Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-30-2016, 2:45 PM
Stumpfenhammer Stumpfenhammer is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 222
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default Violence / CCW ratios: San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Orange Counties

In reviewing DOJ and other statistics today it occurred to me that the California counties that have traditionally placed the most restrictions on firearms ownership (San Francisco and Los Angeles) and whose politicians are behind most of the additional legislation currently proposed, continue to be some of the most violent in California.

For example, in 2015 the number of people with Concealed Carry Weapons (CCW) permits in San Francisco County was only four (4) while that county ranked 3rd highest in per capita violence (7.56 per thousand) out of California's 58 counties. Los Angeles County ranked 12th in per capita violence (5.59 per thousand) with only 500 CCW’s issued (87 to judges). While Orange County, with 7,248 CCW permit holders, comes in as one of the least violent counties, ranking 52nd out of 58 (2.48 incidences per thousand).

If a population-dense county with the highest per capita number of citizens legally carrying firearms also has one of the lowest rates of violence out of 58 counties, how can people not at least consider the possibility that more guns in the hands (or on the person) of law-abiding citizens actually does lead to lower rates of violence, or if it’s not that, that the next most likely possibility is that Orange County has developed a culture or socioeconomic model that leads to lower rates of violence (without the need to disarm law-abiding citizens) -- a model that could be employed elsewhere.

I'd appreciate if some of the more statistically aware and analytical forum members would validate or invalidate my logic as appropriate.
__________________
FOR SALE - Orange County

338 Lapua Magnum, CORBON, 300gr Match HPBT (160 rounds) = $940
338 LM CORBON (subsonic) 300gr Match HPBT (40 rounds) = $220
300 WinMag, Hornady 195gr BTHP Match (400 rounds in two cases) = $750
300 WinMag, Black Hills 210gr BTHP Match (120 rounds) - $250
New in package - SureFire FH762K (flash hider) $85

Last edited by Stumpfenhammer; 07-30-2016 at 5:49 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-30-2016, 4:55 PM
gunnut714 gunnut714 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 713
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default Violence / CCW ratios: San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Orange Counties

You don't need statistics, just drive around town in those top few counties in a Friday night and you can see all the gang banging and pimping going on. Let's keep Orange County safe and protect our county from the liberal scum politicians that run every major city to the ground.

Last edited by gunnut714; 07-31-2016 at 6:36 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-30-2016, 5:10 PM
pacrat pacrat is online now
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Socialist Republic of SoCal
Posts: 3,415
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Violence / CCW ratios: San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Orange Counties
Your logic is sound. And the numbers are irrefutable. Problem being is that politicos in the high density population/crime counties. Ignore them in order to push their agenda.

In order to get CCW in those counties we need Sheriffs that believe in the oath they took. Not the agenda of other politicos in their respective counties that control budgets.

Trying to vote out Liberal Progressive, vote for >me< "I'll give ya Free Ch!t" politicians once entrenched. Is that their constituents are primarily of the "Gimme Free Ch!t" and I'll vote for you crowd.

Kinda like the exercise in futility of trying to vote Santa Claus out of a Christmas parade.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-31-2016, 7:18 AM
rplaw rplaw is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 306
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

There are many factors involved in this beyond crime/CCW statistics.

When you stack rats on top on each other in an enclosed area, they turn on each other and become cannibals. If one of said rats wants to stop the cannibalization, they appeal to other rats to let them 'be in charge' and they will 'make it right.'

Said rats go along with the plan because it's in their best interest to stop the cannibals from eating them. Unfortunately, the cannibals don't care and will continue doing what they're doing. In order to actually BE safe from them, ordinary rats now become cannibals too. Said head rat continues to tighten the screws on the basis that the cannibals are getting more numerous.

What no one realizes is:

A. Said rats will eventually get out of their maze and come to play and prey in YOUR community.

B. Said head rat's ideas were ineffective from the start and have done NOTHING to change the situation except exempt the top rat from all the safety he's (not) imposed. Which was the whole point to the exercise to begin with. Stupid rats.

C. Giving the rats CCW licenses will not change anything. The cannibals will STILL prey on them and they will still join up to avoid that inevitability.

