Yet you continue to espouse causality that gun control works, is the only solution and contributing facto, yet claim foul on the data I forwarded. But then again, we are playing this debate game based on your response hence your position and the rules you employ to support causality, accept it or deny it, make your choice as you cant have it both ways. You going to actually read this or just dismiss this data and facts?
Oh here is a great example of causality, England, Australia, Canada, all gun bans in 1997, England violent crime goes up from 445k reported to 1.4 mill in 2008, murders don't go down, firearms crimes up, Australia 30% increase, Canada stayed the same all at minimum 2 times the US Crime rate which has been going down for over 2 decades. Yeah we see how less guns equals more crimes. Oh darn, forgot to make sure that when you check their data, they count the same as we do, uh, they don't. Don't forget either that England only counts solved cases, so as not to scare their tourist trade off!
And the previous mentioned data
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm FBI UCR Database
Firearm Use by Offenders, Bureau of Justice Statistics, November 2001 http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=940
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/html/bcft/2008/bcft08st.pdf Brady Check report
http://www.data.gov/details/1526 USDOJ National Victimization Report 2008
http://www.constitution.org/2ll/2ndschol/46hard.pdf THE FIREARMS OWNERS' PROTECTION ACT:
Oh geez, since you only have 36,000 officers, the largest police force in the nation for that little 389 sq mile area area call NYC, which if you check the details, doesn't include the metropolitan area so you need to look at those as well as just like when Washington D.C. refurbished several slum areas, they just physically moved the drug trade down the street in the late 1990's. Those studies above don't take into account all the encounters where the police didn't fire, care to dig up those numbers and see if the actual crimes are reduced or they just aren't pulling the trigger as much?
Shall we look at the FBI report from several years ago?
You can go here and read the National Sciences Foundation report from 2004 on gun control laws, a study that was formed by the anti gun Clinton Administration so just like the Ludgwig & Cooke study noted below, doesn't prove any causality theory, much less any effect of gun control laws on violent crime, but then you have better data and facts than these experts who by chance, are anti gun, yeah, they are, sucks for the antis when their own study hurts their position, LOL! http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10881&page=R2
AFter all, looking at the totals, NYC is still #1 in oh so many categories and the question remains, are the officials only reporting those that were closed and not those unsolved as we have seen other cities and countries do? Oh maybe that is just the trend, ya know a mark and comparison from one date to another, easily seen in the FBI UCR data of a trend downward in violent crime. A detailed review of the morgues and the counts from NYC will also tell the true story, care to defend your position on that? I know for a fact that Chicago refuses to release that data for a Freedom of Information act request, care to guess why?
You didn't even take into consideration socio economic factors such as how many run down neighborhoods with the resulting high levels of poverty and crime that invariably inhabit the world of the entitled are counted in the city limits! What exactly is the amount of the police force in comparison to other cities, since you only have 36,000 officers for that small area call NYC, which if you check the details, doesn't include the metropolitan area so you need to look at those as well as just like when Washington D.C. refurbished several slum areas, they just physically moved the drug trade down the street in the late 1990's.
What are the programs in the schools to prevent violence. How many of the criminals have you actually sent away rather than releasing them as liberals are so wont to do to prey again, and again on society. Geez should we go on, or based on your premise, you could save the city millions by immediately halting all the other anti crime efforts right?
Unlike you, I am not citing a known liar like Bloomberg who has an agenda and in doing what he did violated laws just for a flashy piece of propaganda that is and always will be useless rhetoric and means nothing.
Oh, unlike the antis, I will admit an error, 245,000 to 50,000 was the reduction in Type 1 FFL licenses between 1994-2004, still over 70% and still because of the law changes by the ATF goon squads, prove otherwise.
Oh my, lets review the studies on defensive gun uses.
Professor Kleck & Gertz published a study in 1995 http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/KleckAndGertz1.htm identifying that up to 2.5 millions DGU's occur per year. One of the most noted anti gun advocates Professor Wolfgang http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/Wolfgang1.html could not find fault with professor Kleck & Gertz's methodology. The best they have done is to rant about the sample size.
Then we go to http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/165476.pdf which is the "Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms" by Philip J. Cook and Jens Ludwig from 1997.
This is a GOVERNMENT study that creates some problems for the gun banners in that it can't debunk the standard of Professor Kleck & Gertz's 1995 study either, but still admits DGU's occur on page 10:
From their study: The only question is whether that fraction is 1 in 1,800 (as one would conclude from the NCVS) = 165,000 dgu's (adjusted for 2008 population) or 1 in 100 (as indicated by the NSPOF estimate based on Kleck and Gertz's criteria) = 3 million dgu's per year (2008 population level).
