Seattle Defeats The NRA

[Star]

It's amazing how many people believe "If the gun shops close, the whole city's gonna die!"

Nobody belives that. Strawman fallacy.
But look at places where gun shops are restricted: NYC, Chicago, DC. And look at places where they arent: Dallas, Atlanta, Miami. Which places have higher rates of violent crime?

Rather than doing the cowardly thing - asking a question to get your point across without (that's so Donald Trumpish) taking responsibility for making the point, why don't you tell us how gun crime/violence in cities with lax gun laws compare to cities with strong gun laws per capita.

BTW, Seattle's new gun law/tax that takes effect January 1st is similar to Chicago's law/tax - I'm OK with that, why wouldn't I be?
.

Well, Chicago, DC, and LA have some of the toughest gun laws on the books. Houston, Atlanta, and Miami some of the weakest. But the crime rate is much higher in the first set than the second set.

Link?

.

 

[The Rabbi]

It's amazing how many people believe "If the gun shops close, the whole city's gonna die!"

Nobody belives that. Strawman fallacy.
But look at places where gun shops are restricted: NYC, Chicago, DC. And look at places where they arent: Dallas, Atlanta, Miami. Which places have higher rates of violent crime?

Rather than doing the cowardly thing - asking a question to get your point across without (that's so Donald Trumpish) taking responsibility for making the point, why don't you tell us how gun crime/violence in cities with lax gun laws compare to cities with strong gun laws per capita.

BTW, Seattle's new gun law/tax that takes effect January 1st is similar to Chicago's law/tax - I'm OK with that, why wouldn't I be?
.

Well, Chicago, DC, and LA have some of the toughest gun laws on the books. Houston, Atlanta, and Miami some of the weakest. But the crime rate is much higher in the first set than the second set.

Link?

.

Check my sig line.

 

[2aguy]

It's amazing how many people believe "If the gun shops close, the whole city's gonna die!"

Nobody belives that. Strawman fallacy.
But look at places where gun shops are restricted: NYC, Chicago, DC. And look at places where they arent: Dallas, Atlanta, Miami. Which places have higher rates of violent crime?

Rather than doing the cowardly thing - asking a question to get your point across without (that's so Donald Trumpish) taking responsibility for making the point, why don't you tell us how gun crime/violence in cities with lax gun laws compare to cities with strong gun laws per capita.

BTW, Seattle's new gun law/tax that takes effect January 1st is similar to Chicago's law/tax - I'm OK with that, why wouldn't I be?
.

Chicago, Baltimore, D.C. strictest gun laws...highest gun murder rates....dittos for the entire Island of Puerto Rico.....

Why wouldn't you be....because it is a tax that is meant to keep people from accessing a Right. The poor have he right to bear arms as well and added taxes make it harder for them to exercise that right...just like when the democrats put on Poll Taxes to voting to keep poor blacks from exercising that right.

 

[Vigilante]

 

[Star]

It's amazing how many people believe "If the gun shops close, the whole city's gonna die!"

Nobody belives that. Strawman fallacy.
But look at places where gun shops are restricted: NYC, Chicago, DC. And look at places where they arent: Dallas, Atlanta, Miami. Which places have higher rates of violent crime?

Rather than doing the cowardly thing - asking a question to get your point across without (that's so Donald Trumpish) taking responsibility for making the point, why don't you tell us how gun crime/violence in cities with lax gun laws compare to cities with strong gun laws per capita.

BTW, Seattle's new gun law/tax that takes effect January 1st is similar to Chicago's law/tax - I'm OK with that, why wouldn't I be?
.

Well, Chicago, DC, and LA have some of the toughest gun laws on the books. Houston, Atlanta, and Miami some of the weakest. But the crime rate is much higher in the first set than the second set.

Link?

.

Check my sig line.

OK, I get it - y'all can't back up what was said in post #30 with anything but your own say-so (giggle - like that has any credibility whatsoever - LOL). OTOH, below is info to debunk what was said. One of the things I find most interesting is the gun freaks on this M/B try-----try to make some kind of hay out of - most gun violence takes place in places where lots of people live - duh!
But-----but check it out, in the cities that have the most gun violence, if they have a Democratic mayor, the Democratic mayors have been stifled by Republican majority state legislators and Republican governors - whoda thunk?

The info below was gathered from The Rabbi's siggy link - thanks The Rabbi!


Parents Against Gun Violence: "Chicago, Illinois Is Not Even Close To Being The Most Dangerous City In The U.S." Using data from the FBI and the Centers for Disease Control, Parents Against Gun Violence determined that Chicago does not lead the nation in murder, even using several different metrics for comparison:

In Fact, The Three Most Dangerous Cities "Are All Prohibited By State Law From Enacting ANY New Gun Ordinances." Parents Against Gun Violence found that Detroit, New Orleans, and St. Louis are all subject to preemption laws, a type of National Rifle Association-backed law that limits the ability of city authorities to regulate firearms beyond what is contained within state law:

Although Chicago Gun Murders Have Ticked Up In The First Half Of 2015, Rates Over Past Three Years Remain Similar To Historic Lows Not Seen Since 1965. [ABC7Chicago.com, 7/1/15, Huffington Post, 12/31/14, MSNBC.com, 12/2/13]

Pew: "Chicago Nowhere Near U.S. 'Murder Capital.'" Pew Research used FBI data to determine that six cities, some with murder rates nearing 100 per 100,000 people per year, have been the U.S. "murder capital" since 1985, none of them Chicago:

.

 

[Stephanie]

Nobody belives that. Strawman fallacy.
But look at places where gun shops are restricted: NYC, Chicago, DC. And look at places where they arent: Dallas, Atlanta, Miami. Which places have higher rates of violent crime?

Rather than doing the cowardly thing - asking a question to get your point across without (that's so Donald Trumpish) taking responsibility for making the point, why don't you tell us how gun crime/violence in cities with lax gun laws compare to cities with strong gun laws per capita.

BTW, Seattle's new gun law/tax that takes effect January 1st is similar to Chicago's law/tax - I'm OK with that, why wouldn't I be?
.

Well, Chicago, DC, and LA have some of the toughest gun laws on the books. Houston, Atlanta, and Miami some of the weakest. But the crime rate is much higher in the first set than the second set.

Link?

.

Check my sig line.

OK, I get it - y'all can't back up what was said in post #30 with anything but your own say-so (giggle - like that has any credibility whatsoever - LOL). OTOH, below is info to debunk what was said. One of the things I find most interesting is the gun freaks on this M/B try-----try to make some kind of hay out of - most gun violence takes place in places where lots of people live - duh!
But-----but check it out, in the cities that have the most gun violence, if they have a Democratic mayor, the Democratic mayors have been stifled by Republican majority state legislators and Republican governors - whoda thunk?

The info below was gathered from The Rabbi's siggy link - thanks The Rabbi!


