Shooting in Florida

[Irving]

I don't think the amount of guns will have a significant effect on crime rates. It's a pretty argument, but I don't think it works in real life any more than more laws make people safe.

[Great-Kazoo]

I don't think the amount of guns will have a significant effect on crime rates. It's a pretty argument, but I don't think it works in real life any more than more laws make people safe.

Well I know less guns will reduce the number of crimes committed. They will however increase the crime rate for unarmed victims.

[Irving]

I don't think it would. Larger community = more crime. That metric alone will drive numbers so much that any other metric will be almost undetectable.

[Zundfolge]

I don't think the amount of guns will have a significant effect on crime rates.

Dr Lott would disagree ... and he makes the case quite well.

[Skip]

I don't think it would. Larger community = more crime. That metric alone will drive numbers so much that any other metric will be almost undetectable.

Explains increase in volume but not rate. It might make mass shootings more likely (volume of people) in cities.

There are mass shootings level casualties every weekend in Chicago that get ignored.

Denver had 59 homicides last year and is on track for slightly more this year. Shocking in aggregate.

Homicide rate (100K) in 2016 for Denver was 8.22. Go into Westminster and it drops to 3.51. Why are you ~2.5x more likely to be murdered in Denver? Some cities aren't even in the data because they have zero homicides!

http://www.cpr.org/news/story/a-dive...ta-in-5-charts

Thing is you can write all the laws to prevent "bad/dangerous people" from legally acquiring and/or possessing guns but that won't stop anyone.

The only government based solution to the problem is for government to get out of the way of the people being armed whenever and wherever they wish.

Yes, it's more guns that will make us safer. Not less (because the only "less guns" you get with the law is less guns in the hands of good people).

Yeah, I'm struggling to understand how society could have identified this nutter and prevented him from getting a gun. You have more ridiculous cases like Holmes where he is screaming he's insane, making threats, and even his therapist knew it (contacted LE).

This one, I'm not sure. I'm worried any criteria other than we have now would infringe on the rights of people who aren't a problem and never will be.

[Irving]

Homicide rate (100K) in 2016 for Denver was 8.22. Go into Westminster and it drops to 3.51. Why are you ~2.5x more likely to be murdered in Denver? Some cities aren't even in the data because they have zero homicides!

http://www.cpr.org/news/story/a-dive...ta-in-5-charts

There are probably a handful of reasons, but I'd really struggle to believe that the level of gun ownership was a significant factor.

[Skip]

There are probably a handful of reasons, but I'd really struggle to believe that the level of gun ownership was a significant factor.

If gun ownership (respecting RKBA, values) is a part of culture, could that be a factor?

[Irving]

Of course it could be a factor. I'm suggesting that ownership alone is not a significant factor. There is more to the story than just owning a gun. There are people who buy a gun at some point in their life and it just sits in a drawer forever. Those people aren't preventing any crime just by having a gun somewhere in their house.

Gun ownership is, for the most part, a hobby. One has to be at a certain level of financial/economic stability, to engage in and maintain any level of hobby. People with enough economic freedom also have the time and interest in maintaining the quality of the community in which they live. Not everyone is going to be involved, but enough people to make a difference.

You could basically make the same argument for piano ownership. People who own pianos aren't out actively preventing crime, or frightening criminals with the threat of having their fingers smashed by the fallboard anymore than gun owners are out actively preventing crimes. Criminals already live a life of constant risk, and I doubt that the presence of guns adds much perceived risk. Certainly not compared to just having a more involved and aware community to begin with.

I'm sure there is enough of a discussion here to run an entire years long survey. Just because I don't buy that argument anymore, doesn't mean others can't. Believe what you want, I just think that saying, "get more guns and people will behave," is just as tired of a cop-out as "make drugs and prostitution legal and tax the hell out of 'em!"

On a side note, I'm not at all against the state putting mass shooters/murders to death immediately, but I also don't see the death penalty as much of a deterrent, especially among mass shooters who regularly kill themselves anyway.

EDIT: With your emphasis on the culture, I suspect that we're saying similar things. I also suspect that you'd, correctly, point out that the culture of piano ownership and gun ownership are different.

[Skip]

[snip]

EDIT: With your emphasis on the culture, I suspect that we're saying similar things. I also suspect that you'd, correctly, point out that the culture of piano ownership and gun ownership are different.

Yes, we probably are.

While I don't think firearms are magical talismans that ward off criminals and crime, I do think they are a tool that people who have objectively good values have or want to have. I think laws reflect that too... Castle Doctrine vs. expectation to retreat, for example. A society that controls/bans guns is effectively revoking a natural right to self defense. That makes it easy for criminals. And the easier it gets, the less of a check on their behavior we have.

So fewer guns = less opportunity to balance crime = more crime

Not because the guns are magical metal but because they are tools in the hands of decent people. Decent people can't practice their values witout tools anymore than a construction worker can build a house without his tools.

I also think it's more than a hobby for this reason and why it's a Constitutionally protected right.

[Irving]

The concept of owning guns is not just a hobby, but I stand by my statement that for the vast majority of gun owners, it's a hobby.