Gun-control bills could push California to top of firearm-restriction list

[alp227]

With summer recess behind them and the legislative session's five-week homestretch ahead, state lawmakers face a fusillade of gun-control bills that could move California far beyond what any other state has enacted -- including proposals to ban a wide range of semi-automatic rifles and impose strict new regulations on ammunition.

And what happens in Sacramento might not stay in Sacramento. With their agenda stalled in Congress, gun-control advocates hope California can break the inertia and reignite the national debate that erupted after a gunman killed 20 children and six adults at a Newtown, Conn., elementary school in December.

"When we see movement on the California bills and the sort of tenacity that you had post-Newtown, it makes it really hard for the gun lobby to say the momentum has gone away. And it's certainly something Congress pays attention to," said Kristin Rand, legislative director at the Violence Policy Center in Washington, D.C. "You can't underestimate how important it is for Congress to see movement in the states, especially big states like California."

Nonsense, gun-rights supporters say.

"While they may try to reignite their lost momentum, I don't think anything California does is going to affect what Washington does," said Larry Keane, senior vice president and general counsel for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, a firearms trade group coincidentally based in Newtown. "We constantly see a barrage of anti-gun, anti-industry legislation being introduced in California, far more than in any other state."

The state Senate Appropriations Committee on Monday will hear bills already passed by the Assembly that would create a state database of all ammunition purchases, make it a crime to have a gun that's not locked up when not being carried, and extend the time for which someone is banned from owning firearms after making a violent threat.

full: http://www.mercurynews.com/nation-world/ci_23833928/gun-control-bills-could-push-california-top-firearm

[msongs]

1. oh well, gun owners can shoot people in record numbers else where nt

[Eleanors38]

2. "...state database of all ammunition purchases..." Don't we have enough Government data bases?

[Oakenshield]

3. If we have a data base for cars...

Which are are just vehicles that have chance of being dangerous, then damn right we should have a database for products fundamentally designed with violent intent....which is to say... things that are designed to KILL.

[gejohnston]

4. wrong analogy

if you are going to compare guns to cars, then ammunition is equivalent to fuel.

[Oakenshield]

5. I'll concede my analogy sucked.

A data base for objects expressly designed to kill however is a completely reasonable safety measure.

[gejohnston]

6. only if the database preforms as advertized.

Of course, does that mean you want to register bows and crossbows? You register cars for the tax revenue to maintain the roads. If it never leaves the farm, don't have to register it.

[Oakenshield]

8. The answer to your question is no.

While it might be a good idea to register bows as well, it really wouldn't be necessary. A person with a bow can't storm into a classroom and kill everyone in sight with barely any pause in the rate of fire.

[gejohnston]

9. given the rarity of classroom shootings,

and the ones in CT, Australia and Europe have been done with registered guns (when guns are used. Two of the most recent Australian mass murders have been with arson). I don't think registration is a good idea simply because it is theater that takes resources away from real solutions.
Recently in Australia, legal gun owners have been targeted by thieves, some officials there tend to think their database isn't secure. Of course, it doesn't stop gangs from making their own sub machine guns.

[Oakenshield]

10. Except here have been LESS mass shootings in europe and australia.

And they have more firearm regulations. Even if we mathematically inflate the populations of their counties to be comparable to our own they still experience far less gun violence. There's no weaseling out of the plain truth that our gun culture needs some hard reform. If Gun enthusiasts get their feelings hurt that's tough shit. The 2nd amendment included the words "well regulated". It's high time we actually gave those words something more than lip service.

[gejohnston]

11. fewer mass shootings

Maybe. I have not seen any study that extrapolates theirs with ours, and it would have compare with all means with all means here in order to give a true picture.
Their regulations vary with each country. Are we talking about mass murder or street crime? But then, they also had equally low murder rates before any of those gun laws were past, so their lower murder rates can't be traced to gun laws. They passed their gun laws because of the Red Scare after watching political violence in Russia and Germany. UK's murder rates did not drop because of any gun laws.
Canada's murder rate has always been one third of ours (and fluctuates with ours) even when their gun laws were about the same as ours.
Jamaica's total ban did nothing, Brazil's strict laws do nothing, and then there is Mexico.
Classic case of post hoc ergo propter hoc, which is common with gun control advocates. Policy arguments that are little more than logical fallacies strung together with appeals to emotion don't even deserve the lip service it gets. Even though we are first in gun ownership, we are something like 103rd in gun deaths per capita.

[Oakenshield]

12. And there you go with the weaseling

Mass shootings. We're talking instances like the connecticut sandy hook shooting. Instances like the aurora shooting. Or we can just talk gun violence in general. End of the story is the same. European countries have stronger firearm regulations and less gun crime.

