Minneapolis murder rate rising "we don't have a gun problem"

[Croosch]

http://www.kare11.com/news/ts_article.aspx?storyid=100511

Alan D. Reitter, 31, of Minnetonka was with a group of friends when a gunman fired into a crowd near Block E -- a popular entertaiment complex in the city's warehouse district -- on Friday night.

Reitter, who was shot in the head and died at Hennepin County Medical Center, was an innocent bystander, police said.

Officers had come to the Block E area in response to a fight and reports that shots had been fired. They said Reitter hadn't been involved in any altercation.

After a short foot chase, police arrested a 21-year-old Minneapolis man. The man told detectives that he was not defending himself at the time of the shooting and acknowledged shooting into the crowd, police said.

Prosecutors said they will seek first-degree murder charges. Charges could be filed as soon as Monday.

Try to tell me we don't have a gun problem...  Last year by this time, Minneapolis only had 16 murders, this year we already have 28...  And I say only 16 as a comparison to this year, by no means is 16 murders a small amount this early in the year... or at any time.

During the 2005 Session, several firearm carry bills were introduced to address the court decisions regarding the 2003 Minnesota Citizens' Personal Protection Act of 2003. In May of 2005, Senate File 2259 was passed by both the Senate and the House of Representatives. Governor Pawlenty signed Senate File 2259 into law (2005 Session Laws, Chapter 83) on May 24, 2005.

The Minnesota "Personal Protection Act" allows us to carry firarms... put two and two together and one would realize that legalizing the right to carry guns causes a great rise in murder rates... wow, who ever couldn't figure that out in the first place is an absolute dumbass.

Murders are on the rise and what are we doing about it? jack shit.  I know this first hand as one of my good friends, a very good kid, was shot in the chest and killed last spring.

I know damn well people don't need guns to protect themselves.  The more guns we have, whether it be for "protection" or for the purpose of killing people, the more murders we'll have.  It's not a difficult thing to understand but for some reason some people are just clueless.

So you'll argue that making guns illegal won't do anything to stop them fom being sold and used... It will do a hell of a lot more than keeping them legal.  It may not do anything at first, but over time it will prove very beneficial and life saving for many...

All of these issues I've been talking about recently hit very very close to me and maybe that's why I feel so strongly about these things... to me these issues are common sense (same goes for the cancer research budget cut issue) and I can't comprehend how somebody can be so damn stupid to say the least.  Maybe it takes a close friend getting shot and killed or the death of a sister who was denied health insurance to finally see how fucked up these issues are... It's sad really, having so many heartless assholes in the U.S. willing to do anything for that extra buck.

Maybe Bush will one day understand when an issue like this hits close to his family.  Then again, maybe he won't...

[(SiX)Sheixhundt]

Scotland has outlawed guns in the hands of the civilian population,
yet has the highest violent crime rate in the western world.

This again....is not a gun problem..its a CRIMINAL problem.
And a crazzy person problem.

I will grant one point..some of these nuts may not be able to kill quite as many other people with lesser weapons. that is the ONE hole in my argument. But that does NOT negate the fact, that criminal minds are pulling these triggers, and outlawing guns does NOThINg to deal with the mentality that causes them to pull the trigger at innoncents, or rivals...NOTHING.

The argument either for or against, is complex and rife with personal belief over statistical fact...so im not trying to change your mind..at all. I have personal beliefs that are ingrained in how i was raised, and i have an admitted bias toward the RIGHT (amendment guaranteed right) to own a gun if i choose...

Guns in the hands of responsible people hurt VERY few comparitively..(accidents do occur..point granted there). Guns in the hands of criminals hurt many, however.

Criminals dont obey laws. Criminals dont buy guns from legal sources. Changing the gun laws will not stop the criminal mentality. The Scots are absolute evidence of this. They are busy Stabbing each other over fucking football of all things....  The criminals will STILL get guns from illegal sources, as they do now..and were access to the public be restricted...civilians would lose the means with which to defend themselves.

