CDC: Firearm-related homicides rose 30 percent between 2014 and 2016

[Copernicus]

Well said, southernhybrid.

I would add that the source for phands' OP mentions the chilling effect that the Dickey amendment had on gun-related research, and that may be the reason that the CDC report had no analysis of the cause for this spike in gun-related homicides. Congress has now clarified the intention of the Dickey amendment so as to allow government-funded research on firearms to go forward. Hopefully, we will see more analysis in future reports.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

We need guns because peeple got guns!

Once we get rid of government, will people be allowed to own guns?

 

[dismal]

https://www.brennancenter.org/press-release/year-end-analysis-crime-and-murder-down-2017

All measures of crime in the 30 largest American cities — the overall crime rate, violent crime rate, and murder rate — are estimated to decline in 2017 according to a year-end analysis by the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law.

Crime in 2017: Updated Analysis directly undercuts any claims of a nationwide crime wave. Compiled by a team of economics and policy researchers, it updates the Center’s September report, Crime in 2017: A Preliminary Analysis.

“Once again crime rates remain near historic lows. This is welcome news as 2017 comes to an end, and a clear indication that claims of rising crime are unfounded,” said Ames Grawert, a counsel in the Brennan Center’s Justice Program. “However, there are some cities where violence has increased, and those concerning spikes need to be better understood and addressed.”

Gee. Could it be that 2015-2016 were just a blip?

Sure, if by "blip" you mean it was caused by the Russians in cahoots with the Rethuglicans, the NRA, and the Treasonous Tangerine Traitor.

But if you meant something else then stop derailing the thread.

 

[untermensche]

We need guns because peeple got guns!

Once we get rid of government, will people be allowed to own guns?

Having no centralized government does not mean there are no local governments and no rules.

Anarchists believe in things like spreading power as wide as possible.

Capitalists believe in capitalism.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

We need guns because peeple got guns!

Once we get rid of government, will people be allowed to own guns?

Having no centralized government does not mean there are no local governments and no rules.

So ... once we get rid of government, we will have government. Got it. Will these local anarchist governments allow people to own guns?

Anarchists believe in things like spreading power as wide as possible. Capitalists believe in capitalism. Libertarians believe in both at once. An-Coms contradict themselves.

 

[dismal]

Will these local anarchist governments allow people to own guns?

Seems like they'd have to. Or armed vagabonds would steal the magic unicorns.

 

[untermensche]

Having no centralized government does not mean there are no local governments and no rules.

So ... once we get rid of government, we will have government. Got it. Will these local anarchist governments allow people to own guns?

Anarchists believe in things like spreading power as wide as possible. Capitalists believe in capitalism. Libertarians believe in both at once. An-Coms contradict themselves.

You don't get it.

You are blind to it.

You think that spreading government as far as possible is what we have now.

You think we have democracy.

You think democracy is voting for one of two corporate choices you had nothing to do with being there.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Having no centralized government does not mean there are no local governments and no rules.

So ... once we get rid of government, we will have government. Got it. Will these local anarchist governments allow people to own guns?

Anarchists believe in things like spreading power as wide as possible. Capitalists believe in capitalism. Libertarians believe in both at once. An-Coms contradict themselves.

You don't get it.

Don't get what?

You are blind to it.

Blind to what?

You think that spreading government as far as possible is what we have now.

Mindreading fail.

You think we have democracy.

Mindreading fail.

You think democracy is voting for one of two corporate choices you had nothing to do with being there.

Mindreading fail.

You would do well trying to find out what it is I actually believe. That's why I ask you all those questions about your proposed system that you don't like to answer - that's what I'm trying to do to you.

 

[untermensche]

What you believe is exposed in what you oppose.

If you oppose spreading power as far as possible that tells us what you support.

Small centers of power can come together and join in some universal rules.

They can all be wise and all prohibit individual ownership of firearms.

That is possible.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

What you believe is exposed in what you oppose.

Yes, and I oppose depriving individuals of their rights.

Small centers of power can come together and join in some universal rules.

They can all be wise and all prohibit individual ownership of firearms.

That is possible.

So what you're saying is that these local anarchist governments can create a bigger centralized federal anarchist government to create laws that oppress the minority. And you think they are wise when they do so.

 

[ronburgundy]

So, in your version of reality the NRA suddenly came along in 2014? That's some serious delusion you're working with.

The delusion is all you. The NRA has existed far too long. But they still engineered the rise in gun lunacy - which you seem to revel in. Yet again, your nick is onomatopoeic.

Let me give you a little logic help here: To assert something caused this you need to point to something that 1) did not exist in 2014; 2) did exist in 2016; 3) can plausibly cause a rise in gun fatalities.

.

