Live data from Hacker News

United States to fund gun-violence research after 20-year freeze

nature.com

121–130 of 373 posts

Re: United States to fund gun-violence research after 20-year freeze

#121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

cars kill thousands of kids, recommend fewer cars swimming pools kill a thousand, recommend banning swimming pools drugs kill a thousand, make drugs illegal with huge jail terms. wait, that doesn't work. why are there thousands of kids handling guns fine without accidents in rural areas and thousands getting killed by a few hundred in urban areas. it's much more complex than just fewer guns, no private pool ownership…

Neither cars nor swimming pools are weapons designed to kill. Nor are most drugs.

>The fact that guns are “designed to kill people,” while swimming pools aren’t, is beside the point. Such word games can be played both ways: A gun is designed to save your life when no other tool will do the job. Swimming pools are just for fun.

(Sam Harris)

Re: United States to fund gun-violence research after 20-year freeze

#122
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably because those shootings are probably in high gun control areas like Chicago, NJ, CA where laws are strictest, so it shows that gun control doesn't really work to stop those, and those deaths are usually the result overwhelmingly of handguns, not AR-15's or "assault style rifles" which are just semi-automatic rifles that look militaristic and no one would freak out about if they had wooden stocks. In this cas…

I'm really tired of this argument that people are irrationally afraid of black rifles and simply don't understand the machines they're purporting to regulate. These are devices that were designed to be field stripped by 18 year olds in a jungle. They're not that complicated. The Mini-14 (for example) has a wooden stock, and looks like something out of Little House On The Prairie, in part because it was brought to mar…

> I'm really tired of this argument that people are irrationally afraid of black rifles and simply don't understand the machines they're purporting to regulate.

Given that more people are killed with hands and feet than are killed with rifles of any kind, "assault" or otherwise, yes, it's an irrational fear.

Source: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2018/crime-in-the-u.s.-...

For 2018, the numbers are:

Rifles: 297 Hands and feet: 672.

Re: United States to fund gun-violence research after 20-year freeze

#123
post #3

Gun violence research is a good example of how science can be skewed to make different political points. For example, one of the new tactics gun control advocates have adopted is lumping homicides and suicides together into “gun deaths” even though the policy implications of the two things are quite different. (Suicides accounting for the large majority of “gun deaths,” but bans on semi-automatic rifles and high capa…

>I’d also point out that, at the end of the day, gun rights derive from the Constitution. Gun control is therefore not merely a policy choice to be made based on facts and data. That it was written in the Constitution (which also counted black people as three fifths of a person and failed to enshrine voting rights) should not reduce the value the facts and data to "mere" status. You are right about the statistics, th…

[deleted]

Re: United States to fund gun-violence research after 20-year freeze

#124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No they aren’t. Most recent data suggests that the US has twice the suicide rate of the U.K. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide... Japan & Korea are interesting _because_ they are outliers.

The US suicide rate per the CDC is 14/100k (2017). The UK suicide rate is 11/100k per the office of National statistics (2018). I'm not sure why the Wikipedia page dramatically disagrees with the UK's own stats.

The Wikipedia page uses WHO data, which is age-standardised. It's unclear if this explains the entire difference.

The WHO explanation is here: https://www.who.int/data/gho/indicator-metadata-registry/imr... and their data is here: http://apps.who.int/gho/data/node.main.MHSUICIDEASDR?lang=en

Re: United States to fund gun-violence research after 20-year freeze

#125
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The vast majority of gun violence of all types, suicides, gang murders, mass shootings, domestic violence etc. are committed with hand guns. Hand gun ownership popularity is at a high in the US across many demographics. But assault rifle bans are the most popular form of gun control, probably because of the popularity of hand guns.

Not only that, support for banning hand guns has collapsed: https://news.gallup.com/poll/150341/record-low-favor-handgun... . In 1959, 60% of people favored a handgun ban, to 36% opposed. By 2011 that had flipped to 73% opposed and just 26% in favor. People focus on rifles, which are responsible for relatively few deaths, because banning handguns is wildly unpopular. (Heck Kamala Harris owns a handgun.)

