How are they so clueless? "The One Question I Want All Gun Nuts to Answer"

[jmg257]

http://www.forwardprogressives.com/one-question-want-gun-nuts-answer/

"But seeing that we have around 300 million already here in the United States, and gun violence tends to increase as the number of guns in the country goes up, it’s just a question I’d like these people to answer."

So, my question to gun nuts is simple, “How many guns is enough to keep us safe?”

How does ANYONE answer a question which is based on a premise that is totally false, and has been for 20+ years??


https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/nics_firearm_checks_-_month_year.pdf/view

Per the FBI background checks, the number of guns has been steadily climbing since at least 1999, while gun violence has been steadily decreasing since the 90s {I'd wager there are more like 400 million+ guns - its been "300 million" for WAY too long when there are now 20 million+ background checks per year!!}:

"Between 1993 and 2000, the gun homicide rate dropped by nearly half, from 7.0 homicides to 3.8 homicides per 100,000 people. Since then, the gun homicide rate has remained relatively flat. From 2009 to 2014, the most recent year data are available, the number of gun homicides has hovered around 11,000 and 12,000 per year"
...
"The rate of nonfatal gun victimizations declined in a similar way to the gun death rate, with a large drop in the 1990s – 63% between 1993 and 2000. The decline since then has been more uneven. In 2014, there were 174.8 nonfatal violent gun victimizations per 100,000 people ages 12 and older."
...
"while the gun suicide rate has declined overall since 1993, in recent years it has risen, from 6.3 per 100,000 people in 2010 to 6.7 in 2014."

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/10/21/gun-homicides-steady-after-decline-in-90s-suicide-rate-edges-up/

[jonno99]

1. From what I can see it's axiomatic: FEELINGS > facts

[angstlessk]

2. Here is a snapshot of gun associated shootings.

http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/

[jonno99]

3. If we REALLY care about seeing less death & injury, it seems we should be addressing the BIGGER

problems:
http://www.medicalmalpracticelawyer.center/2014/05/new-study-confirms-440000-deat.html

[angstlessk]

5. besides being a non sequitur, it's a biased source.

what? guns don't kill people, doctors who went into medicine for the paychecks kill people?

Of course a site called "medicalmalpracticelawyer" just might be prejudiced?

[jonno99]

6. Please don't "miss the forest for the trees":

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm

IOW - LOTS of folks die every day. And if you take away "gun deaths" attributed to suicide & gang violence, the US would look pretty much like the rest of the (1st) world in term of statistics (and looking much better is some cases).

[angstlessk]

10. I don't see gun deaths, just suicide, homicide and accidental deaths

Go to page 25 it begins to list cause of death for whites then scroll down to page 34 it lists blacks...

Suicide is #10 for all whites, both sexes and all age groups. (page 25) (homicide is included in 'all other deaths')

Homicide is #8 for all blacks, both sexes and all age groups. (page 34) (suicide is included in 'all other deaths')

Like I said, it does not separate out for guns, but it is quite an eye opener!

P.S. thanks for that link...here it is in case someone missed it and want to see some shocking stats!

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr65/nvsr65_02.pdf

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

16. Here's a link to the CDC's WISQARS apps

For fatal injuries: http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/dataRestriction_inj.html
For non-fatal injuries: http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/nfirates2001.html

For more detailed info.

[jmg257]

4. Unfortunately they only go back a couple years. nt

[jmg257]

7. Huh maybe they AREN'T clueless - they just change the argument!

Now its NOT the number of guns, but the percentage of "gun ownership" that's important.



UIsing a blog from 2013, BTW...

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/05/08/conservative-media-misread-data-to-declare-gun/193961

Other factors may help explain the fall of gun crime since the early 1990s including reductions in lead levels, the end of the crack epidemic, advances in medicine that allow more gunshot victims to survive their wounds, and a declining rate of gun ownership.
...
"There are all these claims that gun ownership is going through the roof. But I suspect the increase in gun sales has been limited mostly to current gun owners. The most reputable surveys show a decline over time in the share of households with guns."

SO, they admit the numbers of guns has increased dramatically, they admit the levels of gun violence has dropped.
But its a RW conspiracy because the facts don't match the (latest) meme.

[Eleanors38]

9. Mudmatters through grinding teeth has to admit the data isn't all NRAtalkingPoint!©

[Eleanors38]

8. I think controllers have given up on science and good argument. It is...

NRAtalkingPoint!©, NRAtalkingPoint!©, NRAtalkingPoint!© Over and over and over. They know how the 'tubes work, and being for the most part slacktivists, just say it over and over and over. Not hard to figure out.

[ileus]

11. technically you should only need 5 SD firearms per person.

After that you have hunting, competition, and collecting firearms.

Totals could be in the billions more if everyone were to be 2A progressives instead of 25%.

[DonP]

12. So they think our President is lying?

In an interview just last week on camera, he said that violent crime is lower than anytime in the last 40 years.

So are they saying the President is wrong and lying to America?

That's pretty harsh criticism with no back up.

[jmg257]

13. Maybe they put more stock in Hemenway then the President.

After all, he has all kinds of "studies", cooked to say just about anything (but mostly "guns are bad&quot .

