1
   

GUN SALES UP: CRIME DOWN ( too dangerous )

 
 
Reply Wed 5 Jul, 2006 06:24 pm
HAWAII REPORTER

Report Finds Gun Crime Dropping As Sales Climb
By Dave Workman, 7/4/2006 9:20:59 PM
[ with emphasis added by OmSigDAVID, for the juicier parts ]

Gun crimes, suicides and firearms-related accidents declined last year
at the same time that firearm and ammunition sales climbed,
according to data from the US Treasury Department
released
by the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF).

While this revelation tends to debunk long-standing claims by gun control proponents
that more guns in circulation leads to more crime,
gun rights organizations contend that this bolsters their contention
that armed citizens deter criminals
.

NSSF Public Relations Director Steve Wagner told Gun Week that
approximately 4.7 million new firearms were sold in America last year,
including those manufactured domestically and imported.
The greatest increase was in retail handgun sales, which were up 3%.
Long gun sales were up 1.8%. Ammunition sales were up 3.5%.

Wagner specified that these figures represent dollars generated,
not actual volume of firearms and ammunition sold.

However, the bottom line is that there are millions more firearms in circulation,
which some gun control advocates have been arguing for years
would result in more death and crime.

Said Wagner: "The point of that release was just to help the media understand
that the guys at the Violence Policy Center and Brady Center
are selling a lie when they continue to tell people that more guns equals more bad news."


Wagner said NSSF used data from several sources for its report.
According to the FBI, there were 339,280 firearms crimes reported
in 2005, which is down 2.4% from 2004 and 7% from 1998.


The Centers for Disease Control reported that firearm suicides were down
1.1%, to a reported 16,907, and they have declined 1.8% since 1998.

From the National Safety Council came data on accidental firearms fatalities,
which tied the 2004 figure at an all-time low of 700
.
That is down 19.2% since 1998.

Also, according to National Safety Council data, there were 60 fatal firearms accidents
involving children age 14 and under, which is an all time low.

That figure has declined a whopping 50.4% since 1998.

A spokesman for one leading gun control organization said new guns are
not so much the problem as are firearms that have been in circulation for a while.

Peter Hamm, a spokesman for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun
Violence, remarked, "It's the guns that have been around a while that
could wind up in criminal hands," he explained, "not the guy who's going
out and buying a new $700 handgun. . . . The guns that cause the worst
problems in this country are not selling for very high prices."

Hamm zeroed in on alleged rogue dealers who have been identified as the
source of an inordinate number of firearms connected to crimes.

"There are some bad apple dealers out there and the numbers over and
over again indicate how totally responsible and respectable the vast
majority of gun dealers are in this country," he stated. "It's a shame that
the politics of this issue are so incendiary that the sides on this issue can't
work together to handle the bad actors in this industry."

Hamm was not alarmed at the number of new firearms sold in 2005. He
said new firearms sales "are not the issue to me."

"You've got to hope that those guns are being sold by upstanding dealers
who have better records than some of the dealers who were identified by
the Justice Department as having sold hundreds of firearms they can't
account for," he said.

The NSSF has responded to such problems with a program called "Don't
Lie for the Other Guy." Aimed at stopping dealers from making straw man
sales, this program warns potential violators of the penalties they face
when caught.



Expensive or otherwise, firearm sales are climbing for various reasons,
Wagner suggested. He said one contributing factor to increased handgun
sales has been the expansion of concealed carry across the country.
This year, two more states have been added to the list, and it is
reasonable to expect more handguns for personal protection will be sold
as more people obtain concealed carry licenses.


"Also two more states passed right-to-carry laws," he said, "and there is
an increasing interest in self-defense and home defense and recreational
shooting with handguns is continuing to rise too."

Alan Gottlieb, chairman of the Citizens Committee
for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, told Gun Week that the data "doesn't surprise me."
However, he believes that there is more to the equation
than expansion of concealed carry laws.

"I think the real driving force for gun sales wasn't crime to start with,"
he said, "it was Hurricane Katrina and other natural disasters.
People want to protect themselves."


