Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 37
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    chicago, illinois
    Posts
    12,042
    vCash
    1500

    California gun sales jump; gun injuries, deaths fall

    Charts when you click the link.

    Gun deaths and injuries have dropped sharply in California, even as the number of guns sold in the state has risen, according to new state data.

    Dealers sold 600,000 guns in California last year, up from 350,000 in 2002, according to records of sale tallied by the California Attorney General's office.

    During that same period, the number of California hospitalizations due to gun injuries declined from about 4,000 annually to 2,800, a roughly 25 percent drop, according to hospital records collected by the California Department of Public Health.

    Firearm-related deaths fell from about 3,200 annually to about 2,800, an 11 percent drop, state health figures show.

    Most of the drop in firearm-related injuries and deaths can be explained by a well-documented, nationwide drop in violent crime.

    The number of California injuries and deaths attributed to accidental discharge of firearms also has fallen. The number of suicide deaths involving firearms has remained roughly constant.

    Two caveats: State figures track gun sales, not ownership. They treat a family's first gun purchase the same as a collector's twelfth. Second, gun sales in California peaked in the early 1990s, as violent crime also peaked.

    These charts show gun injuries, deaths and sales trends over the last ten years.
    Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/12/27/507...#storylink=cpy

    Don't ask don't tell is back, not for gays in the military, Obama's policy for questions about Libya - Jay Leno

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,953
    vCash
    1500
    What do you know? Another correlation between more guns making for less gun crimes amid all the reports of less guns leading to more gun crimes.

    You'd think this was a pattern or something.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    15,695
    vCash
    1500
    It's not mentioned in the article, nor has it gotten much press, but there's been a tremendous, tremendous shift in how parts of California are addressing inner city violence.

    The Office of Gang Reduction and Youth Development (GRYD), the gang interventionists they employ/coordinate with, and various interventionist agencies across the state are directly responsible for a significant percentage of the state's reduction of incidents of shots fired/gang related violence.

    Just focusing on Los Angles, the Advancement Project put out a recent report examining the city over the past five years.

    A few weeks ago, all of the LA mayoral candidates unanimously greed that if elected mayor, they will support the above programs and went as far to say they would provide the necessary funding to employ an additional 50 interventionists.

    An interesting note, some of the same people involved in these peace processes are consulting/coordinating the ongoing gang truce in El Salvador, which has been in place since March.
    Last edited by Yagyu+; 12-29-2012 at 03:20 PM. Reason: Missing suffix.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,933
    vCash
    1500
    You guys are to funny.
    Do you understand the term Corellation?
    You clearly dont.Please research it becasue you embarrassing yourselves.Im not trying to pick on you but ignorance is painful to observe.

    What those numbers do, is make an Inference.
    the inference is Idiomatic.
    IF gun sales go up, then crime goes down.
    That is a postulate.
    and not at all corellary.
    For a corellation to exist you need to show the opposite as well.
    Gun sales would have to go down with an increase in Violent crimes.

    How can you debate things that you just dont have a grasp of?
    Its like arguing with a 10 year old about the existence of Santa Claus!

    The problem with a psotulate is you ASSUME certain facts. You rtake them as a given because you dont have the information you need to either prove or disprove part of your theory.
    THAT IS WHAT THAT ARTICLE IS DOING.
    See, you dont care aqbout truth, your looking for information that supports a concl;ussion you have already drawn. Your like the spainiards insisting the world is flat becasue they cant see further then their own noses.

    In addition the article doesnt even really support a correlation it states unequivically that Nation wide crime has gone down.

    BTW guys shouldnt you look into a States gun laws before you make a post like this(LOLOLOL)

    CA has the most restrictive Gun laws in the whole damn country. No assualt weapons, no magazines over 10 rounds... here take a look:

    Gun laws in California regulate the sale, possession, and use of firearms and ammunition in the state of California in the United States.[1][2]

    The gun laws of California[3][4] are some of the strictest in the United States. A Handgun Safety Certificate, obtained by passing a written test, is required for handgun purchases, although there are exemptions to this requirement[5]. Handguns sold by dealers must be "California legal" by being listed on the state's roster of handguns certified for sale. Private sales of firearms must be done through a licensed dealer. All firearm sales are recorded by the state, and have a ten-day waiting period. Unlike most other states, California has no provision in its state constitution that explicitly guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms.[1] The California Supreme Court has maintained that most of California's restrictive gun laws are constitutional based on the fact that the state's constitution does not explicitly guarantee private citizens the right to purchase, possess, or carry firearms. However recent US Supreme Court decisions of Heller (2008) and McDonald (2010) established that the 2nd Amendment applied to all states within the Union, and many of California's gun laws are now being challenged in the federal courts.

