Constitutional Law, Supreme Court July 1, 2012 Know Your Rights -Submitted by David Drumm (Nal), Guest Blogger H/T: Radley Balko. Share this:TwitterRedditFacebookEmailLike this:Like Loading...
70 thoughts on “Know Your Rights”
Well if you stop calling a killing a “murder” or a “homicide” or a “crime” at all, then you will naturally have fewer “CRIMES” right?
That means NOTHING to me. It’s like saying, “Let’s call some rapes ‘non-consensual sexual activities’ and not make them crimes,” and let the police themselves decide which alleged rapes will be re-named. The next year, magically, you have FEWER RAPES! Duh…
Let’s say you have a right to rob a bank if they messed up some item on your statement; no crime will be charged, no court case, no statistic. Miraculously, this tiny adjustment to the criminal law will drive down economic crimes quickly!
What we really need to solve the crime problem is a Department of Renaming Stuff we Don’t Like. The RooS-DeeL Department. Anybody?
SYG. Let’s call some killings crimes, and others Sygs. We’ll have fewer crimes. We might have more KILLINGS but hey…
“The murder rate has gone up in every state that passes a Stand Your Ground law.”
I wasn’t referring specifically to Stand Your Ground, but to widespread concealed carry. But I was bored and decided to look this up, I found three quick examples.
Going by the FBI’s numbers:
In Utah, SYG was passed in 1994. Year to year, murder went up seven times but dropped nine times. In total, it went from 2.9/100,000 to 1.9.
In Florida, murder went up two years in a row after their law passed, then dropped three consecutive years and is now .2 over where it was before the law.
In Texas, they passed it in 2007 and their murder rates have been: 5.9, 5.6, 5.4, and 5.0.
“In contrast, we find significant evidence that the laws increase homicides. Suggestive but inconclusive evidence indicates that castle doctrine laws increase the narrowly defined category of justifiable homicides by private citizens by 17 to 50 percent”
Huh, that’s a stunner. If you make it easier for people to defend themselves, they will defend themselves more.
Nationally, SYG has roughly paralleled the trend of legal concealed carry, which is usually marked by Florida’s CC law in 1987. Dozens of states followed suit over the next couple of decades. Since a high point in 1991, murder has dropped a staggering 53% and violent crime overall nearly as much.
I don’t think it’s because of SYG or concealed carry. In many states, crime was already dropping when they implemented these laws. But I admit that my knowledge of statistics is apparently not sophisticated enough to understand the study you cited.
The murder rate has gone up in every state that passes a Stand Your Ground law. From the study:
Results indicate that the prospect of facing additional self-defense does not deter crime. Specifically, we find no evidence of deterrence effects on burglary, robbery, or aggravated assault. Moreover, our estimates are sufficiently precise as to rule out meaningful deterrence effects.
In contrast, we find significant evidence that the laws increase homicides. Suggestive but inconclusive evidence indicates that castle doctrine laws increase the narrowly defined category of justifiable homicides by private citizens by 17 to 50 percent, which translates into as many as 50 additional justifiable homicides per year nationally due to castle doctrine. More significantly, we find the laws increase murder and manslaughter by a statistically significant 7 to 9 percent, which translates into an additional 500 to 700 homicides per year nationally across the states that adopted castle doctrine.
Thus, by lowering the expected costs associated with using lethal force, castle doctrine laws induce more of it. This increase in homicides could be due either to the increased use of lethal force in self-defense situations, or to the escalation of violence in otherwise non-lethal conflicts. We suspect that self-defense situations are unlikely to explain all of the increase, as we also find that murder alone is increased by a statistically significant 6 to 11 percent.
shano, must be some good cops in NV.
Jason, Can’t drop the analogy ’cause it’s not mythical (don’t know if you mean the 19th century or the 21st but it doesn’t matter). Carrying weapons on the street, in parks, in churches, to political rallies. It’s the wild, wild west with many of the sheriff’s just as wild and lawless. I’m not so sure the crime rate has dropped if you also count the number of false arrests, assaults, kills by the cops.
Please please drop the “Wild West” stuff. During the widespread passage of concealed carry laws over the last 20 years, violent crime of all types, that’s including gun homicides. have fallen through the floor. Those laws aren’t the cause of the drop in crime, but can we at least be honest and quit saying that they are turning our country into a mythical wild west?
Apologies for the many typos.
Since the rest of us were not expressly forbidden to cllck on the link, I strolled casually over after a
time showing ne eagerness.
The world did not disappear, although it said the difference between materia and vaacuum would disappear if the constant were to exceed 1/137.
Please tell your physicist friend that I will do all
in my power to maintain it constant. It is not clear on our possibilities, but assume like most that constants, are just that, constants. So my effort will be minimal.
The possible consequences of inserting 1/707 does intrigue me. So at the first opportunity, I shall see what happens. Let me know if you see any difference Next expecte opportunity will be the next big bang, so won’t expect to hear from you soon.
Tell her that I have never seen so many ways to skin a constant.
And I thought the string boys had promised us that they would natural constants would emerge from their labors. Even such oddities as to electron mass and electron charge, etc.
Constants are fascinating. Perhaps should spend my days with them, reporting as you did from time to time, on an assumed geometry thread.
But you were bearing others wisdom. and I my own. So the reporting frequency (no snarks) will be less.
What good are your rights when they can train a dog to alert on command and that gives them the permission to search and seize?
Interesting in this case former police are suing the active police department, a hoot! I wonder how often that happens:
Homeland Security on the Occupy detail again today in Philly:
S/B that not hat!
I won’t go near hat link!! 🙂
OOPS. Meant to attach that to the thread where you were talking about geometry. Oh well….
raff, I have a dear friend who is a physics professor. She has incorporated the number 137 in her blog username. You can just say the number to her and she will break out into peals of laughter. That is a reference to a concept called the Fine Structure Constant, and she regards it as one of the funniest things she ever heard.
The cosmic question is whether the Fine Structure Constant is truly constant.
Raff, whatever you do, DON’T CLICK THAT LINK!!!!!
A nuclear tipped frisbee!
of course you can open carry in a park. never know when you might have to stand your ground against a frisbee.
I agree with your Wild West analogy. All you have to o is look at the so-called Stand Your Ground laws and see that killings have increased since those laws were enacted.
ken1776 1, July 1, 2012 at 7:35 pm
“imo, that cop was just doing his job…he saw something unusual and he checked it out. How many times do any of you see someone packing a pistol when you going to work?”
I agree with you that the cop had a right to respond to a complaint. He could have gotten an entirely different attitude from the guy that would suggest that the guy was dangerous. But what could he do? The guy wasn’t breaking any laws. The cop would have had to make something up as so many of them do, even w/o any provocation.
The problem is the wild west laws that are being enacted letting anyone and everyone carry weapons where and when ever. I do support the second amendment but we’ve gone over the edge to the wild west.
“Defending ones right to not be obliged to smile and simper when men speak is a right all women should have.”
Right you are. I have that right and it was not given to me, Actually, we should all have that right.
I do believe we have our own thread going here.
imo, that cop was just doing his job…he saw something unusual and he checked it out. How many times do any of you see someone packing a pistol when you going to work?
Did that individual have a right to be carrying?Sure.
But if that individual was carrying, the cop saw it, did nothing and that individual shot a bunch of people shortly afterwards?
You’d all be jumping up and down like chimpanzees demanding that cop be hanged.
It is the duty of our Officers to check out suspicious activities.
That is their job.
I do admire that individual for knowing his legal rights though and peacefully
arguing. That was cool.
Most Americans can’t spell Supreme Court ruling let alone quote case law.
Comments are closed.