Slumlords and their crime generating properties have been chased out, but is life getting better?
Please click onto the COMMENTS for the story.
posted by Bob at Sunday, October 26, 2008
Custom Search
Sunday, October 26, 2008
A DEMOCRACY TOWN HALL HOME
Do you have a topic you want to discuss at the Town Hall? Email your request to A_Democracy@yahoo.com
“A DEMOCRACY” Disclaimer- While the administrators and moderators of this forum will attempt to remove or edit any generally objectionable material as quickly as possible, it is impossible to review every message. Therefore you acknowledge that all posts made to this forum express the views and opinions of the author and not the administrators, moderators (except for posts by these people) and hence will not be held liable.
You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, sexually-oriented or any other material that may violate any applicable laws. Doing so may lead to you being immediately and permanently banned
THE ROOF GUYS
Mickey's Diner 1950 7th Street West, St Paul, MN
(651) 698-8387
AX-MAN SURPLUS
1639 University Ave.
St. Paul, MN 55104
Tel:(651)646-8653
LANDLORD.COM LINK HERE
SHHHH! While we listen to words of wisdom from a wise man.
Conscience is the light of the Soul that burns within the chambers of our psychological heart. It is as real as life is. It raises the voice in protest whenever anything is thought of or done contrary to the righteousness. Conscience is a form of truth that has been transferred through our genetic stock in the form of the knowledge of our own acts and feelings as right or wrong. A virtuous and courageous person can alone use the instrument of conscience. He or she can alone hear the inner voice of the soul clearly. In a wicked person this faculty is absent. The sensitive nature of his / her conscience has been destroyed by sin or corruption. Hence he or she is unable to discriminate right from wrong. Those who are leading organizations, business enterprises, institutions and governments should develop this virtue of the ability to use their own conscience. This wisdom of using the clean conscience will enable them to enjoy the freedom.
Dr APJ Kalam, President of India given during the inauguration of the seminar on “THE EFFECTS OF CORRUPTION ON GOOD GOVERNANCE AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Previous Posts
- Local Republicans targeted
- McCollum condemns racist political flier
- St. Paul business might get the boot, but not with...
- Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending
- Owner of St. Paul duplex raided before RNC plans t...
- Saint Paul/ Federal Fair Housing Lawsuits, Meet Vi...
- Saint Paul/ Federal Fair Housing Lawsuits part 12,...
- Saint Paul/ Federal Fair Housing Lawsuits, Meet Vi...
- Nancy C. Lazaryan, el al., v. City of St. Paul, et...
- Appeals court overturns eviction
60 Comments:
By Nick Ferraro
nferraro@pioneerpress.com
Article Last Updated: 10/26/2008 12:18:55 PM CDT
St. Paul police said this morning the female shot to death Saturday night in the Dayton's Bluff neighborhood is 18 years old.
As reported in today's Pioneer Press, police received a call of shots fired at 9:35 p.m. The woman and a 24-year-old man were shot near Sixth Street East and Forest Street, and the car they were in traveled about four blocks to a gas station at Arcade Street and Minnehaha Avenue East, police spokesman Peter Panos said.
It was unclear whether they were in the vehicle when shot, Panos said.
"I know one of the car windows was shot out pretty good," he said.
No one in custody, he said.
The man was taken to Regions Hospital and his condition is unknown at this time, Panos said, adding the victim was hit in the thigh.
The names of the victims will be released after family members are notified, Panos said.
Investigators are asking anyone with information about this crime to call the homicide unit at 651-291-1111 or Crime Stoppers at 1-800-222-TIPS (8477).
Where the hell are these thugs getting their guns ?
Stolen ?
I am all for members of NRA, but we need serious gun control laws and penaltys.
Jeff Matiatos
No Jeff we need to throw these thugs in jail and throw away the key.We also need more citizens carrying guns to deter criminals.You could take away all the guns and these thugs would use knives and bats as their weapons,Then peple like you would say we need bat control.NO WE NEED THUG CONTROL-PERIOD!
Randy
Randy, so I guess you would propose we fight these thugs like
the days of the ol' west where it's a dog gone shoot out ?
Get real.
To do things your way, you would have to hold a gun to the sheriff just to get a permit to have a side arm.
Right now in Minnesota, the only people licensed to carry are law enforcement and elite buisness operators who can be justified and authorized in carrying a side arm.
There will never be a solution for this problem, only a deterrent perhalps in the manner that you suggest, but that will never be lawfully acceptable or rationalized by any unit of Government.
It's a dog eat dog world out there.
If units of Government were allowed to let everyone carry, you would see more crime than ever before.
Our courts would be backed up to the hill with murders disguised as justifiable homocides.
Remember the Bernard Goetz subway shootings in New York in the 80s ?
It would be like that,only worse.
I personally was satisfied that Mr.Goetz took out those thugs.
You think about that Randy !
Jeff Matiatos
Hey moron.....I have news for you. EVERYONE can carry a gun under the law right now. You just can't be a criminal. Any person who has not had felony convictions can legally carry a gun im Minnesota right now. Every couple of years, the BCA makes a report to the Legislature on those people who carry guns and none of them have used them illegaly. I'm with Randy on this one. We need effective crime control, not the typical DFL feel good gun shit. It's because of idiotic ideas like this that we're in the mess we're in a scoiety. When are you people going to wake up?
I wonder if whoever shot at these people would have done it if everyone on the street had a gun under their coat? I doubt it very much.
1:53 - yes guns are legal and piss isn't...
Strange world, strange town, strange Sheriff...
Was society safer when we had more guns in homes? No.
In 150 years, the only real solution that brought violent crime down has not been more armed citizens or more cops. Its been the economy.
During good economic times violent crime and abortion drops. Unemployment sends both up.
