I'll add some more thoughts to one small point: On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 10:05 PM, Merrill Gibson <[email protected]> wrote:
> If a city's/region's/country's violence problem is construed as being one > of "gun violence," that phrase powerfully suggests a solution to the > problem. If the problem is "gun violence" and there were no guns, there > would be no "gun violence" - problem solved. That's an easy logical step > that nearly everyone can make. However it is apparently very hard for many > (most?) people to take the additional logical steps of noting that > criminals would just substitute different weapons, Could there be "no guns"? Perhaps in a thought experiment, but not in reality. First, it would be impossible to remove all guns. They are small and easily hidden. They are also needed by the military, police and many other gov't agencies as well as private use such as Brinks, etc. and pest control - and there will be "leakage" - there is now and there likely would be more if guns were being confiscated. Smuggling into the US - we now have ton lots of illegal drugs smuggled in. We could easily have gun lots of guns/ammo smuggled in, and they aren't consumed as fast as are the drugs. Local manufacture - there are probably 10,000+ machine shops in the US which could easily manufacture serviceable and high quality firearms. But that is only the start, there are probably 1 million+ home workshops which could do an effective, if not professional job. Here's the start of a book review (let me know if you want the rest): HOMEMADE GUNS AND HOMEMADE AMMO by Ronald B. Brown 1986 Pub. Loompanics Unlimited, PO Box 1197, Port Townsend, WA 98386 ISBN 0-915179-39-3 LC Card Catalog # 86-080535 5 1/2" x 8 1/2" 182 pages paperbound This book is nicely typeset with a profusion of diagrams and good quality photographs. Chapter 3 is the big one, and gives step-by-step detailed instructions with diagrams and photos. The tools involved include such exotic machine tools as a handheld electric drill, taps, dies, files and a pipe threading die. Also a wood saw and a chisel would be needed to shape the stock. The raw materials include pipe, a pipe cap, a nail, a hose clamp, some angle iron, and a spring. I'm expecting to see a 7 day waiting period to be able to walk into a hardware store. :-) ... Oh, you can read it even though Loompanics is no longer in business - http://cnqzu.com/library/Anarchy%20Folder/Ammunition/Homemade%20Guns%20And%20Homemade%20Ammo%20-%20Ronald%20Brown%20-%20Loompanics.pdf > since their motives for violence would be unaffected by the absence of > guns, and therefore construing the problem as "gun violence" is misleading. > My bottom line isn't to disagree with Merril's conclusions, but to say that we can't get to "absence of guns". --henry schaffer > > I'm convinced that the use of the phrase "gun violence" is responsible for > a significant amount of the popularity that gun control enjoys. Sadly, it > is frequently used by many people who are sympathetic to our position. The > language with which a problem is framed is crucial in moving public > opinion. When we are speaking in defense of our cause, we should avoid > using this phase, and we should point out the inaccuracy of this phrase if > used by others, even if it is briefly distracting to the conversation. > > Merrill Gibson > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:firearmsregprof- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Will Brink > Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2017 9:16 AM > To: Kessler, Raymond <[email protected]> > Cc: 'firearmsregprof' <[email protected]> > Subject: RE: Another study considers gun violence as a public health issue > > Is the very term "gun violence" not an artificial construct to have people > focus on the tool used vs tool user? As you all know, cars, knives, and > screw drivers all used regularly to harm/kill people, but are not given > special or magical powers or categories to create crime on their own. In > the UK they like to focus on "knife crime" for similar (illogical) > reasons. > > > Kessler, Raymond wrote: > > Agreed. Calling gun violence a public health problem and calling gun > > control, "gun safety" is a propaganda technique to mask the fact that > > additional gun control increase the power of the state and will be > > enforced by criminal sanctions. Do we need more criminal cases in our > > courts, more people in our prisons, more unlawful search and seizures? > > How many of the defendants will be harmless people? How much will they > > infringe on the 2nd Amendment and the fundamental right of self-defense? > > See the book "Law Abiding Criminals" and my article, "Enforcement > > Problems of Gun Control, A Victimless Crime Analysis." > > Ray Kessler > > ________________________________________ > > From: [email protected] > > [[email protected]] on behalf of Dean Cascio > > [[email protected]] > > Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2017 2:28 AM > > To: [email protected]; 'firearmsregprof' > > Subject: RE: Another study considers gun violence as a public health > issue > > > > > > So true. > > Thank you. > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from Yahoo Mail on > > Android<https://overview.mail.yahoo.com/mobile/?.src=Android> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 6:53 PM, [email protected] > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Just when I thought the