Educated far beyond his intelligence.

DAL · February 22, 2000, 02:39 PM

Here's a piece of fluff I found quoting a guy who likens the use of guns to a disease.

Just for the sake of argument, I'll accept his premise and then ask, "What caused the disease?" I'll give you three guesses, and they all happen to be Government interference. Everything from the War on Drugs, welfare, and Government (public) schools have contributed to the problems we're seeing today.
DAL http://www.sierratimes.com/arap2_022100.htm

Use of Guns Likened to Disease
FEBRUARY 21, 02:22 EST

By PAUL RECER
AP Science Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) — The willingness of young men to use guns spreads like a disease, or even a fashion fad, through urban neighborhoods, often causing youth to view firearms as essential to survival and status, a new study suggests.

Jeffrey Fagan, director of the Center for Violence Research and Prevention, said gun homicides among young men is a contagious impulse that becomes a powerful social current, forcing even violence-averse youth to grab a firearm.

``We found that guns become sort of a social toxin,'' Fagan said Sunday at the national meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. ``Guns became a major influence on the way that one young man interacts with another.''

Fagan said firearms become status symbols, a central part of a violence theme that spreads like a fad from neighborhood to neighborhood.

``The presence of gun homicides in one neighborhood significantly increased the likelihood of gun homicide in any of the surrounding neighborhoods during the subsequent year,'' Fagan said.

He based the conclusion on an analysis of the rise and fall of fatal shootings over many years in New York City.

In interviews with scores of young men in urban neighborhoods, Fagan said, he discovered that a gun, and the willingness to use it, can become a marker for a young man's status in a community.

``Guns created an ecology of death,'' he said. ``All disputes become potentially lethal.'' If a young man fails to carry a gun and then loses an argument, he slips in social status and ``becomes prey, a
potential victim.''

The young man's reaction, for safety and to regain status, is often to start carrying a gun and to be ready to use it. And so the gun culture spreads, from youth to youth, until gun ownership has ``eclipsed or devalued other identities,'' Fagan said.

``Guns became part of their identity,'' he said. ``The decision to carry a gun was very strategic.''

But like a disease epidemic or a fashion fad, said Fagan, gun violence can fade, become stigmatized and socially unacceptable.

The study strongly suggests that a police focus on taking guns off the street can be a successful way to control crime and violence, he said.

Another speaker at the AAAS meeting said a 25 percent decline in national homicide rates among adults in the 1990s may be linked to society's increased willingness to put people in prison and, ironically, to the decline in marriages.

Richard Rosenfeld, a professor of criminology at the University of Missouri, St. Louis, said his study suggests there also is a ``civilizing influence'' at work, creating a reduced tolerance for violence that includes increased respect for the victims of domestic crimes.

The U.S. incarceration rate was stable for 50 years, standing at about 110 people per 100,000 general population. Starting in 1973, society starting putting more people in prison for longer sentences. The
incarceration rate is now 450 per 100,000.

By removing people from the street during the years that they were most prone to violence, the increased incarceration can be credited with about one-quarter of the decline in adult homicide rate, Rosenfeld said. The rate peaked at 16 per 100,000 population in 1980, dropped to 8.3 per 100,000 by 1995 and remains about there, he said.

But if the fall in homicide rate is linked to more crowded prisons, Rosenfeld said, it comes at a high price for society: A net increase of 670 prisoners a year yields one less homicide.

``When you multiply 670 times the $20,000 it costs to house one prisoner, you get $13.4 million,'' he said. Society must decide ``if that is too much to avert one homicide.''

The sharpest decline in the homicide rate has been in the category that includes spouses, family members and intimate partners, Rosenfeld said. One major reason for this is the decline in marriages, he suggested.

In addition, he said, ``Cultural changes are reducing the tolerance for interpersonal violence.''

------------------
Reading "Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal," by Ayn Rand, should be required of every politician and in every high school.
GOA, JPFO, PPFC, CSSA, LP, NRA

Jeff OTMG · February 22, 2000, 05:11 PM

$13.4 million to jail 670 more bad guys. It is worth it if it saves just one life. Where have I heard that before? Keep in mind that it is not just one homicide that is being avoided, those other 669 guys are locked up for a reason, so we are also having 150 fewer cars stolen, 200 fewer burglaries commited, 300 assaults, you get the idea.

glockguy45 · February 22, 2000, 05:21 PM

We need to copy the middle east. QUIT SPENDING OUR HARD EARN MONEY on these leeches to society and let the families take care of the bad apples in jail. No Family, no food, water, etc....

