Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I never said I did.
But you missed the point that magazine size is irrelevant to anyone hell bent on killing people
But only people intent on killing lots of people want a 100 round magazine.
With a 100 round magazine you can look like a badass at the shooting range
But it serves you no practical purpose
It is highly desired by someone who wants to slaughter small children in an elementary school or shoot up a church
remind me again how Britain did it right but crimes involving the use of firearms skyrocketed after the ban and murder with firearms went up as well.
26 Gun murders (equiv. 130) in England vs. *11,004* in US Annually
26 Gun murders (equiv. 130) in England vs. *11,004* in US Annually
Published on
Tuesday, October 03, 2017
Yes....we get it....even though British criminals now have more guns than they had before the gun ban, and they are using them more and more often...gun crime across England and Wales is up another 27%....and in London, it is up 42%.....their criminals do not murder their victims......we get it...but that isn't the point....the point is that they have more gun crime and murder after they banned guns....they are an island nation...........and now have more violent crime than we do...
That is another lie.
The Heller decision was a gift to the anti-gun control crowd
They found that the DC restrictions on handguns were excessive and were not supported by a pressing government interest
But even Heller made it clear that the government had a right to ban certain firearms if they could prove a pressing societal reason for the ban
Given the preference of mass murderers to use assault type weapons with large capacity magazines and the lack of a pressing reason why private citizens need so much firepower...Even Heller would agree with the ban
Yeah....no. Considering there are 13 million AR-15 rifles in private hands...and 2 were used for crimes......one by a guy who was already banned from owning one and who the government screwed up in his background check.....and no, you don't get to ban them.....
And magazine size has nothing to do with how many people die.....you have seen the research...here it is again...
Large-Capacity Magazines and the Casualty Counts in Mass Shootings: The Plausibility of Linkages by Gary Kleck :: SSRN
Do bans on large-capacity magazines (LCMs) for semiautomatic firearms have significant potential for reducing the number of deaths and injuries in mass shootings?
The most common rationale for an effect of LCM use is that they allow mass killers to fire many rounds without reloading.
LCMs are used is less than 1/3 of 1% of mass shootings.
News accounts of 23 shootings in which more than six people were killed or wounded and LCMs were used, occurring in the U.S. in 1994-2013, were examined.
There was only one incident in which the shooter may have been stopped by bystander intervention when he tried to reload.
In all of these 23 incidents the shooter possessed either multiple guns or multiple magazines, meaning that the shooter, even if denied LCMs, could have continued firing without significant interruption by either switching loaded guns or by changing smaller loaded magazines with only a 2-4 second delay for each magazine change.
Finally, the data indicate that mass shooters maintain slow enough rates of fire such that the time needed to reload would not increase the time between shots and thus the time available for prospective victims to escape.
--------
We did not employ the oft-used definition of “mass murder” as a homicide in which four or more victims were killed, because most of these involve just four to six victims (Duwe 2007), which could therefore have involved as few as six rounds fired, a number that shooters using even ordinary revolvers are capable of firing without reloading.
LCMs obviously cannot help shooters who fire no more rounds than could be fired without LCMs, so the inclusion of “nonaffectable” cases with only four to six victims would dilute the sample, reducing the percent of sample incidents in which an LCM might have affected the number of casualties.
Further, had we studied only homicides with four or more dead victims, drawn from the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports, we would have missed cases in which huge numbers of people were shot, and huge numbers of rounds were fired, but three or fewer of the victims died.
For example, in one widely publicized shooting carried out in Los Angeles on February 28, 1997, two bank robbers shot a total of 18 people - surely a mass shooting by any reasonable standard (Table 1).
Yet, because none of the people they shot died, this incident would not qualify as a mass murder (or even murder of any kind).
Exclusion of such incidents would bias the sample against the proposition that LCM use increases the number of victims by excluding incidents with large numbers of victims. We also excluded shootings in which more than six persons were shot over the entire course of the incident but shootings occurred in multiple locations with no more than six people shot in any one of the locations, and substantial periods of time intervened between episodes of shooting. An example is the series of killings committed by Rodrick Dantzler on July 7, 2011.
Once eligible incidents were identified, we searched through news accounts for details related to whether the use of LCMs could have influenced the casualty counts.
Specifically, we searched for
(1) the number of magazines in the shooter’s immediate possession,
(2) the capacity of the largest magazine,
(3) the number of guns in the shooter’s immediate possession during the incident,
(4) the types of guns possessed,
(5) whether the shooter reloaded during the incident,
(6) the number of rounds fired,
(7) the duration of the shooting from the first shot fired to the last, and (8) whether anyone intervened to stop the shooter.
Findings How Many Mass Shootings were Committed Using LCMs?
We identified 23 total incidents in which more than six people were shot at a single time and place in the U.S. from 1994 through 2013 and that were known to involve use of any magazines with capacities over ten rounds.
Table 1 summarizes key details of the LCMinvolved mass shootings relevant to the issues addressed in this paper.
(Table 1 about here) What fraction of all mass shootings involve LCMs?
There is no comprehensive listing of all mass shootings available for the entire 1994-2013 period, but the most extensive one currently available is at the Shootingtracker.com website, which only began its coverage in 2013.
-----
How Often Have Bystanders Intervened While a Mass Shooter Was Trying to Reload?
