That's because its firearm deaths. Suicides and accidental are included.

The more populous a state is the lower the percentage of every death is of the population. So it will take more deaths in a high population state than the number of them in lower population states to equalize the percentage.

By those numbers (calculated on the basis of per 100,000) that you cite, New York would have had approximately 8 times (800%) more gun deaths than Alaska.

Nor does that list differentiate between types of guns used. I'm guessing that most of New York's gun deaths occurred in NY city and most were done with hand guns.

So one of the strictest gun law cities had far more gun deaths than one of the least strict states.

And, then, which type of gun is the most culpable in terms of total gun death numbers, hand guns or semi-automatic? So, which type, logically, is the bigger problem?

DB, the chart alleges per 100,000
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

California has double the population of every state but Texas...um...

People love to say this, toss out Chicago etc... which makes little sense.

Localized restrictive gun laws likely have more to do with giving the police more tools to prosecute crime than to create a weapons vacuum when you can just drive outside of the city to purchase a gun.

This is where you have to decompose the issues. A suicide may be different than a mass murder suicide. Different weapons, different considerations.

People love to push the stats around, see, see most deaths are by handgun not assault weapon etc...this just kills the dialogue.

Do we want to reduce gun violence or just ignore it?

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/poli...icle-1.2843521

Attorney general report shows 74% of firearms used in New York crimes were bought in states with weak gun laws

ALBANY — A new report proves what has long been suspected — the bulk of gun crimes committed in New York involve weapons that originated from out of state.

And even more frightening is how quickly they make it to New York.

Thousands of guns between 2010 and the end of 2015 found their way to the Big Apple and other parts of the state within a year of their last known purchase. And thousands more within three years, the report by state Attorney General Eric Schneiderman’s office says.

Of the 30,606 guns found with complete transaction histories, law enforcement officials recovered 5,873 within three years of the last known recorded purchase, including 2,437 within one year.

And a hefty one-in-five guns recovered after use in crimes were recently trafficked into New York.

The low “time-to-crime” number, the report says, is a strong indication that the weapons were purchased “with the intent to be diverted to criminal use.”

In New York City, 91% of the low "time-to-crime" guns originated out-of-state, the analysis found. That's the largest percentage in the state. Long Island came in second at 58%.

Feds can fight gun crime by fixing flaws in background checks

Schneiderman's office pointed to a Buffalo murder where a 9-mm. pistol was recovered in September 2012. The firearm was initially purchased in Ohio in February 2012 before making its way into New York.

“The data makes one thing abundantly clear: New York’s strong gun laws are being undermined at every turn by lax laws in other states,” Schneiderman said. “Even as we work to make our streets safer, the illegal guns most often used in violent crimes continue to pour into our state.”

Using federal data, Schneiderman’s office analyzed the transaction history of all 52,915 guns connected to crimes and recovered by law enforcement from 2010 through the end of 2015.

The report, “Target on Trafficking: Analysis of New York Crime Guns,” is the first statewide law enforcement agency to obtain and analyze such comprehensive crime gun data provided by the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, Schneiderman said.

Pols say N.Y.'s tough laws can't stop guns from entering state

Of the 46,514 crime guns recovered by police with a known state of origin, an incredible 74%, or 33,344, were first sold to someone in another state.

That influx of out-of-state guns soars above the 29% national average, the report found.

Of the total recoveries, 75% were handguns, the weapon of choice among violent criminals, the report says. Of the 39,491 handguns recovered, 86% originated out-of-state.

“When you look at the illegal crime gun problem, it’s the handgun that’s killing people every day,” Schneiderman said.

A minuscule 6%, or 3,208, of the crime guns recovered belonged to the person who originally purchased the weapon, the report found.

New York in the wake of the Newtown, Conn., elementary school massacre enacted a series of gun control measures. They included expanding the ban on automatic weapons, banning the sale of high capacity magazines, and creating a system designed to keep the mentally ill from buying guns.

But even with the tougher laws, guns from states with weak gun control laws are wreaking havoc in New York, Schneiderman says.

The bulk of the illegal weapons come from six states that make up what’s known as the “Iron Pipeline” — Pennsylvania, Virginia, North and South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida. Ohio is also identified as a big supplier.

All have one thing in common — lax gun control laws, the report says.

The bulk of the guns come from Pennsylvania, Virginia, North and South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida. Ohio is also a big supplier. (Bryan Pace/for New York Daily News)

With 4,216, New York City has the highest concentration of likely-trafficked guns from Iron Pipeline states. Between 2010 and the end of 2015, guns that originated in Virginia made up 19% of all recoveries in the city, followed by Pennsylvania and Georgia, both at 13%, the report says.