Parents Against Gun Violence: "Chicago, Illinois Is Not Even Close To Being The Most Dangerous City In The U.S." Using data from the FBI and the Centers for Disease Control, Parents Against Gun Violence determined that Chicago does not lead the nation in murder, even using several different metrics for comparison:

In Fact, The Three Most Dangerous Cities "Are All Prohibited By State Law From Enacting ANY New Gun Ordinances." Parents Against Gun Violence found that Detroit, New Orleans, and St. Louis are all subject to preemption laws, a type of National Rifle Association-backed law that limits the ability of city authorities to regulate firearms beyond what is contained within state law:

Although Chicago Gun Murders Have Ticked Up In The First Half Of 2015, Rates Over Past Three Years Remain Similar To Historic Lows Not Seen Since 1965. [ABC7Chicago.com, 7/1/15, Huffington Post, 12/31/14, MSNBC.com, 12/2/13]

Pew: "Chicago Nowhere Near U.S. 'Murder Capital.'" Pew Research used FBI data to determine that six cities, some with murder rates nearing 100 per 100,000 people per year, have been the U.S. "murder capital" since 1985, none of them Chicago:

.

just go to Seattle, boss all them around and leave the rest of us alone. see ya bye.

 

[Star]

There is a story perpetuated by propaganda ministries that the number of gun sales have gone up, and that is why murders have gone down. We've seen that story parroted right here in this topic.

This is why it is particularly funny to see someone saying that correlation does not equal causation when confronted with the fact the percentage of gun ownership has plunged.

"More guns" does not mean "more gun owners".

It's a simple fact there is a much smaller percentage of gun owners in America.

If the rubes buy into the story that gun ownership is linked to the murder rate, then how come they suddenly deny it is when shown the percentage of owners is at a record low?


Hmmmm...

Gun-Homicide Rate Decreased as Gun Ownership Increased


Based on data from a 2012 Congressional Research Service (CRS) report(and additional data from another Wonkblog article “There are now more guns than people in the United States”), the number of privately owned firearms in U.S. increased from about 185 million in 1993 to 357 million in 2013.

-------------------------------
Is gun ownership really down in America? | Fox News

Surely, gun control advocates such as GSS director Tom Smith view this decline as a good thing. In a 2003 book of mine, I quoted Smith as saying that the large drop in gun ownership would “make it easier for politicians to do the right thing on guns” and pass more restrictive regulations.

Other gun control advocates have mentioned to me that they hope that if people believe fewer people own guns, that may cause others to rethink their decision to own one themselves. It is part of the reason they dramatically exaggerate the risks of having guns in the home.

The Associated Press and Time ignored other polls by Gallup and ABC News/Washington Post.

These polls show that gun ownership rates have been flat over the same period. According to Gallup, household gun ownership has ranged from 51 percent in 1994 to 34 percent in 1999. In 2014, it was at 42 percent – comparable to the 43-45 percent figures during the 1970s.

A 2011 Gallup poll with the headline “Self-Reported Gun Ownership in U.S. Is Highest Since 1993” appears to have gotten no news coverage.

The ABC News/Washington Post poll shows an even more stable pattern, with household gun ownership between 44 and 46 percent in 1999. In 2013, the ownership rate was 43 percent.

There are other measures that suggest that we should be very careful of relying too heavily on polling to gauge the level of gun ownership. For example, the nationally number of concealed handgun permits has soared over the last decade: rising from about 2.7 million in 1999 to 4.6 million in 2007 to 11.1 million in 2014.

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) shows that the number of gun purchases has grown dramatically over time –doubling from 2006 to 2014.

I didn't realize that Gallup was part of the NRA.....

How about ABC news/Washington Post...are they also on the payroll of the NRA?

Do you have any real data or are you just wishful thinking again?
States with easy to obtain concealed carry permits are less safe from gun violence than States with difficult to obtain concealed carry permits - how do real statistics square with your -ehem- opinion... opinion poll?


Concealed Carry

In regulating the right to carry a concealed weapon, states generally fall into one of two camps: “may issue” and “shall issue.” In the “may issue” states, law enforcement agencies are granted discretion in determining who receives a permit. In the “shall issue” states, law enforcement has little to no discretion, and is obligated to issue a permit to just about any applicant that meets basic requirements. Four states do not require a permit to carry a concealed firearm.

Among the “may issue” states, the average rate of gun homicides in 2013 was only slightly lower than the rate among “shall issue” states, and states that do not require a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

​

.

 

[2aguy]

Nobody belives that. Strawman fallacy.
But look at places where gun shops are restricted: NYC, Chicago, DC. And look at places where they arent: Dallas, Atlanta, Miami. Which places have higher rates of violent crime?

Rather than doing the cowardly thing - asking a question to get your point across without (that's so Donald Trumpish) taking responsibility for making the point, why don't you tell us how gun crime/violence in cities with lax gun laws compare to cities with strong gun laws per capita.

BTW, Seattle's new gun law/tax that takes effect January 1st is similar to Chicago's law/tax - I'm OK with that, why wouldn't I be?
.

Well, Chicago, DC, and LA have some of the toughest gun laws on the books. Houston, Atlanta, and Miami some of the weakest. But the crime rate is much higher in the first set than the second set.

Link?

.

Check my sig line.

OK, I get it - y'all can't back up what was said in post #30 with anything but your own say-so (giggle - like that has any credibility whatsoever - LOL). OTOH, below is info to debunk what was said. One of the things I find most interesting is the gun freaks on this M/B try-----try to make some kind of hay out of - most gun violence takes place in places where lots of people live - duh!
But-----but check it out, in the cities that have the most gun violence, if they have a Democratic mayor, the Democratic mayors have been stifled by Republican majority state legislators and Republican governors - whoda thunk?

The info below was gathered from The Rabbi's siggy link - thanks The Rabbi!


Parents Against Gun Violence: "Chicago, Illinois Is Not Even Close To Being The Most Dangerous City In The U.S." Using data from the FBI and the Centers for Disease Control, Parents Against Gun Violence determined that Chicago does not lead the nation in murder, even using several different metrics for comparison:

In Fact, The Three Most Dangerous Cities "Are All Prohibited By State Law From Enacting ANY New Gun Ordinances." Parents Against Gun Violence found that Detroit, New Orleans, and St. Louis are all subject to preemption laws, a type of National Rifle Association-backed law that limits the ability of city authorities to regulate firearms beyond what is contained within state law:

Although Chicago Gun Murders Have Ticked Up In The First Half Of 2015, Rates Over Past Three Years Remain Similar To Historic Lows Not Seen Since 1965. [ABC7Chicago.com, 7/1/15, Huffington Post, 12/31/14, MSNBC.com, 12/2/13]

Pew: "Chicago Nowhere Near U.S. 'Murder Capital.'" Pew Research used FBI data to determine that six cities, some with murder rates nearing 100 per 100,000 people per year, have been the U.S. "murder capital" since 1985, none of them Chicago:

.

Wrong....

 

[2aguy]

There is a story perpetuated by propaganda ministries that the number of gun sales have gone up, and that is why murders have gone down. We've seen that story parroted right here in this topic.

This is why it is particularly funny to see someone saying that correlation does not equal causation when confronted with the fact the percentage of gun ownership has plunged.

"More guns" does not mean "more gun owners".

It's a simple fact there is a much smaller percentage of gun owners in America.

If the rubes buy into the story that gun ownership is linked to the murder rate, then how come they suddenly deny it is when shown the percentage of owners is at a record low?


Hmmmm...

Gun-Homicide Rate Decreased as Gun Ownership Increased


Based on data from a 2012 Congressional Research Service (CRS) report(and additional data from another Wonkblog article “There are now more guns than people in the United States”), the number of privately owned firearms in U.S. increased from about 185 million in 1993 to 357 million in 2013.