But hey, why only keep the spotlight on me? Let's shed some light on you and see if you you don't scurry away. The side of 2nd amendment zealots have provide NOTHING that can serve as a solution to the gun crime in this country. Instead they give empty speeches about mental health, when they're the same people voting for Republicans who want to gut healthcare across the country.

So, let's hear what you have to say for yourself. Or are you just going to shrug and regurgitate some Benjamin Franklin quote about sacrificing "freedumb"? You'll have to excuse me, but I have very little tolerance for bullshit on this subject.

[gejohnston]

13. calling it as I see it not weaseling anything

Mass shootings. We're talking instances like the connecticut sandy hook shooting. Instances like the aurora shooting. Or we can just talk gun violence in general. End of the story is the same. European countries have stronger firearm regulations and less gun crime.

All of the countries that have more gun violence than us also have stronger regulations.

But hey, why only keep the spotlight on me? Let's shed some light on you and see if you you don't scurry away. The side of 2nd amendment zealots have provide NOTHING that can serve as a solution to the gun crime in this country. Instead they give empty speeches about mental health, when they're the same people voting for Republicans who want to gut healthcare across the country.

I have never voted for a Republican that I can remember. Actually, the issue of violent crime is very complex, but it has been dropping.

So, let's hear what you have to say for yourself. Or are you just going to shrug and regurgitate some Benjamin Franklin quote about sacrificing "freedumb"? You'll have to excuse me, but I have very little tolerance for bullshit on this subject.

Actually I was thinking of Cesare Beccaria. But as far as the Franklin quote, "freedumb" smacks of a love of authoritarianism that is antithetical to classical or modern liberalism.

"False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils, except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.

Can it be supposed that those who have the courage to violate the most sacred laws of humanity, the most important of the code, will respect the less important and arbitrary ones, which can be violated with ease and impunity, and which, if strictly obeyed, would put an end to personal liberty--so dear to men, so dear to the enlightened legislator--and subject innocent persons to all the vexations that the guilty alone ought to suffer?

Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve to rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. They ought to be designated as laws not preventative but fearful of crimes, produced by the tumultuous impression of a few isolated facts, and not by thoughtful consideration of the inconveniences and advantages of a universal decree. "

[Oakenshield]

14. Hah, you've just proven my point.

You're nothing but empty rhetoric. You have no solution. All you can do is offer sophistry. Yes of course European countries generally have stronger regulations across the board. I'd also wager their superior health care and education quite likely also contributes to their comparably lower crime. To BLATANTLY ignore the crux of the matter however is just plain disingenuous just as it is BLATANTLY disingenuous to ascribe SANE and SENSIBLE regulations as challenges upon our freedom.

Britain, Australia and France etc are NO LESS free than we are for maintaining more strict gun control regulations. Their gun control measures didn't represent some slippery slope from which all liberty was threatened. They simply recognized that to maintain a reasonably safe society that the gun trade required strict oversight. And they ARE right.

As for you trying to label me an authoritarian, now that's just hilarious. I could hardly be more disdainful of the military industrial complex and the domestic surveillance that has become rampant since Bush stole his first term.

[gejohnston]

15. Actually, you proved my point

because you have not made a logical or valid point for me to make. Speaking of sophistry, that is all you have.

You're nothing but empty rhetoric. You have no solution. All you can do is offer sophistry. Yes of course European countries generally have stronger regulations across the board. I'd also wager their superior health care and education quite likely also contributes to their comparably lower crime. To BLATANTLY ignore the crux of the matter however is just plain disingenuous just as it is BLATANTLY disingenuous to ascribe SANE and SENSIBLE regulations as challenges upon our freedom.

You have no solution that has ever worked. You have logical fallacies and theater. Simple answers are not solutions to complex problems. This is a bit of reality: In the US, 90 percent of all murderers have criminal records and can not have the guns legally. Most of the victims also have criminal records. The "average gun owner gone wild" is statistically rare. That means the issue is much more complex than some gun regulation, which are violated in DC and Chicago every day. As for their education and health care having to do with violent crime, maybe. We have more gangs and organized crime than they do. "sane and sensible" are meaningless weasel words. I'm willing to wager that those societies have stronger communities and are less mobile also something to do with it as well. They are also less individualistic.

Britain, Australia and France etc are NO LESS free than we are for maintaining more strict gun control regulations. Their gun control measures didn't represent some slippery slope from which all liberty was threatened. They simply recognized that to maintain a reasonably safe society that the gun trade required strict oversight. And they ARE right.