------------------
Rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

jnix · February 22, 2000, 05:37 PM

Hey here is a good idea deport our criminals to Mexico.

------------------
"Guns don't kill people the government does", Rusty Shackleford.

glockguy45 · February 22, 2000, 05:41 PM

Not Mexico, they would just hop the border, lets try Antartica

------------------
Rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

Jim Keenan · February 22, 2000, 05:45 PM

Hi, Jeff OTMG,

That "if it saves one life" is the same argument the antis give for confiscating your guns. If we really believed that, we would ban cars, planes, knives, water, food, etc.

Jim

Gunslinger · February 22, 2000, 06:45 PM

I think Jeff knows the source of the "....if it saves just one life" argument and was using sarcasm to make his point.

------------------
Gunslinger

We live in a time in which attitudes and deeds once respected as courageous and honorable are now scorned as being antiquated and subversive.

HankL · February 22, 2000, 07:41 PM

glockguy45,
Don't even have to go as far as the middle east. If you go to prison in Honduras your family and friends feed you or you go
without. 20 years or less could easily death.
Untill these kids PARENTS teach them that "hell is hot" this will continue. The schools can't do it and the government can't legislate it. I had better stop now.
Sincerely,
Hank

Puddle Pirate · February 23, 2000, 09:34 AM

Glockguy45,
Antarctica is too far away, but Greenland is just around the corner. They look identical, except Greenland has polar bears, and Antarctica has penguins.

KawKLR · February 23, 2000, 12:11 PM

It is time to get mediaeval on criminals.

Futo Inu · February 25, 2000, 10:30 AM

Wait just a cotton-picking minute - now it's perfectly OK when liberals put a price on a human life in a real world cost-benefit analysis. What happened to "if it only saves one life, it's worth banning handguns". Heck, if they're actually going to engage in logic, they're setting themselves up to lose the debate big-time. The real data shows guns save many more lives than the number of deaths that can be attributed to them.

Dennis Olson · February 25, 2000, 11:32 AM

"We found that guns become sort of a social toxin..."

No, that statement is incorrect. The MISUSE of guns by UNTRAINED youth (having NO IDEA about RESPECTING guns, due to being raised by ANTI-gun parents) has become a social toxin.

My opinion only.

And $13.4 MILLION BUCKS, for 670 maggots? You know, a bullet is only a dime. That'd be just $67 DOLLARS. Works for me....

**4V50 Gary** · February 25, 2000, 04:57 PM

I don't believe the writer is overeducated. He's just spewing propaganda just like Goebbels.

------------------
Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt

TOMBERGSTR · February 25, 2000, 06:46 PM

I think I see the beauty of this logic . I'm suprised no one ever thought of this before . If this works we can expand on it . No one really likes foul mouthed people so if we want a foul free society we just ban talking altogether .
These people are always talking about gang bangers and crazies making life a danger to all . We as responsable gun owners do not want these people around either . All we disagree on is the method . We need to adopt legislation wherein these people should pay and pay dearly for the disruption they cause . A punishment that would strike fear in their hearts at the very mention of using a gun again . The bleeding heart liberals want us to pay for the misdeeds of those that the liberals don't have the balls to stand up to . I can understand the logic but it doesn't work in real life . Maybe we need to spread a rumor that liberals carry several thousand dollars at all times . Talk about putting the Bee on someone .