First, we consider the issue of how many times people have disrupted a mass shooting while the shooter was trying to load a detachable magazine into a semiautomatic gun.
Note that 16 it is irrelevant whether interveners have stopped a shooter while trying to reload some other type of gun, using other kinds of magazines, since we are addressing the potential significance of restrictions on the capacity of detachable magazines which are used only with semiautomatic firearms.
Thus, bystander intervention directed at shooters using other types of guns that take much longer to reload than a semiautomatic gun using detachable magazines could not provide any guidance as to the likelihood of bystander intervention when the shooter was using a semiautomatic gun equipped with detachable magazines that can be reloaded very quickly.
Prospective interveners would presumably be more likely to tackle a shooter who took a long time to reload than one who took only 2-4 seconds to do so.
Likewise, bystander interventions that occurred at a time when the shooter was not reloading (e.g., when he was struggling with a defective gun or magazine) are irrelevant, since that kind of intervention could occur regardless of what kinds of magazines or firearms the shooter was using.
It is the need to reload detachable magazines sooner and more often that differentiates shooters using smaller detachable magazines from those using larger ones.
For the period 1994-2013 inclusive, we identified three mass shooting incidents in which it was claimed that interveners disrupted the shooting by tackling the shooter while he was trying to reload.
In only one of the three cases, however, did interveners actually tackle the shooter while he may have been reloading a semiautomatic firearm.
In one of the incidents, the weapon in question was a shotgun that had to be reloaded by inserting one shotshell at a time into the weapon (Knoxville News Sentinel “Takedown of Alleged Shooter Recounted” July 29, 2008, regarding a shooting in Knoxville, TN on July 27, 2008), and so the incident is irrelevant to the effects of detachable LCMs.
In another incident, occurring in Springfield, Oregon on May 21, 1998, the shooter, Kip Kinkel, was using a semiautomatic gun, and he was tackled by bystanders, but not while he was reloading.
After exhausting the ammunition in one gun, the shooter started 17 firing another loaded gun, one of three firearms he had with him.
The first intervener was shot in the hand in the course of wresting this still-loaded gun away from the shooter (The (Portland) Oregonian, May 23, 1998).
The final case occurred in Tucson, AZ on January 8, 2011.
This is the shooting in which Jared Loughner attempted to assassinate Representative Gabrielle Giffords.
The shooter was using a semiautomatic firearm and was tackled by bystanders, purportedly while trying to reload a detachable magazine.
Even in this case, however, there were important uncertainties.
According to one news account, one bystander “grabbed a full magazine” that the shooter dropped, and two others helped subdue him (Associated Press, January 9, 2011).
It is not, however, clear whether this bystander intervention was facilitated because
(1) the shooter was reloading, or because
(2) the shooter stopping firing when his gun or magazine failed to function properly.
Eyewitness testimony, including that of the interveners, was inconsistent as to exactly why or how the intervention transpired in Giffords shooting.
One intervener insisted that he was sure the shooter had exhausted the ammunition in the first magazine (and thus was about to reload) because he saw the gun’s slide locked back – a condition he believed could only occur with this particular firearm after the last round is fired.
In fact, this can also happen when the guns jams, i.e. fails to chamber the next round (Salzgeber 2014; Morrill 2014).
Complicating matters further, the New York Times reported that the spring on the second magazine was broken, presumably rendering it incapable of functioning.
Their story’s headline and text characterized this mechanical failure as “perhaps the only fortunate event of the day” (New York Times “A Single, Terrifying Moment: Shots, Scuffle, Some Luck,” January 10, 2011, p. A1)
. If the New York Times account was accurate, the shooter would not have been able to continue shooting with that magazine even if no one had stopped him from loading it into his gun.
Detachable magazines of any size can malfunction, which would at least temporarily stop a prospective mass shooter from firing, and thereby provide an opportunity for bystanders to stop the shooter.
It is possible that the bystander intervention in the Tucson case could have occurred regardless of what size magazines the shooter possessed, since a shooter struggling with a defective small-capacity magazine would be just as vulnerable to disruption as one struggling with a defective large-capacity magazine. Thus, it remains unclear whether the shooter was reloading when the bystanders tackled him.
-----
The offenders in LCM-involved mass shootings were also known to have reloaded during 14 of the 23 (61%) incidents with magazine holding over 10 rounds.
The shooters were known to have not reloaded in another two of these 20 incidents and it could not be determined if they reloaded in the remaining seven incidents.
Thus, even if the shooters had been denied LCMs, we know that most of them definitely would have been able to reload smaller detachable magazines without interference from bystanders since they in fact did change magazines.
The fact that this percentage is less than 100% should not, however, be interpreted to mean that the shooters were unable to reload in the other nine incidents.
It is possible that the shooters could also have reloaded in many of these nine shootings, but chose not to do so, or did not need to do so in order to fire all the rounds they wanted to fire. This is consistent with the fact that there has been at most only one mass shootings in twenty years in which reloading a semiautomatic firearm might have been blocked by bystanders intervening and thereby stopping the shooter from doing all the shooting he wanted to do. All we know is that in two incidents the shooter did not reload, and news accounts of seven other incidents did not mention whether the offender reloaded.
