Posted: 4/9/2003 8:11:47 PM EDT
|
I am ing an essay for my ENG102 class on gun control laws and why they don't reduce crime rates. This is what I have so far: #1)Murderers and Thieves don’t obey Gun Laws #2)They are based on Cosmetics (Evil Features) Any other ideas would be GREATLY APPRECIATED since I have to wirt 13 pages on the topic. Thanks, Clint |
|
Only law abiding people obey the laws. And the laws do work, when they are enforced properly, rather than just making new ones on top of the old ones. Try going to the NRA web site and the ATF web site to get actual laws and arguments. Read the GCA of 1968. Or the 1934 act regarding machine guns. People think this stuff is new. Its been around for years. It's just more controvertial now days, thanks to things like Columbine and A/H's like Michael Moore |
|
Aussie Homicide News. Homicides by gun down. Total homicides up. Knives popular. [url]http://news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,6231463%255E1702,00.html [/url] Australia has cracked down on gun ownership and yet somehow killers make do. Australian anti-gun movement was initiated by shocked public (and anxious to please nanny-state) over one spree murderer with a semi-auto weapon |
|
Quoted: I am [red]ing[/red] an essay for my ENG102 class on gun control laws and why they don't reduce crime rates. This is what I have so far: #1)Murderers and Thieves don?t obey Gun Laws #2)They are based on Cosmetics (Evil Features) Any other ideas would be GREATLY APPRECIATED since I have to [red]wirt[/red] 13 pages on the topic. Thanks, Clint Idea #1 - SPELL CHECKER! [:D] Okay enough fun. This sounds like the typical "ENG102 Research Paper" that all college folks have to do in their second semester Freshman English. It's up to YOU to do SOME of the actual "research" [;)] but here's a few ideas for what you may want to look up: * Recent rise in crime after England's strict gun-control laws were passed. * Studies showing towns that actually "mandated" gun ownership (in Georgia IIRC) had large decreases in crime after such laws were passed. * According to the [url=http://www.ncjrs.org/pdffiles1/173405.pdf]National Institute Of Justice Report To Congress[/url] Impacts of the 1994 Assault Weapon Ban: [i]* "The ban has failed to reduce the average number of victims per gun murder incident or multiple gunshot wound victims." * "The ban did not produce declines in the average number of victims per incident of gun murder or gun murder victims with multiple wounds." * "The public safety benefits of the 1994 ban have not yet been demonstrated." [/i] * According to the most recent statistics from the [url=http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/fuo.pdf] US Dept. of Justice; Firearm Use by Offender - Table 8[/url] - the most common source of firearms used in crimes is through sources that are ALREADY ILLEGAL: [b]1991: Source of guns used in crimes by state prison inmates - [/b] * 40.8% from street source (drug dealer, theft, blackmarket). * 33.8% from family or friend. * 18.9% from retail store or pawnshop. * 0.6% from gunshows. [b]1997: Source of guns used in crimes by state prison inmates - [/b] * 39.2% from street source (drug dealer, theft, blackmarket). * 39.6% from family or friend. * 12.1% from retail store or pawnshop. * 0.7% from gunshows. * Then you can throw in some famous quotes just to spice it up a bit (you may have to look up the original citations if you want to reference them - which you should do for a research paper): [b]"Gun bans don't disarm criminals, gun bans attract them." ~ [red]Walter Mondale[/red], 4/20/94 "Gun laws haven't been an effective solution to the underlying problem of violent crime." ~ [red]Sen. Al Gore[/red], Washington Monthly magazine, 1986. "Gun control? It's the best thing you can do for crooks and gangsters. I want you to have nothing. If I'm a bad guy, I'm always gonna have a gun. Safety locks? You will pull the trigger with a lock on, and I'll pull the trigger. We'll see who wins." ~ [red]Mafia Hitman Sammy "The Bull" Gravano [/red] "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes" ~ [red]Thomas Jefferson.[/red] [/b] Good luck (and don't forggt the spelchecer!!) [:D] |
|
Quoted: ...what I really need are the reasons. Does anyone have any other reasons why gun laws don't reduce crime and murder? * Gun-control laws actually ENCOURAGE crime because [b]rapists, muggers and murderers PREFER unarmed victims.[/b] * Gun-control laws EMBOLDEN criminals by creating a "victim" mentality - a sense of weakness and defenselessness - among the people. That's a perfect environment for criminals to move about with very little resistance from cowering "victimized" people who feel helpless to stop criminals or defend themselves. It's a psychological effect of disarming people and making them more defenseless. It's called [b]"learned helplessness".[/b] * Gun-control laws actually ENCOURAGE corruption in Gov't. because corrupt politicians PREFER defenseless individuals in society to strengthen their own importance. Corrupt politicians WANT constituents who are dependant on THEM for protection. |
|