Of the pipeline states and Ohio, only Pennsylvania requires background checks for private sales or at gun shows — and that’s only for handguns, the report says.

And only North Carolina of the seven states requires a permit to purchase a handgun.

“From New York's vantage point, the correlation between state and local laws and the source of trafficked guns is undeniable,” the report says.

“We believe the weakness of the gun laws in the Iron Pipeline states and Ohio, combined with direct access to New York via interstate highways and public transportation, has made them become the source-of-choice among gun traffickers running guns into New York.”

Schneiderman recommends the federal government close the so-called gun show loophole and require universal background checks, something Congress has refused to do.

He also urged the feds to make gun trafficking a crime and that states require all handgun owners to have a license.

Even New York can take action, the report found. Schneiderman wants passage of a gun kingpin bill that has been introduced that would make it a felony to illegally sell or possess 10 or more firearms.

The bill by Sen. Jeffrey Klein (D-Bronx) and Assemblywoman Amy Paulin (D-Westchester County) would carry a 25-years to life sentence for the illegal sale or possession of over 20 firearms.

“The Legislature should pass it and send a message to traffickers who think New York is an attractive market for illegal gun sales to think again,” the report says.

Schneiderman’s office on Tuesday is also unveiling an online analytics platform that will allow law enforcement and the public to track gun trafficking patterns in their individual communities.

Tom King, an NRA board member from New York and president of the state Rifle and Pistol Association, said he wanted to see the Schneiderman report before commenting.

New Yorkers Against Gun Violence also had no comment, preferring instead to wait for the release of the report.

Gov. Cuomo, who pushed for passage of the 2013 gun control law, has repeatedly called on Congress to help stem the flow of illegal guns into New York.

"Washington needs to act, pass reasonable gun safety laws, and stem this bloodshed once and for all — and this report is one more reason why,” Cuomo said of Schneiderman’s findings.

“New York proudly passed the strongest gun laws in the nation, but when someone can hop into a car, buy a gun just over the border and bring it back to commit a crime, Congress has failed in its prime responsibility to protect its citizens,” he said.

https://www.chicagocriminallawyerblo...m-chicago.html


September 26, 2017

Where Do All The Illegal Guns In Chicago Come From?

by James G. Dimeas, Esq.


The gun violence in Chicago has been a great source of concern among the citizens and politicians in Illinois for a long time. Every day we are inundated with news of shootings and homicides throughout the City. When the weather heats up we know that the number of shootings will go up. On Monday morning we open the paper to find out how many people were shot and how many were killed over the weekend. In the effort to come up with a way to stop all the shootings, we need to understand how illegal guns are making their way to the streets of Chicago. Illinois has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the United States. To own a gun in your home, Illinois requires that you get a Firearm Owners Identification (FOID) Card which requires that a thorough background search be conducted by the Illinois State Police. FOID cards can be revoked for good cause by the Illinois State Police. Citizens are generally not allowed to carry a gun outside their home unless they have an FOID Card and are legally transporting it, or they obtain a Conceal and Carry Permit. To obtain a Conceal and Carry Permit you have to apply to the Illinois State Police, submit to a thorough background search and supply your fingerprints, and attend and complete gun training classes. Illinois was the last state to allow conceal and carry, and that was only after the Federal Courts ordered Illinois to do this.

In spite of some of the nation’s strictest gun laws, Chicago has established a reputation as America’s deadliest city. Chicago Police report that in 2015, over 2,900 people were shot and 470 people were murdered. In 2016, there were 762 homicides, 3,550 shooting incidents and 4,331 shooting victims. 2016 was the deadliest year in Chicago in 20 years. Chicago recently saw it’s 500th murder of 2017. These statistics, coupled with the strict Illinois gun laws, have become an example cited by gun rights activists to argue that gun control legislation doesn’t work. But a closer look at some of the evidence concerning where these guns are coming from tells us a different story.

According to the FBI, roughly 60% of guns used in crimes in Illinois were from out of state. The overwhelming number of those guns flow into Illinois from states that have much less restrictive gun laws. Most of those out of state guns came from Indiana, which is next to Illinois. Second place goes to Mississippi and third place goes to Wisconsin. The FBI data suggests that there’s lots of trafficking of guns within Illinois but point out that it’s very difficult to trace those guns once they get into the state because Illinois does not require registration of guns, does not license or regulate gun dealers, doesn’t limit how many guns can be sold at one time and does not require background searches on gun sales that are not conducted at a gun show. Indiana has really lax gun laws. Gun dealers are required to perform a very basic background search while a vendor can sell their “private collection” to anyone at a gun show without any background search whatsoever. So someone can buy an assault rifle at a Crown Point Indiana gun show without any background search, and drive an hour into Chicago, where assault rifles are banned. A 2015 study by the University of Chicago suggested that only 11% of guns involved in crimes in Chicago were purchased through federally licensed gun dealers, which require background searches. In 2014 the Chicago Police reported that roughly 60% of guns used and recovered from crime scenes between 2009 and 2013 were purchased outside of Illinois. Exact figures are hard to pin down but it is clear that the vast majority of guns making their way to the streets of Chicago are coming from outside of Illinois.

