Price of Lax Gun Laws

[groovedaddy]

For years, the gun lobby has defeated new gun control laws partly by arguing that stronger laws do not deter crime. A study prepared by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, a bipartisan group headed by Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York and Mayor Thomas Menino of Boston, should finally put that myth to rest.

The study analyzed trace data for guns used in connection with crimes during 2007. The data reveal a strong correlation between weak state gun laws and higher rates of in-state murders, police slayings and sales of guns used in crimes in other states.

Many states have enacted strong gun laws to supplement inadequate federal ones, including mandatory background checks on gun show sales. States requiring the same background checks at gun shows as those required for store purchases show an export rate for guns used in crimes that’s nearly half the national average. This argues for Congressional action to end the gun-show loophole nationally. States with weak gun laws produce different outcomes. More than half the guns recovered in out-of-state crimes last year were supplied by Georgia, Florida, Texas, Virginia and six other states where weak laws make it easy for gun traffickers and other criminals to obtain weapons.

Weak gun laws also put a state’s own citizens at risk. There were nearly 60 percent more gun murders in the 10 states where exports were highest than in the states with low export rates — and nearly three times as many fatal shootings of law enforcement officers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/23/opinion/23tue2.html?th&emc=th

[benEzra]

1. Funny how the prohibitionists never mention New Hampshire, Minnesota,

and other low-crime states with gun laws less restrictive than Florida. I think that's because a lot of people confuse "states with less restrictive gun laws" with "the South", even though the two are not synonymous.

I believe New Hampshire had the lowest murder rate in the nation last year or the year before, but I'd have to go look it up, and this press-release-passed-off-as-journalism piece isn't worth it.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[happyslug]

15. Does the research control for the higher overall crime rate for the South?

For over 300 years the south have had a higher crime rate then the rest of the country. Prior to the 1960s every city in the US had a lower then average Murder rate do to the high rural murder rate in the South. Urban Murder rates peaked in the 1960s and have been going down ever since, as is the Murder rate in the South, but the Southern murder rate is more do to Northerners moving into Southern Cities and bringing with them they traditional low murder rate, then any drop in Rural Southern Murder rate. In fact the Urban Murder rate of the 1960s can be viewed as the result of Blacks moving from the Rural South and bringing with them the Traditional high rural murder rate. The subsequent DROP in Urban Murder rates can be viewed as the result of Blacks adopting the traditional lower Northern Murder rates as the Black population get more then 2-3 generations from the Rural South.

My point is simple, you MUST exclude the South in any research UNLESS you are comparing one part of the South with another. That Rural Southern Murder rate is more a result of the Culture of the South (And its long history of Slavery and then segregation) then anything else AND unless you are comparing areas with a similar history it is just bad research.

More on the South's High Murder Rates":
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1355/is_n12_v94/ai_21020057
http://www.ncpa.org/pi/crime/july98e.html
http://www.benbest.com/lifeext/murder.html
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/region.htm
http://www.bls.gov/opub/cwc/sh20031119ar01p1.htm

[AtheistCrusader]

2. Washington State has 'weak gun laws' by this benchmark.

Funny, we don't have this export problem. I wonder if some other factor might be at work?

[iverglas]

4. "I wonder if some other factor might be at work?"

Geography, perhaps?

[AtheistCrusader]

6. Possibly.

Here's the link to the actual report. Why a reporter would do a story on it, but not link to the source site, or the report itself I cannot understand.

Edit: Curse you and your faster copy/paste!
http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/downloads/pdf/trace_report_final.pdf
I note that Washington State is identified as a destination for guns obtained in Nevada, despite, to my knowledge, no difference in gun acquisition laws between the two. There are two fundamental differences between the states that I can think of: Nevada allows Full-Auto weapons, with BATFE registration and NFA check/tax. Washington State gun shows self-police and require background checks for membership. (Washington Arms Collectors) This does not apply to non-WAC gun shows which may or may not exist, and private transfers at places such as flea markets, or the newspaper.

[iverglas]

3. extremely interesting

The full report (pdf) is accessible here:

http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/home/home.shtml

and I'll be taking a look later.


Funny how the only comeback there ever seems to be is "but what about New Hampshire???"

Of course, there's always Switzerland ...

[Name removed]

5. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Yavapai]

7. 2010 scenario:

Obama assumes the Clinton gun law frenzy in 2009.

2010 we see a Republican congress and Senate. 2010 through 2016? we see nothing of value passed by his administration.

2009, through 2016 massive new membership list and revenues for NRA.

2009 though 2016, result of Obama presidency equals no change from Clinton era.

