We've done this too many times now

[Miss Wendighost]

Well, some lady just blamed *ahem* mature content for shootings. I don't understand how watching an adult film makes one a murderous maniac. People are crazy.

 

[TimmyTom]

They way I see it is that if you restrict legal gun ownership or even disallow it then people have no way of defending themselves against those who illegally obtain guns, which I feel will increase the casualty rate even more. If we disallow gun ownership we will see a huge surge guns on the black market which isn't really tackling the problem of stopping people from having weapons. That brings me to my next point; where there is a will there is a way and that is especially applicable to murderous intent. Take away the guns people will use knives. Take those away and people will get creative maybe even in ways we don't want to encourage. As for a solution, I don't really know because I haven't really studied this field but I have a feeling it lies in increased security and precautions.

 

[gimmepie]

They way I see it is that if you restrict legal gun ownership or even disallow it then people have no way of defending themselves against those who illegally obtain guns, which I feel will increase the casualty rate even more. If we disallow gun ownership we will see a huge surge guns on the black market which isn't really tackling the problem of stopping people from having weapons. That brings me to my next point; where there is a will there is a way and that is especially applicable to murderous intent. Take away the guns people will use knives. Take those away and people will get creative maybe even in ways we don't want to encourage. As for a solution, I don't really know because I haven't really studied this field but I have a feeling it lies in increased security and precautions.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/frankminiter/2014/08/12/inside-the-black-market-for-guns/#1a40c8ae181e

Actually, guns on the black market are more expensive than legally owned guns already. Now factor in supply and demand. Pretty much every black market gun probably begins its life as a legal firearm at some point. Thug McThugperson down the street doesn't have their own private firearm manufacturing gig. If you limit the number of legal firearms you're not only already lessening the number of weapons already available, you're also making them harder to obtain for black market sale which increases their value even further. Further more, if the black market is pretty much the only way you're going to get your hands on the kind of weapon you want, you'll be paying even more still because the person selling can charge whatever they want. Where else will you go? The sheer cost of purchasing an illegal weapon can be enough to prevent someone from committing a crime - or at the least can dramatically lessen the scale.

Keeping in mind that this is ignoring that the majority of shootings and suicides are committed using weapons bought legally (I'm pretty sure there's a link earlier in the thread explaining this one, unless that was the previous GC thread). As for knives or more experimental weaponry, knives are a hell of a lot easier to survive and to stop if you yourself are unarmed. Experimental weapons like explosives are much more conspicuous and are much more likely to fail.

Better gun control definitely won't remove all guns ever, but it definitely will help.

 

[LDSman]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/frankminiter/2014/08/12/inside-the-black-market-for-guns/#1a40c8ae181e

Actually, guns on the black market are more expensive than legally owned guns already. Now factor in supply and demand. Pretty much every black market gun probably begins its life as a legal firearm at some point. Thug McThugperson down the street doesn't have their own private firearm manufacturing gig. If you limit the number of legal firearms you're not only already lessening the number of weapons already available, you're also making them harder to obtain for black market sale which increases their value even further. Further more, if the black market is pretty much the only way you're going to get your hands on the kind of weapon you want, you'll be paying even more still because the person selling can charge whatever they want. Where else will you go? The sheer cost of purchasing an illegal weapon can be enough to prevent someone from committing a crime - or at the least can dramatically lessen the scale.

Keeping in mind that this is ignoring that the majority of shootings and suicides are committed using weapons bought legally (I'm pretty sure there's a link earlier in the thread explaining this one, unless that was the previous GC thread). As for knives or more experimental weaponry, knives are a hell of a lot easier to survive and to stop if you yourself are unarmed. Experimental weapons like explosives are much more conspicuous and are much more likely to fail.

Better gun control definitely won't remove all guns ever, but it definitely will help.

I like your link. Especially this part:

Nevertheless, there is a moral to the story. The basic lesson I drew from meeting the ATF agents is they're never going to get all the bad guys' guns—even in London where handguns are completely banned the bad guys often have handguns. Instead, what cops need to do is go after the bad guys. As they do, they need to respect the good peoples' right to own and carry guns. When they do this the vast majority of law-abiding gun owners become part of the solution to making the streets safer.

