More proof that gun control doesn't work


#1

One of my favorite writers, Dr. Thomas Sowell, spells out the entire lie about needing more gun control and how the libs use tragedy to push their ridiculous agenda. Read on…

(Note what he says about Washington, DC. I’ve been saying this for years after reading the statistics on gun control and violent crime.)

» Sowell: Invincible Ignorance » Commentary – GOPUSA


#2

X2

This guy is a known expert on Gun Control, read what he has to say:

John Lott’s Website

Gun Expert Lott: Let Teachers Carry Arms, Ban Gun-Free Zones to Halt Mass Shootings

Banning gun-free zones and allowing teachers to carry concealed weapons could help eliminate mass shootings at schools, John R. Lott, one of the nation’s leading gun experts, tells Newsmax in an exclusive interview Saturday.

Lott, an author and college professor, told Newsmax that gun-free zones become “a magnet” for deranged killers who hope to burn their names into the history books by running up a big body count.

Lott’s landmark book “More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws” is in its 3rd edition. He told Newsmax there is a “very good chance” the Connecticut school shooting could have been averted, if teachers there were permitted to carry concealed handguns.

It is no accident, he said, that mass shootings repeatedly have occurred in designated gun-free zones, which attract lunatics looking to murder as many souls as possible before they turn their guns on themselves.

Gun Expert Lott: Let Teachers Carry Arms, Ban Gun-Free Zones to Halt Mass Shootings


#3

Lies, damn lies, and statistics. He’s making claims about murders and rural vs urban areas and black vs white and then inferring that gun ownership is the overarching cause for the difference in homicide rates, a false cause I might add, and ignores all the other causes, not to mention any other data that might disagree with him (and there is a lot of data that disagrees with him). Homicide rates are higher in urban areas no matter where you live, gun control laws or not, and blacks historically live in more urban areas where there is more crime, resulting in blacks committing more crimes.

The whole thing is ridiculous.

And then this sentence got a laugh:

“In 1954, there were only a dozen armed robberies in London but, by the 1990s-- after decades of ever tightening gun ownership restrictions-- there were more than a hundred times as many armed robberies.”

Well, first off, if there were a hundred times more robberies in London, that would mean there woud be 1200 robberies in London per year in the 1990s. Surely we can see that this is false. Notice also that he leaves out “per capita”, thus allowing population growth to do magic for him.

Violent crime in 1950 was 1053/100,000 people
Violent crime in 2011 was 7572/100,000 people, and that figure has actually been dropping. But it is hardly the scary 100 TIMES MORE CRIME statistic he’s spouting off.

Linearly that’s like a rise of 619%

Compared to the United States:

1960 (Sorry, BJS only goes back that far): 160.9/100,000 people
2009: 429.4/100,000 people

Rise of 166%. But again, that’s linearly, and there was a massive drop in crime in the 1990s, so it probably rose a lot more by 1990. And the UK and the US define violent crime differently, and he doesn’t even touch that issue.

So in essence, this man’s statistics are lies and his lies are lies.

Put more simply:

http://samuel-warde.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Jon-Stewart-rips-Fox-news-in-Chaos-on-CHAOS-on-BULLSHIT-MOUNTAIN-sm.jpg


#4

Interesting…however, giving guns to public school teachers doesn’t sound very wise to me. To me, they’re almost as dangerous as the lunatics shooting up school children. [that was a sarcastic remark, folks…]


#5

Trekky

Lies, damn lies, and statistics. He’s making claims about murders and rural vs urban areas and black vs white and then inferring that gun ownership is the overarching cause for the difference in homicide rates, a false cause I might add, and ignores all the other causes, not to mention any other data that might disagree with him (and there is a lot of data that disagrees with him). Homicide rates are higher in urban areas no matter where you live, gun control laws or not, and** blacks historically live in more urban areas where there is more crime, resulting in blacks committing more crimes.**
You’ve lost it, totally. You mean that if I move to an area where there is rampant crime, I will commit crimes? WTH?? People commit crimes to achieve GAIN. They do not commit crime because of where they live. That is the most racist thing said here today.

