The Guns of Spring

[babylonsister]

http://egan.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/08/the-guns-of-spring/

The Guns of Spring

snip//

American life in the spring of 2009 is full of hope, peril, and then this: the cancer at the core of our democracy.

In a month of violence gruesome even by our own standards, 57 people have lost their lives in eight mass shootings. The killing grounds include a nursing home, a center for new immigrants, a child’s bedroom. Before that it was a church, a college, a daycare center.

We hear about these sketches of carnage between market updates and basketball scores — and shrug. We’re the frogs slow-boiling in the pot, taking it all in incrementally until we can’t feel a thing. We shrug because that’s the deal, right? That’s the pact we made, the price of Amendment number two to the Constitution, right after freedom of speech.

snip//

The Pittsburgh shooter picked up his AK-47 through an online company that passed the sale through to a licensed firearms dealer, as required. He was apparently legal for these guns despite the fact that he’d been booted from the Marines for assaulting his drill sergeant and had a restraining order from his ex-girlfriend.

All a citizen can do is ask for some common sense around the Second Amendment. The assault weapons ban, outlawing 19 military style guns that no hunter with sense of fair play would ever use, should be reinstated. President Bush and Congress let it expire in 2004, even though it was a godsend for police officers and supported by a majority of gun owners.

To the senators who back assault rifles while speaking of the “sacred part of being a Montanan,” you don’t want this kind of heritage. It demeans you as Westerners to allow easy access to weapons that kill innocents, and it does a disservice to history.

Heritage? Old West towns like Dodge City had strict gun control, making people check their weapons at the city doorstep.

And the gun dealers, they should be hammered for selling to drug cartels or through loopholes to convicts. Throw federal racketeering laws at them. Make it as hard for a wife-beater or a felon to get an AK as it is to get a driver’s license.

The rest of us can only mourn and shrug, marking grim anniversaries: Virginia Tech, Columbine, and on, and on, and on.

[Demeter]

1. Maybe 2nd Amendment Needs a Mental Health Clause

[navarth]

amen to that. n/t

[TheWraith]

16. Or perhaps we should just get people help if they need it, regardless of armament. nt

[Junkdrawer]

2. Well said...n/t

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[L0oniX]

4. Fair and balanced? What about all the news about people who used guns to defend themselves?

Like anything else these recent shootings need to be compared to the news that doesn't go national. While these recent shootings are awful, there are many acts of self defense that happen daily. Insulting remarks that group those who use a gun for self defense in with the crazies is Fox like, unfair, unbalanced and at best juvenile. With a little investigation you can find hundreds of examples of people using guns for defense and escaping death or great harm because of it. DU recently has become a one sided anti gun rant blog and that makes it hypocritical and very repuke like with all the ignorance, bias, extreme knee jerk and reactionary responses. You would think that people might try to use Google every once and a while and find out the balanced truth of the matter of gun use. Google "gun defense" sometime and get a clue. Here's one at the top for ya: http://www.claytoncramer.com/gundefenseblog/blogger.html There are many recent examples of legal gun owners protecting themselves and others. I agree that assault weapons should be banned as they are only good for defending against the ATF in Montana which ain't gonna happen too often. Uniform national gun control laws would stop the crazies and the stupid from legal gun ownership and that is the least that could be done. If we took away everyone's guns, only the criminals, police and military would have them. You can be sure that without guns for self defense there will be increases in strong arm robbery, home invasion robbery and rape. It takes on average 15 minutes for the police to arrive if you can manage to make the 911 phone call. Do you really expect everyone to depend on that? Some choose to defend themselves with a gun and that's a constitutional right. If you want that changed then there are means to do so. Insulting the legit self defense gun owners here on DU and lumping us in with these crazies is unfair, unbalanced and ignorant.

