Cal DoJ and Everytown Sittin' In A Tree....

[Deleted member 16735]

Thanks to Freedom Week, we have a real world example that should clearly demonstrate an increase in gun violence related to Standard Capacity Magazines being brought into the state in the millions (approx 4m are estimated). That should solve that, case closed.

Wait, what? It didn't raise at all? Despite that massive influx, neither California's Department of Justice, nor the state's expert witnesses across multiple rounds of briefing in Duncan, nor any academic study entered into the record has produced data showing this clearly dangerous life threatening influx?? But wasn't California's entire legal argument resting on the premise that standard-capacity magazines pose a distinct and serious public safety threat.

California's response - "Nothing to see here, let's just agree they aren't arms then, how about that?"

Fun fact - There is no known peer-reviewed study, government report, or court-record filing in Duncan v. Bonta that documents a post-Freedom Week surge in gun violence tied to those magazines. How inconvenient.

Surpressors are even more of a joke. Registered as a weapon so easy to track tripled in use over the last 10 years to the tune of just over 5m registrations.....44 suppressor-related crimes per year — roughly 0.003%

I think it would be hard to find a trend there because I don't think the access to stand cap mags really changed. Prop 63 was only around for a few years before "freedom week" so while there may have been a lull, the magazines were basically available to anyone that wanted them enough. All that said I sure hope Duncan gets granted Certiorari soon and please throw in assault weapons and suppressors into the whole deal.

 

[bbp00]

however it is notable that the trendlines here show that violent crime and homicide are at or near the all time low despite there being more mass shootings.

That's because most definitions of what mass shooting is, have changed. From '4 or more killed (counts only dead)' to '4 or more shot (injured and killed)'.
Anti-gun organizations that are tracking mass shootings now also throw into stats gang and domestic violence.
FBI also started tracking 'active shooter' incidents that often get bunched together with mass shootings.
Congress also changed definition of mass killings to 3 or more fatalities.
For those reasons, on paper, reported counts of mass shootings have increased drastically.

I have not read a single study yet, that would account for differences in definitions of mass shootings and adjust data accordingly. Garbage in, garbage out...

 

[Deleted member 16735]

That's because most definitions of what mass shooting is, have changed. From '4 or more killed (counts only dead)' to '4 or more shot (injured and killed)'.
Anti-gun organizations that are tracking mass shootings now also throw into stats gang and domestic violence.
FBI also started tracking 'active shooter' incidents that often get bunched together with mass shootings.
Congress also changed definition of mass killings to 3 or more fatalities.
For those reasons, on paper, reported counts of mass shootings have increased drastically.

I have not read a single study yet, that would account for differences in definitions of mass shootings and adjust data accordingly. Garbage in, garbage out...

I don't think so, by every metric, however you want to define them, mass shootings are more common than they were but targeted homicides are down. But my main point was that even with more public shootings it's still less violent crime overall so why do we care about it one vs the other? The Duncan opinion is kinda interesting because that's the main point, that we hear about mass shootings but not home invasions in the same way.

 

[five.five-six]

TL;DR

Let me guess, everytown is balls deep in DOJ’s colon and Newsom is in a chair in the corner sitting with his legs crossed.

 

[Skilly]

I think it would be hard to find a trend there because I don't think the access to stand cap mags really changed. Prop 63 was only around for a few years before "freedom week" so while there may have been a lull, the magazines were basically available to anyone that wanted them enough. All that said I sure hope Duncan gets granted Certiorari soon and please throw in assault weapons and suppressors into the whole deal.

I mean in 1 week we have an estimated 4m new mags brought into the state. Id say thats a decent enough blip in demand to suggest you should be able to detect a correlation if there was one. Its not there because there is no causation.

 

[Deleted member 16735]

I mean in 1 week we have an estimated 4m new mags brought into the state. Id say thats a decent enough blip in demand to suggest you should be able to detect a correlation if there was one. Its not there because there is no causation.

but how many "criminals" who were going to use them didn't have them already or couldn't access them? Like if someone can get a gun you think they couldn't get the magazine? everyone was already panic buying just a few years earlier not to mention it's just not hard to get them anyway. they never actually went away.

 

[GoldensRule]

Maybe instead of it being a court ordered punishment, a private group handles the live tv executions outside of the justice system, and when they’re on trial afterwards the judge/jury acquit them 100% of the time. 8th amendment bypassed.

Would still violate the constitution as the government relinquished control of a prisoner to a private group for punishment. Additionally, the people employed by the private group would be guilty of first degree murder, conspiracy and RICO violations, just to name a few.

It's so much fun going down these dictatorship legal rabbit holes.

Maybe we can find a way for the government to completely bypass the 2nd amendment next...

 

[GoldensRule]

That's OK. You don't like constitution anyways.

Actually, no I don't. I think it is in desperate need of a complete re-write but, it's what we have and I have sworn oaths to defend it.

 

[GoldensRule]

In cases like I described, cruel and unusual punishment would be warranted. I’m damn sick and tired of people taking innocent lives. Unfortunately I don’t think it will ever happen.

And I don’t think I’d consider the punishment to be cruel or unusual as it would match the nature of the crime.

I don't like it either, especially when it is done under the cover of law enforcement and other government entities. I'm just not willing to go all vigilante and throw away the rule of law in favor of revenge. Next thing you know, the USA has become the DPRK. Aside from that, there is virtually no evidence that any kind of capitol punishment has ever been a deterrent to crime. Deterrents are only effective with thinking, intelligent people who are sane. Most mass shooters are none of those things.

