Mass shooting: At Least 11 Shot At Gilroy Garlic Festival

[2aguy]

No..... men who commit suicide use guns...women use poison.... I just posted the accidental gun death numbers......they are tiny.....I bet you thought they would be much higher?

No expectations. Just general curiosity.

I like to let numbers speak for themselves.

I can also say that when comparing gun ownership rates to murder, there is basically no correlation at all. If anything, it's a very slightly negative correlation at -0.096.

Yes...the CDC does have state maps.......it is just taking forever to load...

Appreciated. I know you like to talk about this stuff so I'm sure you have plenty of good resources ready to go.

So far you seem like a normal person......if you want to discuss the issue I am more than happy too.......the sharp edge to my posts comes from years of debating the issue with people who simply want guns banned no matter what the facts may say...or the concept that normal people should not be disarmed because a tiny number of people use them for crime.

Oh I'm definitely on the other side of you regarding the gun issue.

I just think the truth can be found in the numbers, and the numbers can also be manipulated and misinterpreted.

For example, I think your 26 year argument doesn't work for reasons I've described. Obviously we'll disagree on that though.

Yes....we will...hard to get around a 49% decrease in gun murder, 75% decrease in gun crime and a 72% drop in violent crime as more Americans own and carry guns...


Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I can also say that when comparing gun ownership rates to murder, there is basically no correlation at all. If anything, it's a very slightly negative correlation at -0.096.

Huh.

1999-2017
612,310 gun-related deaths.
180,326 (29.4%) homicides
420,070 (68.6%) suicides
11,914 (1.9%) accidents

What's that tell you?

 

[2aguy]

No..... men who commit suicide use guns...women use poison.... I just posted the accidental gun death numbers......they are tiny.....I bet you thought they would be much higher?

No expectations. Just general curiosity.

I like to let numbers speak for themselves.

I can also say that when comparing gun ownership rates to murder, there is basically no correlation at all. If anything, it's a very slightly negative correlation at -0.096.

Yes...the CDC does have state maps.......it is just taking forever to load...

Appreciated. I know you like to talk about this stuff so I'm sure you have plenty of good resources ready to go.

That map is still working to appear.......WISQARS is a great source.....If you use it, I like to get the text only page...it is easier to get the numbers...

Can you give me the link? I can take a shot at it.

https://wisqars.cdc.gov:8443/cdcMapFramework/

 

[XponentialChaos]

No expectations. Just general curiosity.

I like to let numbers speak for themselves.

I can also say that when comparing gun ownership rates to murder, there is basically no correlation at all. If anything, it's a very slightly negative correlation at -0.096.

Yes...the CDC does have state maps.......it is just taking forever to load...

Appreciated. I know you like to talk about this stuff so I'm sure you have plenty of good resources ready to go.

So far you seem like a normal person......if you want to discuss the issue I am more than happy too.......the sharp edge to my posts comes from years of debating the issue with people who simply want guns banned no matter what the facts may say...or the concept that normal people should not be disarmed because a tiny number of people use them for crime.

Oh I'm definitely on the other side of you regarding the gun issue.

I just think the truth can be found in the numbers, and the numbers can also be manipulated and misinterpreted.

For example, I think your 26 year argument doesn't work for reasons I've described. Obviously we'll disagree on that though.

Yes....we will...hard to get around a 49% decrease in gun murder, 75% decrease in gun crime and a 72% drop in violent crime as more Americans own and carry guns...


Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

What would you say if I argued that we've had a 49% decrease in gun murder, 75% decrease
in gun crime and a 72% drop in violent crime ever since the original Lion King movie came out?

That shows that Lion King has had a great impact on murder rates in this country, right?

 

[M14 Shooter]

What would you say if I argued that we've had a 49% decrease in gun murder, 75% decrease in gun crime and a 72% drop in violent crime ever since the original Lion King movie came out?

Exactly the same thing I'll tell you when you finally try to make a point around your supposed correlation between gun ownership rates and gun deaths:
Correlation does not prove causation .

 

[XponentialChaos]

No expectations. Just general curiosity.

I like to let numbers speak for themselves.

I can also say that when comparing gun ownership rates to murder, there is basically no correlation at all. If anything, it's a very slightly negative correlation at -0.096.

Yes...the CDC does have state maps.......it is just taking forever to load...

Appreciated. I know you like to talk about this stuff so I'm sure you have plenty of good resources ready to go.

That map is still working to appear.......WISQARS is a great source.....If you use it, I like to get the text only page...it is easier to get the numbers...

Can you give me the link? I can take a shot at it.

https://wisqars.cdc.gov:8443/cdcMapFramework/

You're right. Super slow. Thanks though. Definitely going to check this out if I can get it to go.

 

[2aguy]

Yes...the CDC does have state maps.......it is just taking forever to load...

