Go Back   Natural Medicine Talk > Off-topic > Chitchat

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-29-2012, 11:07 PM
Arrowwind09's Avatar
Arrowwind09 Arrowwind09 is offline
Standing at the Portal
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 6,554
Arrowwind09 has a spectacular aura aboutArrowwind09 has a spectacular aura about
Default Gun Violence Going Down in USA & Up in Nations that Remove Guns

Gun Violence

How Prevalent is Gun Violence in America?


Source: http://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/gun-...ce/welcome.htm

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics
Data table [opens in pop-up window] | Text description [opens in pop-up window]


In 2005, 11,346 persons were killed by firearm violence and 477,040 persons were victims of a crime committed with a firearm. Most murders in the United States are committed with firearms, especially handguns.

In 2006, firearms were used in 68 percent of murders, 42 percent of robbery offenses and 22 percent of aggravated assaults nationwide. (Weapons data are not collected for forcible rapes. See table 19 "Violent Crime," from Crime in the United States, 2006.)
Homicides committed with firearms peaked in 1993 at 17,075, after which the figure steadily fell, leveling off in 1999 at 10,117. Gun-related homicides have increased slightly each year since 2002.
Find data on homicides by weapon type from the Bureau of Justice Statistics.

Gun-Related Homicide and Gangs

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics
Data table [opens in pop-up window] | Text description [opens in pop-up window]


Gun-related homicide is most prevalent among gangs and during the commission of felony crimes. In 1976, the percentage of homicides caused by firearms during arguments was about the same as from gang involvement (about 70 percent), but by 1993, nearly all gang-related homicides involved guns (97 percent), whereas the percentage of gun homicides related to arguments remained relatively constant. The percentage of gang-related homicides caused by guns fell slightly to 94 percent in 2004, but the percentage of homicides caused by firearms during the commission of a felony rose from about 60 percent to 77 percent from 1976 to 2005.
See Youths, Gangs and Guns.

Nonfatal Firearm-Related Crime



Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics
Data table [opens in pop-up window] | Text description [opens in pop-up window]


Nonfatal firearm-related crime has fallen significantly in recent years, from almost 1.3 million victims in 1994 to 477,040 victims in 2005.
As a percentage of all violent incidents, nonfatal gun crime has fallen below 10 percent, from 11 percent in 1994 to 9 percent in 2005. These crimes include rape, sexual assault, robbery and aggravated assault.
See Nonfatal firearm-related violent victimization rate.

Go to Who Has Illegal Guns and How Are They Acquired?

Meanwhile gun control in UK and Australia does not provide safety:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...pinion_LEADTop

Joyce Lee Malcolm: Two Cautionary Tales of Gun Control


After a school massacre, the U.K. banned handguns in 1998. A decade later, handgun crime had doubled.



By JOYCE LEE MALCOLM

Americans are determined that massacres such as happened in Newtown, Conn., never happen again. But how? Many advocate more effective treatment of mentally-ill people or armed protection in so-called gun-free zones. Many others demand stricter control of firearms.

We aren't alone in facing this problem. Great Britain and Australia, for example, suffered mass shootings in the 1980s and 1990s. Both countries had very stringent gun laws when they occurred. Nevertheless, both decided that even stricter control of guns was the answer. Their experiences can be instructive.
In 1987, Michael Ryan went on a shooting spree in his small town of Hungerford, England, killing 16 people (including his mother) and wounding another 14 before shooting himself. Since the public was unarmed—as were the police—Ryan wandered the streets for eight hours with two semiautomatic rifles and a handgun before anyone with a firearm was able to come to the rescue.
Nine years later, in March 1996, Thomas Hamilton, a man known to be mentally unstable, walked into a primary school in the Scottish town of Dunblane and shot 16 young children and their teacher. He wounded 10 other children and three other teachers before taking his own life.
Enlarge Image


Close



David Klein


Since 1920, anyone in Britain wanting a handgun had to obtain a certificate from his local police stating he was fit to own a weapon and had good reason to have one. Over the years, the definition of "good reason" gradually narrowed. By 1969, self-defense was never a good reason for a permit.