-------------------------------
Is gun ownership really down in America? | Fox News

Surely, gun control advocates such as GSS director Tom Smith view this decline as a good thing. In a 2003 book of mine, I quoted Smith as saying that the large drop in gun ownership would “make it easier for politicians to do the right thing on guns” and pass more restrictive regulations.

Other gun control advocates have mentioned to me that they hope that if people believe fewer people own guns, that may cause others to rethink their decision to own one themselves. It is part of the reason they dramatically exaggerate the risks of having guns in the home.

The Associated Press and Time ignored other polls by Gallup and ABC News/Washington Post.

These polls show that gun ownership rates have been flat over the same period. According to Gallup, household gun ownership has ranged from 51 percent in 1994 to 34 percent in 1999. In 2014, it was at 42 percent – comparable to the 43-45 percent figures during the 1970s.

A 2011 Gallup poll with the headline “Self-Reported Gun Ownership in U.S. Is Highest Since 1993” appears to have gotten no news coverage.

The ABC News/Washington Post poll shows an even more stable pattern, with household gun ownership between 44 and 46 percent in 1999. In 2013, the ownership rate was 43 percent.

There are other measures that suggest that we should be very careful of relying too heavily on polling to gauge the level of gun ownership. For example, the nationally number of concealed handgun permits has soared over the last decade: rising from about 2.7 million in 1999 to 4.6 million in 2007 to 11.1 million in 2014.

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) shows that the number of gun purchases has grown dramatically over time –doubling from 2006 to 2014.

I didn't realize that Gallup was part of the NRA.....

How about ABC news/Washington Post...are they also on the payroll of the NRA?

Do you have any real data or are you just wishful thinking again?
States with easy to obtain concealed carry permits are less safe from gun violence than States with difficult to obtain concealed carry permits - how do real statistics square with your -ehem- opinion... opinion poll?


Concealed Carry

In regulating the right to carry a concealed weapon, states generally fall into one of two camps: “may issue” and “shall issue.” In the “may issue” states, law enforcement agencies are granted discretion in determining who receives a permit. In the “shall issue” states, law enforcement has little to no discretion, and is obligated to issue a permit to just about any applicant that meets basic requirements. Four states do not require a permit to carry a concealed firearm.

Among the “may issue” states, the average rate of gun homicides in 2013 was only slightly lower than the rate among “shall issue” states, and states that do not require a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

​

.

And here you go......

You'll have to go to the actual link to see the table

Restrictive Gun Laws Don't Make for Safer Cities

The below chart looks at the 10 highest crime cities* and 10 lowest crime cities with populations over 250,000 according to FBI data and compares the cities to the LCPGV/Brady Campaign letter grade assigned to the state for its gun laws.

However, the “gun death rate” that the site uses to show correlation between states with strict gun laws and fewer gun deaths is known to be an unreliable metric to assess crime. As the Pew Research Center points out, gun suicides have continued to outnumber gun homicides since the Center for Disease Control and Prevention began publishing that data in 1981. Therefore, as we have seen even more of a decline in homicides and an increase in suicides in recent years, suicides continue to make up a progressively greater portion of firearm-related deaths.

 

[2aguy]

There is a story perpetuated by propaganda ministries that the number of gun sales have gone up, and that is why murders have gone down. We've seen that story parroted right here in this topic.

This is why it is particularly funny to see someone saying that correlation does not equal causation when confronted with the fact the percentage of gun ownership has plunged.

"More guns" does not mean "more gun owners".

It's a simple fact there is a much smaller percentage of gun owners in America.

If the rubes buy into the story that gun ownership is linked to the murder rate, then how come they suddenly deny it is when shown the percentage of owners is at a record low?


Hmmmm...

Gun-Homicide Rate Decreased as Gun Ownership Increased


Based on data from a 2012 Congressional Research Service (CRS) report(and additional data from another Wonkblog article “There are now more guns than people in the United States”), the number of privately owned firearms in U.S. increased from about 185 million in 1993 to 357 million in 2013.

-------------------------------
Is gun ownership really down in America? | Fox News

Surely, gun control advocates such as GSS director Tom Smith view this decline as a good thing. In a 2003 book of mine, I quoted Smith as saying that the large drop in gun ownership would “make it easier for politicians to do the right thing on guns” and pass more restrictive regulations.

Other gun control advocates have mentioned to me that they hope that if people believe fewer people own guns, that may cause others to rethink their decision to own one themselves. It is part of the reason they dramatically exaggerate the risks of having guns in the home.

The Associated Press and Time ignored other polls by Gallup and ABC News/Washington Post.

These polls show that gun ownership rates have been flat over the same period. According to Gallup, household gun ownership has ranged from 51 percent in 1994 to 34 percent in 1999. In 2014, it was at 42 percent – comparable to the 43-45 percent figures during the 1970s.

A 2011 Gallup poll with the headline “Self-Reported Gun Ownership in U.S. Is Highest Since 1993” appears to have gotten no news coverage.

The ABC News/Washington Post poll shows an even more stable pattern, with household gun ownership between 44 and 46 percent in 1999. In 2013, the ownership rate was 43 percent.

There are other measures that suggest that we should be very careful of relying too heavily on polling to gauge the level of gun ownership. For example, the nationally number of concealed handgun permits has soared over the last decade: rising from about 2.7 million in 1999 to 4.6 million in 2007 to 11.1 million in 2014.

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) shows that the number of gun purchases has grown dramatically over time –doubling from 2006 to 2014.

I didn't realize that Gallup was part of the NRA.....

How about ABC news/Washington Post...are they also on the payroll of the NRA?

Do you have any real data or are you just wishful thinking again?
States with easy to obtain concealed carry permits are less safe from gun violence than States with difficult to obtain concealed carry permits - how do real statistics square with your -ehem- opinion... opinion poll?


Concealed Carry

In regulating the right to carry a concealed weapon, states generally fall into one of two camps: “may issue” and “shall issue.” In the “may issue” states, law enforcement agencies are granted discretion in determining who receives a permit. In the “shall issue” states, law enforcement has little to no discretion, and is obligated to issue a permit to just about any applicant that meets basic requirements. Four states do not require a permit to carry a concealed firearm.

Among the “may issue” states, the average rate of gun homicides in 2013 was only slightly lower than the rate among “shall issue” states, and states that do not require a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

​

.

And here you go..the truth....

Do Strict Firearm Laws Give States Lower Gun Death Rates?



Focusing on homicides can have a dramatic impact on a state's rank. Wyoming, for instance, has a high suicide rate but a low homicide rate. The District of Columbia, by contrast, has a low suicide rate but a high homicide rate.

According to National Journal, the six states with the lowest rates of gun-related deaths in 2013, ranging from 2.6 to 5.7 per 100,000, were Hawaii, Massachusetts, New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and New Jersey, which do indeed have relatively strict gun policies as measured by requirements for buying and carrying handguns. National Journal also considered whether states impose a duty to retreat on people attacked in public places, which all six of these states do.



get past those six states, the hypothesis that low gun death rates go hand in hand with strict gun control starts to break down. New Hampshire, with a gun death rate just a little higher than New Jersey's, has permissive gun policies. Likewise Minnesota, Washington, Vermont, Wisconsin, and South Dakota, all of which have gun death rates of 10 or less per 100,000. New Hampshire and Minnesota have lower rates than California, Illinois, the District of Columbia, and Maryland, all of which have substantially stricter gun rules.