Here is a simple one that easily satisfies all 3 requirements, the number of legal gun sales. They were relatively steady from 1999 to 2010, but massively jumped from 2010 to 2016, with handgun sales doubling. Very similar stats for guns being manufactured in the US show a similar spike over the last several years. Guns are a causal necessity in fire-arm deaths, and FBI stats reported here numerous times show that most guns used in crime come from legal gun sales to legal owners who then turn around and resell to the black market. Thus, the number of guns made and initially sold legally (even with background checks) are a highly plausible cause of an increase in guns used in all crimes including murder.

 

[dismal]

Let me give you a little logic help here: To assert something caused this you need to point to something that 1) did not exist in 2014; 2) did exist in 2016; 3) can plausibly cause a rise in gun fatalities.

.

Here is a simple one that easily satisfies all 3 requirements, the number of legal gun sales. They were relatively steady from 1999 to 2010, but massively jumped from 2010 to 2016, with handgun sales doubling. Very similar stats for guns being manufactured in the US show a similar spike over the last several years. Guns are a causal necessity in fire-arm deaths, and FBI stats reported here numerous times show that most guns used in crime come from legal gun sales to legal owners who then turn around and resell to the black market. Thus, the number of guns made and initially sold legally (even with background checks) are a highly plausible cause of an increase in guns used in all crimes including murder.

Yes, it has often been said Obama is the greatest gun salesman in history. This chart shows it well.

Also, stop derailing the thread.

 

[untermensche]

Yes, it has often been said Obama is the greatest gun salesman in history.

You confuse Obama with the insane specter of Obama created by people looking to sell guns.

A part of the US went absolutely crazy.

And in their insane frenzy we end up with Trump.

 

[dismal]

Yes, it has often been said Obama is the greatest gun salesman in history.

You confuse Obama with the insane specter of Obama created by people looking to sell guns.

A part of the US went absolutely crazy.

And in their insane frenzy we end up with Trump.

Yes, agreed. The insanity of people squealing for more gun control probably led to the increased gun sales as much or more than Obama. Obama was reasonably perceived as being one of them, though, so he's not blameless. And the insanity of these same people led to Trump.

 

[untermensche]

Yes, it has often been said Obama is the greatest gun salesman in history.

You confuse Obama with the insane specter of Obama created by people looking to sell guns.

A part of the US went absolutely crazy.

And in their insane frenzy we end up with Trump.

Yes, agreed. The insanity of people squealing for more gun control probably led to the increased gun sales as much or more than Obama. Obama was reasonably perceived as being one of them, though, so he's not blameless. And the insanity of these same people led to Trump.

No insanity in gun control.

None that you have ever demonstrated.

 

[dismal]

Yes, agreed. The insanity of people squealing for more gun control probably led to the increased gun sales as much or more than Obama. Obama was reasonably perceived as being one of them, though, so he's not blameless. And the insanity of these same people led to Trump.

No insanity in gun control.

None that you have ever demonstrated.

Right, the actual state of gun control didn't really change. It was the crazy people calling for more of it and the impression Obama would give in that caused that gun sales boom.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Yes, agreed. The insanity of people squealing for more gun control probably led to the increased gun sales as much or more than Obama. Obama was reasonably perceived as being one of them, though, so he's not blameless. And the insanity of these same people led to Trump.

No insanity in gun control.

A self-described anarchist asserting that only the government should be allowed to own guns, and should use force to deprive the minority of their right to do so.

 

[Trausti]

Yes, agreed. The insanity of people squealing for more gun control probably led to the increased gun sales as much or more than Obama. Obama was reasonably perceived as being one of them, though, so he's not blameless. And the insanity of these same people led to Trump.

No insanity in gun control.

A self-described anarchist asserting that only the government should be allowed to own guns, and should use force to deprive the minority of their right to do so.

¡Viva la Revolución!

 

[untermensche]

Yes, agreed. The insanity of people squealing for more gun control probably led to the increased gun sales as much or more than Obama. Obama was reasonably perceived as being one of them, though, so he's not blameless. And the insanity of these same people led to Trump.

No insanity in gun control.

None that you have ever demonstrated.

Right, the actual state of gun control didn't really change. It was the crazy people calling for more of it and the impression Obama would give in that caused that gun sales boom.

So what is stopping all those people from having machine guns?

A lot of talk against them.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, agreed. The insanity of people squealing for more gun control probably led to the increased gun sales as much or more than Obama. Obama was reasonably perceived as being one of them, though, so he's not blameless. And the insanity of these same people led to Trump.

No insanity in gun control.

A self-described anarchist asserting that only the government should be allowed to own guns, and should use force to deprive the minority of their right to do so.

In democracy the people control the government.

In dictatorship of some form, like capitalism, a minority controls the government.

 

[dismal]

So what is stopping all those people from having machine guns?

I'm going to guess: someone with bigger machine guns?