Thursday, May 9, 2013

Guns Do More Harm than Good

 Washington Post

Overall, the Justice Department report said, firearm-related homicides dropped from 18,253 homicides in 1993 to 11,101 in 2011, while nonfatal firearm crimes declined from 1.5 million in 1993 to 467,300 in 2011. The drop extended to schools: Homicides at schools declined from an average of 29 per year in the 1990s to an average of 20 per year in the 2000s.

This is why the gun-nuts must hang onto those absurdly high DGU estimates.  Even without suicides, we have on the order of a half-a-million gun crimes REPORTED. The true number is obviously much higher.

In order to exceed that number for defensive uses, they have to include every possible incident, many of which are actually offensive and criminal, and then they have to factor in a whopping 95% for estimated brandishing events.

Obviously, this is a fatuous argument.

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.


  1. And yet your stats show that the number of crimes is declining at the same time that we have more guns, more carry permits, more places people can carry, etc.

    According to your side's predictions, those numbers should be through the roof right now.

  2. Mikeb, do you have a bag o'facts from which you draw at random? That study is talking about a period in which gun laws have significantly loosened and gun ownership has significantly risen. If guns were the problem, the trend would be in the opposite direction.

    1. Texas Colt carryMay 9, 2013 at 7:03 PM

      Greg, I posted a comment in the "civil war tactics" you might be interested in, as soon as it clears the mod. May apply here as well.

  3. When the total number of firearm fatalities is compared for 1993 and 2011 we see: 39,595 and 32,163. Recall that 1993 was the Peak Year with the highest recorded year for Gun Murders and suddenly that 49% drop trumpeted by Unrestricted Gun Violence Supporters is placed in the proper context.

    1. And gun laws have been loosened since 1993--is there a point here, Gene?

    2. So if we add in the suicides that happened to pick a gun instead of another effective method, we still see a decline in firearms deaths of almost 20%. Still not seeing how that means that our loosening of gun laws has led to unrestricted violence.

  4. And by the way, Mike, I just want to apologize for breaking your friend. I kept poking the pooch, hoping he'd return and actually discuss things.

    Eventually, return he did, but my goading, along with the others' goading, seems to have caused him to snap and go "Full E.N." (Kinda like going "Full Retard"--you NEVER want to go "Full E.N.")

    Frankly, our side couldn't be given a bigger gift than now having a real gun control advocate, not a Troll's sock puppet, that is doing nothing but screaming about nuking the opposition, making illogical arguments, and not only telling everyone how he is so much smarter than smart people he disagrees with, but how they are clearly sub-human idiots.

    So, in closing, I'm sorry I broke your friend, but I have to say, it's entertaining as Hell.

  5. Jesus, Tennessean, you are stupid.

    Can't recognise sarcasm when you see it: can you?

    Not sure why you think you are smarter than I am.

    Is it because you write long winded nonsense that you believe sounds impressive?

    Nevermind that I provide a documented argument that you find illogical. Not sure why though.

    Especially since most of them come from respected jurists such as William O.Douglas and aren't exactly original to me.

    Sorry if I don't comment--I really prefer to not pay attention to people who project their personalities onto others.

    And are willfully ignorant, Like yourself, Tennessean.

    1. Why did Douglas care what kind of gun Miller had if he agrees with you, Laci. You don't think the type of gun matters, right?

    2. You attack Tennessean for missing your sarcasm, but earlier you went after me when you failed to recognize mine.

      Laci, your belief in your superiority is just begging the question. But this does raise an interesting point--why do you bother coming around here at all?

    3. Seriously, where would I get a nuke?

      Threats need the potential to be carried out.

      I can't believe how dumb you are, Tennessean, coming up with a statement like that.

      I'm too busy laughing at you to write much more than this.

    4. "So, in closing, I'm sorry I broke your friend, but I have to say, it's entertaining as Hell."

      If you are referring to me, than you are far more ignorant than I give you credit for being.

      A more accurate statement would be

      "I broke up your friend with laughter since he finds me to be an arrogant idiot who write long winded bullshit which seem influenced by an overuse of meth."

    5. Seriously, Tennessean, I don't read the crap that you Campy, Orlin et al write because it is such such pure shit it's not worth my time.

      While you may feel that getting in the last word means you somehow "won"--it really means that I find you too fucked up to pay attention to.

      Does that soak into your probably drug addled (or some other reason for not being compos mentis) brain, or do I need to try and put in in simpler language?

      What the fuck is your problem, Tennessean? I couldn't care less about your opinion since it's so far in outer space as to be laughable.


    6. " I couldn't care less about your opinion since it's so far in outer space as to be laughable."

      Which is how the legal community mostly views the "group rights" opinion of the second amendment

    7. Why does Laci have moderation privileges? His comments appear out of order to our replies.

      But Laci, seriously, all you're doing here is showing yourself to be arrogant and filled with rage. Just because you aren't trustworthy with a gun doesn't mean the rest of us are. Again, I ask, if you hate us so much, why do you come around here displaying what a fool you are?

    8. I don't even know where to begin. I just logged back in here and found where Laci has been fuming and writing disjointed posts over the course of an hour.

      Guess I got to him, which is pretty funny since the main point of each post is that I'm an idiot who is on drugs and whose opinion doesn't matter.

      I guess the best summary is to look at Laci's first barb after calling me stupid: Accusing me of not getting his Sarcasm.


      Laci, could you not detect the sarcasm dripping from my put down of your mental state?

      The only part of Laci's unhinged skreeds worth addressing here is the offense he takes to my comment that he's been "Screaming about nuking the opposition."

      Laci, in case you can't remember, I've noted before how you constantly joke about the government using nukes on us and tell us that no revolution against the U.S. government could ever succeed because the government has Nukes, artillery, bombers, etc. Of course, the government couldn't effectively use these without wiping out millions of it's own civilians, and any government that did that, doesn't deserve to stay in power.

      As for the rest of Laci's comments--his unhinged insults and ramblings speak for themselves.

    9. LMAO! Wow, Tennessean, looks like you struck a nerve. Entertaining, indeed.

    10. Laci cares so little for your opinion that he wrote three posts in 11 minutes to explain how little he cares.

  6. Laci, no doubt the amount of time and verbiage you expend insulting and attempting to bait specific people is indicative of your lack of concern. To abuse Shakespeare..."the Laci doth protest too much."