General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDoes anyone care that the murder rate in the US is lower than it has been in a long time?
The murder rate in the 70s was TWICE as high as it is today. You wouldn't know it looking at headlines.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)Why did you post this thread here today?
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)I mean, when someone sets a grotesque record like Mr. Mateen did, it's really important for some people to inflict a little more pain on them. It's a public service, really.
Cassiopeia
(2,603 posts)Hundreds of families were directly effected just because a family member was there. Many were lucky, but they still grieve knowing today just how close it was.
NobodyHere
(2,810 posts)Many people are posting that America is worst than ever when it comes to violence and that it is spiraling out of control. When factually it just isn't true.
panader0
(25,816 posts)uppityperson
(115,681 posts)onehandle
(51,122 posts)The Second Amendment wasn't written to support the mass slaughter of innocents.
rjsquirrel
(4,762 posts)be a defense of assault weapon ownership.
Yeah murders are down. But mass shootings are at an all time high. Sick deflection dude.
RKBA nuts need to have something to compensate for their tiny little ... Minds.
I don't see why DU tolerates them.
Marengo
(3,477 posts)lancer78
(1,495 posts)You are upsetting their agenda. Gun control does work. But it is a fine line between stopping people who shouldn't have guns and throwing out the 4th and 5th Amendments.
For 500 lives a year, I am not willing to do that. Others might think differently.
My sister and brother-in-law were killed by a drunk driver. I did not start demanding alcohol be banned.
rjsquirrel
(4,762 posts)Assault weapons. Semi auto rifles.
lancer78
(1,495 posts)will require repealing the 2nd, 4th, and 5th Amendments. I feel that the situation is not dire enough to require it. Just like even though I lost 2 family members, I didn't think alcohol should be banned.
rjsquirrel
(4,762 posts)How are fully auto guns banned now? What about rocket launchers?
You guys just make shit up.
And no it's not like banning alcohol. It's like banning drunk driving. Which we do -- even if you don't kill anyone it's a crime.
Pure fear mongering.
ManiacJoe
(10,136 posts)It just takes lots of paperwork and tons of money to buy one. Some states allow them, some don't.
The launchers of rockets are legal to own as they are just glorified tubes. The rockets are bombs; thus illegal as bombs serve no purpose in the hands of civilians.
rjsquirrel
(4,762 posts)ManiacJoe
(10,136 posts)Your welcome.
Now what will you do with your new knowledge?
roamer65
(36,747 posts)Yes?
Very few here are arguing for a complete ban. Most would like to see tighter controls on guns. I don't blame them on it. They would like to be able to feel reasonably safe as they go about their business.
This Mateen guy abused a system similar to a driver's license. He abused the concealed carry licensing system, therefore it is logical adjustments should be made to it.
lancer78
(1,495 posts)is pretty much as strict as can be without banning alcohol. Over-serving people can make you liable for their actions.
And how did Mateen abuse the system? From what I heard he passed all the background checks. He was a former armed security guard. There is simply no law that could have been passed (besides a ban) that would have prevented this. I take that back, banning Muslims from owning firearms would have worked.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)Not exactly a devout Muslim so even that might not work.
roamer65
(36,747 posts)You get preferential treatment under the CC system and more so the further up it you go.
1939
(1,683 posts)you can get a weapon when the NICS check clears. If you don't, there is a waiting period. That is the preferential treatment you get.
Lonusca
(202 posts)Not at all. The current level is generally .08% And we are not considered a society that is tough on drunk driving
We could lower that to something like .02%.
Why don't we do that?
bunnies
(15,859 posts)Just curious.
angrychair
(8,733 posts)Alcohol was not created for the express purpose to kill human beings. A gun was created to kill. Yes, it was.
I believe the outright ban on most guns and the strong regulation of guns used for hunting or sport target shooting is not extreme or out of scope.
There is no reason to carry a weapon in public. Billions have lived, do live and will live, their entire lives and never own a gun and never need a gun. Why is it your "right" to have a gun superior to my right to not worry if, when you walk into the same Taco Bell as me, with a gun on your hip or rifle over your shoulder, if you are there to kill me or the nachos.
bunnies
(15,859 posts)Wow. Does that 500 lives include your friends and family?
dhill926
(16,363 posts)jesus christ...
