Sensible Gun Safety

[cradleandshoot]

Just my own opinion but I have to ask thy question. If your a crazy person who wants to shoot a lot of people, how do you pick your targets? Just a wild guess, the crazy murderer looks for vulnerable targets... Where do you look for first????? Think about it people... Lotta vulnerable targets strolling around the food court at the mall. When you know none of them are packing heat... Double, triple bonus.....

[Kismet]

So you are addressing your grievance to the many millions of Americans who obey the law and respect the rights granted to them under the 2nd amendment to the US Constitution? You remember the rights granted to US Citizens under the 2nd amendment? The right of the people to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed. If your point of order involves what a well regulated militia should be then clarify for us in your own words.

No. I'm saying we have more guns than people in this country now and people are dying seemingly daily from gun violence. Obviously, more guns have not solved the problem. I don't read much about criminals being dispatched by gun-toting citizens but rather unarmed citizens being gunned down by mostly legal gun owners.

As for the 2nd, its about "well-regulated militias" (a common thing in the 18th Century) and not guns which is why militias are mentioned before arms in the text. Let alone that it is so poorly written. Ask any credible grammar expert if they would construct any sentence in this manner.

[Farfromgeneva]

The more serious issue would be that someone like me, under the situation I described, would say 'yes' to this question. Once in my life. 50 years ago. Idiot that I was or am!

Moreover, have I ever heard a sound in the house and then, carrying a shotgun, made noises about being armed? Yup...that would count too, though I've never actually needed to confront a real intruder...usually it's just one of the downstairs doors has blown open...

So, I'm extremely skeptical of how often a homeowner has actually needed a gun to repel an intruder...versus "brandishing a weapon, I "protected" my home"...

And of course there's the example of the a-hole couple brandishing their weapons on their porch as peaceful BLM protestors went down the public street in their neighborhood...

Why don't you give us the stats percentage of how often a homeowner, confronting an actual intruder, actually ended up on the wrong end of that exchange?

and of course, the suicides...

Do you discount the value of guns for personal protection? Tell that to the 110 lb waitress on her way home after midnight. Or the rural family when the nearest deputy is 20 miles away. What would you do against a home invasion? They aren’t some impossibility. You want stats, look them up yourself. You posited the question about getting killed by your own gun. IMHO probably quite small in relation to lives saved. Let me know when you find out.

I haven't seen any stat from you about 'lives saved' just a survey that suggests people brandish their guns when they get concerned.

And the issue is that the criminal, when there actually is one, is very likely to be armed in a USA awash in weapons. Not so in other countries.

What matters is that we have many multiples of guns per civilian in our country than any other first world country and likewise many multiples of gun deaths. Very strong correlation. Same at the state level here in the US, strong correlation. We don't have greater mental health issues, more poverty, etc. Just way, way more guns.

I'm a gun owner and believe that we can have some types of guns safely, used safely, if we get serious about who has these guns, how they are stored, when and where they are used, etc.

With regard to the waitress, I'd rather see her have a safe ride home than carry a gun, scared of a criminal with a gun...what do waitresses in Great Britain do? France? Germany? Sweden? Japan? New Zealand? Canada?....

Your entire premise neglects to consider the criminal in the equation. The waitress doesn't want to carry the gun. It's probably a little scary to her, or any other person who is at a physical disadvantage with the criminal. The gun is an equalizer. I'd be fine with some gun laws that don't change the self defense aspect, but we should have very harsh sentences for anyone who commits a felony with a gun, say 25 years with no parole.

Yes, the issue is that criminals (and nutcases) have guns, easily, in the USA...we're awash in weapons because of our gun culture. That waitress does not have the same danger issues in those other countries, though there's always some degree of danger...but the answer there isn't to carry a gun...pepper spray is sufficient.

I don't ignore this at all.

I agree with you on harsh penalties for crimes committed with guns.

But I also want to dramatically reduce the number of guns in circulation, requiring registration of ALL weapons, else substantial penalties, and restrict when and where and how they can be used. For instance, some types of weapons should never be used away from a well-regulated gun range; indeed, that's where they should be stored.

