Its not just one gender or the other... its everyone.
Everyone is fed up with strange hours
Everyone knows that its getting harder and harder to fill advanced IT jobs.
Things like "flex time" used to be "perks" - now they're mandatory if you're looking to fill a lot of positions.
Weather's crappy? Telecommute. Stay in touch via email, phone, ssh, icq, forwarding X, etc.
Already put in 40 hours or more over 4 days? Long weekend! (but if you're "on a roll" or "in the zone", accumulate the hours and post them next week and take a comp day off.) The 60, 70 and 80-hour week death marches were stupid, unproductive morasses. Getting into them was like getting into Viet Nam - more effort, less results.
A lot of us take our jobs seriously, to the point where we're thinking about code, implementation details, etc., during what should be our "down time"... flexibility from management is expected if you want to keep talent that is serious and committed - because if you don't want them, be sure your competition does, and is probably willing to throw in more perks and more money to boot.
You wanted to be in support? Weeeeelll, that's another kettle of fish. Odd hours and being on call are the nature of the beast. Complaining about that is akin to a taxi driver complaining about having their "space" invaded when they pick up a fare, or a surgeon complaining about the sight of needles and knives and blood making them feel queezy...
All the excuses about the "large number of people in prison for drug offenses" doesn't change tha fact that the US has more people on death row than any other country...
... and if you're not happy with how the drug laws are enforced, change them... states like California turned simple possession of minor amounts into a citation (like a traffic ticket).
I don't disagree with the 5 years for loaning to a drug dealer. I'll bet the interest rate was "interesting", He's just as guilty as the person dealing... (actually, he's more guilty, because without him, there would have been no money, and no deal, right?)
As for the coke, you pays your money and you takes your chances. Its not like people don't know what the penalties are. I think drugs should be treated as a social issue, which is why I'm in favour of the government taking over the sale of illegal drugs and taxing the crap out of them, while removing the competition. Or ban them all, including the #1 gateway drug - tobacco. I could get behind that... an outright ban on tobacco and all other illegal drugs, with mandatory forfeiture of all your assets and 10 years probation on simple possession. After all, if you're going to have a police state, you might as well get some benefit out of it:-)
... and the studies show that the more guns, the more murders. So, instead of one mass murderer being the exception, you have lots of smaller shooting incidents being the norm, with an overall higher body count. The 17-to-25 age group already has the highest rate of committing murders - don't encourage making it worse.
A simple total ban on civilian gun ownership or gun handling until 30 would cut the murder rate by over half. Caught with a gun in your possession - 1 year in jail, and a lifetime ban. Hunting? Wait until you're 30, and less likely to pull the trigger just because someone else pissed you off, or your S.O. dumped you, or you got a bad grade.
"This will drive everyone out of webcasting...except for ClearChannel and maybe AOL"
... and people running their local pirate internet radio stations on wireless routers. What can they do when 802.lls wireless mesh networks are all over the place in a few years, and everyone's sharing their 104mbps of wireless router bandwidth?
Don't get me wrong - I agree. People have misinterpreted the constitution to imply that everyone has a right to own guns, whereas the second amendment is clear that it is referring to an armed militia (which under US law has specific age and gender limits), and "the right of the people", not "the right of individuals".
What's so hard to understand? The two are not mutually exclusive. Tougher gun laws doesn't necessarily translate into fewer firearms - just safer ones. It also means proportionately many fewer handguns and more rifles and shotguns. You can slip a handgun into a pocket - a rifle is a lot harder to conceal, and that means fewer people walking around with concealed weapons.
Also, a mandatory minimum sentence for any crime committed with a firearm, imposed consecutively (not concurrently). Rob a convenience store, and your partner, who is driving the car and never went into the store, has a gun - you BOTH get an additional 3 to 14 years for a crime committed with a firearm - even if its only an imitation gun!
The smarter crooks go out of their way NOT to carry a gun (and keep their partners in crime from doing the same) because the penalties are a lot harsher.
Just pointing a firearm (real or fake) at someone is good for up to 5 years.
Ditto for carrying around ammunition without a license.
Knowingly possessing (not just "on your person" - it may be stashed at home) a prhibited firearm or ammunition without having a license is good for up to 10 years in jail.
Anyone knowingly sitting the the same car as someone with a prohibited firearm or ammunition is liable for up to 10 years in jail...
Crossbows are also regulated.
