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

Status
Not open for further replies.
how about

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:
 
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
 
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.
 
"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."
Click to expand...
Seems to me the government is at fault?
But no, it's the NRA:barf:
Just like pencils and keyboards cause misspelled words:barf:
 
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.
 
crime in NY is not down

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
 
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.
Click to expand...

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

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:
 
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.
 
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!
 
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.
 
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:
 
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.
 
Note to liberals: You won't reduce crime by taking guns away from middle-aged white guys.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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:
 
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
 
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.
Click to expand...
As has often been stated here " If it's time to start burying your guns, it's time to start digging them up"...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

P
  • Locked
Anti's are gearing up...
Replies
2
Views
550
Bartholomew Roberts
B
P
  • Locked
Violent crime 40 year low?
Replies
1
Views
534
Lennyjoe
Lennyjoe
R
  • Locked
FBI: Violent crime rate declines again
Replies
2
Views
390
boofus
B
R
  • Locked
Murders up, other crimes down in early 2005
Replies
0
Views
268
rick_reno
R
M
  • Locked
Violent crime on the rise in Britain...
Replies
15
Views
932
MicroBalrog
M
Back
Top