Felons, Feinstein and Facts: How Criminals Get and Use Their Guns

guns and criminals sources and uses

courtesy US Dept of Justice

The U.S. Department of Justice just published the results of an interesting survey. The Bureau of Justice Statistics polled state and federal prisoners in 2016 asking how they acquired and used firearms in the commission of the crime(s) for which they were convicted. This may not be exciting to read, but I promise the data is interesting.

Check out the full report here.

guns criminals sources uses

courtesy US Dept of Justice

Use of firearms by inmates

When inmates were asked if they had acquired a firearm with the intent of using it in a crime, 19.7% said yes and 80.3% said no. This means that most inmates did not seek out a gun to commit the crime for which they were convicted, they already owned it.

Of federal inmates, 25.9% said they used a firearm while committing their crime(s). An amazing 68% of state inmates used a firearm.

To be clear the survey considers merely showing the firearm as “using” it. The dramatic difference between the state and federal stats is interesting. That’s likely has to do with the types of crimes prosecuted at the federal level. Most assaults, robberies, rapes and murders are handled on the local level.

Here’s how the convicts’ firearm was used in state vs. federal crimes:

Discharged: 46.5% / 11.9%
Killed victim: 27.1% / 4.1%
Injured/shot victim, but did not kill victim: 12.4% / 2.2%
Discharged firearm, but did not shoot anyone: 7.0% / 5.6%
Did not discharge: 21.5% / 14.0%

The estimated number of prisoners who possessed a firearm (with valid data): 245,400 state, 32,900 federal.

Type of Firearm used

Let’s look at the kinds of firearms possessed/used by almost 1.4 million state and federal prisoners surveyed:

Handgun: 18.4% / 11.2%
Rifle: 1.5% / .8%
Shotgun: 1.6% / 1.1%
No firearm used: 79.2% / 87.2%

About 0.1% of state prisoners and 0.2% of federal prisoners reported another type of firearm or did not report enough information to specify the type of firearm. The important stat here is that 87.2% of the inmates surveyed didn’t use a gun at all.

Type of crime committed when a firearm was used

The homicide stat is worth noting: 35.9% of murderers possessed a gun when they killed their victim, but only 25.3% of murderers used a gun.

Type of crime: percent that possessed a firearm vs. percent that used a firearm

Total: 20.0% / 5.0%

Violent:  36.2% / 25.3%
Homicide: 35.9% / 28.4%
Rape/sexual: na / na
Robbery: 46.3% / 32.1%
Assault: 29.0% / 18.1%
Other violent: 34.1% / n/a

Property: 2.6% / na
Burglary: na – na
Other property: 2.4% – na

Drug 12.3% – 0.6%
Trafficking 12.9% – 0.7%
Possession: na – na
Other/unspecified: drug na – na

Percent of Federal prisoners who possessed a firearm during the offense by demographics

The citizenship info is interesting here. Non-US citizens are significantly less likely to be in possession of a firearm than US citizens.

Gender of those who possessed a firearm

Male: 20.9%
Female: 6.6%

Ethnicity of those who possessed a firearm

White: 16.6%
Black: 29.2%
Hispanic: 12.6%
American Indian/Alaska Native: 23.8%
Two or more races: 29.3%

Age at time of survey

18–24: 30.1%
25–34: 27.4%
35–44: 19.0%
45–54:  14.1%
55 or older: 12.2%

Marital status

Married: 14.4%
Widowed/widower: 21.7
Separated: 12.8
Divorced: 15.2
Never married: 24.6

Education

Less than high school: 22.7%
High school graduate: 19.4%
Some college: 18.8%
College degree or more: 6.3%

Citizenship

U.S. citizen: 24.2%
Non-U.S. citizen: 7.2%

Where inmates acquire firearms

These stats are state and federal figures combined. Gun shows — yes, the dreaded “gun show loophole” — account for only 0.8% of purchases. And many/most/all of those may have included a background check. That’s a shockingly low figure. As you would probably guess, most inmates acquired their gun illegally.

Purchased/traded at retail source: 10.1%

Gun shop/store: 7.5%
Pawn shop: 1.6%
Flea market: 0.4%
Gun show: 0.8%

Obtained from individual: 25.3%

Purchased/traded from family/friend: 8.0%
Rented/borrowed from family/friend: 6.5%
Gift/purchased for prisoner: 10.8%

Off the street/underground market:  43.2%

Theft: 6.4%

From burglary: 1.5%
From retail source: 0.2%
From family/friend: 1.6%
Unspecified theft: 3.1%

Other sources: 17.4%

Found at location of crime/victim: 6.9%
Brought by someone else: 4.6%
Other: 5.9%

Multiple sources: 2.5%

From the study:

Prisoners who reported that they had purchased a firearm from a licensed firearm dealer at a retail source were further asked whether they bought the firearm under their own name and whether they knew a background check was conducted. Among those who had possessed a firearm during the offense for which they were imprisoned, 7% of state and 8% of federal prisoners had purchased it under their own name from a licensed firearm dealer at a retail source, while approximately 1% of state and 2% of federal prisoners had purchased a firearm from a licensed dealer at a retail source but did not purchase it under their own name.

