More gun control = fewer gun deaths.

[Direckshun]

The Legal Community Against Violence conducted a study where they compared the rigidity of the gun control laws in all 50 states and the gun-related deaths.

Their conclusion:

Our ranking reveals that many of the states with the strongest gun laws
also have the lowest gun death rates. Conversely, many states with the weakest gun laws have the
highest gun death rates. Although it is beyond the scope of this publication to demonstrate a causal
relationship between state gun laws and gun death rates, the data provides support for the argument
that gun laws are a signifi cant factor in a state’s rate of gun deaths.vi More research is needed to
determine the precise relationship between state gun laws and gun death rates.

Here's the study, it's an insanely easy read, I'd recommend checking it out. I included the article below as a casual summary of the study's findings.

The recommendations of the study:

BEST PRACTICES

DEALER LAWS

• Require all fi rearms dealers to obtain a license and pass a background check (CA, HI, MA, NJ, PA, RI, WA)
• Prohibit dealers in residential and other sensitive areas (MA)
• Require employee background checks (CT, DE, NJ, VA, WA)
• Require security measures (AL, CA, CT, MA, MN, NJ, PA, RI, WV)
• Require sales record reporting to state and local law enforcement (CT)

PRIVATE SALE LAWS

• Require all fi rearm transfers are to be conducted through licensed dealers (CA)
• If transfers are not conducted through dealers, require private sellers to: 1) conduct background checks
  through a central law enforcement agency (RI); 2) maintain sales records for a lengthy period (IL);
  or 3) report sales to state and local law enforcement (MA)

AMMUNITION LAWS

• Require sellers to be licensed (MA)
• Require sales record-keeping (CA — handgun ammunition)vii
• Require license to purchase or posses ammunition (IL, MA)
• Require ammunition sellers to store ammunition safely (CA — handgun ammunition)viii
• Require handgun microstamping (technology that allows a fi rearm to imprint a serial number
  and other information onto a cartridge case when fi red) (CA)

ASSAULT WEAPONS

• Defi ne assault weapon based on generic features that characterize assault weapons and use
  one-feature test (CA for rifl es and pistols, NJ for shotguns)
• Prohibit broad range of activities such as possession, manufacture, sale (CA, CT, NJ have the
  broadest prohibitions)
• If weapons possessed prior to the ban are grandfathered, require registration with strict limits
  on transferability, use and storage (CA, CT)

LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION MAGAZINES

• Defi ne “large capacity ammunition magazine” to include magazines capable of holding in excess
  of 10 rounds (HI, CA, MA, NY)
• Apply ban to large capacity ammunition magazines for use with all fi rearms (CA, MD, MA, NJ, NY)
• Prohibit broad range of activities such as possession, manufacture, sale (NJ, NY are the
  most comprehensive)
• Do not grandfather magazines possessed prior to the ban (HI, MD, NJ)

FIFTY CALIBER RIFLES

• Prohibit broad range of activities such as possession, manufacture, sale (CA)
• If weapons possessed prior to the ban are grandfathered, require registration with strict limits
  on transferability, use and storage (CA)

LICENSING

• Require license for possession of any fi rearm, and require license to be shown prior to
  purchase of any fi rearm (IL, MA)
• Require background check for license (HI, IL, MA, NJ), (handguns — CT, IA, MI, NY, NC)
• Require safety training and/or testing (MA), (handguns — CA, CT, HI, MI, RI)
• Limit duration of license (HI, IL, MA), (handguns — CA, CT, IA, MI, NJ, NC)
• Require background check and testing for renewal (MA)

REGISTRATION

• Require registration for all fi rearms (HI)
• Include identifying information about owner, fi rearm, and source from which fi rearm was obtained (HI)
• Require retention of fi rearm sales records (CA — handguns)

CARRYING CONCEALED FIREARMS

• Prohibit carrying of concealed fi rearms (IL, WI)
• If concealed carry is allowed, require a permit and give the issuer discretion based on strict guidelines (AL,
  CA, DE, HI, MA, NJ, NY, RI issue permits only for good cause to persons of good character)

OPENLY CARRYING FIRERAMS

• Prohibit open carry of handguns (FL, IL, TX)
• Prohibit open carry of long guns (FL, MA, MN)

LOCAL AUTHORITY

• Allow broad local regulation of fi rearms (CT, HI, IL, MA, NJ, NY)
• If broad local regulation is not allowed, allow substantial regulation (CA, NE)

Gun control absolutely must be part of any package designed to reduce gun violence.

http://www.standard.net/stories/2012...ess-gun-deaths

Study: States with more gun control have less gun deaths
By Bob Egelko, San Francisco Chronicle
Wed, 12/26/2012 - 1:03pm

Connecticut has more restrictions on gun ownership than most states, so gun-rights advocates argue the Dec. 14 schoolhouse massacre there illustrates the futility of gun control.

