• Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Subscribe
  • RSS

California Gun Sales Up, Gun Violence Down

Handgun

Recent events in California would suggest that the supposed connection between legal gun ownership and gun violence doesn’t really exist:

Gun deaths and injuries have dropped sharply in California, even as the number of guns sold in the state has risen, according to new state data.

Dealers sold 600,000 guns in California last year, up from 350,000 in 2002, according to records of sale tallied by the California Attorney General’s office.

During that same period, the number of California hospitalizations due to gun injuries declined from about 4,000 annually to 2,800, a roughly 25 percent drop, according to hospital records collected by the California Department of Public Health.

Firearm-related deaths fell from about 3,200 annually to about 2,800, an 11 percent drop, state health figures show.

There are several reasons that gun related deaths an injuries have fallen, of course, not the least of them being a nationwide drop in violent crime that is also reflected in the fact that New York City will end 2012 will the fewest homicides ever, and that Washington, D.C., once the murder capital of the country, will end the year will less than 100 homicides. Nonetheless, the fact that a significant increase in gun ownership has not led to an increase in gun injuries or deaths would seem to undercut one of the primary arguments of advocates of gun control. Contrary to their assertions, it would appear that allowing law abiding Americans to own guns doesn’t lead to an increase in violence after all.

Related Posts:

About Doug Mataconis
Doug holds a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May, 2010 and also writes at Below The Beltway. Follow Doug on Twitter | Facebook

Comments

  1. OzarkHillbilly says:

    When the CDC is allowed to study the relationship between guns and gun violence I will take notice. As is, this could just be statistical noise, something I am most certainly not qualified to judge.

    Of course, the insurance industry is quite good at those kinds of things. We could just ask them, eh? Naaaahhhhhh….. That would make sense.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 15 Thumb down 6

  2. Tim D. says:

    “Contrary to their assertions, it would appear that allowing law abiding Americans to own guns doesn’t lead to an increase in violence after all.”

    Gun violence is complex and multi-causal, so it’s not very helpful to over-simplify and draw glib conclusions one way or the other unless you’ve done the full analysis. Like OH says, time to let the CDC get to work.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 15 Thumb down 6

  3. matt says:

    Like you said it’s just part of the larger trend of reduced violence in the USA. Murder and violence in the USA has nothing to do with the guns and everything to do with the people.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 8

  4. michael reynolds says:

    A man with one gun can commit gun murders. A man with 10 guns can commit gun murders.

    The stat proves nothing at all.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 22 Thumb down 13

  5. al-Ameda says:

    That article was a little light on statistical analysis and correlations.

    More gun sales, less crime? I guess we could infer from that that perhaps Adam Lanza’s mother should have bought more guns, and the Newtown mass killing could have been averted. No?

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 15 Thumb down 13

  6. rudderpedals says:

    Nonetheless, the fact that a significant increase in gun ownership has not led to an increase in gun injuries or deaths would seem to undercut one of the primary arguments of advocates of gun control.

    It might have if it dealt with ownership instead of what it actually reports, gun sales. It could be a buyer’s weapon #15 as owning more than one firearm seems to be part of the hobby. Give that poor single California gun sale graph a break. It’s tired, carrying way too much of the argument.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 7

  7. michael reynolds says:

    More desperate twisting and turning from people who don’t want to face the simple facts. If Adam Lanza’s mother had not brought guns into her home, 20 little kids in Newtown would be playing with their Christmas gifts right now.

    It’s guns.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 23 Thumb down 17

  8. Franklin says:

    I think it sort of depends on who’s buying.There are plenty of people that I would trust to own 10+ guns, and some of them do. They follow all safety precautions, etc. On the other hand, there are also plenty of law-abiding people that I would *not* trust.

    Anyway, there’s no real reason why we can’t attack the problem of mass shootings from several angles, for example:

    1) Reduce easy access to guns and ammo, in particular the ones that make it easy to kill lots of people quickly.
    2) More help for the mentally ill.
    3) Less violence in video games and movies.

    Unfortunately, in each case there’s some group of people that says, “this isn’t a problem” or “this isn’t the main problem” or “this won’t make much difference” so we end up doing nothing at all. Is there some reason why we can’t chip away at the problem from all angles?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 7

  9. bk says:

    Doug, I hope (for the sake of your clients) that your slip-and-fall complaints are drafted with more care and substance than some of your posts here.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 7

  10. Boyd says:

    Denial ain’t just a river in Egypt.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 7

  11. michael reynolds says:

    @matt:

    Murder and violence in the USA has nothing to do with the guns and everything to do with the people.

