Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Bull Gator

Gun nutter sttrikes again

Recommended Posts

Guest

Are you seriously telling us that the stats from the Federal Bureau of Investigation are jaded? But that yours are not? Are you fuking kidding us? Jeezis keyrhyst, no wonder no one takes you seriously here.....

 

He also thinks the stats from the CDC are "jaded" too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

How many daily DGU's are you claiming, and what is your source?

 

I'm not claiming anything. But the CDC, the FBI and the DOJ are:

 

* According to the FBI Uniform Crime Reporting Program, between 2007 and 2011, over 600,000 people reported facing an assailant armed with a gun.

 

* According to the FBI, 3% of firearm assaults known to police result in a death.

 

* According to a Pew Survey, “the vast majority of gun owners say that having a gun makes them feel safer. And far more today than in 1999 cite protection – rather than hunting and other activities – as the main reason for why they own guns” (Pew Research Center, 2013)

 

* Four studies have been done showing that crime victims who actively used a gun to defend themselves had lower rates of injury than crime victims who did not use guns to defend themselves - Kleck 1988; Kleck and DeLone 1993; Tark and Kleck 2004; and Southwick 2000.

 

* The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) has estimated that there are between 60,000 and 105,000 DGUs per year. Between the years 1992 and 1994, the NCVS reported there were in total 116,000 DGUs.

 

cue mikey woofers to come in and regale us with tales about DGUs against coyotes in......3...... 2..........1...............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(Jeff, please cite your quotes, that's how we do it on PA. And let's try for a quality discussion this time.

And I want you guys to know something--I have no assistance or guidance in this research, no Brady, no Everytown. Just some curiosity wrt fools with guns.

All these quotes, and any other cites I have used, were found and organized by myself.

If I am a troll, I had my on-the-job-training on these boards. This is my first rodeo. Enjoy.)

*****************************************************

Gentlemen, in quoting Dr. Gary Kleck you are hereby caught defending criminal gun use.

Gary Kleck's defense of his own work relied on the idea that most defensive gun uses are by criminals.

(Source: Dr. Gary Kleck, featured in eight places in the CDC 2013 DGU section, beginning p14.)

If you didn't know that, you haven't done your homework. (No surprise on my part.)

It gets better. That detail is a mere footnote in any objective analysis of Gary Kleck's stuff.

Significantly, the Waco siege was February 28, 1993 to April 19, 1993; Gary Kleck's interviewing was alsdo carried out from February through April of 1993.

Quote

Kleck and Lott's formal peer review conclusion (by Dr. Daniel Webster)

Although research by John Lott and Gary Kleck has challenged the prevailing view that

gun regulations can reduce lethal crimes, the many limitations of Lott’s and Kleck’s research

indicate that there is no reason to move from view of guns and violence backed by research in

previous decades. Until proven otherwise, the best science indicates that more guns will lead

to more deaths.

http://www.bmsg.org/pdfs/myths.pdf

I do statistics for a living.

I need to go through the early papers more carefully, but I didn't see any error bounds. That would be a good thing, since the canonical 95% error bounds on the estimated 66 incidents in a sample of size 5000 (assuming a flat prior, and ignoring the confounding factors that the various analysts pointed out) are...well, huge. The variance of your estimator, assuming a typical flat beta prior, would be on the order of the size of the probability itself. (Using the R binom package, the 95% confidence range, assuming a flat prior, is typically between 1% and 1.6% -- a huge variance which calls the whole result into question.)

And that ignores the systematic over-reporting biases and the lack of rigor in the sampling method used. To me, at least, the paper appears to be extremely weak, and it appalls me that it was ever accepted for publication.

by demimondian Wed Jan 30, 2013 at 05:55:57 PM PST

Pasted from <http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/01/30/1183422/-A-closer-look-at-DGU-numbers/>

Dr. Kleck, Meet Mr. Gallup

According to Gallup (a poll, not a study, but generally rather reliable) 30 percent of American adults own guns. With a U.S. population of 313 million, roughly 75 percent of whom (about 230 million) are adults, that translates to about 70 million gun owners. The gun culture estimates its own strength at 80 million, so let’s assume they’re right, and Gallup not so much so. That would mean that one out of 32 gun owners is involved in a DGU every year. Seriously? Even if we factor in the additional 12 percent who, according to Gallup, live in a household in which someone owns a gun, that means 99 million who have access to one. And that would still mean that one out of 40 of them is involved in a DGU every year. If that sounds like a reasonable ratio to you, let’s draw a tighter bead on it.

Washington, DC has a population of about 600,000. That means it should have about 450,000 adults and about 189,000 with access to a gun. According to the Kleck ratio, we would expect that Washington would experience 4725 DGUs annually. (Actually much more, since DC is one of the most dangerous cities in the nation -and for several years in the recent past was the most dangerous.) That means almost 13 per day. Seriously? Let’s return to DC later.

In challenging my observation that many of the anecdotes are bogus, a writer at The Truth About Guns whipped out a list of “75 real ones, just from the last 4 months”. Except that many of these “real” ones were, um, not so real. […]

Because 75 in 4 months does not quite add up to 2.5 million. (If there were 75/mo.) It adds up to 225. […]

Even on the busiest day, there are rarely more than 2 or 3 DGUs in the news; and in order to meet the quota of 2.5 million annually, you would need to have 6849 daily, more than 2 per day in each of the nation’s counties.

http://propagandaprofessor.net/2012/02/11/make-my-day-mention-gun-defense-statistics/>

 

A closer look

The 2.5 million DGU number comes from Kleck '95, and it is based on 56 positive responses (weighted to 66) from a pool of 5000 surveyed. The DGU number comes from taking 66/5000 and multiplying by the number of adults in the US at the time (~200 million). Two common critiques to this methodology come from a consideration of 'false positives', and using 'external validation' to compare against other crime statistics.

First, the issue with false positives. This would be a survey responder identifying a DGU when none had occurred. Both Hemenway and Cook point out that when you have such a low probability event as DGU, even small false positives can utterly swamp the measurement of 'true positive' activity. For example, a 1% false positive rate would result in 50 (0.01 * 5000) of those 56 positive responses, a full 90%!

[…]In the end, all Kleck was left with was argument via incredulity that there would not be any significant false positive rate, despite the fact that levels on the order of 1% seem almost unavoidable given the results from surveys in general. If true, not only would it significantly reduce the 'total' DGU rate, but the incredibly low number of actual true positives would generate such large error bars that any extrapolation to the general public would be worthless.

The second factor, 'external validation' is following up on the natural instinct of "2.5 million DGUs each year? That can't be right, that's a huge number!" Indeed, that's 2 times higher than the total violent crime rate of ~1.2 million annually (including estimates of unreported crime).

How can that be? How can crime involving DGU be higher than the total crime rate? Not only that, if you assume crime affects non-DGU victims at roughly the same rate, that would imply significantly more than 2.5 million non-DGU victims.

Kleck's response is twofold, that the incidences he's measuring may not reflect typical crimes (e.g. trespassing or other non-violent crime or threat), and DGU incidences may be significantly under-reported because of illegal gun use, or other illegal activities. So, what the heck is he actually measuring?

I mean, when we're talking about trying to assess the positive social utility of DGU, scaring kids off your property by flashing a shotgun doesn't automatically go in the 'plus' category in my mind. Indeed, if you look at Table 3 in Kleck 95, you find that almost 50% of the DGU he measured involved no actual threat posed to the defender. WTF?

In fact, the primary theme that Kleck '97 uses to answer Hemenway's objections is that there is vast under-reporting of DGU because they are usually used illegally and/or in conjunction with illegal activity on the part of the defender.

Huh? I mean, maybe that's the missing piece that makes all the numbers start to make sense. The DGU measured by Kleck '95, that 2.5 million number that gets thrown around, is not lawful DGU. It's not homeowners lawfully protecting their property or lives, it's criminals using DGU to protect themselves during criminal activity. No other explanation is consistent with the much more precise estimates of crime stats of burglary, rape, robbery, and assault, and even then the 2.5 million number strains credibility.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/01/30/1183422/-A-closer-look-at-DGU-numbers/>

Kleck and Gertz argue that:

  1. Most DGUs involve illegal behaviour on the part of the defender
  1. Therefore the FPR and the FNR will be similar to that for other
    illegal behaviour such as illegal drug use.
  1. Studies of illegal drug use show that FN is much greater than FP.

There are some problems here:

  1. Kleck and Gertz offer no evidence for their claim that gun
    ownership is usually illegal and hence most DGUs involve some
    illegality.
  2. Even if DGUs are usually illegal it does not follow that the FPR
    will be similar to that for behaviours that are
    always illegal. If
    you are inventing a DGU it as possible to invent one that involves no
    illegal behaviour on your part. This is not possible for illegal drug
    use.
  3. Kleck and Gertz present two studies that measured the FPR for
    illegal drug use. Pooling them, I find that the FPR was 1 in 70 or
    1.3%. That is exactly the rate suggested by Hemenway and much greater
    than the rate that Kleck and Gertz claimed the studies supported. The
    reason why FN was greater than FP in these studies was that over half
    the population studied (convicts) were users of illegal drugs. Not
    even Kleck believes that over half the population of the US has a DGU
    each year.

