Does carrying a gun make you safer? No. In fact, right-to-carry laws increase violent crime

[Brain357]

But brain... Last question.. Do you favor the taking away of someones right to do something legal, if it helps reduce criminals acting out?

Do you favor making homosexuality an illegal act in the US since it would end the 80% higher rate of sexual violence and 60% higher rate of physical violence among that group?

I wouldn't ban guns, but Israel seems to have good restrictions.

 

[Brain357]

As feds help Chicago on guns, Trump aide says city's crime more about 'morality'

"Crime and killings in Chicago have reached such epidemic proportions that I am sending in Federal help," he tweeted Friday morning.

Trump said there have been "1714 shootings in Chicago this year!" but the number is actually higher, according to data kept by the Tribune. As of Friday morning, the number of people shot in Chicago was at least 1,760, still lower than this time last year, when violence reached levels not seen in two decades.

Doesn't change the fact that allowing CC reduced crime. So while it is true that morality is definitely the problem, it is still true that CC has led to a huge reduction in crime.

But keep lying.

No it didn't, crime had been soaring.

 

[Slash]

As feds help Chicago on guns, Trump aide says city's crime more about 'morality'

"Crime and killings in Chicago have reached such epidemic proportions that I am sending in Federal help," he tweeted Friday morning.

Trump said there have been "1714 shootings in Chicago this year!" but the number is actually higher, according to data kept by the Tribune. As of Friday morning, the number of people shot in Chicago was at least 1,760, still lower than this time last year, when violence reached levels not seen in two decades.

Interesting...

Baltimore Seeking Solutions Amid Record High Murder Rate


Granted Baltimore has no open/concealed carry.... And it's seeing that same spike. So now that we can remove open/concealed carry from the list of similarities, what ELSE might be causing that similarity?

 

[Slash]

I wouldn't ban guns, but Israel seems to have good restrictions.

So you'd be ok restricting peoples rights maybe to carry guns or openly be a homosexual in public. In the interest of public safety for both?

 

[Brain357]

I wouldn't ban guns, but Israel seems to have good restrictions.

So you'd be ok restricting peoples rights maybe to carry guns or openly be a homosexual in public. In the interest of public safety for both?

I have no idea what you are talking about in regards to homosexuality, sorry.

 

[Conservative65]

So, the majority of gun owners are: White. Married. Have Kids. Rural. Middle class
But the majority of violent crimes are: Minority. Single. No kids. Urban. Low income.

Remind me again how that works?

Who do you think steals the guns?

Minorities, low income, and people that no matter what law you put in place aren't going to follow them.

I had one stolen from my LOCKED vehicle while it was sitting on PRIVATE PROPERTY. What law that the thief will follow in order for that not to happen again.

 

[Brain357]

So, the majority of gun owners are: White. Married. Have Kids. Rural. Middle class
But the majority of violent crimes are: Minority. Single. No kids. Urban. Low income.

Remind me again how that works?

Who do you think steals the guns?

Minorities, low income, and people that no matter what law you put in place aren't going to follow them.

I had one stolen from my LOCKED vehicle while it was sitting on PRIVATE PROPERTY. What law that the thief will follow in order for that not to happen again.

I guess it's not responsible to leave a gun in a car.

 

[Conservative65]

Are you really making the point that criminals doing criminal acts isn't the cause, but law abiding people being victims of criminals rather is?

Stop the criminal. Michael Jordan and Nike didn't cause kids to get robbed and shot. Criminals wanting his shoes did.

From the link:
The image that comes to mind is guys who might in one instance have solved their disagreement with fists now have guns. Is that a fair image or is it exaggerating?

Well, I think that there are many ways in which right-to-carry laws cause problems. One is as you said, and there are some obvious examples just in the last couple of weeks. In one case, a guy in Pennsylvania was merging in traffic and an 18-year-old girl cut in front of him and enraged him, and he just took out his gun, which he had a concealed-carry permit for, and shot her in the head and just drove off – killed her.

Then a couple of days later, in Seattle, a guy was riding home in an Uber from a wedding, and he had had too much to drink, and he and his wife got into a heated argument and he just took out a gun and shot her in the head. I suspect both of these cases would not have happened had the guy not had a concealed carry permit. There wouldn’t have been a gun around, and you know if you get really angry carrying a gun, it’s more likely something bad will happen.