At the other end of the list, Alaska, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, and Wyoming have both permissive gun policies and high gun death rates, ranging from around 17 to nearly 20 per 100,000. But of these six states, only Louisiana has a very high gun murder rate (based on 2010 data). The rate in Mississippi is fairly high but still lower than in D.C. or Maryland, which have much stricter gun laws. Alaska, Wyoming, Alabama, and Arkansas have lower gun murder rates than California, which has more gun restrictions.

Although its overall analysis looks at all gun-related deaths, National Journal (after some prodding, judging from the note in italics) focuses on gun homicides in charts that compare states based on three policies: whether they impose a duty to retreat, whether they require background checks for all gun sales, and whether they issue carry permits to anyone who meets a short list of objective criteria. Excluding suicides makes sense for at least two of those comparisons, since you would not expect the rules for self-defense or for carrying guns in public to affect suicide rates. Background checks conceivably could, since among other things they are supposed to prevent gun purchases by people who were forcibly subjected to psychiatric treatment because they were deemed a threat to themselves.

According to the first chart, the average rate of gun-related homicides in states with "some form of 'stand your ground' law" in 2013 was 4.23 per 100,000, compared to 3.08 in the other states. (Oddly, Arkansas is included in the former category, although its "stand your ground" law was not enacted until this year.) States that did not require background checks for private sales also had a higher average gun homicide rate: 4.02 per 100,000, compared to 3.41 for the other states. But the average rates were the same (3.78 per 100,000) regardless of whether states had discretionary or "must issue" carry permit policies, which is consistent with the observation that permit holders rarely commit violent crimes.

Some states were excluded from these analyses, and the reason is revealing. The fine print at the bottom of the charts says "Alaska, Idaho, Maine, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming had too few homicides in 2013 to calculate a reliable rate" (emphasis added). These are all states with permissive gun laws, and three of them are among the seven states with the highest overall gun death rates, which highlights the importance of distinguishing between suicides and homicides. Had National Journal's main analysis excluded suicides, some of the states with few gun controls, including Alaska and Wyoming, would have looked much safer.

"The states with the most gun laws see the fewest gun-related deaths," say the headline and subhead over the National Journal post, "but there's still little appetite to talk about more restrictions." The implication is that the data prove a cause-and-effect relationship. But the question of whether stricter gun control policies cause lower gun death rates cannot be addressed by this sort of static analysis. Gun laws obviously are not the only way in which Alaska, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, and Wyoming differ from Hawaii, Massachusetts, New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and New Jersey. Furthermore, while the latter states have both low suicide and low homicide rates, the former states (with the notable exception of Louisiana) are distinguished mainly by high suicide rates.

 

[2aguy]

Nobody belives that. Strawman fallacy.
But look at places where gun shops are restricted: NYC, Chicago, DC. And look at places where they arent: Dallas, Atlanta, Miami. Which places have higher rates of violent crime?

Rather than doing the cowardly thing - asking a question to get your point across without (that's so Donald Trumpish) taking responsibility for making the point, why don't you tell us how gun crime/violence in cities with lax gun laws compare to cities with strong gun laws per capita.

BTW, Seattle's new gun law/tax that takes effect January 1st is similar to Chicago's law/tax - I'm OK with that, why wouldn't I be?
.

Well, Chicago, DC, and LA have some of the toughest gun laws on the books. Houston, Atlanta, and Miami some of the weakest. But the crime rate is much higher in the first set than the second set.

Link?

.

Check my sig line.

OK, I get it - y'all can't back up what was said in post #30 with anything but your own say-so (giggle - like that has any credibility whatsoever - LOL). OTOH, below is info to debunk what was said. One of the things I find most interesting is the gun freaks on this M/B try-----try to make some kind of hay out of - most gun violence takes place in places where lots of people live - duh!
But-----but check it out, in the cities that have the most gun violence, if they have a Democratic mayor, the Democratic mayors have been stifled by Republican majority state legislators and Republican governors - whoda thunk?

The info below was gathered from The Rabbi's siggy link - thanks The Rabbi!


Parents Against Gun Violence: "Chicago, Illinois Is Not Even Close To Being The Most Dangerous City In The U.S." Using data from the FBI and the Centers for Disease Control, Parents Against Gun Violence determined that Chicago does not lead the nation in murder, even using several different metrics for comparison:

In Fact, The Three Most Dangerous Cities "Are All Prohibited By State Law From Enacting ANY New Gun Ordinances." Parents Against Gun Violence found that Detroit, New Orleans, and St. Louis are all subject to preemption laws, a type of National Rifle Association-backed law that limits the ability of city authorities to regulate firearms beyond what is contained within state law:

Although Chicago Gun Murders Have Ticked Up In The First Half Of 2015, Rates Over Past Three Years Remain Similar To Historic Lows Not Seen Since 1965. [ABC7Chicago.com, 7/1/15, Huffington Post, 12/31/14, MSNBC.com, 12/2/13]

Pew: "Chicago Nowhere Near U.S. 'Murder Capital.'" Pew Research used FBI data to determine that six cities, some with murder rates nearing 100 per 100,000 people per year, have been the U.S. "murder capital" since 1985, none of them Chicago:

.

Actually....that isn't the one thing they all have in common......

Those three cities...Detroit,

Nobody belives that. Strawman fallacy.
But look at places where gun shops are restricted: NYC, Chicago, DC. And look at places where they arent: Dallas, Atlanta, Miami. Which places have higher rates of violent crime?

Rather than doing the cowardly thing - asking a question to get your point across without (that's so Donald Trumpish) taking responsibility for making the point, why don't you tell us how gun crime/violence in cities with lax gun laws compare to cities with strong gun laws per capita.

BTW, Seattle's new gun law/tax that takes effect January 1st is similar to Chicago's law/tax - I'm OK with that, why wouldn't I be?
.

Well, Chicago, DC, and LA have some of the toughest gun laws on the books. Houston, Atlanta, and Miami some of the weakest. But the crime rate is much higher in the first set than the second set.

Link?

.

Check my sig line.

OK, I get it - y'all can't back up what was said in post #30 with anything but your own say-so (giggle - like that has any credibility whatsoever - LOL). OTOH, below is info to debunk what was said. One of the things I find most interesting is the gun freaks on this M/B try-----try to make some kind of hay out of - most gun violence takes place in places where lots of people live - duh!
But-----but check it out, in the cities that have the most gun violence, if they have a Democratic mayor, the Democratic mayors have been stifled by Republican majority state legislators and Republican governors - whoda thunk?

The info below was gathered from The Rabbi's siggy link - thanks The Rabbi!


