rushmc 23 #26 September 20, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Correlation does not equal causation. If the crime rates went up would you say the same? What are the stats compared to say; Japan? Dont care I see. So as long as a statistic seems to support your position, it's good, but if it doesn't (by quite a LARGE margin), then you don't care. Interesting. If you really care to know, ask I did ask. You said; "Dont care." No, you did not ask anything You framed a bunch of bull shit to try and make some kind of point I didnt bite and you failed Do you really believe the crap you write? Eye sur ass hll doo nt bleive n teh crap U right"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #27 September 20, 2010 QuoteCorrelation does not equal causation. I didn't say it did. But these two facts seem to demonstrate that the predictions of gun control organizations are untrue: More guns in the hands of citizens does not automatically equate to more gun crimes. And the trend has been going like this for 19 years now, so it's not just a temporary anomaly. So one conclusion you should reach from this trend is that there is NO correlation between rates of gun ownership and rates of gun crime. And then given that, another conclusion is that gun ownership is not automatically a bad thing, and therefore there's no reason to restrict it any further than it already is. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #28 September 20, 2010 QuoteWhat are the stats compared to say; Japan? So as long as a statistic seems to support your position, it's good, but if it doesn't (by quite a LARGE margin), then you don't care. Japan has a much higher suicide rate than America, and they have almost no guns. So what does that say about anti-gun statistics that try to link gun ownership to suicide rates? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #29 September 20, 2010 Quote So one conclusion you should reach from this trend is that there is NO correlation between rates of gun ownership and rates of gun crime. it's a more supportable conclusion yes. But your subject says more than that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #30 September 20, 2010 QuoteCome on, John. A one year variation has no significance. I'm sure one of the prior years showed a spike with the same annual gun sales. The number of guns in circulation is always increasing, since they're highly durable goods. Crime continues to cycle up and down, with the percentage of young men in the population being the most significant determinant. You need to do your homework. You're wrong. Violent crime has been decreasing steadily for 19 years, and is at a 35-year low. Did you even read the associated story in the original post? The fact that I put "Again" in the title should have served as a clue to that for you. I've attached a chart for you. And thank you for the admission that crime isn't about gun ownership, rather, it's about things like demographics, and culture. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #31 September 20, 2010 QuoteQuoteSo one conclusion you should reach from this trend is that there is NO correlation between rates of gun ownership and rates of gun crime. it's a more supportable conclusion yes. But your subject says more than that. All it does is list two facts. It doesn't say that the first is responsible for the second. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #32 September 20, 2010 QuoteNews:More Guns, Less Crime Violent crime decreased six percent between 2008 and 2009, according to the FBI. This included an eight percent decrease in murder and a nine percent decrease in robbery. Since 1991, when total violent crime peaked, it has decreased 43 percent to a 35-year low. The murder rate, less than half what it was in 1980, is now at a 45-year low. Throughout, the number of guns that Americans own has risen by about four million a year...Source: http://www.ammoland.com/2010/09/19/deja-vu-all-over-again-more-guns-less-crime/ I would be interested to see the following: *Zip codes where crime when down/up *Zip codes where new gun ownership was registered and cross compare that to the first point. *Total amounts of guns in zip code before and after crime change. *Number of crimes that were averted or at the very least had a gun onsite with the victim *Types of crimes by type (robbery, etc), not category (violent/nonviolent) *Population change in zip code *Income change in zip code *Commercial growth change in zip code *How much money was spent by the local government in improving that zip code or how much had been lost. At least 10 years of data on these would be nice_________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #33 September 20, 2010 QuoteAll it does is list two facts. Well, in both cases they're "sort of" facts. There are absolutely more guns, no question. Although nobody knows exactly how many. The interesting question here is how accurate are the violent crime stats? On the September 10th episode of This American Life there was a fascinating story about how crime statistics have gotten out of whack. Quote ACT TWO. IS THAT A TAPE RECORDER IN YOUR POCKET, OR ARE YOU JUST UNHAPPY TO SEE ME? For 17 months, New York police officer Adrian Schoolcraft recorded himself and his fellow officers on the job, including their supervisors ordering them to do all sorts of things that police aren't supposed to do. For example, downgrading real crimes into lesser ones, so they wouldn't show up in the crime statistics and make their precinct look bad. Adrian's story first appeared as a five part series in the Village Voice, written by Graham Rayman. Schoolcraft's website looking for other cops to come forward is here. (41 minutes) Emphasis mine. This appears to be a systemic issue. It's worth a listen.