11–20 of 266 posts
"Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades." So, gun crime's falling significantly slower than crime in general, which may account for the public perception.
Public perception is being driven by a media with an anti-gun agenda.
"Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades." So, gun crime's falling significantly slower than crime in general, which may account for the public perception.
>"Violent non-fatal crime victimization Why are you comparing violent non-fatal crime , to gun homicides ?
Edit: Referring to some of the comments in this thread, not the article.
If you live outside of a high crime area, and you aren't involved in criminal activity the chances, of being shot are drastically reduced below the average.
If you live outside of a high crime area, and you aren't involved in criminal activity the chances, of being shot are drastically reduced below the average.
Others may be unaware of the shift in suicide rates by firearm: "The sharp decline in the U.S. gun homicide rate, combined with a slower decrease in the gun suicide rate, means that gun suicides now account for six-in-ten firearms deaths, the highest share since at least 1981."
Also ALL violent crime is down 50% since 1993. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ooa98FHuaU0 Fear is a powerful weapon. The media and politicians know this and selectively choose which crime stats to promote. Emotional outrage > rational analysis when it comes to selling pageviews and building political support. That is nothing new. Fortunately the internet is helping to temper that imbalance.
> selectively choose which crime stats to promote For example, FBI homicide stats last year show 350 killed by rifles of any kind, assault or otherwise, while 750 killed by hammers. I keep waiting for the groundswell of public support for hammer control.