Children and Guns - Photojournalism

[BernardLanguillier]

Wouldn't it be good to just do a referendum among all Americans to figure out what a majority of the population wants?

I have not been able to find a single survey will clear data on this.

The second amendment is just that, a modification of the original constitution, so there is no reason why it couldn't/shouldn't be amended again if a large majority of the population wants it to be.

What would be democratic for a change and would once for all shut up all the people (me included) who think the US isn't a democracy but a plutocracy (where a tiny minority of powerful families drive the country towards their own interests, including lobbies).

Cheers,
Bernard

[Damon Lynch]

As is your counter-argument about "top states." Totally irrelevant statistics. Crime is localized.

Okay Slobodan, for argument's sake let's assume you're an expert in this topic, well versed in the literature. You explain these three facts, taken from various news sources (NY Times, Financial Times, and Vox):

• More gun ownership corresponds with more gun murders across virtually every axis: among developed countries, among American states, among American towns and cities and when controlling for crime rates. And gun control legislation tends to reduce gun murders, according to a recent analysis of 130 studies from 10 countries. This suggests that the guns themselves cause the violence.
• There was one gun death, not including suicides, in Japan in 2015, the lowest in the developed world and compared with 13,500 in the US for the same year. Japan has strict gun control laws.
• Switzerland has one of the highest gun related death rates in all of Europe per capita. It fits very well the general trend of more guns = more gun deaths:
  
  

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

...more guns = more gun deaths...

Well, duh!

Just like saying more cars = more car deaths. "This suggests that the guns cars themselves cause the violence deaths."

Remove suicides from the stats and the correlation between gun onwership and murders is non-existent in the US. This graph includes gang-related deaths, and illegal guns, without which murder rates with legal guns and legal gun ownership is even less statistically relevant.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... The second amendment is just that, a modification of the original constitution, so there is no reason why it couldn't/shouldn't be amended again if a large majority of the population wants it to be..

Sure, why not? There is a process for that:

[John Camp]

Wouldn't it be good to just do a referendum among all Americans to figure out what a majority of the population wants?

I have not been able to find a single survey will clear data on this.

The second amendment is just that, a modification of the original constitution, so there is no reason why it couldn't/shouldn't be amended again if a large majority of the population wants it to be.

What would be democratic for a change and would once for all shut up all the people (me included) who think the US isn't a democracy but a plutocracy (where a tiny minority of powerful families drive the country towards their own interests, including lobbies).

 Cheers,
Bernard

Well, Bernard, we had a referendum in November of 2016 on who should be the next President, and Hillary Clinton won by ~3,000,000 votes. As you can see, her administration is not thriving.

If we were to have a referendum on gun control, there would be strict controls, but America doesn't work that way. California has slightly less than 40 million residents. Wyoming has about 580,000 residents. Both states have two senators. There are many more small, rural gun-favoring states than large, populous, urban states, and there's no way in hell that the senators from those states are going to vote for gun control.

[LesPalenik]

1. In Switzerland, the evidence shows that strengthening gun legislation reduces gun-related deaths.
2. They have only a quarter of the number of gun-related deaths and an even smaller fraction of gun-related homicides (0.5 per 100,000 inhabitants) than the United States (5 per 100,000).  Furthermore, a large proportion of gun-related deaths are suicides, not murders.
3. In Switzerland, all automatic weapons are banned for civilians.

In the wake of the devastating school shooting in Parkland, Florida, an American former police officer and current Swiss resident argues it’s time for the US to follow the example of Switzerland in regulating firearms. "I believe the most significant difference between Switzerland and the United States is the relationship between citizens, their government, and guns".

Switzerland arms its militia with the understanding that those weapons are for the protection of the country. A culture of responsible gun ownership means that if a threat of abuse or mishandling is detected, the weapon can be confiscated. Outside of border protection, the only other legitimate purpose for a firearm in Switzerland is for hunting or sports, and shooting clubs are popular among both children and adults.

