« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

The Desire to Return to the Box

Prometheus was a sneaky Titan. He created man despite Zeus warning him not to. Then he brought men fire. In addition to punishing Prometheus, Zeus decided to get even.

He had Hephaestus mold a woman from clay and the gods breathed life into her filling her with all the finest attributes of the gods — beauty, creativity, kindness, and also curiosity.

Zeus then arranged a marriage between the woman and Prometheus’s brother, Epimetheus. Prometheus had warned his brother not to accept gifts from Zeus, but the brother did so anyway. He and his wife, Pandora, were given a box with a very clear instruction on it to never open it.

One day, Pandora, overcome by her gods given curiosity, opened the box. Pestilence, plague, disease, and sin poured forth from the box into the world. Last out of the box came hope.

Some will take issue with comparing guns to Pandora’s box, but in the discussion of gun control, Pandora’s box is the appropriate analogy. Try as we might, we will never, ever put guns back into Pandora’s box.

Gun control is a fool’s errand.

The cities and states with the toughest gun laws typically have the worst gun violence. In Chicago and Washington, DC, two cities with the toughest gun laws and restrictions in America, people have routinely been gunned down. The only people with firearms were the ones unwilling to obey the law.

Writing in the New York Times, Robert Ebert, movie critic and village idiot, wrote

That James Holmes is insane, few may doubt. Our gun laws are also insane, but many refuse to make the connection. The United States is one of few developed nations that accepts the notion of firearms in public hands. In theory, the citizenry needs to defend itself. Not a single person at the Aurora, Colo., theater shot back, but the theory will still be defended.

What Ebert misses in his zeal to turn a tragedy into a political issue is that the theater was a gun free zone. The law abiding citizenry with their guns obeyed the law. They could not fire back because they were obeying a restriction on guns that the criminal refused to obey.

And that is the point the left seems often enough to ignore.

If you take away guns, you will only take them away from the people you don’t have to worry about in the first place.

“But restrictions,” the left cries. “Men don’t need assault rifles.”

We’ve tried this game before. All the manufacturers did to get around the much heralded assault weapons ban was slightly change the specs on the guns. Suddenly what was illegal became legal.

What’s more, restricting the second of the Bill of Rights, does nothing but deter the law abiding. Restrict access to cartridges with lots of bullets and the law abiding citizen is deterred. The criminal is just challenged.

Gun control does not stop random acts of madmen. Gun control does, however, increase the body count in Chicago, Washington, and other places where the armed citizenry, disarmed by government, is confronted with evil unwilling to yield to the laws.

Pandora’s box is open. Gun control will neither put guns back in the box nor control guns. It will just control the people who really do not need to be controlled on the matter.

COMMENTS

  • CincoSolas_del_Bronx

    To wit:

  • CincoSolas_del_Bronx

    Per Wikipedia article Crime in New York City, containing image NYC murders.

  • spandrel

    I agree that we’re not putting the guns back in the box anytime soon. But I take issue with the inference regarding NYC and Chicago. Seems natural for the worst crime areas to enact the tough laws as a consequence of the crime, not as a prelude to it.

    I don’t think it’s the guns, per se, that lead to so much gun violence. There are countries such as Canada with similar rates of firearm ownership but much less violent use of them.. Some of that is due to policies that would not be tolerated in the US because they “infringe our rights”, but I think most is just due to the breakdown of community, and community values, in the US.

  • http://www.erickerickson.org Erick Erickson

    Is Rudy Giuliani governing the city everyone said was ungovernable. The broken window theory of crime prevention works.

  • From ME to You

    It’s so small, old eyes you know! Would also need to see source of the nembers and changes in policies that seemingly affect the trend.
    Correlation does not imply causation right??

  • From ME to You

    Thanks!

  • bk

    This piece says the drop came as the police began to crack down on enforcing laws, not because a bunch of new anti-gun laws were written.

