Violent crime up for 1st time in 5 years - NRA blamed (duplicate threads merged)


PDA






brufener
June 12, 2006, 10:23 AM
Just saw this:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060612/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/fbi_violent_crime

WASHINGTON - Murders, robberies and aggravated assaults in the United States increased last year, spurring an overall rise in violent crime for the first time since 2001, according to FBI data.

ADVERTISEMENT

Murders rose 4.8 percent, meaning there were more than 16,900 victims in 2005. That would be the most since 1998 and the largest percentage increase in 15 years.

Murders jumped from 272 to 334 in Houston, a 23 percent spike; from 330 to 377 in Philadelphia, a 14 percent rise; and from 131 to 144 in Las Vegas, a 10 percent increase.

Despite the national numbers, Detroit, Los Angeles and New York were among several large cities that saw the number of murders drop.

The overall increase in violent crime was modest, 2.5 percent, which equates to more than 1.4 million crimes. Nevertheless, that was the largest percentage increase since 1991.

The FBI data, compiled from reports by more than 12,000 law enforcement agencies, does not contain overall crime numbers in any category nor does it offer any explanation for the changes. The FBI's final annual crime report comes out in the fall.

Criminal justice experts said the statistics reflect the nation's complacency in fighting crime, a product of dramatic declines in the 1990s and the abandonment of effective programs that emphasized prevention, putting more police officers on the street and controlling the spread of guns.

"We see that budgets for policing are being slashed and the federal government has gotten out of that business," said James Alan Fox, a criminal justice professor at Northeastern University in Boston. "Funding for prevention at the federal level and many localities are down and the (National Rifle Association) has renewed strength."

Still, Fox said, "We're still far better off than we were during the double-digit crime inflation we saw in the 1970s."

Robberies were up 4.5 percent and aggravated assaults 1.9 percent, according to preliminary data. Alone among violent crime categories, the number of rapes fell 1.9 percent.

Violent crimes peaked at 1.9 million in 1992 and fell steadily through the end of that decade. The number has been relatively stable for the past six years.

Crime last year increased in all regions, although the 5.7 percent rise in the Midwest was at least three times any other region's. These states make up the Midwest: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota and Wisconsin.

Fox cautioned against reading too much into year-to-year changes in individual cities, saying some differences result from random variation and marked swings the previous year. Also, some large statistical increases result from some small numerical changes.

In Hartford, Conn. for example, murders jumped more than 50 percent, from 16 to 25.

I really don't like how this criminologist blames the NRA and guns in general for the rise in violent crime.

I do think it is funny that Illinois is one of the states that is listed as being "three times worse than the other regions." As I understand it, Illinois' gun laws are pretty strict.

The bad news (in a way) is that New York's violent crime is down. Bloomberg will be sure to take credit for that, no doubt declaring that it is due to his har stance on guns.

Anyone want to take a guess on why violent crime went up?

Any other comments?

If you enjoyed reading about "Violent crime up for 1st time in 5 years - NRA blamed (duplicate threads merged)" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
mbs357
June 12, 2006, 10:24 AM
"Crime is up! It must be the NRA!!"
"What'd they do?"
"I DUNNO!"
Really, what do they think the NRA did to cause crime to go up???

bg
June 12, 2006, 10:34 AM
How can this "learned" fellow compare a crime increase
with renewed NRA strength ? What has an increase in the
NRA's membership have to do with crime ?
http://www.yahoo.com/s/135783/*http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060612/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/fbi_violent_crime

"We see that budgets for policing are being slashed and the federal government has gotten out of that business," said James Alan Fox, a criminal justice professor at Northeastern University in Boston. "Funding for prevention at the federal level and many localities are down and the (National Rifle Association) has renewed strength."

Desertdog
June 12, 2006, 10:50 AM
The question that come to my mind is; Do they count a person that is killed by an intended victim in self-defense or by a cop in a shoot out as murder ?

Halffast
June 12, 2006, 10:55 AM
It would be interesting to see the numbers broken down by legal/illegal residents.

Stiletto Null
June 12, 2006, 10:59 AM
^^^

Seconded. I was going to suggest that maybe the rising illegals count had something to do with it.

boofus
June 12, 2006, 11:01 AM
Crime in Houston was on the downturn until our chocolate city guests showed up.

