Mass shooting in San Bernardino, CA

[Cackalacky]

Holy shit! These graphs are beyond misleading. People will glance at these tables and not realize the double y axis that is making firearm suicides and firearm murders appear to be more than 3.5x and 2x what they should be respectively.

Not.sure why you say this. Double y axis graphs are very useful. These simply show the following:

Non-firearm suicides have remained unchanged with a slight drop from 10 to 8 per 100000.
The armed suicide s decreased from 3 to about 0.5 per 100000.

Armed homicides dropped from 0.65 to virtually 0.1 per 100000.
Non firearm homicides slightly decreased from 0.9 to 0.6 per 100000.

I would say reducing fire arm related homicides has worked very well.

This data tells me two things:
A percentage of the population is going to kill themselves. They will do it with or with out a gun though a gun is much easier and quicker so it's likely people who use a gun to kill themselves may think twice about doing it another way.

A portion of the population is going to kill someone else. They also will choose a gun over other weapons because it is quicker and easier. Removing a tool to kill many people quickly is very effective at limiting the killing done by one person at a time.

 

[yankeehater]

Yep. People here would shoot people trying to do anything like this as TTT said earlier. Imagine if people who wanted to do violence on a group of people had limited or no access to guns and had to choose instead a knife of some other weapon that can't kill 20 people in three minutes.

I have weighed in on the Second Amendment interpretation far too many times but the more these things happen the more I wonder why people like this had access to armor, fatigues, and assault rifles. Are they part of a well regulated militia? Does the NRA check to see if it's members are terrorists? Why are terrorists in the no fly list able to buy guns here? It's maddening truly.

Read what you are saying!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The left is always trying to take away rights from people on everything they do not like. If these people are such a concern to be on a no fly list, why are they even still in this country or at least not in prison. That would definitely solve the problem with them be able to obtain a gun in this country.

 

[BobbyMac]

Read what you are saying!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The left is always trying to take away rights from people on everything they do not like. If these people are such a concern to be on a no fly list, why are they even still in this country or at least not in prison. That would definitely solve the problem with them be able to obtain a gun in this country.

Your South County logic is delicious!

 

[yankeehater]

Your South County logic is delicious!

And I am a non-gun owner, but don't publicize it for fear of being robbed.

Maybe I am so bent right now because I heard from a leftist friend today and we discussed profiling. He said the group that should be profiled is white Christian men. I asked him to give me one instance in the last decade where they caused terrorism in the US.....silence on the other end of the phone.

 

[woolybug25]

And I am a non-gun owner, but don't publicize it for fear of being robbed.

Maybe I am so bent right now because I heard from a leftist friend today and we discussed profiling. He said the group that should be profiled is white Christian men. I asked him to give me one instance in the last decade where they caused terrorism in the US.....silence on the other end of the phone.

Then he didn't think hard. A white christian just committed terrorism last week in CO.

 

[GATTACA!]

Not.sure why you say this. Double y axis graphs are very useful. These simply show the following:

Non-firearm suicides have remained unchanged with a slight drop from 10 to 8 per 100000.
The armed suicide s decreased from 3 to about 0.5 per 100000.

Armed homicides dropped from 0.65 to virtually 0.1 per 100000.
Non firearm homicides slightly decreased from 0.9 to 0.6 per 100000.

I would say reducing fire arm related homicides has worked very well.

This data tells me two things:
A percentage of the population is going to kill themselves. They will do it with or with out a gun though a gun is much easier and quicker so it's likely people who use a gun to kill themselves may think twice about doing it another way.

A portion of the population is going to kill someone else. They also will choose a gun over other weapons because it is quicker and easier. Removing a tool to kill many people quickly is very effective at limiting the killing done by one person at a time.

Because people are stupid.

Using two different values for your y axis is great for when you want to show trends, but there is a wide spread in your two sets of data. 2x and 3.5x are not far enough apart to warrant different scales. Instead the author of this piece chose to use different scales because they know anyone who takes glance at these tables instead of actually looking at the data points is going to come away with the 2 assumptions. A) That the trend of both suicides and homicides as a whole declined after the gun mandate in 1998. Which is accurate. But also they will believe that B) the rate of gun related suicides and non gun suicides are almost identical, same for murders. This is not true, and probably done on purpose.

