Gun violence statistics, I have a question

[bigandy1966]

Ok its more than just one question. Last night I wast thinking about this whole "Numbers of People killed by gun violence" bullshit statistic the idiocracy keeps tossing out there like a holy grail of proof that guns kill innocent victims. And I came up with some causality questions:

1) How many of these " victims" are currently participating in illegal activities like drug deals gone bad when they are " murdered" I believe its a pretty high percentage

2) How many of the "victims" are killed due to repercussions of a past illegal activity? I.E. "Joe sold me some bad smack I will kill him and regain my money" I believe this is also a very high percentage

3) How many "Victims" are shot due to Gang related association of themselves or a relatives gang activities? I.E. "My brother Pete is a member of the XYZ gang and they sprayed our house with gunfire last night in retaliation for Pete joining the XYZ gang, and my cousin Bob caught a bullet in the chest and died" I believe this is also a pretty high number.

4) How many "Victims" of shootings are killed while stealing/robbing to support a drug habit?

5) How many "Victims" are shot due to involvement in the thug/ drug culture per se? I.E. "He was disrespecting me and I shot him like a gangster. Just like (Insert Generic gangstah rapper name here) says to do in his songs"

Ladies and gentlemen, the correlation I am trying to establish here is a statistical relationship to Drugs and the drug culture as a root cause of gun violence, NOT gun ownership by law abiding citizens, or the number of guns in our society. The Drug culture is the overwhelming statistic root cause of the murders and robberies and deaths these anti gun people are throwing out there. Yes we get the occasional deviant random mental case, but this is a statisticaly extremely low number of total deaths caused by firearms. As proof,look at the total number of people killed with semiautomatic rifles as a percentage of total firearm related deaths. 0.048%? I think I saw some where?
so my argument boils down to this "Its not the guns, its the drugs"

Thank you.

[BimmerJon]

Very good questions. I ask the same.

Out of the 11,000 people killed every year by guns, Id imagine 2-3,000 of them... Well, the worlds a BETTER place with them dead.

Not all homocide is a bad things. Two cracked out, drug dealing felons shoot each other, well... That's a perfect scenario for me of things "working themselves out"

[bigandy1966]

I would say the percentages are much higher, like 90 percent are drug/ felony related deaths. 10% might be robbery victims, or innocent bystanders to illegal activity.Now we go into the realm of "Mutual and consensual Combat".
When you undertake Any illegal drug or gang related activity, There is a reasonable resultant outcome of someone getting killed, you have to understand this going into the situation.

The argument might be made,"what are you doing to curtail gun violence?
The reply would be " The cause of 90% of gun violence is related to drug/gang activity. What are you doing to end the epidemic of drug addiction and the failed war on drugs?"

But that's what I would like to know, the numbers and reasons people are getting killed on a day to day basis. Was Pete Killed because he was a known associate of the XYZ gang which sells crack and heroin, Was Jane killed by her pimp because she spent her money on some heroin. And that's what I am hoping to counter the studies by the CDC and FBI crime commissions will point out directly, the root cause of gun violence is directly and indirectly linked to the drug culture and criminal gang activities.

[donm]

During a Congressional hearing on nationwide reciprocity a few months back, Philadelphia Police Commissioner Ramsey made a statement that 90% of shooters and 80% of their victims are "prohibited persons." They know, but only when taken out of context does it server their purpose.

You have to look carefully at the question they ask in these surveys/statistics. For example "the victim was known to the shooter" turns into "he shot his friend" in their talking points. The number they quote includes drug dealers and gang-bangers who knew each other and a police officer who shoots a criminal he has arrested in the past. A lot of this manipulation is explained in John Lott's book "More Guns, Less Crime."

[pennlineman]

Statistics can be skewed to say what you want to say. Based in what you put in, what you left out, what you simply don't imply. The same can be said of polls. Depending on the questions you ask and the base of people you ask the queestions to.

The biggest problem our opponents have is that the right to keep and bear arms is not a popularity contest. It is protected so that mob rules of a majority cannot disenfranchise the rights of the minorty. So all this data they collect is really a moot point. They know they can't completely disarm us, at least for now. The plan is to scare the sheeple and severely neuter the rights that we have. These numbers are just a means to justify an unjust cause.

[jerpa]

Drugs are most destructive when the state sets up a situation where there value is so high that there will always be someone willing to risk themselves for the reward. The value is driven up by prohibition and is further driven up by steadily increasing penalties. Prohibition of alcohol did nothing to curtail the use. It raised the price to a point where the risk of prison or death was outweighed by the potential monetary gain. It spurred on a whole era of organized crime. Prohibition created the perfect market opportunity for them and they took it. There is a ~3 trillion dollar market for illegal drugs in this country. Many see a slice of that pie as worth dying for. They aren't killing over drugs they are killing over money.

To expand the thought further the use of mandatory minimum sentences for non-violent drug offenses has created a huge prison population. This necessitates releasing the violent repeat offenders back into society to make room for all the new convicted drug users. These violent offenders have a huge black market jobs fair waiting for them upon release. They can go make a few thousand dollars a week protecting drugs or they can try and find a $10/hr job as a janitor. Based on their previous experience I doubt they will be mopping floors.

I don't advocate legalizing all drugs. I advocate admitting that prohibition doesn't work. Get rid of mandatory minimums for victimless crimes and quit enforcing the drug laws with such fervor. If the risk isn't as great the money will not be either. If the money isn't great it wont be so attractive an endeavor and it will not be worth shooting over. With less crowded prisons we could keep those in jail who should be in jail. If/When they do get out they will not have such a wide array of illegal activities to choose from. Additionally the funds being used to wage this pointless war , in terms of effect not intent, could certainly be used for more productive purposes.

[CenterTree]

so my argument boils down to this "Its not the guns, its the drugs"

Thank you.

We need to be careful using this type of "argument" though.

Drugs don't kill people anymore than guns kill people. (or cars kill people)

They both require a "user", and it is THE USER who kills. (not an object).


PS: Guns are NOT violent.

[ShooterInPA1]

so my argument boils down to this "Its not the guns, its the drugs"

People were killed over alcohol in the 1920's. They aren't anymore.

Get the govt out of the drug biz and let prices come down, and there will be no shootings over drugs.

I never understood the worry about legalization. If they legalized drugs tomorrow, I would not start doing them, nor would anyone I know. The same people who do drugs now would do them if they were legal, perhaps a tad more, but that is their choice.

And how much worse could it get than what we now see in our inner cities. Does anyone think the status quo is working?

Didn't work for alcohol prohibition and is not working for drug prohibition. Govt is the PROBLEM.....not the solution.

[bigandy1966]

We need to be careful using this type of "argument" though.

Drugs don't kill people anymore than guns kill people. (or cars kill people)

They both require a "user", and it is THE USER who kills. (not an object).


PS: Guns are NOT violent.

Its not the Using of drugs per se, its the involvement with the illegal drug/ drug abuse industry I am drawing a relationship to. But you are Correct that's the correlation I want to make Violence involving firearms is a symptom of a societal disease, the disease statistically speaking, is drug or drug culture related. I see this "Issue" NOT stemming from "GUNS" but the numbers of people involved with "DRUGS"

[bigandy1966]

I have given out too much rep for today. Thanks for your input very valid points and positions. Keep them coming