----
For example, a story in the Hartford Courant about the Sandy Hook elementary school killings in 2012 was headlined “Shooter Paused, and Six Escaped,” the text asserting that as many as six children may have survived because the shooter paused to reload (December 23, 2012). ''
The author of the story, however, went on to concede that this was just a speculation by an unnamed source, and that it was also possible that some children simply escaped when the killer was shooting other children.
There was no reliable evidence that the pauses were due to the shooter reloading, rather than his guns jamming or the shooter simply choosing to pause his shooting while his gun was still loaded.
The plausibility of the “victims escape” rationale depends on the average rates of fire that shooters in mass shootings typically maintain.
If they fire very fast, the 2-4 seconds it takes to change box-type detachable magazines could produce a slowing of the rate of fire that the shooters otherwise would have maintained without the magazine changes, increasing the average time between rounds fired and potentially allowing more victims to escape during the betweenshot intervals.
On the other hand, if mass shooters fire their guns with the average interval between shots lasting more than 2-4 seconds, the pauses due to additional magazine changes would be no longer than the pauses the shooter typically took between shots even when not reloading.
In that case, there would be no more opportunity for potential victims to escape than there would have been without the additional magazine changes
-----
In sum, in nearly all LCM-involved mass shootings, the time it takes to reload a detachable magazine is no greater than the average time between shots that the shooter takes anyway when not reloading.
Consequently, there is no affirmative evidence that reloading detachable magazines slows mass shooters’ rates of fire, and thus no affirmative evidence that the number of victims who could escape the killers due to additional pauses in the shooting is increased by the shooter’s need to change magazines.
remind me again how Britain did it right but crimes involving the use of firearms skyrocketed after the ban and murder with firearms went up as well.
26 Gun murders (equiv. 130) in England vs. *11,004* in US Annually
26 Gun murders (equiv. 130) in England vs. *11,004* in US Annually
Published on
Tuesday, October 03, 2017
Yes....we get it....even though British criminals now have more guns than they had before the gun ban, and they are using them more and more often...gun crime across England and Wales is up another 27%....and in London, it is up 42%.....their criminals do not murder their victims......we get it...but that isn't the point....the point is that they have more gun crime and murder after they banned guns....they are an island nation...........and now have more violent crime than we do...
That is another lie.
More reason why we need to register gunsOK. We can add stealing them to their list of sources if you want to. Where is the proof that crooks ONLY get guns those two ways? Want to add more sources?
And more.....
How Criminals Get Guns: In Short, All Too Easily
When they cannot find them in the grass, gangs get guns by trickery and by theft, by bribery and by intimidation. They often pay or force men who are legally entitled to buy guns to buy weapons for them at gun stores or shows.
Such a transaction is called a "straw man" purchase, but girlfriends and other women, often desperate to feed their children or a drug habit, are also used to buy weapons over the counter.
"We've found people who do it as a kind of side business," said Stephen P. Sinnott, an assistant United States Attorney in Chicago.
One gun-running ring at the city's western limits paid off its buyers with guns. For every half-dozen guns or so a straw man bought, he was allowed to keep one. In about 16 months, Mr. Singer said, the ring put more than 110 illegal guns on the streets. More than 20 of the guns have been recovered in drive-by shootings and drug deals gone bad.
The gangs and other criminals also get weapons through barter, or "trade-ins." The gangs trade narcotics for the guns of drug-addicted burglars, who will sell a $500 pistol fo
Registering guns doesn't do anything.....it doesn't solve crimes it doesn't stop crimes...and mass shooters will register their guns all day long.
It shows where mass shooters and criminals are getting their guns
You will be more careful about who you sell your gun to if you realize the gun can be traced back to you
No.....if they cared who they sold their guns to they wouldn't sell the guns to those people....as the article shows...and you missed the part where the gangs threaten people to buy their guns........
The Heller decision was a gift to the anti-gun control crowd
They found that the DC restrictions on handguns were excessive and were not supported by a pressing government interest
But even Heller made it clear that the government had a right to ban certain firearms if they could prove a pressing societal reason for the ban
Given the preference of mass murderers to use assault type weapons with large capacity magazines and the lack of a pressing reason why private citizens need so much firepower...Even Heller would agree with the ban
Yeah....no. Considering there are 13 million AR-15 rifles in private hands...and 2 were used for crimes......one by a guy who was already banned from owning one and who the government screwed up in his background check.....and no, you don't get to ban them.....
And magazine size has nothing to do with how many people die.....you have seen the research...here it is again...
Large-Capacity Magazines and the Casualty Counts in Mass Shootings: The Plausibility of Linkages by Gary Kleck :: SSRN
Do bans on large-capacity magazines (LCMs) for semiautomatic firearms have significant potential for reducing the number of deaths and injuries in mass shootings?
The most common rationale for an effect of LCM use is that they allow mass killers to fire many rounds without reloading.
LCMs are used is less than 1/3 of 1% of mass shootings.
News accounts of 23 shootings in which more than six people were killed or wounded and LCMs were used, occurring in the U.S. in 1994-2013, were examined.
There was only one incident in which the shooter may have been stopped by bystander intervention when he tried to reload.
In all of these 23 incidents the shooter possessed either multiple guns or multiple magazines, meaning that the shooter, even if denied LCMs, could have continued firing without significant interruption by either switching loaded guns or by changing smaller loaded magazines with only a 2-4 second delay for each magazine change.