Homicides shot up +25% after Nagin's constituents started squatting here. And I'll bet not a one was a NRA member. Liberals of all types are the real criminal enablers. The Nagin voters, the race pimps, the Tookie Williams quadruple murder Peace Prizers, the Michael Dukakises of the world are the real root source.

JesseJames
June 12, 2006, 11:26 AM
Uh, one of the more inane comments I've heard from academics.

Demagogue blockhead. :rolleyes:

WhoKnowsWho
June 12, 2006, 11:26 AM
Maybe it is because of CSI type shows and people thinking they can get away with it. :D

DonP
June 12, 2006, 11:38 AM
The professor is using an old trick.

List a single provable fact, then include several opinions in the same sentence or paragraph and hope that most readers will not read the passage too analytically.

He could have just as easily said that murders are up and ...

"the number of children born to unwed mothers has risen ..."
"membership in the Democrat party has increased ..."
"more walleye have been caught in lake Kabetegoma..."

His objective, and a not too subtle one it is either, is to link the NRA with violent crime in some ignorant people's minds. The sad part is it will probably work for most media types that couldn't have passed a statistics, logic or an ethics class if their life depended on it.

whitebear
June 12, 2006, 11:38 AM
Well, if you're interested in letting him know your opinion, here is his contact information, straight from the website of Northeastern University, Boston, Mass (http://www.cj.neu.edu/):
James Alan Fox

Title: Lipman Family Professor (Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania, 1976), View Bio
Specialties: Homicide, Youth Violence, Quantitative Methods
Contact: 617.373.3296, j.fox@neu.edu
Website:www.jfox.neu.edu

boofus
June 12, 2006, 11:40 AM
I equate professors with serial murderers.

That looney tunes professor in ********** wanted to give Tookie Williams a nobel peace prize for his 4 gruesome murders. Therefore all professors must be enablers of serial killers.

atlctyslkr
June 12, 2006, 12:40 PM
Let's see how the anti's put a spin on this one.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060612/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/fbi_violent_crime

Carl N. Brown
June 12, 2006, 12:43 PM
Violent crime up for 1st time in 5 years By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer
. . . . .Criminal justice experts said the statistics reflect the nation's complacency in fighting crime, a product of dramatic declines in the 1990s and the abandonment of effective programs that emphasized prevention, putting more police officers on the street and controlling the spread of guns.

"We see that budgets for policing are being slashed and the federal government has gotten out of that business," said James Alan Fox, a criminal justice professor at Northeastern University in Boston. "Funding for prevention at the federal level and many localities are down and the (National Rifle Association) has renewed strength." . . . . . .
Maryland spent a couple of million dollars on that "ballistic fingerprint database" which did no good at all; that money would have funded at least twelve full-time highway patrol officers (full wages, training, benefits, etc). In that case, gun control diverted funds away from putting cops on the streets.

And sales and numbers of guns in private hands spread during all the years of the decline in crime rates in the 1990s. If there has been a change in the last year, it should not be blamed on the spread of guns.

slzy
June 12, 2006, 12:43 PM
how would the figures look if illegal aliens,both perps and victims are subtracted?

Hkmp5sd
June 12, 2006, 12:44 PM
The question that come to my mind is; Do they count a person that is killed by an intended victim in self-defense or by a cop in a shoot out as murder ?

It is counted as a homocide.

Selfdfenz
June 12, 2006, 12:47 PM
There was also this from Drudge that actually originated at Breitbart:

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/06/12/D8I6MG9G1.html

In addition to information about the uptick in crime stats in some areas it contained this atatment:

"We see that budgets for policing are being slashed and the federal government has gotten out of that business," said James Alan Fox, a criminal justice professor at Northeastern University in Boston. "Funding for prevention at the federal level and many localities are down and the (National Rifle Association) has renewed strength."

So now the NRA is singled out for blame in increased crime. Absolutley amazing!

S-

Carl N. Brown
June 12, 2006, 12:53 PM
THR > Social Situations > Legal and Political
> Professor equates crime with the NRA ?

Phetro
June 12, 2006, 12:53 PM
He could have just as easily said that murders are up and ...

