Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: ***Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment ***


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: ***Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment *** Page: <<   < prev  48 49 [50] 51 52   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: ***Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to ... - 11/6/2013 7:46:05 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: butternutsquash


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
That is not what the vast majority of surveys show.


Show me a fucking doi. I have been looking at controlled studies on this for a decade, and most credible science demonstrates that gun control does have the intended effect.

However, when you spend money on enforcing a law, there is always an opportunity cost. There is always something that you could have spent the same money on that would have had more of the intended effect.

http://cad.sagepub.com/content/58/2/222

This study doesn't advocate gun control, but it advocates community-based law-enforcement initiatives. We could invest every penny of what we spend on gun control on such initiatives and probably save lives.

But the claim that "gun control makes violent crime worse" is a popular myth that is also a colossal load of baloney.

We seem to have a misunderstanding the surveys I am referring to show that 18 say ccw works much better than gun control.
9 show no effect either way.
All 27 revealed sources and survived peer review.
Only the Brady bunch, who refused to reveal their sources or methodology and (clearly) refused peer review supported the idea that guns cause crime.
As for community policing.
Good idea.
My neighborhood had turned into a jungle.
A few months ago we started getting a more proactive approach to policing the area and it has almost become civilized.


_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to butternutsquash)
Profile   Post #: 981
RE: ***Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to ... - 11/6/2013 7:57:36 PM   
HunterCA


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline 		Oh good, we have your say so and the studies Bama will reference. I really can't believe you didn't eat the snakes you killed. So a person saying exactly what they want like the moderator tried the other day. Can't tolerate the NRA and don't trust them. But, has all sorts of special expertise, non specified here, that trumps what everyone knows. Hum, and burley tough too.

(in reply to butternutsquash)
Profile   Post #: 982
RE: ***Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to ... - 11/6/2013 8:00:17 PM   
butternutsquash


Posts: 59
Joined: 11/5/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: butternutsquash


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
That is not what the vast majority of surveys show.


Show me a fucking doi. I have been looking at controlled studies on this for a decade, and most credible science demonstrates that gun control does have the intended effect.

However, when you spend money on enforcing a law, there is always an opportunity cost. There is always something that you could have spent the same money on that would have had more of the intended effect.

http://cad.sagepub.com/content/58/2/222

This study doesn't advocate gun control, but it advocates community-based law-enforcement initiatives. We could invest every penny of what we spend on gun control on such initiatives and probably save lives.

But the claim that "gun control makes violent crime worse" is a popular myth that is also a colossal load of baloney.

We seem to have a misunderstanding the surveys I am referring to show that 18 say ccw works much better than gun control.
9 show no effect either way.
All 27 revealed sources and survived peer review.
Only the Brady bunch, who refused to reveal their sources or methodology and (clearly) refused peer review supported the idea that guns cause crime.
As for community policing.
Good idea.
My neighborhood had turned into a jungle.
A few months ago we started getting a more proactive approach to policing the area and it has almost become civilized.


You've had the evidence debunking this available to you for years.

http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1065&context=john_donohue&sei-redir=1&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fscholar.google.com%2Fscholar%3Fstart%3D10%26q%3Dconcealed%2Bcarry%2Bviolent%26hl%3Den%26as_sdt%3D0%2C34%26as_ylo%3D2009#search=%22concealed%20carry%20violent%22

There was a rash of studies back in the late 1990's, a lot of which was published in journals of economics and other weird places, that seemed to support RTC laws, but more recent analysis of that data demonstrates that RTC laws don't have any such effect.

< Message edited by butternutsquash -- 11/6/2013 8:01:13 PM >

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 983
RE: ***Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to ... - 11/6/2013 8:05:42 PM   
butternutsquash


Posts: 59
Joined: 11/5/2013
Status: offline 		http://www.nber.org/papers/w18294

Speaking of economics journals, the NBEC released this earlier this year. The only real effect, as far as they could tell, was a jump in aggravated assault.

< Message edited by butternutsquash -- 11/6/2013 8:06:23 PM >

(in reply to butternutsquash)
Profile   Post #: 984
RE: ***Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to ... - 11/6/2013 8:16:39 PM   
HunterCA


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline 		Hum, skimmed through. Most of it seems to speculate that if statistical analysis of economic factors is applied to other studies they'd get different results in those studies. Which goes along with butterscotches assurtions. But I've yet to find their study demonstrating their application of statistic or refuting other actual study findings. Which, so far means nothing as any scientifically trained person will tell you that when you apply your statistic without actual research you also apply your bias. Still reading however.

(in reply to butternutsquash)
Profile   Post #: 985
RE: ***Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to ... - 11/6/2013 8:19:09 PM   
butternutsquash


Posts: 59
Joined: 11/5/2013
Status: offline 		https://scholarworks.csustan.edu/handle/011235813/273

California's concealed carry law also produced an odd mixture of results.