Finally, the data indicate that mass shooters maintain slow enough rates of fire such that the time needed to reload would not increase the time between shots and thus the time available for prospective victims to escape.
--------
We did not employ the oft-used definition of “mass murder” as a homicide in which four or more victims were killed, because most of these involve just four to six victims (Duwe 2007), which could therefore have involved as few as six rounds fired, a number that shooters using even ordinary revolvers are capable of firing without reloading.
LCMs obviously cannot help shooters who fire no more rounds than could be fired without LCMs, so the inclusion of “nonaffectable” cases with only four to six victims would dilute the sample, reducing the percent of sample incidents in which an LCM might have affected the number of casualties.
Further, had we studied only homicides with four or more dead victims, drawn from the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports, we would have missed cases in which huge numbers of people were shot, and huge numbers of rounds were fired, but three or fewer of the victims died.
For example, in one widely publicized shooting carried out in Los Angeles on February 28, 1997, two bank robbers shot a total of 18 people - surely a mass shooting by any reasonable standard (Table 1).
Yet, because none of the people they shot died, this incident would not qualify as a mass murder (or even murder of any kind).
Exclusion of such incidents would bias the sample against the proposition that LCM use increases the number of victims by excluding incidents with large numbers of victims. We also excluded shootings in which more than six persons were shot over the entire course of the incident but shootings occurred in multiple locations with no more than six people shot in any one of the locations, and substantial periods of time intervened between episodes of shooting. An example is the series of killings committed by Rodrick Dantzler on July 7, 2011.
Once eligible incidents were identified, we searched through news accounts for details related to whether the use of LCMs could have influenced the casualty counts.
Specifically, we searched for
(1) the number of magazines in the shooter’s immediate possession,
(2) the capacity of the largest magazine,
(3) the number of guns in the shooter’s immediate possession during the incident,
(4) the types of guns possessed,
(5) whether the shooter reloaded during the incident,
(6) the number of rounds fired,
(7) the duration of the shooting from the first shot fired to the last, and (8) whether anyone intervened to stop the shooter.
Findings How Many Mass Shootings were Committed Using LCMs?
We identified 23 total incidents in which more than six people were shot at a single time and place in the U.S. from 1994 through 2013 and that were known to involve use of any magazines with capacities over ten rounds.
Table 1 summarizes key details of the LCMinvolved mass shootings relevant to the issues addressed in this paper.
(Table 1 about here) What fraction of all mass shootings involve LCMs?
There is no comprehensive listing of all mass shootings available for the entire 1994-2013 period, but the most extensive one currently available is at the Shootingtracker.com website, which only began its coverage in 2013.
-----
How Often Have Bystanders Intervened While a Mass Shooter Was Trying to Reload?
First, we consider the issue of how many times people have disrupted a mass shooting while the shooter was trying to load a detachable magazine into a semiautomatic gun.
Note that 16 it is irrelevant whether interveners have stopped a shooter while trying to reload some other type of gun, using other kinds of magazines, since we are addressing the potential significance of restrictions on the capacity of detachable magazines which are used only with semiautomatic firearms.
Thus, bystander intervention directed at shooters using other types of guns that take much longer to reload than a semiautomatic gun using detachable magazines could not provide any guidance as to the likelihood of bystander intervention when the shooter was using a semiautomatic gun equipped with detachable magazines that can be reloaded very quickly.
Prospective interveners would presumably be more likely to tackle a shooter who took a long time to reload than one who took only 2-4 seconds to do so.
Likewise, bystander interventions that occurred at a time when the shooter was not reloading (e.g., when he was struggling with a defective gun or magazine) are irrelevant, since that kind of intervention could occur regardless of what kinds of magazines or firearms the shooter was using.
It is the need to reload detachable magazines sooner and more often that differentiates shooters using smaller detachable magazines from those using larger ones.
For the period 1994-2013 inclusive, we identified three mass shooting incidents in which it was claimed that interveners disrupted the shooting by tackling the shooter while he was trying to reload.
In only one of the three cases, however, did interveners actually tackle the shooter while he may have been reloading a semiautomatic firearm.
In one of the incidents, the weapon in question was a shotgun that had to be reloaded by inserting one shotshell at a time into the weapon (Knoxville News Sentinel “Takedown of Alleged Shooter Recounted” July 29, 2008, regarding a shooting in Knoxville, TN on July 27, 2008), and so the incident is irrelevant to the effects of detachable LCMs.
In another incident, occurring in Springfield, Oregon on May 21, 1998, the shooter, Kip Kinkel, was using a semiautomatic gun, and he was tackled by bystanders, but not while he was reloading.
After exhausting the ammunition in one gun, the shooter started 17 firing another loaded gun, one of three firearms he had with him.
The first intervener was shot in the hand in the course of wresting this still-loaded gun away from the shooter (The (Portland) Oregonian, May 23, 1998).
The final case occurred in Tucson, AZ on January 8, 2011.
This is the shooting in which Jared Loughner attempted to assassinate Representative Gabrielle Giffords.
The shooter was using a semiautomatic firearm and was tackled by bystanders, purportedly while trying to reload a detachable magazine.
Even in this case, however, there were important uncertainties.