It does not take a rocket surgeon to realize that if I am a criminal, and the area I work, is gun-free, I am safer to commit crimes. A home invader has much less to worry about in California, than in North Carolina. Of course you know all of this. It would be imbecilic to assume that taking the guns of the law abiding, in any way thwarts the criminal. Take our guns, and only the criminals will have them.


#6

Tiny: I suspect that Trekkie’s comments have their basis in political correctness. Only the stupid would believe such nonsense. The truth of the matter is that there is a higher percentage of crime in black areas because the black family unit has been almost completely obliterated with the exception of very few. Ninety percent of black children are being raised in a single-family household on welfare. With no positive male role-models for boys, they grow up on the streets with little or no supervision even from their mothers or grandmothers. That is why gangs are so successful in black areas. Black boys especially are looking for the family they don’t have–with some kind of structure–even though the structure that gangs provide is violent and negative. Because of the money issue with drug dealing and such, this becomes extremely attractive to young impressive boys. There is a status symbol attached to belonging to a gang. This can also be found in non-black families particularly with single, white women with no father in the picture. Interestingly, white children actually have a better chance at a normal life because the percentages of white children with only a mother figure generally have the moral and emotional support from their extended family–usually a grandfather or uncle. In black families, this kind of behavior has become so pervasive over several generations that their extended families are pretty much in the same situation as the children. This is basic sociology 101. There are always exceptions to the rule, but this is basically why blacks commit more crimes and especially more violent crimes than non-blacks. It has become their “culture”.


#7

Crime is committed more often in urban areas, correct? It’s just a characteristic of cities. A bunch of people living together commit more crimes than people spread apart and sparse with a close-knit community.

Now, if blacks are more common in urban areas than rural, does it not make more sense that they would have a higher incidence of crime than others who are not as common in urban areas? Growing up in a place that already breeds crime? All over the world, even if we get away from blacks and move to somewhere like China, the data is still the same. Crime rates in the city are higher than in the country. It just so happens that blacks are usually the ones commonly living in urban areas, so their crime rates are higher than others. In either case, the crime rates are most definitely not linked to some BS about gun ownership. These rates in urban areas remain the same regardless of gun control laws or gun ownership rates.


#8

If that was the case then why would crime rates in urban areas that do not have black populations also have high crime rates? The crime rates have nothing to do with the blacks living there and everything to do with cities fostering more crime.


#9

In Australia;
The results of Australia’s Gun Ban: Armed Robberies UP 69% (other crimes are up as well).

Gun Control - Watch What Happens When Guns Are Banned.

Oh yeah, banning guns is great…bunch of idiots.

.
.


#10

:banghead: Facts mean nothing to libs.


#11

This is a simple bold-faced lie that has been debunked in the past. 69% is just an outrageous figure.

Armed robberies were on the rise before gun control laws came into effect, and in fact in recent years have gone down to their previous levels. So no, they are not up 69%. The percent of armed robberies using firearms has also decreased, from 27.8% in 1995 to 14% five years later, or almost half. So not only has armed robbery gone down to their previous levels, but the percentage of robberies with guns have gone down as well.

Crimes with guns are at record lows in Australia. This bogus about rising crime is that—complete and utter bogus.
FactCheck.org : Gun Control in Australia


#12

Wait wait wait… This guy is a college professor? So just to clarify, this professor is worthy of citing because you agree with him? Hmm kind of hypocritical but okay.


#13

Nothing new here. Move along.

It can be frustrating but don’t let them get to you. that’s what they enjoy doing.

Did I just state the definition of a troll?


#14

I am a gun owner - currently own 11. I have been hunting since a young boy growing up in Oklahoma. I have hunted a broad range of game - from sheep in Alaska, moose in Quebec to mule deer in Utah and elk in Colorado. I do not profess to be a firearms expert, but I am no pilgrim, either.

That said, I am for compulsory background checks for the sale of all firearms. I personally find high capacity clips repulsive and unnecessary. No hunter would be caught dead carrying a Bushmaster in the field. However, I know of no evidence to indicate that banning high capacity, semi-auto weapons would have an impact on mass shootings like the one in Newtown, Conn.

I think there are at least two things we could do to impact mass murders. Keep in mind, we will NEVER be able to eliminate such episodes.