Find a firearm and not report it? 5 years. Lose a firearm and not report it? Ditto. No serial number or an altered serial number? Ditto.
Also, commit a crime with a weapon, - you're prohibited from owning a weapon for 10 years. Second offence - you may never own a weapon again.
You own a gun, it increases your risk of committing suicide. You have a gun around, it increases your risk of being murdered. Your live in a state where more people own guns, it increases your risk of being murdered - 7x higher in the most-gun-owning states as opposed to the least. You have guns around - your kids are more likely to be shot, or to shoot someone else.
This is a US phenomena - other countries can and do have higher rates of gun ownership and lower murder rates, the difference being that other countries also have stiffer gun control laws. But wackos seem to think its an inalienable right to own a gun, and they have an easy time getting them in the US than most other places, where if you want a gun, you can go to the corner store, or steal one from a neighbour, or buy one off a friendly gas-station attendant or barman, no questions asked "for your protection". The easy availability of guns to the general populace is a crime, not a "right".
BOOK: Hemenway, David. "Private Guns and Public Health" Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2004. This book summarizes the literature on the relationship between guns and injuries and describes the public health approach to reducing firearm-related violence. More information at the University of Michigan Press website: http://www.press.umich.edu/titleDetailDesc.do?id=1 7530
A: HOMICIDE
1. Guns and homicide (literature review).
We performed a review of the academic literature on the effects of gun availability on homicide rates. Major Findings: A broad array of evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide, both in the United States and across high-income countries. Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the US, where there are more guns, both men and women are at higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide. Publication: Hepburn, Lisa; Hemenway, David. "Firearm Availability and Homicide: A Review of the Literature." Aggression and Violent Behavior: A Review Journal. 2004; 9:417-40.
2. Gun availability and state homicide rates, 1988-1997
Using a validated proxy for firearm ownership, we analyzed the relationship between firearm availability and homicide across 50 states over a ten year period. Major findings: After controlling for poverty and urbanization, for every age group, people in states with many guns have elevated rates of homicide, particularly firearm homicide. Publication: Miller, Matthew; Azrael, Deborah; Hemenway, David. "Household Firearm Ownership Levels and Homicide Rates across U.S. Regions and States, 1988-1997." American Journal of Public Health. 2002: 92:1988-1993.
3. Gun availability and state homicide rates, 2001-2003
Using survey data on rates of household gun ownership, we examined the association between gun availability and homicide across states, 2001-2003. Major Findings: States with higher levels of household gun ownership had higher rates of firearm homicide and overall homicide. This relationship held for both genders and all age groups, after accounting for rates of aggravated assault, robbery, unemployment, urbanization, alcohol consumption, and resource deprivation (e.g., poverty). There was no association between gun prevalence and non-firearm homicide. Submission: Miller, Matthew; Azrael, Deborah; Hemenway, David. “Homicide Victimization of Americans in Relation to Household Firearm Ownership, by Age and
I agree that humans are the most dangerous animals to ever walk the face of this plant.
Everyone can kill, under the "right" circumstances. Not everyone can murder - which isn't the same thing. There really is something wrong with people who, while capable of distinguishing right from wrong, decide to murder a bunch of strangers because they're not happy. Same with people who kill their spouse, or their kids so their spouse can't have them.
They're definitely "human"... but they're defective as all hell. They probably tortured cats when they were younger.
Sex crimes is the most rapidly growing category of incarcerated prisoners. If the rates continue for 30 years, more than 5% of the population of the US will be in prison for sex crimes and almost 10% of the population will be on the Sex Offender Registry.
Yes, that's 1 in 10.
*sings* America! Fuck yeah!
... and you'll have a 5-year waiting list of perverts/priests/pastors/politicians all wanting to get in to get some "action" or "rough trade" or "hook up with their homies"...
Here you go:
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/Firearms.htm
1. Guns and homicide (literature review).
We performed a review of the academic literature on the effects of gun availability on homicide rates.
Major Findings: A broad array of evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide, both in the United States and across high-income countries. Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the US, where there are more guns, both men and women are at higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide.
In other words, owning a gun makes you more likely to be killed by a gun...
2. Gun availability and state homicide rates, 1988-1997
Using a validated proxy for firearm ownership, we analyzed the relationship between firearm availability and homicide across 50 states over a ten year period.
