Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware • Hacker News Board

Re: Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

#201

Post by beeffective » Wed, May 08, 2013, 5:02 PM UTC

coldtea wrote: post #174

learc83 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The second is that few argue for "rifle control", but instead want "gun control". Except that's not what was actually happening. Most of what was hotly debated over the last few months has been over an "Assault Weapons Ban", that is a ban on certain semi-automatic rifles, very rarely involved in crime. It was only after that was defeated that people started talking about universal background checks. >Those guns that…

> Except that's not what was actually happening. Most of what was hotly debated over the last few months has been over an "Assault Weapons Ban", that is a ban on certain semi-automatic rifles, very rarely involved in crime. That's because they knew that the nuts in NRA and other pro-gun lobbies would never in a 1000 years accept a total "gun control" law. So they scaled down their proposal. Plus you also have this BS…

Most people who are anti-gun, such as yourself due to your "BS amendment" comment, are usually very ignorant or fearful of guns.

As a very middle of the road type of guy, I joined NRA and 2nd Amendment Foundation for the first time a few months ago because of too many people like you who are too easily influenced by the media in the past 6 months.

Re: Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

#202

Post by fywacro » Wed, May 08, 2013, 5:03 PM UTC

maxerickson wrote: post #122

jordan0day wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it's an economic indicator? Collecting guns is a popular hobby, so perhaps a rise in gun sales correlates to a rise in the economic standing of gun collectors?

100 million modern, collectible guns seems unlikely. (I agree that there are lots of people that like to collect guns, I just don't think they could possibly be driving (that much) manufacturing, making a lot of something makes it less collectible.)

Your point seems reasonable & logical. But in my experience, it's also incorrect: Plenty of gun collecting is predominantly around modern, mass-produced, non-scarce guns. I believe it's because scarcity is not a significant driver of value, in most gun owners' minds. Gun collectors derive a large portion of their guns' value from using (firing) them in a sports setting. Contrast with art or stamps, which don't really have recreational uses, just "stand-back-and-appreciate-it" value. Some guns DO have this museum-style appreciation-value, too, but the contribution is negligable WRT most mass-produced, modern guns. Also, modern guns have plenty of mythological cachet. Film & video games have celebrated and iconified the distinctive lines of particular guns, like the AR-15 and its variants. Even with millions of ARs in circulation, it may have a higher "cool factor" than an older, rarer flintlock pistol, especially to the younger set. Which brings me to my final point: In the US, gun ownership appears to be on the rise, lately, in non-traditonal demographics. More so than in decades past, you'll find new gun owners trendng: * young * politically liberal * high disposable income * shooting paper or zombies, not hunting * getting introduced to guns via friends, not family They buy guns for the same reason they buy video games--Fun. To that end, their buying habits tend toward the gun equivalents of the Honda Civic or Jeep Wrangler: Reliable, cost-effective, semi-automatic. Generally, that means a modern, mass-produced gun.

Re: Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

#203

Post by Zimahl » Wed, May 08, 2013, 5:05 PM UTC

damoncali wrote: post #24

Terretta wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

I've seen estimates of death by auto-erotic asphyxiation to be in the 500-1,000 per year in the US. Whatever will they ban to stop that?

Belts and closets I suppose?

Re: Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

#204

Post by mindcrime » Wed, May 08, 2013, 5:07 PM UTC

nsmartt wrote: post #152

corresation wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Baseball bats kill more people per baseball bat than do "assault weapons". What font of imaginary statistics are you pulling this ludicrous claim from? Do you know how many hundreds of millions of baseball bats there are in the United States? If we're discussing the confused, exaggerated stats that originally kicked this off, add in the billions of other "club-like" objects in circulation. You are making absolutely r…

Do keep in mind that the parent was specifically referring to assault weapons, which are presumably much more rare than other firearms, and also very rarely used in crime. I have no statistics, and I have no clue how many baseball bat deaths occur annually. I just thought maybe this would be a useful reminder.

I haven't looked up the stats lately, but IIRC, the number of times a legally owned actual assault weapon was used in a crime in the US was something like 3 or 4... ever.

Re: Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

#205

Post by hga » Wed, May 08, 2013, 5:07 PM UTC

edtechdev wrote: post #80

Well back in 1993, almost 49% of households had a gun. Today the number is 32%. That alone is a 35% drop in gun ownership. There are so many other factors that could play a role here. And none of them negate the need for common sense gun regulations and re-funding research on both gun and non-gun violence.

See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5675330; you're talking about the number of households that admit to owning a gun, not the real number.

That's somewhere around the middle of the nationwide sweep of shall issue concealed carry regimes, now totalling 42 states and 2/3rds of the population. Such an astounding political development---there were 2-3 states when Florida opened the floodgates in 1987---wouldn't seem to correlate with lower ownership rates.

As for this so called research, would you be talking about the output of people like Dr. Mark Rosenberg, director of the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control at the CDC in 1994 when he said objective was to make people see firearms as “dirty, deadly—and banned.”

Any wonder the NRA and gun owners in general were able to get the Congress to ban such "research"? And aren't you a bit disturbed by the violations of the rule of law of Obama ignoring these laws?

Re: Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

#206

Post by beeffective » Wed, May 08, 2013, 5:07 PM UTC

rgraham wrote: post #100

bluedino wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rifles (especially AK47s) are very popular with gangs for drive by shootings.

Do you have a citation for that? AK47s became popular with many hunters and target shooters because they're rugged, cheap, and have really cheap ammunition for target practice with a rifle.