Here, roughly, is what the graphs look like if the scale is uniform. Here it is clear that the rate of non firearm murder and non firearm suicide is much higher than firearm homicide/suicide overall.

 

[Cackalacky]

Read what you are saying!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The left is always trying to take away rights from people on everything they do not like. If these people are such a concern to be on a no fly list, why are they even still in this country or at least not in prison. That would definitely solve the problem with them be able to obtain a gun in this country.

I am fairly cognizant of what I am writing. I am not taking a political side here. It's not the agenda of the left to take away people's rights. That is a false narrative. What happens is a policy gets enacted that affects a portion the population. Take for example Highway safety. After a few decades of Americans driving like dipshits and killing themselves and other people with their high velocity all steel Cadillacs, sensible legislation was enacted and reduced highway collisions fatalities and other related situations to small rates per capita. Then Americans propensity for drinking and driving became exposed increasing roadway fatalities to the car driver but also occupants and other drivers. So sensible legislation was passed and drunk driving fatalities are lower. Seatbelts are very effective at saving lives in collisions. Legislation to require use of a standard automobile feature is a good thing. You probably think these things take away your rights to enjoy a privileged too....

And before you say it I know you and others will say that guns are a right not a privilege... well that depends on your interpretation of the 2nd amendment and whether or not a well regulated militia is literally required by the amendment or just extraneous historical BS.

Regardless, guns like cars can and should be regulated to the extent that people who should not drive or own guns can't and don't use them to harm themselves and others around them. Sensible legislation is not infringing on your right to own guns but if done correctly it will decrease the amount of senseless tragedies we have here everyday with gun related violence.

But you know why terrorists can get guns here right? The NRA hand writes policy and because every Republican and most Democrats are beholden to the NRA and sensible legislation just is not possible with theses corrupt oligarchs dismissing the will of 90% of the American population on simple back ground checks and registered sales.

So please don't tell me to read what I write. I know very well what I wrote and I have several friends and family that are no longer her to always remind me how and why they died and whether or not it could have been prevented.

 

[GATTACA!]

Then he didn't think hard. A white christian just committed terrorism last week in CO.

Clearly the reason they were discussing the topic at all was because of the events in CO. So he was asking previous to that event. But you already knew that, you're just being purposefully obtuse.

 

[yankeehater]

Then he didn't think hard. A white christian just committed terrorism last week in CO.

Proof? He was a nut job with no electricity. His ex-wife even said he never once commented on being against abortion.

 

[BobbyMac]

And I am a non-gun owner, but don't publicize it for fear of being robbed.

Maybe I am so bent right now because I heard from a leftist friend today and we discussed profiling. He said the group that should be profiled is white Christian men. I asked him to give me one instance in the last decade where they caused terrorism in the US.....silence on the other end of the phone.

Progressive white guilt... powerful mojo.

 

[Cackalacky]

Because people are stupid.

Using two different values for your y axis is great for when you want to show trends, but there is a wide spread in your two sets of data. 2x and 3.5x are not far enough apart to warrant different scales. Instead the author of this piece chose to use different scales because they know anyone who takes glance at these tables instead of actually looking at the data points is going to come away with the 2 assumptions. A) That the trend of both suicides and homicides as a whole declined after the gun mandate in 1998. Which is accurate. But also they will believe that B) the rate of gun related suicides and non gun suicides are almost identical, same for murders. This is not true, and probably done on purpose.

Here, roughly, is what the graphs look like if the scale is uniform. Here it is clear that the rate of non firearm murder and non firearm suicide is much higher than firearm homicide/suicide overall.

I gotcha. I see that. IDK if they would do that on purpose but in this day and age its possible and even likely.

Did you input that data in excel your self? Reps if so.

 

[woolybug25]

Proof? He was a nut job with no electricity. His ex-wife even said he never once commented on being against abortion.

Tell yourself whatever you want, but you're wrong.

One person who spoke with him extensively about his religious views said Mr. Dear, who is 57, had praised people who attacked abortion providers, saying they were doing “God’s work.” In 2009, said the person, who spoke on the condition of anonymity out of concerns for the privacy of the family, Mr. Dear described as “heroes” members of the Army of God, a loosely organized group of anti-abortion extremists that has claimed responsibility for a number of killings and bombings.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/02/us/robert-dear-planned-parenthood-shooting.html

 

[woolybug25]

Clearly the reason they were discussing the topic at all was because of the events in CO. So he was asking previous to that event. But you already knew that, you're just being purposefully obtuse.