Cassiopeia
(2,603 posts)Hell, most major metro areas blow that number away in a year alone, much less nationally.
ManiacJoe
(10,136 posts)Not sure if that is the number is what he means.
SunSeeker
(51,725 posts)Cassiopeia
(2,603 posts)Negligence? Sure, and that should be a crime that is prosecuted.
struggle4progress
(118,356 posts)JI7
(89,275 posts)Gidney N Cloyd
(19,847 posts)Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)The large number of dead make these atrocities loom large in the public awareness, in no small part because we're absolutely inundated with stories about them, social media references, etc. This makes it seem like we're killing each other off at an unprecedented rate...when that's manifestly not the case. The vast majority of people being murdered die with little fanfare, and the factors behind their deaths, usually very different from those that produce spree killers, remain unaddressed.
It's a bit insane...but that's our society in a nutshell.
bunnies
(15,859 posts)Are we at an acceptable level of deaths for you?
onehandle
(51,122 posts)bunnies
(15,859 posts)To a guy who is willing to sacrifice 500 lives a year to keep his precious.
Wtf is wrong with people?
lancer78
(1,495 posts)the number of people die from drunk drivers each year than from rifles (including the AR15). As a victim of a drunk driver(lost 2 family members) I think we should ban alcohol before banning the AR15.
bunnies
(15,859 posts)We're not talking about addiction here. We're talking about guns.
lancer78
(1,495 posts)is not necessarily an addict. When you answer me about the 10,000 "free deaths" caused by drunk drivers, which I have been a victim of, than I will answer yours.
I am sorry, but I think saving 500 lives a year is not worth it to lose the 2nd, 4th, and 5th Amendments. You apparently think it is. And before you say that losing those rights wouldn't be necessary, yes it would. In order to prevent gun deaths, you have to confiscate guns. It is that simple.
metroins
(2,550 posts)I'm a 2a supporter, it's in our Constitution and a "semi auto rifle" is my .22 long rifle or an "assault rifle" is if I stuck a forward grip on it. Ludicrous.
However, deflecting to drunk driving ignores the conversation being had. They are not equivocal and I honestly think you can, and are, making a real argument, like you are with the 2,4 and 5th.
Deflecting to drunk driving may end the conversation with a weak opponent, but I think sticking to the real reasons is a better argument.
If the government wanted to tomorrow, it could enact prohibition again. It couldn't however ban guns without a constitutional amendment. That's a STRONG argument for gun rights.
I'm a "blame the person, not the tool" kind of guy. If you ban something, people usually get around it.
Travis_0004
(5,417 posts)Even people who want to ban guns will tell you that.
Of course, if we ban all guns, some magic fairy is going to make them all go away, and there will be peace on earth. At least thats what I've been told.
dhill926
(16,363 posts)Dem2
(8,168 posts)Off to ignore with ya. Oh, and what you posted isn't true, but I will not argue with gun nuts.
(notice gun deaths are increasing)
Fresh_Start
(11,330 posts)most people including children use motor vehicles hundreds of times a year...
so there are 35,000 motor vehicle deaths for 500,000,000,000 individual usage events (car trips)
while it is possible to suffer vehicle death while never using a vehicle (e.g. pedestrian deaths)
those events are rare
for the vast vast majority, the deaths are for people who have accepted the risk of using a motor vehicle
compare that with firearm deaths...
33,000 firearm deaths with for 1,000,000,000 individual usage events (days of shooting)
AND many people who are killed are not and have never used a firearm
There is no comparison.
Gunz owners are responsible for FAR FAR more deaths...especially deaths of people who have never accepted the risk of guns
Dem2
(8,168 posts)arguing on their terms is sometimes necessary since their point isn't really good anyway and automotive deaths have dropped far more than gun deaths (which are actually increasing again) due to government regulation of safety standards
Dem2
(8,168 posts)All of the right-wing talking points have been dumped here in the past couple of days.
TeddyR
(2,493 posts)Exactly are you concerned about? I find that every time someone can't refute a valid argument they say it is a "right wing" (or "left wing" talking point.
On edit, what the fuck is a "right wing talking point" anyway? Is it just some opinion you don't like?
quaker bill
(8,224 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)The fact that it's worldwide usually suggests something atmospheric or climate related.
hunter
(38,328 posts)Yep, maybe that's why I'm an asshole.