Major findings: After controlling for poverty and urbanization, for every age group, people in states with many guns have elevated rates of homicide, particularly firearm homicide.
In other words, the more people "packing heat" in your state, the more likely you'll be shot to death
3. Gun availability and state homicide rates, 2001-2003
Using survey data on rates of household gun ownership, we examined the association between gun availability and homicide across states, 2001-2003.
Major Findings: States with higher levels of household gun ownership had higher rates of firearm homicide and overall homicide. This relationship held for both genders and all age groups, after accounting for rates of aggravated assault, robbery, unemployment, urbanization, alcohol consumption, and resource deprivation (e.g., poverty). There was no association between gun prevalence and non-firearm homicide.
A gun in the house means you're more likely to kill yourself or someone is more likely to kill you.
Srolling down, we come to this:
RECENT FIREARMS RESEARCH
Harvard Injury Control Research Center 2001-2006
Firearms Research Archive 1990-1998
Firearms Research Archive 1998-2003
Firearms Research Archive 2004-2005
The Firearm Research Center:
David Hemenway, Matthew Miller, Deborah Azrael, Beth Molnar, and Lisa Hepburn
Funded by the Joyce Foundation
(unpublished material is not to be cited w/o approval of authors)
BOOK: Hemenway, David. "Private Guns and Public Health" Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2004. This book summarizes the literature on the relationship between guns and injuries and describes the public health approach to reducing firearm-related violence. More information at the University of Michigan Press website: http://www.press.umich.edu/titleDetailDesc.do?id=1 7530
ARTICLES:
I GUNS AND DEATH
A: HOMICIDE
1. Guns and homicide (literature review).
We performed a review of the academic literature on the effects of gun availability on homicide rates.
Major Findings: A broad array of evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide, both in the United States and across high-income countries. Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the US, where there are more guns, both men and women are at higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide.
Publication: Hepburn, Lisa; Hemenway, David. "Firearm Availability and Homicide: A Review of the Literature." Aggression and Violent Behavior: A Review Journal. 2004; 9:417-40.
2. Gun availability and state homicide rates, 1988-1997
Using a validated proxy for firearm ownership, we analyzed the relationship between firearm availability and homicide across 50 states over a ten year period.
Major findings: After controlling for poverty and urbanization, for every age group, people in states with many guns have elevated rates of homicide, particularly firearm homicide.
Publi
Look north of your borders. We have tighter gun control laws - for everyone! And our murder rate is lass than half yours.
We have our share of gun nuts too - and they have easier access to firearms now because of the flood of illegal guns coming into the country from one country... the US.
We also have more legal firearms per capita than the US, so with a lower murder rate per capita, we must be doing something right.
Gun control for everyone works. But Jack Thompson is going to continue to try to blur the issue by claiming its not guns that kill people, but video games. So, how much do you think Thompson is being encouraged by the gun lobby?
Its actually part of the design - the thing will now fart to cool itself or to reduce load by getting the user to leave the keyboard. Their marketing motto - "You'll be blown away!"
They were going to use jumping beans, but they realized the CPU already has a bunch of JMP instructions.
Eventually I realized that the freaking dog was scratching himself. Drove me crazy for several days trying to figure out what the noise was, and it turns out to be Microsoft trying to be cute.
Ahh... the dog had fleas. Proof that Microsoft software is infested with bugs.
So you'd allow anyone and everyone access to a gun, so that "the good guys" will be armed...
And nobody will lose their self-control fighting over a boyfriend/girlfriend/parking spot/bad grades/bad hair day/failing an exam/getting dumped.
... yeah... right.
And nobody will ever point a gun at someone just to get them to go away, or scare them or as a prank...
... yeah... right.
So you'd arm the age group with the highest murder rate (late teens to mid twenties) and expect them to all behave rationally, when statistics say they're the ones MOST likely to go nuts and murder someone.
... yeah... right.
If you REALLY wanted to really lower the murder rate (as opposed to using guns as a penis extension) - you'd ban all gun ownership below 30 years of age. You'll cut the murder rate in half or more.
But if you want the killings to continue, just keep on keeping on, same old same old... because, after all, its more important to let people use guns as a surrogate and outlet for their sexual and other inadequacies than it is to have a safer environment.
He got away with it *both* times because the law emasculates the citizen from carrying a weapon at all times. If there were no restrictions on concealed carry, more people would carry. If V. Tech (like may schools) didn't ban firearms on its grounds, it's probable that some people in either group would have been armed and could have defended themselves.