  • CincoSolas_del_Bronx

    Understood re the total Giuliani package/enforcement/non-correlation–which I tried to anticipate with “model” rather than “laws”. Just trying to point out that for urbs where nothing has worked, as bad a rep as my town understandably has among conservatives, this little factoid has been quite well sustained and could bear further looking into.

    Thanks all! Anytime you’re passing through feel free to drop in and see what an increasingly conservative neighborhood in the South Bronx looks like up close!

  • tankertodd

    Gun control is all about mitigating body count. Instead of this guy killing 12, perhaps with magazine limitations, with firearm limitations, perhaps he kills 10, or 8, or 6. Big assumptions there. Giant ones. (After all, why not buy more of the limited weapon?)

    So all this “debate” is about is reducing the loss of life, not about eliminating the incident in the first place. Where we need to put our focus is on stopping this before it happens. Specifically, in these cases, the parents and people around these nut jobs are AWARE that the person is a nut job. And for whatever reason, they are not taking action. Perhaps they are (like me and probably a majority of the country) illiterate in mental health issues. Perhaps they don’t understand what steps to take.

    I would think honest liberals would prefer to attack, instead of the endless windmill of gun control, the issue of mental health in this country. That would pair well with their designs on taking over medical care. But of course instead of tackling the tough issue where the free market solution is unclear they take over the area where the free market solution is well understood, if not yet realized.

    Conservatives, who champion personal responsibility, ought to be asking more about this mother, whom upon being called by ABC, apparently knew they had the right guy. I know she’s walking this back, sure, but if this guy is as looney as he seems, she knew he was ill. What did she do? What did she know and when did she know it? The Virginia Tech shooter (another gun-free zone) also was on the parent’s radar. The parents of those two kids in Columbine knew something as well.

    This is the dialog we need. Not about what bans to enact to maybe reduce body count by x%. Let’s eliminate the incidents by figuring out how to get treatment to the right people before they destroy.

  • Repair_Man_Jack

    They seem to have similar Gun Control Laws to NYC and have gotten some bad press over their recent spate of homocides.

  • renl57

    We all have the freedom to travel as we wish.

    But if you show up at the airport without any luggage and buy a one-way ticket, don’t be surprised if you get a second look from the security detail there.

    Gun rights should not be impinged. But if a character like Mr. Holmes buys a semi-auto rifle, shotgun, ammo, gas mask and body armor all within a few months of each other, that should alert the authorities.

    A citizen may have a legitimate reason to want to arm himself like a SWAT team member. Just like a citizen may have a legitimate reason to fly one-way with no luggage. But in both cases, the authorities should check the person over, just in case.

    That’s the price we pay for the age we live in.

    Now to do those checks, we need a central database run by Homeland Security that reports all sales of the kind of paraphernalia that Mr. Holmes was carrying and wearing. Data mining would show that he bought enough stuff to outfit himself like a SWAT team member. At that point, the cops should pay him a visit.

  • Repair_Man_Jack

    Proponents of these laws would claim the guns come in from the backwoods where less brilliant legal minds fail to pass adequately civilized gun control laws.

    Opponents would say criminals make a rational decision to prey on people who are less well equipped to make such behavior difficult or fatal.

  • CincoSolas_del_Bronx

    and is one of the few things, thankfully, that the current Hizzoner hasn’t managed to regulate away yet.

    Another thing which I know you will understand will never appear in any sociological study but is undeniable among those who had a reason for staying through the dark days of the 70s and 80s: the influence of local churches in all 5 boroughs. The crazy anything-goes spirituality which many associated with NYC–from smooth-tongued Rev. Ike to sharp-tongued Rev. Al to the proudly antinomian liberal mainstream ruins–palpably gave way to a more vibrant and consistent preaching of the Gospel than had been seen in generations, and its effects have been seen in many neighborhoods. sDg

  • ateam

    That there are other resources a criminally insane individual can resort to that will never be regulated:
    Fertilizer (was very effective in Ok City)
    Gasoline

    A person hell bent on destruction is hell bent on destruction. Gun control will just push that person to the next deadliest resource.

