America..why won't you just ban the fucking gun?

[elliseamos]

Do those of you in favor of more gun control have a better understanding of the gun-rights crowd, now?

I don't expect that many of you will agree with them, but do you at least understand where they are coming from?

no and no. i don't see how someone could reasonably argue that having tougher restrictions on personal gun and ammo purchases equals the complete banning of all personal fire-arms.

[simple schoolboy]

Do those of you in favor of more gun control have a better understanding of the gun-rights crowd, now?

I don't expect that many of you will agree with them, but do you at least understand where they are coming from?

no and no. i don't see how someone could reasonably argue that having tougher restrictions on personal gun and ammo purchases equals the complete banning of all personal fire-arms.

If the restrictions are onerous enough, you end up with a de facto ban. The militia clause certainly suggests* that at least those who are eligible for militia service should have weapons appropriate for said service. Seven round magazines don't seem to fit the bill.

On an unrelated note, I have well over 10,000 rounds of ammunition (not including .22, which I am short on like everyone else). I don't know what I'll do with it. Maybe give it to those who can shoot better than me, which would be pretty much anyone. =/
This is primarily because CA is threatening to require background checks for ammo purchases which in the current environment would make buying ammunition so expensive that it would become unaffordable. That is assuming the $25 fee for a background check would apply and most stores will only sell a few boxes at a time due to unprecedented demand. A previously proposed bill would have made it a crime to hand a few rounds to a buddy at the range. 'Reasonable'? Sure, if by reasonable you mean making the greatest number of individuals criminals.
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Miller

[broken iris]

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_a ... rom_a.html

Rethinking Gun Control
Surprising findings from a comprehensive report on gun violence.

By William Saletan|Posted Monday, June 24, 2013, at 10:29 AM

Background checks are back. Last week, Vice President Joe Biden said that five U.S. senators—enough to change the outcome—have told him they’re looking for a way to switch their votes and pass legislation requiring a criminal background check for the purchase of a firearm. Sen. Joe Manchin, the West Virginia Democrat who led the fight for the bill, is firing back at the National Rifle Association with a new TV ad. The White House, emboldened by polls that indicate damage to senators who voted against the bill, is pushing Congress to reconsider it.

The gun control debate is certainly worth reopening. But if we’re going to reopen it, let’s not just rethink the politics. Let’s take another look at the facts. Earlier this year, President Obama ordered the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to assess the existing research on gun violence and recommend future studies. That report, prepared by the Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council, is now complete. Its findings won’t entirely please the Obama administration or the NRA, but all of us should consider them. Here’s a list of the 10 most salient or surprising takeaways.

1. The United States has an indisputable gun violence problem. According to the report, “the U.S. rate of firearm-related homicide is higher than that of any other industrialized country: 19.5 times higher than the rates in other high-income countries.”

2. Most indices of crime and gun violence are getting better, not worse. “Overall crime rates have declined in the past decade, and violent crimes, including homicides specifically, have declined in the past 5 years,” the report notes. “Between 2005 and 2010, the percentage of firearm-related violent victimizations remained generally stable.” Meanwhile, “firearm-related death rates for youth ages 15 to 19 declined from 1994 to 2009.” Accidents are down, too: “Unintentional firearm-related deaths have steadily declined during the past century. The number of unintentional deaths due to firearm-related incidents accounted for less than 1 percent of all unintentional fatalities in 2010.”

3. We have 300 million firearms, but only 100 million are handguns. According to the report, “In 2007, one estimate placed the total number of firearms in the country at 294 million: ‘106 million handguns, 105 million rifles, and 83 million shotguns.’ ” This translates to nearly nine guns for every 10 people, a per capita ownership rate nearly 50 percent higher than the next most armed country. But American gun ownership is concentrated, not universal: In a December 2012 Gallup poll, “43 percent of those surveyed reported having a gun in the home.”

4. Handguns are the problem. Despite being outnumbered by long guns, “Handguns are used in more than 87 percent of violent crimes,” the report notes. In 2011, “handguns comprised 72.5 percent of the firearms used in murder and non-negligent manslaughter incidents.” Why do criminals prefer handguns? One reason, according to surveys of felons, is that they’re “easily concealable.”

