Report: 2010 was deadly year for law enforcement

[jpak]

http://www.wjla.com/articles/2011/05/report-2010-was-deadly-year-for-law-enforcement-60460.html

<snip>

In 2010, law enforcement officers suffered a 24 percent increase in deaths by gunfire over 2009, according to a new report by the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.

Since Jan. 1, 2009, 122 law enforcement officers have been shot and killed. Since the beginning of 2011, guns have killed at least 30 officers.

"The same weak gun laws that put ordinary Americans at risk of gun violence are especially lethal to law enforcement officers who are on the front lines protecting us," said Paul Helmke, President of the Brady Center. "To protect our officers, as well as ordinary Americans, Congress needs to close the loopholes in federal law that allow easy access to assault weapons and large-capacity assault clips. Law enforcement officers shouldn't be under the constant threat of deadly gunfire as they do their jobs."

<more>

[rrneck]

1. If the cops are having that much of a problem

I better go buy another gun.

[jpak]

2. That's the problem - gun and ammo sales have gone way up since Obama took office

this is what that reaped

yup

[rrneck]

3. Prove it. nt

[jpak]

4. There is a significant correlation between gun ownership and gun deaths from all causes

more guns

more death

fact proved

yup

[eqfan592]

7. *cough* bullshit *cough*

Correlation does NOT equal causation, something you really need to think about. What else happened in that time span? Oh yeah, our economy collapsed and unemployment sky rocketed. That likely had a heck of a lot more to do with it than an uptick in gun sales, which have been steadily increasing for years, while the crime rate has not. It's been on a generally downward tick, with occasional upsurges.

In reality, it's very difficult to even show a correlation, much less causation, in the grand scheme.

[Hoyt]

9. "Correlation NOT causation" -- tell gunners here who say crime decreases because of more guns.

[rrneck]

10. Link? nt

[eqfan592]

12. Most of the "gunners" here who say that....

...are generally only making the point that correlation actually supports the assertion of a decrease in crime, not increase, with the increase in gun sales. Rarely have I seen somebody try to argue causation in this case. That's NOT to say I haven't ever seen it, because I know I've responded to posts like that. In reality, I believe the data points to firearms being a relative non-factor in the crime rate.

[Hoyt]

18. Most of those that say that can't keep their head and other body parts out of their barrels.

[Euromutt]

23. Whoever they are, supposedly

Because I'm reasonably certain I've seen more pro-RKBAers on this forum express skepticism about John Lott's "more guns, less crime" hypothesis than I've encountered citing it in support of their argument.

And speaking for myself, I've been openly critical about Lott's work, approvingly citing Ted Goertzel's article (http://crab.rutgers.edu/~goertzel/mythsofmurder.htm) that described Lott's work as "an example of statistical one-upmanship" in which obviously faulty conclusions were "obscured by a maze of equations."

[Hoyt]

29. There are plenty of the others here as well.

[X_Digger]

31. Then find one, Hoyt. Use the search. n/t

[Hoyt]

33. X-Digger, you've published the graphs that show gun accumulation increasing and crime going down.

And they are shown with the implication that more guns reduces crime.

[eqfan592]

37. Ehhhh, no.

At least not how I've ever seen them. I've always viewed them as a counter to the implication that more guns equals more crime, not that more guns equals less crime. But hey, nice try. :P

[X_Digger]

40. If you can't see the difference, then I question your ability to comprehend..

or your willingness to read what people write.

You and I have been through this before, and you stalk off in a cloud of ignorance.

We get people saying more 'guns = more crime'.

I can demonstrably prove that is false.

That does not mean I endorse the converse (namely, 'more guns = less crime'.)



Last time you made this assertion, I even tried to break it down for you in terms that would make it clear. Let me be even more blunt this time-

Person A says the moon is made of green cheese.

Person B says the moon is made of tofu.

If I say I can prove the moon is not made of green cheese, that does not mean I'm claiming the moon is made of tofu.


Clear yet? Do I need to go over this again in smaller words? If you don't get it at this point, I have to think it's intentional obtuseness. Nobody could be this dense and not fall to the center of the earth.

[Euromutt]

43. Funny you should mention X_Digger

Here's a post of his from last November http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=349012&mesg_id=349088

I don't claim that more guns = less crime, but the inverse has been disproven..

more guns definitely != more crime.

Lott goes too far for me, ascribing causation where it is unwarranted.

He wasn't even talking to you at the time, Hoyt.

[friendly_iconoclast]

53. You fumbled the punt, now go give us a link or it's BS. n/t

[rrneck]

8. LOL You're funny.

So you got nothing. Allrighty then.

[Euromutt]

11. No, you've asserted it; you haven't proved a thing

Riddle me this: if this increase is the result of an increase in sales of firearms and ammunition since November 2008, why did more cops die of gunshot wounds in 2007 than in 2010?

[Hoyt]

34. Many of you guys are hoarding the firearms and ammunition.

[AtheistCrusader]

41. I too, like to have it both ways.

Then again, that's how I swing.

[Euromutt]

44. You know "many of you guys" like to tell "us guys" we need to read the prefatory clause?

I suggest you follow that advice. I said: if this increase in cops from 2009 to 2010 being shot is entirely attributable to increased sales from November 2008 onwards (as jpak claimed in post #2), then why is it that there were more cops shot to death in 2007--prior to the increase in sales--than in 2010?

I mean, you do realize that jpak's assertion and yours are mutually exclusive, I hope?

[oneshooter]

49. Can you cite any law against it? Or is it only in your mind? n/t

[PavePusher]

55. Someone should ask him to define "hoarding" in respect to firearms and ammunition.

I have a few bricks of .22LR, and a few hundred rounds of each of the 6-7 calibers I normally shoot, in about 10 different rifles.

Is that "hoarding"?

[X_Digger]

21. Bullshit, codswallop, and tripe.

Has the violent crime rate in the last 20 years gone up, or down?

Down. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=kfa

Has the murder rate gone up or down in the last 20 years?

Down. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/glance/guncrime.cfm

Has the rate of gun use in crime gone up or down in the last 20 years?

Down. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/glance/guncrime.cfm

Has the number of firearms in private hands gone up or down in the last 20 years?

Up (by 125M since 1998 alone). http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/reports/total-nics-background-checks

Bullshit busted.

Yup.

[RSillsbee]

27. There is a significant correlation between gun ownership and gun deaths from all causes

Then it shouldn't be hard for you to show the correlation.

Pretend it's math class jpak show your work

[krispos42]

39. Man, you're just begging for a reality fix, aren't you?

[spin]

52. You are good at posting but unfortunately poor at backing up your posts with facts ...

surely you can prove that the violent crime rate increased when the gun and ammo sales sky rocketed. That only makes commonsense.

I'll wait with baited breath.

[ileus]

17. pick up this months issue of Tactical Shotguns by Shooting times...good stuff

[Hoyt]

35. "Tactical Shotguns"? Sounds like a lovely read, and monthly too. Do they have a daily forum?

Just about anybody who looks at the market surrounding guns and stuff can't really think people ought to be packing or sitting on a home weapons cache.

[rrneck]

38. It's much more interesting than

Whining Scold Monthly. Although the tips on how to be a sanctimonious ass look pretty funny.

[Union Scribe]

47. Ha!

[eqfan592]

50. lol, nice :) NT

[PavePusher]

56. Oh dear, he used that word again.

I still don't know if I have a "cache" or not, because he won't say what the parameters are....

It's turribly vexing, ain't it?

[rrneck]

57. I think for him

it means something like an anti cachet. And if the two touch it will cause a huge explosion that will spell the end of the universe.

[PavePusher]

58. I sense a disturbance in the fabric of space-time....

Someone is preparing to divide by zero....

[notesdev]

5. enforcing just laws is safer than enforcing unjust ones

just sayin'

[Euromutt]

6. Two data points don't make a trend (much as the Brady Campaign would like to pretend otherwise)

The number of officers who died from gunshot wounds (GSWs) may have increased by 24% from one year to the next, but what the press release (and let's face it, this is lazy reporting: they just copied and pasted the Brady Campaign press release with no effort to examine it critically) doesn't say is that 2009 saw comparatively few LEO fatalities.

In 2009, 47 LEOs died of GSWs: 45 felonious, 2 accidental. A 24% increase means that 58 LEOs died of GSWs in 2010. That's roughly on a par with 2007 (60: 56 + 4), and markedly fewer than 2001 (66: 61 + 5). Note that in 2001, the federal ban on so-called "Assault Weapons" was still in effect.

See the FBI's LEOKA statistics, Tables 27 http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/killed/2009/data/table_27.html and 61 (http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/killed/2009/data/table_61.html)

[HankyDubs]

13. lol @ all the people unreccing

do you guys ever step back and think about how ridiculous you are?

[eqfan592]

14. Ridiculous for calling down a BS stat by a BS org???

Any officer deaths are tragic, but these scumbags trying to twist that data for their means is disgusting.

[HankyDubs]

15. officer deaths are tragic

but doing anything about the problem...THAT would be the real tragedy.

[eqfan592]

16. Well if you have solid evidence that the primary cause of officer deaths....

....was the increase in firearms ownership and not, say, our economic issues that lead to higher unemployment (higher unemployment equals more desperate people) then yeah, maybe we could talk. But since you don't have that (because it doesn't exist) then stripping a right from the people that would literally accomplish nothing productive in the name of these dead officers would indeed be tragic.