    Right. Because the sniper who killed those firemen the other day could just as easily have done that with a banana.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 21 Thumb down 10

  12. JKB says:

    @michael reynolds: If Adam Lanza’s mother had not …

    And here we have the split.

    I would say, “If Congress hadn’t voted to make schools law-abiding citizen gun-free little kids in Newtown would be playing with their Christmas gifts right now.”

    Can’t say all would because killers kill but the important thing is to have the capability to stop them as soon as possible. But neither can the fantasy of not having guns guarantee all the kids would have survived. Lanza had 20 minutes to kill. The key is to have someone who can stop killer sooner regardless of his chosen killing method, not shift the killer to knives, gas, IEDs, bow and arrow, wrench, paper cutter, hammer, screwdriver, nail gun, chisel, bat, pipe, acid, molotov cocktail, automobile, ad infinitum.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 15

  13. Rafer Janders says:

    @Tim D.:

    Gun violence is complex and multi-causal, so it’s not very helpful to over-simplify and draw glib conclusions one way or the other unless you’ve done the full analysis.

    Oversimplifying and drawing glib conclusions without doing full analysis is, of course, what Mataconis does best.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 5

  14. Rafer Janders says:

    @Franklin:

    1) Reduce easy access to guns and ammo, in particular the ones that make it easy to kill lots of people quickly.
    2) More help for the mentally ill.
    3) Less violence in video games and movies.

    Canada has just as many mentally ill as we do, proportionally, and they play the same violent video games and watch the same movies. If these two factors were significant, you’d expect them to have the same rate of gun violence as us, and yet we suffer 20 times more gun deaths than Canada does.

    The one major difference between us and them is gun laws and attitudes towards gun ownership.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 5

  15. Rafer Janders says:

    @Rafer Janders:

    To expand, I chose Canada as the closest to home example, and yet it’s also true for the rest of the developed world — they all have mentally ill people and all watch violent movies and play violent video games. America is not unique in that regard. And yet across the board, other developed nations have far lower rates of gun violence than us. The only statistically significant factor is easy access to guns.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4

  16. Rafer Janders says:

    Contrary to their assertions, it would appear that allowing law abiding Americans to own guns doesn’t lead to an increase in violence after all.

    Sure. Just look at law-abiding gun owner Nancy Lanza.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 4

  17. Rafer Janders says:

    Nonetheless, the fact that a significant increase in gun ownership

    That data doesn’t necessarily represent an increase in gun ownership, just gun sales. We don’t know, for example, if 10 new people each bought one gun, or if one pre-existing gun owner bought ten additional guns.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 4

  18. matt says:

    @michael reynolds: A small bomb would of been more effective…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5

  19. michael reynolds says:

    @JKB:

    Yes, but you’re an idiot.The notion that armed teachers would do anything but provide us with cases of classroom rage killings is utterly, completely, absolutely, indubitably stupid.

    It’s the kind of idiocy one sees in arguing with Scientologists or creationists. You actually have to twist the fabric of reality in order to support your cult mentality.

    Let’s walk this through, shall we? Let’s arm the teacher. Does she carry the gun on her hip? Where little kids can grab it? Hopefully even you agree that that would be madness. Does she lock the gun in her drawer? And who guarantees that drawer is never jimmied or that she never forgets to lock it? A hundred thousand teachers, let’s say, day in and day out and none of them ever forget to lock the drawer?

    So, what’s next? A gun safe with a combo lock? If I suggested that for your home you’d go nuts explaining that you won’t have time to get the thing out in time to save your wife being raped by brown people.

    Your idea doesn’t pass the laugh test. It is beyond stupid. It’s cultish.

    As for your knives, acid, etc… diversion: utter horseh!t and you know it. Try stabbing 20 little kids to death. You know that’s a dishonest argument and you make it anyway because you are a brainwashed member of a cult and when dealing with matters of the cult you surrender what higher mental functions you have to your brainwashing.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 15 Thumb down 11

  20. stonetools says:

    Dunno, Doug, maybe it proves that neither you or I are capable of doing statistical analysis of complex data. I know my limitations there.
    I’m pretty sure that if over the short term the crime rate rose as gun sales rose, we would hear the NRA telling us that correlation is not causation and that we shouldn’t rush to judgment.
    I would counsel the same now, and wait for the professionals to tell us what it means.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2

  21. superdestroyer says:

    @michael reynolds:

    I guess you refuse to let facts get in the way of your personal opinions. Progressives claim they are reality driven but refuse to accept any facts that do not support their personal opinions. Why should anyone trust what a progressive says when they refuse to face reality. The assault weapon ban ended in 2004 and crime went down despite all of the predictions otherwise.