We'd see more, not fewer, killings. People are less likely to commit murder as they grow older. Universities are packed with prime candidates for committing murder. Load them up with guns and booze at a campus "kegger" and watch how many people end up trying to solve problems with a gun. Or how many other gun-enabled crimes would also be committed. Now add in the "accidental shootings", the "I thought he was going for his gun so I shot him", and the "I was just trying to get him to back off" shootings, and the "he was stalking/harrassing/bugging me" shootings.
Now mix in some drugs... and more shootings.
Your simplistic assumption that nobody would use their weapons foolishly is just that - an assumption, contradicted by statistics about murder rates by age group.
"Check the murder rate since the year 1200 in the world. The fact that this is huge news means we do a lot right."
You have murder stats going back over 800 years?
I'll assume you meant 2001. The United States has much higher murder rates than Canada and European Union countries. It also has both the highest incarceration rate of any country in the world, and, in absolute numbers, the most people in jail.
More than 5.6 million Americans are in prison or have served time there, according to a new report by the Justice Department released Sunday. That's 1 in 37 adults living in the United States, the highest incarceration level in the world.
More prisons, tougher jail sentences... they don't work. There's something about American culture that makes people think a gun is a solution instead of an accident waiting to happen, and we're seeing this attitude bleed over into other countries...
p>
"Is that how this happened? Probably not. However, it's suprising how quickly good people can go bad when there's no one willing or able to support them."
... and yet, for every one that goes squirrelly, there are hundreds, thousands, who go through worse, and don't go around shooting up the place.
No, its not "their fault" - they're nuts. Still, how do we deal with it? Lock up everyone who might be a threat? That will just alienate the already alienated, or make them hide more diligently until that fatal day when they seek revenge for imagined slights.
One thing they all seem to have in common is and power narcisism - they think they are "more deserving" of attention than what they've gotten to date, and they're "darned well going to get attention, even if it means killing a bunch of people." Unfortunately, we don't have a preventative test to discriminate between someone going through a "stage" and "terminal looser".
Until then, tighter gun control laws, smaller, more dispersed campuses, and a health-care system that would give marginalized people without HMOs access to someone to talk to can't hurt, but they're not a cure. There is no cure for someone who thinks they're better than everyone else, and as a result thinks he has the right to kill others.
Slashdot Mirror
Its not just one gender or the other ... its everyone.
Everyone is fed up with strange hours
Everyone knows that its getting harder and harder to fill advanced IT jobs.
Things like "flex time" used to be "perks" - now they're mandatory if you're looking to fill a lot of positions.
Weather's crappy? Telecommute. Stay in touch via email, phone, ssh, icq, forwarding X, etc.
Already put in 40 hours or more over 4 days? Long weekend! (but if you're "on a roll" or "in the zone", accumulate the hours and post them next week and take a comp day off.) The 60, 70 and 80-hour week death marches were stupid, unproductive morasses. Getting into them was like getting into Viet Nam - more effort, less results.
A lot of us take our jobs seriously, to the point where we're thinking about code, implementation details, etc., during what should be our "down time" ... flexibility from management is expected if you want to keep talent that is serious and committed - because if you don't want them, be sure your competition does, and is probably willing to throw in more perks and more money to boot.
You wanted to be in support? Weeeeelll, that's another kettle of fish. Odd hours and being on call are the nature of the beast. Complaining about that is akin to a taxi driver complaining about having their "space" invaded when they pick up a fare, or a surgeon complaining about the sight of needles and knives and blood making them feel queezy ...
All the excuses about the "large number of people in prison for drug offenses" doesn't change tha fact that the US has more people on death row than any other country ...
I don't disagree with the 5 years for loaning to a drug dealer. I'll bet the interest rate was "interesting", He's just as guilty as the person dealing ... (actually, he's more guilty, because without him, there would have been no money, and no deal, right?)
As for the coke, you pays your money and you takes your chances. Its not like people don't know what the penalties are. I think drugs should be treated as a social issue, which is why I'm in favour of the government taking over the sale of illegal drugs and taxing the crap out of them, while removing the competition. Or ban them all, including the #1 gateway drug - tobacco. I could get behind that ... an outright ban on tobacco and all other illegal drugs, with mandatory forfeiture of all your assets and 10 years probation on simple possession. After all, if you're going to have a police state, you might as well get some benefit out of it :-)
Seriously, they call it "dope" for a reason ...