"the number of children born to unwed mothers has risen ..."
"membership in the Democrat party has increased ..."
"more walleye have been caught in lake Kabetegoma..."

Yeah, but he'd be more accurate if he said that--at least in his second assumed cause...after all, criminals are usually democrats!

benEzra
June 12, 2006, 12:55 PM
I'm sure the increase is due to the 5000 people killed by drug dealer bayonet charges since the expiration of the AWB... :rolleyes:

John Rogers
June 12, 2006, 12:55 PM
My first thought was that the quote was out of context and the reference to NRA was to indicate that the organization's renewed strength was a response to rising crime, not a cause of it. Then I read some of the columns on his web site, like this one: http://www.jfox.neu.edu/herald%20gun.htm. And he writes statistics textbooks too!

John

bigun15
June 12, 2006, 12:58 PM
I want to know how many of those murderers/rapists/whatevers are even NRA members. How can it be the NRA's fault if the people aren't even members of it?

Thefabulousfink
June 12, 2006, 01:08 PM
The article says the "the NRA has renewed strength", but doesn't say how that relates to the rise in crime. It is like saying that "10 people comitted suicide yesterday, the same day that meatloaf was served in the cafeteria." It might be a coinicedence, but there is not evidence of a correlation.

The "criminologist" in this article makes 2 assumptions as to the cause of the rise in violence. The first is that the lack of funding for LE angencies has reduced the level of enforcment/prevention. The second is that the NRA has something to do with the proliferation of weapons used in crimes.

The first assumption has a bit of reasoning behind it, obviously an under-funded police force is less effective than a well-funded one. The second assumption is purely political BS. The use of a gun in a crime goes against every tennent of responsible gun ownership that the NRA teaches.

I won't even begin to mention the unproven correlation between legal civilan gun ownership and the level of violent crime. To think that so-called "educated" people can peddle this hogwash :barf:

RaetherEnt
June 12, 2006, 01:46 PM
My opinion? I think the increase in violent crimes nationwide has a lot to do with the growing problem of methamphetamines nationwide. Those people are CRAZY. Unfortunately, I only think it is going to get worse before it gets better.

All the more reason for the rest of us law-abiding folk to be able to carry to protect ourselves.

Zundfolge
June 12, 2006, 01:57 PM
I have a theory.


New Orleans was a hell hole before Katrina (very high crime rate) ... Katrina caused the mass evacuation of the citizens of New Orleans (a much higher percentage of them are criminals than the rest of the country). NOLA also has a very corrupt/inept police department so its crime rate was likely grossly under-reported.

New Orleans crime problem just got spread around the rest of the country (where its getting honestly reported).


I believe the increase in home invasions here in Colorado Springs was the fault of a couple of NOLA "refugees".

romma
June 12, 2006, 03:07 PM
1) lack of jobs with decent wages 2) shortage of jobs over all 3) the glorification of thug mentality lifestyle by hip-hop and mainstream entertainment 4) the endless cycle of poverty/drug addiction that continues to peretuate on it's own 5) Leftist elitist seperation barriers from socialist power-mongers... I could type all day :barf:

Nightfall
June 12, 2006, 04:23 PM
If the NRA has to suffer the blame for a rise in violent crime, how come they don't get to enjoy some credit ala CCW when it falls?

Yes, it's a rhetorical question. :p

brufener
June 12, 2006, 04:28 PM
I just sent Professor Fox a letter. Here it is:

Dear Professor Fox:

I am writing in regards to an article titled “Violent crime up for 1st time in 5 years” that appeared on Yahoo.com (see http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060612/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/fbi_violent_crime). In the article you are quoted as saying “[f]unding for prevention at the federal level and many localities are [sic] down and the (National Rifle Association) has renewed strength.” The quote is placed in context such that the reader is led to infer that the reduced funding for policing and the renewed strength of the National Rifle Association are, at least in part, to blame for the rise in violent crime.

I was not aware that the renewed strength of the National Rifle Association was associated with a rise in violent crime. May I ask how you came to associate the renewed strength of the NRA to the rise in violent crime? I am particularly interested in any studies and/or statistics you may have used.

Thank you,

I sent it from a .edu mailbox I have, so hopefully it will get to him. I'll update when and if I receive a response.