But there are also so many other ways in which carrying concealed handguns creates problems. One huge way is that guns are much more likely to be stolen when you’re taking them around town and walking around. We see this quite a bit in California over the last couple of years. A number of incidents in San Francisco got a lot of headlines when somebody left their gun in their car – a permit holder – and somebody breaks into the car and steals the gun and within a day or so, or even a number of hours, murders someone on the street.

So the one thing we know is that permit holders do an amazing effectively job of arming criminals with their lost and stolen guns.

That obviously causes a lot of problems. And then, you also cause a lot of problems for police, and anything that causes problems for police tends to make all crime go up, because the police are such an important force in restraining crime.

We’ve seen this with the Philando Castile case in Minneapolis. The guy was a permit-holder and as soon as the cop heard he was carrying a gun, you could see that he became much more nervous and ended up shooting Castile, because he thought he was reaching for the gun when he was in fact reaching for his driver’s license.

So I don’t think it’s any surprise that police in the United States kill a lot more people than police in other industrialized nations -- not that they have fewer criminals than we have; there are just many fewer people walking around with guns, and police feel a lot more nervous when they’re meeting angry people with guns than they would in England or France or Germany or Japan, where they’re meeting angry people, but the worst that’s going to happen is they’re carrying a knife.

Seems in your second example, being angry AND drunk played a role in it but you want us to believe it's entirely or in any way the gun's fault. Did the gun get drunk or mad? Did the gun shoot itself? No to both. That means it isn't the gun's fault. It's the angry drunk guys fault. Would it have been OK with you had he taken out a knife and stabbed her. Would it have been the knife's fault?

 

[Slash]

I have no idea what you are talking about in regards to homosexuality, sorry.

Just using the logic of your argument in another situation to see if it's sound. If everyone did away with concealed carry and put their guns in the closet and that reduced crime you'd be in favor of taking those rights away to reduce crime.

If gays were to be forced to keep their sexuality in the closet and that reduced crime, you'd be ok taking those rights away to reduce crime.

 

[Conservative65]

So, the majority of gun owners are: White. Married. Have Kids. Rural. Middle class
But the majority of violent crimes are: Minority. Single. No kids. Urban. Low income.

Remind me again how that works?

Who do you think steals the guns?

Minorities, low income, and people that no matter what law you put in place aren't going to follow them.

I had one stolen from my LOCKED vehicle while it was sitting on PRIVATE PROPERTY. What law that the thief will follow in order for that not to happen again.

I guess it's not responsible to leave a gun in a car.

Perhaps you missed the words LOCKED and PRIVATE.

Interesting you say nothing about the thief that went somewhere he didn't belong and took something that didn't belong to him. Maybe you think that's OK.

I followed the law. He didn't. Somehow I'm wrong and he's perfectly OK.

Like I said before, if you don't think people should carry guns, I challenge you to personally do something about taking mine. Are you man enough?

 

[Brain357]

I have no idea what you are talking about in regards to homosexuality, sorry.

Just using the logic of your argument in another situation to see if it's sound. If everyone did away with concealed carry and put their guns in the closet and that reduced crime you'd be in favor of taking those rights away to reduce crime.

If gays were to be forced to keep their sexuality in the closet and that reduced crime, you'd be ok taking those rights away to reduce crime.

You are comparing sexual preference to carrying a dangerous weapon?

 

[hjmick]

According to a "novel algorithm" -- hmmmmmmmmmm.

We take that composite of other states and see what happened in that composite of other states after 1996. Then we’re comparing Texas against this composite of other states, because that composite was such a good match for identifying the impact, the pattern of crime prior to 1996.

Let’s compare it with what actually did happen in Texas after 1996, and the difference between those two numbers becomes your prediction of what the impact of Texas passing the right-to-carry law in 1996 was on violent crime.

What we found [was] that there tended to be a fairly substantial difference between those two numbers, such that it looked as though you saw about 10% to 15% higher levels of violent crime than you would have seen had you not adopted right to carry.

For some states, and Texas happened to be one of them, crime was trending down, and it just didn’t trend down nearly as much in this comparison group of states that had mimicked the pattern of Texas prior to 1996.

