Dar's Handy Dandy Gun Stat thread

[Dardedar]

.

[Dardedar]

[Dardedar]

[Dardedar]

.
.

.
.
***
A List of People Injured or Killed by Guns on ‘Gun Appreciation Day’

Yesterday was deemed a day to appreciate your guns in America, and boy did we. Five people were shot at gun shows in North Carolina, Ohio and Indiana. These were not, however, the only instances of gun violence yesterday.

As happens everyday, numerous people were either injured or killed by guns on "Gun Appreciation Day," be it on purpose or accidentally. Spanning Alaska to Florida, here are those people:

A 14-year-old suburban Atlanta boy shot and killed his 15-year-old brother while playing with their mother's handgun.
A 26 year old was shot and killed while driving in San Francisco.
A woman in an El Paso County, Texas shooting range was hit in the knee by a bullet that ricocheted off a trash can.
Two women were shot to death in a Dallas-area home.
Two women were injured after someone opened fire at a crowded soccer field in Las Vegas.
A 15-year-old girl was shot while sleeping in her bed when her Anchorage home was shot at.
A 7-year-old boy in Tallahassee shot a 5 year old with a gun he found in a 22-year-old relative's room.
A Huntsville woman shot her boyfriend after the two had an argument.
A 23-year-old man died after being accidentally shot in a Greshman, Oregon home.
A Cleveland father has been charged in connection with the death of his 6-year-old daughter from a self-inflicted gunshot wound.
A man was found shot dead in a parking lot in Greenville County, South Carolina.
Two people were shot and killed outside an inn in Hampton, Virginia.
A Colorado Springs man was driven to the hospital with a gunshot wound.
One man was shot at a Martin Luther King Jr. parade in Jackson.
An 11-year-old boy was shot in an Oklahoma City apartment complex.
Police believe gang violence is to blame for the shooting death of one man in Santa Ana, California.

LINK

On average, 270 Americans are shot each day. So the above was very much a slow day.

***

.
.

.
.

[Dardedar]

Americans Back Obama's Proposals to Address Gun Violence

Criminal background checks on gun sales garner highest level of support

LINK

[Dardedar]

.
.

[Dardedar]

Gun Violence in America: The 13 Key Questions (With 13 Concise Answers)

The Atlantic

How much gun violence is there in the U.S.?
How many guns are there in the U.S.?
How do mass shootings differ from other types of gun violence?
What gun control laws currently exist?
What could be done to reduce gun violence?
Would fewer guns result in less gun violence?
Would gun control result in fewer guns?
How often are guns used in self-defense?
Won't criminals kill with other weapons if they don't have guns?
What has worked to reduce gun violence?
Are the White House proposals likely to be effective?
How does the U.S. compare to other countries?
What don't we know yet?

[Dardedar]

[David Franks]

RE Chart: "Gun-related murders and video game consumption"

I'm not sure that video-game spending per capita (annual, I take it) is a good way to assess the effect of video games here. Generally, in the video games that are relevant to this issue, one accrues higher scores by killing more people, which requires more time spent learning the game and moving to higher levels. This would tend to decrease the amount of spending on games. On the other hand, one could spend far more on video games by not getting very good at any of them and getting bored with them.

Also, Americans may well have more opportunities to get video games at lower prices than people in other countries.

And there is no way to assess the amount of spending on nonviolent video games. (I'm sure there must be a few of them-- perhaps especially in other countries.)

[Dardedar]

RE Chart: "Gun-related murders and video game consumption"
I'm not sure that video-game spending per capita (annual, I take it) is a good way to assess the effect of video games here.

I think looking at annual sales is a normal metric to look at to get an idea of general video game consumption. And it's about what one would expect. I knew South Korea was quite bonkers about them but didn't know the Netherlands was so into them. Video games peaked and have been kind of stagnating in Japan for some time, or else they would be higher. I would guess (only a guess) that some of the northern countries like Canada and northern parts of Europe have more use (as judged by sales) due to colder weather.

Wayne Lapierre would like to find a correlation between games and guns, but I think this chart shows the outlier is the guns.

...one could spend far more on video games by not getting very good at any of them and getting bored with them.

And maybe people are buying lots of things they don't use. I don't see why sales of a product wouldn't be a good, general, indication of use. And I see no reason to assume it would be different by country.

Americans may well have more opportunities to get video games at lower prices than people in other countries.

I have no idea where you would get that idea from. Canada is very similar in how video games are purchased and rented (and the used markets are huge and I don't see why this would be very different in our peer countries. There is an AmazonUK and ebayUK etc.).

And there is no way to assess the amount of spending on nonviolent video games.

I have a PS3 and dozens of video games (easily about $500 in stock with twice that much spent over the years). I spend more time reading about the technology and industry than I do playing the games. Similar games are popular the world round. Let's look at the top five video games in Canada last year:

Top 5 video games of 2012

1. Halo 4 (bigtime shoot'em up, *very* violent)

2. Far Cry 3 (extremely graphic first person shooter. I had Far Cry 2. It's just waves and waves of shooting at people).

3. Scribblenauts Unlimited (have no idea what this is)

4. ZombiU (Zombie blaster, graphic, violent, gross)

5. Mass Effect 3 (very thoughtful, strategy but has lots of shooting too I think)

1, 2, and 5, are top selling video games around the world. And these are just the new ones. People are still playing the exceedingly successful Grand Theft Auto 4 which is quite a blood bath. GTA 5 will be out in June.