Ludwig & Cook have also created a failure in their logic in:
The key explanation for the difference between the 108,000 NCVS estimate for the annual number of DGUs and the several million from the surveys discussed earlier is that NCVS avoids the false-positive problem by limiting DGU questions to persons who first reported that they were crime victims. Most NCVS respondents never have a chance to answer the DGU question, falsely or otherwise.
Of course a respondent who replied they were not a victim because they had defended themselves by showing their weapon, thereby preventing the physical attack from occurring, that data was not considered by Ludwig & Cook., hence their survey value for DGU's was affected and made artificially low down from the 1.5 million DGU they identified in their study
Now the problem you have is that the 165,000 is not insignificant and is agreed upon by your anti gun professors of whom have been contracted to perform multiple studies for the anti gun organizations, but that is the minimum, not the maximum.
The next problem is that during their study, Ludwig and Cook reached that 1.5 million DGU's BEFORE they used their illogic to arbitrarily remove valid data from the study. That is the same number that the Clinton administration agreed occurred on average every year in 1997.
Yeah, nothing presented by these government reports and government sponsored studies "sponsored" means anything though right? You cant prove causality based on one variable. Yet I can point out multiple variables as to self defense working. So the fact still remains, you and the people who believe a gun ban works have no valid reason to restrict the law abiding gun owner.
Of course you can attempt to prove otherwise, but the 3-4 pages above is only a portion of all the facts. Care to continue?
Unfortunately for you Moff, that is one of 4 possible responses of which 3 are the ones we are used to seeing, verbal attacks, repeating the same fallacy, or outright dismissal as you have done and no answer to counter. The other response "acknowledging those facts and so many others exist", is just too painful for the majority of the "anti crowd" to comprehend that those facts, like the sun rising in the east and setting in the west exist!
No I am not pissed, I do feel empathy for your plight though as I have experienced the feeling of disenchantment and utter disbelief when a different portion of my belief system I held was utterly destroyed. So next time you decide to discuss the emphasis of empathy and the role it does not play in the reality of the world, we can begin again, or you can run away, either way, I am not angry, so please don't mistake sarcasm for anger though is sarcasm a real danger to anyone unless they are truly thin skinned?
Ninety nine, you are comparing and lumping law abiding gun owners in with criminals, ya know there is a difference but we will let you get back to us on that little problem. After all, police studies (Chicago 1990's, NYC 2007) identified that 76%-80% of those involved in shooting both victim and shooter were professional criminals or were both involved in criminal activity at the time of the shooting, but we wont let facts like that get in the way.
Of course since 20,000 gun laws only affect the criminals, oh wait, per Haynes vs US Supreme Court 1968 ruled 8-1 that a felon did not have to violate their 5 th amendment right of self incrimination, then all those wonderful laws of registration, reporting lost firearms, background checks etc. that make up oh what over 90% of all the gun laws have what effect on criminals but we will let ya get back to us on that one!
Or how about the USDOJ Background Check & Firearm Transfer Report 2008 where since 1994 99 million checks, 1.67 million valid rejections, 58% were felons, with a 68% reduction in felons attempting to buy since 1994 from licensed sources.
Per the USDOJ Survey in 1997, felons acquired their weapons 80% from private buy, 12% retail stores and 2% gun shows. Yeah that 68% reduction from licensed sources as the Brady Check only is responsible for monitoring licensed sources means a 9.52% reduction of attempted buys from licensed sources and places that % in the private sales or 90% at present. Yeah we see how licensed gun dealers are the majority of the problem.
Oh don't forget the Background check report also noted that between 2000-2008 only 13,204 of those rejected were prosecuted, or less than 1%. Yeah, what a wonderful example of the poster child of all gun control laws how it is only enforced less than 1% of the time. Care to counter how all the other gun laws are enforced more effectively? We of course see the government data to support that not one of those 1.66 million rejected who weren't prosecuted then didn't go buy a firearm from an unlicensed source eh?
