Some inconvienent statistics for MA rifle ban supporters:

[friendly_iconoclast]

Per the FBI's Uniform Crime Report "Crime In The United States"

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s

Murder
by State, Type of Weapon

All figures are for Massachusetts

https://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007/data/table_20.html

Rifles 1

Handguns 65

Knives or cutting instruments 31

Hands, fists, feet, etc. 14

https://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2008/data/table_20.html

Rifles 2

Handguns 59

Knives or cutting instruments 49

Hands, fists, feet, etc. 3

https://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/data/table_20.html

Rifles 2

Handgun 47

Knives or cutting instruments 40

Hands, fists, feet, etc. 7


https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10tbl20.xls

Rifles 0

Handguns 52

Knives or cutting instruments 50

Hands, fists, feet, etc. 10

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-20

Rifles 0

Handguns 52

Knives or cutting instruments 30

Hands, fists, feet, etc. 9

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2012/crime-in-the-u.s.-2012/tables/20tabledatadecpdf

Rifles 0

Handguns 32

Knives or cutting instruments 33

Hands, fists, feet, etc. 6

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/tables/table-20/table_20_murder_by_state_types_of_weapons_2013.xls

Rifles 2

Handguns 35

Knives or cutting instruments 41

Hands, fists, feet, etc. 7

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2014/crime-in-the-u.s.-2014/tables/table-20

Rifles 0

Handguns 33

Knives or cutting instruments 34

Hands, fists, feet, etc. 3

[Duckhunter935]

1. That is very interesting

I am sure you will get lot's of quality responses from the ones supporting her po's.

[Lurks Often]

2. Stop using facts on them, that's mean and unfair!

[Ford_Prefect]

3. This of necessity does not take into account the very likely increase in future long gun deaths due

to the increased availability of them resulting from increased sales EVERY TIME a new mass murder is reported, and reported and reported and...

We have not as yet hit critical mass for long gun distribution to the degree that hand guns have, but it is coming at an alarming rate. The concept of market saturation does not appear to apply to weapons sales regardless of caliber, rate of fire, barrel length, portability, concealment factor, or prominence in films and TV programs or the News.

Of course the measure of collateral damage has not yet been applied, in law or in sales.

A sidelight of this is that one day we may need to begin mining operations in landfills to recover enough brass, copper and lead to continue the staggering rate of ammunition sales required when every American household has, and uses their constitutionally required firearms on a regular and frequent basis.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

4. Some questions and data:

"...does not take into account the very likely increase in future long gun deaths due to the increased availability..." When will that kick in? There are about as many rifles as there are handguns. Long guns (rifles and shotguns) account for almost twice the number of handguns.

"We have not as yet hit critical mass for long gun distribution to the degree that hand guns have..." Please explain your metaphor and add a dash of quantitative to that stew.

"Of course the measure of collateral damage has not yet been applied, in law or in sales." How is a "measure of collateral damage" which hasn't occurred applied? Is this just a statement meaning that the future hasn't yet become the past?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/united-states
Number of Privately Owned Firearms
The estimated total number of guns (both licit and illicit) held by civilians in the United States is 270,000,000 to 310,000,000

Rate of Civilian Firearm Possession per 100 Population
The estimated rate of private gun ownership (both licit and illicit) in the United States is 101.05 firearms per 100 people

Number of Privately Owned Rifles
In the United States, the number of rifles in civilian possession is reported to be 110,000,000

Number of Privately Owned Shotguns
In the United States, the number of shotguns in civilian possession is reported to be 86,000,000

Number of Privately Owned Handguns
In the United States, the number of handguns in civilian possession is reported to be 114,000,000

[Duckhunter935]

5. Damn, those pesky facts again

[friendly_iconoclast]

8. Excellent reply, but I rather doubt your trenchant observations and questions will get a response

But thanks anyway!

[ileus]

7. Landfills are going to be gold mines in the future.

Not because of their content of lead, brass, or copper (those are recycled probably in the 90% range these days) but for all the crap Americans throw away in their "regular" trash.

[benEzra]

9. Of course market saturation applies.

"The concept of market saturation does not appear to apply to weapons sales regardless of caliber, rate of fire, barrel length, portability, concealment factor, or prominence"

Of course market saturation applies. But you are looking at the wrong criteria. And long guns already have greater market saturation than handguns; the difference in misuse boils down to the fact that you can't stick a 26"+ rifle in your waistband under a T-shirt. Long-gun misuse has actually declined considerably today compared to the 1970s.

It's not mass murders that drive rifle sales, though. It's the fact that every time there is a mass murder, journalists and prohibitionists demand that future rifle sales to the lawful and nonviolent be constrained. So if you have just come of age to own guns or have just never gotten around to buying that rifle you wanted, the politicians/media push people to hedge against the possibility of bans. Josh Sugarmann and Michael Bloomberg have together sold more rifles than any other two people in U.S. history, IMO.

As to the criteria you list, caliber is already constrained by law and practicality; anything .51 caliber or higher is banned unless exempted for "sporting purposes" (that's how .729-caliber 12-gauge shotguns are legal), and anything less than about .20 caliber is small to be practical under Federal rifling rules, so civilian caliber has been stuck between .22 and .50 for a century and will probably stay there.

Civilian rate of fire has been limited to one shot per trigger pull for nearly a century and will likely stay there.