I really think that trying to reduce violent crime is going to require us to stop thinking about it in terms of our gun laws, though. Instead, I think that we should regard violent crime as a symptom of an underlying problem. Although violent crime is harmful unto itself, the socioeconomic problems that have been MOST linked with high rates of violent crime are, from my point-of-view, a bigger issue. It reflects very low morale among individuals from underprivileged backgrounds, and I see that as a tragedy.

If we could fix the socioeconomic problems that lead to gun violence, the violence itself would disappear, and we'll have resolved what is, in my opinion, a more depressing problem.

< Message edited by butternutsquash -- 11/6/2013 8:20:43 PM >

(in reply to butternutsquash)
Profile   Post #: 986
RE: ***Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to ... - 11/6/2013 8:19:24 PM   
HunterCA


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline 		I'll read more tomorrow. But it seems butterscotch has just found biased opinions he agrees with that somehow refute the NRA which he doesn't trust, although I'm not aware of any NRA studies.

(in reply to HunterCA)
Profile   Post #: 987
RE: ***Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to ... - 11/6/2013 8:23:49 PM   
HunterCA


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: butternutsquash

https://scholarworks.csustan.edu/handle/011235813/273

California's concealed carry law also produced an odd mixture of results.

I really think that trying to reduce violent crime is going to require us to stop thinking about it in terms of our gun laws, though. Instead, I think that we should regard violent crime as a symptom of an underlying problem. Although violent crime is harmful unto itself, the socioeconomic problems that have been MOST linked with high rates of violent crime is, from my point-of-view, worse. It reflects very low morale among individuals from underprivileged backgrounds, and I see that as a tragedy.

If we could fix the socioeconomic problems that lead to gun violence, the violence itself would disappear, and we'll have resolved what is, in my opinion, a more depressing problem.


Sure, as the lasted deep recession showed no significant up take in crime with the devastating economic loss this sort of reasoning has become pretty well debunked. But I'm sure that debunking will officially take a while longer.

(in reply to butternutsquash)
Profile   Post #: 988
RE: ***Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to ... - 11/6/2013 8:25:44 PM   
HunterCA


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


quote:

ORIGINAL: butternutsquash

https://scholarworks.csustan.edu/handle/011235813/273

California's concealed carry law also produced an odd mixture of results.

I really think that trying to reduce violent crime is going to require us to stop thinking about it in terms of our gun laws, though. Instead, I think that we should regard violent crime as a symptom of an underlying problem. Although violent crime is harmful unto itself, the socioeconomic problems that have been MOST linked with high rates of violent crime is, from my point-of-view, worse. It reflects very low morale among individuals from underprivileged backgrounds, and I see that as a tragedy.

If we could fix the socioeconomic problems that lead to gun violence, the violence itself would disappear, and we'll have resolved what is, in my opinion, a more depressing problem.


Sure, as the lastest deep recession showed no significant up take in crime with the devastating economic loss this sort of reasoning has become pretty well debunked. But I'm sure that debunking will officially take a while longer.


(in reply to HunterCA)
Profile   Post #: 989
RE: ***Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to ... - 11/6/2013 8:26:44 PM   
HunterCA


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


quote:

ORIGINAL: butternutsquash

https://scholarworks.csustan.edu/handle/011235813/273

California's concealed carry law also produced an odd mixture of results.

I really think that trying to reduce violent crime is going to require us to stop thinking about it in terms of our gun laws, though. Instead, I think that we should regard violent crime as a symptom of an underlying problem. Although violent crime is harmful unto itself, the socioeconomic problems that have been MOST linked with high rates of violent crime is, from my point-of-view, worse. It reflects very low morale among individuals from underprivileged backgrounds, and I see that as a tragedy.

If we could fix the socioeconomic problems that lead to gun violence, the violence itself would disappear, and we'll have resolved what is, in my opinion, a more depressing problem.


Sure, as the lastest deep recession showed no significant up take in crime with the devastating economic loss this sort of reasoning has become pretty well debunked. But I'm sure that debunking will officially take a while longer.




(in reply to HunterCA)
Profile   Post #: 990
RE: ***Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to ... - 11/6/2013 8:29:25 PM   
butternutsquash


Posts: 59
Joined: 11/5/2013
Status: offline 		http://aler.oxfordjournals.org/content/13/2/565.short

The American Law and Economics Review is not known for having a heavy political bias.

(in reply to HunterCA)
Profile   Post #: 991
RE: ***Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to ... - 11/6/2013 8:36:48 PM   
HunterCA


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: butternutsquash

https://scholarworks.csustan.edu/handle/011235813/273

California's concealed carry law also produced an odd mixture of results.

