Harvard Study on Guns & Violence: Suck it, Donks!

[JoltinJoe]

Harvard....the Truckee Community College of the Charles River.

Hah! At the rate we're plummeting down the academic rankings, we'll be staring up Truckee's kilt before long!

See my siggy below.

Not even No. 1 in Cambridge.

[Ivytalk]

Hah! At the rate we're plummeting down the academic rankings, we'll be staring up Truckee's kilt before long!

See my siggy below.

Not even No. 1 in Cambridge.

You mean we're behind Lesley University now?

[JoltinJoe]

Damn you, I thought I was setting this up so I could say my college is the best in the Bronx.

[Ivytalk]

Damn you, I thought I was setting this up so I could say my college is the best in the Bronx.

You mean you've pulled ahead of Lehman College?

[LeadBolt]

Still laughing at the "Harvard" Study comparing only gun owernership rates and not other factors or accelerants like rampant alcholism (Russia) and legal or decriminalized drugs (Scandanavian Countries.)

Z = conk dupe.

Did you actually read the study?

"One reason the extent of gun ownership in a society does not spur the murder rate is that murderers are not spread evenly throughout the population. Analysis of perpetrator studies shows that violent criminals—especially murderers—“almost uniformly have a long history of involvement in criminal behav‐ ior.”37 So it would not appreciably raise violence if all law‐ abiding, responsible people had firearms because they are not the ones who rape, rob, or murder.38"

"To reiterate, the determinants of murder and suicide are basic social, economic, and cultural factors, not the preva‐ lence of some form of deadly mechanism. In this connection, recall that the American jurisdictions which have the highest violent crime rates are precisely those with the most strin‐ gent gun controls.49"

"The political causation is that nations which have violence problems tend to adopt severe gun controls, but these do not reduce violence, which is determined by basic socio‐ cultural and economic factors.
The point is exemplified by the conclusions of the premier study of English gun control. Done by a senior English police official as his thesis at the Cambridge University Institute of Criminology and later published as a book, it found (as of the early 1970s), “Half a century of strict controls . . . has ended, perversely, with a far greater use of [handguns] in crime than ever before.” 51

"Though only 15% of Americans over the age of 15 have arrest records,63 approximately 90 percent of “adult murderers have adult records, with an average adult criminal career [involving crimes committed as an adult rather than a child] of six or more years, including four major adult felony arrests.”64 "

"Per capita, African‐American murder rates are much higher than the murder rate for whites.92 If more guns equal more death, and fewer guns equal less, one might assume gun ownership is higher among Afri‐ can‐Americans than among whites, but in fact African‐ American gun ownership is markedly lower than white gun ownership.93

Particularly corrosive to the mantra are the facts as to rural African‐Americans gun ownership. Per capita, rural African‐ Americans are much more likely to own firearms than are ur‐ ban African‐Americans.94 Yet, despite their greater access to guns, the firearm murder rate of young rural black males is a small fraction of the firearm murder rate of young urban black males.95"

"Whatever their race, ordinary peo‐ ple simply do not murder. Thus preventing law‐abiding, re‐ sponsible African‐Americans from owning guns does nothing at all to reduce murderers, because they are not the ones who are doing the killing. The murderers are a small minority of extreme antisocial aberrants who manage to obtain guns whatever the level of gun ownership in the African American community."

As you can see, social factors were taken into account. Taking guns away from Law abiding citizens will not reduce gun violence and passing of stricter gun laws will not limit the access of guns to criminals, who commit most of the murders.

[JoltinJoe]

Damn you, I thought I was setting this up so I could say my college is the best in the Bronx.

You mean you've pulled ahead of Lehman College?

Oh sure, and Manhattan College too (you know what they say about studying geography at Manhattan College??).

We are the MIT of the Bronx.

[AZGrizFan]

Still laughing at the "Harvard" Study comparing only gun owernership rates and not other factors or accelerants like rampant alcholism (Russia) and legal or decriminalized drugs (Scandanavian Countries.)

Z = conk dupe.

Did you actually read the study?

"One reason the extent of gun ownership in a society does not spur the murder rate is that murderers are not spread evenly throughout the population. Analysis of perpetrator studies shows that violent criminals—especially murderers—“almost uniformly have a long history of involvement in criminal behav‐ ior.”37 So it would not appreciably raise violence if all law‐ abiding, responsible people had firearms because they are not the ones who rape, rob, or murder.38"

"To reiterate, the determinants of murder and suicide are basic social, economic, and cultural factors, not the preva‐ lence of some form of deadly mechanism. In this connection, recall that the American jurisdictions which have the highest violent crime rates are precisely those with the most strin‐ gent gun controls.49"

"The political causation is that nations which have violence problems tend to adopt severe gun controls, but these do not reduce violence, which is determined by basic socio‐ cultural and economic factors.
The point is exemplified by the conclusions of the premier study of English gun control. Done by a senior English police official as his thesis at the Cambridge University Institute of Criminology and later published as a book, it found (as of the early 1970s), “Half a century of strict controls . . . has ended, perversely, with a far greater use of [handguns] in crime than ever before.” 51