So much for the effectiveness of “universal background checks.”

What can we learn from these figures? Not much that we didn’t already know or suspect. Sure, the widow/widower stat may be interesting, but this study doesn’t contain any Earth-shattering information.

We already knew that most criminals acquire their guns illegally. We already knew that rifles are used in crimes extremely rarely and most of the time when criminals fire their guns, it doesn’t result in a death.

The title of this post is Felons, Feinstein and Facts. You got your facts about felons, so what about Feinstein? Senator Diane Feinstein is the de facto leader of the federal civilian disarmament caucus. What will she do with these facts? Nothing.

Anti-gunners couldn’t care less about objective statistics like these. Rifles were possessed by a mere 1.5% of the 1.4 million inmates surveyed and a tiny .8% used them in the commission of their crimes. If you think that will affect her efforts to enact another “assault weapons” ban, think again.

comments

  1. avatar Geoff "Mess with the bull, get the horns" PR says:

    “If the laws we propose keep even one gun out of the hands of a criminal, it will be worth it.”

    How Leftist scum (seriously, are there any other type?) justify the destruction of specifically-numerated civil rights…

    1. avatar Vicrattlehead says:

      “If the laws we propose keep even one gun out of the hands of a criminal, it will be worth it.”

      Well then, she should be satisfied because looking at the stats listed (guns used in crimes and types used), ONE GUN (at best) is what I would guestimate all the restrictions they’re wanting to impose would keep out if the hands of a violent criminal. Of course, that’s at the cost of stomping on the rights of literally MILLIONS of lawful gun owners.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Don’t forget the hundreds of millions of future gun owners.

    2. avatar Dude says:

      “If the barriers we propose keep even one criminal illegal alien out of our country…”
      Funny how the gun law rhetoric doesn’t translate to immigration rhetoric.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “Funny how the gun law rhetoric doesn’t translate to immigration rhetoric.”

        No irony at all. “They” don’t want citizens to have guns, but “they” do want an unending supply of government-dependent Campesinos to have the vote.

    3. avatar Yogi says:

      So, by your idiotic logic, we should ban cars cigarettes, booze, knives, forks, food (Mama Cass chocked on something she ate) as well. All of these things kill thousands every year. We have already banned a multitude of drugs that no longer kill anybody, oh I forgot, the drugs are still killing folks. So more bans everyone will live, RIGHT? Rather you, and all of your ilk, like it living cause death! Get over it and shut up.

  2. avatar Mark N. says:

    Feinstein is firmly and irrevocably convinced that more guns means more gun violence; therefore the statistics are irrelevant until everyone is disarmed.

    1. avatar Geoff "Mess with the bull, get the horns" PR says:

      …and she *knows* that’s a lie.

      That is what is so infuriating about Leftist scum…

    2. avatar jomama says:

      fineswine has a cc……….if we can stop 1 illegal alien from killing an American citizen than a wall is worth it

    3. avatar jram01 says:

      Feinstein not interested in those who have purchased firearms legally. What she means is keep illegal guns out of the hands of those with criminal records. The question is how? As for background checks. They should be more intense and exacting. The way they stand now, is that just about anyone can lie regarding most of the questions asked. There should even be more restrictions at gun shows. Many of the firearms buyers can get around not even going through a background check and walk out of the show with their firearm(s) in their hands. Start there and see the reduction in illegal firearms.

      jram01

      1. avatar Craig says:

        You’ve never heard of straw-purchase have you??

        1. avatar jram01 says:

          What’ya think I’m talking about. Get rid of the 4473. Gotta change the Constitutional Law.

          jram01

      2. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Why don’t you check your facts by running right down to your local gun store and lying on every question of the 4473? Then you can report back your findings in a few years when you get out of jail? If you think our laws are so easily broken, why advocate more laws? Your post is idiotic, try some thinking!

      3. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Oh, and by the way, we don’t care about “illegal firearms”, (in fact, if you read 2A you discover there is no such thing!), let’s see her propose something which might reduce CRIME!!

      4. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

        You’re buying into and perpetuating that tired old, discredited “gun show loophole” myth by bruiting about the alleged lack of background checks. I bet you’ve never even been to a gun show. The fact is that EVERY single last federal law that exists and is in force outside of a gun show, also exists and is in force inside of a gun show. There are no exceptions; there are no special circumstances.

        Federal firearms license (FFL) holders pay to be able to set up a sales table at gun shows. That’s how the organizers who rented the facility make their money. Those FFLs, regardless whether they sell at a gun show, back at their gun shop, or across their kitchen table, are legally obligated to conduct a NICS federal background check. Period.