Parents Against Gun Violence: "Chicago, Illinois Is Not Even Close To Being The Most Dangerous City In The U.S." Using data from the FBI and the Centers for Disease Control, Parents Against Gun Violence determined that Chicago does not lead the nation in murder, even using several different metrics for comparison:

In Fact, The Three Most Dangerous Cities "Are All Prohibited By State Law From Enacting ANY New Gun Ordinances." Parents Against Gun Violence found that Detroit, New Orleans, and St. Louis are all subject to preemption laws, a type of National Rifle Association-backed law that limits the ability of city authorities to regulate firearms beyond what is contained within state law:

Although Chicago Gun Murders Have Ticked Up In The First Half Of 2015, Rates Over Past Three Years Remain Similar To Historic Lows Not Seen Since 1965. [ABC7Chicago.com, 7/1/15, Huffington Post, 12/31/14, MSNBC.com, 12/2/13]

Pew: "Chicago Nowhere Near U.S. 'Murder Capital.'" Pew Research used FBI data to determine that six cities, some with murder rates nearing 100 per 100,000 people per year, have been the U.S. "murder capital" since 1985, none of them Chicago:

.

From the list of the top 10 cities with the most gun violence......

Oakland, California
Baltimore, Maryland
Stockton, California
Buffalo, New York......

All had A- ratings for their strict gun control.......all are from strict gun control states, Baltimore has the entire list of anti gun laws that the anti gunners want everywhere

And the states with the lowest gun murder rates.....have some of the lowest gun control laws.......

 

[Wildman]

FEDERAL MACHINE-GUN BAN UNDER LEGAL CHALLENGE

Just as Barack Obama is plotting to create more limits on firearms, ammunition and the like during his final year in the Oval Office, there are court arguments developing that the longstanding federal ban on machine guns is, in fact, unconstitutional.

Read more at Federal machine-gun ban under legal challenge

Seattle is going to piss their pinky panties over this. ...

 

[2aguy]

Nobody belives that. Strawman fallacy.
But look at places where gun shops are restricted: NYC, Chicago, DC. And look at places where they arent: Dallas, Atlanta, Miami. Which places have higher rates of violent crime?

Rather than doing the cowardly thing - asking a question to get your point across without (that's so Donald Trumpish) taking responsibility for making the point, why don't you tell us how gun crime/violence in cities with lax gun laws compare to cities with strong gun laws per capita.

BTW, Seattle's new gun law/tax that takes effect January 1st is similar to Chicago's law/tax - I'm OK with that, why wouldn't I be?
.

Well, Chicago, DC, and LA have some of the toughest gun laws on the books. Houston, Atlanta, and Miami some of the weakest. But the crime rate is much higher in the first set than the second set.

Link?

.

Check my sig line.

OK, I get it - y'all can't back up what was said in post #30 with anything but your own say-so (giggle - like that has any credibility whatsoever - LOL). OTOH, below is info to debunk what was said. One of the things I find most interesting is the gun freaks on this M/B try-----try to make some kind of hay out of - most gun violence takes place in places where lots of people live - duh!
But-----but check it out, in the cities that have the most gun violence, if they have a Democratic mayor, the Democratic mayors have been stifled by Republican majority state legislators and Republican governors - whoda thunk?

The info below was gathered from The Rabbi's siggy link - thanks The Rabbi!


Parents Against Gun Violence: "Chicago, Illinois Is Not Even Close To Being The Most Dangerous City In The U.S." Using data from the FBI and the Centers for Disease Control, Parents Against Gun Violence determined that Chicago does not lead the nation in murder, even using several different metrics for comparison:

In Fact, The Three Most Dangerous Cities "Are All Prohibited By State Law From Enacting ANY New Gun Ordinances." Parents Against Gun Violence found that Detroit, New Orleans, and St. Louis are all subject to preemption laws, a type of National Rifle Association-backed law that limits the ability of city authorities to regulate firearms beyond what is contained within state law:

Although Chicago Gun Murders Have Ticked Up In The First Half Of 2015, Rates Over Past Three Years Remain Similar To Historic Lows Not Seen Since 1965. [ABC7Chicago.com, 7/1/15, Huffington Post, 12/31/14, MSNBC.com, 12/2/13]

Pew: "Chicago Nowhere Near U.S. 'Murder Capital.'" Pew Research used FBI data to determine that six cities, some with murder rates nearing 100 per 100,000 people per year, have been the U.S. "murder capital" since 1985, none of them Chicago:

.

And the top 10 cities with the lowest gun violence rates......


Restrictive Gun Laws Don't Make for Safer Cities

The below chart looks at the 10 highest crime cities* and 10 lowest crime cities with populations over 250,000 according to FBI data and compares the cities to the LCPGV/Brady Campaign letter grade assigned to the state for its gun laws.


Mesa, Arizona........F
Lincoln, Nebraska......D
Fort Wayne, Indiana...D-
Lexington, Kentucky...F
Virginia Beach, Virginia...D
Henderson, Nevada...F
Plano, Texas....F

Blows your idea out of the water......

Cities with the strictest gun control, that make it impossible for law abiding citizens to own and carry guns have gun murder rates, not gun suicide rates which is another way the anti gunners bump up their numbers, that are way out of control.

 

[2aguy]

Nobody belives that. Strawman fallacy.
But look at places where gun shops are restricted: NYC, Chicago, DC. And look at places where they arent: Dallas, Atlanta, Miami. Which places have higher rates of violent crime?

Rather than doing the cowardly thing - asking a question to get your point across without (that's so Donald Trumpish) taking responsibility for making the point, why don't you tell us how gun crime/violence in cities with lax gun laws compare to cities with strong gun laws per capita.

BTW, Seattle's new gun law/tax that takes effect January 1st is similar to Chicago's law/tax - I'm OK with that, why wouldn't I be?
.

Well, Chicago, DC, and LA have some of the toughest gun laws on the books. Houston, Atlanta, and Miami some of the weakest. But the crime rate is much higher in the first set than the second set.

Link?

.

Check my sig line.

OK, I get it - y'all can't back up what was said in post #30 with anything but your own say-so (giggle - like that has any credibility whatsoever - LOL). OTOH, below is info to debunk what was said. One of the things I find most interesting is the gun freaks on this M/B try-----try to make some kind of hay out of - most gun violence takes place in places where lots of people live - duh!
But-----but check it out, in the cities that have the most gun violence, if they have a Democratic mayor, the Democratic mayors have been stifled by Republican majority state legislators and Republican governors - whoda thunk?

The info below was gathered from The Rabbi's siggy link - thanks The Rabbi!


Parents Against Gun Violence: "Chicago, Illinois Is Not Even Close To Being The Most Dangerous City In The U.S." Using data from the FBI and the Centers for Disease Control, Parents Against Gun Violence determined that Chicago does not lead the nation in murder, even using several different metrics for comparison:

In Fact, The Three Most Dangerous Cities "Are All Prohibited By State Law From Enacting ANY New Gun Ordinances." Parents Against Gun Violence found that Detroit, New Orleans, and St. Louis are all subject to preemption laws, a type of National Rifle Association-backed law that limits the ability of city authorities to regulate firearms beyond what is contained within state law:

Although Chicago Gun Murders Have Ticked Up In The First Half Of 2015, Rates Over Past Three Years Remain Similar To Historic Lows Not Seen Since 1965. [ABC7Chicago.com, 7/1/15, Huffington Post, 12/31/14, MSNBC.com, 12/2/13]

Pew: "Chicago Nowhere Near U.S. 'Murder Capital.'" Pew Research used FBI data to determine that six cities, some with murder rates nearing 100 per 100,000 people per year, have been the U.S. "murder capital" since 1985, none of them Chicago:

.

