gftChris Posted February 20, 2014 Report Share Posted February 20, 2014 For what it's worth, I trust the bbc as a relatively impartial website. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-26222578 Researchers claim a new study provides some of the most compelling evidence yet for tighter gun controls in the US. The team followed the consequences of the State of Missouri repealing its permit-to-purchase handgun law in 2007. The law had required purchasers to be vetted by the local sheriff and to receive a licence before buying a gun. Reporting soon in the Journal of Urban Health, the researchers will say that the repeal resulted in an immediate spike in gun violence and murders. The study links the abandonment of the background check to an additional 60 or so murders occurring per year in Missouri between 2008 and 2012. (continued in link) Now, I obviously can't speak for the gun enthusiasts among us, but I would suspect that that type of legislature - including vetting by the sheriff - would be the kind of 'good' gun control you would be ok with, rather than more blanket bans? I think the point here is that this isn't suggesting that banning guns is a good idea, it's not discussing that prospect. What it is saying to me is that, assuming you want a country where you can legally own a firearm, this type of vetting is better in place than not. What say you guys? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted February 20, 2014 Report Share Posted February 20, 2014 It's odd for sure. There was a national trend down in gun homicide rates (for about 10-15 years) that was "Coincident exactly with the policy change," (to quote the article). I'd actually like to read the study 1st. The article conveniently has left it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 20, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 20, 2014 The original article from the university: http://www.jhsph.edu/news/news-releases/2014/repeal-of-missouris-background-law-associated-with-increase-in-states-murders.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 20, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 20, 2014 I don't give a flying fuck what the UK, Piers Morgan, or The BBC has to say about American gun laws. Well I've tried to find an article from Fox or TopRight news but I couldn't. Admittedly my knowledge of republican skewed outlets isn't great. In fact the story wasn't carried very much, only by HuffPost (Dem bias) and Washington Post (?Bias?), as well as MSNBC (?Bias?). And if you actually read the BBC article - which, believe it or not, wasn't written by Piers Morgan - you'll find that it doesn't express an opinion. Just presents the findings, with some quotes by the researchers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted February 20, 2014 Report Share Posted February 20, 2014 The original article from the university: http://www.jhsph.edu/news/news-releases/2014/repeal-of-missouris-background-law-associated-with-increase-in-states-murders.html Webster and colleagues found that the spike in murders in Missouri following the PTP handgun law repeal only occurred for murders in Missouri committed with a firearm and was widespread across the state's counties. Following the change in Missouri's gun laws, none of the states bordering Missouri experienced significant increases in murder rates and the U.S. murder rate actually declined by over five percent. This is subjective. And it's the inverse to the bullshit reasoning that the "Pro-Gun law" advocates use to write off the high gun homicide rate found in D.C. "They just travel across to VA when laws are less stringent, buy a gun, and commit the crime in DC" So which is it? I'd be more interested in comparing murder rates in MO in that time period to nationwide murder rates when "privately sold" weapons were used. That's the objective comparison. I'd be willing to bet there isn't much difference. The JHU study focused on privately purchased guns involved in homicides. That is what resulted in the increased homicide rate. Guns in MO purchased from dealers still go through a background check so as dealers can still maintain their FFL. The change from requiring a Sheriff check prior to purchase removes additional red tape and complications for responsible gun owners who aren't a part of the guns that were used in the homicides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 20, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 20, 2014 Which part is subjective? But I see what you mean about the neighbouring states business. They said that there was no increase in gun crime, but that they found more and more guns coming from Missouri. I guess that's all there is to that side, and that it just affects Missouri. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted February 20, 2014 Report Share Posted February 20, 2014 the part i underlined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 20, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 20, 2014 OK, I must have missed the second part of your post somehow. If you want that information I'm sure it's readily available, if you want to do all the legwork...I know I wouldn't! I agree it would be an interesting comparison to make, although this is also a worthwhile comparison, IMHO. Just because two states have the same laws, it doesn't necessarily mean that you can equate them like that. For example, if NY and, I don't know, Idaho, had the same gun laws, you couldn't equate any gun crime statistics based on that alone, since there's a vastly different culture in both states. You'd want to compare states with nearby states, which presumably have a similar cultural background. Alternatively, you could profile them by 'type' - NYC with Miami and LA, for example. In other news in the article, I saw this: [1] "Because many perpetrators of homicide have backgrounds that would prohibit them from possessing firearms under federal law, they seek out private sellers to acquire their weapons," said study author Jon Vernick, JD, MPH, deputy director for the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research. [2]"Requiring a background check on all gun sales is a commonsense approach to reducing gun violence that does not infringe upon the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding gun owners." [numbers mine] I think the first quote is subjective as well, but probably hard to disagree with. The second quote is up for debate, but I happen to agree with it in principal - practicalities of enforcing aside, obviously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosar_For_President Posted February 20, 2014 Report Share Posted February 20, 2014 Missouri is the size of England. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted February 20, 2014 Report Share Posted February 20, 2014 Wait. What prompts the bbc, in jolly old, to cherry pick ONE state out of FIFTY states, to try to find a murder rate that went up, allegedly after a gun control law was repealed. Couldn't there have been other reasons for the murder rate? Like a federal clamp down on gangs, maybe? Like, maybe St. Louis is one of the most dangerous, violent crime ridden cities in the U.S. ? Competition of two different drug cartels finally duking in out, since one moved in with encouragement from Obamao and HOlder, with guns from "Fast and Furious" ? And gangs have illegal weapons. They trade in them. And murder U.S. agents with them. From the illegal black market, from overeseas, and I suppose from some American illegal buyer here. But a freaking control law that affects me, and millions of legal, law abiding American citizens sure as hell won't change that illegal behavior one freakin bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted February 20, 2014 Report Share Posted February 20, 2014 Yeah. I call bbc biased. A quick lookup: ************************************************************* We are biased, admit the stars of BBC News | Mail Online - Daily Mail www.dailymail.co.uk/.../We-biased-admit-stars-BBC-News.ht... Daily Mail A leaked account of an 'impartiality summit' called by BBC chairman Michael Grade, is certain to lead to a new row about the BBC and its reporting on key issues ... Is the BBC biased? isthebbcbiased.blogspot.com/ 2 days ago - s hidden microphones in BBC H.Q. caught the following discussion .... (I could almost hear Iain Duncan Smith fuming about BBC bias as the ... Hard Evidence: How biased is the BBC? - New Statesman www.newstatesman.com/.../hard-evidence-how-biased-bb... New Statesman Aug 23, 2013 - Does the BBC really have a left-wing, anti-business agenda as certain elements of the press like to claim? Or is there more to it than that? And the award for most biased BBC journalist of the year goes to ... blogs.telegraph.co.uk › ... › Politics › Toby Young The Daily Telegraph Dec 18, 2013 - Most Biased BBC Journalist. Many people will have their own favourites for this category, but mine is Hannah Richardson, a correspondent for ... BBC is biased toward the left, study finds - Telegraph www.telegraph.co.uk › ... › TV and Radio › BBC The Daily Telegraph Aug 11, 2013 - The BBC is twice as likely to cover left-wing policy proposals than those that are right-wing, a study has found. News for bbc biased BBC is too political when it comes to reporting politics Evening Standard - 1 day ago Political bias tends to be found in the eyes of the beholder. The Labour voter will see a rich seam of Conservative propaganda in certain media ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted February 20, 2014 Report Share Posted February 20, 2014 I read this post from some guy named Erik, in Mo. It's just interesting... ************************************ "FWIW, Jennings is the next 'town' south of me. The St Louis County police took over law enforcement and one of the most classically racist PD's was shut down. Only three cops from that PD of 18 were retained, the rest were fired. I had no idea until a coworker of mine told me about what it was like to grow up near there as a black person. Bull Conner had nothing on them...And those were who anyone in that town had to go to in order to get permission to buy a pistol. If you wanted to carry it, you had to be a deputy. Deputization was almost unilaterally the perview of the white male. MO CCW fixed a LOT of issues and I would gladly go toe to toe with those who are blaming it for the crime rate in MO." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted February 20, 2014 Report Share Posted February 20, 2014 Correlation does not equal causation. Like Legacy said, how did Missouri's murder rates compare to the rest of the U.S. over the same time period? This article definitely fits the BBC's "oh god Americans are gun yielding nuts" agenda. There are so many variables that would have to be covered (job loss/poverty, location, drug abuse/markets) in order to draw a total picture. St. Louis I imagine accounts for a good deal of gun murer in Missouri. East St Louis looks like Fallujah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 20, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 20, 2014 If you have such a problem with the BBC, pick your own source, there are plenty. Trouble is, most I can identify as left-leaning - if someone can find a right wing article on this study I'd love to see it. The cynic in me says that none will publish one because it doesn't fit their agenda - am I wrong on that? Logic, yes, the general theme from over here is very much 'guns are bad' and you'll struggle to find anyone in this country lobbying for wider access to guns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted February 20, 2014 Report Share Posted February 20, 2014 If you have such a problem with the BBC, pick your own source, there are plenty. Trouble is, most I can identify as left-leaning - if someone can find a right wing article on this study I'd love to see it. The cynic in me says that none will publish one because it doesn't fit their agenda - am I wrong on that? Logic, yes, the general theme from over here is very much 'guns are bad' and you'll struggle to find anyone in this country lobbying for wider access to guns. You can find studies on both sides that support their agenda. The problem is that they have agendas so you can't trust how they compiled the data. It is rare to get a balanced review of data pertaining to a political hot button issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 20, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 20, 2014 You can find studies on both sides that support their agenda. The problem is that they have agendas so you can't trust how they compiled the data. It is rare to get a balanced review of data pertaining to a political hot button issue. Agreed, so do you propose that we just disregard any topic because you can't find impartial reports? Trust me, I really tried to find a counter-view on this article. Just couldn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted February 20, 2014 Report Share Posted February 20, 2014 Agreed, so do you propose that we just disregard any topic because you can't find impartial reports? Trust me, I really tried to find a counter-view on this article. Just couldn't. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13504851.2013.854294#.UwZC0PldUgk Just one that I found pretty quickly. You can find countering reports pretty easily. The problem is that they suffer from the same sort of problems as the anti-gun studies. Too many variables can effect crime and violence. What can't be disputed is that gun crime over the last 10 or so years has declined and gun laws have loosened. That does not mean that "more guns = less crime" it just means that gun crime declined over a time period in which gun laws loosened. It could be a decrease in gang activity, increase in social programs, employment levels in neighborhoods have low or high crime levels, etc. Just too many things to figure in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted February 20, 2014 Report Share Posted February 20, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 20, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 20, 2014 http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13504851.2013.854294#.UwZC0PldUgk Just one that I found pretty quickly. You can find countering reports pretty easily. The problem is that they suffer from the same sort of problems as the anti-gun studies. Too many variables can effect crime and violence. What can't be disputed is that gun crime over the last 10 or so years has declined and gun laws have loosened. That does not mean that "more guns = less crime" it just means that gun crime declined over a time period in which gun laws loosened. It could be a decrease in gang activity, increase in social programs, employment levels in neighborhoods have low or high crime levels, etc. Just too many things to figure in. I meant that I couldn't find an opposing view on this particular report - most of the reports I could find were from 'liberal' outlets. I've no doubt you could find a report to back up basically any theory you could think up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted February 20, 2014 Report Share Posted February 20, 2014 Saw this. Hi-Point is awful but I would definitely take it over a pointy stick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted February 20, 2014 Report Share Posted February 20, 2014 Yup. It looks like they found it in a ditch. Still worked apparently. Haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted February 20, 2014 Report Share Posted February 20, 2014 It grates my nerves when "assault rifle" as a term is improperly used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 24, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 24, 2014 Given what people have been saying about criminal charges for negligible parents wrt gun control, this is presumably the kind of thing you had in mind? http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2014/02/06/4669291/17-month-old-shot-by-3-year-old.html#.Uwt8pvl_uoO What do you think - a case for the parent (dad, I guess) to answer in terms of negligence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted February 24, 2014 Report Share Posted February 24, 2014 "The Shelby Star reported that the children’s father and owner of the gun is Justin Carper, who writes a parenting column for the newspaper." irony If you have children in the home and you just leave your guns where a 3 year old could get them... yeah, I think you should be punished. Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2014/02/06/4669291/17-month-old-shot-by-3-year-old.html#.UwuCZ_k9KUn#storylink=cpy" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 24, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 24, 2014 "The Shelby Star reported that the children’s father and owner of the gun is Justin Carper, who writes a parenting column for the newspaper." irony If you have children in the home and you just leave your guns where a 3 year old could get them... yeah, I think you should be punished. Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2014/02/06/4669291/17-month-old-shot-by-3-year-old.html#.UwuCZ_k9KUn#storylink=cpy" Has he not been punished enough, having his daughter shot? I mean, he's not likely to leave his gun unlocked any time soon is he? Devil's advocate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted February 24, 2014 Report Share Posted February 24, 2014 Ehhh, I understand where you are coming from. But what if his 3 year old took it outside and shot the neighbor's kid on accident. I think a punishment being in place would be more to deter future adults from leaving their gun on the counter with kids home in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 24, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 24, 2014 I agree, but there are also things you have to be careful of. If you make the punishment a jail sentence, then you run the risk of the head of a a single parent family going to jail, his kids being presumably taken in to foster care, when really the best thing all around is for them to stay with a dad that loves them and has learnt his lesson. on the other hand, if you make it punishable only by a fine, you end up with people perhaps not taking it seriously enough if it's too low, or it potentially crippling the family if it's too high. I agree there needs to be a punishment, but a measure of common sense needs to be used in some cases, which will inevitably lead to inconsistencies in sentencing, which people will bang on about to no end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted February 24, 2014 Report Share Posted February 24, 2014 I agree. I mean, that could be said about a lot of crimes by heads of single family households that maybe got in desperate situations and needed to feed their kids. But I see how this example is a little different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted February 24, 2014 Report Share Posted February 24, 2014 The gun owner should do time if they let a 3 year old shoot themself. Child neglect, especially where hubs are converned, should never be taken lightly. It is up to the person committing the crime to decide if the risk of punishment is worth it when they are the lone provider. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted February 25, 2014 Report Share Posted February 25, 2014 The gun owner should do time if they let a 3 year old shoot themself. Child neglect, especially where hubs are converned, should never be taken lightly. It is up to the person committing the crime to decide if the risk of punishment is worth it when they are the lone provider. Agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.