Another Shooting

[Irishize]

Again you are clinging to this secondary and tertiary issue namely fatherless/motherless children. Per capita they are comparable. Volume is meaningless except in that the number of incidents would concurrently be higher, which we dont see. All developed countries has single parent families, and all have similar levels of drug use, mental illness, etc... except with guns, so singling out single parent houses as a large or singular cause is not correct.

Also I dont have an agenda as you insinuated above.Just having a discussion.

Also you are proving my point. America has a singular problem that others do not and its not fundamentally related to societal ills and blaming these secondary and tertiary things for gun violence is a cop out and deflection. How many of these school/mass shooters are from single parent families? Do you know? What race are they as well? What we do know is the majority of these mass shooters are predominantly white, male, and from broken homes, however the overarching fundamental trait in this country is GUNS

Yeah that’s my bad but I can see the confusion as I digressed to the subject of fatherlessness of black children which is at epidemic proportions but I noted as much yet should’ve known it would be ignored as I stated that black kids are more adversely affected & involved in the inner city murders we see in Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, etc. That’s a lot more bodies, but it’s the school shooters that get all the attention...& yes they are predominantly white kids who could come from seemingly perfect nuclear families or from single parent households. That’s what I get for digressing from the discussion so again...my bad.

I know you have allowed that there are legitimate tertiary issues like mental health, culture, etc so I realize you’re not saying “ban all guns b/c that’s the only reason this is happening.” My question is “Why wasn’t this happening in the decades prior to 1999 when Columbine occurred?” My other question is “Even if neighboring states have looser gun control than cities like Chicago where the murderers can allegedly get these guns, why is the underlying issue continually ignored?” They’re going to get the guns no matter how many surrounding states tighened their gun control. Just like people who wanted to drink were able to get booze during Prohibition. Just like people who sell cocaine or heroin are able to have it imported through our borders despite the security, etc.

Guns were just as accessible...if not more accessible. As stated by numerous posters, most grew up in communities where both adults & teens could be seen w/ a hunting rifle in the gun rack of their truck. Dirty Harry & Charles Bronson were killing bad guys in a movie theater near you almost every year. Guns haven’t gone anywhere but the culture has changed drastically over the decades. Some of this change has resulted in awesome advancements in technology, how we work, how we bank, how we communicate socially, hell even these message boards are a result of that. But isn’t it fair to say there have been some cultural changes for the worse as well? How we value life, what we allow ourselves & our children to be exposed to via media, the list goes on and could well devolve into an agrument of morality & personal responsiblity so I won’t digress again into another topic.

 

[Cackalacky]

Yeah that’s my bad but I can see the confusion as I digressed to the subject of fatherlessness of black children which is at epidemic proportions but I noted as much yet should’ve known it would be ignored as I stated that black kids are more adversely affected & involved in the inner city murders we see in Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, etc. That’s a lot more bodies, but it’s the school shooters that get all the attention...& yes they are predominantly white kids who could come from seemingly perfect nuclear families or from single parent households. That’s what I get for digressing from the discussion so again...my bad.

I know you have allowed that there are legitimate tertiary issues like mental health, culture, etc so I realize you’re not saying “ban all guns b/c that’s the only reason this is happening.” My question is “Why wasn’t this happening in the decades prior to 1999 when Columbine occurred?” My other question is “Even if neighboring states have looser gun control than cities like Chicago where the murderers can allegedly get these guns, why is the underlying issue continually ignored?” They’re going to get the guns no matter how many surrounding states tighened their gun control. Just like people who wanted to drink were able to get booze during Prohibition. Just like people who sell cocaine or heroin are able to have it imported through our borders despite the security, etc.

Guns were just as accessible...if not more accessible. As stated by numerous posters, most grew up in communities where both adults & teens could be seen w/ a hunting rifle in the gun rack of their truck. Dirty Harry & Charles Bronson were killing bad guys in a movie theater near you almost every year. Guns haven’t gone anywhere but the culture has changed drastically over the decades. Some of this change has resulted in awesome advancements in technology, how we work, how we bank, how we communicate socially, hell even these message boards are a result of that. But isn’t it fair to say there have been some cultural changes for the worse as well? How we value life, what we allow ourselves & our children to be exposed to via media, the list goes on and could well devolve into an agrument of morality & personal responsiblity so I won’t digress again into another topic.