To summarize: even the data presented by Kleck and Gertz on the “false positive” question supports Hemenway’s position.

2. Kleck and Gertz’s reply.

They open with an ad hominem argument: Don’t trust Hemenway – he’s associated with HCI. I hope I don’t need to point out what is wrong with this argument. Kleck and Gertz are rather heavy with the rhetoric throughout their reply. For example, they complain about the “illegitimacy” of Hemenway’s “idle speculation”. They assert that Hemenway’s critique is neither honest nor scientifically-based. They claim that the NCVS based DGU estimate is “dead” and Hemenway is the only one left who believes it isn’t.

Pasted from <http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/1998/06/04/dgu-00037/>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, let's compare a widespread survey to Kleck's 5000 phone calls. Jeff's figure (above) can be found in the lower part.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. 2.5 million DGUs, even in 1993, is 7000 per day. The fact that our newspapers, TV reports, and personal experience is completely at odds with those numbers mean something. It means that either there is a huge effort to suppress or hide all of these DGUs, or they just aren't happening in that number.

TABLE 5-1 Comparing Sampling Design of the NCVS and (Kleck's) NSDS

National Crime Victimization Survey vs.

National Self-Defense Survey

Coverage

    • NCVS: Noninstitutionalized U.S. population, age 12 and over, each year since 1973
    • Defensive gun use questions to victims (self-reported)
    • Kleck: U.S population, age 18 and over, with phones, 1993
    • DGU questions to all respondents

Sample design

    • NCVS: Rotating panel design
    • Stratified, multistage cluster sample of housing units
    • Telephone and personal contacts
    • Kleck: One-shot cross-section
    • Stratified by region (South and West oversampled)
    • Random digit dialing

Sample size

NCVS:Approximately 50,000 households and 100,000 individuals

Kleck: 4,997 individuals

Response rate

NCVS: Approximately 95% of eligible housing units

Kleck: 61% of eligible numbers answered by human beings

Sponsorship

NCVS: U.S. Census Bureau for U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics

Kleck: Research Network

Estimated defensive gun use

NCVS: 116,398 annual incidents using 1993-1994 data from redesigned survey Jeff's figure

Kleck: 2,549,862 annual incidents

About the national survey just quoted (NCVS:, above).

Quote

Evidence about the incidence and characteristics of gun victimization and self defense gun use come from two types of survey. The first is the large, public National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). The NCVS, conducted by the Census Bureau for the Bureau of Justice Statistics, asks questions of the same household every six months for three years. By excluding incidents reported in the first interview (that is, by “bounding” the responses), the NCVS greatly reduces the substantial problem of “telescoping” (the reporting of events that actually occurred outside the time frame in question). In criminal victimization surveys, telescoping can increase estimates by between 40% and 50% depending on the type of crime; the inflation rate is greatest for violent crimes.3,4

The NCVS focuses on six specific serious crimes (for example, assault, rape, robbery) and asks the respondent whether s/he has been the victim of an attempted or completed crime within the preceding six months. Follow up questions ask whether the offender used a gun in the criminal attempt, as well as what, if anything, the respondent did to protect him/herself. Estimates from the NCVS suggest that each year about one million violent crimes involve guns while victims use guns in self defense perhaps 60 000 to 120 000 times.5,6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great stuff there, JokeAwf, please keep it up. Makes feel even better today about the Ruger SR1911 I'm thinking of buying from a friend in town here. Haven't had a 45 semi automatic for a while, but this baby's just fuking gorgeous. Even more so 'cuz it'll be FTF sale-----no fees, no taxes, no b/g check, no hassles, no govvy intervention.

 

Gawd dammit but I love Arizona, State of the Free. Long live legal private firearm sales!.........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the jargon above, FN means "false negative"--a person claiming an incident didn't happen, though it did.

FP means "false positive", a person claiming he used a gun in a DGU, though he didn't.

FPR is "false positive rate."

 

You don't have to be a rocket scientist to benefit from formal studies. I agree with Happy Jack that most of us don't have the skills to follow the study methods; but that limitation can be circumvented by simply reading the study conclusions.

 

If you want to check the credibility of XYZ, use the search function, and any peer criticism will surface.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or just do what us intelligent people do and look at the FBI's own stats. Which prove all of your verbal ejaculate you paste here incorrect. But thanks for playing-----loser....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You really like the FBI dontcha Boothie? Surprising really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You really like the FBI dontcha Boothie? Surprising really.

 

I like stats & facts, Sean, not studies that are muddied.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You really like the FBI dontcha Boothie? Surprising really.

I like stats & facts, Sean, not studies that are muddied.....

You will get stats, but not necessarily facts, from the FBI. And you do know that police agencies are not required to report, right?

 

http://www.propublica.org/article/why-dont-we-know-how-many-people-are-shot-each-year-in-america

 

Updated May 15, 2014 3:38 p.m.: The article was updated to clarify that CDC estimates for nonfatal, violent gun injuries include only injuries caused by violent assault, not accidents, self-inflicted injuries, or shootings by police.

 

How many Americans have been shot over the past 10 years? No one really knows. We don't even know if the number of people shot annually has gone up or down over that time.

 

The government's own numbers seem to conflict. One source of data on shooting victims suggests that gun-related violence has been declining for years, while another government estimate actually shows an increase in the number of people who have been shot. Each estimate is based on limited, incomplete data. Not even the FBI tracks the total number of nonfatal gunshot wounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great stuff there, JokeAwf, please keep it up. Makes feel even better today about the Ruger SR1911 I'm thinking of buying from a friend in town here. Haven't had a 45 semi automatic for a while, but this baby's just fuking gorgeous. Even more so 'cuz it'll be FTF sale-----no fees, no taxes, no b/g check, no hassles, no govvy intervention.

 

Gawd dammit but I love Arizona, State of the Free. Long live legal private firearm sales!.........

 

Have some fun, Rick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Teenage gangsters attempt robbery, gun nutter shoots and kills 15 year old


...Police say a 15-year-old boy, whom they describe as a known gang member, was shot and killed at 2nd and National.

 

Police say the 15-year-old boy had previously been arrested for armed robbery, auto theft, fleeing and theft.

 

Police say he was a victim in a non-fatal shooting that occurred on August 1st in the 3100 block of N. 55th Street.

 

A 30-year-old West Allis man was taken into custody Monday for shooting the 15-year-old boy. He has been released — but ordered in to the Milwaukee County District Attorney’s Office on a future date.

 

Police say they have arrested five additional suspects believed to be part of a group responsible for “dozens” of Milwaukee-area robberies committed over a three-day period — including the 2nd and National attempted armed robbery that resulted in the fatal shooting.

 

The suspects arrested by police are: two 14-year-old boys, a 16-year-old boy, a 17-year-old boy, and an 18-year-old man.

 

Guns didn't cause this tragedy.

 

Growing up in a neighborhood where joining a gang meant surviving and dealing drugs was one of very few ways to make money did. I know Jocal will count it as a gun death, but I count it as a drug war death and an apparently legitimate self-defense shooting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile, some anti-nutters are doubling down on idiotic reasoning;

 

 

 

Column: TrackingPoint under fire for being 'too accurate'

By Lee Williams, Herald-Tribune
/ Wednesday, September 3, 2014
tp.jpeg


The TrackingPoint Networked Tracking Scope includes a laser rangefinder, 6-35X magnification video camera, ballistic calculator, environmental sensors and built-in Wi-Fi.
STAFF PHOTO / MIKE LANG

Published: Tuesday, September 2, 2014 at 2:19 p.m. Last Modified: Tuesday, September 2, 2014 at 2:19 p.m.

Is it possible to create a rifle that’s too good, too accurate, too easy to use, leaving only terrorists and other outlaw groups as potential buyers?

That is what Elliot Fineman, CEO of the National Gun Victims Action Council says about the Precision Guided Firearms made by TrackingPoint, a gun maker located in Austin, Texas.

The NGVAC wants to ban the rifles, which they say have “no legitimate civilian use.”

“There are three groups who will buy these rifles — insurrectionists, terrorists and hate groups,” Fineman said in a recent statement. “Given the sniper rifle’s deadly accuracy, no one is safe — this cannot be allowed.”

The group’s biggest objection is to the technology behind the heart of TrackingPoint’s Precision Guided Firearm system, its “network tracking scope,” a computer which calculates 20 ballistic variables 54 times per second.

All the shooter does to fire the $27,500 weapon is align the reticle onto the target, press the “tag” button, pull the trigger and hold it to the rear.