In the United States, the relationship with firearms is different. Two-thirds of American gun owners cite personal protection as their primary reasonexternal link for obtaining a firearm even though they are actually less likely to perceive gun crime as a serious problem. Tellingly, most gun owners in the US cite gun ownership as intrinsic to their sense of personal freedom, whereas the Swiss perceive gun possession as intrinsic to their sense of national freedom. To put it another way, the Swiss have guns because they trust their government, and Americans have guns because they don’t.

https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/florida-school-shooting_what-can-the-swiss-teach-the-us-about-guns-/43923350

[John Camp]

As is your counter-argument about "top states." Totally irrelevant statistics. Crime is localized. In Chicago, it is not even Chicago, let alone Illinois, but South Chicago. My former hometown, Naperville, IL, has been recently named "the safest city in America." And it is only 33 miles from Chicago.

Totally irrelevant point. We all know there are "bad neighborhoods," but statewide statistics based on per capita violent crime demonstrate quite clearly that states that have looser gun controls have more violent-crime gun deaths per capita.

By the way, Naperville was the 7th safest city in *Illinois* and 33rd in the US in 2017, not first in the US. Which is still good. It's so good because Naperville is a highly educated, extremely affluent community with a median family income of a bit more than $130,000, and given those demographics, and given Illinois' strict gun laws, it should be safe. It's south Chicago that's the anomaly, not Naperville.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... In Switzerland, all automatic weapons are banned for civilians...

As are in the US.

[texshooter]

Nobody ever mentions the crimes thwarted by guns.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?t=221s&v=CQAWmAISxGg

[Rob C]

Where do you live Rob?

Spain. Lots of armed police, as well as Guardia Civil, and glad of it!

There are many people who have guns for hunting on private estates. The only gun crime one hears of is when drug cartels are discovered and busted, the weapons confiscated. I don't remember hearing of any actual shoot-outs between them and the forces of law and order; I suspect the guns are for inter-gag control and threat, rather than actual shooting. On the other hand, a few nutters get done for arma blanca crimes: knives.

Baseball has not caught on - yet!

;-)

Rob

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Well, Bernard, we had a referendum in November of 2016 on who should be the next President, and Hillary Clinton won by ~3,000,000 votes. As you can see, her administration is not thriving.

If we were to have a referendum on gun control, there would be strict controls, but America doesn't work that way. California has slightly less than 40 million residents. Wyoming has about 580,000 residents. Both states have two senators. There are many more small, rural gun-favoring states than large, populous, urban states, and there's no way in hell that the senators from those states are going to vote for gun control.

And the reason is:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/10/04/opinion/thoughts-prayers-nra-funding-senators.html

The beginning of a solution seems simple, collectively do not vote for recipients of NRA money, and make it clear that that is the reason. Follow the money.

Cheers,
Bart

[Alan Goldhammer]

What difference? Were they successful in banning cars, alcohol, or teenagers?

Nobody ever talked about banning cars, alcohol or teenagers [sic] (though some of us wish their children would have gone from pre-teen to adulthood without all the 'sturm und drang' of the teenage years)..  Courts and judges have become less lenient in letting drivers off on DUI charges which is huge progress.

[Alan Goldhammer]

The other potential answer is morality, the decline of nuclear family, for instance, and absence of fathers.

There is a control group that somewhat disproves this and that is the black family where there is an abundance of sociological evidence.  Fatherless families were documented in the 1930s and onward yet there was little gun violence.  During the racial unrest which I believe first started in World War 2 in Detroit have had very few gun related fatalities.  Most of the damage was from arson and looting.  I think gun violence began to escalate during the gang wars beginning in the 1970s when handguns became readily available.  Just an anecdote, the gang issues in my area of San Diego in 1960-61 were nothing more than fights with no firearms involved.  There were a couple of uses of knives and chains but that was the extent of things.

[Alan Goldhammer]

The beginning of a solution seems simple, collectively do not vote for recipients of NRA money, and make it clear that that is the reason. Follow the money.