  • funwithknives

    Wherever they went, it was guns ,guns, guns.
    But a not-so-funny thing happened. They got intercepted more and more with each ascending year.

    So they went to suicide bombs. They saw the ROI on one dead bomber for who-knows-how-many Jewish {and otherwise} victims.

    They using guns again? Nope. Now we gotta sweat poison gas…….

  • Repair_Man_Jack

    -Nt.

  • AzHat

    Any thoughts on their assessment of the decrease in crime?

  • AzHat

    But, their theory would hold across the entire country, so Chicago’s data would be a valid indicator. How’s their crime rate?

  • acat

    Start here … but be prepared for frustration.

    Because the Chicago Police Department tallies data differently than police in other cities, the FBI often does not accept its crime statistics. Chicago police officers record all criminal sexual assaults, as opposed to only rape. They count aggravated battery together with the standard category of aggravated assault. As a result, Chicago is often omitted from studies such as Morgan Quitno’s annual “Safest/Most Dangerous City” survey, which relies on FBI-collected data.

    Mew

  • spandrel

    Hard to find an otherwise peaceful locale that implemented gun control.

    Generally, criminals will always have guns; but the majority of gun deaths are the result of suicide (the majority of all gun deaths on it’s own), domestic misery, or madmen. Though not a very satisfying conclusion, one can reasonably argue that if only criminals had guns, the gun-related death rate would plunge. There would, however, likely be unintended consequences…

  • danno86

    http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/07/23/tea-party-leader-says-all-muslims-a-threat-to-u-s-seeks-recall-of-mccain/

    Just wondering – Who’s backing Wes here?

  • Bill S

    Please don’t threadjack. If you want to post that, put it on a diary about Abedin or publish your own diary (with some semi-substantive analysis)

  • AzHat

    If only criminals had guns, the death rate “may” fall, but the crime rate will certainly rise.

    Besides, some death rates are more important than others. Namely my friends and family. I’d prefer to defend them,

  • tnfriendofcoal101368

    About, 20 years ago, the FBI started a phase in of incident based reporting (i.e. Police Departments would report each incident separately and details like race, location, etc) and as a result phasing out summary based reporting (i.e. we had 200 agg assaults). As a result, the FBI also updated the categories you report. Rape was moved out of sexual assault into it’s own category and moved aggravated assault into it’s own category from battery. The idea being to provide the public with better information and analysis around crimes like rape, agg assault, murders, kiddie porn etc without diluting the number of rapes by including them with public groping between adults in a bar. My opinion but the FBI is on the side of the angels with this one.

    Sounds to me like Chicago liked the old system better so the FBI stopped accepting their data at some point (Note: this last statement and it’s implication is my personal opinion).

  • avagreen

    The mother was quoted out of context by the liberal network, ABC, (who wudda thought) when she told the reporter “You have the right person” after he asked for the mother of the shooter.
    http://www.wbtv.com/story/19091976/family-james-eagan-holmes-dark-knight-rises-shooting-theater

    And, the mental health angle was answered here and may have also been touched on on other posts, as well:
    http://www.redstate.com/jeff_emanuel/2012/07/20/shut-up-please/#comment-9725

    From my point of view, the stockpiling of ammunition should have tripped something alarming. I’m surely not interested in further Gov’t rules, but this may need to be looked at.

    The question of how he paid for this…..credit cards used to mailed willy-nilly to college students, hoping to snare them in a web of debt before graduating. I’m sure that a PhD student would be a prime target, especially in his field of neuroscience.

  • acat

    This is for the last two decades or so.

    Mew

  • acat

    Why? Because I was already knee-deep in the spreadsheet….