Appreciate the responses and the good discussion. All I am trying to say is the shear amount of guns has increased while ownership has been relatively the same. Our fathers guns to hunt are not anything like the lethal high capacity versions today. Of course there are many intrinsic issues in our culture but none of them really correlate to gun violence. I don’t know what else to say other than the fundamental issue is accessibility and lethality and only by starting with these two issues can any sensible progress be made to minimizing these shootings.

 

[Legacy]

My question is “Why wasn’t this happening in the decades prior to 1999 when Columbine occurred?” My other question is “Even if neighboring states have looser gun control than cities like Chicago where the murderers can allegedly get these guns, why is the underlying issue continually ignored?” They’re going to get the guns no matter how many surrounding states tighened their gun control. Just like people who wanted to drink were able to get booze during Prohibition. Just like people who sell cocaine or heroin are able to have it imported through our borders despite the security, etc.

Contributing to your second question, research shows that states with strong gun laws not only have a lower rate of gun deaths, but in those counties neighboring their states benefit from those stronger gun laws with lower gun deaths.

State Firearm Laws and Interstate Firearm Deaths From Homicide and Suicide in the United States: A Cross-sectional Analysis of Data by County (Journal of the American Medical Association)

Question Are state firearm laws associated with increases in interstate firearm deaths from homicide and suicide?

Findings In this cross-sectional study, strong firearm laws in a state were associated with lower firearm suicide rates and lower overall suicide rates in the state regardless of the strength of the laws in other states. Strong firearm laws in a state were associated with lower rates of firearm homicide. Counties in states with weak laws had lower rates of firearm homicide only when surrounding states had strong laws.

Meaning Strengthening firearm policies at the state level could help to reduce the incidence of both firearm suicide and homicide, with benefits that extend across state lines.

Consider that, if every state had lax gun laws, not only would those strict gun laws states have a higher rate and amount of gun deaths but also the nearby counties in lax gun states would see a further increase in gun deaths and rate of gun deaths.

California, which has been a focus of criticism of culture change in our society over the last decades, has one of the lowest rates of gun deaths in the country (7.7%, in lowest ten states) and one of the lowest rates of gun ownership (20.1%, also in the lowest 10 states) in the U.S. Overall, gun deaths are decreasing as more states pass stricter gun laws. California requires background checks on private sales, state permit to purchase through a registered dealer, firearm registration, waiting periods, and red flag laws among others.

Gun laws in California (Wiki)

Such laws, which are constitutional, are meant to restrict easy access to guns to felons and other prohibited persons and decrease gun deaths, with resultant decrease in costs from gun violence to state taxpayers. Since 1993, when California began enacting stricter gun laws, they have had an enormous impact. California, since 1993, has cut its rate of gun murders by 63%, its rate of fatal gun accidents by 82%, and its overall rate of gun deaths by 56%. Although the cultural changes can be considered by many in the U.S. to be the epitome of deteriorating values and the exportation of these values through movies, games, technology, etc., the cohesive community approach to gun laws has significantly impacted the violence in their communities. It would be hard to directly correlate their perceived cultural values to gun violence and death.

So, this is more of a gun ownership, access and availability question that deserves further study in lax gun law states whose values may be considered consistent with their cultural norms. Should gun deaths in lax gun states with those cultural norms rise with easier gun availability, ownership and access, then you'd conclude that cultural values have less of an impact than more restrictive gun laws and the cause of gun violence, overall, may be independent of cultural issues.

Lessons from Missouri: the Cost of Eliminating Background Checks (Everytown)

 

[Irishize]

Appreciate the responses and the good discussion. All I am trying to say is the shear amount of guns has increased while ownership has been relatively the same. Our fathers guns to hunt are not anything like the lethal high capacity versions today. Of course there are many intrinsic issues in our culture but none of them really correlate to gun violence. I don’t know what else to say other than the fundamental issue is accessibility and lethality and only by starting with these two issues can any sensible progress be made to minimizing these shootings.