Not at all. His post below doesn't mention CO at all and the conversation took place today. I'm not the one being "obtuse"...

And I am a non-gun owner, but don't publicize it for fear of being robbed.

Maybe I am so bent right now because I heard from a leftist friend today and we discussed profiling. He said the group that should be profiled is white Christian men. I asked him to give me one instance in the last decade where they caused terrorism in the US.....silence on the other end of the phone.

 

[T Town Tommy]

Australia confiscated 650,000 guns. Murders and suicides plummeted. - Vox

This is the best paragraph I've ever read on gun control and mass shootings - Vox

And yet Europe, who has harsh gun control laws, have more gun murders per capita than the US.


I asked earlier and didn't get a response so I will ask again. What gun control law would have prevented any of the mass killings in the US we have seen in recent years? Why does NYC have a lower murder rate than DC or Chicago when all three have similar gun control laws? Why does Houston, Tx have a low per capita murder rate with guns when Texas has some of the most lax gun control laws in the US?

Guns are a symptom of a far more complex problem. If we aren't willing to understand and address the root cause of the problem then we will not see any improvement in gun related murders in this country. Europe decided to enforce strict gun control laws. France, in particular, has some very stringent laws. And yet in 2015 alone, France has seen more gun related murders per capita than the US. Attacking the symptom and not the problem may yield some short term success but not sustainable success.

Now, before I get attacked, I have stated numerous times that I am in favor of common sense gun control legislation. What I am not in favor of is law abiding citizens of this country not being allowed to own guns. If you don't want to own a gun... don't buy it. But don't come running to my house when all hell breaks lose asking for one to defend yourself either. (I would let you in but you get the point) As another poster said earlier in this thread, I would rather be part of a shootout with deranged individuals or, God forbid, terrorists, than be massacred.

 

[GATTACA!]

I gotcha. I see that. IDK if they would do that on purpose but in this day and age its possible and even likely.

Did you input that data in excel your self? Reps if so.

Haha yeah I figured a visual would be better at explaining what I was trying to say then me just typing it out.

 

[IrishLax]

Sooo... guns banned in Australia in 1996, right?

Firearm homicides down ~78%... but non-firearm homicides down ~45% in the same timeframe? So it would suggest that the law had a large effect, but that people also generally stopped killing each as frequently over the same timespan.

For suicides, firearm suicides went down 62%... non-firearm suicides went down 28%. So basically the same sort of thing, less overall death and a significant decrease in death related to firearms.

What I'm wondering is why gun laws would have any effect on the non-firearm rates? Logically it shouldn't, right? Just a weird correlation?

 

[GATTACA!]

Not at all. His post below doesn't mention CO at all and the conversation took place today. I'm not the one being "obtuse"...

Yes he was because other than that event in CO there is zero reason why that person would be saying white christian men need to be profiled.

 

[woolybug25]

And yet Europe, who has harsh gun control laws, have more gun murders per capita than the US.


I asked earlier and didn't get a response so I will ask again. What gun control law would have prevented any of the mass killings in the US we have seen in recent years? Why does NYC have a lower murder rate than DC or Chicago when all three have similar gun control laws? Why does Houston, Tx have a low per capita murder rate with guns when Texas has some of the most lax gun control laws in the US?

Guns are a symptom of a far more complex problem. If we aren't willing to understand and address the root cause of the problem then we will not see any improvement in gun related murders in this country. Europe decided to enforce strict gun control laws. France, in particular, has some very stringent laws. And yet in 2015 alone, France has seen more gun related murders per capita than the US. Attacking the symptom and not the problem may yield some short term success but not sustainable success.

Now, before I get attacked, I have stated numerous times that I am in favor of common sense gun control legislation. What I am not in favor of is law abiding citizens of this country not being allowed to own guns. If you don't want to own a gun... don't buy it. But don't come running to my house when all hell breaks lose asking for one to defend yourself either. (I would let you in but you get the point) As another poster said earlier in this thread, I would rather be part of a shootout with deranged individuals or, God forbid, terrorists, than be massacred.