    Mew

  • acat

    First, you’re evidently more of a statistics wonk than I am. I can speak the language, but I have a noticeable accent, eh?

    Second, yes, it does appear that Chicago “are doing their own thing” .. that is, they may report numbers to the FBI, but they report in their own style. One wonders how many man-hours the Chicago PD save by not changing over. (grin)

    Third, the New York data appears to go back to the 1920s, based on Cinco’s findings above, while the Chicago data – both on Wikipedia and at the FBI unified reporting website – stops at 1985 or so. This is in line with your “about 20 years ago”, but does make comparing the two significantly more difficult.

    C’est la vie – see chart below.

    One point – I am NOT willing to do the extra digging to plot these against the aggregate city population or summer temperatures, although IIRC two of the better predictors for the murder rate are how hot the summer is and how densely packed the population is. Both should be readily available, and as NYC and Chicago haven’t changed their boundaries in decades, one can assume (grin) population fluctuations are a decent proxy for density.

    Mew

  • tnfriendofcoal101368

    I started in the data business with labor and then crime (student teaching convinced me I didn’t want to be a math teacher)- then I found out while you can live on a government salary – that private industry pays data analyst/administrators much better than the taxpayers. Anyway, the FBI does do some conversion of the old summary based data from the incident based data to do analysis over time. My wish is they would just cut the cord with the summary data and start the analysis with the incident based data (because the NIBRS (acronym for National Incident Based Reporting System) data is better (though I have been in private industry for 15 years now so I am out of date with the specifics).

  • Don T.

    Your sentence here is alarming and contradictory, all in the same space.

    “From my point of view, the stockpiling of ammunition should have tripped something alarming. I?m surely not interested in further Gov?t rules, but this may need to be looked at.”

    What does the stockpiling of ammunition say about anything whatsover? What does the legal purchase and ownership of 4 or 5 or 10 guns say about anything of note? I know you probably mean well, but I hate to break this to you. I know plenty of folks who view this guy’s “arsenal” as a laughably small good start.

    We are all striving for the perfect security formula, as if it was a math problem, and we could factor in the variables of amounts of ammo, number of guns, how twitchy the guy looked, how creepy his phone message was, and the like. But there isn’t a mathematical formula for attaining security.

  • avagreen

    What would be your suggestion to put a damper on this guy’s behavior?

  • AzHat

    You have far more faith in the “authorities” than I do.

    (Clearly someone hacked my account to type that ;) )

  • skorrent1

    But it rankles us gun-nuts. You say “cartridges with lots of bullets”. You mean “magazines with lots of cartridges”.

    For people in Chi, DC and NYC: You load a cartridge into a firearm, the bullet is the little pointy thing that comes out the end, real fast. Some weapons let you load several cartridges into a clip or magazine and stick the whole wad into the weapon at one time. It takes a skilled shooter about two seconds to drop out an empty magazine and plug in a full one.

  • Don T.

    I’m not sure anyone does have a clearcut way to catch nutjobs like this. I would say what is not the answer, and that is, more government restrictions and regulations aimed at law abiding citizens. I would also say that not part of the answer is hindering citizens in being able to legally carry weapons for their own self defense.

  • dpmaine

    But one of the conferences I often attend is chock full of analysts from the UCR operations directorate at the DOJ.

    My understanding is that most departments provide good data, but the ones with COMSTAT style reporting systems either (a) provide data that is hard to validate, or (b) effectively keep two sets of books.

    COMSTAT and it’s successors are extremely susceptible to low-level data collectors (i.e. officers) individually downrating or downplaying criminal incidents to improve the statistics passed up the chain. These type of statistical shenanigans show up in a statistical model very easily and without much hope of hiding it – it takes a sophisticated, long-term effort to “bend the curve” on the numbers without corrupting them beyond belief.

    I’ve heard loads of anecdotal evidence that the UCR data team spend considerable time determining the relative reliability of the source data in order to be able to apply various confidence intervals to the underlying incident-based data.

