More gun stuff
-
It's odd for sure. There was a national trend down in gun homicide rates (for about 10-15 years) that was "Coincident exactly with the policy change," (to quote the article).
I'd actually like to read the study 1st. The article conveniently has left it out.
-
The original article from the university:
-
@walterwhite said:
I don't give a flying fuck what the UK, Piers Morgan, or The BBC has to say about American gun laws.
Well I've tried to find an article from Fox or TopRight news but I couldn't. Admittedly my knowledge of republican skewed outlets isn't great. In fact the story wasn't carried very much, only by HuffPost (Dem bias) and Washington Post (?Bias?), as well as MSNBC (?Bias?).
And if you actually read the BBC article - which, believe it or not, wasn't written by Piers Morgan - you'll find that it doesn't express an opinion. Just presents the findings, with some quotes by the researchers.
-
The original article from the university:
The original article from the university:
Webster and colleagues found that the spike in murders in Missouri following the PTP handgun law repeal only occurred for murders in Missouri committed with a firearm and was widespread across the state's counties. Following the change in Missouri's gun laws, none of the states bordering Missouri experienced significant increases in murder rates and the U.S. murder rate actually declined by over five percent.
This is subjective. And it's the inverse to the bullshit reasoning that the "Pro-Gun law" advocates use to write off the high gun homicide rate found in D.C. "They just travel across to VA when laws are less stringent, buy a gun, and commit the crime in DC"
So which is it?
I'd be more interested in comparing murder rates in MO in that time period to nationwide murder rates when "privately sold" weapons were used. That's the objective comparison. I'd be willing to bet there isn't much difference.
The JHU study focused on privately purchased guns involved in homicides. That is what resulted in the increased homicide rate. Guns in MO purchased from dealers still go through a background check so as dealers can still maintain their FFL. The change from requiring a Sheriff check prior to purchase removes additional red tape and complications for responsible gun owners who aren't a part of the guns that were used in the homicides.
-
Which part is subjective?
But I see what you mean about the neighbouring states business. They said that there was no increase in gun crime, but that they found more and more guns coming from Missouri. I guess that's all there is to that side, and that it just affects Missouri.
-
the part i underlined.
-
OK, I must have missed the second part of your post somehow. If you want that information I'm sure it's readily available, if you want to do all the legwork...I know I wouldn't! I agree it would be an interesting comparison to make, although this is also a worthwhile comparison, IMHO. Just because two states have the same laws, it doesn't necessarily mean that you can equate them like that. For example, if NY and, I don't know, Idaho, had the same gun laws, you couldn't equate any gun crime statistics based on that alone, since there's a vastly different culture in both states. You'd want to compare states with nearby states, which presumably have a similar cultural background. Alternatively, you could profile them by 'type' - NYC with Miami and LA, for example.
In other news in the article, I saw this:
[1] "Because many perpetrators of homicide have backgrounds that would prohibit them from possessing firearms under federal law, they seek out private sellers to acquire their weapons," said study author Jon Vernick, JD, MPH, deputy director for the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research. [2]"Requiring a background check on all gun sales is a commonsense approach to reducing gun violence that does not infringe upon the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding gun owners." [numbers mine]
I think the first quote is subjective as well, but probably hard to disagree with.
The second quote is up for debate, but I happen to agree with it in principal - practicalities of enforcing aside, obviously.
-
Missouri is the size of England.
-
Wait. What prompts the bbc, in jolly old, to cherry pick ONE state out of FIFTY states,
to try to find a murder rate that went up, allegedly after a gun control law
was repealed.
Couldn't there have been other reasons for the murder rate? Like a federal clamp down on gangs, maybe?
Like, maybe St. Louis is one of the most dangerous, violent crime ridden cities in the U.S. ?
Competition of two different drug cartels finally duking in out, since one moved in with encouragement
from Obamao and HOlder, with guns from "Fast and Furious" ?
And gangs have illegal weapons. They trade in them. And murder U.S. agents with them.