While I actually agree with your premise (guns are a symptom), the stats are the stats.

The United States has the highest gun ownership rate in the world and the highest per capita rate of firearm-related murders of all developed countries.

Gun homicides and gun ownership by country - The Washington Post

 

[Cackalacky]

Sooo... guns banned in Australia in 1996, right?

Firearm homicides down ~78%... but non-firearm homicides down ~45% in the same timeframe? So it would suggest that the law had a large effect, but that people also generally stopped killing each as frequently over the same timespan.

For suicides, firearm suicides went down 62%... non-firearm suicides went down 28%. So basically the same sort of thing, less overall death and a significant decrease in death related to firearms.

What I'm wondering is why gun laws would have any effect on the non-firearm rates? Logically it shouldn't, right? Just a weird correlation?

My personal opinion is that if people have to use something more crude or less quick then they are less likely to follow through on the action. No one wants to stab themselves and bleed out. It's much easier to just blast a hole in your brain.

Likewise with assaults. Using other weapons are far less effective, require close range and usually intimacy to use them. It's much easier to stand 20 yards away and squeeze a trigger especially automatic fire.

 

[yankeehater]

I am fairly cognizant of what I am writing. I am not taking a political side here. It's not the agenda of the left to take away people's rights. That is a false narrative. What happens is a policy gets enacted that affects a portion the population. Take for example Highway safety. After a few decades of Americans driving like dipshits and killing themselves and other people with their high velocity all steel Cadillacs, sensible legislation was enacted and reduced highway collisions fatalities and other related situations to small rates per capita. Then Americans propensity for drinking and driving became exposed increasing roadway fatalities to the car driver but also occupants and other drivers. So sensible legislation was passed and drunk driving fatalities are lower. Seatbelts are very effective at saving lives in collisions. Legislation to require use of a standard automobile feature is a good thing. You probably think these things take away your rights to enjoy a privileged too....

And before you say it I know you and others will say that guns are a right not a privilege... well that depends on your interpretation of the 2nd amendment and whether or not a well regulated militia is literally required by the amendment or just extraneous historical BS.

Regardless, guns like cars can and should be regulated to the extent that people who should not drive or own guns can't and don't use them to harm themselves and others around them. Sensible legislation is not infringing on your right to own guns but if done correctly it will decrease the amount of senseless tragedies we have here everyday with gun related violence.

But you know why terrorists can get guns here right? The NRA hand writes policy and because every Republican and most Democrats are beholden to the NRA and sensible legislation just is not possible with theses corrupt oligarchs dismissing the will of 90% of the American population on simple back ground checks and registered sales.

So please don't tell me to read what I write. I know very well what I wrote and I have several friends and family that are no longer her to always remind me how and why they died and whether or not it could have been prevented.

Wow...after all these years I never knew why my car is now mainly made of plastic. Funny thing is it goes just as fast as it did back in those days you so speak.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

And yet Europe, who has harsh gun control laws, have more gun murders per capita than the US.


I asked earlier and didn't get a response so I will ask again. What gun control law would have prevented any of the mass killings in the US we have seen in recent years? Why does NYC have a lower murder rate than DC or Chicago when all three have similar gun control laws? Why does Houston, Tx have a low per capita murder rate with guns when Texas has some of the most lax gun control laws in the US?

Guns are a symptom of a far more complex problem. If we aren't willing to understand and address the root cause of the problem then we will not see any improvement in gun related murders in this country. Europe decided to enforce strict gun control laws. France, in particular, has some very stringent laws. And yet in 2015 alone, France has seen more gun related murders per capita than the US. Attacking the symptom and not the problem may yield some short term success but not sustainable success.

Now, before I get attacked, I have stated numerous times that I am in favor of common sense gun control legislation. What I am not in favor of is law abiding citizens of this country not being allowed to own guns. If you don't want to own a gun... don't buy it. But don't come running to my house when all hell breaks lose asking for one to defend yourself either. (I would let you in but you get the point) As another poster said earlier in this thread, I would rather be part of a shootout with deranged individuals or, God forbid, terrorists, than be massacred.

You keep coming back to that straw man. No one is advocating that we remove all guns from all hands. I think you and I agree on most of the gun control legislation you've talked about.