According to one news account, one bystander “grabbed a full magazine” that the shooter dropped, and two others helped subdue him (Associated Press, January 9, 2011).
It is not, however, clear whether this bystander intervention was facilitated because
(1) the shooter was reloading, or because
(2) the shooter stopping firing when his gun or magazine failed to function properly.
Eyewitness testimony, including that of the interveners, was inconsistent as to exactly why or how the intervention transpired in Giffords shooting.
One intervener insisted that he was sure the shooter had exhausted the ammunition in the first magazine (and thus was about to reload) because he saw the gun’s slide locked back – a condition he believed could only occur with this particular firearm after the last round is fired.
In fact, this can also happen when the guns jams, i.e. fails to chamber the next round (Salzgeber 2014; Morrill 2014).
Complicating matters further, the New York Times reported that the spring on the second magazine was broken, presumably rendering it incapable of functioning.
Their story’s headline and text characterized this mechanical failure as “perhaps the only fortunate event of the day” (New York Times “A Single, Terrifying Moment: Shots, Scuffle, Some Luck,” January 10, 2011, p. A1)
. If the New York Times account was accurate, the shooter would not have been able to continue shooting with that magazine even if no one had stopped him from loading it into his gun.
Detachable magazines of any size can malfunction, which would at least temporarily stop a prospective mass shooter from firing, and thereby provide an opportunity for bystanders to stop the shooter.
It is possible that the bystander intervention in the Tucson case could have occurred regardless of what size magazines the shooter possessed, since a shooter struggling with a defective small-capacity magazine would be just as vulnerable to disruption as one struggling with a defective large-capacity magazine. Thus, it remains unclear whether the shooter was reloading when the bystanders tackled him.
-----
The offenders in LCM-involved mass shootings were also known to have reloaded during 14 of the 23 (61%) incidents with magazine holding over 10 rounds.
The shooters were known to have not reloaded in another two of these 20 incidents and it could not be determined if they reloaded in the remaining seven incidents.
Thus, even if the shooters had been denied LCMs, we know that most of them definitely would have been able to reload smaller detachable magazines without interference from bystanders since they in fact did change magazines.
The fact that this percentage is less than 100% should not, however, be interpreted to mean that the shooters were unable to reload in the other nine incidents.
It is possible that the shooters could also have reloaded in many of these nine shootings, but chose not to do so, or did not need to do so in order to fire all the rounds they wanted to fire. This is consistent with the fact that there has been at most only one mass shootings in twenty years in which reloading a semiautomatic firearm might have been blocked by bystanders intervening and thereby stopping the shooter from doing all the shooting he wanted to do. All we know is that in two incidents the shooter did not reload, and news accounts of seven other incidents did not mention whether the offender reloaded.
----
For example, a story in the Hartford Courant about the Sandy Hook elementary school killings in 2012 was headlined “Shooter Paused, and Six Escaped,” the text asserting that as many as six children may have survived because the shooter paused to reload (December 23, 2012). ''
The author of the story, however, went on to concede that this was just a speculation by an unnamed source, and that it was also possible that some children simply escaped when the killer was shooting other children.
There was no reliable evidence that the pauses were due to the shooter reloading, rather than his guns jamming or the shooter simply choosing to pause his shooting while his gun was still loaded.
The plausibility of the “victims escape” rationale depends on the average rates of fire that shooters in mass shootings typically maintain.
If they fire very fast, the 2-4 seconds it takes to change box-type detachable magazines could produce a slowing of the rate of fire that the shooters otherwise would have maintained without the magazine changes, increasing the average time between rounds fired and potentially allowing more victims to escape during the betweenshot intervals.
On the other hand, if mass shooters fire their guns with the average interval between shots lasting more than 2-4 seconds, the pauses due to additional magazine changes would be no longer than the pauses the shooter typically took between shots even when not reloading.
In that case, there would be no more opportunity for potential victims to escape than there would have been without the additional magazine changes
-----
In sum, in nearly all LCM-involved mass shootings, the time it takes to reload a detachable magazine is no greater than the average time between shots that the shooter takes anyway when not reloading.
Consequently, there is no affirmative evidence that reloading detachable magazines slows mass shooters’ rates of fire, and thus no affirmative evidence that the number of victims who could escape the killers due to additional pauses in the shooting is increased by the shooter’s need to change magazines.
You still haven't said why the military always uses large capacity magazines in combat, if it doesn't make any difference anyway.
remind me again how Britain did it right but crimes involving the use of firearms skyrocketed after the ban and murder with firearms went up as well.
26 Gun murders (equiv. 130) in England vs. *11,004* in US Annually
26 Gun murders (equiv. 130) in England vs. *11,004* in US Annually
Published on
Tuesday, October 03, 2017
Yes....we get it....even though British criminals now have more guns than they had before the gun ban, and they are using them more and more often...gun crime across England and Wales is up another 27%....and in London, it is up 42%.....their criminals do not murder their victims......we get it...but that isn't the point....the point is that they have more gun crime and murder after they banned guns....they are an island nation...........and now have more violent crime than we do...
That is another lie.
Saying it is a lie when it is the truth, and I have links showing that you are wrong is pretty dumb...
Culture of violence: Gun crime goes up by 89% in a decade | Daily Mail Online
The latest Government figures show that the total number of firearm offences in England and Wales has increased from 5,209 in 1998/99 to 9,865 last year - a rise of 89 per cent.
