We should create a ban on undetectable brains - but then Congress would probably exempt themselves...

Birds of a feather...water is wet...
 

A study that supports what many have suggested for some time - passing restrictive firearms laws to control virtually the entire population when only a very small subgroup participates in gun crime - is inefficient and just does not work to control gun crime. Targeting the criminal is a much better approach.

This study did not address whether being a member in good standing of a lawful concealed carry cohort results in substantially less illegal gun violence. I think I know the answer...

Links contained in the story and comments are always interesting.

From the article...

"Overall, the community's five-year homicide rate was 39.7 per 100,000 people, which was still much higher than the averages of other areas of Chicago (14.7 per 100,000). But being a part of that network of co-offenders, essentially just being arrested, raised the rate to by nearly 50 percent, to 55.2 per 100,000. What's more, being in a network with a homicide victim increased the homicide rate by 900 percent, to 554.1 per 100,000.

"You're at a risk for living in this [certain] community, but if you're in the network, your risk is astronomical," Papachristos says. "That rate is beyond epidemic proportion, that's actually scary."



Gun Violence Significantly Increased by Social Interactions
Being arrested and knowing a homicide victim could increase a person's risk by 900 percent
USNews

By ALLIE BIDWELL
November 14, 2013

It turns out that who you know and spend time with may have more of an influence on your risk of becoming a gun homicide victim, than race, age and gang affiliation, according to a new study from a team of sociologists at Yale University.

Andrew Papachristos, an associate professor of sociology at Yale, analyzed police and gun homicide records from 2006 to 2011 for people living in a high-crime neighborhood in Chicago. He found that 41 percent of all gun homicides occurred within a network of less than 4 percent of the neighborhood's population, and that the closer one is connected to a homicide victim, the greater that person's chances were for becoming a victim. Each social tie removed from a homicide victim decreased a person's odds of becoming a victim by 57 percent.

"What the findings essentially tell you is that the people who are most at risk of becoming a victim are sort of surrounded by victims within a few handshakes," Papachristos says. "These are young men who are actively engaged in the behaviors that got them in this network."

The network in question consists of more than 3,700 high-risk individuals – young, African-American males from a poor neighborhood – who were clustered into a network by instances of co-offending, meaning each person in the group had been arrested with another person.

Overall, the community's five-year homicide rate was 39.7 per 100,000 people, which was still much higher than the averages of other areas of Chicago (14.7 per 100,000). But being a part of that network of co-offenders, essentially just being arrested, raised the rate to by nearly 50 percent, to 55.2 per 100,000. What's more, being in a network with a homicide victim increased the homicide rate by 900 percent, to 554.1 per 100,000.

"You're at a risk for living in this [certain] community, but if you're in the network, your risk is astronomical," Papachristos says. "That rate is beyond epidemic proportion, that's actually scary."

Typically, Papachristos says, there are traditional factors that put a person at a higher risk of becoming a victim of gun violence homicide - African-Americans are more likely to be killed than whites; men more likely than women; gang members more likely than non-gang members; and those who come from low-income neighborhoods more likely than affluent individuals.

But even more than any of those factors, Papachristos says, a victim's social network was a better indicator.

"What you see, which is what drives the finding, is precisely that the victims cluster in the network. They're not randomly distributed," Papachristos says. "The opposite, however, is also interesting, which is there are lots of parts of the networks where there aren't any victims."

Papachristos says it makes sense to look at the spread of gun violence like the spread of a disease or an epidemic, comparing it to how people contract HIV. Much like the roles needle sharing and unprotected sex play in the spread of HIV, a person's behaviors and personal associations play a role in the spread of gun violence homicides, he says.

"It's the behavior of sharing needles that puts you at risk for contracting HIV, not simply being poor and black and living in a certain neighborhood," Papachristos says. "The same is true with violence. It's who you hang around with that gets you in trouble."

<snip>

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/...l-interactions

NFL denies pro-gun advertisement during Super Bowl
 

A gun manfacturer's ad designed for the Super Bowl won't be run during the big game because it doesn't meet the NFL's standards for advertising.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-sh...0020--nfl.html

But allowing brutal dog killing convicted felon to play is OK with the NFL.

Yeah all the "real" men should send the NFL a message and not watch the game. I don't watch the National Felon's League anymore.

Right on cue, this shows up in an email from a friend:

National Movement to Boycott NFL Launched

I quit watching the NFL several years ago and don't miss it all. The celebrations for routine midfield tackles were just too much. Throw in the gangsta culture and I will happily pass.

This young lady's video will piss off many liberals.

Why Good People Should Be Armed.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/20RoAff...h=0&theme=dark

I still watch the NFL because I enjoy a hard-fought football game (preferably a defensive one, which seems to be more of a rarity now given the rule changes). But I completely agree with you all that the silliness and look-at-me culture has poisoned the league, perhaps to a point of no return. :rolleyes:

I know who my heroes are, and they sure as heck aren't egotistical professional athletes or Hollywood celebrities...

Multi-clip gun owners sent packing as NYPD begins to enforce 2010 law
 

MOLON LABE

It begins and you LEO's said you'd never enforce this sort of law. I guess we know the truth now.