First, we must make it easier/less risky and more practical to clinically refer those who require intervention. We live in a very litigious society - there is a real risk of being sued for those stepping forward and refering another person to mental health practitioners for evaluation. As one reviews nearly all of these killings there is a common thread - “Oh yeah, he was crazy and everyone knew it”. Even the psych seeing/treating the theater shooter in Colorado was reluctant to “pull the trigger” on institutionalizing the shooter - an individual she knew to be a paranoid schizophrenic who presented a real and even professed danger to himself and others. Even the campus police refused to refer the shooter for psych evaluation. That attitude MUST change.

Second - how can one not notice that these shooters almost always carry out their homicidal ideation/rage at locations where they are least likely to encounter armed/deadly opposition? It is no accident that schools and places of employment, locations often devoid of a lethal means of self protection - read, guns - provide the typical setting for slaughter. This fact by itself should tell the idiots running the country that these highly vulnerable locations require an enhanced ability to protect those present, not less. But, don’t hold your breath - not as long as demogoguery and voter ignorance translates into votes!!


#15

I know it’s a side issue to your main point, but I would like to address these two sentences. First, the 2nd Amendment isn’t about hunting; it’s about self-defense, whether against individual criminals, gangs, or (especially) the government. Combat rifles with high-capacity magazines are the best firearms for defense against the latter.

That said, I would certainly have hunted with my combat rifle if it weren’t for the fact that PA doesn’t allow hunting semiautos; it would have saved me the cost of an additional gun (which I ended up selling anyway; I got all four of my deer with archery tackle).


#16

I grew up in and around Los Angeles, so I need no lecture about urban vs rural. Los Angeles has about 50% white and less than 10% black. Lincolnton NC(pop. 10,000) is our county seat, is 76% white and 13% black. Our crime rate is way less than State or National averages. The fact is, WE CARRY GUNS. Cities like LA, Chicago, New York, invoke gun control, disarming their constituents, whereas, criminals know that chances are 99/100 they will encounter a gun, here.
We have a higher percentage of blacks and lower crime rate, because like Teri said, our families are more cohesive. Also, the Christian Population is WAY higher here.
Black people commit more crime as a result of lack of parenting, and the urban culture that promotes the gansta mentality.


#17

I’m sorry but that simply isn’t true. Los Angeles isn’t even lower in crimes, particularly murders and robberies than the average in California or the national average as you claim.

Los Angeles crime rates and statistics - NeighborhoodScout


#18

[quote=“Trekky0623, post:17, topic:37529”]
I’m sorry but that simply isn’t true. Los Angeles isn’t even lower in crimes, particularly murders and robberies than the average in California or the national average as you claim.

Los Angeles crime rates and statistics - NeighborhoodScout
[/quote]Do you or did you live there? Or is this another one of those I know more about it than those with actual experience moments?


#19

It’s one of those I have statistics to back up the claims I’m making, not personal anecdotes or stories moments.


#20

I know many hunters that carry an AR, in fact I carry one, my AR 10 in 7.62 NATO. They make GREAT HOG guns, hogs like to run in packs, my wife carries a Bushmaster in 5.56 for the smaller hogs.

For BIG game I carry a Ruger Mdl 1, which is a single shot rifle. I believe in 1 shot 1 kill but I also know my game and when hunting packs you better be prepared, many hogs can be quite vicious and also attack. More than one hunter has been treed by a hog.

As for HiCap mags I have nothing against them at all, I have some 30 rd down to as little as 5, which is what is use to for Hogs. That said lets look at the 2nd RKBA to understand what kind of a weapon I can carry and how big a mag I should have:

“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

  1. Well regulated militia: This is based upon the citizen soldier

  2. RIGHT of the people of bear arms: How can I as a citizen be prepared to defend my family, my state and my country from all enemies foreign and domestic if I am NOT armed?

  3. When the Constitution was written the ‘assault weapon’ of the day was probably a Brown Bess Musket. In 2012 its an AR (Bushmaster) in 5.56. Anyway you want to spin it in order for me as a citizen to fulfill my duties to myself, family and govt I should have at my hand a proper weapon and that would not be a musket or some single shot weapon…

  4. Lastly, our founders wanted to insure we had the ability to defend ourselves against tyranny from a govt out of control. And that is a REALL possiblity…NEVER forget that more children murdered in Waco, Tx by a govt out of control than died in Newtown Conn!!!