?

Log in

Interesting Research - Shattered Death Community and RL Journal of Magest [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Shattered Death Community and RL Journal of Magest

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Interesting Research [Oct. 6th, 2005|08:27 am]
Shattered Death Community and RL Journal of Magest

shattereddeath

[themagestorm]
Well, I was delayed on my entries due to some research I was up to. This morning, I was researching some surprising gun facts.

Instances of gun violence and accidents INCREASE the more gun laws restict legal ownership. Amazing that the top 10 states for gun violence are ALSO the 10 most restrictive states for gun ownership.

States where gun ownership is less restrictive has shown a marked drop in gun related violence.

A direct correlation between may issue states and shall issue states for gun violence also shows that shall issue states have a marked drop in violence.

80% of the time when a carry concealed weapon permit holder draws a firearm for self protection, the gun is never even discharged. Only 5% of the time is the gun used to injure or kill the assailant.

No records exist for CCW permit holders shooting an officer of the law, while there have been many reports of CCW permit holders SAVING law officials with their legal firearms.

Much of these are in unrelated databases, from the NRA to Anti-gun lobby websites. However, it took me hours of looking at these unrelated facts to see the connections. Also amazing is the fact that while child related gun accidents were about 1200 in 2001, they made up a mere 1.5% of accidental fatalities. Most of these accidents could have been avoided by simple methods that responsible gun owners carry out.

Because of this, and more, I'm seriously thinking of getting the hell out of this state. Where I live right now, I can get an illegal gun for as cheap as $40, and I hear gunfire all the time. However, Massachusetts has some of the tightest gun laws in the books. So while law abiding citizens are stuck cowering in their homes, punks with illegal weapons can go around as they please.

If you live in a restrictive state, I suggest lobbying for less gun laws. I feel backround checks are a good thing, as they make sure that psychos and criminals aren't buying guns. But, since I am not either one of these, it should be no problem for me to own one. Here in the state of Massholes, I can't even get damn pepper spray without a permit.

Maybe Washington state, Nevada, or other less restrictive state would be better for me.

Oh well. For now, I'll just get back to researching. Will link this at Hotel 23 (link to it in story journal profile) and see what they have to say on it.
linkReply

Comments:
From: (Anonymous)
2005-10-07 05:26 am (UTC)

An interesting bit of info

although I don't think you can safely say that unrestrictive gun laws equal less crime. It seems to me like gun laws tend to be set up after the fact as a response to growing gun violence. People are obviously to blame for crime and not weapons, and cities that refuse to accept this I believe are far more likely to adopt further laws that do nothing for the problem, even worsening the problem by creating a favourable environment for crooks. Like with that one story about the burglar who sued a home owner after injuring himself in that home.

For another example, right now in Ontario, people are getting pissed at all the muders in Toronto. It's pretty much assured that this is going to be a very bad year for Toronto in terms of crime. Toronto and the provincial and federal government's response to this has been mostly bull. There's been plenty of yelling by the mayor about how it's all the US's fault, because of all the illegal guns coming through the border, or how toronto needs even more restrictive gun laws on homeowners. Meanwhile, various people and some newspapers have been pointing out that weak sentencing for these criminals isn't helping. I remember just a couple weeks ago in the opinion section of a newspaper a letter was posted from the justice minister or someone similar. It was an incredibly rediculous letter in which he stated that prison sentences do not matter because it is the THREAT OF BEING CAUGHT and threat alone that discourages criminals. This is from the man setting the tone of judicial sentencing for the province and much of canada if I'm not mistaken. This doesn't bode well at all for crime in Canada for the next decade

So, yeah, I think restrictive gun laws follow unrealistic ideas of how to reduce crime. They also serve to distract the public from crackpot criminal theory advanced by law-makers and the like.


As an aside, you ever thought of tweaking the colours for your journal? I've found the bright reds and greens make my eyes bleed and are sort of distracting. I made a little test page to see what it might look like if the colours were more desaturated and if the red bar stuck out less from the background. Try opening it and yours in separate windows(or tabs if you use firefox) and switch between them http://www.livejournal.com/users/im_a_test/

Also, the line "A direct correlation between may issue states and shall issue states for gun violence also shows that shall issue states have a marked drop in violence." is a little hard to read. What exactly is a shall issue state? Shall issue gun control? Shall issue guns?
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: themagestorm
2005-10-08 01:26 am (UTC)

Re: An interesting bit of info

Well, here's some replies to this.

On the journal colors, I have been wanting to get a totally new theme. However, I'm not savvy enough with Livejournal's settings to get a totally new look for it. The problem with the muted colors is that it makes it all really hard to read for others. So without a totally new theme (rotted limbs and green crystals?) I'm just not seeing a middle ground on it much. Either way, it will bug people.

On the subject of gun laws and gun violence:

A may issue state is a state that may issue a permit to carry to those that apply for one. However, because of the laws, the issuing agency (usually the local police) make it so most people can't get one. Unless you know a cop, or have a job that requires a gun carried or copious ammounts of cash carried, most of them will just laugh in your face.

On the other hand, a shall issue state is a state that issues the licence to carry UNLESS the person is a criminal, or mentally unsuitable to carry a weapon. In a shall issue state, anyone who is suitable to carry a weapon and applies can get their license.

Problem with a may issue state is that it basicly infringes on a person's rights, as those people that are suitable to carry a firearm and want one cannot, because of rampant corruption.

Yes, I think there are also other factors that may influence these numbers I have looked at. However, when you see that the top 10 states for gun violence is also the top 10 states for gun restrictions, it raises a HUGE red flag. Add into it the lowest 20 states for gun violence are also the least restrictive, and it shoots up another red flag.

Yes, reduced sentances do encourage the revolving door. But, when you have an enemy force armed with superior weaponry, you find yourself in one hell of a bind. But, if the crroks found out their potential victims could be packing as little as 1 in 5 times, or as much as 4 in 5 times, then you would definitely see a drastic reduction in violent crimes. Most criminals fear getting shot over getting arrested, so this is a powerful deterrant against crime.

Add into it that 80% of the time a CCW holder pulls their gun, it is reholstered without ever firing a shot, and that adds up to an impressive set of facts.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: (Anonymous)
2005-10-11 04:27 am (UTC)

Re: An interesting bit of info


Yes, I think there are also other factors that may influence these numbers I have looked at. However, when you see that the top 10 states for gun violence is also the top 10 states for gun restrictions, it raises a HUGE red flag. Add into it the lowest 20 states for gun violence are also the least restrictive, and it shoots up another red flag.

Yes, this certainly is telling. Where are you getting these links to find the top ten states for gun violence? I'm having some trouble finding some unbiased sites with charts and tables for each state. I'm interested in looking at Texas, as, from what I understand, it has a pretty high crimerate while having some pretty unrestrictive gun laws. I want to see if this is true when compared to the top ten.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: themagestorm
2005-10-11 07:07 pm (UTC)

Re: An interesting bit of info

I used mostly figures coming from Anti gun sites. Seems they can't see the nose in front of their faces if I can look at these numbers and see this glaring inconsistancies.

When the numbers are straight violence numbers, you don't get to see the actual comparison. Of course a state with millions of people will have more violence than one with under a million people.

But taken as a percentage, you can have a basis for comparing. Once all the states' figures have a common denominator, ONLY then can one actually make comparisons.

When these figures are taken as a percentage, You see how the restrictive gun laws start affecting gun violence, compared to less restricitve states.

But, I used all sites, comparing one set of figures to the other. Once I had a consistant set, I was able to make the comparisons and draw these conclusions.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)