Would you believe: http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2014/07/29/Army-s-New-Handgun-Weapon-Criminals
Which purports to blame the Army's request for replacement of the 1911 as the reason why multiple gunshot wounds went up.
Said quote coming from another columnists article which actually makes the claim. And the study quoted made no effort to distinguish exactly what firearm was actually used in the shooting, or if it was legal self defense.
So, we have the resulting headline which is spurious at best. Criminals were not suddenly changing over to the new military issue firearm, what happened was that the market itself was already changing. The Army was actually being delinquent in that the nature of it's sidearm was already 30 years behind the times - plenty of other NATO allies had adopted double stack double action duty guns. We had just finally put pencil to paper and could no longer justify the expense of reworking them for the third time.
This is a great example of the convoluted reasoning that the antigunners use to justify their view - blame the good guys for expanding crime because they finally updated a little used sidearm nearing the end of it's service life.
And they are going to do it again, Oh Woe Is Us! We will now suffer even more hideous injuries because whatever the military uses will trickle down to the hands of criminals!
It's Clinton era thinking and exactly the reason he had the Army's inventory of 1911's cut up for scrap. Notwithstanding that 1) criminals tend to choose the same issue weapon as Police, which means 2) they tend to prefer Glocks. Not Berettas.
However, this study claims that crooks steal what is being sold on the market, and the .357 revolver was still riding high even in 1995. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/GUIC.PDF
Somebody can't get their facts straight. Taking the findings at face value, tho, there was some reason that people were starting to pull the trigger a lot more, whatever it was that they were using. Since the majority of criminal shooters in the studies were born after 1960, and were coming of age prior to 1983, what could have influenced them to suddenly increase the number of shots they were taking? They would have been teens in the mid 1970's.
Well, it wasn't video games, Pong debuted in 1976. We wouldn't see active shooter games for another 15-20 years. Nope, what was going on were the Drug Wars of the 1980's, and a much larger number of cops pursuing the crooks. When gunfights occurred, cops weren't backing off or running like another rival gang may have chosen to do. And cops in that era were largely still carrying revolvers, not hi cap military duty guns.
In other words, some ignorant columnist once again has their conclusions based on an agenda, not fact or documented history, and the general public is once again completely misinformed by their propaganda.
Which purports to blame the Army's request for replacement of the 1911 as the reason why multiple gunshot wounds went up.
Said quote coming from another columnists article which actually makes the claim. And the study quoted made no effort to distinguish exactly what firearm was actually used in the shooting, or if it was legal self defense.
So, we have the resulting headline which is spurious at best. Criminals were not suddenly changing over to the new military issue firearm, what happened was that the market itself was already changing. The Army was actually being delinquent in that the nature of it's sidearm was already 30 years behind the times - plenty of other NATO allies had adopted double stack double action duty guns. We had just finally put pencil to paper and could no longer justify the expense of reworking them for the third time.
This is a great example of the convoluted reasoning that the antigunners use to justify their view - blame the good guys for expanding crime because they finally updated a little used sidearm nearing the end of it's service life.
And they are going to do it again, Oh Woe Is Us! We will now suffer even more hideous injuries because whatever the military uses will trickle down to the hands of criminals!
It's Clinton era thinking and exactly the reason he had the Army's inventory of 1911's cut up for scrap. Notwithstanding that 1) criminals tend to choose the same issue weapon as Police, which means 2) they tend to prefer Glocks. Not Berettas.
However, this study claims that crooks steal what is being sold on the market, and the .357 revolver was still riding high even in 1995. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/GUIC.PDF
Somebody can't get their facts straight. Taking the findings at face value, tho, there was some reason that people were starting to pull the trigger a lot more, whatever it was that they were using. Since the majority of criminal shooters in the studies were born after 1960, and were coming of age prior to 1983, what could have influenced them to suddenly increase the number of shots they were taking? They would have been teens in the mid 1970's.
Well, it wasn't video games, Pong debuted in 1976. We wouldn't see active shooter games for another 15-20 years. Nope, what was going on were the Drug Wars of the 1980's, and a much larger number of cops pursuing the crooks. When gunfights occurred, cops weren't backing off or running like another rival gang may have chosen to do. And cops in that era were largely still carrying revolvers, not hi cap military duty guns.
In other words, some ignorant columnist once again has their conclusions based on an agenda, not fact or documented history, and the general public is once again completely misinformed by their propaganda.
