No gun problem in the US

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Red flag laws MIGHT have stopped Sandy Hook. That poor kid was well known as being horribly broken. But it's also very easy to see red flag laws abused, where certain people would spend all day calling the cops, telling them that everyone they don't like, is too dangerous to own a gun. Very ripe for abuse.

A Red Flag law that has serious provisions to protect people's individual rights - current ones don't - and are written to mitigate bad faith manipulation - yeh, I can get behind those.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by JohnR

A Red Flag law that has serious provisions to protect people's individual rights - current ones don't - and are written to mitigate bad faith manipulation - yeh, I can get behind those.

agreed. THATS common sense.

and institute stop and frisk to address garden variety city gun violence.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

agreed. THATS common sense.

and institute stop and frisk to address garden variety city gun violence.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I am mixed on Stop and Frisk because THAT has impacts on the person's rights. There needs to be Just Cause, yada yada yada, to search someone by Gov officals.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

and institute stop and frisk to address garden variety city gun violence.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

In 2012, the NYPD made more than 532,000 stops, each of which could progress to a frisk or to a full search. The police found guns only 715 times. In other words, guns were found during 0.1 percent of stops.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

In 2012, the NYPD made more than 532,000 stops, each of which could progress to a frisk or to a full search. The police found guns only 715 times. In other words, guns were found during 0.1 percent of stops.

If the cops weren't doing anything else at that specific time, removing 715 illegally carried guns in one year, seems like a worthwhile use of time. Until the bad guys start wearing signs that announce their intentions, unfortunately we need to cast the net pretty wide. What's a more efficient way to get illegal guns of the street? Ask criminals to pretty please turn themselves in? Chicago and DC in recent past had very tough restrictions on gun ownership, did that help gun crime more than the things Rudy did?

Put stop and frisk, specifically, aside. Did murder rates drop meaningfully during Rudy's tenure Paul? Did he do a great job with violent crime? In the 5-6 years begore Rudy was sworn in, NYC had about 2500 murders a year. By the time he left, it was under 1,000 a year. Rapes went from 5,000 per year to 3,500. Robberies from over 100,000 per year to under 40,000. Total violent crimes from over 200,000 per year to under 100,000.

Maybe stop and frisk had zero impact. But obviously in aggregate, the things he did, helped. Why in Gods name would we willfully choose to ignore that, because we don't like the party he is affiliated with?

We would all (conservatives included) do well to put ideology aside, focus on results. Look at what has worked, and do more of that. Look at what doesn't work, and stop doing it. Why is that so hard?

https://www.disastercenter.com/crime/nycrime.htm

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

If the cops weren't doing anything else at that specific time, removing 715 illegally carried guns in one year, seems like a worthwhile use of time. Until the bad guys start wearing signs that announce their intentions, unfortunately we need to cast the net pretty wide. What's a more efficient way to get illegal guns of the street? Ask criminals to pretty please turn themselves in? Chicago and DC in recent past had very tough restrictions on gun ownership, did that help gun crime more than the things Rudy did?

Put stop and frisk, specifically, aside. Did murder rates drop meaningfully during Rudy's tenure Paul? Did he do a great job with violent crime? In the 5-6 years begore Rudy was sworn in, NYC had about 2500 murders a year. By the time he left, it was under 1,000 a year. Rapes went from 5,000 per year to 3,500. Robberies from over 100,000 per year to under 40,000. Total violent crimes from over 200,000 per year to under 100,000.

Maybe stop and frisk had zero impact. But obviously in aggregate, the things he did, helped. Why in Gods name would we willfully choose to ignore that, because we don't like the party he is affiliated with?

We would all (conservatives included) do well to put ideology aside, focus on results. Look at what has worked, and do more of that. Look at what doesn't work, and stop doing it. Why is that so hard?

https://www.disastercenter.com/crime/nycrime.htm

Murder (and all crimes) dropped across the whole US - not only in NY. Rates started to fall before stop and frisk and continued to fall after S&F was stopped. Criminologist argue over the reasons with probably 10 -15 being listed. Some that people agreed on previously have been called into question. One that is lately getting more study is the decrease in lead in gas. There is/was no smoking gun that is an answer.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

https://www.disastercenter.com/crime/nycrime.htm

FYI - Rudy was mayor from 1994 to 2001. It looks like most crimes started to go down a few year before he became mayor and continued to decrease after Rudy.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

FYI - Rudy was mayor from 1994 to 2001. It looks like most crimes started to go down a few year before he became mayor and continued to decrease after Rudy.

When you say "it looks like", what were you looking at? You got data that shows that NYC's crime drop didn't stick out?

I googled that question, saw this article.

University of California isn't known as a right-wing school last time I checked. Yet a law professor there said NYC's crime drop under Rudy "one of the most remarkable stories in the history of urban crime".

https://www.city-journal.org/html/ho...ory-13197.html

Here is another article. From the article:

"During the 1990s, crime rates in New York City dropped dramatically, even more than in the United States as a whole. Violent crime declined by more than 56 percent in the City, compared to about 28 percent in the nation as whole."

Meaning, NYC saw a drop that was exactly double the nationwide average.

During the 1990s, crime rates in New York City dropped dramatically, even more than in the United States as a whole. Violent crime declined by more than 56 percent in the City, compared to about 28 percent in the nation as whole.

But Rudy was a Republican, and even worse, a Trump ally. He can't have done anything good.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

When you say "it looks like", what were you looking at? I looked at the chart you linked. You got data that shows that NYC's crime drop didn't stick out?

I googled that question, saw this article.

University of California isn't known as a right-wing school last time I checked. Yet a law professor there said NYC's crime drop under Rudy "one of the most remarkable stories in the history of urban crime".

https://www.city-journal.org/html/ho...ory-13197.html

Here is another article. From the article:

"During the 1990s, crime rates in New York City dropped dramatically, even more than in the United States as a whole. Violent crime declined by more than 56 percent in the City, compared to about 28 percent in the nation as whole."

Meaning, NYC saw a drop that was exactly double the nationwide average.

During the 1990s, crime rates in New York City dropped dramatically, even more than in the United States as a whole. Violent crime declined by more than 56 percent in the City, compared to about 28 percent in the nation as whole.

But Rudy was a Republican, and even worse, a Trump ally. He can't have done anything good.

The crime rates (according to the chart YOU linked) started to decline BEFORE Rudy was Mayor and continued AFTER Rudy was no longer Mayor.

So it has nothing to do with Rudy being a Republican or "even worse" a Trump ally.