Once the scope determines the proper alignment is achieved, the rifle fires on its own.

“TrackingPoint’s sniper rifles are a classic example of technology outpacing legislation,” Fineman wrote. “The weapons unquestionably pose a significant danger to public safety, and this danger will only grow as additional companies develop similar technology.”

His group is seeking legislation to “banish the threat posed by these weapons.”

TrackingPoint, for the most part, has ignored the fury and declined to comment to the mainstream media — until now.

You can read the rest of my column here.

 

 

 

http://thegunwriter.blogs.heraldtribune.com/17748/column-trackingpoint-under-fire-for-being-too-accurate/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hold it to the rear? Sounds like a good way to get a bruised butt.

 

Exactly. I can pay a semi-hot chick a helluva lot less than $27k to bruise my ass for me....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good grief, for most of these groups, there is no "legitimate civilian use" for any firearm at all. The pro GC groups are some of the most dishonest propagandists in existence. There is absolutely zero indication that terrorist groups would utilize a firearm like this, and plenty of reason to believe that the real market is going to be guys with too much money and too little time to learn long distance shooting and hunting without the aid of a computerized rifle, and to a lesser extent possible police and military applications. It is not magic, it just makes the learning curve a little less steep at the expense of finer control of the end result. So basically it is a lot like computer aided traction control in a sports car. Big F'ing deal. Terrorists use things like IEDs and truck bombs, improvised weapons made out of commonly available items. They only use 27k computerized rifles in action movies. Stupid, stupid, stupid. Although, I guess I should be happy that they are now focusing their energy on banning something I would never ever buy anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good grief, for most of these groups, there is no "legitimate civilian use" for any firearm at all. The pro GC groups are some of the most dishonest propagandists in existence. There is absolutely zero indication that terrorist groups would utilize a firearm like this, and plenty of reason to believe that the real market is going to be guys with too much money and too little time to learn long distance shooting and hunting without the aid of a computerized rifle, and to a lesser extent possible police and military applications. It is not magic, it just makes the learning curve a little less steep at the expense of finer control of the end result. So basically it is a lot like computer aided traction control in a sports car. Big F'ing deal. Terrorists use things like IEDs and truck bombs, improvised weapons made out of commonly available items. They only use 27k computerized rifles in action movies. Stupid, stupid, stupid. Although, I guess I should be happy that they are now focusing their energy on banning something I would never ever buy anyway.

 

Don't forget the "insurrectionists" and "hate groups." I think they mean the NRA. Scarier than Ebola.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Don't forget the "insurrectionists" and "hate groups." I think they mean the NRA. Scarier than Ebola.

 

NO! Nothing is scarier than ebonics.... I mean ebola.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

To expose what you are laying out here, even if 26 DGU's matched 26 criminal homicides, that's what one would call a real mess. It would show a broken, gun-ridden society. Is that what you are proposing?

 

I would call that a "good start"......

 

Then you would be proposing a vigilante blueprint for society.

Please explain this, Jeff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess Jocal missed my self-defense updates?

 

Linky? Are you willing to discuss them directly, and honestly? If so, I'm game.

 

ManondikeTomscredibility_zps39935104.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So protecting yourself, your loved ones or even complete strangers by ANY means available or neccessary is considered 'vigilantism' in your book?.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I guess Jocal missed my self-defense updates?

 

Linky? Are you willing to discuss them directly, and honestly? If so, I'm game.

 

ManondikeTomscredibility_zps39935104.png

 

Here's the most recent:

 

http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=142774&page=27#entry4664266

 

The link leads to the top of this page, so you could just scroll up. Prior ones are on previous pages.

 

BTW, calling the private transfer exemption a "gun show loophole" is designed to sow confusion in two ways: one, it exists everywhere, not just at gun shows, and two, it's a valid exemption, which is why it is included in bills like Washington's own 594, the favorite new gun control bill of the billionaire set. They don't call it a "loophole" in their own law, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or just do what us intelligent people do and look at the FBI's own stats. Which prove all of your verbal ejaculate you paste here incorrect. But thanks for playing-----loser....

 

Hi Rick. The FBI figures are not jaded, as such, but they are not complete, either. And they are open to a wide sway in their interpretation. Tom likes to quote the high percentage of black-involved homicides from the first line of this one, from table 3. His unflattering stat is that blacks, with 16% of the U.S. population, have compiled 5486 murders, but the whites only 4729. (Note, 4077 other murders, ONE THIRD, are of unknown racial origin). But see below for a more subtle take of the bigger racial picture.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-3

But since you insist on the validity of an FBI-only data set, let's look into it further. Three of the favorite geographical areas brought up by others on our boards are non-reporters to the FBI system. From the report you insist on using:

--In 2010, as in years past, the state of Florida did not submit any data to the FBI Supplementary Homicide Report. Data from Florida was not requested individually because the difference in collection techniques would create a bias in the study results.

--In addition, according to the FBI, limited SHR data was received from Illinois for 2010.

--For the five-year period 2006 through 2010, the District of Columbia submitted SHR data only in 2009, during which there

were no justifiable homicides in the District.

 

 

FBI REPORT, Justifiable Homicides by Firearm

It could be that you need to do more reading (and less habitual belittling of others, heh heh.)

Because here's another reason not to put all your eggs in the FBI stat basket.

The single absolutely valid metric is from the FBI Uniform Crime Reports tables of justifiable homicides. The data show that that very consistently from year to year, close to 200 defensive homicides occur each year in the entire country, a very low number. This number gives a minute chance of lethal defensive gun use: 1/1,000,000.

However, when the FBI UCR data are looked at to see, when shooters do kill, WHO they kill, it is FAMILY, FRIENDS AND ONESELF BY A PERCENTAGE OF 94% (suicide data is from the CDC, also on line).

Pasted from <http://www.msnbc.com/melissa-harris-perry/watch/gun-reform-and-the-compulsion-for-protection-91937347745>

But to be fair to you, and to be objective, here is the problem with these FBI figures. This cite is from a knee-jerk, pro-gun source.

The import of the cite is that we need to standardize this reporting, and to confront the NRA about systemically obfuscating the data.

 

Justifiable Homicide: How the FBI Uniform Crime Report defines it

Friday, December 7, 2012 2:30

If you rely on the FBI Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) for numbers of justifiable homicides, the numbers will always be significantly under reported. First, in many years, many states simply do not submit numbers, so they are not counted. Not all police jurisdictions in other states submit numbers, so the total is always going to be low.

The definition of justifiable homicides vary from state to state. What is reported is often politically determined.

Here is the FBI UCR definition for justifiable homicides, from pages 17 and 18 of the Uniform Crime Reporting Handbook:

Justifiable Homicide

Certain willful killings must be classified as justifiable or excusable. In UCR, Justifiable Homicide is defined as and limited to:

• The killing of a felon by a peace officer in the line of duty.

• The killing of a felon, during the commission of a felony, by a private citizen.

NOTE: To submit offense data to the UCR Program, law enforcement agencies must report the willful (nonnegligent) killing of one individual by another, not the criminal liability of the person or persons involved.

The following scenarios illustrate incidents known to law enforcement that reporting agencies would consider Justifiable Homicide:

15. A police officer answered a bank alarm and surprised the robber coming out of the bank. The robber saw the responding officer and fired at him. The officer returned fire, killing the robber. The officer was charged in a court of record as a matter of routine in such cases.

16. When a gunman entered a store and attempted to rob the proprietor, the storekeeper shot and killed the felon.

NOTE: Justifiable homicide, by definition, occurs in conjunction with other offenses. Therefore, the crime being committed when the justifiable homicide took place must be reported as a separate offense. Reporting agencies should take care to ensure that they do not classify a killing as justifiable or excusable solely on the claims of self-defense or on the action of a coroner, prosecutor, grand jury, or court.

The following scenario illustrates an incident known to law enforcement that reporting agencies would not consider Justifiable Homicide:

17. While playing cards, two men got into an argument. The first man attacked the second with a broken bottle. The second man pulled a gun and killed his attacker. The police arrested the shooter; he claimed self-defense.

By this definition, many justifiable homicides will never be reported to the FBI.

2012-12-07 02:20:47

Source: http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2012/12/how-fbi-uniform-crime-report-defines.html

Rick, here's a more racially balanced look at homicides, from your FBI source:

The Shooters: # In 2010

52.6 percent (121) of the shooters who committed justifiable homicides were white,

44.3 percent (102) were black,

2.2 percent (five) were Asian,

none were American Indian, and

0.9 percent (two) were of unknown race.7

For the five-year period 2006 through 2010,

53.1 percent (547) of the shooters who committed justifiable homicides were white,

40.8 percent (421) were black,

3.3 percent (34) were Asian

0.4 percent (four) were American Indian, and

2.4 percent (25) were of unknown race.