After Hungerford, the British government banned semiautomatic rifles and brought shotguns—the last type of firearm that could be purchased with a simple show of fitness—under controls similar to those in place for pistols and rifles. Magazines were limited to two shells with a third in the chamber.
Dunblane had a more dramatic impact. Hamilton had a firearm certificate, although according to the rules he should not have been granted one. A media frenzy coupled with an emotional campaign by parents of Dunblane resulted in the Firearms Act of 1998, which instituted a nearly complete ban on handguns. Owners of pistols were required to turn them in. The penalty for illegal possession of a pistol is up to 10 years in prison.
The results have not been what proponents of the act wanted. Within a decade of the handgun ban and the confiscation of handguns from registered owners, crime with handguns had doubled according to British government crime reports. Gun crime, not a serious problem in the past, now is. Armed street gangs have some British police carrying guns for the first time. Moreover, another massacre occurred in June 2010. Derrick Bird, a taxi driver in Cumbria, shot his brother and a colleague then drove off through rural villages killing 12 people and injuring 11 more before killing himself.

Meanwhile, law-abiding citizens who have come into the possession of a firearm, even accidentally, have been harshly treated. In 2009 a former soldier, Paul Clarke, found a bag in his garden containing a shotgun. He brought it to the police station and was immediately handcuffed and charged with possession of the gun. At his trial the judge noted: "In law there is no dispute that Mr. Clarke has no defence to this charge. The intention of anybody possessing a firearm is irrelevant." Mr. Clarke was sentenced to five years in prison. A public outcry eventually won his release.

In November of this year, Danny Nightingale, member of a British special forces unit in Iraq and Afghanistan, was sentenced to 18 months in military prison for possession of a pistol and ammunition. Sgt. Nightingale was given the Glock pistol as a gift by Iraqi forces he had been training. It was packed up with his possessions and returned to him by colleagues in Iraq after he left the country to organize a funeral for two close friends killed in action. Mr. Nightingale pleaded guilty to avoid a five-year sentence and was in prison until an appeal and public outcry freed him on Nov. 29.
***

Six weeks after the Dunblane massacre in 1996, Martin Bryant, an Australian with a lifelong history of violence, attacked tourists at a Port Arthur prison site in Tasmania with two semiautomatic rifles. He killed 35 people and wounded 21 others.
At the time, Australia's guns laws were stricter than the United Kingdom's. In lieu of the requirement in Britain that an applicant for permission to purchase a gun have a "good reason," Australia required a "genuine reason." Hunting and protecting crops from feral animals were genuine reasons—personal protection wasn't.

With new Prime Minister John Howard in the lead, Australia passed the National Firearms Agreement, banning all semiautomatic rifles and semiautomatic and pump-action shotguns and imposing a more restrictive licensing system on other firearms. The government also launched a forced buyback scheme to remove thousands of firearms from private hands. Between Oct. 1, 1996, and Sept. 30, 1997, the government purchased and destroyed more than 631,000 of the banned guns at a cost of $500 million.

To what end? While there has been much controversy over the result of the law and buyback, Peter Reuter and Jenny Mouzos, in a 2003 study published by the Brookings Institution, found homicides "continued a modest decline" since 1997. They concluded that the impact of the National Firearms Agreement was "relatively small," with the daily rate of firearms homicides declining 3.2%.
According to their study, the use of handguns rather than long guns (rifles and shotguns) went up sharply, but only one out of 117 gun homicides in the two years following the 1996 National Firearms Agreement used a registered gun. Suicides with firearms went down but suicides by other means went up. They reported "a modest reduction in the severity" of massacres (four or more indiscriminate homicides) in the five years since the government weapons buyback. These involved knives, gas and arson rather than firearms.
In 2008, the Australian Institute of Criminology reported a decrease of 9% in homicides and a one-third decrease in armed robbery since the 1990s, but an increase of over 40% in assaults and 20% in sexual assaults.