To conduct a more accurate analysis of how gun laws actually affect the criminal use of guns, Media Trackers used rates for violent crime in large cities that were reported in the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report of 2012. After compiling the list, Media Trackers compared the violent crime rates to the severity of local gun laws by looking at the letter grade the state received.

Unlike the LCPGV report, this method showed no correlation between restrictive gun laws and lower crime rates.

Among the top ten cities for highest violent crime rate, 4 of them are located in states that received an A-, two received C-range grades, one received a D and three received F’s. For the states with the lowest violent crime rates there were 3 A- grades (all located in California), there were no B’s or C’s, but there were three D’s and four F’s.

 

[2aguy]

Nobody belives that. Strawman fallacy.
But look at places where gun shops are restricted: NYC, Chicago, DC. And look at places where they arent: Dallas, Atlanta, Miami. Which places have higher rates of violent crime?

Rather than doing the cowardly thing - asking a question to get your point across without (that's so Donald Trumpish) taking responsibility for making the point, why don't you tell us how gun crime/violence in cities with lax gun laws compare to cities with strong gun laws per capita.

BTW, Seattle's new gun law/tax that takes effect January 1st is similar to Chicago's law/tax - I'm OK with that, why wouldn't I be?
.

Well, Chicago, DC, and LA have some of the toughest gun laws on the books. Houston, Atlanta, and Miami some of the weakest. But the crime rate is much higher in the first set than the second set.

Link?

.

Check my sig line.

OK, I get it - y'all can't back up what was said in post #30 with anything but your own say-so (giggle - like that has any credibility whatsoever - LOL). OTOH, below is info to debunk what was said. One of the things I find most interesting is the gun freaks on this M/B try-----try to make some kind of hay out of - most gun violence takes place in places where lots of people live - duh!
But-----but check it out, in the cities that have the most gun violence, if they have a Democratic mayor, the Democratic mayors have been stifled by Republican majority state legislators and Republican governors - whoda thunk?

The info below was gathered from The Rabbi's siggy link - thanks The Rabbi!


Parents Against Gun Violence: "Chicago, Illinois Is Not Even Close To Being The Most Dangerous City In The U.S." Using data from the FBI and the Centers for Disease Control, Parents Against Gun Violence determined that Chicago does not lead the nation in murder, even using several different metrics for comparison:

In Fact, The Three Most Dangerous Cities "Are All Prohibited By State Law From Enacting ANY New Gun Ordinances." Parents Against Gun Violence found that Detroit, New Orleans, and St. Louis are all subject to preemption laws, a type of National Rifle Association-backed law that limits the ability of city authorities to regulate firearms beyond what is contained within state law:

Although Chicago Gun Murders Have Ticked Up In The First Half Of 2015, Rates Over Past Three Years Remain Similar To Historic Lows Not Seen Since 1965. [ABC7Chicago.com, 7/1/15, Huffington Post, 12/31/14, MSNBC.com, 12/2/13]

Pew: "Chicago Nowhere Near U.S. 'Murder Capital.'" Pew Research used FBI data to determine that six cities, some with murder rates nearing 100 per 100,000 people per year, have been the U.S. "murder capital" since 1985, none of them Chicago:

.

And here you go.....

L.A., Chicago Rank 1 and 2 for Gun Murders; N.O. Has Highest Rate

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/01/us/murder-rates-rising-sharply-in-many-us-cities.html?_r=0


These Are The Major Cities With The Highest Murder Rates In America

Brady rating of gun law states...

http://www.bradycampaign.org/sites/default/files/SCGLM-Final10-spreads-points.pdf

california....A-
New York....A-
Massachuesetts...B+
Connecticut...A-
New Jersey...A-
Maryland...A-

Of those how many cities are on top 25 most violent list...

California.....2 (Stockton California, Oakland California)
New York...1 (Buffalo)
Massachusetts...
Connecticut...3 ( New Haven, Hartford, Bridge port)
New Jersey...1 (Newark)
Mary Land...1 (Baltimore)

And of course we can't forget the other large cities with the strictest gun control, Chicago, D.C., L.A. and Boston....all the most violent cities and high gun murder rates.....in States with with high ratings from the anti gun extremists the Brady Campain Against Civil Rights.

 

[2aguy]

And the thing to keep in mind...the Brady campaign to deny civil rights....lies. They use gun death rate to rank their states, not gun murder rate...

They rank Wyoming as a high "gun death rate" state......they give it an F for gun control...

But....Wyoming has almost 0 gun murders and a high rate of gun suicide.

 

[2aguy]

There is a story perpetuated by propaganda ministries that the number of gun sales have gone up, and that is why murders have gone down. We've seen that story parroted right here in this topic.

This is why it is particularly funny to see someone saying that correlation does not equal causation when confronted with the fact the percentage of gun ownership has plunged.

"More guns" does not mean "more gun owners".

It's a simple fact there is a much smaller percentage of gun owners in America.

If the rubes buy into the story that gun ownership is linked to the murder rate, then how come they suddenly deny it is when shown the percentage of owners is at a record low?


Hmmmm...

Gun-Homicide Rate Decreased as Gun Ownership Increased


Based on data from a 2012 Congressional Research Service (CRS) report(and additional data from another Wonkblog article “There are now more guns than people in the United States”), the number of privately owned firearms in U.S. increased from about 185 million in 1993 to 357 million in 2013.

-------------------------------
Is gun ownership really down in America? | Fox News

Surely, gun control advocates such as GSS director Tom Smith view this decline as a good thing. In a 2003 book of mine, I quoted Smith as saying that the large drop in gun ownership would “make it easier for politicians to do the right thing on guns” and pass more restrictive regulations.

Other gun control advocates have mentioned to me that they hope that if people believe fewer people own guns, that may cause others to rethink their decision to own one themselves. It is part of the reason they dramatically exaggerate the risks of having guns in the home.

The Associated Press and Time ignored other polls by Gallup and ABC News/Washington Post.

These polls show that gun ownership rates have been flat over the same period. According to Gallup, household gun ownership has ranged from 51 percent in 1994 to 34 percent in 1999. In 2014, it was at 42 percent – comparable to the 43-45 percent figures during the 1970s.

A 2011 Gallup poll with the headline “Self-Reported Gun Ownership in U.S. Is Highest Since 1993” appears to have gotten no news coverage.

The ABC News/Washington Post poll shows an even more stable pattern, with household gun ownership between 44 and 46 percent in 1999. In 2013, the ownership rate was 43 percent.

There are other measures that suggest that we should be very careful of relying too heavily on polling to gauge the level of gun ownership. For example, the nationally number of concealed handgun permits has soared over the last decade: rising from about 2.7 million in 1999 to 4.6 million in 2007 to 11.1 million in 2014.

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) shows that the number of gun purchases has grown dramatically over time –doubling from 2006 to 2014.

I didn't realize that Gallup was part of the NRA.....

How about ABC news/Washington Post...are they also on the payroll of the NRA?

Do you have any real data or are you just wishful thinking again?
States with easy to obtain concealed carry permits are less safe from gun violence than States with difficult to obtain concealed carry permits - how do real statistics square with your -ehem- opinion... opinion poll?