As he walked me out of the ATF's Manhattan office Agent Mulham said, "I don't care if a guy like you has a million guns. What I'm after are the bad guys and their guns."

 

[gimmepie]

I like your link. Especially this part:

You mean the one part that expresses personal opinion not fact?
I never said that gun control will remove all firearms, I said it will help.

 

[Sektor]

Keeping in mind that this is ignoring that the majority of shootings and suicides are committed using weapons bought legally (I'm pretty sure there's a link earlier in the thread explaining this one, unless that was the previous GC thread).

. . . knives are a hell of a lot easier to survive and to stop if you yourself are unarmed. Experimental weapons like explosives are much more conspicuous and are much more likely to fail.

Pretty much 'no' is the answer to nearly everything you've stated here.

FBI, I choose you! https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015/tables/table-20.

I'm going to drop the FBI's UCR data table. A cursory glance will tell you that even the combined might of the rifle and the shotgun pale in comparison to the almighty sword (knives and stabbing weapons). The count of stabbing deaths; you can go through the years if you like, but I assure you that the difference is only in count and not a difference in ratio (meaning there has always been more stabbings than shootings when up against rifles and shotguns).

"So it looks like you're trying to ban rifles . . ." - Clippy

Now, let us review the trials and tribulations of bringing up the knee jerk "Legal weapons do most of the killing".

I will, again, use the FBI which states that findings across the nation (United States) find: "Criminal gangs commit as much as 80 percent of the crime in many communities, according to law enforcement officials throughout the nation. Typical gang-related crimes include alien smuggling, armed robbery, assault, auto theft, drug trafficking, extortion, fraud, home invasions, identity theft, murder, and weapons trafficking."

https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/pressrel/press-releases/national-gang-threat-assessment-issued

Before you respond and say that doesn't include anyone else only the FBI: "The following agencies contributed to the report: the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance; Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics; Department of Justice, Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force; Drug Enforcement Administration; Federal Bureau of Investigation; Federal Bureau of Prisons; National Drug Intelligence Center; National Gang Intelligence Center; Office of National Drug Control Policy, High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas; United States Army Criminal Investigations Division; United States Customs and Border Protection; United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement; United States Marshals Service; numerous sate and local law enforcement agencies; and the Canada Border Service Agency."

If you feel lucky and think this is a fluke (a small, flat parasitic worm) let's use another governmental source: https://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/gun-violence/Pages/welcome.aspx.

Now, if we look at the numbers provided and the information given to us this report states: "Gun-related homicide is most prevalent among gangs and during the commission of felony crimes. In 1980, the percentage of homicides caused by firearms during arguments was about the same as from gang involvement (about 70 percent), but by 1993, nearly all gang-related homicides involved guns (95 percent), whereas the percentage of gun homicides related to arguments remained relatively constant."

Now, Pie, I know you know that the vast majority of gang members are prior felons. I also know you know that felons cannot own any firearm whatsoever legally. Because I've told you this. Multiple times. But, let's chalk it up to shoddy memory.

Even if we conclude that 80% of all homicides are gang and/or drug related, we can be sure that the vast majority of gang members that have been in prison for any amount of time are unable to purchase a firearm legally.

Now, you've never bought a gun. The process for purchasing any gun in the united states through legal channels nets you a federal background check. This is federally mandated. If your check comes back and they say "Don't sell this individual a firearm of any kind) and you sell one to them anyways, you lose your license, get fined and get sentenced if and where applicable because this is a felony.

What else . . ? Ah, there also was a study regarding the survival rates between stabbing and gunshot victims to be roughly averaged (by Penn. State). But even studies that claim as such (and conversely, those that claim the contrary) are almost always dubious and tend to waver either or, every other year or so.

Also, these studies don't account for caliber used or type of knife used as far as I've been able to track them. There also doesn't seem to be a general concensus on whether or not to even group like victims together.

If, for example, you get stabbed in the leg and I get shot in the gut. I die. You don't. This data is skewed. These studies count a stabbing as a stabbing and a gunshot as a gunshot.

The opposite is equally true. You get stabbed in the leg and die and I get shot in the gut and live. Silly. It doesn't tend to matter that the wounded area is different and less or more vital.

The very idea of even comparing this data is ridiculous. Body types, age, area affected (stabbed or shot), time taken to arrive at the hospital all take a factor in the victim's survival chances.