    Ban guns has almost nothing with limiting crime but it is really about making the government more powerful and making people more dependent on the government.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 8

  22. stonetools says:

    @OzarkHillbilly:

    When the CDC is allowed to study the relationship between guns and gun violence I will take notice. As is, this could just be statistical noise, something I am most certainly not qualified to judge.

    Amen. The Republicans followed their NRA masters and barred the CDC from conducting such studies- the most shameful kind of suppression of research I know of .
    Let the CDC return to those kinds of studies. Until then, I’m not going to accept any facile conclusions about the harmlessness of increased gun ownership.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4

  23. michael reynolds says:

    @superdestroyer:

    Here’s reality: Adam Lanza shot 20 children and seven adults with a gun. He had a gun because his mother brought guns into their home. If she had not done so, 20 little children would be alive.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 14 Thumb down 7

  24. matt says:

    @michael reynolds: You assume.

    I can play this game.

    Without guns adam decides to build a bomb and levels the entire school or most of it. Like the bath school tragedy.

    Without a gun Adam decides to rig the boiler system to explode leveling the full school and killing everyone inside,.

    You get to play the guessing game well so do I.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 11

  25. matt says:

    @michael reynolds: Without a society that stigmatizes those who admit to having issues with mental health Adam lanza would of opted to get help with his issues.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3

  26. Jay Dubbs says:

    @matt: Clearly you are an idiot.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 8

  27. stonetools says:

    @matt:

    Dude, its only on TV that untutored people easily create working bombs or rig boilers to explode. Generally, amateur bomb-makers fail. OTOH, anyone with minimal gun handling skills can wreak carnage with a semi-auto pistol/rifle, 30 round magazines, and lots of ammo. The beauty of semi-automatics is that you don’t have to be a marksman or the fastest gun in the west to kill 30 people in 20 minutes. Your average nut case can do it.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 5

  28. stonetools says:

    @matt:

    Without a society that stigmatizes those who admit to having issues with mental health Adam lanza would of opted to get help with his issues

    I thought you were against guessing games. Clearly Adam was mentally ill. We just don’t know whether he wanted to seek treatment or not. Maybe we’ll never know, since Adam and his mother are dead. I am about 90 per cent confident, though, that if those guns weren’t in the house the Sandy Hook massacre wouldn’t have happened . Having an arsenal at hand just made it too easy for him to act out his insane fantasies.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 5

  29. Brad says:

    @OzarkHillbilly: Sorry, gun ownership is not a disease.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2

  30. stonetools says:

    @Rafer Janders:

    To expand, I chose Canada as the closest to home example, and yet it’s also true for the rest of the developed world — they all have mentally ill people and all watch violent movies and play violent video games. America is not unique in that regard. And yet across the board, other developed nations have far lower rates of gun violence than us. The only statistically significant factor is easy access to guns.

    What’s astonishing to me is that so many sane, educated people resist the obvious conclusion. In the future, people are going to look back at us and wonder why we held on so long to this bizarre national fixation with guns. .

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 5

  31. Rafer Janders says:

    You know, Doug, with your ability to cherrypick pre-conceived proof that you want out of statistical noise, it’s a wonder the Romney campaign never recruited you to run their statistical analysis.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 4

  32. Rafer Janders says:

    @superdestroyer:

    Ban guns has almost nothing with limiting crime but it is really about making the government more powerful

    The government is already incredibly powerful. What is your sad, tiny rifle going to do against a SWAT team, a Bradley armored fighting vehicle, a tank, a platoon of Marines, an Apache attack helicopter? One man piloting a drone from behind a console at an air base in Nevada can wipe out you and your little toy pistol before you even know what’s happening. Seriously, if we the people want you dead, in what scenario is a gun really going to protect you?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 5

  33. matt says:

    @stonetools: Wow you’re completely overestimating the complexity of boiler systems and bombs. If you’re capable of figuring out how to shoot a gun and shoot it well then you could easily of spent that same time figuring out how to do all kinds of other horrific things. Bombs are extremely easy to make and deploy in a safe manner.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 8

  34. Rafer Janders says:

    @matt:

    If you’re capable of figuring out how to shoot a gun and shoot it well

    Capable of figuring out how to shoot a gun? Pick up gun. Insert finger through trigger guard. Point at target. Pull trigger with finger. Boom.

