Note how many were killed by rifles. All rifles. ARs, AKs, Garands, Mausers, Winchester lever guns... all rifles.
248, for 2% of all murders. Less, mind you, than those beaten to death with blunt objects, stabbed or killed by punching or kicking.
But hey, Bloomie and Hillary gotta push to ban them AR-15s. Because reasons.
A side note to all of you folks who are calling the NRA a "terrorist organization": There are five million or more of us who are paid-up NRA members.
11 comments:
Retail vs. wholesale. Break it down into shootings involving >x people by weapon.
Now you 'know' facts don't count against 'feelings'... sigh
So this is what we get, then. And maybe we deserve it. Having lived in the poor sections of Oakland for 32 years, I've kind of had it with gun violence. Seen way too much of it, way too close. On the other hand, in all of that time, I haven't done shit to try to stop it (except for disarming a guy who was out of his mind on drugs one time). So perhaps I should just STFU and admit that this is how we live and die here. I just get really frustrated that we we can't even try anything to lessen the slaughter. Not that much of it would be likely to work, but how can we know if we don't even try? It seemed at first that this asswipe was a perfect example of how background checks could help, then it came out that he had already had a background check to be a security guard. That's when I remembered that as they currently exist, background checks are a joke. Remember the guy on the terrorist watch list accused of war crimes that got hired by the TSA? But if we try to talk about doing anything to fix that all that happens is that we dig in and hate each other, which I don't find to be helpful in any way, shape or form. I wish like hell that I knew of something to do about this, but I just don't. And you're absolutely right about the raw emotion: when I remember my dead friends, I can't really think dispassionately about the issue of gun violence.
-Doug in Oakland
A polarized and fragmented society is what we've become. It will end badly, if we can't find some common ground, somewhere, for us all to,start to come back together. I certainly do not want to reside in the Country of Texas or Dixie.
I have lived for a time in rural areas where damn near every household has several guns. Back when the first AWB went down, I compared homicide rates from two places with the-near equal populations: The City of Boston and the State of Vermont.
Vermont had 24 homicides, which included justified killings.
Boston had 400 murders.
Other than some pockets around ski resorts and Chittenden County (where Burlington is), Vermont wasn't a wealthy state. Lots of medium-sized towns with disappearing industries and hardscrabble farmers. But Vermonters were killing each other at roughly 5% the rate of Bostonians. And I dare say that there were a lot more guns in Vermont.
I have owned three shotguns and two rifles, starting when I was nine years old. That was in quasi-rural northern California, where the use and ownership of guns is normal and healthy. We had a 100 yard range right outside the dining room doors. I took the NRA hunter safety test to get my hunting license in 1971 when I was ten. In 1984 when I moved to Oakland, in a rare bit of accidental intelligence, I left my guns at my dad's house in Eureka. Had I kept them, I wouldn't have had them long: the only item they took in our first burglary was Briana's two shot .22 mag Hi Standard derringer, which was hidden behind a mattress in the back bedroom. Guns in the city are a very different thing than guns somewhere like Eureka or Vermont. In Oakland, handguns are a power symbol for kids without much hope. They are a certain victory to any argument, and an excuse to forego the learning of the very social skills required to live in such high population densities. Please note that I did not say they were the only such reason or excuse, we both know that it is more complicated than that. There are thousands of guns floating around in the black market here, and the people buying them aren't going to the range for recreation, OK?
As I have said, I don't pretend to know what to do about any of this, but I just wish that we could be a little honest about it and admit that it's not a binary issue. Guns aren't always anything, especially good or bad. They definitely have their place. I just wish that place wasn't everywhere, though, realistically, it most probably is and will continue to be. I don't mean to rag on you on your blog, I have been commenting here for about ten years and read it every day, I just wanted to try and express what I feel is a sane viewpoint in a respectful manner, and I hope I have succeeded at least a little bit.
-Doug in Oakland
I'm not going to get into the details of life in an inner city, Doug, for you know them far better than I do.
But still, when people describe gun violence in a city, that crime is a symptom of a far larger set of issues and problems. Addressing only the gun component is like using dermablend as the treatment for skin cancer.
When you have almost nothing in life, then little things matter. It's a lot easier to suffer somebody attacking your pride when you have a good job, a nice home/apartment, clothes in your closet and food in your cupboards. When you have nothing, there is no "big picture" to keep in mind. When you grow up in an environment where the adults with power are in a gang which gets respect by violence and fear (and yes, that includes the cops), then that's what you know
Access to good education, health care, and jobs would go a long way towards fixing things.
So would putting people away who use firearms in the commission of a crime.
None of which will stop somebody who is on a mission to kill and is uncaring as to the personal consequences.
Interesting post at Althouse about how Hillary's gun control focus might get Trump elected.
Her husband could have told her that. Al Gore, too.
Hillary's gun control focus was Bernie's strength if he got to run against Drumpf.
Population density is surely a factor, too, in that spread-out areas allow everyone to know everyone. Anonymity makes crime more tempting; one is less likely to rob someone they know or sell hot items where everyone knows who just got robbed.
Don't forget the drug prohibition laws that cause communities to fear and distrust police, are the backbone of gang structure and finance, and are the main object of turf wars.
-Doug in Oakland
Post a Comment