I've got relatives who were so good with guns they were ordered to stay home here in the U.S.A. training shooters. My dad's cousin married a guy who volunteered for service in Korea but the Army, in all of it's wisdom, threw him into the Olympics as a trainer.
I'm competent enough with guns myself. I don't have to like that.
My dad's dad wanted to be the romantic pilot in World War II, women swooning, all that. But he was too old, and had too many mad engineering skills. The Army Air Force put him to work supervising people deemed essential to the war effort, people more eccentric then himself. He was an explainer and protector of the people whose work he was explaining. He acquired mad skills with titanium at some point, he wouldn't talk about that, and was later an engineer for the Apollo project.
My dad's a nearsighted MASH Radar O'Reily sort, and an artist. He did his military service in California, and they repaid him with a university arts degree. My wife's dad escaped the Korean conflict too, but was used as a guinea pig in nuclear weapons testing in Nevada, witnessing a nuclear explosion from a hole in the ground, marching across ground zero, and scrubbing off the radioactive dust in field showers.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)mass shooting incidents comprise many more of the total number of murders there are, now, than they did in the 1970's. This is clearly a problem. And the US murder rate is still around five times higher than it is for any comparable developed country.
lancer78
(1,495 posts)is lower here than the EU based on population.
scscholar
(2,902 posts)You can't open a paper without reading about yet another mass shooting. They're constantly happening.
lancer78
(1,495 posts)the media like to sensationalize them. As I said, the frequency of mass shootings is higher in the EU based on population than it is in America from 2009-2015.
Jim Beard
(2,535 posts)should not be reported.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)That's an incredibly ignorant statement. Those bullshit numbers are arrived at by looking at mass shooting deaths per capita for the whole of the USA and then comparing them to mass shooting deaths per capita for say Norway (population: 5 million) or for the UK (population: 60 million) rather than considering them as per capita for the whole of the EU (500 million) or for all of Europe (740 million).
Travis_0004
(5,417 posts)Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)considering that Europe has far fewer mass shooting incidents and a much lower overall murder rate and firearms murder rate.
YouDig
(2,280 posts)Do you even care?
Zippyzagnut
(77 posts)"...twice as high as it is today." Is that number okay with you? It's not okay with me. It's still too high. Any murder is too many.
lancer78
(1,495 posts)to remove protections of the Bill of Rights in order to decrease the murder rate?
GeorgeGist
(25,323 posts)lancer78
(1,495 posts)go as well as those will be preventing confiscation.
TeddyR
(2,493 posts)If we could torture criminals that really might cut down on the crime rate, and if we could cut off hands for theft the recidivism rate might go down. Should we eliminate that amendment as well?
stopbush
(24,396 posts)so we shouldn't concern ourselves with heart attacks.
struggle4progress
(118,356 posts)in firearm deaths: the natural explanation is that medical improvements are currently outstripping increases in injuries
Years
Firearm Injury Rate
Firearm Death Rate
Injuries per Death
2001-2002
21.28
10.45
2.04
2003-2004
22.34
10.24
2.18
2005-2006
23.78
10.37
2.29
2007-2008
24.53
10.38
2.36
2009-2010
22.79
10.24
2.23
2011-2012
24.81
10.53
2.36
2013-2014
26.62
10.58
2.52
hunter
(38,328 posts)GaYellowDawg
(4,449 posts)Consolation is going to have to wait.
But I will say I'd feel a lot better about statistics if the CDC wasn't legally banned from compiling them.
BootinUp
(47,195 posts)Dem2
(8,168 posts)https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=
This is a lesson people, never believe what the pro-gun lackey's are telling you.
Kilgore
(1,733 posts)Don't see the connection.
It's just a statistic gun-nuts were wont to bring up over the years.
So, I like to note that auto-deaths, which WERE a major public concern years ago, have dropped precipitously due to government regulations. See how that works?
(also I showed that the O/P was exaggerating a lot when they stated that gun deaths were 2x as high in 1970's.)
etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)I realize that our enumerated rights are absolute .... even when they infringe on the safety , well being, and rights of others ...... oh wait, that's not even remotely true.
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)Based on the rhetoric of those who want to ban guns you would think the US was a war zone.