Jeff,
"I am all for members of NRA, but we need serious gun control laws and penaltys"
"Gun Control" controls only the law-abiding. Chicago has the highest murder rate in the US AND the toughest "gun control" laws.
As to penalties? The NRA is leading that fight. The American left has, on the other hand, lagged at dishing out penalties. Saint Paul has had for years a VERY tough sentencing guideline for gun crimes - but for years, Susan Gaertner pled it away to get deals. (Not sure if that's still the case, but for years it certainly was).
"Right now in Minnesota, the only people licensed to carry are law enforcement and elite buisness operators who can be justified and authorized in carrying a side arm."
That is patently untrue. Anyone who...:
* Is 21+ years old
* Has a clean crime record
* Has no record of drug or booze
abuse
* Has no record of violent mental
illness
* passes a background check
* passes a skills course
...can get a permit to carry.
And...
"If units of Government were allowed to let everyone carry, you would see more crime than ever before"
People licensed to carry via the process above tend to commit crimes at TWO ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE less than the general public.
"Was society safer when we had more guns in homes? No."
Well, yes. Yes, we were.
Is Minnesota safer now than it was before 1974? I ask because, until 1974, you didn't even *need* a permit to carry a concealed firearm in Minnesota - provided you'd never been conficted of a violent crime.
John Lott in "More Guns, Less Crime", pretty well proved that "shall-issue" laws like Minnesotas *reduce* violent crime (all other things being equal - and yes, the economy plays a big role in overall crime rates).
The overall conclusion? Yes - more *law abiding citizens* carrying guns (WITH the training and knowledge to use them properly and legally) DOES lower crime.
Gun violence is not new in the United States, President Abraham Lincoln, James Garfield, William McKinley, and John F. Kennedy all got the debate started on guns, access to guns and violence. In the 19th century (1800's), most mass violence were due to riots and guns played a secondary role.
I don't have a problem with people owning guns and do believe that its an amendment right however, save the crap about it preventing crime. That's BS put out by the overly political NRA.
Stats show that in the process of a violent crime when the victim or observer was armed, that person only went to their weapon 28% of the time. You see, have the inflated sense of self esteem is one thing, actually using it (sober) to potentially kill someone is tough on most people's minds. Its just a matter of decency. You are more likely to use it to protect a vulnerable love one than to protect a stranger or even yourself.
The second reason I call BS is that most criminals, don't think in a preventive way. In other words, they set out to carjack someone, they don't think about what if the person is armed or if they caught they will do more time for bringing a weapon. These dipshits never think they'll be caught so they will still be out there- even when everyone around them have been shot or caught, they will still live that lifestyle.
I've got answers for addressing some crime within young populations (not with violent criminals who have a real mental disorder) with more cops on patrol, more after-school programs, skill training and real rehabilitation in prison for the perps who will one day walk outside of the prison.
Get all the you want, I don't care. It won't solve the problem.
Eric
11:48,
I like your research on the issue, but I have yet to see anyone carrying a side arm other than a cop on st.paul streets.
I am sure there is a few out there though.
Why is that ?
The sheriff, who has to approve the permit, can deny folks for the slightest of reasons.
A 5th degree domestic can deny you the permit even if it was 20 years ago.
Didn't someone here say that it was Benanav who got wal-mart to stop selling hunting rifles and high powered pellet guns in St.Paul ?
Do we have a sub cultured city council that wants to rid citizens of there right to own any kind of guns.
I support the right to carry, but I see that on the other hand , there are to many illegal guns out on the streets that are primarily responcible for murders abroad.
You fail to convince me however, that law abiding citizens that carry, lowers crime less than the crime rates that currently exists given the number of law enforcement personel that carry.
Just because you have a permit to carry doesn't deputize you to fight crime as a whole, it's just that your personal protection is a lot more secure.
Jeff Matiatos
Eric said: These dipshits never think they'll be caught so they will still be out there- even when everyone around them have been shot or caught, they will still live that lifestyle.
Truer words were never spoken. It makes NO difference if you increase the penalty for using weapons or if you put a concealed weapon on everyone on the planet. Neither of those things will change the thought process of someone who is going to commit a crime.
I worked in Corrections from 1974 to 1989, one thing I learned is that the people who commit crimes aren't terribly bright and they don't think much about what they are doing.
For anyone to think that they are smart enough to go through the thought process of figuring out how much time in prison they are going to do if they get caught shows extreme ignorance of the corrections problem. It is just as true to think that these clowns would reason out that someone "might" be carrying. If you told them it was a 9 out of 10 chance that the person they were thinking about robbing was packing heat, they'd be sure that they were going to get lucky.
That is why the conceal law was so strange. If you want to carry a gun, why not just get it so that you can holster the dang thing on your hip? That would be much more likely to scare the bad guys away (though some of them would be sure your gun was fake, or not loaded).
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
In order for the community as a whole to feel that the right to carry was having such an impact on lowering crime, there would have to exists a signifigant number of citizens carrying in open public to even present an intimidating factor to prevent crime.
It just isn't happening in St.Paul.
Why St.Paul cops were harassing citizens who had obtained permits to carry.
Cops just don't like others carrying guns because it impairs there ability to have power over you even if your legal.
St.Paul is anti right to carry.
Jeff Matiatos
Rehabilitation is one thing but jail time should be tough and not a cake walk.You can take a dumb dog a beat the piss out of it and it will learn.These criminals should be cleaning our highways and streets.Pulling weeds and mowing grass-we should have the best looking road systems in the world.
Make jail time so tough that when criminals get out they don't want to come back.Its called memory managment.And if they do have a bed ready.Obviously what we are doing isn't working and we need to make a change.
And by the way Jeff sometimes your just way off.
Randy
Jeff is just like an irritant to the skin!