    Semi-automatic firearms that the state has classified as assault weapons, .50 BMG caliber rifles, and magazines that can hold more than ten rounds of ammunition may not be sold in California. Possession of automatic firearms, and of short-barreled shotguns and rifles, is generally prohibited.

    California is a "may-issue" state for permits to carry concealed guns. The willingness of issuing authorities in California ranges from No-Issue in most urban areas to Shall-Issue in rural counties. However, concealed carry permits are valid statewide, regardless of where they were issued. California does not recognize concealed carry permits issued by other states, and non-residents are generally forbidden from obtaining a California concealed carry permit.

    California has state preemption for many, but not all, firearms laws. Actual enforcement of California's firearms laws also varies widely across the state. Urban areas, such as the San Francisco and Los Angeles metropolitan areas strictly enforce firearms laws, and some communities within these areas have passed local ordinances that make legally owning a firearm difficult. Meanwhile, some rural jurisdictions are narrowly enforcing the same firearms laws by targeting only those who demonstrate malicious intent, or not enforcing portions of the state's firearms laws at all.



    [edit] Summary tableSubject/Law Long guns Handguns Relevant Statutes Notes
    State Permit to Purchase? No Partial* §26500, §12071, §12082 All firearm sales (except long guns more than 50 years old) must be completed through a dealer. *Handgun purchases require a Handgun Safety Certificate and proof of residency.
    Firearm registration? No Yes §12025 and §12031 All handgun serial numbers and sales are recorded by the state (registered) in the Department of Justice’s Automated Firearms System. Long arm serial numbers are not recorded, only the sale. While there is no requirement for California residents to register previously owned handguns or firearms with law enforcement, §12025 and §12031 enhance several misdemeanor offenses to felonies if the handgun is not on file in the Department of Justice’s Automated Firearms System. California §12025 states that handguns must be transported unloaded and in a locked box other than the glove compartment or utility box in a motor vehicle. New residents must register handguns (purchased outside of California) with DOJ within 60 days.

    "Assault weapon" law? Yes Yes §12280, §12285 Illegal to possess, import, or purchase assault weapons and .50 BMG rifles, unless such weapons were acquired by the owner prior to June 1, 1989. Legally defined assault weapons and .50 BMG rifles listed by make and model by the DOJ must be registered. Their sale and transfer is prohibited. Military look-alike rifles that are not chambered for .50 BMG and are not on the DOJ roster are legal to purchase or possess, with some restrictions in configuration—known as "banned features." Active-duty military members residing out of state and assigned to duty in California may bring personally-owned assault weapons into the state. The military member's residence must be in a state that permits private citizens to own and possess assault weapons, and the firearms must be registered with the California Department of Justice prior to the servicemember's arrival in California by submitting the registration form with a copy of the member's Permanent Change of Station (PCS) orders.
    Carry permits issued? Yes Yes §12050 May issue, depending on jurisdiction. County sheriff's or local Police Chief's discretion, many counties are de facto "no-issue," while others are "shall-issue" in practice. CCW permits valid statewide. Out-of-state permits not valid in California.
    Open Carry? No No §26350
    State Preemption of local restrictions? Yes Yes §53701 GC Most but not all local restrictions preempted.
    NFA weapons restricted? Yes Yes §12220, §12020 Possession of automatic weapons or short-barreled shotguns or rifles prohibited without DOJ "Dangerous Weapons Permit"; permission rarely granted outside of film industry. Suppressors (aka silencers) prohibited. AOW's (Any Other Weapons) permitted, except for "pen guns."
    Peaceable Journey laws? No No None



    It gets tiring trying toeducate people who dont want to learn

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    5,876
    vCash
    1500
    The sun rose in the morning. People bought guns that very day. Therefore, the sun rising in the morning causes people to buy guns that very day.
    Bill Parcells: "You are what your record says you are."

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,933
    vCash
    1500
    WE have a winner!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    5,876
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by stephkyle7 View Post
    WE have a winner!
    It works for their argument as well as yours.
    Bill Parcells: "You are what your record says you are."

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    3,921
    vCash
    1500
    I'd like to add to the thread but I'm simply too tuckered out with 2nd Amendment debates.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    OH
    Posts
    41,135
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by C-ross12 View Post
    I'd like to add to the thread but I'm simply too tuckered out with 2nd Amendment debates.
    Yeah, this is getting old and it's becoming as tiring as an abortion debate circa 2004. And I can't say I'm surprised to see this poster starting this thread.