Chris Cox, who heads the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action
(NRA-ILA), is also not surprised that crime and accident rates declined
while gun sales went up. He credited expansion of right-to-carry laws
to 40 states, and said the drop in accidents is due to the NRA's firearm safety programs.

"These are the facts that the Hillary Clintons, Mike Bloombergs and
Charlie Schumers won't admit," Cox stated. "Lawful Americans don't break the law."
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,495 • Replies: 28
No top replies

 
NickFun
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Jul, 2006 06:43 pm
Re: GUN SALES UP: CRIME DOWN ( too dangerous )
OmSigDAVID wrote:
"Lawful Americans don't break the law."


Well DUH! If they DID break the law then they wouldn't be "lawful Americans" now would they?
0 Replies
 
Joe Nation
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Jul, 2006 06:53 pm
Let's see, less crime because there were more guns sold.

Hmmmmmm

Not less crime because of better policing.
Not less crime because of active prosecution of current law.
Not less crime because of better forensic science leading to more convictions.
Not less crime because of better records keeping of purchases.

Nope, it's because T.J and Junior got their carry license and they are watching out for anything there in East Jesus, Oklahoma to happen and onced it does, they will be on it like a duck on a bug.


Joe(I feel a lot safer here in Washington Heights.)Nation
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Jul, 2006 07:33 pm
Interesting story compared to the FBI crime stats

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/2005preliminary/05table3.htm

It seems violent crime was up 2.5%, murder was up 4.8%. Where is this reduction in crime claimed by the story?

The only thing that changed was the number of gun crimes which is probably related to gun crimes now having a mandatory sentencing and have nothing to do with more people having guns. If criminals were truly afraid of more people with guns there would have been a reduction in person to person crimes. Yet every person on person crime category but rape showed an increase last year.
0 Replies
 
Joe Nation
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Jul, 2006 07:48 pm
You're trying to bust OmDavid's bliss with actual facts.


Joe(they are crunchy)Nation
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Jul, 2006 08:04 pm
It does seem that more guns means more crime if we trust him on the gun purchasing figures.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jul, 2006 04:05 am
parados wrote:
Interesting story compared to the FBI crime stats

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/2005preliminary/05table3.htm

It seems violent crime was up 2.5%, murder was up 4.8%. Where is this reduction in crime claimed by the story?

The only thing that changed was the number of gun crimes which is probably related to gun crimes now having a mandatory sentencing and have nothing to do with more people having guns.

If criminals were truly afraid of more people with guns
there would have been a reduction in person to person crimes
.
Yet every person on person crime category but rape showed an increase last year.


We know from televised interviews with criminals in prisons,
that what violent criminals fear is disgruntled victims venting their emotions
upon the predators.
My discussions with police, or retired police,
has revealed a consensus that this is indeed the case, among criminals.

One wonders Y some people are hostile to well-armed victims ?
Y they desperately argue for weakness and helplessness
in the future victims of crime;
do they have friends n relatives among career predators ??

David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jul, 2006 04:09 am
Joe Nation wrote:
Let's see, less crime because there were more guns sold.

Hmmmmmm

Not less crime because of better policing. Better HOW ??

Not less crime because of active prosecution of current law. Different ? HOW ?
Not less crime because of better forensic science leading to more convictions. HOW is it " better " ?
Not less crime because of better records keeping of purchases. HOW is " records keeping " better ??
Nope, it's because T.J and Junior got their carry license and they are watching out for anything there in East Jesus, Oklahoma to happen and onced it does, they will be on it like a duck on a bug.


Joe(I feel a lot safer here in Washington Heights.)Nation
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jul, 2006 04:16 am
Supporting " gun control " is like supporting drunken driving:
its dangerous and reduces your ability to survive.

From Kitty Genovese, in N.Y.C., to Reginald Denny in L.A.,
citizens have found out the hard way that police can be away
for a long time when you need them.

Should your life depend on other people who are not around ?


Does discriminatory licensure of the right
to effectively defend your life provide "...equal protection of the laws" ?

