U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 09-15-2008, 07:05 PM
 
Location: Cold Frozen North
1,928 posts, read 4,522,595 times
Reputation: 1266

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader View Post
A brief quote citing some facts: "Police View: Over 100,000 police officers delivered a message to Congress in 1990 stating that only 2% to 3% of crimes are committed using a so-called "assault weapon." (16)

* Florida study: In Florida, only 3.5% of the guns recovered by the police were guns that could loosely be defined as "assault weapons." (17)
* California study: The California Department of Justice suppressed an official report showing that "assault weapons" comprised only 3.7% of the guns used in crime. (18) While the report was eventually leaked to the media, it received little press coverage.
* Virginia task force: A special task force on assault weapons found that only 2.8 percent of the homicides involved "assault-type weapons" during 1992. (19)
* Connecticut: The Department of Public Safety reports that only 1.79% of all confiscated firearms were "assault type weapons." (20)
* New Jersey: The New York Times reported that, "Although New Jersey's pioneering ban on military-style assault rifles was sold to the state as a crime-fighting measure, its impact on violence in the state . . . has been negligible, both sides agree." (21) Moreover, New Jersey police statistics show that only .026 of 1 percent of all crimes involve "assault rifles." (22)
* Nationwide: The Bureau of Justice Statistics reported in 1993 that violent criminals only carry or use a "military-type gun" in about one percent of the crimes nationwide. (23) * Knives more deadly: According to the FBI, people have a much greater chance of being killed by a knife or a blunt object than by any kind of rifle, including an "assault rifle." (24) In Chicago, the chance is 67 times greater. That is, a person is 67 times more likely to be stabbed or beaten to death in Chicago than to be murdered by an "assault rifle." (25) "

Can view the rest at: Fact Sheet: Assault Weapons Ban


And even better, the Justice Department was commissioned to study the effects of the Assault Weapons Ban. Their conclusion: it had no measurable effect. Washington Times - Ban on assault weapons didn't reduce violence
Very interesting article. Definitely information that many in the news media would not want widely diseminated. But I'm sure that if the statistics proved the reverse, they would be all over it.

 
Old 09-16-2008, 06:22 AM
 
Location: on an island
13,374 posts, read 40,158,807 times
Reputation: 13176
Quote:
Originally Posted by HighPlainsDrifter73 View Post
Very interesting article. Definitely information that many in the news media would not want widely diseminated. But I'm sure that if the statistics proved the reverse, they would be all over it.
Those statistics are available for anyone who wants to see them, you don't have to go to gunowners.org to read them.
Meanwhile, the new assault weapons ban is being considered.
I dunno. If someone wants to fire a
weapon
that is basically an Ingram submachine gun, who am I to say no? I don't understand the thrill, but it's all recreational, right?
However:
According to the Brady Organization, (http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/faqs/?page=awb - broken link) many law enforcement organizations support the ban on "cop killer guns."
Gun traces are one of the best measures of gun usage in crime. In 1999, the National Institute of Justice reported that trace requests for assault weapons in the 1993-95 period declined 20% in the first calendar year after the ban took effect, dropping from 4,077 in 1994 to 3,268 in 1995. Over the same time period, gun murders declined only 10% and trace requests for all types of guns declined 11 percent, clearly showing a greater decrease in the number of assault weapons traced in crime.
Except then we end up with criminals holding the banned weapons.
The one-gun-a-month probably doesn't do any good, either, although I understand owning an arsenal about as well as concealed carry.
I say, if you're gonna carry, let it be out in the open.
 
