Albuquerque police have announced that they have arrested the man responsible for the killing of Lilly Garcia, 4, in a road rage incident. Tony Torrez, 32, reportedly confessed to the crime and the police hit him with a long list of charges that should guarantee that he remains in jail most if not all of his life. Indeed, even a plea agreement at this point would likely place the sentence near the maximum level but, if Torrez confessed, there is little in terms of a defense to present without striking the confession on some grounds.
Alan Garcia was traveling westbound on Interstate 40 when Torrez cut him off in a Lexus in attempting to exit the freeway. The men exchanged words and Torrez pulled out a gun and fired at Garcia’s truck. He hit the four-year-old girl. With the witnesses and alleged confession, Torrez is toast absent some surprising development.
Torrez is charged with murder, aggravated battery with a deadly weapon, assault with the intent to commit a violent felony, shooting at or from a motor vehicle, child abuse, child abuse resulting in death and tampering with evidence. He was being held on $650,000 bail.
While the actions of Torrez leaves one, again, depressed about our society, it is important to note that Torrez was captured with the help of a tip. Moreover, two nurses stopped and rendered aid to Lilly until she was taken to the hospital. Finally, thousands of people have gone to a gofundme site to contribute to the family.
Just showing the picture below is enough to secure a death penalty.
What was it that Trump said?
“…the killing…a road rage incident…Tony Torrez, 32, reportedly confessed to the crime…”
Rick,
Look Sport, I don’t what passes for scholarship there at Trump University or wherever you snoozed your time away but here’s what I’m looking at:
The Supreme Court had several occasions to review state regulation of firearms in the context of the Second Amendment. A review of these cases reveals that the courts have uniformly held that the Second Amendment relates merely, solely, totally, and only to the unhampered regulation of a state militia. It does not confer an individual right.
L. Stanley Chauvin, President, American Bar Association, ABA Journal, 1990
If you have any trouble with those words in bold, ask DavidM to look up the definitions for you. He seems pretty handy with a dictionary.
For more than 200 years, the federal courts have unanimously determined that the Second Amendment concerns only the arming of the people in service to an organized state militia; it does not guarantee immediate access to guns for private purposes. The nation can no longer afford to let the gun lobby’s distortion of the Constitution cripple every reasonable attempt to implement an effective national policy towards guns and crime.
Nicholas Katzenbach, Ramsey Clark, Elliot L. Richardson, Edward H. Levi, Griffin B. Bell, and Benjamin R. Civiletti, former Attorneys General for the United States, The Washington Post, October 3, 1992
The second sentence is pretty much what I’ve been throughout this thread, and many of you are whining like a child who doesn’t want to go to bed. It’s not about the rights of gun owners, it’s about what’s in the best interests of the community.
“…FAR LESS STRESSED THAN OURS.”
Duh!
_____
T. Hall,
You said,
“In Switzerland, the citizens have guns but not ammo. Ammunition is kept at military facilities.
In Switzerland, citizens receive gun safety training as part of their military preparation.
in Switzerland, there’s no conceal carry madness.
Moreover, as a social democracy, their society is far less stressed than ours.”
____
Are there cocaine, stolen art works, marijuana, stolen cars, etc. transferred among the population in Switzerland? Are there no bullets? Seriously? You said that. There seem to be plenty of bullets all around the world.
_____
You said,
“moreover, as a social democracy, their society is far less stressed than ours.”
“…less stressed…” Were the Swiss adversely affected by illegal immigration to the degree that Switzerland morphed into a huge, impossibly indebted welfare state?
_____
Thomas Jefferson –
“Suppose 20 millions of republican Americans thrown all of a sudden into France, what would be the condition of that kingdom? If it would be more turbulent, less happy, less strong, we may believe that the addition of half a million of foreigners to our present numbers would produce a similar effect here.”
3 million freed slaves/property/non-citizens, 50 million Mexicans and 20 million refugee “asylum seekers” (for whom it is safe to go home now) have been thrust upon the American landscape – all having abused unconstitutional amendments and laws that were adopted “for the benefit of” foreign and non-citizens without standing.
“…to ourselves and our posterity,…”
T. Hall,
Do the studies also include the number of confrontations that ended without violence due to the presence of a gun; more specifically one produced by a CCP holder?
Also, I did not see an answer from you regarding this question I posed up thread:
“What are the reasonable limits? Where should the community and by extension its governing body look to guide their actions?”