The significance of these figures is that unless national standards are imposed, there’s no law or amount of regulation in Illinois that is going to stop guns from making their way into Chicago and being used in shootings and murders. Instead of gun rights activists pointing to Illinois strict gun laws to argue that they don’t work, they should point to states that have lax gun laws as an example of why such stricter laws are needed to stop, or at least slow down, the rising numbers of shootings and murders in Chicago.

It was not specified in the post, but I did calculate the numbers on that basis. I edited the post to specify that. I did not note in the post how I arrived at the numbers. I actually considered the populations of NY and Alaska and used those in figuring out the per 100,000 stats.

regardless of where the gun comes from, handguns are the gun of choice in most killings.

But generally not the most deadly.

No, pointing out that most gun deaths or injuries are by handguns, does not kill the dialogue. It expands and clarifies the dialogue. The dialogue that you propose is strictly about AR types or large magazine capacity. It is that dialogue that deflects from and kills the larger dialogue of what to do about gun violence. It is that larger dialogue which has gone on for a long time but has been compressed to the AR dialogue because AR types create a greater (unwarranted) emotional impact. Emotionally driven dialogue is more effective in achieving the desired outcome of the overall "problem" of gun violence than is the mere recitation of statistical numbers.

The current mantra, which you and others have repeated over and over, is that "no one" wants to take away hand guns. Just the scary ones. Look how much the scary ones can kill at one time!

Logically speaking, hand guns, re the gun violence problem, are the bigger problem. Emotionally speaking, the scarier types are a more effective way of riling up enough of the population to persuade lawmakers to "do something."

But the descending order of types of guns needed to be gotten rid of in order to solve the overall problem goes something like: OK, we took care of the fully automatics, now lets take it one notch lower on the scary scale and get rid of the semi automatic, then, because the overall problem will remain virtually the same after we get that done, we can get back to dealing with those nasty but bigger problem, the hand guns.

Dead is dead. The greater number of deaths, by far, are caused by using handguns.

From that article I posted above.

"People killed in mass shootings make up less than half of 1 percent of the people shot to death in the United States. More than half of gun deaths every year are suicides. In 2015, more than 12,000 people have been killed by guns, according to the Gun Violence Archive."

I think you're perhaps missing the really obvious, completely apparent and totally significant point...

While suicide is tragic, it doesn't make the masses look over their shoulders wondering if and when they're going to be involved in the next atrocity.

You haven't even bought a ticket on your own train of thought, have you?

You're the one who brought up all the firearm deaths. So now we're back to mass shootings? Can you make up your mind please
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I remember a few years back when gun control advocates where more open about further regulations on hand guns even to the point of banning them in whole cities or states, and at the time suicide was named as one of the important reasons for the ban. Back then, we were supposed to be horrified by the number of suicides, and the greater ease of doing so, by handguns.

Now since that notion seems to have died out, we must still find emotional reactions based on horror to keep the public pressure up against gun ownership. NO, no, we won't ban hand guns, just the scary ones.

And if you subtract the number of suicides by gun from the total number of gun deaths, the number deaths by hand gun still dwarf the number by AR types.

Handguns are likely never going to be banned, nor do I think they need to be, but the laws in states making it easy to pick them up and bring them to chicago or NYC where individuals can't meet muster need to be tightened up.

Health care ties into all of this, because the suicide rates could come down if the proper care was available and the drug issue goes hand in hand as well.

The assault rifle discussion is logical, as it's the only likely ban that could even be considered; although I'm guessing the lobbying power of the NRA will make even that a long shot.

As I said, the AR type with its more potent emotional reaction is the next logical step down from fully automatic to semi-automatic. After that is accomplished, and the number of gun deaths is barely reduced, what's next?

All illegal guns were once legal.. lost or stolen or bought by someone else.... the issue is volume . It's not hard to get a gun in any state

Heres a thought Don't involve me in your disagreements with another member . And then there's no need cry about the response... with the I am rubber your glue argument :btu:

Here's a thought, respond to my actual thoughts and discussions rather than merely characterizing them in some disparaging way or by changing the subject. You do that a lot. And that signals that you are not logically able to continue the discussion and must invoke some irrelevant stupidity to deflect your way out of being wrong or illogical.