Let's not forget that gun laws in general are nothing more than playing cards to prosecutors. What's a the first thing dropped or reduced?? Gun violations. Why? They're just a stepping stone for larger convictions. Why take a felony and convert it to a misdemeanor? There are currently more than enough gun laws to convict and lock criminals away for a long time. It's the mentality that guns are bad for EVERYONE to possess and that's just not true. Why can't I own a handgun to defend my home? How could I possibly retreat from my home at 2:30 in the morning when a deranged gun toting criminal is in my hallway separating me from my children and blocking my path of retreat. I CAN'T!! However, this is the mentality of certain law makers that don't feel you have a right to defend yourself and family. |
|
Gun control laws demonstrate a profound lack of understanding of human nature. While most people are decent, there are those who are not. Liberals make the mistake of thinking EVERYBODY is basically good. That's why they thought we could continue negotiating with Saddam Hussein. The concept that seems simple but is incomprehensible to liberals is that what defines a criminal is that he doesn't care about their laws. Thus, laws only restrict the actions of law-abiding citizens, who aren't likely to commit crimes in the first place. Washington DC is a great example. You cannot legally own a handgun there. So, why are there som many murders? Libs will say it's because of the loose gun laws in other areas (such as Virginia). So then, common sense would ask why the entire state of Virginia is not a mega-sized, DC-like war zone? Because armed citizens are a deterrent to criminal activity. Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner. A republic is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote. BTW, if you are presenting this research in debate with a liberal, they really hate it when facts get in the way of their arguments! Just remind them that the moment they start calling you names they've lost the argument! |
|
The supreme law of the land doesn’t change with the will of the President, the Congress, the media or even the people. The law, as stated in The Bill of Rights of these United States of America, clearly states that the “…the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” As scary as an AR-15 might be to you, you have no legal right to take one from my hands or any other law-abiding citizen. The law protects our rights equally and honestly can’t be changed from day-to-day to fit the politically correct feelings of the mood of those in charge. There is a proper way to change the Untied States Constitution and that is by Amendment not by administrative rulings and regulations. Moral people have a duty to disobey immoral laws. Was Rosa Parks committing a crime when she refused to sit in the back of a public bus or were the people who wrote the immoral law committing the bigger crime? Our Constitution has been amended many times for very good reasons throughout American history. Never before have the rights of the people been so usurped by our government. These are busy times and this is a complex issue, important issues like these take careful thought and study. To me it comes down to point that how can I trust, and continue to serve a government that doesn’t trust me to own the method to protect my family and myself? Don’t be so confused with the emotions of the issue to think that gun control is crime control. Child pornography, drunk driving and arson are all terrible crimes but do you hear the government calling for bans on digital and instant cameras, cars or cigarette lighters and matches? It’s the misuse of the camera, car, and lighter that we control. We all agree to punish the user of these items for the misuse rather than controlling the ownership of them. Why are firearms any different? Because they scare urban social liberals who have never had an enjoyable experience with a firearm. One of my fondest childhood memories is going to Boy Scout camp and plinking (informal target shooting) with a .22 LR bolt action rifle. Sure I know we license and regulate the use of automobiles on public highways but not their use on private lands. Nobody makes you wait three days, limits the shape and features or tells you what size of car you can buy now do they? If cars were only as safe as firearms we’d be much better off. According to the National Center for Health Statistics National Vital Statistics Report children are 12 times more likely to die in an automobile accident than from gun-related homicides or even legal interventions (like being shot by the police) if they are ages 0-14 years old. For the age group 0-24 years old the rate is still 8.6 times or 860% higher for cars. There are so many myths about firearms that aren’t supported by the facts or the laws that entire web sights with links to the FBI, BATF, and the National Center for Health Statistics are available. I however am puzzled by a question that I have not yet been able to answer. Why are liberal politicians so bent on taking rifles from me and not putting criminals in jail or taking guns from their hands or even holding people accountable for their actions? What does the liberal public have to fear from lawful citizens owning firearms? First off I have a right to own such firearms and when we start talking about how one feels about my need to a right, things get very dangerous very fast. One never has to justify a right. See, I don’t feel that you have a need for a car that travels faster than 