    This ain’t rocket surgery.

    Bombs are extremely easy to make and deploy in a safe manner.

    I was going to go for something a bit more sophisticated than “you are an idiot”, but sometimes, that’s all you really need to say.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 5

  35. matt says:

    @Rafer Janders: L2 English buddy..

    Shooting a gun =/= shooting it well.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 7

  36. Rafer Janders says:

    @matt:

    How well do you need to be able to shoot to murder 20 six-year olds in an enclosed space?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1

  37. Rafer Janders says:

    @matt:

    Bombs are extremely easy to make and deploy in a safe manner.

    This is why, on a rainy and cold day like today when the kids can’t run outside, I often have them make and deploy a bomb. It’s an easy and safe activity for children, and also quite educational.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2

  38. Rafer Janders says:

    @matt:

    So, if I may summarize the, uh, logic, here, it’s like this:

    Figuring out how to turn a boiler system into a bomb, or how to build, transport and trigger a bomb from scratch = easy!

    Figuring out how to pick up a gun, aim, and pull the trigger = hard!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2

  39. Jenos Idanian Who Has No Pony Tail says:

    Let’s see… increased gun sales are followed by a DROP in gun crimes.

    Mass shootings almost always take place in “gun-free” zones.

    Mass shootings NEVER take place where there are lots of people and lots of guns.

    Areas with very, very strict gun control laws have far above average rates of gun crimes, and violent crime in general. (Chicago, I believe, just passed 500 homicides this year, and has very strict gun control laws.

    So… the most logical response is to disarm people, usually targeting odd demographics of gun owners (the latest trend is poor people, by plans to make legal gun owning more and more expensive) that almost never correlates with the groups that are actually committing gun crimes.

    I think I need more alcohol and/or drugs to fully wrap my head around that logic.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 9

  40. Ernieyeball says:

    @Jenos Idanian Who Has No Pony Tail: I think I need more alcohol and/or drugs to fully wrap my head around that logic.

    It’s apparent that your current consumption levels aren’t doing you any good in your quest for wisdom so yeah, you should go for more!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3

  41. al-Ameda says:

    315 million people + 250 million guns + gun cult mentality = two things, (1) unavoidable periodic mass killings, (2) ongoing public health problem.

    Also, why did Adam Lanza choose high powered guns rather than say knives to slaughter those people? I mean, we’re often told that guns are not the issue here, that other means could just as easily have sufficed.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2

  42. michael reynolds says:

    @Jenos Idanian Who Has No Pony Tail:

    Actually, New York City has very tough gun laws and just had its lowest murder rate in a long time.

    But as you must know city-wide gun laws are utterly ineffective in a country where a ten minute drive to some redneck-run “gun show” can procure an unregistered Bushmaster Kindergarten Killer.

    So cut the crap.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2

  43. michael reynolds says:

    @al-Ameda:

    Yeah, it’s never guns. A thousand other things would work just as well. Which is why we send our Marines into action armed with steak knives.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2

  44. Ernieyeball says:

    Guns are only relevant when Jenos and his ilk dogmatize that “guns save lives” then it is all about the guns.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2

  45. Andy says:

    Well, it seems pretty obvious there isn’t a linear relationship between gun ownership and gun violence (which is a subset of violence more generally). Guns are one factor, but not the only factor and not the most important.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3

  46. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    @al-Ameda: 315 million people + 250 million guns + gun cult mentality = two things, (1) unavoidable periodic mass killings, (2) ongoing public health problem.

    I hadn’t thought of it that way before, but considering that works out to four guns for every five people, it’s astonishing that we don’t have even more shootings.

    Well, astonishing until you remember that we’re talking about our fellow Americans (for the most part), and some of us simply have more faith in our fellow citizens than others.

    I trust my fellow citizens to, for the most part, do the right thing in most circumstances. Today, I happened to see a guy in a store accidentally reveal his concealed handgun. I shrugged and didn’t think anything of it, and I still don’t see it as any kind of a big deal. And there was not a single incident provoked by the presence of a ZOMG GUN!!!!!!1111!!!!!