Actually, Olly, the studies shows that confrontations that would have normally resulted in an aggravated assault, ie. a fight, escalated into a shooting. It also showed that confrontations occurred that normally would not have, but for the presence of a gun in the possession of one of the parties.
Paul,
You said guns weren’t allowed, then they were. Whatever, you miss the point. Small, local communities, the ones Ronald Reagan said were best left to regulate themselves, decided it was in their interest to impose regulations on gun possession. In the wild west. Closer in time to the Founding.
Guns are the problem in America, and there needs to be a change.
T. Hall – there are two Pauls on today, which are you speaking to?
A gunfight. Need more guns.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/23/us/tennessee-state-university-campus-shooting/index.html
“1 dead in shooting at Tennessee State University in Nashville
CNN)A shooting that left one person dead at Tennessee State University started after an apparent dispute over a dice game, Nashville police said.
Two others were injured in the shooting at an outdoor courtyard at the campus in Nashville. They were hospitalized with non-life-threatening injuries, said Kelli Sharpe, a university spokeswoman.
The wounded are students, but their names have not been released pending their families’ notification, she said.
The incident occurred during a student gathering in which two men not enrolled at the university may have been gambling, according to Sharpe.
Both men exchanged gunfire, and one was killed, she said.”
Inga – one should never gamble on campus.
Louisa,
I could “suggest” statistical evidence can be shown that home burglaries increase as ice cream sales increase.
Does your data demonstrate aggravated assault was committed by individuals licensed to carry? Or does this Stanford study only “suggest” this relationship?
Correlation DOES NOT necessarily equal Causation…but I’m sure you already knew that.
Here is another study from Texas A&M, with slightly different results. Bottom line is, concealed carry doesn’t not affect crime positively and maybe even does so negatively.
Legalizing concealed guns doesn’t deter crime, Texas A&M study concludes
The idea that concealed handguns lead to less crime is at the center of much firearms legislation, but the science behind that conclusion has been murky,” Texas A&M health sciences professor Charles D. Phillips said in a university release.
Phillips and his research team have attempted to clear away the murkiness by analyzing crime data county by county rather than by simply looking at crime rates before and after concealed-carry legislation has been enacted, the latter being what many previous studies have done. Phillips’ team studied data from 500 counties in Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Texas.
Their conclusion is that concealed-carry laws have “zero effect” on crime rates. “This research suggests that the rate at which CHLs (concealed handgun licenses) are issued and crime rates are independent of one another — crime does not drive CHLs; CHLs do not drive crime,” the study states.
“What we found when we drilled down to the county level was that the changes in the number of concealed handgun permits in a county had no relationship to either an increase or decrease in the county crime rate,” Phillips said.
The study, “Concealed Handgun Licensing and Crime in Four States,” has been published in the Journal of Criminology, where you can see how Phillips and his researchers dug into the data and analyzed it.
http://www.oregonlive.com/today/index.ssf/2015/09/legal_concealed_guns_dont_dete.html
Right-to-carry gun laws linked to increase in violent crime, Stanford research shows
New Stanford research confirms that right-to-carry gun laws are linked to an increase in violent crime.
Right-to-carry or concealed-carry laws have generated much debate in the past two decades – do they make society safer or more dangerous?
New Stanford research confirms that right-to-carry gun laws are linked to an increase in violent crime.
Right-to-carry or concealed-carry laws have generated much debate in the past two decades – do they make society safer or more dangerous?
While there is no federal law on concealed-carry permits, all 50 states have passed laws allowing citizens to carry certain concealed firearms in public, either without a permit or after obtaining a permit from local government or law enforcement.
Recently published scholarship updates the empirical evidence on this issue. Stanford law Professor John J. Donohue III, Stanford law student Abhay Aneja and doctoral student Alexandria Zhang from Johns Hopkins University were the co-authors of the study.
“Trying to estimate the impact of right-to-carry laws has been a vexing task over the last two decades,” said Donohue, the C. Wendell and Edith M. Carlsmith Professor of Law, in an interview.
He explained that prior research based on data through 1992 indicated that the laws decreased violent crime. But in 2004, he noted, the National Research Council issued a report that found that even extending this data through 2000 revealed no credible statistical evidence these particular laws reduced crime.
‘Totality of the evidence’
Now, Donohue and his colleagues have shown that extending the data yet another decade (1999-2010) provides the most convincing evidence to date that right-to-carry laws are associated with an increase in violent crime.