------------------
TOM SASS MEMBER AMERICAN LEGION MEMBER NRA MEMBER

February 22, 2000, 02:39 PM	#1
DAL Senior Member Join Date: October 15, 1999 Location: Colorado Springs, CO, USA Posts: 662	Here's a piece of fluff I found quoting a guy who likens the use of guns to a disease. Just for the sake of argument, I'll accept his premise and then ask, "What caused the disease?" I'll give you three guesses, and they all happen to be Government interference. Everything from the War on Drugs, welfare, and Government (public) schools have contributed to the problems we're seeing today. DAL http://www.sierratimes.com/arap2_022100.htm Use of Guns Likened to Disease FEBRUARY 21, 02:22 EST By PAUL RECER AP Science Writer WASHINGTON (AP) — The willingness of young men to use guns spreads like a disease, or even a fashion fad, through urban neighborhoods, often causing youth to view firearms as essential to survival and status, a new study suggests. Jeffrey Fagan, director of the Center for Violence Research and Prevention, said gun homicides among young men is a contagious impulse that becomes a powerful social current, forcing even violence-averse youth to grab a firearm. ``We found that guns become sort of a social toxin,'' Fagan said Sunday at the national meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. ``Guns became a major influence on the way that one young man interacts with another.'' Fagan said firearms become status symbols, a central part of a violence theme that spreads like a fad from neighborhood to neighborhood. ``The presence of gun homicides in one neighborhood significantly increased the likelihood of gun homicide in any of the surrounding neighborhoods during the subsequent year,'' Fagan said. He based the conclusion on an analysis of the rise and fall of fatal shootings over many years in New York City. In interviews with scores of young men in urban neighborhoods, Fagan said, he discovered that a gun, and the willingness to use it, can become a marker for a young man's status in a community. ``Guns created an ecology of death,'' he said. ``All disputes become potentially lethal.'' If a young man fails to carry a gun and then loses an argument, he slips in social status and ``becomes prey, a potential victim.'' The young man's reaction, for safety and to regain status, is often to start carrying a gun and to be ready to use it. And so the gun culture spreads, from youth to youth, until gun ownership has ``eclipsed or devalued other identities,'' Fagan said. ``Guns became part of their identity,'' he said. ``The decision to carry a gun was very strategic.'' But like a disease epidemic or a fashion fad, said Fagan, gun violence can fade, become stigmatized and socially unacceptable. The study strongly suggests that a police focus on taking guns off the street can be a successful way to control crime and violence, he said. Another speaker at the AAAS meeting said a 25 percent decline in national homicide rates among adults in the 1990s may be linked to society's increased willingness to put people in prison and, ironically, to the decline in marriages. Richard Rosenfeld, a professor of criminology at the University of Missouri, St. Louis, said his study suggests there also is a ``civilizing influence'' at work, creating a reduced tolerance for violence that includes increased respect for the victims of domestic crimes. The U.S. incarceration rate was stable for 50 years, standing at about 110 people per 100,000 general population. Starting in 1973, society starting putting more people in prison for longer sentences. The incarceration rate is now 450 per 100,000. By removing people from the street during the years that they were most prone to violence, the increased incarceration can be credited with about one-quarter of the decline in adult homicide rate, Rosenfeld said. The rate peaked at 16 per 100,000 population in 1980, dropped to 8.3 per 100,000 by 1995 and remains about there, he said. But if the fall in homicide rate is linked to more crowded prisons, Rosenfeld said, it comes at a high price for society: A net increase of 670 prisoners a year yields one less homicide. ``When you multiply 670 times the $20,000 it costs to house one prisoner, you get $13.4 million,'' he said. Society must decide ``if that is too much to avert one homicide.'' The sharpest decline in the homicide rate has been in the category that includes spouses, family members and intimate partners, Rosenfeld said. One major reason for this is the decline in marriages, he suggested. In addition, he said, ``Cultural changes are reducing the tolerance for interpersonal violence.'' ------------------ Reading "Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal," by Ayn Rand, should be required of every politician and in every high school. GOA, JPFO, PPFC, CSSA, LP, NRA

February 22, 2000, 05:11 PM	#2
Jeff OTMG Senior Member Join Date: October 15, 1998 Location: Austin, Tx (for now) Posts: 3,548	$13.4 million to jail 670 more bad guys. It is worth it if it saves just one life. Where have I heard that before? Keep in mind that it is not just one homicide that is being avoided, those other 669 guys are locked up for a reason, so we are also having 150 fewer cars stolen, 200 fewer burglaries commited, 300 assaults, you get the idea.

February 22, 2000, 05:21 PM	#3
glockguy45 Senior Member Join Date: February 19, 2000 Location: Laurel MD Posts: 252	We need to copy the middle east. QUIT SPENDING OUR HARD EARN MONEY on these leeches to society and let the families take care of the bad apples in jail. No Family, no food, water, etc.... ------------------ Rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

February 22, 2000, 05:37 PM	#4
jnix Senior Member Join Date: January 17, 2000 Location: Tacoma, Wa Posts: 130	Hey here is a good idea deport our criminals to Mexico. ------------------ "Guns don't kill people the government does", Rusty Shackleford.

