Choose Your Crime Stats

[petegz28]

[ClevelandBronco]

The guy makes some very good points, but I have to question the value he places on the U.S. having six times as many metropolitan populations of 250,000 or greater than England and Wales. That would absolutely affect the total number of murders, but it wouldn't necessarily affect the murder rate. If the murder rates (murders per 1,000 people) are lower in large English and Welsh cities than they are in large U.S. cities, then that part of his argument evaporates unless we are to believe that somehow the murder rate is increased in a given American city simply because five other cities like it also exist. Unless I'm missing something, the number of cities in a country should be unimportant to the murder rate in those cities.

If we're to draw anything from the comparison, wouldn't we also have to know the percentage of people in each country that live in large cities?

[nstygma]

what do you think about his ending statement: "improve poverty level, create jobs, improve the education system, that is how you're gonna reduce violent crimes in those neighborhoods."

does being poor, uneducated, and unemployed make a person commit crime?
if not, what is the cause behind violent crime?
sure as hell aint magazines and offensive youtube videos.

[2bikemike]

I went on the FBI Website to verify some statements that I have heard recently. The site is fairly easy to navigate and figure out.

Here are some 2011 stats. http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr...ables/table-20

Murder by Rifle 323
Murder by Handgun 6220
Murder by other Firearms 1680
Murder by Sharp Objects 1694
Murder by Hands, Feet 728
Murder by Other Weapons 1659

By other Weapon I am assuming they mean blunt objects hammers etc.

But by all means lets ban the evil AR's

[rockymtnchief]

Originally Posted by 2bikemike

But by all means lets ban the evil AR's

Because they're black and scary looking!!! Oh my!

[RNR]

Chickenshit sheep shitbags do not care about reality. They just want the government to to take of them and protect them. These ill informed assholes who are yelling to place more rules on law abiding gun owners are a total waste of air~

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by nstygma

what do you think about his ending statement: "improve poverty level, create jobs, improve the education system, that is how you're gonna reduce violent crimes in those neighborhoods."

does being poor, uneducated, and unemployed make a person commit crime?
if not, what is the cause behind violent crime?
sure as hell aint magazines and offensive youtube videos.

Haven't we been pouring money galore into education to improve it and we keep getting these shootings from kids that attended these schools? Guess this is the results.

[2bikemike]

Originally Posted by RedNeckRaider

Chickenshit sheep shitbags do not care about reality. They just want the government to to take of them and protect them. These ill informed assholes who are yelling to place more rules on law abiding gun owners are a total waste of air~

You would think the media who cherishes their right to Free Speech would be all over the misinformation and holding the politician feet to the fire. At least in my mind that seems logical.

[listopencil]

Senator Dianne Feinstein,

I will not register my weapons should this bill be passed, as I do not believe it is the government's right to know what I own. Nor do I think it prudent to tell you what I own so that it may be taken from me by a group of people who enjoy armed protection yet decry me having the same a crime. You ma'am have overstepped a line that is not your domain. I am a Marine Corps Veteran of 8 years, and I will not have some woman who proclaims the evil of an inanimate object, yet carries one, tell me I may not have one.

I am not your subject. I am the man who keeps you free. I am not your servant. I am the person whom you serve. I am not your peasant. I am the flesh and blood of America.

I am the man who fought for my country. I am the man who learned. I am an American. You will not tell me that I must register my semi-automatic because of the actions of some evil man.

I will not be disarmed to suit the fear that has been established by the media and your misinformation campaign against the American public.

We, the people, deserve better than you.

Respectfully Submitted,
Joshua Boston
Cpl, United States Marine Corps
2004-2012

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-902515

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Governm...r-Gun-Grabbing


Apparently "gun grabber" is correct.

[Aries Walker]

I totally support this guy's initiative to look at statistics without bias.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr...tables/table-1

Politicians are promoting a 'fear agenda': He offers this claim with no proof. I am not totally refusing to believe that politicians tend to do this, but he needs to show his work. Also, he needs to consider that it's the result of being filtered through the media, who are masters at promoting fear agendas.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr...group_2011.xls

Big cities have much higher violent crime and murder rates: Totally correct. No argument there.

Whenever the above statement is brought up, the response is to redirect to international comparisons: Another groundless assertion, but not important in the grand scheme. I think he puts it in here mostly as a transition to . . .

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publica...12?view=Binary

Comparing us to Britain, which he totally flubs, and for the same reason (or one of the reasons) why I am not a fan of comparing two nations - different nations measure in different ways. If you look on page 16 of the same document he uses, you'll see that the British way of measuring "Violence against the person" is broken down into many classifications, including but not limited to deaths by drunk driving (4.4-4.6), causing harm through negligence (8F), making threats (3B), possession (10A-D), harassment (8L), something called "public fear, alarm, or distress" (9A), and giving someone a shove (105A). By including all of these, it makes Britain's "violent crime" numbers skyrocket, in comparison.