5. Mass shootings aren’t the problem. “The number of public mass shootings of the type that occurred at Sandy Hook Elementary School accounted for a very small fraction of all firearm-related deaths,” says the report. “Since 1983 there have been 78 events in which 4 or more individuals were killed by a single perpetrator in 1 day in the United States, resulting in 547 victims and 476 injured persons.” Compare that with the 335,000 gun deaths between 2000 and 2010 alone.

6. Gun suicide is a bigger killer than gun homicide. From 2000 to 2010, “firearm-related suicides significantly outnumbered homicides for all age groups, annually accounting for 61 percent of the more than 335,600 people who died from firearm-related violence in the United States,” says the report. Firearm sales are often a warning: Two studies found that “a small but significant fraction of gun suicides are committed within days to weeks after the purchase of a handgun, and both also indicate that gun purchasers have an elevated risk of suicide for many years after the purchase of the gun.”

7. Guns are used for self-defense often and effectively. “Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year … in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008,” says the report. The three million figure is probably high, “based on an extrapolation from a small number of responses taken from more than 19 national surveys.” But a much lower estimate of 108,000 also seems fishy, “because respondents were not asked specifically about defensive gun use.” Furthermore, “Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was 'used' by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies.”

8. Carrying guns for self-defense is an arms race. The prevalence of firearm violence near “drug markets … could be a consequence of drug dealers carrying guns for self-defense against thieves or other adversaries who are likely to be armed,” says the report. In these communities, “individuals not involved in the drug markets have similar incentives for possessing guns.” According to a Pew Foundation report, “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 or other activities—as the major reason for why they own guns.”

9. Denying guns to people under restraining orders saves lives. “Two-thirds of homicides of ex- and current spouses were committed [with] firearms,” the report observes. “In locations where individuals under restraining orders to stay away from current or ex-partners are prohibited from access to firearms, female partner homicide is reduced by 7 percent.”

10. It isn’t true that most gun acquisitions by criminals can be blamed on a few bad dealers. The report concedes that in 1998, “1,020 of 83,272 federally licensed retailers (1.2 percent) accounted for 57.4 percent of all guns traced by the ATF.” However, “Gun sales are also relatively concentrated; approximately 15 percent of retailers request 80 percent of background checks on gun buyers conducted by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.” Researchers have found that “the share of crime gun traces attributed to these few dealers only slightly exceeded their share of handgun sales, which are almost equally concentrated among a few dealers.” Volume, not laxity, drives the number of ill-fated sales.

These conclusions don’t line up perfectly with either side’s agenda. That’s a good reason to take them seriously—and to fund additional data collection and research that have been blocked by Congress over politics. Yes, the facts will surprise you. That’s why you should embrace them.

[Green Habit]

We have 300 million firearms, but only 100 million are handguns

Only?

[Orpheus]

I was watching Vice's report on the UT student who is trying to make models for 3D printed receivers easily available. It was equal parts fascinating and terrifying. I really don't think the guy has thought about the long term implications of what he's trying to do.

[simple schoolboy]

I was watching Vice's report on the UT student who is trying to make models for 3D printed receivers easily available. It was equal parts fascinating and terrifying. I really don't think the guy has thought about the long term implications of what he's trying to do.

Did Vice not do a good job covering Cody Wilson's political motivations?

There was another Vice story where a reporter went to a build party to make his own (unregistered) semi-automatic AK. Its totally legal to manufacture your own firearm and there is no need to register it, even in restrictive California. All you need is a friend with a mill and an internet connection and you can make your very own highly reliable firearm.

[Green Habit]

The patch of yellow out west will get SS riled up.

[simple schoolboy]

The patch of yellow out west will get SS riled up.

I thought there was something going through the courts in CA that might force shall issue as in Illinois. In most CA counties there is no ability to carry at all since they banned open, unloaded carry.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woollard_v._Sheridan Maybe I'm thinking of this? Doesn't seem like something SCOTUS wants to touch - mandating shall issue nationwide.