  • dpmaine

    On why NYC is generally considered to be “very safe” and Chicago appears to be a cess-pool? Is it all media based? Or is there anything qualitative about it?

    I’ve traveled overseas and in some international locales, there is *horrible* gang/factional violence, but in general, the rest of the population doesn’t “see” the crime as a problem because it’s basically “gang on gang” violence. As if it doesn’t “count”.

    I wonder if in Chicago if the public feels a sense of “randomness” to the criminal activity, where in NYC, there is a feeling more of safety/security because the major crimes seem to involve persons with some connection to crime.

  • dpmaine

    > Generally, criminals will always have guns; but the majority of gun
    I think that Austrialia recently implemented some sort of handgun ban, but the impact on crime has been minimal. I believe that they banned new sales, and perhaps private ownership, but there are so many guns already in circulation that it could be *forever* before the illicit guns “run through the system”.

    This is one of the strongest arguments against any changes to gun laws in the US. Whatever laws the left passes could only be reasonably implemented if it involved widespread confiscation, and of course, that’s 100% anathema to 2nd amendment. Progressives believe despite all evidence to the contrary that step 1 is ban, followed by step 2 which is widespread confiscatory policies.

    Eventually it would be possible, on paper, to get rid of 99.999% o the guns out there. But then, you have the problem of the memory hole: myself and ten friends could easily build a reliable firearm in the course of a few weeks. In fact, we have all milled our own short-barrel shot-gun similar to a blunderbuss. The tools required are not sophisticated and the materials are raw and plentiful. In short, a ban would require (a) a massive change in US culture plus (b) a true police state to execute and enforce…

  • dpmaine

    It is likely the data that this guy was having what may turn out to be a “mental break” was out there.

    The problem is that doing anything with involves massive, widescale, in-depth data mining and information processing, and then, once you have a “red flag” situation, you have the problem of “what do you do about it”.

    Even if flagged, what is the solution consistent with the laws? At what point did he first break the law?

    Put another way, if an FBI agent dropped by to check on him the day before the crime, what if anything, could be done to stop it? There was no conspiracy (apparently), likely no written plans and so outwardly you just have a guy who’s spending his life savings/college money on weapons and ammunition.

    It all leads back to the mind of an insane person. And that leads back to fixing our broken, dysfunctional culture which glorifies violence, secularism, convenience, sex, and adulates the short-term desires of your inner self to position of primary importance.

  • dpmaine

    Huestics and modeling can clue you in. But in both cases – the airline and the SWAT scenario, when the person gets a “second look”, what does that mean?

    Do we know that the shooter in Colorado had broken any laws until he showed up at the movie theatre?

    What does the police/FBI/DHS do when take a “second look”?

    In the airline world, they “no-fly” you, and you have the burden to prove to DHS that you should be able fly.

    In the firearms sense, do they “no-gun” you, and you have to provde that should be able to buy/own guns again?

    How is this consistent with the 2nd amendment?

    (And, there is a seriously good question about that versus the government “no-flying” American citizens without due process or recourse to seek redress).

  • CincoSolas_del_Bronx

    shows raw number of homicides in both cities, with the similar numbers providing a convenient sense of scale for marking the relative rates of decline. But a city-to-city comparison of “likelihood of ending up in the morgue before my time” would need to show the graphs on a per-capita basis. Lacking the raw numbers, one can nevertheless quite closely approximate the shape of that graph by

    1) ignoring the current scale
    2) keeping the NYC graph in place
    3) inflating the height of the Chicago graph by the ratio of pop NYC/Chicago, which for 2010-2011 is 3.06**

    So imagine the blue Chicago line over 3 times higher, starting off the chart around 2700 in 1990, ending around 1400 in 2010. This would mean that while in 1990 you would be slightly more likely in Chicago than New York to be killed by gun, in 2010, while your survivability would be markedly higher in both cities than earlier, you would now be in over 2.5 times as much danger in Chicago than New York!