MOLON LABE



Multi-clip gun owners sent packing as NYPD begins to enforce 2010 law
By Edmund DeMarche/
Published December 05, 2013/
FoxNews.com

The New York City Police Department is taking aim at owners of certain shotguns and rifles, telling them all long guns with a five-round or more capacity must be turned in, altered or taken out of town.

An estimated 500 recipients of the notices, which were mailed on Nov. 18, were given the options to surrender their gun, permanently move the gun out of city jurisdiction or employ a licensed gunsmith to modify the weapon to get into compliance with the law. Rifles and shotguns with a capacity of five or more rounds are affected.

An NYPD spokeswoman told FoxNews.com the initiative has been in practice since 2010, but this year is the first time critics say the notices were so widely dispersed. The notice was first reported on the website TheTruthAboutGuns.com.

cont:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/12/05...otguns-rifles/

How it begins indeed...
 

"Sorry, it's not here."

"You registered it. Therefore, we have reasonable suspicion that it should be with you, yet you have not advised us of its disposition. So we will now come inside to have a look around."

"I don't consent to that."

"We don't need your consent."

"But..." :boohoo

I saw a movie where only the military and the police had guns: Schindler’s List.

Those that do not learn from history are dammed to repeat it....

And most Jews in NY vote democrat/progressive/socialist.....

When it happens again, I'll be fishing.

It's just a game if it isn't racing...Senna is my hero

It's like a subtle cancer isn't it...not surprised about the police nor my once home state that's become a police state.

Enjoy the knockout (or murder) games, the punks have nothing to fear

Gun-grabbing Notre Dame Philosopher: successfully resisting tyranny is fantasy
 

http://bearingarms.com/gun-grabbing-...ny-is-fantasy/

In a citizen control op-ed in the New York Times strung together with logical fallacies, rhetorical faults, and broken philosophical proofs, he chucked in a howler suggesting that our modern military would simply steamroll over American gun owners, so we may as well turn in our guns.

"Finally, there’s the idea that citizens need guns so they can, if need be, oppose the force of a repressive government. Those who think there are current (or likely future) government actions in this country that would require armed resistance are living a paranoid fantasy. The idea that armed American citizens could stand up to our military is beyond fantasy."


If Professor Gutting isn’t familiar with the Green Berets, perhaps it is worthwhile to point out now their primary mission:

The main mission of the Special Forces was to train and lead unconventional warfare (UW) forces, or a clandestine guerrilla force in an occupied nation.

They train insurgencies to overthrow oppressive regimes. Their motto de oppresso liber is understood to mean to liberate the oppressed. How do the Green Berets feel about heavy-handed regime tactics toward gun control and confiscation like those favored by Professor Gutting? 1,100 of them sent a letter to President Obama earlier this year, warning the President in no uncertain terms that they would not sit quietly by if the government sought to undermine the Second Amendment. The language was measured, but unmistakable.

Molon Labe, Professor.

Fool. 270 million firearms, 3 million National Firearms Act Registered weapons. 50% of Americans own firearms. Add to that the advantage of knowing where the military is and them not knowing where you are, not to mention there are less than a million of them, and you would have a recipe for a bloodbath.....and not the way he thinks.

:D :munchin

What about mass defection? I can't imagine American soldiers carrying out orders to seize weapons from Americans if they didn't comply with some rich politicians dream to disarm the populace. Come at me Obama, because you and the suits can come get them, bro. Never gonna happen that way.

They're going to take our guns through disinformation over time in my opinion. PS.com should have its own TV network, so Americans can learn from the best America has, rather than a liberal controlled media.

I apologize but I'm going to go OT for a minute to prove a point. I sent an email to foxnews (Bill OReilly) several weeks ago, detailing a problem the California National Guard created by 'overpaying' soldiers. Close to 100 million dollars was 'overpayed' and the soldiers are being told they may have to pay their enlistment bonuses back! As far as I can tell, foxnews never aired it. The local news covered the story, but this needs national attention. The one outlet I bet would air it, hasn't. Americans sit hypnotized, impatiently waiting for the next wave of worthless gossip, and that indifference will cost us our freedom.

Like your avatar says, there are many that feel the same.

Just remember there are plenty working with and for the 'fools', many whom you'd never guess. Others you think are, aren't; not willingly. The data and patterns computers and other high grade hardware generate doesn't lie. It's there if you look.

The truth is good and always comes out eventually, many sheep are starting to realize it; at least parts of it...

And hey, you got Indiana Jones on your side, just keep him away from the liquor cabinet - he looks funny otherwise :D

That is alot of Rem 742/762-based deer rifles as well as bolt guns if the one that can be in the chamber is counted.

So anytime someone says "we're not after grampa's deer rifle" take appropriate action and, only then, call the paramedics. Maybe.

Commies.

Can you elaborate?

I hope there's a silver lining but I believe our society is too dependent to become disenchanted with 'hand out' government. Like others have said, a large percentage of our population has a 'what can you do for me now' mentality, but all good things must come to an end. I don't think a large portion of our population would understand the truth if it hit them in the face, and if they did, I don't think they would care until it affected their quality of life.