Here's another thought, don't assume that your suggestion here means anything to me. I rub your nose into your own poop of characterizing me as a verbal gymnast, then you cry, telling me not to do it again. :btu:

For RI (and I think Nebe might actually like the Bannon in this interview), there are other sources, beside the Salon type or the left wing mainstream outlets such as NYT or WAPO etc. or their counterpart TV stations CNN etc., that describe a different portrait of Bannon than the one you seem to have. I've checked many of the sources that characterize Bannon as sexist, racist, homophobe, anti-Semite, etc., and they basically all repeat the same limited set of sources with the same 15 or whatever number of claims, with only one that I read or heard that might seem sexist, but involved a bitter divorce which may have slanted what Bannon actually said or meant. The rest were stretched interpretations of quotes or titles of articles which didn't prove anything, rather they created innuendos without actual substance. As I say, there are more serious articles that prove Bannon to be the opposite than the picture that left wing sources promote.

I just saw this video, an interview with Bannon by the author of a new biography of Bannon: Steve Bannon: Always the Rebel. Please watch it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9g4nRKfaMUE

That is not a rebuttal to what I said; it's just your rationalization for maintaining an indefensible position.

Sigh. Sounds like someone who has nothing left in the brainbank to write a debate check.

That leftists believe and recite fairy tales doesn't really make for a debate. What point have you made that is legally, constitutionally correct? Where is the "debate" if only one side is presenting facts and citations of verifiable legal decisions?

I guess now you will say my idea of debate is old and outdated and nobody uses facts anymore.

Speech isn't a monolithic thing either, the term is used as a catch-all for a myriad of expression -- some of which isn't even audible. Arms is a perfectly acceptable term that does not facially limit, qualify, condition or define what is protected . . . As it should be!

Someday you might realize / accept / understand that the right is not created, given, grated or established by the words chosen to secure it and you will stop trying to make the right dependent on words it does not depend upon.

The right to arms is not what can be squeezed from the words of the 2nd Amendment. The right is the silence in the body of the Constitution -- what it doesn't say -- granting any power to the federal government to have any interest whatsoever in the personal arms of the private citizen.

I recognize that a problem exists; I just do not agree that the way to solve it is to enact laws that impact those who are not responsible for the problem (and violate fundamental rights in the process).

Just looking at statewide stats doesn't give much useful data.

Homicide is a city / metro thing and suicide is a suburban / rural thing. 60 percent of U.S. firearm homicides occur in the 62 cities of the country’s 50 largest metros . . . Only 27 percent of suicides do.

But the mass shooting hysteria that drives the left's gun control agenda is like being hysterical about the dangers of electricity and only discussing lightning.

Gun rights people aren't the ones who are ignoring the real causes of gun violence. We are shouted down and demonized when we mention anything about it.

If the entire nation were murdered with guns at the same rate as Black males, 15 -24 years old (70.6/100K), there would be over 225,000 gun murders a year. 1.1% of the population comprises 20.3% of the gun homicides (2015 CDC stats).

What ideas do you have to reduce that horrible statistic?

Just a hint; making it harder for me, a 56 year old retired White guy living in the sticks, to acquire, possess and use a gun, is a non-starter.

The FBI doesn't break out "assault weapons" from the overall rifle category but ALL rifles represent 1.87% of all murder weapons and 2.62% of gun homicide weapons.

Knives, blunt objects and Hands and feet are each used to kill more people than ALL rifles:

https://image.ibb.co/m0bEJR/murderweapon.jpg

(Screengrab from https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s..._2011-2015.xls

Are you under the impression that running guns is legal?

The laws are there, multiple purchase forms are sent to ATF which then sends them to local law enforcement for follow-up.

Except in leftist hell-holes like Philly where the city told the ATF to stop sending the reports because they didn''t do anything with them and the costs of mandated destruction were too high.

The program has been in continuous operation for 3 decades.

"Assault weapons—just like armor-piercing bullets, machine guns, and plastic firearms—are a new topic. The weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons—anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun—can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons. In addition, few people can envision a practical use for these weapons."

Josh Sugarmann, Assault Weapons and Accessories in America, 1988

I was listening to a gun discussion on the radio yesterday between a former RI state Rep and a current RI State Rep...the moderator asked the about the gun violence in the urban areas of RI(Providence)....the former rep's response was that "guns were too easily available and Congress needs to help with more laws"..."someone can drive to Mississippi or New Hampshire and load their car up with AK47's and bring them back to RI".......

sadly the time was up and the current rep who was on the other side of the fence on the issue was unable to respond to that nonsense......