Guns don't kill criminals, criminals use guns to kill people

[dan7000]

@Bass

otherwise demographically similar areas

Missed the " otherwise demographically similar areas " part of the question, huh?

[Mister44]

@dan7000

Please define “criminal” as you are using it in this phrase. Typically it would be someone previously convicted of a crime – and if they are walking the streets, presumably someone who has paid their price to society for that crime already. If those people are the ones “usually” killed, why is that relevant exactly?

You honestly can’t see how that is relevant? Check out page 23 and page 24 of the report. 90% of the suspects and 77% of the victims had arrest records. A quarter of them had 15 more arrests. The median was 7. That isn’t a youthful indiscretion or a DUI or getting into one little fight before moving to your aunt and uncles in Bel Air. It shows someone who is consistently on the wrong side of the law. Page 22 shows about 20% of them were under ACTIVE supervision with the Dept of Corrections. Over twice that were under past supervision.

I am not here to demonize anyone, but you can’t hope to fix a problem if you aren’t honest with what is causing the problem. Granted this is just Milwaukee and we can’t extrapolate these numbers to every city in America, but after finding this study I have it on my list to find similar ones. I am really interested in some of the other hot spots like Chicago, LA, and my local area in KC.

@Brainspore

Again, it also doesn’t reflect how many times guns were used to commit crimes that didn’t result in death.

Fair enough, but the number of people using their guns lawfully still far eclipses these people.

[Bass]

I’m sure in those 10 states you could find demographically similar areas to compare.

[Brainspore]

@Mister44

Fair enough, but the number of people using their guns lawfully still far eclipses these people.

If you mean that for every criminal who brandishes a gun in a robbery or assault there are several law-abiding gun owners who just want to go shooting at the local gun range, I agree.

If you mean that for every crime facilitated by someone brandishing a gun there are several crimes prevented by someone brandishing a gun, I very much doubt it.

[dan7000]

@Mister44

77% of the victims had arrest records. A quarter of them had 15 more arrests. The median was 7. That isn’t a youthful indiscretion or a DUI or getting into one little fight before moving to your aunt and uncles in Bel Air. It shows someone who is consistently on the wrong side of the law. Page 22 shows about 20% of them were under ACTIVE supervision with the Dept of Corrections. Over twice that were under past supervision.

I am not here to demonize anyone, but you can’t hope to fix a problem if you aren’t honest with what is causing the problem.

I truly cannot see the relevance of this unless the purpose is to demonize someone. Perhaps you missed the bold caveat on page 23 saying that this is arrest information only, and does not reflect whether the person was ever charged, let alone convicted? Perhaps you missed the caveat that explains that this, in fact, does include DUIs? (In fact, because Milwaukee’s chief is known for his aggressive “broken windows” policing, in which minority neighborhoods are targeted for arrests for very minor offenses like broken taillights and jaywalking, it is much more likely that in Milwaukee you will see high arrest statistics, especially in minority neighborhoods, that do not correlate with serious criminality. Murphy’s Law: Does “Broken Windows” Theory Hurt Milwaukee? » Urban Milwaukee).

But again, all of this seems 100% irrelevant to me. And you have not explained the relevance - perhaps because it will show the part of your argument you wish to remain unspoken?

[dan7000]

And most likely you would find similar crime rates in the demographically similar areas.

[Mister44]

@Brainspore

If you mean that for every crime facilitated by someone brandishing a gun there are several crimes prevented by someone brandishing a gun, I very much doubt it.

No, you’re probably right on that. The truth is no one knows the numbers. I see a lot of anecdotal data just from what makes it into the papers, but it makes sense the number would be lower, as criminals pick out people they think they can control and over power. I wish someone made a site similar to the one made to track police shootings, where one could report incidents of guns preventing crime from documents cases, such as news reports and police blotters.

[anon68952647]

@John_Borgstrom

everything looks like shit after it hits the fan

But only shit looks like shit beforehand.

[peemlives]

@dacree

common-law definition “light infantry weapons which can be carried and used, together with ammunition, by a single militiaman, functionally equivalent to those commonly used by infantrymen in land warfare.”

Davy Crockett (nuclear device)

[anon68952647]

@StephenCJuliano

so the amount of firearms used for crime is less than 1%

Clearly we need more responsible guns.

