PDA

View Full Version : 2010 FBI Statistics on weapon deaths (Per type)


LCpl Kutches
12-25-2012, 5:23 PM
http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/525002_527674883918623_396123208_n.jpg

AlpineWeiss
12-25-2012, 5:26 PM
As much as I enjoy facts I do not believe this helps our argument.

NorCalXJ
12-25-2012, 5:27 PM
Bet you the stats are nearly the same for 2012

SelfGovernor
12-25-2012, 10:05 PM
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-20

Here is the 2011 source for that data.

LoneYote
12-26-2012, 12:18 AM
This doesn't help as much as it would if you added "Death by lightening strike, death by drowning, and death by motor vehicle" to the graph....

socalbud
12-26-2012, 12:29 AM
http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/525002_527674883918623_396123208_n.jpg

So what your saying is confiscate handguns, assault rifles, and shotguns...hmmmmmmm.....lol. Poor argument. What about mass killings of 10 or more, any stats on that?

press1280
12-26-2012, 3:29 AM
They go after "assault rifles" because handguns can't be banned under Heller, not to mention too many people own handguns, shotguns, and regular rifles. They want to go after a "minority" gun if you will, because they figure only a very few own them. That may be a different matter this time as compared to 94 though as evidenced by the huge sales numbers right after Sandy Hook.

CDFingers
12-26-2012, 5:22 AM
The graph in the OP is the main reason we won't see a nationwide "assault weapon" ban.

We may see changes in two areas: private sales and magazine size. Of those two, the one most likely to pass will be regulating private sales.

Much talk will be made of mental health, but ultimately nothing there will pass due to privacy concerns.

My guesses.

CDFingers

Ford8N
12-26-2012, 5:49 AM
The graph in the OP is the main reason we won't see a nationwide "assault weapon" ban.

We may see changes in two areas: private sales and magazine size. Of those two, the one most likely to pass will be regulating private sales.

Much talk will be made of mental health, but ultimately nothing there will pass due to privacy concerns.

My guesses.

CDFingers

None of which would affect criminals and wouldn't have changed the outcome of the autistic monster in Connecticut. But I do agree, that this will probably be what will happen at the Federal level. In California, I expect it will be much worse.

CDFingers
12-26-2012, 5:57 AM
On another thread, about "compromise," I suggested a law requiring the ownership of a gun safe in order to be able to buy a gun as a law I'd be willing to accept.

I suggested it because two recent mass shootings featured unsupervised and unlocked rifles stolen from their rightful owners. I said that California has a law requiring a gun safe if children live in the house. I said such a law would not in any way infringe upon the RKBA, but it would prohibit unauthorized access to the weapons.

CDFingers

donny77
12-26-2012, 6:37 AM
On another thread, about "compromise," I suggested a law requiring the ownership of a gun safe in order to be able to buy a gun as a law I'd be willing to accept.

I suggested it because two recent mass shootings featured unsupervised and unlocked rifles stolen from their rightful owners. I said that California has a law requiring a gun safe if children live in the house. I said such a law would not in any way infringe upon the RKBA, but it would prohibit unauthorized access to the weapons.

CDFingers
The first litmus test of any law is can it be enforced. How would you enforce this? Mandatory inspections? Unlikely to hold up against unreasonable search. So is this just an additional charged tacked on when your guns are used in a crime? Not a fan of tacked on charges, just punish the original crime to the degree necessary to make it a deterrent. Is a $200 gun locker, aka can break into in a minute with a crowbar good enough? Considering a $600-$1000 safe will only last about 5 minutes again power tools... is that good enough?

Point two, a gun in a safe is not a gun you can defend your home with. I have a pistol safe, designed for quick access, for my home defense pistol by my bed, but I wonder if I wanted to leave my AR loaded for home defense how I would store it and have it readily accessible. Every situation is different and you need to know how you need to store your guns to protect yourself and society from them.

NotEnufGarage
12-26-2012, 6:49 AM
On another thread, about "compromise," I suggested a law requiring the ownership of a gun safe in order to be able to buy a gun as a law I'd be willing to accept.