2:09,
Thanks, if you will just leave your name and address, I will send you some Hemmoroid creme for your ass thats itching so bad.
How am I way off Randy ?
Only a dumb ass individual like you would beat the piss out of a dog to get it to do what you want it to do.
I hope you don't have kids because you would probably beat the piss out of them because you don't know the first thing about how to get any respect.
You really think crimminals will be rehabilitated by picking up trash on the highways ? WoW !
Stop littering and we won't have to worry about it.
Clue us in on this memory management thing your talking about.
How does it work ?
Jeff Matiatos
"save the crap about it preventing crime. That's BS put out by the overly political NRA."
Er, not true. Even if you discount John Lott's work on the subject (and it's an academic work that's been pretty strenuously peer-reviewed), Gary Kleck - a U of Florida criminologist and, by the way, a liberal - has pretty much shown that defensive firearm use DOES impact crime.
If you have some *objective proof* that it's "BS", please favor us with something more than your assurance.
"Stats show that in the process of a violent crime when the victim or observer was armed, that person only went to their weapon 28% of the time."
Please show us the "stats", Eric. They make no sense.
Against that, by the way, the FBI stat show that resisting a violent attack (aggravated assault, rape, kidnapping, ADW or attempted murder) with a firearm was 1/7 as likely to leave the victim dead as non-resistance, and 1/4 as likely as with non-lethal force.
" You see, have the inflated sense of self esteem is one thing"
I call BS, Eric. There is NO study linking anything on the subject to "self-esteem".
You may be able to BS a lot of people on this subject, Eric, but not me.
"You are more likely to use it to protect a vulnerable love one than to protect a stranger or even yourself."
Actually, if you've taken concealed carry training, it's more a matter of law; using lethal force to defend someone else is VERY legally tricky.
"The second reason I call BS is that most criminals, don't think in a preventive way...These dipshits never think they'll be caught so they will still be out there- even when everyone around them have been shot or caught..."
You're half right.
Criminals will still commit crime. But Lott showed that there is a displacement in "shall-issue" states - violent crime drops, property crime rises.
In other words - you're wrong.
"Get all the you want, I don't care. It won't solve the problem."
Nobody (nobody credible, at least) is saying it will.
Merely that for any given individual in a specific situation, having a gun might be the *second*-worst possible solution; shooting in self-defense is emotionally and legally difficult, but not as difficult as being raped or murdered.
Jeff,
"I like your research on the issue, but I have yet to see anyone carrying a side arm other than a cop on st.paul streets."
That's because while a Minnesota carry permit DOES allow open carry, it's usually a bad idea. Seeing guns makes people nervous. It's generally more *tactful* to carry concealed. It also makes the cops less nervous.
"The sheriff, who has to approve the permit, can deny folks for the slightest of reasons."
Jeff, you really, really need to learn the law.
We have a "Shall Issue" system in MN (along with 39 other states); if you are over 21, have a clean record and pass the skills course and background check, the sheriff MUST issue you the permit. The Sheriff CAN try to revoke it - if, for example, he's seen you starting fights - but under THE LAW, the applicant can demand an administrative hearing to make sure the denial was legal; if the Sheriff loses, he *must* pay the legal bills and court fees.
"A 5th degree domestic can deny you the permit even if it was 20 years ago."
True.
"Do we have a sub cultured city council that wants to rid citizens of there right to own any kind of guns."
I suspect six of the seven would approve of a gun ban. I know of at least one city councilperson who, at one point, believed that there was justification for the Shall Issue law. I'm not naming names right now.
"I support the right to carry, but I see that on the other hand , there are to many illegal guns out on the streets that are primarily responcible for murders abroad."
You're comparing apples and cars. Right to carry and illegal guns have NOTHING to do with each other.
"You fail to convince me however, that law abiding citizens that carry, lowers crime less than the crime rates that currently exists given the number of law enforcement personel that carry."
Not sure what that sentence means - nothing about civilian carry has ANYTHING to do with law enforcements' guns - but you need to read John Lott's "More Guns, Less Crime", or Gary Kleck's "Point Blank".
"Just because you have a permit to carry doesn't deputize you to fight crime as a whole, it's just that your personal protection is a lot more secure."
That is one of the key points in the training class you MUST pass to get the permit; a carry permit is not a Junior Cop badge. The rules for civilian self-defense are MUCH more strict than for cops.
Repke:
"It makes NO difference if you increase the penalty for using weapons or if you put a concealed weapon on everyone on the planet. Neither of those things will change the thought process of someone who is going to commit a crime."
Nor has anyone EVER said it would.
Concealed carry merely gives the honest, law-abiding citizen the means to defend herself from a lethal threat.
That is *all*.
"I worked in Corrections from 1974 to 1989, one thing I learned is that the people who commit crimes aren't terribly bright and they don't think much about what they are doing."
Which is why some of them need some reinforcement in consequences - like the business end of a .45. NOBODY's dumb enough to miss that hint.
"That is why the conceal law was so strange. If you want to carry a gun, why not just get it so that you can holster the dang thing on your hip? That would be much more likely to scare the bad guys away (though some of them would be sure your gun was fake, or not loaded)."
Chuck, why do you keep bringing that up? I've set you straight on that point MANY times over the past ten years.
There are people who get nervous around guns - as is their right. There are people who will try to harass the law-abiding gun owner who carries openly just on "principle" (and that can get legally dicey and expensive for the law-abiding citizen). And while most criminals are morons, it doesn't take a genius to think "I'm robbing this Superamerica; I'd better take out the big guy with the .45 on his hip first".
No, Chuck - between tact and tactics, I'll keep mine hidden, thanks.
And finally, Jeff again:
"How am I way off Randy?"
With all due respect, Jeff, your understanding of both the Minnesota Personal Protection Act AND Minnesota's self-defense law is faulty.
