• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons 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!

Another stellar article on gun violence

Lutherf

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
39,806
Reaction score
46,370
Location
Tucson, AZ
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
So "ShotSpotter" data sows that gun violence is way, way beyond what gets reported.

This may be the best way to measure gun violence in America

Well, if you REALLY want to count the number of gunshots and compare that to gun crimes you might want to include the data from public and private ranges too where people practice, train and compete. If you think 165,500 gunshots over 62 municipalities in a year is a lot then you'd better sit down when you hear how many rounds are fired at just one range here in Tucson. At the Southeast Regional Park there are 30 tables open from 8-5 four days a week. On a Saturday or Sunday most, if not all, tables will be occupied all day and few shooters will go through less than 20 rounds while most will go through more than 100. A conservative estimate would be that over 20,000 rounds are fired just in one day which would work out to more than 4,000,000 a year just at that range.

There's a reason that we measure crimes by using crime statistics. It's because not every gunshot constitutes a crime.
 

Beaudreaux

Preserve Protect Defend
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
18,233
Reaction score
15,860
Location
veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Holy crap on a cracker... What a full of unadulterated bull**** train of contempt for the reader. Here's a few examples:

When discussing 772 recordings of shots fired in Canton, Ohio, a city of 73,000 people, they make the assumption and statement: "Yet, either by luck or intent, relatively few of these projectiles hit anyone." as if all those shots were fired AT someone.

Then, a few sentences later, they finally admit their bias and debilitating ignorance by stating this: "It does not account for all the times when a gun is fired in anger, fear or by accident and the bullet simply misses its mark. Yet whether a bullet kills or injures someone is an almost random outcome from a violent act." Seriously? Direct unsupported insinuation that ALL gun shots are a result of a violent act? That statement makes two assumptions, none of which is supported by any scientific data, professionally developed study of gun fire and it's relationship to actual criminal intent, or even just a drive-by interview with thugs in the hood since that's where what limited data they have comes from - "Last year, there were 165,531 separate gunshots recorded in 62 different urban municipalities nationwide [...] The ShotSpotter system also covers just a sliver of each city that it is in, usually higher-crime neighborhoods. ShotSpotter’s total coverage was 173 square miles last year." And, then they say this little gem: "And if you want to avoid getting shot, it’s best to lie low from 2 a.m. to 3 a.m. on Saturdays."

Then they go into a sales pitch for the ShotSpotter system, as if it's some panacea of anti-gun technology which will reduce gun fire and save lives just by installing it and paying their fees. What an obvious shill for that company.

Then we get into the long step stretch where unrelated data is used to bolster the pre-established outcome - determine your end-game and then create the data to support it:

"In another study, Doleac and Carr found that ShotSpotter data showed evidence of “severe underreporting” of gun violence when compared to the traditional metrics of homicides or 911 calls.

In Washington, just 1 in 8 gunfire incidents led to a 911 call for “shots fired” in the covered areas.

“It’s clear most people don’t bother to call 911,” Doleac said.

In Washington, there was one reported homicide for every 181 gunfire incidents.

In Oakland, Calif., the other city that researchers studied, it was one homicide for every 62 gunshot incidents."

This makes the unsupported assumption that the other seven shots fired were criminal intent, guns shot in anger, and/or as they stated earlier in their diatribe of manure, an "outcome from a violent act."

THen they conclude with the final sales pitch:

"Doleac said she looked forward to wider adoption of gunshot detection systems.

“We need more data like this,” Doleac said. “It allows for a much better understanding of gun violence.”"

Wow. What a load of happy horse ****. Anyone with any experience with, as well as basic capabilities in, critical thinking skills can see that this article is a loosely assembled grouping of opinion decorated as fact with unsupported assertions used as proof of product.
 

Goshin

Burned Out Ex-Mod
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
45,539
Reaction score
50,149
Location
Dixie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
So "ShotSpotter" data sows that gun violence is way, way beyond what gets reported.

This may be the best way to measure gun violence in America

Well, if you REALLY want to count the number of gunshots and compare that to gun crimes you might want to include the data from public and private ranges too where people practice, train and compete. If you think 165,500 gunshots over 62 municipalities in a year is a lot then you'd better sit down when you hear how many rounds are fired at just one range here in Tucson. At the Southeast Regional Park there are 30 tables open from 8-5 four days a week. On a Saturday or Sunday most, if not all, tables will be occupied all day and few shooters will go through less than 20 rounds while most will go through more than 100. A conservative estimate would be that over 20,000 rounds are fired just in one day which would work out to more than 4,000,000 a year just at that range.

