DOJ released a report this week that shows Gun crime is on the decrease and gun ownership is on the increase.The Media and its blatant lies are on the ropes,I say we go for the Knockout punch and call all media Outlets and demand they report on this DOJ Document and the Truth it carries,It would give me great pleasure to see the media eat Crow and it would be vindication for all the Legal law abiding gun owners out there. its Just a Thought, What say you all?  

Views: 34

Comment by Robin on May 8, 2013 at 7:56am

DOJ Report: Gun Homicides Declined 39 Percent from 1993 to 2011 (VIDEO)

In the national debate over reforming the nation’s gun laws, one critical component is often missing: the facts. In particular, the metrics with respect to gun-related crime.

If we are to take President Barack Obama at his word, gun violence is an “epidemic” in this country. But if one stops and examines the actual numbers, would he/she reach the same conclusion? Is gun-related crime widespread and out of control in the U.S.?

To help answer those questions, one should consult a recent report published by the Department of Justice, entitled “Firearm Violence, 1993-2011.“ At its core, the report is an unbiased statistical analysis of the number and rate of fatal and nonfatal firearm violence between those years.

So, what were the central findings of the report?

Well, from 1993 to 2011, firearm-related homicides declined 39 percent while nonfatal firearm crimes (aggravated assault, robbery and sex crimes) declined 69 percent. In terms of the actual numbers, in 1993 there were 18,253 gun-related homicides. In 2011, that number had fallen to 11,101. With respect to nonfatal firearm crimes, there were 1.5 million victimizations in 1993. By 2011, that metric had plummeted to 467,300.

Pew: Homicide Rate Per 100,000 People

Another way to look at the decline in fatal and nonfatal gun crime is its prevalence per 100,000 people. So, for example, in 2010 there were 3.6 gun homicides per 100,000 people as opposed to 7.0 per 100,000 people in 1993. For nonfatal gun crime, there were 181.5 crime victimizations per 100,000 people in 2011 versus 725.3 per 100,000 in 1993. Clearly, a big drop.

At a glance, here are the highlights:

-Firearm-related homicides declined 39%, from 18,253 in 1993 to 11,101 in 2011.

-Nonfatal firearm crimes declined 69%, from 1.5 million victimizations in 1993 to 467,300 victimizations in 2011.

-Firearm violence accounted for about 70% of all homicides and less than 10% of all nonfatal violent crime from 1993 to 2011.

-From 1993 to 2011, about 70% to 80% of firearm homicides and 90% of nonfatal firearm victimizations were committed with a handgun.

-Males, blacks, and persons ages 18 to 24 had the highest rates of firearm homicide from 1993 to 2010.

-About 61% of nonfatal firearm violence was reported to the police in 2007-11.

Pew Research Center conducted its own analysis of the data, drawing similar conclusions, i.e. all gun crime is strikingly lower than it was in the mid-1990s.

However, Pew also surveyed Americans this spring to see how aware they were of the reduction in gun crime. According to Pew’s survey, more than half of respondents (56 percent) believe that gun crime is higher than it was 20 years ago. Twenty-six percent said it stayed the same and only 12 percent were correct, noting that gun crime had actually dropped over the past two decades (6 percent didn’t respond to the question).

Pew Researchers did not have an explanation to explain why the public was so in the dark about the decline in crime. “It’s hard to know what’s going on there,” said D’Vera Cohn, senior writer at the Pew Research Center.

Moreover, Pew did not identify a single reason to explain why firearm-related violence has dropped so precipitously. Instead, researches cited several popular theories, including: the offspring of the outsized baby boom generation, which allegedly drove up much of the crime in the 1960 and 1970s, has grown up; the legalization of abortion combined with an increased access to birth control; reductions in exposure to lead in gasoline and paint, which is said to be associated with violent behavior, among others.

The impact that gun ownership has had on crime was only obliquely addressed, with Pew pointing out that the “number of firearms available for sale to or possessed by U.S. civilians (about 310 million in 2009, according to the Congressional Research Service) has grown in recent years, and the 2009 per capita rate of one person per gun had roughly doubled since 1968. It is not clear, though, how many U.S. households own guns or whether that share has changed over time.”

What is clear, however, is that the number of states that have “shall-issue” concealed carry laws has grown over that same time span, as illustrated by the chart below (a fact that wasn’t explicitly mentioned in either report):

Concealed Carry Expansion

Another interesting point is that the DOJ report cited a 2004 study that found “among state prison inmates who possessed a gun at the time of the offense, fewer than two percent bought their firearm at a flea market or gun show. About 10 percent of state prison inmates said they purchased it from a retail store or pawnshop, 37 percent obtained it from family or friends, and another 40 percent obtained it from an illegal source.”