I really think that trying to reduce violent crime is going to require us to stop thinking about it in terms of our gun laws, though. Instead, I think that we should regard violent crime as a symptom of an underlying problem. Although violent crime is harmful unto itself, the socioeconomic problems that have been MOST linked with high rates of violent crime are, from my point-of-view, a bigger issue. It reflects very low morale among individuals from underprivileged backgrounds, and I see that as a tragedy.

If we could fix the socioeconomic problems that lead to gun violence, the violence itself would disappear, and we'll have resolved what is, in my opinion, a more depressing problem.


Sorry about the redundant posts above. Trying to edit on my phone. The people I've heard who talk like this, have these ideas and use these words have always tended to be people trained, sometimes by law enforcement, by very politically correct agencies like the City of San Francisco police. Their political point usually is, "We can't arrest our way out of gang problems." It's a pretty fashionable argument now a days in the politically correct crowd and since its inculcated into people like the police who wouldn't normally be considered politically correct it tends to carry apparent weight.

(in reply to butternutsquash)
Profile   Post #: 992
RE: ***Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to ... - 11/6/2013 8:39:41 PM   
HunterCA


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: butternutsquash

http://aler.oxfordjournals.org/content/13/2/565.short

The American Law and Economics Review is not known for having a heavy political bias.


Oh jees, the lawyers give more money to Obama than just about any other organization. You can a accept what they report if you want but don't pretend no bias.

(in reply to butternutsquash)
Profile   Post #: 993
RE: ***Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to ... - 11/6/2013 8:47:51 PM   
HunterCA


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


quote:

ORIGINAL: butternutsquash

https://scholarworks.csustan.edu/handle/011235813/273

California's concealed carry law also produced an odd mixture of results.

I really think that trying to reduce violent crime is going to require us to stop thinking about it in terms of our gun laws, though. Instead, I think that we should regard violent crime as a symptom of an underlying problem. Although violent crime is harmful unto itself, the socioeconomic problems that have been MOST linked with high rates of violent crime are, from my point-of-view, a bigger issue. It reflects very low morale among individuals from underprivileged backgrounds, and I see that as a tragedy.

If we could fix the socioeconomic problems that lead to gun violence, the violence itself would disappear, and we'll have resolved what is, in my opinion, a more depressing problem.


Sorry about the redundant posts above. Trying to edit on my phone. The people I've heard who talk like this, have these ideas and use these words have always tended to be people trained, sometimes by law enforcement, by very politically correct agencies like the City of San Francisco police. Their political point usually is, "We can't arrest our way out of gang problems." It's a pretty fashionable argument now a days in the politically correct crowd and since its inculcated into people like the police who wouldn't normally be considered politically correct it tends to carry apparent weight.


I should also mention that agencies like the San Francisco police generally have a politically appointed head who pass the political drivel down. Most rank and file on the street see it for the crap it is.

(in reply to HunterCA)
Profile   Post #: 994
RE: ***Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to ... - 11/6/2013 8:49:05 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: butternutsquash

https://scholarworks.csustan.edu/handle/011235813/273

California's concealed carry law also produced an odd mixture of results.

I really think that trying to reduce violent crime is going to require us to stop thinking about it in terms of our gun laws, though. Instead, I think that we should regard violent crime as a symptom of an underlying problem. Although violent crime is harmful unto itself, the socioeconomic problems that have been MOST linked with high rates of violent crime are, from my point-of-view, a bigger issue. It reflects very low morale among individuals from underprivileged backgrounds, and I see that as a tragedy.

If we could fix the socioeconomic problems that lead to gun violence, the violence itself would disappear, and we'll have resolved what is, in my opinion, a more depressing problem.

I have long quoted a paper written in the late sixties / early seventies that predicted the huge crime jump we experienced and accurately predicted when it would begin the rapid drop we have seen in recent years.  This theory has recently revived but has received little attention.
Simply put it is the baby boomer's (my generation)  "fault"
It stated that a rise in crime was unavoidable due to the population bulge represented by my generation.  As you know doubt know certain age groups are more prone to crime and violence.  While the baby boomers are no worse than any other but when they hit that age they  contributed a larger portion of the total population than that age group had previously contributed.  As the baby boomers aged the crime rate began to fall.
Of course this isn't  a "sexy" explanation and politicians can't get headlines with it so it tends to be ignored.
It leaves us with boring solutions like community policing and full employment. 

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to butternutsquash)
Profile   Post #: 995
RE: ***Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to ... - 11/6/2013 8:52:32 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline 		California's concealed carry law also produced an odd mixture of results.

--------------------------------------

It's California of course the results will be odd.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to butternutsquash)
Profile   Post #: 996
RE: ***Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to ... - 11/6/2013 8:52:39 PM   
HunterCA


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline 		However, since there are some pretty high power agencies who need this sort of drivel to promulgate their political views there tends to be a lot of study funding available and a lot of "acceptable" studies performed. Sort of like global warming studies funded by the government that wants to regulate based on global warming.