I hear ya & I appreciate your feedback as well. The question that stays w/ me is why haven’t school shootings occurred in the past the way they have taken off since Columbine in 1999? I get your point about guns w/ higher lethal capacity but remember Charles Whitman murdered 17 from a clock tower on the Austin campus at UT with a hunting rifle. He was found to have 3 hunting rifles, 3 pistols & a sawed-off shotgun with him but I believe all the victims were shot by the hunting rifle. Yes, with the firearms used by the murderer in Vegas, he was able to murder many more but 17 dead is still a mass shooting that has a higher death toll than some of the mass shootings occurring in modern times. That was 1966. Why didn’t it set off more threshold massacres like Columbine seemed to set off in 1999?

 

[BleedBlueGold]

Active shooter in Noblesville, IN Middle School.

Shooter detained. At least one injury reported.

 

[wizards8507]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">NPD will address the media at Fox Prairie Golf course at 10:30.</p>— Noblesville Fire (@NoblesvilleFD) <a href="https://twitter.com/NoblesvilleFD/status/1000015347091693569?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 25, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">There are two victims en route to Methodist from the Noblesville West Middle School Active Shooter <br><br>Those families have been notified<br><br>Suspect in custody <br><br>All students are being taken to the Noblesville High School, parents are asked to pick up there<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/NoblesvilleWest?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#NoblesvilleWest</a></p>— Sgt. John Perrine (@ISPIndianapolis) <a href="https://twitter.com/ISPIndianapolis/status/1000014127782350848?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 25, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

One teacher, one student apparently.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

While everyone is red-faced and debating guns, mental health, etc more and more people are getting hurt in this manner. Idk why you can't guard a school like you guard an airport in the meantime. Raise taxes, hold fundraisers, ask for charitable donations. Figure. It. Out. Find the money to protect these kids.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

I hear ya & I appreciate your feedback as well. The question that stays w/ me is why haven’t school shootings occurred in the past the way they have taken off since Columbine in 1999? I get your point about guns w/ higher lethal capacity but remember Charles Whitman murdered 17 from a clock tower on the Austin campus at UT with a hunting rifle. He was found to have 3 hunting rifles, 3 pistols & a sawed-off shotgun with him but I believe all the victims were shot by the hunting rifle. Yes, with the firearms used by the murderer in Vegas, he was able to murder many more but 17 dead is still a mass shooting that has a higher death toll than some of the mass shootings occurring in modern times. That was 1966. Why didn’t it set off more threshold massacres like Columbine seemed to set off in 1999?

We've had guns for a few hundred years. We have a people problem.

 

[GowerND11]

We've had guns for a few hundred years. We have a people problem.

Why can't it be both? Guns are far more accurate, have higher capacities, and are probably cheaper (relative to the time) than they have been before. I don't think we should ban guns, but I don't think you can say it's just a people problem.

 

[ACamp1900]

Why can't it be both? Guns are far more accurate, have higher capacities, and are probably cheaper (relative to the time) than they have been before. I don't think we should ban guns, but I don't think you can say it's just a people problem.

It's a bit of everything imo.. social media's rise, our society glorifying violence in music and movies and such more and more... the lack of the father and on and on. I really don't know that guns are a cause here, but if heavier restrictions are part of the solution then so be it. Let's do it. It's still very transparent when some make the NRA the sole focus here though.

 

[GowerND11]

It's a bit of everything imo.. social media's rise, our society glorifying violence in music and movies and such more and more... the lack of the father and on and on. I really don't know that guns are a cause here, but if heavier restrictions are part of the solution then so be it. Let's do it. It's still very transparent when some make the NRA the sole focus here though.

Oh it's absolutely both, I agree. It's a shame really. The music my students listen to, the music videos with guns everywhere. The fact that I have students who have had "poles" (guns) running around the streets since they were 10! As I mentioned before, it's not just these school shootings and public shootings. It's the inner city of Chicago, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, etc. So much damage is being caused by this gun culture, yet the kids are all about it.

Both sides need to look deep inside them, and reach across the aisle. It is our culture today, movies, etc. It is our fatherless rate. It is our easy access to guns. It is our lack of mental health help. It's all of it.

 

[IrishSteelhead]

Another Shooting

Edit: person is full of shit, disregard

 

[Irishize]

Why can't it be both? Guns are far more accurate, have higher capacities, and are probably cheaper (relative to the time) than they have been before. I don't think we should ban guns, but I don't think you can say it's just a people problem.