From the illegal black market, from overeseas, and I suppose from some American illegal buyer here.
But a freaking control law that affects me, and millions of legal, law abiding American citizens sure as hell
won't change that illegal behavior one freakin bit.
-
Yeah. I call bbc biased.
A quick lookup:
*************************************************************
We are biased, admit the stars of BBC News | Mail Online - Daily Mailwww.dailymail.co.uk/.../We-biased-admit-stars-BBC-News.ht...Daily MailA leaked account of an 'impartiality summit' called by BBC chairman Michael Grade, is certain to lead to a new row about the BBC and its reporting on key issues ...Is the BBC biased?isthebbcbiased.blogspot.com/2 days ago - s hidden microphones in BBC H.Q. caught the following discussion .... (I could almost hear Iain Duncan Smith fuming about BBC bias as the ...Hard Evidence: How biased is the BBC? - New Statesmanwww.newstatesman.com/.../hard-evidence-how-biased-bb...New StatesmanAug 23, 2013 - Does the BBC really have a left-wing, anti-business agenda as certain elements of the press like to claim? Or is there more to it than that?And the award for most biased BBC journalist of the year goes to ...blogs.telegraph.co.uk › ... › Politics › Toby YoungThe Daily TelegraphDec 18, 2013 - Most Biased BBC Journalist. Many people will have their own favourites for this category, but mine is Hannah Richardson, a correspondent for ...BBC is biased toward the left, study finds - Telegraphwww.telegraph.co.uk › ... › TV and Radio › BBCThe Daily TelegraphAug 11, 2013 - The BBC is twice as likely to cover left-wing policy proposals than those that are right-wing, a study has found.News for bbc biasedBBC is too political when it comes to reporting politicsEvening Standard - 1 day agoPolitical bias tends to be found in the eyes of the beholder. The Labour voter will see a rich seam of Conservative propaganda in certain media ... -
I read this post from some guy named Erik, in Mo.
It's just interesting...
************************************
"FWIW, Jennings is the next 'town' south of me. The St Louis County police took over law enforcement and one of the most classically racist PD's was shut down. Only three cops from that PD of 18 were retained, the rest were fired. I had no idea until a coworker of mine told me about what it was like to grow up near there as a black person. Bull Conner had nothing on them...
And those were who anyone in that town had to go to in order to get permission to buy a pistol. If you wanted to carry it, you had to be a deputy. Deputization was almost unilaterally the perview of the white male. MO CCW fixed a LOT of issues and I would gladly go toe to toe with those who are blaming it for the crime rate in MO." -
Correlation does not equal causation. Like Legacy said, how did Missouri's murder rates compare to the rest of the U.S. over the same time period? This article definitely fits the BBC's "oh god Americans are gun yielding nuts" agenda.
There are so many variables that would have to be covered (job loss/poverty, location, drug abuse/markets) in order to draw a total picture. St. Louis I imagine accounts for a good deal of gun murer in Missouri. East St Louis looks like Fallujah.
-
If you have such a problem with the BBC, pick your own source, there are plenty. Trouble is, most I can identify as left-leaning - if someone can find a right wing article on this study I'd love to see it. The cynic in me says that none will publish one because it doesn't fit their agenda - am I wrong on that?
Logic, yes, the general theme from over here is very much 'guns are bad' and you'll struggle to find anyone in this country lobbying for wider access to guns.
-
If you have such a problem with the BBC, pick your own source, there are plenty. Trouble is, most I can identify as left-leaning - if someone can find a right wing article on this study I'd love to see it. The cynic in me says that none will publish one because it doesn't fit their agenda - am I wrong on that?
Logic, yes, the general theme from over here is very much 'guns are bad' and you'll struggle to find anyone in this country lobbying for wider access to guns.
If you have such a problem with the BBC, pick your own source, there are plenty. Trouble is, most I can identify as left-leaning - if someone can find a right wing article on this study I'd love to see it. The cynic in me says that none will publish one because it doesn't fit their agenda - am I wrong on that?