In Dallas alone, at the passage of the 'concealed carry' law, Road rage shootings dropped (% unknown) in the first month, muggings dropped somehwere between 5-7%, and home invasions (for some reason) dropped 13% in the following year.  Rapes (with knives and or other weapons increased, as did property theft and damage)

Other crimes went up..sadly..but this was an instance, where crime WAS reduced, factually, by the knowledge that people were arming themselves for such occasions. I heard some kids talking at a mexican market last week, and they were saying that they stopped breaking into cars, becuase they were getting fired on. SOunds like effective, responsible Gun use to me..

These random shootings are a SYMPTOM of something deeper..not just the access to the guns. there HAS to be a dispostion to pull a trigger in ager, and normal, law abiding, concerned citizens are not predisposed that way..(although, again there are exceptions to the rule--just as murders are still commited by people with knives and other instruments)  there are more school STABBINGS, by a factor of three, than there are school SHOOTINGs...Outlaw knives too?

Not taking away from your belief...valid on its own as a belief, but cannot be justified statistically, when talking into account mental condition, and priors of shooters (and where these people acquire the guns they use)  They are NOT buying them legally, in stores, with or without waiting lists and background checks...the numbers just wont do what you want them to.

Numbers, arent needed tho, when it comes to personal beliefs as yours, and i DO respect them...
I just cannot agree.

[Croosch]

How can you explain the number of murders nearly doubling from last year at this time to this year at this time... The Minnesota gun law allowing us to carry side-arms was passed later last year... you're trying to tell me that legalizing side-arms has nothing to do with the large increase in murders?

They are NOT buying them legally, in stores, with or without waiting lists and background checks...the numbers just wont do what you want them to.

Like I said, legalizing the guns does make it much easier to acquire one, whether you're getting it legally or not.

Scotland has outlawed guns in the hands of the civilian population,
yet has the highest violent crime rate in the western world.

I'm sure there's more to this... like a bad police force or something deeper.  I'd look into it but I have to get to bed for the night.

there are more school STABBINGS, by a factor of three, than there are school SHOOTINGs...Outlaw knives too?

Guns are much much more effective for killing, I'm sure you know this...  Knives can be found in kitchens and camping equipment... knives have many uses for the good.  Guns only have one use.

Guns in the hands of responsible people hurt VERY few comparitively..(accidents do occur..point granted there). Guns in the hands of criminals hurt many, however.

On a side note... a man was hunting here and shot a boy who was in the woods taking pictures in high weeds.  He shot him once thinking he was a squirl... then he shot a second time to make sure it was dead. This man was said to be very responsible with a gun, he legally recieved his lisence and gun... accidents like these aren't reversable.  "Accidents do happen" just doesn't cut it for me...

[*DAMN Hazard]

Innocent citizens will never drop their guns until criminals do. You can't expect a family man with four children that lives in a bad neighborhood to just chuck his berretta. Some people deserve the right to use firearms others certainly do not. This is one of those debates that will rage on for many more years and the only real solution is to eliminate criminal activity... which is pretty much impossible.

[Ein]

Give up my gun? Then the king of england could come into my house anytime he wanted and start pushing me around... Pfft I don't think so (damn monarchies).

Legal firearms are regisyered which means that if they are used in a violent crime, it will be easier to trace the gun back to the person who purchased it. Many shootings are with unregistered firearms... Why it always takes so long to find the perpitrator. These people got the guns illegally which they would have done with a law banning guns or not. The guns are already in the country weather you like it or not and will be found by those who want them. I think it best to try to get at least some od them registered more than none of them.

Also as Hazard said... People don't feel safe while criminals have guns. People would like their own gun to defend their own family. You have stories about friends being shot... Well I have stories about neighbors stopping their homes from being robbed by puling a gun on the thief. They didn't shoot him though but that gun still protected their assets and their family.

I personally don't have a gun nor do I want one but I they are around and I would prefer people who did have them at least to have to get them registered and have a liscence instead of people just getting them illegally.

Ein

[BTs_Mysterio]

To directly reply to the second last paragraph of Ein's post:

I have never heard a story of a house be defended from robbers with a gun around here, not have I ever had a friend, or a friend of a friend, or someone non-mediaclustered being shot. I'm not saying Canada is murder free, but if you can actually think of a story of murder and armed self-defense like *snap* "that" then I think it's more of a cultural problem.

The only way to ever ban guns in an effective way is to go around, completely close down all private weapons  and munitions production make them into controlled government agencies. Go door to door in a massive shock and awe wave and confiscate all civilians weapons whilst incinerating the black market.

