Gun deaths reduced by more guns - Suck it Libs/ Europeans!

[Blind_Io]

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...=2008801060602

(Please take the title as the sarcasm it is)

Michigan sees fewer gun deaths -- with more permits

January 6, 2008
By DAWSON BELL
FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER
Six years after new rules made it much easier to get a license to carry concealed weapons, the number of Michiganders legally packing heat has increased more than six-fold.
But dire predictions about increased violence and bloodshed have largely gone unfulfilled, according to law enforcement officials and, to the extent they can be measured, crime statistics.

The incidence of violent crime in Michigan in the six years since the law went into effect has been, on average, below the rate of the previous six years. The overall incidence of death from firearms, including suicide and accidents, also has declined. More than 155,000 Michiganders -- about one in every 65 -- are now authorized to carry loaded guns as they go about their everyday affairs, according to Michigan State Police records.
About 25,000 people had CCW permits in Michigan before the law changed in 2001.
"I think the general consensus out there from law enforcement is that things were not as bad as we expected," said Woodhaven Police Chief Michael Martin, cochair of the legislative committee for the Michigan Association of Chiefs of Police. "There are problems with gun violence. But ... I think we can breathe a sigh of relief that what we anticipated didn't happen."
John Lott, a visiting professor at the University of Maryland who has done extensive research on the role of firearms in American society, said the results in Michigan since the law changed don't surprise him.
Academic studies of concealed weapons laws that generally allow citizens to obtain permits have shown different results, Lott said. About two-thirds of the studies suggest the laws reduce crime; the rest show no net effect, he said.
But no peer-reviewed study has ever shown that crime increases when jurisdictions enact changes like those put in place by the Legislature and then-Gov. John Engler in 2000, Lott said.
In Michigan and elsewhere (liberal permitting is the rule in about 40 states), those who seek CCW permits, get training and pay licensing fees tend to be "the kind of people who don't break laws," Lott said.
Nationally, the rate of CCW permits being revoked is very low, he said. State Police reports in Michigan indicate that 2,178 permits have been revoked or suspended since 2001, slightly more than 1% of those issued.
Another State Police report found that 175 Michigan permit holders were convicted of a crime, most of them nonviolent, requiring revocation or suspension of their permits between July 1, 2005, and June 30, 2006.
But even if more armed citizens have not wreaked havoc, some critics of Michigan's law chafe at how it was passed: against stiff opposition in a lame duck legislative session and attached to an appropriation that nullified efforts at repeal by referendum.
Kenneth Levin, a West Bloomfield physician, was one of those critics. In a letter to the Free Press in July 2001, he referred to the "inevitable first victim of road or workplace rage as a result of this law."
Last month, Levin said he suspected "it probably hasn't turned out as bad as I thought. I don't think I was wrong, but my worst fears weren't realized."
But the manner in which the law was enacted was nevertheless "sneaky" and "undemocratic," Levin said.
Other opponents remain convinced that it has contributed to an ongoing epidemic of firearms-related death and destruction.
Shikha Hamilton of Grosse Pointe, president of the Michigan chapter of the anti-gun group Million Moms March, said she believes overall gun violence (including suicide and accidental shootings) is up in Michigan since 2001. Many incidents involving CCW permit holders have not been widely reported, she said.
The most publicized recent case came early in 2007, when a 40-year-old Macomb County woman fired from her vehicle toward the driver of a truck she claimed had cut her off on I-94. Bernadette Headd was convicted of assault and sentenced to two years in prison.
Hamilton said that even if gun violence has ebbed, it remains pervasive, tragic and unnecessary. At the least, a more liberal concealed weapons law means there are more guns in homes and cars and on the street, she said, and more potential for disaster.
Advocates for the law argue that there is nothing equivocal about the experience of the CCW permit holders who have warded off threats and, in a few instances, saved themselves from harm.
In September, a 36-year-old Troy man killed an armed 18-year-old assailant who, with three other suspects, attempted to steal his car outside Detroit Police headquarters.
Michelle Reurink, 40, a consultant in Lansing, got her CCW permit last year, not so much because she felt an imminent threat to her well-being, she said, but because she's a strong believer in the Constitution's Second Amendment -- the right to bear arms.
"The primary reason I got it is because I feel like I have the right to have it," she said.
Still, she doesn't often carry her gun during her daily routine, though she takes it when she and her husband go on their boat, she said.
Having the license and a handgun makes her feel more secure in her home (where no one needs a CCW license to have a gun), she said. She also feels more secure because of the required training, including self-defense lessons, she took as part of the license application.
Mark Cortis of Royal Oak, who conducts concealed weapons license training and sits on the Oakland County gun board, said he believes the benefits of an armed citizenry are evident in small ways almost every day, as permit holders deter trouble and live more confidently.
"The police just can't protect you," Cortis said. "If you have to call 911, it's probably already too late."

[gtrietsc]

This should end well. (By which I mean this thread.)

[Red_Bull]

It might be a good thing if everyone on the street had a gun. Everyone would be awfully polite to each other, knowing what the result of a confrontation could be

"sorry for bumping you, good sir"
"not at all, fair lady" (tips hat)

as opposed to:

"hey watch where you're going, buddy"
"wanna make something of it?" *bang*

Yeah probably time I went to bed...