Concealed Carry

In regulating the right to carry a concealed weapon, states generally fall into one of two camps: “may issue” and “shall issue.” In the “may issue” states, law enforcement agencies are granted discretion in determining who receives a permit. In the “shall issue” states, law enforcement has little to no discretion, and is obligated to issue a permit to just about any applicant that meets basic requirements. Four states do not require a permit to carry a concealed firearm.

Among the “may issue” states, the average rate of gun homicides in 2013 was only slightly lower than the rate among “shall issue” states, and states that do not require a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

​

.

Can you explain why it is that as more Americans own and carry guns.....we now have over 357 million guns in private hands, and over 13 million people carry guns for self defense......that our gun murder rate has gone down, not up? Our gun suicide rate has gone down, not up? Our gun accidental death rate has gone down, not Up?

 

[The Rabbi]

There is a story perpetuated by propaganda ministries that the number of gun sales have gone up, and that is why murders have gone down. We've seen that story parroted right here in this topic.

This is why it is particularly funny to see someone saying that correlation does not equal causation when confronted with the fact the percentage of gun ownership has plunged.

"More guns" does not mean "more gun owners".

It's a simple fact there is a much smaller percentage of gun owners in America.

If the rubes buy into the story that gun ownership is linked to the murder rate, then how come they suddenly deny it is when shown the percentage of owners is at a record low?


Hmmmm...

Gun-Homicide Rate Decreased as Gun Ownership Increased


Based on data from a 2012 Congressional Research Service (CRS) report(and additional data from another Wonkblog article “There are now more guns than people in the United States”), the number of privately owned firearms in U.S. increased from about 185 million in 1993 to 357 million in 2013.

-------------------------------
Is gun ownership really down in America? | Fox News

Surely, gun control advocates such as GSS director Tom Smith view this decline as a good thing. In a 2003 book of mine, I quoted Smith as saying that the large drop in gun ownership would “make it easier for politicians to do the right thing on guns” and pass more restrictive regulations.

Other gun control advocates have mentioned to me that they hope that if people believe fewer people own guns, that may cause others to rethink their decision to own one themselves. It is part of the reason they dramatically exaggerate the risks of having guns in the home.

The Associated Press and Time ignored other polls by Gallup and ABC News/Washington Post.

These polls show that gun ownership rates have been flat over the same period. According to Gallup, household gun ownership has ranged from 51 percent in 1994 to 34 percent in 1999. In 2014, it was at 42 percent – comparable to the 43-45 percent figures during the 1970s.

A 2011 Gallup poll with the headline “Self-Reported Gun Ownership in U.S. Is Highest Since 1993” appears to have gotten no news coverage.

The ABC News/Washington Post poll shows an even more stable pattern, with household gun ownership between 44 and 46 percent in 1999. In 2013, the ownership rate was 43 percent.

There are other measures that suggest that we should be very careful of relying too heavily on polling to gauge the level of gun ownership. For example, the nationally number of concealed handgun permits has soared over the last decade: rising from about 2.7 million in 1999 to 4.6 million in 2007 to 11.1 million in 2014.

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) shows that the number of gun purchases has grown dramatically over time –doubling from 2006 to 2014.

I didn't realize that Gallup was part of the NRA.....

How about ABC news/Washington Post...are they also on the payroll of the NRA?

Do you have any real data or are you just wishful thinking again?
States with easy to obtain concealed carry permits are less safe from gun violence than States with difficult to obtain concealed carry permits - how do real statistics square with your -ehem- opinion... opinion poll?


Concealed Carry

In regulating the right to carry a concealed weapon, states generally fall into one of two camps: “may issue” and “shall issue.” In the “may issue” states, law enforcement agencies are granted discretion in determining who receives a permit. In the “shall issue” states, law enforcement has little to no discretion, and is obligated to issue a permit to just about any applicant that meets basic requirements. Four states do not require a permit to carry a concealed firearm.

Among the “may issue” states, the average rate of gun homicides in 2013 was only slightly lower than the rate among “shall issue” states, and states that do not require a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

​

.

Can you explain why it is that as more Americans own and carry guns.....we now have over 357 million guns in private hands, and over 13 million people carry guns for self defense......that our gun murder rate has gone down, not up? Our gun suicide rate has gone down, not up? Our gun accidental death rate has gone down, not Up?

Forget it. You've thrown so many facts at him all he can do is run away.
I think you schlonged him.

 

[Star]

There is a story perpetuated by propaganda ministries that the number of gun sales have gone up, and that is why murders have gone down. We've seen that story parroted right here in this topic.

This is why it is particularly funny to see someone saying that correlation does not equal causation when confronted with the fact the percentage of gun ownership has plunged.

"More guns" does not mean "more gun owners".

It's a simple fact there is a much smaller percentage of gun owners in America.

If the rubes buy into the story that gun ownership is linked to the murder rate, then how come they suddenly deny it is when shown the percentage of owners is at a record low?


Hmmmm...

Gun-Homicide Rate Decreased as Gun Ownership Increased


Based on data from a 2012 Congressional Research Service (CRS) report(and additional data from another Wonkblog article “There are now more guns than people in the United States”), the number of privately owned firearms in U.S. increased from about 185 million in 1993 to 357 million in 2013.

-------------------------------
Is gun ownership really down in America? | Fox News

Surely, gun control advocates such as GSS director Tom Smith view this decline as a good thing. In a 2003 book of mine, I quoted Smith as saying that the large drop in gun ownership would “make it easier for politicians to do the right thing on guns” and pass more restrictive regulations.

Other gun control advocates have mentioned to me that they hope that if people believe fewer people own guns, that may cause others to rethink their decision to own one themselves. It is part of the reason they dramatically exaggerate the risks of having guns in the home.

The Associated Press and Time ignored other polls by Gallup and ABC News/Washington Post.

These polls show that gun ownership rates have been flat over the same period. According to Gallup, household gun ownership has ranged from 51 percent in 1994 to 34 percent in 1999. In 2014, it was at 42 percent – comparable to the 43-45 percent figures during the 1970s.

A 2011 Gallup poll with the headline “Self-Reported Gun Ownership in U.S. Is Highest Since 1993” appears to have gotten no news coverage.

The ABC News/Washington Post poll shows an even more stable pattern, with household gun ownership between 44 and 46 percent in 1999. In 2013, the ownership rate was 43 percent.

There are other measures that suggest that we should be very careful of relying too heavily on polling to gauge the level of gun ownership. For example, the nationally number of concealed handgun permits has soared over the last decade: rising from about 2.7 million in 1999 to 4.6 million in 2007 to 11.1 million in 2014.

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) shows that the number of gun purchases has grown dramatically over time –doubling from 2006 to 2014.

I didn't realize that Gallup was part of the NRA.....

How about ABC news/Washington Post...are they also on the payroll of the NRA?

Do you have any real data or are you just wishful thinking again?
States with easy to obtain concealed carry permits are less safe from gun violence than States with difficult to obtain concealed carry permits - how do real statistics square with your -ehem- opinion... opinion poll?


Concealed Carry

In regulating the right to carry a concealed weapon, states generally fall into one of two camps: “may issue” and “shall issue.” In the “may issue” states, law enforcement agencies are granted discretion in determining who receives a permit. In the “shall issue” states, law enforcement has little to no discretion, and is obligated to issue a permit to just about any applicant that meets basic requirements. Four states do not require a permit to carry a concealed firearm.