Appreciated. I know you like to talk about this stuff so I'm sure you have plenty of good resources ready to go.

So far you seem like a normal person......if you want to discuss the issue I am more than happy too.......the sharp edge to my posts comes from years of debating the issue with people who simply want guns banned no matter what the facts may say...or the concept that normal people should not be disarmed because a tiny number of people use them for crime.

Oh I'm definitely on the other side of you regarding the gun issue.

I just think the truth can be found in the numbers, and the numbers can also be manipulated and misinterpreted.

For example, I think your 26 year argument doesn't work for reasons I've described. Obviously we'll disagree on that though.

Yes....we will...hard to get around a 49% decrease in gun murder, 75% decrease in gun crime and a 72% drop in violent crime as more Americans own and carry guns...


Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

What would you say if I argued that we've had a 49% decrease in gun murder, 75% decrease
in gun crime and a 72% drop in violent crime ever since the original Lion King movie came out?

That shows that Lion King has had a great impact on murder rates in this country, right?

That would be silly....

The argument from anti gunners is this...

More Guns = More Gun Crime

That is their argument, likely yours too......

26 years...more Americans buy, own and carry guns.....millions and millions of guns....and more and more Americans actually carry those guns into public spaces....now over 17.25 million people..

We had 26 years of More Guns....

What happened during that time...

Gun murder went down 49%
Gun crime went down 75%

the theory, again.... More Guns = More Gun Crime...

The result.... the exact opposite....

So that theory is wrong......if it was right...gun crimes would have gone up, not down with the introduction of more guns into society....

 

[M14 Shooter]

I'm specifically linking gun ownership rate to homicides. (bold and underlined emphasis, yours)
It's a fact that these two measures have a moderate to high positive correlation.

Heh.

Most states, especially those with high rates of gun ownership rates, do not have registration of guns, or licensure of gun owners.
Thus, the number of guns and ownership rates in those states are - at best - a guess, and may contain errors as high as an order of magnitude.

Given that, how can your calculated correlation have real any meaning?

 

[2aguy]

Yes...the CDC does have state maps.......it is just taking forever to load...

Appreciated. I know you like to talk about this stuff so I'm sure you have plenty of good resources ready to go.

So far you seem like a normal person......if you want to discuss the issue I am more than happy too.......the sharp edge to my posts comes from years of debating the issue with people who simply want guns banned no matter what the facts may say...or the concept that normal people should not be disarmed because a tiny number of people use them for crime.

Oh I'm definitely on the other side of you regarding the gun issue.

I just think the truth can be found in the numbers, and the numbers can also be manipulated and misinterpreted.

For example, I think your 26 year argument doesn't work for reasons I've described. Obviously we'll disagree on that though.

Yes....we will...hard to get around a 49% decrease in gun murder, 75% decrease in gun crime and a 72% drop in violent crime as more Americans own and carry guns...


Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

What would you say if I argued that we've had a 49% decrease in gun murder, 75% decrease
in gun crime and a 72% drop in violent crime ever since the original Lion King movie came out?

That shows that Lion King has had a great impact on murder rates in this country, right?

We have 26 years of experience...starting with the violence spike starting in the 1960s.....according to anti-gunners....adding more guns to the country would have increased that violence...instead, it went down, not up.

 

[XponentialChaos]

Appreciated. I know you like to talk about this stuff so I'm sure you have plenty of good resources ready to go.

So far you seem like a normal person......if you want to discuss the issue I am more than happy too.......the sharp edge to my posts comes from years of debating the issue with people who simply want guns banned no matter what the facts may say...or the concept that normal people should not be disarmed because a tiny number of people use them for crime.

Oh I'm definitely on the other side of you regarding the gun issue.

I just think the truth can be found in the numbers, and the numbers can also be manipulated and misinterpreted.

For example, I think your 26 year argument doesn't work for reasons I've described. Obviously we'll disagree on that though.

Yes....we will...hard to get around a 49% decrease in gun murder, 75% decrease in gun crime and a 72% drop in violent crime as more Americans own and carry guns...


Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

What would you say if I argued that we've had a 49% decrease in gun murder, 75% decrease
in gun crime and a 72% drop in violent crime ever since the original Lion King movie came out?

That shows that Lion King has had a great impact on murder rates in this country, right?

That would be silly....

The argument from anti gunners is this...

More Guns = More Gun Crime

That is their argument, likely yours too......

26 years...more Americans buy, own and carry guns.....millions and millions of guns....and more and more Americans actually carry those guns into public spaces....now over 17.25 million people..

We had 26 years of More Guns....

What happened during that time...

Gun murder went down 49%
Gun crime went down 75%

the theory, again.... More Guns = More Gun Crime...

The result.... the exact opposite....

