• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Analysis of “Stand Your Ground” Self-defense Laws and Statewide Rates of Homicides and Firearm Homicides

Somerville

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 29, 2012
Messages
17,873
Reaction score
8,364
Location
On an island. Not that one!
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
Obviously nonsense carried out by some of those liberal academic types who just hate guns. Homicide rates have increased since the onset of the covid pandemic.


Surprisingly, the Washington Post found that the situation may not be as simple as the "gun banners" would like to make it
[. . .]
 
Obviously nonsense carried out by some of those liberal academic types who just hate guns. Homicide rates have increased since the onset of the covid pandemic.
So you're not arguing that stand your gun laws have reduced violent crime, you're arguing that they might not be the reason there was more violent crime?
Either way, these numbers sure seem to indicate that stand your ground laws are not reducing violent crime.
 
Doesn't a crime have to be committed before stand your ground can be invoked?
 
Doesn't a crime have to be committed before stand your ground can be invoked?
The theory here is that people will be less likely to commit a violent crime if they know there's a good chance that they could end up dead.
But as usual, criminals never really expect to get caught, and generally are too desperate to consider the risks. The result is that harsh punishments and threats of violence do very little to discourage anything.
 

Given that criminals have this mindset, self defense should be encouraged.
 
Given that criminals have this mindset, self defense should be encouraged.
Meh, not really. De-escalation tactics should be encouraged. More often than not the gun gets you into trouble not out of it. In the best-case scenario, you end up in a struggle for your life that you may very well lose.
In the worst-case scenario, the pure and simple fact that you have a gun makes you more likely to pull it in a situation you shouldn't.
Turns out the type of person who is paranoid enough to think they need a gun also tend to end up having itchy trigger fingers.
 
People should have a requirement to retire if possible before drawing a firearm is even considered.
 
How many millions of people who legally carry compared to how many cases of "itchy trigger fingers"?
 
Meh, not really. De-escalation tactics should be encouraged.
Like what? If some has a weapon, what are the nice words we should say?

More often than not the gun gets you into trouble not out of it. In the best-case scenario, you end up in a struggle for your life that you may very well lose.
True, but that could happen not fighting back. It's why I practice with my firearm drawing from AIWB.

In the worst-case scenario, the pure and simple fact that you have a gun makes you more likely to pull it in a situation you shouldn't.
Please show the white paper that supports your pure and simple fact.

Turns out the type of person who is paranoid enough to think they need a gun also tend to end up having itchy trigger fingers.
Perhaps this is supported in the same white paper.
 
harsh punishments or getting "Rittenhoused" tends to prevent recidivism though. I do agree with most of what you say about criminals not expecting to be caught. A criminal law professor I had in law school-a guy who was the death penalty PD for a major league PDs office at one time, said his studies found that certainty of punishment, rather than severity, was more likely to deter hard core criminals. in other words, if every single murderer got 8 years for committing a murder, than would cause far more deference if one in 10 was boiled alive (his example)
 

Trouble is many homicides are hot blooded with people acting on impulse and just not thinking.
 
Trouble is many homicides are hot blooded with people acting on impulse and just not thinking.
you have any statistics on how many murders are impulsive vs premeditated?
 
How many millions of people who legally carry compared to how many cases of "itchy trigger fingers"?
The question is: Do more guns lead to less death?
The answer is a resounding NO!

For as much as right-wing asshats want to talk about violence in Chicago, New York, or California, the fact is homicide rates are the highest in Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi.
You want to avoid violent crime? Move to Minnesota, New England, or the Pacific Coast where the liberals live.
 
well we also know that millions upon millions more normal capacity 9mm Handguns and millions and millions more semi auto magazine fed rifles bought in the last 30 years has not caused violent crime to increase either

the highest rates of violent crime tend to take place in inner city areas dominated by Democrats
 
We do know that the number of guns in the US increased by 270 million from 1986 to 2019 yet the homicide declined over that same time period by 42%.

Blaming crime on the number of guns suggests that you want to reduce the number of guns in order to address crime. Is this true in your case?

You should focus your geographic crime rates down to the city and even neighborhood levels to see where the safety and the danger exists.
 

You didn't answer my question, and seem determined to bleat partisan attacks. Nice talking to you.
 
you have any statistics on how many murders are impulsive vs premeditated?

Do you ?

In recent shootings, in fast food restaurants, employees have been shot for telling a customer to leave because the dining area was closed, or because their order was short

Hot tempers and guns = hot blooded shootings

OK, in neither incident, were people actually killed but in the latter, the employee was shot in the face:

 
wow, one shooting. I will raise you the manson killings, the son of Sam shootings, the Zebra killings, the DC sniper and of course Steven Paddock's Las vegas killing spree that was planned for at least a year
 
You didn't answer my question, and seem determined to bleat partisan attacks. Nice talking to you.
Your question is irrelevant. The goal is to reduce violent crime.

So what we need to determine is:
A = what are the odds that you will be a victim of a violent crime.
B = what are the odds that having a gun would save you
C = what are the odds that the gun will get you into trouble in the first place.

If A * B is less than C you shouldn't carry a gun around. Spoiler alert: C is definitely greater than A * B.
 

You made a statement: Turns out the type of person who is paranoid enough to think they need a gun also tend to end up having itchy trigger fingers.
You want that statement to stand without examination. Easy enough to see, given you characterize a question directed at that statement as "irrelevant".

You answer the question examining your statement, and then maybe we can discuss whatever quaint notions you might have about odds and such.
 
This is your primary crime refuction effort?

If it's dangerous enough to need more gun control, you can't tell me it's not dangerous enough to carry a gun.
 
If you are the victim of a violent crime, what are the odds the criminal will have used a motor vehicle to position himself in anticipation of his crime?

Disarmed and Afoot, sez me.
 
Would it not also encourage criminals to sneak up on a victim rather than go face to face.
 
Would it not also encourage criminals to sneak up on a victim rather than go face to face.
that's why open carry is not a good idea in most cases
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…