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #34 September 20, 2010 QuoteQuoteCome on, John. A one year variation has no significance. I'm sure one of the prior years showed a spike with the same annual gun sales. The number of guns in circulation is always increasing, since they're highly durable goods. Crime continues to cycle up and down, with the percentage of young men in the population being the most significant determinant. You need to do your homework. You're wrong. Violent crime has been decreasing steadily for 19 years, and is at a 35-year low. Did you even read the associated story in the original post? The fact that I put "Again" in the title should have served as a clue to that for you. I've attached a chart for you. And thank you for the admission that crime isn't about gun ownership, rather, it's about things like demographics, and culture. No, John, it's you that needs to stop presenting the high school quality statistics that the NRA trumpets out. There's no excuse for doing a better job given the data does exist. You're so fucking blinded that you seem to forget I actually am on your side, I just am tired of seeing idiots hurt the cause with this kind of tripe. Has violent crime decreased every single year of the last 19, or has it steadily declined? You gave a single year decline as proof (and saying you just presented it without a conclusion is lying). It's very simple for Kallend to pick out a single countering year and shoot you down. Whereas if you had a 20 year graph with crime and gun purchases, it would be a much more defensible assertion. If you are going to continue specialize in a single issue (plus harass the Limeys), you can do a much better job of it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #35 September 21, 2010 QuoteNo, John... stop presenting the high school quality statistics that the NRA trumpets out... You're so fucking blinded... I just am tired of seeing idiots... Blah blah blah. The stats come from the FBI and BJS. Not the NRA. I presented a graph showing the trend over decades. What more do you need to realize that this isn't just a one-time thing? Now that we've reached the point of insults once again, another thread is shot to heck. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #36 September 21, 2010 QuoteQuoteNo, John... stop presenting the high school quality statistics that the NRA trumpets out... You're so fucking blinded... I just am tired of seeing idiots... Blah blah blah. The stats come from the FBI and BJS. Not the NRA. I presented a graph showing the trend over decades. What more do you need to realize that this isn't just a one-time thing? Now that we've reached the point of insults once again, another thread is shot to heck. well, hopefully you'll learn something here. Because in this thread, you posted evidence that proves "More Guns, More Crime." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skipbelt 0 #37 September 21, 2010 for those of you that carry a concealed weapon and are licensed , thank you , nobody will be a crime victim around me , even the libs ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #38 September 21, 2010 Quotefor those of you that carry a concealed weapon and are licensed , thank you , nobody will be a crime victim around me , even the libs ! So, you think having a concealed weapon is some sort of immunity shield? Interesting. I'm curious if you believe the Secret Service was carrying concealed weapons when Ronald Reagan was shot?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #39 September 21, 2010 QuoteQuoteNo, John... stop presenting the high school quality statistics that the NRA trumpets out... You're so fucking blinded... I just am tired of seeing idiots... Blah blah blah. The stats come from the FBI and BJS. Not the NRA. I presented a graph showing the trend over decades. What more do you need to realize that this isn't just a one-time thing? Now that we've reached the point of insults once again, another thread is shot to heck. he won't get called on it though.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #40 September 21, 2010 Nifty little lead thrower. I'd been thinking about an LCP, but I'm reconsidering. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #41 September 21, 2010 my PSL is on a UPS truck in Mesquite, TX. should be delivered tomorrow.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skipbelt 0 #42 September 21, 2010 QuoteQuotefor those of you that carry a concealed weapon and are licensed , thank you , nobody will be a crime victim around me , even the libs !So, you think having a concealed weapon is some sort of immunity shield? Interesting.I'm curious if you believe the Secret Service was carrying concealed weapons when Ronald Reagan was shot?yes quade i'll shield you too ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #43 September 21, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuotefor those of you that carry a concealed weapon and are licensed , thank you , nobody will be a crime victim around me , even the libs ! So, you think having a concealed weapon is some sort of immunity shield? Interesting. I'm curious if you believe the Secret Service was carrying concealed weapons when Ronald Reagan was shot? yes quade i'll shield you too ! Wanna take a guess at how many cops get shot each year? A gun isn't a shield. http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=number+of+police+officers+shot&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8#sclient=psy&hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&source=hp&q=police+officers+shot&aq=f&aqi=g-c3g1g-o1&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=6f32b8af52b7e0b8quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #44 September 21, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote for those of you that carry a concealed weapon and are licensed , thank you , nobody will be a crime victim around me , even the libs ! So, you think having a concealed weapon is some sort of immunity shield? Interesting. I'm curious if you believe the Secret Service was carrying concealed weapons when Ronald Reagan was shot? yes quade i'll shield you too ! Wanna take a guess at how many cops get shot each year? A gun isn't a shield. http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=number+of+police+officers+shot&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8#sclient=psy&hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&source=hp&q=police+officers+shot&aq=f&aqi=g-c3g1g-o1&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=6f32b8af52b7e0b8 Want to go for the number of officer on citizen shootings in a year... they are winning in BIG numbers.... GO