65 miles per hour, a video camera that can make child pornography, a church, temple or synagogue different than mine, access to books that I don’t feel good about, or to have more children, the need to vote ... can you see where this all leads? Secondly, I don’t hunt and neither does the argument that the Second Amendment is about hunting. Don’t be so stupid to think that the Constitution guarantees our right to hunt, it instead gives us the tools to keep our government in balance. Thomas Jefferson, quoting Cesare Beccaria, “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” Taking a rifle from my safe will not prevent some doped up gang banger from doing yet another drive by shooting over drug territory using a gun bought illegally. There are some pretty clear laws prohibiting murder yet it continues so why continue to pass more gun laws attempting to prevent murder? The number one weapon of choice (by a wide margin) continues to be hands and feet (FBI crime statistics) yet the media’s major focus is on so called “assault weapons”, which according to the FBI facts are used in less than one percent of killings. Quite clearly the Founding Fathers were most strongly for law abiding citizens owning military firearms. To quote James Madison “The Constitution preserved the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation .... (where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms”. Again quoting one of the patriots who risked everything throwing off an oppressive governement: “The Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms.” Samuel Adams Words mean something and despite the best efforts of some to change their meanings or to completely ignore them in some cases the Constitution is still the supreme law of the land. The loss of a single child is a tragic - the loss of the freedom to suppress a tyrannical government is a tragedy on a much larger scale. |
|
If this country is to remain a "Government of, for, by the People", then the government cannot be allowed to have a monoply of firearms. Governments are no more to be trusted than criminals. They are like the dog who sits in the middle of the road and licks his balls... he does it because he can. Government will become totalitarian because it can, IF it is free to do so. There are NO benevolent dictators. As far as the Second Amendment goes... it is a nice to have, could have been better written, but it does NOT grant citizens the right to bear arms. The Second Amendment is a restriction on government. The People already have that God-given right. It is ours, and I don't remember surrendering it to any government. People often have said, Why don't the Iraqi (or any oppressed) people rise up and overthrow Saddam Hussein? They can't, repressive gun laws make sure of that. Repressive gun laws caused the Holocaust, and many, many other genocides. |
|
It also depends what the purpose of your paper is: Are you out to PROVE a specific point (ie. you have an agenda) or are you interested in writing a balanced report, and let the facts speak for themselves. Statistically, it is VERY, VERY difficult to link any guns laws - either restrictive ones, or permissive ones (like concealed carry) to increases or decreases in crime/violence. I don't want to bore you with the statistics of it (and not to insult you, but you probably don't have the mathematical background for it), but you need to take ANY and ALL reports of increaes and decreases in crime due to guns laws with a huge sack of salt. mostly, they are statically speaking - total garbage. So if you go to gun-rights resources, they will quote all sorts of stats at you, and most of them are crap. if you go to gun-control resrources, they will quote other stats at you, and most of those are total crap as well. You need to wade through a lot of it before some fuzzy picture of reality starts to emerge. If you really want a global perspective, take a look at some countries where gun control HAS worked (Scandinavia, Japan, etc), and ask yourself why it is so - and why those solutions probably would not work in the U.S. society. Also, be very wary of the sensationalist examples - spree killers on the gun control side, and that diner in Texas on the gun rights side. They are insignificant from an aggregated public policy perspective, but are very distracting because they are so shocking. |
|
I am writing my essay and am having problem proving why the AWB is ineffective. I have talked about the logical side of it, but am LACKING GREATLY as far as statistics are concerned. I really need to find some statistics on the AWB and Crime Rates or something like that. I need actual, credible sources too. .com's are a no go, but .org's and .gov's are fine. All help is greatly appreciated. Thanks, Clint |
|
