aban57 wrote:

willhud9 wrote:

Rumraket wrote:

willhud9 wrote:And so again, I raise my point of contention. The US and many other western countries have a comparable assault rate. The US is different because many people can successfully carry out their assault to lethal means. I agree that is a problem. But the bigger problem is the assaults themselves. They need to be addressed, a cure needs to be found for them. You lower assault rates and you lower gun homicide. It’s a simple correlation.

Sure, assaults need to be addressed... too.

But that is not an excuse for doing nothing about guns. You can do something about both, and one doesn't have to be at the expense of the other.

I’m not saying do nothing about guns, and as I’ve said I’m all for gun control.

My thing is you can have guns, even semi-autos in a society where the assault rates are low.

Do you have an example of any society where assault rate is low ? What makes you think it's even possible to reach that level in our current societies, unless putting some anti-testosterone in the water ?

willhud9 wrote:

Thommo wrote:Don't know if it's accurate, but an alternative version of the whites only murder rate appears here with some context:

http://americablog.com/2013/01/ann-coul ... lgium.html

Had Ann Coulter looked at other (western) European countries, besides Belgium – the countries most like the US – she would have found a much lower overall murder rate per 100,000. For example (and these are rough back-of-the-envelope averages over the same time period):

US ‘whites only’ murder rate: 2.6
Denamark 1.0
Ireland 1.2
Norway 0.8
Sweden 0.9
Greece 1.4
Italy 1.4
Spain 1.2
Austria 0.8
France 1.7
Germany 1.2
Switzerland 1.0

Now you know why Ann Coulter picked Belgium. Even the US’ ‘whites only’ murder rate is two to three times the murder rate in western Europe.

If that's accurate, then it seems that a murder rate 2-3 times higher than for "whites only" in comparable countries is still a serious problem (as I suppose is clear to the families and friends still grieving this avoidable Las Vegas tragedy). I'm not sure the fact it's a much bigger problem for some disadvantaged groups makes much difference. It's a problem for everyone else as well.

It is a problem, but at the same time what is the comparison to assaults? Last time I checked roughly equal. And this is something I really hate about playing with statistics. A person can get beaten to an inch of death, become permanently paralyzed, and count as just an assault statistic. A person can get stabbed and require intensive surgery and lose access to a motor function but still considered just an assault statistic.

The people in Las Vegas who survived many of them have a high chance of having a physical disability after all is done, not to mention the emotional trauma. These people are deemed assault statistic because they were not killed.

So we point to these statistics and say, “well it’s better than being killed” and yes death is final, but I honestly could not cope if I was shot, stabbed, beaten, etc to an inch of life and suffered some hindering long term disability? What kind of life is that? To many victims of serious assault their life loses quality in their eyes. And the “it could be worse they could be dead” comfort is grossly insensitive to the fact that anyone who has gone through painful assaults knows that sometimes you wish you were dead. Suicide numbers increase for assault survivors.

And so again, I raise my point of contention. The US and many other western countries have a comparable assault rate. The US is different because many people can successfully carry out their assault to lethal means. I agree that is a problem. But the bigger problem is the assaults themselves. They need to be addressed, a cure needs to be found for them. You lower assault rates and you lower gun homicide. It’s a simple correlation.

zulumoose wrote:

How do inner-city criminals get their illegal guns? Where do those guns come from?

Snatched from coffee tables, drawers, bedside tables, glove compartments, pickup gun racks, mugging victims, etc. Must be easy when they are commonplace and in many states registration and secure storage is not required.

laklak wrote:We focus on mass shootings because they're newsworthy,

laklak wrote:I've said this before, the only place I've ever been a victim of personal, violent crime is the UK. This despite living in places like the USA, Johannesburg, and Lagos.

Willie71 wrote:

aban57 wrote:

willhud9 wrote:

Rumraket wrote:
Sure, assaults need to be addressed... too.

But that is not an excuse for doing nothing about guns. You can do something about both, and one doesn't have to be at the expense of the other.

I’m not saying do nothing about guns, and as I’ve said I’m all for gun control.