Civilian barrel length for rifles is 16"-24", constrained on the low end by Federal law and on the high end by practicality.

Portability/concealment are inherent to the type of weapon, not to technology. Most handguns are concealable; rifles are not. Rifles and shotguns are still required to be at least 26" long with 16" barrels minimum; you might be able to make a rifle lighter with future materials, but you can't make a rifle disappear into a waistband or pocket.

I'm not sure what you mean by "prominence". The AR platform is the most common civilian rifle in U.S. homes, but does that make it "prominent"? If so, does that mean it should be banned, or that it should become the national standard? Not following you here.

[friendly_iconoclast]

14. Would you like to know how I know those 'concerns' are bullshit? Behold:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172181197

http://wwlp.com/2015/11/10/i-team-guns-licenses-jump-by-66-in-massachusetts/

Gun Ownership in MA Increases 66% since 2010

CHARLEMONT, Mass. (WWLP) – As the debate over gun laws continues, more and more people in Massachusetts are getting their gun license. The 22News I-Team discovered the amount of licenses in the state has grown by more than 65 percent since 2010.

The number of legal gun owners in Massachusetts is growing. The 22News I-Team obtained and analyzed state data showing how many people have a license to carry from 2009 to September 2015. .

378,642 people or one in every 14 adults has a gun license in Massachusetts. Up from 227,612 in 2010. A 66% increase.

Gee, I wonder what happened to murder and aggravated assault rates in Massachusetts
while the number of firearm owners increased by two-thirds...


https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10tbl05.xls

Massachusetts

Murder 3.2/ per 100,000 inhabitants

Aggravated Assault 331.8/100,000


https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2014/crime-in-the-u.s.-2014/tables/table-5

Massachusetts

Murder 2.0/100,000

Aggravated Assault 267.6/100,000

[friendly_iconoclast]

16. Overall violent crime rate also went down, from 466.6/100K to 391.4

[ileus]

6. Facts don't matter....they feel good. That's the desired result.

[DonP]

10. In a month or two the "Grabnutz" will tell us how effective it is

Close to no rifle crimes before and none after, so obviously it must be the new gun control laws, right?

[Eleanors38]

11. "Grabnutz" ^^^

[Eleanors38]

12. Mass. murder-by-rifle rate over 8 years: 1.14 per year. Huge number( ).

[friendly_iconoclast]

13. That's not the rate, that's the actual number of murders-by-rifle per year (on average)

And as you can see from the OP, some years had no murders-via-rifle at all

[virginia mountainman]

15. Now now..

You know that facts, are NRA talking points® ...

[Nuclear Unicorn]

17. "You know that facts, are NRA talking points"

The line of argument you're (rightfully) mocking always struck me as more of a concession than a rebuttal.

If another party is considered the nemesis and one's interlocutor has no rebuttal except to note that a certain line of argumentation comes from the nemesis then the interlocutor is stating the nemesis is in possession of facts that cannot be refuted.

That seems to bolster the position of the nemesis while undermining the interlocutor.

And yet, they seem so proud of such things. It's really inexplicable.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

18. But when it becomes acceptable to simply impugn the source...

...facts don't matter. Such reasoning (or lack thereof) have Godwinism for ideological parents.
Often the result of these interactions is the sad conclusion that for some a viewpoint of an opposing political entity or individual that isn't shared by a political ally is unprovable to them.

Not surprising, just prejudice. Prejudice is one of the reasons Dorthy Fontana is better known as D.C. Fontana.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

20. It's a one-sided affair.

They have no qualms throwing around, "30,000! 30,000! 30,000!" as an appeal to facts but as soon as any other facts enter the picture the deadline for submitting facts is found to be suddenly closed.

There are 2 sorts of individuals I've grown particularly skeptical of: Those who demand I not even look at a thing lest it corrupt me and those who insist the rules only work in their favor.

Gun control extremists have pegged my Skeptometer on both counts.

[beergood]

22. "Those who demand I not even look at a thing lest it corrupt me"

this is why gun controllers remined me of those religious nuts that demand their followers never question them or their god.

no offense to anyone of any faith, i had the unfortunate of attending churches that preached the benefits of being close minded.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

23. Due to certain double standards...

...I'm taking to ignoring certain proven cases who've caught the control religion.
When you have both time and inspiration, I look forward to some insightful, informative and humorous tidbits from your end of the table.

[EX500rider]

19. The line of argument that always strikes me as stupid..

....is when someone bring up the facts that cars or alcohol kill more people, they come back with "But guns are designed to kill people!" as if pointing out that something not "designed" to kill people still actually kills MORE people is a good thing..

[beevul]

21. "Designed".

They seem to like the "designed" talking point, and repeat it as if it has some relevance.

It doesn't.


Not to mention, that civilian legal non-automatic rifles and handguns, are generally designed specifically to pass stringent standards of non-convertability to automatic fire, and for lawful sale and use in the civilian market in the US.

They argue that cars are "designed" to transport people and goods to and fro, and in doing so, they operate on the pretense that this or its many equivalents, do not exist:



They have to, because otherwise someone might point out that we don't regulate that car any farther than we regulate this car, which is quite obviously not designed for the same purpose:




The anti-gun market of ideas is simply layers of murk on top of layers of murk mixed with lots of muddy water, intended to mislead those who aren't knowledgeable on the topic and are therefore easily swayed.