PDA

View Full Version : General Politics Gun violence down 49% since 1993 peak


jjjayb
05-07-2013, 03:30 PM
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/07/gun-homicide-rate-down-49-since-1993-peak-public-unaware/

Yet most people think gun violence is up. I wonder where they get that impression?

LiveSteam
05-07-2013, 03:36 PM
Chicago

Frazod
05-07-2013, 03:39 PM
That's because we have about 1,000 times more media outlets now than we did then, and they're all competiting for advertising dollars by seeing which one can SCARE THE FUCK OF THE GENERAL POPULATION THE MOST.

CrazyPhuD
05-07-2013, 03:46 PM
Well let's be honest it's probably this.....

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_7jcntZe5q58/TPwZPx4co_I/AAAAAAAAAK0/CY5WzzLkX7E/s400/Picture22.png

And like the freaknomics guys suggested....roe V. wade in 1973....20 years after it passed violence peaked....with a correlation between being an unwanted pregnancy and later criminal behavior...

CrazyPhuD
05-07-2013, 03:47 PM
Yet most people think gun violence is up. I wonder where they get that impression?

people think airline travel is unsafe why do you think that is....

Prison Bitch
05-07-2013, 03:49 PM
GOP takoever of COngress

WhawhaWhat
05-07-2013, 04:06 PM
people think airline travel is unsafe why do you think that is....

Do they?

cosmo20002
05-07-2013, 04:11 PM
GOP takoever of COngress

In 1993? :hmmm:

CrazyPhuD
05-07-2013, 04:13 PM
Do they?

between 12-16% of people are yet I'd bet those same people aren't afraid to drive even though they are ~300,000% more likely to die in an auto accident than a plane crash.

Aries Walker
05-07-2013, 04:44 PM
Wow, look at that huge drop during the Clinton administration. It starts right after the Brady Bill was implemented and leveled off once it was hamstrung. Whaddya know.

Okay, I hear you crying 'correlation without causation' from here, and you might be right. But I can't understand for the life of me why anti-gun control advocates would use these charts to try and argue their case.

LiveSteam
05-07-2013, 04:47 PM
Wow, look at that huge drop during the Clinton administration. It starts right after the Brady Bill was implemented and leveled off once it was hamstrung. Whaddya know.

Okay, I hear you crying 'correlation without causation' from here, and you might be right. But I can't understand for the life of me why anti-gun control advocates would use these charts to try and argue their case.

I went through my AK & SKS phase during the Clinton years

Prison Bitch
05-07-2013, 05:22 PM
In 1993? :hmmm:

Peak was 1993. So says the chart.

Radar Chief
05-07-2013, 05:33 PM
Wow, look at that huge drop during the Clinton administration. It starts right after the Brady Bill was implemented and leveled off once it was hamstrung. Whaddya know.

Okay, I hear you crying 'correlation without causation' from here, and you might be right. But I can't understand for the life of me why anti-gun control advocates would use these charts to try and argue their case.

'93 was the peak, the rapid drop didn't start until '95.
Gee, what else was happening at that time?

http://i42.tinypic.com/33c7lfl.gif

Well would you look at that huge jump in the number of "Shall Issue" states between '93 and '95. :hmmm:

cosmo20002
05-07-2013, 05:36 PM
Peak was 1993. So says the chart.

Yes, the steep decline started 1993. Rs didn't gain control of Congress until Jan 1995. Not that they had anything to do with it, but your dates don't correspond anyway.

Radar Chief
05-07-2013, 05:38 PM
Yes, the steep decline started 1993. Rs didn't gain control of Congress until Jan 1995. Not that they had anything to do with it, but your dates don't correspond anyway.

No it didn't.

CrazyPhuD
05-07-2013, 05:51 PM
Wow, look at that huge drop during the Clinton administration. It starts right after the Brady Bill was implemented and leveled off once it was hamstrung. Whaddya know.

Okay, I hear you crying 'correlation without causation' from here, and you might be right. But I can't understand for the life of me why anti-gun control advocates would use these charts to try and argue their case.

Sure even though mainstream science(including the CDC) has stated that the effects of the brady law are inconclusive at best. The only potential statistically significant impact of the original Brady law was that for those > 55 years old the rate of suicide by firearm dropped a small amount. Interestingly the same study found that the overall suicide rate didn't change by a statistically significant amount because if they didn't use a gun they used another method.

By all means share what the 'hamstringing' of the Brady bill was. The only significant change when it was made permanent was that the 3 day waiting period was removed. That is hardly 'hamstringing' because the impact of a waiting period on crime is highly questionable. For suicides is periodically does show a reduction in firearms suicides but still has yet to show a reduction in overall suicides because people tend to use another method.

Now if you want to talk correlations here's a better one....rate of abortion post Roe V Wade.

http://www.nrlc.org/News_and_Views/Aug10/Graph1.jpg

in 1993 those who would have been born but were aborted would have been 19-20 years old. Notice post Roe V Wade the rate of abortions skyrocketed in a very similar curve to your drop in homicide death.