“The totality of the evidence based on educated judgments about the best statistical models suggests that right-to-carry laws are associated with substantially higher rates” of aggravated assault, rape, robbery and murder, said Donohue.
The strongest evidence was for aggravated assault, with data suggesting that right-to-carry (RTC) laws increase this crime by an estimated 8 percent – and this may actually be understated, according to the researchers.
“Our analysis of the year-by-year impact of RTC laws also suggests that RTC laws increase aggravated assaults,” they wrote.
The evidence is less strong on rape and robbery, Donohue noted. The data from 1979 to 2010 provide evidence that the laws are associated with an increase in rape and robbery.
The murder rate increased in the states with existing right-to-carry laws for the period 1999-2010 when the “confounding influence” of the crack cocaine epidemic is controlled for. The study found that homicides increased in eight states that adopted right-to-carry laws during 1999-2010.
http://news.stanford.edu/news/2014/november/donohue-guns-study-111414.html
Louisa – a homicide is not a murder. It is just death at the hands of another.
In my link above from the FBI, the 69% number is correct regarding weapon used in crimes. This is a huge percentage, not to be dismissed.
“Guns were 69% of weapon of choice in commission of a crime, however, FBI statistics state that violent crime with weapons have gone down since 2009. And gun ownership is at its highest since 1993.”
This is incorrect, gun ownership has actually declined.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/06/18/11-essential-facts-about-guns-and-mass-shootings-in-the-united-states/#2
Gun ownership in the United States is declining overall, but nearly a third of households still have a gun.
The General Social Survey has been asking Americans about whether they have a gun in their home for decades, and last year essential tied the record low level of gun ownership reached in 2010. As you can see the chart below, 31 percent of adults reporting having a firearm in their household in 2014. That is 17 percentage points below the peak gun ownership from 1977 to 1980.
Louisa – the last entity I am going to tell that I have a gun is the government. There is a lot of lying going on.
Crime Statistics for 2013 Released
Decrease in Violent Crimes and Property Crimes
11/10/14
The FBI released Crime in the United States, 2013 today, which shows that the estimated number of violent crimes in 2013 decreased 4.4 percent when compared with 2012 figures, and the estimated number of property crimes decreased 4.1 percent. There were an estimated 1,163,146 violent crimes reported to law enforcement last year, along with an estimated 8,632,512 property crimes.
The crime statistics report, issued by the Bureau’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program, contains voluntarily submitted data from 18,415 city, county, state, tribal, campus, and federal law enforcement agencies on specific crimes brought to their attention. They include the violent crimes of murder, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault, and the property crimes of burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson.
Property Crime Graphic from Crime in the U.S., 2013 Report
The downward progression in the number of reported property crimes over the past five years, according to Crime in the United States, 2013.
The primary goals of Crime in the United States? To assess and monitor the nature and type of crime in the nation and to generate reliable information for use in law enforcement administration, operations, and management. The data has also been used by criminologists, sociologists, legislators, municipal planners, the media, and other students of criminal justice for research and planning purposes.
But a word of caution: Don’t draw conclusions from the report by making direct comparisons between cities. Valid assessments are only possible with an understanding of various factors affecting each jurisdiction. For more details, read the UCR Statistics: Their Proper Use section.
Beginning in 2013, the UCR Program began collecting rape data under a revised definition. However, not all law enforcement agencies have been able to convert their records management systems to reflect the new definition yet, so this year’s report includes data collected under the previous (or legacy) definition as well as the revised definition. Footnotes for tables in the report indicate which definition of rape is being used. For more information, read the report’s Rape Addendum.
Here are some quick highlights from Crime in the United States, 2013:
During 2013, law enforcement made an estimated 11,302,102 arrests (including 480,360 for violent crimes and 1,559,284 for property crimes). The highest number of arrests were for drug abuse violations (estimated at 1,501,043), larceny-theft (estimated at 1,231,580), and driving under the influence (estimated at 1,166,824).
There were an estimated 14,196 murders last year.
Aggravated assaults (an estimated 724,149 last year) accounted for the largest percentage of violent crimes reported to law enforcement—62.3 percent.
Firearms were used in 69 percent of the nation’s murders, 40 percent of robberies, and 21.6 percent of aggravated assaults (weapons data is not collected on rape incidents).
There were an estimated 79,770 rapes (legacy definition) reported to law enforcement.
