TexasCHLforum.com

Purplehood wrote:I would like to say that I find it strange when a media-source has to put a disclaimer that something they post is strictly factual.

Wait, no I don't.

Hello,
I wanted to thank you for your effort to stay abreast of the gun-control debate. I was curious if you have read the latest Department of Justice report titled "Firearm Violence" released on Tuesday.
Here is a press release summary: http://bjs.gov/content/pub/press/fv9311pr.cfm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
And here is a link to the report: http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fv9311.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I have not seen much news coverage about this report, and I would assume it is important information for Americans concerned about gun related legislation.
One of the fascinating finds is that of the illegal guns purchased, 0.8% were actually purchased at a gun show. That accounts for 1/125 of illegally possessed guns. Of course this number would still not accurately reflect private transactions at a gun show, as the universal background checks bills specifically targeted. Even at gun shows, any FFL (licensed gun dealer - every gun sold at every gun booth) would be required to perform a background check. In addition, many states (i.e. Colorado) already require background checks for all transactions at every gun show - public and private. Other states (i.e. New Jersey) do not allow private transactions at gun shows for modern weapons (anything manufactured after 1898 I believe - I could be mistaken on the year). This report does not go into this much detail, but it is likely that this 0.8% would be a much smaller percentage if the research were to report how many illegally purchased guns came through "gun show loophole".
Thank you for reading. I hope to see something mentioned soon in the news.

12:58pm
WFAA-TV
Hi ****, thanks for writing. I'll take a look at it and pass it on to our assignments desk to see if they'd like to do a local angle on it!

terryg wrote:I am shocked to find that even NBC has picked up the story:

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05 ... finds?lite" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Note the disclaimer at the end however:

The report is strictly factual and offers no analysis about the reasons for the decline in gun violence.

The report is strictly factual and we haven't figured out how to spin it so it properly serves our masters.

Pawpaw wrote:

terryg wrote:I am shocked to find that even NBC has picked up the story:

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05 ... finds?lite" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Note the disclaimer at the end however:

The report is strictly factual and offers no analysis about the reasons for the decline in gun violence.

Translation:

The report is strictly factual and we haven't figured out how to spin it so it properly serves our masters.

TxA wrote:Is the Justice Dept. report the same or in conjunction with the Pew report???

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/ ... c-unaware/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

C-dub wrote:Cool, but what the Breitbart article appears to ignore and I can't believe I'm even going to bring up is about the biggest period of decrease from 93-2002. I haven't read the entrie article yet, so maybe I've yet to read an explanation or possible cause for this decline during this period. What I'm wondering, though, is how much of an influence does anyone think the Clinton AWB may have had on this? I'm very suspicious of it really having any significant effect because of the number of crimes committed with the banned weapons to begin with.

About 70% to 80% of firearm homicides and 90% of nonfatal firearm victimizations were committed with a handgun from 1993 to 2011.

Superman wrote:

C-dub wrote:Cool, but what the Breitbart article appears to ignore and I can't believe I'm even going to bring up is about the biggest period of decrease from 93-2002. I haven't read the entrie article yet, so maybe I've yet to read an explanation or possible cause for this decline during this period. What I'm wondering, though, is how much of an influence does anyone think the Clinton AWB may have had on this? I'm very suspicious of it really having any significant effect because of the number of crimes committed with the banned weapons to begin with.

The Clinton AWB had nothing to do with the drop, since it didn't really cover handguns (effectively) and the report states:

About 70% to 80% of firearm homicides and 90% of nonfatal firearm victimizations were committed with a handgun from 1993 to 2011.

C-dub wrote:

Superman wrote:

C-dub wrote:Cool, but what the Breitbart article appears to ignore and I can't believe I'm even going to bring up is about the biggest period of decrease from 93-2002. I haven't read the entrie article yet, so maybe I've yet to read an explanation or possible cause for this decline during this period. What I'm wondering, though, is how much of an influence does anyone think the Clinton AWB may have had on this? I'm very suspicious of it really having any significant effect because of the number of crimes committed with the banned weapons to begin with.

The Clinton AWB had nothing to do with the drop, since it didn't really cover handguns (effectively) and the report states:

About 70% to 80% of firearm homicides and 90% of nonfatal firearm victimizations were committed with a handgun from 1993 to 2011.

You're right, but I thought it was curious enough and such a coincidence. I wonder why the drop began so dramatically at that point in time.

Dadtodabone wrote:

C-dub wrote:

Superman wrote:

C-dub wrote:Cool, but what the Breitbart article appears to ignore and I can't believe I'm even going to bring up is about the biggest period of decrease from 93-2002. I haven't read the entrie article yet, so maybe I've yet to read an explanation or possible cause for this decline during this period. What I'm wondering, though, is how much of an influence does anyone think the Clinton AWB may have had on this? I'm very suspicious of it really having any significant effect because of the number of crimes committed with the banned weapons to begin with.

The Clinton AWB had nothing to do with the drop, since it didn't really cover handguns (effectively) and the report states:

About 70% to 80% of firearm homicides and 90% of nonfatal firearm victimizations were committed with a handgun from 1993 to 2011.

You're right, but I thought it was curious enough and such a coincidence. I wonder why the drop began so dramatically at that point in time.

I believe there were 3 factors to the decline, all kicking off in 1993, one being the burgeoning U.S. economy, 3 strike legislation, and:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rtc.gif
While statistics have surfaced that bring 3 strikes into question as a deterrent to violent crime, I believe they had and still have an effect.