A simple total ban on civilian gun ownership or gun handling until 30 would cut the murder rate by over half. Caught with a gun in your possession - 1 year in jail, and a lifetime ban. Hunting? Wait until you're 30, and less likely to pull the trigger just because someone else pissed you off, or your S.O. dumped you, or you got a bad grade.
the 17 to 25 year old group is the age group the most likely to commit murders - and you want to arm more of them?
Right ... immaturity, hormones and guns - a really good mix at the next campus kegger ...
"This will drive everyone out of webcasting...except for ClearChannel and maybe AOL"
Don't get me wrong - I agree. People have misinterpreted the constitution to imply that everyone has a right to own guns, whereas the second amendment is clear that it is referring to an armed militia (which under US law has specific age and gender limits), and "the right of the people", not "the right of individuals".
There's a reason they're called "gun nuts."
What's so hard to understand? The two are not mutually exclusive. Tougher gun laws doesn't necessarily translate into fewer firearms - just safer ones. It also means proportionately many fewer handguns and more rifles and shotguns. You can slip a handgun into a pocket - a rifle is a lot harder to conceal, and that means fewer people walking around with concealed weapons.
http://www.canlii.org/ca/as/1995/c39/sec139.html
Also, a mandatory minimum sentence for any crime committed with a firearm, imposed consecutively (not concurrently). Rob a convenience store, and your partner, who is driving the car and never went into the store, has a gun - you BOTH get an additional 3 to 14 years for a crime committed with a firearm - even if its only an imitation gun!
The smarter crooks go out of their way NOT to carry a gun (and keep their partners in crime from doing the same) because the penalties are a lot harsher.
Just pointing a firearm (real or fake) at someone is good for up to 5 years.
Ditto for carrying around ammunition without a license.
Knowingly possessing (not just "on your person" - it may be stashed at home) a prhibited firearm or ammunition without having a license is good for up to 10 years in jail.
Anyone knowingly sitting the the same car as someone with a prohibited firearm or ammunition is liable for up to 10 years in jail ...
Crossbows are also regulated.
Find a firearm and not report it? 5 years. Lose a firearm and not report it? Ditto. No serial number or an altered serial number? Ditto.
Also, commit a crime with a weapon, - you're prohibited from owning a weapon for 10 years. Second offence - you may never own a weapon again.
The stats for the US are unequivocal - the more guns around, the more likely you are to get killed.
You own a gun, it increases your risk of committing suicide. You have a gun around, it increases your risk of being murdered. Your live in a state where more people own guns, it increases your risk of being murdered - 7x higher in the most-gun-owning states as opposed to the least. You have guns around - your kids are more likely to be shot, or to shoot someone else.
This is a US phenomena - other countries can and do have higher rates of gun ownership and lower murder rates, the difference being that other countries also have stiffer gun control laws. But wackos seem to think its an inalienable right to own a gun, and they have an easy time getting them in the US than most other places, where if you want a gun, you can go to the corner store, or steal one from a neighbour, or buy one off a friendly gas-station attendant or barman, no questions asked "for your protection". The easy availability of guns to the general populace is a crime, not a "right".
BOOK: Hemenway, David. "Private Guns and Public Health" Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2004. This book summarizes the literature on the relationship between guns and injuries and describes the public health approach to reducing firearm-related violence. More information at the University of Michigan Press website: http://www.press.umich.edu/titleDetailDesc.do?id=1 7530
A: HOMICIDE
1. Guns and homicide (literature review).
We performed a review of the academic literature on the effects of gun availability on homicide rates.
Major Findings: A broad array of evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide, both in the United States and across high-income countries. Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the US, where there are more guns, both men and women are at higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide.
Publication: Hepburn, Lisa; Hemenway, David. "Firearm Availability and Homicide: A Review of the Literature." Aggression and Violent Behavior: A Review Journal. 2004; 9:417-40.
2. Gun availability and state homicide rates, 1988-1997
Using a validated proxy for firearm ownership, we analyzed the relationship between firearm availability and homicide across 50 states over a ten year period.
Major findings: After controlling for poverty and urbanization, for every age group, people in states with many guns have elevated rates of homicide, particularly firearm homicide.