Now I really hope Obama is smart and avoids this stupid path and we get real change that we need, instead of fuzzy warm feel good gun laws that don"t work! Even though Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar, he was blinded by ideological bullshit and ended up doing the bidding of the Republicans (such as lower capitol gains taxes for the wealthy and extra-ordinary renditions and NAFTA)rather that getting us Universal health care and the laws that we really needed.

Think about it for one minute, please. Almost 1/2 of American households have guns in them and those households will be voting for the opposition (as in 1994), when Democrats decide to take away their constitutional rights (the second amendment), and I will be among them...

[iverglas]

9. it actually only took about 5 seconds

Think about it for one minute, please. Almost 1/2 of American households have guns in them and those households will be voting for the opposition (as in 1994), when Democrats decide to take away their constitutional rights (the second amendment), and I will be among them...

and while I do think quite fast, I didn't even need to, for this.

[Yavapai]

12. Message to Iverglas

you appear to be so smug in your belief system that you cannot discuss anything that might show any difference of opinion opposed to yours. I used to get Jehovah witnesses at the door all the time. They were as ignorant of the bible as they could be, but they had their belief system all worked out with out of context verses. Your responses in this forum strongly remind me of them.

Have read many of your postings here and they seem to show a great disdain for anyone who might have the slightest difference of
opinion from your opinion. You talk in circles and are very arrogant in your response to others.

What is your purpose in these forums? To show your great command of our language? To convince us of your great intellect? Or to discuss and debate ideas for a greater understanding of the issues brought up here? You dismiss thoughts, facts and information without any serious thought about the content they contain.

[iverglas]

13. hmm

They were as ignorant of the bible as they could be, but they had their belief system all worked out with out of context verses. Your responses in this forum strongly remind me of them.

Mirror mirror.

And scenarios like the one you laid out remind me of similar things. Those End Times ...

You said:

Almost 1/2 of American households have guns in them and those households will be voting for the opposition (as in 1994) ...

-- the sort of thing that people who believe they have the gift of prophecy tend to say, for sure.

... when Democrats decide to take away their constitutional rights (the second amendment), ...

Yes, the righteous will be persecuted.

... and I will be among them...

And they will take up their swords, or ballots, or whatever, and smite the anti-christ. Or something.


Have read many of your postings here and they seem to show a great disdain for anyone who might have the slightest difference of opinion from your opinion. You talk in circles and are very arrogant in your response to others.

Aww. Were that all true -- or even it being not -- perhaps I should reconsider, and take up fortune-telling and threatening to vote for the enemies of all things decent.


You dismiss thoughts, facts and information without any serious thought about the content they contain.

I guess that stuff of yours TO WHICH I RESPONDED might qualify as "thoughts". "Serious thought"? Well, who can say?

[Aventurier]

16. RUN FORREST RUN

Read Eric Hoffer's "The True Believer". It explains Our Dear Friend in some detail, and sheds light as well on the seductiveness of the irrefutable position.

Please don't be badly disposed toward our northern neighbors because of the boorishness of one fearful and misguided soul. Had my life been different, who is to say that my mind might not contain similar notions?

The mind is capable of filtering out noise; it does this automatically in many cases, even before the raw sensation ripples across the cortex. In our particular case, the quandary we find ourselves in is that this particular source of noise is both loud, and cleverly disguised to appear to be intelligent discourse.

Don't contribute to the noise. The louder it gets, the harder it is to filter it out, friend.

[iverglas]

17. ah

poésie, to me.

I haven't kept count. Is that 2.5% of your output devoted to moi, or more?

Ah! here's one, devoted to moi.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=151468&mesg_id=151914

Surely there must be more ...

[Aventurier]

18. Ha! Maybe ...

But I am an avid reader of your work, and I do listen to you. I seldom bother to write about much of anything, though, and for that I am truly sorry.

[friendly_iconoclast]

19. One must remember two other facts about Our Distinguished Northern Neighbor

1. Due to DHS's rather arbitrary and capricious rules, they may decide to disallow almost
any foreign national from visiting the Big PX. Last year, they even rejected a fellow for
admitting to the use of LSD back in the Sixties. And they certainly keep folks out whose
politics they don't care for.

So, as a non-US citizen, ODNN carefully refrains from posting *anything* that might even be slightly
construed as critical of US Government policy, something us USAians do as naturally as breathing
(the 'critical' bit, not the 'refrain' bit).

US citizens of course are fair game, so are roundly criticized. One might even say
that this criticism of individuals is somewhat exaggerated as compensation.