Wow. That was a long comment.
Guns lowered crime in Louisiana. They had a very bad probelm a few years ago with violent car jackings and people egtting hurt. The powers that be wanted to make it LEGAL to shoot anyone trying to car jack you. The usual Repkes and Erics of the world came out and warned that there would be shoot outs like the wild west and lots of minority people getting gunned down by white people. The law passed and a few people got gunned down and the problem was solved. Car jacking went down to the point where it was almost non existent. More guns, less crime Jeff. So in closing Jeff......I have one question to ask you. Since your so anti gun, if I'm eating dinner or lunch in a restuarant where you are also present and someone comes in and starts shooting the place up, would you prefer that I shoot him before or afetr he shoots you?
Thank you Mitch. You made some nice points.
The one thing I appreciate about Mitch is that he doesn't make the BS deterent argument.
I have no problem with someone who is trained to operate a gun owning a gun and carrying a gun.
I have problems with the BS that it will reduce crime.
It may help some people, some time be able to protect themselves.
It also is where most crooks get their guns... by robbing gun owners houses. It also is how children shoot themselves and their playmates and how domestic disputes end... so, there are trade offs.
But, I believe in the constitution and support the second amendment... which to me means that Sherrif Fletcher was out there violating it when he arrests someone for owning a bucket of piss.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
6:59,
Obviously you make a final point that everyone agrees with.
We all would be thankful for a citizen who defended us in a shooting senario that you mention.
I am not anti-gun, I was saying how stolen guns contribute to firearms crimes more than by persons who lawfully own guns.
I am sure law enforcement statistics confirm this.
The crime in louisiana leading to passage of laws letting citizens carry guns, that you speak of was a drastic law created after hurricane Katrina.
We just are not seeing cities accross the country passing laws like that unless your prepared to post names of others cities that have.
Personal protection is the constitutional basis that forms the right to bear arms.
Jeff Matiatos
How about the whole state of Texas Jeff? By the way, the carjacking/shoot law was passed prior to Katrina. You must be thinking of afgter Katrina when the NAZI police were out kncoking old women to the ground to get their guns.....lawfully owned guns. To this day, all those people still can't get their guns back, even though the US Supreme Court ordered the state to return them. Maybe you should live there Jeff. I'm sure you'd be much safer with no guns and all.
Mitch, isn't this an argument we've had before over and over?
I'll make this short and sweet:
I'm not against carrying firearms. I'm not a proponent of banning guns. However, I'm not convinced that it will stop crime. It won't.
I've seen the argument arguments against your stats Mitch and I've seen you go back and forth. Bottom line is that statistics can be skewed one way or another and have been.
The economy is a strong factor in crime and I bet you can show the same places that you cite had a drop in crime also had an economic boost.
My argument is simple. More people carrying firearms do not deter crime, it may protect you in the event of a crime of you have the psychy to pull the trigger. Criminals do not commit crime by taken in account the stats of running into a person who may be strapped. They never think they'll get caught and therefore don't let up on their activities.
6:59
I don't think I ever said anything about a shoot out. I actually the opposite that most won't be able to pull the trigger.
Its a tough thing to do if you haven't done it, haven't been well-trained or not a phycho. Even then, many find it tough.
For the record, the Old West was not the 'old west' you see on tv with shoot outs and such on a regular basis.
Eric
Chuck and Eric,
Thanks for the civil discussion.
You both make variations on this point - Eric said "More people carrying firearms do not deter crime", and Chuck said (paraphrasing) "at least I don't make the BS argument for deterrence".
I don't need to; Kleck and Lott both do, and their case is pretty dispositive. As Eric notes, both sides can play with their pet statistics - but nobody has ever really refuted Lott's thesis, and to the best of my knowledge nobody's even tried to attack Kleck's numbers.
There was also an FBI survey in the nineties of career criminals in the Federal prison system; these criminals - career jacklegs, for the most part - noted that they feared armed homeowners four times as much as they feared the police.
Further evidence for deterrence: in the US, about one of eight home burglaries is "hot" (i.e. someone is home at the time). In the UK, it was about the same, until they banned civilian gun ownership. Since then, the rate of "hot" burglaries is up to half. *Lack* of a deterrent changes the kind of crime you see.
I don't want to rehash all of these arguments, though, because (as Chuck will testify) I've been doing it for over a decade, and the fact remains we (the good guys) won. Minnesota is a shall issue state. Even the DFL knows better than to try to challenge CCRN-MN, which carried out the single best grass-roots campaign in the history of Minnesota politics in getting the law passed.
As to how the deterrent effect would have worked in *this* story - we may never know. While carry permit holders come from every race, ethnicity and part of the state, it's a safe bet that Dayton's Bluff is not a hotbed of law-abiding gun-ownership. The city's government has done a good job of making it impossible for the law-abiding citizen to buy a legal firearm in this city.
Eric,
"Its a tough thing to do if you haven't done it, haven't been well-trained or not a phycho. Even then, many find it tough."
It's incredibly tough - and the emotional ramifications are almost as awful as the legal ones can be. That's one of the things that is *pounded* into your head in CCW training - along with the need to practice, practice and practice some more, so that if you ever DO need to defend yourself or your family, you'll be able to.
"For the record, the Old West was not the 'old west' you see on tv with shoot outs and such on a regular basis."
No, but the deterrent effect of civilians with guns was pretty much everywhere.
And when Jesse James' gang tried to hold up the bank in Northfield, MN, it wasn't the Gang Strike Force that took 'em down. It was a town full of armed citizens with rifles.
One last bit:
Eric,
"Mitch, isn't this an argument we've had before over and over?"
The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.
I have a permit to carry and know that its going to reduce crime the moment a criminal tries to rob,beat or assault me.And that my friends is a reduction in crime.