February 22, 2000, 05:41 PM	#5
glockguy45 Senior Member Join Date: February 19, 2000 Location: Laurel MD Posts: 252	Not Mexico, they would just hop the border, lets try Antartica ------------------ Rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

February 22, 2000, 05:45 PM	#6
Jim Keenan Senior Member Join Date: March 17, 1999 Posts: 10,956	Hi, Jeff OTMG, That "if it saves one life" is the same argument the antis give for confiscating your guns. If we really believed that, we would ban cars, planes, knives, water, food, etc. Jim

February 22, 2000, 06:45 PM	#7
Gunslinger Senior Member Join Date: January 5, 1999 Location: Springfield, Missouri Posts: 2,106	I think Jeff knows the source of the "....if it saves just one life" argument and was using sarcasm to make his point. ------------------ Gunslinger We live in a time in which attitudes and deeds once respected as courageous and honorable are now scorned as being antiquated and subversive.

February 22, 2000, 07:41 PM	#8
HankL Senior Member Join Date: March 11, 1999 Location: The Sunny South Posts: 2,175	glockguy45, Don't even have to go as far as the middle east. If you go to prison in Honduras your family and friends feed you or you go without. 20 years or less could easily death. Untill these kids PARENTS teach them that "hell is hot" this will continue. The schools can't do it and the government can't legislate it. I had better stop now. Sincerely, Hank

February 23, 2000, 09:34 AM	#9
Puddle Pirate Senior Member Join Date: November 3, 1999 Location: Indy Posts: 128	Glockguy45, Antarctica is too far away, but Greenland is just around the corner. They look identical, except Greenland has polar bears, and Antarctica has penguins.

February 23, 2000, 12:11 PM	#10
KawKLR Member Join Date: February 7, 2000 Posts: 25	It is time to get mediaeval on criminals.

February 25, 2000, 10:30 AM	#11
Futo Inu Senior Member Join Date: February 12, 1999 Location: Oklahoma City, OK, USA Posts: 3,629	Wait just a cotton-picking minute - now it's perfectly OK when liberals put a price on a human life in a real world cost-benefit analysis. What happened to "if it only saves one life, it's worth banning handguns". Heck, if they're actually going to engage in logic, they're setting themselves up to lose the debate big-time. The real data shows guns save many more lives than the number of deaths that can be attributed to them.

February 25, 2000, 11:32 AM	#12
Dennis Olson Senior Member Join Date: August 21, 1999 Posts: 1,186	"We found that guns become sort of a social toxin..." No, that statement is incorrect. The MISUSE of guns by UNTRAINED youth (having NO IDEA about RESPECTING guns, due to being raised by ANTI-gun parents) has become a social toxin. My opinion only. And $13.4 MILLION BUCKS, for 670 maggots? You know, a bullet is only a dime. That'd be just $67 DOLLARS. Works for me....

February 25, 2000, 04:57 PM	#13
4V50 Gary Staff Join Date: November 2, 1998 Location: California Posts: 13,263	I don't believe the writer is overeducated. He's just spewing propaganda just like Goebbels. ------------------ Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt

February 25, 2000, 06:46 PM	#14
TOMBERGSTR Senior Member Join Date: February 2, 2000 Posts: 104	I think I see the beauty of this logic . I'm suprised no one ever thought of this before . If this works we can expand on it . No one really likes foul mouthed people so if we want a foul free society we just ban talking altogether . These people are always talking about gang bangers and crazies making life a danger to all . We as responsable gun owners do not want these people around either . All we disagree on is the method . We need to adopt legislation wherein these people should pay and pay dearly for the disruption they cause . A punishment that would strike fear in their hearts at the very mention of using a gun again . The bleeding heart liberals want us to pay for the misdeeds of those that the liberals don't have the balls to stand up to . I can understand the logic but it doesn't work in real life . Maybe we need to spread a rumor that liberals carry several thousand dollars at all times . Talk about putting the Bee on someone . ------------------ TOM SASS MEMBER AMERICAN LEGION MEMBER NRA MEMBER