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

[untermensche]

But if nobody owns guns there are much fewer guns to kill children at school with and that is much less likely.

Less gun ownership would likely decrease the risk (in total volume) of gun misuse. I think we got that.

Then we are done.

SANE harm reduction.

The best that is possible.

What I'm trying to get through to you is something else.

Maybe we should create a law requiring people to rent guns on a monthly basis. Let's substantially increase the availability of guns and put them in the hands of more people. Far more people. In the hands of those that would rather not touch them. They must familiarize themselves with them. So long as they're rented and not owned, all should be fine. Why? Because you appear to be expressing the point that it's ownership of them that is the problem.

If no one owned a car but rented instead, would you blame accidents on rental agencies?

As far as the children go, what you're really wanting to say is that if there were less access to guns, there would be less awful tragedies, (and even still, it's the misuse not the access that is the culprit), but I think you (and many others) don't understand the imposed trade off on a personal level.

Less gun ownership will not alleviate the burden in its entirety. There will be less bad guys with guns but the good guy bad guy with a gun ratio will be whopsided. Too many good people will have to endure the increased danger. I can't speak to statistics, but as far as I'm concerned, I'm more likely to fare better than not in worst case scenarios. I'm not going to give that up.

Either way, don't confuse risk with harm. Don't be like insurance companies that charge based on the former.

You still will have the pathetic outcasts or psychotics killing children in numbers where they congregate on what is now a regular basis.

My grandfather was a NYC cop. Well trained in the use of a firearm.

He had an accidental discharge one time, before I was born.

Humans and guns means there will be accidents.

Millions of humans with guns means there will be a lot.

And we could reduce that number a lot.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Using government force to ban guns really is an anarchistic position.[/sarcasm]

 

[untermensche]

The government is a tool to use to reduce harm. But it could only happen in an Anarchist situation by a vote of a majority

Anarchism actually believes in democracy.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Just admit that you want to dictate to other people.

 

[untermensche]

Just admit that you want to dictate to other people.

Just admit you have nothing and are reduced to twisting things.

You have been raised in a twisted dictatorial system.

There are better ways for most.

This is the best system for dictators and wanna-be dictators.

For a minority in other words.

The human rat race is to feed a minority more than it can eat.

Imagine if we didn't have to feed these dictators so much?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

A home run wrapped in a field goal.

Baltimore police stopped noticing crime after Freddie Gray's death. A wave of killings followed.

In the space of just a few days in spring 2015 – as Baltimore faced a wave of rioting after Freddie Gray, a black man, died from injuries he suffered in the back of a police van – officers in nearly every part of the city appeared to turn a blind eye to everyday violations. They still answered calls for help. But the number of potential violations they reported seeing themselves dropped by nearly half. It has largely stayed that way ever since.

“What officers are doing is they’re just driving looking forward. They’ve got horse blinders on,” says Kevin Forrester, a retired Baltimore detective.

The surge of shootings and killings that followed has left Baltimore easily the deadliest large city in the United States. Its murder rate reached an all-time high last year; 342 people were killed. The number of shootings in some neighborhoods has more than tripled. One man was shot to death steps from a police station. Another was killed driving in a funeral procession.

If the Ferguson Effect is a/the primary reason for the increase in gun deaths reported by the CDC, it seems we would expect to see a sharp increase in black-on-black homicides, as the cops were easing off policing primarily black neighborhoods. I would expect far less increases in white-on-white homicides, and white-on-black homicides. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to find any racial breakdown of the homicide perpetrators/victims. Maybe someone else will have some luck.

It's not just actions against blacks that the police are afraid of, but rather of being persecuted over actions someone can find a way to criticize. Thus there should not be a racial effect in the results we see.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Just admit you have nothing and are reduced to twisting things.

Pointing out that you are an anarchist who wants the government to have a monopoly on force is not twisting things. You want a small minority to have all the power, and will grant the masses the vote IF they vote the way you want.

 

[ronburgundy]

If the Ferguson Effect is a/the primary reason for the increase in gun deaths reported by the CDC, it seems we would expect to see a sharp increase in black-on-black homicides, as the cops were easing off policing primarily black neighborhoods. I would expect far less increases in white-on-white homicides, and white-on-black homicides. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to find any racial breakdown of the homicide perpetrators/victims. Maybe someone else will have some luck.

It's not just actions against blacks that the police are afraid of, but rather of being persecuted over actions someone can find a way to criticize. Thus there should not be a racial effect in the results we see.

That makes no sense. The Ferguson case and criticism of Ferguson cops, the DOJ report, and similar cases around the country that have ignited intense scrutiny are all about race. Thus, anything that can be called a "Ferguson effect" or is at all causally linked to recent scrutiny of cops would be heavily dependent upon race. It absolutely would show up primarily as an effect on failure to prosecute crimes by blacks or to police black neighborhoods.

Also, the idea that cops are not prosecuting gun related crimes is bullshit. Ferguson happened in 2014, and prosecution of gun offenses have risen every year since then, and were 35% higher in 2017 than in 2014.
=. This directly contradicts what is predicted by the Ferguson Effect hypothesis.

Did arrests drop from 2014 to 2016? Yes, because they have dropped every year since 2006, several years prior to any kind of real scrutiny of policing. And arrests dropped by twice as much in the 2 years prior to Ferguson than the 2 years after Ferguson which is the exact opposite result predicted by the Ferguson Effect hypothesis. And bear in mind, since the rise in firearm homicides being explained are national stats, only national stats are relevant to explaining it. Using stats for specific locations that might have seen greater recent drops in arrests is cherrypicking bullshit.