Regardless, arguing that knives are less deadly isn't a very good argument to take away my rights, because as it is written, that's what they are: a right.

Also, if we boil it down, knives do tend to kill more people than rifles and shotguns combined so why not ban them first?

If the argument is that rifles can kill more people faster, why do you care whether during the course of a year more people die in a single day than overall?

Because to me, trying to solve crime that happens in a single day is backwards and doesn't lessen the crime through the rest of the year. What should be done about the criminals?

Criminals and felons commit the vast majority of homicides and other violent crime (US Associated). This is fact. The question isn't what is lethal or not (as evidenced by the distinct near 10:1 ratio in favor of knives over rifles/shotguns) but how to combat that criminal rate.

 

[LDSman]

Interestingly enough, I'm not finding actual hard data on black market price ranges. Anecdotal evidence seems to indicate that handguns range from $50 for older, crappy handguns or guns with a history, Ie homicides, to above market value. Higher prices apply to new guns and are also dependent on how the gun was obtained. In other words, a stolen gun will be cheaper that a straw purchased gun than a gun that is smuggled into an area.

 

[MortalPhoenix]

This debate is focusing too much on the Guns, and not enough on why people believe that using violence in the first place is necessary. Pretty much, this debate is focusing on the symptoms and not the cause. If you nip the problem in the bud, then you will resolve the issue.

"Advance Peace interrupts gun violence in American urban neighborhoods by providing transformational opportunities to young men involved in lethal firearm offenses and placing them in a high-touch, personalized fellowship—the Peacemaker Fellowship™.

By working with and supporting a targeted group of individuals at the core of gun hostilities, Advance Peace bridges the gap between anti-violence programming and a hard-to-reach population at the center of violence in urban areas, thus breaking the cycle of gun hostilities and altering the trajectory of these men's lives.

Advance Peace works with both public and community-based stakeholders to establish responsive community-driven strategies that achieve high-impact outcomes for those caught in the cycle of urban gun violence."

https://www.advancepeace.org/about/the-solution/

A solution that can reduce gun violence without having to take away guns.

 

[LDSman]

This debate is focusing too much on the Guns, and not enough on why people believe that using violence in the first place is necessary. Pretty much, this debate is focusing on the symptoms and not the cause. If you nip the problem in the bud, then you will resolve the issue.

"Advance Peace interrupts gun violence in American urban neighborhoods by providing transformational opportunities to young men involved in lethal firearm offenses and placing them in a high-touch, personalized fellowship—the Peacemaker Fellowship™.

By working with and supporting a targeted group of individuals at the core of gun hostilities, Advance Peace bridges the gap between anti-violence programming and a hard-to-reach population at the center of violence in urban areas, thus breaking the cycle of gun hostilities and altering the trajectory of these men's lives.

Advance Peace works with both public and community-based stakeholders to establish responsive community-driven strategies that achieve high-impact outcomes for those caught in the cycle of urban gun violence."

https://www.advancepeace.org/about/the-solution/

A solution that can reduce gun violence without having to take away guns.

This group doesn't nip the problem in the bud, they intervene after the violence starts, provide what amounts to bribes for good behavior and then promises to not talk to the police if they uncover evidence that their fellows are the perpetrators of gun violence. Didn't at least one of these groups get busted because their felon was running gangs while in the program?

 

[MortalPhoenix]

This group doesn't nip the problem in the bud, they intervene after the violence starts, provide what amounts to bribes for good behavior and then promises to not talk to the police if they uncover evidence that their fellows are the perpetrators of gun violence. Didn't at least one of these groups get busted because their felon was running gangs while in the program?