Among the “may issue” states, the average rate of gun homicides in 2013 was only slightly lower than the rate among “shall issue” states, and states that do not require a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

​

.

Can you explain why it is that as more Americans own and carry guns.....we now have over 357 million guns in private hands, and over 13 million people carry guns for self defense......that our gun murder rate has gone down, not up? Our gun suicide rate has gone down, not up? Our gun accidental death rate has gone down, not Up?

I give you credit for working really-really hard trying to make your case but-----but... FAIL

Looking up lists, checking them twice... +,+, then cherry picking the parts that you like and ignoring the parts you don't just makes you look like an ideology driven gun freak - facts be damned.
The facts from your own link tell a different story from the one you wish it told, the fact that there are islands of violence in an otherwise relatively safe state doesn't take away from the fact that states with strong gun laws average having less gun violence than states with lax gun laws - no matter how you try to spin, slice and dice the numbers.

​

While conservatives are busying trying to shutdown any debate on gun control following the 45th school shooting this year by yelling about Chicago’s murder rates — apparently unaware that Chicago is the third largest city in the country but not even in the top five cities with the highest murder rate per capita — and reflexively decrying any mention of gun control as a “gun grab,” what if we just entertained their wildest conspiracy theories for just a bit?

A 2015 study found that when guns are used to kill people in the United States, they are overwhelmingly used for murder rather than self-defense. That study found that in 2012, there were only 259 justifiable homicides, or what is commonly referred to as self-defense, compared to 8,342 criminal firearm homicides. In 2008-2012, the report says, guns were used in 42,419 criminal homicides and only 1,108 justifiable homicides.​

.

 

[2aguy]

There is a story perpetuated by propaganda ministries that the number of gun sales have gone up, and that is why murders have gone down. We've seen that story parroted right here in this topic.

This is why it is particularly funny to see someone saying that correlation does not equal causation when confronted with the fact the percentage of gun ownership has plunged.

"More guns" does not mean "more gun owners".

It's a simple fact there is a much smaller percentage of gun owners in America.

If the rubes buy into the story that gun ownership is linked to the murder rate, then how come they suddenly deny it is when shown the percentage of owners is at a record low?


Hmmmm...

Gun-Homicide Rate Decreased as Gun Ownership Increased


Based on data from a 2012 Congressional Research Service (CRS) report(and additional data from another Wonkblog article “There are now more guns than people in the United States”), the number of privately owned firearms in U.S. increased from about 185 million in 1993 to 357 million in 2013.

-------------------------------
Is gun ownership really down in America? | Fox News

Surely, gun control advocates such as GSS director Tom Smith view this decline as a good thing. In a 2003 book of mine, I quoted Smith as saying that the large drop in gun ownership would “make it easier for politicians to do the right thing on guns” and pass more restrictive regulations.

Other gun control advocates have mentioned to me that they hope that if people believe fewer people own guns, that may cause others to rethink their decision to own one themselves. It is part of the reason they dramatically exaggerate the risks of having guns in the home.

The Associated Press and Time ignored other polls by Gallup and ABC News/Washington Post.

These polls show that gun ownership rates have been flat over the same period. According to Gallup, household gun ownership has ranged from 51 percent in 1994 to 34 percent in 1999. In 2014, it was at 42 percent – comparable to the 43-45 percent figures during the 1970s.

A 2011 Gallup poll with the headline “Self-Reported Gun Ownership in U.S. Is Highest Since 1993” appears to have gotten no news coverage.

The ABC News/Washington Post poll shows an even more stable pattern, with household gun ownership between 44 and 46 percent in 1999. In 2013, the ownership rate was 43 percent.

There are other measures that suggest that we should be very careful of relying too heavily on polling to gauge the level of gun ownership. For example, the nationally number of concealed handgun permits has soared over the last decade: rising from about 2.7 million in 1999 to 4.6 million in 2007 to 11.1 million in 2014.

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) shows that the number of gun purchases has grown dramatically over time –doubling from 2006 to 2014.

I didn't realize that Gallup was part of the NRA.....

How about ABC news/Washington Post...are they also on the payroll of the NRA?

Do you have any real data or are you just wishful thinking again?
States with easy to obtain concealed carry permits are less safe from gun violence than States with difficult to obtain concealed carry permits - how do real statistics square with your -ehem- opinion... opinion poll?


Concealed Carry

In regulating the right to carry a concealed weapon, states generally fall into one of two camps: “may issue” and “shall issue.” In the “may issue” states, law enforcement agencies are granted discretion in determining who receives a permit. In the “shall issue” states, law enforcement has little to no discretion, and is obligated to issue a permit to just about any applicant that meets basic requirements. Four states do not require a permit to carry a concealed firearm.

Among the “may issue” states, the average rate of gun homicides in 2013 was only slightly lower than the rate among “shall issue” states, and states that do not require a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

​

.

Can you explain why it is that as more Americans own and carry guns.....we now have over 357 million guns in private hands, and over 13 million people carry guns for self defense......that our gun murder rate has gone down, not up? Our gun suicide rate has gone down, not up? Our gun accidental death rate has gone down, not Up?

I give you credit for working really-really hard trying to make your case but-----but... FAIL

Looking up lists, checking them twice... +,+, then cherry picking the parts that you like and ignoring the parts you don't just makes you look like an ideology driven gun freak - facts be damned.
The facts from your own link tell a different story from the one you wish it told, the fact that there are islands of violence in an otherwise relatively safe state doesn't take away from the fact that states with strong gun laws average having less gun violence than states with lax gun laws - no matter how you try to spin, slice and dice the numbers.

​

While conservatives are busying trying to shutdown any debate on gun control following the 45th school shooting this year by yelling about Chicago’s murder rates — apparently unaware that Chicago is the third largest city in the country but not even in the top five cities with the highest murder rate per capita — and reflexively decrying any mention of gun control as a “gun grab,” what if we just entertained their wildest conspiracy theories for just a bit?

A 2015 study found that when guns are used to kill people in the United States, they are overwhelmingly used for murder rather than self-defense. That study found that in 2012, there were only 259 justifiable homicides, or what is commonly referred to as self-defense, compared to 8,342 criminal firearm homicides. In 2008-2012, the report says, guns were used in 42,419 criminal homicides and only 1,108 justifiable homicides.​

.

Sorry, the minute you quote a "study" from the Violence Policy Center it shows you have no idea what you are talking about.....

You know that actual studies show that americans use guns on average 1.5 million times a year, according to bill clinton......

And of course the 259 justifiable homicides does not include all the gun use for self defense....they are only counting dead bodies, not all the times guns are used. Why do you anti gunners never realize how stupid that stat is when you use it.

Why do you think the only defensive gun use that can be used in any stat is the one where the victim kills the violent attacker...........



And as to the Iron Highway...that is a load of crap. Guns are legal products. If someone breaks the law and takes them to New York there is a simple solution...you arrest the guys who use the guns for the crime. All of the other places that have people with gun stores and people actually carrying guns for self defense but the cities with the strictest gun control have the most gun crime.......because their thugs have guns and the law abiding people do not.