So that theory is wrong......if it was right...gun crimes would have gone up, not down with the introduction of more guns into society....

It's silly because Lion King had nothing to do with those murder rates. But it's still a true statement - those murder rates significantly decreased ever since the movie Lion King came out. This is what I mean by correlation does not necessarily imply a causation. You can find some numbers that fit your argument, and you can ignore the possibility that they may have had nothing to do with each other.

I think there are numerous reasons why murder has decreased over time - and I think it's mostly tied to the societal norms in this country, not on whether people own guns or not. Of course, I know we disagree on this point. I'm just trying to explain my reasoning for the disagreement.

Also, I didn't say anything about gun crime.

 

[OldLady]

You are oversimplifying and you know it. If the Second Amendment is going to be used as a roadblock toward effective regulation of guns in this country, then it needs to go.

Stop whining on USMB, get off your rump, and amend the Constitution.

If people were willing to accept restrictions on the types of guns and ammunition they could own...

Why on God's green earth would we let anti-gun loons define how we're "allowed" to exercise our rights?

You will lose, eventually. How much you lose is going to be dependent on the choices you make. I might not be around to see it, but it is inevitable that the mass gun slaughter in this country will stop.

 

[XponentialChaos]

Appreciated. I know you like to talk about this stuff so I'm sure you have plenty of good resources ready to go.

So far you seem like a normal person......if you want to discuss the issue I am more than happy too.......the sharp edge to my posts comes from years of debating the issue with people who simply want guns banned no matter what the facts may say...or the concept that normal people should not be disarmed because a tiny number of people use them for crime.

Oh I'm definitely on the other side of you regarding the gun issue.

I just think the truth can be found in the numbers, and the numbers can also be manipulated and misinterpreted.

For example, I think your 26 year argument doesn't work for reasons I've described. Obviously we'll disagree on that though.

Yes....we will...hard to get around a 49% decrease in gun murder, 75% decrease in gun crime and a 72% drop in violent crime as more Americans own and carry guns...


Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

What would you say if I argued that we've had a 49% decrease in gun murder, 75% decrease
in gun crime and a 72% drop in violent crime ever since the original Lion King movie came out?

That shows that Lion King has had a great impact on murder rates in this country, right?

We have 26 years of experience...starting with the violence spike starting in the 1960s.....according to anti-gunners....adding more guns to the country would have increased that violence...instead, it went down, not up.

I can make a similar argument for Lion King. And it would be wrong for the same reason I think you're wrong.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You are oversimplifying and you know it. If the Second Amendment is going to be used as a roadblock toward effective regulation of guns in this country, then it needs to go.

Stop whining on USMB, get off your rump, and amend the Constitution.

If people were willing to accept restrictions on the types of guns and ammunition they could own...

Why on God's green earth would we let anti-gun loons define how we're "allowed" to exercise our rights?

You will lose, eventually

13 states, 7-8% of the people.

How much you lose is going to be dependent on the choices you make. I might not be around to see it, but it is inevitable that the mass gun slaughter in this country will stop.

Only mass slaughter will remove the right to keep and bear arms.
And then, the REAL mass slaughter will begin.
But, that's OK by you.

 

[2aguy]

So far you seem like a normal person......if you want to discuss the issue I am more than happy too.......the sharp edge to my posts comes from years of debating the issue with people who simply want guns banned no matter what the facts may say...or the concept that normal people should not be disarmed because a tiny number of people use them for crime.

Oh I'm definitely on the other side of you regarding the gun issue.

I just think the truth can be found in the numbers, and the numbers can also be manipulated and misinterpreted.

For example, I think your 26 year argument doesn't work for reasons I've described. Obviously we'll disagree on that though.

Yes....we will...hard to get around a 49% decrease in gun murder, 75% decrease in gun crime and a 72% drop in violent crime as more Americans own and carry guns...


Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

What would you say if I argued that we've had a 49% decrease in gun murder, 75% decrease
in gun crime and a 72% drop in violent crime ever since the original Lion King movie came out?

That shows that Lion King has had a great impact on murder rates in this country, right?

That would be silly....

The argument from anti gunners is this...

More Guns = More Gun Crime

That is their argument, likely yours too......

26 years...more Americans buy, own and carry guns.....millions and millions of guns....and more and more Americans actually carry those guns into public spaces....now over 17.25 million people..

We had 26 years of More Guns....

What happened during that time...

Gun murder went down 49%
Gun crime went down 75%

the theory, again.... More Guns = More Gun Crime...

The result.... the exact opposite....

So that theory is wrong......if it was right...gun crimes would have gone up, not down with the introduction of more guns into society....

It's silly because Lion King had nothing to do with those murder rates. But it's still a true statement - those murder rates significantly decreased ever since the movie Lion King came out. This is what I mean by correlation does not necessarily imply a causation. You can find some numbers that fit your argument, and you can ignore the possibility that they may have had nothing to do with each other.

