Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Max White]

Oh hey, I found some real figures that relate to that newspaper article was was posted waaay before and I struck it down as cherry picking. Well turns out I was wrong, it wasn't as such, it was super imposing a line of best fit like you would not believe!


So there is nooo way that for ten years anything changed that might have caused a spike in crime, then the criminals, using their phycis senses knew the law would change back and stopped breaking the law.

[G-Flex]

E: If we're talking news-worthy, though, there was an elderly fellow that shot and killed a home invader in my area within the last year or so that made the news. It's another one of those anecdotal it-does-happen things, but yeah.

I know a few people who have had to defend themselves with a gun if we are talking personal anecdotes here.

I would like to state, for the record here, that there is a difference between someone defending themselves with a gun and someone needing to defend themselves with a gun.

[Frumple]

So there is nooo way that for ten years anything changed that might have caused a spike in crime, then the criminals, using their phycis senses knew the law would change back and stopped breaking the law.

Yeaaah, '86 was apparently around when the cocaine thing became, well, a thing. There was an across the board increase in violent crime related to that.

[Vector]

Yeah, I lived in an area of LA where there were literally folks in gangs jumping the back fence and having at it in the yard (we and the other renters ended up paying for the construction of an 8-foot wall, which we were lucky to have the money for), and lots of tennis shoes strung up on telephone poles where people had died.  If my parents hadn't been extreme pacifists, we probably would have owned some sort of piece.  I can't blame folks for feeling threatened, especially people for who such arrangements weren't temporary.

[Max White]

Is that what the tennis shoes meant?

[Vector]

Is that what the tennis shoes meant?

In certain areas of the US, yes, tennis shoes strung up on the wire mean that someone bit it there in a gang-related killing.

[Montague]

Oh hey, I found some real figures that relate to that newspaper article was was posted waaay before and I struck it down as cherry picking. Well turns out I was wrong, it wasn't as such, it was super imposing a line of best fit like you would not believe!

So there is nooo way that for ten years anything changed that might have caused a spike in crime, then the criminals, using their phycis senses knew the law would change back and stopped breaking the law.

Well yeah, you have to look at statistics critically. It's obviously biased, but it doesn't take a genius to figure out that the control measures had no effect one way or the other. The causes and correlates of the crime trends are entirely independent of anything related to guns, this graph here isn't the only one like it.

I'd say it discredits much of the rationale behind gun control because the evidence suggests that guns do not appear to be the public safety menace they are often made out to be. That said, I don't believe that all gun regulation results in increased murder rates either.

[Max White]

It seems to have no effect, there for we shouldn't restrict use of these dangerous implements.

[Frumple]

More along the lines of it doesn't (seem ot have) have a strong effect on homicide, and that there's other, much stronger influences (Quick E: At least in Washington DC).

What would be really interesting would be stats on gun regulation and accidental (or negligent, if one prefers) shootings. I wouldn't even know where to start looking for that, though. I've never heard that kind of thing brought up in the various raging furors that fired up around the gun control issue.

[Leafsnail]

So there is nooo way that for ten years anything changed that might have caused a spike in crime, then the criminals, using their phycis senses knew the law would change back and stopped breaking the law.

I think this graph is actually trying to provide evidence for reverse causality.  Legalising hand guns reduces crime ten years ago.  You know it makes sense.

[Max White]

What would be really interesting would be stats on gun regulation and accidental (or negligent, if one prefers) shootings. I wouldn't even know where to start looking for that, though. I've never heard that kind of thing brought up in the various raging furors that fired up around the gun control issue.

Hmm, sorry, can't seem to find that. I did find this though.

Homicides per capita, that is any homicide, not just shootings.

Firstly, I'm noticing that in general, the US is a lot worse than Australia. The big stand out over here is NT, where we have the most relax gun laws. Anybody who knows more about US culture see any patterns for murder per capita and gun restrictions?

[G-Flex]

I'd say it discredits much of the rationale behind gun control because the evidence suggests that guns do not appear to be the public safety menace they are often made out to be.

Or you could realize that a single graph of a single case study doesn't necessarily mean much either way, what with there being so many damn confounding factors involved.

[Montague]

It seems to have no effect, there for we shouldn't restrict use of these dangerous implements.

I'd say the restrictions and regulation in place are having the intended effect and no change is warranted either way. Since the laws have remained generally consistent while crime has not, then why mess with it?

More along the lines of it doesn't (seem ot have) have a strong effect on homicide, and that there's other, much stronger influences (Quick E: At least in Washington DC).

What would be really interesting would be stats on gun regulation and accidental (or negligent, if one prefers) shootings. I wouldn't even know where to start looking for that, though. I've never heard that kind of thing brought up in the various raging furors that fired up around the gun control issue.

http://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/vprp/publications/tint.html
http://www.lcav.org/statistics-polling/gun_violence_statistics.asp

According to these, fatalities from gun accidents are far less frequent then homicides, which are much less frequent then suicides.

So, statistically you are more likely to shoot yourself on purpose then be shot by somebody else.

I'd say it discredits much of the rationale behind gun control because the evidence suggests that guns do not appear to be the public safety menace they are often made out to be.

Or you could realize that a single graph of a single case study doesn't necessarily mean much either way, what with there being so many damn confounding factors involved.

That's just one graph. There are plenty of other sources that show the same lack of correlations. They all seem to suggest firearms being a pretty marginal factor, despite their prevalence.

[Max White]

So let's assume that firearms have minimal effect on crime. Cool! So that means any argument involving criminals in pretty irrelevant.

Now what is more likely, somebody shooting a family member by accident in a country that:
A. Allows you to keep a loaded fire arm next to your bed, or...
B. States that to keep fire arms, they must be in a locked safe, dissembled, and no ammo can be kept in the same safe.

[Montague]

So let's assume that firearms have minimal effect on crime. Cool! So that means any argument involving criminals in pretty irrelevant.

Now what is more likely, somebody shooting a family member by accident in a country that:
A. Allows you to keep a loaded fire arm next to your bed, or...
B. States that to keep fire arms, they must be in a locked safe, dissembled, and no ammo can be kept in the same safe.

There is certainly a reasonable compromise between the two. A dissembled gun with no ammo locked in a safe is of absolutely no use and defeats the purpose of owning one for self defense. It might as well be on the moon if you had to use it in an emergency.

At the same time a responsible gun owner isn't going to keep a loaded pistol next to their bed, or tucked down their pajamas or under their kid's mattress or anything else like that either.