[swek]

Yes I absolutely agree. The best way to solve our non-existing gun problem is to hand out guns to everyone.
Worked in the US ergo it works everywhere q.e.d.

/end

[smib]

I don't think Blind is saying that other countries should loosen up gun laws, just that maybe those Americans that feel doing it here where gun violence is a major problem isn't a bad an idea as many claim.
I'm not at all surprised by the results, but I'm still on the fence on whether this would work on a more national scale. There are a lot of people out there who may seem normal and generally law abiding, but will find it far too easy to shoot someone for something that doesn't warrant it.

[swek]

After reading it again It seems you're correct. Sorry Blind, the thread title made me do it!

[KaJuN]

Originally Posted by smib

There are a lot of people out there who may seem normal and generally law abiding, but will find it far too easy to shoot someone for something that doesn't warrant it.

We call these people "police" and tasers are their weapon of choice.

[Blind_Io]

Originally Posted by swek

After reading it again It seems you're correct. Sorry Blind, the thread title made me do it!

I accept apologies in the form of Visa, Master Card and obscene amounts of rep points.

/No worries.

[tigger]

Originally Posted by smib

There are a lot of people out there who may seem normal and generally law abiding, but will find it far too easy to shoot someone for something that doesn't warrant it.

Well that seems to be exactly what's been dis-proven in many CCW states. But I'd agree that it's better that this is handled on a state level than at the federal level.

[Scooby5]

Was there more killings, as a percentage of the population, during the "Wild West" days when gun law was totally uncontrolled?

[jetsetter]

Originally Posted by Scooby5

Was there more killings, as a percentage of the population, during the "Wild West" days when gun law was totally uncontrolled?

I doubt it.

[LeMans GTR]

It might be a good thing if everyone on the street had a gun. Everyone would be awfully polite to each other, knowing what the result of a confrontation could be

"sorry for bumping you, good sir"
"not at all, fair lady" (tips hat)

as opposed to:

"hey watch where you're going, buddy"
"wanna make something of it?" *bang*

I've changed my mind about guns after reading your post.

Originally Posted by Blind_Io

I accept apologies in the form of Visa, Master Card and obscene amounts of rep points.

/No worries.

American Express okay?

[Lilleput]

I guess it makes sense.. As Americans can't run (Their much too fat) They have to end a tense situation without losing to many calories so guns is the logical choice..


Seriously though, If a lot of people own guns more criminals would think they need guns, so instead of someone just getting mugged or threatened with a knife one of the two will be dead.. Or what?

[Red_Bull]

Originally Posted by LeMans GTR

I've changed my mind about guns after reading your post.

You realise it was a joke right?

[LeMans GTR]

^ Of course I did,

But then again it does sorta make senes.

[vegasrebel29]

Originally Posted by Scooby5

Was there more killings, as a percentage of the population, during the "Wild West" days when gun law was totally uncontrolled?

That was as much of a function of the lack of government in the region as anything else.

On a related note, the issue of guns is far more complicated than anyone who discusses it usually gives it credit for.

[Hercules286]

Originally Posted by Lilleput

I guess it makes sense.. As Americans can't run (Their much too fat) They have to end a tense situation without losing to many calories so guns is the logical choice..


Seriously though, If a lot of people own guns more criminals would think they need guns, so instead of someone just getting mugged or threatened with a knife one of the two will be dead.. Or what?

The thing is though, you have to think in reality. We don't have time machines, so we can't ban guns for everyone in 1875, thus making it hard for criminals to get one. The criminals already have guns and there's no way you can effectively take them away. The only guns you CAN take away are those of the orderly citizen who works and pays taxes. It ain't gonna lead to anything good.

[Hidden_Hunter]

Originally Posted by petarkb

The thing is though, you have to think in reality. We don't have time machines, so we can't ban guns for everyone in 1875, thus making it hard for criminals to get one. The criminals already have guns and there's no way you can effectively take them away. The only guns you CAN take away are those of the orderly citizen who works and pays taxes. It ain't gonna lead to anything good.

I'm sure it's possible to remove them from circulation but it would take a while (20+ years I would think) with strict border control eventually the supply of guns will dry up (read eventually )

[Hercules286]

Originally Posted by Hidden_Hunter

I'm sure it's possible to remove them from circulation but it would take a while (20+ years I would think) with strict border control eventually the supply of guns will dry up (read eventually )

20 years is very optimistic. Guns work for a really long time, if given due maintenance, and they don't get outdated like TV sets. The AK-47 is just as lethal today as it was in 1947, when it was invented. If you give it a few hundred years, it might work.

[Hidden_Hunter]

Originally Posted by petarkb

20 years is very optimistic. Guns work for a really long time, if given due maintenance, and they don't get outdated like TV sets. The AK-47 is just as lethal today as it was in 1947, when it was invented. If you give it a few hundred years, it might work.

I'm not suggesting that they'd break, i'm suggesting that if they're being removed from circulation and not being replaced (eg through law enforcement and restriction of sale) that eventually the amount of gun related deaths would lower (theortically at least)