarios.  I would require a recent sign off by a psychiatrist or clinician before purchasing a firearm.  It wouldn't contain the person's diagnosis, just a simple pass-fail.  This information could be kept in a database that would be federally maintained.

I'd  like to see a situation where the person would need to get check-ups annually and/or after any significant life event, such as job loss or divorce.  If the person failed that exam, firearms would be removed until he person was once again able to pass.  But I would compromise on this if I had to.
 
2013-05-08 12:33:51 PM

mrshowrules: fluffy2097: mrshowrules: The U.S. firearm homicide rate is 20 times higher than the combined rates of 22 countries that are our peers in wealth and population.

Is that per capita?

We have a shiatload more people then 22 other countries. Of course the raw numbers will be higher.


You are also arguing a rate versus a second, combined population. It's ambiguous whether you mean

US per capita versus Combined-Next-22 per capita, or US per year versus Combined-Next-22 per year.

Both are rates.
 
2013-05-08 12:33:51 PM

dericwater: Endive Wombat: Since there is no other place to say this:

I wish that folks would stop lumping suicide by gun into gun death stats.  My reason is this: If someone is determined to kill themselves, they are going to use whatever means necessary, and all the gun laws in the world will not stop someone who has decided to off themselves.

I understand why the left likes to keep those numbers in the stat, because it bolsters their message, but it is disingenuous.

\That's all I have to say about that

Your claim is blatantly false. The availability of guns makes the suicide that much easier to conduct. The lack of a gun will make the person contemplate more rigorously on how to off him or herself. During that time, the person might decide not to do the deed. Others might try drugs and fail because they don't know what is the large enough dosage. Others might try jumping from a high place and is talked out of it. The ease of pulling a trigger is what allows many suicidal people to succeed.


Suicide rates of many European nations and of Canada are close to (within 1 per 100,000) of the rate of the United States of America and several developed nations (such as France, Belgium, Austria and Japan) experience a rate of suicide higher than that of the United States of America, though because the majority of these suicides are committed without use of a firearm you (by your own admission) believe them to be more acceptable.
 
Displayed 50 of 832 comments

First | « | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report