Some guns can be used in specified ways, for specified purposes, eg hunting, but must be stored properly and usage should only by those well trained and licensed and where appropriate for such use. (I have never had to take a gun safety course, grandfathered from my childhood; I'm super safe when hunting and handling in transit...to the extent one can be with such a danger...but I know lots of people who are way less careful in their gun handling, putting themselves and others in danger...and there are no rules, requirements, restrictions, training etc as to how I store my guns at home. I could have a loaded gun by my bed, in my closet, next to my door, whatever...and is one always going to be sober, not depressed, no angry, not scared and thus potentially make a tragic mistake in a momentary lapse? )

I want gun manufacturers and each owner of a gun to be liable for how that gun is used, if used improperly. Put the economics squarely on those who profit and those who are negligent or worse. A manufacturer selling high capacity weapons with glorifying gun culture marketing should be liable for the use of the gun away from the highly regulated gun range...and an owner who fails to follow storage regulations should be liable for the use of a stolen gun, much less the sale or gift of the gun to someone not properly registered. What those liability levels are we could niggle on, but there should be economic incentives, at least, to modifying behavior.

If someone feels the need to have a gun for self-defense, let's start by admitting that really should never have to be the case, it's a failure of regulation and law enforcement.

But ok, it's a reality that there are some definable situations that could exist...then such availability for such potential use should require one heck of a lot of training, ongoing throughout the time in which that weapon is registered for such. Annual reviews required on handling and storage. Mental stability open to review as well.

Back to the criminals, yes, severe penalties.

The topic thread is "Sensible Gun Safety".

cradle,
I'm not going to separately respond to you as the above addresses amply, but I'm not ignoring you.
I picked my wife up at night when she had long hours, so that she wouldn't have to walk 6 blocks in transitional area of Boston. Was it truly necessary, probably not, but maybe...she did get her purse snatched one night, but that was right in front of me...I took off chasing him, but lost ground in my hard shoes and he in his sneakers, but a couple of guys going into their townhouse blew a police whistle as he ran past and the thief dropped the bag...police were there in less than 2 mins...so, yeah, having someone escort you can help, though no guarantee...if he'd had a gun, and held us up, it wouldn't have mattered if I had one too...he'd have been ready I wouldn't...

The point is that your example of waitresses is way less of an issue in countries in which it's much harder to obtain a gun.

So give your wife some pepper spray and drop her off at Mondawmin Mall in West Baltimore.

Like I said, I picked up my wife. Every bit as challenging a walk as 6 blocks from Mondawmin today would be.
In today's era, Uber is a beautiful alternative if there's nobody to do that pick up.

But are you really going to ignore everything else?

Yes everything else is going to be ignored including the reality in the stupid retort that criminals target opportunities which aren’t in poor areas. (Just like claiming you neglect thinking about the criminal side…in the USA…ignorantly/dishonestly assumes the environment is equal in other countries with respect to all other factors-same reason I push back to comparing us and scandanavian countries in anything especially healthcare)

The inability to distinguish planned/targeted crimes vs random crime by some os astounding.

If your the victim of random violence do you really care if it was random violence or targeted violence. Your loved one is just as dead either way. There was a local dude who was blown away in a parking lot outside of a downtown nightclub. He was acquitted years back of being involved in a shooting at a local Boys and Girls club. He escaped several murder attempts in the past. I guess this is an example of targeted violence. There were people who wanted him dead and now he is. Sometimes street justice just gets the job done as barbaric as it is.

One should care. Most crime isn’t personal. It feels that way, I’ve had my car broken into three times in 5-6yrs, lost three computers because I’m an a-hole for being tired late or running back to my office for five min while leaving my computer bag in the car (once in my corporate office below grade deck of a 300k sq Fr office building in midtown) etc. I had a cousin as documented murdered in a mass shooting. Other crime has affected myself and my family and I still find the reasonable and responsible thing is to have the EQ to take a step back and think before changing my entire life around this.

