How Do Gun Laws Influence College Shootings?

[Cyrus]

Homicides commited with guns has been dropping drastically in the US. If "more guns equals more murders", why the astounding drop?

Notice anything about the huge spike in gun homicides in the late 80's through early 90's commited by the age group 14-24? Notice this spike coincides with "gangsta rap"? I thought that was interesting.

http://img225.imageshack.us/img225/1595/weapagepa4.gif
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/weapons.htm

It's like I said, it's more of a cultural problem than 'gun's themselves. Thanks for the data.

 

[JasonRox]

http://rkba.org/research/kleck/point-blank-summary

Um... that's still VERY large.

It says well under %1, so let's say it's 0.5%. That's well under 1%, in fact it's half of it!

From the comment above, it says that most people have like on average 5 guns in the household. Let's assume there are 100 000 000 (100 million) homes in the US. I took 300 million divided by 3. Lots of people live single/double and in families, so I took rough guess dependent on that.

That means we have 500 000 000 guns in households alone! (Some people have more or less than 5 guns in their homes based on the reply above.)

Multiply that by 0.05 (5%) and we get 25 000 000 (25 million) guns involved in a crime! That certainly is a lot of crimes for one piece of equipment.

Now, let's assume that only in 50% of those cases the gun was actually shot. We now have 12 500 000 (12.5 million) cases where the gun was shot. Now, let's take another 50% for the cases that someone actually got wounded and that leaves us with 6 250 000 (6.25 million) cases where someone got wounded by a particular gun! Let's call these minor wounds.

Cutting off another 50% for serious wounds! We get 3 125 000 cases of serious wounds by a particular gun! Now, let's assume that it cost only $5000 to provide surgery and care (this is a VERY small amount compared to the actual cost). It would cost about 15 625 000 000 (15.6 billion) dollars for hospital bills! I'm not even including the cost of the minor wounds, justice system, time of police officers, etc... meanwhile only charging $5000 for surgery and care where it's probably more like $25 000 and that comes out to 78 125 000 000 (78.1 billion) dollars. So, it impacts the economy in a big way. You decide whether it's a good way or not. Be aware that during recovery they are not working, which I would consider not good for the economy.

Anyways, let's move on. Let's now take 50% of the serious wounds where someone actually gets killed. Therefore, 1 562 500 million people get killed! That's a large number! Sure not this many people get killed every year, but we can assume this many people get killed by guns every 10 years! (If we make the time span larger than 10 years, then we have to start considering the fact that guns are being made every year too.)

Therefore, 1 562 500 million people get killed!

In case you missed that.

Now, let's assume it cost $10 000 each for the funeral. So, that has an impact of 15 625 000 000 (15.6 billion) dollars! That's a lot of money.

Adding that up with the seriously wounded, we get 93.7 billion dollars. Now, round it up to 100 billion dollars to cover minor wounds and justice services.

Now, let's assume that out of the 1.5625 million people who died, at least 50% were going to live the next 10 years or more and the other half only 5 years. Heart attack or whatever reason.

Assume the average income of all of them was $25 000 a year. That's not a lot, but I have to consider the bias of those who are involved in guns might be more likely to be living in poverty (I don't stand by this bias opinion, but I'm adding it in because some people might argue it. Also, it makes the number smaller. So, if you don't want to be bias, I'd be happy not to be too. )

Ok, since half are working for 10 years, we have 390 625 000 000 (390.6 billion) dollars of income for that half of people who died! Wow, that's a lot of cash.

Now, for the other half we get 195 312 500 000 (195.3 billion) dollars!

For the seriously wounded, we will assume that they were not capable of working for 6 months. Using the same salary, we get 19 531 250 000 (19.5 billion) dollars.

So, now income versus expenses (from above) gives us 609.9 - 100 = 509.9 billion dollars!

Wow, that's a big impact on the economy. Not sure about you, but that's a lot of cash. Maybe not compared to the national debt, but I'm sure Bush would love to have that disposable income.

It's affecting you in two negative ways. First, lots of people get injured and die. Second, the economy get affected.