[For additional information see Table Seven:

Race of Shooter in Justifiable Homicides by Firearm, 2006–2010.]

The Deceased

Race of Persons Killed in Justifiable Homicides by Firearm

# In 2010, 39.1 percent (90) of persons killed with a gun in a justifiable homicide were white,

60.0 percent (138) were black,

none were Asian,

0.4 percent (one) was American Indian, and

0.4 percent (one) were of unknown race.

For the five-year period 2006 through 2010,

39.6 percent (408) of persons killed with a gun in a justifiable homicide were white,

58.2 percent (600) were black,

0.4 percent (four) were Asian,

1.1 percent (11) were American Indian, and

0.8 percent (eight) were of unknown race.

[For additional information see Table Eight:

Race of Persons Killed in Justifiable Homicides by Firearm, 2006–2010.]

Those shot by whites

For the five-year period 2006 through 2010,

65.1 percent (356) of the persons killed by white shooters were white,

32.7 percent (179) were black,

0.2 percent (one) were Asian, 1.1 percent (six) were American Indian, and

0.9 percent (five) were of unknown race.

[For additional information see Table Nine: Race of Shooter and Person

Killed, Justifiable Homicides by Firearm, 2006–2010.]

Tom likes to breezily sell guns as anti-rape devices.

What do the FBI figures show? That this "Let's arm the females" subject is a complex, mixed bag.

 

FBI report on Women and Self Defense

In 2009…1,818 females were murdered by males in single victim/single offender incidents that were submitted to the FBI for its Supplementary Homicide Report. Examination of that data dispels many of the myths regarding the nature of lethal violence against females.

  • For homicides in which victim-to-offender relationship could be identified, 93% of female victim (1,579 out of 1,693) were murdered by a male they knew.

  • Nearly fourteen times as may females were murdered by a male they knew (1,579 victims) as were killed by male strangers (114 victims).

  • For victims who knew their offenders, 63% (989) of female homicide victims were wives or intimate acquaintances of their killers.

  • There were 296 women shot and killed by either their husbands or acquaintances during the course of an argument.

  • Nationwide, for homicides in which the weapon could be determined (1,654), more female homicides were committed with firearms (53%) than any other weapon.

  • <http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded/expandhomicidemain>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I guess Jocal missed my self-defense updates?

 

Linky? Are you willing to discuss them directly, and honestly? If so, I'm game.

 

ManondikeTomscredibility_zps39935104.png

 

Here's the most recent:

 

http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=142774&page=27#entry4664266

 

The link leads to the top of this page, so you could just scroll up. Prior ones are on previous pages.

 

BTW, calling the private transfer exemption a "gun show loophole" is designed to sow confusion in two ways: one, it exists everywhere, not just at gun shows, and two, it's a valid exemption, which is why it is included in bills like Washington's own 594, the favorite new gun control bill of the billionaire set. They don't call it a "loophole" in their own law, though.

 

Are you imagining the bolded words? Actually, you taught me better than that. To whom are you referring?

Meh, why do you think we need to generate any confusion? We need to dispel the confusion placed by yourself and the gun lobby.

Do you think we are fabricating this problem? :rolleyes:

 

40% of gun sales are private, a HUGE problem which lacks background checks. This void of responsibility is explicitly supported by yourself for some dubious reason. (Dumbassery, IMO.) One of your own tables, which I saw today, shows private sales as a significant source for criminals' guns, IIRC.

 

The gun show loophole, at 2% of the market, is a different problem, and a lesser problem, yes--but one that our neighbors to the north and south (Canada and Mexico) have both formally complained about. Dr. Garen Wintemute did an extensive study (278 gun shows in 19 states) and brought back consistent photographic evidence of a steady stream of straw buyers. You avoided or denied this evidence in another thread. If you have a platform to stand on, take a look at it and let's toss it around. But for you to simply deny that a gun show loophole exists is not acceptable to me. It strains your credibility publicly, Tom

 

 

"Inside Gun Shows: What Goes on When Everybody Thinks Nobody’s Watching,"

 

http://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/welcome/features/20090923_gun_study/index.html>

 

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Gawd dammit but I love Arizona, State of the Free. Long live legal private firearm sales!.........

stayin dry?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inch & a half here yesterday in 45 minutes. Red rivers of silt pouring off the Dragoons. Guess Tucson metro area got their asses kicked a lot worse. Somewhere north/west of Marana I heard they're still looking for an Ace Hardware delivery van. Cue Muddy Waters.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Teenage gangsters attempt robbery, gun nutter shoots and kills 15 year old

 

 

...Police say a 15-year-old boy, whom they describe as a known gang member, was shot and killed at 2nd and National.

 

Police say the 15-year-old boy had previously been arrested for armed robbery, auto theft, fleeing and theft.

 

Police say he was a victim in a non-fatal shooting that occurred on August 1st in the 3100 block of N. 55th Street.

 

A 30-year-old West Allis man was taken into custody Monday for shooting the 15-year-old boy. He has been released — but ordered in to the Milwaukee County District Attorney’s Office on a future date.

 

Police say they have arrested five additional suspects believed to be part of a group responsible for “dozens” of Milwaukee-area robberies committed over a three-day period — including the 2nd and National attempted armed robbery that resulted in the fatal shooting.

 

The suspects arrested by police are: two 14-year-old boys, a 16-year-old boy, a 17-year-old boy, and an 18-year-old man.

 

Guns didn't cause this tragedy.

 

Growing up in a neighborhood where joining a gang meant surviving and dealing drugs was one of very few ways to make money did. I know Jocal will count it as a gun death, but I count it as a drug war death and an apparently legitimate self-defense shooting.

 

I disagree. It seems to go back to Jeff's idea that 26 good guys shooting 26 miscreants on a given day is "a good start."

He counts 26 pro-gun victories. I count 52 tragedies.

 

Because even the shooters walk away messed up, according to psychologists. (This includes policemen, infantry, and sometimes even commanding officers.)

And because the dispassionate administration of justice is the hallmark of a civilized country.

(Sidebar: Native Americans were quite impressed by our calm, systematic legal hearings, and copied them in the PNW circa 1830.)

 

One (or twenty-six) daily DGU's is not a good start, nor is it socially desirable. It's mayhem, i.e. the lack of civilization.

It's de-generation of society... now driven by guns on both sides.

 

I answered as directly as I could. Your turn; I ask that you do the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you should be preaching to the criminal scum of this country. .....instead of us responsible gun owners. You've been jerking your lettuce here for two years, but unfortunately you've been jerking it to the wrong audience. We're not the problem, it's the parasites of America who are the problem. .....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So protecting yourself, your loved ones or even complete strangers by ANY means available or neccessary is considered 'vigilantism' in your book?.....

 

It's far from a personal definition. (Don't you ever follow your curiosity to any reading outside of Political Anarchy?)

 

Wikipdia: (first line)

A vigilante is a civilian who undertakes law enforcement with or without legal authority.

 

The appalling part of this: pro-gunners claim to trump genteel behavior with the U.S. Constitution, while bypassing a basic: the due process of law.

​Not even the government or law enforcement has that right, but the NRA and SAF have bestowed it onto any gunowner?

 

Others can see right through this; it fails the smell test, buddy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you should be preaching to the criminal scum of this country. .....instead of us responsible gun owners. You've been jerking your lettuce here for two years, but unfortunately you've been jerking it to the wrong audience. We're not the problem, it's the parasites of America who are the problem. .....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you should be preaching to the criminal scum of this country. .....instead of us responsible gun owners. You've been jerking your lettuce here for two years, but unfortunately you've been jerking it to the wrong audience. We're not the problem, it's the parasites of America who are the problem. .....

 

"Criminal scum of this country" are not the problem.

85% of our homicides are committed by family and acquaintances, not criminal strangers.

 

Furthermore, the "parasites" you refer to have the same needs and traits and hopes as the Nursetta.

You talk like white trash. A lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did the guy who raped your wife have 'needs & traits & hopes' that she and you approve of?.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

Did the guy who raped your wife have 'needs & traits & hopes' that she and you approve of?.....

 

You really need to drop that Shit. .. pronto.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Did the guy who raped your wife have 'needs & traits & hopes' that she and you approve of?.....

You really need to drop that Shit. .. pronto.

 

Uhm...., no I don't, it's a legit question given all the crap he's posted about it. He claims his wife would not have shot him if she had a gun with her. I'm thinking he's full of shit. Fuk, I would have shot the fuker if I stumbled across that scene. With. No. Hesitation. At. All. Guys like that don't deserve sympathy.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tell ya what, let's go one even better. See if y'all can follow me on this one;

 

Hey Jocal, did that guy get arrested, tried & convicted?....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Did the guy who raped your wife have 'needs & traits & hopes' that she and you approve of?.....

You really need to drop that Shit. .. pronto.