"Though only 15% of Americans over the age of 15 have arrest records,63 approximately 90 percent of “adult murderers have adult records, with an average adult criminal career [involving crimes committed as an adult rather than a child] of six or more years, including four major adult felony arrests.”64 "

"Per capita, African‐American murder rates are much higher than the murder rate for whites.92 If more guns equal more death, and fewer guns equal less, one might assume gun ownership is higher among Afri‐ can‐Americans than among whites, but in fact African‐ American gun ownership is markedly lower than white gun ownership.93

Particularly corrosive to the mantra are the facts as to rural African‐Americans gun ownership. Per capita, rural African‐ Americans are much more likely to own firearms than are ur‐ ban African‐Americans.94 Yet, despite their greater access to guns, the firearm murder rate of young rural black males is a small fraction of the firearm murder rate of young urban black males.95"

"Whatever their race, ordinary peo‐ ple simply do not murder. Thus preventing law‐abiding, re‐ sponsible African‐Americans from owning guns does nothing at all to reduce murderers, because they are not the ones who are doing the killing. The murderers are a small minority of extreme antisocial aberrants who manage to obtain guns whatever the level of gun ownership in the African American community."

As you can see, social factors were taken into account. Taking guns away from Law abiding citizens will not reduce gun violence and passing of stricter gun laws will not limit the access of guns to criminals, who commit most of the murders.

Well, that's just a stupid question now, isn't it?

[D1B]

Did you actually read the study?

"One reason the extent of gun ownership in a society does not spur the murder rate is that murderers are not spread evenly throughout the population. Analysis of perpetrator studies shows that violent criminals—especially murderers—“almost uniformly have a long history of involvement in criminal behav‐ ior.”37 So it would not appreciably raise violence if all law‐ abiding, responsible people had firearms because they are not the ones who rape, rob, or murder.38"

"To reiterate, the determinants of murder and suicide are basic social, economic, and cultural factors, not the preva‐ lence of some form of deadly mechanism. In this connection, recall that the American jurisdictions which have the highest violent crime rates are precisely those with the most strin‐ gent gun controls.49"

"The political causation is that nations which have violence problems tend to adopt severe gun controls, but these do not reduce violence, which is determined by basic socio‐ cultural and economic factors.
The point is exemplified by the conclusions of the premier study of English gun control. Done by a senior English police official as his thesis at the Cambridge University Institute of Criminology and later published as a book, it found (as of the early 1970s), “Half a century of strict controls . . . has ended, perversely, with a far greater use of [handguns] in crime than ever before.” 51

"Though only 15% of Americans over the age of 15 have arrest records,63 approximately 90 percent of “adult murderers have adult records, with an average adult criminal career [involving crimes committed as an adult rather than a child] of six or more years, including four major adult felony arrests.”64 "

"Per capita, African‐American murder rates are much higher than the murder rate for whites.92 If more guns equal more death, and fewer guns equal less, one might assume gun ownership is higher among Afri‐ can‐Americans than among whites, but in fact African‐ American gun ownership is markedly lower than white gun ownership.93

Particularly corrosive to the mantra are the facts as to rural African‐Americans gun ownership. Per capita, rural African‐ Americans are much more likely to own firearms than are ur‐ ban African‐Americans.94 Yet, despite their greater access to guns, the firearm murder rate of young rural black males is a small fraction of the firearm murder rate of young urban black males.95"

"Whatever their race, ordinary peo‐ ple simply do not murder. Thus preventing law‐abiding, re‐ sponsible African‐Americans from owning guns does nothing at all to reduce murderers, because they are not the ones who are doing the killing. The murderers are a small minority of extreme antisocial aberrants who manage to obtain guns whatever the level of gun ownership in the African American community."

As you can see, social factors were taken into account. Taking guns away from Law abiding citizens will not reduce gun violence and passing of stricter gun laws will not limit the access of guns to criminals, who commit most of the murders.

Well, that's just a stupid question now, isn't it?

Yeah, like you read it yourself.

[ASUMountaineer]

Suck it, Skelly. Obama's an oppressive socialist.

Oy vey. Imagine that, Bush 44 is just like Bush 43.

[Baldy]

Obama is one, or has he "evolved"?

Obama supports a nationwide ban on handguns... and this is a position he has been pushing?



Maybe you are right, but this would be news to me.

Nice qualifier.
However, he did support a ban on the sale of handguns in the state of Illinois when he was running for state senate.

[Skjellyfetti]

Oh. Yeah. You got me.

I admit that I was unaware of a questionnaire he filled out in 1996.

Doesn't change the fact that this is a strawman argument. No one in any kind of legitimate power is trying to ban your fucking handguns. Or your ammo. Or sportfishing.

[Baldy]

Oh. Yeah. You got me.

I admit that I was unaware of a questionnaire he filled out in 1996.

Doesn't change the fact that this is a strawman argument. No one in any kind of legitimate power is trying to ban your fucking handguns. Or your ammo. Or sportfishing.

You low information Obamabots aren't aware of quite a few things.
Being dumb and content is not the way to go through life.