Were you part of the group that conducted the study? Or are you simply plagiarizing the article you linked in an effort to appear slightly smarter than you think you are? Because the above post sure seems like you're trying to pass off text pilfered directly from the article as your own. Matbe you didn't think anyone would read the article...



Attribution, smart guy, attribution...

 

[Brain357]

So, the majority of gun owners are: White. Married. Have Kids. Rural. Middle class
But the majority of violent crimes are: Minority. Single. No kids. Urban. Low income.

Remind me again how that works?

Who do you think steals the guns?

Minorities, low income, and people that no matter what law you put in place aren't going to follow them.

I had one stolen from my LOCKED vehicle while it was sitting on PRIVATE PROPERTY. What law that the thief will follow in order for that not to happen again.

I guess it's not responsible to leave a gun in a car.

Perhaps you missed the words LOCKED and PRIVATE.

Interesting you say nothing about the thief that went somewhere he didn't belong and took something that didn't belong to him. Maybe you think that's OK.

I followed the law. He didn't. Somehow I'm wrong and he's perfectly OK.

Like I said before, if you don't think people should carry guns, I challenge you to personally do something about taking mine. Are you man enough?

Cute.

 

[Brain357]

According to a "novel algorithm" -- hmmmmmmmmmm.

We take that composite of other states and see what happened in that composite of other states after 1996. Then we’re comparing Texas against this composite of other states, because that composite was such a good match for identifying the impact, the pattern of crime prior to 1996.

Let’s compare it with what actually did happen in Texas after 1996, and the difference between those two numbers becomes your prediction of what the impact of Texas passing the right-to-carry law in 1996 was on violent crime.

What we found [was] that there tended to be a fairly substantial difference between those two numbers, such that it looked as though you saw about 10% to 15% higher levels of violent crime than you would have seen had you not adopted right to carry.

For some states, and Texas happened to be one of them, crime was trending down, and it just didn’t trend down nearly as much in this comparison group of states that had mimicked the pattern of Texas prior to 1996.

Were you part of the group that conducted the study? Or are you simply plagiarizing the article you linked in an effort to appear slightly smarter than you think you are? Because the above post sure seems like you're trying to pass off text pilfered directly from the article as your own. Matbe you didn't think anyone would read the article...



Attribution, smart guy, attribution...

It is obviously from the article in the OP Sherlock.

 

[Missourian]

The flawed and misleading Donohue, Aneja, & Weber Study claiming right-to-carry laws increase violent crime - Crime Prevention Research Center

 

[Brain357]

The flawed and misleading Donohue, Aneja, & Weber Study claiming right-to-carry laws increase violent crime - Crime Prevention Research Center

There is that shady guy(lott). What points does he make you think are valid. Hope all is well sir!

 

[Slash]

You are comparing sexual preference to carrying a dangerous weapon?

Not at all. I am saying if you think it's ok to add restrictions to someone who is doing nothing illegal (carrying gun/being gay) because it makes them a potential victim (stolen gun/hate crime), then does your logic stand up?

Are you making a logical argument? Or are you just trying to cover a political dislike for guns behind that argument which you don't believe is the way to go when the topic is something you politically agree with.

 

[Brain357]

You are comparing sexual preference to carrying a dangerous weapon?

Not at all. I am saying if you think it's ok to add restrictions to someone who is doing nothing illegal (carrying gun/being gay) because it makes them a potential victim (stolen gun/hate crime), then does your logic stand up?

Are you making a logical argument? Or are you just trying to cover a political dislike for guns behind that argument which you don't believe is the way to go when the topic is something you politically agree with.

Sorry, don't follow homosexual crime.

 

[Slash]

And you've still not addressed why crime spiked in the same way in a gun carry and a non-gun carry city. If carrying laws was the reason, we'd see a spike in the carry law city only. And we wouldn't also see a record low year for violent crime AFTER the carry law was put in place.

Your own numbers are all over the place and you can't show any correlation between carry laws.

 

[Brain357]

And you've still not addressed why crime spiked in the same way in a gun carry and a non-gun carry city. If carrying laws was the reason, we'd see a spike in the carry law city only. And we wouldn't also see a record low year for violent crime AFTER the carry law was put in place.

Your own numbers are all over the place and you can't show any correlation between carry laws.

Which numbers in the study are all over the place?