 

[GoldensRule]

but how many "criminals" who were going to use them didn't have them already? everyone was already panic buying just a few years earlier not to mention it's just not hard to get them anyway. they never actually went away.

And everyone should keep in mind that if Duncan v. Bonta is upheld, the so called "Freedom Week" magazines are nothing but a fever dream. Even now, since the 9th circuit's decision; PC § 32310 is in full force and has not been stayed, that includes section (c):

(c) Except as provided in Article 2 (commencing with Section 32400) of this chapter and in Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 17700) of Division 2 of Title 2, commencing July 1, 2017, any person in this state who possesses any large-capacity magazine, regardless of the date the magazine was acquired, is guilty of an infraction punishable by a fine not to exceed one hundred dollars ($100) per large-capacity magazine, or is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed one hundred dollars ($100) per large-capacity magazine, by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment.

 

[bbp00]

I don't think so, by every metric, however you want to define them, mass shootings are more common than they were

Not by every metric. If we are talking absolute numbers, then most likely yes. Population grew by 35% since 1980, if all else is equal, then statistically, there should be 35% more mass shootings.
Let's say above is true, mass shootings rate per 100,000 people would remain the same.

To get an accurate picture, somebody would have to compile data of all the incidents, adjust the data for difference in reporting requirements over the decades, define what mass shooting is, exclude gang and domestic violence incidents and apply the criteria equally across the whole dataset.

To make things even murkier, mass shootings are rare events compared to frequency of other violent crimes, therefore even with correct data, recognizing and predicting trends is difficult. Calculating the impact of semi-automatic rifles and magazines even more so.

If anybody thinks that accuracy of data and using same definitions doesn't matter, according to FBI and their definition, there were 103 mass shooting events in 2021, while going by "Gun Violence Archive" definition, there were 706 in the same year. That's a whooping 700% discrepancy.

As I've said before, I have not seen accurate study yet, so I have to agree with RAND, nobody really knows.

 

[Deleted member 16735]

Not by every metric. If we are talking absolute numbers, then most likely yes. Population grew by 35% since 1980, if all else is equal, then statistically, there should be 35% more mass shootings.
Let's say above is true, mass shootings rate per 100,000 people would remain the same.

To get an accurate picture, somebody would have to compile data of all the incidents, adjust the data for difference in reporting requirements over the decades, define what mass shooting is, exclude gang and domestic violence incidents and apply the criteria equally across the whole dataset.

To make things even murkier, mass shootings are rare events compared to frequency of other violent crimes, therefore even with correct data, recognizing and predicting trends is difficult. Calculating the impact of semi-automatic rifles and magazines even more so.

If anybody thinks that accuracy of data and using same definitions doesn't matter, according to FBI and their definition, there were 103 mass shooting events in 2021, while going by "Gun Violence Archive" definition, there were 706 in the same year. That's a whooping 700% discrepancy.

As I've said before, I have not seen accurate study yet, so I have to agree with RAND, nobody really knows.

I don't think you have looked at any studies in order to properly discredit them. They all say the same thing. That said, my main point is that it doesn't matter as much as many people say it does, as far as restricting access to certain types of guns especially.

 

[bbp00]

PC § 32310 is in full force and has not been stayed, that includes section (c):

That's not true. Preliminary injunction issued on June 29, 2017 for (c) and (d) is still in effect for all, as is (a) and (b) for those that have acquired magazines during freedom week.

 

[bbp00]

I don't think you have looked at any studies in order to properly discredit them.

I have read most cited studies and looked into most cited data sets. They're good for media talking points and dramatic headlines, and as a source for pro gun-control advocates.
There's very little scientific value in these studies (that includes study by right leaning think tank)

Now, if you have found a (scientific) study that would seem to be accurate, I am all ears.

 

[Nog805]

Would still violate the constitution as the government relinquished control of a prisoner to a private group for punishment. Additionally, the people employed by the private group would be guilty of first degree murder, conspiracy and RICO violations, just to name a few.

It's so much fun going down these dictatorship legal rabbit holes.

Maybe we can find a way for the government to completely bypass the 2nd amendment next...

Call me a dictator but I for one am completely fine with “cruel and unusual” punishment for cruel and unusual “people” such as mass shooters and child rapists.

 

[GoldensRule]

Call me a dictator but I for one am completely fine with “cruel and unusual” punishment for cruel and unusual punishment “people” such as mass shooters and child rapists.

Emotionally, I wouldn't mind seeing Every Single One of the Epstein class pedophiles keelhauled through shark infested waters, I feel the same way about every one of the January 6th insurrectionists.

 

[GoldensRule]

That's not true. Preliminary injunction issued on June 29, 2017 for (c) and (d) is still in effect for all, as is (a) and (b) for those that have acquired magazines during freedom week.

I do not believe that is the case after the 9th circuit's last ruling, can you provide a reputable citation? I could always be wrong.

 

[Nog805]

Emotionally, I wouldn't mind seeing Every Single One of the Epstein class pedophiles keelhauled through shark infested waters, I feel the same way about every one of the January 6th insurrectionists.

 

[bbp00]

I do not believe that is the case after the 9th circuit's last ruling, can you provide a reputable citation? I could always be wrong.

It remains in place until SCOTUS's final disposition

 

[GunZKK]

Educate me on this- still half a sleep this morning- this shows non profits coordinating with doj to setup conferences to discuss future steps to mitigate the rulings of it doesn’t go their way?

Are they legally allowed to do that? If not CRPA should sue them.