Festivus Toad wrote:
And there's an interesting 1967 study that set out to determine if blacks in Chicago would switch more to knives if the city banned guns, and whether their homicide rate would go up or down. They figured it would probably go down, but weren't sure. The murder rate their remains extremely high despite the ban they enacted.
Here's the reason.
ALL THEY HAD TO DO IS LEAVE THE CITY OF CHICAGO TO BUY A GUN.
Likewise, when you ponder as to why Washington, DC's murder rate has always been so high...
ALL THEY HAD TO DO WAS LEAVE THE CITY OF WASHINGTON TO BUY A GUN.
And so forth and so on. You seem to think that Chicago and Washington and really every other example you throw at us is a city surrounded by a vast no-man's land where no human or creature can exist. Sadly for you, this isn't the case.
And all that killing is done to contol cocaine and heroin grown and imported illegally from... Wisconsin? No. That's not it. Maryland? No, that's not it either. The answer will come to me.
But anyway, before Chicago or DC banned guns, nobody even had to leave the city to by one. Back in 66 or 67 they only used guns in 52 percent of murders, yet could buy them locally, while now they use guns in 83 percent of murders.
People in Montana, Wyoming, and other high gun states don't use guns nearly that often in their murders. They tend to go for knives, even though they all apparently carry
guns. Strange, no?
Here's one of the studies from the 1960's. http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/ZimringReduceKillings.htm
Here's two showing how far Chicago has come in analyzing their shootings.
Year to year accuracy rates, labeled "Marksmanship and effort", single shot kill probabilities, caliber ratings, etc. Everything but style points.
And a recent city report, vastly more detailed and sophisticated than the early efforts.