        Now, private gun sales, meaning those made between a private individua selling a firearm from his or her own personal collection and not in the course of regularly selling of firearms as a business, are not federally obligated to conduct a background check. In fact, they’re legally BARRED from doing so, because as a non-holder of an FFL, they don’t have access to the NICS system.

        Moreover, selling firearms as a business, without holding a federal license to do so, is a serious crime. You do see the occasional individual walking around a gun show with a gun or two to sell. They test out tge dealers fir pricing first, buy are open to a private sale, too. The thing is, it costs them an entrance fee like everyone else to enter the gun show. So that cuts into your money if you only have one or two guns to sell, as any private seller, non-FFL holder would. So tgese private sales are uncommon atvgun shows, but nit unheard of.

        Still, that same private transaction could legally take place outside in the parking lot without a background check, because the laws are the same. It’s still illegal to sell to someone whom you know or have reason to believe is barred from possessing a gun. Nothing changes inside or outside of a gun show. In fact, as a non-FFL wandering around a gun show, you’re apt to attract the attention of on duty police and undercover ATF agents lurking about. It’s probably the worst place to conduct an illegal firearms transaction.

        People perpetuate the “gun show loophole” myth primarily out of ignorance of the facts, like you do. However, others who do so knowing that it’s a myth, but exploiting others’ ignorance to try to trick them into supporting complete bans of private sales altogether. Also like you.

        1. avatar jram01 says:

          Get with it man. Not talking about the National Gun Shows (which are about 99%OK). It’s the local gun shows where many illegal transactions occur.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          ” It’s the local gun shows where many illegal transactions occur.”

          Citation, please.

          BTW, a “loophole” is not an intentional, specified element of a law.

        3. avatar Indiana Tom says:

          Everybody that sells at those gun shows are FFLs and they have to do background checks. Gun show loop hole is bullshit.
          Yeah, you might find a couple guys who are not FFL, but they usually sell old junk.

  3. avatar m. says:

    congress-t**ts are not concerned about dealing with criminals (their constituents), they are after the law-abiding – who do not vote for them. where’s the surprise?

    1. avatar Broke_It says:

      As a connoisseur of 4 letter words I gotta ask, what is this t word you keep self censoring? Is it “twat”? It’s twat isn’t it?

      1. avatar Mad Max says:

        Twit would work for both sexes of
        Congress critters.

        1. avatar Broke_It says:

          So would twat. I’ve known plenty of twats in both sexes. As well as pricks. It’s 2018, the genitals don’t make the insult. The behavior does.

        2. avatar Indiana Tom says:

          Well, we are all gender fluid now and can use any toilet we want so genitals do not matter.

        3. avatar Jeremy S. says:

          I feel like my genitals matter.

      2. avatar Bloving says:

        I was thinking “tarts” or “toots”.
        🤠

  4. avatar Michael Stilinovich says:

    What are you trying to do here ? Give us facts. Surely they have nothing to do with logic when it is discussed by the intelligence of our beloved Democratic party.

    1. avatar Flying Fish says:

      I thought it was all supposed to be about common sense responsible gun ownership. Shit, you ruined it all with this article. Too bad the only people reading it are the ones not surprised by the con-clusions.

  5. avatar Yepnope says:

    So criminals have no disregard for firearms laws? Shocking

  6. avatar possum says:

    When criminals were asked, Do you always tell the truth? 100℅ of them said yes.

    1. avatar Red in CO says:

      They’re already locked up, so there’s very little reason to lie. Without a doubt some do for whatever reason, but I’m inclined to believe the sentiment of the survey, if not the exact numbers

      1. avatar possum says:

        Nope, truth mabey convict to convict, everybody else a lie. Din du ain’t going to admit to nothing,

    2. avatar joefoam says:

      They also claimed to be innocent as well. Any survey using criminals is suspect, however I think this one covers the gist of things. Young black men are acquiring guns on the black market and killing each other. Universal background checks will do nothing to stop or even slow down this activity. It’s all feel good politics that democrats and RINOs will use to pander for votes. Facts and statistics have no chance against emotions.

  7. avatar Silentbrick says:

    By their logic, if we execute everyone in prison, if it saves just one life, we should do it.

    1. avatar Save One Life and Throw the Baby out with the Bath Water says:

      I was tempted to extend your logic to the entire Demoncratic Party.

      1. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

        Heavens to Betsy. What a dreadful idea.

  8. avatar NORDNEG says:

    Feinstein’s own dem party was giving guns to criminal’s, FAST & FURIOUS ring a bell, Obummer & Erick Holder was responsible for that little scandal,,, main stream media didn’t want to follow up on that one… wonder why?

