HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control & RKBA (Group) » Congressional report on g...

Mon Jun 30, 2014, 06:29 AM

 

Congressional report on gun violence in U.S.

More Americans have been killed by guns in the past 50 years than in all of the wars the country has ever fought -- including the Continental Army's victory over the British in 1781.

Black men aged 15-24 are 16 times more likely to die of gunshot wounds than non-Hispanic whites. While only 20 percent of gunshot victims are women, the vast majority of them are killed by current or former romantic partners.

Those sobering statistics are in a comprehensive report on gun violence compiled by U.S. Rep. Robin Kelly, D-IL, released Wednesday. The report that Kelly called the first Congressional analysis of gun violence, makes several recommendations, including treating gun violence as a mental health issue.

Po Murray, vice chairman of the Newtown Action Alliance, said in the report there have been 57 school shootings since Adam Lanza blasted his way into Sandy Hook Elementary on Dec. 14, 2012, killing 20 first-graders and six educators.

http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/local/article/Congressional-report-on-gun-violence-in-U-S-5583036.php

38 replies, 3205 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 38 replies Author Time Post
Reply Congressional report on gun violence in U.S. (Original post)
SecularMotion Jun 2014 OP
Duckhunter935 Jun 2014 #1
DonP Jun 2014 #2
flamin lib Jul 2014 #5
blueridge3210 Jul 2014 #7
flamin lib Jul 2014 #11
blueridge3210 Jul 2014 #13
flamin lib Jul 2014 #14
blueridge3210 Jul 2014 #15
flamin lib Jul 2014 #16
blueridge3210 Jul 2014 #18
flamin lib Jul 2014 #20
blueridge3210 Jul 2014 #24
flamin lib Jul 2014 #28
blueridge3210 Jul 2014 #30
flamin lib Jul 2014 #31
Straw Man Jul 2014 #35
Jenoch Jul 2014 #32
flamin lib Jul 2014 #33
Jenoch Jul 2014 #34
flamin lib Jul 2014 #36
Jenoch Jul 2014 #37
DonP Jul 2014 #8
flamin lib Jul 2014 #9
ManiacJoe Jun 2014 #3
russ1943 Jun 2014 #4
hack89 Jul 2014 #6
flamin lib Jul 2014 #10
hack89 Jul 2014 #12
flamin lib Jul 2014 #17
hack89 Jul 2014 #19
flamin lib Jul 2014 #21
hack89 Jul 2014 #23
flamin lib Jul 2014 #25
hack89 Jul 2014 #26
flamin lib Jul 2014 #27
gejohnston Jul 2014 #22
discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2014 #29
krispos42 Jul 2014 #38

Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Mon Jun 30, 2014, 06:48 AM

1. care to comment as per the SOP

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Mon Jun 30, 2014, 09:58 AM

2. Robyn Kelly? You mean the bought and paid for by Bloomberg Robyn Kelly?

 

Yeah, she's got great credibility ... after selling out to Bloomberg in the Illinois primary.

Most people involved in Chicago area politics realize she is just a temporary place holder for Jesse Jr. after he serves his time.

But I'm sure you know much more about Illinois politics than those of us that have worked in it for 4 decades.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonP (Reply #2)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 11:21 AM

5. Have you read the report?

Its long and attention spans here are short unless the article is about AR15 accessories, but it is well researched and heavily footnoted for sources.

So instead of offering an opinion on the author how about reading the report and disagreeing with the footnoted sources?

Too much trouble? Yeah, I thought so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #5)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 11:55 AM

7. Read the report.

 

Nothing new here. To quote a meme that's all the rage in the pro-control camp: "Guns aren't cars". Trying to compare the two regarding cause of death is inane. Cars are not, generally, used to commit homicide or suicide or to commit forcible felonies. Most auto related deaths are the result of accidents; safety improvements have reduced fatalities and injuries. Most gun deaths are suicides; safety features and "safe storage" requirements mean nothing to someone who intends to take his/her own life.