    I don’t know why he felt the need to carry it, and don’t care. He was minding his business and acting responsibly, keeping it out of sight (except for that brief moment), and not a single person was killed or injured.

    I’ve encountered quite a few people armed in public, and it’s never once bothered me in the least. Because I trust my fellow citizens enough to have faith that they won’t suddenly be overwhelmed by their ZOMG GUN!!!!!!111!!!!!!! and suddenly turn psycho.

    Then again, I most likely haven’t encountered wr, michael reynolds, anjin, or herb while they were packing and knew who I was. That would probably give me reason to consider…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 5

  47. Rafer Janders says:

    @JKB:

    The key is to have someone who can stop killer sooner regardless of his chosen killing method, not shift the killer to knives, gas, IEDs, bow and arrow, wrench, paper cutter, hammer, screwdriver, nail gun, chisel, bat, pipe, acid, molotov cocktail, automobile, ad infinitum.

    So what’s the big deal with gun control then? If we restrict guns, then you can always defend yourself with knives, gas, IEDs, bow and arrows, wrenches or paper cutters. If we outlaw AR-15s, you can always go target shooting with a hammer, screwdriver, nail gun or chisel. If you can’t have a hunting rifle, you can always go after big game with a bat, pipe, acid, Molotov cocktail, or automobile.

    If, that is, you believe these things are all just as deadly, effective and easy to use as a gun.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0

  48. JKB says:

    Actually, it isn’t hard to fashion a bomb. The hard part is not being there when it goes off. But since these killers usually suicide, that isn’t such a problem for them. And you might forget, many of these mass killers are said to be very intelligent.

    Teacher going all rage? Amusing, your ignorance of facts. Carry permit holders are far less likely to be involved in crime than even police, much less the general population. And that includes the fact that what might be cast as simple argument or scuffle is a serious criminal offense when someone is armed.

    Personally, I see some issue with teacher carry unless the teacher is a person carrying in their life. The rarity of these attacks makes arming up specially for them likely to become burdensome after a while. Far better is to allow those with lawful carry permitted on school grounds, With restrictions, such as carry on body, in holster, firearm cannot be removed from holster except for self defense/defense of others.

    And the teacher would have to carry on their person in the school. No little kid would be grabbing their gun that can’t be dealt with by gun retention techniques even if they turned out to be a high school athlete.

    Oh and we’ll ignore retention holsters which are difficult to operate except by the person wearing it.

    If you are to excited about the prospect, guns with magazine interlocks could be mandated. Many patrol officers carry those. If the bad guy is going for the officer’s gun he just presses the magazine release (assuming some moron hasn’t mandated a tool be required to release the magazine) and the gun is inoperable. It’s a trade off, others prefer having the ability to fire that one last shot or single load in extremis, and the magazine is removed.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 6

  49. JKB says:

    @Rafer Janders:

    Apparently, you are confused with the difference between a defensive weapon and an offensive weapon. The killer wants to kill. The defender wants to stop the threat. The killer dying as a result of the actions to stop is just an acceptable risk of the level of force permitted to stop a threat of imminent death or serious bodily injury.

    But for your information, hunting wild boar with a knife is quite popular. I’m to old for such hunting but for the young. You wouldn’t like the description of what it is like for the hunter.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4

  50. Stonetools says:

    So bombs are easy to make and set off, hey? Then it’s hard to understand why the preferred weapon of mass killers are semi automatic assault rifles with high capacity magazines. Guess they never got the memo from mass killer experts Matt, Jenos, and JKB. The mass killers just take the hard way out and go for those semi automatics every time. This must really irritate the gun cultists, who tell us that guns are perfectly harmless and none more harmless than their favorite man card, the BUSHMASTER. (Bushmaster = large snake. Get it?).
    I think Michael must be right. Gun rights advocates lose 30 IQ points when they try to make arguments for their pet cause. It’s like creationists. You can’t really make intelligent arguments for a theory that is itself dead wrong, even if you are yourself intelligent.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2

  51. Rafer Janders says:

    @JKB:

    Apparently, you are confused with the difference between a defensive weapon and an offensive weapon.

    Apparently, you are confused, as all projectile and edged weapons are offensive — the object is to project force against an opponent. Shields, helmets, body armor, doors, walls, etc. — that’s defensive.