Pawn shop manager shoots would-be robber
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=6745869

Shotgun-toting robbery suspect shot and killed by business owner
http://www.woai.com/news/local/story/Shotgun-toting-robbery-suspect-shot-and-killed-by/3VbZvZI0VES46MF9V8Nxjg.cspx

Suspect Shot During Gas Station Robbery
http://www.10tv.com/live/content/local/stories/2009/04/02/story_gas_station.html?sid=102

Man jailed with a gunshot wound after harassing ex-wife
http://www.wcax.com/Global/story.asp?S=10107735

Pizza shop owner describes robbery, shooting
http://www.ohio.com/news/break_news/42296357.html

Orange Blossom Trail pharmacist kills armed robber
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/orl-loc-pharmacy-robber-killed-040109,0,550904.story

Shotgun blast deters robbers
http://www.weatherforddemocrat.com/local/local_story_090104944.html

Robbery suspect dies after getting shot, run over
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/6348060.html

Man fends off knife-wielding intruder during home invasion
http://www.kfor.com/news/local/kfor-news-home-invasion-story,0,5748075.story

Couple Shoots, Stabs Intruder
http://www.wyff4.com/news/19023821/detail.html

Would-Be Robber Ends Up As Shooting Victim
http://www.wcpo.com/news/local/story/Would-Be-Robber-Ends-Up-As-Shooting-Victim/wARMg2W2PECgzXU6tMKyIg.cspx

...and there is much more. Tell these people they should depend on their local police for protection and not have self defense guns.

[babylonsister]

5. Do you consider assault weapons guns of self-defense?

What in your opinion are assault weapons good for?

[L0oniX]

6. Ah ...you didn't read what I said but responded anyway?

"I agree that assault weapons should be banned as they are only good for defending against the ATF in Montana which ain't gonna happen too often." ...and I meant that as a joke. Automatic assault weapons should be banned.

[babylonsister]

7. You're right, I didn't, so I apologize. I just

saw all those links defending guns, and wondered what you were defending as this article is about an assault weapons ban. So sorry.

[L0oniX]

9. I'm just trying to counter all these anti gun posts with some balance.

Your posts are always good and worth reading. :hi:

[babylonsister]

10. I don't consider this an anti-gun post. It's an anti-assault weapon

post. But I hear ya. I just think people are very concerned about the violence in our country, but I also believe there surely are people who have guns who have no intention of turning them on their fellow countrymen (unless provoked).

I read recently that every last 'mass murderer' in recent memory was legally licensed, so that's cause for additional concern.

I have no answers, but I'm not surprised the topic is coming up.

:hi:

[L0oniX]

12. In Florida you must pass a background check. You will be denied if you have a record of

mental/emotional problems or any case of domestic violence, and that record goes back to day one. I would include those with a mandatory gun safety and gun defense class along with a national registration/license. True there may be some crazies who have taken the courses and were legally licensed but the accidental deaths surely could be reduced if we adapted national regulations and training courses. I am sure there are far more unlicensed and untrained people with guns who commit crimes than those that have recently hit the spot light. Automatic assault weapons certainly should be banned.

[TheWraith]

17. Assault weapons are only used in about 3% of homicides. Pistols are the problem.

Twice as many people are killed by hands and feet as by rifles. The Binghamton shooter had two pistols, two of the three cops in Pittsburgh were killed with a shotgun, and it goes on. The problem in a lot of these recent cases is people who need mental health treatment--the people they shot would be just as dead if they'd had hunting rifles, or revolvers.

But if you break down all gun deaths in the US, something like 85% are the result of pistols. That's because they're the preferred weapon for criminals due to concealability and ease of disposal.

(This is, of course, aside from the fact that "assault weapon" just means "scary looking black gun," similar to the verbal framing of "partial birth abortion.")

[X_Digger]

8. AWB as 'common sense'?? Hardly

The '94 ban specified which 'features' in combination make a weapon an 'assault weapon'.

These included:
-pistol grip
-detachable magazine
-barrel shroud
-removable flash supressor
-collapsible / folding stock
-bayonet mount
-grenade launcher
A combination of a detachable magazine and 2 other features from this list makes one an 'assault weapon'.

Thing is, these features don't make a weapon particularly dangerous compared to their counterparts without the features. To that point, manufacturers produced weapons with the bayonet mount ground down, flash supressor permanently affixed, collapsible stock pinned in place- thus removing them from the 'assault weapon' designation.

You might as well say that a 'race car' is a car that runs on premium gas and has two of the following:
-spoiler
-low profile tires
-racing stripes
-large muffler(s)
-bucket seats with five point restraints
-coil over shocks

It doesn't make sense for cars, and it doesn't make sense for rifles, either.

The following are all california legal (cali's AWB is still on the books):

[alarimer]

11. Gun enthusiasts always forget the "well-regulated" part of the 2nd Amendment.

I am not sure what laws will work best. I think a 5 day or one week waiting period might stop a lot of this. Give people some time to cool off. But that doesn't really stop those who have stockpiled guns in anticipation of their paranoid fantasies. So I don't know.