DRZinn
June 12, 2006, 04:35 PM
Did it ever cross your mind that the increase in crime could be causing the increase in NRA funding, and not the other way around? Probably not.

Moron.

PCGS65
June 12, 2006, 04:37 PM
"We see that budgets for policing are being slashed and the federal government has gotten out of that business," said James Alan Fox, a criminal justice professor at Northeastern University in Boston. "Funding for prevention at the federal level and many localities are down and the (National Rifle Association) has renewed strength."
Seems to me the government is at fault?
But no, it's the NRA:barf:
Just like pencils and keyboards cause misspelled words:barf:

JesseJames
June 12, 2006, 05:10 PM
I don't think anyone really knows why crime rates go up and down. There are many contributing factors.
But blaming the NRA is so galactically silly it's astounding that anyone would believe it.
Only people who WANT to believe it would accept that proposition. This guy is just imploring to peoples prejudices to possibly garner more support for an unclear agenda.

gunsmith
June 12, 2006, 05:43 PM
the trick they do there is not report it, I was attacked
there once by a random stranger for no reason, I called the police
and they pretty much laughed it off.
they do not respond to or investigate many, many crimes there.

This article is the top of drudge, I wonder what he's thinking?
he is better then that most of the time

1911Tuner
June 12, 2006, 06:19 PM
Crime isn't on the rise. People choose to commit crime. The crime and safety committee leaders might be better served to ask: "What the hell is wrong with these morons??"

FireBreather01
June 12, 2006, 07:08 PM
I also wrote Mr Fox and questioned his NRA = violent crime link. I didn't save my message but this is his response - (Since this will be in his column, I think it's fair-game to post it here.)

I am not suggesting, of course, a direct link, only concern for changes inour posture regarding guns. To put it the context of my words, not the APquote, this is from my column for tomorrow: "The great 1990s crime decline was in part a result of fewer at-risk youth in the population plus more federal dollars to supporting children inafter-school programs and other important initiatives. The crime drop was also aided by increased funding from Washington for local cops here andelsewhere, as well as federal muscle in combating the flow of guns with the gun lobby losing its strangle-hold over the political agenda. Well, times have certainly changed. Not only are there now more at-risk youngsters (we knew that would happen), but the resources for supporting them have been slashed by the new administration on Pennsylvania Avenue. President Bush also decimated the federal community policing program, and saddled up to the NRA as a political base. Bush and key conservative members of Congress passed an amendment to block the release of ATF crimegun trace information, enacted a shield of immunity for the gun industry against civil litigation, and permitted the semi-automatic weapons ban to expire."

All I'm saying really is that as we look ahead that we adopt sound gunpolicies,without seeing Congress yield to pressure from the gun lobby.

There are so many inacccuracies and over-simplifications I find it hard to believe he is to be taken seriously!

1911Tuner
June 12, 2006, 07:16 PM
Firebreather wrote:

>There are so many inacccuracies and over-simplifications I find it hard to believe he is to be taken seriously.<
***************************

Oh, but many will. See...Fox and others like him have their minds made up on this issue. I've found that most people who do that rarely learn anything useful beyond that point.

Example:

Mr. Councilman! We have had reports of many cars exceeding the speed limit in the Go Sheepie Go Heights district!

"Okay then. I guess we'd better lower the speed limit there so that everybody can be safe. All in favor?"

:rolleyes:

DRZinn
June 12, 2006, 07:48 PM
I got the same answer, FireBreather. I think we're keeping the guy busy.

After seeing the same old socialist thinking (we need to give them more money so they'll commit fewer crimes, the "gun lobby" puts guns on the street, etc), I don't want to waste any more time on this guy.

jazurell
June 12, 2006, 08:03 PM
Just went to the link to read the article....
The paragraph:

"We see that budgets for policing are being slashed and the federal government has gotten out of that business," said James Alan Fox, a criminal justice professor at Northeastern University in Boston. "Funding for prevention at the federal level and many localities are down and the (National Rifle Association) has renewed strength."

has been changed to:

"We see that budgets for policing are being slashed and the federal government has gotten out of that business," said James Alan Fox, a criminal justice professor at Northeastern University in Boston. Still, Fox said, "We're still far better off than we were during the double-digit crime inflation we saw in the 1970s."