There's a reason that we measure crimes by using crime statistics. It's because not every gunshot constitutes a crime.



Some people would LIKE to make every gunshot a crime...
 

Lutherf

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
39,806
Reaction score
46,370
Location
Tucson, AZ
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Holy crap on a cracker... What a full of unadulterated bull**** train of contempt for the reader. Here's a few examples:

When discussing 772 recordings of shots fired in Canton, Ohio, a city of 73,000 people, they make the assumption and statement: "Yet, either by luck or intent, relatively few of these projectiles hit anyone." as if all those shots were fired AT someone.

Then, a few sentences later, they finally admit their bias and debilitating ignorance by stating this: "It does not account for all the times when a gun is fired in anger, fear or by accident and the bullet simply misses its mark. Yet whether a bullet kills or injures someone is an almost random outcome from a violent act." Seriously? Direct unsupported insinuation that ALL gun shots are a result of a violent act? That statement makes two assumptions, none of which is supported by any scientific data, professionally developed study of gun fire and it's relationship to actual criminal intent, or even just a drive-by interview with thugs in the hood since that's where what limited data they have comes from - "Last year, there were 165,531 separate gunshots recorded in 62 different urban municipalities nationwide [...] The ShotSpotter system also covers just a sliver of each city that it is in, usually higher-crime neighborhoods. ShotSpotter’s total coverage was 173 square miles last year." And, then they say this little gem: "And if you want to avoid getting shot, it’s best to lie low from 2 a.m. to 3 a.m. on Saturdays."

Then they go into a sales pitch for the ShotSpotter system, as if it's some panacea of anti-gun technology which will reduce gun fire and save lives just by installing it and paying their fees. What an obvious shill for that company.

Then we get into the long step stretch where unrelated data is used to bolster the pre-established outcome - determine your end-game and then create the data to support it:

"In another study, Doleac and Carr found that ShotSpotter data showed evidence of “severe underreporting” of gun violence when compared to the traditional metrics of homicides or 911 calls.

In Washington, just 1 in 8 gunfire incidents led to a 911 call for “shots fired” in the covered areas.

“It’s clear most people don’t bother to call 911,” Doleac said.

In Washington, there was one reported homicide for every 181 gunfire incidents.

In Oakland, Calif., the other city that researchers studied, it was one homicide for every 62 gunshot incidents."

This makes the unsupported assumption that the other seven shots fired were criminal intent, guns shot in anger, and/or as they stated earlier in their diatribe of manure, an "outcome from a violent act."

THen they conclude with the final sales pitch:

"Doleac said she looked forward to wider adoption of gunshot detection systems.

“We need more data like this,” Doleac said. “It allows for a much better understanding of gun violence.”"

Wow. What a load of happy horse ****. Anyone with any experience with, as well as basic capabilities in, critical thinking skills can see that this article is a loosely assembled grouping of opinion decorated as fact with unsupported assertions used as proof of product.

And they wonder why 2A supporters are leery government funded "studies" on gun violence.
 

Chomsky

Social Democrat
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2015
Messages
55,782
Reaction score
42,993
Location
Third Coast
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
It's a good law enforcement tool and, by most accounts, a reliable system. It is not, however, a crime statistic calculator.
I never heard of it, and am blown away by it!

But data systems produce, well, data! And I assume that data would become publicly available for all to use. So I'd expect to see it supporting FUD from both sides of the debate.

Hell, it can probably find my kid playing with firecrackers!
 

eohrnberger

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
44,184
Reaction score
28,794
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
So "ShotSpotter" data sows that gun violence is way, way beyond what gets reported.

This may be the best way to measure gun violence in America

Well, if you REALLY want to count the number of gunshots and compare that to gun crimes you might want to include the data from public and private ranges too where people practice, train and compete. If you think 165,500 gunshots over 62 municipalities in a year is a lot then you'd better sit down when you hear how many rounds are fired at just one range here in Tucson. At the Southeast Regional Park there are 30 tables open from 8-5 four days a week. On a Saturday or Sunday most, if not all, tables will be occupied all day and few shooters will go through less than 20 rounds while most will go through more than 100. A conservative estimate would be that over 20,000 rounds are fired just in one day which would work out to more than 4,000,000 a year just at that range.

There's a reason that we measure crimes by using crime statistics. It's because not every gunshot constitutes a crime.

Well, hell. I'm rather new the to firearms enthusiast activities, and I'm already contributed some 1,500 rounds down range.
 

