[QUOTE id="d1696e68-8564-4c4b-9c8b-42ad8b920f72"]Note to the author: Pennsylvania is a commonwealth, not a state. Second of all, without getting into a whole argument on the 2nd Amendment, gun control, etc. all I can say is this: when one of these thugs tries to rob or assault me on the street, I should have a right to defend myself with a firearm. Gun control laws only prevent law-abiding citizens from protecting themselves; criminals have open access to firearms on the black market. The gun ban in DC (recently overturned) has really done wonders for that city! [/sarcasm][/QUOTE] How are you going to defend yourself on the street with a firearm when you're being robbed? Chances are, the robber will have a weapon trained on you while this is happening. You don't think he's going to see you reach for your concealed weapon, draw it, and aim it in his direction before he does something to you? If they don't kill or shoot you right then, they will at least steal your firearm and likely sell it on the street...which is just what Philly needs more of.

[QUOTE id="d1696e68-8564-4c4b-9c8b-42ad8b920f72"]How are you going to defend yourself on the street with a firearm when you're being robbed? Chances are, the robber will have a weapon trained on you while this is happening. You don't think he's going to see you reach for your concealed weapon, draw it, and aim it in his direction before he does something to you? If they don't kill or shoot you right then, they will at least steal your firearm and likely sell it on the street...which is just what Philly needs more of. [/QUOTE] ...a simple illustration, no matter how seemingly logical, does not mean anything if it is statistically proven wrong. If you seriously think that citizens possessing guns ends in more guns on the street because of your scenario (BTW, most mugging instances don't involve guns anyway), it just might behoove you to get off your ass and quit speculating out of it.

Before you admonish posters for speculating, perhaps you could provide some factual basis for your arguments instead of making blanket assertions. Hypocrisy aside, your rather incoherent argument has no logical basis whatsoever. Muggings involve either weapons or some element of surprise, like someone pushing you down. How are you possibly going to reach for your concealed weapon, draw it, and aim it in such an instance? What does any mugger with a weapon have to lose by shooting or stabbing you before you have a chance to shoot him? He has a lot more to lose by not attacking you. Guns only escalate the situation. Plus, where's the deterrent factor in carrying a gun for "protection" when it needs to be concealed anyway? Of course, if you're handing over money to someone who is unarmed and when there is no element of surprise or anything like that, you have more money than brains.

I work at HUP and see the shooting victims brought in the ER everyday. Students should take a break from the partying and come down for a visit sometimes. Penn students have always been insulated from city concerns by Penn administrations. They want parents and students to believe we live in some West Philly la-la land called "Univercity City." Everyone is shocked when Penn students sometimes get shot. These are daily occurrances a few blocks from Locust Walk. It is sad to see in some West Philly neighborhoods, being shot is some sort of rite of passage.

I work at HUP and see shooting victims brought in everyday to the ER. They have to stop lying to parents and students about how safe "University City" is. A lot of these shootings happen a few blocks from Locust Walk. It is sad to see how getting shot in West Philly has become some sort of rite of passage.

Ah yes, the old trope of gun control, which the CDC itself proved does absolutely nothing. Washington DC has its own gun laws, in the form of a complete ban, and it's the most violent city in America. Gun laws are a classic way for ignorant people to pretend they're doing something about crime. Never mind the fact that legal sales within Philadelphia play almost no part in the city's crime rate. All these laws would do is prevent law-abiding individuals from protecting themselves FROM Philly's criminals. One idea that moron Street put forward was cutting off conceal-and-carry permits. Carrying a gun without a permit is already illegal. By banning concealed carry permits, you leave the legal landscape unchanged for the people who are already criminals, but you disarm permit-holders, who are statistically the best behaved group in America. They're a trained, legally screened subset who actively deter street crime. It's moronic. Judge for yourself. The research of Penn's own John Lott shows clearly that these laws only do harm. The answer isn't "gun control", it's effective control of criminal populations. The fact is, the Philadelphia Police Department has proven itself to be one of the least effective in the country. Their capture and conviction rates are well below average, which means there is both less deterrence to commit crime and, quite simply, more criminals on the loose who haven't been caught. New York reduced crime not because of their gun laws (which were unchanged since 1911), but through clamping down on paroled felons within the city, coupled with rather shameful acts of racial profiling. But this involves both a radical departure from current doctrine and a politically unpalatable practice. In sum, you kids are screwed.

It's important to note that parts of D.C.'s gun-control ordinance were struck down a few months ago by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit: Parker v. District of Columbia. The ruling turned on an increasingly common reading of the Second Amendment, declaring the right to bear arms as an individual right as opposed to a group right that the Supreme Court advocated in United States v. Miller in 1939. The city plans to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court, and given the makeup of the Court at the moment, it looks like any attempt at gun control in Philadelphia would be later declared unconstitutional, assuming the Court grants certiorari. But no need to worry - Harrisburg won't let it come to that.