    1. avatar TheUnspoken says:

      I wonder how many of these students have ever fired a real gun…

      If it detects you are pointing it at a person or crowd you get 1 shot every 20 seconds… so they said that way you can still use it for self defense purposes! Nice of them to include that feature! Except Geo-fenced gun free zones, you can’t shoot it at all. So no self defense allowed in a school, even at 20 s intervals.

      I hope it has a bayonet lug, you will need something pointy after the first shot doesn’t stop the perp or if you miss.

      1. avatar калифорния! says:

        That is why I have a Soviet SKS with bayonet on layaway. Go ahead, ban the ammo too! Ready for SHTF. A Soviet Rifle that is California compliant, go figure, coincidence? привет товарищ, из советской республики калифорния!

        1. avatar Indiana Tom says:

          But why did the Orthodox missionaries have to invent a Cyrillic Alphabet for the Russians? The Poles got along just fine with a Latin Alphabet. Life would be a bit easier.

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Kids are allowed and expected to be inexperienced and naïve. Good exercise to sharpen actual abilities to solve problems, later they may learn how to identify problems more adroitly.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Such as, lock the shooter up forever, before he ever obtains a gun of any description.

  9. avatar James A. "Jim" Farmer says:

    But don’t tell this to these treasonous anti-gun socialist Bolshevik legislators in
    Salem , Oregon!

  10. avatar Chip in ' says:

    Wow! It’s almost as if the firearm has no fault for the crime or criminal. Who would have thought that all those criminals *didn’t* seek out a firearm from a gun show or the internet before committing those crimes? And all that time and effort that the anti-gun crowd has been focusing on gun shows and internet sales is…. what… wasted now?

  11. avatar Juice says:

    I’m not surprised most of them owned the gun before using it for a crime. Criminals want to protect themselves, too.

    1. avatar joefoam says:

      If you are going to get involved in gangs and/or the drug trade you’d better arm yourself. Anywhere there are drugs and money is not a gun free zone and your life is at risk.

  12. avatar Ronnie says:

    Do most gun carrying criminals see themselves as Blue or Red party people?

  13. avatar Unrepentant Libertarian says:

    Interesting that the folks in power want to disarm everyone to protect the criminal element. If this is not true than they would pay attention to reports like this and not pretend that they don’t exist. Instead they will do everything to disarm the citizens while knowing that it does nothing to effect the criminal element! Makes one think that they worship Satan.

    1. avatar Indiana Tom says:

      Agree.
      Well, they are paving the way for Satanic activities, that is for sure.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “Well, they are paving the way for Satanic activities, that is for sure.”

        It has to get extremely bad before the restoration.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Happily, satanic activities or any other such nonsense are a waste of everyone’s time.

        2. avatar Indiana Tom says:

          Not when the idiots think globally and act locally.

        3. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Not when the idiots think globally and act locally.”

          All of which is integral to things getting extremely bad before the restoration.

  14. avatar Jake Texas says:

    This gun grabbers socialists aren’t out to protect you from gun violence. Their out to disarm the citizens so we can’t fight back against the tyranny that would be forced on us! Look what they’ve done in the country in South America? Venezuela? Disarmed and starving. So arm up, practice and be ready to take on tyranny! Be prepared and vigilant.

    1. avatar Mad Max says:

      The Democrats are the party of crooks, cronies, criminals, and Communists and are against law-abiding, hard-working, tax-paying, Americans.

  15. avatar Truckman says:

    The democrats do not care about facts there only concern is that we do what they tell us to do not like they do in other words we cannot have a border wall while a lot of them live in Gated communities or walled compounds and we cannot have guns while they are protected by armed guards so let’s just think what is going on I think they should all should lose their jobs and all benefits

  16. avatar bushkill ridgerunner says:

    Why isn’t this traitorous chicom loving bitch in jail or hung for treason? A chinese spy driving her around for years, and our gov officials are OK with it ?

  17. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

    When I saw the title Felon,Feinswine ,how appropriate.

  18. avatar Sam I Am says:

    To borrow from the Trumpmeister, “UBC is not the only tool that can be used to reduce gun violence. It is an important tool, but not the entire toolbox. We need technology, more agents to monitor gun sales, FFL compliance, more prosecutors and judges to process real and attempted straw purchases, more education on how destructive guns are to the community, more control over ammunition and accessories that make guns more efficient at killing. UBC is just one of many avenues we need to pursue to stop the humanitarian crisis bordering on national suicide.”

  19. avatar m. says:

    fartstain, optional-kotex, pees-loosely, & toilet-waters can all count up to 22 if they take off their bras and shoes

  20. avatar Sam I Am says:

    Many commenters here are all about somehow guns protect us from a government bent on turning the nation into one gigantic concentration camp. But where is the evidence for that? Does it truly follow that oppressive gun control will lead us into a nation of slaves?