Lutherf

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
39,806
Reaction score
46,370
Location
Tucson, AZ
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I never heard of it, and am blown away by it!

But data systems produce, well, data! And I assume that data would become publicly available for all to use. So I'd expect to see it supporting FUD from both sides of the debate.

Hell, it can probably find my kid playing with firecrackers!

The Boomerang system has been around for more than a decade and ShotSpotter is, apparently, a comparable civilian focused system. It can help LE quite a bit in situations like tracking a drive by shooting spree but it can't detect lawful vs unlawful discharges. It's also an "after the fact" system that can't stop a shooting.
 

Crimefree

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
10,476
Reaction score
2,606
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
So "ShotSpotter" data sows that gun violence is way, way beyond what gets reported.

This may be the best way to measure gun violence in America

Well, if you REALLY want to count the number of gunshots and compare that to gun crimes you might want to include the data from public and private ranges too where people practice, train and compete. If you think 165,500 gunshots over 62 municipalities in a year is a lot then you'd better sit down when you hear how many rounds are fired at just one range here in Tucson. At the Southeast Regional Park there are 30 tables open from 8-5 four days a week. On a Saturday or Sunday most, if not all, tables will be occupied all day and few shooters will go through less than 20 rounds while most will go through more than 100. A conservative estimate would be that over 20,000 rounds are fired just in one day which would work out to more than 4,000,000 a year just at that range.

There's a reason that we measure crimes by using crime statistics. It's because not every gunshot constitutes a crime.

Another fruitless, useless gun intervention. When are these cretins going to learn they should be spending the money on crime fighting and fixing the SOCIAL problems. I guess it will have to wait for somebody to tell the public how these idiot officials are wasting their money and increasing their risk Giving criminals a joy ride while they play with useless expensive toys that do nothing to help.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
259,753
Reaction score
79,536
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Some people would LIKE to make every gunshot a crime...

well a poster on this board claimed that anyone who buys a firearm demonstrates "criminal intent"
 

Chomsky

Social Democrat
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2015
Messages
55,782
Reaction score
42,993
Location
Third Coast
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
How in the hell do they tell lawful gunfire from unlawful?
No idea.

But in some cities it's against the law to fire a gun w/i city limits.

No idea if that's changed over the years, but it was that way when I was paying attention to these things.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
259,753
Reaction score
79,536
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
No idea.

But in some cities it's against the law to fire a gun w/i city limits.

No idea if that's changed over the years, but it was that way when I was paying attention to these things.

that's a good point. unless you are in reasonable fear of imminent harm or death, the only time you can discharge a firearm in city limits is in an indoor shooting range where the rounds have no possibility of exiting the enclosed space. 22 birdshot rounds might be an exception (as it was in Cincinnati for pigeon control in some parts of downtown cincinnati. none of those indoor ranges would resonate to the point that they could be tracked by any sort of shot triangulation device because most cities require indoor ranges to have noise abatement so as not to annoy neighboring residences or businesses
 

LaMidRighter

Klattu Verata Nicto
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
30,534
Reaction score
10,682
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
well a poster on this board claimed that anyone who buys a firearm demonstrates "criminal intent"
I am surprised that assertion isn't considered either hate speech or defamation considering it is a direct attack on a person's character.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
259,753
Reaction score
79,536
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I am surprised that assertion isn't considered either hate speech or defamation considering it is a direct attack on a person's character.

he was making the claim about ANYONE who legally buys a gun
 

LaMidRighter

Klattu Verata Nicto
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
30,534
Reaction score
10,682
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
he was making the claim about ANYONE who legally buys a gun
Exactly, and I saw it myself in action. That right there is a false claim of criminal intent, which any sane person knows is a horrible statement. It's not just here though, there are a lot of antis that make that same claim to try to advance gun control and if it were directed at an individual rather than a group those organizations would be due to defend a major defamation suit.
 

Crimefree

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
10,476
Reaction score
2,606
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I am surprised that assertion isn't considered either hate speech or defamation considering it is a direct attack on a person's character.

It would seem that most authorities cannot see that this is what is known as dehumanisation. It is a very important step when you are instilling hate and fear so that your target can be "removed" by them without the slightest twinge of moral conscious. Yes removed means exactly that. No democide or genocide is without it.

One such gun control organisation official, a man of the cloth put it this way. Firearm owners are but a trigger pull away from murder.
 

Crimefree

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
10,476
Reaction score
2,606
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
he was making the claim about ANYONE who legally buys a gun

As I said in propaganda terms dehumanisation if taken with the obvious campaign of instilling hate and fear of a group.
 
Top Bottom