Amazing what pressure will do....keep it up!

cbsbyte
June 12, 2006, 08:18 PM
I think its time to start burying our guns, since once the Dems take the Congress in Nov, they will be using this data to call for more restrictive gun control measures. You wait and see this data is going to be broadcasted in the media through Nov, people will be pleading for more gun control. Once congress becomes Dem controlled, Bush will happily sign any gun control bill improve his sagging public image and get attention of the Iraq issue.

distra
June 12, 2006, 08:19 PM
My profession is in the business of turning knowledge into wisdom. This column is just a data dump of knowledge. Direction of causality is not that easy to predict unless you design the experiment correctly and control the variables properly. Obviously, Houston's issues have a direct correlation with Katrina's aftermath. As for the increased NRA strength = increase in violent crime (not necessarily gun related crimes), one can not say whether or not violent crime has caused the increase in NRA strength or vise versa. It appears that his point, albiet wrongly IMHO, is that with increase in gun ownership equates to more guns in the wrong hands. :rolleyes: Now, I'd like to see the data on firearm theft and increase in gun crimes. IMHO, violent crimes <> gun crimes. :banghead:

Desertdog
June 12, 2006, 09:09 PM
How many of the present day people know or care about period of the Great
Depression to say 1960.

Great Dression had millions out of work. I have read of an unemployment of 25%, no Social Security, few if any retirement plans, no unemployment insurance, no liscense to buy or carry firearms in most of the nation, and very little, compared to today, crime. And guns could be bought for a few dollars.

After the WW2 to the 1960s there still was not a whole lot of difference. Crime still low, compared to today, firearms available, including semi and full automatics from the battle field. Maybe not really legal, but I knew a few people with them.

So what went wrong after the 1960s?

Teachers could disipline the students or they would be sued, no religious training at school even though the kids could opt out and have recess instead, Judges started slapping the wrist of criminals instead of giving them what they deserved. Liberals started many many feel-good programs.

Every time a cop fired their firearm they were investigated more than the crook they shot at, wether the hit them or not. If a cop looked at a crook wrong or talked rough to them they were sued.

The inmates started running the asylum and people like Professor Fox are chelping them stay in chage.

Pawcatch
June 12, 2006, 09:36 PM
and very little,compared to today,crime.

I'm not sure that statement is true.The homicide rate in 1933 was 9.7 per 100,000 people and the homcide rate of the last few years in this country is only about 6 homicides per 100,000 people.
It should also be noted that the homicide rate in 2004 was only a little higher than in 1950.

www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0873729.html

www.druglibrary.org/Schaffer/Library/homrate1.htm

Kentak
June 12, 2006, 11:19 PM
Note to liberals: You won't reduce crime by taking guns away from middle-aged white guys.

Desertdog
June 12, 2006, 11:26 PM
I wonder how much increase of crime is caused by the increased illegal alien population.

From the Los Angeles news media there seems to be a lot of Hispanics on the wanted list.

Haymaker
June 12, 2006, 11:40 PM
This smells like a Hoc Ergo Post Propter Hoc argument:neener: Which is a Fallicy :p :p :p

TWIT!:cuss: :banghead:

Haymaker
June 12, 2006, 11:41 PM
This smells like a Hoc Ergo Post Propter Hoc argument:neener: Which is a Fallacy!! :p :p :p

TWIT!:cuss: :banghead:

Kim
June 13, 2006, 12:10 AM
Hey Mr. Fox. If you really want to be honest look into the money wasted on the COPS program.. Investigate how may new cops in Little Rock Arkansas were nothing but a computer. Look into little towns like Hector, AR who ended up with 5 hired cops when the town needed nothing but one.. Waste , Waste and Waste. Plus the program was supposed to last only 3 years to help towns get new cops hired to to pay for them forever. In other words it was a political scam. There were some small towns that got angry having all the cops in their town so they pulled out of the program. The whole country in not Boston, NY, LA, DC., etc.

Kim
June 13, 2006, 12:15 AM
Hey Mr. Fox. If you really want to be honest look into the money wasted on the COPS program.. Investigate how may new cops in Little Rock Arkansas were nothing but a computer. Look into little towns like Hector, AR who ended up with 5 hired cops when the town needed nothing but one.. Waste , Waste and Waste. Plus the program was supposed to last only 3 years to help towns get new cops hired NOT to to pay for them forever. In other words it was a political scam. There were some small towns that got angry having all the cops in their town so they pulled out of the program. The whole country in not Boston, NY, LA, DC., etc. And while you are at it look into the corruption and dumb spending of Homeland Security. The little town hospital I work at got a 75,000 dollar remote fancy camera and TV. It will collect dust until it obsolete and then pollute the earth when discarded something you probaly have nightmares about.:neener:

brufener
June 13, 2006, 10:26 AM
I also got the same response. My biggest problem was that he makes the assumption that Bush's gun policies are not sound, and thus causing (at least in part) a rise in crime. Yet he gives no evidence that the changes in the laws that Bush made had any effect at all.

I love how he ends it :rolleyes:

All I'm saying really is that as we look ahead that we adopt sound gun policies, without seeing Congress yield to pressure from the gun lobby.

I'm all for sound gun policies as well, but my idea of "sound" is different from his. Also, why is it bad if Congress yields to the gun lobby? If the NRA is representing the views of Americans then Congress should be listening to them. I see no problem with Congress "yielding" to what voters want. Seems to me that's what they should do. I wouldn't call it yielding though, I would call it enacting the will of the people.

Manedwolf
June 13, 2006, 11:04 AM
I would think that the fact that crime in Illinois went UP would be a sort of "hoist with their own petard", by simple truths?

1. Nobody can legally carry a concealed weapon in Illinois.
2. Criminals carry weapons concealed and use them, as evidenced by street crime.
3. Therefore, concealed weapons prohibition is not effective.

And also:

1. Guns must be registered in Illinois
2. Criminals are shooting people with unregistered or stolen guns.
3. Therefore, the registry is not useful.

And even:

1. It is very difficult for a law-abiding citizen to own a gun in Chicago.
2. The number of guns in Chicago is hundreds or thousands of times the number of legal permits.
3. Therefore, the legal permit laws ARE NOT WORKING.

romma
June 13, 2006, 11:25 AM
I think its time to start burying our guns, since once the Dems take the Congress in Nov, they will be using this data to call for more restrictive gun control measures. As has often been stated here " If it's time to start burying your guns, it's time to start digging them up"...

Third_Rail
June 13, 2006, 11:51 AM
I always thought that overall, crimes involving firearms were relatively small compared to knives, etc.?

Carl N. Brown
June 13, 2006, 01:13 PM
I would think that the fact that crime in Illinois went UP would be a sort of "hoist with

their own petard", by simple truths?

1. Nobody can legally carry a concealed weapon in Illinois.
2. Criminals carry weapons concealed and use them, as evidenced by street crime.
3. Therefore, concealed weapons prohibition is not effective.

And also:

1. Guns must be registered in Illinois
2. Criminals are shooting people with unregistered or stolen guns.
3. Therefore, the registry is not useful.

And even:

1. It is very difficult for a law-abiding citizen to own a gun in Chicago.
2. The number of guns in Chicago is hundreds or thousands of times the number of legal

permits.
3. Therefore, the legal permit laws ARE NOT WORKING.

If the concealed weapons prohibition is not effective,
if the registry is not useful,
if the permit laws are not working,
the answer is obvious: MORE OF THE SAME ineffective, useless, unworkable laws.

Equally obvious is that punishing criminals for violent crime is judgemental
and vindictive and not respectful of the criminal's life style.

longeyes
June 13, 2006, 01:26 PM
I wonder how much increase of crime is caused by the increased illegal alien population.

From the Los Angeles news media there seems to be a lot of Hispanics on the wanted list.

Shssss. Just one more of those optical illusions going around. Couldn't be a connection. They just come here to work.

baz
June 13, 2006, 01:47 PM
Okay, so the national murder rate is up overall. And up pretty significantly in Houston, TX. But when I look at all the TX cities listed here (http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/2005preliminary/05jan-dec.pdf), declines in the rest of the state wipe out the increase in Houston, and there may have been one, net, more in 2005 than in 2004.

When I look at the FL cities listed, there was a pretty healthy decline overall, with the cites listed being down 21.