    And that’s quantitative.

    *for which many thanks, O felicitous feline!
    ** per Wikipedia (I know, shoot me–no, don’t, then you’d have to input new points): NYC 2011 = 8,244,910 / Chicago 2010 = 2,695,598 = 3.0586

  • CincoSolas_del_Bronx

    OK, after saying “ignore the scale”–meaning y-axis–my references to “around 2700/1400″ were intended as: “around where 2700/1400 were on the original chart”.

    Point about the >2.5 per-capita ratio still holds, however.

    acat, if you have the time, would you consider making such chart, ie simply by weighting the Chicago points up by 3.06 to produce a semi-accurate per-capita chart? Unless civic pride forbids you, of course.

  • michaelbowler

    Every time something bad happens, there’s some group that thinks the answer is to pass a new law. This kind of knee jerk reaction is typical of busybody hand wringing malcontents. One step worse than them are the ideological opportunists that take such a tragedy as this and turn it into the “sure proof” they need to reduce individual rights. There are already many laws on the books, too darned many, the problem isn’t the laws. There are a plethora of laws, several broken by this perpetrator, new ones wouldn’t prevent him from doing what he did…criminals don’t obey laws, that’s why they’re criminals. Good citizens obey laws, then die because those laws have disarmed them…

    The United States of America is the first country ever to recognize the individual’s right to his own life, and the first to codify it into law. The right of the individual to protect that life was inherent in their intent. Police depts are certainly an assistance in that, but they cannot be everywhere, nor would you WANT them to be. In the end, police are an after the fact solution, serving to investigate and arrest those in violation, rarely actually stopping the commission of crimes in progress. Part of your rights are your responsibilities, including being proactive in the defense of your own life, liberty and property. If you choose to cede that responsibility to others, the consequences are often disappointing…in some cases fatally so…

  • feuerstoss

    This is my first post on this site, so please be patient.

    As a Colorado resident, there are a few interesting facts about firearm regulations in this state. Firstly, open carry of firearms is legal except for the city or county of Denver(who passed that law a few years back). We also have a shall-issue concealed carry law on the books; while some areas(such as the counties in the Denver metro area) take their sweet time in getting a permit out to a qualified, law-abiding citizen, this is still a shall-issue state.

    Now, the most a regular business can do(such as the theater in Aurora) is post a sign on their door stating “The -display- of firearms in this facility is not allowed.” All this means is that if you walk in carrying a firearm openly you will be kicked out; the business is well within their rights to do so.

    Interestingly enough, someone carrying a concealed handgun with a legal permit can ignore one of these ‘gun-free zones.’ A CCW permit holder is not displaying their firearm, and won’t get in hot water if they end up using their weapon within the limits of the law(in Colorado you can use deadly force if you or others are in immediate danger of death or severe bodily injury). The only way a business can get away with disarming a legal CCW permit holder is by posting metal detectors and/or armed guards at every entrance and exit, thereby making it a secure facility.

    I’m not saying this to downplay this tragedy; friends of mine know people who were wounded by this madman. I wish our existing laws were more clear on these issues; most state CCW instructors don’t even go over this vital detail. I fully believe that if there were just one or two people who were legally armed in that theater, the shooter wouldn’t have been able to harm so many people. Even if the shooter wasn’t killed by armed citizens, the time he would have needed to engage an armed opponent or two would have allowed more people to escape with their lives.

    Those who believe that this tragedy is a wake-up call for more firearms regulation really need to climb down out of their ivory towers and take a stroll in the real world. Ultimately, the only person responsible for our own personal safety is ourselves.

  • dpmaine

    Per Capita, that makes sense.

    Thanks for point out that obvious little oversight.

