DKSuddeth
Member
Not like they'll print this, but you have to try.
Cut down on gun crime?
Focus on the criminal, not the weapon.
I say 'weapon' because not all crime is committed with a gun, in fact, I will show you that almost half of all non-suicide deaths are committed with something OTHER than a firearm.
Mayor Menino said that there were 73 homicides last year in Boston, the highest number in a decade, and that shootings were up so far this year. He described gun violence as an epidemic fueled by a "code of silence" among fearful residents, the return of former inmates to their neighborhoods and a growing phenomenon of "community guns" used by multiple criminals.
Mr. Menino, if you want to cut down on homicides, let your residents arm themselves. Credible studies show that criminals are more afraid of being shot by their victim than they are of getting caught by the police. They are also apt to reconsider targeting an individual if they think that individual might be armed. Try capitalizing on that fear. You just might see your homicide rate drop.
You complain about a 'code of silence' yet refuse to allow those 'fearful residents' the means to protect themselves, thus breaking that 'code of silence'. When citizens feel that they can protect themselves against criminals, they will speak up, which will HELP law enforcement and the judicial system put these criminals away for long periods of time.
The return of inmates to their neighborhoods can be easily stopped by keeping these thugs behind bars, where they belong. If the person who's been convicted of a crime can't be trusted in society, armed or not, they don't belong in society.
You can remove 'community guns' by removing the community criminals. After all, guns can't commit a crime unless they are in a criminals hands.
To all the mayors at this 'summit', try focusing on the things that matter. For instance, a CDC statistic of 30,000 gun related deaths is meaningless unless you break it down. I gather that you don't break it down correctly or people probably wouldn't take you seriously, like detailing that of those 30,000 gun deaths annually, almost half of them are suicides. Anyone with a lick of common sense and intelligence is going to know that you will not be able to stop anyone who is intent on taking their life simply by limiting their access to a firearm.
Now, can we move on to some more meaningful numbers?
The FBI records approximately 16,137 murders in the US for 2004. 666 of these were 'justifiable', or the death of a felon by law enforcement or private citizens. 604 of those were by firearms. Now, of the approximately 14,121 murders and non-negligent homicides, 9,326 of these were committed by someone with some sort of firearm. That leaves 4795 murders and non-negligent homicides by other means. These means include knives, blunt weapons, and the perpetrators own hands and feet as well. Now, it's difficult to find accurate numbers on how many of these are gang/drug related, but the number is somewhere close to 3,000. How many of those 10,000 remaining people would be alive today if they had easy access to a defensive firearm?
Guns are neither good nor evil, it is just a matter of who uses it and how.
The FBI also reports approximately 94,635 forcible rapes for 2004. There were approximately 401,326 robberies in the US for 2004. There were approximately 854,911 aggravated assaults for 2004. How many of these could have been prevented by law abiding citizens allowed to protect themselves with a gun IF there weren't strict laws that often prevent these citizens from owning one?
Now, before any Law enforcement types start protesting about 'officer safety' because more people will have guns, lets take a look at some other numbers for 2004. As I said above, 14,121 private citizens were murdered in 2004. There were 57 non-federal police officers murdered in 2004. 14,121 to 57........who do we need to be looking out for again? Don't get me wrong, I don't want police officers to be murdered either, but their lives are not worth any more OR less than mine or John Q. Public in Boston. If a gun is a good self defense weapon for a police officer, I would think it's a good self defense weapon for a private citizen also.
According to the Associated Press, there seems to be a domestic migration out of major cities like New York City, Chicago, and Los Angeles. These are cities with extremely strict gun laws. Maybe people are getting tired of not being able to exercise their right to self defense and are moving out. If that is the case, these anti-gun cities better start preparing for smaller budgets in the future.
DKSuddeth