Chuck you act as if there were no guns we wouldn't have crime.Sure we would.Criminals would just use other means to attack.
Chuck light rail has killed 5 people since opening it how many conceal and carry citizens killed an innocent person?Maybe we should get rid of light rail.Its way to dangerous.
One last thing, the best thing I ever learned from a conceal and carry class is it gives you the right to defend yourself and your family not the store clerk on the corner-thats why we have cops.If a store ever gets robbed withme in it and I'm not threatened tell the cops I'm hiding in the bathroom.
Randy
Maybe they can just outfit the inspectors with guns. Then they can intimidate, lie, and force their way into even more homes in pursuit of the political agenda.
How many stolen guns were involved in crimes Randy ?
Jeff Matiatos
As with this and all other City of St Paul issues, we need more clear language, which would show up the scum bags that are in charge of the city.
* A mass of Latin words falls upon the facts like soft snow, blurring the outline and covering up all the details.
* The great enemy of clear language is insincerity.
* When there is a gap between one’s real and one’s declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink.
* In our age there is no such thing as “keeping out of politics”. All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred, and schizophrenia.
When the general atmosphere is bad, language must suffer. -George Orwell, writer (1903-1950)
Well I may be a day late and a dollar short, but for my 2 cents worth, I do not think Jeff would be so quick so sacrifice everyone's 2nd amendments rights if it was his head that got used for softball practice over at lake Phalen a month or two ago. Just sayin.....
Jeff how many cars were stolen to commit a crime?Now you don't want to ban cars now do ya?You said the magic word stolen.So whats your point?
Randy
Randy,
Quote me where I said here that I wanted to ban guns.
Your view is that guns in public solve more crime as opposed to my view that the personal choice to carry only protects primarily those that carry.
Once and a while you here a good samaritin story about a liscensed
to carry person who saved the day with his gun.
You act like this sort of thing happens all the time.
More people here would agree with me that crimes with stolen guns cause way more crimes than the instances where johnny saved the day.
My point ?
More stolen guns and cars are used in crimes than there are instances where people that carry are confronted by crimminals.
If you carry concealed, a crimminal is more likeley to approach you than if you carried with an open holster.
Your to partisan on the issue and blinded by your own passion for guns.
Jeff Matiatos
You're a fool Jeff. You should stop talking because you don't know what your talking about. Guns are used millions of times a year by private citizens to stop crime and there's statistics to prove it. It may also suprise you to know that more people drown in swimming pools every year than are killed by guns. Your out of your league here buddy. Do some research and find out what your really talking about. Until then, it looks to me like you are the one who has the passion against guns and not Randy ahving a passion for the gun. I'm sorry ......."evil gun" in your world.
Show us the statistics !
It's your argument and your point of view.
Show us your research.
Jeff Matiatos
According to the National Self Defense Survey conducted by Florida State University criminologists in 1994, the rate of Defensive Gun Uses can be projected nationwide to approximately 2.5 million per year -- one Defensive Gun Use every 13 seconds.
Among 15.7% of gun defenders interviewed nationwide during The National Self Defense Survey, the defender believed that someone "almost certainly" would have died had the gun not been used for protection -- a life saved by a privately held gun about once every 1.3 minutes. (In another 14.2% cases, the defender believed someone "probably" would have died if the gun hadn't been used in defense.)
In 83.5% of these successful gun defenses, the attacker either threatened or used force first -- disproving the myth that having a gun available for defense wouldn't make any difference.
In 91.7% of these incidents the defensive use of a gun did not wound or kill the criminal attacker (and the gun defense wouldn't be called "newsworthy" by newspaper or TV news editors). In 64.2% of these gun-defense cases, the police learned of the defense, which means that the media could also find out and report on them if they chose to.
In 73.4% of these gun-defense incidents, the attacker was a stranger to the intended victim. (Defenses against a family member or intimate were rare -- well under 10%.) This disproves the myth that a gun kept for defense will most likely be used against a family member or someone you love.
In over half of these gun defense incidents, the defender was facing two or more attackers -- and three or more attackers in over a quarter of these cases. (No means of defense other than a firearm -- martial arts, pepper spray, or stun guns -- gives a potential victim a decent chance of getting away uninjured when facing multiple attackers.)
In 79.7% of these gun defenses, the defender used a concealable handgun. A quarter of the gun defenses occured in places away from the defender's home.
Source: "Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun," by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz, in The
Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, Northwestern University School of Law, Volume 86, Number 1, Fall, 1995
I am all for members of NRA, but we need serious gun control laws and penaltys.
Jeff you stated the above so why don't you tell us you serious gun control measures.
Randy
This is from the Bureau of Justice Web site:
In 2006, U.S. residents age 12 or older experienced approximately 25 million crimes, according to findings from the National Crime Victimization Survey.
-- 75% (18.9 million) were property crimes
-- 24% (6.1 million) were crimes of violence
-- 1% (173,200) were personal thefts.
-snip-
So this...
According to the National Self Defense Survey conducted by Florida State University criminologists in 1994, the rate of Defensive Gun Uses can be projected nationwide to approximately 2.5 million per year -- one Defensive Gun Use every 13 seconds
-snip-
Is total garbage...
Unless you believe that exactly one in ten crimes are stopped by someone using a gun...
You don't even hear about one person every ten days in the state of Minnesota stopping a crime by using a gun and the press LOVES those stories.
So, again I have no problem with someone trained to use a weapon carrying a permitted weapon, but to say that it is some great detterent to crime is pure BS. And to say that it is reducing crime now is even bigger BS.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
Excuse me but the press would never print a story about someone using a gun to stop crime. It doesn't fit their agenda.
Excuse me 3:34 but the press loves those stories and goes crazy if they get it on film.
