Green Witch wrote:oralloy wrote:Green Witch wrote:I bet that death by gun shot will soar in DC over the next couple of years.
Of course it will.
But I'd be very surprised if there was much change in the overall homicide or murder rates.
More guns equal more crime.
No, it's just the opposite.
More Guns = Less Crime.
Green Witch wrote: Unlike those old western movies when the good guy and the bad guy faced each other before firing, most gun crimes are committed from behind. Someone grabs you by the throat and sticks a gun to your head while they tell you to drop your wallet.
One must not be paying any attention to their surroundings for this sneak attack to occur. Be alert and aware at all times.
How do they know a gun was used from behind? They could have been held up by someone holding a small metal pipe to their head.
This happens often and the victim assumes it was a gun. Don't be a victim.
oralloy wrote:Green Witch wrote:More guns equal more crime. It's a fact.
No it isn't.
Sorry. That was probably more curt than was warranted.
There are plenty of places where there are lots of guns, but not much in the way of crime -- Norway, Switzerland, and Canada for instance.
And there are places where there is a non-gun homicide rate far in excess of the US's total (gun + nongun) homicide rate.
And those states that have widespread concealed carry (40 out of the 50 states I believe) didn't have a big spike in crime when people started carrying guns everywhere.
While I am content, and in agreement, with the decision, I would have preferred that SCOTUS would have ruled 5-4 against the individual right to bear arms.
Consecutive ill-rulings by The Court (particularly one involving guns) would have invigorated the Republican base.
Ironically, I can see the rationale behind upholding the DC ban on handguns far more clearly that that manufactured for justifying the right of habeas corpus for illegal enemy combatants held outside of US sovereign soil, and the notion that the death penalty, for any crime, should be considered in anything but the context of what is cruel and unusual punishment.
Kennedy is a Quisling who is probably enthralled by his power as The Swing Vote, but, in any case, hardly reliable to tow a conservative line.
If Obama wins in November, he and the Democratic congress with almost certainly have the opportunity to preserve the number of Liberal voices on the Court at four.
Stephens will either retire once a Dem president is elected (no political influence on the bench there) or die during the term of a Repub president.
Obama will appoint a similarly Liberal justice and the status quo will remain with Kennedy as the swing.
McCain would have the opportunity to appoint a strict constuctionist similar to Alito and Scalia, and ensure a conservative majority on the Supreme Court.
This is a huge reason to vote McCain (even if he ultimately disappoints us with a quixotic nod towards moderation). We can't be entirely sure what McCain will do with a SCOTUS opening, but we can be dead sure what Obama will do.
I guess the crime rate in Dallas should be less than that of NYC if more guns equal less crime.
http://jobsanger.blogspot.com/2006/09/dallas-has-highest-crime-rate-for.html
Interesting, the crime rate in Dallas is almost 3 times higher than it is in New York City. Not only that but Houston and San Antonio have higher crime rates than New York City.
It seems the "more guns less crime" claim is nothing but made up crap that isn't supported by data other than Lott's study that has it's own problems in that it only shows more guns equaled less crime in Florida and not in the other 20 or so states that passed CCW.
You -could- come to that conclusion... except that Washington, DC has a higher rate of -everything- across the board. So do other cities with a strict and now-unconstitutional gun prohibition...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_cities_by_crime_rate
So why would crime as a whole be higher in Texas? The obvious conflating factors are immigrant population and drug-related crime, given the geography. I won't say that's all of it - I mean, it ain't why Detroit is #1 on the list - but it factors in there.
Oh? did you really check your source?
Dallas has higher rape, burglary, larceny, property crime and arson rate compared to DC.
Quote:
So why would crime as a whole be higher in Texas? The obvious conflating factors are immigrant population and drug-related crime, given the geography. I won't say that's all of it - I mean, it ain't why Detroit is #1 on the list - but it factors in there.
So, that only proves that factors other than guns affect crime which means "more guns = less crime" is not a valid claim. It is a platitude that gun advocates like to trot out but it really doesn't mean much in the reality of crime rates.
From everything I've read, gun control has had virtually no impact in D.C. -- at that's at best.
In England, after adopting a gun ban in 1997, handgun crime rose by 40%.
Australia is an even better (or maybe I should say worse) example:
They adopted gun control in 1996. Since then armed robberies have increased by 51%, aggravated assault by 32%.
Stray Cat wrote:From everything I've read, gun control has had virtually no impact in D.C. -- at that's at best.
In England, after adopting a gun ban in 1997, handgun crime rose by 40%.
Australia is an even better (or maybe I should say worse) example:
They adopted gun control in 1996. Since then armed robberies have increased by 51%, aggravated assault by 32%.
And where are you getting your stats from?
You might want to try to track down an actual source. You might be amazed at what it says.
This was a great ruling by the SCOTUS.
I am very happy.
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:oralloy wrote:Hey Chicago!! You're next!!!!!!!! 
"plaintiffs include Chicago residents Otis McDonald, a retiree who has been working with police to rid his neighborhood of drug dealers, and who wants to have a handgun at his home; Adam Orlov, a former Evanston police officer; software engineer David Lawson and his wife, Colleen, a hypnotherapist, whose home has been targeted by burglars. Attorney Alan Gura, who argued the District of Columbia challenge before the high court, and Chicago area attorney David G. Sigale, represent the plaintiffs.
"Our goal," Gura said "is to require state and local officials to respect our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. Chicago's handgun ban, and some of its gun registration requirements, are clearly unconstitutional.""
http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnw/saf_files_lawsuit_challenging_chicago_s_handgun_ban
Link to complaint (PDF):
http://www.chicagoguncase.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/complaint.pdf
Time to drive the Freedom Haters into the sea!
Like I said, Chicago, you're next.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Taking on a major new constitutional dispute over gun rights, the Supreme Court agreed on Wednesday to decide whether to apply the Second Amendment to state, county, and city government laws.
. . . .
The Court had three cases from which to choose on the Second Amendment issue " two cases involving a Chicago gun ban, and one case on a New York ban on a martial-arts weapon. It chose one of the Chicago cases " McDonald v. Chicago (08-1521) " a case brought to it by Alan Gura, the Alexandria, VA., lawyer who won the 2008 decision for the first time recognizing a constitutional right to have a gun for personal use, at least in self-defense in the home (District of Columbia v. Heller)."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/court-to-rule-on-gun-rights-terrorism-law