The number of people injured or killed by guns, excluding air weapons, has increased from 864 in 1998/99 to a provisional figure of 1,760 in 2008/09, an increase of 104 per cent .
========
Crime rise is biggest in a decade, ONS figures show
Ministers will also be concerned that the country is becoming increasingly violent in nature, with gun crime rising 23% to 6,375 offences, largely driven by an increase in the use of handguns.
=========
Gun crime in London increases by 42% - BBC News
Gun crime offences in London surged by 42% in the last year, according to official statistics.
Top trauma surgeon reveals shocking extent of London’s gun crime
A leading trauma surgeon has told how the number of patients treated for gunshot injuries at a major London hospital has doubled in the last five years.
----
He said the hospital’s major trauma centre had seen a bigger rise in gunshot injuries compared to knife wounds and that the average age of victims was getting younger.
-----
Last year, gun crime offences in London increased for a third year running and by 42 per cent, from 1,793 offences in 2015/16 to 2,544 offences in 2016/17. Police have seized 635 guns off the streets so far this year.
Dr Griffiths, who also teaches medical students, said: “Our numbers of victims of gun injury have doubled [since 2012]. Gunshot injuries represent about 2.5 per cent of our penetrating trauma.
-----
Dr Griffiths said the average age of gun crime victims needing treatment at the hospital had decreased from 25 to the mid to late teens since 2012.
He added that medics at the Barts Health hospital’s major trauma centre in Whitechapel had seen a bigger rise in patients with gun injuries rather than knife wounds and that most were caused by pistols or shotguns.
Met Police commander Jim Stokley, who was also invited to speak at the meeting, said that handguns and shotguns were the weapons of choice and that 46 per cent of London’s gun crime discharges were gang-related.
He said: “We believe that a lot of it is associated with the drugs trade, and by that I mean people dealing drugs at street level and disagreements between different gangs.”
Violent crime on the rise in every corner of the country, figures suggest
But analysis of the figures force by force, showed the full extent of the problem, with only one constabulary, Nottinghamshire, recording a reduction in violent offences.
The vast majority of police forces actually witnessed double digit rises in violent crime, with Northumbria posting a 95 per cent increase year on year.
Of the other forces, Durham Police recorded a 73 per cent rise; West Yorkshire was up 48 per cent; Avon and Somerset 45 per cent; Dorset 39 per cent and Warwickshire 37 per cent.
Elsewhere Humberside, South Yorkshire, Staffordshire, Essex, Hertfordshire, Kent, Wiltshire and Dyfed Powys all saw violence rise by more than a quarter year on year.
-------
Two men stabbed dead within hours as violent crime soars in London
The shocking attacks come as new figures revealed crime overall in London is rising, with significant increases in cases of youth violence.
A total of 35 young people under the age of 25 have been murdered in the capital in the last 12 months, an 84 per cent rise on the same period last year.
The number of cases of serious youth violence - a measure of gang activity - also rose by 18 per cent.
-----
as well as a 16 per cent rise in the number of rapes.
-------
Gun crime rose by nearly 19 per cent and the number of shootings was up by 11 per cent to 338.
==============
London now more dangerous than New York City, crime stats suggest
While both London and New York have populations of around 8 million, figures suggest you are almost six times more likely to be burgled in the British capital than in the US city, and one and a half times more likely to fall victim to a robbery.
London has almost three times the number of reported rapes and while the murder rate in New York remains higher, the gap is narrowing dramatically.
The change in fortunes of the two global cities has been put down largely to the difference in tactics adopted by the two police forces.
Both Scotland Yard and the New York City Police Department (NYPD) have just over 30,000 officers each and budgets of around £3 billion a year.
But in the mid-1990s spiralling crime rates in New York - sparked by the crack cocaine epidemic - resulted in radical a new approach being adopted by the city's police department.
Under the leadership of Mayor Rudy Giuliani, and police commissioner, Bill Bratton, the NYPD introduced a zero tolerance approach to low level crime and flooded problem areas with patrols.
The force also put a huge amount of emphasis on community policing in order to build bridges between the police and members of the public.
As a result the murder plummeted from a high in 1990 of over 2,000 to a record low of 335 last year.
That figure is expected to fall even lower this year, and is currently in line to dip below 240.
=
More reason why we need to register gunsAnd more.....
How Criminals Get Guns: In Short, All Too Easily
When they cannot find them in the grass, gangs get guns by trickery and by theft, by bribery and by intimidation. They often pay or force men who are legally entitled to buy guns to buy weapons for them at gun stores or shows.
Such a transaction is called a "straw man" purchase, but girlfriends and other women, often desperate to feed their children or a drug habit, are also used to buy weapons over the counter.
"We've found people who do it as a kind of side business," said Stephen P. Sinnott, an assistant United States Attorney in Chicago.
One gun-running ring at the city's western limits paid off its buyers with guns. For every half-dozen guns or so a straw man bought, he was allowed to keep one. In about 16 months, Mr. Singer said, the ring put more than 110 illegal guns on the streets. More than 20 of the guns have been recovered in drive-by shootings and drug deals gone bad.