    The killer wants to kill. The defender wants to stop the threat.

    Sure — and if the killer has a Bushmaster AR-15, you can just defend yourself with a bomb, or a boiler system, or a hammer, screwdriver, nail gun or chisel. What’s the problem? You’re still on an even footing with the killer as long as you have any of those in hand.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2

  52. superdestroyer says:

    @Rafer Janders:

    Gun control is about making middle class, law abiding people fill out forms, ask permission from the government, and living the the arbitrary decisions of law enforcement. If you look at the Feinstein proposal, law enforcement has to approve every gun sell.

    In the long run, that means that the family members of law enforcement will own guns and have conceal carry permits but anyone who is a registered Republican or veterans will be denied because they cannot be trusted.

    The left is pushing their own version of the vaginal ultra-sound probe. The left wants to make the administrative process of owing a gun a painful experience for law abding citizens. That means the Left wants the middle class to be totally dependent on the government for protection from criminals. If you look at how the left has attacked George Zimmerman, it is clear that the left wants to end the idea of self defense and end the idea of community watch or citizens aiding law enforcement.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3

  53. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    @Stonetools: I think Michael must be right. Gun rights advocates lose 30 IQ points when they try to make arguments for their pet cause. It’s like creationists. You can’t really make intelligent arguments for a theory that is itself dead wrong, even if you are yourself intelligent.

    Funny, I was just thinking the exact opposite thing. The gun-grabbers have their goal in mind, and nothing gets in the way — and man, do they get stupid on the way. Confusing automatic and semi-automatic, refusing to grasp the difference between “assault rifles” and “assault weapons,” confusing “military-grade” and “military-style” weapons, emphatically ignoring the facts about mass shootings and gun control efforts in the past…

    The basic concept behind most of the gun control advocates here is “get rid of the guns.” It’s magical thinking, and reality seems to make no difference to them — they’re fixated on the goal, and nothing gets in the way of that.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 6

  54. john personna says:

    So a whole article about California, gun sales up, gun violence down, and not a word about California magazine restrictions or the California bullet button.

    Why do I even come to OTB?

    Nonetheless, the fact that a significant increase in gun ownership has not led to an increase in gun injuries or deaths would seem to undercut one of the primary arguments of advocates of gun control. Contrary to their assertions, it would appear that allowing law abiding Americans to own guns doesn’t lead to an increase in violence after all.

    That might be defensible if California had not also increased regulation in that same time.

    California has also increased trigger lock and storage requirements, right?

    … geez, an argument from ignorance.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1

  55. john personna says:

    “California effected regulations in 2000 that forced gun locks to be approved by a firearm safety device laboratory via California Penal Code Section 12088.[15] All gun locks under this code must receive extensive tests including saw, pick, pull, and many other tests in order to be approved for the state of California. If a lock passes the requirements then it is said to be California Department of Justice (CADOJ) approved.[16]“

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0

  56. Rafer Janders says:

    @john personna:

    John, you don’t actually expect Doug to do any research before posting, do you?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0

  57. john personna says:

    @Rafer Janders:

    One would think that he could remember California as an example of “too much gun control.”

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

  58. john personna says:

    @this:

    Dear idiot downvoter,

    California has an affidavit for gun owners to certify that they have suitable and safe gun storage. It strongly encourages the ownership of a gun safe.

    Do you think having that nationally would reduce firearm deaths, even as sales go up?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0

  59. matt says:

    @john personna: Probably because your bullet button and magazine ban doesn’t even effect the gun that is most commonly used for murder in California (handguns). Almost none of the shotguns used for murder in California were effected either (shotguns take up a distant second place).

    Oh BTW there’s a push in California to ban the bullet button. This is one of the reasons why the gun folks aren’t willing to compromise on the bullet button. There’s no noticeable effect on crime and when the bullet button people see that they start demanding even more restrictions.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4

  60. john personna says:

    @matt:

    California has done a number of changes.

    The gun safe thing probably does more to reduce “everyday” gun deaths.

    How many states have an affidavit requirement for storage?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1

  61. john personna says:

    @matt:

    BTW, if you look at the animation for school shootings, we are actually under-represented.

    Are you telling us from a higher shooting state that we aren’t making a difference?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1

  62. susanne says:

    Do the other countries have the mass media as the USA does? Let’s take a long hard look at the media.@Rafer Janders:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0