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.
You are using facts, statistics, data and applying some critical thinking here that I'm not sure is well appreciated by everyone contributing to this thread, but I certainly appreciate something other than how anyone FEELS about these realities and/or fantasies...
Perhaps all of us might have more facts, more statistics, & more data to use while applying a creative & critical thinking approach to these & other significant problems we are all facing if there hadn't been a kibosh put on the type of research studies that would provide such:
Quote:
...In 1996, the Republican-majority Congress threatened to strip funding from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention unless it stopped funding research into firearm injuries and deaths. The National Rifle Association accused the CDC of promoting gun control. As a result, the CDC stopped funding gun-control research — which had a chilling effect far beyond the agency, drying up money for almost all public health studies of the issue nationwide.
The National Institute of Justice, an arm of the U.S. Department of Justice, funded 32 gun-related studies from 1993 to 1999, but none from 2009 to 2012, according to Mayors Against Illegal Guns. The institute then resumed funding in 2013, in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting the year before. Researchers in search of private funding say they know to avoid the word “gun” or “firearm” in the titles of violence-prevention studies to avoid blowback. ...
Why gun violence research has been shut down for 20 years
How long have you had a fire extinguisher and thinking this way? How many fires have you been able to stop? There are a lot out there, fires being started every day. How many have you put out or stopped from happening so far? Extrapolate those numbers and compare to the fire statistics we're talking about here. Let us know your conclusion based on that sort of analysis objectively speaking, without bias toward your emotions and notions about citizen fire fighters...
...
What we all know about preventing or reducing the damages of fire in our communities is based on what we all know about the facts re: fire.
For example, the fire 'triangle' illustrates the three elements a fire needs to ignite: heat, fuel, & an oxidizing agent (usually oxygen).
Preventing or reducing the damages of fire does not depend on emotional attachments or notions regarding fire.
What we all know about preventing or reducing the damages of fire in our communities is based on what we all know about the facts re: fire.
For example, the fire 'triangle' illustrates the three elements a fire needs to ignite: heat, fuel, & an oxidizing agent (usually oxygen).
Preventing or reducing the damages of fire does not depend on emotional attachments or notions regarding fire.
I was responding to post #1153 using their word's as they apply to guns.
Quote:
How long have you been armed and thinking this way? How many criminals have you been able to stop? There are a lot out there, crimes being committed every day. How many have you brought to justice or stopped from committing a crime so far? Extrapolate those numbers and compare to the crime statistics we're talking about here. Let us know your conclusion based on that sort of analysis objectively speaking, without bias toward your emotions and notions about citizen crime fighters...
You are using facts, statistics, data and applying some critical thinking here that I'm not sure is well appreciated by everyone contributing to this thread, but I certainly appreciate something other than how anyone FEELS about these realities and/or fantasies...
Just so the banners know, below is a picture of what an AR is under the definition by Law, and just so ya know anyone with a good Printer can make one after another.
Perhaps all of us might have more facts, more statistics, & more data to use while applying a creative & critical thinking approach to these & other significant problems we are all facing if there hadn't been a kibosh put on the type of research studies that would provide such:
Why gun violence research has been shut down for 20 years
What about just plain violence research? Guns do not have any supernatural powers that turn ordinary people into violent criminals. If that were the case the 10's of millions of people that own them lawfully would be running around murdering everyone in sight. Same for law enforcement and military personnel who are armed by the government.
How well do you think it would hold up in court if a criminal said that: "The gun made me do it, it's all the gun's fault?"
The problem is that there are violent people living amongst us that are free to roam the streets because our broken criminal justice system continues to release them. How much money needs to be spent in order to figure that out? Unless you've been living in a vault, that does not take too much creative & critical thinking. Nor does it require millions of dollars spent on research.
What about just plain violence research? Guns do not have any supernatural powers that turn ordinary people into violent criminals. If that were the case the 10's of millions of people that own them lawfully would be running around murdering everyone in sight. Same for law enforcement and military personnel who are armed by the government.
How well do you think it would hold up in court if a criminal said that: "The gun made me do it, it's all the gun's fault?"
The problem is that there are violent people living amongst us that are free to roam the streets because our broken criminal justice system continues to release them. How much money needs to be spent in order to figure that out? Unless you've been living in a vault, that does not take too much creative & critical thinking. Nor does it require millions of dollars spent on research.