Strange they mention the incidence of violence involving black males but omit that the biggest threat to the life or health of a black male is another black male. The vast majority of homicide, with or without a firearm, is intra-racial.

Regarding domestic violence: most women do not involve themselves in the types of crimes where death or serious bodily harm is a likely outcome; therefore if they are the victim of violence it would be most likely to occur in a domestic setting.

It is already illegal to go to another state to purchase a handgun unless the weapon is shipped back to a FFL in the purchaser's state who will conduct the background check before completing the transaction. This point is ignored by the author of the article in order to present a strawman argument.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blueridge3210 (Reply #7)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 01:20 PM

11. You're right. Nothing new, all well established data that points to some serious issues

With the availability of guns in the US.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #11)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 01:32 PM

13. No, it points to some serious issues regarding violence in the US.

 

Regardless of access to firearms

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blueridge3210 (Reply #13)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 01:36 PM

14. You have a very unique way of analyzing data. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #14)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 01:43 PM

15. I read the report. (nt)

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blueridge3210 (Reply #15)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 01:58 PM

16. And found no connection between guns and gun violence. Like I said, unique. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #16)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 02:10 PM

18. I didn't say no connection.

 

I said the report incorrectly compared death by automobiles, which are largely the results of accidents, and deaths by firearms, which are largely intentional acts. I also pointed out that the report cited the disparity in homicides among black males without going to the source of the action which is other black males; regardless of weapon. The report then attempted to introduce a non-sequitur regarding female deaths (largely the result of domestic violence) which cannot be directly linked to the availability, or lack thereof, of firearms as a number of homicides are the result of fists/knifes/bludgeoning objects. Finally the report attempted to falsely imply that is was legal to go to another state to purchase a handgun if the purchaser could not legally purchase one in their own state due to a domestic violence history.

All in all, the report makes errors regarding false equivalence, non-sequitur arguments, misleading statements and ignores the bad actors regarding violent behavior. As I first said, nothing new. Business as usual for the pro-control crowd who cannot engage in an honest discussion of the issue. The report is also glaringly light on proposals to address any of the issues.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blueridge3210 (Reply #18)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 02:17 PM

20. No, the auto comparison is correct in that

because of federal legislation for safety devices in cars the death rate in autos is falling and continuingmto fall in spire of more cars on the road and no marked decline in accidents. Perhaps a similar increase in gun legislation could have a similar effect.

The reference to black on black violence is purely a red herring: don't look at guns, look over there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #20)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 02:45 PM

24. Which legislation?

 

As noted earlier auto deaths are largely the result of unintentional acts, safety features can address this. If I attempt to kill myself by parking in front of a moving freight train all the safety features will do little to assist me. Likewise, if I attempt to use a vehicle to run assault someone seatbelts and ABS systems are of little effect. What legislation would you propose that would EFFECTIVELY address the use of firearms to commit suicide or forcible felonies?

The reference to black on black violence was no red herring; the report cited a greater incidence of homicide among black males without attempting to look at the root cause, the bad actors.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blueridge3210 (Reply #24)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 04:01 PM

28. Right now we are still operating with 19th century technology. If the auto industry had its

way cars would still have wood frames. Lee Iococca opposed even seat belts.

Maybe if guns were mandated to be safer before sale? As for how I'm not an engineer but Armatech has a functioning "smart gun".

How about mandating safe storage? Prove you have gun safe before you get a gun to put in it. UCB goes without saying.

A universal registration so if someone is dangerous to themselves or others guns could be removed from the premises.

Mandating that states must fully report to the NICS or lose all federal funds.

There is a lot of things that would make a difference.

Then, of course, we could simply ban the sale, import or manufacture of handguns. It would take 50 years to take effect.

Or we could simply copy Australia.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #28)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 04:32 PM

30. I'm opposed to mandatory registration.

 

The government has a track record of registering firearms, then declaring some "illegal" and using registration lists to confiscate what was previously legal to own. Criminals cannot be required to register firearms and this will not prevent suicides.