Horrendous statistics. I had no idea. My sister is living in the city and even she had no clue it was quite so dire. Such things are easy to ignore if you really want to.

You can blame countless organizations, lacksidasical policies and corrupt leaders what the heck is "lacksidasical"????????? Good proofreading editors...

Updating the NYC comparision--2005 is out of date: As of 7/22/07, NYC had 266 homicides year to date versus Philly's 246 at 7/31 despite a 5.8 times larger population. NYC's homicide rate has declined 15% this year over last year at the same time. Here's another comparison: Manhattan has approximately the same population as Philadelphia: 1.5 million versus 1.4 million. Of course, Manhattan has far more visitors, both commuters and tourists, than Philadelpia, so there are actually quite a few more people in Manhattan during the day and evening than in Philadelphia. Yet Manhattan as of 7/22/07 had 35 homicides versus Philly's 246 at 7/31/07. Wow. Regarding guns: it would be interesting to know how many of the guns used in Philly's murders were legally owned. NYC is hawkish on illegal firearms. Philadephia needs to do likewise. The second step is stricter gun laws in general.

How exactly is it my responsibility to go down to take a break from my studies to go down to HUP and look at shooting victims? I'm sure most other Penn students are like me: Philly is not our home; we are here a total of 28/52 weeks of the year; we do not even entertain the thought of staying here after graduation; we are here for the service for which we pay, i.e. education for the field for which we wish to enter. What goes on Kensington is none of my business. It is not my responsibility to hold the hand of every misguided, unloved child who lives in a shitty school district. There are neighborhoods in my own hometown that need help, and that is where I direct my humanitarian efforts when there is something tangible I can do. Philly is simply the location of a transaction for us-- we pay a shit ton of money (and take out a life's worth of loans in my case), and in return we get our degree in four years. We do not pay $45k/yr to have the weight of Philly's problems placed on our shoulders, nor is there any more moral obligation to do anything about it than there is to do something about, say, the problems in Namibia.

Interesting article, but some of your facts are a bit off. While Philly's murder rate is higher than in recent years, it isn't shattering any records. There were over 500 murders a year in the early 1990s, and I don't think the murder rate dipped below 400/yr at all in the 1990s. Murders are up, but the media is also hyping it substantially. Of course it's an outrage, and of course gun control could go a long way to dealing with this problem. But I fail to see how Penn students being more outraged is going to change anything. How many Penn students know or communicate with any of the people involved with these homicides? I'm all for spreading awareness and all that stuff, but it needs spread where it will matter most--the impoverished communities that are suffering the most from these murders. A bunch of angry Penn students and Center City residents just aren't going to get through to the people most likely to commit these crimes. In Pennsylvania, it is not required to report a stolen gun (like it is required for a stolen car). It's also OK to buy as many hand guns as you want at a time. Since punishments for possession of stolen goods are determined by value of the object, you can often get more jail time for having a stolen TV than a stolen gun. The Philadelphia legislators know this, and so does the Governor. If you want to see some changes to the law, I suggest you start lobbying the Republicans from the hinterlands who are bankrolled by the NRA...they're the obstacle to new gun laws. Of course, the long-term solution is more opportunity through better education and more jobs. If you know how to pull that off without a hitch, you're smarter than anyone else on the planet.

Aren't most of these murders related to economics and illegal drugs in some way ? Instead of more invasions of privacy and shredding of Constitutional guidelines (i.e. Bolshevik style gun control and profiling ), why not eliminate the real reason for most of this violence ... eliminate prohibition . Taking the profit incentive out of the illegal drug market would result in less crime and an increased respect for government . How can we respect a government when they dictate what adults can or can not consume , at the same time forcing some children to swallow the same or very similar compounds ? Yes, there are serious health problems that arise with chronic use of amphetamines (Adderal) and cocaine (Ritalin), but education and honesty go along way in reducing some ones dependence on these substances .

In reply to Andy Hines: I agree a better comparison is between all of NYC and all of Philadelphia, and provided those figures first, which show that the homicide rate in Philly is almost six times that of New York City despite NYC's far larger size. The Manhattan comparision is the most favorable (except maybe Staten Island), but it doesn't matter which borough you pick. The Bronx, Brooklyn, and Queens ALL have far lower homicide rates than Philadelphia. The Bronx is also comparable to Philadelphia is size with a population of about 1.36 million. 2007 homicides in the Bronx as of 7/22/07: 66, down 17.5% for the year, compared to Philly's 246. Wealth or lack of wealth is not the issue when it comes to homicide rates. You write that part of what separates Penn from other Ivies and top universities is its urban location in one of America's largest cities. Actually there are many great urban universities in the Ivy League and elsewhere, such as Columbia, Harvard, NYU, Chicago, UC Berkeley, UCLA, Georgetown. and many more. That is hardly unique to Penn. I think the concern of many Penn alumni is that Philadelphia with its high crime and shrinking population is far more a detriment than an advantage to Penn. I am impressed with how well Penn does despite Philadelphia's problems. My NYC comparison was meant to say that a very different kind of Philadelphia is possible, as far off as it appears today. Philadelphia won't turn around until crime abates. And eliminating illegal handguns is obviously the single most important step in making Philadelphia's streets safe again.