The only true answer to the problem lies in getting rid of the head rat and exterminating all the other rats at the same time. Maybe N Korea can lob a nuke into LA/SF/SAC soon.
__________________
Evil doesn't only come in black.

No. Absolutely not. I refuse. I WILL NOT go gently into that goodnight.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-31-2016, 9:58 AM
Mithrandir13's Avatar
Mithrandir13 Mithrandir13 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 763
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Too many democrat lies!!!
__________________
The founding fathers did a wonderful thing when they included the second amendment to the constitution...

Yes... and this! http://www.constitution.org/2ll/2ndschol/87senrpt.pdf

Good Guys with Guns HERE
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-31-2016, 11:28 AM
JonW JonW is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 330
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stumpfenhammer View Post
If a population-dense county with the highest per capita number of citizens legally carrying firearms also has one of the lowest rates of violence out of 58 counties, how can people not at least consider the possibility that more guns in the hands (or on the person) of law-abiding citizens actually does lead to lower rates of violence, or if its not that, that the next most likely possibility is that Orange County has developed a culture or socioeconomic model that leads to lower rates of violence (without the need to disarm law-abiding citizens) -- a model that could be employed elsewhere.
OC had much lower violence prior to the huge ramp up in CCW's, so you really can't use the CCW/violence relationship argument. However, you can use the argument that issuing so many CCW's has had no impact what-so-ever on increasing the crime rate in OC. The FUD of blood in the streets never materialized.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-31-2016, 11:52 AM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 9,890
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stumpfenhammer View Post
..., how can people not at least consider the possibility that more guns in the hands (or on the person) of law-abiding citizens actually does lead to lower rates of violence, ...
There are two distinct aspects to answering your question: (1) statistical/scientific, and (2) political.

From the political standpoint, we live in the times where the goal of politics is not debate and finding solutions, but pushing agendas. Nobody cares about discussion. The only purpose of even bringing up "discussion" is to blame the other side for blocking your agenda.

Just look at how Democrats at national level talk about "common sense gun laws" and "need to address gun violence," while in CA where they have majority they could care less about either common sense or any discussion about gun violence or 2A rights - they are just implementing their agenda, no questions asked.

So, the answer to the political angle of your question is that it doesn't matter whatsoever what numbers or arguments you come up with. The other side is working on implementing an agenda and they have the numbers to do it. A bunch of laws just got passed and we'll get more next legislative session. Arguments and facts are irrelevant and they are merely a distraction for little people while the laws are getting cemented on the books.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-31-2016, 12:07 PM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 9,890
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stumpfenhammer View Post
..., how can people not at least consider the possibility that more guns in the hands (or on the person) of law-abiding citizens actually does lead to lower rates of violence, ...
Statistically this is not a good argument. You can "consider the possibility," but the numbers don't tell the story you'd like to tell.

When you want to establish causality you need to have correlation (which you do,) but it's much more than that. Instead of going into details, I'll give you a simple example.

There is very little crime in Amish communities. Let's say that they own a lot of guns. Can you make an argument that there is no violence in Amish country *because* they have a lot of guns? Now consider the opposite, that Amishes don't own any guns. Can you make an argument that there is no violence in Amish country *because* there are no guns? In both cases the answer is "no."

Instead of trying to make a correlational argument that "more guns lead to less crime," we should concentrate on the opposite - the negative correlation between gun ownership and crime. This negative correlation disproves the antis' argument that "more guns lead to more crime."

Notice that instead of making a statement about what causes what, we should be making a statement about what *doesn't cause* what - that's the only scientific argument we can make from these types of quick correlational observations (a.k.a., statistics.)

