Posted on 01/31/2006 9:47:55 AM PST by walkerk
High murder rate attributed to large supply of firearms
There are more guns than ever on the streets of San Francisco — particularly in the hands of young people — leading to a doubling of gun murders over the last five years, according to the police department.
The number of homicides by firearms jumped from 39 in 2001 to 80 in 2005 and a handful of other indicators, from shootings to the number of guns seized by police, all point to a greater level of gun violence in San Francisco.
The new statistics come to light as city officials grapple with The City’s bloodiest year in a decade that resulted in 96 murders in 2005.
Eighty-one percent of those homicides were committed with a gun, a 10 percent increase from the year before, according to police. There were 316 shootings in 2005, which is up from 260 in 2004.
About 60 percent of San Francisco’s murder suspects and 57 percent of its victims are under 30. More than 60 percent of shooting suspects in 2005 had prior arrests, according to police.
San Francisco police Capt. Kevin Cashman, who appeared before a special Board of Supervisors committee Monday to address the murder rate, blamed the increase in gun violence on gangs and the availability of guns on the streets. However, law enforcement officials did not provide any indications of why there are more guns in San Francisco.
Cashman said the police had seized nearly 1,100 guns in 2005 and had increased the number of cases for federal gun prosecution from 77 in 2003 to 133 in 2005.
District Attorney Kamala Harris, who also appeared at the hearing, said her department did not have an official policy on gun crime before 2004.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfexaminer.com ...
Proposition H in the land of Preparation H. too funny.
The gangs and other criminals have obviously not heard of this law and clearly what is needed is for the city to spend a whole lot of tax payer money on public service announcements, community outreach programs and such to educate the under priviledged and misguided yutes.
"In November, voters passed Proposition H that bans the sale, manufacture, distribution and possession of firearms in San Francisco"
So what's the obvious conclusion? This is a combined IQ and civics test.
(a) Pass MORE gun control laws. Clearly, the current ones are not effective enough.
(b) Issue press releases that it's time to "end the cycle of violence," and then raise taxes to provide more counseling services to high school and gang youths.
(c) Call Senators Feinstein and Boxer and have them issue joint press releases blaming President Bush and the Republican Congress, for not having funded enough inner-city after-school basketball programs.
(d) Admit that feel-good control measures passed by rich homosexuals in the nation's most addle-brained, liberal city are a waste of time. Then, let law-abiding SF citizens carry guns and stop coddling the little monsters that commit crimes and are let out with probation.
[ sorry ... lost it there with last entry ... must've forgot to take my medication this morning...]
They're probably related at some level, probably in the sense that both spring from some common cultural factor.
I think it probably has something to do with the fact that people who live in densely populated areas tend to be quite far removed from the "real facts of life" as they pertain to things like food and other "raw materials" of life.
Dollars to doughnuts the SF supervisors propose a "gun buyback program" to address the problem.
About guns "seeping" across city boundries....
[“Obviously, there are folks trafficking weapons into The City. We need to do a better job figuring out how they are doing it,” Nance said.]
I say they are putting them in cars and driving into town.
But this makes no sense to me. It is illegal to carry guns in San Fransisco. According to liberal logic, since it is illegal for anyone to have guns to defend themselves, then there should be no guns "on the streets." What is this world comming to? How can we keep guns from getting into the cities of California?
Try this, how can we protect our citizens from thugs? Better... how can we help our citizens defend themselves against violent thugs while simultaneously discouraging such behavior?
Answer: Arm responsible citizens, build more prisons, be less lenient on criminals.
But, but, the good citizens of San Fran have spent countless tax dollars to turn in guns, to educate about the unparalleled evils of guns, and to create laws prohibiting guns. I think they just need more tax dollars to solve this dilemma. Yeah, that's it.
I've got an idea: why doesn't SF pass an initiative banning guns for law-abiding citizens and requiring those law-abiding citizens to turn their guns in by 4/1/06? THAT will stop all these "streets flowing with guns." Yes! That'll do it. Oh, wait. . . .
Not to worry - aren't they all gentle people with flowers in their hair?
Why, he would call for another "gang summit."
The last one made SUCH a difference, didn't it?
(/sarc.)
LOL!!!!!!!!!!
Oh, wait a minute... San Francisco... nope, my "Give a Damn's" busted...
Yuts? ....Ok, Vinny.
I loved that movie.
Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who didn't.
Nothing surprises me coming out of San Francisco.
"The gangs and other criminals have obviously not heard of this law"
I think they heard of the law and now know they can rob people without the risk of being shot.
Elementary, my Dear Watson. Gun control laws only disarm law-abiding citizens and/or citizens with something to lose if they are accused of a crime. People who use crime to make a living could care less about gun control laws.
Guns?
Wonder if there are any rifles?
[People who use crime to make a living could care less about gun control laws.]
How dare you insult such a prestigious proffession? You mean to suggest that criminals do not consider the ramifications of their behavior as it relates to the law and rights of their fellow citizens. Have you ever considered that they just do not know that it is illegal to rob/mug/shoot/rape/murder/car jack/assult other people? Maybe they just need to be educated on what the law says they are allowed to do. Then maybe they would not use guns as the primary tool of their trade.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.