[geeks] FW: [rescue] UPS Recommendation

[N.Miller]

On Thursday, July 17, 2003, at 10:56 PM, wa2egp at att.net wrote:

>>> The same logic can be easily converted though - I don't think it  
>>> takes
>>> a
>>> genius to see that less strict gun laws will risk a higher rate of
>>> murders
>>> (if you get my meaning). And yes, I know the phrase "if all guns are
>>> outlawed, only the outlaw will have guns" but I don't think it's  
>>> true.
>>
>> You might want to check the crime statistics in Australia since
>> guns were banned, if you don't believe this.  Ditto, England.
>>
>> =Nadine=
>
> I remember the new media up here in the northeast predicting a  
> bloodbath in Florida when they changed their guns laws a few years  
> back....a 24 hour waiting period I believe.  No "bloodbath" was ever  
> reported.  Any statistics out there?
> Bob

Supposedly the homicide rate has gone down 21% (likewise there was
a spate of attacks on tourists, identified by their rental cars as
non-CCW natives after the CCW law was passed).  Texas has similarly
seen a drop--even more so for women, as the sheriff's departments
have been actively recruiting women to CCW classes.

Here's an op-ed piece about the problems with the statistics on
both side of the debate:

<http://www.gillikin.org/documents/columns/Gun%20Control%20Stats%20- 
%2007%20May%2001.html>

As far as lies, damned lies, and statistics...most people don't know
it, but the "missing children" advocates also skew their reported
statistics.  It's very common for any "child advocate" type statistics
to report "children" as people between the ages of 0 and 21 (in some
cases as high as 25) years of age.

So, yes, it may be that not all crimes are reported (unlikely with
shootings), or that crimes are misclassified (also unlikely with
shootings).  But you can go to the DOJ web site and look at the
FBI's Uniform Crime Reports.  If you are not male, minority and
between 16 and 25 or so, you are highly unlikely to be the victim of a  
violent crime involving a firearm.

=Nadine=