Rifles have none of the legitimate uses that gun advocates go on about so its a low reward but 0 loss situation to ban them.

Unless someone is proposing you need to defend your house against a zombie invasion.

Re: United States to fund gun-violence research after 20-year freeze

#127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm really tired of this argument that people are irrationally afraid of black rifles and simply don't understand the machines they're purporting to regulate. These are devices that were designed to be field stripped by 18 year olds in a jungle. They're not that complicated. The Mini-14 (for example) has a wooden stock, and looks like something out of Little House On The Prairie, in part because it was brought to mar…

> I'm really tired of this argument that people are irrationally afraid of black rifles and simply don't understand the machines they're purporting to regulate. Given that more people are killed with hands and feet than are killed with rifles of any kind, "assault" or otherwise, yes, it's an irrational fear. Source: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2018/crime-in-the-u.s.-... For 2018, the numbers are: Rifles: 297…

Do you think people advocating gun control haven't considered these numbers? Heart disease kills more people than crime of all sorts. We still generally want police departments.

Is there some book or FAQ these arguments all get sourced from? They always seem to be the same ones. At this point, I'm not even annoyed that people disagree with me about firearms, but just that their arguments are so boring.

Re: United States to fund gun-violence research after 20-year freeze

#128
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meaning what? The SCOTUS has ruled several times that the individual right to bear arms is separate from the "militia" statement and both are covered in the 2A.

Why is the phrase "well-regulated militia" in there then? Is it just fluff that can be ignored?

ryeights gave a cite below, but consider this:

If the First Amendment had been written as "A well-educated legislature being essential to the governance of a free state, the right of the people to keep and read books shall not be infringed", you would argue, what, exactly?

That only the legislature had the right to books?

That only "well-educated" people had the right to books?

No, you wouldn't. Neither would anyone else, because that would be a tortured interpretation of the language.

Re: United States to fund gun-violence research after 20-year freeze

#129
post #30
post #3

Gun violence research is a good example of how science can be skewed to make different political points. For example, one of the new tactics gun control advocates have adopted is lumping homicides and suicides together into “gun deaths” even though the policy implications of the two things are quite different. (Suicides accounting for the large majority of “gun deaths,” but bans on semi-automatic rifles and high capa…

The entire 2nd Amendment claim is hotly debated, of course. Chief Justice Warren Burger’s epic rant: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Eya_k4P-iEo There’s also an excellent episode about the Second Amendment on WNYC. https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/radiolab/articles/radio... When people tell you the Constitution is clear about gun ownership and that it’s settled, they are lying.

The meaning of amendment itself is plain enough that many who argue for certain interpretations seem to be doing so in bad faith. As for why it has rarely mattered, at the very least until it was for-sure incorporated it had a much more limited importance at the national level since states could pretty much do absolutely whatever they felt like.

In any case, the militia clause is clearly an explanation and/or justification for what follows. It's the "why" they decided to include the amendment, and could just as soon say "because bats have wings," for how much bearing it has on the other clauses. Though I do agree the whole thing has way too many commas.

Re: United States to fund gun-violence research after 20-year freeze

#130
post #81
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably because those shootings are probably in high gun control areas like Chicago, NJ, CA where laws are strictest, so it shows that gun control doesn't really work to stop those, and those deaths are usually the result overwhelmingly of handguns, not AR-15's or "assault style rifles" which are just semi-automatic rifles that look militaristic and no one would freak out about if they had wooden stocks. In this cas…

Bill Gates' graphic isn't compelling except in the case of some cancer and traffic accidents. Most heart disease, almost all Alzheimer's, most cancer, etc. are just various ways that old people die. You're going to have to die in some manner, so reducing Stroke deaths is just going to mean more Heart Disease deaths a few years later on a person who got to live a full life. Traffic accidents, earlier cancers, suicides…

Even if you exclude "natural causes" the point is still there. Terrorism is ludicrously over-represented in the media, even compared to homicide. Homicide is half as likely as suicide but the media has it reversed. Drug overdose is preventable in ~100% of cases and kills three times more people than homicide but it's completely ignored.
Post reply on HN