So Canada is playing lots of video games, and violent ones at that, just like the US. For some reason, this game use doesn't get translated into gun related murders like it does in the US. I think it's not the games but rather the much more strict regulation of guns, especially handguns.

[Dardedar]

[Dardedar]

[Dardedar]

And the statistic is correct.

And school shootings are trending down: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/sch ... 8a1a6136ed

[Dardedar]

Copy of a fun little exchange I just had with a gun nut with some whacked out anarchism on top.

***

Bruce: "...we should not be placing restrictions on our first amendment rights"

So under your notion of "unlimited" First Amendment rights I should be able to call the Fire Department and tell them that your house is on fire right now?

And likewise, I should be able to call the police and tell them that I saw you commit a crime?

All rights are necessarily limited. That's why we have a SCOTUS to interpret when and how they are limited.

District of Col. v. Heller decision, Justice Antonin Scalia writing for the majority:

"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited," he stated. "The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."http://tinyurl.com/7qv3w2l

Bruce: "I believe that we hurt ourselves irreparably by censoring speech. As for the fire in the movie house argument, I find that it is not worth the sacrifice to speech. I do not know if you can have unlimited rights, but I would allow anyone to yell fire in a crowded movie house."

I notice you didn't answer my questions.

So, under these unlimited rights of free speech I should be able to publish and distribute material going on about you being a serial rapist or murderer or anything else I would like?

Do you ever stop to think about what you say?

The notion of unlimited rights for either the first or second make no sense. I've already referred to the absurdity of thinking speech can or should not be restricted, let's look at weapons.

Shoulder fired nuke missile (quite feasible by even today's technology never mind tomorrow's). Not allowed, never will be. RPG. Not allowed.

Stinger shoulder fired heat seeking missile. Not allowed.

Full auto machine guns. Not allowed or heavily restricted.

Bazooka, grenades, grenade launchers, flame throwers, Howitzers, Browning 50 cal's, etc. All banned or restricted for civilian use. There are hundreds of examples, these are just a few.

So is Bruce going to argue that the mentally or children should have unlimited access to all of the above?

Let's see just how deep his silly goes.

Bruce: "I did answer your questions, and I will again. You seem to be well acquainted with what I call the stupidity or asshole excuse, which is that if I am stupid or an asshole that should be so important that we actually inhibit valuable activities as a result. I think that we should try to get stupid people and assholes to understand that just because you can do certain things you should not do them because you should know better, so that we don't see a day when some asshole outlaws pencils because some asshole stabbed another asshole in the eye with it, and as a result pencils are considered to dangerous. As for you if you want to participate in any of these above mentioned activities feel free and be my guest.

Bruce: "I did answer your questions, and I will again.">>

Nope, didn't. So let me number them so you can respond to them directly:

1) So under your notion of "unlimited" First Amendment rights I should be able to call the Fire Department and tell them that your house is on fire right now?

2) And likewise, I should be able to call the police and tell them that I saw you commit a crime?

3) Under these unlimited rights of free speech I should be able to publish and distribute material going on about you being a serial rapist or murderer or anything else I would like?

4) Shoulder fired nuke missile, RPG, Stinger shoulder fired heat seeking missile, Full auto machine guns, bazooka, grenades, grenade launchers, flame throwers, Howitzers, Browning 50 cal's.
Is Bruce going to argue that the mentally or children should have unlimited access to all of the above?

Don't duck them this time.

Bruce: "Yes I did, you just need to read better. I will make it simple for you. To questions 1-5, YES. This is all spelled out under the stupidity and asshole argument. I applaud you with your vast knowledge of these types of people and their antics, and continued luck in the future. I did say again, and you can read this because it is right there that, "I do not know if we can have unlimited rights", however I do believe that it is worth looking into. I hope that is clear enough for you."

Bruce: "To questions 1-5, YES."

Excellent. So Bruce was stuck between the crazy and going with a limit on the crazy, and we went with the full bore crazy with extra cheese.

Bruce believes children and the mentally ill should have unfettered access to shoulder fired nuclear missiles.

Love it.

This is why no one takes, or can take you Right Wing Nuts seriously.

Bruce: "Well that is why we need brilliant people like you to look out for us. Good luck with stupidity and the assholes it seems to work for you. See ya"

Bruce: "that is why we need brilliant people like you to look out for us.">>

I could not agree more. And glad to do it.

And thanks for answering the questions. Most wing-nuts duck and run to avoid doubling down on the crazy.

[Dardedar]

.
.


Or as someone else put it: "Guns don't kill people, gaping holes in vital organs do."