 

Uhm...., no I don't, it's a legit question given all the crap he's posted about it. He claims his wife would not have shot him if she had a gun with her. I'm thinking he's full of shit. Fuk, I would have shot the fuker if I stumbled across that scene. With. No. Hesitation. At. All. Guys like that don't deserve sympathy.....

 

That's not for you to say, Amigo.

The perp was Navy personnel with a good record, then committed multiple rapes.

He was successfully prosecuted in Northern California by our remarkable legal system.

My wife kept a loaner gun under her pillow for a year, then relinquished it when some healing kicked in.

Counselling worked in her favor (not ancient concepts of vengeance).

 

If you can't handle the truth of her words, then just think about it while pheasant hunting.

She has tits and she came out of it twice the man you are.

 

Kevin, a powerful thank-you goes out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blah blah blah. Now my second question----is he still in prison? .....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

 

Did the guy who raped your wife have 'needs & traits & hopes' that she and you approve of?.....

 

You really need to drop that Shit. .. pronto.

 

Agree. Not cool. Its one thing to ask a related question about the incident. But that's just an unnecessary jab in the eye.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

 

 

However, when the FBI UCR data are looked at to see, when shooters do kill, WHO they kill, it is FAMILY, FRIENDS AND ONESELF BY A PERCENTAGE OF 94% (suicide data is from the CDC, also on line).

Pasted from <http://www.msnbc.com/melissa-harris-perry/watch/gun-reform-and-the-compulsion-for-protection-91937347745>

 

First of all Joe, you're wearing out the scroll wheel on my mouse. I'm on my 3rd one because of you.

 

And for the last time, suicides do NOT belong in a discussion about gun crime, homicides, defensive shootings etc. Take out suicides and that 94% number plummets. Its disingenuous and I will call you on your BS every time. I tune you out the moment you try to slip in that kind of BS into a discussion. What tiny shred of credibility you have shrinks every time you try to pull that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

 

 

To expose what you are laying out here, even if 26 DGU's matched 26 criminal homicides, that's what one would call a real mess. It would show a broken, gun-ridden society. Is that what you are proposing?

 

I would call that a "good start"......

 

Then you would be proposing a vigilante blueprint for society.

Please explain this, Jeff.

 

I think you need to go re-look up the word "vigilante". Defending yourself from an attack is not vigilantism. If those people defending themselves were out on the streets looking for trouble ala Charles Bronson, you might have a point. But trouble finds them instead - usually in their home or at their workplace. Having a gun in your home is not being a vigilante. Carrying a gun for protection is not being a vigilante. Walking up to a drug dealer on the corner near an elementary school and assassinating him IS being a vigilante. See the difference?

 

As for the 26 DGU's being a good start..... what's your alternative? In your world, there would be an additional 26 people dead, raped, robbed, stabbed or beaten. DGU's don't just happen in a vacuum. For someone to use a gun to defend them self - it means that someone was threatening their life. I would rather have 26 innocent folks still alive who can go back to their family that night instead of their family having to IDing them in the morgue. And if that means that an additional 26 shitbags are dead as a result - then yes, that is a good start. Being a criminal is a dangerous line of work. Or it is so long as there is an armed populace who has the ability to protect themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

BTW, calling the private transfer exemption a "gun show loophole" is designed to sow confusion in two ways: one, it exists everywhere, not just at gun shows, and two, it's a valid exemption, which is why it is included in bills like Washington's own 594, the favorite new gun control bill of the billionaire set. They don't call it a "loophole" in their own law, though.

 

Are you imagining the bolded words? Actually, you taught me better than that. To whom are you referring?

Meh, why do you think we need to generate any confusion? We need to dispel the confusion placed by yourself and the gun lobby.

Do you think we are fabricating this problem? :rolleyes:

 

40% of gun sales are private, a HUGE problem which lacks background checks.

 

.

 

No, I'm not imagining them, I see them all the time. Want me to search this forum for that phrase and show you? Such a search won't show the picture you posted, and on which I was commenting. At least, I thought I imagined that pic had those words. Was I wrong?

 

I think you need to generate confusion to hide what you really intend: you don't intend to regulate gun shows. You intend to regulate individuals.

 

Yes, you're fabricating the "gun show loophole" problem.

 

crime-gun-sources.gif

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Hi Rick. The FBI figures are not jaded, as such, but they are not complete, either. And they are open to a wide sway in their interpretation. Tom likes to quote the high percentage of black-involved homicides from the first line of this one, from table 3. His unflattering stat is that blacks, with 16% of the U.S. population, have compiled 5486 murders, but the whites only 4729.

 

I only "like" to point that out when people like yourself come along claiming that a high rate of gun ownership causes high crime rates.

 

The gun ownership rate among black Americans is significantly lower than among whites, yet the homicide rate is much higher. This makes me question the causal relationship you assert.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Did the guy who raped your wife have 'needs & traits & hopes' that she and you approve of?.....

 

You really need to drop that Shit. .. pronto.

 

Agree. Not cool. Its one thing to ask a related question about the incident. But that's just an unnecessary jab in the eye.

Agreed,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

Did the guy who raped your wife have 'needs & traits & hopes' that she and you approve of?.....

 

You really need to drop that Shit. .. pronto.

Agree. Not cool. Its one thing to ask a related question about the incident. But that's just an unnecessary jab in the eye.

Agreed,
Jeff could put an end to it. Just call rick a cunt. You know he is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JoCal (trim quotes, please), Specious and others who clamor for firearm prohibition are completely missing the point in their protestations: What they are calling for won't get them where they want to go.

 

I like my little arsenal, but, it doesn't define me. If I thought I could positively impact the problem of violence in this country by "turning in" my firearms, I'd do so immediately, and stick to bowhunting.

 

It won't.

 

The presence of an implement doesn't create the behaviors by which the implement is used improperly. The people who claim differently are, IMHO, intellectual cowards who refuse to acknowledge and take efforts to address the real causes of violence in our society. The breakdown of societal standards, resulting in the lack of self-respect, and respect for others, coupled with the promotion of a "victim mentality" and the continued "you cant get there without our help because you're a _________ (fill in whatever disadvantaged group you want)" are the root causes of the propensity to use violence as a means of expression, as a means of "getting respect", as a means of obtaining "stuff", as a means of settling disputes.

 

You want to fix violence? Quit glorifying and promulgating the conditions and policies that tend to incite it. Prohibition of the means thru which an undesired behavior is implemented isn't the right approach, no matter WHAT behavior you're trying to address.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

Oh - I see what you did - you posted a Pitcher..

 

Oh stop showing the obvious. Hypocrisy? Nawwwww....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JoCal (trim quotes, please), Specious and others who clamor for firearm prohibition are completely missing the point in their protestations: What they are calling for won't get them where they want to go.

I am clamoring for firearm prohibition? Only in your mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" Prohibition of the means thru which an undesired behavior is implemented isn't the right approach, no matter WHAT behavior you're trying to address."

 

Just ask the preachers daughter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gun nutter attempts to rob medical marijuana merchant, gets shot and killed


The suspect walked up to the 54-year-old seller, who was in the back seat of a vehicle, about 9:45 p.m., Crump said.

 

But when the seller asked to see the suspect's medical marijuana card, the suspect pulled a handgun and tried to rob the victim.

 

Crump said the suspect's attention was diverted and the victim also pulled a handgun and shot the suspect several times.

 

The suspect returned fire and struck the victim's vehicle at least once, but did not hit the seller, Crump said.

The victim and several witnesses who arrived at the park together fled, but were quickly stopped by officers, Crump said.

 

The suspect was taken to a hospital, where he died.

 

The victim and witnesses were questioned by police and released, pending a review of the case, Crump said.

 

Released? This victim was attempting to commit a federal crime when he was attacked. He obviously had a gun in his possession while attempting to commit that crime. There are some pretty stiff penalties for that. And this guy walks? And it gets one line in the story, just like it's a routine thing to release people who have just killed someone while attempting to commit a federal crime?

 

This is the incoherence of our drug war. That guy shouldn't be selling "medical" marijuana on Craigslist and operating out of the back of his car. We don't let a liquor business operate that way. When things go horribly wrong, it muddies the waters a bit as to whether he could be exercising federally-protected rights.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

JoCal (trim quotes, please so you can join Guy, a sanctimonious Bill-of-Rights kinda guy, in obstructing Joe's First Amendment expression, on Sailing Anarchy.), Specious and others who clamor for firearm prohibition are completely missing the point in their protestations: What they are calling for won't get them where they want to go.

 

I like my little arsenal, but, it doesn't define me. If I thought I could positively impact the problem of violence in this country by "turning in" my firearms, I'd do so immediately, and stick to bowhunting.

 

It won't.