I guess I’m doing a horrible job at making my point so I apologize. Yes, it’s more than guns BUT in 1966 a guy was able to murder 17 people w/ a hunting rifle so it’s not that more accurate or lethal guns are available today vs then that kept a mass shooting from happening. I can’t imagine any of you minimizing 17 people dead whether it was 1966 or 2018...either may it’s a massacre. So why didn’t this set of a string of mass shooting similar to what we’ve seen since Columbine in ‘99?

 

[Irishize]

Oh it's absolutely both, I agree. It's a shame really. The music my students listen to, the music videos with guns everywhere. The fact that I have students who have had "poles" (guns) running around the streets since they were 10! As I mentioned before, it's not just these school shootings and public shootings. It's the inner city of Chicago, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, etc. So much damage is being caused by this gun culture, yet the kids are all about it.

Both sides need to look deep inside them, and reach across the aisle. It is our culture today, movies, etc. It is our fatherless rate. It is our easy access to guns. It is our lack of mental health help. It's all of it.

Sadly, I don’t think the inner city epidemic of killings will ever end b/c middle America and above are removed from that reality and couldn’t care less about people of color murdering each other in a dilapidated community they would never step foot in. It may as well be in another country.

Hell, I don’t think the authorities would be as involved if they simply sold drugs minus the murders. But there’s always going to be collateral damage of innocents.

 

[ACamp1900]

Sadly, I don’t think the inner city epidemic of killings will ever end b/c middle America and above are removed from that reality and couldn’t care less about people of color murdering each other in a dilapidated community they would never step foot in. It may as well be in another country.

I think most middle of America is pretty powerless to do anything about it. I have quite a few family members who live in Texas who try through various charities and programs to help Chicago primarily and from my perspective it's a lot of wasted effort. Not because some racist Godfather attitude of, "they're animals anyway so let them lose their souls.." but because what can they really accomplish in the grand scheme??

 

[GowerND11]

I guess I’m doing a horrible job at making my point so I apologize. Yes, it’s more than guns BUT in 1966 a guy was able to murder 17 people w/ a hunting rifle so it’s not that more accurate or lethal guns are available today vs then that kept a mass shooting from happening. I can’t imagine any of you minimizing 17 people dead whether it was 1966 or 2018...either may it’s a massacre. So why didn’t this set of a string of mass shooting similar to what we’ve seen since Columbine in ‘99?

Comparing now and 50 years ago on technology... yeah I agree. I meant more so throughout our history. Generally I agree with what you're saying here. As ACamp touched on, it's social media (and media in general), it's mass culture continuing to push the envelop and allow more and more to be acceptable in regards to violence.

Sadly, I don’t think the inner city epidemic of killings will ever end b/c middle America and above are removed from that reality and couldn’t care less about people of color murdering each other in a dilapidated community they would never step foot in. It may as well be in another country.

Hell, I don’t think the authorities would be as involved if they simply sold drugs minus the murders. But there’s always going to be collateral damage of innocents.

I'm hopeful you're wrong that the epidemic in the inner city, though I agree I' not sure if it will end. It's sad though that, unfortunately, most of the white middle to upper class citizenry in this nation turn a blind eye, and continue to just blame it directly on the black people themselves. Instead of trying to help our neighbor, so to speak, we blame them, condemn them, laugh at them, and more. It's truly sad.

 

[GowerND11]

I think most middle of America is pretty powerless to do anything about it. I have quite a few family members who live in Texas who try through various charities and programs to help Chicago primarily and from my perspective it's a lot of wasted effort. Not because some racist Godfather attitude of, "their animals anyway so let them lose their souls.." but because what can they really accomplish in the grand scheme??

There is definitely truth to that as well. I've realized in my line of work with inner city kids that they come from a very proud upbringing, which is so ironic when you consider how poor, run down, and dangerous the life they live is. They don't want white people to help them. They look at it as if we are trying to control them again. And if other black people are seeking to improve the neighborhoods... They're white now too, or cops, as they call them.

 

[ACamp1900]

Frankly, I don't care about the skin color involved either way... it's pretty fucking lame to place blame and ownership for what's occurring in our inner cities on some random lower to middle class dude from rural America who is also just trying to grind out his own life.

