- Joined
- Jan 10, 2009
- Messages
- 42,744
- Reaction score
- 22,569
- Location
- Bonners Ferry ID USA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
...I don't even
You don't even what?
...I don't even
Why would you limit your google inquiry to "gun related deaths?"
Search for all homicides.
The following map shows the per capita murder rate by country. Darker colors mean a higher murder rate.
The USA is relatively safe.
You libs have picked a battle that you're just not going to win this time.
Higher gun deaths ? What a generic goofy braod brushed statement.
Yes CRIMINALS shoot each other alot in the US.
Good riddance.
I encourage liberals to push full tilt with their newest and most retarded agenda driven objective yet.
Good luck
You're nieve if you think people are rational as individuals.
Regarding your argument how do you explain the statistics?
Also I care more about those dead kids than your rights to have fun with a gun.
I don't even know where to start.
Rights and laws? Rights are defined by laws.
You can legally own a gun with minimal requirements because of the 2nd amendment. Go to most other developed nations and you won't find it so easy.
I should ask these questions.
When you were a kid learning about the constitution for the first time. Which amendment seemed the most out of place to you?
Those of you that support the 2nd amendment. Do you guys know the primary reason our founding fathers put it in place?
We get it. The NRA is a right wing organization that subscribes to a false interpretation of the actual wording of the Second Amendment but that is still not extreme enough for some here.
Yup - we get it loud and clear.
And then some wonder why LIBERTARIANS cannot even get 1% of the vote at election time. :doh:roll: Extremism such as this is the answer.
And what gun law would have stopped the massacre?
their interpretation is that the federal government cannot pass silly laws that are designed to harass honest people as a pretext for pretending to care about crime
your interpretation is other than an outright ban on some guns, the government can do what ever the masses want?
but what you have consistently failed to do is either discuss what laws, short of an outright ban are clearly unconstitutional (the 7th circuit ruled a ban on carrying guns is unconstitutional) or told us where the federal government PROPERLY was delegated the POWER to impose those silly restrictions that your posts appear to support
finally, your posts suggest you see the NRA as an enemy to something--your party, your agenda or what?
the one that got rid of gun free school zones
You don't think that mother in Newton increased HER risk of being murdered by having those weapons in the home? Of course she did.
Your risk is greater too, you just are too hooked to realize it.
The word is getting out though and gun ownership is declining because of it.
It matters not to my position what the circuit court ruled - just like it mattered not to your position what you thought the second amendment meant before the Court ruled it was an individual right rather than one linked to the militia.
It always has been an individual right. The court just upheld it.
I never blame the victim, nor do I know that had she been without guns her son still wouldn't have killed her.
Hooked? Hooked on what? What a baseless non-sequitur. Freedom isn't safe, but I challenge you to prove on quantify my risk.
Any source for your claim that gun ownership is going down because of perceived increased risk? Or is this another one of your baseless assertions?
CAMDEN, NJ — Residents of New Jersey's most impoverished and murder-prone city turned in a record number of weapons in a recent gun buyback program, and officials on Tuesday surmised that the Connecticut school shooting could have something to do with that.
"A lot of people said they don't want the guns around the house now," said state Attorney General Jeffrey Chiesa as he announced the result of the program held Friday and Saturday at two Camden churches.
The state brought in 1,137 guns, surpassing the previous record of 700 weapons from a 2009 Essex County event. Among them were scores of rifles, shotguns and pistols, sawed-off shotguns, a century-old antique weapon, a rifle used for hunting elephants and five fully automatic weapons. Some 90 percent were in working condition. Many were illegal weapons under state laws; some were so-called community guns stashed around neighborhood. Nearly all are to be destroyed
The number of households owning guns has declined from almost 50% in 1973 to just over 32% in 2010, according to a 2011 study produced by The University of Chicago's National Opinion Research Center. The number of gun owners has gone down almost 10% over the same period, the report found
Your hooked on guns, you have swallowed the kool-aid and not even your increased risk of gun violence will change that. Others are more thoughtful and logical.
Like these people in New Jersey who gave up their guns because they realize they are safer without them.
Record setting weekend for New Jersey's gun buyback program in wake of Newtown massacre - NYPOST.com
Analysis: Fewer U.S. gun owners own more guns - CNN.com
You say baseless crap like this then proceed to talk about being thoughtful and logical? What kool-aid? Are you completely ignorant of the facts regarding the failures of gun control, and how CCW effects crime rates?
There is no increased chance if you take suicide out of the picture, but no amount of facts will change your mind.
So then that's a no on sourcing your baseless claim that gun ownership is going down because of perceived increased risk?
Citing a source that states that gun ownership is going down doesn't do that, not to mention that I already knew this.
Guns in the Home Provide Greater Health Risk Than BenefitApr. 28, 2011 — Despite the fact that nearly one-third of American households have a firearm, studies show that having a gun in the home poses a household a greater health risk than a potential benefit. A new study released in the American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine examined scientific research on both sides of the debate to put hard numbers to this on-going discussion.
Author David Hemenway studied the various risks of having a gun in the home, including accidents, suicide, homicide, and intimidation. Additionally, the benefits of having a firearm in a household were also examined and those benefits included deterrence, and thwarting crimes (self-defense). From this in-depth look, it was concluded that homes with guns were not safer or deter more crime than those that do not. In fact, it was found that in homes with children or women, the health risks were even greater.
"Whereas most men are murdered away from home," wrote Hemenway. "Most children, older adults, and women are murdered at home. A gun in the home is a particularly strong risk factor for female homicide victimization."
You're nieve if you think people are rational as individuals.
Regarding your argument how do you explain the statistics?
Also I care more about those dead kids than your rights to have fun with a gun.
Agreed. What i meant was, what restrictions would have stopped it.the one that got rid of gun free school zones
For two full centuries of American jurisprudence , no Supreme Court or even a Federal Court that I am aware of ever ruled that the Second Amendment was a individual right apart from any consideration with the language about the militia.
If I am in error I would be happy to be corrected and read the appropriate legal decision which says otherwise.
How about the right to walk down the street without a fear of being shot ?
And these law-abiding "sane" men, are they 20% of the population ? 40% ?....
A law with teeth in it will have an effect on the criminals.....
Number of murders by guns do not matter, the only thing that matters is number of murders total, regardless of what was used. When you look at actual murders, the US ranks
Being below average is acceptable?
Also if you look at more developed regions of the world such as Europe or Asia we look even worse.
I agree with the bettering society part. Lets begin with not allowing guns to be privately owned unless there presents a need. If you want to go hunt, you should go to a gun licensed range where guns are less accessible to those who wish to do harm. Not that I think killing animals for sport is all that glamorous to begin with.