People need to be and do better. Not impose their will in everyone else because of a single or few experiences. You don’t want anyone to be or do better just impose rules, restrictions and create an environment where fear is institutionally embedded. That’s what your advocating for here.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/vi ... r-AA16EHtY This was a classic example of a targeted shooting. The only other possibility is this young lad stepped into that parking lot and got in the way of a flock of bullets flying south for the winter. FTR, I am the polar opposite of preaching fear to anyone. Hell I'm not afraid of dying yet I have no death wish. It is that "circle of life" thing. Is it normal to be afraid or feel fear?? I made 37 static line parachute jumps with the 82nd Airborne. I was afraid every effing time I jumped. The fear never trumped the exhilaration after hitting the ground. There is no more intense feeling when the air force loadmaster opens the door on the plane and the red light comes on. You would have to be there to understand the feeling. I'm not talking about Hollywood jumps, I'm talking about a night jump in full gear. To quote Tim Taylor... whoof whoof whoof .

Fear can be healthy. It’s how it’s processed and responded to that matters. Not being reactionary, having empathy (thinking from others positions not ones own) and not creating or fostering the wrong environment and worse outcomes.

Understand it’s overused as an example and may have some technical issues but see the Stanford Prison experiment?

But honestly I don’t get your point here. There’s both types of crime. What are your proposed solutions other than raging and filtering everything through this incredibly narrow lens of Rochester am nowhere else?

My proposed solution is pretty simple. If your mad at somebody you don't have to shoot that person to assuage your anger. An eye for an eye leaves both people blind. Too many angry people running around with too many weapons and too many scores to settle. If you can't shoot em, then stab em to death. If you can't shoot em or stab em, pull out your Buford Pusser stick and beat them to death.

So what? Give everyone guns? Create a police state and out everyone on lockdown? What?

I have no idea what your point is. My point is pretty simple. There are folks out there with vendettas against other people. They will find a method to vent their anger and frustration. It may take them months or years but they will have their vengeance.

Like talking to Brick in anchorman

[Farfromgeneva]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/26/us/newpo ... index.html

Kid thought he was in an elevator at the mall.

There’s only one gun I’m trying to use in an elevator and I’m that case I want it to stay cocked and loaded but not go off until sting is impressed.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=h3Yrhv33Zb8

[cradleandshoot]

So you are addressing your grievance to the many millions of Americans who obey the law and respect the rights granted to them under the 2nd amendment to the US Constitution? You remember the rights granted to US Citizens under the 2nd amendment? The right of the people to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed. If your point of order involves what a well regulated militia should be then clarify for us in your own words.

No. I'm saying we have more guns than people in this country now and people are dying seemingly daily from gun violence. Obviously, more guns have not solved the problem. I don't read much about criminals being dispatched by gun-toting citizens but rather unarmed citizens being gunned down by mostly legal gun owners.

As for the 2nd, its about "well-regulated militias" (a common thing in the 18th Century) and not guns which is why militias are mentioned before arms in the text. Let alone that it is so poorly written. Ask any credible grammar expert if they would construct any sentence in this manner.

I'm all for well regulated. When you jump through all of the hoops here in NYS to prove you can carry a concealed weapon and the governor defies a SCOTUS ruling saying you can't carry your concealed weapon outside of the shitter in your own home...what is an innocent victim to do??? So you wonder why your local Walmart store has become a tantalizing target? When the bad guy doesn't have to worry about a good guy with a gun trying to stop them.

[Farfromgeneva]

The problem also becomes when the planned/targeted crimes ARE random crimes.

Targets of opportunity. Terror for fun.

My parents had an incident in Towsontownd mall on an elevator with their granddaughter. My dad now has his concealed carry. No fear, just an option, in a crazy world.

And what would you propose is that overlap? In probability terms.

A handgun in an elevator with your family. What's the over/under in any kind of struggle or confrontation that the family members are also in as much danger from shots fired by your father as well as the perp.