[L0oniX]

13. Many of "US" would rather not have guns for defense. Not all gun owners are "enthusiasts".

[depakid]

20. Ironically, you make yourself MANY times more likely to suffer a tragedy

than if you didn't own a firearm.

[L0oniX]

21. Really? You obviously don't read about those who use a gun for defense.

Here ya go ...read up so you'll know what your talking about.

http://www.claytoncramer.com/gundefenseblog/blogger.html

...and where's the link for your stats?

[depakid]

22. I've posted the science dozens of times

It's really a matter of rational risk assessment on the hand- vs. irrational fear on the other. Unfortunately, with Americans, fear often wins.

This stusdy's nice because it's the full article (free) and it references (and links to) abstracts of other studies.

Guns in the Home and Risk of a Violent Death in the Home: Findings from a National Study


http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/160/10/929#KWH309C20

There are also a bunch of related risk and injury studies summarized here:

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/research/hicrc/firearms-research/

(toolbar on left)

[L0oniX]

23. From what I read it seems that gun owners are for the most part successful..

in defending themselves and others. I am sure there are studies by people who don't live in high risk areas. I am never for knee jerk reactionary moves on the part of people who buy a gun out of fear but rather as a law abiding citizen who takes precautions in consideration of the crime statistics in ones local. I prepare for hurricane season too. http://www.claytoncramer.com/gundefenseblog/blogger.html

[depakid]

24. Just as long as you realize that you and your family are much LESS SAFE with a gun in the house

[L0oniX]

25. Well I don't believe that. Maybe if I had kids.

[depakid]

26. Facts are facts- whether you believe them or not

[L0oniX]

27. I think these people would dissagree with those "facts".

http://www.claytoncramer.com/gundefenseblog/labels/home%20invasion.html

[depakid]

28. Only if you're not interested in the actual science on the subject

[X_Digger]

29. And has been repeatedly pointed out to you..

Correlation != Causation

[depakid]

30. Generally, when people make that statement

it's pretty clear that they don't know what they're talking about, much less how to read (or conduct) epidemiological studies. This seems particularly true of gun proliferation advocates.

Here's a hint: the studies discuss relative risks between two populations, gun owners and non gun owners.

Gun owners (and members of their households) are at greater risk of harm than non gun owners. That's a fact.

[X_Digger]

31. *sigh*

There have not been studies that show that purchasing a firearm increases risk, absent other variation.

What Kapman and Loftin have shown is correlation absent causation. Cummings comes closest to linking causality, but even then admits problems making a firm link:

"Clinicians and researchers never have all the evidence that they desire. In addition to having more studies similar to those that have been done, it would be desirable to have evaluations of other outcomes, such as unintentional gunshot injuries, both fatal and nonfatal, and other nonfatal outcomes, such as rape or assault. More accurate information is needed regarding the effect of firearm storage practices on the balance of risks. Clinicians and researchers also might wish to know if there are settings or subgroups for which benefits do outweigh the risks."

<snip>

"Evidence that a gun in the home increases the risk of homicide comes from only 2 studies and seems weaker"

Perhaps those who most feel the need to purchase a firearm are more likely to actually be at risk of needing one, ie, at risk of being the victim of violent crime whether or not they have a firearm handy.

Kleck addresses this-

"This association was at least partly attributable to confounding factors that are known to be strongly associated with both gun ownership and homicide victimization, such as dealing in illicit drugs (but not drug use) and membership in a street gang. Either of these confounding factors alone is associated strongly enough with gun ownership and homicide victimization to produce a spurious odds ratio of 2.8, and neither factor was controlled by the researchers. Indeed, most factors that increase the risk of homicide victimization in a way that is evident to the subjects are likely to also motivate some of them to acquire a gun for self-protection."

[slackmaster]

15. A waiting period for someone who already owns one or more firearms makes no logical sense

We have a 10-day wait here in California BTW.

[slackmaster]

14. "military style guns that no hunter with sense of fair play would ever use" is BS

With a five-round magazine as required by many states' hunting regulations, there is no functional difference between a "military style" rifle and a more traditional looking semiautomatic hunting rifle.

[No More Bushbots]

18. You can take my grenade launcher!

When you pry it from my cold, dead hands!

j/k

[slackmaster]

19. Grenade launchers are strictly regulated under the National Firearms Act of 1934

That's not what we're discussing here.