Publication: Miller, Matthew; Azrael, Deborah; Hemenway, David. "Household Firearm Ownership Levels and Homicide Rates across U.S. Regions and States, 1988-1997." American Journal of Public Health. 2002: 92:1988-1993.
3. Gun availability and state homicide rates, 2001-2003
Using survey data on rates of household gun ownership, we examined the association between gun availability and homicide across states, 2001-2003.
Major Findings: States with higher levels of household gun ownership had higher rates of firearm homicide and overall homicide. This relationship held for both genders and all age groups, after accounting for rates of aggravated assault, robbery, unemployment, urbanization, alcohol consumption, and resource deprivation (e.g., poverty). There was no association between gun prevalence and non-firearm homicide.
Submission: Miller, Matthew; Azrael, Deborah; Hemenway, David. “Homicide Victimization of Americans in Relation to Household Firearm Ownership, by Age and
"Alcohol, hormones, immaturity, and guns: yow."
"Alcohol, hormones, drugs, immaturity, fast cars and guns: yow."
There, fixed it for you!
I agree that humans are the most dangerous animals to ever walk the face of this plant.
Everyone can kill, under the "right" circumstances. Not everyone can murder - which isn't the same thing. There really is something wrong with people who, while capable of distinguishing right from wrong, decide to murder a bunch of strangers because they're not happy. Same with people who kill their spouse, or their kids so their spouse can't have them.
They're definitely "human" ... but they're defective as all hell. They probably tortured cats when they were younger.
Here you go: http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/Firearms.htm 1. Guns and homicide (literature review). We performed a review of the academic literature on the effects of gun availability on homicide rates. Major Findings: A broad array of evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide, both in the United States and across high-income countries. Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the US, where there are more guns, both men and women are at higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide. In other words, owning a gun makes you more likely to be killed by a gun ...
2. Gun availability and state homicide rates, 1988-1997
Using a validated proxy for firearm ownership, we analyzed the relationship between firearm availability and homicide across 50 states over a ten year period.
Major findings: After controlling for poverty and urbanization, for every age group, people in states with many guns have elevated rates of homicide, particularly firearm homicide.
In other words, the more people "packing heat" in your state, the more likely you'll be shot to death
3. Gun availability and state homicide rates, 2001-2003
Using survey data on rates of household gun ownership, we examined the association between gun availability and homicide across states, 2001-2003.
Major Findings: States with higher levels of household gun ownership had higher rates of firearm homicide and overall homicide. This relationship held for both genders and all age groups, after accounting for rates of aggravated assault, robbery, unemployment, urbanization, alcohol consumption, and resource deprivation (e.g., poverty). There was no association between gun prevalence and non-firearm homicide.
A gun in the house means you're more likely to kill yourself or someone is more likely to kill you.
Srolling down, we come to this:
RECENT FIREARMS RESEARCH
Harvard Injury Control Research Center 2001-2006
Firearms Research Archive 1990-1998
Firearms Research Archive 1998-2003
Firearms Research Archive 2004-2005
The Firearm Research Center:
David Hemenway, Matthew Miller, Deborah Azrael, Beth Molnar, and Lisa Hepburn
Funded by the Joyce Foundation
(unpublished material is not to be cited w/o approval of authors)
BOOK: Hemenway, David. "Private Guns and Public Health" Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2004. This book summarizes the literature on the relationship between guns and injuries and describes the public health approach to reducing firearm-related violence. More information at the University of Michigan Press website: http://www.press.umich.edu/titleDetailDesc.do?id=1 7530
ARTICLES:
I GUNS AND DEATH
A: HOMICIDE
1. Guns and homicide (literature review).
We performed a review of the academic literature on the effects of gun availability on homicide rates.
Major Findings: A broad array of evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide, both in the United States and across high-income countries. Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the US, where there are more guns, both men and women are at higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide.
Publication: Hepburn, Lisa; Hemenway, David. "Firearm Availability and Homicide: A Review of the Literature." Aggression and Violent Behavior: A Review Journal. 2004; 9:417-40.
2. Gun availability and state homicide rates, 1988-1997
Using a validated proxy for firearm ownership, we analyzed the relationship between firearm availability and homicide across 50 states over a ten year period.
Major findings: After controlling for poverty and urbanization, for every age group, people in states with many guns have elevated rates of homicide, particularly firearm homicide.
Publi
Still doesn't explain having a higher murder rate than Canada or any EU country ... and Canada has more firearms per capita than the US.
