You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 04, 2016, 08:18:36 PM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: The Virginia Shooting, Gun Rights, and Revolutions (Split from News thread)  (Read 14741 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Cycle

Re: The Virginia Shooting, Gun Rights, and Revolutions (Split from News thread)
« Reply #200 on: October 15, 2015, 11:45:06 AM »
The whole system could do with some improvements, but improvements should be possible if people have the will to tackle those problems and if the funds are made available to implement changes.

I'm not entirely sure how people get on no-fly lists, but my understanding is that it can be fairly capricious.  Otherwise these seem obvious, and are justified limits on rights in the context of criminal activity.

There could be some further interpretation, but I'd rather issues like dog stealing as a felony be addressed by changing those laws, not opening every felony to subjective review. 

Any type of warrant.  Simple bench warrants can usually be resolved fairly simply (by appearing in court as directed). 

*nods*  To me, this kind of dialog is helpful.  Progress!  Instead of trying to tackle the everything at once, we go step by step.  Lots of good points being raised.  All positive, constructive too.  Fine tuning.  Really, if we tried, I bet we can find a compromise that works instead of just arguing why each other is "wrong."  Alas, if only lawmakers will talk this way.

Offline Cassandra LeMay

Re: The Virginia Shooting, Gun Rights, and Revolutions (Split from News thread)
« Reply #201 on: October 15, 2015, 12:07:13 PM »
Alright, so if we are actually agreeing on some points, how about this:

Currently guns can (and will usually) be sold if the background check through the FBI's NICS system takes more than 3 days. While more than 90% of background checks (if I remember the statistics correctly) take only a few minutes, there are still many cases that take some time to resolve.

From 2010 to 2014 there were more than 15,000 cases (an average of about 3,150 per year) where the background check did eventually turn up information that would have precluded the sale of the gun, but the gun sale had already happened. (I think in those cases the FBI hands the case over to the ATF in form of a "request to retrieve", but how long those take to process and what the usual outcome is, i.e. how many of those guns are actually retrieved ... no idea.)

There are states that have similar rules but with longer wait periods, and some states completely rule out the sale unless and until the background check is completed.

Shouldn't the checks through the federal system also be extended? Would it be so bad for the 10% who don't have their background check resolved within minutes to wait ... say, up to 14 days? And just think about the money that might be saved if the ATF didn't have to go after so many guns that shouldn't have been sold in the first place.

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: The Virginia Shooting, Gun Rights, and Revolutions (Split from News thread)
« Reply #202 on: October 15, 2015, 12:13:26 PM »
Alright, so if we are actually agreeing on some points, how about this:

Currently guns can (and will usually) be sold if the background check through the FBI's NICS system takes more than 3 days. While more than 90% of background checks (if I remember the statistics correctly) take only a few minutes, there are still many cases that take some time to resolve.

From 2010 to 2014 there were more than 15,000 cases (an average of about 3,150 per year) where the background check did eventually turn up information that would have precluded the sale of the gun, but the gun sale had already happened. (I think in those cases the FBI hands the case over to the ATF in form of a "request to retrieve", but how long those take to process and what the usual outcome is, i.e. how many of those guns are actually retrieved ... no idea.)

There are states that have similar rules but with longer wait periods, and some states completely rule out the sale unless and until the background check is completed.

Shouldn't the checks through the federal system also be extended? Would it be so bad for the 10% who don't have their background check resolved within minutes to wait ... say, up to 14 days? And just think about the money that might be saved if the ATF didn't have to go after so many guns that shouldn't have been sold in the first place.

Or - what if there was both a minimum and a maximum time between purchase and delivery?  Brady-law minimum of three days to cover the impulse purchase, and background check max of 14 days, but if the background check comes in definitively clear at any time before the 14, they only have to wait the three days (assuming that's not already passed). Gun store gets the all-clear, calls the customer, says 'Come on down to pick up your Glock (or whatever).'

Offline Cassandra LeMay

Re: The Virginia Shooting, Gun Rights, and Revolutions (Split from News thread)
« Reply #203 on: October 15, 2015, 12:24:11 PM »
Or - what if there was both a minimum and a maximum time between purchase and delivery?  Brady-law minimum of three days to cover the impulse purchase, and background check max of 14 days, but if the background check comes in definitively clear at any time before the 14, they only have to wait the three days (assuming that's not already passed). Gun store gets the all-clear, calls the customer, says 'Come on down to pick up your Glock (or whatever).'
I don't see how a minimum wait of 3 days would improve things. If you have a minimum wait of 3 days you'd have a hard time applying background checks to guns shows and other sales outside a store. A minimum wait would pretty much rule out any sale at gun shows and I don't see how background checks could possibly be extended to gun shows under those provisions. It would prevent gun sales at gun shows and passing legislation that restricts the business that much is not at all likely to be passed. Better to introduce background checks for gun show sales and private sales, because they actually do reduce firearms murder (and suicide). Best to keep that door open, IMO.