I think there are numerous reasons why murder has decreased over time - and I think it's mostly tied to the societal norms in this country, not on whether people own guns or not. Of course, I know we disagree on this point. I'm just trying to explain my reasoning for the disagreement.

Also, I didn't say anything about gun crime.

Sorry, that doesn't hold water.....

Again, the argument is that adding guns to a society will automatically increase gun murder and gun crime.....

That did not happen.

Yes...I also agree that many things contributed to the decrease in crime..... more police, better police techniques....

But that isn't their argument.....their argument is

More Guns = More Gun Crime..... and that didn't happen over the last 26 years....no matter how you try it, it doesn't work.

The reason we have more murder and crime in general is due to societal factors, not gun ownership by normal people....

Singel teenage mothers raising children from multiple males without a father is the biggest factor.....and Europe is beggining to feel the effect of this...as their knife murder rates show......and now illegal guns are flooding that country....so gun crime will be escalating in the not to far future.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Sorry, that doesn't hold water.....
Again, the argument is that adding guns to a society will automatically increase gun murder and gun crime.....
That did not happen.

And thus, the premise is unsound.
-Some- of us know this.

 

[OldLady]

The Center for Disease Control has been effectively prohibited from conducting any meaningful research on guns in the country for decades.

Someone lied to you - the CDC has -all kinds- of information and research regarding gun violence.

Don't ignore the Dickey Amendment. Don't you dare.
the Dickey Amendment is a provision first inserted as a rider into the 1996 federal government omnibus spending bill which mandated that "none of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) may be used to advocate or promote gun control."[1] In the same spending bill, Congress earmarked $2.6 million from the CDC's budget, the exact amount that had previously been allocated to the agency for firearms research the previous year, for traumatic brain injury-related research.[2]

The amendment was lobbied for by the NRA. The amendment is named after its author Jay Dickey, a Republican member of the United States House of Representatives from Arkansas.[2] Many commentators have described this amendment as a "ban" on gun violence research by the CDC.[3]
Dickey Amendment - Wikipedia

 

[2aguy]

You are oversimplifying and you know it. If the Second Amendment is going to be used as a roadblock toward effective regulation of guns in this country, then it needs to go.

Stop whining on USMB, get off your rump, and amend the Constitution.

If people were willing to accept restrictions on the types of guns and ammunition they could own...

Why on God's green earth would we let anti-gun loons define how we're "allowed" to exercise our rights?

You will lose, eventually. How much you lose is going to be dependent on the choices you make. I might not be around to see it, but it is inevitable that the mass gun slaughter in this country will stop.

There is not mass gun slaughter no matter what you say.....

Gun murder is down 49%...... gun accidents down too....nothing you believe about guns is true....

More Americans own guns, more people carry guns......less gun murder not more......

You have nothing but emotion...

600 million guns, 17.25 million carrying guns...

12 mass public shootings in 2018,

93 people killed.

How is that mass slaughter?

Cars killed 38,000

Can you tell which number is bigger?

 

[XponentialChaos]

Oh I'm definitely on the other side of you regarding the gun issue.

I just think the truth can be found in the numbers, and the numbers can also be manipulated and misinterpreted.

For example, I think your 26 year argument doesn't work for reasons I've described. Obviously we'll disagree on that though.

Yes....we will...hard to get around a 49% decrease in gun murder, 75% decrease in gun crime and a 72% drop in violent crime as more Americans own and carry guns...


Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

What would you say if I argued that we've had a 49% decrease in gun murder, 75% decrease
in gun crime and a 72% drop in violent crime ever since the original Lion King movie came out?

That shows that Lion King has had a great impact on murder rates in this country, right?

That would be silly....

The argument from anti gunners is this...

More Guns = More Gun Crime

That is their argument, likely yours too......

26 years...more Americans buy, own and carry guns.....millions and millions of guns....and more and more Americans actually carry those guns into public spaces....now over 17.25 million people..

We had 26 years of More Guns....

What happened during that time...

Gun murder went down 49%
Gun crime went down 75%

the theory, again.... More Guns = More Gun Crime...

The result.... the exact opposite....

So that theory is wrong......if it was right...gun crimes would have gone up, not down with the introduction of more guns into society....

It's silly because Lion King had nothing to do with those murder rates. But it's still a true statement - those murder rates significantly decreased ever since the movie Lion King came out. This is what I mean by correlation does not necessarily imply a causation. You can find some numbers that fit your argument, and you can ignore the possibility that they may have had nothing to do with each other.

I think there are numerous reasons why murder has decreased over time - and I think it's mostly tied to the societal norms in this country, not on whether people own guns or not. Of course, I know we disagree on this point. I'm just trying to explain my reasoning for the disagreement.