Of course, it's in your CONSTITUTION. You have the RIGHT to have a gun. Just because you have the right to have gun, does not mean you should exercise that right or even keep it. It's a stupid thing to have in my opinion. What if they discovered a missing piece to the constitution, and it said, you can commit rape. It's YOUR right to rape someone. Should you exercise it? Obviously NOT!

You have no use for a gun besides things like law enforcement (which is not done in your home so can't use that as an excuse), military (also not in your home), hunting (not that many people hunt compared to the whole population and besides you can rent if you only hunt once a year or once in a lifetime), etc... where do we need a gun? Hmmm...

Note: The calculations are definitely crude, but keep in mind, I was cutting each number in HALF.

 

[JasonRox]

In 2001, firearms were used in 63% of homicides, and 49% of homicides were committed with a handgun (78% of firearm homicides were committed with a handgun). (For a breakdown of weapon types used, see page 23 of the 2001 FBI Uniform Crime Report [1995-2001 FBI UCR's]). Although still unacceptably high, the U.S. homicide rate reached a 30 year low of 5.6 per 100,000 in 2001.

http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvmurd.html

63% of homicides are by firearms.

What if there were very little firearms? Possibly in those cases when harm wanted to be inflicted, they wouldn't get killed. Hence, bringing down the total homicides down and the percentage of homicides by firearms dramatically down.

 

[Cyrus]

http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvmurd.html

63% of homicides are by firearms.

What if there were very little firearms? Possibly in those cases when harm wanted to be inflicted, they wouldn't get killed. Hence, bringing down the total homicides down and the percentage of homicides by firearms dramatically down.

You are looking at a single year, so what? I just showed you a trend that guns have increased by 360% and crime rate has not rised significantly.

Although still unacceptably high, the U.S. homicide rate reached a 30 year low of 5.6 per 100,000 in 2001.

I just showed you data that answers specifically your statements, not just any ole stat from any arbitrary year.

Did you see the link to the graph right below what you quoted?

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/homage.gif

 

[JasonRox]

You are looking at a single year, so what? I just showed you a trend that guns have increased by 360% and crime rate has not rised significantly.



I just showed you data that answers specifically your statements, not just any ole stat from any arbitrary year.

Did you see the link to the graph right below what you quoted?

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/homage.gif

[/URL]

Um... there is a downward trend? That trend ended.

 

[Cyrus]

What, do you not see the black line?

I just gave you the graph about your comments.

http://img245.imageshack.us/img245/9813/gsupplyxf3.gif

What is there left to debate? Are you saying the FBI data is wrong?

I have shown you what the data says, but you choose not to believe it.

 

[Cyrus]

What if there were very little firearms? Possibly in those cases when harm wanted to be inflicted, they wouldn't get killed. Hence, bringing down the total homicides down and the percentage of homicides by firearms dramatically down.

Sigh.........You are talking about 2% of all guns used in homicide...taking away guns from the masses is pointless...how is this not clear to you?

Do you take all cars off the road because 2% are drunk drivers that kill people?

 

[Cyrus]

Um... that's still VERY large.

It says well under %1, so let's say it's 0.5%. That's well under 1%, in fact it's half of it!

From the comment above, it says that most people have like on average 5 guns in the household. Let's assume there are 100 000 000 (100 million) homes in the US. I took 300 million divided by 3. Lots of people live single/double and in families, so I took rough guess dependent on that.

That means we have 500 000 000 guns in households alone! (Some people have more or less than 5 guns in their homes based on the reply above.)

So what? What's your point of this? Yes, people own guns. Where do you think those guns are kept? Why are you so scared of people owning guns?

Arg, that post is way too long, and filled with way too much junk to comment fully. Stop making up arguments. Did you pull every number out of thin air? That was absurd!

Of course, it's in your CONSTITUTION. You have the RIGHT to have a gun. Just because you have the right to have gun, does not mean you should exercise that right or even keep it

You should learn what it means to have your rights taken away from you, hint hint: what YOU are trying to do here. Read what you just wrote, does that make sense to you? Just because you have a right does not mean you should exercise it or even keep it...so what should I do with it, hang it on a wall read what my 'rights' really arnt? ...aye caramba.

