GUN SALES UP: CRIME DOWN ( too dangerous )

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.

Gun crimes, suicides and firearms-related accidents declined last year at the same time that firearm and ammunition sales climbed,

* Most recent year for which statistics have been compiled; may be 2005, 2004 or earlier

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.

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.

I guess that tells us something about YOU,
if u believe alleged facts with no idea who is telling them to u,

and u further believe that all but 200 homicides of an alleged 30,000
were not justifiable, but even if we were to grant that, momentarily
for purposes of argument,

the fact remains that every man has the inalienable right
to defend his life and other property from violent depredation
and has the right to access to the optimally necessary
emergency equipment to do that.

To the extent that this right has been infringed by government,
it is only by USURPATION, with the same authority as a schoolyard bully.
David[/b]

I am not the one that drew conclusions. OSM and the author of the article did. "gun rights organizations contend that this bolsters their contention that armed citizens deter criminals.

It doesn't prove anything one way or the other. It does prove one thing though. Some people believe you can claim actions in 2003 are a response to 2005 gun sales. Do you believe that fishin?

Omsig tends to post things that only support his view so it wouldn't surprise me to find that to be the case.

HawaiiReporter.com reports the real news, and prints all editorials submitted, even if they do not represent the viewpoint of the editors, as long as they are written clearly."