Also, I didn't say anything about gun crime.

Sorry, that doesn't hold water.....

Again, the argument is that adding guns to a society will automatically increase gun murder and gun crime.....

That did not happen.

Yes...I also agree that many things contributed to the decrease in crime..... more police, better police techniques....

But that isn't their argument.....their argument is

More Guns = More Gun Crime..... and that didn't happen over the last 26 years....no matter how you try it, it doesn't work.

The reason we have more murder and crime in general is due to societal factors, not gun ownership by normal people....

Singel teenage mothers raising children from multiple males without a father is the biggest factor.....and Europe is beggining to feel the effect of this...as their knife murder rates show......and now illegal guns are flooding that country....so gun crime will be escalating in the not to far future.

I know the argument doesn't hold water. That's the point. Correlation does not necessarily imply causation. And we're already agreeing with the external forces that may have significantly decreased crime, including amount of police and their techniques. We're both agreeing that something other than guns helped reduce the gun crime, which is why your 26 year argument, while true, is misleading. Just as it would be misleading for me to say that gun crime has decreased by 49% ever since the movie Lion King came out.

Once again, I didn't say that more guns = more gun crime. I can look into it later, but I'm not making that argument.

 

[2aguy]

The Center for Disease Control has been effectively prohibited from conducting any meaningful research on guns in the country for decades.

Someone lied to you - the CDC has -all kinds- of information and research regarding gun violence.

Don't ignore the Dickey Amendment. Don't you dare.
the Dickey Amendment is a provision first inserted as a rider into the 1996 federal government omnibus spending bill which mandated that "none of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) may be used to advocate or promote gun control."[1] In the same spending bill, Congress earmarked $2.6 million from the CDC's budget, the exact amount that had previously been allocated to the agency for firearms research the previous year, for traumatic brain injury-related research.[2]

The amendment was lobbied for by the NRA. The amendment is named after its author Jay Dickey, a Republican member of the United States House of Representatives from Arkansas.[2] Many commentators have described this amendment as a "ban" on gun violence research by the CDC.[3]
Dickey Amendment - Wikipedia

I didn't ignore it I had it in my link...that did not stop gun research it stopped the CDC from advocating gun control....I have links to gun research from the CDC after that Amendment.....you are just wrong...

Here.....just two......there are more...

Obama CDC Study: Silencers Best Option for Noise Reduction at Gun Ranges - The Truth About Guns

The CDC looked at a number of different solutions to reduce the exposure to the hazardous noise levels in shooting ranges and arrived at the same solution as every other logical gun owner: silencers.
The only potentially effective noise control method to reduce students’ or instructors’ noise exposure from gunfire is through the use of noise suppressors that can be attached to the end of the gun barrel. However, some states do not permit civilians to use suppressors on firearms.
Some gun control activists claim that noise on shooting ranges isn’t a health issue. The CDC says otherwise, and the report is right here in black and white. Are these luddites going to argue with science?


====================

When Gun Violence Felt Like a Disease, a City in Delaware Turned to the C.D.C.

When epidemiologists from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention came to this city, they were not here to track an outbreak of meningitis or study the effectiveness of a particular vaccine.



They were here to examine gun violence.

This city of about 70,000 had a 45 percent jump in shootings from 2011 to 2013, and the violence has remained stubbornly high; 25 shooting deaths have been reported this year, slightly more than last year, according to the mayor’s office
.-------



The final report, which has been submitted to the state, reached a conclusion that many here said they already knew: that there are certain patterns in the lives of many who commit gun violence.

“The majority of individuals involved in urban firearm violence are young men with substantial violence involvement preceding the more serious offense of a firearm crime,” the report said. “Our findings suggest that integrating data systems could help these individuals better receive the early, comprehensive help that they need to prevent violence involvement.”

Researchers analyzed data on 569 people charged with firearm crimes from 2009 to May 21, 2014, and looked for certain risk factors in their lives, such as whether they had been unemployed, had received help from assistance programs, had been possible victims of child abuse, or had been shot or stabbed. The idea was to show that linking such data could create a better understanding of who might need help before becoming involved in violence.

 

[Slade3200]

Why do you oppose universal? Wouldn’t that be more efficient and effective?

No.....criminals get past current, Federally mandated background checks by using straw buyers, people who have clean records who can pass the background check....usually relatives or friends, most likely girlfriends, baby mommas, grandmothers, mothers, and a lot of the time they are under threat of physical violence....and as actual research shows, criminals don't like private sales for guns because they don't know if the stranger they are buying the gun from is an undercover police officer.....

Mass shooter's first crime is the mass shooting, so they have clean records which is why they can pass any background check either current or universal.