Since Correlation does not imply causation

It must preclude it? Natch.

[drunken_oranget]

The Supreme Court only argued that after 2008. Before that, no.

[Mister44]

@dan7000

But again, all of this seems 100% irrelevant to me. And you have not explained the relevance - perhaps because it will show the part of your argument you wish to remain unspoken?

Right arrest doesn’t mean conviction, but how many people do you know have been arrested arrested 7 times for anything? Even if they were only guilty half the time, that shows a pattern. I am not saying false arrests don’t happen, but most people who really are falsely arrested and were not doing anything wrong, continue to do obey the law, not go out and kill someone.

20% of those involved were on parole or probation, and over 40% of those were at one time. Look on page 24 you can see the Alcohol arrests were the lowest type, next to sexual violence and homicide. Property, Court, drugs, and other violent crimes were the most common.

The relevance is that it shows that a small segment of repeat offenders are doing the bulk of the violence. And often times to one another. Page 28 shows fights, robberies, and drugs were the 3 most common circumstances.

If our goal is to reduce gun violence, any violence, especially murders, we need to figure out who is doing most of it and why before we can start to think of ways to reduce it.

[bolamig]

The convincing justifications for gun ownership apply to sparsely populated areas. We need a legal framework that acknowledges these differences, so that we can get rid of the guns that don’t belong in urban areas.

[ShlomoGS]

The Violence Policy Center is just an anti-gun lobby group. It is bad journalism to just write an article paraphrasing the conclusions of a press release given out by any lobbying group. It is worse journalism to write an article paraphrasing someone else’s article paraphrasing that same press release. Even if you hate guns, it is foolish to take such propaganda at face value. It is very much like getting your information about abortion from Crisis Pregnancy Centers. It is not even information, in that it does not “inform” you or provide you with facts upon which to base your viewpoint. There are good unbiased sources of information out there. If your beliefs are backed up by lies propagated by paid lobbyists, You are being duped. Even if the propaganda reinforces what you want to believe. Especially then.

[dan7000]

@Mister44

If our goal is to reduce gun violence, any violence, especially murders, we need to figure out who is doing most of it and why before we can start to think of ways to reduce it

OK, so how is the victim’s arrest record relevant to the question of “who is doing most of” the gun violence?

@Mister44

arrest doesn’t mean conviction, but how many people do you know have been arrested arrested 7 times for anything?

The report also says this includes arrests for non-criminal offenses. I know a number of people who have been arrested 7 times and never charged or convicted of anything. Who you are and where you live has a lot to do with whether you will be arrested for minor crimes. E.g. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/03/04/17-disturbing-statistics-from-the-federal-report-on-ferguson-police/

@Mister44

Property, Court, drugs, and other violent crimes were the most common

Who knows what these are? Again, they are just arrests. But the segment called “court/police interference” – the second largest category – likely means something like bothering a police officer or that notorious vehicle for police abuse of power “resisting arrest”. There are many more arrests in the categories of “drug” and “other nonviolent crimes” than violent crimes. So you are left with a majority of these victims arrested for drugs, other nonviolent crimes, or resisting arrest.

And arrests for minor crimes can easily become jail sentences or probation. E.g. How Ferguson Uses Cops and the Courts to Prey on Its Residents | BillMoyers.com

[HMSGoose]

But when they have those, you have a much better chance of running away / walking away unscathed or at least alive.

[Shuck]

During the period when gun violence (and most other crimes) reduced in frequency, fewer US households now have guns, too. Also, states with higher rates of gun ownership also have higher rates of gun violence. Causation, correlation, etc. etc., but still…

[shaddack]

@Brainspore

“But not MY guns…” —Every gun owner

And almost every one of them is right.

[Brainspore]

@shaddack

And almost every one of them is right.

Guess that depends on what you consider “almost every one.”

If more than 30,000 Americans were killed each year by freely available dynamite, I doubt “almost everyone who buys dynamite uses it for constructive purposes” would convince most people that we needn’t consider any new regulations for explosives.

[shaddack]

Dynamite sucks. I’d prefer to get my hands on something more brizant, to get familiar with shaped charges. But, unlike guns, there aren’t blasting ranges one could go to and have fun…