Is the right to self-defense limited to saints, angels
and PERFECT Americans ? the elite ?
David
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jul, 2006 05:06 am
Do you need a big gun to make up for your lack of penis size?
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jul, 2006 05:38 am
Wilso wrote:
Do you need a big gun to make up for your lack of penis size?


No.
I don 't know of any person who supports
the freedom to fight back in defense of his life, or other property,
who has indicated any correlation.
What DOES matter is STOPPING POWER.

U anti-freedom, pro-helplessness types appear to believe
( or to pretend to believe ) that this is a sore point with us.
It is not; this foolishness means nothing to me.

Have u conducted a survey revealing evidence on this issue
that u keep raising, so obsessively ?

Incidentally, my handgun collection consists predominantly
of 2 inch revolvers, tho not exclusively. I don 't deem a " big gun "
to be optimally of use for defensive purposes against criminals.
In my considered opinion, among handguns,
a .44 special DA/SA revolver with a 2 or 3 inch barrel,
loaded with hollowpointed slugs, with W-I-D-E cavities is ideal,
taken in combination with plenty of practice.

David
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jul, 2006 05:53 am
I don't live in such a corruptly violent society as the US.

The last time I heard statistics on guns in the US, was on an ABC radio segment. Whoever the talking head was, he quoted a statistic to the effect that of the 30000 odd gun related deaths in the US each year, less than 200 were justifiable homicides by people in self defense. I have no reason to disbelieve that data, so I believe that those who want weapons for self defence, are living a fantasy. If you want to refute that, go ahead, but until you do, I will consider people like you to be dangerous nut cases, who are more likely to create crimes than prevent them.
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jul, 2006 05:57 am
That bold type you use speaks volumes about your personality. You are definitely compensating for something. It might be lack of height, lack of strength, lack of personality, lack of friends, but one thing is for certain. You are miles away from being a stable individual, and probably shouldn't be allowed within miles of a firearm.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jul, 2006 07:31 am
OmSigDAVID wrote:
parados wrote:
Interesting story compared to the FBI crime stats

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/2005preliminary/05table3.htm

It seems violent crime was up 2.5%, murder was up 4.8%. Where is this reduction in crime claimed by the story?

The only thing that changed was the number of gun crimes which is probably related to gun crimes now having a mandatory sentencing and have nothing to do with more people having guns.

If criminals were truly afraid of more people with guns
there would have been a reduction in person to person crimes
.
Yet every person on person crime category but rape showed an increase last year.


We know from televised interviews with criminals in prisons,
that what violent criminals fear is disgruntled victims venting their emotions
upon the predators.
My discussions with police, or retired police,
has revealed a consensus that this is indeed the case, among criminals.

One wonders Y some people are hostile to well-armed victims ?
Y they desperately argue for weakness and helplessness
in the future victims of crime;
do they have friends n relatives among career predators ??

David

I see you didn't address the facts of the crime statistics.
Do you hate the FBI? Their stats prove your original claim is factually incorrect. There was not LESS crime. There was MORE CRIME.

You can whine and accuse me of loving criminals all you want. The facts speak louder than your ignorant rants. More guns and more crime.
0 Replies
 
fishin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jul, 2006 08:09 am
parados wrote:
OmSigDAVID wrote:
parados wrote:
Interesting story compared to the FBI crime stats

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/2005preliminary/05table3.htm

It seems violent crime was up 2.5%, murder was up 4.8%. Where is this reduction in crime claimed by the story?

The only thing that changed was the number of gun crimes which is probably related to gun crimes now having a mandatory sentencing and have nothing to do with more people having guns.

If criminals were truly afraid of more people with guns
there would have been a reduction in person to person crimes
.
Yet every person on person crime category but rape showed an increase last year.


We know from televised interviews with criminals in prisons,
that what violent criminals fear is disgruntled victims venting their emotions
upon the predators.
My discussions with police, or retired police,
has revealed a consensus that this is indeed the case, among criminals.

One wonders Y some people are hostile to well-armed victims ?
Y they desperately argue for weakness and helplessness
in the future victims of crime;
do they have friends n relatives among career predators ??

