For one minute into 2019, there were no gun-related arrests. Then 12:02AM came.

[Jhhnn]

I know, that is why I said the US is different. Jhhnn, what do you think you are doing here?

I'm correcting the misperception you projected with this-

That said, when you look at a country like Australia where guns were taken away, you don't see much reduction in homicide and suicide.

 

[realibrad]

I'm correcting the misperception you projected with this-

You don't in terms of guns being the reason it was reduced. There has been no casual evidence.

 

[fskimospy]

That study was just establishing a link, and not a cause. Further, I also think the US is unique which is why I am for gun control and regulation.

Studies establish evidence for causation, they rarely if ever establish causation itself. For example studies on smoking and lung cancer generally didn't establish causation, they simply noted your odds were a zillion times higher to have lung cancer if you smoked a lot, indicating strong evidence for causation.

 

[realibrad]

Studies establish evidence for causation, they rarely if ever establish causation itself. For example studies on smoking and lung cancer generally didn't establish causation, they simply noted your odds were a zillion times higher to have lung cancer if you smoked a lot, indicating strong evidence for causation.

So, if I were to provide a study that found reducing guns connected with higher rates of crime, would it be equally as valid? What about no effect?

What if my previous point was that it is complex? What if my original entry was along that line?

 

[dank69]

So, if I were to provide a study that found reducing guns connected with higher rates of crime, would it be equally as valid? What about no effect?

What if my previous point was that it is complex? What if my original entry was along that line?

If it were peer-reviewed and found to have effectively controlled for other factors?

 

[fskimospy]

So, if I were to provide a study that found reducing guns connected with higher rates of crime, would it be equally as valid? What about no effect?

What if my previous point was that it is complex? What if my original entry was along that line?

It could be equally valid, although if you're talking about research from Lott I would caution against it as it's been widely discredited.

If a study is competently done and peer reviewed it is absolutely valid and a meaningful contribution to understanding the topic. That being said, I'm pretty familiar with the literature on gun control and the large majority of it points to greater gun availability as a risk factor for homicide and suicide.

This shouldn't be the most surprising finding in the world, guns are the most effective personal weapon for killing people we've come up with so far. When you have more effective killing tools at hand you end up with more homicides and suicides because they are easier to do.

 

[Jhhnn]

You don't in terms of guns being the reason it was reduced. There has been no casual evidence.

Yeh, I'm sure that the reason there are fewer snake bites in places where there are fewer poisonous snakes there would be no causal evidence to support the premise.

But only in the post-truth realm, of course.

 

[realibrad]

If it were peer-reviewed and found to have effectively controlled for other factors?

Yep. Its all quite confusing.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309755075_Does_Gun_Control_Reduce_Violent_Crime

Which is why I started by saying little to no effect, which is what spy took issue with.

 

[realibrad]

Yeh, I'm sure that the reason there are fewer snake bites in places where there are fewer poisonous snakes there would be no causal evidence to support the premise.

But only in the post-truth realm, of course.

Then explain Norway. It has very high gun ownership rates relative to say the U.K. Less guns in the U.K., but, higher murder rate. Weird eh. For an issue that you are trying to make out as simple, it sure does not seem simple.

 

[Viper1j]

https://wgntv.com/2019/01/01/2019s-first-illegal-weapon-seized-arrest-made-police/

https://abc7chicago.com/first-chica...s-boy-12-shot-through-window-at-home/5000866/


First illegal gun arrest at 12:02AM. For one minute there was no gun crime in Chicago in 2019. 540 gun homicides last year in Chicago. Seems like the highest homicide rates are always tied to long time blue cities. Just sayin

Seems like the highest rates for child molestation, and incest are always tied to long time red states..

Just sayin'..

 

[dank69]

Then explain Norway. It has very high gun ownership rates relative to say the U.K. Less guns in the U.K., but, higher murder rate. Weird eh. For an issue that you are trying to make out as simple, it sure does not seem simple.

Are you controlling for things like population density?

 

[Jhhnn]

Are you controlling for things like population density?

He's thrashing about in futility.

 

[shortylickens]

You understand the solution to this is to confiscate & outlaw all firearms right?

Exactly.
Thats why people in America havent been able to drink since 1919.

 

[realibrad]

Are you controlling for things like population density?

Not the point. His argument was that more snakes equal more bites. That is an oversimplification of the problem.

 

[dank69]

Not the point. His argument was that more snakes equal more bites. That is an oversimplification of the problem.

It is the point. When someone says more x = more y, the assumption is that all other factors are controlled for.

 

[realibrad]

It is the point. When someone says more x = more y, the assumption is that all other factors are controlled for.

Do you find that to be in disagreement with this?

The US is a huge outlier that is very hard to understand. Personally, I think a big part of it comes down to us having a very violent and aggressive culture. I also don't think that guns are good to mix in with that violent and aggressive culture.

That said, when you look at a country like Australia where guns were taken away, you don't see much reduction in homicide and suicide. The US being in a unique place might see more of a reduction, but, the motive and desire to murder will still be there.

 

[dank69]

Do you find that to be in disagreement with this?

All of reality is in disagreement with that post.