POLICE Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skipbelt 0 #45 September 21, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuotefor those of you that carry a concealed weapon and are licensed , thank you , nobody will be a crime victim around me , even the libs !So, you think having a concealed weapon is some sort of immunity shield? Interesting.I'm curious if you believe the Secret Service was carrying concealed weapons when Ronald Reagan was shot?yes quade i'll shield you too !Wanna take a guess at how many cops get shot each year?A gun isn't a shieldhttp://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=number+of+police+officers+shot&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8#sclient=psy&hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&source=hp&q=police+officers+shot&aq=f&aqi=g-c3g1g-o1&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=6f32b8af52b7e0b8no . i'll use your olive branch as a shield while dispatching your attackers ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #46 September 21, 2010 Quote. . . while dispatching your attackers ! What attackers? I live in a fairly high crime zip code and have done so for quite awhile, but have never felt the need. Maybe you live in a more "dangerous" zip code than I do, but I kind of doubt it.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #47 September 21, 2010 QuoteI live in a fairly high crime zip code and have done so for quite awhile, but have never felt the need. I'm sure Kitty Genovese didn't 'feel the need' either.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #48 September 21, 2010 QuoteQuoteI live in a fairly high crime zip code and have done so for quite awhile, but have never felt the need. I'm sure Kitty Genovese didn't 'feel the need' either. Pretty certain you've missed the point of her story which has far more to do with bystander effect than guns. If the popular phrase "guns don't kill people" means anything, then you also have to assume it applies to those with guns that are unwilling to become involved as well. Somehow I doubt that on that street in New York on that night there wasn't somebody that had a gun. That person either didn't hear or decided not to help; either way the gun was moot. She, being stabbed twice in the back, didn't appear to have the wherewithal to have seriously defended herself from the outset even if she had a gun. We could debate her state of mind and physical capabilities at the time after being stabbed twice in the back, but it certainly doesn't seem as if she behaved capably or rationally after that point. I realize it's a super hero fantasy for some people to come to the rescue of a fair maiden, but the reality is the opportunity doesn't present itself all that often. We've been over this countless times before.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #49 September 21, 2010 QuoteQuoteNo, John... stop presenting the high school quality statistics that the NRA trumpets out... You're so fucking blinded... I just am tired of seeing idiots... Blah blah blah. The stats come from the FBI and BJS. Not the NRA. I presented a graph showing the trend over decades. What more do you need to realize that this isn't just a one-time thing? Now that we've reached the point of insults once again, another thread is shot to heck. Seeing more details and more depth to the information would help end the argument, however neither side is invested in seeing an end to the discussion; there is money to be made in the argument. LA and Chicago have taken to recording all homicides in detail. Once the census data is out you will be able to start making better comparisons to the old data. Is it possible to get a listing of how many new guns entered a neighborhood legally? http://projects.latimes.com/homicide/blog/page/1/ http://homicides.redeyechicago.com/ The raw data is there for you to pull and a google map of the data is already active on each page. note: I'll try to find the numbers, but crime, shootings, murders and dead cops are all on the rise locally. Additionally shootings and murders around schools have skyrocketed, the majority of which are ending up dead as they walk home and were caught in a crossfire. The Chicago Police Department is grossly understaffed and have turned on their leadership._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #50 September 21, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteI live in a fairly high crime zip code and have done so for quite awhile, but have never felt the need. I'm sure Kitty Genovese didn't 'feel the need' either. Pretty certain you've missed the point of her story which has far more to do with bystander effect than guns. If the popular phrase "guns don't kill people" means anything, then you also have to assume it applies to those with guns that are unwilling to become involved as well. Absolutely certain you missed the point of my mentioning her, which is to point out that you can be the victim of a violent crime regardless of where you live or whether or not you 'feel the need' to have a gun. QuoteSomehow I doubt that on that street in New York on that night there wasn't somebody that had a gun. That person either didn't hear or decided not to help; either way the gun was moot. Except to her, yes - which was my point. QuoteShe, being stabbed twice in the back, didn't appear to have the wherewithal to have seriously defended herself from the outset even if she had a gun. We could debate her state of mind and physical capabilities at the time after being stabbed twice in the back, but it certainly doesn't seem as if she behaved capably or rationally after that point. Well, it makes a nice theory - unfortunately, we'll never know for sure. QuoteI realize it's a super hero fantasy for some people to come to the rescue of a fair maiden, but the reality is the opportunity doesn't present itself all that often. I realize it's a common argument of anti-gun folks to make that claim (about some 'rescue fantasy' as a purpose for being armed). QuoteWe've been over this countless times before. Yes, we have - and the same old "I've never needed one" argument is just as lame as it ever was as a counter.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
