this might act as kryptonite to people who are the majority in Arlington
consistent with the Forbes article, too.
@NS, the article is rather lacking in any details, in fact it’s only a few sentences long. The Richmond Times Dispatch article (linked in the WTOP article) presents a rather balanced view that indicates that the issue is not as cut and dry as your initial post speculates. That is, the article is very weak kryptonite. In fact, as a gun control supporter, I find much in the article to support my views.
1. The article compares gun crime to legal gun sales. But as the Times article states, guns sold via background checks are less likely to be involved in crimes than guns sold without a background check. Thus one unanswered question is what's the level of gun sales without a background check?
2. Thomas R. Baker, an assistant professor at Virginia Commonwealth University's who specializes in research methods and criminology theory, cautioned against drawing any conclusions that more guns in the hands of Virginians are causing a corresponding drop in gun crime. “To substantiate the “more guns, less crime argument” you would need to eliminate a number of other factors that could potentially explain away the relationship of more guns, less crime in Virginia. Only if the relationship remained after controlling for additional factors could a researcher be more comfortable making the claim that more guns lead to less crime.”
3. Robberies accounted for the largest drop in gun-related crime, falling 11 percent from 2,935 offenses in 2011 to 2,508 last year. Robberies involving handguns dropped 7 percent from year to year. Thus, maybe the drop in crime is due to an improving economy?
Bottom line: Making any conclusion from one headline from a very poor article is not good academics. The gun vs violence vs crime vs etc issue is much more complicated. That’s for posting the article.
Improving economy? Are you serious? The only reason why the unemployment rates are “only” 7.4% is due to people giving up looking for work. The real rate is at least 15%
If it is not good academics, can you explain why gun violence is so much higher in places with the strictest gun control? If you blame “neighboring jurisdictions and their lax gun laws” then why don’t those jurisdictions have high gun violence rates as well?
I’m sure facts deeply offend you, but if the US didn’t have all the urban violence (which liberals ignore anyways, can’t score political points from addressing it on a national level like they do with mass shootings, despite occuring every day, killing dozens per week), we would have the same gun violence rates as western europe if you didn’t count suicides. And don’t you dare su ggest guns are the only way to commit suicide. There are plenty of countries where guns are banned or stricly regulated that have higher suicide rates.
I know, facts offend you, so you will ignore it, change the subject, talk about dogs, post pictures.
@NS….you take umbrage at my comments that the article is “not good academics” and the “facts deeply offend me”. No, I am not offended by facts. But the article you link to has the bare minimum of facts or supporting evidence. I’ve reposted the entire article below in italics. Instead of addressing my points taken from the Times-Dispatch report that the WTOP article links to, you assume I blame things like “neighboring jurisdictions” while I don’t recall even mentioning such items.
BTW: here is the complete WTOP article. Do you call this a substantive article on which to base a theory about gun control? Why do you ignore what Dr Baker says in the Times-Dispatch article that contradicts your conclusion? And yes, even the WSJ (the baston of Right Wing editorials) reports the economy is improving.
RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — Firearms sales in Virginia are increasing while gun-related violent crimes are declining. Federally licensed gun dealer sales estimates obtained by the Richmond Times-Dispatch (http://bit.ly/12RDAFM ) show that firearms sales rose 16 percent in 2012 to a record 490,119 guns purchased. During the same period, the number of major crimes committed with firearms dropped 5 percent to 4,378. Virginia Commonwealth University assistant professor Thomas R. Baker specializes in research methods and criminology theory. He tells the newspaper that the data indicate that more guns don’t necessarily lead to more crime.Josh Horwitz with the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence says the real question is how many guns are sold without a background check. He says these guns are more likely to be involved in crimes.
My conclusion is that you don’t really want to engage in a conversation, as that entails, at the very least, to consider the “other sides” points, and address them.
Again, thanks for the posting.
@NS, are u drawing a direct correlation between the two? Gun ownership up, violence down? If so, what is your basis?
“Improving economy? Are you serious? The only reason why the unemployment rates are "only" 7.4% is due to people giving up looking for work. The real rate is at least 15%”
That doesn’t prove the economy isn’t improving. The CHANGE in unemployment is going down, whether the official one or the “real” one. The proof of that is that new jobs have been created, so it’s not just due to people giving up looking.
“If it is not good academics, can you explain why gun violence is so much higher in places with the strictest gun control? ”
But you can’t prove cause and effect. It’s possible that places with high gun crime would have even higher crime rates without gun control, and gun control law are simply a response to that crime designed to help stop it, not the cause of it. And, as noted, those gun control measures might work even better if they were more uniform.
@Sansabelt, good reply to NS, but most likely he will not address your specific points. He rarely provides a direct, enlightening response to my arguments, points, and questions. Instead the same old reiterations of short incendiary phrases. Such as his singular comment when starting this thread that was, “this might act as kryptonite to people who are the majority in Arlington.”
Seems to me his sole purpose is to flame. There are many threads in which I asked a direct question, and that is the end of the thread. Doesn’t like an old thread, just skim the headlines and start a new one.
So does gun control reduce gun violence? Look to where it is most strict in the usa
@NS asked, “So does gun control reduce gun violence? Look to where it is most strict in the usa.”
As usual, doesn’t provide an answer to previous questions, such as “NS, are u drawing a direct correlation between the two? Gun ownership up, violence down? If so, what is your basis?”
Just more of the same, overused rhetorical questions. how boring.
“good reply to NS, but most likely he will not address your specific points. He rarely provides a direct, enlightening response to my arguments, points, and questions.”
Or he just ignores your point and repeats himself:
“So does gun control reduce gun violence? Look to where it is most strict in the usa”
Bottom line: Making any conclusion from one headline from a very poor article is not good academics. The gun vs violence vs crime vs etc issue is much more complicated. That's for posting the article.
Good point, so let’s look at something a little more ‘long term’ (as in since America was founded).
What is the only state in the USA that has never restricted its citizens from carrying a concealed weapon (NO PERMIT REQUIRED)?
What state has the least amount of crime per capita, gun or otherwise?
Hint: What state has the only ‘admitted, true Socialist’ as a Senator?
Yup, you guessed it….Vermont!
And criminals know, the most dangerous potential victim to confront, would be a liberal with a gun!
So there ya go….all states should be like Vermont. No permitting means newspapers can’t publish your records. Everyone is equal.
BTW…don’t bother bringing up Alaska. A few years back they instituted a requirement for carry permits….which they then repealed as an unnecessary burden.
My guess would be the fact that there are no major cities (like Chicago, etc) in Vermont that this lowers gun violence. I guess Vermont should be the standard bearer for all national policies?
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.