Nemises – how many times can you go wrong in 3 paragraphs; you gave us your 2 cents and you did not overcharge.
“I live in California, which has the most restrictive gun laws in the USA”
Wrong, California does not require a purchase permit for possession in the home or transport for lawful purposes and for business purposes for the vast majority of handguns, rifles and shotguns. There are rules regarding semi-auto military pattern rifles but particularly effective variants with certain modifications are still allowed. This is better than most East Coast states, New York, New Jersey, Massachusettes, Illinois, and several other Midwest states. Further – California is an NFA Class III State which permits, subject to federal registration and payment of a $200 tax – the possession and use of full auto machine guns, short barreled rifles, etc. (although they are expensive). In NY and NJ – NFA items are banned.
If you are getting your gun control scorecard about California from the Brady bunch website – their gun control score is based upon a score that includes gov’t record retention, mandatory background checks, storage requirements, waiting periods, etc. – these do not limit or stop the sale and transfer of guns by and to the general populace. Since the enactment of the Federal NCIC database a number of years ago – most State law background checks are window dressing because the federal system picks up just about any country wide criminal conviction, outstanding warrants, etc. The shooter of the Congresswoman in Arizona passed the NCIC database and would have passed the California background checks as well – they are attempting to add mental hygiene state court actions to the NCIC database but there are problems with doing that.
“for example, it is almost impossible to get a CCW permit here"
Wrong – California CCW permits are issued at the County/local law enforcement level and, depending on jurisdiction, require an application and a sign off by the Sheriff. It may be impossible to get a full carry license in San Francisco – but for much of California it does not present much an obstacle beyond the 175$ fee and a training requirement. Most rural areas have de facto dispensed with the requirement and do not care if you are packed so long as you look and act like a law abiding citizen.
“You live in Texas, which has probably the most permissive gun laws in the USA.”
Wrong – Kentucky, Vermont, Louisiana, Alaska, Montana, Wyoming are all more permissive. I think one of these states has a manufacturer attempting to sell weapons outside of BATF jurisdiction by marking them for possession in the home state only – as to avoid federal regulation under the interstate commerce clause. But like I said – the permissiveness is largely related to not having storage requirements, 3 day waiting periods, things like that. The bulk of the weapons available in these state are the same as California. Vermont for example, you don’t even need a license to conceal carry.
Now I will take this next piece out of turn –
“Well, the violent crime rate (per capita) in Texas is significantly higher than in California; Texas rate is 1.32 (above) national average, California is 0.92 (below)”
You read the statistic wrong – that is the overall crime rate including larceny (theft) and auto theft – scroll to the bottom of the screen where violent crime is spelled out by category: Cali beats Texas in robbery. The violent crime rate estimate for year 2009 per 100k per capita population is
.0472 per 100k for Cali
.00491 per 100k for Texas –
There were statistically no real differences in per capital violent crime rate for 2009 – if you are going to argue crime and guns – argue violent crime and guns – not throw crimes like possession of weed, etc.
Scroll to the bottom of the chart at this link for a bar graph - the two states are neck and neck
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=Tex...CrimeRate-
Now continuing -
“ Both are populous states”
They are different – 2009 population of Cali was 38,292,687 2009 population of TX 24,873,773 –
“So you probably expect all the violent criminals from the USA to move to California to commit their crimes against the disarmed population”
No one expects that. If that were true – the 5 boroughs of NYC would have the highest crime rate in the world.
“Well, the violent crime rate (per capita) in Texas is significantly higher than in California; Texas rate is 1.32 (above) national average, California is 0.92 (below).
Uh . . NO.
“The homicide rate in "gunless" UK is three times lower comparing to the USA (1.28 vs 5.0)”
Sure – that totally makes a difference. UK crime statistics are not kept like the FBI does – but from one wiki article there are 16 violent crimes per 1000 residents – I am looking for the violent crime definitions and charts but found this article from the Daily Mail saying England has a higher violent crime rate than South Africa at 2034 violent crimes per every 100k residents – and look at this from the article -
"The U.S. has a violence rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents, Canada 935, Australia 92 and South Africa 1,609."
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...z1VG69mady
I’m curious to see homicide charts for England that pre-date the handgun ban - the overall rate would still be lower than the United States - even during the years that the IRA was most active.
You are so far off base with this its not even funny. You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about - you should not be setting crime policy or gun policy.
“I live in California, which has the most restrictive gun laws in the USA”
Wrong, California does not require a purchase permit for possession in the home or transport for lawful purposes and for business purposes for the vast majority of handguns, rifles and shotguns. There are rules regarding semi-auto military pattern rifles but particularly effective variants with certain modifications are still allowed. This is better than most East Coast states, New York, New Jersey, Massachusettes, Illinois, and several other Midwest states. Further – California is an NFA Class III State which permits, subject to federal registration and payment of a $200 tax – the possession and use of full auto machine guns, short barreled rifles, etc. (although they are expensive). In NY and NJ – NFA items are banned.
If you are getting your gun control scorecard about California from the Brady bunch website – their gun control score is based upon a score that includes gov’t record retention, mandatory background checks, storage requirements, waiting periods, etc. – these do not limit or stop the sale and transfer of guns by and to the general populace. Since the enactment of the Federal NCIC database a number of years ago – most State law background checks are window dressing because the federal system picks up just about any country wide criminal conviction, outstanding warrants, etc. The shooter of the Congresswoman in Arizona passed the NCIC database and would have passed the California background checks as well – they are attempting to add mental hygiene state court actions to the NCIC database but there are problems with doing that.
“for example, it is almost impossible to get a CCW permit here"
Wrong – California CCW permits are issued at the County/local law enforcement level and, depending on jurisdiction, require an application and a sign off by the Sheriff. It may be impossible to get a full carry license in San Francisco – but for much of California it does not present much an obstacle beyond the 175$ fee and a training requirement. Most rural areas have de facto dispensed with the requirement and do not care if you are packed so long as you look and act like a law abiding citizen.
“You live in Texas, which has probably the most permissive gun laws in the USA.”
Wrong – Kentucky, Vermont, Louisiana, Alaska, Montana, Wyoming are all more permissive. I think one of these states has a manufacturer attempting to sell weapons outside of BATF jurisdiction by marking them for possession in the home state only – as to avoid federal regulation under the interstate commerce clause. But like I said – the permissiveness is largely related to not having storage requirements, 3 day waiting periods, things like that. The bulk of the weapons available in these state are the same as California. Vermont for example, you don’t even need a license to conceal carry.
Now I will take this next piece out of turn –
“Well, the violent crime rate (per capita) in Texas is significantly higher than in California; Texas rate is 1.32 (above) national average, California is 0.92 (below)”
You read the statistic wrong – that is the overall crime rate including larceny (theft) and auto theft – scroll to the bottom of the screen where violent crime is spelled out by category: Cali beats Texas in robbery. The violent crime rate estimate for year 2009 per 100k per capita population is
.0472 per 100k for Cali
.00491 per 100k for Texas –
There were statistically no real differences in per capital violent crime rate for 2009 – if you are going to argue crime and guns – argue violent crime and guns – not throw crimes like possession of weed, etc.
Scroll to the bottom of the chart at this link for a bar graph - the two states are neck and neck
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=Tex...CrimeRate-
Now continuing -
“ Both are populous states”
They are different – 2009 population of Cali was 38,292,687 2009 population of TX 24,873,773 –
“So you probably expect all the violent criminals from the USA to move to California to commit their crimes against the disarmed population”
No one expects that. If that were true – the 5 boroughs of NYC would have the highest crime rate in the world.
“Well, the violent crime rate (per capita) in Texas is significantly higher than in California; Texas rate is 1.32 (above) national average, California is 0.92 (below).
Uh . . NO.
“The homicide rate in "gunless" UK is three times lower comparing to the USA (1.28 vs 5.0)”
Sure – that totally makes a difference. UK crime statistics are not kept like the FBI does – but from one wiki article there are 16 violent crimes per 1000 residents – I am looking for the violent crime definitions and charts but found this article from the Daily Mail saying England has a higher violent crime rate than South Africa at 2034 violent crimes per every 100k residents – and look at this from the article -
"The U.S. has a violence rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents, Canada 935, Australia 92 and South Africa 1,609."
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...z1VG69mady
I’m curious to see homicide charts for England that pre-date the handgun ban - the overall rate would still be lower than the United States - even during the years that the IRA was most active.
You are so far off base with this its not even funny. You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about - you should not be setting crime policy or gun policy.