Comments on: American riddle: more guns, less violence?

By: rfurtkamp

rfurtkamp — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 00:05:28 +0000

“despite mass shootings” really closes with a particular political slant that is disappointing here.

Yes, it’s a shame that madmen did crazy things.

Yes, it’s a shame that criminals misused objects.

But we’re dealing with a few anomalies, usually in unarmed victim zones (schools, universities, and the like) where attackers know that their law-abiding targets are not armed and thus, no match for the shootout that is about to begin.

The fact is that guns exist in America. We have a Constitutional right to them, incorporated finally since Heller and McDonald.

The question isn’t about gun control.

It should be about madman and lunatic control, which frankly given the scarcity of incidents in a nation of over 300 million, we do a marvelous job of.

By: CaptnCrunch

CaptnCrunch — Sun, 22 Jan 2012 17:39:40 +0000

Good for you Bernd! A rational question about an interesting statistical anomaly regarding firearms without any prejudicial undercurrent.

The riddle you question has been a recurring theme since Florida passed one of the first “shall issue” laws in the country in 1987. Good citizen gun ownership goes up, criminal activity goes down.

At this point in the USA, the most dangerous places to be are those with the least firearms freedom. Chicago or Washington DC for example. Places where murderous thugs have no reason to fear armed citizens.

By: Bobby1963

Bobby1963 — Sat, 07 Jan 2012 07:28:15 +0000

splendidanomaly, the point is what changed over the last couple of years. Has law enforcement and the penalties for crime increased over the last few years? No. At least one big change has been the increase in gun ownership. Claiming that the increase is due to racism might be your easy way to dismiss the relationship, but do remember Obama’s quote about the bitter Americans who live in small towns who “cling to guns or religion.” Could it have something to do with Obama appointing two members of the Supreme Court who don’t believe that there is an individual right to self defense. Look at Obama’s signing statements saying that he won’t enforce provisions in the omnibus budget bill that he just signed that deal with guns (e.g., preventing federal government funds to be used to lobby for gun control).

By: splendidanomaly

splendidanomaly — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 18:57:32 +0000

The bump in gun ownership is most likely attributable to the election of a black man to the presidency who was thought to be hostile to second amendment rights. The drop in crime has nothing to do with it. Guns are a constant in the U.S. and affect not the quantity of crime so much as the seriousness of the results of crimes. Putting such a huge proportion of people convicted of crimes into prison prevents a lot of crime, too, at least temporarily.