Geez, what happened in 1994, oh yeah the ATF changed their rules on licensing gun dealers after they had been handcuffed by the McClure Volkmer Act of 1986 from prosecuting gun stopping the persecution by the ATF OF gun owners who sold more than a few firearms a year for not having a dealers permit. Most of those collectors and such had then registered for a type 1 permit prior to 1994, allowing essentially a home business. Then the ATF changed the rules, jacking the license fees up over 40 times, requiring an at will inspection by the ATF who by their rules must find a certain amount of violations real or imagined to justify their storied existence and other draconian rules that a mere paperwork error on the permitted person will as history has shown, be a felony charge. Yeah love how those 2 plus million type one license holders have been reduced by approximately 70% between 1994-2004. Such that these people no longer have to report their sales, such are the unintended consequences of another moronic gun law that didn't do anything to address the criminal.
So again, what about all these wonderful examples of stupidity in gun control warrants your position that gun dealers are the problem, much less the laws only affect the criminals or are even enforced when they do?
Moff, are you claiming we must have empathy and feel the pain of every single incident that occurs? Why? Please demonstrate that we have not acknowledged that accidents happen.
Of course the hard evidence shows in 2006 CDC data that 642 accidental discharges occurred of which 140 were 0-18 yrs old? Lets see, that rate has been falling steadily for 3 decades, what with all the training programs and education provided by Pro-Gun organizations (NRA Eddie Eagle is the leader), hunter safety laws and programs one must question your perspective on empathy.
We recognize accidents occur, otherwise those safety programs would not have emerged and been established over 3-4 decades. Lets see, 100 million households with a firearm per ATF data and 140 deaths of children. 140/100,000,000 = .0000014.
Per the JAMA the 700,000 doctors in the US average 98,000 fatal mistakes per year or .14 deaths per physician. Man where is your empathy for that high risk of being attended by a doctor, after all there are only 255 million people in the US who have health coverage. Which means on average a doctor will have close to 350 patients (if they were all general practitioners) so your risk is .14/350 = .0004.
That is higher than the .0000001 average of being harmed by a concealed carry holder in Florida, a trend that is consistent through all concealed carry states! So where is your empathy for all those children that are killed by malpractice every year as they are 4,000 times more likely to be harmed by a doctor than a gun owner.
Lets talk more on empathy, how about the empathy for the criminals here, after all per government studies (USDOJ Gang Activity Report 2008) the professional criminal and gangs are responsible for up to 80% of violent crime in the US! Where is your empathy for all those criminals who get shot by choosing to be criminals. Unless you believe they are born to be criminals or have an inherent right to be criminals?
Yeah kinda sucks when your "empathic plea" is wasted on 80% of the incidents. Tell ya what, why don't you empathic people begin a peace movement and go on the streets of every city, every homeless area, every drug den, racketeering operation, every corner of the criminal underworld (this includes our politicians) and demand from them that they all "feel" the empathic pain for someone else's actions as the sole reason for stopping what they are doing and giving up their inherent rights. We wish you luck!
Reality is, emotions and empathy exist, but there is no proof that empathy for a bad incident, must inherently place the responsibility for another's actions upon everyone else..
So until you Moff or any who claim emotional standing as the only valid reason to defend the position that gun control is morally right, then you must also be prepared to get whacked with the reality of the facts.
Fact, gun owners acknowledge accidents, violent crime and whackos exist, otherwise we wouldn't plan and prepare for such an emergency, all the while hoping we don't have to exercise our inherent right to defend ourselves.
Fact we believe emphatically that we will not pay for someone else's actions.
Fact if 20,000 gun laws really did work, to control the seven sloths of human nature there wouldn't be any violent crime with firearms, but we digress to reality eh?
Gun free zones sure seem to have a growing number of shootings. Those gun free zones were put in place by all those lovely empathic people yet where is your guilt and remorse every single time a nut job knows they have carte blanche to kill where no one else who followed the law should be armed and first response by the only ones is minutes away?
Where is your remorse for the 100 plus million over the last century were killed when gun control was implemented, guns confiscated and the genocides began?
Here are a couple web sites http://www.keepandbeararms.com/, http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/, http://www.thearmedcitizen.com/ that actually identify where successful self-defense with a gun has happened.
Start counting how many have happened in the last month, then start calculating as these are only the ones reported. So where is you empathic joy that these people saved themselves from attack as one can only wonder how you intend for everyone else to feel your pain for victims eh?
Why is it that you cant feel the joy of being alive after having to defend oneself. Where is your empathy for the pain those who have defended themselves feel as they did something they didn't want to, yet by the actions of the other, were forced to do?
So Moff, this is only a glimpse of empathy from a pro gun person and empathy is a two way street that is lined with the reality of facts from which you cannot escape to into some fantasy world where empathy is the only one sided logic for any decision, it just does not exist!