 

[GowerND11]

Frankly, I don't care about the skin color involved either way... it's pretty fucking lame to place blame and ownership for what's occurring in our inner cities on some random lower to middle class dude from rural America who is also just trying to grind out his own life.

Oh absolutely. And I think again that goes back to the problem of the loudest voice in the room type thing. Most America’s don’t give a damn about race and shit. However we are getting blasted from both sides (loudly) about all kinds of bullshit without really being able to just live our lives, help our fellow man, have some beer, and enjoy football.

 

[Legacy]

The costs of medical care alone from gun violence over a nine year period:

The annual cost of gun violence in America—$2.8 billion in emergency room, inpatient charges (Hub)

A Johns Hopkins study of more than 704,000 people who arrived alive at a United States emergency room for treatment of a firearm-related injury over a nine-year period finds decreasing incidence of such injuries in some age groups, increasing trends in others, and affirmation of the persistently high cost of gunshot wounds in dollars and human suffering.

Among the findings—firearm-related injuries account for approximately $2.8 billion in emergency department and inpatient care each year.

The research team found that:

- Firearm injuries were ninefold higher among male than female patients and were highest among males 20 to 24 years old

- The average emergency department and inpatient charges annually were $5,254 and $95,887, respectively, resulting in approximately $2.8 billion in annual charges for the group studied. Gani notes that more than half of patients in the study sample were uninsured or self-paying, which means they either bear the burden of the actual hospital charges, or these charges are unrecovered and add to the overall uncompensated care provided by hospitals and health care systems.

- The overall incidence of emergency department admissions for firearm-related injuries decreased 22.9 percent from 2009 to 2013. However, emergency department visits generally increased for those older than 30 and increased overall for the entire study population in 2014.

- The proportion of patients who arrived with a previously diagnosed mental health disorder rose over the study period

- The proportion of patients injured by unintentional firearm-related injury increased. The majority of patients were injured by assault (49.5 percent) or unintentional injury (35.3 percent). Attempted suicide accounted for 5.3 percent.

The True Cost of Gun Violence in America

Our investigation also begins to illuminate the economic toll for individual states. Louisiana has the highest gun homicide rate in the nation, with costs per capita of more than $1,300. Wyoming has a small population but the highest overall rate of gun deaths—including the nation’s highest suicide rate—with costs working out to about $1,400 per resident. Among the four most populous states, the costs per capita in the gun rights strongholds of Florida and Texas outpace those in more strictly regulated California and New York. Hawaii and Massachusetts, with their relatively low gun ownership rates and tight gun laws, have the lowest gun death rates, and costs per capita roughly a fifth as much as those of the states that pay the most.

Overall, What Is The Financial Impact Of Gun Violence & Mass Shootings In The US?

The price tag

Back in 2012, Mother Jones, the liberal magazine, launched a three-year investigation, following the Colorado cinema shooting rampage in July, when James Holmes killed 12 people and injured 70. The magazine went through the combined annual impact of a total of about 11,000 murders, approximately 22,000 suicides and 75,000 injuries that are the result of gunfire. The findings of the investigation showed that the annual cost of fatal and non-fatal gun violence to the US was $229 billion, representing 1.4% of total gross domestic product. In comparison, obesity in the US costs the country $224bn, which makes the economic impact of gun violence higher than that of obesity. These $229bn are also the equivalent of the size of Portugal’s economy or the equivalent of $700 for every American citizen.

The study notes that about $8.6bn is direct cost, including emergency care and hospital charges, the expense of police investigations, the price of court proceedings, as well as jail costs. According to the investigation, $169bn goes to the estimated impact of victims’ quality of life, based on jury awards for pain and suffering in cases of wrongful injury and death, and the rest $49bn account for lost wages and spending.

It is of course worth mentioning the positive economic impact that the gun and ammunition manufacturing industry has on the country, which according to IBIS World was $13.5 billion in 2015, with a $1.5 billion profit. However, it is also worth pointing out the distinction between the profit from manufacturing the very products used in shootings, in comparison to the financial loss seen due to gun violence.

How do local economies respond to increased gun violence?

