The suggested approach is not laughable, ineffective or wishy washy. It's
insane. It's more of the same, and that hasn't been working. We have
to remove the concept that everyone is entitled to a personal arsenal free for
all, and the only way to do that is to change attitudes. And the only way to
change attitudes is to say no, you can't have every gun you want just
because you want it.
If education is important is curbing violent crimes, then we need to support
parents in educating their children. Teachers often admit that they
shouldn't be held accountable for their students lack of achievement.
America has about the 4th highest homicide rate using guns. However if you
remove from the statistics the 4 largest cities from this list, who have gun
control, we are about 4th from the bottom. There is no evidence gun control
works, and a lot that it does. Education I am sure would help. Isn't it
interesting that in the nearly 5 years of his reign, Mr. Obama has done nothing
to help inner city education other than trying to remove a successful voucher
system in D C.
You one of the first principles of marketing any product is to create the aura
of limited supply. You see the signs all over the place. "For a limited
time only". "Supplies Limited". In less than two weeks we will be
bombarded with like messages.The gun lobby has done a wonderful job
of creating the panic that if you don't act now... you may not be able to
get their product later. Its a perfect marketing program. You create a sense
of urgency.... and attach to it the mantle of fulfilling an patriotic
imperative.I personally love guns... not sure why. Perhaps it was
my youth with my Uncles going shooting up in Idaho or in the desert of Nevada.
I own several guns... and see no problem with it. And I get why the gun lobby
is doing what they are doing... its working.But what it is doing is
also preventing any serious dialog about how to keep guns out of the hands of
kids.... and those who would do ill with them. And for that, we are all losers.
"Hospitalizations and in-hospital deaths for children with GSWs are
increasing. Currently, over 7,500 children are annually hospitalized for GSWs,
including over 500 in-hospital deaths. While recent policy proposals to limit
military-style semi-automatic assault weapons are important, handguns remain the
leading injurious agent and may be a more efficacious target. Household gun
ownership and safety practices vary widely by state. There was a significant
relationship between %-household gun ownership and %-GSWs occurring in the home.
The relationship was dose-dependent with safety measures (any
??????What happened to the rest of my comment? Anyway, the source was U
of Michigan Medical Center.From the American Academy of
Pediatrics:"Gun avoidance programs are designed to educate children as
a way of reducing firearm injury (eg, Eddie Eagle, STAR); however, several
evaluation studies have demonstrated that such programs do not prevent risk
behaviors and may even increase gun handling among children.The AAP
affirms that the most ef- fective measure to prevent suicide, homicide, and
unintentional firearm- related injuries to children and adolescents is the
absence of guns from homes and communities."
@What in Tucket?"America has about the 4th highest homicide rate using
guns. However if you remove from the statistics the 4 largest cities from this
list, who have gun control, we are about 4th from the bottom."That's false.
Gun murders per 100,000 residents (per wikipedia)California 3.4Illinois 2.8Massachusetts 1.8New York 2.7Utah 0.8Idaho 0.8If gun ownership and "permissive" gun laws were
the cause of gun violence, Utah's and Idaho's gun murder rates should
be greater than CA, IL, MA, and NY. Yet Utah's and Idaho's are a mere
fraction of the gun murder rates of those states with draconian gun laws.Just last August multiple news organizations reported that Virginia gun
crime had dropped 5% while gun sales had increased 16% in the same time period.
These facts counter the false argument that gun ownership is somehow responsible
I have not read the study referenced in the column but I am very skeptical about
more education preventing mass shootings such as those in Arizona, Colorado and
Connecticut. One reason gun control is so popular in some circles is
because it is "control"
@atl134,What in Tucket has a good point.Illinois has an
overall murder rate of 3.5 per 100,000 (2.8 from guns). Chicago alone has a
murder rate of 18.5 per 100,000 (according to Wikipedia 13.875 per 100,000
involve a firearm). Consider how much the state's overall murder rate
would drop without Chicago.In 2011 SLC's murder rate was 3.2
per 100,000. Contrast that with the broader state's overall murder rate of
1.9 per 100,000 (including all forms of homicide) and it is obvious that SLC is
dragging the state's crime rates up. Without SLC, Utah's low murder
rates would be even lower.So What in Tucket has a strong argument
that much of the problem in the USA centers around urban areas and not gun
re:ShaneYou gave an incomplete picture of deaths caused by guns. Firearm death rates:UT 12.2ID 12.8WY 15.6AZ 14.6CA 7.7MA 4.1IL 8.2NY 5.1(CDC
2010)Study after study has shown that states with stronger gun laws
have lower rates of death from firearms.
The cherry picking of numbers is just kind of funny? Why no mention of Texas,
Louisiana, South Carolina, Mississippi? Because they don't match the story
you are trying to thread? When it comes down to it.... gun laws and murder
rates by guns have very little correlation. You aren't safer in a pro-gun
state (see Texas and South Carolina) nor are you safer in a state that has more
regulations (California). California actually has a lower gun death rate per
100,000 then does Texas.High population areas where you have large
pockets of poverty is the strongest corollary out there. How you get ride of
these high poverty and high crime areas is another topic. But then you sprinkle
in a few states like Alaska and New Mexico - where populations densities are
extremely low, but gun ownership is higher to extremely higher than average...
and you have murder and gun murder rates that are also above average.Bottom line is the numbers will support any story line you want conjure.
What we do know is a 12 and 15 year old are dead, and how they ended up with
guns is the question that needs to be answered.
@Shane333How many of those guns sold in VA end up in DC, Maryland
and other neighboring states?Why don't we compare apples
to-apples?How does UT compare to other similarly homogenous states?
