How well do "gun control" measures work in minimizing gun-related violence?

[Lliam]

A new report released Monday by the Washington [State] Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs (WASPC) offers evidence that two gun control initiatives, have failed miserably.

WASPC data released Monday showing a 96 percent increase in homicides since 2019. (They have doubled!) Passage of Initiative 594 in 2014 and I-1639 in 2018 have accomplished nothing.

These gun control measures have not only failed, but the billionaire-backed gun-control lobby will no doubt try to spin the new report to suggest even stricter measures are necessary.

I-594 Concise Description: This measure would apply currently used criminal and public safety background checks by licensed dealers to all firearm sales and transfers, including gun show and online sales, with specific exceptions.

I-1639 was the most comprehensive gun law ever put forward in Washington State. The main components of the Initiative are:
- Raise the age to purchase semi-automatic assault rifles to 21.
- Create an enhanced background check for semi-automatic assault rifles, similar to what is required for handguns. This includes a local law enforcement check of the most up-to-date local court, criminal, and mental health records; a 10-day waiting period; and the completion of a firearm safety training course within the last five years.
- Create standards for Safe Storage. These standards hold gun owners accountable if a child or other prohibited person accesses and uses an unsecurely stored firearm to hurt themselves or someone else.

My question isn’t whether or not some of these measure seem like a good idea, but if they accomplish the intended goal of minimizing gun-related homicides.

[nolabels]

Laws of any sort will not stop criminal activity.

Adding additional laws on top of laws that already address criminality do nothing to stop such crime.

The problems with gun crime won't be stopped by attempting to legislate them away. The problem is of a social nature, with such criminals having no respect for human life.

Even if there were to be a massive change in social behavior taking place immediately, with children being taught the difference between right and wrong, it'd take at least two generations for the miscreants to disappear from the world.

[RealMarek]

If you deindustrialize, concentrate the vast majority of wealth within a rapacious elite, allow mass migration, and let inflation rip, there will be no lid on violence. Anarchotyranny cannot lead to peace.

[madhatters4]

i don't think we can look at singular measures and say gun control works or doesn't based on them. in a single locale we could attribute a lot of different things to gun violence and the reality is that since 2014 we've seen a rise in gun violence nationally. we've had pandemics, record inflation, near recessions, and a lot of political and social unrest... could these be factors that lead to increased gun violence? i don't know but i don't feel like we can look at singular measures to determine if gun violence works.

by that logic we'd have to look at the ban on assault weapons that passed in the 90s the significant drop in gun violence that followed, followed by the spike when the ban was lifted as evidence that gun control definitively works right? we'd also have to look at places that have very lax gun laws and ask, how come more access to guns hasn't made those places safer

I look at the rest of the developed world though and wonder why the US can't accomplish similar reductions in gun deaths per capita. what about america is so inherently violent that we have to simply suffer with gun deaths rates that are exponentially higher than similarly developed nations? Until that time i think we should always be considering and weighing methods to reduce gun violence

[Jonnyanalog]

A disarmed society is a compliant society. Meaning they can pass laws and do whatever they want and no one will fight back. Australia, New Zealand, UK, etc. all got this bill.

You’ll hear a bunch of people say “how can a bunch of rabble-rousing rednecks stand up to the might and power of the US military?” Easy. Look at Afghanistan and Iraq. You have a determined foe and a military that is weakened and unwilling to fight. Plus, most of those so-called rednecks are former military, LE, or special forces. They know how to fight. They know how to train to fight.

[Daniela1982]

We can't own assault rifles in California, yet the gang members have no problem getting them. So, say the cartel wanted to take over a town, they would have superior firepower to the police and would have no problem. The police are defunded and the citizens can't have guns. Marvelous!

[exitseven]

Until the laws that are already in place get enforced nothing will change. The largest percentage of people that are doing the shooting are doing it with unregistered or stolen hand guns. The state I live in has a mandatory jail sentence for possession of an unregistered gun. It has not been enforced in years because it was racist. Most of the people getting lugged for it were gangbangers.

[Daniela1982]

The same for felons being in possession of a gun. They mostly get plea bargained down instead of prison - don't pass GO, go straight to jail.