  • jiminga

    Only liberals, living in their utopian dream, would believe it’s possible to make guns go away with a law. If they were to pass such a law, they would push back from the table and say “There, I made the world a better place” and actually believe they did. Then they would clamor for more taxes to hire all the new cops necessary to curb the crime wave caused by the law, seeking to fix the problem they caused.

  • jiminga

    This quote is in my email signature:

    “Government is a disease masquerading as its own cure.” – Bob LeFevre

  • thethinman

    How many “civilian” Muslim men do not have guns?

  • proudamericanradical

    This is one of the best discussions I have come across in a blog. My question is, “Is 650 a good number of murders per year?” Were #s prior to the 90s greater? Like everything else we are so innundated with the bad we’ve come to accept a new normal.

  • CincoSolas_del_Bronx

    but have read more than once, and it certainly fits my personal memory of the years, that the gun-homicide surge which in many cities rose through the 80s and peaked in the early 90s was largely crack-induced.

    The chart immediately below the OP does show NYC data for at least certain decades prior to that. Here, each successive years’ news announcements about its rate tends to be compared–often favorably–with “the earliest years for which records were kept”, by which the mid-1960s numbers are implied. When one considers that during 1964-1965 the city was in full concert attire for the World’s Fair in Flushing Meadows, a fair number (ouch) of tourists apparently thought the rate an acceptable risk to venture.

  • Don T.

    You are right on, sir. My home state of Georgia has similar laws to Colorado, in which “no firearms” signs have no force of law. But businesses are allowed here by law, as in CO, to ban firearms from their premises. However, it requires a manager or security person to identify that firearm, and then the permit holder when asked to depart, must do so or face criminal trespass charges. If the weapon is concealed, the permit holder goes about their business at the mall, the theater, wherever.

  • phenom527

    …just try that in a Texas theater…the state would have been saved the prosecution costs!.

  • cbartlett

    Not sure I’m ready for Homeland Security to have that kind of data mining power. Since Obama was elected, my other half has been collecting a lot of guns and ammo – simply because he didn’t trust the liberal agenda he** bent on gun control. Since he has a CHL (Concealed Handgun License), it is relatively “easy” to purchase guns in retail stores and I imagine he would be one of those HS red-flagged individuals since they report all gun sales. But he has also bought them on the internet and at gun shows – the government only “knows” about half of his weapons. Bill O’Reilly was ranting last night about controlling the “bad” guns because of the Colorado event. He is extremely mis-informed if he really thinks reporting and tracking of all of the stuff that crazy guy bought would have stopped this. He kept saying over and over that “stockpiling 60,000 rounds” should have been flagged and investigated. First of all – it was 6000, NOT 60,000 (get your facts straight, Bill), and the guy could have very easily ordered a few hundred rounds at a time over the internet from several different places over the span of several months and no one would know how much he had – especially if they were for several different caliber guns.
    Agree with Erick – no way can we put the guns and ammo back in the box. We just really need to find a better way to help the people who know these crazies are out there to take action before they do.

  • gwbramhall

    If Chicago will not report their crime statistics in a manor that
    leads to understanding their crime situation as compared to
    the rest of the country, federal assistance and federal money
    should be withheld until they decide to comply. There should
    be consequences to their failure to report their crime statistics
    properly

  • acat

    I am guessing he doesn’t have time either…

    Yes, if you break this out per capita, the New York numbers are safer.

    Then there’s the question of how to show the data by neighborhoods … some parts of Chicago are quite safe, others are quite unsafe… I presume the same is true for NYC.

    The perception of safety seems to have more to do with how much of the violence leaks across… and while I’m sure the data to support it is available – location of homicide has to be part of the data .. somewhere – I don’t know where to start digging, and don’t have a big enough shovel.

    Mew

  • CincoSolas_del_Bronx

    What you put up already was very instructive. While I would have had fun banging out a perl script to cram the points into a .png, but it wouldn’t have done any good since I don’t have a public account anyway!