[broken iris]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23250361

Illinois becomes last state to allow 'concealed carry'

The mother of a Chicago murder victim says too many people have access to guns

Illinois has become the last state in the US to allow residents to carry concealed handguns, after lawmakers overrode the governor's veto.

Large majorities in the state House and Senate dismissed objections by Democratic Governor Pat Quinn.

The state had been under court order to adopt a concealed carry law.

The debate over gun rights in the US has raged since December, when a gunman killed 26 people, including 20 children, at a school in Connecticut.

Gun rights proponents say the US constitution protects an individual's right to carry guns, while opponents of the concealed carry law feared it would allow virtually unregulated possession of handguns in the city of Chicago, which is grappling with a severe gun violence epidemic.

In December, a federal appeals court struck down Illinois' ban on carrying a concealed weapon as a violation of the US constitution's guarantee of the right to bear arms. The court gave the state six months to write a law legalising it.

Mr Quinn vigorously opposed a concealed carry law, but the Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal.

In May, the state legislature passed a bill despite his objections. He vetoed the bill, suggesting restrictions on concealed weapons that would satisfy him.
'A historic day'

On Tuesday, legislators in the House and Senate easily mustered a two-thirds majority needed to override Mr Quinn's veto, barely beating the court deadline.

"Following a weekend of horrific violence in Chicago in which at least 70 people were shot and 12 killed, this was the wrong move for public safety in Illinois," Mr Quinn said in a statement after the vote.

He said legislators had "surrendered" to the National Rifle Association, a powerful gun rights lobby funded in part by weapons manufacturers.

He warned the new law would allow people to carry guns in pubs and bars, and allow people to carry virtual arsenals on their persons.

Gun rights proponents, meanwhile, celebrated.

"This is a historic, significant day for law-abiding gun owners,'' Representative Brandon Harris, a southern Illinois Democrat said, according to the Associated Press.

Referring to the clause in the US constitution that refers to gun ownership, he said, "They finally get to exercise their Second Amendment rights."

Trayvon Martin verdict coming up soon. Hopefully not until after we have all left Chicago.

[Harry Lime]

Well, you know Zimmerman's winning his case when the prosecutors are trying to get him on child abuse now. Good lord I hate reading about this stupid case.

[broken iris]

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government ... e-Violence

Harvard Study: No Correlation Between Gun Control and Less Violent Crime

A Harvard Study titled "Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?" looks at figures for "intentional deaths" throughout continental Europe and juxtaposes them with the U.S. to show that more gun control does not necessarily lead to lower death rates or violent crime.

Because the findings so clearly demonstrate that more gun laws may in fact increase death rates, the study says that "the mantra that more guns mean more deaths and that fewer guns, therefore, mean fewer deaths" is wrong.

For example, when the study shows numbers for Eastern European gun ownership and corresponding murder rates, it is readily apparent that less guns to do not mean less death. In Russia, where the rate of gun ownership is 4,000 per 100,000 inhabitants, the murder rate was 20.52 per 100,000 in 2002. That same year in Finland, where the rater of gun ownership is exceedingly higher--39,000 per 100,000--the murder rate was almost nill, at 1.98 per 100,000.

Looking at Western Europe, the study shows that Norway "has far and away Western Europe's highest household gun ownership rate (32%), but also its lowest murder rate."

And when the study focuses on intentional deaths by looking at the U.S. vs Continental Europe, the findings are no less revealing. The U.S., which is so often labeled as the most violent nation in the world by gun control proponents, comes in 7th--behind Russia, Estonia, Lativa, Lithuania, Belarus, and the Ukraine--in murders. America also only ranks 22nd in suicides.

The murder rate in Russia, where handguns are banned, is 30.6; the rate in the U.S. is 7.8.

The authors of the study conclude that the burden of proof rests on those who claim more guns equal more death and violent crime; such proponents should "at the very least [be able] to show a large number of nations with more guns have more death and that nations that impose stringent gun controls have achieved substantial reductions in criminal violence (or suicide)." But after intense study the authors conclude "those correlations are not observed when a large number of nations are compared around the world."