A report by the Urban Institute, published on 1st June 2017, found that surges in gun violence in the US can ‘significantly reduce the growth of new retail and service businesses and slow home value appreciation’. According to the study, higher levels of neighbourhood gun violence drives depopulation, discourages business and decreases property values, resulting in fewer retail and service establishments, fewer new jobs, lower home values, credit scores and homeownership rates. The report features interviews with local stakeholders (homeowners, renters, business owners, non-profits, etc.), who confirm the findings, which state that ‘Business owners in neighbourhoods that experience heightened gun violence reported additional challenges and costs, and residents and business owners alike asserted that gun violence hurts housing prices and drives people to relocate from or avoid moving to affected neighbourhoods’. In Minneapolis for example, the report finds that each additional gun homicide in a census tract in a given year was associated with 80 fewer jobs the next year, while average home values in Minneapolis census tracts dropped by $22,000.

As noted previously, gun violence as well as costs are very hard to directly relate it to cultural changes, but may be an indirect factor perhaps related to contributing to being disaffected, marginalized and detached from their communities. The direct correlations are gun ownership, gun accessibility, governments failure to take gun control steps that have been proven to lower gun violence. The direct and indirect costs burden the citizens of those states who have lax gun laws as note above - Louisiana, Wyoming, Florida, Texas etc. Some of these have a more homogenous population with shared values. Some do not. New York City has lower rate of gun deaths and lower costs per capita from gun violence than Georgia, which often serves as a source for criminals' guns, who then return to NYC.

Gun violence can be related to a consistent behavior of the perp as well as the state of residence. Nine of the ten deadliest mass shooters were committed by persons who had previously threatened to commit violence against women, threatening violence against women, or harassing or disparaging women. When an abusive partner is permitted to access firearms, the risk that the other partner will be killed increases fivefold. Of those ten deadliest mass shootings, eight have occurred in states with lax gun laws. With current trends, we see more of the "red flag laws" being passed in gun control states, which should reduced their domestic violence fatalities. On the other hand, lax gun law states, who reject such laws, should continue to see the fatalities and costs of domestic violence. Whether these type of fatalities are related to cultural changes or not is difficult to prove.

 

[ACamp1900]

back to our dialogue on different things playing into what we are seeing,... this is making the rounds:

pretty good post about parents simply not parenting far too often these days. I've seen this too and pretty much agree... kind of a perfect storm of shit.

https://www.facebook.com/amiediprimabrown/posts/10216030293659434

 

[Irishize]

Frankly, I don't care about the skin color involved either way... it's pretty fucking lame to place blame and ownership for what's occurring in our inner cities on some random lower to middle class dude from rural America who is also just trying to grind out his own life.

I agree with you. It’s not like there’s not stressors or problems in the suberbs or rural areas. Hell, my kids’ school won’t allow drug dogs b/c of the fricking perception it will give the public a black eye. That’s b/c the truth is they’d be making busts every day until it got cleaned up. As a parent, I’m all for drug dogs.

 

[Legacy]

Police: Ind. school gunman asked to be excused from class, returned with 2 handguns (At Middle School in Nobelsville, Ind)

Of the 23 school shootings so far this year, five incidents have occurred in states whose gun laws are graded by the Gifford's state scorecard as A or above - California, NY and NJ. Of the other eighteen incidents, they have occurred in states graded C or below. The overwhelming majority of those eighteen (16) are graded D or below and are located in the South from Missouri to Virginia through Texas to Florida. The other two have been in Indiana (D-) and in Michigan (C).

From: There has been, on average, 1 school shooting every week this year (See graphic)

From: Annual Gun Law Scorecard (Gifford's)

 

[loomis41973]

Another lead filled weekend in Chicago. Thank you Democrats and to some of the most tough guns laws out there.

Too bad Barry couldn't do more. His "community organizing" are the places you are most likely to see this gun violence.

 

[Irish YJ]

Haven't you heard, every single gun in Chicago comes from Indiana.

 

[Legacy]

Haven't you heard, every single gun in Chicago comes from Indiana.

Only 21% of guns used in crimes come from Indiana, though 60% of those used in crimes in Chicago are obtained from out of state. (I recognize your use of italics.) The second highest is Mississippi with 5%. The Chicago police seize about 7,000 guns from people committing crimes there. Imagine if those confiscated weapons used in crimes were mandated to be resold by the state vs destroyed. In Illinois, outside of the city of Chicago, where the gun laws are more lax, criminals go to buy their guns.