I suggested it because two recent mass shootings featured unsupervised and unlocked rifles stolen from their rightful owners. I said that California has a law requiring a gun safe if children live in the house. I said such a law would not in any way infringe upon the RKBA, but it would prohibit unauthorized access to the weapons.

CDFingers

To some, that requirement could be perceived as a tax, similar to a poll tax. "In order to exercise this right, you must make this expenditure."

Making a gun safe required for anyone with unruly children or mentally deficient children or adults in the house is whole other thing, though. I would be in favor of mandatory reporting of mental health treatment, which would trigger the gun safe requirement.

Not all children treat guns as a curiosity. Some are properly raised to respect then and fear what they can do. Generally, though, the parents of those children are smart enough to have a gun safe, not because they're required to, but because it's the smart thing to do.


BTW - what the heck is a "Other gun"??? Except for .22lr, it should be pretty easy to determine what kind of gun was used in a murder from the bullet.

IVC
12-26-2012, 7:07 AM
We may see changes in two areas: private sales and magazine size. Of those two, the one most likely to pass will be regulating private sales.

I believe this one has a serious technical problem. Private sales of ordinary items are controlled by the states. Since legally owned guns are not federally controlled goods such as narcotics or NFA items, the feds would have to push for "commerce clause" to control it.

However, chief justice Roberts limited commerce clause in declaring Obamacare a tax and there would be some states that would seriously object and challenge federal authority in regulating ordinary in-state sales.

m03
12-26-2012, 7:15 AM
What constitutes "Unknown guns"? AOWs, short-barreled shotguns, and the like?

IVC
12-26-2012, 7:21 AM
As much as I enjoy facts I do not believe this helps our argument.

Sure it does.

It shows why AWB in principle cannot have effect on murder rates, which would be the only "compelling government interest" in regulating AW-s, which in turn is required in front of a judge in order to allow AWB to stand as a regulation and not be stricken down as an infringement.

donny77
12-26-2012, 7:23 AM
What constitutes "Unknown guns"? AOWs, short-barreled shotguns, and the like?
I'm thinking not recovered weapon or bullet?

IVC
12-26-2012, 7:28 AM
What constitutes "Unknown guns"? AOWs, short-barreled shotguns, and the like?

AOW and SBS would be "known guns" and would be classified appropriately. Unknown guns are when the type cannot be determined, e.g., because the murder weapon and/or bullet was not found and the type of firearm cannot be inferred reliably.

Damn True
12-26-2012, 7:43 AM
Graph needs a column for swimming pools

RotaryRevn
12-26-2012, 7:48 AM
Looks like "Hands Fists and Feet" need to be outlawed.

BBJohnnyT
12-26-2012, 7:50 AM
This chart is a lousy argument. Here's a better one... If restricting firearms would make us safer, can do you please explain how 2,977 civilians were murdered by 19 men armed with box cutters?

chris
12-26-2012, 7:59 AM
As much as I enjoy facts I do not believe this helps our argument.

sure it does. even though many in the media will ignore the pure fact that their argument for more control is not backed up by accurate data. and the best part is the FBI is a government agency and has produced this data for decades and their is tons of evidence that guns are not the problem.

but of course politicians do not care about the fact it's the WOW factor of this latest tragedy to get them in the news.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-20

Here is the 2011 source for that data.

sreiter
12-26-2012, 8:07 AM
On another thread, about "compromise," I suggested a law requiring the ownership of a gun safe in order to be able to buy a gun as a law I'd be willing to accept.

I suggested it because two recent mass shootings featured unsupervised and unlocked rifles stolen from their rightful owners. I said that California has a law requiring a gun safe if children live in the house. I said such a law would not in any way infringe upon the RKBA, but it would prohibit unauthorized access to the weapons.

CDFingers

apartment dwellers might have a hard time with safes

blackandredwarrior
12-26-2012, 8:08 AM
BTW - what the heck is a "Other gun"??? Except for .22lr, it should be pretty easy to determine what kind of gun was used in a murder from the bullet.

I've seen a number of lever action rifles chambered in "pistol" calibers. As well as Circuit Judge rifles.

As others have said, the wounds could have been through and through, no bullet or firearm recovered.