I would say you are wrong because legal AR15s, even California legal AR15s with bullet buttons, have become popular among all types of gun owners. It's the #1 selling rifle. There are many variants and styles for hunting, such as the 6.8, 6.5 and .308 (also known as the AR10).

Re: Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

#207

Post by Zimahl » Wed, May 08, 2013, 5:11 PM UTC

bluedino wrote: post #167

evan_ wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'll get a lot of hits on that because the media calls every long gun an AK47. No criminal in his right mind would use one, it's expensive and objectively terrible.

You think full-auto weapons aren't used on the streets of America?

Fully automatic weapons are exceedingly rare. I know everyone thinks gang members are just flush with first-world armaments but most are using handguns. Easy to get a hold of (either stolen or straw purchases) and easy to conceal. Other than organized crime, street gangs have very few contacts for illicit imported weapons purchases.

Re: Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

#208

Post by saalweachter » Wed, May 08, 2013, 5:12 PM UTC

nsmartt wrote: post #152

corresation wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Baseball bats kill more people per baseball bat than do "assault weapons". What font of imaginary statistics are you pulling this ludicrous claim from? Do you know how many hundreds of millions of baseball bats there are in the United States? If we're discussing the confused, exaggerated stats that originally kicked this off, add in the billions of other "club-like" objects in circulation. You are making absolutely r…

Do keep in mind that the parent was specifically referring to assault weapons, which are presumably much more rare than other firearms, and also very rarely used in crime. I have no statistics, and I have no clue how many baseball bat deaths occur annually. I just thought maybe this would be a useful reminder.

I love trying to find numbers for random claims. This one is a little bit tricky because none of the four numbers are readily available.

The closest numbers I can find so far are:

  Number of murders committed with blunt objects, 2010: 600 [1]
  Number of murders committed with 'rifles', 2011: 323 [2]
  Number of 'assault-style' rifles: 3.75 million [3]
  Number of baseball bats produced per year: > 1.6 million [4]

So we don't know what fraction of blunt object murders are bats, and we don't know what fraction of 'rifle' murders are 'assault-style' rifles. We also don't know for sure how many 'assault-style' rifles there, are just a random reporter's guess. We also don't know how many bats there are, just how many one company of many makes.

All this together makes me believe that no one has any basis to make any claims about the deadliness of guns versus bats, because no one knows anything about the deadliness of guns versus bats.

I certainly can't come to any conclusions either, but I can at least sketch out the bounds. If we assume that every blunt object murder is a bat and every rifle murder is an assault rifle, then there are twice as many bat murders as assault rifle murders. But the question is murder per bat versus murder per assault rifle. So how many bats are there? There are probably somewhere between 2 and 5 million bats sold each year, depending on how much of the market Hillerich & Bradsby have. If the average lifespan of a bat is 5 years and 2 million are sold per year, then we have around 10 million bats in the country. If the average lifespan is 10 years and 5 million are sold per year, then we have around 50 million bats in the US. This puts the bats : assault-rifles ratio at between 2.5 and 13.

So the way I see it, as long as no more than twice as many murders are committed by baseball bat than assault rifle, I feel comfortable saying that assault rifles are more deadly than baseball bats, using the metric of people killed / weapon. For me to feel comfortable saying that bats are more deadly than assault rifles, at least ten times as many people would need to be killed by baseball bat as are killed by assault rifles.

The numbers I could find would still allow for either conclusion -- there's just too much uncertainty in them -- but IMO it leans heavily towards the conclusion that assault rifles are deadlier.

  [1] http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/baseballbats.asp
  [2] http://blogs.marketwatch.com/election/2013/01/16/assault-rifles-are-not-involved-in-many-u-s-murders-a-look-at-the-data/
  [3] http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2012/12/20/assault_rifle_stats_how_many_assault_rifles_are_there_in_america.html
  [4] http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/2136195

Re: Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

#209

Post by hga » Wed, May 08, 2013, 5:13 PM UTC

Taylorious wrote: post #103

ebbv wrote: post #45

Of course it is. All violent crime is down. That has nothing to do with the fact that kids are still accidentally getting shot. I propose a new law; if a child (under 18) is found in possession of a gun the gun owner is fined $50,000. If the gun's ownership cannot be established, the parents or legal guardians are fined $50,000 instead. People might be a little more serious about locking up their guns and not letting…

What a silly law. Why don't we fine people $50,000 every time they do anything irresponsible or dangerous. Surely that would make our society safe and responsible! Seriously, no one is going to pay heed to this law because how would you ever get caught? No one thinks their kid is going to get into their guns, if they did they would do something to prevent it. I can't believe you actually suggest that someone would ca…

Indeed; my father started taking all of us out hunting at age 3, and if we wanted to go dove hunting at age 10 (it's a safe type where he could and would be right next to us in the beginning), started teaching me how to shoot ~ 1st grade, and I was allowed to use firearms without supervision before 18. Not a lot before 18, but such a proposed law ... well, it totally ignores rural realities, e.g. "Kill that cottonmouth NOW!"

Re: Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

#210

Post by jeffdavis » Wed, May 08, 2013, 5:14 PM UTC

ebbv wrote: post #184

Lexarius wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Boy Scouts even have separate Rifle Shooting and Shotgun Shooting merit badges.

Yes and I got both of them. But giving them up is a small price to pay for fewer dead kids.

I don't see a rational weighing of costs and benefits here.

In particular, you should examine the risk of other activities that you consider acceptable for children, like swimming or going on a car trip to visit relatives in another state.

And you should also consider how many lives would reasonably be saved by your law, which might not work out as perfectly as you think.