The only reason to have universal background checks, since they wouldn't do anything to stop either criminals or mass shooters....is to come back later and demand universal gun registration....that is the real goal. The anti-gunners demand universal background checks knowing they won't stop criminals or mass shooters. Then, when criminals and mass shooters keep getting guns because of the reasons above, they come back and say....see, in order for UBCs to work, we need to register all the guns, otherwise we can't know who originally owned the guns in the first place.

They want universal gun registration because that is the last thing they need to ban guns and confiscate them when they get the political power to enact those steps. How do we know this? Because of Germany, Britain, Australia, Canada, various states in the U.S. who first registered rifles and then banned them.....New York, and other cities......

Then, Universal Background checks are also aimed at normal gun owners...how?

Gun Control Won't Stop Crime

“Universal” Background Checks
Part of the genius of the Bloomberg gun control system is how it creates prohibitions indirectly. Bloomberg’s so-called “universal” background check scheme is a prime example. These bills are never just about having background checks on the private sales of firearms. That aspect is the part that the public is told about. Yet when you read the Bloomberg laws, you find that checks on private sales are the tip of a very large iceberg of gun prohibition.

First, the bills criminalize a vast amount of innocent activity. Suppose you are an nra Certified Instructor teaching an introductory safety class. Under your supervision, students will handle a variety of unloaded firearms. They will learn how different guns have different safeties, and they will learn the safe way to hand a firearm to another person. But thanks to Bloomberg, these classroom firearm lessons are now illegal in Washington state, unless the class takes place at a shooting range.

It’s now also illegal to lend a gun to your friend, so that you can shoot together at a range on your own property. Or to lend a firearm for a week to your neighbor who is being stalked.

Under the Bloomberg system, gun loans are generally forbidden, unless the gun owner and the borrower both go to a gun store first. The store must process the loan as if the store were selling the gun out of its inventory.

Then, when your friend wants to return your gun to you, both of you must go to the gun store again. This time, the store will process that transaction as if you were buying the gun from the store’s inventory. For both the loan and the return of the gun, you will have to pay whatever fees the store charges, and whatever fees the government might charge.

The gun store will have to keep a permanent record of you, your friend and the gun, including the gun’s serial number. Depending on the state or city, the government might also keep a permanent record.

In other words, the “background check” law is really a law to expand gun registration—and registration lists are used for confiscation.

Consider New York City. In 1967, violent crime in the city was out of control. So the City Council and Mayor John Lindsay required registration of all long guns. The criminals, obviously, did not comply. Thanks to the 1911 Sullivan Act, New York City already had established registration lists for handgun owners.

Then, in 1991, the City Council decided that many lawfully registered firearms were now illegal “assault weapons.” The New York Police Department used the registration lists to ensure that the guns were either surrendered to the government or moved out of the city. When he was mayor of New York City, Bloomberg did the same, after the “assault weapon” law was expanded to cover any rifle or shotgun with an ammunition capacity greater than five rounds.

In Australia and Great Britain—which are often cited as models for the U.S. to follow—registration lists were used for gun confiscation. In Great Britain, this included all handguns; in Australia, handguns over .38 caliber. Both countries banned all semi-automatic or pump-action long guns.

Most American jurisdictions don’t have a comprehensive gun registration system. But even if your state legislature has outlawed gun registration, firearm stores must keep records. Those records could be harvested for future confiscations.

Under the Bloomberg system, the store’s list would include not just the guns that the store actually sold, but all the guns (and their owners) that the store processed, for friends or relatives borrowing guns.

So if those people ca

Wow, that whole straw buyer process sounds pretty intense. Surely you wouldn’t assume that every criminal who wanted a gun would have the will and the resources to do all that. Right? Some, yes, I’m sure they would, but that process alone sounds like it would detour a good percentage of criminals from getting guns. Also, what about the mentally ill who you agree shouldn’t be carrying. Wouldn’t universal
Background checks and an improved system help identify more of those individuals?

Again...you register the individual who can't buy guns, not all gun owners, there is no need. And if the straw buyer process was so difficult, the criminals wouldn't use it as one of their main sources for illegal guns....friends and family are a major source for illegal guns....and again, the baby mommas and grandmothers buying the guns for their boyfriend and grandson criminals often do it under threats........

Mass shooters rarely use straw buyers because they can already pass current background checks, which means they can use regular gun stores. They have no criminal records...for example...the Pulse Night Club shooter passed a criminal background check for his job as a security guard....he passed a current, federally mandated background check for each gun he bought, he was under covert FBI surveillance for a year, he was given a complete FBI criminal investigation as well, and he was interviewed by the FBI 2 times.....he passed all of it even though someone reported him as a possible terrorist....then he went on to attack the night club.

Criminals use straw buyers or steal their guns.....bypassing both current Federal background checks, and if they wanted to buy a gun from a private individual, their straw buyer could buy the gun from those sources too...since they can pass background checks.

