Talk:Gun violence and gun control in Texas

Prem's Comments
Overall, an interesting article about a very controversial topic. You kept the page neutral and balanced in showing arguments from both sides, which was also good. Outside of a few editing issues, notably the blank "Intro" sections to almost every new subtopic, the article reads well in its layout.

My recommendations include:
 * if you could create a bar chart showing the percentage of overall Texas guns licensed in each county in the section on "Gun Ownership", that might give the reader a better depiction of the state layout and an understanding of just how high the number of guns licensed in Harris County is relative to the rest of the state
 * in the "Accidents and Crime" section, I know we're not supposed to provide an analysis of the facts, but I'm wondering what the interrelation between the 65,000+ convictions and the 101 of those with licenses to carry handguns means. If there is perhaps more information that delve further into this relationship, it might be worth adding in here
 * in the "Homicides" subsection under "Accidents and Crime", the following is stated: "the firearms homicides per 100,000 people in Texas have remained stable around 4 since year 2000 (see chart)". However, the graph, to me, looks like the number of homicides per 100,000 people is around 4.  The graph should be labelled clearly that these are firearm homicides.

Outside of these issues, it looks great! --pdurairaj1081 (talk) 16:32, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Jenn's comments
This is a very thorough article. The structure and flow of the article is great. I believe it is clear from the beginning that you are laying out a neutral argument, since you note in the first paragraph that there are two arguments to gun control laws and in parallel that there are two interpretations of the second amendment.

Even though your focus is gun control laws in Texas, I appreciate the brief background on Federal gun laws. You mention the Brady Act; is this particularly relevant to Texas? Or is there another Federal law that might have more of an influence on Texas? Or a law that was created because of Texas gun control issues?

I agree with Prem, that in the Accidents and Crime section, it would be good to delve deeper into the significance of the 101 licenses out of the 65,000+ convictions. It’s a striking statistic and I found myself wanting more information.

I think the Prevention and Awareness section is important and I am glad you have included it. The New Mexico model highlights the fact that gun control involves more than just the government and gun owners. Is there any information available on Prevention and Awareness Programs in addition to New Mexico’s? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jgrandfield (talk • contribs) 23:47, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

CSR Comments
From the opening para: "According to a recent study, the state of Texas is considered to have some of the nation's most lenient gun laws." "Public concerns have increased..."

I like the idea of an introduction but I think you should have a citation so people don't doubt your credibility. I realize that you're probably still working on your page, so this isn't really that much of an issue. I also noticed that throughout your wiki you use one citation at the end of a large block of text. I've always assumed that citations should be used after each full stop, even if it is the same citation over and over again. For example, you may happen to cite the same source 4 or 5 times in the same paragraph because all information is derived from that source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bearsaresoft (talk • contribs) 05:39, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Campus Ambassador comments
Hi all, good work so far! Here is some feedback on the article to help you improve it further:


 * Section titles should be in sentence case: all lowercase letters except for the first letter and any proper nouns.
 * The lead needs to be reworked; the first paragraph should be a fairly direct statement of what the topic of the article is and what the contents of the article will be. Starting with a single (uncited) study is a bit too specific of an item to begin with.
 * Wikipedia style is a bit more like journalistic writing rather than essay writing, in that the more important sections should be closer to the top. Specifically, I'd put the "History" section (which should probably be renamed "Legal basis" given its content) and the "Facts and Statistics" section closer to the bottom.
 * The "Gun control" section doesn't seem to be specifically about Texas. Given the scope of this article it would be good to explain the reaction to the Columbine shootings within the state of Texas, such as statements by politicians or the media, or any legislation that was enacted as a result of the shooting.