Look north of your borders. We have tighter gun control laws - for everyone! And our murder rate is lass than half yours.
We have our share of gun nuts too - and they have easier access to firearms now because of the flood of illegal guns coming into the country from one country ... the US.
We also have more legal firearms per capita than the US, so with a lower murder rate per capita, we must be doing something right.
Gun control for everyone works. But Jack Thompson is going to continue to try to blur the issue by claiming its not guns that kill people, but video games. So, how much do you think Thompson is being encouraged by the gun lobby?
Its actually part of the design - the thing will now fart to cool itself or to reduce load by getting the user to leave the keyboard. Their marketing motto - "You'll be blown away!"
They were going to use jumping beans, but they realized the CPU already has a bunch of JMP instructions.
Eventually I realized that the freaking dog was scratching himself. Drove me crazy for several days trying to figure out what the noise was, and it turns out to be Microsoft trying to be cute.
Ahh ... the dog had fleas. Proof that Microsoft software is infested with bugs.
I've got a better idea for an article: "Slashdot's 20 most annoying duplicate articles.""
No need - they'll be duped again in a few days.
Perhaps that's because Jack Thompson is funded by the gun manufacturers to help take attention away from the fact that guns, not games, kill?
Guns are the tobacco of the next generation.
Nerdz with gunz.
Scary.
Arming all the students will increase the death toll. The 18 to 25 year old group are already statistically the most likely to commit murder.
So you'd allow anyone and everyone access to a gun, so that "the good guys" will be armed ...
And nobody will lose their self-control fighting over a boyfriend/girlfriend/parking spot/bad grades/bad hair day/failing an exam/getting dumped.
And nobody will ever point a gun at someone just to get them to go away, or scare them or as a prank ...
So you'd arm the age group with the highest murder rate (late teens to mid twenties) and expect them to all behave rationally, when statistics say they're the ones MOST likely to go nuts and murder someone.
If you REALLY wanted to really lower the murder rate (as opposed to using guns as a penis extension) - you'd ban all gun ownership below 30 years of age. You'll cut the murder rate in half or more.
But if you want the killings to continue, just keep on keeping on, same old same old ... because, after all, its more important to let people use guns as a surrogate and outlet for their sexual and other inadequacies than it is to have a safer environment.
They're called "gun nuts" for a reason.
You're making a false argument
We'd see more, not fewer, killings. People are less likely to commit murder as they grow older. Universities are packed with prime candidates for committing murder. Load them up with guns and booze at a campus "kegger" and watch how many people end up trying to solve problems with a gun. Or how many other gun-enabled crimes would also be committed. Now add in the "accidental shootings", the "I thought he was going for his gun so I shot him", and the "I was just trying to get him to back off" shootings, and the "he was stalking/harrassing/bugging me" shootings.
Now mix in some drugs ... and more shootings.
Your simplistic assumption that nobody would use their weapons foolishly is just that - an assumption, contradicted by statistics about murder rates by age group.
"Check the murder rate since the year 1200 in the world. The fact that this is huge news means we do a lot right."
You have murder stats going back over 800 years?
I'll assume you meant 2001. The United States has much higher murder rates than Canada and European Union countries. It also has both the highest incarceration rate of any country in the world, and, in absolute numbers, the most people in jail.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0818/p02s01-usju.htm l
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/uk/06/prisoMore prisons, tougher jail sentences ... they don't work. There's something about American culture that makes people think a gun is a solution instead of an accident waiting to happen, and we're seeing this attitude bleed over into other countries ...
No, its not "their fault" - they're nuts. Still, how do we deal with it? Lock up everyone who might be a threat? That will just alienate the already alienated, or make them hide more diligently until that fatal day when they seek revenge for imagined slights.
One thing they all seem to have in common is and power narcisism - they think they are "more deserving" of attention than what they've gotten to date, and they're "darned well going to get attention, even if it means killing a bunch of people." Unfortunately, we don't have a preventative test to discriminate between someone going through a "stage" and "terminal looser".
Until then, tighter gun control laws, smaller, more dispersed campuses, and a health-care system that would give marginalized people without HMOs access to someone to talk to can't hurt, but they're not a cure. There is no cure for someone who thinks they're better than everyone else, and as a result thinks he has the right to kill others.
She turned to me and asked, "Is this a left handed keyboard or something?"
I hope you told her yes ...