The idea that a firearm (especially a semi-auto) is the solution to any kind of confrontation is not the answer IMHO. If everybody is armed, any number of disagreements will end badly (and not necessarily for just the bad guy) is much higher. We are a country with more guns than people - and our current predicament I'd maintain is TOO many guns rather than not enough.

There are people that use intimidation and assault and robbery as sport and entertainment. They also choose their targets thinking they wont receive pushback.
Semi autos are high risk. Revolvers are the answer for carry.
My personal thought is that right now, bad guys already have the guns. They assume good people are unarmed and defenseless. They need to consider that a higher percentage of people ARE armed. So they might choose the wrong target, or the target isn't as helpless as they seem. It may curb their behavior.
And if it doesn't, I'd feel better about a positive outcome for MY family, with my father armed, given his background and training.

Good reading material

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Butter_Battle_Book

BTW, I may have to fire my assistant coach soon.

[Farfromgeneva]

The problem also becomes when the planned/targeted crimes ARE random crimes.

Targets of opportunity. Terror for fun.

My parents had an incident in Towsontownd mall on an elevator with their granddaughter. My dad now has his concealed carry. No fear, just an option, in a crazy world.

And what would you propose is that overlap? In probability terms.

A handgun in an elevator with your family. What's the over/under in any kind of struggle or confrontation that the family members are also in as much danger from shots fired by your father as well as the perp.

The idea that a firearm (especially a semi-auto) is the solution to any kind of confrontation is not the answer IMHO. If everybody is armed, any number of disagreements will end badly (and not necessarily for just the bad guy) is much higher. We are a country with more guns than people - and our current predicament I'd maintain is TOO many guns rather than not enough.

There are people that use intimidation and assault and robbery as sport and entertainment. They also choose their targets thinking they wont receive pushback.
Semi autos are high risk. Revolvers are the answer for carry.
My personal thought is that right now, bad guys already have the guns. They assume good people are unarmed and defenseless. They need to consider that a higher percentage of people ARE armed. So they might choose the wrong target, or the target isn't as helpless as they seem. It may curb their behavior.
And if it doesn't, I'd feel better about a positive outcome for MY family, with my father armed, given his background and training.

Plus 1000% Bad people with guns expect their victims to be unarmed. The only folks that don't understand that concept are some of our fellow forum members.

You don’t know this and it’s not true. Fear mongering and thoughtless speculation. I know many bad people who carry heaters all the time. They simply don’t think that.

[cradleandshoot]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/26/us/newpo ... index.html

Kid thought he was in an elevator at the mall.

There’s only one gun I’m trying to use in an elevator and I’m that case I want it to stay cocked and loaded but not go off until sting is impressed.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=h3Yrhv33Zb8

So your hoping you won't become yet one more time a victim of premature ejaculation? So how often do you walk onto an elevator with an erection? Never mind, I really don't want to know

[Farfromgeneva]

The problem also becomes when the planned/targeted crimes ARE random crimes.

Targets of opportunity. Terror for fun.

My parents had an incident in Towsontownd mall on an elevator with their granddaughter. My dad now has his concealed carry. No fear, just an option, in a crazy world.

And what would you propose is that overlap? In probability terms.

A handgun in an elevator with your family. What's the over/under in any kind of struggle or confrontation that the family members are also in as much danger from shots fired by your father as well as the perp.

The idea that a firearm (especially a semi-auto) is the solution to any kind of confrontation is not the answer IMHO. If everybody is armed, any number of disagreements will end badly (and not necessarily for just the bad guy) is much higher. We are a country with more guns than people - and our current predicament I'd maintain is TOO many guns rather than not enough.

There are people that use intimidation and assault and robbery as sport and entertainment. They also choose their targets thinking they wont receive pushback.
Semi autos are high risk. Revolvers are the answer for carry.
My personal thought is that right now, bad guys already have the guns. They assume good people are unarmed and defenseless. They need to consider that a higher percentage of people ARE armed. So they might choose the wrong target, or the target isn't as helpless as they seem. It may curb their behavior.
And if it doesn't, I'd feel better about a positive outcome for MY family, with my father armed, given his background and training.