Also, when comparing statistics, it's extremely important to control for as many independent variables as possible. Comparing L.A. to S.F. doesn't pass even the smell test. Instead, you need to look at the statistics in the same area as it goes through transition, e.g., from "no issue" to "shall issue," or at national level from "AWB" to "AWB sunset." The lack of correlation with crime in those cases (the trend in crime is unchanged) shows that the antis' argument of "our laws make us safer" is invalid.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-31-2016, 12:10 PM
Bogart's Avatar
Bogart Bogart is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 268
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hyQDQPEsrs
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-31-2016, 12:22 PM
user120312 user120312 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 38
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Follow the money. Violence inevitably does.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 07-31-2016, 12:41 PM
anthonyca anthonyca is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,129
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Those numbers are even more skewed if you look at the rate of reported crime to actual crime. In OC or other low crime areas, if someone were assaulted, would they call the cops, would they show up and perform a full investigation? Would the DA vigorously prosecute the case?

Now take bad areas in SF would the victim always call the police? Would the police perform a complete investigation? Would the DA vigorously prosecute the case?
__________________
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Union...70812799700206

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wherryj View Post
I am a physician. I am held to being "the expert" in medicine. I can't fall back on feigned ignorance and the statement that the patient should have known better than I. When an officer "can't be expected to know the entire penal code", but a citizen is held to "ignorance is no excuse", this is equivalent to ME being able to sue my patient for my own malpractice-after all, the patient should have known better, right?

Last edited by anthonyca; 07-31-2016 at 12:43 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 07-31-2016, 2:36 PM
pacrat pacrat is online now
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Socialist Republic of SoCal
Posts: 3,415
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JonW View Post
OC had much lower violence prior to the huge ramp up in CCW's, so you really can't use the CCW/violence relationship argument. However, you can use the argument that issuing so many CCW's has had no impact what-so-ever on increasing the crime rate in OC. The FUD of blood in the streets never materialized.
Two other major factors played into the rise in violent crime here in Ca.

In 2011 Brown got his wet dream of getting the Feds off his A**. With AB 109. Sold as a "cost cutting, money savings for taxpayers".

And in Nov of 2014, prop 47. Again sold as "cost cutting, money savings for taxpayers"

Both of those little jewels dumped tens of thousands of criminals that should have remained in prison. Back on the streets to do what they do best.

Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07-31-2016, 5:06 PM
Mute's Avatar
Mute Mute is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Diamond Bar
Posts: 5,715
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pacrat View Post
Two other major factors played into the rise in violent crime here in Ca.

In 2011 Brown got his wet dream of getting the Feds off his A**. With AB 109. Sold as a "cost cutting, money savings for taxpayers".

And in Nov of 2014, prop 47. Again sold as "cost cutting, money savings for taxpayers"

Both of those little jewels dumped tens of thousands of criminals that should have remained in prison. Back on the streets to do what they do best.

In addition, you can look at the other counties along the same time line. If the crime rate spiked at the same time but at a higher level on the low CCW counties, you can at least make the argument that CCW issuance may have contributed to the a lower rise in crime rates, if the data supports it.
__________________
NRA Life Endowment Member
NRA Certified Pistol, Rifle & Refuse To Be A Victim Instructor

American Marksman Training Group, LLC
Visit our American Marksman Facebook Page
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 07-31-2016, 5:20 PM
PaIadin's Avatar
PaIadin PaIadin is online now
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,345
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stumpfenhammer View Post
In reviewing DOJ and other statistics today it occurred to me that the California counties that have traditionally placed the most restrictions on firearms ownership (San Francisco and Los Angeles) and whose politicians are behind most of the additional legislation currently proposed, continue to be some of the most violent in California.

For example, in 2015 the number of people with Concealed Carry Weapons (CCW) permits in San Francisco County was only four (4) while that county ranked 3rd highest in per capita violence (7.56 per thousand) out of California's 58 counties. Los Angeles County ranked 12th in per capita violence (5.59 per thousand) with only 500 CCWs issued (87 to judges). While Orange County, with 7,248 CCW permit holders, comes in as one of the least violent counties, ranking 52nd out of 58 (2.48 incidences per thousand).

If a population-dense county with the highest per capita number of citizens legally carrying firearms also has one of the lowest rates of violence out of 58 counties, how can people not at least consider the possibility that more guns in the hands (or on the person) of law-abiding citizens actually does lead to lower rates of violence, or if its not that, that the next most likely possibility is that Orange County has developed a culture or socioeconomic model that leads to lower rates of violence (without the need to disarm law-abiding citizens) -- a model that could be employed elsewhere.