Sorry, no. Use your judgement. If you're in Phoenix in the future pm me.

From a 'very limited' perspective look at some of the big internet companies, which one is and has been making it consistently difficult for the 'fools' to gather data; which one(s) do you hear crickets or slight rumbles from? Which one stands to lose the most from pissing off the 'fools'? You should have one or maybe two good company(s) and one big bad one in your answer.


Agree, that's why I said partly...common sense and going by what folks do and not what they say (or how they say it) are not that common. Neither is knowing history as several of the QP's have pointed out. The Affordable Care Act has and definitely will wake up 'some' of the dumber ones or those too wrapped up in themselves.

I try to be hopeful that our exceptional country will wake up despite all those with clouded judgments in Washington and else where.

...but yeah, they ain't gettin' my firearms regardless of how many rounds they can hold. The morons missed the whole point of the Second Amendment. Hunting rifles back then weren't military weapons they just shot straighter.

Beautiful example of clouded as well as self serving logic - lack of character, diginity, honesty, and few other things.

Frankly I don't know how they like what they see in the mirror.

Another good year...now, if ammo supply would just catch up with demand...

Total NICS Background Checks November 30, 1998 - December 31, 2013 at link below:

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nic...als-123113.pdf

Again, in Arizona if you have a CCW permit there is no NICS Background Check. Add another 500k to those numbers. ;) 6 of those purchases are mine......:munchin

...it appears that a good year for the 2A might have just got a bit better.

:lifter

A video and an article on recent gun control research.

Study: Gun control laws do not reduce violent crime

Jan. 06, 2014 - 7:24 - Professor Mark Gius explains research
Fox News vid at link below
http://video.foxnews.com/v/301846640...#sp=show-clips

More gun laws, more murder? Quinnipiac prof’s study suggests it
By Joe Amarante, New Haven Register

Days after a new Connecticut gun-control law spurred long lines of people trying to register firearms deemed to be “assault weapons,” a study from a Quinnipiac University professor has found that bans on assault weapons on the state level had no significant effect on murder rates around the country. And it also found that states with more restrictive concealed weapons laws had higher gun-related murder rates on average than states with less restricted concealed weapons.

But the study’s author says more research is needed on the issue before lawmakers run with its conclusions.

Mark Gius, an economics professor at Quinnipiac for two decades, admitted he was a little bit flabbergasted Monday at the response his study has been getting since it was published in the November issue of the academic journal, “Applied Economics Letters.” He had just returned Monday afternoon from Hartford, where he appeared in a segment on Fox News Channel about the study.

“I’ve actually done other research on gun control and gun ownership,” Gius said. “So it’s kind of amazing that, for some reason, this article really took off.”

Gius, a 51-year-old Democrat, said economics professors often do research on policy issues and laws on crime and guns “to see if they have the desired impact.” His topic was his own idea, not funded by any company, he said. But he said he’s half-regretting it, given the number of media people who want to talk about it.

<snip>

http://www.nhregister.com/general-ne...dy-suggests-it

Montana too, with an average of 20-27 weapons per household depending on your stats source and 40k+ CCW holders, add some more.

The issue isn't about crime so don't try to rationalize the argument. It's about government control and the registration/confiscation of arms. Why? Because they can't control the population without seizing the arms. I can't believe the NRA still doesn't get it. They constantly prop up the argument of crime and blah blah blah of the law abiding citizens who will do what the government tells them to do based on being lawful citizens. What if nobody stood in line to register their arms? You want to be policed? Then go get in line, you will also get a free shower and warm meal. Oh but I have too much to lose so I must comply. Anyone heard about the Colonist standing in line to register their weapons? Neither did I. Crazy ain't it?:D

It would appear exactly the opposite of it. Behaviors indicate your statements are quite sane if the current direction continues.

The Second Amendment is Not Enough! (GUNS 10.1, Jan64)

Lawmakers plot new strategy for defying gun laws.
 

Having failed in an earlier effort to bar federal agents from enforcing gun regulations in Missouri, conservative lawmakers are trying a new tack this year: banding together with other like minded states to defy certian federal laws at the same time.

This I like.

http://news.yahoo.com/lawmakers-plot...-politics.html

Me too - good post.

If Federal laws are superior to state laws then why is Colorado allowing the sale of pot when it is a federal crime? Pick and choose what law you want to enforce.

In a 3 hour interview on Book TV's In Depth program, Mark Levin addressed Nullification with 3 different callers. Searching "nullification" in the Text Timeline below the video player will pull up clickable links that will jump the video to the sections. If you want to do it manually, they are at: 1:48:11, 2:29:57, and 2:45:06. Total, they are probably less than 10 minutes.

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/MarkLev

Watch it and see if you still agree.

Pat

Good post and very informative.

Nullification happened once before in this country and it can happen again. ;)

No disrespect meant by this statement: I believe the NRA gets it and has for a long, long time. Any Association that is that large, powerful and filthy rich, and spends as much time in D.C. as they do? C'mon, they understand it all.:munchin