 

The presence of an implement doesn't create the behaviors by which the implement is used improperly. The people who claim differently are, IMHO, intellectual cowards who refuse to acknowledge and take efforts to address the real causes of violence in our society. The breakdown of societal standards, resulting in the lack of self-respect, and respect for others, coupled with the promotion of a "victim mentality" and the continued "you cant get there without our help because you're a _________ (fill in whatever disadvantaged group you want)" are the root causes of the propensity to use violence as a means of expression, as a means of "getting respect", as a means of obtaining "stuff", as a means of settling disputes.

 

You want to fix violence? Quit glorifying and promulgating the conditions and policies that tend to incite it. Prohibition of the means thru which an undesired behavior is implemented isn't the right approach, no matter WHAT behavior you're trying to address.

 

But Prohibition has worked well for alcohol and drugs so far. Why can't it work equally well for guns?

 

Oh wait, never mind......

 

It's not fair (or constructive) to put me down as pro-prohibition.

That said, 1957 was the Year of The Big Tail Fender, and then we got more selective about car safety. For good reasons.

 

 

 

 

 

 

aapuzzle_zps138eef05.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

JoCal (trim quotes, please), Specious and others who clamor for firearm prohibition are completely missing the point in their protestations: What they are calling for won't get them where they want to go.

I am clamoring for firearm prohibition? Only in your mind.

 

+2. Delusions abound with these guys.

 

This sign, now on my road, is asking for votes against a similar straw man.

I-591posterstopgunconfiscation_zps472fca

 

And this is the wisdom, written by them, which is behind the background-check legislation being opposeded by the sign.

Voter Pamphlet Ballot Statement

PROTECT YOUR RIGHTS, VOTE YES ON 591

Initiative 591 protects against illegal search and seizure, preventing politicians and bureaucrats driven by an anti-rights agenda from depriving citizens of their property without due process.

The gun prohibition lobby responsible for draconian anti-civil rights and self-defense laws in New York, Washington, D.C. and Chicago, is now targeting Washington citizens, using money and resources from out of state.

NO GUN CONFISCATION WITHOUT DUE PROCESS

We saw firearms confiscated without due process in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. Some people never got their property back. We are seeing confiscation of firearms in Connecticut, New York, New Jersey and California.

THIS AFFECTS YOU IF YOU OWN A GUN, OR NOT

In Washington State, we have already seen legislation proposed to allow police to enter your home and search your bedroom for lawfully owned firearms without a warrant or court order. Government agencies are collecting record amounts of your personal data, raising grave privacy concerns.

591 DOES NOT PREVENT BACKGROUND CHECKS

591 protects background check uniformity and prevents unwarranted intrusion by the state into temporary firearm loans to friends or in-laws. It stops the state from creating a universal gun registry that could enable future confiscation. Maintaining balance between privacy rights and public safety is what 591 is about. It is supported by a diverse bipartisan coalition of law enforcement professionals, collectors, competitors, and sportsmen and women who believe that nobody’s privacy should be for sale to the gun prohibition lobby.

Ballot Statement Committee Roster

Alan Gottlieb, Chair, Protect Our Gun Rights Coalition

Bill Burris, Spokesman, Washington State Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors Association

Brian Blake, State Representative, Democrat, six term veteran legislator

John Rodabaugh, President, Washington Arms Collectors

Julianne Versnel, Publisher, Second Amendment Foundation’s Women & Guns Magazine

Phil Shave, Retired Chief, Law Enforcement State Parks

Pasted from <http://wagunrights.org/>

 

This is the bill itself: It's pretty unclear.

PROTECT OUR GUN RIGHTS

AN ACT Relating to protecting gun and other firearm rights; adding new sections to chapter 9.41 RCW; and creating new sections.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:

NEW SECTION. Sec. 1. A new section is added to chapter 9.41 RCW to read as follows:

It is unlawful for any government agency to confiscate guns or other firearms from citizens without due process.

NEW SECTION. Sec. 2. A new section is added to chapter 9.41 RCW to read as follows:

It is unlawful for any government agency to require background checks on the recipient of a firearm unless a uniform national standard is required.

NEW SECTION. Sec. 3. The provisions of this act are to be liberally construed to effectuate the intent, policies, and purposes of this act.

NEW SECTION. Sec. 4. If any provision of this act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the act or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances is not affected.

NEW SECTION. Sec. 5. This act is known and may be cited as the “Protect Our Gun Rights Act.”

— END —

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heller and McDonald overturned gun prohibitions closed registries. Didn't know you were a fan, JC!

 

aadorothyandstrawman_zps8e7dd059.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JokeAwf, has the thought ever once crossed your mind that you are doing far more harm to your 'cause' here than good? By a humongous margin? To the point that The Brady Group wouldn't even hire you to clean their toilets? Really pal, you should stop embarrassing yourself right now. You've become a sad caricature of insanity-in-the-making.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AP:

Top News - Most Recent: 51 mins ago

 

BELL, Fla. (AP) - Media outlets are reporting that a shooting in north Florida could involve multiple fatalities.

The Gilchrist County Sheriff's Office has confirmed to The Associated Press that it is investigating a shooting in the town of Bell Thursday and that a news conference has been scheduled for 8 p.m. WCJB-TV says police are classifying it as a major shooting.

It wasn't immediately clear how many people were shot or their ages and genders.

A photo on the Gainesville Sun's website shows several police vehicles on a rural road. A sheriff's deputy was keeping people away behind police tape.

Bell is small town of just 350 people about 30 miles west of Gainesville.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being suicidal and homicidal is the worst case scenario for mental health, it appears this latest shooter fits the worst case for mental health.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

JokeAwf, has the thought ever once crossed your mind that you are doing far more harm to your 'cause' here than good? By a humongous margin? To the point that The Brady Group wouldn't even hire you to clean their toilets? Really pal, you should stop embarrassing yourself right now. You've become a sad caricature of insanity-in-the-making.....

 

that would imply being self aware - much the same problem as our Rezzident induhpendant from Floriduh...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TX concealed weapons nutters much less violent than general population

 

The two numbers give us the ratio of CHL holder convictions for murder and manslaughter per 100,000 CHL holders. That number is .70 per 100,000. Yes, the decimal point is in the correct place.

 

The rate of murder and manslaughter for the general population of Texas averaged for the years 1996-2011 is 6.0 per 100,000.

 

I'm afraid of people who do not have concealed weapons permits, and as the TX stats and surveys from other states show, my fear is perfectly rational.

 

I think people without concealed weapons permits, being considerably more dangerous than CWP holders, should have to wear signs identifying themselves as part of the dangerous segment of society. ;)

 

Only partial figures in TX and NC are shown in Tom's links.The sample sizes are not significant. Link broken to the actual TX study.JURY IS OUT>

 

 

The Badgeless Dodger, bless his heart, is sort of playing hide-and seek. The CCP -to-felony ratio figures he is asking for have been prevented, by law, in many places, and not gathered in most places as a privacy matter.

 

Secondly, no comprehensive figures are known which answer Tom's DGU stat question, due to blocked research.

 

But one detail Tom omitted is that Tom's Texas study revealed that 38% of the 44 CCP felons arrested had obtained their permits illegally.

 

The known numbers for CCP violators are not that bad, about 100/yr. But the ratio of CCP mass shooters is quite high.

 

Note: the VPC uses three deaths to define a mass shooting. Factor that to relate to how the FBI counts them at four , but do not dismiss 100% of CCP mass shooters offhandedly due to the VPC math, as His Badgelessness has done on these boards.

 

**********************************

 

Three other takes on it? Here's One:

Michigan CCW Holders' Suicide Rate Higher Than Michigan's General Population

Posted: 12/01/2010 1:46 pm EST Updated: 05/25/2011 6:15 pm EDT

Concealed handgun license holders in the Wolverine State commit suicide at a rate higher than the general Michigan population according to information analyzed by my organization, the Violence Policy Center, as part of our Concealed Carry Killersproject, an on-line resource that tallies reports of killings by concealed handgun permit holders that have not been determined to be legitimate self defense.

According to information from the Michigan State Police, for the period July 1, 2007 through June 30, 2008, 29 of Michigan's 164,793 concealed handgun license holders took their own lives for a concealed handgun license holder suicide rate of 17.6 per 100,000 license holders. For the period July 1, 2008 through June 30, 2009, 28 of Michigan's 182,749 concealed handgun license holders took their own lives for a concealed handgun license holder suicide rate of 15.3 per 100,000 license holders.

In comparison, in 2007 Michigan's suicide rate for the general population was 11.3 per 100,000. In 2008, the suicide rate for the general population was 11.7 per 100,000. Only data for each calendar year is available and data for 2009 has not yet been released.

Pasted from <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-sugarmann/michigan-ccw-holders-suic_b_790524.html>

 

Two

 

Concealed Carry Killers Responsible for at Least 26 (Edit: 29) Mass Shootings in the Past Six Years

WASHINGTON - October 31 - Private citizens legally allowed to carry concealed handguns have committed at least 26 mass shootings over the past six years — including the recent mass murder at the Washington Navy Yard that left 12 dead and a July shooting in Hialeah, Florida that ended the lives of six innocent victims.

