Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
24 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Facts: since the Assault Weapon Ban expired… (Original Post) kpete Jan 2013 OP
Why is the number after the ban expired more than twice what it was before the ban ? n/t PoliticAverse Jan 2013 #1
The sample size is so small, the difference may not be statistically significant slackmaster Jan 2013 #3
The sensitivity of arithmetic mean to outlier leverage when event n is small and variance is BIG HereSince1628 Jan 2013 #9
The big dishonesty of this discussion to me is that only shootings are included in the numbers slackmaster Jan 2013 #23
it also leaves out airplane bombings, and use of vehicles as means to multiple homicides HereSince1628 Jan 2013 #24
Because Fux Noise started in 1996. Zoeisright Jan 2013 #8
Facts can be found to tell whatever story you want to tell slackmaster Jan 2013 #2
And the link is? MichiganVote Jan 2013 #5
I doubt that there is one slackmaster Jan 2013 #7
No link.... baldguy Jan 2013 #11
Only your facts bear no relation to the point BainsBane Jan 2013 #15
My point is that neither the implementation nor the sunset of the "AW" ban had any obvious effect... slackmaster Jan 2013 #17
It was pointed out in another thread that banning 'high firepower' weaponry would be better than AWB randome Jan 2013 #18
Wrong BainsBane Jan 2013 #19
The OP says nothing about what types of weapons were used in the mass murders. slackmaster Jan 2013 #20
His chart suggests otherwise BainsBane Jan 2013 #21
Only to a person who is ignorant about what the AWB did and did not do slackmaster Jan 2013 #22
Those facts may be true, but I doubt they had anything to do with the ban justanidea Jan 2013 #4
I think it can be argued that the ban increased interest in the "forbidden" items slackmaster Jan 2013 #6
Some people also argue that certain drugs being illegal increases the demand for them. PoliticAverse Jan 2013 #10
Military style semi-automatic rifles were legal during the AWB hack89 Jan 2013 #12
The 1994 AWB didn't ban any guns. GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #13
Fact EarthWindFire Jan 2013 #14
. Motown_Johnny Jan 2013 #16
 

slackmaster

(60,567 posts)
3. The sample size is so small, the difference may not be statistically significant
Thu Jan 17, 2013, 08:54 PM
Jan 2013

The vast majority of homicides are one-off tragedies.

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
9. The sensitivity of arithmetic mean to outlier leverage when event n is small and variance is BIG
Thu Jan 17, 2013, 08:59 PM
Jan 2013

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

 

slackmaster

(60,567 posts)
23. The big dishonesty of this discussion to me is that only shootings are included in the numbers
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 05:33 PM
Jan 2013

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.

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
24. it also leaves out airplane bombings, and use of vehicles as means to multiple homicides
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 07:30 PM
Jan 2013

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.

Zoeisright

(8,339 posts)
8. Because Fux Noise started in 1996.
Thu Jan 17, 2013, 08:57 PM
Jan 2013

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

 

slackmaster

(60,567 posts)
7. I doubt that there is one
Thu Jan 17, 2013, 08:57 PM
Jan 2013

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.

BainsBane

(53,032 posts)
15. Only your facts bear no relation to the point
Thu Jan 17, 2013, 10:37 PM
Jan 2013

Unless your goal is to argue for a handgun ban.

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

 

slackmaster

(60,567 posts)
17. My point is that neither the implementation nor the sunset of the "AW" ban had any obvious effect...
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 12:08 PM
Jan 2013

...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.

 

randome

(34,845 posts)
18. It was pointed out in another thread that banning 'high firepower' weaponry would be better than AWB
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 12:23 PM
Jan 2013

BainsBane

(53,032 posts)
19. Wrong
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 03:02 PM
Jan 2013

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.

 

slackmaster

(60,567 posts)
20. The OP says nothing about what types of weapons were used in the mass murders.
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 03:04 PM
Jan 2013
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.

BainsBane

(53,032 posts)
21. His chart suggests otherwise
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 03:15 PM
Jan 2013

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.

 

slackmaster

(60,567 posts)
22. Only to a person who is ignorant about what the AWB did and did not do
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 03:26 PM
Jan 2013

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

 

justanidea

(291 posts)
4. Those facts may be true, but I doubt they had anything to do with the ban
Thu Jan 17, 2013, 08:54 PM
Jan 2013

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.

 

slackmaster

(60,567 posts)
6. I think it can be argued that the ban increased interest in the "forbidden" items
Thu Jan 17, 2013, 08:55 PM
Jan 2013

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

PoliticAverse

(26,366 posts)
10. Some people also argue that certain drugs being illegal increases the demand for them.
Thu Jan 17, 2013, 09:16 PM
Jan 2013

An example of the unanticipated consequences of purposive social action

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


hack89

(39,171 posts)
12. Military style semi-automatic rifles were legal during the AWB
Thu Jan 17, 2013, 09:31 PM
Jan 2013

so I don't see the connection.

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

GreenStormCloud

(12,072 posts)
13. The 1994 AWB didn't ban any guns.
Thu Jan 17, 2013, 09:40 PM
Jan 2013

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).

 

EarthWindFire

(84 posts)
14. Fact
Thu Jan 17, 2013, 10:05 PM
Jan 2013

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

 

Motown_Johnny

(22,308 posts)
16. .
Thu Jan 17, 2013, 10:50 PM
Jan 2013

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.



Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Facts: since the Assault ...