[exitseven]

@Daniela1982 exactly

[19magic]

The middle point sounds obsessive but age 21 and safe storage seems common sense. You should have the gun in high places in case of toddlers and/or in locked places in case of young kids and depressed teens. 21 for a semi, still sounds like a handgun beforehand is okay.

[Lliam]

My dad gave me a semiautomatic Ruger 10/22 rifle for Christmas when I was 16. A couple years later, I bought a matching Ruger semiautomatic model.44 rifle over the counter in a department store without even having to show ID.

I don't recall hysteria over gun violence back then.

At that time, in the early 1970s, the rate of firearm homicide was around 15/100,000. In 2022, it was under 16/100,000
But from 2000 to 2014, it was barely over 10/100,000, yet during that period, the gun control lobbyists still promoted hysteria over gun violence, which shows that their goal is to disarm Americans, not save lives.
If people had the same attitude about cars, they would be trying to ban them.

[19magic]

But you could apply that argument to loads of things my nan used to give dad money and in the 70/80s he could buy 18 movies despite being under 10 and no ID, same with fags and alcohol could buy them all under 18, but you can't now. Sure you had yours at 16 but does it make that much of a difference if it was 21? I mean isn't drinking in all of us 21 anyhow so what does it matter.

They didn't give a rat's ass about a lot of things back then. If they were to keep changing the ages I could understand the anger but, and this is from my understanding, this is just for the semis, handguns are unaffected in that law. And can still be owned at 16 so will be fine in protecting you in a situation of defence. No things should be micromanaged, like I'm hating the law they're trying to place here of no petrol past 2030 and having only electric cars.

[Lliam]

I think the purpose of most gun laws is to set a precedent in infringing upon the second amendment. If they can get certain restrictions legalized, then they can keep pushing for more and more.

It's like Oliver Wendel Holmes's disingenuous claim that the first amendment doesn't protect a person who shouts fire in a crowded theater. He said that in defense of the Wilson government's brutal crackdown on people who were protesting U. S. entry into WWI and the draft. He was equating their exercise of their second amendment rights to shouting fire in a crowded theater.
His ruling was later struck down, but his quote has been continued to be used to squelch free speech.

[19magic]

Yeah I get you with that first one, once one is in, so are many more.

And I don't know if I'm being really dense here, but I don't get how free speech/freedom has anything to do with protection in a crowd, unless you mean it should provide protection in a crowd? I know it's a metaphor, but I really can't think of an equivalent meaning.

[Lliam]

The American people were opposed to entering WWI. President Wilson had campaigned on the promise not to get involved.
Once elected, he not only entered the U. S. in the war, but also instituted the draft.

There were mass protests. The government reacted to their peaceful protests with violence.

Charles T. Schenck, the general secretary of the U. S. Socialist Party, was convicted in a Philadelphia federal court for violating the Espionage Act by printing leaflets that criticized the military draft as unconstitutional.

The case eventually went to the Supreme Court.

Justice Holmes invented the erroneous claim that the second amendment doesn't give the right to shout fire in a crowded theater as a justification for the government's actions against protestors.

The First Amendment says "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

[19magic]

I didn't know that, I knew that the US didn't officially join WW2, until Japan struck pearl harbor, but nothing really about WW1.

[Lliam]

In my first comment to you, I said "second" amendment rights when I meant first amendment. That would have been confusing. Sorry.

[19magic]

I really don't know much about American history, or laws - just that obviously for the most part its the same/similar as ours. And for most things it seems like American laws are a lot more lax.

Though I was 19/20 when I first found out it was illegal to have fireworks in California that was an eye opener, after I learned that I also learned it was due to sparks and bush fires it made sense. But it's still a shock I've brought fireworks as a teen before, and you normally see people set them off in bins and then close the lid and see how far they can run before it is set off. Plus Guy Fawkes fireworks night is always something big here so I couldn't imagine not seeing fireworks every couple of months or so.

[BoopBoopBeep]

Hey work great. Look at Chicago, Detroit, NYC, D. C... oh... wait...

[Anonymous]

People with serious mental health issues and those overdosed on anti depressants keep getting their hands on guns.

[Juxtapose]

Not to mention that gun free zones are where most of the shootings happen.

[Pterodon]

None because criminals don’t follow gun laws