Thread: Yet another shooting incident in the states

This from the NZ Herald website

Gunmen opened fire on dozens of people marching in a Mother's Day second-line parade in New Orleans on Sunday, wounding at least 17 people, police said. Police spokeswoman Remi Braden said in an email that many of the 17 victims were grazed and most of the wounds weren't life-threatening. No deaths were reported.

Police Superintendent Ronal Serpas told reporters that a 10-year-old girl was grazed in the shooting around 2pm. She was in good condition. He said three or four people were in surgery, but he didn't have their conditions. Officers were interspersed with the marchers, which is routine for such events. As many as 400 people joined in the procession that stretched for about three blocks, though only half that many were in the immediate vicinity of the shooting, Serpas said.

Police saw three suspects running from the scene in the city's 7th Ward neighbourhood. No arrests had been made as of late afternoon. Second-line parades are loose processions in which people dance down the street, often following behind a brass band. They can be impromptu or planned and are sometimes described as moving block parties.

A social club called The Original Big 7 organized Sunday's event. The group was founded in 1996 at the Saint Bernard housing projects, according to its MySpace page. The neighborhood where the shooting happened was a mix of low-income and middle-class row houses, some boarded up. As of last year, the neighbourhood's population was about 60 percent of its pre-Hurricane Katrina level.

Police vowed to make swift arrests.

"We'll get them. We have good resources in this neighbourhood," Serpas said

they definitely did the right thing in knocking back recent gun law amendments. The most ridiculous thing is that the NRA will use this incident to promote even higher gun ownership

I'm thankful that no one was injured. Still, it is alarming. I hope it will serve as a kick with a spur in tightening up the gun laws over there.

Originally Posted by phillipgr

injured

You mean killed? ha

When you're in the States or Canada for any amount of time and read the newspapers daily, there are ALOT of shootings that occur regularly. We only hear about a fraction of them.

Originally Posted by Bavarian_Hunter

You mean killed? ha

Hah whoops. The forum muppet strikes yet again!

Originally Posted by JoshC

When you're in the States or Canada for any amount of time and read the newspapers daily, there are ALOT of shootings that occur regularly. We only hear about a fraction of them.

It cant be justified in my opinion, their gun laws I mean.

What new law would have stopped this shooting?

There are multi millions of guns in the US currently and many of those millions are in the hands of criminals. Criminals are criminals for the simple reason that they ignore and break current laws. I doubt that adding a few more laws will stop criminals from committing crime.

Why do some people want to harm or kill others? That's what the powers at be need to focus on.

The issue with the last laws were they restricted the law abiding without disarming the criminal. For a law to work then it must target those causing the crime and not the law abiding. Enforcing current laws may be a good starting point.

Cheers.

Originally Posted by Littledog

What new law would have stopped this shooting?

There are multi millions of guns in the US currently and many of those millions are in the hands of criminals. Criminals are criminals for the simple reason that they ignore and break current laws. I doubt that adding a few more laws will stop criminals from committing crime.

Why do some people want to harm or kill others? That's what the powers at be need to focus on.

The issue with the last laws were they restricted the law abiding without disarming the criminal. For a law to work then it must target those causing the crime and not the law abiding. Enforcing current laws may be a good starting point.

Cheers.

All they basically wanted to do was introduce background checks on people before they were just allowed to buy any gun they wanted to. Granted it wouldnt stop everyone, but if those laws stopped one person from getting one gun and in turn saved one life arent they justified and fully worth it?

And how would you work that out? Seems like the "policy" of increasing firearm ownership is rather effective at reducing gun crime... Why don't you just carry on just beating the same drum as the rest of the uninformed opinion out there.....

May 9th, 2013
Major Drop in Gun Crime Not Understood by American Public
A recently-released study by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) establishes, without a doubt, that serious gun crime has dropped dramatically in the last twenty years. The BJS Report showed a 39% decline in gun murders from 1993 to 2011 plus a 69% drop in non-fatal gun crimes.

In fact, according to the L.A. Times: “In less than two decades, the gun murder rate has been nearly cut in half. Other gun crimes fell even more sharply, paralleling a broader drop in violent crimes committed with or without guns. Violent crime dropped steeply during the 1990s and has fallen less dramatically since the turn of the millennium.”

A separate independent study by the Pew Research Center, affirms that “National rates of gun homicide and other violent gun crimes are strikingly lower now than during their peak in the mid-1990s, paralleling a general decline in violent crime[.] Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm — assaults, robberies and sex crimes — was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993.” The PRS findings were based on CDC data (for gun homicides) and on U.S. Justice Department data for “non-fatal victimizations”.

Ignorant Americans Believe Gun Crime is Rising
Ironically, though it is absolutely clear that serious gun crime has dropped while gun ownership has increased, the majority of Americans believe that gun crime is on the rise. According to a survey by the Pew Research Center, the majority of Americans believe that serious gun crime is on the rise.
A recent Pew Research Center survey asked the question: “Compared with 20 years ago, has the number of gun crimes in America gone up, gone down, or stayed the same?” Among those surveyed, 56% said gun crime had gone up, 26% said it had stayed the same, and 12% said it had gone done. 65% of women said gun crime has gone up compared to 46% of men.
As to why most Americans don’t understand that gun crime has gone down, one can only speculate. Certainly, the way firearms-related subjects are reported by the mass media may play a role in confusing the general public.
We recommend that you read the Overview of the Pew Research Center Study, which presents many interesting (and thought-provoking) points. After “crunching the numbers”, the Pew researchers analyzed why gun crime rates have declined so dramatically over the last two decades. A variety of factors are discussed, including demographic changes, increased policing, and tougher laws.