politicization of science could not get stranger > … > > it does. > > > > Summarizing the abstract, they say that because the Feds do not fund a > > lot of gun violence research (for well-known historical reasons) this is > > a problem. I find this to be an odd assumption. Frankly, gun violence and > > gun control policy is one of the most insanely over studied topics in > > criminology. > > > > Start at the Bureau of Justice Statistics and search on "firearm > > violence". Thousands of studies, reports and raw data tables to the > > taking. > > > > Next, do a Google Scholar search for the same and similar terms, adding > > the word "criminology" (this helps you avoid the intellectual malpractice > > committed by doctors posing as criminologists). The number of peer review > > papers is nearly unmeasurable. > > > > Now add up all the books published by criminologists and economists on > > the topic. Some of these tomes cover every angle of the field. > > > > Federal research dollars is not a relevant proxy for the depth or quality > > of available research. The paper’s methodology appears to be flawed from > > the start. > > > > Guy Smith > > [email protected] www.linkedin.com/in/gunfacts/ > > > > > > > > From: [email protected] > > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Henry > > Schaffer > > Sent: Tuesday, January 3, 2017 4:45 PM > > To: firearmsregprof <[email protected]> > > Subject: Another study considers gun violence as a public health issue > > > > > > This on the air this evening on NPR's All Things Considered > > http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/01/03/ > 508037642/study-says-gun > > -violence-should-be-treated-as-a-public-health-crisis > > > > > > It has a link which is supposed to go to the study in JAMA (Journal of > > the American Medical Assoc) but mistakenly links to a 30 year old study. > > > > NPR says, "David Stark, one of the study's leaders ..." - so I searched > > JAMA for his name, and found this just published article: > > ------------------ > > JAMAResearch LetterJanuary 3, 2017 > > Funding and Publication of Research on Gun Violence and Other Leading > > Causes of DeathDavid E. Stark, MD, MS; Nigam H. Shah, MBBS, PhD > > JAMA. 2017; 317(1):84-85. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.16215 > > > > > > This study uses Centers for Disease Control and Prevention mortality and > > federal agency research funding data to compare funding for and > > publication of gun violence research with that for 30 other leading > > causes of death in the United States. > > > > Abstract: > > The United States has the highest rate of gun-related deaths among > > industrialized countries, with more than 30 000 fatalities annually.1 To > > date, research on gun violence has been limited. A 1996 congressional > > appropriations bill stipulated that “none of the funds made available for > > injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and > > Prevention [CDC] may be used to advocate or promote gun control.”2 > > Similar restrictions were subsequently extended to other agencies > > (including the National Institutes of Health), and although the > > legislation does not ban gun-related research outright, it has been > > described as casting a pall over the research community.2,3 This study > > sought to determine whether funding and publication of gun violence > > research are disproportionately low relative to the mortality rate from > > this cause. --------------- > > > > > > which doesn't quite fit the story of what I heard on the air, (which had > > a lot about violence in social networks in Chicago- and there is no link > > the the recording of the on-air item. Maybe there will be tomorrow?) but > > it does have that Figure 1 shown on the web. > > > > --henry schaffer > > _______________________________________________ > > To post, send message to [email protected] > > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > > http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof > > > > > > Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as > > private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are > > posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly > > or wrongly) forward the messages to others. > > > -- > Sincerely, > > Author and industry consultant, Will Brink @ www.BrinkZone.com > > Free articles, free ebook, and other stuff of interest to fitness > enthusiasts, see my site at: > > http://www.brinkzone.com/ > > Remember, "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from > mediocre > minds." -- Einstein > > _______________________________________________ > To post, send message to [email protected] > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof > > Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as > private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are > posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or > wrongly) forward the messages to others. > > > > _______________________________________________ > To post, send message to [email protected] > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof > > Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as > private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are > posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or > wrongly) forward the messages to others. >
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to [email protected] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