WHAT THE ADVANCE PEACE PEACEMAKER FELLOWSHIP IS NOT

• Payment to stop shooting. The Stipend is awarded for performance of responsibilities articulated above, period.
• A "get-out-of-jail-free" card. If law enforcement brings a case against any of the Fellows, there is no protection
against arrest or prosecution. The AP program is designed to fill the gap where prosecution does not occur. While the suspected "firearm offender" is not in custody, AP will continue to work with him or her.
• An anti-gang program. AP is focused exclusively on those at the center of firearm hostilities, not others who may be affiliated with them. Not all suspected "firearm offenders" are members of gangs, and not all gang members are suspected "firearm offenders."
• An investigative arm for law enforcement. AP cannot retain its credibility with the Fellows if AP relays incriminating information to police. However, if AP learns that violence may occur at any given time or place, it will
alert law enforcement.
• Free money for violent individuals. As indicated above, Fellows who do not perform, do not earn.

https://www.cityofsacramento.org/-/...cement-Perspective-on-Advance-Peace.pdf?la=en

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/is-sacramento-paying-gang-members-not-to-kill/

 

[LDSman]

WHAT THE ADVANCE PEACE PEACEMAKER FELLOWSHIP IS NOT

• Payment to stop shooting. The Stipend is awarded for performance of responsibilities articulated above, period.

I bet one of the responsibilities is "stay out of trouble." The stipend is explicitly aimed at those suspected of gun violence and is meant to stop the cycle of violence. At its base, it's payment to stop shooting with conditions added.

• A "get-out-of-jail-free" card. If law enforcement brings a case against any of the Fellows, there is no protection against arrest or prosecution. The AP program is designed to fill the gap where prosecution does not occur. While the suspected "firearm offender" is not in custody, AP will continue to work with him or her.

never said there was such a card.

• An investigative arm for law enforcement. AP cannot retain its credibility with the Fellows if AP relays incriminating information to police. However, if AP learns that violence may occur at any given time or place, it will alert law enforcement.

so AP will protect offenders if they come across evidence regarding past crimes. And I'm supposed to believe that they won't protect future offenders?

Free money for violent individuals. As indicated above, Fellows who do not perform, do not earn.

Be a good citizen and get paid.

What are the fellowship criteria?

 

[MortalPhoenix]

I bet one of the responsibilities is "stay out of trouble." The stipend is explicitly aimed at those suspected of gun violence and is meant to stop the cycle of violence. At its base, it's payment to stop shooting with conditions added.
never said there was such a card.

so AP will protect offenders if they come across evidence regarding past crimes. And I'm supposed to believe that they won't protect future offenders?

Be a good citizen and get paid.

What are the fellowship criteria?

I'm quoting it from the link I posted below. The fact you are asking what the criteria of the Fellowship shows that you don't know enough to talk about it.

Here, watch this video from the Daily Show about it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLiyFumseqQ

 

[LDSman]

I'm quoting it from the link I posted below. The fact you are asking what the criteria of the Fellowship shows that you don't know enough to talk about it.

Here, watch this video from the Daily Show about it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLiyFumseqQ

The link you provided doesn't list any of the fellowship program criteria.

Are you sure you know enough about the program to discuss it?

The program has positives and negatives to it. If it works, it does seem like it could prevent repeat offenders from continuing gun violence. However, it doesn't stop the gun violence from starting and there are indicators that the group will not help law enforcement if they find a participant has committed violence.

 

[MortalPhoenix]

The link you provided doesn't list any of the fellowship program criteria.

Are you sure you know enough about the program to discuss it?

The program has positives and negatives to it. If it works, it does seem like it could prevent repeat offenders from continuing gun violence. However, it doesn't stop the gun violence from starting and there are indicators that the group will not help law enforcement if they find a participant has committed violence.

"The overall strategy is known to experts as "cognitive behavioral therapy," or CBT, which basically means helping someone change his thoughts in order to elicit positive action. Studies have shown that CBT is one of the most effective ways to combat crime; in one study, the likelihood of a criminal committing another offense after CBT intervention declined an average of 25 percent or, in the best case, up to 50 percent.

In this case, the controversial stipends are but one piece of the CBT strategy. According to the crime and delinquency center's independent review of Advance Peace, as of 2015 only about 60 percent of the fellows had received stipends — and only after six months, once they'd proven their desire to change. Most of the stipends were between $300 and $700 per month, though the program allows up to $1,000 per month.

The stipends serve several purposes, the nonprofit center says. They provide an incentive for young men to participate in the program. They provide an alternative to committing a crime like robbery. And they send a "powerful message to fellows about their worth."

"Homicides in Richmond declined from 47 in 2007 to 11 in 2014. The University of Southern California valued that improvement at more than $500 million."

I would say yes. The program is working.

http://www.recordnet.com/news/20180113/advance-peace-promise-and-potential