#### fishpoem

I lived with a really nice-looking chick for quite awhile. Only she had a little personality quirk. Insane jealousy. Finally she decided to kill me. Missed, though. So my view of the world is: being smart is good. Being strong is great. But being LUCKY is best of all.

#### arentol72

"Let’s examine the first issue of statistical probability; how many people are actually killed by AR-15s each year? Not many according to the FBI, which does not track the stats on specific rifles, but does track the stats on all rifles together. And, as it turns out, only around 6% of all gun deaths involve rifles in the US each year."
Great post, many good thoughts on the topic. If you don't mind I will jump in with a rant on journalism and data analysis. Yeah, so the problem here is the typical one you get from writers, and worse "Journalists" these days, complete inability to understand data, specifically in the form of doing data analysis wrong, and not understanding what their chosen data source is about.

What the writer wrote is "around 6% of all gun deaths", but what the writer linked to would be properly characterized as "around 4% of all firearm murders".

Data Analysis Error:

I honestly have zero idea where he got 6% from. I can't imagine a way one could look at those numbers and finagle 6% out of them for any purpose. It is 4% for percent of rifle murders from the linked chart though, as you need to take the rifle number and divide it by the sum of Handguns, Rifles, Shotguns, and Other guns to get the rifle percentage. You can't use "Total Firearms" because about 28% of the time the firearm types are "not reported". The proper assumption is that those unreported cases track to the reported ones. So you just use the reported numbers for both Rifles and "total" to get your estimate. In this case 4%, though it is notable that Rifles have risen somewhat consistently as a percentage for the 5 years covered on the chart. However, this could be an anomaly where 2015 was just a very low year, making it look like an increase when it is really just normal annual variance. We would need another 5 years or so of data to start figuring that out reliably.

Misunderstanding:

The other error is very obvious. The linked chart is literally titled "Murder Victims", not "Gun Deaths". So they looked at that and somehow thought it described gun deaths when it was just about murders. Not even really worth talking about further, this is the state of our society today, people don't take time to understand what they are looking at before spouting off about it.

What does this mean? It means trust nobody who writes articles, even if you like what they are saying. Do your own analysis, make sure they aren't talking out their bubblegum, because even with good intentions most writers suck hardcore at understanding what is right in front of them.

#### GripItAndRipIt

I appreciate most of the points in the article; especially the portrait of the mindset of the gun-grabbers. However, (and this is certainly no knock on you for posting it OP), the article has a couple things that I take issue with.

1st is this incorrect statistic here:

(The article states)

"Let’s examine the first issue of statistical probability; how many people are actually killed by AR-15s each year? Not many according to the FBI, which does not track the stats on specific rifles, but does track the stats on all rifles together. And, as it turns out, only around 6% of all gun deaths involve rifles in the US each year."

These are the actual #s...

There are roughly (on average) 35-40K deaths attributed to the use of firearms in the country per year. There are roughly 350-400 deaths attributed to the use of ALL long guns(this includes all types of rifles, carbines and shotguns - whether they be semi-auto or otherwise).

The correct statement would be that around 1%(not 6%) of all gun deaths involve ALL long guns(not just rifles) each year.

The other beef that I have is referring to the semi-auto AR-15 as a "military grade rifle". While similar in many ways to the M16A2 and M4A1, there are some fundamental differences between a semi-auto AR-15 and the afore mentioned rifles. The anti-gunners love to apply the inane reasoning that "military grade rifles don't belong on our streets".

The author writes in the article:

"The AR-15 is indeed a weapon in military use"

While technically correct when referencing its select-fire cousins. I know of no military in the world that employs the semi-auto AR-15, nor have I ever heard anybody apply the moniker 'Battle-Rifle' to the semi-auto AR-15. The semi-auto AR-15 is (and always has been) marketed to civilians.

I understand that it may be merely semantics, and we all know that the NFA is unconstitutional bubblegum, but words matter in the battle of public opinions.

Semi-auto AR-15s ought to be referred to as 'Modern Sporting Rifles'. "Gun Violence' ought to be referred to as 'Gang Violence'. Etc. Etc. Etc.
Semantics matter! That error also immediately jumped out at me as well. It is bad enough the antis already control the lexicon, and we must remain vigilant. I am going to give this guy the BOTD and hope he has likely been corrected at this point.

#### GripItAndRipIt

I agree with your points, but feel compelled to point out your use of 35-40k gun deaths includes over 25,000 suicides by firearm - which is NOT "gun violence" as the left claims - they intentionally conflate suicides with homicides to make gun deaths appear a larger problem to be solved by more gun control laws.

US non-suicide deaths by firearm are fewer than 20k (in 2020), averaging considerably less over the last 20 years.

The number of rifles (long guns) used for HOMICIDE, when subtracting police, accidental and self-defense shootings is about 2% of US gun homicides.

As pointed out by you and others, no military uses the semi-automatic AR rifle.

Claims of 'weapons of war' historically includes swords, muskets, bolt action rifles, revolvers and spears - it means anything and nothing at the same time.
Now there you go spoiling a perfectly good argument with facts.

#### GripItAndRipIt

While the sensationalist Marxist, disarming theories may be what the politicians are going for (I don't think so), it's not why the average liberal American wants ar15s banned.

Their reason is much simpler. Fear. They're unfamiliar, uneducated and only ever see that type of gun after a mass shooting. The media paints it as a super killing machine, shows chops and politicians saying the average person has no need for such weapons and the uneducated masses blindly follow.

Why would city liberals defend guns? They didn't grow up with one, don't have friends or family with guns, don't see a need for a gun and so on. And let's be honest, unless you live in the ghetto, the chances of you needing to defend yourself in an American city is pretty low (and thank goodness for that.)
Well, if you live in Portland and are not "in the ghetto," give it time. Coming soon to a neighborhood near you! Just ask the folks in Buckhead, Atlanta... Or Uptown Minneapolis.

#### American123

Well, if you live in Portland and are not "in the ghetto," give it time. Coming soon to a neighborhood near you! Just ask the folks in Buckhead, Atlanta... Or Uptown Minneapolis.
Diversity is always a good thing, this is fake news… lol

#### GripItAndRipIt

Diversity is always a good thing, this is fake news… lol
By "diversity," they mean "we're going to make sure everyone has a chance to experience misery."

#### fishpoem

What is happening in the minds of many Leftie Democrats is analogous to what happened to the minds of the good citizens of Salem during the witch hunt or to the minds of ordinarily decent German citizens consequent to Goebbels propaganda campaign. This is a classic example of delusional hysteria driven by a steady barrage of inflammatory falsehoods from the corporate media. Rather than calming the waters, Democratic politicians have been pouring gasoline on the fire, hoping to create a conflagration from which they will emerge triumphant. The puppet master behind the curtain is Barack Hussein Obama, guided step by step by Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals." Download and read that book. It will help understand what's going on.

### Upcoming Events

Oregon Arms Collectors September Show
Portland, OR
Rimfire Challenge Oct 9th @ DRRC
Eagle Creek, OR
Nrl22 at DRRC
Eagle Creek, OR