Simple fix there, find alternative punishments for many non-violent criminals, and keep the violent criminals in prison for all or at least 90% of their sentence.
What about just plain violence research? Guns do not have any supernatural powers that turn ordinary people into violent criminals. If that were the case the 10's of millions of people that own them lawfully would be running around murdering everyone in sight. Same for law enforcement and military personnel who are armed by the government.
How well do you think it would hold up in court if a criminal said that: "The gun made me do it, it's all the gun's fault?"
The problem is that there are violent people living amongst us that are free to roam the streets because our broken criminal justice system continues to release them. How much money needs to be spent in order to figure that out? Unless you've been living in a vault, that does not take too much creative & critical thinking. Nor does it require millions of dollars spent on research.
Wholeheartedly agree more research on "just plain violence" would be helpful.
It's these types of back-door maneuvering that are definitely not helpful:
Quote:
In the immediate aftermath of the massacre in Charleston, South Carolina, the US House of Representatives Appropriations Committee quietly rejected an amendment that would have allowed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to study the underlying causes of gun violence. ...
Quietly, Congress extends a ban on CDC research on gun violence
[/b]
Simple fix there, find alternative punishments for many non-violent criminals, and keep the violent criminals in prison for all or at least 90% of their sentence.
Agree this could be a part of competently addressing.
Consider this also as a plausible & pragmatic approach:
What If We Treated Gun Violence Like A Public Health Crisis?
Same here, have had several "encounters" that were averted simply by letting them know that I was armed, twice while out on hikes and twice while working in the "wrong" area late at night, and once when on our way to the State Fair and stopped at a carwash due to a car problem. Deterrence works but some people will never accept that, their irrational fear of firearms overrides logic.
I kept from being robbed and who knows what else twice by carrying a gun.
Critical thinking, I suspect, does not mean what you think it means.
Ok study 4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault carrying a gun than not. However based on which odds? The odds of being assaulted as an average, or the odds of being assaulted while carrying a gun?
Here's an example.
Suppose the odds of being assaulted (general) are 100/100,000 so 1 in 1000. Of those 10/100,000 result in being shot. Ok. Now for gun carriers suppose their odds of being assaulted are only 10/100,000 (has to be lower the population does not carry with 100% certainty), but they have 4.5/100,000 result in being shot. While the stats show the gun carrier has 4.5 times greater risk of being shot (45% of assaults compared to 10%), the true picture is that the risk is still lower than not carrying a gun.
Critical thinking requires one to engage the brain, and ask questions about stated information. The example fulfills the criteria presented, but demonstrates lower risk for gun owners in spite of a "4.5 times greater odds"
Upon a second look at your numbers here and they seem no less confusing...
Simply stated, you seem to be admitting on the one hand that the risk of being assaulted are 4.5 times higher for those carrying a gun vs those who don't. Then you conclude, "based on the odds" that the risk is lower for gun carriers. Does not compute.
You don't site this study you are referring to, so I Googled what information there is about carrying vs not carrying, all of which pretty well points out that carrying doesn't do much other than increase the odds for a gun carrier to be shot. Here, for example, is further explanation (note that reference to "gun culture" again BTW)...
"Despite the US having the highest rate of firearms-related homicide in the industrialised world, the relationship between gun culture and violence is poorly understood. A recent study found that treating violence like an infectious disease led to a dramatic fall in shootings and killings.
Overall, Branas’s study found that people who carried guns were 4.5 times as likely to be shot and 4.2 times as likely to get killed compared with unarmed citizens. When the team looked at shootings in which victims had a chance to defend themselves, their odds of getting shot were even higher.
While it may be that the type of people who carry firearms are simply more likely to get shot, it may be that guns give a sense of empowerment that causes carriers to overreact in tense situations, or encourages them to visit neighbourhoods they probably shouldn’t, Branas speculates. Supporters of the Second Amendment shouldn’t worry that the right to bear arms is under threat, however. “We don’t have an answer as to whether guns are protective or perilous,” Branas says. “This study is a beginning.”
Daniel Webster, co-director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research in Baltimore, Maryland, thinks it is near-sighted to consider only the safety of gun owners and not their communities. “It affects others a heck of a lot more,” he says."
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.
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.