[url=www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm]FBI Uniform Crime Reports, 1995-2002[/url] General crime statistics Non-fatal injury statistics: [url]webapp.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/nfirates.html[/url] A roll-your-own site for injury statistics including gunshot as a specific class. Recent data only. Fatal injury statistics [url]webapp.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate.html[/url] The same, but for injuries resulting in death. Covers more years, too. Bureau of Justice Statistics, [url=www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/cvict.htm]Crime and Victims Statistics[/url] Study this to see just [i]who[/i] are victims of crime, how many crimes involve weapons, and what kind of weapons. Lots of stuff on the Bureau of Justice Statistics site, but it's difficult to navigate and find it. This one is good: [url=www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/guns.htm]Firearms and Crime Statistics[/url], and there are links to other sites, such as the [url=www.atf.treas.gov/]Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms[/url] where I found the FBI's [url=www.fbi.gov/hq/cjisd/nics/oper-rpt/oper-rpt2000.pdf]National Instant Criminal Background Check System[/url] report for the year 2000, where they state "Since the establishment of the NICS, millions of U.S. citizens have engaged in timely and lawful firearms transfers, while at the same time over 156,000 felons, fugitives, and other prohibited persons have been denied firearms transfers by the FBI NICS. Approximately the same number of gun transfers were denied by the POC states, so that the total number of denials since the NICS began operations exceeds 300,000." Doing a quick Google search on "NICS prosecution" turned up [url=judiciary.senate.gov/oldsite/6212000_sct.htm]this Statement by Senator Craig Thomas before the Senate Judiciary Committee[/url] where he states: "Under a federal background check 81,000 individuals were denied the ability to purchase firearms (71 percent due to a felony indictment or conviction) yet in another Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report titled, "Federal Firearm Offenders 1992-1998" it states that in 1999 there were only 7,146 defendants charged in U.S. District courts with a firearm offense. The real question for the Administration is why are they so pleased that 81,000 individuals were denied the ability to purchase a firearm when more importantly there were only 7,146 defendants charged with a firearms offense? I believe the American public will find it interesting that the FBI and ATF have the name and address of these felons who were denied the ability to purchase a firearm, yet there is only a dismal 11.3% chance of getting them prosecuted." [i]Fascinating[/i] what you can turn up on the Web, isn't it? Anyway, hope that helps. |
|
Wow, that is a lot of info. I looked at the Bureau of Justice Statistics, but it didn't say anything about assault weapons. Thanks for the effort though. I am looking more for AWB related material. Something about how assault weapons were not used in a lot of crime even before the ban. |
|
Quoted: I am writing my essay and am having problem proving why the AWB is ineffective. I have talked about the logical side of it, but am LACKING GREATLY as far as statistics are concerned. I really need to find some [red]statistics on the AWB and Crime Rates[/red] or something like that. I need [red]actual, credible sources too[/red]. .com's are a no go, but .org's and .gov's are fine. All help is greatly appreciated. Thanks, Clint Oh give me a break!! [rolleyes] Did you even LOOK at the stats or the original sources I posted here???? [stick] Okay here's some more for you: According to the [b][url=http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/fuo.pdf]Dept. of Justice; Firearm Use by Offender, 1997 Data -[/url][/b] [b][blue]FACT:[/blue] "Assault weapons" are RARELY possessed by criminals during commission of a crime.[/b] - Of State and Federal prison inmates who possessed firearms during the crime for which they are being incarcerated: * 9.9% of state and 7.3% of federal inmates possessed "single-shot" firearms. * 7.9% of state and 7.7% of federal inmates possessed conventional semiautomatic firearm. * [b]1.5%[/b] of state and [b]1.7%[/b] of federal inmates possessed military-style semi-auto or full-auto firearms. [b][blue]FACT:[/blue] "Assault weapons" are RARELY involved in ANY crimes.[/b] - Of State and Federal prison inmates who have ever possessed firearms during ANY crime: * 14.2% of state and 10.6% of federal inmates possessed "single-shot" firearm during ANY crime. * 10.9% of state and 9.8% of federal inmates possessed conventional semiautomatic firearm during ANY crime. * [b]2.5%[/b] of state and [b]2.3%[/b] of federal inmates possessed military-style semi-auto or full-auto firearms during [b]ANY[/b] crime. [b][blue]FACT:[/blue] "Assault weapons" possessed by criminals during crimes are USUALLY obtained [u]illegally[/u] (and are are RARELY obtained through [u]gunshows[/u]).[/b] - Of state prison inmates who possessed military-style semi-auto or full-auto firearms in crimes for which they are incarcerated: * [b]48.5%[/b] obtained them through [u]illegal sources[/u] (theft, drug dealer, black market, etc.) * 25.2% obtained them from family or friend. * 19.3% obtained them from retail sale. * 1.9% obtained them from gun shows. Also from the same source DOJ source above: [b][blue]FACT:[/blue] "Assault weapons" that are possessed during a crime are the LEAST LIKELY type of firearm to be actually discharged during the crime.[/b] [b][blue]FACT:[/blue] "Assault weapons" that are possessed during a crime are the LEAST LIKELY type of firearm to be used to injure the victim.[/b] [b][blue]FACT:[/blue] "Assault weapons" that are possessed during a crime are the LEAST LIKELY type of firearm to be used to kill the victim.