Victims of burglary offenses suffered an estimated $4.5 billion in property losses, and burglaries of residential properties accounted for 74 percent of the total reported.
Larceny-thefts accounted for the largest percentage of property crimes reported to law enforcement—69.6 percent. (The average value of property taken during larceny-thefts was $1,259.)
During 2013, an estimated 699,594 motor vehicles were reported stolen, and 73.9 percent of those were cars. (Other types of stolen vehicles included trucks, sport utility vehicles, buses, motorcycles, motor scooters, all-terrain vehicles, and snowmobiles).
https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2014/november/crime-statistics-for-2013-released/crime-statistics-for-2013-released
T. Hall
you had no cogent come back about how conceal carry laws encourage the presence of more guns in public, and how injuries from guns are increasing as a result.
Other than pointing out that it simply is not true of course. Laws don’t encourage, they allow or prohibit. There is also no evidence gun violence is increasing.
I pointed out the activism of the Roberts court in crafting an interpretation of 2d Am that had never been considered and rejected by previous generations. no one addressed that.
Invented is the better term that “pointed out”. Scholarship on the matter is quite clear that Heller reinforced the always understood meaning. The claim that because Heller was the first case mention of the individual right proves it was never thus understood is logically false. Heller was the first case to mention it specifically because the individual right was never questioned before. Academic scholarship, as opposed to public policy or activism “research” is quite clear the Second Amendment always applied to individuals. Activists just don’t understand this because they’re profoundly ignorant of all but the propaganda scholarship.
Lastly, I was searching for some semblance of reasonableness
I as well, and I’m finding none from the gun critics since their only solution is confiscation in violation of our constitutional rights.
I note you avoided admitting you would not accept the outcome you advocate for other constitutions protections. Why not just admit it?
I think this scene from True Detective sums up my feelings on this guy:
KCFleming
“It’s their violence and murder culture, you know, part of the Holy Diversity you worship.The guns are merely the means.”
I agree and I’m sick to death of ignorant liberals blaming guns, instead of mental illness or the culture of accepted violence in our society. Torrez has a lengthy arrest record and charges were all dropped except a speeding ticket and he has an active warrant for failing to respond to a parking citation.
He didn’t get his gun legally. I notice in crimes such as misdemeanors like speeding or parking tickets are not dropped but the more serious charges of burglary, drugs or assault are. One set of minor crimes generate money whilst the other set generate costs. The ones that generate money are never dropped.
Also, law abiding gun owners should not be penalized because the criminal justice system doesn’t do their job. Are people going to outlaw knives because that is also a favorite weapon of choice in violent crime.
Guns were 69% of weapon of choice in commission of a crime, however, FBI statistics state that violent crime with weapons have gone down since 2009. And gun ownership is at its highest since 1993.
How about our society putting offenders in jail when they commit a crime, instead of dropping charges like that judge did for the perp that shot the NY cop because the judge chose to put him in a program instead of jail.
“My response was how communities could reasonably be allowed to decide the role of weapons within their borders for themselves.”
T. Hall,
What are the reasonable limits? Where should the community and by extension its governing body look to guide their actions?
Ellen,
I can paraphrase the Founders, too.
“Forgot, you don’t know what you’re talking about.”
Rick,
My arguments haven’t failed, largely because i haven’t relied on studies about gun safety from Ted Nugent.
Furthermore, I pointed out the activism of the Roberts court in crafting an interpretation of 2d Am that had never been considered and rejected by previous generations. no one addressed that.
Also, you had no cogent come back about how conceal carry laws encourage the presence of more guns in public, and how injuries from guns are increasing as a result.
Lastly, I was searching for some semblance of reasonableness: Olly asked how any regulations could reasonably accommodate gun rights. My response was how communities could reasonably be allowed to decide the role of weapons within their borders for themselves.
The citizens of Dodge City knew the reality of gun violence and they also knew how to deal with it; if you own a gun, don’t bring it into town.
Guns are the problem, not a symbol of freedom.
T. Hall –
Until the arrival of Wyatt Earp, Dodge City was a free-for-all. Then Wyatt, as Chief Deputy Marshall established a Deadline on Front Street. North of that line was the commercial district of Dodge City. No guns were allowed. South of that line were the saloons and brothels. Guns were allows and gun fights continued.
“Paraphrasing” what came from the lips of the founders is the problem. No one knows exactly what was in their heads at the time.
Ellen –
Yes, we do. Read The Federalist Papers.