Where'd they get their guns

[fulltlt]

FYI

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3addb9bd7da6.htm

WASHINGTON, April 18 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The Violence Policy Center
(VPC) today released Where'd They Get Their Guns? An Analysis of the
Firearms Used in High-Profile Shootings, 1963 to 2001, an examination
of 65 high-profile shootings over the past four decades. The report
provides details for each shooting including: the identity of the
shooter; the number of people killed and wounded; the make, model, and
caliber of the gun(s) used in the shooting; the circumstances of the
shooting; and, how the gun was acquired. The shooters in these
killings varied from school-aged children to disgruntled employees to
lone-wolf assassins -- acting out of a wide range of motives.


``This report reveals that most mass shootings involved handguns,
usually legally acquired,'' VPC Policy Analyst and report author Marty
Langley said today. ``The message is clear, until we begin focusing
upstream at the gun manufacturers by regulating the gun industry
itself -- instead of relying on traditional gun control measures that
focus solely on the user -- killings of this type will continue
unabated.''


Among the study's findings are:


In the 59 high-profile shootings from 1980 onwards:


-- A handgun was used in 71 percent of the shootings (42 cases) as
the only or primary weapon, while in 29 percent (17 cases) a rifle or
shotgun was used as the only or primary weapon.


-- The handguns were acquired legally in 62 percent of the handgun
shootings (26 cases).


-- The long guns were acquired legally in 71 percent of the
long-gun shootings (12 cases).


In the 10 high-profile shootings in America's schools from October
1997 to March 2001, handguns were among the weapons used in nine of
the shootings. In eight of the 10 school shootings the guns were
obtained from a family member or friend of the shooter.


Adds Langley, ``This week, as we mark the second anniversary of the
Columbine massacre, we should more closely examine the source of these
devastating shootings and look toward a more comprehensive approach to
lessen the impact guns have on our lives.''


---


Where'd They Get Their Guns? is available from the VPC's web site
at http://www.vpc.org. The Violence Policy Center is a national non-profit
educational organization working to stop gun death and injury in
America.

 

[fulltlt]

How does Marty Langley think that regulating the gun industry is going to have any effect?

 

[Digger]

This guy is lying. How, if you are of shool age, can you a acquire a firearm "legally" for which you have to be 18 or 21 years old to purchase????

Yes, the firearms were acquired legally by somebody, at some point in time, but not by the youths who used them in the subject shootings.

 

[PaladinVC]

Good call, Digger. This puts the whole study in doubt. If that's their definition of "legal", then how can we trust their use of words like "high-profile" or "comprehensive"?

 

[Dan from MI]

VPC ALWAYS lies.

 

[LawDog]

65 high-profile shootings over the past four decades

65 shootings out of the past 40 years? Which 65? And why were those particular 65 chosen?

If I were a nasty, suspicious person, I'd say that the VPC decided what it wanted the study to reveal and then picked and chose only those 65 shootings which matched the impression they wanted to give.

``This report reveals that most mass shootings involved handguns, usually legally acquired,''

Involved handguns? Does this mean handguns were used, or that handguns were present in some form, whether discharged or not?

killings of this type will continue unabated.''

Killings of what type? Killings of those chosen 65 incidents?

In the 59 high-profile shootings from 1980 onwards:

Wait a minute, so only 6 shootings from 1963 to 1979 were profiled? Out of the turbulent decades of the 60's and 70's (UTA Bell Tower, JFK, MLK, Kent State, the SLA, Watermen, the Black Panthers, bank robberies out the wazoo) they could only find 6 "high-profile" shootings for their database?

They only give stats from 1980 onward. Why is that? The study is from 1963 to 2001. Why are only statistics from 1980 to 2001 given?

:barf: Junk science at it's best.

LawDog

 

[chink]

We then have to define Hi profile. They only looked at 65 shootings. I will put good money down that there are more that 65 shootings in this country a year let alone in 4 decades. That sample size is so small that the margin of error has to be incredibly large Then there are the gun crimes where no shooting occurred, just the brandishing of a weapon, those make us look bad also. VPC is full of it. The 65 cases they looked at are probably (didn't read the article) perdominately exceptions to the rule.

 

[griz]

This kind of "research" is the most misleading way of presenting things. If you start from the premise that guns are bad, then pick certain specific facts to make your point, you end up with a distorted view that almost sounds logical.
If he really wanted to study high-profile attacks, he would have found the OK city bombing, the student who intentionally ran over classmates, or the arson of the club in New York. Even though these incidents killed more people than all of the shootings he listed combined, no guns were used so he ignored them.

From the article:
``The message is clear, until we begin focusing upstream at the gun manufacturers by regulating the gun industry itself -- instead of relying on traditional gun control measures that focus solely on the user -- killings of this type will continue unabated.''

Instead of saying "we have a rash of troubled kids who have decided to steal their relatives guns and shot people", he makes a huge leap of logic that these guns were purchased legally so the gun manufactures must be the problem. VPC’s solution is of course to make it illegal for the law abiding relatives to have guns.

High-profile is just his buzz word that means the kind of shooting that gets a lot of news coverage.

 

[USP45]

You have to go to VPC.org and read the study. ROTFLMAO!

If i didn't know better, i'd think that VPC was a Pro-gun plant/mole intending to make the anti-gun side look stupid.

The firearm was legal. Williams (15 years old) took the handgun from his father’s locked gun cabinet.

15 yo in possesion of handgun is legal?

Despite a history of mental instability including a suicide attempt in 1987, McDermott received a gun permit from the Rockland, Massachusetts, police in 1989. Investigators believe he legally purchased the weapons used in the shooting before letting his permit expire in 1998.

So if his permit expired, 2 years earlier, it makes him Illegal, NO?

CONCLUSION
After Columbine, our nation, supposedly utterly jaded by gun violence, showed
that it still had the capacity to be shocked and sickened. And yet after each mass
shooting, the unspoken public hope is that it can’t possibly get any worse. But it
always does. From George Hennard in Killeen, Texas, to Eric Harris and Dylan
Klebold in Littleton, Colorado. And when the next shooting occurs, violating a
previously safe haven—a ballpark, concert hall, supermarket, or shopping mall—what
will our reaction be?

Nice, objective language, huh?

Today, the gun industry is virtually free of any government oversight
regarding the design, manufacture, and distribution of firearms. The result is the
ready availability of assault weapons; ultra-concealable, high-capacity, high-caliber
“pocket rockets;” and, junk guns small and light enough for six-year-olds to carry and
fire.

Say, no more, say no more!