Offline Cycle

Re: The Virginia Shooting, Gun Rights, and Revolutions (Split from News thread)
« Reply #204 on: October 15, 2015, 12:25:44 PM »
(I think in those cases the FBI hands the case over to the ATF in form of a "request to retrieve", but how long those take to process and what the usual outcome is, i.e. how many of those guns are actually retrieved ... no idea.)

Stray thought:  if someone developed an app to do this, they could be rich...

"Siri, run a NICS background check on Cycle."  ;D


Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: The Virginia Shooting, Gun Rights, and Revolutions (Split from News thread)
« Reply #205 on: October 15, 2015, 01:05:05 PM »
I don't see how a minimum wait of 3 days would improve things. If you have a minimum wait of 3 days you'd have a hard time applying background checks to guns shows and other sales outside a store. A minimum wait would pretty much rule out any sale at gun shows and I don't see how background checks could possibly be extended to gun shows under those provisions. It would prevent gun sales at gun shows and passing legislation that restricts the business that much is not at all likely to be passed. Better to introduce background checks for gun show sales and private sales, because they actually do reduce firearms murder (and suicide). Best to keep that door open, IMO.

I thought that there was already a minimum wait?  I basically didn't want to remove an existing precaution if one existed.

Offline Mithlomwen

  • ~ E's resident kilt inspector ~ ~ Atropos ~
  • Goddess
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2008
  • Location: Somewhere between the dark and the light...
  • Gender: Female
  • ~ Thunder only happens when it's raining.... ~
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Virginia Shooting, Gun Rights, and Revolutions (Split from News thread)
« Reply #206 on: October 15, 2015, 01:09:33 PM »
Stray thought:  if someone developed an app to do this, they could be rich...

"Siri, run a NICS background check on Cycle."  ;D

Two words...

Abby Sciuto

/derail

*flees* 

Offline Cassandra LeMay

Re: The Virginia Shooting, Gun Rights, and Revolutions (Split from News thread)
« Reply #207 on: October 15, 2015, 01:22:36 PM »
I thought that there was already a minimum wait?  I basically didn't want to remove an existing precaution if one existed.
Oh no. There is no minimum wait, at least not for federal background checks. I am not sure if there are any states have have different legislation, but the FBI background check is just a database search that can be done in a matter of minutes.

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: The Virginia Shooting, Gun Rights, and Revolutions (Split from News thread)
« Reply #208 on: October 15, 2015, 01:37:30 PM »
Okay then.  I withdraw the minimum time, then.  (You can tell how often I purchase firearms.  :D )

Offline Cycle

Re: The Virginia Shooting, Gun Rights, and Revolutions (Split from News thread)
« Reply #209 on: October 15, 2015, 01:41:32 PM »
Two words...

Abby Sciuto

/derail

*flees*

Ooooh.

Plot bunny!!!


Offline Tairis

Re: The Virginia Shooting, Gun Rights, and Revolutions (Split from News thread)
« Reply #210 on: October 15, 2015, 07:09:34 PM »
Many states have minimum wait times, usually 3 days. Those wait times are often waived if you have a concealed carry or active duty law enforcement since both involve much more extensive recording and background checks already.

I would appreciate it if you didn't strawman my position as "I don't know what they do and they look scary so I want to take away ya guns." I know exactly what the fuck these things do, I know how dangerous and scary ALL guns are, I just think that certain types are overkill for what they're given to the public for and COULD cause huge levels of death and damage if they fell into the wrong hands...so they should be banned because they're just more dangerous on an individual level than pistols. Automatic weapons also includes machine pistols, by the way. What would have happened, do you think, if the Virginia shooter had had a machine pistol instead, hm?

This is the problem with your argument. You say 'I know exactly what these things do', but then you keep making statements that show that you do not know what they do or even what current laws and regulations are.

Leveling a city block? A hand grenade for example has an effective lethal radius of 15 meters, so roughly the length of a city bus. That's a pretty big area, but it's not a city block. RPGs? I'm going to assume you mean the stereotypical russian shoulder mounted rocket launcher since that's what most people see in video games and movies: less than half that, 7 meters. All deadly weapons, but designed for military applications. If someone just wants to kill people they're literally better off building a bomb with basic instructions from the internet and things they can buy from Home Depot.

