Released just today, but it seems to me that it’s making assumption on top of assumption. Nonetheless, it throws numbers around with authority. I’m not sure how statements like this are convincing, however:
Moreover, the average TTC of the ten states that export crime guns at the lowest rates is 14.1 years, while the average TTC of the ten states that export crime guns at the highest rates is 9.9 years. This average TTC data provides an alternative method to assess which states are the top sources of crime guns most likely to have been trafficked. However, this report primarily relies on the proportion of short TTC crime guns originating from a state because ATF has specifically identified a short TTC as a key indicator of gun trafficking.
OK, so the “source” states are still having an average “Time to Crime” rate of 9.9 years for guns recovered? Your average crime gun is still on the street 9.9 years before recovered in a crime? Sounds like we have a horrible trafficking problem to me. They also seem to claim that state laws against straw purchasing make a difference in TTC rates, and that restricting private sales does as well. Actually they seem to claim all gun control laws lower TTC.
But all of this is really based on some pretty wild assumption. I think it’s probably reasonable to conclude that guns will flow from places with low restrictions to places with great restrictions, because that’s easier than alternatives. But it makes the assumption that if we just make all the US a place of great restriction, we’ll solve this whole problem. But that ignores the alternative methods of trafficking and obtaining firearms. It might take a bit more creativity, and gaming the system, but where there’s demand, there will be supply. Just ask people who smoke crack.
Bloomberg also ignores the fact that we do not find New Jersey’s, New York’s or California’s gun laws acceptable, or constitutional. So keep tilting at windmills, Mayor Mike, we’re coming for your gun laws in short order. You will be made to comply. We promise.
So criminals are currently using weapons aquired while the AWB was in effect?
And they want it back?
Unsurprisingly, there isn’t much difference between Texas and California “crime gun exports” despite how free Texas is and how draconian California is. That fact destroys the entire conclusion of this latest MAIG agit-prop.
Yes, I remember reading something showing that California is one of the top ten “crime gun sources”.
Odd, it’s like gun control isn’t about safety or something…
So according to Bloomie, if I own a gun for 9.9 years it will automatically commit a crime?
It makes sense when you’re crazy.
They lost me when they started to claim that their TTC statistic actually means anything.
9 YEARS? Holy … I often joke in class breaks (nra) about having watched my guns for a day to see if they would move to pull their own triggers or wander to a convenience store. I had no idea there was that kind of lag time…
I think Pete pegged it: “It makes sense when you’re crazy.”
MAIG.. another non reliable source.
So your saying That a criminally obtained gun floats around for 10 years before events cause its capture?
If so that means a few guns can looks like a lot as they are actively recycled. The report looks a bit skewed. One parameter that was notable but lightly commented was states where criminally obtained guns were importers, seems gun controls made them more valuable because they were unable to get them locally. So here I sit in naked in MA and we have one of the most draconian gun laws but as we already know the criminals don’t care.
Looks like they are making a case for more laws like MA or worse. I expect off shore imports and home brewed hardware to appear in oh, 9.9 years after that.
Makes me think and I don’t like the pattern.
Eck!
I remember researching this a bit back in the day, and Phil Lee came up with some great stats–apparently the number one source for crime guns in NY is (drum roll please)…NY.
The number one source for crime guns in MD, a gun restrictive state with permissive VA just to our south?
You guessed it…MD.
Yes, I remember reading something showing that California is one of the top ten “crime gun sourcesâ€.
That was pointed out to our local anti-gun columnist. His response? “You know very well that California made that list by virtue of it’s enormous population.”
Apparently, other factors can cause correlation when it suits the anti’s purposes.
Also worth noting is the ATF’s disclaimer (warning: PDF link) on gun trace data (which MAIG claims as it’s source):
Somehow, the anti’s continually fail to mention that the data they’re using doesn’t actually represent what they are trying to prove.