June 27, 2005

Some reality

Inspired by a post by James Wolcott, here are some facts. Make of them what you will.

FACT: In 2002, there were 1,231 gun deaths in the state of Illinois, a 5% decrease from the 1,293 gun deaths in the state in 2001. The 2002 Illinois gun deaths included:

- 728 homicides (59% of all IL gun deaths),
- 466 suicides (38% of all IL gun deaths),
and 17 unintentional shootings, 6 legal intervention, and 14 of undetermined intent (3% of all IL gun deaths combined).

In 1998, there were 19 gun deaths in Japan, 54 in England and Wales, 151 in Canada.

I'll let you guess how many there were in the U.S. Answer in the first comment below.


At 6/27/2005 4:39 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

11,789 gun deaths in the U.S. back in 1998.

Same year, 19 in Japan, 54 in England and Wales, 151 in Canada.

Next time you meet a rabid NRA gun-nut, be sure to thank him for defending our nation's ability to be so civilized.

At 6/27/2005 4:51 PM, Blogger loudogblog said...

Statistics are almost meaningless. they can be twisted to support any point of view.

Gun control and crime

In 1976, Washington, D.C., instituted one of the strictest gun-control laws in the country. The murder rate since that time has risen 134 percent (77.8 per 100,000 population) while the overall rate for the country has declined 2 percent. Washington, D.C., politicians find it easy to blame Virginia’s less-stringent gun laws for the D.C. murder rate. Yet Virginia Beach, Virginia’s largest city with almost 400,000 residents, has had one of the lowest rates of murder in the country — 4.1 per 100,000.

In New York City, long known for strict regulation of all types of weapons, only 19 percent of the 390 homicides in 1960 involved pistols. By 1972, this proportion had jumped to 49 percent of 1,691. In 1973, according to the New York Times, there were only 28,000 lawfully possessed handguns in the nation’s largest city, but police estimated that there were as many as 1.3 million illegal handguns there.

In 1986, Maryland banned small, affordable handguns called Saturday night specials. Within two years, Maryland’s murder rate increased by 20 percent, surpassing the national murder rate by 33 percent. Then Maryland passed a one-gun-a-month law. Yet between 1997 and 1998, 600 firearms recovered from crime scenes were traced to Maryland gun stores. Virginia, one of only two other states with a similar law, ranked third as a source of guns used by criminals in other states.

On the other hand, New Hampshire has almost no gun control and its cities are rated among the safest in the country. Across the border in Massachusetts, which has very stringent gun-control laws, cities of comparable size have two to three times as much crime as New Hampshire.

Vermont has the least restrictive gun-control law. It recognizes the right of any Vermonter who has not otherwise been prohibited from owning a firearm to carry concealed weapons without a permit or license. Yet Vermont has one of the lowest crime rates in America, ranking 49 out of 50 in all crimes and 47th in murders.

States which have passed concealed-carry laws have seen their murder rate fall by 8.5 percent, rapes by 5 percent, aggravated assaults by 7 percent and robbery by 3 percent.

Texas is a good example. In the early 1990s, Texas’s serious crime rate was 38 percent above the national average. Since then, serious crime in Texas has dropped 50 percent faster than for the nation as a whole. All this happened after passage of a concealed-carry law in 1994."


At 6/27/2005 5:23 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Well, YOUR stats are meaningless, as A. They come from a biased source with suspect credibility, and B. they don't address the situation illustrated by the statistics.

"fff.org" or "The Future Freedom Foundation" is nothing but some raving libertarian think tank who is out to take us back to the bad old days of survival of the fittest. They're opposed to any government programs of any kind and feel there shouldn't be any gun laws whatsoever.

My stats are from the Center for Disease control and aren't subject to ideological B.S. They're just the straight, raw data.

Your stats are meaningless because they don't address the core point, namely, that America is a far, far, FAR more violent and deadly country than any other so-called developed society, and it's largely due to our fixation on guns and the fact that they practically litter our streets.

If you want to argue that we need more guns, not less, and less regulation, not more, go ahead.
If you really want to argue that guns have nothing to do with the shameful and immoral amount of death and destruction done with guns in the country, go ahead.
But any 5 year old realizes that it goes against simple common sense.

But the fact remains that there is a direct link between the number and availability of guns and the sheer number of senseless deaths, murder, suicides, and maimings that occur dozens of times a day in this country.

Bottom line? You stats and all the rest only ignore the real facts that the CDC stats illustrate. Nice try.

At 6/27/2005 5:48 PM, Blogger maybesomeday said...

The Gun Nuts always weigh in. And nuts they truely are in every sense of the word.

They are loosing the clout they had with Heston in the PR department. Today he can't remember his own name and probably is not allowed to touch his beloved guns anymore - for safety's sake.

At 5/20/2008 1:31 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I only say this... for those of you who are for gun control... Post a big neon sign in your front yard that says, "NO GUNS HERE."
We live in a place where we have a choice. It's called freedom. You do not have to own a gun, you have that choice.
Remember, Criminals break the law. You and I do not. The only people that gun laws affect are the ones who care to obey the law. Bad guys didn't care before and they don't care after.
Throwing numbers out there about only "gun related" crime grossly neglects all of the crime that did happen and could have been prevented if the victim(s) could have defended themselves.
I'm not trying to start a big ol' fight here just please take a moment and consider what you would feel like if you were watching your spouse get raped because you were being held at gunpoint (bad guys don't obey gun laws) and you could do nothing but get shot if you move?
There is a reason for Americans to be able to defend themselves. If you can't move cause the bad guy got into your house and you don't have a gun near the nightstand, you also won't be able to dial 911. Even if you did, they'd get there sometime during or after the assault, so again... too late.

I'm just honestly asking you all to ponder whether we need to be focusing on controlling guns or on controlling crime?


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home