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/files/2013/05/SDT-2013-05-gun-crime-1-2.png

Abortions soared from ~1973-1980 or about 7 years...oddly ~20 years later gun homicides sharply dropped from 1993-2000...or again 7 years.... Sure this is just a correlation and could be a coincidence...but it's a hell of a lot stronger than an unsubstantiated handwavey argument about the 'hamstringing' of the Brady act...

Of course frankly neither side would want to admit that abortion was one of the primary factors leading to a drop in gun crime...But really it's not surprising those that choose to get abortions tend to be poor, or teens, or from families(or single mothers) who aren't ready to have children yet. It's not like there's data that says the those who commit violent crime come disproportionally from family groups with poverty, young mothers and broken homes.

Garcia Bronco
05-07-2013, 05:56 PM
Number 1 problem this country and world faces is exponential growth. It seems logically that less people fighting for the same resources would curb violence.

RNR
05-07-2013, 06:30 PM
No it didn't.

You are dealing with people who will defend the left no matter what. If the left was pro gun these same people would be screaming to allow the right to own a tank~

CrazyPhuD
05-07-2013, 06:32 PM
You are dealing with people who will defend the left no matter what. If the left was pro gun these same people would be screaming to allow the right to own a nukes and anti-matter bombs

FYP

WhiteWhale
05-07-2013, 07:16 PM
Well let's be honest it's probably this.....

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_7jcntZe5q58/TPwZPx4co_I/AAAAAAAAAK0/CY5WzzLkX7E/s400/Picture22.png

And like the freaknomics guys suggested....roe V. wade in 1973....20 years after it passed violence peaked....with a correlation between being an unwanted pregnancy and later criminal behavior...

People have no idea how much the death of Len Bias matters here.

When Bias died it helped push through mandatory minimum sentences for drugs and that is a big reason why the prison population exploded. Most of those people in prison are not violent criminals and it's an enormous waste of tax money.

Aries Walker
05-07-2013, 07:23 PM
Yes, the steep decline started 1993. Rs didn't gain control of Congress until Jan 1995. Not that they had anything to do with it, but your dates don't correspond anyway.

No it didn't.

You two are looking at two different charts, I think. Firearm Homicide Deaths reached its peak (as stated) in 1993, and thereafter started dropping - obviously, because where else would it go after the peak? Non-Fatal Violent Firearm Crime doesn't look like it started dropping until after its high-water mark in 1994. You're both right.

Sure even though mainstream science(including the CDC) has stated that the effects of the brady law are inconclusive at best. The only potential statistically significant impact of the original Brady law was that for those > 55 years old the rate of suicide by firearm dropped a small amount. Interestingly the same study found that the overall suicide rate didn't change by a statistically significant amount because if they didn't use a gun they used another method.
I would like to see those studies, especially the one that reaches your last conclusion. Do you have a link to them?

By all means share what the 'hamstringing' of the Brady bill was. The only significant change when it was made permanent was that the 3 day waiting period was removed. That is hardly 'hamstringing' because the impact of a waiting period on crime is highly questionable. For suicides is periodically does show a reduction in firearms suicides but still has yet to show a reduction in overall suicides because people tend to use another method.
I was referring to when the Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional, leading some states to stop running them altogether. And yes, I know they eventually started back up, but my point is this: these charts don't show what the anti-gun control advocates seemed to want them to show.

Presumably, these charts are presented (here and elsewhere) to legitimize the argument that what we're doing is working, and therefore we need no more gun control measures. What they do show, however, is that the big drops in gun crime statistics ended about 15 years ago, just as Clinton left office. Seeing as how it was under his watch that we got both the Brady Bill and the Assault Weapons Ban, I'm a bit puzzled how the gun rights advocates think it will help their case.

Backwards Masking
05-10-2013, 02:50 PM
When Bias died it helped push through mandatory minimum sentences for drugs and that is a big reason why the prison population exploded. Most of those people in prison are not violent criminals and it's an enormous waste of tax money.

a younger cousin of mine at Easter was telling me he'd been filling out applications at fast food joints (subway, dominos, etc.) and said when it got the part of the app asking for criminal history, almost all of them said something along the lines of:

DO NOT include any marijuana related offenses, even felonies, when reporting criminal history

apparently doing so makes these low paying jobs difficult to staff with any regularity

'Hamas' Jenkins
05-10-2013, 08:20 PM
I have to laugh at this, as they devote a large section of Freakonomics to this very debate. The conclusion they reach is that it's not due to the COPS program, Assault Weapons Ban, or Right to Carry, but abortion.

And...here...you...go.

rockymtnchief
05-11-2013, 07:08 AM
https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/180228_498256036910693_2034229225_n.jpg

rockymtnchief
05-11-2013, 07:19 AM
BTW...it's true that nobody wants to take our guns. I read it on CP!:cuss:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/05/10/anti-gun-dems-shocking-hot-mic-comments-confiscate-confiscate-confiscate/

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/jMptQ_YfvzE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Backwards Masking
05-11-2013, 08:52 AM
https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/180228_498256036910693_2034229225_n.jpg

hard not to notice how the two highest peaks come after Prohibition and The War On Drugs

when the stuff is legally available people aren't killing each other over the market, imagine that?