In fact, the numbers presented in the Harvard study support the contention that among the nations studied, those with more gun control tend toward higher death rate

So basically violent cultures = misuse of firearms. Crazy talk.

[kahli sana]

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government ... e-Violence

Harvard Study: No Correlation Between Gun Control and Less Violent Crime

A Harvard Study titled "Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?" looks at figures for "intentional deaths" throughout continental Europe and juxtaposes them with the U.S. to show that more gun control does not necessarily lead to lower death rates or violent crime.

Because the findings so clearly demonstrate that more gun laws may in fact increase death rates, the study says that "the mantra that more guns mean more deaths and that fewer guns, therefore, mean fewer deaths" is wrong.

For example, when the study shows numbers for Eastern European gun ownership and corresponding murder rates, it is readily apparent that less guns to do not mean less death. In Russia, where the rate of gun ownership is 4,000 per 100,000 inhabitants, the murder rate was 20.52 per 100,000 in 2002. That same year in Finland, where the rater of gun ownership is exceedingly higher--39,000 per 100,000--the murder rate was almost nill, at 1.98 per 100,000.

Looking at Western Europe, the study shows that Norway "has far and away Western Europe's highest household gun ownership rate (32%), but also its lowest murder rate."

And when the study focuses on intentional deaths by looking at the U.S. vs Continental Europe, the findings are no less revealing. The U.S., which is so often labeled as the most violent nation in the world by gun control proponents, comes in 7th--behind Russia, Estonia, Lativa, Lithuania, Belarus, and the Ukraine--in murders. America also only ranks 22nd in suicides.

The murder rate in Russia, where handguns are banned, is 30.6; the rate in the U.S. is 7.8.

The authors of the study conclude that the burden of proof rests on those who claim more guns equal more death and violent crime; such proponents should "at the very least [be able] to show a large number of nations with more guns have more death and that nations that impose stringent gun controls have achieved substantial reductions in criminal violence (or suicide)." But after intense study the authors conclude "those correlations are not observed when a large number of nations are compared around the world."

In fact, the numbers presented in the Harvard study support the contention that among the nations studied, those with more gun control tend toward higher death rate

So basically violent cultures = misuse of firearms. Crazy talk.

This could be the best, most scientifically rigorous study ever done, and I would be really skeptical just because your link is from Breitbart.

To be clear, I'm not saying the study did or didn't show that - I haven't looked it up or checked corroborating sources. I'm just leery of believing any headline or summary I see on such an obviously biased site.

[kahli sana]

I briefly looked at the study, and the one thing I noticed in the introduction, at least (I didn't look into the guts of the study, just the introduction and conclusion), and the one thing that stuck out to me is that they didn't define "gun." Their table showing other nations' rates of gun ownership didn't break it out into rifles and handguns. It's possible they did that in the body of the study, but it would make sense to me that if rifle ownership is high but handgun ownership is not, it could skew the data one way or the other. Just an observation.

[broken iris]

I briefly looked at the study, and the one thing I noticed in the introduction, at least (I didn't look into the guts of the study, just the introduction and conclusion), and the one thing that stuck out to me is that they didn't define "gun." Their table showing other nations' rates of gun ownership didn't break it out into rifles and handguns. It's possible they did that in the body of the study, but it would make sense to me that if rifle ownership is high but handgun ownership is not, it could skew the data one way or the other. Just an observation.

Good point. They would also need to tie that into what type of weapon is used in the death and legal vs. illegal guns to get a clear picture, but that data may not be available for such a geographically diverse study. It's of interest though as it shows gun ownership in and of itself is not directly correlated with gun deaths (at least not when you look across cultures), something many gun control advocates argue is true.


And I agree about Breitbart, but it's the only site that has covered it so far, unless is missed it in all the Miley updates.

[broken iris]

So.... lots of panic here right now. We will see where this goes.

[simple schoolboy]

In addition to shooting out the tires of a car, the Navy Yard shooter also 'negligently discharged' into his neighbors apartment (his neighbor thought it was intentional due to previous interactions). Why he was legally allowed to poses and purchase firearms is beyond me. It shouldn't be easy to disenfranchise individuals of their rights, but it seems like repeated, reckless use of firearms is an appropriate cause for suspending at least the related right. If he was suffering from PTSD or something else, the first incident should have at least warranted a psychiatric evaluation if not charges.

