HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Facts: since the Assault ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 07:47 PM

Facts: since the Assault Weapon Ban expiredů





http://granholmtwr.tumblr.com/post/40266952709/a-group-of-8th-graders-rally-to-end-gun-violence

24 replies, 1949 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 24 replies Author Time Post
Reply Facts: since the Assault Weapon Ban expiredů (Original post)
kpete Jan 2013 OP
PoliticAverse Jan 2013 #1
slackmaster Jan 2013 #3
HereSince1628 Jan 2013 #9
slackmaster Jan 2013 #23
HereSince1628 Jan 2013 #24
Zoeisright Jan 2013 #8
slackmaster Jan 2013 #2
MichiganVote Jan 2013 #5
slackmaster Jan 2013 #7
baldguy Jan 2013 #11
BainsBane Jan 2013 #15
slackmaster Jan 2013 #17
randome Jan 2013 #18
BainsBane Jan 2013 #19
slackmaster Jan 2013 #20
BainsBane Jan 2013 #21
slackmaster Jan 2013 #22
justanidea Jan 2013 #4
slackmaster Jan 2013 #6
PoliticAverse Jan 2013 #10
hack89 Jan 2013 #12
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #13
EarthWindFire Jan 2013 #14
LineLineNew Reply .
Motown_Johnny Jan 2013 #16

Response to kpete (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 07:52 PM

1. Why is the number after the ban expired more than twice what it was before the ban ? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PoliticAverse (Reply #1)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 07:54 PM

3. The sample size is so small, the difference may not be statistically significant

 

The vast majority of homicides are one-off tragedies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #3)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 07:59 PM

9. The sensitivity of arithmetic mean to outlier leverage when event n is small and variance is BIG

The Aurora shooting and the Newtown shooting had much larger numbers of victims

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HereSince1628 (Reply #9)

Fri Jan 18, 2013, 04:33 PM

23. The big dishonesty of this discussion to me is that only shootings are included in the numbers

 

Events in which FAR more people were murdered en masse, such as the Oklahoma City bombing and the attacks of 9/11/2001 are excluded. And the 1993 World Trade Center bombing that most people have forgotten about - Six people were killed in that.

Some will say that it's not fair to include those because they were "terrorist attacks." But were Aurora and Sandy Hook not also terrorist attacks? How about the Sikh Temple massacre in Wisconsin? It would be hard to make a case against that being properly called an act of terrorism. In 2003 George Russell Weller slaughtered 10 people and injured 63 in Santa Monica, California; that was mainly an act of negligence rather than terrorism (he pleaded guilty to a felony charge,) but he used a car instead of a firearm so that doesn't count either.

People can split hairs and argue over definitions, but the only conclusion I can see here is that the figures presented in the OP are plain old propaganda, and not very sophisticated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #23)

Fri Jan 18, 2013, 06:30 PM

24. it also leaves out airplane bombings, and use of vehicles as means to multiple homicides

I don't see dishonesty, but rather narrowing of the problem.

The soft spot to get something done requires using the dismay the public has for school and shopping center-killings, so the outcome is going to turn around that emotional issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PoliticAverse (Reply #1)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 07:57 PM

8. Because Fux Noise started in 1996.

Whipping up hatred, paranoia, and gun nut fantasies is their specialty.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 07:52 PM

2. Facts can be found to tell whatever story you want to tell

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #2)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 07:55 PM

5. And the link is?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MichiganVote (Reply #5)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 07:57 PM

7. I doubt that there is one

 

Homicide rates have more to do with socioeconomic conditions, demographics (i.e. the number of males age 18-24), and patterns of events such as the availability of one street drug or another.

People buying guns is basically a reflection of disposable income, and whatever other forces drive the market.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MichiganVote (Reply #5)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 08:29 PM

11. No link....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #2)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 09:37 PM

15. Only your facts bear no relation to the point

Unless your goal is to argue for a handgun ban.

I hear the sale of artificial Christmas trees have gone up since 2000 too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #15)

Fri Jan 18, 2013, 11:08 AM

17. My point is that neither the implementation nor the sunset of the "AW" ban had any obvious effect...

 

...on the homicide rate. Nor has the recent increase in people buying firearms.

I hear the sale of artificial Christmas trees have gone up since 2000 too.