Safe storage? I have to buy a $2000 safe to store my $300 handgun? No thanks. As noted earlier this will do little to nothing to address suicide or criminal misuse of firearms.

Armatech's "smart gun" is currently untested in the field. It is also only available in .22; not suitable for self defense and is incredibly expensive. You ever have a situation where your "smart" phone locks up and won't respond? I cannot trust my life to such a situation.

Given the recent Supreme Court rulings, banning ownership of firearms will not survive a court challenge.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blueridge3210 (Reply #30)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 05:10 PM

31. Haven't shopped for gun safes have you.

You can buy a pistol safe that bolts to a stud in the wall and is damn near indestructible for under $100. A safe like this would prevent the theft of hundreds of thousands of guns a year (gejohnson's numbers) and prevent hundreds of child gun deaths a year. Can't afford a gun safe? Can't afford a gun. Simple as that.

Again, if Lee Iacocca had his way cars wouldn't have safety class or tempered glass much less airbags. Don't let the manufacturer dictate the standards. Just like CAFE standards mandate that by (date) new manufacture and imports will have (this ) safety feature. Hide and watch the gun industry jump thru their ass and make it happen. The Armatech is only expensive because of volume and caliber will follow price once the technology takes hold.

Even Scalia has said that there is no proscription on regulating guns and ya know what? The old bastard won't live forever. States can do number of things easily and the Fed could as well with the will of the people behind it.

And I don't really care about your paranoia over registration. That is the only way to secure the guns owned by people who join the restricted category AFTER buying a gun or to locate guns in the hands of those who become a danger to themselves not others. I find it ironic that the NRA wants to invade the privacy of people in the care of health professionals but not somebody who has taken up the sale of meth after buying a legal firearm.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #31)

Wed Jul 2, 2014, 02:44 AM

35. Gun safes?

Haven't shopped for gun safes have you.

You can buy a pistol safe that bolts to a stud in the wall and is damn near indestructible for under $100.

Yes, I have. No, you can't. Anything in that price range can be broken open with one swing of a sledgehammer. Wall studs are made of wood. Nothing you have mentioned would be more than a momentary inconvenience to a determined thief.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #28)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 06:06 PM

32. "Wooden car frames?" Hyperbole is all you got?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jenoch (Reply #32)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 11:55 PM

33. Not in the least. The auto industry has fought every innovation

the government has mandated. Seat belts? No, too expensive. Air bags? No can't sell cars that cost $200 more. Crumple zones? 10 mph bumpers? Reinforced side rails?
Have to raise fuel efficiency? Oh hell no! Can't possibly get to 18 mpg fleet! Can't be done! Shit, the 1998 Ford T- bird came in $50 over budget and they fired the design team!

So yeah, if automakers could still use 2x4 frame rails they sure as hell would. For shit's sake the 1965 Ford Galaxie (ads read 'quiet as a mouse') had 4, count em 4, 3/8 inch bolts holding the body to the frame! You could hit a curb hard enough to sever the passenger compartment from the frame.

If it were mandated that (this safety feature) must be in place by (this date) Ruger et al would jump through their ass to sell guns. As it is there is no federal oversight into the safety of guns. They're not even required to have a mechanical safety mechanism for Christ's sake. Cars, drugs, ladders, barbie dolls can be recalled by government but not guns. Only the mfg can recall guns. And Remington shows how well that works.

No, not hyperbole. Hard ass truth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #33)

Wed Jul 2, 2014, 12:03 AM

34. There are countries that did not have

 

those government imposed regulations. Name one that built cars with wooden frames. Hell, that wasn't even done a hundred years ago. Again, hyperbole does not help your argument.

(East Germany did make 2-stroke cars with bodies made of cardboard.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jenoch (Reply #34)

Wed Jul 2, 2014, 09:29 AM

36. pure obstinance doesn't help much either. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #36)

Wed Jul 2, 2014, 10:39 AM

37. What obstinence?

 

My only point is your use of hyperbole about wood framed cars, which were never built.

The technology for smart guns is not here yet. When it becomes viable, and is used by law enforcement agencies on a wide scale, then it will be viable.

