The etymology of the phrase "gun violence"

[Koda]

the Giffords shooting was actually January 8, 2011, so this from Wiki:

"In January 2013, she and her husband launched Americans for Responsible Solutions, a non-profit organization and Super-PAC which later joined with the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence to become Giffords."

Interesting, then its not clear when they added "gun violence" to their name...

 

[Knute]

the Giffords shooting was actually January 8, 2011, so this from Wiki:

"In January 2013, she and her husband launched Americans for Responsible Solutions, a non-profit organization and Super-PAC which later joined with the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence to become Giffords."

I can't find an origin of "gun violence" as a phrase in America but it was probably created as part of the James Brady efforts in the 1990s.

The FBI uses the phrase "violent crime" in there data bases but not "gun violence." Here is a little snip from their 2018 UCR:

• More than 72 percent (72.7) of the homicides for which the FBI received weapons data in 2018 involved the use of firearms. Handguns comprised 64.3 percent of the firearms used in murder and nonnegligent manslaughter incidents in 2018.(Based on Expanded Homicide Data Table 8.)

Anyway, I'm guessing it's a catch-all phrase that the stupid media and gun grabbers came up with 25+ years ago to lump all firearm "reporting" into.

 

[Stomper]

this is a long shot (pun intended) as Im not certain any documentation exists on this question but....
Does anyone know the origin of the phrase "gun violence" as well as when govt agencies like the FBI started using it in their research? What phrase was used before "gun violence" became a label or has gun violence been used since the invention of guns?

It has Rectalthal origins from a modern variant know as spincterspeak…. Cuz they're always talking out their bums.

 

[RX-79G]

Anyway, I'm guessing it's a catch-all phrase that the stupid media and gun grabbers came up with 25+ years ago to lump all firearm "reporting" into.

And the reason they did that is because of the widespread belief that labor-saving devices make people more likely to use them. In other words, if it wasn't so easy to kill with a gun, there would be fewer homicides (and suicides) in total.

So if you want to respond to the idea of "Gun violence", it ought to be by pointing out why those deaths would have occurred anyway do to the murderous nature of many Americans vs Europeans, rather than due to the differential in access to firearms between the US and European countries.

 

[Koda]

So if you want to respond to the idea of "Gun violence", it ought to be by pointing out why those deaths would have occurred anyway do to the murderous nature of many Americans vs Europeans, rather than due to the differential in access to firearms between the US and European countries

But why give up an arguing point? the argument isnt murder rates or gun access its that "gun violence" isnt a thing its violent crime. Why give the opposition the upper hand in a debate?

 

[RX-79G]

But why give up an arguing point? the argument isnt murder rates or gun access its that "gun violence" isnt a thing its violent crime. Why give the opposition the upper hand in a debate?

Pretending that there isn't a connection between our murder rate and gun availability just makes us sound stupid. The goal in debate is not to deny facts but to question the presumption of causality.

The single greatest predictor of violence of all types is economics, not access to weapons.

 

[Ura-Ki]

How about mental issues? How about self medication instead of getting help? How about the complete devaluing of life?
Folks want to point the finger at the tool, and not the human who wields it! That kind of argument in disingenuous and obtuse, saying it's ease of access to a kind of tool, when there are literally MILLIONS of them in the hands of law abiding citizens that never have any issues!

 

[Koda]

Pretending that there isn't a connection between our murder rate and gun availability just makes us sound stupid. The goal in debate is not to deny facts but to question the presumption of causality.

The single greatest predictor of violence of all types is economics, not access to weapons.

Except I never said there wasnt a connection.
But prove to me that a gun is responsible for murdering someone? Prove to me that its the gun thats violent and not the person. No, its not because guns are easier to use. Milliins of people defend themselves with guns, so now I can say guns save lives.
If I cant say guns save lives, then the gun control lobby cant say guns are violent, or even imply the cause of violence.

Why play into their manipulation strategy?

 

[Sundance]

So where does one go to find or buy a 'violent' gun? Mine all seem to be totally docile - they just lie there and do nothing. I've rehabilitated several German Shepherds that were considered 'violent' and would like to try my hand at rehabilitating a 'violent' gun. If anyone has one, or knows of one, I'm willing to take it and try rehabilitating it .

 

[Knobgoblin]

I think it started back in 93 after that loony shot up a law office in San Francisco
The Law Center To Prevent Gun Violence that later tacked on the Giffords name to cash in on that tragedy.

Their use of the "gun violence" phrase is diabolically smart as it turns out because of its constant use nowadays, the sheeple automatically assume violence whenever they hear the word gun.