The gangs and other criminals also get weapons through barter, or "trade-ins." The gangs trade narcotics for the guns of drug-addicted burglars, who will sell a $500 pistol fo
Registering guns doesn't do anything.....it doesn't solve crimes it doesn't stop crimes...and mass shooters will register their guns all day long.
It shows where mass shooters and criminals are getting their guns
You will be more careful about who you sell your gun to if you realize the gun can be traced back to you
No.....if they cared who they sold their guns to they wouldn't sell the guns to those people....as the article shows...and you missed the part where the gangs threaten people to buy their guns........
The problem is that it doesn't matter if they care who they sell their guns to. The buyer isn't even required to give his name. Not even a fake name.
Is threatening someone to buy a gun for them the on;y way they get guns?
remind me again how Britain did it right but crimes involving the use of firearms skyrocketed after the ban and murder with firearms went up as well.
26 Gun murders (equiv. 130) in England vs. *11,004* in US Annually
26 Gun murders (equiv. 130) in England vs. *11,004* in US Annually
Published on
Tuesday, October 03, 2017
Yes....we get it....even though British criminals now have more guns than they had before the gun ban, and they are using them more and more often...gun crime across England and Wales is up another 27%....and in London, it is up 42%.....their criminals do not murder their victims......we get it...but that isn't the point....the point is that they have more gun crime and murder after they banned guns....they are an island nation...........and now have more violent crime than we do...
That is another lie.
Saying it is a lie when it is the truth, and I have links showing that you are wrong is pretty dumb...
Culture of violence: Gun crime goes up by 89% in a decade | Daily Mail Online
The latest Government figures show that the total number of firearm offences in England and Wales has increased from 5,209 in 1998/99 to 9,865 last year - a rise of 89 per cent.
The number of people injured or killed by guns, excluding air weapons, has increased from 864 in 1998/99 to a provisional figure of 1,760 in 2008/09, an increase of 104 per cent .
========
Crime rise is biggest in a decade, ONS figures show
Ministers will also be concerned that the country is becoming increasingly violent in nature, with gun crime rising 23% to 6,375 offences, largely driven by an increase in the use of handguns.
=========
Gun crime in London increases by 42% - BBC News
Gun crime offences in London surged by 42% in the last year, according to official statistics.
Top trauma surgeon reveals shocking extent of London’s gun crime
A leading trauma surgeon has told how the number of patients treated for gunshot injuries at a major London hospital has doubled in the last five years.
----
He said the hospital’s major trauma centre had seen a bigger rise in gunshot injuries compared to knife wounds and that the average age of victims was getting younger.
-----
Last year, gun crime offences in London increased for a third year running and by 42 per cent, from 1,793 offences in 2015/16 to 2,544 offences in 2016/17. Police have seized 635 guns off the streets so far this year.
Dr Griffiths, who also teaches medical students, said: “Our numbers of victims of gun injury have doubled [since 2012]. Gunshot injuries represent about 2.5 per cent of our penetrating trauma.
-----
Dr Griffiths said the average age of gun crime victims needing treatment at the hospital had decreased from 25 to the mid to late teens since 2012.
He added that medics at the Barts Health hospital’s major trauma centre in Whitechapel had seen a bigger rise in patients with gun injuries rather than knife wounds and that most were caused by pistols or shotguns.
Met Police commander Jim Stokley, who was also invited to speak at the meeting, said that handguns and shotguns were the weapons of choice and that 46 per cent of London’s gun crime discharges were gang-related.
He said: “We believe that a lot of it is associated with the drugs trade, and by that I mean people dealing drugs at street level and disagreements between different gangs.”
Violent crime on the rise in every corner of the country, figures suggest
But analysis of the figures force by force, showed the full extent of the problem, with only one constabulary, Nottinghamshire, recording a reduction in violent offences.
The vast majority of police forces actually witnessed double digit rises in violent crime, with Northumbria posting a 95 per cent increase year on year.
Of the other forces, Durham Police recorded a 73 per cent rise; West Yorkshire was up 48 per cent; Avon and Somerset 45 per cent; Dorset 39 per cent and Warwickshire 37 per cent.
Elsewhere Humberside, South Yorkshire, Staffordshire, Essex, Hertfordshire, Kent, Wiltshire and Dyfed Powys all saw violence rise by more than a quarter year on year.
-------
Two men stabbed dead within hours as violent crime soars in London
The shocking attacks come as new figures revealed crime overall in London is rising, with significant increases in cases of youth violence.
A total of 35 young people under the age of 25 have been murdered in the capital in the last 12 months, an 84 per cent rise on the same period last year.
The number of cases of serious youth violence - a measure of gang activity - also rose by 18 per cent.
-----
as well as a 16 per cent rise in the number of rapes.
-------
Gun crime rose by nearly 19 per cent and the number of shootings was up by 11 per cent to 338.
==============
London now more dangerous than New York City, crime stats suggest
While both London and New York have populations of around 8 million, figures suggest you are almost six times more likely to be burgled in the British capital than in the US city, and one and a half times more likely to fall victim to a robbery.
London has almost three times the number of reported rapes and while the murder rate in New York remains higher, the gap is narrowing dramatically.
The change in fortunes of the two global cities has been put down largely to the difference in tactics adopted by the two police forces.
Both Scotland Yard and the New York City Police Department (NYPD) have just over 30,000 officers each and budgets of around £3 billion a year.
