re: Fox Sports Marcellus Wiley says it’s not guns, it’s about people

quote:

---

There was a study done a few years ago looking at states with waiting periods and those without that suggested that there was an effect fro...

---

Trust the experts, huh?

Same crowd probably said cOViD didn’t start from a lab in Wuhan…

The 2020 election was the most secure-evar!

Trump colluded with Russia to rig the 2016 election.

VP Joe didn’t do anything wrong regarding Hunter & his business dealings in Ukraine, China.

Hunter’s laptops were hacked by Russia. Typical‘tradecraft’, and such.

quote:

---

You may want to look up the race of these mass shooters, champ.

---

The race of mass shooters reflects the population. What’s your point?

quote:

---

That's a deflection.

---

No its a reasonable argument. Part of what makes this country basically uninvadible is the amount of guns we have in private hands. It also means we have a defense against tyranny. Gun deaths are tragic, yes, but unfortunately freedom is messy.

quote:

---

I would like to see the empirical evidence to support this. Are there data that shows definitively that x number of kids have said they would have committed a school shooting absent having to be 21 to get a firearm? I say that mostly in jest, but seriously, how has that been determined? I’d like to see the study.

---

It's impossible to prove something is *causal* but this paper uses a difference-in-difference analysis to explore state variation in gun homicides. This analysis aims to get as possibly close to 'causal' as possible.

LINK

It reduced homicides by around 17% and it even reduced suicides. Forcing people to think rather than act reduces homicides.

For the minimum age, there are a few studies out there but they essentially note that most gun violence is carried out by young people and disproportionately by youths.

quote:

---

It reduced homicides by around 17%

---

This implies that substantially greater than 17% of homicides are committed with guns purchased within some “waiting period” time period. This is utter bullshite. How do you not see such a remarkable flaw in this study?

quote:

---

This implies that substantially greater than 17% of homicides are committed with guns purchased within some “waiting period” time period. This is utter bull shite. How do you not see such a remarkable flaw in this study?

---

No, it doesn't unless I'm misunderstanding you.

It's comparing different states - not all states have a waiting period so it's very much possible for most murders to be committed within or outside a waiting period because some states don't have a waiting period.

It doesn't imply that at all. The 17% implies that compared to states that don't have a waiting period, there are 17% fewer homicides (controlling for everything else).

quote:

---

No, it doesn't unless I'm misunderstanding you.

---

Stay out of the weeds. Keep it simple here.

You posted that this study suggests that some length of waiting period would result in 17% fewer homicides because people “cool off” - or is that not what you posted?

That would imply that substantially more than 17% of murders (because the waiting period would not be 100% effective) are committed with guns that a waiting period pertains to, that is a recently purchased firearm. Correct?

quote:

---

quote: Guys who want to commit mass murders can and WILL get their hands in a gun no matter an age requirement. If that were true why did the perpetrator in Uvalde wait until just after he turned 18 to purchase a weapon? Is it your assertion that at 17 he was peaceful, but the day he turned 18 he turned homicidal? Or maybe it's that as soon as he was legally (easily) able to obtain a gun, he did so. Obviously. quote: Take a man’s gun who someone (possibly with an I’ll-meaning agenda against another) reports to law-enforcement will likely embolden them if they wish to kill. Luckily at that point the homicidal person won't have a gun to commit said killing with. quote: Other than what’s already in place to impede the law-abiding citizen’s purchase of a firearm? Yes. quote: The bad guys/felons aren’t stupid enough to risk jail time knowing a background check will catch them. Stronger background checks would also include stricter penalties for straw purchases. quote: I’ll ask you again. Make up a reasonable example of an instance where any of the measures you tout would stop a person bent on using a firearm to kill people. Glad I could help you by doing that. I'm happy to hear you're on board with these measures now, since your questions were answered

---

Not so fast, lol.

Uvalde: do we know he waited to commit murder until he was 18? Or did he lawfully acquire a gun with no ill-intent at the time? I don’t know. Besides, the age requirement ultimately didn’t prevent the crime. I still think if he’d wanted to commit the crime prior he’d have had little trouble finding a gun. Admittedly I haven’t soaked up the news on Uvalde, perhaps these questions have been answered. But what little I do know seems to indicate this started as a domestic “kill grandma” that escalated?

Red flag: Sure, you disarm the man in the short term. Hopefully he “cools”. But the guy who’s desperate to kill will get a gun on the street or will steal one. The big problem for me here is the constitutionality of seizing a person’s firearms based on a report of an individual who may or may not have ulterior motives and is falsely reporting. Ultimately this is going to be decided by the Supreme Court, sooner or later.

Background Checks: My points still stand that background checks will be easily avoided. Sure, it takes more effort to acquire a gun through illegal methods but it doesn’t stop it for bad actors. I’m ok going through a background check because I know I’ll pass it. And if I couldn’t I wouldn’t be the guy acquiring one illegally.

Straw Purchases: I mean sure, you can make the penalty worse. But the current one is pretty stiff. I don’t see someone telling their friend or spouse, “Man, have you seen the tougher penalties for straw purchases? I can get 20 years instead of 10 now, so I’m not helping you get a gun.” I’m all for tougher laws for straw purchases but don’t see the typical person who’s willing to make a straw purchase deterred any more than they might already be. Hell, if a murder is committed using a firearm it is determined to have been acquired via straw I say the violator should be subject to murder charges.

quote:

---

An illegal firearm purchase (straw purchase) is a federal crime. An illegal firearm purchase can bring a felony conviction sentence of ten years in jail and a fine of up to $250,000. Buying a gun for someone who can't can cost you your good name and land you in big trouble.

---

Straw Law

quote:

---

Public shootings in which four or more people were killed and I believe non-gang-related.

---

So you could shoot and injure 20 people and not kill anyone and that doesnt count? Why are gang related shootings excluded? Is this defined according to you, reserch, fbi, etc?