Orlando

[Kel Varnsen]

Per the FBI, these are instruments/weapons of murder in 2014 (out of 11,961 homicides):



And these are the homicide rates for every year since 1950, also per the FBI:

[shocka khan]

The funny thing is that most of the gun-phob's like Shaka Khan actually think the AR in AR-15 stands for assault rifle.

Admit it, you do.

That is all.

It's kind of stupid to assume that I don't know anything about guns and that I'm a gun-phobe. To assist in your reading comprehension skills, I would like to point out that I support gun ownership and I think concealed carry is a good thing. I can also tell that you can't comprehend what you read because my correct name is Shocka Khan, not Shaka. I'm not related to Shaka Smart or Shaka Khan.

I can't believe that you as a ref (who also uses the tag 'above all make the right call') would be jumping to so many conclusions.

What I can believe is that if you ref the way you post on these blogs, your skills would be better suited to being a referee in a biddy (grade school level) league. Somehow, I think you are capable of a higher calling and I would think you would have enough professional pride in yourself (and the impression you leave on others) to not to make such broad generalizations and make sure you have all facts in hand, so you can indeed 'make the right call'. So that people respect for the decisions you make and not the conclusions you jump to. So that you can leave people with the impression that you are accomplished in both your professional and personal life and not some dumb cluck who just fell off the turnip truck.

That is all.

[shocka khan]

Per the FBI, these are causes of murder in 2014:



And these are the homicide rates for every year since 1950, also per the FBI:

Your data is from 2014. Although murder rates are trending down, in many large urban areas, they are actually going up. I would like to see your data updated and I would also like to see what the murder rate in the top 20 urban areas actually is.

[MoValley John]

Per the FBI, these are instruments/weapons of murder in 2014 (out of 11,961 homicides):



And these are the homicide rates for every year since 1950, also per the FBI:

Looks like we should be banning handguns... and knives...

[Kel Varnsen]

Your data is from 2014. Although murder rates are trending down, in many large urban areas, they are actually going up. I would like to see your data updated and I would also like to see what the murder rate in the top 20 urban areas actually is.

I looked on the FBI website and they don't have the detailed data on murder weapons available for 2015.

Here are some statistics showing the 2015 rate. Looks like murder was up 6.2% after being down around 6% for each of the previous two years. Why would that be (this is a genuine question as I have no clue)?



EDIT: Included the wrong image at first glance.

[im4wsu]

But you're still missing the logical component. Terrorist attacks via bombs don't mean that guns should be lawful. There is no logical connection between those two points.

Assume with me that a ban on assault rifles would be some level of effective. Some people who would kill with a lawful, easily procured weapon are deterred. Some killers would switch to bombs, some would utilize the black market, but some are effectively deterred because they don't have the time or resources or knowledge to procure another option. So on the one hand we have this benefit, some number of killers that are deterred. On the other side of the scale, we have the burden. Your freedom that is infringed by an assault rifle ban. The best argument I've heard in this thread comes from @rrshock saying he thinks they're fun to shoot. That enjoyment would go away because, presumably, anyone who just shoots them for fun will be deterred by the fact that they are illegal.

And such a law would almost certainly be somewhere between 0% and 100% effective. There are alternate means to kill people, but they are harder. @pinstripers post showed an extreme example of a knife attack. Fewer people were killed than in Orlando and it took 10 attackers. More easily procured weapons tend to be less effective at killing people. Weapons like bombs either take serious amounts of planning, knowledge, or an ability to sneak large amounts of explosives into the desired area. As ineffective as the TSA is sometimes, we haven't seen a bomb threat on a plane in the US in a long time. A full ban on assault rifles is likely to prevent at least one depressed teenager from shooting a dozen classmates sometime, right? I know everyone in this thread is trying to say it's 0% effective, but humor me for a moment.

My question: how many deaths (if we could hypothetically know that information) would need to be prevented for you to support a ban?