Regardless of any of that 9:40 AM stats were pure bunk.
25 million crimes a year and 2.5 million of the stopped by someone having a weapon... right...
I got a bridge to sell you.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
The press publishing a story about a gun owner using the gun to stop a crime Chuck is a very rare occurance and you know it. The press has an agenda and as a general rule, the only time they publish a story about gun use is something they can use to indoctrinate peole to have the ideas Jeff has about guns. There's a huge amount of people who don't know how to think for themselves and their opinions are formed by what pothers tell them and by what they hear. You're out to lunch with your opinion.....as usual.
Chuck the same liberal press that has been sleeping with Barack Obama and his agenda?Chuck face it we have a liberal press and the day we hear them promoting gun defense stories is the day poigs fly out my arse.
You were kiding though, right?
Randy
DA: Criminal charges possible in boy's Uzi death
By RODRIQUE NGOWI, Associated Press Writer Rodrique Ngowi, Associated Press Writer Tue Oct 28, 11:00 pm ET
BOSTON – A prosecutor said Tuesday he is investigating whether criminal charges should be filed after an 8-year-old boy accidentally killed himself while firing an Uzi submachine gun at a gun fair in western Massachusetts.
Christopher Bizilj (Bah-SEAL) of Ashford, Conn., shot himself in the head when he lost control of the 9mm micro submachine gun as it recoiled while he was firing at a pumpkin. Police have said the shooting at the Machine Gun Shoot and Firearms Expo at the Westfield Sportsman's Club on Sunday was an accident.
Hampden County District Attorney William Bennett said he is investigating whether the gun fair violated the state's firearms law by allowing the boy to fire the machine gun, and also whether it was "a reckless or wanton act to allow an 8-year-old to use a fully loaded automatic weapon."
"At this point in the investigation I have found no lawful authority which allows an 8-year-old to possess or fire a machine gun," Bennett said in a statement.
Daniel Vice, senior attorney with the Washington-based Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said his interpretation is that Massachusetts law specifically prohibits "furnishing a machine gun to any person under 18."
"It is unconscionable that the gun fair allowed and encouraged young children to fire machine guns," he said in a statement.
On Monday, Westfield police Lt. Hipolito Nunez said it is legal in Massachusetts for children to fire a weapon if they have permission from a parent or legal guardian and they are supervised by a properly certified and licensed instructor.
The section of the statute that mentions that exception, however, only lists rifles, shotguns and ammunition — and is silent on the use of machine guns.
Bennett did not return calls Tuesday seeking additional comment.
The boy was attending the gun fair with his father and brother Colin, a sixth-grader. His father, Charles Bizilj, said Christopher had experience firing handguns and rifles, but Sunday was his first time firing an automatic weapon. A certified instructor was with the boy at the time.
On Monday, Bizilj told The Boston Globe he was about 10 feet behind his son and reaching for his camera when the weapon fired. He said his family avoided larger weapons, but he let his son try the Uzi because it's a small weapon with little recoil. The family did not return messages for comment Tuesday.
Francis Mitchell, a trustee and longtime member and shooting range officer for the sportsman's club, declined comment Tuesday, saying he was unaware that a criminal investigation was under way.
Edward Fleury, owner of COP Firearms & Training, which co-sponsored the event, did not immediately return a message left after business hours.
The Republican newspaper of Springfield reported Tuesday night that the town of Pelham, where Fleury has been police chief since 1991, took undisclosed administrative action after he discharged a loaded rifle during a gun safety class he was teaching in 2003. No one was injured, and Fleury said in a public apology he would take steps to prevent similar incidents.
Pelham selectman Edward Martin told the newspaper Tuesday the board plans to issue a statement to residents this week pointing out that Fleury was at the gun expo on his own time. Martin called Bizilj's death "a tragic accident."
Fleury's company and the sportsman's club have held the expo since 2002. The newspaper said Fleury described it in a 2005 interview as a safe environment for people "to see and fire some of the guns that they've seen in the movies, or on the History Channel, or other events that involve firearms."
OH My God, you are that nuts...
Think about it people. You all live on this planet, in this country. Has it happened in your neighborhood in the last year, five years? Do your friends regularly talk about the guy down the street that pulled a gun and stopped a burglary?
2.5 million times a year in the USA!??? If one 50th of those occured in Minnesota that would be 50,000 crimes stopped by gun owners a year, 4,167 a month, somewhere in Minnesota!
Its not happening. Not in the real world. Maybe it happens in the pretend world of right wing radio but those are not the stats that occur in this universe.
Sorry, to keep having to make you face the real world.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
I know you are wrong Chuck because I know somewone who carries a gun and has used it several times around your lovely city to deter people from perpetrating harm against this person.
Yes, 11:39 his name is Bob Fletcher.
Guns and Terrorists.
Our gun laws make it easier for terrorists to get guns. It's not like we have closed borders.
The report's release follows the recent acknowledgment by Attorney General John Ashcroft that he has refused a request by the FBI to use Brady Law criminal background check records to determine if any of 1,200 foreign nationals detained after the September 11 terrorist attacks had bought guns.
This special 30-page Brady Center report makes the case for stronger gun laws, and for better enforcement of existing laws, as an essential part of a comprehensive homeland security program. The report details specific cases involving terrorists and guns purchased in the U.S. In some instances, the perpetrators have been definitively linked to known terrorist organizations. In others, the perpetrators acted on their own, but were clearly intent on waging a campaign of terror against their targets. All of these cases illustrate weaknesses and loopholes in current law.
By examining in detail specific cases involving terrorists and guns, the report shows that:
� Gun shows are a breeding ground for gun sales to terrorists, because in most states, unlicensed sellers can sell guns without background checks.
� Nothing in federal law prevents terrorists from quickly amassing arsenals of weapons.