In other words, the “gun-show loophole” does not appear to be the problem that gun control advocates have played it out to be.

LA Times Poll

Moving forward, as the nation continues to debate federal and state restrictions on gun ownership it would behoove all parties involved in the discussion to take a look at these facts and figures. If they did, they might rethink the way they characterize the current state of affairs.

Bottom line: it’s pretty evident to any rational individual that the prevalence of guns in the U.S. does not have a statistically significant impact on gun-related crime rates. Simply put, more guns does not mean more gun crime.

http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2013/05/doj-report-gun-homicid...

Comment by Jerseygal on May 10, 2013 at 9:54pm

Wow, more news and facts that just do not fit the left's narrative!  That 39% is one heck of a drop! Now, if unemployment could drop like that, we'd have a REAL recovery underway!

Comment

You need to be a member of Fundamental Refounding to add comments!

Join Fundamental Refounding

Attention:

 

 

Please view our mission, policy, and legal disclaimer to learn about us by visiting the main menu.  Thank you.

PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION!

AGENDA 21/2030

http://bit.ly/2mqIVmH 

CONTACT CONGRESS!

Let your voice be counted!

House:  http://1.usa.gov/mHZjgo

Senate:  http://1.usa.gov/3UAs

 

 

PLEASE PRAY FOR OUR NATION.

 

 

national debt

Founders' Corner

Latest Activity

JeansBrother replied to Robin's discussion FCC Votes to Repeal Obama's Net Neutrality Regulations
"All in all, the government has shown little competent ability to regulate water, natural gas,…"
yesterday
Robin posted a discussion

FCC Votes to Repeal Obama's Net Neutrality Regulations

“The internet is the greatest free market success story in history,” FCC Chairman Ajat Pai said in…See More
yesterday
Griswold liked Jodi180's discussion Peter Stzrok: 'This is horribly wrong'
Tuesday
Griswold liked Fundamental Refounding's discussion Judge Recuses in Michael Flynn case. Flynn’s sentencing judge mysteriously recuses w/out explanation, replaced with a Clinton appointee.
Tuesday
JeansBrother replied to Jodi180's discussion Peter Stzrok: 'This is horribly wrong'
"Great find!  Thanks for sharing!"
Monday
JeansBrother replied to Fundamental Refounding's discussion Judge Recuses in Michael Flynn case. Flynn’s sentencing judge mysteriously recuses w/out explanation, replaced with a Clinton appointee.
"Great find! Absolutely.  Now we know that Contreras and other FISA judges are part of the…"
Monday
Jodi180 replied to Jodi180's discussion Peter Stzrok: 'This is horribly wrong'
"Speaking of FISA abuse!.... Judge Who Presided Over Michael Flynn’s Case and Recused Himself…"
Monday
Jodi180 replied to Fundamental Refounding's discussion Judge Recuses in Michael Flynn case. Flynn’s sentencing judge mysteriously recuses w/out explanation, replaced with a Clinton appointee.
"No need to wonder, JB: Judge Who Presided Over Michael Flynn’s Case and Recused Himself…"
Monday
JeansBrother replied to Jodi180's discussion Peter Stzrok: 'This is horribly wrong'
"This is interesting.  I assume the points made are true when certain conditions are met. …"
Dec 9
Robin replied to Jodi180's discussion Peter Stzrok: 'This is horribly wrong'
"From my experience at my job, none of what Mueller has done will hold up in court! NONE of…"
Dec 9
Robin replied to Jodi180's discussion Peter Stzrok: 'This is horribly wrong'
"Byron York: Dossier author was in contact with Obama Justice Department It's been 10 months…"
Dec 9
Robin replied to Jodi180's discussion Peter Stzrok: 'This is horribly wrong'
"Thanks, Jodi! No, he wasn't our guy but with the way he is, it may have been best for his win.…"
Dec 9
Robin replied to Jodi180's discussion Peter Stzrok: 'This is horribly wrong'
"OMG Jodi. The hubris of these people. They all thought the Hildabeast was going to win hands down…"
Dec 9
Jodi180 replied to Jodi180's discussion Peter Stzrok: 'This is horribly wrong'
"Speaking of horribly wrong... An attorney for special counsel Robert Mueller attended Hillary…"
Dec 9
Jodi180 replied to Jodi180's discussion Peter Stzrok: 'This is horribly wrong'
"Good point, Robin.  Trump wasn't our guy, but he may just be the right guy for these…"
Dec 9
JeansBrother replied to Susan Taylor's discussion Trump Pulls Out of UN Global Compact on Migration
"That will be the next project after draining the swamp."
Dec 9

TRAFFIC



© 2017   Fundamental Refounding.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service