    Look around. Most of Western Europe is made of governments that strictly limit gun ownership by private citizens. Where are the concentration camps? Europe does prove that strict gun control does not lead to Gulags and gas chambers. Why is it that strict gun control will not lead to a more European model, where government is not terrorizing the public; and stop? Do we suspect that European governments are just bidding their time until they can make their nations resemble Venezuela?

    The overwhelming majority of nations around the world do not disarm the public, then throw all government opposition into prisons. There are no mass roundups of non-conformists. Such situations do exist, but they are not the norm for all 168 nations of the UN. There are good reasons for personal possession of firearms, but we really don’t have a strong case that our government is poised to eliminate all vestiges and personnel dedicated to limited government and rule of law.

    1. avatar Chip in Florida says:

      “… don’t have a strong case that our government is poised to eliminate all vestiges and personnel dedicated to limited government and rule of law.”

      True. But if the government were to try and head that way and we were unarmed we wouldn’t be able to even try and stop it.

      And the countries and governments that DID eliminate all vestiges of limited government ideals didn’t start off as oppressive regimes, they started off by convinceing everyone that it was all ok and they would never turn on their own citizens. And they were nice places right up until they weren’t.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        Your remarks seem to be on the order of, “wudda, shudds, cudda, maybe, might, somehow, someday, someway do harm, so let’s take the guns now.”

        If you go back to WW1 (a hundred years), we see only one Western European Nation establishing concentration camps. Wonder why that is? Are we not trying to use a Black Swan event to convince ourselves that personal firearms hold a modern government in check? What is holding the modern European nations is check?

        In the beginning, the founders has ample reason to think our government could attempt to overturn the rule of law, and install a monarch. They also has reason, as proven in 1812) to believe the British would again try to re-capture their colonies. But after 1812, where was the threat that the central government would try to establish a dictatorial government through armed force? And who was to be that dictator?

        Promoting self-defense as reason to ensure private ownership of guns is a difficult enough sell. Continuing to push the idea that an armed citizenry stands ready to overthrow our government actually hurts us. Have you not seen the claims that POTG represent a group of armed insurrectionists? People look around at their circumstance, and their experience. Nowhere are there indications a new Stalin, and NKVD are upon us, or even on the horizon. What is the political value of focusing on a firefly event when we cannot even get that vast majority of voters to believe they need, or should allow others, the ability to defend themselves from deadly attack.

        We need concentration of force, not a full horizon of potential usurpation of rights and liberties. The whole “well regulated militia” thing should be retired until we have the majority of voters convinced they need self-protection. Proclaiming that “the people” need to be able to cast off a rogue government is a distraction that makes POTG appear unserious, and even dangerous.

        1. avatar Albert Witte says:

          You give up your gun(s), I’ll keep mine, thank you! If you need help, then I guess I’ll come and protect you ONCE! After that you are on your own!!

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “You give up your gun(s), I’ll keep mine, thank you!”

          Irrelevant comment.

          To help out, my question/point was that leaning on revolution as a reason to advocate/rally for private ownership of guns may be not only a waste, but detrimental. People can understand self-defense because they watch the news everyday. They may not easily agree that defending oneself is necessary, but they understand it on some level. People do not see any evidence of government rounding up civilians who have committed no crime but opposition to the dominant political ideology. They do not see concentration camps. They do not see martial law. They do not see shops and homes of deplorables being confiscated or destroyed. The defense of the nation from rogue government is simply unimaginable. So, why try to use that argument, versus focusing on the visible threat?

          Re-thinking tactics for protecting the Second Amendment has nothing to do with giving up guns.

    2. avatar Indiana Tom says:

      but we really don’t have a strong case that our government is poised to eliminate all vestiges and personnel dedicated to limited government and rule of law.
      From the sheenagians in State , Federal, and Local governments, we are well past that point.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “From the sheenagians in State , Federal, and Local governments, we are well past that point.”

        Not seeing the roundups of non-Leftists. Not seeing the concentration camps. Not seeing destruction of non-Leftist businesses and homes. Not seeing any yellow tags on clothing. Not seeing flying squads freely and frequently beating up on non-Leftists. Not seeing non-Leftists dragged from their homes (and their property confiscated). Not seeing non-Leftist books being burned at rallies.

        An invisible, theoretical threat does not move “the people” to action. But it does make strong 2A supporters look deranged.

        1. avatar Indiana Tom says:

          The wave is coming.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “The wave is coming.”

          You think it is coming here before it hits Europe?

          Why? Europe has a history of its people being ruled by governments. Wouldn’t “the wave” begin there? Yet, we do not see Western governments slaughtering their populace.