Since the MSM like to generalize, how about these generalizations:

Concealed carry works. In FL, murders were down significantly in 2005, compared to 2004. In TX, thanks to concealed carry, the state held its own against the influx of all the Katrina thugs.

Yeah, let's see if that gets reported.

Lies, damn lies, and statistics.

Actually, I think statistics can be useful, in the right hands. But the MSM only likes to report statistics mangled by the wrong hands.

The big problem with the FBI data is that so far, it is not detailed enough. As others have noted, no per capital details, no socio-economic context, and so on.

xd9fan
June 13, 2006, 03:43 PM
All that education...and he's still dumb as a box of rocks.......

JesseJames
June 13, 2006, 05:47 PM
You know, I am what most of you guys would consider a fence-sitter on the whole fight for gun rights issue.
But stories like this are pushing me more and more in considering joining the NRA. Something that I've been real hesitant about because generally, I don't believe much in being part of a "club". Community sure, but club?

I actually went to the NRA website and clicked on the "join" link and stared at the membership fees page.

Zundfolge
June 13, 2006, 05:51 PM
I actually went to the NRA website and clicked on the "join" link and stared at the membership fees page.

The American Rifleman magazine and the free window stickers are worth the cost of membership :D

JesseJames
June 13, 2006, 05:56 PM
Man, I am depressed. I was all happy in buying a new AR style rifle for myself for Christmas.
I knew that the federal AWB expired. But now I learn that CT has state legislation AWB.
I am truly disgusted. And (R)Congressman Chris Shays supports the ban.

Connecticut. Once the gun cradle of Western civilization. Now I can't buy a gun that was originally manufactured here. Chrissakes.

It may be time to get involved.

romma
June 13, 2006, 06:04 PM
But now I learn that CT has state legislation AWB.
Actually JesseJames, you can get pretty cool ar-15 rifles still. I bought a Bussmaster xm-15 M4gery a few months ago. No collapsable stock, but it is styled like one. No flash supressor, but the barrel is ported like one. Would I have liked those features? Absolutely. It is still an awesome weapon that has the Evil black style at least.

JesseJames
June 13, 2006, 06:29 PM
Yeah, but I know what I want. And I am a bit of a stickler.

Why do I have to sacrifice personal freedom choices because of some irresponsible morons?:banghead:

Zen21Tao
June 13, 2006, 08:24 PM
Criminal justice experts said the statistics reflect the nation's complacency in fighting crime, a product of dramatic declines in the 1990s and the abandonment of effective programs that emphasized prevention, putting more police officers on the street and controlling the spread of guns.

I would agree in the sense that Dems have created a complacency when it comes to crime through it’s socialist view that the government will take care of its people so that the people don’t have to take care of themselves. Clinton abandoned the concept of punishing the criminal in favor of the idea of banning a line of weapons hardly every used in crimes to provide those ignorant of firearms with the illusion that crimes are being prevented.

"We see that budgets for policing are being slashed and the federal government has gotten out of that business," said James Alan Fox, a criminal justice professor at Northeastern University in Boston. "Funding for prevention at the federal level and many localities are down and the (National Rifle Association) has renewed strength."

Ah, hum. And which party cuts the budgets of law enforcement insisting that taking weapons out of the hands of criminal will prevent them from committing crime? What in hell does the NRA have to do with federal funding for law enforcement? The NRA is not shy on stating its opinion that law enforcement agencies put cops on the street and prosecute criminals rather than put that money into stupid programs that try to ban only one kind of weapon. Hello, when criminals are deprived of one weapon they just get another.

Fox cautioned against reading too much into year-to-year changes in individual cities, saying some differences result from random variation and marked swings the previous year. Also, some large statistical increases result from some small numerical changes.

Yes but there is also a statistical rule called “regression to the mean” which contends that extreme measurements will eventually regress back to more average measurements. For example, a basketball player with a normal 50/50 free through average that shoots say 60 in a couple of games is more likely to fall back to his natural average than maintain an extreme scores. In this case if the crime rate around 2001 was at an all time low then statistical probability alone asserts that it is more likely for the crime rate to return to a more average rate than maintain such extreme lows.

Sylvan-Forge
June 14, 2006, 02:31 PM
... per capita ...