In addition to being a fang-toothed liberal, I'm also a firearms
enthusiast. I've just got to say here that the panic-buying and price
gouging I observe among my fellow gun owners in response to even the mildest
proposals designed to prevent the next Newtown, Tucson, Navy Yard or Aurora is
completely insane. The conversations I overhear at gun stores makes
me wonder what planet I'm on.I agree that preventing the next
Newtown or Navy Yard will have far more to do with changes in the way we treat
people with mental health problems than through gun control measures. That said, gun owners have to acknowledge that if you're going to keep
weapons away from crazy people then you have to enact and abide by a
comprehensive background check system for the purchase of all firearms, and be
willing say, "Ma'am, your son/husband has been diagnosed with paranoid
schizophrenia and since he lives with you, you can't buy this weapon."
(Yeah, like that's going to happen.)Since when does your love
of firepower trump common sense?
It's really paranoia that fuels gun sales.
Restricting the rights of good people to have guns is not only ineffective in
combating violence, it is unconstitutional. If you are truly against violence
then work to get rid of gun free zones. This is one thing you could do that
actually would work.
re one old manOne could just as accurately say it is paranoia that
motivates society to have police and the military.
@hutteriteWhy stop with guns... what about your opinions? I dislike
your opinion and think you are not entitled to it. Should we stop you from
spouting off? That's not very fair I think.Yes, you are
entitled to your opinion. Yes, I am entitled to buy as many guns as I want.Gotta love the constitution.
@ 1aggieYou ask an interesting question. Utah's homogenous
demographics do indeed play a large role in violence rates. In fact, while it
is poligically incorrect to look into them, societal demographics answer many of
the questions regarding violence in general, and not just gun violence. But that's just the point: It would be far more productive to
address cultural demographics than gun control, but since it isn't
politically correct to do so, the government and the ignorant-but-well-meaning
push gun control instead.
@Shane333"What in Tucket has a good point."No, he
doesn't. The least violent states in the US have gun violence rates that
are still several times higher than Canada, Japan, and Western European nations
so his statement is completely false.Your point about urban areas
actually has a basis in fact as does the other comments people have made about
correlations with poverty in particular, those are legitimate points.@cjb" If you are truly against violence then work to get rid of gun
free zones."I'd love to see you petition BYU to let guns on
campus, considering you gun lovers insist on there being guns on my campus (and
yet my school is the one that had the armed bicycle theft last month... so much
for your logic).
cjb -- okay, paranoia fuels the compulsion to purchase arsenals and stockpile
ammo. How's that?
In controlled studies as well as in the field, animals that are overcrowded have
the following characteristics: 1) lower birth rate. 2) Increase in neglect of
the offspring. 3) Abnormal sexual behavior. 4) More aggressive behavior. 5)
Emotional disorders. The same thing can be observed in human populations--in
dense populations there are smaller families, more child neglect, more sexual
perversion and promiscuity, more crime, and the more emotional disorders (ADHD,
schizophrenia, depression, etc.). In animal studies, overcrowded animals have
larger adrenal glands, secreting more adrenalin which throws off the whole
endocrine system which may be a major reason there are more bizarre behaviors
and crimes in larger cities. Gun control won't fix this. I don't know
what will fix it.
Conservatives have proven over and over that all that has to happen is a
democrat is elected and gun sales will skyrocket as very gullible conservatives
believe every rumor they hear.
And "who" pray tell stokes the fires and promotes the "rumors"
of pending "Obama the boogie-man is coming to take your guns"?The NRA perhaps?The gun manufactures who sell guns?The ammo
dealers who sell ammo?I haven't heard Obama or very many
Democrats out campaigning against them.Paranoia is fertile group for
I think the whole term "Gun free zones" is simply a phony way to sell
more guns. You certainly can't show that former GFZ's are safer once
guns are freely allowed. They're liable to show up anywhere as it is. After
all, there are as many guns as people in the US.Can't we just
compromise a tiny bit by agreeing to keep the firearms locked up until
they're "needed"? Or does that make one too "moderate" to
The more I read these articles and posts the more I'm convinced that the
whole "gun" issue is really a convenient tool for first of all the sale
of guns and then secondly the creation of a field of play where basic social
values can do battle armed with statistics, anecdotes, and opinions. None of this will change until somehow there is a broad societal agreement
that we can't have a society with frequent mass murders, children being
shot and killed daily by the dozens etc. Unfortunately we are no where near
that as a founding principle and I don't see any movement towards it.
Even if you got all of the assault rifles off the street, people will just
convert rifles into assault rifles. So that will never work.
Why not?Rumors like this raise the prices for -- "Gas" shortages, "Pumpkin" shortages, and"Bacon" shortages.Real or not, the perception alone
is enough to spike the demand causing the "shortage" in and of itself.
re atl134Salt Lake City, UTWhile you are at BYU, consider
taking a class in statistics. If you do you will learn that you are more likely
to arrive at the truth if you make use of more than one data point. Gun free
zones are among the most dangerous places in the United States.
re:Cjb" Gun free zones are among the most dangerous places in the
United States."gun-free zones like churches? If
that is what BYU is teaching perhaps I should re-think my donations.
Gun crazies get paranoid?
"Attempting to limit access to guns for law-abiding citizens is not going to
keep guns out of the hands of criminals."I enjoy this statement;
it is the key of the entire matter. Guns exist and they can never be eliminated
or taken away from us. Good and educated people with guns are a benefit to
society as they deter actual mischief, it's those who lack such qualities
that are so dangerous with firearms, so let's focus on helping people
become good and educated.
The myth of the "dangers of the gun-free zones" is alive and well here.
Unfortunately, the evidence proves otherwise. Of the 62 mass shooting between
1982 - 2012 no one indicates that the location had to do with gun-free zone
status. The shooters instead picked these areas instead because of some
relation they shared with the location.