 

[untermensche]

Just admit you have nothing and are reduced to twisting things.

Pointing out that you are an anarchist who wants the government to have a monopoly on force is not twisting things. You want a small minority to have all the power, and will grant the masses the vote IF they vote the way you want.

In a functioning democracy the people have the monopoly of force.

You are the one advocating for dictatorship.

I am advocating for democracy.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Just admit you have nothing and are reduced to twisting things.

Pointing out that you are an anarchist who wants the government to have a monopoly on force is not twisting things. You want a small minority to have all the power, and will grant the masses the vote IF they vote the way you want.

In a functioning democracy the people have the monopoly of force.

So you don't want to restrict the right to own firearms, which means you just reversed yourself again.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If the Ferguson Effect is a/the primary reason for the increase in gun deaths reported by the CDC, it seems we would expect to see a sharp increase in black-on-black homicides, as the cops were easing off policing primarily black neighborhoods. I would expect far less increases in white-on-white homicides, and white-on-black homicides. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to find any racial breakdown of the homicide perpetrators/victims. Maybe someone else will have some luck.

It's not just actions against blacks that the police are afraid of, but rather of being persecuted over actions someone can find a way to criticize. Thus there should not be a racial effect in the results we see.

That makes no sense. The Ferguson case and criticism of Ferguson cops, the DOJ report, and similar cases around the country that have ignited intense scrutiny are all about race. Thus, anything that can be called a "Ferguson effect" or is at all causally linked to recent scrutiny of cops would be heavily dependent upon race. It absolutely would show up primarily as an effect on failure to prosecute crimes by blacks or to police black neighborhoods.

Also, the idea that cops are not prosecuting gun related crimes is bullshit. Ferguson happened in 2014, and prosecution of gun offenses have risen every year since then, and were 35% higher in 2017 than in 2014.
=. This directly contradicts what is predicted by the Ferguson Effect hypothesis.

Did arrests drop from 2014 to 2016? Yes, because they have dropped every year since 2006, several years prior to any kind of real scrutiny of policing. And arrests dropped by twice as much in the 2 years prior to Ferguson than the 2 years after Ferguson which is the exact opposite result predicted by the Ferguson Effect hypothesis. And bear in mind, since the rise in firearm homicides being explained are national stats, only national stats are relevant to explaining it. Using stats for specific locations that might have seen greater recent drops in arrests is cherrypicking bullshit.

You see it as being about race. The cops see it as being persecuted and dumped when someone frames their actions as bad. Thus the cops put themselves in such situations as little as they can and crime shoots up.

- - - Updated - - -

Just admit you have nothing and are reduced to twisting things.

Pointing out that you are an anarchist who wants the government to have a monopoly on force is not twisting things. You want a small minority to have all the power, and will grant the masses the vote IF they vote the way you want.

In a functioning democracy the people have the monopoly of force.

You are the one advocating for dictatorship.

I am advocating for democracy.

You are advocating for people to be allowed to vote the way you want, anything else is by definition illegitimate.

 

[untermensche]

You are advocating for people to be allowed to vote the way you want, anything else is by definition illegitimate.

Nobody except a very few slave owners ever voted to allow people to own firearms.

It has never been instituted by popular vote.

It is illegitimate.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Indeed, well armed slaves has a lot of historic precedent.

 

[untermensche]

Indeed, well armed slaves has a lot of historic precedent.

?

The small group of elitists that thought it was a good idea to enshrine the ownership of guns were slave owners. They thought women were second class.

What are you trying to say about them?

 

[laughing dog]

You see it as being about race. The cops see it as being persecuted and dumped when someone frames their actions as bad. Thus the cops put themselves in such situations as little as they can and crime shoots up.

Your argument amounts to calling the police shirkers because they cannot kill people with impunity. That is an indictment of the police as a group as unfit for duty.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Indeed, well armed slaves has a lot of historic precedent.

?

The small group of elitists that thought it was a good idea to enshrine the ownership of guns were slave owners. They thought women were second class.

What are you trying to say about them?

That you think that elitists thought arming the slaves was a good idea.

Meanwhile in the real world, the elites wanted to ensure the slaves weren't armed. And after slavery finally ended, there were laws passed to prevent the newly freed slaves from acquiring arms. That is the historic origin of the gun control laws you want. And the same reason you want them.

 

[untermensche]

Indeed, well armed slaves has a lot of historic precedent.

?

The small group of elitists that thought it was a good idea to enshrine the ownership of guns were slave owners. They thought women were second class.

What are you trying to say about them?

That you think that elitists thought arming the slaves was a good idea.

That is something pulled straight from your ass.

I said elite slave owners wanted to give themselves the right to own guns.

Slaves and women had no rights.

And today people worship the capricious decisions of these racist, misogynistic, elitist assholes.

Decisions like the right to bear arms.

Nothing natural about it.

And today the harm outweighs any imagined good.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You see it as being about race. The cops see it as being persecuted and dumped when someone frames their actions as bad. Thus the cops put themselves in such situations as little as they can and crime shoots up.

Your argument amounts to calling the police shirkers because they cannot kill people with impunity. That is an indictment of the police as a group as unfit for duty.

The problem is they are being punished for justified actions. Michael Brown was not innocent!