When you look at UK's street cams, no BoR that can't be swept away by an act of Parliament tomorrow, their libel laws, I would call them less free. A bit of a straw man since no one is making that claim, or at least I am not. Actually, UK isn't "reasonably safe". It actually has more violent crime than we do. Outside of a few urban areas, the US is every bit as safe or safer than Europe. You ignored the many. The gun trade in the US does have strict oversight, stricter than the 1950s on the federal level. Why didn't the Gun Control Act drop crime? DC gun ban? The stricter laws passed in other countries? None of them resulted in lower crime rates. Cherry picking Europe is one thing, but when you look at the world at large, there is no correlation. Their gun laws have not made them safer societies. If that were true, South Africa should also have a lower violent crime and murder rate than we do.

As for you trying to label me an authoritarian, now that's just hilarious. I could hardly be more disdainful of the military industrial complex and the domestic surveillance that has become rampant since Bush stole his first term.

You used the less than literate "freedumb" a dismissive term used by those who have no actual ideas, but simply use mocking terms. That also denotes an anti rural working class bias that is common with gun control advocates.

[Oakenshield]

16. No solution that ever worked?!

PURE UNMITIGATED BULLSHIT. Just look at Australia for fuck's sake. After a lunatic shot up Port Arthur their country got together and passed sweeping gun control measures and its thanks to those measures that they haven't suffered a SINGLE mass shooting since. That was EIGHTEEN YEARS ago. Meanwhile we've had HOW MANY of these tragedies? And all you can think to do is shift your feet and shrug. Shameful.

As for Britain's freedom being tenuous. Oh that's just fucking rich. How ignorant and fallacious do you have to be not to see how narrow minded you're being? Do you seriously think any of OUR freedoms can't be swept aside under the guise of "national security" and the Patriot Act? We're no better off than they are. Not by a long shot.

[gejohnston]

17. Not true

PURE UNMITIGATED BULLSHIT. Just look at Australia for fuck's sake. After a lunatic shot up Port Arthur their country got together and passed sweeping gun control measures and its thanks to those measures that they haven't suffered a SINGLE mass shooting since. That was EIGHTEEN YEARS ago. Meanwhile we've had HOW MANY of these tragedies? And all you can think to do is shift your feet and shrug. Shameful.

and they haven't before 1985 either. They had a few over a couple of days and a couple of gang battles that had over four dead on each side. Again, post hoc ergo propter hoc. BTW, gun ownership in Australia is the same now as it was then, and increasing. Oh yeah, there has been one mass shooting since then and two arsons. The arsons killed more people than the shootings other than Port Author. So, not so shameful. BTW, before Port Author, each state had its own laws, all stricter than most US states, so even then strict gun laws did not prevent Port Author. While Tasmania had the least restrictive, it still had a licensing and registration scheme. So even then, your comparison fails.

As for Britain's freedom being tenuous. Oh that's just fucking rich. How ignorant and fallacious do you have to be not to see how narrow minded you're being? Do you seriously think any of OUR freedoms can't be swept aside under the guise of "national security" and the Patriot Act? We're no better off than they are. Not by a long shot.

You need to travel more. MI-5 has been doing that for years. Beyond that, you are projecting.
I will give you credit for not bringing up Japan since they:
have no exclusionary rule
no right to a jury trial
no right to have a lawyer present during questioning, often brutal
can be held up to a month without charges
forced confessions are admissible.

Your simple answers are not solutions.

[gejohnston]

19. No idea

although it did have a gang battle between two biker gangs with a total of seven of both sides. They had another one a few years later. Port Author was a one time event.

Australia's gun laws didn't do anything for them, why would it do anything for us?

[jimmy the one]

22. more guns, more lies

johnston: All of the countries that have more gun violence than us also have stronger regulations..

That includes 3rd world countries, & underdeveloped & non industrialized countries, as if you didn't know; amongst industrialized nations, USA is either first or in the top 2.
'More regulations than USA' also misleading, since USA only one of 3 countries in world with such lax firearm regs, so all the other ~180 countries indeed fit the 'stronger regulations' than USA, INCLUDING THOSE WITH LESS CRIME.
Why wander so far from home tho? how about an internal examination? bend over, america:

Highest murder rates 3 yrs 2011,2010,2009- 9 of 10 gunny
1 Louisiana .. 11.2 11.0 11.8 -- PRO GUN
2 Mississippi 8.0 6.9 6.6 -- PRO GUN
3 New Mexico ..7.5 6.8 9.9 -- LEANS GUN
4 Maryland ...6.8 7.4 7.7 -- gun control <<<
5 SoCarolina . 6.8 5.7 6.7 -- PRO GUN
6 Alabama ....6.3 5.7 6.8 - LEANS GUN
7 Michigan ...6.2 5.9 6.2 -- LEANS GUN
8 Arizona ....6.2 6.4 5.8 -- PRO GUN
9 Missouri .. 6.1 7.0 6.5 -- PRO GUN
10 Tennessee ..5.8 5.6 7.4 -- PRO GUN
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder-rates-nationally-and-state