But a new study by a pro-gun control San Francisco organization reaches the opposite conclusion: States with the most restrictive laws, including Connecticut and California, have lower rates of gun-related deaths, while states with few limits on firearms have the highest rates.

In 2009 and 2010, the most recent years for which information is available, California had the nation’s strongest gun controls and the ninth-lowest rate of gun deaths, according to the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which favors firearms regulation. Connecticut had the fourth-strongest gun laws and was sixth-lowest in gun deaths, while Hawaii ranked fifth in gun control and had the lowest death rate.

At the other end of the scale, the report found that Alaska, Louisiana and Montana -- all graded F for gun control -- had the highest rates of deaths caused by gunfire, more than double California’s rate. The law center graded all 50 states and gave an F, for weak regulation, to 24 of them.

In 2010, the report said, quoting the federal Centers for Disease Control, California had 7.88 gun deaths for each 100,000 residents, compared with rates of 3.31 in Hawaii and 20.28 in Alaska.

More research is needed on the links between specific weapons regulations and fatalities, but “the data supports the common-sense conclusion that gun laws are a significant factor in a state’s rate of gun deaths,” said the report.

Since the report’s release last month, The Chronicle has forwarded it for comment to four gun-rights organizations: the National Rifle Association, the National Shooting Sports Foundation, Gun Owners of America and its state affiliate, Gun Owners of California. None replied to calls or e-mails.

Other recent studies have reached similar conclusions. A researcher at the University of Alabama at Birmingham reported in July that states requiring comprehensive background checks before gun purchases had lower death rates than those without such requirements.

But as long as the federal government leaves gun regulations largely up to each state, the effectiveness of any state’s laws is inherently limited, said Laura Cutiletta, an attorney at the law center that conducted the study.

California, for example, bans most semiautomatic rifles, including the Bushmaster .223 that Adam Lanza used to kill 20 students and six educators at a Newtown, Conn., elementary school this month. But the rifles are legal in neighboring Nevada, and can be taken easily -- though illegally -- to California.

The Bushmaster is also legal in Connecticut, a circumstance that Cutiletta said illustrates the modest level of gun regulation even in states ranked high in the law center’s survey.

While Connecticut is one of about 10 states with any restrictions on semiautomatic rifles, it prohibits them only if they have certain additional features, such as a pistol grip and a folding or collapsible stock.

The Bushmaster that Lanza reportedly used-was a version of the widely sold AR-15 rifle, and had been legally purchased by his mother, whom he killed before taking her guns and heading to the school.

A federal assault weapons law, in effect from 1994 to 2004, also banned semiautomatic weapons only if they had specific features. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., sponsored that law after a gunman used assault weapons to kill eight people and then took his own life at 101 California St. in San Francisco.

Feinstein is proposing a more far-reaching national law in the wake of the Newtown bloodbath.

Although the federal law has been widely regarded as ineffectual, Cutiletta cited a 2004 study commissioned by President George W. Bush’s Justice Department that found assault weapon use in gun crimes dropped by 17 to 72 percent in six cities during the decade. On the other hand, use of large-caliber ammunition magazines increased through the late 1990s, probably because the ban did not apply to weapons acquired before 1994, the study said.

[LOCOChief]

Originally Posted by RedNeckRaider

No I do not, I think this is all a game. For some reason certain people just enjoy starting shit on the Internet. Seriously he has a half dozen threads about gun control going. If he was genuinely debating this issue he would state his case in one thread. He starts several to fan the flames and keeps poking people for reaction. The angrier the better. Why some people thrive on negative attention is beyond me but some do. I picked up on his act a long time ago. Whenever there is a hot button topic he floods DC with threads. I firmly believe it is nothing more than a game to him~

Well first of all I don't think it's a "he" As for the rest of your theory maybe your right, maybe.

[AustinChief]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Oh, I never claimed to be. I would honestly, personally describe myself as having below average intelligence.

But I support my points of view with as much evidence as you can have on a message board. You might disagree with the quality of the material but to say I don't back my shit up is clearly wrong.

Ton of respect your way for being honest with yourself on that front.

The problem comes in when you A)fail to understand what other people are trying to tell you and b)try to back up your shit with nonsense that in your little mind passes for "evidence"

[Dayze]

I haven't read through all the threads, so it's most like Q but..

no amount of gun control is going to stop someone who is dead set on killing someone/people.

Period.

again...I know it's probably Q

[trndobrd]

Originally Posted by Dayze

I haven't read through all the threads, so it's most like Q but..

no amount of gun control is going to stop someone who is dead set on killing someone/people.