And, with regard to different gun violence rates in different cities, I think you're right that it's important that we study that phenomenon. It's likely very complex. But, as we've said, congress won't allow those investigations to happen.

The same poster that referenced the shootout was talking about just how much safer we are now than we used to be. He stopped with that narrative as soon as he realized that the gunman had a Middle Eastern name.

 

[Cackalacky]

Haha yeah I figured a visual would be better at explaining what I was trying to say then me just typing it out.

I like it.

 

[T Town Tommy]

While I actually agree with your premise (guns are a symptom), the stats are the stats.



Gun homicides and gun ownership by country - The Washington Post

The first liar never has a chance.

The facts shoot holes in Obama's claim that US is only host to mass killings | Fox News

 

[Cackalacky]

Wow...after all these years I never knew why my car is now mainly made of plastic. Funny thing is it goes just as fast as it did back in those days you so speak.

ok.. out of that entire post you respond with this. Lol. That sensible legislation included standard driving rules, signals, signage, road line markings, and speed limits based on safety data and road design and it significantly reduce highway and road way fatalities. Not whether your car is much lighter or contsin less steel than cars were back then...Sheesh...

 

[DomerInHappyValley]

While I actually agree with your premise (guns are a symptom), the stats are the stats.



Gun homicides and gun ownership by country - The Washington Post

According to that graph I'd say Switzerland is considered a developed country and at 72.2% vs our 67.5%.

 

[woolybug25]

Yes he was because other than that event in CO there is zero reason why that person would be saying white christian men need to be profiled.

How in the hell do you know what his friend was thinking? Even after I brought up CO, yankee made no mention of that. In fact, he elaborated that ZERO events could be brought up.

Furthermore, Yankee didn't even say "terrorism on the behalf of christianity" he clearly said:

I asked him to give me one instance in the last decade where they caused terrorism in the US

If the only thing he was looking for was a white christian causing an act of terrorism, then that list is quite lengthy. They might not have done it because of their faith, but let's not act like white, christian males haven't taken part in terrorism. Hell... the Klu Klux Klan and the Army of God are almost primarily comprised of them.

 

[Irish YJ]

My personal opinion is that if people have to use something more crude or less quick then they are less likely to follow through on the action. No one wants to stab themselves and bleed out. It's much easier to just blast a hole in your brain.

Likewise with assaults. Using other weapons are far less effective, require close range and usually intimacy to use them. It's much easier to stand 20 yards away and squeeze a trigger especially automatic fire.

I'd think people would rather OD on something than blow a hole in themselves.... would be interesting to see some data on the means of suicide (non firearm) before and after the ban.

 

[T Town Tommy]

You keep coming back to that straw man. No one is advocating that we remove all guns from all hands. I think you and I agree on most of the gun control legislation you've talked about.

And, with regard to different gun violence rates in different cities, I think you're right that it's important that we study that phenomenon. It's likely very complex. But, as we've said, congress won't allow those investigations to happen.

The same poster that referenced the shootout was talking about just how much safer we are now than we used to be. He stopped with that narrative as soon as he realized that the gunman had a Middle Eastern name.

A recent post on this forum showed Australia confiscating guns. While I have no way of knowing, I would bet there are those that post out here as IE brothern that would probably advocate gun confiscation. There are plenty of politicians looking for votes when tragedies occur. And there are those like the NRA that are just as irrational on the other side. This I know, a zero sum game in either direction will never solve the problems we are facing with this issue.

While I haven't researched everything about guns and/or gun violence, I do remember reading that most murders occur between people that have some form of a relationship together. Either acquaintances, spouses, family members, etc. And I sure don't want to see another person killed with a gun ever. That's unrealistic but at least we can hope.

I do think that domestic terrorism, whether homegrown or not, is going to be the biggest challenge we face in the next decade.

 

[Cackalacky]

I'd think people would rather OD on something than blow a hole in themselves.... would be interesting to see some data on the means of suicide (non firearm) before and after the ban.

Yeah definitely. But that gets back to my earlier point. People will kill themselves but having to decide using something not as effective or quick makes that decision harder and the will to do so much greater. So I have been told anyway.

 

[GATTACA!]

Why am I gonna argue about this when we can just ask him.


Hey yankeehater what was the reason the person you were talking to said that white christian males need to be profiled?