2. "Gun ownership = right wing" is as much a religious belief for ODNN as "bread and wine are the flesh
of the deity" or "a collection of eight cells is a human being with a soul and should have
all the rights of citizenship" is for others.

You have as much chance of refuting this logically as convincing an LDS bishop
that Joseph Smith wasn't the prophet of God. It just ain't gonna happen.

[iverglas]

22. yass ...

The one big thing being the number of untruths that are published about moi here in this very forum, and all over the world wide net.

I just loves being a celebrity.

And of course I luuuuvs my fan club.


But my goodness. I wonder what we would find at DU if we googled, oh, iverglas bush, or iverglas iraq, or iverglas firearm trafficking (referring to the international aspect, and "US Government policy" in respect thereof in particular). Yes, a timid soul I am when it comes to criticizing "US Government policy" indeed. That will be me in photos of noisy crowds outside the US Embassy 6 years ago in the files of more than one government, and in many places over many years before that. Never did think much of US government policy in Vietnam ...



"Gun ownership = right wing" is as much a religious belief for ODNN as "bread and wine are the flesh of the deity" or "a collection of eight cells is a human being with a soul and should have all the rights of citizenship" is for others.

I'm trying to figure out who/what this "ODNN" is, so that I may disabuse him/her/them/it of the strange belief you ascribe to him/her/them/it. Can you point me?


I have an idea for a new tradition. On Christmas Eve, no falsehoods may be propagated in the DU guns forum.

[Yavapai]

23. Great idea Iverglas!

"I have an idea for a new tradition. On Christmas Eve, no falsehoods may be propagated in the DU guns forum."

My guess is that you intend to have your computer turned off during that time!

Here is my idea for X-mas, Iverglas and all DUers, have a great holiday!!!

[rangersmith82]

20. Your adding to the noise...

Don't entice the noise, it has been heard and it is lousy.....

Like you said the more you talk to it, the louder IT gets.....

[Redneck Socialist]

8. Interstate hand gun sales are already illegal. (mostly)

So, if someone is buying guns in Georgia and selling them in New York, unless they are transferred through an FFL, they are already violating the law. I suppose making it more illegal might help, but somehow I doubt it.

I won't bother to address the "gun show loophole" nonsense as that horse died a long time ago.

[iverglas]

10. gosh

Funny how criminals don't obey the law, eh?

I suppose making it more illegal might help, but somehow I doubt it.

If only anyone had actually proposed doing that ...

Certainly a clever fellow such as yourself has no need to actually read what he's talking about before opening his gob!

[slackmaster]

11. Same shit, different day

Causation inferred from correlation, no realistic solutions proposed.

[Indy Lurker]

21. Report shows criminals break laws

Doesn't this report show that restrictive gun laws are ineffective?



Actually half of the laws they recommend seem reasonable to me.

I don't mind the idea of universal background checks as long as it has a reasonable price

If you are using a universal background check, I don't see the use of a Handgun Permit.

Mandatory reporting of lost and stolen guns to law enforcement is also fine with me.

I don't really know anything about dealer inspections, so I can't really comment.

Local jurisdictions should NOT regulate firearms, at least not in places like the Chicago suburbs. A ten minute drive can literally take you through 20 towns, it could be extremely difficult to know the laws of every town.

http://www.mapquest.com/maps/map.adp?city=Lombard&state=il

[gorfle]

24. As I have said for a long time...

For years, the gun lobby has defeated new gun control laws partly by arguing that stronger laws do not deter crime. A study prepared by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, a bipartisan group headed by Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York and Mayor Thomas Menino of Boston, should finally put that myth to rest.

As I have said for a long time, it is folly to try and tie firearm ownership rights to either crime or hunting, and I wish the pro-firearm side would stop allowing the argument to be so framed.

The purpose of firearm ownership in this country is to serve as a counter to federal military power. This would be true no matter how bad firearm crime may be, and in fact it is very low - probably less than 2% of the 40-80 million lawful firearm owners are involved in crime each year.

It is useless to argue that gun control does not affect crime. Of course it does. Machine gun crime is virtually unheard of because they have been effectively regulated into non-existence. No doubt other firearm crime could likewise be regulated into non-existence. This temporary safety is not worth the essential liberty of being able to resist tyranny.

[BridgeTheGap]

25. You can't even take guns to the Inauguration! What's this country coming too!?!

just kidding.

[Mad_Cow_Disease]

26. I don't see the big deal about guns at the innauguration.

I mean, seriously... somebody with bad intentions is going to have thier gun if they want despite a silly rule.
A felony possesion charge will be the least of thier worries for what they probably plan to do with it.

I don't have any problem with licensed law-abiding citizens carrying thier protection to the innaguration.