Their plan is working.

And, a lot of people automatically assume shooting any time there's a violent incident.
I've seen numerous reports of a "shooting " that later turned out to be a stabbing, blunt instrument, fistfight, adw with vehicle. Etc.

 

[GWS]

So where does one go to find or buy a 'violent' gun? Mine all seem to be totally docile - they just lie there and do nothing. I've rehabilitated several German Shepherds that were considered 'violent' and would like to try my hand at rehabilitating a 'violent' gun. If anyone has one, or knows of one, I'm willing to take it and try rehabilitating it .

I've had a couple guns that have bitten me, but I've already fixed or gotten rid of them. I'll keep you in mind for the next violent gun I get.

 

[mhayd93]

Pretending that there isn't a connection between our murder rate and gun availability just makes us sound stupid. The goal in debate is not to deny facts but to question the presumption of causality.

The single greatest predictor of violence of all types is economics, not access to weapons.

Using basic math, this presumption does not add up. Taking France as a random example from Europe, the United States has a little over 6 times as many firearms per capita than France. When it comes to firearm-related deaths however, the United States only has a little over 4 times as many such deaths per capita as compared to France.

If access to firearms was inherently linked to using them for violent purposes, then there should be a proportionate increase in deaths per capita. Instead, there is a 33% "deficit" (less than expected) between the amount of firearms in the US and the amount of total deaths as a result of gun violence. Again, this is just comparing France to the United States.

Gun Ownership by Country 2023

worldpopulationreview.com

Gun Deaths by Country 2023

worldpopulationreview.com

 

[Knobgoblin]

Don't do it.

 

[OldTengu]

Aren't most murders committed with hand held weapons like knives and hammers?
How come there aren't phrases like "hammer violence", "knife violence", or "fist violence"?

 

[RX-79G]

Except I never said there wasnt a connection.
But prove to me that a gun is responsible for murdering someone? Prove to me that its the gun thats violent and not the person. No, its not because guns are easier to use. Milliins of people defend themselves with guns, so now I can say guns save lives.
If I cant say guns save lives, then the gun control lobby cant say guns are violent, or even imply the cause of violence.

Why play into their manipulation strategy?

You've basically repeating what I said. But I don't think just saying the opposite of what someone else says is not thoughtful or convincing debate. There isn't really good data for either presumption, since the SD numbers are all over the place.

 

[RX-79G]

Aren't most murders committed with hand held weapons like knives and hammers?
How come there aren't phrases like "hammer violence", "knife violence", or "fist violence"?

No, about 75% are with firearms - almost all handguns.

 

[Koda]

You've basically repeating what I said. But I don't think just saying the opposite of what someone else says is not thoughtful or convincing debate. There isn't really good data for either presumption, since the SD numbers are all over the place.

not really, im not the one thats letting them use the term "gun violence". I intentionally leave out DGUs and avoid "gun violence" statistics unless forced. Except they continue to manipulate the conversation establishing "gun violence" as the problem when its not. They dont get to use the term even when they do, it needs to be called out.

 

[OldTengu]

No, about 75% are with firearms - almost all handguns.

Everyone is wrong once, I suppose.
Doesn't change my view any, I'd still rather they were even more available than they are.

 

[RX-79G]

Using basic math, this presumption does not add up. Taking France as a random example from Europe, the United States has a little over 6 times as many firearms per capita than France. When it comes to firearm-related deaths however, the United States only has a little over 4 times as many such deaths per capita as compared to France.

If access to firearms was inherently linked to using them for violent purposes, then there should be a proportionate increase in deaths per capita. Instead, there is a 33% "deficit" (less than expected) between the amount of firearms in the US and the amount of total deaths as a result of gun violence. Again, this is just comparing France to the United States.

Gun Ownership by Country 2023

worldpopulationreview.com

Gun Deaths by Country 2023

worldpopulationreview.com

That assumes that ownership rates are similar to the number of guns, but clearly every American doesn't own 1.2 guns. I knew a guy with hundreds.

However, I don't disagree that gun ownership has little to do with violence rates, which is why I suggested economics has much more to do with it. Europeans never get quite as poor as Americans can.

 

[Koda]

Everyone is wrong once, I suppose.
Doesn't change my view any, I'd still rather they were even more available than they are.

Availability plays a part though. The problem is when we ignore a system set up intentionally to keep guns out of bad guys hands. Theres a viral thread in this forum right now discussing a bad guy who ambushed to police officers with an illegal gun... the guy had multiple violent felony convictions, and was let out on bond.