I believe the safe, secure storage of firearms is a much more achievable goal than changing the technology of the guns themselves. There are more than 300 million guns in circulation, new gun technology is not going to change that.

My state has a safe storage law. Firearms owners who have minor children living in their home have to either disable the firearms, use a cable lock or trigger lock, or a safe. Ammunition must be store separately.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #5)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 12:50 PM

8. Yup, read it yesterday

 

"Well Researched"? Bloomberg supplied research has all the credibility of NRA supplied research.

Let us know when you find NRA data equally compelling.

In the meantime ... better work harder on getting gun control through that "Right Wing" Senate, that blocked the last round of gun control attempts.

You have over $50 million from Bloomie to work with and still can't get jack or shit done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonP (Reply #8)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 01:17 PM

9. Which particular source of information in the study do

You find discreditable?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Mon Jun 30, 2014, 04:59 PM

3. Not real useful without a link to the report.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 11:41 AM

6. Tobacco killed that many people in five years

it kills 480,000 a year. I know what threat I would focus on if saving lives was the top priority.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #6)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 01:18 PM

10. Can't walk and chew gum, huh?

Why not do both? Like jacking up the taxes on guns and ammo like on tobacco? Why not put graphic warnings on all guns and ammo? Why not run ads demonizing guns and gun owners? Oh, right, Blomberg is starting to do that and you really support that don't ya?.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #10)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 01:22 PM

12. Just putting things in perspective

going purely on the number of deaths per year, there are many bigger problems to solve first.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #12)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 02:02 PM

17. Then I suppose you support the same methods applied to tobacco?

Very high taxes? Aggressive ad campaigns?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #17)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 02:12 PM

19. You would have to have several separate campaigns

A suicide prevention one first since the majority of gun deaths are suicides. A safe storage campaign would be next. Gun safety classes in schools would be an excellent idea (Eddie the Eagle is a great program.) I guess a "don't murder people" campaign could be tried but I doubt many will pay attention.

The present 11% tax on guns and ammo is adequate to fund such campaigns.

Of course - the smarter thing to do is devote more resource to anti-smoking campaigns. It will save many more lives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #19)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 02:20 PM

21. And you are doing what to forward these worthy

campaigns? Made any phone calls? Sent any emails? Donated to any organizations proposing thaes worthwhile issues?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #21)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 02:31 PM

23. I donate a lot a time and money to mental health organizations

they are the proper organizers for an anti-suicide campaign. Unfortunately there are no anti-gun organizations with the membership, gravitas and political clout to get things done so sending them money is just pissing it away - besides with Bloomberg's new "grassroots" organization, I doubt they need my financial help.

The majority of gun deaths are due to mental health issues - and with a family history of mental health issues, that is what I choose to focus on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #23)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 03:34 PM

25. Good. I applaud that. Just don't say "I support UCB." If you have done nothing

Active to back up the statement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #25)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 03:39 PM

26. Don't take this the wrong way

but go take your sanctimonious moralizing and shove it where the sun don't shine. There is nothing special about you or your views. Despite what you might think, you are not the moral standard by which others are judge. So just fuck off. Ok?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #26)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 03:45 PM

27. Right back at cha. I'm rubber, you're glue . . . bye.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #19)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 02:25 PM

22. I would add an extra percent

before I would take away from P-R funds, but then that's the treehugger in me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Tue Jul 1, 2014, 04:09 PM

29. Can't be right

"...57 school shootings since...Sandy Hook..."

I heard 74.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Wed Jul 2, 2014, 07:45 PM

38. Don't a lot of wartime deaths occur from gunfire?

How does that figure in the report?

And why are people continually surprised that, if you stretch the time frame enough, one cause can be focused on?

I mean, shit, more people have died from car accidents than in "all the wars combined"... medical malpractice, tobacco, trans-fats, pneunomia, etc.

Hell, since non-gun murders run about half of gun murders, how far back do you have to go to get the same equivalency?

Oh, and wasn't is 74 school shooting a few weeks ago???

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread