By @BGinKC

The Centers for Disease Control has completed and released the results of a massive new study of gang violence, conducted by analyzing data collected in five cities — Long Beach, Oakland and Los Angeles in California, Oklahoma City and Newark, N.J. In one study, they manage to debunk the “drugs fuel practically all gang violence” talking point/panicbutton that has been taken at face value and unchallenged, literally for decades.

As it turns out, drugs are not much of a factor at all in gang violence and homicides. Instead, the CDC found, homicides of gang members are driven by grudges, coupled with the ready availability of firearms.

Gang homicides almost always involve guns, frequently occur in public and often are the result of drive-by shootings. Typically, two people from rival gangs see one another in a public place, and contention quickly escalates to gunplay and homicide. Sometimes the guns come out on the spot, sometimes a drive-by is penciled in for later.

In the cities studied, the percentage of gang killings that were drug-related ranged from zero in Long Beach to about 25 percent in Oklahoma City.

Only in Newark did the number of drug killings related to gangs significantly exceed those involving non-gang members.

“A possible explanation of this divergent finding could be that Newark is experiencing homicides by gangs formed specifically for drug trade,” the CDC said.

Nationwide, homicide is the second leading cause of death among those aged 15-24, the CDC said. In Los Angeles and Long Beach, gang killings account for the majority of homicides in that age group.

The study provides empirical evidence for several things I observed when I was working traumas in the inner city, especially the young age of most of the victims. Early in my career, they weren’t that much older than my own children, or they were the same age as the children of my friends and coworkers. A couple of years later, they were the same age as my kids.

But there was one huge, life-altering difference…my kids grew up, and far to many of the children who came into my trauma bay never did.

I have shed many, many tears over wasted lives, and the plaintive  wails of mothers who have just been told that their baby is dead will ring in my ears until the day I die.  

The hard, cold reality is that victims of gang violence tend to be young. Indeed, homicide is the second-leading cause of death for those in the 15-19 age bracket, exceeded only by accidents. In fact, the victims of gang homicides in that cohort accounted for between 27 and 42 percent of gang-related homicide victims in the cities the study surveyed. When gangs are taken out of the equation, those numbers fall dramatically, to a range of 9 to 14 percent for non-gang murders.

The study also found that in Los Angeles and Oklahoma City, nearly a fourth of gang killings occurred in drive-by shootings. In all five cities, more than 90 percent of the killings involved firearms, and the killings were more likely to occur in public than non-gang deaths.

This suggests that “gang homicides are quick, retaliatory reactions to ongoing gang-related conflict,” the CDC said.

The findings highlight the need to deter gang involvement early in adolescence and to teach young people to resolve conflict nonviolently, the agency said.

“These homicides are preventable,” CDC epidemic intelligence service officer Dawn McDaniel told Reuters. “We need programs targeted at adolescents before they reach the ages of 15-19 to prevent them from joining gangs and being put at risk for gang violence in the first place.”

I can’t disagree with that assessment — but ask any developmentalist and they will tell you that teenagers aren’t finished yet. The human brain continues to develop until we are around 25 — and the last part to develop, the prefrontal cortex, is where impulse control comes from.

All the intervention and interdiction programs in the world are not going to make brains develop any faster, and they aren’t going to stem the easy availability of guns. And the only way that the easy availability of guns is going to wane will require politicians with the courage to stand up to the NRA. In other words…I ain’t holding my breath with the crop of pusillanimous cowards that populate the current congress.

[This post is written as part of the Media Matters Gun Facts fellowship. The purpose of the fellowship is to further Media Matters’ mission to comprehensively monitor, analyze, and correct conservative misinformation in the U.S. media Some of the worst misinformation occurs around the issue of guns, gun violence, and extremism. The fellowship program is designed to fight this misinformation with facts.]  

By @BGinKC

Without a doubt, one of the absolute best investigative journalists plying the trade today is Adrian Chen of the online news outlet Gawker.com. He has been relentless in exposing the dark and tawdry side of the internet, and now he’s exposing the violent, dangerous and criminal elements of it.

It’s been eight months since we exposed Silk Road, the underground online marketplace where you can anonymously buy any drug imaginable. After our article, a couple U.S. senators declared war on Silk Road. But it hasn’t been shut down. It’s bigger than ever, and now you can buy a Glock with your LSD.

Yesterday, Betabeat pointed out that Silk Road still exists, and is still home to hundreds of users openly trading illegal drugs using the nearly-untraceable hacker currency Bitcoins.

So I fired up my TOR anonymizing network browser, which is the only way to visit Silk Road’s unusual URL, to see what was new with the site. What was new was guns: Back when we broke the story in June, Silk Road’s anonymous administrator said he wouldn’t allow weapons to be sold on the site. But since then, an entire subcategory for firearms has sprung up.

He goes on to provide a list of all the real firearms that are available for purchase with untraceable pretend money…from a basic Beretta 9 mm to an Uzi to a 9 mm assault pistol with a silencer.

One of the most well-regarded vendor of firearms is a user named Dbush, who sells guns from the U.S. and Mexico and has 100% feedback from over 100 transactions. (Those weren’t all guns; he also sells meth, LSD and ecstasy.) Dbush’s user profile on the site boasts he can procure “AK pistols, AR15 pistols, and many tactical style guns. Additionally regular style shotguns, rifles, and handguns are available.”

Dbush told us in a message that most of his customers are Europeans trying to circumvent their countries’ strict gun laws. “Every single citizen should have enough firepower that the government fears the citizens. The people should not fear the government,” he said.

Dbush said he tries not to sell guns to people who want to kill civilians or commit crimes. But most importantly, he won’t sell to people who are anti-American or anti-Israel. “I would try to keep their money if I found out this was the case. Maybe send it 2 the US Israeli lobby 2 help gain more support for Israel,” he wrote.

A patriotic meth dealer with unwavering support for Israel. Awesome! There’s gotta be a country lyric in there somewhere just bustin’ to get out!

The addition of firearms to a site dedicated to facilitating the act of getting high has sparked a lot of discussion on the site’s boards and forums, but it hasn’t slowed it’s growth any, nor has the notoriety that the site has received in the wake of Chen’s original article a few months ago. The illegal drug side of the business is booming, in spite of politicians calling on federal agencies like the FDA to shut them down.

You can bet that after Chen’s firearms expose this week that the same politicians who wanted the FDA to shut them down last week have the ATF on speed-dial this week.

[This post is written as part of the Media Matters Gun Facts fellowship. The purpose of the fellowship is to further Media Matters’ mission to comprehensively monitor, analyze, and correct conservative misinformation in the U.S. media Some of the worst misinformation occurs around the issue of guns, gun violence, and extremism. The fellowship program is designed to fight this misinformation with facts.]  

By @BGinKC

I’m going to be honest here — I have never given The Daily Caller any serious consideration at all. I mean, it’s a Tucker Carlson joint, and Jon Stewart has a higher opinion of that schmuck than I do.

So it makes me cranky when I am forced to pay attention to him and/or any project he happens to be involved with, which is where I find myself now. I scoffed when Carlson announced the launch of the site, and probably mused about the underwriter of the wingnut welfare checks that were supporting him.

Now it seems pretty clear who is behind him. Or at least it does to me, anyway.

The Daily Caller has been the driving force in trying to keep the “Fast & Furious” gun-walking scandal alive — and they recently added a tab to the top of their site. The “Guns and Gear” page regurgitates NRA propaganda and talking points and features articles by such Second Amendment champions as OIiver North and Jerry Curry. They have even gone so far as to poll about an imaginary “U.N. gun ban.”

I don’t know about anyone else, but I don’t believe in coincidences. Not ones that big, anyway. Not when the attacks on Attorney General Holder and calls for his resignation by the Daily Caller coincide with the appearance of the Guns and Gear tab last month. Someone with more time and resources than I have ought to try to follow the money…

[This post is written as part of the Media Matters Gun Facts fellowship. The purpose of the fellowship is to further Media Matters’ mission to comprehensively monitor, analyze, and correct conservative misinformation in the U.S. media Some of the worst misinformation occurs around the issue of guns, gun violence, and extremism. The fellowship program is designed to fight this misinformation with facts.]  

There have been lots of criticisms of the Troubled Assets Relief Program or TARP, some justified and some not so justified. From the right critics excoriate it as an unwarranted meddling with the free market at tax payer expense, and from the left it is criticized as an unwarranted rescue of wall street at the expense of main street. Nevertheless, the unavoidable fact is that without TARP or something like it, we would have seen a banking failure that could have easily plunged us into depression that would make the Bush recession of 2008 look like fun and games. As Politico’s Ben Smith notes, there is general confusion about what TARP was and what it achieved:

Polls suggest the public has only the haziest view of what TARP was. It’s often conflated – not least by politicians who voted for it and now seek to muddy the waters – with the stimulus, a piece of policy whose supporters and foes have fallen into a much more familiar debate about the role of government and public spending.

Count politicians who bit the bullet and did what had to be done, such as Missouri Senators Roy Blunt and Claire McCaskill, among those loathe bring up the topic, others such as senatorial primary contender Todd Akin continue to come down hard on the program. Akin not only consistently voted against the program, but he continues to base his conservative bona fides on his contempt for the program which he dismisses as “trash.”

However, despite its bad reputation with the no-government-instrusion-into-anything-but-women’s-health crowd, which locally means Todd Akin more than any other politician, TARP has chalked up some remarkable successes. You’ve no doubt read that Detroit’s automotive industry is beginning to flourish once again. This recovery would not have taken place were it not for use of TARP funds to rescue the failing companies. It’s possible to argue as The New Republic’s Jonathan Cohn does,  that this success offers a strong demonstration of the vital role that government can play in developing a healthy economy that works for everyone:

… This success, however partial and tentative, isn’t accidental. It’s a product of hard work by public officials who wanted to do right by their citizens. … Obama and his advisers conducted extensive analysis and entertained a wide-ranging internal debate, putting policy well before politics.

Another objection to TARP has been its cost. However, the actual sum seems to dwindle year by year. The initial estimates were as high as $700 billion dollars that would be charged to taxpayers. As the financial recovery gains steam and banks and automobile companies pay back the loans that sum has diminished consideratly, currently Congressional Budget Office is estimating the cost of TARP to taxpayers to be $34 billion. Not so bad, given the scale of the disaster that was assured if nothing had been done.

Back in 2008, though, Rep. Akin did suggest an alternative to the government bailouts funded by TARP:

Akin also co-sponsored H.R. 7223, an alternative proposal, which would have increased the federally backed insurance program and empowered private investors and sound corporations to capitalize economic recovery through federal loan guarantees.

Kind of like shooting Godzilla with a peagun – and a peagun weilded by Godzilla’s parents at that. Note, though that the one part of the TARP program that did not perform as expected is the Home Affordable Modification Program which has, to date, expended only 6.6% of the funds which were allocated to the Program. The reason? It was put in the hands of just those  “empowered private investors and sound corporations,” that have “refused to cooperate with the program or have tried to scam potential participants.” Expecting financial firms who, when left without adult supervision, ran amok, creating the mess, to behave responsibly when it’s time to fix the mess is not really too bright.

I’m one of the millions, and I emphasize the word millions, whose retirement savings would have been wiped out if the financial failure with which we were threatened had taken place. I’m also a former citizen of Detroit – I know what the failure of the Big Three would have meant to thousands of workers there, and I can figure out what a United States without an automobile industry would be like. Consequently, I think the $39 billion is money well-spent.

Could it have been a better structured program? Should there have been consequences for the folks who caused our problems and then got bailouts? Yes and yes – Hell yes, in fact. And we will have to keep pushing to make sure that regulators are put in place who will make sure that “to big to fail” becomes inconceivable in the future. Dodd- was a good first step, but much more good regulatory legislation will be needed.

By @BGinKC

The Republicans in the Colorado state legislature are making another run at expanding gun rights, reintroducing legislation that would allow concealed weapons in schools and expand the “castle doctrine” to businesses. Republicans say they are just defending the Second Amendment while Democrats accuse them of grandstanding and straying from the job-creation agenda that both parties promised would be their legislative focus this year.

A proposal running simultaneously in the House and Senate would allow concealed weapons on school grounds and college campuses if a person has a permit and another bill would let business owners and employees use deadly force against intruders. Both proposals have previously failed, including last year when Senate Democrats rejected the concealed weapons bill.

Another proposal would prevent state officials from restricting the use of firearms during a declared state of emergency. Another bill would eliminate background checks done by the Colorado Bureau of Investigation for firearm purchases. Republican Rep. Mark Waller, the legislation’s sponsor, said the state is spending unnecessarily on its background check program because it duplicates checks already done federally.

CBI spokesman Lance Clem said the agency opposes Waller’s bill because the federal checks are not as fast or thorough as the state checks.

Republican Rep. Kevin Priola, a sponsor of the concealed weapon legislation, said the goal is to improve public safety by allowing people to protect themselves.

Just what the state that gave us the Columbine massacre needs! Guns on every campus!

The presence of guns in schoos does not make anyone safer. In fact, the presence of guns on campus creates a negative learning environment and increases the level of inherent danger by increasing the odds of a tragic accident occurring, as well as increasing  the odds of a gun falling into the wrong hands via theft, a more common occurrence in communal settings than private residences.

But they aren’t stopping there. Oh heavens no! They are also considering legislation that would eliminate background checks for firearms purchases, which would make it even easier for people who shouldn’t have guns to get their hands on one — and that’s a problem that is already manifesting itself in tragic ways. It certainly doesn’t need to be helped along and made worse, which is exactly the results that would be realized if the GOP legislators in Colorado get their way.

[This post is written as part of the Media Matters Gun Facts fellowship. The purpose of the fellowship is to further Media Matters’ mission to comprehensively monitor, analyze, and correct conservative misinformation in the U.S. media Some of the worst misinformation occurs around the issue of guns, gun violence, and extremism. The fellowship program is designed to fight this misinformation with facts.]