David

I see you didn't address the facts of the crime statistics.
Do you hate the FBI? Their stats prove your original claim is factually incorrect. There was not LESS crime. There was MORE CRIME.

You can whine and accuse me of loving criminals all you want. The facts speak louder than your ignorant rants. More guns and more crime.


Your facts don't disprove his original claim.

In his original post it says there were less "firearms-prelated crimes".

The page and numbers you listed are for ALL crime.

Crimes CAN BE committed without a firearm so both sets of stats could be correct. (I don't know if his original claim is accurate or not but it hasn't been disproved by your FBI Stats link.)

EDITED TO ADD: Maybe this page would be of some use here: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/guns.htm
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jul, 2006 08:10 am
Hey fishin.. maybe you should read the title of the thread before you make a fool of yourself.
0 Replies
 
fishin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jul, 2006 08:17 am
Hey Parados, Maybe you should have read the actual post before making a fool of yourself.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jul, 2006 08:30 am
I did. The article doesn't say what OSM stated in the thread title.

You can't make the leap that more guns equals less crimes based on the article. It also makes it impossible to make the leap that more guns caused less gun crimes since there was more crime in total. More guns to prevent crime would have had to prevent crime if there was an actual connection between the two.

Fewer gun crimes can not be shown to be caused by more guns. There is no direct correlation.

By the way, I can find no published report by the FBI on the number of gun crimes in 2005. The preliminary FBI report doesn't include it. (It is included in the final reports for other years.) I wonder where the author got his numbers from.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jul, 2006 08:44 am
Guns suicides in 1999 - 16,599
Gun suicides in 2005? according to the article. - 16,907
The article then trumpets that gun suicides are down since 1998. They failed to disclose they are UP since 1999.


CDC reports there were 16,907 suicides in 2003. The 2003 figures were released in 2005. The article isn't even honest with its figures. It states

Quote:
Gun crimes, suicides and firearms-related accidents declined last year
But then they use figures from 2003 instead of 2005 for their suicides.

I bet they used the 2004 FBI crime stats for their gun crime.

They aren't even close to being honest in the article when you actually examine the numbers.

Go ahead fishin. I dare you to check the numbers given in the article and post the 2005 sources for them. I know OSM won't bother to check.
0 Replies
 
fishin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Jul, 2006 08:58 am
parados wrote:
I did. The article doesn't say what OSM stated in the thread title.


Ah! I see... So your entire complaint here and the reason you posted the 2005 FBI UCR was because of the thread title? You purposely ignored the actual article so that you could just argue about a title??

Quote:
You can't make the leap that more guns equals less crimes based on the article. It also makes it impossible to make the leap that more guns caused less gun crimes since there was more crime in total. More guns to prevent crime would have had to prevent crime if there was an actual connection between the two.

Fewer gun crimes can not be shown to be caused by more guns. There is no direct correlation.


As I said earlier, I don't know how the stats fall out for sure but the article very clearly identifies that it is talking about firearms related crimes and no, you can't make the leap from "more guns caused less gun crimes since there was more crime in total" because it's apples and oranges.

You also can't prove the claim that guns caused any crimes at all using your linked stats for the same reason.

The only way to find the validity of the claims in the article is to find the stats they used and figure out if the stats are accurate and whether they've interpreted them correctly.

Quote:
By the way, I can find no published report by the FBI on the number of gun crimes in 2005. The preliminary FBI report doesn't include it. (It is included in the final reports for other years.) I wonder where the author got his numbers from.


I did a quick Google search and the NSSF lists/links where they got their stats from in their press release:
http://www.nssf.org/news/PR_idx.cfm?AoI=generic&PRloc=common/PR/&PR=060506.cfm

I don't know if any of the Federal agencies have complete 2005 stats yet. It usually takes them at least a full year to compile them all.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Friends don't let friends fat-talk - Discussion by hawkeye10
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
 
  1. Forums
  2. » GUN SALES UP: CRIME DOWN ( too dangerous )
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/24/2019 at 07:56:15