These and other criminal killings can be found in the Violence Policy Center’s (VPC) latest update to Concealed Carry Killers, an online resource that offers examples of non-selfdefense killings by private citizens legally allowed to carry concealed handguns in public. Overall, concealed carry killers were involved in at least 386 (edit: updated to 659) fatal incidents since May 2007, leading to at least 540 deaths including the killing of 14 law enforcement officers.

Concealed Carry Killers is the most comprehensive report available on non-self defense killings by legal carriers of concealed firearms. Because there is no comprehensive recordkeeping of these incidents and many states in fact bar the release of such information, the examples on the Concealed Carry Killers website are taken primarily from news reports and most likely represent a fraction of actual events.

“Mass shootings by concealed handgun permit holders are now a common occurrence. It’s no surprise that the NRA and the gun industry, who benefit financially from lax concealed carry laws, ignore this growing body count. But for the sake of the victims and survivors of these shootings, the human cost of these lethal laws must be exposed,” states VPC Legislative Director Kristen Rand.

Concealed Carry Killersdocuments 386 incidents in 32 states and the District of Columbia since May 2007, resulting in 540 deaths involving private citizens legally allowed to carry concealed handguns. Fourteen of the victims were law enforcement officers. Twenty-six of the incidents were mass shootings, resulting in the deaths of 125 victims.

Click here to view a graph that breaks down the types of incidents documented in the report.

In the vast majority of the incidents documented (315, or 82 percent), the concealed carry killer either committed suicide (132), has already been convicted (135), perpetrated a murder-suicide (37), or was killed in the incident (11).

Of the 58 cases still pending, the vast majority (48) of concealed carry killers have been charged with criminal homicide. Four were deemed incompetent to stand trial, and six incidents are still under investigation. An additional 13 incidents were fatal unintentional shootings involving a gun of the concealed handgun permit holder.

The 386 incidents do not include any that were eventually ruled as self-defense. Only 12 of the hundreds of examples tallied in Concealed Carry Killers were eventually deemed lawful self-defense. Such cases are then removed from the site’s ongoing totals.

A detailed summary of each of the 386 incidents is available at http://www.vpc.org/ccwkillers.htm. Clicking on each category leads to a state-by-state breakout for the incidents.To review all deaths involving concealed carry killers, click on “Total People Killed by Concealed Carry Killers.”

For examples of non-fatal concealed carry incidents, visit the VPC’s Concealed Carry Killers page on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/?sk=pages#!/pages/Violence-Policy-Center-Concealed-Carry-Killers/258069527568

Pasted from <https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2013/10/31-4>

Three

 

Concealed Carry Killers Responsible for At Least 659 Deaths Since 2007

Washington, DC —Individuals legally allowed to carry concealed handguns are responsible for at least 659 non-self defense deaths since 2007, a number that likely represents a fraction of the actual total, according to updated data released today by the Violence Policy Center (VPC).

Details can be found in the latest update to Concealed Carry Killers, an online resource that offers examples of non-self defense killings by private citizens legally allowed to carry concealed handguns in public. Overall, Concealed Carry Killers documents 493 incidents in 36 states and the District of Columbia since May 2007, resulting in the deaths of 659 people.

Because there is no comprehensive recordkeeping of deaths involving concealed handgun permit holders and many states in fact bar the release of such information, the examples on the Concealed Carry Killers website are taken primarily from news reports and most likely represent a fraction of actual events.

“State laws allowing concealed handguns in public do not make us safer,” states VPC Executive Director Josh Sugarmann. “Our database shows that individuals legally allowed to carry concealed handguns regularly use their guns in homicides, suicides, and mass shootings. In all likelihood, the fatal incidents we have documented are only a fraction of the total, and they also do not include the frequent non-fatal incidents perpetrated by concealed carry permit holders.”

In the vast majority of the 493 incidents documented (408, or 83 percent), the concealed carry killer either committed suicide (190), has already been convicted (164), perpetrated a murder-suicide (40), or was killed in the incident (14).

Of the 67 cases still pending, the vast majority (58) of concealed carry killers have been charged with criminal homicide. Five were deemed incompetent to stand trial, and four incidents are still under investigation. An additional 18 incidents were fatal unintentional shootings involving the gun of the concealed handgun permit holder.

Twenty-nine of the incidents were mass shootings (3 or more victims), resulting in 134 deaths. The database also shows at least 15 law enforcement officers died at the hands of concealed carry killers since May 2007.

The 493 incidents do not include any that were ruled as self-defense. Only 15 of the hundreds of examples tallied in Concealed Carry Killers were eventually deemed lawful self-defense. Such cases are then removed from the site’s ongoing totals.

A detailed summary of each of the 493 incidents is available at http://www.vpc.org/ccwkillers.htm. Clicking on each category leads to a state-by-state breakout for the incidents with current known status. To review all deaths involving concealed carry killers, click on “Total People Killed by Concealed Carry Killers.” To view a list of incidents organized by state, visithttp://www.vpc.org/ccwkillersstates.htm.

Pasted from <http://www.vpc.org/press/1408ccw.htm>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, there is some good news in there. Hopefully they kill themselves before they kill others...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, there is some good news in there. Hopefully they kill themselves before they kill others...

 

 

Let's see here....Shitcago averages 20 murders a week, or about a thousand dead folks a year. Or roughly 7250 murder victims in the same 8 year period of JokeAwf's 'study', where under 700 (supposedly) non-legal self defense murders were perpetrated by licensed CCP'ers.

 

Wanna guess how many of the Shitcago shooters have CCP"s?......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JokeAwf, has the thought ever once crossed your mind that you are doing far more harm to your 'cause' here than good? By a humongous margin? To the point that The Brady Group wouldn't even hire you to clean their toilets? Really pal, you should stop embarrassing yourself right now. You've become a sad caricature of insanity-in-the-making.....

 

I've answered that question before. I don think that "kinder and gentler" is going to work with your elk. You are an adamant, committed lot, IMO.

 

Secondly, the forums of Sailing Anarchy include a refreshing culture of plain speaking, at least at its best.

 

Thirdly, there's the twist that within that no BS culture, so much pro-gun spew passes between Preacher and Choir, then back again,without getting called out. A few of you have made a cottage industry of it.

 

Fourth. Based on damage to society, your lot has earned an earful.

 

Fifth. It's fun to debunk all this stuff while trying to not get any on me. Since it makes great reading on both sides of the issue, it's a win-win. At the end of the day I find your arguments are vacuous, your manner is often mean-spirited, your history is fiction paid for by ALEC, your historical quotes are skewed from both context and intent, you are making insurrection somewhat mainstream, and your vision of the future is simply dark.

 

I'm just watching your gun culture. It makes great sport to hear the choir then marvel at your lyrics, basically.

Mariachi, I'm not here to candy coat the destruction caused by gun fixation, but rather to make it clear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing that you've made clear here is that you are nothing but a vacuous twat without an original thought in that head of yours. You're basically the Queen of C&P......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing that you've made clear here is that you are nothing but a vacuous twat without an original thought in that head of yours. You're basically the Queen of C&P......

 

It is no exaggeration to say that the reason we have a 2A is that there are people out there like JokeAwf.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The only thing that you've made clear here is that you are nothing but a vacuous twat without an original thought in that head of yours. You're basically the Queen of C&P......

 

It is no exaggeration to say that the reason we have a 2A is that there are people out there like JokeAwf.

 

 

Am I the only one to notice that the majority of people who live in the Pacific North Wet are either crazy....or insane?.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

aapuzzle_zps138eef05.jpg

 

That's a great cartoon, joe. It sadly doesn't support your point and is exactly what the SA Gun club has been saying all along.

 

Why is it that you have a singular, narrow focus on an individual, small piece of that puzzle (gun laws)?

 

Hi Jeff. Please lay out what you perceive as "your (meaning my) point."

 

The social science disciplines have gone inter-agency in their search for gun violence solutions. I'm pretty sure they were represented in the IOM/CDC pow wow, specifically to co-ordinate their research. I am on record as saying the solution will be not a magic bullet, but a complex of social improvements, understandings, and adjustments on all sides.

 

 

Ahem, my alleged focus on gun law as a single solution is a misrepresentation. The eventual law is an effect, not a cause. The law will reflect policy, which fair enough will need to follow evidence-based data. My "singular, narrow focus" has been a challenge to the SA Gun Club on why gun violence data is not enthusiastically forthcoming, to lay out the policy, and thus form decent law. Since the SA Gun Club tacitly accepts TR playing games about funding AND denying the research blockage, I smell a rat. I smell a gamey kissoff to support of research, which is neither constructive nor in good faith.