Weapons recovered in Chicago were also traced back to Mississippi, Wisconsin, Ohio, Kentucky, Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama and Texas, according to the report.

Majority of Guns Used in Chicago Crimes Come From Outside Illinois: Report

To that end, the report identified four major policy proposals to be enacted at the state level, as well as several federal solutions.

First, the report urges Illinois lawmakers to pass the statewide Gun Dealer Licensing bill, legislation that mirrors provisions in the model gun dealer ordinance. The legislation will is slated to be considered during veto session next week.

The report's second area of focus is comprehensive background checks on private firearm sales.

Both federal and state law require background checks at licensed dealers, and Illinois also mandates that all sellers, regardless of setting, check a person's Firearm Owner's Identification (FOID) card prior to completing the transaction.

However, private sellers are exempt from penalty for failing to verify a buyer's FOID card ahead of the sale - a policy the report urged lawmakers to address, particularly in light of an audit this year that found that just 30 percent of revoked FOID cards are actually returned to Illinois State Police.

Specifically, the report asks legislators to institute a mandated background check before all firearm sales, and to tie a criminal penalty to all sellers who do not verify a buyer's FOID card.

Third, the analysis seeks more effective enforcement and harsher punishment for violations of Illinois' "lost and stolen reporting" law, which requires reporting a firearm's loss or theft "within 72 hours of obtaining knowledge" of the incident.

Failure to do so is a petty offense under the current law, which researchers said was too lenient. They suggested instead that a violation should make an offender eligible for arrest and possibly for the revocation or suspension of his or her FOID card as well.

Last - but certainly not least in terms of complexity — the report calls for a firearms registration system.

The report said having a way to track lawful firearm transfers before a weapon enters the secondary illegal market would "provide an invaluable tool" to detectives in criminal investigations.

Current federal law requires keeping records of a firearm's initial sale with the ATF, but without a way to track subsequent sales, tracing the full path of a weapon used in a crime remains difficult.

Gun Dealers
5% of gun dealers supply 90% of guns used in crimes, termed "bad apple" dealers.

An ATF study found that in cities like New Orleans and Pittsburgh, more than 60 percent of crime guns come from a few local “bad apple” gun dealers.

A report from the City of Chicago found that just four stores on the outskirts of the city supplied nearly 20 percent of the city’s crime guns traced from 2009 to 2013.

“Bad apple” gun dealers can develop well established reputations among local criminals as easy sources of guns. However, many “bad apple” gun dealers — frequently from states with lax gun laws — also supply guns that are trafficked hundreds of miles away. For example, 75 percent of the guns recovered and traced in New York City originated more than 250 miles away.

A Georgia-based gun shop Arrowhead Pawnshopvhas been a major source of crime guns in New York City. Georgia has been among the top five states supplying guns to New York State for the past eight years.

Another on-line marketplace - ArsenalExchange.com - has a User Agreement similar to Armslist. It's merely a post, not anything you have to click on to accept like a website that sells liquor. You agree to abide by all laws. Arsenal Exchange absolves itself from any liability. Arsenal Exchange guarantees "complete privacy" to the transaction for both parties.

Opposition by gun lobbies to stricter legislation sustain these sources of weapons for gangs and criminals. The difficulty in tracing them as well as limiting background checks for private sales, which the gun lobby was able to get into legislation, inhibits enforcement and facilitates gun availability for these crimes.

 

[drayer54]

Only 21% of guns used in crimes come from Indiana, though .....

Freedom hating crap from the gun-control lobby doesn't make Chicago safer.

Actual policework makes Chicago safer.

https://www.economist.com/united-states/2018/05/05/violent-crime-is-down-in-chicago
Better software to target higher risk areas helps.

Increasing drug enforcement was met with lower homicides. And in 2016, when they engaged the people less, the murders spiked.

It sounds like a few gun stores need sting operations and put out of business. But, the idea of widespread repressive gun control fixing the issue is just a flawed attack on the freedom of Americans.

 

[no.1IrishFan]

Another lead filled weekend in Chicago. Thank you Democrats and to some of the most tough guns laws out there.