The NRA is an interesting organization with a checkered history.  It was originally established to promote shooting safety and was the organization that managed the US shooting teams in international competitions.  In the late 1970s a 'reactionary' gun rights group took over at their annual meeting, installed new officers and changed the by-laws of the organization that makes it almost impossible to get rid of the leadership.  I read through the by-laws in the belief that a lot of us could join and evict the leadership.  One has to be a paying member for FIVE years before being able to vote in member elections.  Even then it is only for 1/3 of the Board of Directors.  They have also arranged it so that is very difficult for the membership to propose their own Board slate.  There are certain life members who are guaranteed Board seats and IIRC the current Board appoints 1/3 of the Board members.  Membership dues are very low and the organization gets most of its operating money from the gun industry (manufacturers and dealers). 

It's interesting that there are now gun dealers who refuse to sell assault style rifles and associated equipment.  Remington firearms just declared Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

[Rob C]

The NRA is an interesting organization with a checkered history.  It was originally established to promote shooting safety and was the organization that managed the US shooting teams in international competitions.  In the late 1970s a 'reactionary' gun rights group took over at their annual meeting, installed new officers and changed the by-laws of the organization that makes it almost impossible to get rid of the leadership.  I read through the by-laws in the belief that a lot of us could join and evict the leadership.  One has to be a paying member for FIVE years before being able to vote in member elections.  Even then it is only for 1/3 of the Board of Directors.  They have also arranged it so that is very difficult for the membership to propose their own Board slate.  There are certain life members who are guaranteed Board seats and IIRC the current Board appoints 1/3 of the Board members.  Membership dues are very low and the organization gets most of its operating money from the gun industry (manufacturers and dealers). 

It's interesting that there are now gun dealers who refuse to sell assault style rifles and associated equipment.  Remington firearms just declared Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

Beards are fashionable. Follow the money whiskers.

Rob

[RSL]

I think gun violence began to escalate during the gang wars beginning in the 1970s when handguns became readily available.

Alan, why do you think handguns weren't "readily available" prior to the 1970's? What you saw may have been one of those peculiar California things. When I was a kid in Michigan I could walk into any hardware store and buy a handgun.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

...the general trend of more guns = more gun deaths...

About that "trend":

"Rate Of U.S. Gun Violence Has Fallen Since 1993, Study Says"

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2013/05/07/181998015/rate-of-u-s-gun-violence-has-fallen-since-1993-study-says

Since 1993, the United States has seen a drop in the rate of homicides and other violence involving guns, according to two new studies released Tuesday. Using government data, analysts saw a steep drop for violence in the 1990s...

... There were seven gun homicides per 100,000 people in 1993, the Pew Research Center study says, which dropped to 3.6 gun deaths in 2010. The study relied in part on data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The study also notes that while the number of gun homicides has dropped, the number of guns in America hasn't.

Noting that it isn't clear how many Americans have guns in their households, the Pew researchers found that the "2009 per capita rate of one person per gun in the U.S. had roughly doubled since 1968."

So, homicides dropped 50%, while gun ownership doubled... some "trend"!

[OmerV]

About that "trend":

"Rate Of U.S. Gun Violence Has Fallen Since 1993, Study Says"

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2013/05/07/181998015/rate-of-u-s-gun-violence-has-fallen-since-1993-study-says

So, homicides dropped 50%, while gun ownership doubled... some "trend"!

I doubt the downward trend in gun violence is due to the increase of gun sales. However I'm sure the gun industry has been happy to take the credit. Personally, I think social media, better education, access to news, the work of neighborhood social agencies, and yes, gun control advocates for their constant advocacy, can all take credit. No empirical data, just my opinion.

Does GAS stand for gear acquisition syndrome or gun acquisition syndrome? Considering the cost of camera gear, it seems many folks have decided to go for the gun version. Just a little levity, there.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... Does GAS stand for gear acquisition syndrome or gun acquisition syndrome? Considering the cost of camera gear, it seems many folks have decided to go for the gun version. Just a little levity, there.

Even better: "Teach your children photography... they'll never have enough money for drugs." 

[RSL]

ROTFL. Gun sales and NRA memberships have experienced a huge jump in the past few days.