PDA

View Full Version : An interesting remark about DC crime increase


otteray
11-19-2007, 7:17 PM
Here's an interesting factoid from the Gotham Gazette:
(People v Handsome , NYC)


"...the New York judge used the decision to present statistics about the nationwide proliferation of deaths and injuries caused by privately owned guns." Since the 2007 decision in Parker, Washington, D.C. has experienced 750 armed robberies, 520 armed assaults and 111 homicides, according to sources cited by Gerstein in his decision. In the United States, more than 30,000 people are killed each year by guns in murders, suicides and accidents with another 65,000 suffering gun injuries."
http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/law/20071116/13/2348

Patriot
11-19-2007, 7:22 PM
Yeah, I've heard that one before.

To see whether that holds any significance you'd need to find out how many day elapsed between Parker and the article (I estimate about 8 months), then average the crime stats per day, then find out the comparable figures from the preceding x years, then find out if it's statistically significant either way.

Otherwise, it's just number spouting.

Fjold
11-19-2007, 7:22 PM
They are going to act like gun related crimes just started, even though Parker hasn't changed anything yet. Just wait until SCOTUS upholds the lower court and people start keeping guns in their homes in D.C., every gun related crime will be blamed on Parker.

pnkssbtz
11-19-2007, 7:24 PM
What is more remarkable is the judge is going against the DC Circuit ruling saying that everything they said is wrong...


Proof there are ignorant judges... =(

Patriot
11-19-2007, 7:26 PM
What is more remarkable is the judge is going against the DC Circuit ruling saying that everything they said is wrong...


Proof there are ignorant judges... =(

AFAIK, depending on where the guy's a judge at, Parker may not be binding precedent, which is one reason why there are higher courts to resolve such splits.

G17GUY
11-19-2007, 7:27 PM
Well yea, they still can not have guns in DC!!

M. Sage
11-20-2007, 7:21 PM
Here's an interesting factoid from the Gotham Gazette:
(People v Handsome , NYC)


"...the New York judge used the decision to present statistics about the nationwide proliferation of deaths and injuries caused by privately owned guns." Since the 2007 decision in Parker, Washington, D.C. has experienced 750 armed robberies, 520 armed assaults and 111 homicides, according to sources cited by Gerstein in his decision. In the United States, more than 30,000 people are killed each year by guns in murders, suicides and accidents with another 65,000 suffering gun injuries."
http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/law/20071116/13/2348

Very misleading since the appeals court has stayed the decision for SCOTUS to rule on. Those laws are still being enforced.

Nothing worse than the truth being used out of context so that it becomes a lie...

pnkssbtz
11-20-2007, 7:22 PM
AFAIK, depending on where the guy's a judge at, Parker may not be binding precedent, which is one reason why there are higher courts to resolve such splits.

No no, you are totally right. I wasn't saying the judge was violating precedent. I was just saying his not fully thought out opinion is worth more than was shown in the DC case which is very well formalized.

Pvt. Cowboy
11-20-2007, 7:40 PM
I think what the gun prohibition people are going to be trying to stage, depending on the outcome of the USSC's review of Heller, is that the pro-gun notion of 'More Guns Equals Less Crime' is a fallacy ... as if there's no distinction between allowing law abiding citizens to defend themselves with a firearm versus simply adding more guns to the DC area by leaving boxes of loaded handguns on street corners in high crime areas.

I think what should be prepared for is that the homicide rate in DC won't fall measurably if the DC ordinance is finally overturned. Just because people would have a right to own a firearm won't mean that the rest of DC's crime problem will suddenly vanish.

pnkssbtz
11-20-2007, 7:46 PM
I think what the gun prohibition people are going to be trying to stage, depending on the outcome of the USSC's review of Heller, is that the pro-gun notion of 'More Guns Equals Less Crime' is a fallacy ... as if there's no distinction between allowing law abiding citizens to defend themselves with a firearm versus simply adding more guns to the DC area by leaving boxes of loaded handguns on street corners in high crime areas.

I think what should be prepared for is that the homicide rate in DC won't fall measurably if the DC ordinance is finally overturned. Just because people would have a right to own a firearm won't mean that the rest of DC's crime problem will suddenly vanish.

A good point. The DC crime problem exists DESPITE a complete ban on the firearms used.

RRangel
11-20-2007, 7:49 PM
What is more remarkable is the judge is going against the DC Circuit ruling saying that everything they said is wrong...


Proof there are ignorant judges... =(

I don't believe it's ignorance. Possible liberal activism. You know the ends justify the means.

Pvt. Cowboy
11-20-2007, 8:16 PM
A good point. The DC crime problem exists DESPITE a complete ban on the firearms used.

If Heller is upheld, the anti-gun people will blame the pre-existing conditions that DC now faces with violent crime on "all the new guns flooding the streets".

pnkssbtz
11-20-2007, 8:33 PM
If Heller is upheld, the anti-gun people will blame the pre-existing conditions that DC now faces with violent crime on "all the new guns flooding the streets".

So... they'll just make sh** up as usual ;)

dustoff31
11-20-2007, 8:33 PM
I think what should be prepared for is that the homicide rate in DC won't fall measurably if the DC ordinance is finally overturned. Just because people would have a right to own a firearm won't mean that the rest of DC's crime problem will suddenly vanish.

I think you're right. I'd be willing to bet that the majority of the stats referenced are dirtbag on dirtbag crime and not necessarily dirtbag vs. disarmed law abiding citizen.

tyrist
11-21-2007, 10:36 AM
Most of the murders are murders of other felons. Also alot of "robberies" are actually drug transactions gone wrong. When people start quoting statistics they seem to never divide the numbers up appropriately and use a gross number instead. If some drug dealer gets robbed I would not place it with the local restaurant getting robbed or a tourist to get a true feeling of crime.

JALLEN
11-21-2007, 1:51 PM
Here's an interesting factoid from the Gotham Gazette:
(People v Handsome , NYC)


"...the New York judge used the decision to present statistics about the nationwide proliferation of deaths and injuries caused by privately owned guns." Since the 2007 decision in Parker, Washington, D.C. has experienced 750 armed robberies, 520 armed assaults and 111 homicides, according to sources cited by Gerstein in his decision. In the United States, more than 30,000 people are killed each year by guns in murders, suicides and accidents with another 65,000 suffering gun injuries."
http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/law/20071116/13/2348

The most important question is how many of these crimes were committed by law-biding citizens legally owning and possessing their gun(s).

I am willing to say it was very few.

Smokeybehr
11-21-2007, 2:09 PM
Here's an interesting factoid from the Gotham Gazette:
(People v Handsome , NYC)


"...the New York judge used the decision to present statistics about the nationwide proliferation of deaths and injuries caused by privately owned guns." Since the 2007 decision in Parker, Washington, D.C. has experienced 750 armed robberies, 520 armed assaults and 111 homicides, according to sources cited by Gerstein in his decision. In the United States, more than 30,000 people are killed each year by guns in murders, suicides and accidents with another 65,000 suffering gun injuries."
http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/law/20071116/13/2348

In reading the judge's opinion, I can see that he has no clue whatsoever about federal firearms law, the definition of "militia" as defined in the US Code, the 1939 Miller decision, and the US Constitution. He and his clerks should all be sent back to law school; or at least a few hours with Mark Levin. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Levin)