    There's plenty of situations that have been made that give both arguments on this topic some credence.

    I'm ready to sit back and see what's going to be presented by the administration before even continuing these discussions. Because it really is pointless and tiring. It always goes a little something like this:

    "The clips are too big. Why do you need those kinda guns?"

    "More guns equal more people safe! Bad guys will always get guns!"

    "Look at Britain!"

    "Look at Switzerland!"

    "Gun laws are too loose"

    "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" (everyone's favorite)


  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,953
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by stephkyle7 View Post
    You guys are to funny.
    Do you understand the term Corellation?
    You clearly dont.Please research it becasue you embarrassing yourselves.Im not trying to pick on you but ignorance is painful to observe.



    It gets tiring trying toeducate people who dont want to learn
    I would read your responses. I really would. They're long, but I can tolerate long responses so long as there is a sentence structure, punctuation, capitalization and at least semi-decent spelling.

    You really shouldn't question the intelligence of others when you can't type out coherent responses, and you really shouldn't talk about education when you can't punctuate. And asking me if I understand the term correlation would be better if you spelled the word right.

    I'm going to give you some facts. You can use inference, you can use whatever word you want. You can make up words to explain it for all I care. Whatever you decide to do with them, they are facts.

    There is a pattern of lower gun crime with higher amounts of guns.
    Australia, Switzerland, California in this case.

    There's an old saying. Different ways of saying it, but same principle. Once is an occurrence. Twice is a coincidence. Three times is a pattern. There is more than a pattern to suggest that gun control doesn't help in preventing gun crimes or gun murders.

    The same thing that's happening in California right now happened in Virginia. Gun sales soared, gun crimes decreased. Call it whatever you want, but it keeps happening.

    Your argument is not being based on facts, it is being based on lawyer-istic bull that doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

    http://www.timesdispatch.com/news/lo...9bb30f31a.html

    You can continue to use words to argue against facts, but the facts are there.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    3,921
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Buckwheat View Post
    Yeah, this is getting old and it's becoming as tiring as an abortion debate circa 2004. And I can't say I'm surprised to see this poster starting this thread.

    There's plenty of situations that have been made that give both arguments on this topic some credence.

    I'm ready to sit back and see what's going to be presented by the administration before even continuing these discussions. Because it really is pointless and tiring. It always goes a little something like this:

    "The clips are too big. Why do you need those kinda guns?"

    "More guns equal more people safe! Bad guys will always get guns!"

    "Look at Britain!"

    "Look at Switzerland!"

    "Gun laws are too loose"

    "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" (everyone's favorite)

    You got it. I like having debates on here but the gun control issues have consumed everything lately.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    OH
    Posts
    41,135
    vCash
    1500
    Let's not forget this is tracking one year. And this is also key:

    Two caveats: State figures track gun sales, not ownership. They treat a family's first gun purchase the same as a collector's twelfth. Second, gun sales in California peaked in the early 1990s, as violent crime also peaked

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    65,117
    vCash
    1500
    I would be interested to know the education process required before someone purchases a firearm. Do they have to demonstrate knowledge of the firearm and the power it possess? Do they have to demonstrate that they know how to use it in a safe manner, store it from those who might not know how (such as kids), and register it with the proper authorities so that if it is used in the commission of a crime it can be tracked down quickly and the owner brought in for questioning?

    But one thing to be skeptical about is that it doesn't seem that the gun sales records actually track if the sales are from a California dealer to a California resident.
    Member of the Owlluminati!


  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,933
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Tongue-Splitter View Post
    I would read your responses. I really would. They're long, but I can tolerate long responses so long as there is a sentence structure, punctuation, capitalization and at least semi-decent spelling.

    You really shouldn't question the intelligence of others when you can't type out coherent responses, and you really shouldn't talk about education when you can't punctuate. And asking me if I understand the term correlation would be better if you spelled the word right.

    I'm going to give you some facts. You can use inference, you can use whatever word you want. You can make up words to explain it for all I care. Whatever you decide to do with them, they are facts.

    There is a pattern of lower gun crime with higher amounts of guns.
    Australia, Switzerland, California in this case.

    There's an old saying. Different ways of saying it, but same principle. Once is an occurrence. Twice is a coincidence. Three times is a pattern. There is more than a pattern to suggest that gun control doesn't help in preventing gun crimes or gun murders.