The point being that it just won't happen (effectively). The world will only change when each person on it wants it to.

[(SiX)Sheixhundt]

Again, I'll reiterate that it's a 'Criminal' problem...and the causes of that criminality are all over the board.
Canadians own guns, and Myst unwittingly proved my argument for me...there arent a tremendous number of murders. Cultural or not...Its not guns..its the underlying criminality causing the problems.

Here in Texas, somewhere in the neighborhood of 80% of gun deaths are caused by guns that are not legally held, purchased, or Licenced. You see..responsible gun owners dont end up in those statistics.
Where they Do show up however, is in the countless accounts of Texas howeowners protecting their families from home-invading Meth freaks..of which we have PLENTY..unfortunately.
Any Texas congressman who even joked about proposing gun control legislation,
would be laughed out of office.

We have this super cool thing called the CONSTITUTION.
It GUARANTEES my right to own guns.
They will NEVER get my gun....even if they roll back the constitution.

I will not be waiting on the criminals to change the world.
And WANTING the criminals to change wont do it either.
Nor will i accept a law that forces me to be an easy target for the 'unenlightened criminal'....
So for now, theyll have to settle for Gambling on whether or not im a licenced Concealed weapon holder or not.

[Guest]

I see no problem with the general population owning "arms" however its what arms are available.

What is the official defenition of "arms" as per the constitution and where does it cease?

[(SiX)Sheixhundt]

Great Question..

Im not actually sure myself, but ive always been under the impression, that it encompasses any and all short of fully auto weapons of any size.

I know a person who owns a modified mounted 50 cal. Modification being to make it semi-auto.
And im pretty sure he bought it at a gun show.

Could be wrong about the limitations tho..for a while you could not own assault weapons..but that law has been rescinded, and now Ak47's are fair game. They sell for about $300-600.....

[BTs_GhostSniper]

Im not actually sure myself, but ive always been under the impression, that it encompasses any and all short of fully auto weapons of any size.

I know a person who owns a modified mounted 50 cal. Modification being to make it semi-auto.
And im pretty sure he bought it at a gun show.

Could be wrong about the limitations tho..for a while you could not own assault weapons..but that law has been rescinded, and now Ak47's are fair game. They sell for about $300-600.....

"Arms", as it is used in the U.S. Constitution, includes any firearm (there weren't many automatic weapons in 1787 when it was written, you know).  I currently own a whole host of firearms, including several that were illegal to own until fairly recently (my H&K MP5, M-4, and AK-47 come to mind).  But I also have several "regular" firearms like my 10mm Glock 29, Remington 700 (chambered in .308), and Remington 1100 Tactical Shotgun (12-gauge).  I must be the liberals' worst nightmare.

Of course I believe that owning firearms, whether for sport or self-defense, is the right of every citizen of this great country.  The founders of the United States knew that a well-armed public was not only a great deterrent against attackers, but it also kept the government in check (it's much harder to really screw your citizens when they are all armed).

Peace (through the use of superior firepower),

-GhostSniper Out.[/size]

[cO.libre]

i'm gonna get an AK and fuck all yall.

[Croosch]

In my personal opinion GS went way overboard... (and I also realize he doesn't care)

Though I now do understand some of your views a bit better and I thank you for that... finally a thread is actually flameless and insightful.

I must say though, there is absolutley no reason to own an AK-47.

[BTs_GhostSniper]

I must say though, there is absolutley no reason to own an AK-47.

Sure there is!  It is of great historical value to me...I am a military historian, in case you didn't know (among other things!).  I have only fired the AK-47 a few times, just for target practice and to get familiar with it.  Not a firearm I would normally use for self-defense, simply another gun in my collection.  Some people collect Barbies, I collect firearms.  My prized possession is an original RZM-Marked Walther PPK made in Germany before WWII began (currently valued at over $10,000).[/size]

[Ein]

I must say though, there is absolutley no reason to own an AK-47.

I think he uses it for hunting... you know... rhinos or Godzilla. haha

Ein

[Croosch]

I must say though, there is absolutley no reason to own an AK-47.

I think he uses it for hunting... you know... rhinos or Godzilla. haha

Ein

heh