What to conclude? Strict gun laws in Great Britain and Australia haven't made their people noticeably safer, nor have they prevented massacres. The two major countries held up as models for the U.S. don't provide much evidence that strict gun laws will solve our problems.

Ms. Malcolm, a professor of law at George Mason University Law School, is the author of several books including "Guns and Violence: The English Experience," (Harvard, 2002).
__________________
"Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth." Marcus Aurelius
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-30-2012, 10:29 AM
Mad Scientest's Avatar
Mad Scientest Mad Scientest is offline
Lecturer
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Illinois
Posts: 2,077
Mad Scientest has a spectacular aura aboutMad Scientest has a spectacular aura aboutMad Scientest has a spectacular aura about
Default


We have heard many suggestions on ways to stop this gun violence, a few might have some merit, but in the end they are just Band-Aids for one particular type of attack. Once the attackers realize that a particular attack will no longer work they will simply devise another way. So of course we continually go running around trying to prevent one tragedy after another from “ever happening again” the only thing that really happens is we continue to lose more and more of our freedom. But then that is the real goal here, to eventually take away all our rights and freedom. Naturally this will be done for our safety, but it will also turn us into nothing more then obedient slaves.

It is at that point that the elite can start the real killings and mass extermination of us “useless eaters” in earnest and probably without many even realizing what is happening.



Two days after the CT shooting, a man went to a restaurant in
San Antonio to kill his X-girlfriend. After he shot her, most of the people in the restaurant fled next door to a theater. The gunman followed them and entered the theater so he could shoot more people. He started shooting and people in the theater started running and screaming. It’s was somewhat similar to the Colorado shooting.

But how many have heard of this? Surely the anti-gun crowd would want us all to know about this. Why wasn’t it a lead story in the national media along with the school shooting?

Could it possibility have something to do with the fact that by chance there was an off duty county deputy at the theater and SHE pulled out her gun and shot the man 4 times before he had a chance to kill anyone?


So since this story makes the point that the best thing to stop a bad person with a gun is a good person with a gun, the media is treating it like it never happened.

Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-30-2012, 11:00 AM
kind2creatures's Avatar
kind2creatures kind2creatures is online now
...elusive dreamer
Wiki Editor
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 6,439
Blog Entries: 47
kind2creatures is a splendid one to beholdkind2creatures is a splendid one to beholdkind2creatures is a splendid one to beholdkind2creatures is a splendid one to beholdkind2creatures is a splendid one to beholdkind2creatures is a splendid one to beholdkind2creatures is a splendid one to beholdkind2creatures is a splendid one to behold
Default

Plenty of cases where guns save lives, here's just a few...http://www.akdart.com/gun3.html
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-30-2012, 11:55 AM
Arrowwind09's Avatar
Arrowwind09 Arrowwind09 is offline
Standing at the Portal
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 6,554
Arrowwind09 has a spectacular aura aboutArrowwind09 has a spectacular aura about
Default

Bump with this.... the shooter in Connecticut did not us an assault rifle. Please famaliarize yourself with the facts on gun control and just how much safety it has provided people in countries that have inforced such laws. Lets get to the truth.


Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-30-2012, 02:00 PM
Arrowwind09's Avatar
Arrowwind09 Arrowwind09 is offline
Standing at the Portal
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 6,554
Arrowwind09 has a spectacular aura aboutArrowwind09 has a spectacular aura about
Default




Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-30-2012, 02:43 PM
jfh jfh is offline
perpetual student
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 5,095
jfh is a splendid one to beholdjfh is a splendid one to beholdjfh is a splendid one to beholdjfh is a splendid one to beholdjfh is a splendid one to beholdjfh is a splendid one to beholdjfh is a splendid one to behold
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arrowwind09 View Post
Bump with this.... the shooter in Connecticut did not us an assault rifle. Please famaliarize yourself with the facts on gun control and just how much safety it has provided people in countries that have inforced such laws. Lets get to the truth.
It might as well have been an assault rifle. These Bushmasters are very similar. He was able to pump several bullets into nearly every child.