2011 Highest Violent Crime Rates by State, 8 of 10 gunny:
1 Tennessee .... 608 .. PRO GUN
2. Alaska .... 606 VERY PRO GUN
3. SCarolina.. 571 VERY PRO GUN
4. NMex ...... 567 LEANS GUN
5. Nevada .... 562 PRO GUN
6. Delaware .. 559 Neutralish
7. Louisiana . 555 PRO GUN
8. Florida ... 515 PRO GUN
9. Maryland .. 494 gun control <<<<
10. Arkansas . 481 PRO GUN
http://www.infoplease.com/us/statistics/crime-rate-state.html

[gejohnston]

23. actually,

Mexico, South Africa, Estonia, Brazil are all developed countries. "Developed" refers to economics and technological infrastructure, so how is that relevant?

Mexico and Estonia are part of the OECD.
http://www.oecd.org/about/membersandpartners/

Fine piece of post hoc ergo propter hoc. Guns are used in less than 20 percent of violent crime. BTW, Florida isn't actually "pro gun". The actual gun ownership rate in Florida is below the national average, it is closer to Deleware's and France's.

US, Switzerland, and who else? Yemen perhaps? Both have lower murder rates than we do. Also, define "lax". Until 1977 Canada had laxer gun laws than most states, certainly laxer machine gun restrictions than the US or most other countries. Their handgun laws were about like Illinois.

[jimmy the one]

20. beccaria overruled in america

johnston citing cesar beccaria : False is the idea of utility (false idee') .. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.

Written mid 1700's by an italian I believe, italians which likely had bow & arrow & edged weapons rather than muskets. His view above was contradicted by about a dozen US state constitutions when they enabled legislators to forbid carrying concealed weapons in their states, due to making robbers more potent.

Louisiana: The right of each citizen to keep and .. but this provision shall not prevent the passage of laws to prohibit the carrying of weapons concealed on the person. (1974).
1879: "A well regulated militia being nec.. This shall not prevent the passage of laws to punish those who carry weapons concealed."
Montana: The right of any person to keep .. but nothing herein contained shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons. (1889). http://www2.law.ucla.edu/volokh/beararms/statecon.htm

Beccaria was correct for his time, but with more sophisticated development of firearms the following century, these united states felt rules & regulations regarding carrying firearms, fit & proper.

oakenshield to johnston: You're nothing but empty rhetoric.. All you can do is offer sophistry.. Creating some imaginary goal posts for yourself? I've about had it debating with you as you quite clearly have no intention of discussing this topic with integrity

Welcome oakenshield to DU 'gungeon' = spin off dungeon with 'gun geon'; also called Fort Gunsalot. Lotsa so called dems here who say they are but are so far right on so many issues it's hard to believe it. Johnston says "I have never voted for a Republican that I can remember.", sort of an odd way of saying 'never', & a clever way of avoiding admitting to voting repub if indeed that were the case - pulling the wool over other eyes. I agree with much of what you wrote, tho johnston can be informative if he avoids his subjective ramblings & red herring soups he dishes out half the time.

[gejohnston]

21. what red herrig?

He or she was talking criminology, Beccaria was speaking as a criminologist about the effectiveness of such laws, not the constitutionality of such laws. Your references to US state constitutions are red herrings.

Lotsa so called dems here who say they are but are so far right on so many issues it's hard to believe it. Johnston says "I have never voted for a Republican that I can remember.", sort of an odd way of saying 'never', & a clever way of avoiding admitting to voting repub if indeed that were the case -

Given that my first presidential vote was for Jimmy Carter.... That said, many local offices are nonpartisan, although those running might be registered as one party or another. On the other hand, a Long Island residents voting for Carol McCarthy's first term would be in another situation, she ran as a Democrat after losing a Republican Primary. While she had a D next to her name on the ballot, she did not change her voter registration until few years later.

pulling the wool over other eyes. I agree with much of what you wrote, tho johnston can be informative if he avoids his subjective ramblings & red herring soups he dishes out half the time.

Rich coming from you.

[jimmy the one]

24. swiss myth

johnston: Fine piece of post hoc ergo propter hoc. Guns are used in less than 20 percent of violent crime. BTW, Florida isn't actually "pro gun". The actual gun ownership rate in Florida is below the national average, it is closer to Deleware's and France's.

Florida is pro gun despite your protests - readers note florida has a lot of retirees who either gave up guns or are (aged) disallowed due family insistence. Florida probably has more total guns than 40 other states. Florida 2011 is ranked by the brady campaign as tied for 41st, with a pathetic 'guncontrol' score of 3: T41 FLORIDA 3 http://www.bradycampaign.me/sites/default/files/2011_Brady_Campaign_State_Scorecard_Rankings.pdf

Wanna rethink your idea that florida isn't 'actually' pro gun? what is it by you, neutral? I'll stick with brady campaign ranking rather than your pathetic spin, & where does florida fit in nra rank?

johnston: Guns are used in less than 20 percent of violent crime.