Period.

again...I know it's probably Q

Especially if that person is him/herself. Using the same source as the original article, 30k "Gun Violence" deaths in 2007:

613 - Unintentional
12,632 - Homicide
351 - Legal Intervention
17,352 - Suicide

When you go back and analyze gun homicides by state the conclusion of the article falls apart

[RNR]

Originally Posted by AustinChief

Ton of respect your way for being honest with yourself on that front.

The problem comes in when you A)fail to understand what other people are trying to tell you and b)try to back up your shit with nonsense that in your little mind passes for "evidence"

I don't think he is being honest at all. I have read enough from him to gage he is sharp enough to understand that he can push buttons of intelligent people. Not sucking up to you but you strike me me as well educated and well read. When you take on a subject you come well armed. I think he gets a kick out of having someone like yourself engage him in a discussion.

Of course he is getting his ass handed to him however this "gee I am not very smart" reply continued the interaction, and will be picked up by all who have been debating him. This will generate more posts. Many will respond to this omission taking shots of how he admits he is not smart. It allows him to respond and start the cycle all over. I could be wrong but I doubt it, if I am than it is a truly tragic study of someone who is lost and ignores history thinking the government is his friend and will protect him~

[frazod]

Hey Dickshun, I just bought a nice little conceal carry 9mm with a 12 round magazine. So what do you and your below average intelligence think about that?

[AustinChief]

Originally Posted by RedNeckRaider

I don't think he is being honest at all. I have read enough from him to gage he is sharp enough to understand that he can push buttons of intelligent people. Not sucking up to you but you strike me me as well educated and well read. When you take on a subject you come well armed. I think he gets a kick out of having someone like yourself engage him in a discussion.

Of course he is getting his ass handed to him however this "gee I am not very smart" reply continued the interaction, and will be picked up by all who have been debating him. This will generate more posts. Many will respond to this omission taking shots of how he admits he is not smart. It allows him to respond and start the cycle all over. I could be wrong but I doubt it, if I am than it is a truly tragic study of someone who is lost and ignores history thinking the government is his friend and will protect him~

I don't disagree that he is being disingenuous with the comment, I do however disagree with any idea that he actually is intelligent. His complete inability to follow along with simple logical constructs has demonstrated this time and again.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by AustinChief

I don't disagree that he is being disingenuous with the comment, I do however disagree with any idea that he actually is intelligent. His complete inability to follow along with simple logical constructs has demonstrated this time and again.

As far as I've learned logic has to be learned—it is not an innate ability.

[AustinChief]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

As far as I've learned logic has to be learned—it is not an innate ability.

It's a healthy mixture of both actually.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by RedNeckRaider

Sorry guy I just don't buy it~

You can choose to interpret my persona however you want, fortunately it has no bearing on the validity of my arguments.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by trndobrd

Especially if that person is him/herself. Using the same source as the original article, 30k "Gun Violence" deaths in 2007:

613 - Unintentional
12,632 - Homicide
351 - Legal Intervention
17,352 - Suicide

When you go back and analyze gun homicides by state the conclusion of the article falls apart

Exactly. But that doesn't invoke passionate emotions, so nobody really addresses that.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by RedNeckRaider

Seriously he has a half dozen threads about gun control going. If he was genuinely debating this issue he would state his case in one thread.

Not necessarily.

Each of my threads address a particular aspect of an issue we both care about.

This thread, in particular, is a proposal to restart federal gun research.
This thread addresses an actual Congressional proposal.
This thread displays the immense bargaining power of the NRA relative to their opponents.
And this thread cites a study which suggests a correlation between gun control and gun deaths.

You want to dislike the threads? Sure. But claiming that each of them are superfluous is stupid, unless you're arguing each issue should only have one uberthread.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by AustinChief

It's a healthy mixture of both actually.

...which probably varies from individual to individual.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by AustinChief

Ton of respect your way for being honest with yourself on that front.

Meh. You've treated me like garbage whether you've respected me or not (including this very reply), so forgive me if I don't really give a shit about how much respect you don me with at any given moment.

Originally Posted by AustinChief

The problem comes in when you A)fail to understand what other people are trying to tell you and b)try to back up your shit with nonsense that in your little mind passes for "evidence"

I disagree on both cases.

And for someone with your gargantuan, insurmountable intellect, you've blatantly misrepresented or misunderstood my positions radically, committing a half dozen strawman fallacies along the way. Not exactly a person I'd entrust with arbiting when anybody's comprehending information being sent their way.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by trndobrd

When you go back and analyze gun homicides by state the conclusion of the article falls apart

How so?