Skip to main content

View Diary: Center for American Progress issues 13 recommendations for 'Preventing Gun Violence in Our Nation' (205 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  And how much of this is caused by criminal (3+ / 0-)

    activity?  I am willing to hazard a guess that it is an extremely large amount.  Take for example the statistics from the Texas Dept of Corrections that show that 2% of the population has a concealed carry permit, yet commits only 0.2% of the crimes, most of which were carrying a gun into a prohibited place, followed by simple (non gun) assault.

    Yet for some reason so many people are calling to punish the honest, law abiding gun owner and they wonder why they have such still opposition with hundreds of thousands of people willing to spend money on political lobbying firms simply to work against any legislation.  Folks, it is time to get the priorities straight.  Most of what is proposed is working along the right lines.  The silly bans do not.

    •  You would be wrong. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      WakeUpNeo, Laconic Lib
      In the U.S. for 2010, there were 31,513 deaths from firearms, distributed as follows by mode of death: Suicide 19,308; Homicide 11,015; Accident 600.

      This makes firearms injuries one of the top ten causes of death in the U.S. The number of firearms-related injuries in the U.S., both fatal and non-fatal, increased through 1993, declined to 1999, and has remained relatively constant since. However, firearms injuries remain a leading cause of death in the U.S., particularly among youth (CDC, 2001) (Sherry et al, 2012).

      Denial is a drug.

      by Pluto on Mon Jan 14, 2013 at 05:34:09 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  And what else are we missing? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Laconic Lib, cany
      Firearms, youth homicide, and public health


      Homicide is seven times as common among U.S. non-Hispanic Black as among non-Hispanic White youth ages 15 to 24 years. In 83% of these youth homicides, the murder weapon is a firearm. Yet, for more than a decade, the national public health position on youth violence has been largely silent about the role of firearms, and tools used by public health professionals to reduce harm from other potential hazards have been unusable where guns are concerned. This deprives already underserved populations from the full benefits public health agencies might be able to deliver. In part, political prohibitions against research about direct measures of firearm control and the absence of valid public health surveillance are responsible. More refined epidemiologic theories as well as traditional public health methods are needed if the U.S. aims to reduce disparate Black-White youth homicide rates.


      Levine RS, Goldzweig I, Kilbourne B, Juarez P. J. Health Care Poor Underserved 2012; 23(1): 7-19.

       (Copyright © 2012, Johns Hopkins University Press)



      (emphasis added)

      Firearms, youth homicide, and public health

      •  Atleast part of what your are missing (0+ / 0-)

        is the realization that there is more to this than the gun.  First, someone under 21 years old is not allowed to purchase a handgun, and under 18 is not allowed to purchase a long gun.  Since the overwhelming majority of crimes are committed with handguns, we can put the focus there.  That being the case, most of the 15-24 year olds (about 2/3 if the distribution is even) aren't allowed to go into stores and buy.  Undoubtedly they are not.  Instead they are either getting them on the street or using proxies to purchase for them.  In the case of the former, no law is going to help.  The latter is one of the areas where we could focus.  

        At Pluto, no my statement was not wrong.  Those who bother to go through the legal process to obtain and own guns properly commit far less crime than the population as a whole.   With respect to suicide, again, no law is going to do away with the thoughts or the action.  If you take away guns, something else will be used.  You will have only trampled on peoples rights for naught.  

        And yes, let's be clear, unlike  places Australia, UK, and Canada, in the USA it is a right.  If you don't think it should be, if the control control population can garner enough support then the constitution can be changed,  There is a process for it.  Until such time, talk of bans approaches the point of being unconstitutional.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site