Also, it'll be interesting to see what direction cables news goes with this, as the shooter is not a white male that can be tenuously tied to the tea party (I'm just guessing on that last part). Neglected mental health of veterans, perhaps?

[broken iris]

Also, it'll be interesting to see what direction cables news goes with this, as the shooter is not a white male that can be tenuously tied to the tea party (I'm just guessing on that last part). Neglected mental health of veterans, perhaps?

Here's a first try:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... games.html

[Harry Lime]

Neglected mental health of veterans, perhaps?

A veteran of what?

Neglected mental health issues in general is where it starts.

Also, it'll be interesting to see what direction cables news goes with this, as the shooter is not a white male that can be tenuously tied to the tea party (I'm just guessing on that last part). Neglected mental health of veterans, perhaps?

Here's a first try:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... games.html

Aw, man, I'm kind of tired of that argument. No one can diagnose whether video games pushed him over the edge. The guy had social issues. And his fear & paranoia of persecution slowly made him go insane. Singling out violent video games is just a lazy analysis.

[Harry Lime]

Aaron Alexis worked stateside for the Navy as an electrician. His potential problems with PTSD have nothing to do with being a veteran. Perhaps because he was near the Twin Towers when they collapsed? Maybe, but I doubt it. Straight up social issues. Another Travis Bickle.

[broken iris]

Not sure how we missed this one but:

http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/21/us/georgi ... index.html

Antoinette Tuff hailed as 'true hero' for handling Georgia school gunman

Atlanta (CNN) -- A man slips behind someone else into a packed elementary school with an AK-47-type weapon. He goes into the office and shoots at the ground, then darts between there and outside to fire at approaching police.

So what do you do?

If you're Antoinette Tuff, who works in the front office at Ronald E. McNair Discovery Learning Academy just outside Atlanta, you don't run. You talk. You divulge your personal struggles to the gunman, you tell him you love him, you even proactively offer to walk outside with him to surrender so police won't shoot.

And then the nightmare ends with the suspect, later identified as Michael Brandon Hill, taken into custody and no one inside or outside the Decatur school even hurt, despite the gunfire.

"Let me tell you something, babe," Tuff tells the dispatcher, Kendra McCray, at the end of the dramatic 911 call that recounts her minutes of valor and terror. "I've never been so scared in all the days of my life. Oh, Jesus."

This brief outburst of emotion, moments after police entered the school Tuesday, was in stark contrast to her cool, calm demeanor as heard earlier on that 911 call.

As a go-between, she relayed his demands that police refrain from using their radios and "stop all movement," or else the suspect would shoot.

"He doesn't want the kids, he wants the police, so back off," she said in the call. "What else, sir? He said he don't care if he die, he don't have nothing to live for, and he said he's not mentally stable."

By the end -- with police themselves having never directly talked to him -- Tuff and the gunman were talking about where he would put his weapon, how he'd empty his pockets and where he'd lie down before authorities could get him.

"It's going to be all right, sweetie," she tells Hill at one point in the call. "I just want you to know I love you, though, OK? And I'm proud of you. That's a good thing that you're just giving up and don't worry about it. We all go through something in life."

Tuff then let the gunman know that she'd been down before herself, but she'd picked herself up. He could, too.

"I thought the same thing, you know, I tried to commit suicide last year after my husband left me," she said. "But look at me now. I'm still working and everything is OK."

That day, for everyone at that school, everything did turn out OK. Shots were fired, but no one got hurt. The gunman never made it to the classroom area, deciding instead to give up and lay down.

This ending is thanks largely to Tuff, said McCray, the woman who fielded her 911 call. Echoing President Barack Obama -- who called Tuff on Thursday to thank her -- and many others, McCray described Tuff as a "true hero" for being courageous, calm and personable.

"You did a great job," McCray said, shortly after the two met in person for the first time Thursday for an exclusive interview with CNN's Anderson Cooper. "You made my job a lot easier."

This is one time I gotta agree with the term "Hero".