[Dardedar]

The Debunk:

***
"Really now?!?

As governor of California, Ronald Reagan signed the Mulford Act, which prohibited the carrying of firearms on your person, in your vehicle, and in any public place or on the street, and he also signed off on a 15-day waiting period for firearm purchases. “There’s no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons,” Reagan said at the time, according to Salon.com.

In 1986 as president, he signed into law the Firearm Owners Protection Act, which “banned ownership of any fully automatic rifles that were not already registered on the day the law was signed.”

After leaving the presidency, he supported the passage of the Brady bill that established by federal law a nationwide, uniform standard of a 7-day waiting period for the purchase of handguns to enable background checks on prospective buyers.

In 1991 Reagan wrote an Op-Ed piece in the New York Times stating his support for the Brady Bill and noted that if the Brady Bill had been in effect earlier, he never would have been shot. He also urged then President H.W. Bush to drop his opposition to the bill and lobbied other members of Congress to support the bill.

In 1994 Reagan wrote to Congress urging them to listen to the American public and to the law enforcement community and support a ban on the further manufacture of military-style assault weapons.

To summarize:

As Gov. of California, Reagan signed the Mulford Act which prohibited the carrying of firearms on your person, in your vehicle and in any public place.
As Gov. of Cal. Reagan signed off on a 15-day waiting period for guns.
As president he signed into law a ban on ownership of fully automatic rifles.
After leaving the presidency he supported the Brady Bill which provided for a 7-day waiting period for guns.
In 1994 he wrote Congress supporting a ban on assault rifles."

LINK

[Dardedar]

.

.
.

.
.

.
.

.
.

.

[Dardedar]

Keeping Guns Away From Children

"Every day in the United States, 18 children and young adults between the ages of 1 and 24 die from gun-related injuries. That makes guns the second leading cause of death in young people — twice the number of deaths from cancer, five times the deaths from heart disease and 15 times the deaths from infections...

The United States has the dubious distinction of leading high-income countries in firearm homicides, suicides and unintentional deaths among young people. Among American children ages 5 to 14, an international study showed that firearm suicide rates were six times higher, and death rates from unintentional firearm injuries 10 times higher, than in other high-income countries."

[Dardedar]

Guns kill people, in one chilling graph

Ezra Klein, December 26, 2012

"This isn’t the merriest graphic we’ve ever posted, but it’s important. The Washington Post’s Todd Lindeman picked through the data on the cause of violent deaths by age and illustrated the results. He included a separate category for suicides, which is important because those are more common than homicides. The results are sobering:



You know that line, “guns don’t kill people, people kill people?” It’s true, so far as it goes. But in the United States, when people decide to kill people, or kill themselves, they typically reach for a gun."

LINK

That chart doesn't include traffic accidents, this one does: http://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/pdf/1 ... 2010-a.pdf

[Dardedar]

From Think Progress

***
Your Essential Guide To The Background Check Debate

Myth:
Background checks are ineffective and restrictive. Checks “would significantly restrict the rights of law-abiding Americans
while doing little or nothing to protect against further gun violence.” [Sen. Mike Lee, 4/9/2013]

Reality:
Ninety percent of background checks can be completed in less than two minutes and the Manchin-Toomey proposal would expedite the process. Under the amendment, if a background check at a gun show does not result in a definitive response within 48 hours, the sale may proceed. After four years, the background check would be required to be conducted in 24 hours. Background checks have already contributed to violence reduction. In the 14 states and Washington D.C. that require background checks for private handgun sales (including Toomey’s home state of Pennsylvania): 38 percent fewer women are shot to death by intimate partners, 17 percent fewer firearms are involved in aggravated assaults, and 48 percent less gun trafficking.

Myth:
Criminals will avoid background checks. “My problem with background checks is, you’re never going to get criminals to go through universal background checks.” [Wayne LaPierre, 1/30/2013]

Reality:
From 1999 to 2009, 1.8 million people were blocked from purchasing guns after failing a background check because they had criminal records or suffered from mental illness. In fact, Seung Hui Cho, the shooter at Virginia Tech and Jared Loughner, who targeted Gabby Giffords, both obtained their guns legally and slipped through the cracks of the existing background check system. The Manchin-Toomey bill addresses this by encouraging states to provide their available records into the federal database and directing future grant money towards creating systems to send records into the database. The bill will also reduce federal funds to states that do not comply.

Myth:
Background checks will lead to a gun registry. “The Democrats’ proposed legislation would require universal background checks for private sales between law-abiding citizens, which according to DOJ would be effective only if accompanied by a national gun registry. ” [Sen. Ted Cruz, 4/9/2013]

Reality:
Federally licensed gun dealers have conducted background checks for more than 40 years without ever creating a national gun registry, which federal law specifically prohibits. Under this agreement, federal dealers would conduct screenings for private sellers and keep the record; the federal government would not. When a gun is recovered at a violent crime, law enforcement can use the records to track down the perpetrator. All information identifying the buyer generated by the background check would be destroyed by law enforcement within 24 hours. The Manchin-Toomey amendment explicitly bans the federal government from creating a registry in three different places and treats the misuse of records for the pursue of creating a registry as a felony punishable by 15 years in prison. From the legislative language:



Think Progress