(in reply to HunterCA)
Profile   Post #: 997
RE: ***Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to ... - 11/6/2013 9:09:54 PM   
HunterCA


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline 		Hum, I'm confused. Butterscotch is still on line and I'm anxiously awaiting that expressed knock down from the professional. Yet butterscotch is keeping me waiting. As smart and, refined and as burly powerful as butterscotch is I'm quivering in anticipation of the knock down.

(in reply to HunterCA)
Profile   Post #: 998
RE: ***Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to ... - 11/6/2013 9:29:19 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: butternutsquash

You've had the evidence debunking this available to you for years.

However, the report of President Obama's Committee on Priorities for a Public Health Research Agenda to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence concluded:

Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was ‘used’ by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies. ~Source

It's always convenient to assume that studies with findings to your liking used appropriate measures and evaluated the data in a correct an unbiased manner. But needless to say, there are always other studies with different findings that claim to debunk the former. Sometimes you have to get your hands dirty and actually look for yourself. Let's take a case in point:

The State of Florida publishes crime statistics dating back to 1971. Florida became a "shall issue" concealed carry state in 1987. So we have 17 years of data before the law was passed, and 25 years of data since. In the years from 1971 to 1987 inclusive Florida's total crime rate rose 49.6%, violent crime went up 86.4%, and forcible rape offenses more than doubled.

When we compare 2012, the latest year for which data is available, to the 1987 rates we find that total crime fell by 55.1%, violent crime dropped 52.7%, and forcible rape offenses were down by 44.9%. More interestingly, attempted forcible rape plummeted 84.4%. It would seem the rapists were taking more care to choose likely to be defenseless targets.

Now, crime in the United States has been dropping since the early 90's. So the question arises as to how much (if any) of Florida's drop in crime can be credited to concealed carry and how much was due to the general trend toward lower crime rates. Or as the question is usually put, how much was due to something else? But I have to ask, why the embedded assumption that it was "something else"?

In 1986, only 8 states had "shall issue" concealed carry laws, and 1 allowed unrestricted carry. By five years later, in 1991, the number of "shall issue" states had risen to 16. Five years later again, in 2001, 31 states had "shall issue" concealed carry laws. By 2006, 37 states had gone to "shall issue," and the number of unrestricted carry states rose to 2. Today in 2013 we have a total of 37 states with "shall issue" concealed carry, and 5 that now allow unrestricted carry.

So, there seems little basis on which to assume that our national drop in crime rates was due to "something else". Granted there are other factors involved in crime rates, and states vary. But that opens up a whole different subject. I know of nothing that tracks the overall trend as clearly and unambiguously as the spread of concealed carry.

As a closing note, the percentages above are my calculations from the data and any errors are mine alone. The sources are here:

http://www.fdle.state.fl.us/Content/getdoc/f089698a-26f4-4899-9695-7c2dbc41f674/1971_fwd_sex_offenses.aspx
http://www.fdle.state.fl.us/Content/getdoc/d75b9423-91ea-4704-86c8-5beb8c50fb61/1971_fwd_totalcrime.aspx
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rtc.gif

K.


< Message edited by Kirata -- 11/6/2013 9:32:03 PM >

(in reply to butternutsquash)
Profile   Post #: 999
RE: ***Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to ... - 11/6/2013 9:31:19 PM   
HunterCA


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline 		Hum, I'm going to be silly again and discuss the last time I had a knock down offer.

I was working as a bouncer in a topless bar in Scotsdale Az. A dancer I was fucking was dancing for an Apache Indian at the table next to me. The reference to an Apache Indian is germain to the story.

So sitting at the table next to me this blond dancer I was fucking was dancing for an Apache. He, for some reason, hauled off and hit her. My reaction was immediate. I stood up and hit the Apache and knocked him over his table. Unfortunately, the cranial configuration of the Apache meant I hooked my last two knuckles on his cheek bones and shattered my hand. It was the third time I actually shattered those specific bones. But, regardless the effect was the same and I was one handed in a knock down fight.

Actually, it ended up working out well. The bar had a heavy steel front door and I was able to pick up the dude and run him head first into the steel door one handed a few times before actually throwing him outside one handed.

I then set the bones in my hand, for the third time and went outside and hauled the guy to the dumpster into which I deposited him. I don't even wonder if he woke up before the trash company came.

But the point is, it's been a long long time since I've been in a knock down situation and I'm curious what butterscotch has in mind.

(in reply to HunterCA)
Profile   Post #: 1000
Page:   <<   < prev  48 49 [50] 51 52   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: ***Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment *** Page: <<   < prev  48 49 [50] 51 52   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109