[/b] And then there's the following stats from the USDOJ taken from the SAME YEAR that the AWB was passed: [b][blue]FACT:[/blue] "Assault Weapons" are RARELY ever used in crimes:[/b] [b][url=http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/guic.pdf]Guns Used In Crimes:[/url] 10 Most Frequently Traced Guns Used In Crimes In 1994:[/b] 1) Lorcin P25 [red](pistol)[/red] 2) Davis Ind. P380 [red](pistol)[/red] 3) Raven Arms MP25 [red](pistol)[/red] 4) Lorcin L25 [red](pistol)[/red] 5) Mossberg 500 [red](shotgun)[/red] 6) Phoenix Arms Raven [red](pistol)[/red] 7) Jennings J22 [red](pistol)[/red](pistol) 8) Ruger P89 [red](pistol)[/red] 9) Glock 17 [red](pistol)[/red] 10) Bryco 38 [red](pistol)[/red] [b][blue]FACT:[/blue] "Assault Weapons are RARELY ever used to kill police officers:[/b] [b]Calibers Most Often Used To Kill Police Officers:[/b] Firearm Caliber and % Of LEOs Killed - * .38 caliber handgun - [red]25.2%[/red] * .357 magnum handgun - [red]12.1%[/red] * 9mm handgun - [red]9.5%[/red] * 12 gauge shotgun - [red]7.4%[/red] * .22 caliber handgun - [red]5.4%[/red] * .22 caliber rifle - [red]4.4%[/red] And here's one more set of stats from the same source: [u]Virginia Inmate Survey (1992-93) -[/u] * 10% of adult inmates reported ever possessing a military-style firearm. [b]* 0% of adult inmates reported ever carried a military-style firearm at a scene of a crime.[/b] * 20% of juvenile inmates reported ever possessing a military-style firearm. [b]* 1% of juvenile inmates reported ever carrying a military-style firearm at a scene of a crime.[/b] [u]Virginia Dept. Criminal Justice Services (1989-1991) -[/u] * 1.6% (10/600) murders were commited with "assault weapons". [blue]So all these CREDIBLE statistics all confirm the same thing: "Assault weapons" are RARELY ever used in crimes.[/blue] SEE A TREND????? [;)] Lemme guess... the paper's due tomorrow morning right? [:D] |
|
How about this: [url=www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/aw_final.pdf]Impact Evaluation of the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act of 1994[/url] (It's an Adobe Acrobat PDF file, and I hope you're on broadband, because it takes a while to download. It's 117 pages long, and it's not light reading.) You're going to have a hard time finding stuff on .gov and .org sources exclusively. What about .coms that are the online versions of dead-tree journals like [i]National Review Online[/i], or the like? I mean, you should be able to go to the [s]library[/s] media center and use newspapers and magazines as sources, shouldn't you? |
|
Thanks Macallan, and it's actually due on Tuesday morning [banghead]. I am quite a procrastinator when it comes to school work. In all seriousness though, I LOVE THIS PLACE. If I ever have questions, whether its gun related or not, I have always gotten responces. Thanks guys. |
| There is, or was a town in Ill that banned all firearms, maybe Greenville, their crime rate sky rocketed in a real short time, a place with no guns is a crooks paradise, Also Switzerland has the lowest crime rate in the world, all citizens are required to do a mandatory hitch in the service, & all homes must have at least 1 full auto weapon. Bad place to rob if ever home has a machine gun, & trained people to use it. At least these are things I have read, in years past. I can't swear to exact figures, or if Greenville is the town in Ill. Someone else will know , or a search will find it. Hope this helps. |
| Go to the Americans for gun safety website(anti-gun) the violence policy center website(anti)the Brady campaign whatever they are called today website. Read the press releases and such about legislation and look at the goals of the legislation they support, as your reading some of the stuff you'll think to yourself now thats just dumb as hell because if i was a felon and i needed a gun i would just go and do X and Id have one. or thats nice but since I really want to put a cap in this fool and i know he'll be here at X time and he can't have a weapon here, I'll get him when he's on the way out. Ok that was the long winded approach. Basicly read some of these laws and than think like a criminal and find every way that you could skirt break or bend the law. There have been a couple good examples of it recently. like the school shooting in Shreveport La. It's agains t the law to have a gun within 1000ft of a school or school ground. that did not stop two people from crawling under the wire fence around the school, one with a hand gun and one with an sks from going in and killing a student at the school who himself was armed with a .45ACP handgun. Not to mention that only one of the two people was over 18 and only the sks could have been legaly purchased or possessed by that person. And the student who was killed was himself not even old enough to own or posses the handgun he was carryin'. And this was gang banger on gangbanger it was a retaliation shooting, for another shooting. Or as was stated in the thread about the North Hollywood bank robbery. All those full autos used were smuggled into the country. So the ban on importation of specific weapons has worked great as long as you not a criminal then there was never and will never be a ban on the importation of any gun. I'll see what i can dig up at home as far as info. When is yer paper due? |