� The irresponsibility of the gun industry, as well as irrational statutory restraints on federal record keeping of gun sales and other necessary enforcement tools, allows corrupt gun dealers to funnel guns to terrorists.
� Loopholes in federal law have allowed terrorists to buy assault weapons and high-capacity military ammunition magazines.
� A loophole in federal law allows terrorists to buy "gun kits" through the mail that can be assembled into untraceable assault weapons.
In addition, the report proposes a specific agenda for reform of our nation's gun laws in the interest of national security, including:
� Requiring complete criminal background checks wherever a gun is sold, whether at a gun show, through classified ads or over the Internet.
� Retaining federal background check records and allowing reasonable access to those records by federal law enforcement.
� Limiting large-volume gun purchases to curb trafficking of guns to terrorists and criminals.
� Permanently reauthorizing the assault weapons ban.
The connection between terrorism and guns is undeniable. As America conducts its war on terrorism - at home and abroad - authorities must have the strongest possible mechanisms to root out terrorists before they strike. In short, they need the strongest possible gun laws. Our national security demands it.
http://tinyurl.com/gunsandterrorists
Gun Show Pipeline: From Michigan to Lebanon
On September 10, 2001 – just one day before the devastating attacks on the
Pentagon and the World Trade Center – Ali Boumelhem was convicted on a variety of
weapons violations plus conspiracy to ship weapons to the terrorist organization
Hezbollah in Lebanon. He and his brother Mohamed had purchased an arsenal of
shotguns, hundreds of rounds of ammunition, flash suppressers and assault weapon
parts from Michigan gun shows, according to press reports.
Had it not been for a police informant, they might have eluded any scrutiny.7
Neither federal nor state laws in Michigan require background checks between a private
or unlicensed gun seller and a buyer. Mohamed had a clean record, but Ali was
legally prohibited from purchasing firearms as a result of a felony grand-theft
conviction.8
Ali Boumelhem was arrested in Detroit in November of 2000 before he could
depart on a one-way ticket back to Lebanon, along with Mohamed, who was also
indicted on conspiracy charges, but acquitted. According to press reports, the arrests
came after a lengthy surveillance and the discovery on a Lebanon-bound ship of an
auto-parts container whose cargo included the firearms, ammunition and gun parts.
Federal agents said they watched Ali, a resident of Detroit and Beirut, travel to gun
shows to buy gun parts and ammunition for shipment overseas. An ATF and FBI
informant also told investigators that he had seen Ali in Beirut with automatic
weapons and explosives, as well as grenades and rocket launchers.9
6
The Hezbollah is identified by the U.S. State Department as a terrorist organization.
The group was founded in 1982 as a guerrilla movement to end Israeli occupation
of southern Lebanon. It is known or suspected to have been involved in numerous
anti-U.S. terrorist attacks, including the bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in
Beirut in 1983 that killed 241 people. Elements of the group were also responsible for
the kidnapping and detention of U.S. and other Western hostages in Lebanon, according
to the State Department.10
Moreover, testimony in the trial of suspects in the two 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings
in Africa showed that some members of Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda group had
trained with Hezbollah in Lebanon in using explosives to destroy large buildings.11
Al-Qaeda Suspect Goes Gun Show Shopping
Over the course of seven years, Muhammad Navid Asrar, a Pakistani and an
illegal immigrant, frequented gun shows, buying several weapons, including a Ruger
Mini-14 rifle, two pistols and a hunting rifle. On October 30, 2001, he pleaded guilty in
Texas to immigration charges and to illegal possession of ammunition.12
Asrar said he resold the weapons at gun shows, but a federal grand jury is currently
investigating whether he may be linked to al-Qaeda terrorists, according to the
police chief of Alice, Texas where Asrar owned a convenience store and gasoline station.
13 A Houston FBI spokesman said Asrar was being investigated by ATF agents
before the September 11 attacks.14 He had aroused authorities’ suspicions when he
asked his employees to take pictures of tall buildings in Houston and other cities and
to mail letters for him from Pennsylvania back to Texas.
Chuck have you ever wondered if that statistic included cops?Why do cops with guns stop criminals but a law abiding citizen with a conceal and carry permit can't?
Who cares if it deters crime?Its a non issue.I'm sure it makes a person feel safe who carries it thats all that really matters.
Randy
Randy, I am fine with people (who are trained...by an NRA approved class) being able to carry. Doesn't bother me in the least.
I am only saying that the prevention stats that they use are so much BS it just blows your mind that anyone can take them seriously. What is such a joke is that they say that it isn't that their stats are insane and defy common sense, but it is the media and the cops that won't report all of these crimes that are stopped by people carrying. PURE BS... 2.5 million people a year stopping crimes with guns and if we hear about 1 a year in Saint Paul that would be huge! And, no their stats are for victims defending themselves... unreal...
Anyway... as long as they are trained in gun safety, fine by me. Unfortunately, a lot of untrained idiots will continue to buy guns and hide them under their pillow, allowing their kids to blow their playmates away... But, that isn't the guns fault, that's the idiots fault. I hope that they get their asses sent to jail.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
Now there ya go. First some of you are all upset about about guns and people getting hurt. When it's pointed out that guns actually are more useful than harmful, then you focus your argument on the fact that people are buying guns to ship them out of the country to Lebanon. If your argument was not so disingenuous, one would think that you would want all the guns in the USA to bought and shipped out of the country. What better gun control could there be? All the guns gone and the terrorists using them to kill each other in third world countries which would mean that there would less of them looking to come here to harm us. You gun control people have only one thing in mind and that's control. You're all idiots who buy into all the DFL handout to the lazy, hold everyone else responsible, spread the wealth BS. We have rights here and one of them is to keep and bear arms so we cna protect ourselves against people like you. If you don't like it here with the guns, get out. There's plenty of other countries where you can live safely without guns. I for one am not going to give up my rights so you people can live your retarded fell good mis-informed life.