Besides...from actual research, criminals do not like to use unknown, private sellers......they are too afraid the sellers might be police.

Besides....it is already against the law to use a gun in a crime...if you do we can already arrest you. It is already against the law for a felon to buy, own or carry a gun.....if they are caught they can already be arrested.

We have all the laws we need to reduce gun crime...the problem isn't that we don't have enough laws, the problem is that judges give bail to repeat gun offenders, prosecutors plea bargain away the gun charge, and politicians reduce sentences for gun offenders because they think the criminal justice system is unfair..

That is where the gun violence problem comes from...not John and Jane citizen having a gun for self defense.

The focus on banning guns is a waste of time. The focus needs to be on keeping the known, repeat gun offenders in prison.

Japan keeps their criminals from using guns with a life sentence for any crime involving a gun....that is how you actually dry up gun crime. Here? You have felons, with repeat arrests for illegal gun possession getting personal recognizance bonds, walking out of the court room in a matter of days, going out and shooting people.....that is our problem...

Here are the reasons we have a gun problem in our big cities...if any of these criminals were refused bond for repeat gun violations, and then, when convicted were sentenced to 30 years to life for using a gun, even for armed robbery where they didn't fire the weapon.....criminals would stop using guns for crime. The gangs would start using gullible 15 year olds to commit their murders, but the majority of gun crime would dry up....

Look at the following stories...the facts and reality of lax enforcement.......if you kept these guys in jail, you wouldn't have gun violence....

Top cop laments violence as 66 shot, 5 fatally, over long Fourth of July weekend


Between last Wednesday and Friday, 42 people were charged with felony gun-related offenses, he said, but only 15 remain in custody.


That lack of accountability for gun offenders has damaged the Police Department’s relationship with the communities most beset by violence, Johnson said, making victims of crimes less likely to cooperate with officers.
-----
“It’s not about mass incarceration. It’s not about having quotas. But when somebody has a demonstrated track record of being a violent gun offender, that should say something to the judges who are making decisions about bail. They shouldn’t be out on the street,” Lightfoot said. “We can’t keep our communities safe if people just keep cycling through the system because what that says to them is, I can do whatever I want, I can carry whatever I want, I can shoot up a crowd and I’m going to be back on the street. How does that make sense? It doesn’t.”
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/07/criminal_justice_reform_comes_home_to_roost.html
=======

CWB Chicago: You Be The Judge: We give you the case details. You try to guess their bail amount.

McKay was sentenced to four years for robbery in 2008; two years for aggravated unlawful use of a weapon (firearm) in 2010; seven years for being a felon in possession of a weapon (firearm) in 2012; and three years for possession of fentanyl in 2016.
-----
For McKay, who has two gun convictions and a robbery conviction, Willis set bail at….$5,000. McKay will need to put down a 10% deposit of $500 to go free. Willis also ordered him to go on electronic monitoring if he is released.

Some details that Willis did not know:
• McKay’s 2008 robbery conviction involved an armed carjacking. Prosecutors reduced the charge to “ordinary” robbery as part of a plea deal.• In 2012, McKay’s second gun case also included allegations that he fired the weapon. Prosecutors dropped the weapon discharge count and seven other weapons charges in a plea deal.• The 2016 drug possession charge started as allegations of manufacture-delivery of fentanyl, but, again, prosecutors pleaded that down to possession.

========


Under DA Krasner, more gun-possession cases get court diversionary program

In June 2018, Maalik Jackson-Wallace was arrested on a Frankford street and charged with carrying a concealed gun without a license and a gram of marijuana. It was his first arrest.

The Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office recommended the Frankford man for a court diversionary program called Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition (ARD) that put him on two years’ probation. His record could have been expunged if he had successfully completed the program.

But Jackson-Wallace, 24, was arrested again on gun-possession charges in March in Bridesburg. He was released from jail after a judge granted a defense motion for unsecured bail. And on June 13, he was arrested a third time — charged with murder in a shooting two days earlier in Frankford that killed a 26-year-old man.

Jackson-Wallace’s case has been cited by some on social media as an example of how they say District Attorney Larry Krasner’s policies are too lenient and lead to gun violence.



In fact, statistics obtained from the DA’s Office show that in 2018, Krasner’s first year in office, 78 gun-possession cases were placed in the ARD program — compared with just 12 such diversions in gun-possession cases the previous year, 11 in 2016, 14 in 2015. and 10 in 2014.

============

Officials Address 'Vicious Cycle' Of I-Bond Violations After Violent Weekend

Many of the gun offenders arrested by Chicago police over the weekend walked out of jail on bond, without having to pay a dime.

As of Monday morning, 19 people had been arrested on gun-related charges. By Monday afternoon, 11 were back on the street, some with prior gun offenses.