Logic, yes, the general theme from over here is very much 'guns are bad' and you'll struggle to find anyone in this country lobbying for wider access to guns.
You can find studies on both sides that support their agenda. The problem is that they have agendas so you can't trust how they compiled the data. It is rare to get a balanced review of data pertaining to a political hot button issue.
-
If you have such a problem with the BBC, pick your own source, there are plenty. Trouble is, most I can identify as left-leaning - if someone can find a right wing article on this study I'd love to see it. The cynic in me says that none will publish one because it doesn't fit their agenda - am I wrong on that?
Logic, yes, the general theme from over here is very much 'guns are bad' and you'll struggle to find anyone in this country lobbying for wider access to guns.
You can find studies on both sides that support their agenda. The problem is that they have agendas so you can't trust how they compiled the data. It is rare to get a balanced review of data pertaining to a political hot button issue.
You can find studies on both sides that support their agenda. The problem is that they have agendas so you can't trust how they compiled the data. It is rare to get a balanced review of data pertaining to a political hot button issue.
Agreed, so do you propose that we just disregard any topic because you can't find impartial reports? Trust me, I really tried to find a counter-view on this article. Just couldn't.
-
You can find studies on both sides that support their agenda. The problem is that they have agendas so you can't trust how they compiled the data. It is rare to get a balanced review of data pertaining to a political hot button issue.
Agreed, so do you propose that we just disregard any topic because you can't find impartial reports? Trust me, I really tried to find a counter-view on this article. Just couldn't.
Agreed, so do you propose that we just disregard any topic because you can't find impartial reports? Trust me, I really tried to find a counter-view on this article. Just couldn't.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13504851.2013.854294#.UwZC0PldUgk Just one that I found pretty quickly.
You can find countering reports pretty easily. The problem is that they suffer from the same sort of problems as the anti-gun studies. Too many variables can effect crime and violence. What can't be disputed is that gun crime over the last 10 or so years has declined and gun laws have loosened. That does not mean that "more guns = less crime" it just means that gun crime declined over a time period in which gun laws loosened. It could be a decrease in gang activity, increase in social programs, employment levels in neighborhoods have low or high crime levels, etc. Just too many things to figure in.
-
Sure, luck means a lot in football. Not having a good quarterback is bad luck. -Don Shula
-
Agreed, so do you propose that we just disregard any topic because you can't find impartial reports? Trust me, I really tried to find a counter-view on this article. Just couldn't.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13504851.2013.854294#.UwZC0PldUgk Just one that I found pretty quickly.
You can find countering reports pretty easily. The problem is that they suffer from the same sort of problems as the anti-gun studies. Too many variables can effect crime and violence. What can't be disputed is that gun crime over the last 10 or so years has declined and gun laws have loosened. That does not mean that "more guns = less crime" it just means that gun crime declined over a time period in which gun laws loosened. It could be a decrease in gang activity, increase in social programs, employment levels in neighborhoods have low or high crime levels, etc. Just too many things to figure in.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13504851.2013.854294#.UwZC0PldUgk Just one that I found pretty quickly.
You can find countering reports pretty easily. The problem is that they suffer from the same sort of problems as the anti-gun studies. Too many variables can effect crime and violence. What can't be disputed is that gun crime over the last 10 or so years has declined and gun laws have loosened. That does not mean that "more guns = less crime" it just means that gun crime declined over a time period in which gun laws loosened. It could be a decrease in gang activity, increase in social programs, employment levels in neighborhoods have low or high crime levels, etc. Just too many things to figure in.
I meant that I couldn't find an opposing view on this particular report - most of the reports I could find were from 'liberal' outlets. I've no doubt you could find a report to back up basically any theory you could think up.
-
Saw this. Hi-Point is awful but I would definitely take it over a pointy stick.
-
Yup.
It looks like they found it in a ditch. Still worked apparently. Haha
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login