He does, to his credit, note Britain's murder rate of 1.3, which is lower than the United States's. In fact, it is a lot lower - about one third the rate.

His next line is accusing others of picking and choosing stats that meet their agenda. Ironic, that - and I'm only about halfway through his video.

[2bikemike]

Originally Posted by listopencil

Senator Dianne Feinstein,

I will not register my weapons should this bill be passed, as I do not believe it is the government's right to know what I own. Nor do I think it prudent to tell you what I own so that it may be taken from me by a group of people who enjoy armed protection yet decry me having the same a crime. You ma'am have overstepped a line that is not your domain. I am a Marine Corps Veteran of 8 years, and I will not have some woman who proclaims the evil of an inanimate object, yet carries one, tell me I may not have one.

I am not your subject. I am the man who keeps you free. I am not your servant. I am the person whom you serve. I am not your peasant. I am the flesh and blood of America.

I am the man who fought for my country. I am the man who learned. I am an American. You will not tell me that I must register my semi-automatic because of the actions of some evil man.

I will not be disarmed to suit the fear that has been established by the media and your misinformation campaign against the American public.

We, the people, deserve better than you.

Respectfully Submitted,
Joshua Boston
Cpl, United States Marine Corps
2004-2012

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-902515

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Governm...r-Gun-Grabbing


Apparently "gun grabber" is correct.

I saw this earlier. Good for him! Here is mine sent the other day.

Dear Ms. Feinstien,
I am writing you today to let you know how disappointed I am in the position you are taking against law abiding gun owners. Not letting a horrible tragedy go to waste you immediately took to the media and started your campaign against the rights of gun owners. You said and I quote “ we can’t allow the rights of the few overcome the safety of the majority”. ( had to rewind the DVR a couple times to make sure I heard you right) First off I should not have to remind a sitting Senator that the 2nd Amendment extends to all Americans with the exception of a few who couldn’t follow the law making them prohibited persons. Secondly you are eroding the rights of the majority over the actions of a few.
Your proposals will do nothing to end violence or prevent these tragedies. There are more guns now than ever before and yet violent crime is down. The last AWB really did nothing to reduce violence. The problem is a gun is just a tool and you always fail to address the reason these troubled individuals choose to be violent.

According to statistics there are about 10,000 homicides a year. Which is about the same number of people killed in drunk driving accidents. Yet I have not heard one proposal about banning alcohol or cars. Could this be because we blame the behavior of consuming alcohol? Why should guns be any different?

If you really want to do something meaningful for the lives of our children you and your fellow legislators should spend your time figuring out how to reduce our debt and get the country’s fiscal house in order. I fear what the future holds for my children and future grandchildren as you continually erode the rights of Americans while spending us into poverty.

Sincerely,
2bikemike

[Fish]

[2bikemike]

Originally Posted by Fish

You know she wants to ban the so called "assault weapons" because they look scary.

Can we ban her and Pelosi and any of the other libs who looks scary?

[listopencil]

Here's another crazy idea for you guys to rip apart (bear with me, Ambien Walrus is coming and I have to finish before he gets to my computer desk):

Instead of making firearms illegal, lets require all citizens to go through firearms safety courses. I separated this sentence out because I mean all citizens. It can be incorporated at the High School level, lower grades would work for some communities. Adults can go to training facilities of their choosing.

Out in Colorado you were required to take a hunter safety course to buy a tag. I assume those courses still exist. If they don't-bring them back, if they do-use them.

You can start with a basic safety class that everyone has to take, and then have a system set up to cover weapons/weapon types for if/when the citizen decides to make a purchase, giving a more focused and specific curriculum. Let the classes be set up as a joint project between the NRA and Homeland security. Allow weapon permits based on class performance. That is, you have to show some proficiency to purchase the weapon, with a bit of tactical/strategic theory thrown in to help you defend yourself if necessary.

At no point am I suggesting that those people who own guns now would have to attend these classes to keep their weapons. The NRA would jump all over setting this up.

[listopencil]

Oh no, Ambien Walrus. Looks like I must sleep.

[ClevelandBronco]

Originally Posted by listopencil

Here's another crazy idea for you guys to rip apart (bear with me, Ambien Walrus is coming and I have to finish before he gets to my computer desk):

Instead of making firearms illegal, lets require all citizens to go through firearms safety courses. I separated this sentence out because I mean all citizens...

And what's the penalty you would propose when I refuse to comply?