    3. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Yeah! I mean, let’s look at North Korea just for example. Normal people own zero guns, yet there is no necessity to lock them up in concentration camps, if they step one inch out of line they are publicly executed with an antiaircraft cannon, but there are no such camps! There is no food, and if you find some you’d better surrender it if you don’t feel like being a target aircraft today. But we would no longer have the politics of envy going on, if you envy any leaders we kill you. We should so envy them their peaceful utopia and attempt to emulate them in every way! Particularly the estimated 10,000,000 who have died of starvation in the past few decades. We could probably interview more tens of millions of German or Russian or Chinese people to see how they felt about the necessity of firearms ownership, if only they weren’t dead. Venezuela awaits interview as well, if you don’t mind a probability of dying. Somalia? Hey, we should go for it, I can guarantee everything will be fine, until it is not, and even then there is no reason to worry, there is not a damn thing you can do about it.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        Invalid comparison. Korea (either half) does not have a European culture. Nor does any other country (the Spanish culture was not imported into South and Central America, only the concept of “patron”).

        Your entire response ignores the proposition….there is no visible threat of the US government turning this nation into a gigantic gulag/concentration camp, so why make the remote possibility a focus of supporting the Second Amendment. Government tyranny is a component, of course, but not one that the vast majority of voters can conceptualize. So, why harp on something that is unimaginable to the vast majority of voters? Why not reduce that focus on the contingency, and concentrate on the utilitarian element of self-defense? That is something more people can at least “see” happening (though they disagree about the mitigation).

        The politics surrounding gun ownership is not an academic debate, where there are objective criteria that represent “right and wrong”. Speculating on a Black Swan event saps energy (and credibility) from our immediate threat – armed attack by a random person, or group of individuals.

        1. avatar Indiana Tom says:

          Korea (either half) does not have a European culture.
          Just because you have a European culture does not mean jack crap.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Just because you have a European culture does not mean jack crap.”

          Oh, but it does.

          Just where in Western Europe do you see governments imprisoning the public as a means to establish total dictatorship? Where are even the seeds of such?

          The point is, warning about some speculative event is not “selling” well to those dozen or so who remain “undecided” about the Second Amendment. Definitely not converting any anti-gunners. Why keep doing the same thing, expecting different results. Focus on things that might actually penetrate closed minds…like self-defense of family.

    4. avatar joefoam says:

      Sam I AM, check the map sir. Stalin disarmed the people, the gulags were created, and millions of dissidents were murdered. Castro disarmed the people and prisons were filled and tens of thousands were executed. Pol Pot disarmed the people and again millions were murdered or put into concentration camps. Saddam Hussein disarmed the people and put dissidents into concentration camps and tens of thousands were murdered. The Ayatollahs disarmed the people of Iran, thousands languish in prisons and more have been murdered. South Africans have been disarmed and now are being murdered wholesale. Need more examples of why you don’t trust the government and want to keep you weapons? Democide, the act of murder by the regime in power has been estimated to have killed over 250 million people. That should give anyone with any ability of cognitive thinking reason to question disarming oneself.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “Sam I AM, check the map sir.”

        @joefoam
        Check the comment, sir. I specifically called-out Western Europe. Not Russia, Sri Lanka, Mexico, Korea (2), or any other geographic segment.

        Please stay on point.

  21. avatar Pmac says:

    Don’t confuse them with the facts. They don’t care anyway.

  22. avatar FB says:

    This whole Feinstein banning behavior is an act of war. She is seeking absolute disarmament.
    Be prepared for the Democrats to lie, cheat, steal and kill the next election as they did with the mid-terms. Next will be the Senate and POTUS.

  23. avatar dpk54 says:

    For all the anti-gun idiots out there………”In the last 100 years or so, Europe has created two World Wars and seen millions killed by war or genocide. They have insulted our country over and over again, all the while happily taking OUR tax dollars in foreign aid! Yeah, wonderful, peaceful Europe gave us Napoleon, Hitler, Lenin, Stalin and Mussolini”….and let’s not forget China who gave us Mao, Vietnam who gave us Ho Chi Minh….Cambodia who gave us Pol Pot or Japan who gave us Hirohito…..Iraq who gave us Sadaam and last but not least, Afghanistan who gave us Bin Ladin, Al Queda and ISIS!!!!! One of the first things done by the European, Asian and some African establishments (like Ethiopia) was to confiscate firearms including LEGAL ones from everyday citizens. I don’t know who said it but it is so true…….”When the public is disarmed, CRIMINALS have greater impunity to rob, assault and murder law-abiding citizens…….so also do CRIMINAL GOVERNMENTS!”

  24. avatar Lorraine E Blazich says:

    The fact is that if a criminal wants a gun, he will steal it. If REAL statistics were available, they would include the large percentage of guns stolen and used by criminals. Those statistics wouldn’t support diane feinstein and her lust to take guns away from honest Americans who need guns to protect themselves. Watch the You Tube “Innocents Betrayed” to see what happens to a country when the people allow themselves to be disarmed by their government. We, the people, have a God given right to protect ourselves and our out of control gigantic government has absolutely no right to disarm us.