Yes, that is another good example of a trend that doesn't have any clear connection to the homicide rate.

The OP is a cherry-picked factoid about a type of event that has always been rare compared to the overall homicide rate. It does not establish a causal connection between the numbers presented and the implementation or sunset of the AWB.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #17)

Fri Jan 18, 2013, 11:23 AM

18. It was pointed out in another thread that banning 'high firepower' weaponry would be better than AWB

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #17)

Fri Jan 18, 2013, 02:02 PM

19. Wrong

You cited murder rates overall. We all know most murders are committed with handguns. The OP is talking about incidents of mass murder, which is what the AW ban seeks to reduce. Your stats are tangential. If he was arguing than banning AW was the most effective measure to reduce the murder rate, you would have a point, but he did not.

Moreover, the proposed AW ban will not be the same as the expired law. It will be more comprehensive and the measure to reduce magazines over 10 round s especially important. Yes, it will infringe upon the rights on the next mass murder who will have to stop to reload in between his 6 year old victims. That may disturb you, but very very few Americans share such concerns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #19)

Fri Jan 18, 2013, 02:04 PM

20. The OP says nothing about what types of weapons were used in the mass murders.

 

The OP is talking about incidents of mass murder, which is what the AW ban seeks to reduce.

The AW ban from 1994 - 2004 had no effect on mass murders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #20)

Fri Jan 18, 2013, 02:15 PM

21. His chart suggests otherwise

Inductive reasoning: fewer mass murders, dates of AW ban: fewer AW weapons.

I have no reason to believe his numbers are less reliable than the NRA talking points you espouse.

I have a blessed but rare vacation day today. I'm not going to spend it arguing with gunners. Enjoy your afternoon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #21)

Fri Jan 18, 2013, 02:26 PM

22. Only to a person who is ignorant about what the AWB did and did not do

 

Lacking any formal training in statistics and data analysis helps too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 07:54 PM

4. Those facts may be true, but I doubt they had anything to do with the ban

 

From '94-04, you could still buy assault weapons and high capacity magazines, provided they were made before the ban went into effect. There were millions of exempted pre-94 guns and magazines in existence. Gun stores everywhere had them on the shelves during the entire time the ban was active.

Therefore I doubt the expiration of the ban (that wasn't really a ban) is the reason for the increase.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to justanidea (Reply #4)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 07:55 PM

6. I think it can be argued that the ban increased interest in the "forbidden" items

 

Perhaps even increasing the number of them in the long run.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #6)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 08:16 PM

10. Some people also argue that certain drugs being illegal increases the demand for them.

An example of the unanticipated consequences of purposive social action

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unintended_consequences


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 08:31 PM

12. Military style semi-automatic rifles were legal during the AWB

so I don't see the connection.

Also, the weapon of choice for mass shootings is a handgun. Remember Va Tech?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 08:40 PM

13. The 1994 AWB didn't ban any guns.

It only required some cosmetic alterations on some guns. Rates of fire, calibers, size of existing magazines, etc. were not changed. The gun manufacturers made the cosmetic alterations and continued to sell the same guns. In some cases they had to change the name of the gun. For example, the TEC-9 had the barrel shroud removed and was renamed the AB-10 (AB=After Ban).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 09:05 PM

14. Fact

 

13 assault weapons were used in mass shooting during the ban... Only 8 assault weapons have been used in mass shootings since the ban expired. In the last 20 years assault weapons were used in 25 mass shootings half of which happened during the AWB. Handguns were used in 46 mass shootings. Go figure...right

http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EarthWindFire (Reply #14)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 09:50 PM

16. .

EDIT

I rushed my response and got the dates terribly wrong, so here is my correction.

If you click on the "weapons catagories" tab on that link and look at the right hand column you will find .....

There were 11 mass shootings in the 12 years listed prior to the ban using 14 assault weapons.


There were 7 mass shootings using an assault weapon while the assault weapons ban was in place (9/13/1994 - 9/13/2004) 10 years.

13 assault weapons were used in those 7 shootings.



There have been 7 instances of shootings using 8 assault weapons in the 8.25 years since the ban has expired.



So before the ban 11 in 12 years or just less than one a year on average.

During the ban 7 in 10 years or .7 per year on average.

After the ban 7 in 8.25 years or again a little less than one a year on average.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread