This is just a quicky...time to make the donuts...I mean holsters.

http://www.salon.com/2012/09/23/america ... e_handgun/

This is a longish interview with Paul Barrett, the author of “Glock: The Rise of America’s Gun” . He does say things we have been saying for a long time. Dems have got to stop this anti gun talk. It loses elections.
There were several things I agree with, and a few I don't, but it does bring up the fact that there is no correlation between gun ownership and the rise and fall of violence. It just can't be denied that crime has come down even with more gun sales.

"The idea that you should make it legally harder to buy a gun and limit the type of gun that can be purchased or categories of people permitted to buy the guns, and that this will have a direct effect on crime has just become a very, very hard argument to make with a straight face. Something is causing crime to go down, and it’s not greater gun control because gun control is actually loosening."

rockyriverleather wrote: There were several things I agree with, and a few I don't, but it does bring up the fact that there is no correlation between gun ownership and the rise and fall of violence. It just can't be denied that crime has come down even with more gun sales.

Give Freakanomics a read. The whole first chapter of the book argues how the drop in crime wasn't the result of increased police presence, good politicians, or anything else you would think of. The authors argue that the drop in crime is a direct result of Roe v. Wade. One of the unintended consequences of having less children born into bad situations is that you have less children who grow up in bad situations to be criminals.

I've been meaning to read this book, but haven't had time to.

Thank you, and long time no see!

Heard a chunk of his interview on NPR, a while back. He made some interesting points, but I couldn't listen to the whole interview (I was already late for a meeting). Incidentally, most really good NPR interviews seem to start right before I have important meetings to attend.

One thing I disagree with is gun control was an effort to control crime. The reason behind the assault weapon ban is gun companies didn't want to compete with the Chinese gun makers. Before the Assault weapon ban you could buy an SKS for $50. It's hard to sell a $600 Browning when people can buy an SKS for $50. Outdoor Life heralded the SKS as the poor mans deer rifle when it was first imported. Even though the assault weapon ban was allowed to expire. The laws restricting importation of parts and the of the SKS are still on the books. Yet the unmodified SKS is CA and MA compliant. The assault weapon ban wasn't about crime control. It was about controlling the competition.

Today anyone who has CNC equipment and a knowledge of guns is building AR parts. In ten years these grass roots companies will be competing with mainstream gun manufacturers across the board. Glock, a foreign company is dominating the market. We have new cries for the assault weapon ban. No one wants another assault weapon ban more than mainstream gun manufacturers. The NRA actually supported the gun control act of 1968. They had to ensure they would have a reason for existence for the next couple decades. No matter who wins the election we will see another assault weapon ban. There is to much competition out there.

OldCrow wrote:One thing I disagree with is gun control was an effort to control crime. The reason behind the assault weapon ban is gun companies didn't want to compete with the Chinese gun makers. Before the Assault weapon ban you could buy an SKS for $50. It's hard to sell a $600 Browning when people can buy an SKS for $50. Outdoor Life heralded the SKS as the poor mans deer rifle when it was first imported. Even though the assault weapon ban was allowed to expire. The laws restricting importation of parts and the of the SKS are still on the books. Yet the unmodified SKS is CA and MA compliant. The assault weapon ban wasn't about crime control. It was about controlling the competition.

Today anyone who has CNC equipment and a knowledge of guns is building AR parts. In ten years these grass roots companies will be competing with mainstream gun manufacturers across the board. Glock, a foreign company is dominating the market. We have new cries for the assault weapon ban. No one wants another assault weapon ban more than mainstream gun manufacturers. The NRA actually supported the gun control act of 1968. They had to ensure they would have a reason for existence for the next couple decades. No matter who wins the election we will see another assault weapon ban. There is to much competition out there.

Man, you've just injected a measure of lucidity that is unfortunately lacking in our reactionary culture.

Bisbee wrote:

OldCrow wrote:One thing I disagree with is gun control was an effort to control crime. The reason behind the assault weapon ban is gun companies didn't want to compete with the Chinese gun makers. Before the Assault weapon ban you could buy an SKS for $50. It's hard to sell a $600 Browning when people can buy an SKS for $50. Outdoor Life heralded the SKS as the poor mans deer rifle when it was first imported. Even though the assault weapon ban was allowed to expire. The laws restricting importation of parts and the of the SKS are still on the books. Yet the unmodified SKS is CA and MA compliant. The assault weapon ban wasn't about crime control. It was about controlling the competition.

Today anyone who has CNC equipment and a knowledge of guns is building AR parts. In ten years these grass roots companies will be competing with mainstream gun manufacturers across the board. Glock, a foreign company is dominating the market. We have new cries for the assault weapon ban. No one wants another assault weapon ban more than mainstream gun manufacturers. The NRA actually supported the gun control act of 1968. They had to ensure they would have a reason for existence for the next couple decades. No matter who wins the election we will see another assault weapon ban. There is to much competition out there.

Man, you've just injected a measure of lucidity that is unfortunately lacking in our reactionary culture.

It's the same reason I laugh at the idea that they do away with the '86 ban and allow the sale of newly built full auto weapons to civilians with tax stamps. Could you imagine if you had a $100k full auto Thompson in pristine unfired condition that all of a sudden tanked in price? Could you imagine if you had a full auto MP5K and the hit you would take if they allowed post '86 guns? Exactly.

Back to the subject:
There's a long and well-studied correlation of demographics to violent crime. In the US, almost all non-DV crimes of violence are committed by young, unmarried males. We are an aging population; crime rates among the young are actually pretty constant.

The Roe v. Wade angle is interesting and not easily dismissed - nor is it easily proven.