Adam Lanza used a semiautomatic Bushmaster .223 rifle during his rampage through Sandy Hook Elementary School on Friday, firing dozens of high-velocity rounds as he killed 20 children and six adults, authorities said Sunday.
__________________
.
- Jim

"The best and most beautiful things in the world cannot be seen or even touched — they must be felt with the heart." — Helen Keller
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-30-2012, 09:53 PM
Mad Scientest's Avatar
Mad Scientest Mad Scientest is offline
Lecturer
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Illinois
Posts: 2,077
Mad Scientest has a spectacular aura aboutMad Scientest has a spectacular aura aboutMad Scientest has a spectacular aura about
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arrowwind09 View Post
Lets get to the truth.
Truth, Facts? Who needs facts all that is required is emotion. Just think of those poor children that we ----ah excuse me were killed, you don’t need to bother asking questions, just trust us and turn all your guns and we will make you safe.
Of course anyone that takes the time to look at the statistics can see that wherever guns are banned public safety declines and crime went up. Still the anti-gun groups claim if concealed carry is allowed the streets will be “flowing in blood”. Yet when tried the reality is just the opposite happens.


I have been following the Sandy Hook story and it now appears it was just a catalyst for this latest round of gun control laws. But before we blindly agree to more laws would someone care to answer these questions:


How did a camouflaged person carrying a rifle get into the school? The front door was supposedly lock and watched via a security camera, who unlocked the door and why?

Why did “State police” appear to be on the scene before the shooting?

Why did “State Police” prevent a local cop from responding to the shooting?

Why were we told the shooter entered the school with two hand guns yet latter told all the victims were shot with a rifle that was locked the trunk of his car?

Latter we were told the shooter went in with the rifle and wounded only one person while everyone else was shot and killed. Then went back to his car put the rifle in the trunk grabbed two hand guns and went back inside the school to kill himself.
How was the shooter able to achieve such deadly accuracy and do all this in such a short length of time? Apparently 3 -5 minutes. That would seem pretty speedy for a supposedly mentally deranged shooter.

Why did a local paper quote the schools principle as say “a masked man entered the school with a rifle and started shooting multiple shots – more than I could count.” Could her counting ability been affected by the fact that latter she was reported to be one of the first to be killed?

We were told that this was the shooter’s old school and that his mother taught there. Latter we learned nether had any connection with the school, as the shooter was home schooled.

After going to the trouble of dressing up in a bullet-proof vest, mask and black camouflage gear why would he bother to carry his brother’s identification that he hadn’t seen in a year?

We do have live emergency services radio feed in which we hear that two men have been apprehended and are “proned out” on the ground AND live video footage supported by eyewitness testimony showing what appears to be a THIRD man being arrested by police in the woods but the media didn’t cover this. Who where they and what happened to them? If they were not involved why not just say so, and that they were released?

Why were the bodies supposedly left on the scene for two days before being autopsied? Why would you need to autopsy a gun shot victim? Why can’t certification of the doctor that did the autopsies be found in any of the usual sources?

Why weren’t the parents of the children allowed to see the bodies but rather only shown pictures so as a way to identify them?

Early on “officials” placed both the shooter and his brother at the scene.
Latter the story was either or both brothers planed to kill the parents before going to the school, all this and more speculation.
Where did these stories come from? Could they have been prepared? Were they a set of “alternative scenarios” that if the facts on the ground turned had out differently would have found their way into the official reports? But were inadvertently released???

Why did the policechief threaten the reporters not to mention these stories and only report on his “official” story?