My thing is you can have guns, even semi-autos in a society where the assault rates are low.

Do you have an example of any society where assault rate is low ? What makes you think it's even possible to reach that level in our current societies, unless putting some anti-testosterone in the water ?

...or get the lead out of the water. I suspect lead paint in low income housing, and lead in water in black communities significantly contributes to the violence in low income communities.

Sendraks wrote:

laklak wrote:We focus on mass shootings because they're newsworthy,

They're newsworthy but, they are also an event that is distinct from routine homicide. The changes in UK gun law were made to mitigate against the chances of another mass shooting occurring, rather than simply to reduce homicides overall.

In terms of the US, if changes in gun control law reduce the frequency of mass shootings from what they are now and indeed if they can make it so its at least twenty years until the next one, then those changes in the law would have done their job, even if the homicide rate itself didn't change very much.

laklak wrote:I've said this before, the only place I've ever been a victim of personal, violent crime is the UK. This despite living in places like the USA, Johannesburg, and Lagos.

Which only goes to show.............actually I'm not sure what it goes to show.

zulumoose wrote:

How do inner-city criminals get their illegal guns? Where do those guns come from?

Snatched from coffee tables, drawers, bedside tables, glove compartments, pickup gun racks, mugging victims, etc. Must be easy when they are commonplace and in many states registration and secure storage is not required.

The_Piper wrote:
I figured many came from gun shows and private sales in states like Maine where someone can buy a bunch of guns without so much as showing an ID, and then immediately turn them over in cities like Boston for a gigantic profit.

Thomas Eshuis wrote:

Then there is this genuinely scary shit (recently pulled after the LV shooting)...



A portion of your gun purchase goes to this whether you like it or not.

Please tell me that's satire?

Macdoc wrote:I was just curious if all of WilH guests ...especially those with kids .... were made aware of a loaded revolver with an "easy safety" in the coffe table.

laklak wrote:We focus on mass shootings because they're newsworthy, but ignore the fact that the monthly murder toll in Chicago is higher than the Las Vegas massacre. But it's not one, big killing that can be used to churn up outrage, and the vast majority of victims are black, so nobody bothers talking about it. It's not ""newsworthy". OS may have been off on a figure or two, but his point stands. My "white privilege" apparently reduces my chances of dying by gun violence by a huge factor over the average black male (and to a lesser percentage than an Hispanic male).

I've said this before, the only place I've ever been a victim of personal, violent crime is the UK. This despite living in places like the USA, Johannesburg, and Lagos.

willhud9 wrote:

Macdoc wrote:I was just curious if all of WilH guests ...especially those with kids .... were made aware of a loaded revolver with an "easy safety" in the coffe table.

No. The coffee table was in my father’s room which no one went into aside from my parents. Why should we tell anyone where it was? If the police came to investigate something we’d tell the police if you look in that coffee table there is a gun but like, what is the point of your question?

Macdoc wrote::roll:

Sendraks wrote:

zulumoose wrote:

How do inner-city criminals get their illegal guns? Where do those guns come from?

Snatched from coffee tables, drawers, bedside tables, glove compartments, pickup gun racks, mugging victims, etc. Must be easy when they are commonplace and in many states registration and secure storage is not required.

You could easily amend the question to include any number of common place and readily thieve-able items.

How do inner-city criminals get their smartphones? Where do those smartphones come from?

How do inner-city criminals get their cars? Where do those cars come from?

laklak wrote:We focus on mass shootings because they're newsworthy, but ignore the fact that the monthly murder toll in Chicago is higher than the Las Vegas massacre. But it's not one, big killing that can be used to churn up outrage, and the vast majority of victims are black, so nobody bothers talking about it. It's not ""newsworthy". OS may have been off on a figure or two, but his point stands. My "white privilege" apparently reduces my chances of dying by gun violence by a huge factor over the average black male (and to a lesser percentage than an Hispanic male).

I've said this before, the only place I've ever been a victim of personal, violent crime is the UK. This despite living in places like the USA, Johannesburg, and Lagos.