 

[Bystander]

http://www.unodc.org/pdf/crime/forum/forum3_Art2.pdf#search=""global homicide rate""

See p. 43 --- U.S. homicide rate is about equal to global average homicide rate --- with the usual caveats regarding comparisons of statistics from a variety of jurisdictions and sources. The U.S. is NOT a more violent society than the rest of the world. The U.S. does NOT have an unusual homicide rate.

 

[Cyrus]

Even better! (But I do know it does have the highest overall crime rate of the industrialized world).

 

[Bystander]

"... overall highest reported crime rate ..."

 

[selfAdjoint]

I'm with cyrusabdollahi. The proposition that number of guns owned is correlated with number of handgun crimes is refuted by the FBI statistics; you can't explain a steady or declining trend by a linearly increasing one, any more you can do it the other way around.

On the other hand the US does have a high overall crime rate. Are there any correlations between the occurence of handgun crimes with occurrence of crimes of all kinds?

 

[Cyrus]

More importantly, how many of those guns used in crimes are legal? If those guns are illegal, how does stopping citizens from legal ownership solve the problem? It does not.

 

[Bystander]

"Overall crime rate?" Between insurance claims, "casualty and theft losses" on income tax forms, and who knows what other bookkeeping tricks there are, might be a bit difficult to establish a "real" rate for crimes against property to compare to a "reported" rate for crimes against property. Sticking to "violent" crime rates, crimes against other people, there's nothing all that statistically unusual.

 

[Cyrus]

Overall as in both violent and nonviolent crimes. That was the first thing my criminal justice professor told us when I took the course.

The unreported figures you speak of is called the 'dark figure of crime.'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_figure_of_crime

 

[Bystander]

--- and, "non-violent" crime I'm taking to be crimes against property rather than counting all the PC misdemeanors like smoking in bars and poolrooms --- if that nonsense is showing up in the stats, it's no wonder.

 

[Cyrus]

Yes, property crimes, all 'white collar' crimes.

White collar crimes make up more damages than all violent crimes, by far.

 

[Bystander]

Come to think of it, there are a boatload of traffic cases that fall into the felony category, DUI & DWI depending upon jurisdiction, speeding violations in excess of "blank" over the limit --- far as comparing U.S. to global "overall," probably have to subtract traffic felonies as being culture specific.

 

[J77]

This has turned into blimming Cluedo

It was in the kitchen with some poison...



Guns are bad. Kids are being brought up on gun cultures - whether on the news, in video games or with their parent's pastime.

 

[Anttech]

So why stop at guns? Why not liberalise all weapons, apart from Weapons of mass destruction? Like Grenades, rocket launchers, gun ships. etc etc

These can also be used responsibly by adults in the context of "sport" After all it would only be the same "nutters" who would use these weapons to kill people, the same as with guns. Apart from gun ships, any nutter with enough money could get a hold of a these weapons in the arms trade business, and perhaps even gun ships.

Just a thought

 

[J77]

Fine by me.

Why anyone would want to buy grenades is beyond me.

Though having one's own aircraft carrier is somewhat appealing

 

[Anttech]

Hey maybe we could meet up with our gun ships and do some 'sport' Perhaps we could put up some targerts and blow them up from 10Km away?

J77 let me know when you have your gunship and we will hook up

 

[ptabor]

hahaha, because if you try to hunt deer with a rocket launcher all you'll get is a grease spot.

Aside from hunting, most people have guns either for a) home protection and b) the joy of shooting them.

As to a, a grenade would do little more than demolish your home, although it may be a hoot to play with one in an open field.

For home protection, all most people would need is a 12 gauge shotty. The mere sound of the home owner chambering a round would most likely cause an invader to wet his or her pants.

 

[Cyrus]

Hey maybe we could meet up with our gun ships and do some 'sport' Perhaps we could put up some targerts and blow them up from 10Km away?

J77 let me know when you have your gunship and we will hook up

Or you could take them to airshows, like people who own figther jets privately, do. So what's your point?

I guess you don't want to believe the data either.

 

[Astronuc]

And now, something completely different.