And after all of that the reality is that these items (generally referred to as incendiary or explosive devices) are already heavily regulated. There is no gunstore you can go into and pick up an RPG-7 off the shelf.

Gun-Free Zones... so 13% of crime happens in a gun-free zone (assuming this is correct, just going with it). So more than 1 and 10 crimes happen in a gun-free zone. If one and ten burglaries happened in a 'door lock free' zone would that somehow be a good statistic for removing all door locks?

Also how are you enforcing the gun free zone? Are you going to invest billions of dollars for metal detectors, full time employees, and training for every one of these gun free zones? Because otherwise they're just quaint signs on a door. I know I ignore them every time I go to the movies or the mall because I have no interest in being disarmed by a little yellow placard that will be equally ignored by anyone that is actually meaning to do harm.

And then we get into assault weapons, which is the word you keep using. Can you actually define an 'assault weapon' for me? Because as far as I know the term has never been defined. The 90s assault weapons ban was a completely random selection of guns that were entirely chosen based upon public knowledge and how 'military' they looked.

Hi capacity magazines and automatic weapons? Have you ever wondered, if these 50 and 100 round magazines are such 'machines of death' why the US Military doesn't equip all of our soldiers with them? It's because they're generally terrible. They jam with regularity and tend to result in their users missing more than they hit.

Elliot Rodgers? He was using normal handguns with basic ten round magazines. Look at the list of spree killings in the United States (which is, indeed, too damn many) and what you'll find? Most of them are not perpetrated by guys like Holmes wearing full body armor with 100 round magazines. Most of them are people with normal, off the shelf guns. Normal remington hunting rifles, glock 9mm pistols, etc. In the Aurora shooting the fact that Holmes was using one of those 100 mags probably meant less people died because it jammed with over 1/3 of the magazine still in it.

Finally your 'gun license' idea? I'm actually all for universal background checks and such. But half the things you want to implement? Already exist. Which is why people usually don't take these arguments seriously. Most the people arguing for gun control aren't even aware of the laws they are trying to change.

The fact of the matter is you cannot stop someone that wants to kill people in mass as long as guns exist, and there is way to get rid of them all. These ideas that somehow one less round in the chamber or banning pistol grips, or any of the rest are just ways for politicians to make it look like they're doing something just like the TSA. If you want to stop spree killings then the only way to do that is to stop them BEFORE there is ever an attack.
« Last Edit: October 15, 2015, 07:11:03 PM by Tairis »

Offline LisztesFerenc

Re: The Virginia Shooting, Gun Rights, and Revolutions (Split from News thread)
« Reply #211 on: October 15, 2015, 07:18:26 PM »
Because otherwise they're just quaint signs on a door. I know I ignore them every time I go to the movies or the mall because I have no interest in being disarmed by a little yellow placard that will be equally ignored by anyone that is actually meaning to do harm.

  So you break the law and you're proud of it? Unless I'm mistaken, the cinemas are privately owned, and so ignoring those signs isn't your right, you are breaking the law by entering a company's property whilst refusing to abide with their request.

Offline Ironwolf85

  • Eletronic Scribe of naughty things.
  • Lord
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: May 2010
  • Location: New England Somewhere I won't tell you
  • Gender: Male
  • Here to have fun, Role play, and maybe get laid
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Virginia Shooting, Gun Rights, and Revolutions (Split from News thread)
« Reply #212 on: October 15, 2015, 07:21:50 PM »
I think it's more we need to change the culture around guns... not sure what it is but it feels like there a more... "shoot first never talk about it" or "guns = POWAR" mind set going around since the 80s

Offline eBadger

Re: The Virginia Shooting, Gun Rights, and Revolutions (Split from News thread)
« Reply #213 on: October 15, 2015, 07:52:02 PM »
I think it's more we need to change the culture around guns... not sure what it is but it feels like there a more... "shoot first never talk about it" or "guns = POWAR" mind set going around since the 80s

And yet violent crime has dropped by half since the 90s and continues a steady decline. 

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: The Virginia Shooting, Gun Rights, and Revolutions (Split from News thread)
« Reply #214 on: October 15, 2015, 08:16:40 PM »
And yet violent crime has dropped by half since the 90s and continues a steady decline. 

I'm still not sure how they are measuring that.  Is it number of incidents?  Number of victims?  Something else?