Chuck,
I don't really want to get too much into this, because - hey, the good guys won, and we'll work our asses off to keep it that way.
But there's somethign I've been meaning to bring up.
You continuously refer to Gary Kleck's research (which extrapolates on police records to arrive at a figure of between 750,000 and 2.25 million defensive gun uses per year) as "Nuts" and "insane" and all sorts of other ad-homina - and you transfer that to people who *cite* Kleck's research.
Kleck's work is academic, and has been peer-reviewed and generally accepted, even by law-enforcement (Kleck is a widely-respected criminology professor), as valid.
Would you be able to favor us with some actual counter-data [*], or is your only real counter-argument "You're all nuts!!!!!", which is really nothing but an ad-hominem.
And purely ad-hominem arguments aren't all that much fun, at least to those of us with the actual data.
[*] I'm being charitable, Chuck. Of course you can't. There IS no counterargument. But I'm just giving you an opening, in case you'd like to try to make a serious attempt at discussion.
Hmmmm St.Paul, is life getting better?
Police seek 3 after woman stabbed on library steps
By Tad Vezner and Mara H. Gottfried
tvezner@pioneerpress.com mgottfried@pioneerpress.com
Article Last Updated: 10/30/2008 10:30:52 AM CDT
Police continued looking today for three people in the stabbing of a 19-year-old woman on the steps of St. Paul's Arlington Hills Library Wednesday afternoon.
The woman was stabbed several times in the torso but was expected to survive, said St. Paul police watch commander Todd Axtell.
The victim said she didn't know the suspects, an initial report indicated, said Sgt. Pete Crum, a police spokesman.
The attack took place just after 4 p.m. on the outside stairs of the library at 1105 Greenbrier St. in the Payne-Phalen neighborhood.
The woman's identity hasn't been released. She was taken to Regions Hospital in St. Paul.
No arrests have been made. The suspects are male, but a more detailed description wasn't immediately available, Crum said.
No other major incidents have been reported at the Arlington Hills Library in the last month, Crum said.
Mitch I have generally viewed you as being somewhere close to sane.
So, I will type this slowly and give you time to think it through.
This is from the Bureau of Justice Web site:
In 2006, U.S. residents age 12 or older experienced approximately 25 million crimes, according to findings from the National Crime Victimization Survey.
25 million crimes and you believe that 2.5 million one in 10 were stopped by some victim being armed?
As to what he's peers say:
Gary Kleck's study of defensive gun use has been shown by numerous scholars to not be plausible. His 2.5 million defensive gun uses a year has been called "the most outrageous number mentioned in a policy discussion by an elected official." (Cook, Ludwig, Hemenway, 1997 - see evidence) And while Marvin Wolfgang might not have found fault with Kleck's methodology he did point out the limitations of survey research and the "problems of small numbers and extrapolating from relatively small samples to the universe."
Basically, Kleck's work is to extrapolate from very small data huge numbers nation-wide.
It would be like taking the murder rate in Chicago (currently the highest) and passing those numbers on to the rest of the country.
Again if 1/50th of the crime in the US happens in Minnesota then we would expect that over 4,000 people a month would be stopping a crime by the use of their hand gun.
Sorry Mitch those stats will sell on right wing talk radio, but in the real world they are pure unadulterated garbage.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
10:01 am
I like the DFL "handouts" and I like guns. What now?
Support for or against the Second Amendment is not a liberal or conservative position. That's what the NRA has done to the issue. Everyone who likes guns is supposed to be a country music loving, 'real patriot', republican. Bull Sh@!. But, its exactly why people like me- who could actually expand the support for the Second Amendment beyond the wing nuts will never side up with the NRA.
Of course half of your skulls are exploding when you think about liberals who aren't opposed to guns.
I interpret the Second Amendment to mean that you have a right to own what you want, as long as you can carry it. If you have to hitch it up to your pick up truck or, you can climb in it and drive it- then you may need a permit for that.
Oh, I still find it hard to believe, that it deters crime. If you do, great, knock yourself out.
Eric
...and Mitch; Cook, Ludwig are proponents of people using weapons to protect themselves. They just say that any good data would show that the highest number someone could come up with is 3%. A maximum of 100,000 times a year in the country and that would include the times where someone woke up, "thought" they heard a burglar and scared them away when they yelled, "I have a gun..."
Again garbage stats...
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
...sorry, that is .3%.
Meaning 3 out of a thousand times that a crime occurs someone interrupts it by using a handgun. Between 75,000 and 100,000 times a year.
Chuck
Your argument citing the Justice Dept stats is full of hot air Chuck. Not all crimes are reported, you're well aware of that. Not every time a gun is used is it fired. Many times just brandihing it is enough to make the robber, raper or whatever head for the hills. Most people are not about to call the Polcie and tell them they just pulled their gun on someone when this happens. Hell, in this town the cops would go find the perp and have him make a complaint against you for agg assault. Keep on trying Chuck but so far I don't think you're impressing may people here.
Right 2:16 you think it happens one out of ten crimes...
On what planet?
Chuck
Chuck
"Meaning 3 out of a thousand times that a crime occurs someone interrupts it by using a handgun. Between 75,000 and 100,000 times a year."
Kleck directly addressed this. The FBI/DOJ use a pretty restrictive definition of Defensive Firearm Use; I forget the criteria, but it's pretty hard for a DFU to get on the list.
Kleck explained his methodology for coming up with his higher figure. Again, it's an academic publication whose methodology was peer reviewed (like, in 1991) and has pretty much been accepted by criminologists who don't have, er, axes to grind.
Post a Comment
<< Home