Old 09-16-2008, 07:26 AM
 
Location: Northglenn, Colorado
3,689 posts, read 9,253,000 times
Reputation: 944
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueWillowPlate View Post
Those statistics are available for anyone who wants to see them, you don't have to go to gunowners.org to read them.
Meanwhile, the new assault weapons ban is being considered.
I dunno. If someone wants to fire a
weapon
that is basically an Ingram submachine gun, who am I to say no? I don't understand the thrill, but it's all recreational, right?
However:
According to the Brady Organization, (http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/faqs/?page=awb - broken link) many law enforcement organizations support the ban on "cop killer guns."
Gun traces are one of the best measures of gun usage in crime. In 1999, the National Institute of Justice reported that trace requests for assault weapons in the 1993-95 period declined 20% in the first calendar year after the ban took effect, dropping from 4,077 in 1994 to 3,268 in 1995. Over the same time period, gun murders declined only 10% and trace requests for all types of guns declined 11 percent, clearly showing a greater decrease in the number of assault weapons traced in crime.
Except then we end up with criminals holding the banned weapons.
The one-gun-a-month probably doesn't do any good, either, although I understand owning an arsenal about as well as concealed carry.
I say, if you're gonna carry, let it be out in the open.
Why would I give a criminal the advantage to knowing I have a firearm? one of the main reasons for the conceal part of the carry permit, it allows people that are not carrying some sort of increased protection. The criminals Do not know who is and who is not carrying when they decide to commit a crime, thus making them think twice.
 
Old 09-16-2008, 08:00 AM
 
Location: on an island
13,374 posts, read 40,158,807 times
Reputation: 13176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noahma View Post
Why would I give a criminal the advantage to knowing I have a firearm? one of the main reasons for the conceal part of the carry permit, it allows people that are not carrying some sort of increased protection. The criminals Do not know who is and who is not carrying when they decide to commit a crime, thus making them think twice.
Well, open carry might be a deterrent, and is legal in some places.
I guess it depends on where you live and the people around you.
 
Old 09-16-2008, 01:12 PM
 
Location: Santa Monica
4,708 posts, read 7,561,996 times
Reputation: 1023
How many persons are killed per incident involving an assault weapon?

Maybe the number of incidents ain't the point?
 
Old 09-17-2008, 05:55 PM
 
Location: The Woods
16,455 posts, read 21,473,314 times
Reputation: 8412
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParkTwain View Post
How many persons are killed per incident involving an assault weapon?

Maybe the number of incidents ain't the point?
Did you read the article I linked to? The justice department stated it pretty clearly: the "assault weapons" ban had no measurable effect on crime. There's no getting around it: the so-called "assault weapons" are really not used in crime the way the gun banners want you to think they are. That they like to resort to trying to get people to mix up these semi-automatic weapons with full automatic weapons (that is, machine guns) is quite telling. If the truth and the statistics were shown honestly to the public there would be no case whatsoever for any such ban.
 
Old 09-18-2008, 04:20 PM
 
Location: Santa Monica
4,708 posts, read 7,561,996 times
Reputation: 1023
If you own an M-16 but don't have it properly secured in your home, then that weapon is stolen and used in a heinous crime, do you mind if I sue your arse off for damages?
 
Old 09-18-2008, 04:45 PM
 
27,903 posts, read 33,424,573 times
Reputation: 4016
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParkTwain View Post
If you own an M-16 but don't have it properly secured in your home, then that weapon is stolen and used in a heinous crime, do you mind if I sue your arse off for damages?

Are you one of those people that think if your hurt during the commission of a crime that you can then sue the person that hurt you?

Last edited by BigJon3475; 09-18-2008 at 04:57 PM.. Reason: Forgot this was in the great debate sorry...
 
Old 09-18-2008, 04:53 PM
 
Location: Santa Monica
4,708 posts, read 7,561,996 times
Reputation: 1023
That's called a tort. That's part of present-day law. Tough break for the perps, I guess. Why would consider a person's exercising his/her rights under the law to be like the act of a criminal? Or were you being facetious? (add a smiley, please)
 
Old 09-18-2008, 04:58 PM
 
27,903 posts, read 33,424,573 times
Reputation: 4016
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParkTwain View Post
That's called a tort. That's part of present-day law. Tough break for the perps, I guess. Why would consider a person's exercising his/her rights under the law to be like the act of a criminal? Or were you being facetious? (add a smiley, please)
I rephrased it so as not to be offensive....as it obviously was reading back over it.

What right gives you the ability to sue me for being a victim of crime?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top