Time for a "Mass Shootings" Forum?

States with stricter gun control laws have fewer deaths from gun-related violence.
Last year, economist Richard Florida dove deep into the correlations between gun deaths and other kinds of social indicators. Some of what he found was, perhaps, unexpected: Higher populations, more stress, more immigrants, and more mental illness were not correlated with more deaths from gun violence. But one thing he found was, perhaps, perfectly predictable: States with tighter gun control laws appear to have fewer gun-related deaths. The disclaimer here is that correlation is not causation. But correlations can be suggestive:

“The map overlays the map of firearm deaths above with gun control restrictions by state,” explains Florida. “It highlights states which have one of three gun control restrictions in place – assault weapons’ bans, trigger locks, or safe storage requirements. Firearm deaths are significantly lower in states with stricter gun control legislation. Though the sample sizes are small, we find substantial negative correlations between firearm deaths and states that ban assault weapons (-.45), require trigger locks (-.42), and mandate safe storage requirements for guns (-.48).”

 

Irrelevant, bit nice attempt to move the goal posts.

[edit]To point out that many crimes have no or very little impact on or correlation with gun violence. Hence the irrelevance of the question.

 

What world do you live in? Many countries use government to correct social issues, including our own. We had an uneducated populace, so our federal government mandated public schooling. That happened 100 years ago and we're not totalitarian yet.

 

I find it of interest that 5 of 11 deadliest shootings have happened since 2007. I wonder if there is some reason for that? And given the information provided above it makes it that much more surprising that this happened in Ct. Where they have rather strict gun laws.

 

Better idea-- don't waste the first shot.

Semi-autos make you careless just like unemployment benefits make you lazy...

 

Banning guns wouldn't solve the problem. There are so many of them out on the street, anyway. There are responsible gun owners in this country. The problem lies with unstable people getting a hold of weapons that can result in mass deaths, as we've seen recently.

 

A it is not moving the goalposts. You are just giving misleading information since many states with no gun control laws are also in the low death by firearm states. Secondly not all deaths by firearms are murders. Some are justified shootings.

The sample size is entirely too small but it appears that a lot of those yellow states have no gun control laws and those yellow states are low death by firearm rates as well. I just felt that since you were showing a correlation and hinting at causation it would also be fair to ask do those laws have an inverse correlation to increased crime.

I will see you at the polls I will be the guy voting on the other side. Not that it matters if they repeal the second amendment or not, I have enough firearms and reloading supplies to last well beyond my lifetime.

 

Sure it has.. It corrected the social issues of slavery and 'separate but equal' .. Sure, the nutjobs opposed both of them and went down kicking and screaming, but in the end it was corrected..

 

No we went corporate statist, my bad.

 

What a horrible tragedy. No words can express the sympathy I have for this loss.

The absolute non-compromising ways of the NRA are a big problem, but I just don't believe that more gun control is the only answer. How could this kid could buy a gun if it was already illegal for him to do so? How much more "comprehensive" can gun control get, but to completely abolish the right to bear arms? It's my opinion that this right should not be abolished, but tragedies like this makes us want to look for answers.

I would be interested to know in data connecting all the similarities in these shootings. Guns were used, yes, but you just didn't see this type of behavior until Columbine. And guns were legal and way easier to access before that particular tragedy. There are other substantial factors. It's not just guns.

 

Slavery was well on its way out BEFORE the civil war started. Separate but equal created white flight to the suburb and hastened the decay of the inner city. While a black man can drink of at the same water fountain as white guy now statistically he is not any better off.

 

I do not mean to make light but i think there is something to the infamy. I remember when the rage was to storm the field during a sporting event naked and get on TV. Tv quit publicizing and showing it. I know we walk a thin line with censorshi,p but if there could be a way to not tell the guys name, or just maybe mention it once or something dunno just spit balling, but I do believe there is the loser wanting to go out famous dynamic at play that needs to be addressed in some way.

 

Yeah... the free black man in 21 century America is not better off than the his slaved 19th century ancestors.. uh huh

 

Obviously you didn't read what I posted or the studies it linked to. You're trying to pull a fast one with a red herring about "highest crime rate". Just man up and accept you got called on it and move on.