But in the mid-1990s spiralling crime rates in New York - sparked by the crack cocaine epidemic - resulted in radical a new approach being adopted by the city's police department.
Under the leadership of Mayor Rudy Giuliani, and police commissioner, Bill Bratton, the NYPD introduced a zero tolerance approach to low level crime and flooded problem areas with patrols.
The force also put a huge amount of emphasis on community policing in order to build bridges between the police and members of the public.
As a result the murder plummeted from a high in 1990 of over 2,000 to a record low of 335 last year.
That figure is expected to fall even lower this year, and is currently in line to dip below 240.
=
You keep repeating the same propaganda that has been discredited. Get new material.
More reason why we need to register guns
Registering guns doesn't do anything.....it doesn't solve crimes it doesn't stop crimes...and mass shooters will register their guns all day long.
It shows where mass shooters and criminals are getting their guns
You will be more careful about who you sell your gun to if you realize the gun can be traced back to you
No.....if they cared who they sold their guns to they wouldn't sell the guns to those people....as the article shows...and you missed the part where the gangs threaten people to buy their guns........
The problem is that it doesn't matter if they care who they sell their guns to. The buyer isn't even required to give his name. Not even a fake name.
Is threatening someone to buy a gun for them the on;y way they get guns?
You have gun traffickers who buy guns legally in order to sell them to criminals....so no law is going to stop them .......
You have the links, several of them...read and get an education.....
And again...the felon knows it is against the law for them to buy, own or carry a gun...and we can already arrest them when they are caught committing a crime with the gun.....or just getting caught carrying a gun....the problem is that people like you keep letting gun criminals back on the street, over and over again, even with multiple gun convictions....
By so high you mean not arbitrary.
Felons and the adjudicated mentally ill cannot possess firearms.
But yet they are able to get them.
So the system is broken and needs to be fixed. If that means you have to jump through a few more hoops to get a gun, I don't have a problem with that.
If gun control works so well How did James Brady get a gun shot wound to the head in the 1981 assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan from a loon with a handgun, in a city where they had been banned since 1976? - Miketx
sooooo why do NRA ijitis insist that if something doesn't stop 100% of lunatics shooting up the joint then it shouldn't be explored?
waiting for a rational response.
But unless you uninvent the gun you can't prevent that from being a possibility.
Except for Japan and all the Western European Nations who have done exactly that, um, yeah, totally impossible except for those who actually try.
My politics involve the absolute sanctity of rights enshrined in the constitution.
The Constitution isn't a suicide pact.
I can see the case where someone who belongs to a well regulated militia has a need for a large capacity magazine. It could be necessary to the security of a free state
But a private gun owner has no use for one other than playing Rambo at the local gun range
Again, in most of these crimes the perp could have done just as much damage with 10 round mags and a few hours practice swapping them out.
Actually, no
Having to carry multiple small capacity magazines and efficiently swap them out under extreme stress is no easy task.
If it was just as easy......Mass killers would use smaller capacity magazines....They don't
Well, the process for verifying one's eligibility to vote is broken too. So, let's apply the same logic there as well. How about valid, government issued, photo ID to prove you are who you claim to be? Or is that an undue hardship? Remember, you need to provide that very same ID to board a plane, and that isn't a right.By so high you mean not arbitrary.
Felons and the adjudicated mentally ill cannot possess firearms.
But yet they are able to get them.
So the system is broken and needs to be fixed. If that means you have to jump through a few more hoops to get a gun, I don't have a problem with that.
I agree
Lets provide EVERY citizen with a valid Government ID
Once that is done, we can require one to vote
Go troll somewhere else.10 rounds?
Screw that
Someone wanting to shoot up a church or elementary schools needs as big a magazine as he can get
Getting to you?
Is there any other purpose of a 50-100 round magazine?
Now, suppose I want to shoot up a concert in Las Vegas
Ten rounds just doesn't cut it when I can get 45 rounds and a bump stock
Die suckers....Die
If it doesn't make a difference, why does the military ALWAYS use high capacity magazines in combat?
I can see the case where someone who belongs to a well regulated militia has a need for a large capacity magazine. It could be necessary to the security of a free state
But a private gun owner has no use for one other than playing Rambo at the local gun range
Again, in most of these crimes the perp could have done just as much damage with 10 round mags and a few hours practice swapping them out.
Actually, no
Having to carry multiple small capacity magazines and efficiently swap them out under extreme stress is no easy task.
If it was just as easy......Mass killers would use smaller capacity magazines....They don't
For a trained person it's a matter of convenience only.
Its more than convenience. It is efficiency in killing
How about you attempt to reword that in a way that is not an insult?If gun control works so well How did James Brady get a gun shot wound to the head in the 1981 assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan from a loon with a handgun, in a city where they had been banned since 1976? - Miketx
sooooo why do NRA ijitis insist that if something doesn't stop 100% of lunatics shooting up the joint then it shouldn't be explored?
waiting for a rational response.
why would you take an insult to the NRA as a personal insult? I was careful in my target. I'm afraid I have no reason not to insult an organization that gets 75% of their funding from gun manufacturers and acts only in the interests of those manufacturers.
Should it be 10 rounds or 15 rounds?
I really don't care
But should you be able to go out and buy 50-100 round magazines?
No way