Too bad Barry couldn't do more. His "community organizing" are the places you are most likely to see this gun violence.

So let's assume the strict gun laws aren't doing much, if any good, to curb gun violence and homicide in Chicago. Do you feel the problem would be worse, stay the same, or get better, if they implemented the same gun laws we have here in Arizona?

Honest question.

 

[loomis41973]

So let's assume the strict gun laws aren't doing much, if any good, to curb gun violence and homicide in Chicago. Do you feel the problem would be worse, stay the same, or get better, if they implemented the same gun laws we have here in Arizona?

Honest question.

I am really not sure, but doing the same thing over and over is stupid.

Better leadership and policing would be a great start.

 

[Legacy]

So let's assume the strict gun laws aren't doing much, if any good, to curb gun violence and homicide in Chicago. Do you feel the problem would be worse, stay the same, or get better, if they implemented the same gun laws we have here in Arizona?

Honest question.

Your premise is certainly debatable with Chicago seeing a decrease in gun crimes for thirteen straight months, which is a combination of a number of factors. Homicides do get the attention, but many other places have higher gun violence rates. Gang violence with easy availability of guns elsewhere is a major cause and that's hard to root out. I've posted the link to other actions Chicago considers necessary. Summer usually brings more gang killings.

As for Arizona, as you know, is the same old, same old. While Chicago police confiscate 7,000 weapons from crimes a year and destroys them, Arizona has a state law that requires them to be resold. Arizona also has other state pre-emptive laws limits local governments from enacting any ordinance dealing with acquisition, licensing, registration or use of firearms. Tucson was destroying about 1,000 guns confiscated by police annually for five years until the Az Supreme Court ruled a state law requiring the guns be resold pre-empted Tucson's.

About twelve bills were introduced in the Arizona legislature and almost all never got out of committee including universal background checks, a red flag law to temporarily confiscate guns from someone threatening to kill a family member and one that restricts guns from someone on probation for domestic violence. One gun control bill got to the floor, but was blocked from a vote by the majority leader. Among states, Arizona has the 14th highest gun death rate nationally. Illinois has the 40th highest.

Arizona does not require background checks on private sales, no waiting periods, no limit on the amount of weapons purchased at one time, dealers don't have to have a state license, and no state requirements on keeping track of gun sales. Arizona guns are used in California gun crimes more than any other state and is a source for guns to be trafficked to Mexico gangs, which also plague Arizona.

The state's minority leader is a trauma surgeon who has seen the effects of gun violence and both he and the other sponsor of one of the bills, who was an intern under Gabby Giffords, were involved in trying to save lives that day.

Arizona is one of the top ten states with "bad apple dealers".

To try to make some changes to Arizona's same old status Giffords and her husband Mark Kelly started a gun coalition to reduce gun violence. (See list for the legislators, organizational, religious including the diocese, businesses, legal, educational and other members) The recommendations are basic and what's been proven to reduce gun violence nationally and favored by most Americans.

Until any changes, it's estimated Arizona taxpayers will pay almost $900 each annually for gun violence and be a major source for gun trafficking. The community policing that Chicago has instituted may be more difficult due to Arizona's immigration policies and the subsequent challenges of obtaining Hispanic communities' cooperation.

You may want to consider which category of gun violence - homicides, suicides, domestic violence deaths, accidents - most affect Arizonans because different gun laws apply in different situations and may not be comparable to Chicago's situation and, of course, not worthy of coming to conclusions about gun laws working overall.
- If you have more gun deaths from domestic violence, red flag laws would help. Az's domestic violence gun homicide rate is 45% higher than the national average.
- A higher rate of suicides in Arizona with more of a national rate of homicides may argue towards more mental health treament facilities as well as the red flag laws that would remove guns.
- Waiting periods would help with suicide rates and domestic violence fatalities.
- Gun safety laws would apply should Arizona have more accidental deaths and injuries with consideration to be given to gun availability, access and guns in the home unlocked and loaded.

You may not be able to approach NY's firearm death rate of 4.4, especially with the easy availability of firearms in AZ (15.2 firearm death rate). Perhaps you could approach California's firearm death rate of 7.9. But Illinois's firearm death rate of 11.7 is more realistic.

Arizonans for Gun Safety - Deaths