I will of course, grant that ILLEGAL handguns should be attacked aggressively, but you can only do so much while at the same time respecting the rights and proven crime-deterring powers of the citizenry. Focusing on the criminals and keeping them from returning to circulation has proven itself to be the correct course of action.

Hello All: I wanted to address a few of these comments. C. Kyle Rupe: I looked into the figures you said about murder counts in the 90s in Philadelphia. The homicide count peaked at 502 in 1990 and declined pretty steadily from there by 1998 there were 338 murders in the city, in 99, 292. Until last year, Philadelphia has been below 400, in fact until 2005 the count has been below 350. Still not a number to be proud of. I found these numbers at the Philadelphia Police Department website, if you'd like to take a look. (http://www.ppdonline.org/hq_statistics.php) I agree with most of the comments here on gun control, it is by no means a solution to this epidemic, especially considering many of the guns used are more than likely purchased illegally. But, this measure, however pointless you may think it, is action, and at this point we have seen very little with regards to the issue. Penn alum, mentions the incredible safety of Manhattan. I think there are a few reasons for the discrepancies between our homicide rate and that of Manhattan's. First off, Manhattan is the richest part of New York City, with money seemingly dripping from the buildings that line it. When compared with Philadelphia's Center City District, comparable in wealth, but not in population or size, we see an equally small and impressive figure. As of last week, I believe there were only 3 murders in that area. New York also benefited from former Mayor Giuliani's crack down on crime in the city. Crime was curbed by such questionable practices as "stop and frisk," which have been considered in some of Philly's most dangerous neighborhoods. One of the problems in Philly is the lack of responsible and decisive leadership; hopefully the city demands change from Michael Nutter once he is elected in the coming months. Making these neighborhoods safer will only result from decisive and strong action, which will likely toe the line between Constitutional and un-Constitutional. To ???: I realize that not every Penn student will take it upon themselves to go out and change this city. It is of your own decision whether or not to invest yourself in Philadelphia. I too know what it is like to have neighborhoods at home in need, just two years my home state, Louisiana, was rattled by two very large, and very damaging hurricanes. I need not explain more on that issue. Philadelphia is much more than a place where a transaction occurs to Penn students. In this very same edition of the DP there is an article (http://media.www.dailypennsylvanian.com/media/storage/paper882/news/2007/08/02/News/Theres.No.Place.Like.Philadelphia-2929000.shtml) that puts forth many of the recognitions received by this great city. Part of what separates Penn from the other Ivies and other institutions of its caliber is its urban location in one of America's largest cities. I realize that here we are simply arguing a point of personal preference, and I respect your decision to not involve yourself with the local community, but I would say that by ignoring your surroundings puts a damper on the education that you have taken out "a life's worth of loans" for. Thank you all for reading, and I encourage you to continue posting. Creating a dialogue and an awareness for this issue is part of what this editorial is all about. -Andy Hines

Andy: Yes, gun control is action. And so is jumping up and down and screaming "stop killing each other!" Just because it's action does not therefore mean it is just or prudent. Every action has an outcome, and if that outcome is illegal, unconstitutional, harmful, or all of the above, then that action should be rejected. Bad solutions can make problems worse, or create new problems, instead of just failing to make them better.

Note to the author: Pennsylvania is a commonwealth, not a state. Second of all, without getting into a whole argument on the 2nd Amendment, gun control, etc. all I can say is this: when one of these thugs tries to rob or assault me on the street, I should have a right to defend myself with a firearm. Gun control laws only prevent law-abiding citizens from protecting themselves; criminals have open access to firearms on the black market. The gun ban in DC (recently overturned) has really done wonders for that city! [/sarcasm]

NYC is a better than the 80's when I lived there. So why not aspire to that same vision and hope, lest nothing will change. [QUOTE id="af749157-223c-4e86-8e1a-6a962d08aa6e"]Updating the NYC comparision--2005 is out of date: As of 7/22/07, NYC had 266 homicides year to date versus Philly's 246 at 7/31 despite a 5.8 times larger population. NYC's homicide rate has declined 15% this year over last year at the same time. Here's another comparison: Manhattan has approximately the same population as Philadelphia: 1.5 million versus 1.4 million. Of course, Manhattan has far more visitors, both commuters and tourists, than Philadelpia, so there are actually quite a few more people in Manhattan during the day and evening than in Philadelphia. Yet Manhattan as of 7/22/07 had 35 homicides versus Philly's 246 at 7/31/07. Wow. Regarding guns: it would be interesting to know how many of the guns used in Philly's murders were legally owned. NYC is hawkish on illegal firearms. Philadephia needs to do likewise. The second step is stricter gun laws in general.[/QUOTE]