[DonP]

14. If we weren't all banned ....

... somebody could post the video clip of President Obama saying "We're safer than we've ever been".

Then we can watch to see how long it takes them to ban the President from Castle Bansalot as another NRA shill?

[jmg257]

15. Better to have questions answered the way YOU want them answered.

(Or not answered at all.)

And reinforcement is best, when posting stuff that is often found out to be goofy.

Contrary messages (aka 'facts') can distract simple folks from all the progress made in promoting change & reform...and ruin a safe haven!!

[jimmy the one]

17. half wrong, half right, both of youse

jmg: Per the FBI background checks, the number of guns has been steadily climbing since at least 1999, while gun violence has been steadily decreasing since the 90s

National gunstock has been 'steadily increasing' since the early 1960's; I'd even wager since 1776 excepting wartimes perhaps.

National gunstock 1960's ~75 millions.
......" ....... mid 70's ...... 150 millions (guns & murder rate both doubled since 1960's)
.............. early 1990's .. 225 millions
............ now ~2015 ..... 300 millions

That's a 300% increase in 50 years, in national gunstock.
More importantly, author Tim Johnson isn't technically wrong, tho he's not technically right either:

What OP said: .. and gun violence tends to increase as the number of guns in the country goes up,...

............. pop... total crime... violcrime ... propcrime... murder
1960 ..179,323,175 ..1,887.2 ..160.9 .. 1,726.3 ..5.1
1962 ..185,771,000 ..2,019.8 ..162.3 ...1,857.5 ..4.6

2012..313,873,685..3,255.8..387.8...2,868.0...4.7
2014 ..318,857,056..2,971.8..375.7 ..2,596.1.. 4.5
http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

As you see above, violent crime rate circa 2015 is well over twice what it was in 1960's, and total crime rate circa 2015 is approx 50% higher than it was in the 60's, supporting Johnson's claim that gun violence TENDS to rise as gunstock goes up, as gunstock did from 75 millions to 300 millions (gun violence generally linearly related to violent crime).
But Johnson is wrong for the time period early 90's to present 2015. He is spot on for time period early 60's to early 90's, as violent crime increased 5 times to over 750.

You, jmg, are wrong when you wrote this, partially wrong, since what johnson said isn't 'totally' wrong:

How does ANYONE answer a question which is based on a premise that is totally false, and has been for 20+ years??

National gunstock increased by 200% from 1960's to early 1990's, while violent crime rate increased 400% and total crime tripled, increasing 200%, during same time period. Johnson was right.
Since early 1990's, as you noted, violent crime has indeed fallen by about 50% as well as total crime falling by about 50%, while national gunstock increased by 33%. Johnson wrong.
The greater the proportional increase in national gunstock, the greater has been the rise of violent crime & total crime rates.
With a lower proportional increase in national gunstock, a decrease in crime rates has occurred, but at a slower rate of decline, and with a concomitant decrease in gun ownership rates. (demonstrated next post)

[jmg257]

20. Nt a lot of time now, but considering the number of background checks lately

are around 23million a year vs 9 mill in 1999, I am not sure of the total increase being slower now then decades ago...I bet gunstock is way over 300 million these days.

[jimmy the one]

18. gun ownership rates fell dramatically 1992 - 2000

There are 3 reputable polls that show gun ownership RATES have fallen over the past 20 years: Gallup, Pew, & GSS (general social survey).

1) Gallup: .. even Gallup's numbers show a decline in gun ownership since the early 1990s, from 54% of households in late 1993 to 43% as of this fall. http://www.gallup.com/poll/186236/americans-desire-stricter-gun-laws-sharply.aspx

2) General Social Survey (GSS) .. data show a substantial decline in the shares of both households and individuals with guns... 1973, 49% reported having a gun or revolver in their home or garage. In 2012, 34% said they had a gun in their home or garage.
.. personal gun ownership in 1980, 29% said a gun in their home personally belonged to them. This stands at 22% in the 2012 GSS survey. http://www.people-press.org/2013/03/12/section-3-gun-ownership-trends-and-demographics/
3) ... The Pew Research Center has tracked gun ownership since 1993, and our surveys largely confirm the General Social Survey trend. In our Dec 1993 survey, 45% reported having a gun in their household; in early 1994, the GSS found 44% saying they had a gun in their home. A Jan 2013 Pew Research Center survey found 33% saying they had a gun, rifle or pistol in their home, as did 34% in the 2012 wave of {GSS}.

Now you know the rest of the story. According to all 3 polls above, personal & household gun ownership rates fell dramatically during the same 8 yr time period as when violent crime & total crime rates fell dramatically, ~1992 - 2000.
National gunstock increased during that time period as well, also to now, but is demonstrably shown that a solid portion of those guns went to existing gun owners rather than creating any increase in the rate of gun owners.
The clinton crime initiative went into effect in 1994, which also had an affect on declining violent crime rates, but wouldn't've affected 1992, 93, 94.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=178997

[jmg257]

19. Thanks jimmy - addressed this in another post about ownership rates vs gunstock#s.

I also mention the large increase in handgun permits, representing new owners (at least in states that track such things). Also mention the increase in percentage of semis ("AWs&quot and defense shotguns (which I have no specific #s on).