So, 'more guns, less crime' is just an illusion to you? (since pro gun states tend to have higher overall violent crime rates). Shouldn't just the thought of armed resistance lessen overall violent crime? jeez, gun lobby keeps saying that.
.. And if you want to just limit to 'guncrime' rates & not overall violent crime rates, observe that NO stricter guncontrol state (nine of them) has a firearm related aggravated assault rate greater than 50/100k, only pro gun states do, plus neutralish delaware & shall issue michigan (michigan only state with significant brady grade).
Aggravated assault rates with firearm: Tennessee 137/100k; SCarolina 127; Arkansas 100; Louisiana 99; Missouri 88; NewMex 87; Michigan 86***; Delaware 81; Alaska 80; Kansas 77; Okla 58; NCar 67; Georgia 58; Arizona 57; Nev 53; WVA 52; http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state

gej: US, Switzerland, and who else? Both have lower murder rates than we do. Also, define "lax".

Lax is permissive, yet another red herring; Switzerland does NOT have permissive gun laws, they have relatively strict gun laws in switzerland, this is a revelation to you? Swiss have about 3 million guns, america has 300 million guns, your utopia does not exist, it's a swiss myth - they even ban carrying concealed unless demonstrated need.

[gejohnston]

37. from red herring to straw man

Florida is pro gun despite your protests - readers note florida has a lot of retirees who either gave up guns or are (aged) disallowed due family insistence. Florida probably has more total guns than 40 other states. Florida 2011 is ranked by the brady campaign as tied for 41st, with a pathetic 'guncontrol' score of 3: T41 FLORIDA 3 http://www.bradycampaign.me/sites/default/files/2011_Brady_Campaign_State_Scorecard_Rankings.pdf

Actually, Florida is full of retirees that moved there from New York and have never owned guns. In the winter, it also has a lot of Canadians that either leave theirs home or don't own any at all. As for Brady's stupid score card, no state has less than five points, when you compare their criteria vs federal law.

Wanna rethink your idea that florida isn't 'actually' pro gun? what is it by you, neutral? I'll stick with brady campaign ranking rather than your pathetic spin, & where does florida fit in nra rank?

I don't think the NRA has a ranking. But if you want to stick to Brady's pathetic spin and dishonesty, that's your business. Fact of the matter is that Florida's gun ownership rate is the same as Deleware's and France's, but lower than Canada's.

So, 'more guns, less crime' is just an illusion to you? (since pro gun states tend to have higher overall violent crime rates). Shouldn't just the thought of armed resistance lessen overall violent crime? jeez, gun lobby keeps saying that.
.. And if you want to just limit to 'guncrime' rates & not overall violent crime rates, observe that NO stricter guncontrol state (nine of them) has a firearm related aggravated assault rate greater than 50/100k, only pro gun states do, plus neutralish delaware & shall issue michigan (michigan only state with significant brady grade).
Aggravated assault rates with firearm: Tennessee 137/100k; SCarolina 127; Arkansas 100; Louisiana 99; Missouri 88; NewMex 87; Michigan 86***; Delaware 81; Alaska 80; Kansas 77; Okla 58; NCar 67; Georgia 58; Arizona 57; Nev 53; WVA 52; http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state

Straw man, I never said that. Go discuss it with John Lott. The article only relates to use of firearms, not overall assault rates.

Lax is permissive, yet another red herring; Switzerland does NOT have permissive gun laws, they have relatively strict gun laws in switzerland, this is a revelation to you? Swiss have about 3 million guns, america has 300 million guns, your utopia does not exist, it's a swiss myth - they even ban carrying concealed unless demonstrated need.

If you read their laws, their purchase permit system is basically the same as MI's and MN's. The carry laws would be the same as those states 30 years ago. Their gun laws are more liberal than, say New York, and UK's. Their concealed carry is stricter than the Czech Republic's, which allows unrestricted CCW as long as you have a license to own the gun. That said, the Swiss' private gun ownership rate (not counting military issue) is lower than Norway, Canada, and Finland. (I'm counting the number of households with a gun in it, not the number of guns per capita.)

BTW, I don't think you know what red herring is.

[beevul]

38. I'm sure we'll never see a cite for this...

I'm sure we'll never see a cite for this:

"Lotsa so called dems here who say they are but are so far right on so many issues it's hard to believe it."

Particularly the "on so many issues" part.

Someone loves the smell of slanderish postings in the afternoon...which is just too damn clever by half.