[HankyDubs]

22. how about "a cause"

why does it need to be the primary cause? Besides, the NRA supported right wing candidates that filibustered any progressive jobs agenda, so any way you slice it, the NRA is in the way.

[eqfan592]

30. Lol, so there it is.

You're one of those people who thinks it doesn't matter how much possible good may come of something (in this case, defensive hand gun usage), if only ONE CHILD, or ONE POLICE OFFICER or ONE ANYTHING is killed by accident or malicious intent, then they must be banned. Sorry, but that's simply not a rational train of thought.

[HankyDubs]

32. lol, so there it is

then they must be banned

Same straw man every time.

[eqfan592]

36. Ok, take banned out of the equation...

...though it is NOT in fact a straw man, as there is plenty of evidence that shows that banning is indeed the primary goal of many prominent gun control advocates. Say strongly restricting firearms, then. It still serves mostly the same purpose by removing most defensive uses of firearms (depending on the severity of the restrictions). But hey, nice try and a dodge!

[Euromutt]

46. Maybe it'd help if you told us what you ARE suggesting

There'd be fewer "straw men" if people didn't have to guess what you're driving at.

[Euromutt]

45. Do you?

[X_Digger]

19. Check the trend line from 2000-2009

I'll wait til the FBI publishes the numbers from 2010, thanks. Bullshit brady bunch crap doesn't mean squat.

[Euromutt]

24. Note, moreover, that the Brady press release speaks of LEO "deaths by gunfire"

That allows them to conveniently lump accidental shootings by other LEOs in with felonious shootings.

Also note that the press release assiduously avoids comparing the relevant numbers:

Since Jan. 1, 2009, 122 law enforcement officers have been shot and killed. Since the beginning of 2011, guns have killed at least 30 officers.

Okay, so how many were killed in 2009, and how many in 2010? When the main thrust of your press release is about how "in 2010, law enforcement officers suffered a 24 percent increase in deaths by gunfire over 2009," why not state the actual numbers? Why the line about how many cops have been killed since 01/01/2009, which seems intended to mislead the reader into thinking 122 died from GSWs in 2009 alone (and that therefore 1.24 x 122 = 151 cops must have been fatally shot in 2010), whereas in fact that number appears to be LEOs dead from gunshot wounds in 2009, 2010 and 2011 lumped together.

[AtheistCrusader]

42. And how many were officer Suicides?

Because THAT never happens.

[beevul]

20. The batty campaign?

paul "were not a gun ban organization. We don't push for gun bans" "glock handguns aren't suited for hunting or self defense" helmke?

Bwahahahaha.


"assault clips"?

Is that the new batty bunch meme?

"Congress needs to close the loopholes in federal law that allow easy access to assault weapons and large-capacity assault clips."


Oh, the fact that they're legal is a "loophole" now?


The only hole that needs any closing, for the good of the public, is helmkes lieing piehole.

[lawodevolution]

25. Were you gleeful when you came across this info?

[rl6214]

26. Quoting the brady center=FAIL

Instan unrec

And you forgot your normal GOP/NRA shtick

[Historic NY]

28. RW domestic terrorist haven't helped either. Sec. of Homeland Security warned about them.

[PeanutGallery]

51. Really?

What RW domestic terrorists?? More than likely, the cops that have been killed were in urban settings. Not exactly a bastion of RW terrorists. But nice try though.

[oneshooter]

54. Cite to proof of "RW domestic terrorist " cop killers. n/t

[YllwFvr]

48. I knew about the risk to LEOs

And I hear it all the time. I know what im getting into and armed citizens are a risk im willing to accept.

[Surf Fishing Guru]

59. I just posted this comment at the souce linked in the OP

As a news organization I would hope that you would be the first to recognize that the Brady Center does not issue "reports" it issues glorified press releases containing rhetoric and hyperbolic propaganda to further its agenda.

Certainly LEO's being killed is horrific but the incidence is of such a low-base-rate phenomenon that minor moves can create large percentage changes from year to year. When the numbers are disingenuously presented, (and also disingenuously withheld), political agendas are exposed.

The National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund keeps very close track of officer deaths and they report:

"In 2010, firearm-related fatalities climbed to 61 line of duty deaths, 24 percent higher than in 2009 when 49 officers were killed. While the 2010 total was high compared to the rest of the decade, fatal shootings have decreased more than 45 percent since the 1970s."

That 24% increase is in the overall firearm related number which includes officers killed in accidents, training mishaps, friendly fire and suicide. In 2009 the number of "feloniously killed" officers was 47 with 2 deaths of other causes. In 2010 the number of officers killed by "other" means listed by NLOEMF is 11.

Perhaps the 24% increase in total firearm deaths was caused by a 450% increase in "other" firearm deaths which no amount of gun control legislation could effect?