So trade a single-digit dead to 50 dead with assault rifle to tens to hundreds or more with bombs.

[im4wsu]

Your data is from 2014. Although murder rates are trending down, in many large urban areas, they are actually going up. I would like to see your data updated and I would also like to see what the murder rate in the top 20 urban areas actually is.

Suppose the 2014 rate of 4.5 was increased by 33% to 6% for both 2015 and the first half of 2016, just what conclusion would you draw from these facts that would be different than what the other much larger base of data would lead you to conclude? Or are you thinking that the 4.5 would double back to its highest level in the past 65 years?

[Kel Varnsen]

Keep in mind that the increase in 2015 was 6.2%. So increased at a rate of 6.2% of 4.5%, the previous rate. At least that's how I took it.

[pinstripers]

So we are assuming that all Orlando victims were shot with the rifle, none with his Glock?

[wufan]

Per the FBI, these are instruments/weapons of murder in 2014 (out of 11,961 homicides):



And these are the homicide rates for every year since 1950, also per the FBI:

I wonder how long I'd have a job if my boss gave me this chart and said "I want you to decrease the murder rate", and I fired back, "I'm going to take care of that purple sliver at 10:00."

[SB Shock]

So we are assuming that all Orlando victims were shot with the rifle, none with his Glock?

or the police?

[shockmonster]

The meaning of the 2nd Amendment is maybe where the debate should be.......

http://www.examiner.com/article/the-original-intent-of-the-2nd-amendment-was-not-to-facilitate-citizen-rebellion

[wufan]

The meaning of the 2nd Amendment is maybe where the debate should be.......

http://www.examiner.com/article/the-...izen-rebellion

There are varied interpretations of the intent of the second amendment. The one you cited is by far the most liberal view. What I dislike about this version is that the author ignores the previous drafts of this amendment in Pennsylvania Constitution in 1776 and New Hampshire a few years later, not to mention the English Bill of Rights; and pretends that the only factor in arming the citizens was to put down local rebellions. There were multiple debates prior to the ratification of the Constitution in which it was determined that the rights of the people must be protected in the Bill of Rights, and the Second Amendment was included.

Noah Webster wrote in 1787, "Before a standing army can rule the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States."

At least some major scholars believed that an armed citizenship was an important aspect to freedom against tyranny.

[wufan]

Actually, Wikipedia has some really good info on the second amendment, (I found it while looking for the Webster quote) and if you don't have time to read some of the actual scholarly books, it gives some basic cliffs notes.

[SB Shock]

The meaning of the 2nd Amendment is maybe where the debate should be.......

http://www.examiner.com/article/the-...izen-rebellion

“I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.” – Speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 14, 1778 (George Mason - Co-Author of 2nd Amendment)

A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves… and include all men capable of bearing arms. . . To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms… The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle.” – Letters From the Federal Farmer to the Republican, Letter XVIII, January 25, 1788 [Richard Henry Lee]

And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; or to raise standing armies, unless necessary for the defense of the United States, or of some one or more of them; or to prevent the people from petitioning, in a peaceable and orderly manner, the federal legislature, for a redress of grievances; or to subject the people to unreasonable searches and seizures of their persons, papers or possessions.” – Debates of the Massachusetts Convention of February 6, 1788; Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 1788 (Pierce & Hale, eds., Boston, 1850)

“To suppose arms in the hands of citizens may be used at individual discretion in private self defense, or by partial orders of towns, counties, or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government.” – A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America, Chapter Third: Marchamont Nedham, Errors of Government and Rules of Policy, 1787; The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States: with a Life of the Author, Notes and Illustrations, by his Grandson Charles Francis Adams, (Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1856) 10 volumes, Volume 6 [Samuel Adams]

“False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils, except destruction. Laws that forbid the carrying of arms laws of such a nature. They 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 act rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” – Quoting Cesare Beccaria, On Crimes and Punishment [Thomas Jefferson]