Guns Deter Crime The Best

[cmotherofpirl]

[url="http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=57641"]http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE...mp;pageId=57641[/url]

[KnightofChrist]

Great article.

[Deb]

Yes, especially since they were quoting the decrease in crime in 1967. I wonder how many rapes there were in 1966 and how many in 1967? What has happened since then?
In 1996 the population of Orlando was 173,000 and they had 165 rapes. In 2001 the population was 188,000 and they had 135 rapes. The population in 2006 was 224,000 and they had 163 rapes.
So, what caused the drop between 1996 and 2001 and upswing by 2006? To base any statistic on the falling crime stats in one year 42 years ago doesn't even make sense.
Orlando also has one of the highest crime rates in Florida and it's violent crime rate is 2.9 TIMES higher than the national average. So, did everyone dump their guns?

I really hate articles that give you one little thing and expect you to make an assumption from that. This isn't even journalism, it is sensationalism. If it is on the internet, it probably is a bunch of carp.

[KnightofChrist]

The only part about the 60's is the first paragraph. It simply uses that example to show that women who are armed are less likely to be attacked, or better yet a armed victim is less likely to be attacked.

The rest of the articles deals which the recent brief of the Law Enforcement Alliance of America, and those findings in the brief, which is not base on data from the 60's.

Edited February 29, 2008 by KnightofChrist

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Deb' post='1471321' date='Feb 29 2008, 02:50 PM']Yes, especially since they were quoting the decrease in crime in 1967. I wonder how many rapes there were in 1966 and how many in 1967? What has happened since then?
In 1996 the population of Orlando was 173,000 and they had 165 rapes. In 2001 the population was 188,000 and they had 135 rapes. The population in 2006 was 224,000 and they had 163 rapes.
So, what caused the drop between 1996 and 2001 and upswing by 2006?[/quote]

Part of the answer is that there was no change in the rate between 2001 and 2006. In '01 it was 0.72 per 100,000 and in '06 it was 0.73 per 100,000. The 0.95 per 100,000 in '96 was significantly higher, but then you still have to look at overall trends. For all we know, the police simply haven't enforced them as much, and if it's not reported you don't see it in the statistics. My guess is the migration of retirees to Florida is causing lower crime rates in general... simply because retired folks aren't committing much crime, so they raise the population base regardless of what the community is doing to fight crime. But then again, all those new people strain resources, so maybe it has the opposite effect...

Edited February 29, 2008 by LouisvilleFan

[Red Knight]

Louisville Fan,
I should have read the whole thread before I went through the trouble of doing the math. Next time.

[XIX]

If you torture the numbers long enough, you can get them to confess anything.

[KnightofChrist]

I'll get you [b]next time[/b], Gadget! [b]Next time[/b]!

[img]http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Screen/7219/23.jpg[/img]

No one gets away from Inspector Gadget and gets away with it. Go Go Gadget Gun! /highjack

Edited February 29, 2008 by KnightofChrist

[XIX]

Go go gadget Rosary!

For the record, I lean pro-legalizing guns.

[KnightofChrist]

Wowsers! That is cool...

[Fidei Defensor]

Anyone who has at least had elementary statistics should know that there is a big difference between causation and correlation. This is correlation.

That being said, I'm not too fond of statistics being used like this. Crime rates really come down to individuals making choices. Statistics can't be certain when drawing those kinds of conclusions.

[KnightofChrist]

But speaking of choices, iwhat house or person would we chose to steal from if we were thieves? A person who is armed with a gun, or we think is armed or could be, or someone we believe is not armed? Logically, the person without the gun would be the safest choice for us.

Edited February 29, 2008 by KnightofChrist

[Mercy me]

Great article!

[rkwright]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1471518' date='Feb 29 2008, 06:59 PM']But speaking of choices, iwhat house or person would we chose to steal from if we were thieves? A person who is armed with a gun, or we think is armed or could be, or someone we believe is not armed? Logically, the person without the gun would be the safest choice for us.[/quote]

We assume criminals think logically?

[KnightofChrist]

When it comes to being shot, and not being shot, yes. But, its probably more instinct than logic.

[blovedwolfofgod]

well, here in Germany, firearm related crimes are pretty low. of course, this great country was forcibly disarmed, and hasnt been rearmed like the United States since. here the hoodlums just carry knives and brass knuckles, making violence a little more personal (which is just the way i like it). I dont think outlawing firearms in the US would help. first would be the disarmament of the society, then outlaw them. otherwise, the old adage goes, only outlaws would have guns.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='blovedwolfofgod' post='1472812' date='Mar 3 2008, 07:38 AM']well, here in Germany, firearm related crimes are pretty low. of course, this great country was forcibly disarmed, and hasnt been rearmed like the United States since. here the hoodlums just carry knives and brass knuckles, making violence a little more personal (which is just the way i like it). I dont think outlawing firearms in the US would help. first would be the disarmament of the society, then outlaw them. otherwise, the old adage goes, only outlaws would have guns.[/quote]
yes.

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='XIX' post='1471490' date='Feb 29 2008, 05:27 PM']Go go gadget Rosary!

For the record, I lean pro-legalizing guns.[/quote]

I'm definitely pro-legalization of guns also.

[littleflower+JMJ]

The reality is the person who is committing a crime will always be the one who is able to get a hold of a gun and use it, so what can we do for the law-abiding citizen on the other end? Especially if no one is cracking down on the guns in the wrong places.

[picchick]

This is cool because the other day I was eating in a restraunt with my grandma and there were a bunch of Chicago cops in the place and they all had their guns at their hips.

So I began to think. If everyone had a gun on their hip or had the possibility of a gun on their person, would a ciminal think twice about robbing/raping/attacking someone?

Meg