And some are suicides. Hence the international HOMICIDE figures I posted earlier in this thread that weed out the suicides at least. Sorry, but you're trying to weasel your way out of accepting the overwhelming evidence of facts here.

And it's not just the map in the article that's important. It's the 11 other facts in the story in addition to the lessons to be drawn from the international picture as well. A few yellow states with relatively lows gun violence don't trump that mountain of evidence to the contrary any more than the outliers in the international statistics. It's called "preponderance of the evidence" and it's on my side, not yours.

Just like you were last month, I'm sure. And you're still butthurt over that one, I bet.

Or modify it to account for the fact that it's not 1789 anymore...

And enough copies of Red Dawn, the Turner Diaries and the following book in your backyard disaster shelter, no doubt:

http://www.amazon.com/The-Zombie-Survival-Guide-Protection/dp/1400049628/ref=cm_lmf_tit_7

I hope you stocked up on Twinkies.

 

I did not come anywhere near saying that in reference to that and you know it.

 

The mother bought the guns for her semi-autistic son? Who the ******** does that?

 

Here's some data connecting a whole lot of these mass shootings: http://www.nycrimecommission.org/initiative1-shootings.php

 

I believe that you are right. We're all human beings and at some point in time in the '60's, '70's, '80
s, or early '90's I'm sure that someone thought of performing such an atrocity. Why didn't it happen until the late '90's? What changed? It wasn't just access to guns. Guns are harder to get now. Many of these have become copycat or infamy type of events.

 

Anecdotal examples are weak sauce and in this case the numbers don't lie. As a society, we can't handle guns. Maybe we used to and maybe we will be able to in the future. Right now, though, we simply can't. You can debate until your tonsils bleed why that is but it is and until that changes, we have to do something because this shit's gotten out of control in a very very dark way.

Yeah, it sucks for the people who can control themselves just like it sucks for those of us who can hold our liquor that we have drunk driving laws that consider you drunk if you've one beer in the past two hours but there you are. We all acknowledge that. I'd still rather have to take turns being designated driver than die (or have my wife or my parents or my sister's kids die) because some asshat got crocked, hopped into his car and swerved oncoming into their lane. The stakes are too high to just sit stick our heads in the sand anymore. It's just a shame that not even 20 dead little kids will wake some people up.

 

Im sick of people like you who've probably never had to worry about paying the bills to keep your farm, and feed your family. Who the hell are you to pass judgement? I grew up on a farm that was barely surviving, half the food we ate was supplemented by hunting. I guess youd just love it if we had gotten food stamps instead right?

Ohh and this was in new jersey. Im sure this type of supplimental hunting is much more prevalent and neccesary out in the true "sticks"

 

"I believe that you are right. We're all human beings and at some point in time in the '60's, '70's, '80
s, or early '90's I'm sure that someone thought of performing such an atrocity. Why didn't it happen until the late '90's? "

August 1966

 

That's why some of us believe that just banning guns is necessary but hardly sufficient to really move towards lessening the problem. Like I said earlier...

"...we need to get ourselves to the point where we're sane enough as a society to handle the kinds of laws they have in most of the rest of the developed countries where you can have a decent level of gun ownership without a sky high homicide rate. Getting to that place will take a multifaceted approach - gun bans initially working our way to sane gun control measures as appropriate, regulated hunting by renting guns with draconian penalties for failing to turn your rented gun back into the authorities, better education in schools, adjusting the media and its glorification of violence and guns, more accessible mental health care and probably a bunch of things none of us has as yet thought of."

It will take a wholistic approach, not some half-assed piecemeal muddling through, to improve things.

 

[Laissez-faire glibertarian free marketer]Then you should have worked harder and gotten a better paying job more in accordance with the wisdom of the holy markets, you lazy slob.[/Laissez-faire glibertarian free marketer]

 

One. One makes a trend? Things changed later on.

 

How dare we censor the arts!?

You know what is odd about watching a football game on Sundays with my 4 year old daughter? Some of the commercials are more violent than the sport we are watching.