[rl6214]

35. You don't know what "well regulated" meant in that time

At that time "well regulated" meant in good working order, not controlled.

[jimmy the one]

39. An Orderly Militia, being necessary....

rl: You don't know what "well regulated" meant in that time .. At that time "well regulated" meant in good working order, not controlled..

The 'well regulated' canard has popped up from it's jack in the box again! and it's bobbing about all over the place!!
'Good working order' is one definition of 'regulate' from 1790's, but why do you ignore the other ones which do define regulate as subject to rules & restrictions & control? here's webster's 1828 definition of 'regulated' & 'regulate':

1 REG'ULATED, pp. Adjusted by rule, method or forms; put in good order; subjected to rules or restrictions.
2 REG'ULATE, v.t.1. To adjust by rule, method or established mode; as, to regulate weights and measures; to regulate the assize of bread; to regulate our moral conduct by the laws of God and of society; to regulate our manners by the customary forms.
2. To put in good order; as, to regulate the disordered state of a nation or its finances.
3. To subject to rules or restrictions; as, to regulate trade; to regulate diet. http://1828.mshaffer.com/d/word/regulate

You could be partly right, tho, but how does that help the individual rkba side? since good working order does not rule out firearm regulation. Indeed it suggests it.

[Jenoch]

7. If that is a database for guns,

will the database include the name of the owner of said gun? If so, then that would be against the law. See the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986

[jimmy the one]

25. States where you're more apt to be gunkilled

RANK: #40, California Gundeaths per 100,000: 9 Permissive gun laws: 50th of 50
RANK: #43, Illinois Gun deaths per 100,000: 8 Permissive gun laws: 45th of 50

California & Illinois (& chicago) did 'relatively well' on gundeaths (incl suicide homicide accidental).
The top 23 states with the highest gundeath rates are all pro gun states, while most all the guncontrol states rank low, meaning less chance of dying by gunfire in guncontrol states:

#1, Mississipp Gundeaths per 100,000: 18.3 Permissive gunlaws: 4th of 50
#2, Arizona Gun deaths per 100,000: 15 Permissive gun laws: 1st of 50
#3, Alaska Gun deaths per 100,000: 17.6 Permissive gun laws: 11th of 50
#4, Arkansas Gun deaths per 100,000: 15.1 Permissive gun laws: 7th of 50
#5, Louisiana Gun deaths per 100,000: 19.9 Permissive gun laws: 23rd of 50
#6, New Mexico Gun deaths per 100,000: 15 Permissive gun laws: 6th of 50
#7, Alabama Gun deaths per 100,000: 17.6 Permissive gun laws: 27th of 50
#8, Nevada Gun deaths per 100,000: 16.2 Permissive gun laws: 22nd of 50
#9, Montana Gun deaths per 100,000: 14.5 Permissive gun laws: 10th of 50
#10, Wyoming Gun deaths per 100,000: 14.5 Permissive gun laws: 8th of 50
#11, Kentucky Gun deaths per 100,000: 14.4 Permissive gun laws: 5th of 50
#12, WVirginia Gun deaths per 100,000: 14.8 Permissive gun laws: 25th of 50
#13, Tennessee Gun deaths per 100,000: 15 Permissive gun laws: 31st of 50
#14, Oklahoma Gun deaths per 100,000: 13.4 Permissive gun laws: 17th of 50
#15, Idaho Gun deaths per 100,000: 12.5 Permissive gun laws: 2nd of 50
#16, Georgia Gun deaths per 100,000: 13.1 Permissive gun laws: 13th of 50
#17, Missouri Gun deaths per 100,000: 12.9 Permissive gun laws: 12th of 50
#18, SCarolina Gun deaths per 100,000: 13.4 Permissive gun laws: 20 of 50
#19, NCarolina Gun deaths per 100,000: 12.3 Permissive gun laws: 28 of 50
#20, Florida Gun deaths per 100,000: 12.5 Permissive gun laws: 41st of 50
#21, Kansas Gun deaths per 100,000: 10.5 Permissive gun laws: 14th of 50
#22, Indiana Gun deaths per 100,000: 10.6 Permissive gun laws: 21st of 50
#23, Texas Gun deaths per 100,000: 10.7 Permissive gun laws: 32nd of 50
#24, Michigan Gun deaths per 100,000: 10.9 Permissive gun laws: 39 of 50
#25, Maryland Gun deaths per 100,000: 12.1 Permissive gun laws: 44th