  25. avatar Thom says:

    Statistics are funny things. You can also interpret this to say that existing gun laws are quite effective in that they appear to have cut off the legal path to firearm ownership by criminals. So they “work. In a hypothetical world without those laws what would the statistics look like and what would the crime rate be? Prior to GCA 68 was there more or less violent crime? Have to look at the big picture of you want to argue against Feinstein and her acolytes.

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “Have to look at the big picture of you want to argue against Feinstein and her acolytes.”

      The big picture also includes the fact that as gun ownership has exploded since 1993, the crime rate has fallen dramatically. Given 300 million guns in the wild, we should have seen an apocalyptic explosion in deaths from gunfire.

      Of course, no one really knows why the crime rate has fallen dramatically since 1993. Am willing to concede that among many factors (and many factors unknown) gun restrictions and increased ownership each play some immeasurable part).

  26. avatar Geoff says:

    Pretty sure that 1.9% of legally bought guns were then used by the buyer to commit a crime, arrested, convicted and tossed into prison. Or ended up dead.
    Gee! I wonder how many examples of that there are?
    https://gunsandamerica.org/story/18/11/02/since-1982-74-percent-of-mass-shooters-obtained-their-guns-legally/

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Numbers are obviously bogus. 1.9% of what? Throwing numbers around like they mean something is a child’s game, anyone can play. I have a gun which appears new, which I bought 50 years ago, and it has not escaped to commit any crimes, where does that fit into this supposed “data”? I also own enough guns that your evidence would indicate I must have committed an armed crime by now, but I have not. So, WTF is your point, other than meaningless gibberish?

  27. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    The global elites do not care about the above statistics, power is their end goal and they will lie more than Hitler and Stalin to get it. Part of the Big Lie.

    1. avatar joefoam says:

      Have seen the list and done a little math. The total of mass shooting victims for over thirty years doesn’t even cover the deaths by drunk drivers for 2 months, yet politicians are all over gun control but nothing on alcohol.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “The total of mass shooting victims for over thirty years doesn’t even cover the deaths by drunk drivers for 2 months,…”

        Did the math for my BIL. Going all the way back to the Texas Tower affair, the average is ~11 people/yr killed in “mass shootings” (however defined). Pointed out more than 11 killed, during the time frame reviewed, each week in Chicago (one of BILs favorite places), and no one seems to care. I suppose that is because BIL thinks only “the right people” are being killed in Chiraq.

  28. avatar Bloving says:

    Saved to my bookmarks for the edification of bigots I’ll be arguing with on other sites.
    Please archive this one to the Facts About Guns… it should come in handy for us later.
    🤠

  29. avatar me says:

    I hope to hell in 2020 we get rid of the Fienstien,Pelosi, and the president Obunhole types in the election. How did the Dumocrat take the house last year? Seems the way they were after the presidental election voters would have went the other war. All the dumbocrats have become is robbers of the law-abiding. If we have the second amendment taken away. there will probly be another revolution.

    1. avatar m. says:

      they got control of the house by cheating, how else?

      1. avatar jram01 says:

        How did the Dems get the House?? Where have you been, man??????????
        Talk about LCCDD Trump, (i.e., Lying, Cheating, Commie, Deny, Delay Trump). Dozen women w/lawsuits against the Trumper, sixteen more women waiting i-line to file their lawsuits. 30-40 WH/WW employees quitting or fired, at least eight close individuals indited , six Guilty, one awaiting a second trial, one going to prison. Not counting the Russian group indited. CRIPS, the list goes on, on, on and Trumper still says there’s no collusion,no obstruction of Justice, fake news, changes his story every other day etc., etc., etc.
        Can’t wait to see him (and others) in a pair of Orange Coveralls to match his Orange

  30. avatar Kent Brashear says:

    I just want to say, Thank You for this information.

  31. avatar Steve says:

    “The homicide stat is worth noting: 35.9% of murderers possessed a gun when they killed their victim, but only 25.3% of murderers used a gun”

    This is something that is never discussed by thew anti gun left. There are a lot of murder victims that aren’t killed with guns in this country. There are people murdered by any number of ways using a multitude of different weapons. The FBI reports these numbers faithfully every year (https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-2016/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-4.xls) but apparently these anti gun types aren’t interested. In fact they are talking about a sub set of guns that are used in very rare but sensationalized killings, the so-called evil “assault rifle.” By perusing the data, one can see that it takes 10 years for the number of shooting victims killed with rifles of all types to equal just one year of victims murdered with knives. But instead of talking about knives they talk about a sub set of rifles, the so-called “assault rifles.” In fact, they hardly ever discuss any other type of weapon used for murder.

