http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...t-passed-this-law/?postshare=6861434326597080 In a study released Thursday in the American Journal of Public Health, they estimate that the law reduced gun homicides by 40 percent between 1996 and 2005. Thats 296 lives saved in 10 years. requiring a permit to possess a handgun in Connecticut, reduced gun murders by 40%. this is strong evidence that gun control does work. the rest of the USA should learn from CT. possessing a handgun in the USA, should require a permit
SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH. http://crimepreventionresearchcente...ticut-fell-40-because-of-a-gun-licensing-law/ Let the healing begin. - - - Updated - - - http://hotair.com/archives/2015/06/14/fact-checking-one-of-the-worst-wapo-gun-control-stories-ever/
Murder in Texas dropped 30% between 1995 and 2005. That's over 600 lives every year. Texas began it's CHL program in 1996 and relaxed other gun laws. The amount of murders dropped 45% after 19 years since 1995. With the population increase that would make the murder rate drop over 50%. Our way supports the people's freedom and Constitutional rights. That's "all murders" and not just "gun murders". I don't see a difference. Murder is murder. http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/txcrime.htm
Study is flawed or more likely it has a poilitical agenda without revealing all of the facts. It only counts homicide deaths but ignores those who were shot but survived. Every time America goes to war there are improvements or great advances in medicine and treating gunshot wounds. A gunshot victim was more likely to survive in 1976 than one in 1960. A gunshot victim today is more likely to survive than if he was shot before 2003. Unless the study is honest and actually shows how many people were actually shot, it's nothing more than revisionism aka cultural-Marxism. I've seen leftist studies including homicides by guns with gun crime stats. The American Journal of Public Health has a long history of being anti Second Amendment.
I believe most states had a reduction in gun violence in the same time period. The journal of public health has a well known agenda.
those numbers are so small, they really do not tell you if it was the laws or not "That’s 296 lives saved in 10 years." is not enough to trade our freedoms in for..... " that the law reduced gun homicides by 40 percent " so what did knife and other homicides percents rise too .
I see a rise coming on too, with people starting to not trust the police and the police upset that people do not trust them fact is these rates rise and fall, taking away our rates for this would be sill, especially with the same numbers were talking about if we used these same stats to ban cars... we would no longer have cars
Nice try at cherry picking a flawed report; but then we have this little gem in regards to that same report: "Their results are also extremely sensitive to the last year that they pick. While it is true that Connecticuts firearm homicide rate fell by 40% from 1995 to 2005, it only fell by 16% between 1995 and 2006 and 12.5% between 1995 and 2010. Meanwhile the drops for the US and the rest of the Northeast are much greater. From 1995 and 2006, the firearm homicide rates for the US and the rest of the Northeast fell respectively by 27% and 22%. From 1995 and 2010, the drops were 39% and 31%. The longer samples show a relative increase in Connecticuts firearm homicide rate whether Rudolph et al. had looked at one additional year or five additional years." http://crimepreventionresearchcente...ticut-fell-40-because-of-a-gun-licensing-law/ Thanks Small Town Guy for finding that link!
Looking at other developments, the tech boom caused the planet wide depression that we are still experiencing. Pick a cause; any cause, and attach your pet effect to it.
Let me see if I understand you correctly. Individuals who would have otherwise ignored laws and penalties associated with murder were stopped short by the requirement to register their gun? A law is only effective against those who are law abiding, and I doubt that applies to people who think it's a good idea to slaughter other people. Besides how exactly do gun laws stop gun crime? Do drug laws stop drug crime? Law abiding citizens that register their guns are not the ones going around killing people, it is the people that are already ignoring one of the most severe crimes a human is capable of. I DO agree there should be more gun education, and gun owners being held responsible for weapons in their possession. But again, only people that would normally comply with laws in the first place would be affected.
its stupid to focus on crime control when dealing with gun banners. since they are not motivated by public safety, proving to them that gun control didn't decrease crime means nothing to them. its all about controlling people who don't buy into their socialist agenda
Correlation without causation. Head on over to chicago, and the story changes. Crime has been nosediving since the 90's, mostly because of a lead ban and abortion. Kids don't grow up mentally incapable of right and wrong due to childhood lead exposure, and less unwanting mothers neglect and abuse their children. At the same time, people around the country enacted stricter laws for criminals, and beefed up policing. The whole nation benefited, even the lax gun control states.
Interesting but it is unfortunate that the full report is hidden behind a paywall. http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2015.302703
There's also a new report out showing that as ice cream sales increase, so do murders. Clearly, we need to start licensing ice cream. Personally though I think those restrictions might just fuel black-market related ice cream crime.
My life and the lives of my family are certainly the most important thing when it comes to my constitutional rights
LOL...same in Alabama ! This is almost as bad as when the tornado in Tuscaloosa wiped out the Krispy Creme store/factory. We went almost a year without fresh doughnuts. When they re-opened the police had to be there to direct traffic...no kidding !! But back to the point, this argument using Connecticut as an example is so flawed I shan't comment, other than to say he needs to go to the environmental forum and claim proof of global warming. The flaws are many, most of which have been pointed out by other posters.
Why were murders always so much higher in Washington DC, Chicago, Mexico, Brazil during the same time---all with massive gun control laws? This is stong evidence to chuckle at gun control laws.
And in every situation where these countries have low ownership of guns you find one of two things: either a higher violent crime and non-violent crime rate, or armed group control (warlords, governments, cartels) I don't like either option.
The lives of people who rape, murder and rob people don't matter at all. Every one of them that is permanently removed from the streets saves who knows how many future victims. Guns that are inherently unsafe (like the Remington debacle) and cause death should be pursued like any other unsafe product that causes death or bodily injury. People who are hurt by guns due to mishandling have my sympathy, either because they are dumb (slamming shots of tequila while cleaning your weapon is not encouraged) or just not prepared to own a gun for whatever reason. I highly support firearm education and exposure to our law abiding citizens, and everyone should get scenario training if they can.