Offline Lustful Bride

  • "Logic is for Squares."
  • Lady
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2014
  • Gender: Female
  • This is some personal text. There are many like it, but this one is mine!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Virginia Shooting, Gun Rights, and Revolutions (Split from News thread)
« Reply #215 on: October 15, 2015, 08:27:23 PM »
Quote
.Because otherwise they're just quaint signs on a door. I know I ignore them every time I go to the movies or the mall because I have no interest in being disarmed by a little yellow placard that will be equally ignored by anyone that is actually meaning to do harm.   


*Kind of feels like a chump for obeying the law in those areas*....... oh well I'm such a square Il probably still never carry in those zones cause 'Law" :P

Hurray for me, *waits for my gold star*

Offline Caehlim

Re: The Virginia Shooting, Gun Rights, and Revolutions (Split from News thread)
« Reply #216 on: October 15, 2015, 08:31:34 PM »
I'm still not sure how they are measuring that.  Is it number of incidents?  Number of victims?  Something else?

I looked into it. This statistic is from the FBI's Uniform Crime Reporting program, which is incident based per 100,000 people. (source).

Quote
In the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program, violent crime is composed of four offenses: murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. Violent crimes are defined in the UCR Program as those offenses that involve force or threat of force.
Quote
The data presented in Crime in the United States reflect the Hierarchy Rule, which requires that only the most serious offense in a multiple-offense criminal incident be counted. The descending order of UCR violent crimes are murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault, followed by the property crimes of burglary, larceny-theft, and motor vehicle theft. Although arson is also a property crime, the Hierarchy Rule does not apply to the offense of arson. In cases in which an arson occurs in conjunction with another violent or property crime, both the arson and the additional crime are reported.




Offline Cycle

Re: The Virginia Shooting, Gun Rights, and Revolutions (Split from News thread)
« Reply #217 on: October 15, 2015, 08:37:17 PM »
And this drop is due to the increase in gun ownership?


Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: The Virginia Shooting, Gun Rights, and Revolutions (Split from News thread)
« Reply #218 on: October 15, 2015, 08:38:50 PM »
Okay - is an incident where one perpetrator kills 5 people in one location at one time counted as one or as five?

Offline Caehlim

Re: The Virginia Shooting, Gun Rights, and Revolutions (Split from News thread)
« Reply #219 on: October 15, 2015, 08:46:53 PM »
Okay - is an incident where one perpetrator kills 5 people in one location at one time counted as one or as five?


Online TheGlyphstone

Re: The Virginia Shooting, Gun Rights, and Revolutions (Split from News thread)
« Reply #220 on: October 15, 2015, 08:52:15 PM »
Just idle number-crunching too, and some unscientific rounding via napkin math....

Using the chart, there were a little over 700 violent crimes per hundred thousand people in 1990. Out of the 249.6 million people in the US in that year, that'd be a total of est. 1.75 million violent crimes.

In 2014, there were...call it 375 per hundred thousand. The population increased to 318.9 million too. That makes, roughly 1.2 million violent crimes.

So per capita, the violent crimes dropped by almost 50%. In absolute numbers, it dropped by around 30%. Still a nice figure though.

And this drop is due to the increase in gun ownership?
This Gallup poll says that an even 50% of American households self-reported that they owned a gun in  1991.

This Pew Research poll says that around 34% of American households have a gun in 2014.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/07/15/the-demographics-and-politics-of-gun-owning-households/

So gun ownership has dropped by a hair under one-third in the same period that absolute violent crimes dropped by one-third and per capita violent crimes dropped by one-half. Could just be a coincidence, but it's interesting data to chew over.
« Last Edit: October 15, 2015, 08:57:47 PM by TheGlyphstone »

Offline eBadger

Re: The Virginia Shooting, Gun Rights, and Revolutions (Split from News thread)
« Reply #221 on: October 16, 2015, 01:26:33 AM »
I'm still not sure how they are measuring that.  Is it number of incidents?  Number of victims?  Something else?

That number is pulled from FBI data which is focused on criminal activity rather than victims, so yes, per incident.  However, the overall trend is consistent by every metric I've seen. 

In strict numbers by the Department of Justice,

Quote
There were 11,101 firearm homicides in 2011, down by 39% from a high of 18,253 in 1993

From Pew Research:

Quote
Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

Note that it's not just for incidents with a firearm, though.  Nor does it look like the absolute number of guns in the US dropped. 

The frustrating thing for me, because it demonstrates a consistent and deliberate theme of misinformation from our news sources and politicians to create tension and panic, is this bit:

Quote
Despite national attention to the issue of firearm violence, most Americans are unaware that gun crime is lower today than it was two decades ago. According to a new Pew Research Center survey, today 56% of Americans believe gun crime is higher than 20 years ago and only 12% think it is lower.