#45, New York Gun deaths per 100,000: 5.1 Permissive gun laws 43 of 50
#46, New Jersey Gun deaths per 100,000: 5.2 Permissive gun laws 49 of 50
#47, Connecticut Gun deaths per 100,000: 4.3 Permissive gun laws 46 of 50
#48, Rhode Island Gun deaths per 100,000: 3.5 Permissive gun laws 42 of 50
#49, Massachusetts Gundeaths per 100,000: 3.6 Permissive gun laws 48 of 50
#50, Hawaii Gun deaths per 100,000: 2.8 Permissive gun laws: 47th of 50
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/01/11/20-deadliest-gun-states-from-mississippi-to-arizona.html

[BlueJazz]

26. Good post, Jimmy.

[gejohnston]

34. it would be better if he subtracted the suicides

[alp227]

28. How many of the deaths in the high death states are from self defense?

I'm not convinced by this study...a real one would compare homicide rate.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

29. Thanks for the 2 1/2 year old news story

I'd like to know what the ranking means and how it was calculated. It doesn't make sense that #5 is Louisiana (with Gun deaths per 100,000 = 19.9) when #1 is Mississipp (with Gundeaths per 100,000 = 18.3). Louisiana is also kind of middle of the road as far as permissive gun laws at 23 of 50.

California has 9 per 100,000, which is more than 3 times Hawaii (at 2.8 per 100,000) but has the least permissive laws, lower than Hawaii.

These aberrations undermine any trust in this ranking.

[jimmy the one]

31. was there all along

dscntnt: I'd like to know what the ranking means and how it was calculated. It doesn't make sense that #5 is Louisiana (with Gun deaths per 100,000 = 19.9) when #1 is Mississipp (with Gundeaths per 100,000 = 18.3). Louisiana is also kind of middle of the road as far as permissive gun laws at 23 of 50.

Why didn't you click on the link at the bottom, where it was explained? now you gots egg on your face - the answer 'was there all along'. The permissiveness of the gun laws in the state was factored in at some slight level (as evidenced by the greater tendency to follow statistical gundeath rates), less controlled guns being the reason.

dscntnt: These aberrations undermine any trust in this ranking.

I can almost see you shrieking in horror, Begone Demon! Heretic! That can't be soooo! my 2ndAmendment Mythology Bible says where guns go murder go down, guns good guncontrol baaaaad!
Even to shuffle the deck & sort strictly by gundeaths, list ain't gonna change much, you just don't wanna see the truth & prefer myths.

alp: How many of the deaths in the high death states are from self defense? >>>>> Surely on a par with national figures, or about 1 or 2% (presuming they're counted), hardly enough to alter pole positions.

alp: I'm not convinced by this study...a real one would compare homicide rate. >>>>> I can almost see you shrieking in horror, 'Begone Demon! Heretic! That can't be soooo! my 2ndAmendment Mythology Bible says where guns go murder go down, guns good guncontrol baaaaad!'
What you ask for (homicide rate by state) was provided in a previous post#22, another lapse in attention span, sit with dscntnt - multiply by 2/3 for approx gunhomicide rate:
Highest murder rates 3 yrs 2011,2010,2009- 9 of 10 pro gunny
1 Louisiana .. 11.2 11.0 11.8 -- PRO GUN 2 Mississippi 8.0 6.9 6.6 -- PRO GUN
3 New Mexico ..7.5 6.8 9.9 -- LEANS GUN 4 Maryland ...6.8 7.4 7.7 -- gun control <<<
5 SoCarolina . 6.8 5.7 6.7 -- PRO GUN 6 Alabama ....6.3 5.7 6.8 - LEANS GUN
7 Michigan ...6.2 5.9 6.2 -- LEANS GUN 8 Arizona ....6.2 6.4 5.8 -- PRO GUN
9 Missouri .. 6.1 7.0 6.5 -- PRO GUN 10 Tennessee ..5.8 5.6 7.4 -- PRO GUN
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder-rates-nationally-and-state

PS: Thanks blue jazz!

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

40. re: "Why didn't you click on the link at the bottom..."

I did. "how it was calculated" was not explained.

I maintain that Louisiana is the deadliest state from this data and yet Idaho (12.5/100,000) which ranks #2nd in permissive gun laws has more than 37% fewer deaths per 100,000 than Louisiana (19.9/100,000).

Florida is near the bottom 41st of 50 in permissive gun laws but has the same rate (12.5/100,000) as #2 Idaho and #28 North Carolina (12.3/100,000).



Any correlations are weak and probably not strongly linked to variations in laws.

[jimmy the one]

42. hiding in plain sight

dscntnt: re: Why didn't you click on the link at the bottom..."
I did. "how it was calculated" was not explained.