 

[realibrad]

All of reality is in disagreement with that post.

Then feel free to pick out a part and tell me why.

 

[dank69]

Then feel free to pick out a part and tell me why.

The US is a huge outlier that is very hard to understand.

This is you trying to add a bunch of other factors into a discussion about the effectiveness of changing one factor.

Personally, I think a big part of it comes down to us having a very violent and aggressive culture. I also don't think that guns are good to mix in with that violent and aggressive culture.

As opposed to which country that doesn't have a violent and aggressive culture?

That said, when you look at a country like Australia

Speaking of violent cultures...

where guns were taken away, you don't see much reduction in homicide and suicide.

This is a demonstrably false statement that you should be embarrassed by. However, you are continuing on as if it wasn't debunked several times in this thread alone and haven't acknowledged your error. Your stupid, stupid error. Really, just...fucking dumb thing to say.

The US being in a unique place might see more of a reduction, but, the motive and desire to murder will still be there.

And reduced access to guns will reduce the number of successful murders, all other factors being equal.

 

[BurnItDwn]

Chicago's murders are mostly gang members killing other gang members. It's cut throat black market capitalist competition.
They peddle sex and drugs mostly, so, how about an alternative, let people buy legal sex and drugs instead?

Set up legal brothels or legal bars where women or men can work the oldest profession legally.
Come up with on the books, legal production, distribution, and consumption for all the "illegal" goods.
Make them have consumer protection laws, make them pay sales tax, and treat them like any other service or product being sold on the market.

Yes, there still will be a black market, but, the participation rate will be much lower. Many criminals would go "legit", or else face dwindling market shares and income streams.

 

[dank69]

Chicago's murders are mostly gang members killing other gang members. It's cut throat black market capitalist competition.
They peddle sex and drugs mostly, so, how about an alternative, let people buy legal sex and drugs instead?

Set up legal brothels or legal bars where women or men can work the oldest profession legally.
Come up with on the books, legal production, distribution, and consumption for all the "illegal" goods.
Make them have consumer protection laws, make them pay sales tax, and treat them like any other service or product being sold on the market.

Yes, there still will be a black market, but, the participation rate will be much lower. Many criminals would go "legit", or else face dwindling market shares and income streams.

This, but everywhere.

 

[fskimospy]

Then explain Norway. It has very high gun ownership rates relative to say the U.K. Less guns in the U.K., but, higher murder rate. Weird eh. For an issue that you are trying to make out as simple, it sure does not seem simple.

This is cherry picking.

Yep. Its all quite confusing.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309755075_Does_Gun_Control_Reduce_Violent_Crime

Which is why I started by saying little to no effect, which is what spy took issue with.

Your own article disagrees with you.

requiring a license to possess a gun and bans on purchases of guns by alcoholics appear to reduce rates of both homicide and robbery.

Having little effect on overall violent crime rate isn't that surprising as most violent crimes don't involve guns to begin with. This is why most studies on the issue focus on crimes that frequently do involve guns, like homicide.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Chicago's murders are mostly gang members killing other gang members. It's cut throat black market capitalist competition.
They peddle sex and drugs mostly, so, how about an alternative, let people buy legal sex and drugs instead?

Set up legal brothels or legal bars where women or men can work the oldest profession legally.
Come up with on the books, legal production, distribution, and consumption for all the "illegal" goods.
Make them have consumer protection laws, make them pay sales tax, and treat them like any other service or product being sold on the market.

Yes, there still will be a black market, but, the participation rate will be much lower. Many criminals would go "legit", or else face dwindling market shares and income streams.

I agree 100%. You don't see many alcohol-selling turf shootouts any more. Ending the war on drugs would be, in my opinion, a much bigger step towards lowering (gun and other) homicide rates than silly shit like bump stock bans.

 

[zerocool84]

I cannot count how many threads people have posted statistics that states with stronger gun laws have lower gun deaths. It's their choice to completely ignore the hard evidence and dig their head in the sand like the OP.

 

[realibrad]

This is you trying to add a bunch of other factors into a discussion about the effectiveness of changing one factor.

Yes, because its complex. Its weird that you see this as a problem, considering how you yourself were asking if factors were controlled for. Seems weird of you to want to control for things, but also see complexity as obfuscation.

As opposed to which country that doesn't have a violent and aggressive culture?

Dumb point. There does not have to be a non violent and aggressive culture. I said the US is uniquely violent and aggressive culture. But, what in reality disagrees with my statement that the US is more violent and aggressive than the baseline?

Speaking of violent cultures...

Finish your thought.

This is a demonstrably false statement that you should be embarrassed by. However, you are continuing on as if it wasn't debunked several times in this thread alone and haven't acknowledged your error. Your stupid, stupid error. Really, just...fucking dumb thing to say.

Again, you don't as a casual relationship. That has not been disproved by anyone here. Two things were presented. One study by spy that did find a reduction in one state. The other was a correlation that higher gun ownership rates correlated with higher homicide rates. That is all

And reduced access to guns will reduce the number of successful murders, all other factors being equal.

Nope, and the data shows that you are wrong when trying to talk that broadly.

What a weird post by you.