There is a glaring connection between the recent shootings, and now this, officiallyall are claimed to have been carried out by alone gunmenyet at the time of each eyewitnesses reported multiple gunmen! This logically tells us that the real perpetrators are being protected with cover stories because if the truth were known, some section of the government might be shall we say “embarrassed”.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-11-2015, 01:17 PM
Solstice Goat's Avatar
Solstice Goat Solstice Goat is offline
Frater Aegagrus
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 2,062
Solstice Goat has a spectacular aura aboutSolstice Goat has a spectacular aura aboutSolstice Goat has a spectacular aura about
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Scientest View Post
Truth, Facts? Who needs facts all that is required is emotion.

How did a camouflaged person carrying a rifle get into the school? The front door was supposedly lock and watched via a security camera, who unlocked the door and why?

Why did “State police” appear to be on the scene before the shooting?

Why did “State Police” prevent a local cop from responding to the shooting?

Why were we told the shooter entered the school with two hand guns yet latter told all the victims were shot with a rifle that was locked the trunk of his car?


Why did a local paper quote the schools principle as say “a masked man entered the school with a rifle and started shooting multiple shots – more than I could count.” Could her counting ability been affected by the fact that latter she was reported to be one of the first to be killed?

We were told that this was the shooter’s old school and that his mother taught there. Latter we learned nether had any connection with the school, as the shooter was home schooled.

After going to the trouble of dressing up in a bullet-proof vest, mask and black camouflage gear why would he bother to carry his brother’s identification that he hadn’t seen in a year?



Why were the bodies supposedly left on the scene for two days before being autopsied? Why would you need to autopsy a gun shot victim? Why can’t certification of the doctor that did the autopsies be found in any of the usual sources?

Why weren’t the parents of the children allowed to see the bodies but rather only shown pictures so as a way to identify them?

Early on “officials” placed both the shooter and his brother at the scene.
Latter the story was either or both brothers planed to kill the parents before going to the school, all this and more speculation.
Where did these stories come from? Could they have been prepared? Were they a set of “alternative scenarios” that if the facts on the ground turned had out differently would have found their way into the official reports? But were inadvertently released???

Why did the policechief threaten the reporters not to mention these stories and only report on his “official” story?

Yes, where are the answers?
__________________
"We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now you begin to understand me." George Orwell
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-12-2015, 02:25 AM
knightofalbion knightofalbion is offline
Lecturer
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Glastonbury, England
Posts: 1,844
knightofalbion has a spectacular aura aboutknightofalbion has a spectacular aura aboutknightofalbion has a spectacular aura about
Default

Cease-fire!

According to official records, gun crime in England and Wales has gone down 42% in the last 9 years.

Carry on shooting ...
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-12-2015, 02:33 AM
knightofalbion knightofalbion is offline
Lecturer
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Glastonbury, England
Posts: 1,844
knightofalbion has a spectacular aura aboutknightofalbion has a spectacular aura aboutknightofalbion has a spectacular aura about
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arrowwind09 View Post


http://www.wagingnonviolence.org/fea...ht-about-guns/
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 02-12-2015, 10:16 AM
Solstice Goat's Avatar
Solstice Goat Solstice Goat is offline
Frater Aegagrus
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 2,062
Solstice Goat has a spectacular aura aboutSolstice Goat has a spectacular aura aboutSolstice Goat has a spectacular aura about
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by knightofalbion View Post
Cease-fire!

According to official records, gun crime in England and Wales has gone down 42% in the last 9 years.

Carry on shooting ...
You're not even allowed a pocket knife!
Reply With Quote
Reply
Please reply to this thread with any new information or opinions.

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Remove the Green Mask Arrowwind09 Chitchat 1 10-16-2012 04:55 PM
Cilantro Pesto to Remove Heavy Metals Arrowwind09 Recipes 2 07-25-2011 08:33 AM
Think About This..(accidental death physicians vs guns) pinballdoctor General Discussions 4 10-03-2010 01:21 PM
US Trails Other Nations In Chronic Health Care Arrowwind09 Health Insurance 1 11-14-2008 11:40 PM
Principles of Non-Violence Arrowwind09 Chitchat 0 10-21-2008 12:03 PM