    The same thing that's happening in California right now happened in Virginia. Gun sales soared, gun crimes decreased. Call it whatever you want, but it keeps happening.

    Your argument is not being based on facts, it is being based on lawyer-istic bull that doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

    http://www.timesdispatch.com/news/lo...9bb30f31a.html

    You can continue to use words to argue against facts, but the facts are there.
    I write in forums not for the wall street journal.
    If you are interested in Grammer, Im sure there is a message board for that.
    I dont fix my punctuation, spelling, or sentence structure becasue it is unimportant.
    The only people who comment on it are people such as yourselves who become upset that their lack of logic or knowledge are exposed, and like most children when they get upset they want to Hit back.

    I provioded no LAWYERISTIC anything.
    the terms I used are from a statisticians lexicon.
    If you are going to use statistics in an argument ,shouldnt you understand what they mean, and how they are compiled, and what can be drawn from them?

    You obviously didnt read any of the links I presented which is a BIG issue for me, becasue I tend not to want to waste my time to provide them just for that reason.
    You respond back trying to make a point which ive already destroyed because this is a game to you. You want to appear AS IF YOUVE PROVEN SOMETHING.

    Guns sales going up and Crime going down cannot be determined to be corelllllaaarrryyy becasue OTHER FACTORS ARE INVOLVED. You have popultaion increses/decreases..you have poverity rates which directly are asociated withe crime, you have different gun laws and on and on.

    I provided a link which explains it and at least 10 different scientific studies, as well as 10 different compilations of satistical evidence and you continue to site a completely non causal stat as evidence of fact.

    I suppose increased police funding doesnt effect crime?
    I suppose tougher criminal penalties dont effect the numbers either?

    You are not making a damn bit of sense and its really boring.

    CA has an assualt weapons ban,
    Ca has registration of Forearms,
    CA, has certification requirements,
    you must take and complete gun safety classes,
    CA. has a 10 day waiting period,
    Ca denies the purchase of Hand Guns to not only Felons, But certain MISDEMEANORS AS WELL.
    Ca has a 10 rround magazine limit.

    were are those FACTS in your assestment? see they dont fit the crap you believe so you make up your own set of facts.

    Harvard PHDs, have produced studys linking guns to increased injury risks. here is their study. these are freaking HARVARD SCIENTISTS.

    http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/stor...ns-in-newtown/

    there are literally dozens of long term scientific studies showing that the Inference you are trying to make is WRONG.

    but you just keep on making it as if shouting something louder ans louder makes it anymore true....

    BTW, rote memorization is considered the lowest level of determining intelligence, spelling, grammer, it is a regurgitation of repetitive instruction, I ignore it because it doesnt matter, unless ofcourse your feelings got hurt.
    http://www.google.com/url?q=http://w...xnbMtDGDGGvRGg
    the above link was an interview, here is a link to the study.
    The filter on the right allows for a breakdown by topic but its all the same
    GUNS=Violence
    Last edited by stephkyle7; 12-29-2012 at 06:41 PM.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    chicago, illinois
    Posts
    12,042
    vCash
    1500
    I know some people don't like history or facts when it's not in their favor, but as one man said, if we don't learn history, we are doom to repeat it.

    A LITTLE GUN HISTORY

    In 1929, the Soviet Union
    established gun control.
    From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend
    themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

    In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million
    Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
    exterminated.

    Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total
    of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were
    rounded up and exterminated.

    China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million
    political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
    exterminated.

    Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000
    Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
    exterminated.

    Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000
    Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
    exterminated.

    Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million
    educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
    exterminated.

    Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century
    because of gun control: 56 million.

    You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians
    disseminating this information.

    Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes,
    gun-control laws ONLY adversely affect the law-abiding citizens.
    With guns, we are 'citizens'. Without them, we are 'subjects'.

    During WW II the Japanese decided not to invade America because they
    knew most Americans were ARMED
    Tojo told Yamamoto that he intended to dictate surrender terms to Roosevelt in Washington DC. Yamamoto told him to forget about it. Tojo asked him why, to which Yamamoto replied, "because in America you will find a gun behind every blade of grass".

    Now I know some of you will say this won't happen in America because America would never do such travesties, tell that to the Japanese during WW2, it happen once, it could happen again, besides technology, the human race hasn't evolved that much and the right to bare arms will make sure it definitely won't or a lot harder to do those things.

    Don't ask don't tell is back, not for gays in the military, Obama's policy for questions about Libya - Jay Leno

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •