The Pernicious Myth of the Good Guy With a Gun

Another counterpoint free response,it is clear Vegas has nothing but one line red herrings,must be a poor fisherman.

 

Just more of your cherry picking. Homicide also went down after the AWB and Brady Bill became law, but your chart conveniently omits that information.

 

America was listed at # 107 out of 218 listed for PER CAPITA homicide rate. Despite having by far the MOST Per Capita rate of firearms in the world. Yet somehow the homicide rate is far less than many nation with often far fewer fire arms. Why can'y you admit that?

LINK BASED ON U.N. Crime Data

LINK Based on Per Capita gun ownership

America has over 300 MILLION firearms today.

You offer nothing but empty babble as you don't have any decent counterpoint to offer.

 

And the "Wild West" wasn't the gun-control free utopia you fantasize about.

"The irony ... is that Tombstone lawmakers in the 1880s did more to combat gun violence than the Arizona government does today.
For all the talk of the 'Wild West,' the policymakers of 1880 Tombstone—and many other Western towns—were ardent supporters of gun control."
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/...gun-laws-were-actually-stricter-then-than-now

 

I asked you a question you can't answer. You are in favor of gun free zones. Lol

 

Name a first world country on the list. Honduras? This is priceless. Lol

 

Gee....I wonder why there are a lot of homicides in Yemen. Lol

 

And here are some more cherry picked facts taken out of context: there are zero guns and zero homicides on the moon. There are also zero guns and zero homicides on other planets in the solar system. The planet with the most guns, Earth, has the most homicides.

 

At least you mentioned something, but still no scholarly effort showed up. The main success of the Brady Bill reduced suicide rates and to show that states Background law was already effective in 18 states,which became a control group to assess the effectiveness of the Brady Bill on the other 32 states.

Here is a study showing that outside of Suicide rates,the Law didn't do that much:

From University School of Law,

Study Shows Brady Bill Had No Impact on Gun Homicides

"The Brady Bill, the most important piece of federal gun control legislation in recent decades, has had no statistically discernable effect on reducing gun deaths, according to a study by Philip J. Cook, a Duke University professor of public policy, economics and sociology. "The Brady Bill seems to have been a failure," Cook told a sparsely attended lecture in Caplin Pavilion on March 11."

LINK here

========================
This one from Duke University:

Selected Excerpts:

"If these handgun denials were successful in preventing violence-prone people from arming themselves, we would expect to see a larger reduction in gun crimes committed in the 32 Brady states compared with the non-Brady states. Disappointingly, our study did not find significant trend differences between the Brady and non-Brady states in the most reliably measured gun crime - homicide. Thus the direct effect on gun crime that advocates expected from denying disqualified adults in the Brady states does not reveal itself in our data."

and,

"While it is possible that the Brady Act has thus contributed to the nationwide reduction in gun violence, the evidence is sketchy at best. The fact is that homicide rates already started to decline in 1991, before the Brady Act became law. Various reasons have been offered for this decline ‚ more cops, more prisons, a better economy and an easing of the crack epidemic are all plausible explanations. Since non-gun homicides decreased by about the same proportion as gun homicides during the 1990s, the same factors that led to fewer murders without guns are presumably responsible for much of the reduction in gun murders as well. In any event, the percentage of homicides with guns was 65 percent in 1991 and a virtually identical 66 percent in 1997."

LINK to this

===============================

Meanwhile the Brady bill background check stops about 1% of the applicants,which mean very little impact to preventing homicides:

Selected Excerpts:

"With such a broad range of people prohibited from purchasing or possessing firearms, it’s no wonder we still get people applying to purchase a gun who don’t realize they’re prohibited. These people account for about 1 percent of all background checks submitted. They are not dangerous, but they are legally prohibited from purchasing firearms, and their attempts at doing so are effectively blocked by the Brady Law. About 25 percent of those blocked file appeals challenging their denial, and about 5 percent win. The other 20 percent, who obviously strongly believed that they were not legally prohibited, lose their appeal and the denial is sustained."

and,

"To put things in perspective, in 2010, the last year for which we have good numbers, over 6 million applications were filed with NICS. Of those, 72,659 were denied. That seems like a lot, but here are the really significant numbers: Of the 72,659 prohibited persons who illegally attempted to purchase a firearm from a licensed dealer, only 62 were considered worthy of prosecution, and of those only 13 were found guilty.

That means that each year, you and I pay hundreds of millions of dollars to investigate millions of lawful firearm purchases, only to prevent a few thousand sales to people federal officers and prosecutors don’t consider dangerous, and ultimately fine or incarcerate a dozen or so criminals.

That doesn’t seem like a very efficient use of resources, does it? And the Department of Justice has requested an additional $100 million for NICS in 2014 and an additional $50 million to help states improve their reporting to NICS."

LINK for the rest

The Brady Bill took effect in 1994, the homicide rate had already been dropping for 3 years. There other causes that deserve attention, such as: More Cops, More Prisons, Better Economy........

Personally I have no problem with Background Checks being done,but most criminals don't care about that,they find a way around that to do their ugly deed.

 

Distressingly poor analogy, as there are NO people on those other celestial bodies. No rational comparison/Explanation can be made at all.

Your Cheery picking arguments expose your shallow position on this important topic,devoid of cogent arguments. I post using facts, you reply with short retorts devoid of facts. It is a one sided debate here, when one side (You) don't try to make an honest debate on the topic.

 

It's all they got ZERO REBUTTAL!

 

Why don't you try explaining it,instead of this........?

 

Happy to. Compare us to any first world nation that has the rule of law and you will see our gun laws fail miserably. Compare us to nations ruled by corruption and absence of rule of law and you are making a false comparasion

 

Of those 29 alleged mass murders carried out by concealed carry permit holders, precisely six mass murders (using the accepted FBI definition of a mass murder, which is four or more victims) were carried out by concealed carry permit holders using concealed handguns.

Seven of the claimed “29 mass shootings” were not mass shootings.

https://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2015/...aims-29-mass-murders-concealed-carriers-lied/

 

I did by pointing out that your airplane was a Red Herring. The Humorous Video made the obvious point that Gun Free Zones,don't stop criminals from shooting in Gun Free Zones, as amply shown here:



Over 98% of mass shootings occurred on gun-free zones, research shows

Selected Excerpt:

"According to the Crime Prevention Research Center, from the 1950’s through July 10th of 2016, 98.4 percent of mass shootings have occurred on gun-free zones, with just 1.6 percent occurring where citizens are allowed to have firearms with them.

The research was actually updated from a previous figure in response to an article written by the gun-control advocacy group Everytown.org, which attempted to dismiss the CPRC’s research, saying “the gun lobby’s claims that so-called “gun-free zones” endanger Americans are inconsistent with evidence.” The CPRC says that Everytown.org used both incomplete information, and used criteria that falls outside of what the FBI considers as qualifications for mass shootings."

LINK for the rest

 

You are making the point that airplanes should not be gun free zones. Just be an adult and say that then

 

You post yet ANOTHER unsupported opinion.

 

It is easy to prove me wrong. List the first world countries with gun control that have more homicides than us per capita. Easy peazy......right?

 

STRAWMAN attempt, since I never said anything about airlines should not be a gun free zone.

You write,

"Should you be able to bring your AR15 on a plane? Lol"

My reply was pointing out the absurdity that posting Gun Free Zone signs, would convince criminals to stay away. The Video used absurd humor, in making the point,that amazingly ZOOOMS right over your head.

Why are you having so much difficulty understanding the obvious?

 

Look you are against gun free zones. I give you an example of one and you are unable to say you are against it. Pick a side. Lol

 

I made a case based on U. N. INTERNATIONAL Crime stats, that you have yet factually rebutted. The ONUS is on YOU, to make a counterpoint, since you make clear you do not agree with me.

Where is it?

 

If I give you a list of first world countries with less gun deaths per capita than us will you admit you are wrong?

 

Ha ha,

I am talking about the absurdity that Gun Free Signs, convinces criminals from shooting in them. That is the POINT of the Video! You must be humor free, to fail to get the point of the video.

You keep pushing the Red Herring fallacy over and over,since your Airplane Gun Free Zone question replies, doesn't even address the point of the Video. They don't stop criminals..........

You finally get it?

 

Yawn..... Zzzz.....

 

Good to know you are in favor of gun free zones. Welcome aboard