Alternative to guns
[MEDIA=youtube]IhJQp-q1Y1s[/MEDIA][/URL]

and
[PLAIN][MEDIA=youtube]zP8Kah6vXsQ[/MEDIA]&NR[/URL]

 

[Anttech]

What exactly was the data saying? That although there is lots of violent crime in the US its decreasing, because everyone is so responsible with there weapons, or because the cops are better at their jobs. And yes guns are weapons They arent showers, nor are they cars, they are designed to kill. They kill indiscriminately, maybe not in our middle class environments where they are just used for "sport" (as if killing an animal that can't fire back is really a sport?). But in the poorer area's guns are used to kill humans.

 

[Cyrus]

What, did you not read about the part where I said 2% of all guns are ever used in an actual crime?

Sorry, you are making sweeping statements...get some facts.

They kill indiscriminately

What weapon does kill discriminantly? Nice spin bucko.

 

[Anttech]

What, did you not read about the part where I said 2% of all guns are ever used in an actual crime?

So how does one tell if the police are doing a better job or gun users are more responsible, from that data?

So let's take that 2% and extrapolate a bit, if 100 people have guns then 2 are used in violent crimes, if you have 10,000,000 then 200,000 are used.

What weapon does kill discriminantly? Nice spin bucko.

Spin? Its fact. That is why weapons are generally outlawed, and cars or showers or any other 'killer' arent

Anyway don't worry I won't infringe on your 'right to bear arms' I understand how much this right seems to mean to the average American. I just don't understand why you can't just accept that it makes America a more dangerous place to live. But if you prefer that, then that's also fine

 

[Cyrus]

So let's take that 2% and extrapolate a bit, if 100 people have guns then 2 are used in violent crimes, if you have 10,000,000 then 200,000 are used.

No, as Jason has already shown, you DO NOT extrapolate data.

That is why weapons are generally outlawed, and cars or showers or any other 'killer' arent

Last time I checked, weapons nor cars are outlawed.

 

[ptabor]

a more dangerous place to live than where? The UK? Sudan? France? China?

The problem isn't the guns, it's the people. A gun is nothing but an instrument, a tool. It is the will of a person that kills.

If someone wants to commit murder, they'll do it with whatever means necessary. This includes guns, bats, knives, sharp sticks, cars, gasoline and a match... the list goes on.

The prevalence of violence in America is certainly a fascinating question, but I suspect the answer is more complex than the mere fact there is legal gun ownership.

 

[shmoe]

If someone wants to commit murder, they'll do it with whatever means necessary. This includes guns, bats, knives, sharp sticks, cars, gasoline and a match... the list goes on.

Do you not think they would be more likely to carry out their plan of murdering someone if they have a gun on hand than if they have to forage in the bush for a suitable pointy stick?

It seems likely that the gun culture is both a symptom and a partial cause of an overall violent culture, no?

 

[selfAdjoint]

Do you not think they would be more likely to carry out their plan of murdering someone if they have a gun on hand than if they have to forage in the bush for a suitable pointy stick?

It seems likely that the gun culture is both a symptom and a partial cause of an overall violent culture, no?

Can we get off speculations like this, which have been exposed at length and never go anywhere, and back to the facts of the case? What "seems likely" to one person seems unlikely to another and doesn't make any difference to the crime statistics anyway.

 

[shmoe]

Can we get off speculations like this, which have been exposed at length and never go anywhere, and back to the facts of the case? What "seems likely" to one person seems unlikely to another and doesn't make any difference to the crime statistics anyway.

Happily, when people stop using the "anything can be used as a weapon to kill someone" argument. A gun is not a pointy stick, it's not a knife, it's not a car, and it's not a nerf baseball bat, it's a gun.

 

[Bystander]

(snip)I just don't understand why you can't just accept that it makes America a more dangerous place to live. But if you prefer that, then that's also fine

Same reason Europeans and S. Americans can't just accept that soccer incites fans to violence. Talk about barbarism --- how many people die in soccer riots a year?

 

[Evo]

I just don't understand why you can't just accept that it makes America a more dangerous place to live.

The fact is, the overwhelming majority of violent crime in the US is concentrated in large cities, specifically with populations of 1 million or more, and of those cities, mostly in inner city ghettos. I was looking over the statistics last night, but don't have access to them from work right now. The US is huge, the majority of the country has very low crime and is quite safe. I personally have never in my life gone into an inner city ghetto and can't imagine that I ever will.