I'd appreciate if some of the more statistically aware and analytical forum members would validate or invalidate my logic as appropriate.
LA and SF attract the cockroches of society with their tolerance of disorderly behavior and constant apologetics for disruptive cultures.

This leads to ghettos and the glamorization of the thug life.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 07-31-2016, 6:58 PM
Blade Gunner's Avatar
Blade Gunner Blade Gunner is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 507
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

If the quoted four CCW permits in SF (excluding retired law enforcement) Dianne Feinstein has one of them
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 07-31-2016, 8:57 PM
rootuser rootuser is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,589
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rplaw View Post
There are many factors involved in this beyond crime/CCW statistics.

When you stack rats on top on each other in an enclosed area, they turn on each other and become cannibals. If one of said rats wants to stop the cannibalization, they appeal to other rats to let them 'be in charge' and they will 'make it right.'

Said rats go along with the plan because it's in their best interest to stop the cannibals from eating them. Unfortunately, the cannibals don't care and will continue doing what they're doing. In order to actually BE safe from them, ordinary rats now become cannibals too. Said head rat continues to tighten the screws on the basis that the cannibals are getting more numerous.

What no one realizes is:

A. Said rats will eventually get out of their maze and come to play and prey in YOUR community.

B. Said head rat's ideas were ineffective from the start and have done NOTHING to change the situation except exempt the top rat from all the safety he's (not) imposed. Which was the whole point to the exercise to begin with. Stupid rats.

C. Giving the rats CCW licenses will not change anything. The cannibals will STILL prey on them and they will still join up to avoid that inevitability.

The only true answer to the problem lies in getting rid of the head rat and exterminating all the other rats at the same time. Maybe N Korea can lob a nuke into LA/SF/SAC soon.
Very very good points.

Guns are neither the solution, nor the problem. The right to self defense, the 2A are inalienable. It has nothing to do with lowering crime, raising crime etc.

We walk a fine line when we start to claim CCW is a savior because "oh look at San Francisco".... Well then oh look at San Jose? One of the safest cities of its size in America, but then very low CCW...... Same goes for state by state... Utah, fairly loose restrictions on guns, low murder rate by gun, Louisiana, fairly loose restrictions on guns, high crime murder rate by gun. Hawaii, very low murder rate by gun, very restrictive gun laws. Texas, much looser regulations on guns, no higher murder rate by gun than California, much more stringent regulations.

Murder and crime have little to nothing to do with guns at all. Social and economic situations play much more of a role than guns ever will or ever have, CCW or not.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 08-01-2016, 6:09 AM
R Dale R Dale is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 676
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rootuser View Post
Very very good points.

Guns are neither the solution, nor the problem. The right to self defense, the 2A are inalienable. It has nothing to do with lowering crime, raising crime etc.

We walk a fine line when we start to claim CCW is a savior because "oh look at San Francisco".... Well then oh look at San Jose? One of the safest cities of its size in America, but then very low CCW...... Same goes for state by state... Utah, fairly loose restrictions on guns, low murder rate by gun, Louisiana, fairly loose restrictions on guns, high crime murder rate by gun. Hawaii, very low murder rate by gun, very restrictive gun laws. Texas, much looser regulations on guns, no higher murder rate by gun than California, much more stringent regulations.

Murder and crime have little to nothing to do with guns at all. Social and economic situations play much more of a role than guns ever will or ever have, CCW or not.
Very good points I tend to agree, but I do think when we look at many places that have tight gun restrictions the facts bare out the gun restrictions do little to nothing to lower crime.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 08-01-2016, 2:50 PM
Drivedabizness's Avatar
Drivedabizness Drivedabizness is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Folsom, CA
Posts: 1,656
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blade Gunner View Post
If the quoted four CCW permits in SF (excluding retired law enforcement) Dianne Feinstein has one of them
wrong. she gave up her permit a long time ago. she has armed guards now
__________________
Proud CGN Contributor
USMC Pistol Team Alumni - Distinguished Pistol Shot
Owner of multiple Constitutionally protected tools
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 5:14 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2016, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.