Originally Posted by Sidney

And how would you work that out? Seems like the "policy" of increasing firearm ownership is rather effective at reducing gun crime... Why don't you just carry on just beating the same drum as the rest of the uninformed opinion out there.....

May 9th, 2013
Major Drop in Gun Crime Not Understood by American Public
A recently-released study by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) establishes, without a doubt, that serious gun crime has dropped dramatically in the last twenty years. The BJS Report showed a 39% decline in gun murders from 1993 to 2011 plus a 69% drop in non-fatal gun crimes.

In fact, according to the L.A. Times: “In less than two decades, the gun murder rate has been nearly cut in half. Other gun crimes fell even more sharply, paralleling a broader drop in violent crimes committed with or without guns. Violent crime dropped steeply during the 1990s and has fallen less dramatically since the turn of the millennium.”

A separate independent study by the Pew Research Center, affirms that “National rates of gun homicide and other violent gun crimes are strikingly lower now than during their peak in the mid-1990s, paralleling a general decline in violent crime[.] Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm — assaults, robberies and sex crimes — was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993.” The PRS findings were based on CDC data (for gun homicides) and on U.S. Justice Department data for “non-fatal victimizations”.

Ignorant Americans Believe Gun Crime is Rising
Ironically, though it is absolutely clear that serious gun crime has dropped while gun ownership has increased, the majority of Americans believe that gun crime is on the rise. According to a survey by the Pew Research Center, the majority of Americans believe that serious gun crime is on the rise.
A recent Pew Research Center survey asked the question: “Compared with 20 years ago, has the number of gun crimes in America gone up, gone down, or stayed the same?” Among those surveyed, 56% said gun crime had gone up, 26% said it had stayed the same, and 12% said it had gone done. 65% of women said gun crime has gone up compared to 46% of men.
As to why most Americans don’t understand that gun crime has gone down, one can only speculate. Certainly, the way firearms-related subjects are reported by the mass media may play a role in confusing the general public.
We recommend that you read the Overview of the Pew Research Center Study, which presents many interesting (and thought-provoking) points. After “crunching the numbers”, the Pew researchers analyzed why gun crime rates have declined so dramatically over the last two decades. A variety of factors are discussed, including demographic changes, increased policing, and tougher laws.

I am very dubious of statistics as they can be manipulated very easily into saying exactly what someone wants. For example lets take your fine country, are you aware that statistically the average New Zealander has one tit and one testicle?

I still believe having mandatory background checks on people will in no way hinder legitimate gun owners and users. We have a fairly rigourous system here in Aus and it works well, I still have guns, so does my brother and all my mates but a lot of drugged out deros who would be dangerous do not. Granted its impossible to completely eradicate gun crime but common sense should take a seat in gun politics in my mind.

No its actually 1.something - and you should have said "statistically less than 2"...

If you understood anything about probability you might be able to draw some conclusions about an almost 50% drop in serious gun crime over 20 years. If you bothered to check the sources of the information, you might find out they are reputable. And clearly your opinions seem to be based on popular media.... I think that I would rather use statistics.

You are obviously unaware that much of the states has cool off periods, vetting and checking and waiting periods before people can acquire guns. But don't let me stop you from recycling popular opinion...

You also fail to understand that criminals don't bother with these sort of proceedures... So how many people are you going to save by making more rules - give me some statistics.... had enough of the opinion.

Originally Posted by Bavarian_Hunter

they definitely did the right thing in knocking back recent gun law amendments. The most ridiculous thing is that the NRA will use this incident to promote even higher gun ownership

NRA will probably argue now for armed guards for parades

the only thing stopping a bad guy at a parade is a good guy armed

Also keep an eye on this page here, it lists gun deaths in the USA since Sandy Hook shootings. Overall it makes for pretty horrific and sad reading. 3,695 since Dec 14 2012.

Don't get me wrong its unacceptable, any of it.. but the americans have a system.. a dramatic change to the system will have catastrophic effects... the law abiding will comply, those that don't are by definition not law abiding... more guns in a criminal world, with less fear of the law abiding. Moving from the cold war mentality of deterence by equal or greater force in the american psyche would take some radical change in direction..

I don't like it, I wouldn't want what they have... but I don't do trite either

Originally Posted by Bavarian_Hunter

I am very dubious of statistics as they can be manipulated very easily into saying exactly what someone wants. For example lets take your fine country, are you aware that statistically the average New Zealander has one tit and one testicle?

I still believe having mandatory background checks on people will in no way hinder legitimate gun owners and users. We have a fairly rigourous system here in Aus and it works well, I still have guns, so does my brother and all my mates but a lot of drugged out deros who would be dangerous do not. Granted its impossible to completely eradicate gun crime but common sense should take a seat in gun politics in my mind.

I watched a show where a leb gang member boasted that he could find a handgun in under 15mins. He did this for the camera in broad daylight.

I Truly believe that NZ has the best system in regards to firearms. It's not perfect but people have a lot of freedom, while being checked on from time to time by the police if need be.