Slashdot Mirror

I'm not going to rationally turn on the lights and try to have a discussion with a criminal who has just broken into my home to ascertain what their intentions are.

Just because it's legal doesn't make it right. In addition to the fact that this is morally indefensible behavior (they entered my home without permission, therefore murder them!?), this kind of impulsive response has often led to someone mistakenly shooting a friend, family member, or police officer. You should ALWAYS be certain of your target before firing, or even bringing a weapon to bear.

Citations:
https://www.thetrace.org/2018/...
http://www.orlandosentinel.com...
https://www.vibe.com/2017/04/d...

Gee... I wonder what we could use gun registration to pay for...

It's not cheap to treat gunshot victims.

Err...well, if you want to get a CC (Carry Concealed) license in most states, you have to first take training classes, learn the laws, and show a proficiency with you firearm before you can get said carry license.

Haha... pull the other one.

I don't believe that ammo is actually restricted, only the ammo subsidized for range shooting and ammo given to soldiers.

Per my link and your wikipedia link, open carry is very restricted and you don't have to worry that the person carrying has a hot round in the chamber, which is all to common in the US, rifle or pistol. These guys had to explicitly tell their members not to keep a round chambered. That seems to indicate it's common, and I personally know it's common from interacting with the community.

Of the three counties you mentiond, Contra Costa seems to have the highest violent crime rate, per 1,000 citizens

If a gun carrier stands out, they will self police.

I'm not a big guy by any means and I can conceal a full-size 1911 without imprinting. I don't stand out in any way when I carry.

California seems to be doing a pretty good job with their gun laws.

Indeed, we are; except for the bullshit that started in 2017, which your link really doesn't represent. I'd also like to point out that California also currently accounts for 10% of the 30 cities with the highest murder rates in the US (#9, #17, and #18) and that those are the cities with the most restrictive local gun laws in the state. Statistically, California should have a 60% chance of having even one city on that list; less, if weighted by per-capita incidence of gun violence, yet here we are making up 10% of that list.

Hell, in 2015, Oakland had the 5th highest murder rate in the US and placed #3 for gun crimes. Hell, Stockton was #14 for murder rate, to Indianapolis' #19 in 2015; Indianapolis was also #19 in gun crime that year.

An I'm not sure gun control should be a priority when, even in Indiana (where gun deaths per capita are nearly double California), the flu killed more people than guns in 2014 and 2015, the two years for which your source has that data. In fact, that seems to hold true everywhere in the US, Alaska being the exception. Maybe we should prioritize that?

Really. the moderators couldn't even spend 1 minute to show that you have purposely worded that to push a right wing talking point.

https://www.thetrace.org/2015/...

Assuming that's a question, the answer is "No. Gary doesn't even crack the top 20."

St. Louis, Baltimore, and Detroit are the top 3.

Hotter weather is associated with more violence. This is particularly true in Chicago, shootings go way up in summer. So kind of a mixed bag. A surprising number of chicagoans think the city is actually dangerous. It's not by any reasonable metric but if enough people start thinking it actually is dangerous outside of the south side, I suspect people would start leaving.

It reminds me of the argument that gun owners are some sort of threat to the general public. We've got more than 300 million guns and several trillion rounds of ammunition. Trust us, if we were a threat, you'd know it by now.

"As of December 23 12,942 people had been killed in the United States in 2015 in a gun homicide, unintentional shooting, or murder/suicide".*

Yes, you are a threat. We know it. We are trying to do something about it. Have a nice day.

AC

https://www.thetrace.org/2015/...

Just compare the highway deaths to deaths by gun to see how f'd up our political process is.

https://www.thetrace.org/2015/...

Gun violence (including self inflicted) is 1/3 of highway deaths, but you would think it is the leading cause of death in the US based on how people treat it in politics. Driving isn't in the Bill of Rights, but gun ownership is; yet many politicians want to take our guns away while ignoring our cars!

BTW, my link is intentionally to a site that is inflammatory, I chose that to highlight my point, not because I agree with them in any way. I figured if anything, a site like that would have the highest figures for gun violence, and they didn't disappoint. They don't even make a distinction between intentional, self inflicted, and accidental deaths.

You are conflating several bullshit statistics, cherry picked without rhyme or reason.
Meanwhile, back in reality, concealed carry laws have been debunked as the cause for lower crime rates.
And no, it isn't the stand your ground laws either.

Hint: Florida ain't the only state with conceal carry nor stand-your-ground laws. Where are those supposed low Florida numbers in all other states?
In fact, ALL 50 STATES have concealed carry laws. It's just that some require a concealed carry LICENSE.
Of those that DON'T REQUIRE A LICENSE - two (Alaska, New Mexico) are first and second on the list of the most dangerous US states, due to their high violent crime rate.
Florida is ninth.
Shouldn't easier concealed carry mean less violent crime?

And what about three other states (New Hampshire, Maine, Vermont) that also don't require a license - but which are among the most peaceful states?
Vermont and Maine being the most peaceful states.
How can the same easier concealed carry actually create less violent crime in these states but not in others?

I.e. Concealed carry, with or without a permit IS NOT the cause nor is it an indicator of violent crime rates.

Why leave out accidental deaths and murder-suicide and ignore woundings?

You also ignore the possibilities of rehabilitation, wrongful conviction, being in the wrong place at the wrong time, knocking on the wrong door, having one drink too many and all the nuances and mistakes which make up our lives. I've given up with the links - just Google any of the phrases with "gun" (US can usually be assumed) or conversely Google them with "US" where gun can usually be assumed. It must be very cold and hard in your black and white world but real life isn't like the movies, where only the bad guys get hurt and justice rules.

Yes, because disarming law-abiding citizens is a well known and effective tactic to prevent street gangs and Mexican drug cartels who transport whatever they wish across the border from obtaining, possessing, and using guns against those same law-abiding citizens.

Bravo, Sir!

You have single-handedly solved all gun crime!

You win an internets!

Strat

I could refer you to this study as an example of the myth of the gun defense argument. Note that the article/study aren't advocating for gun control, just for a better understanding of the real data.