Plus 1000% Bad people with guns expect their victims to be unarmed. The only folks that don't understand that concept are some of our fellow forum members.

There already 300+ million firearms in this country. So the suggestion is to make and sell even more with the goal that everybody is armed?
What possibly could go wrong? Just had a 6YO shoot his teacher in class who also threatened a classmate if they told anyone he had a weapon in his possession.

Do you all work for a firearms manufacturer?

Uhh his name is Vulcan

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Vd0VUq7qGV0

[Farfromgeneva]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/26/us/newpo ... index.html

Kid thought he was in an elevator at the mall.

There’s only one gun I’m trying to use in an elevator and I’m that case I want it to stay cocked and loaded but not go off until sting is impressed.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=h3Yrhv33Zb8

So your hoping you won't become yet one more time a victim of premature ejaculation? So how often do you walk onto an elevator with an erection? Never mind, I really don't want to know

I mean it depends on how many floors the elevator serves. Sometimes the two pump jump is appropriate

[cradleandshoot]

The problem also becomes when the planned/targeted crimes ARE random crimes.

Targets of opportunity. Terror for fun.

My parents had an incident in Towsontownd mall on an elevator with their granddaughter. My dad now has his concealed carry. No fear, just an option, in a crazy world.

And what would you propose is that overlap? In probability terms.

A handgun in an elevator with your family. What's the over/under in any kind of struggle or confrontation that the family members are also in as much danger from shots fired by your father as well as the perp.

The idea that a firearm (especially a semi-auto) is the solution to any kind of confrontation is not the answer IMHO. If everybody is armed, any number of disagreements will end badly (and not necessarily for just the bad guy) is much higher. We are a country with more guns than people - and our current predicament I'd maintain is TOO many guns rather than not enough.

There are people that use intimidation and assault and robbery as sport and entertainment. They also choose their targets thinking they wont receive pushback.
Semi autos are high risk. Revolvers are the answer for carry.
My personal thought is that right now, bad guys already have the guns. They assume good people are unarmed and defenseless. They need to consider that a higher percentage of people ARE armed. So they might choose the wrong target, or the target isn't as helpless as they seem. It may curb their behavior.
And if it doesn't, I'd feel better about a positive outcome for MY family, with my father armed, given his background and training.

Plus 1000% Bad people with guns expect their victims to be unarmed. The only folks that don't understand that concept are some of our fellow forum members.

You don’t know this and it’s not true. Fear mongering and thoughtless speculation. I know many bad people who carry heaters all the time. They simply don’t think that.

I'm not talking about bad guys with heaters. I'm talking about good guys with heaters. You know, those are the folks who give you agita.

[Farfromgeneva]

The problem also becomes when the planned/targeted crimes ARE random crimes.

Targets of opportunity. Terror for fun.

My parents had an incident in Towsontownd mall on an elevator with their granddaughter. My dad now has his concealed carry. No fear, just an option, in a crazy world.

And what would you propose is that overlap? In probability terms.

A handgun in an elevator with your family. What's the over/under in any kind of struggle or confrontation that the family members are also in as much danger from shots fired by your father as well as the perp.

The idea that a firearm (especially a semi-auto) is the solution to any kind of confrontation is not the answer IMHO. If everybody is armed, any number of disagreements will end badly (and not necessarily for just the bad guy) is much higher. We are a country with more guns than people - and our current predicament I'd maintain is TOO many guns rather than not enough.

There are people that use intimidation and assault and robbery as sport and entertainment. They also choose their targets thinking they wont receive pushback.
Semi autos are high risk. Revolvers are the answer for carry.
My personal thought is that right now, bad guys already have the guns. They assume good people are unarmed and defenseless. They need to consider that a higher percentage of people ARE armed. So they might choose the wrong target, or the target isn't as helpless as they seem. It may curb their behavior.
And if it doesn't, I'd feel better about a positive outcome for MY family, with my father armed, given his background and training.

Plus 1000% Bad people with guns expect their victims to be unarmed. The only folks that don't understand that concept are some of our fellow forum members.