Also, the professor wants you to solicit feedback from other Wikipedians; the best way to do this is to leave a note on a relevant WikiProject's talk page. I'd suggest WikiProject Texas and WikiProject Firearms, which have already included this article in their projects (see banners at the top of the page). Keep up the good work! Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 23:50, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Editor comments
I'm not very familiar with the Wikipedia Ambassador Program, but I see several areas in which this article can be improved. --Hamitr (talk) 23:16, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
 * The lead should not contain bullet points.
 * All section headings with no corresponding content (Accidents, Suicides, Policing and other gun-related crimes, etc.) should be removed. They can be added back when content is added.
 * The "Intro" placeholder texts should be replaced with proper introductions to the sections. In most cases, it is poor style to have a third-level heading immediately following a second-level heading without introductory text, but the placeholders are certainly not encyclopedic.
 * The flag map of Texas image adds nothing to the article and should be replaced with something like Template:USgunlegalbox or another template pertaining to Texas, gun violence, and/or gun control.
 * The "2009 manufacture and export of firearms in US and Texas" table should either have data added to the "Texas" columns, or it should be removed. Without data in the "Texas" columns, it really doesn't address the topic of the article, and it looks very un-encyclopedic with the "Example" placeholder texts.
 * The "Firearms Homicides in Texas 1976-2005" graphic should be enlarged a bit so that it is legible without the reader clicking to view the full-sized image. This graphic should also be enhanced and/or converted to png/svg.
 * The "Drug-War Related Murders in Mexico" graphic should be removed unless a source is found and added to that section which shows a connection between "gun violence and control in Texas" and "drug-war related murders in Mexico." Without a reliable source claiming a connection, we should not imply that such a connection exists.
 * Why is the AR-15 image included? Is it because it is a "scary-looking" gun?  Why not include an image of a 9mm or .45 caliber handgun instead?  What value does the image add to the article?
 * The "International Repercussions" section should be renamed.
 * The entire first paragraph in the "International Repercussions" section is copied verbatim from the GAO source, so it should be summarized/rephrased.
 * The "87 percent of firearms seized" claim has been proven false by many sources, so I would recommend removing it and replacing it with more correct information. Even though it is cited to a reliable source, it is highly disputed, so it should at least be rephrased as, "A GAO report claimed that 87 percent... However, other sources indicate that the number is closer to X..."
 * Consider adding a summary of the BATFE's "Project Gunrunner" (or "gunwalker") scandal to the section for balance.

Major Flaws
Ok, I haven't bothered investigating the edit history to see when this occurred, but this article has developed a rather serious flaw, in that almost half of it is completely irrelevant to the topic. After a discussion of Texas-related firearms statistics, which is quite good (if outdated) there follows a long section that deals almost exclusively with gun violence in Mexico, and it's effect on border states. There is virtually nothing there to reference the material specifically to Texas. After the heading Gun Control, there is a long section (maybe 1/3 of the entire body) which discusses gun control issues applicable to all states, without mentioning Texas at all. I hate say it, since it's well written I hate to remove it from article space, but unless somebody tells me why this applies to Gun Violence and Gun Control In Texas, I'm going to delete it. Eaglizard (talk) 08:59, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gun violence and gun control in Texas. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111015050830/http://atf.gov/publications/factsheets/factsheet-project-gunrunner.html to http://www.atf.gov/publications/factsheets/factsheet-project-gunrunner.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110611022116/http://www.fedstats.gov/ to http://www.fedstats.gov/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:54, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Does Wikipedia really need to document the most foolishly inaccurate of views?
I observe that in the article, there is a prominent placement of the view that "Those who believe gun control laws are ineffective in reducing gun-related accidents and crime and thus support fewer gun control measures." Given that this view is as foolish as thinking that, say, tobacco control does not reduce tobacco-related cancers, why is a subjective position that cannot and does not have a basis in fact given such prominence? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elroch (talk • contribs) 22:35, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

The article also presents the nearly opposite argument "Those who believe gun control laws are effective in reducing gun-related accidents and crime and should be enforced by the government." It's merely listing the major arguments that are both for and against gun control. It's not a foolish viewpoint -- there are a lot of people that subscribe to it. The author of this statement may surprise you: ""During my 12 and a half years as a member of this body, I have never believed that additional gun control or federal registration of guns would reduce crime. I am convinced that a criminal who wants a firearm can get one through illegal, nontraceable, unregistered sources, with or without gun control," Senator Joe Biden, July 1985 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/biden-voted-nra-when-senate-nation-were-very-different-n997311 https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-CRECB-1985-pt13/pdf/GPO-CRECB-1985-pt13-4-2.pdf Linktex (talk) 15:58, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment
This article is the subject of an educational assignment supported by  the Wikipedia Ambassador Program&#32;during the 2011 Spring term.

The above message was substituted from by PrimeBOT (talk) on 16:37, 2 January 2023 (UTC)