AlanQ
3187
It’s pretty simple. If armed guards are effective in deterring violence, we might expect places without armed guards to experience more violence. Many places do not have armed guards and those places do not appear to experience more violence. Ergo we should question the premise.
Also, if this thread is exclusively the domain of U.S. posters it should probably be renamed “Some-purpose gun legislation thread”.
ShivaX
3188
Considering most nations the “legislation” is “You can’t have them,” that makes for a pretty silly topic. Pulling in other nations that have vastly different cultures and laws smacks of self-righteousness.
We could also ask why the UK has so much more crime than the US. Their chance of assault is over twice what it is in the US. But ultimately, that isn’t the topic. Blaming the title of a 106 page thread is horseshit.
The basic problem, of course, being the confounding variables - and they are quite prolific in that setup. That said, you’re right that it’s still good to question the premise. The issue is with finding an answer.
re: the usefulness of armed guards defending against robberies as opposed to crazies, I suppose that’s why the Secret Service just has a bunch of unarmed guys walking around.
Oh, and just to reiterate points I made on earlier pages lest someone think I’m an advocate for the policy, nobody seems to be arguing that it would be anything but a stupidly expensive policy and with only a limited impact.
ShivaX
3191
It would be a huge waste of money with tons of issues. But then again we spend more on the TSA. :)
Houngan
3192
Officer deaths by firearm drop to levels not seen since the 19th century:
http://www.nleomf.org/facts/officer-fatalities-data/
Meanwhile,
84 percent of retailers surveyed reported that overall sales in 2012 exceeded sales from the previous year.
76.9 percent of retailers surveyed said sales of AR-style modern sporting rifles in 2012 exceeded sales from the previous year (60.1 percent), the largest increase in the firearms category.
Retailers surveyed said that 25.8 percent of their customers were first-time firearm buyers in 2012 compared to 25 percent in 2011 and 20.8 percent in 2010.
For the third year in a row, the number of female customers increased. For the year 2012, 78.6 of retailers surveyed said more women came to their stores, compared to 72.8 in in 2011 and 61.1 in 2010.
Firearms most often purchased by women were a semiautomatic handgun followed by revolvers, modern sporting rifles, shotguns, traditional rifles and muzzleloaders.
The number of retailers who participate in the survey has grown each year.
We know that correlation != causation in all cases, but can you have causation with negative correlation?
One thing that baffles me is that the ammunition shortage seems to be ongoing. I haven’t bought any myself in some time, but the local Dick’s Sporting Goods will still only sell you one box of .22LR at a time. I get the “Obama’s coming for us!” panic, but shouldn’t that have worn off about 4 years ago?
Houngan
3195
For hunting. We have specific muzzleloader seasons that occur before the regular firearm season.
Ah, thanks, that explains it.
Houngan
3197
It’s a weird dynamic. Hoarding is always a problem, but .22 is the caliber that everyone owns, and it’s the cheapest to hoard. Googling around I’m seeing estimates of 2 years before the backlog of demand is met.
There are lots of ways for officer deaths by firearm to go down despite an increase in overall gun violence. Tin hats increased the number of reported head injuries when they were introduced.
As long as there’s a black Democrat in the White House, there’s plenty of (faux) panic to be milked!
Newb question: can you keep ammo in long-term storage indefinitely; or do you have to worry about, say, the gunpowder losing its effectiveness the way you do with gasoline?
Houngan
3200
Except there’s not an increase in gun violence, either.
Just keep it in a dry place. It will last decades.
Sarkus
3202
I don’t see much of a shortage beyond certain retailers (like Walmart) that haven’t caught up and a few calibers, with 22lr being the biggie. I’ve had no problem finding anything else since mid-summer. The local LGS always has the major calibers on the shelf now, as do the sporting goods stores in the area (including Cabela’s). There is also plenty available to order online at the major web ammo retailers, if not always at a good price.
As for 22lr, there are a couple of factors involved. First, while the shortage has ended on other common calibers, the prices have not dropped back to pre-Sandy Hook levels. So its now more expensive to shoot and so people are choosing to practice more with the cheaper 22 guns, increasing demand. Second, my understanding is that most ammo manufacturers produce 22lr seasonally, but not year round. They’d have to take something else out of production to make more 22lr. Third, and finally, if you look around you’ll see that unlike just about every other major caliber, 22lr is almost exclusively offered only by a few major US companies. I’ve never seen Russian or European 22lr. Nor have I seen small ammo companies producing it either. In fact, the only 22lr brand I’ve seen that is not a major US company is Mexican. So you have a caliber that is supplied only by a few big companies, who as noted about tend to produce calibers seasonally and not year-round.
ShivaX
3203
American Rifleman had an article about it. Basically there was the whole Obama thing, but at the same time lots of people bought guns. Ammo makers don’t want to invest in increasing production for a bubble since they get screwed in the long term doing it, but they’ve decided demand actually HAS increased and are expanding. Of course it takes time for that to happen and get rolling.
ShivaX
3204
http://news.yahoo.com/lawmakers-plot-strategy-defying-gun-132343072.html
From Missouri, how to NOT read or understand any part of the Constitution when it doesn’t suit you. Seriously, if you don’t get the Supremacy Clause, you shouldn’t be allowed to make laws. Most people get it around 3rd grade.
Under the Missouri legislation, federal law enforcement officers could face misdemeanor charges punishable by up to a year in jail and a $1,000 fine for attempting to enforce federal laws considered to be “infringements on the right to keep and bear arms.”
It’s one thing to just not enforce federal laws (ala every pot legislation ever). It’s another to criminalize feds enforcing federal laws. One can actually work somewhat, and one is so fucking stupid that it will draw down the wrath of God.
I’m pretty sure the American legislative system is based on the principle of throwing shit against the wall to see what will stick.
ShivaX
3206
Generally, but you don’t shit in the Fed’s yard and dare them to do something about it. They’ll do something about it and then some.
You play the pot smoker’s game. You just stop doing their job for them and see what happens.
Edit: I also think that as people who profess to love the Constitution so much, they’d have a basic understanding of how the thing actually works.