Crime is cut in half, but somehow nearly five times as many people think it's up compared to those who know the truth.  And that belief is so deep that, as we see in this thread, the initial response is to disbelieve the hard numbers. 

For more craziness: the trend in schools is even more pronounced

Quote
School violence in the U.S. reached a peak in 1993, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. That year, there were 42 homicides by students in total, as well as 13 "serious violent crimes" — rape, sexual assault, robbery and aggravated assault — per 1,000 students at primary and secondary schools. By 2010, the latest figures available, those numbers had decreased to two homicides and four violent crimes per 1,000 students.

Total homicides in primary and secondary schools:


Note that Columbine, typically seen as the start of our current mass killing era, was in '99 - after which there's actually a marked decade of significantly reduced violence.  The numbers are certainly up in the last couple of years, but I haven't found any raw numbers for '13 and after. 

Quote
It may come as no surprise that the 24-hour news cycle gets much of the blame for perpetuating a false notion about the extent of school violence.

I also think they deserve a lot of the blame for causing it, but that's opinion :-)

To be clear, I'm not saying there isn't a problem - there absolutely is.  However, it should be approached with an informed and logical conversation, and the evidence shows that various social programs, most of which aren't very newsworthy, are being very successful at reducing crime and deaths during an era with very little increased gun regulation.  We can be an armed and polite society. 

On the other hand, most of the deaths from firearms are not murders: they're suicides.  While we're fixated on stranger danger, the reality is that you're more likely to do yourself in than be killed by someone else with a gun. 

Quote
gun suicides now account for six-in-ten firearms deaths
And an article here: Gun Deaths Are Mostly Suicides.

Which, despite the difficulties involved, is a solid argument for finding a way to keep guns away from those suffering dangerous mental illness, primarily by some sort of screening process but also, yes, by finding ways to reduce and control the national arsenal. 

« Last Edit: October 16, 2015, 01:30:28 AM by eBadger »

Offline Cassandra LeMay

Re: The Virginia Shooting, Gun Rights, and Revolutions (Split from News thread)
« Reply #222 on: October 16, 2015, 02:09:00 AM »
Yes, firearm homicides have dropped a lot since 1993. But - the largest drop was from the early to the mid/late 1990s. The rate of gun homicides has stayed almost constant over the last 15 years. 1993 had the highest rate of the last 35 years. Picking that year as a basis for the comparrison does not at all reflect more recent trends.



And while firearm homicides have remained at a mostly constant rate over the 2000s and 2010s, the number of non-fatal firearm injuries has risen by about 50% since the turn of the century. What has also increased is the survival chance for people admitted to hospitals with gunshot wounds. In short: the number of fatalities has remained constant (at least in part) because doctors are getting better at saving gunshot victims, not because the number of shootings has remained constant, or even dropped.

Offline eBadger

Re: The Virginia Shooting, Gun Rights, and Revolutions (Split from News thread)
« Reply #223 on: October 16, 2015, 04:31:45 AM »
The rate of gun homicides has stayed almost constant over the last 15 years.

That shows the number of homicides, not the rate (which has steadily decreased as population increases), but yes. 

In short: the number of fatalities has remained constant (at least in part) because doctors are getting better at saving gunshot victims, not because the number of shootings has remained constant, or even dropped.

Could be valid to a degree (where did you get the injury numbers?) and yes, the decline certainly isn't as dramatic after 2000, but the last 15 years haven't been stagnant.  The trend is actually more pronounced in non-fatal firearms crime, which drops by 1/3 after 2001.  If the issue were just better hospitals, that number would reflect an increase coinciding with your theoretical 'would have been a fatality but saved by medicine' cases. 


Offline Cassandra LeMay

Re: The Virginia Shooting, Gun Rights, and Revolutions (Split from News thread)
« Reply #224 on: October 16, 2015, 05:02:38 AM »
Could be valid to a degree (where did you get the injury numbers?)
CDC data. And yes, I know the CDC data is something to be taken with a grain of salt, as they don't collect these statistics nationwide (I think?). The numbers I retrieved at their database for " Violence-Related Firearm Gunshot Nonfatal Injuries and Rates per 100,000" are:
2001: Total 45,000 = 15.9 per 100,000 population
2013: Total 67,000 = 21.3 per 100,000 population

I'll take a closer look at the Pew data you cited later. I am not sure what their definition of "non-fatal victimization" is, e.g. if they include armed robberies where guns were brandished but not actually used.
« Last Edit: October 16, 2015, 08:00:00 AM by Cassandra LeMay »