You don’t know this and it’s not true. Fear mongering and thoughtless speculation. I know many bad people who carry heaters all the time. They simply don’t think that.

I'm not talking about bad guys with heaters. I'm talking about good guys with heaters. You know, those are the folks who give you agita.

You said bad people with guns don’t expect victims to be armed. This isn’t true nearly as much as you’re claiming and projecting while being scared of boogeymen in suburban Rochester.

[PizzaSnake]

The problem also becomes when the planned/targeted crimes ARE random crimes.

Targets of opportunity. Terror for fun.

My parents had an incident in Towsontownd mall on an elevator with their granddaughter. My dad now has his concealed carry. No fear, just an option, in a crazy world.

And what would you propose is that overlap? In probability terms.

A handgun in an elevator with your family. What's the over/under in any kind of struggle or confrontation that the family members are also in as much danger from shots fired by your father as well as the perp.

The idea that a firearm (especially a semi-auto) is the solution to any kind of confrontation is not the answer IMHO. If everybody is armed, any number of disagreements will end badly (and not necessarily for just the bad guy) is much higher. We are a country with more guns than people - and our current predicament I'd maintain is TOO many guns rather than not enough.

There are people that use intimidation and assault and robbery as sport and entertainment. They also choose their targets thinking they wont receive pushback.
Semi autos are high risk. Revolvers are the answer for carry.
My personal thought is that right now, bad guys already have the guns. They assume good people are unarmed and defenseless. They need to consider that a higher percentage of people ARE armed. So they might choose the wrong target, or the target isn't as helpless as they seem. It may curb their behavior.
And if it doesn't, I'd feel better about a positive outcome for MY family, with my father armed, given his background and training.

[Seacoaster(1)]

“My personal thought is that right now, bad guys already have the guns. They assume good people are unarmed and defenseless. They need to consider that a higher percentage of people ARE armed. So they might choose the wrong target, or the target isn't as helpless as they seem. It may curb their behavior.”

Think, just a little, about the potential consequences and end results of this kind of thinking.

[HooDat]

This talk about self defense is as much a red herring as the talk about hunting used to be.

The reason we have the second amendment is to defend ourselves against governmental tyranny, plain and simple. And before you ask about Joe and his latent desire to come after us with F-15 and nukes - please don't.

We all know the only way the US government is coming after its own citizens is with lawyers or an EMP - where they let us kill each other for them

[jhu72]

The problem also becomes when the planned/targeted crimes ARE random crimes.

Targets of opportunity. Terror for fun.

My parents had an incident in Towsontownd mall on an elevator with their granddaughter. My dad now has his concealed carry. No fear, just an option, in a crazy world.

And what would you propose is that overlap? In probability terms.

A handgun in an elevator with your family. What's the over/under in any kind of struggle or confrontation that the family members are also in as much danger from shots fired by your father as well as the perp.

The idea that a firearm (especially a semi-auto) is the solution to any kind of confrontation is not the answer IMHO. If everybody is armed, any number of disagreements will end badly (and not necessarily for just the bad guy) is much higher. We are a country with more guns than people - and our current predicament I'd maintain is TOO many guns rather than not enough.

There are people that use intimidation and assault and robbery as sport and entertainment. They also choose their targets thinking they wont receive pushback.
Semi autos are high risk. Revolvers are the answer for carry.
My personal thought is that right now, bad guys already have the guns. They assume good people are unarmed and defenseless. They need to consider that a higher percentage of people ARE armed. So they might choose the wrong target, or the target isn't as helpless as they seem. It may curb their behavior.
And if it doesn't, I'd feel better about a positive outcome for MY family, with my father armed, given his background and training.

Plus 1000% Bad people with guns expect their victims to be unarmed. The only folks that don't understand that concept are some of our fellow forum members.

There already 300+ million firearms in this country. So the suggestion is to make and sell even more with the goal that everybody is armed?
What possibly could go wrong? Just has a 6YO shoot his teacher in class.

Do you all work for a firearms manufacturer?