    Years ago I was listening to one of these groups being interviewed on a radio show and the host asked them about their work in preventing all types of violence. The moron answered that they were ONLY CONCERNED with gun violence at which time the host kicked them off his show and ranted on for awhile about all of the types of violence visited upon the victims of violence by the perpetrators. Every time you hear them they talk murder in the US they talk about how the US is the gun murder capitol of the world.

    The fact is that the United States ranks 28th in the world in terms of gun homicides per NPR (https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2018/11/09/666209430/deaths-from-gun-violence-how-the-u-s-compares-with-the-rest-of-the-world). Keep in mind that we are 28th behind a bunch of countries that have draconian gun laws and even out right bans on civilian gun ownership. When faced with this, the anti gun advocate has been coached to tell you that most of the countries we are behind in terms of gun violence are “non-developed” countries. When I am told this, I am very happy to ask them “What do you have against brown and black people?” (yes, I have learned to argue like a progressive leftist who throw race in your face at every possible opportunity). This argument id false based on any number of economic indicators etc., but it’s fun to see the looks on their faces when their own tactics are used against them.

    The next fact they are hard pressed to deal with is the fact that in terms of intentional homicide rates, the US is somewhere between 86th and 126th world wide. So I always ask about these people, are they somehow less dead that those murdered with guns? Are their lives somehow worth less? Invariably they will come back and say their talking about the 30,000 plus lives lost to gun violence in this country. Okay, lets play.

    In the first place, to get to the 30,000 plus number you have to include those who have taken their own lives. While these deaths are without a doubt tragedies, any psychiatrist/psychologist/sociologist worth their salt will tell you that anyone bent on taking their own life will do so, method aside. So let’s take these unfortunate deaths out of the “gun violence” death toll numbers right off the bat (this is also how they tell you that a gun in the home is more likely to kill a household member that a criminal. Once you take suicides out of their “study” it virtually NEVER happens). Now we’re talking around 10,000 gun murders per year. According to the FBI Joint Crime Statistics cited above, 80% of these are drug related gang murders. So if you don’t kill yourself or are a gang member involved in the drug trade, were talking about roughly 2,000 murders per year…out of 320,000,000 American citizens. And again, this is not out of line with the number of murders committed with knives in this country.

    In any event, if ‘Guns” were the problem, them why wasn’t the America I grew up in awash in blood? I had gun safety (REAL gun safety) taught to me not only at home but in Grade School when NRA certified instructors brought real guns into our classrooms are drilled gun safety into our heads. We took Hunters Safety through Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts (yes, I had a Marksmanship Merit Badge like most of the Scouts of the day), and Indian Guides. Most of us were hunting by the age of 10 or so. I was on my High School Marksmanship Team. Yes, I would get on the School Bus twice a week with a rifle and 100 rounds of ammunition and go to school. I’d then lock it up in my wall locker, go to class, get it out for practice, lock it back up, and then take it home on the bus that evening.

    Many schools in Colorado were closed during Deer and Elk season because most students were out hunting. Once I bought my first car, there wasn’t a single day when there wasn’t a rifle, shotgun, and plenty of ammunition in the trunk. We hunted ducks, geese, pheasants, rabbits, etc almost daily both before and after class. Everywhere in the parking lot were cars with guns in them, pickups with them hanging in a gun rack in the rear window, and in wall lockers inside. I remember sitting in the lot at lunch cleaning our shotguns/rifles from the mornings hunt and the Principle or a teacher stopping by, sitting down, and start cleaning theirs.

    So what has changed in society that we are now having these problems? Lots of things. I can remember being in knock-down drag -out fist fights within easy distance of my car. We never even thought about going and getting our guns and shooting each other. No, we respected each other and life. We understood consequences. We had self control and responsibility. People didn’t get pregnant out of wedlock because they understood that THEY were responsible for raising and providing for their child. That isn’t true today where people are actually rewarded for irresponsible behavior. Have a child out of wedlock? That’s okay, we’ll put you up in your own apartment, feed you, pay your food, utilities, medical, child care, etc. Not a worry in the world. No personal responsibility necessary. No consequences.

    They talk about “toxic masculinity” these days. Dead wrong, the problem is that people aren’t raising “men” anymore as there has been a war on men going on for a long time now. In any event, the vast majority of the young “men: that are involved in the drug trade are not raised my other men, they are raised by women, mostly very young women, who have no idea how to raise a man. Men have testosterone, women don’t. Nor do they have any idea of how to teach their sons how to deal with testosterone. They become violent, they act out, they pick up a gun or another weapon and use it.

    What we get down to is that “guns” are not the problem. The problem is multi faceted and requires that people are once again expected to be responsible for their own actions. It is that we need to make people live with the negative consequences of their own actions. We need discipline in schools and to get it, we need to break the monopoly of education that the public school system currently has. We need to truly EDUCATE our children, teach them critical thinking, analytic skills, responsibility. We need true school choice and we need it now. Let’s solve the problem, not treat a symptom or the battle and war are lost.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email