Zundfolge
June 14, 2006, 05:04 PM
The more I look at this issue, the more convinced I am that crime rates have risen across the nation because New Orleans dumped at least 100,000 criminals into communities accross the country.

New Orleans has apparently lost about 40% (http://www.wistv.com/Global/story.asp?S=5000352&nav=0RaP) of its population.
The most recent U.S. census put New Orleans' population at 484,674 and the population of Greater New Orleans at 1,337,726. So that's between about 190,000 and 535,000 people who haven't returned (most of which I'm sure are decent people, but NOLA had more than its share of criminals).

When they where in NOLA they were left alone by the police but now that they are out in areas that actually keep track of crime they are committing crimes that are being recorded.

I seem to recall the city of Houston tried to bill the city of New Orleans for the extra police bill caused by the increase in crime caused by NOLA refugees.

1911Tuner
June 14, 2006, 05:17 PM
Zundfolge.......:scrutiny: I like it! I think you're probably closer to the truth than on the face of it. Look at what happened to southern Florida after the Cuban boat refugee influx. Castro simply opened his prisons and asylums and gave'em a ticket. Smart move. Got rid of his problems and made'em ours.

BFWE
June 14, 2006, 05:27 PM
Reading this on my lunch break and don't have time to read the whole thing. I thought I would throw this into the discussion and get back with ya'll latter and I appoligize if I'm repeating someone else or distracting the line of reasoning.

This is my take on why crime is up:

A lot of crime statistics have to do with how crimes are reported to the FBI for that agency to compile the Uniform Crime Report (UCR).
There may be a spike in the male 16-21 year old population -- historically a spike in this segment of the population has always equated to higher crime stats.

The UCR numbers are tied to Federal funding. That makes it more political than an actual useful tool. I have not checked on the general population trends and the number of "target" males. I'll try to do this and post about what I find latter. However, when I worked as a PO in Harris Co., Texas this was always something we paid attention to and was a suprizingly accurate indicator of where we could expect to see the distribution of our arrest, ticketing, etc.

Art Eatman
June 14, 2006, 05:32 PM
More than any one factor, violent crime (with or without guns) is tied to demographics: How many of the population are in the age group of around 16 to around 25.

This number declined during the 1990s, and is now on the rise. This is based on an article I read (somewhere, damfino) a couple or three years back, predicting that this age group would increase in numbers and that the violent crime rate would, also.

I haven't checked year-by-year census dat and estimates.

Art

PCGS65
June 14, 2006, 05:33 PM
Mandewolf
FYI, In Illinois face to face gun trans do not have to be registered. But if you buy from FFL you have too.
Also in chicago it's illegal to own a gun period(legally that is)unless your a LEO or an alderman. Alderman can CC.:barf:
I'm not nit picking your post and I agree with it.:)

Selfdfenz
June 14, 2006, 05:36 PM
JesseJames

Zundfolge hit the nail on the head as either of the mags are worth the price.

Join the NRA.

S-
NRA Life Member

Mongo the Mutterer
June 14, 2006, 05:56 PM
We had a situation in St. Louis in 05 about our PD's under reporting on UCR. It seems that certain types of crimes, such as acquaintance rape, were not reported.

The attesting officer would make a "memo for file", not a police report, so the event never hit the crime stats.

Our Socialist Newspaper, the Bejing Dispatch caught the practice, and the numbers were revised by the Chief. Knowing how lazy newspaper people are, I'm just wondering if this was a trend in the nation. "If it works in STL, lets do it in Cincinnati, etc."

Feedback folks?

Gordon Fink
June 14, 2006, 06:06 PM
So what went wrong after the 1960s?

If anything, it was our various “wars” against abstractions: “wars” on poverty, guns, drugs, and now terror.

~G. Fink

Manedwolf
June 14, 2006, 06:38 PM
Also in chicago it's illegal to own a gun period(legally that is)unless your a LEO or an alderman. Alderman can CC.

So why aren't politicians pointing to this constantly? Two basic facts there.

1. Guns are illegal in Chicago.
2. There ARE STILL LOTS OF GUNS IN CHICAGO.

Ergo, the laws don't work! Man. They could point that out everyday!

If you enjoyed reading about "Violent crime up for 1st time in 5 years - NRA blamed (duplicate threads merged)" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!