Well you've done it again, or was it just hiding in plain sight?:

Given the complexities involved in gun regulation and violence, The Daily Beast sought to determine which states are the most dangerous when it comes to firearms. Our methodology was simple: Rather than measure the number of guns, we measured the measure of gun deaths per capita in each state, using the most recent data available from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. That counted for 75% of the ranking. The other 25% was derived from the Legal Community Against Violence's state-by-state comparison of firearm laws, which ranks all 50 states by their relatively severity, incorporating everything from policies on mental-health background checks to whether loaded guns are allowed in bars.http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/01/11/20-deadliest-gun-states-from-mississippi-to-arizona.html

http://smartgunlaws.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/Gun_Laws_Matter_Brochure.pdf

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

45. Thanks for the pointers...

...to all this. I have made known which aspects and inconsistencies bothered me.

My personal opinion is that various jurisdictions have differing social and human problems as well as variations in attitudes from which I infer that laws or programs that help in one area may do nothing in other areas.

I have also found a lot of info in the MAIG paper titled Fatal Gaps. None of these are definitive and, therefore, also inconclusive but I trust some continued study will add to my understanding of the problems involved.


Have a nice evening.

[gejohnston]

33. You realize the vast majority of those are suicides right?

How else do you get a "gun death" several times higher than the murder rate. IOW, it is quite dishonest. There is a correlation with rural areas having higher suicide rates than urban areas. That is not only true in the US, but also true in Australia and Japan.

For example, Wyoming's murder rate for 2011 was 3.4 and its 2012 was 1.5 yet it is listed as a "gun death" as 14.5. Since Wyoming's murder with guns were about five out of the eight murders in 2011, that would put their gun murders about 2.9 and 1 respectively. Had Wyoming had a complete ban on guns, that would put their rope death rate at 13 or 14 per 100K

[tumtum]

41. Remove the suicides and justifiable homicides

and I'll bet you'll get a far different results

[jimmy the one]

43. gundeath chart was clear

johnston: You realize the vast majority of those are suicides right? How else do you get a "gun death" several times higher than the murder rate.
tumtum: Remove the suicides and justifiable homicides and I'll bet you'll get a far different results

60 - 65% is not considered a vast majority, just a solid majority, & yeah of course you'd get different results if you changed the format & input, duh;
Ok, before we go any further, I want both of youse to scroll back up to my post 25 & search the first paragraph where I wrote this: California & Illinois (& chicago) did 'relatively well' on gundeaths (incl suicide homicide accidental).
.. So you see, my post clarified what was meant by gun death, clarified that the list represented gundeath from suicide, homicide, & accidents; dunno why all this lack of comprehension from about 5 or 6 gun enthusiasts on this thread, things whooshing over heads, hiding in plain sight all over the place, hope you aren't this way with your guns.

another source of gundeath stats (VPC), juxtaposed but pretty much the same states, few displacements: State Firearm Death Rates, Ranked by Rate, 2010: 1 Alaska 20.28 2 Louisiana 19.06 3 Montana 16.58 4 Alabama 16.36 5 Wyoming 16.32 6 Mississippi 16.01 7 West Virginia 14.73 8 Tennessee 14.69 9 Nevada 14.63 10 New Mexico 14.62 11 Arizona 14.57 12 Arkansas 14.37 13 Oklahoma 14.34 14 Missouri 14.13 15 South Carolina 14.01 16 Kentucky 12.79 17 Idaho 12.63 18 Georgia 12.62 19 Florida 12.06 20 Oregon 11.95 21 North Carolina 11.78 22 Utah 11.36 23 Vermont 11.19 24 Colorado

41 Illinois 8.29 42 California 7.88 43 Iowa 6.99 44 Minnesota 6.88 45 Connecticut 5.85 46 New York 5.22 47 New Jersey 5.19 48 Rhode Island 4.66 49 Massachusetts 4.12 50 Hawaii 3.31 National Firearm Death Rate 10.25 http://www.vpc.org/fadeathchart13.htm

[ileus]

27. Remember their ultimate goal...

[DontTreadOnMe]

30. Can we make a mobile phone app...

that puts all gun owners on a map so we know where they are at all times.

"Gun Nut Locator"

Tax the Churches.

Triple Tax the Gun Owners.

[Duckhunter935]

32. that would help criminals both ways

where to steal a gun and then go to the houses without guns with the stolen gun. Sounds like a win win to me.

[spin]

36. You might suggest that mobile phone app to the NSA. Hell they might even offer you a job. ...

Taxing the churches might work but triple taxing Gun Owners would probably lead to a revolution. It hard to say who would win but you might be caught in the cross fire.

[Eleanors38]

48. Compared with B______s, that's an honor, though expensive.

[Eleanors38]

46. Maybe the NSA has. Ask 'em. And please get back ASAP.

[tumtum]

44. Impose strict new regulations on ammunition?

If that's the case, all CA gun owners will do is drive to border states and buy their ammo, states like Oregon, Nevada, and my home state, Arizona.

A rather nice boon for those states.

[Eleanors38]

47. But it worked with county-line liquor & fireworks stores!