“We know who a lot of these people are,” Chicago Police Supt. Eddie Johnson said. “And how do we know that? Because we keep arresting them over and over and over and over and over again. And it’s just a vicious cycle.”

In a tweet Sunday night, a Chicago police spokesperson criticized the practice of letting gun offenders out on Individual Recognizance Bonds or “I-Bonds.”
-----

The tweet said, in part, “Letting gun offenders out on I-Bonds shows there is absolutely no repercussion for carrying illegal guns In Chicago.”
-----
In a statement, an office representative said since the beginning of this year, 72% of gun related cases received monetary bail or no bond.
==================
http://www.cwbchicago.com/2019/05/man-connected-to-whitney-young-high.html

The man who is charged with driving the carjacked SUV of a Whitney Young High School teacher this week is on probation for possessing a handgun—a probation term that was cut in half just three weeks ago by a Cook County judge.

The CPD arrest report that documents the capture of Nicholas Williams on Tuesday says cops and federal agents found Williams “in possession” of a loaded 9-millimeter handgun with a defaced serial number. But, a source with knowledge of the case told CWBChicago tonight that the gun was “ditched” and weapons charges could not be approved.

The Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office did not immediately respond to an after-hours email seeking comment.

Court records show that in Aug. 2017 Williams was charged with felony unlawful use of a weapon for allegedly carrying a handgun in the front of his waistband during a traffic stop on the West Side. Police said in a report that the gun had been reported stolen one month earlier.

A grand jury returned a 12 felony count true bill against Williams. But the Cook County State’s Attorney dropped all charges on May 3, 2018.

Five months after that case was dropped, Williams was charged with a new set of eight weapons felonies for allegedly carrying a handgun in the front of his waistband while riding his bike on the West Side.

----

Last month, Judge Maria Kuriakos-Ciesil sentenced Williams to two year’s probation, 30 hours of community service and 175 days time served in the case.

His attorneys asked for a reduced sentence and, on April 29th, Kuriakos-Ciesil granted the motion by reducing Williams’ punishment to one year of TASC probation and 30 hours of community service.

-------------------------
14 year old shot two men, released without bond or home confinement...


Cook County, IL: 14-Year-Old Charged With Shooting Two, Freed Without Supervision - The Truth About Guns

Welcome to Cook County, Illinois, where crime often has no meaningful consequences. Between a State’s Attorney’s Office reluctant to file charges and judges who mollycoddles defendants, Chicagoland has become the modern Wild West.

Case in point: a 14-year-old who (reportedly) shot and tried to kill two in a nice uptown neighborhood was released by a judge Friday to his parent with no bond – not even electronic home monitoring.


The Cook County judge claims the police failed to bring this suspected would-be gang killer (pictured above, right) in front of a judge quickly enough. So the judge, in order to penalize the police, released the kid without conditions other than to report to court next week.

Of course, the judge is really only penalizing the community as the accused certainly missed his calling as a choir boy.

The police, on the other hand, said they had concerns about the young man’s safety. Police released images of the suspects to the media in an effort to identify them and the media published them.

The Chicago mainstream media refer to the accused as a “boy.” Even though this “boy”reportedly shot one man in the back, abdomen, buttocks and groin and the other in the head.
===========

16 year old shooter released on 10,000 bond.....Cuomo's Raise the age bill for family court let this shooter go free on bail...

Case Of 16-Year-Old Accused Of Shooting Up Bronx Street Prompts Criticism Of NY's Raise The Age Law
Bronx Supreme Court Justice John Collins made Garcia’s release contingent on either $10,000 bail or $25,000 bond, he made bail and he was freed.

As The New York Post explains, “The law already guarantees that he can’t be held in a jail that also houses adults — and if convicted, his sentencing judge would have to take his age into account.”
--------
On Monday, prosecutor Daniel Defilippi indicated he would try to stop the case from being transferred to Family Court. Assemblywoman Nicole Malliotakis, referring to the case as a “prime example” of the problems with the Raise the Age bill, said, “One of the things we brought up during debate was how this encourages gang recruitment. Gangs can recruit young people to do dirty work because they won’t be treated the same when caught.
------
Residents of the neighborhood acknowledged that the neighborhood has become a frightening place to live; one said, “We don’t go out. We don’t go to the park. I keep my kids in the house. We’re scared.” Another commented, “People don’t feel safe. People shooting in the street like that? No one is safe.” A third commented of the young girl, “She is lucky. Like an angel is watching over her because she was really close.”

I’m glad you like to add info to back up your statements but you really gotta work on being more concise. It will yield a much better conversation

You want to know why we have gun crime....I gave you all the information you need to understand that it isn't gun owners....it is the constant releasing of violent gun offenders back into the public......

Oh I think the issue is much more complicated than that with many of factors involved