So you are addressing your grievance to the many millions of Americans who obey the law and respect the rights granted to them under the 2nd amendment to the US Constitution? You remember the rights granted to US Citizens under the 2nd amendment? The right of the people to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed. If your point of order involves what a well regulated militia should be then clarify for us in your own words.
If you want to debate how a 6 year old gets his hands on a handgun, his family is adamant in maintaining the weapon was always secured. This 6 year old has Houdini like abilities. The little tyke can remove a handgun from a secure location, load it and start popping off caps.

... 2 year olds, masquerading as adults, like you, are the reason COPS shoot first and asks questions never! If you walk upright these days in America it is assumed you are carrying a gun by the police. Expanded concealed carry will help a lot there. We will see more and more law abiding citizens killed at the hands of more and more law abiding citizens in the near future as everyone thinks they are "the good guy with a gun". That will be great fun eh?

[Farfromgeneva]

This talk about self defense is as much a red herring as the talk about hunting used to be.

The reason we have the second amendment is to defend ourselves against governmental tyranny, plain and simple. And before you ask about Joe and his latent desire to come after us with F-15 and nukes - please don't.

We all know the only way the US government is coming after its own citizens is with lawyers or an EMP - where they let us kill each other for them

Of course the self defense is a red herring and it was brought up by someone who has the cadence of divert, state one thing while a link embedded demonstrates something else and is surely familiar to others.

[Farfromgeneva]

Not an anomaly: 2020's red states have higher murder rates

Alexi McCammond
Reproduced from Third Way; Chart: Axios Visuals
The murder rates in Trump-voting states from 2020 have exceeded those in Biden-voting states every year since 2000, according to a new analysis by ThirdWay, a center-left think tank.

Why it matters: Republicans have built their party on being the crime-fighting candidates, even as murder rates in red states have outpaced blue states by an average of 23% over the past two decades.

Four reliably-red states consistently made the top of the list — Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Missouri.
Driving the news: Third Way's report analyzed homicide data for all 50 states from 2000 through 2020, using CDC data.

They used the 2020 presidential election results to characterize "red states" from the "blue states."
The findings build on a previous Third Way report that only analyzed murder rates from 2019-2020. This time, they write, they wanted "to see if this one-year Red State murder epidemic was an anomaly."
Zoom out: In Oct. 2022 — just before the 2022 midterm elections — a record-high 56% of Americans said there was more crime where they live, per Gallup.

That included 73% of Republicans and a whopping 51% of Independents.
Both parties rushed to spend tens of millions of dollars on crime ads that month.
Between the lines: The political implications don't always match the reality.

"Crime has historically been a very potent political issue. It’s also very anecdote driven," said Jim Kessler, Third Way's executive vice president for policy.
Murder isn't the only crime committed or discussed, but Third Way hopes to combat the "media and political narrative that crime is a Democratic problem, occurring mostly in big blue cities and fueled by lax policies," they write.
What to watch: Democratic messaging on the issue in the 2024 cycle and whether there are renewed divisions between Democratic Party leaders and members of Congress — particularly after party infighting blamed progressives’ “defund the police” slogan for down-ballot losses in 2020.

President Biden reiterated his views just last week when he told a group of bipartisan mayors gathering in D.C. that handling public safety shouldn't involve defunding police departments.
Methodology: Data is based on death certificates collected by state registries and provided to the National Vital Statistics System. To allow for comparison, Third Way calculated the state’s per capita murder rate, the number of murders per 100,000 residents, and categorized states by their presidential vote in the 2020 election, resulting in an even 25-25 state split.

[HooDat]

Not an anomaly: 2020's red states have higher murder rates

Now do "Blue" cities.....

Murder rates ain't about politics, and they aren't about 2A rights. They are about poverty, broken cultures and a lack of hope.

[jhu72]

Not an anomaly: 2020's red states have higher murder rates

Now do "Blue" cities.....

Murder rates ain't about politics, and they aren't about 2A rights. They are about poverty, broken cultures and a lack of hope.

.... do cities period.