 

Why any focus on gun laws on my part? Because of the intense legal programs and effects of the ILA, and of the SAF, and the CCKRBA, and the GOA.

Because an extremist minority, using often-questionable legislative processes, is taking us in a poorly considered direction.

Pushback is fair, especially when warranted, Jeff.

 

The better question is where is your concern, as a gun aficionado about rolling back the high gun violence rates? Do you think 19.5X more gun violence is acceptable?

 

You make the point that people have changed. Well, yes. But our flexible legal system has to change accordingly. Then law-abiders, same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The only thing that you've made clear here is that you are nothing but a vacuous twat without an original thought in that head of yours. You're basically the Queen of C&P......

 

It is no exaggeration to say that the reason we have a 2A is that there are people out there like JokeAwf.

umm, not even close.

 

Something to do with continental defense and an unsecured border more likely.

 

 

 

aapuzzle_zps138eef05.jpg

 

That's a great cartoon, joe. It sadly doesn't support your point and is exactly what the SA Gun club has been saying all along.

 

Why is it that you have a singular, narrow focus on an individual, small piece of that puzzle (gun laws)?

 

Hi Jeff. Please lay out what you perceive as "your (meaning my) point."

 

The social science disciplines have gone inter-agency in their search for gun violence solutions. I'm pretty sure they were represented in the IOM/CDC pow wow, specifically to co-ordinate their research. I am on record as saying the solution will be not a magic bullet, but a complex of social improvements, understandings, and adjustments on all sides.

 

 

Ahem, my alleged focus on gun law as a single solution is a misrepresentation. The eventual law is an effect, not a cause. The law will reflect policy, which fair enough will need to follow evidence-based data. My "singular, narrow focus" has been a challenge to the SA Gun Club on why gun violence data is not enthusiastically forthcoming, to lay out the policy, and thus form decent law. Since the SA Gun Club tacitly accepts TR playing games about funding AND denying the research blockage, I smell a rat. I smell a gamey kissoff to support of research, which is neither constructive nor in good faith.

 

Why any focus on gun laws on my part? Because of the intense legal programs and effects of the ILA, and of the SAF, and the CCKRBA, and the GOA.

Because an extremist minority, using often-questionable legislative processes, is taking us in a poorly considered direction.

Pushback is fair, especially when warranted, Jeff.

 

The better question is where is your concern, as a gun aficionado about rolling back the high gun violence rates? Do you think 19.5X more gun violence is acceptable?

 

You make the point that people have changed. Well, yes. But our flexible legal system has to change accordingly. Then law-abiders, same.

 

From what I can tell, the SA gun club doesn't see most of the deaths as negative.

 

Suicides, gang violence, all had it coming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The only thing that you've made clear here is that you are nothing but a vacuous twat without an original thought in that head of yours. You're basically the Queen of C&P......

 

It is no exaggeration to say that the reason we have a 2A is that there are people out there like JokeAwf.

 

 

Am I the only one to notice that the majority of people who live in the Pacific North Wet are either crazy....or insane?.....

 

Coming from a southwesterner? As if you guys made sense...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DT--->crazy

 

JokeAwf--->crazy

 

Charlie Cobra--->crazy

 

Green River killer--->crazy

 

Hobot--->normal

 

75/25. Not good odds......:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what the old guys used to say, in the Maritimes? The whole continent's tilted towards the pacific - so all the fruits and nuts roll down to the west coast.

 

...

 

They didn't make a distinction between the northern part, and the southern part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

In related news, the Internet is facing a bit shortage due to indiscriminate cutting and pasting of large amounts of irrelevant material which is never read. Wasteful.... very very wasteful. Authorities say that if the offenders are not reined in, people may be faced with the prospect of using pencils and paper or in the most extreme cases talking to live people occupying the same physical space as them.

 

Irrelevant? Hardly. I count 109 documented gun shootings in one weekend there. It speaks to the enormity of the problem. Let's face it.

 

I notice you didn't paste them with the links this time, making it harder for me to identify the ones that are self-defense shootings so I can ask you questions you will not answer.

 

Your silence strongly suggests you think Ms. Mason should have just laid back and thought of England, you know...

 

I think mixing self-defense cases like hers and the others I have picked out of your long copy/pastes with violent crimes is dishonest.

 

You are suggesting that I go chasing and isolating SDU's for you? I will not do so, of course, but have searched for the best and highest SDU lists of others.

It's a consistently modest total, a vague mishmosh of info, from which you can and do cherry pick.

 

We lack the means of quantifying this (meaning the social viability of presenting SDU as a social normal based on public safety) . It speaks to the need of less obstruction of data gathering wrt SDU's...same for CCP violators, if any, OMG.

 

What I conclude in general reading is that both CCP holders and AW's have some broad aspects which flat-out suggest low risk...until mass shootings come up, and both look bad.

 

Mother Jones counted 32 of 64 mass shootings as having involved AW's and/or LCM's.

The CCP mass shooter total is in the mid-twenties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, your cutesy labeling of links is objectionable for a few reasons, Tom.

They sometimes spin the article before it is opened

They are often unclear or misleading about subject matter.

Dude I want to follow the best of your intellect, not get Rick-rolled.

 

Mrs Mason, I take it, was a name on an injury list I must have submitted, but she was not just an unfortunate gunshot victim...

darned if she isn't also an SDU fucking hero!

 

Tom, I did not and never will open that link because of the insensitive labelling, of your (petty) info.

And because it is a spun, mis-quoted misrepresentation, in a link.

I wish your Ms. Mason wellness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tom, I did not and never will open that link because of the insensitive labelling, of your (petty) info.

 

 

Gawd but you're truly an idiot, 1st Class. If for one am both saddened & embarrassed that you even exist......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Tom, I did not and never will open that link because of the insensitive labelling, of your (petty) info.

 

 

Gawd but you're truly an idiot, 1st Class. If for one am both saddened & embarrassed that you even exist......

 

Oh, hi Rick.

 

Is your post, above, an example of your entertainment art? Would it be fair to say that?

If so, would you consider stepping it up?

 

Music is my entertainment bit, I guess, but here's a suggestion for upgrading your "entertainment" presentation.

Set out to kind of spice it up, and break up the tedium, while drawing attention to your POV.

 

It involves work, but maybe like this. First, organize bs (if you can spot it). Then you need some eye-catching photo to go with some foolish gem (like below in the quote below). Next, in this example, I can, say add an edgy bit...about your FFL references.

 

Wish me luck. I'll be right back...

 

 

R Booze

Anarchist

  • Members
  • 41,625 posts
  • Location:43 miles from both Mexicos.....
  • Interests:Postponing my funeral 'til tomorrow....

Posted 29 October 2013 - 04:30 AM

I don't normally approve of shooting bad guys in the back, but this fuk-stik seems to have deserved a rather large exit wound out the front of his shirt. And good on the husband for not interupting the local cops during their donut break.

Win-win.....

Pasted from <http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=142774&page=24>

and

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all torn up about which one to put on the Myths of Self Defense thread.

Be a pal, Rick, advise me.FFL%20speak%20Boothy_zpseywlmlmk.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

In related news, the Internet is facing a bit shortage due to indiscriminate cutting and pasting of large amounts of irrelevant material which is never read. Wasteful.... very very wasteful. Authorities say that if the offenders are not reined in, people may be faced with the prospect of using pencils and paper or in the most extreme cases talking to live people occupying the same physical space as them.

 

Irrelevant? Hardly. I count 109 documented gun shootings in one weekend there. It speaks to the enormity of the problem. Let's face it.

 

I notice you didn't paste them with the links this time, making it harder for me to identify the ones that are self-defense shootings so I can ask you questions you will not answer.

 

Your silence strongly suggests you think Ms. Mason should have just laid back and thought of England, you know...

 

I think mixing self-defense cases like hers and the others I have picked out of your long copy/pastes with violent crimes is dishonest.

 

You are suggesting that I go chasing and isolating SDU's for you? I will not do so, of course, but have searched for the best and highest SDU lists of others.

It's a consistently modest total, a vague mishmosh of info, from which you can and do cherry pick.

 

We lack the means of quantifying this (meaning the social viability of presenting SDU as a social normal based on public safety) . It speaks to the need of less obstruction of data gathering wrt SDU's...same for CCP violators, if any, OMG.

 

What I conclude in general reading is that both CCP holders and AW's have some broad aspects which flat-out suggest low risk...until mass shootings come up, and both look bad.

 

Mother Jones counted 32 of 64 mass shootings as having involved AW's and/or LCM's.

The CCP mass shooter total is in the mid-twenties.

 

In 2013, I did suggest you comment on the cases you claim to have "documented."

 

You still can't find any figures on the crime rate of concealed weapons permit holders, huh?

 

We know it's not zero. There are millions of us, so assembling a list of a couple of dozen by going back decades is not exactly surprising nor alarming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites