How rational countries deal with gun violence.

Do you know that no reputable statistician would say that broad statistics like gun ownership apply equally to all gun owners? Do you know who accounts for about half of the gun deaths, but who only account for about one seventh of the US population?

 

Your first statement is wrong. The hypothesis tested is "are you at greater risk of death with a gun in the house". This is not a broad statistic

And your second statement about the one seventh is irrelevant. You ignore the fact that that one of those in that one seventh (or whole) of the population could enter your home and see that you are armed and kill you because you being armed is a threat to his attempted burglary and this is the subject of the hypothesis being tested. Also accidental shooting which is again the subject of the hypothesis being tested is not race specific. The statistics show that having a gun in your house increasing the chance of the gun owner or family members being harmed either by the owner's gun or by an intruder

 

There's nothing rational about what they're doing, and now they look like complete idiots to the entire world.

https://kiwifarms.net/threads/2019-...uding-ip-addresses-email-addresses-etc.54376/

Not only are they trying to grab guns, but they're trying to grab the internet. Fortunately, they ran into a real American who told them exactly what they need to hear.

 

You can't possibly know whether that is true. The "average" citizen does not even come close to fitting our profile. We live in the country. Law enforcement is a minimum of fifteen minutes away. We have no neighbors who can see my house. The nearest neighbor is about a half mile away. If anybody is going to protect us against a home intruder, it is us. I am not about to make it a fair fight.

Not at all. They badly skew the statistics away from me.

 

New Zealand just banned military-style firearms. Here’s why the U.S. can’t.

“In New Zealand, the gun lobby dictates policy to the government,” Philip Alpers, founding director of gun legislation research tool GunPolicy.org, told Australia’s ABC last week. “They are listened to far too acutely by the government, and they have managed to water down every single attempt at improving the gun laws. The gun lobby is directly responsible for having defeated the amendments that could have prevented this crime.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...gun-laws-face-tragedy/?utm_term=.5bf9483c0046

 

That assumes they would not have done the same thing with other semiautomatic weapons.

 

First of all, my name ain't "dude". Mr. Dude would be appreciated. Secondly, your record would not make you exempt from a gun-banning law. Such a law would not consider you a safe & shining example for the population to admire. It is well-documented and accepted that alcohol impairs one's judgment.

 

Havent drank in over 2 years. But even if I had: a rights a right and no one asked for your input.

Furthermore, I invite anyone holding the belief that their input is required to perform anatomically improbable sex acts with common farm chattels.

 

My membership to this forum requires my input. It is illegal to handle a firearm while drunk or otherwise impaired.

We are talking about guns, not your wet-dream fantasies of bestiality.

 

Patently absurd. Ask any criminal on the planet whom he would rather commit a crime against, someone with a gun or someone without a gun. The answer will UNIVERSALLY be the latter.

 

Ask any victim whether they would rather be robbed or get shot and then robbed; victim being armed significantly increases the probability of being shot by an intruder

 

I refer you to Mr. Truth and Master Justice:

Absolutely correct. It boils down to the old quote, "Give me your money or your life ..... and your money".

 

So tell me. Why does the town where EVERYONE is required to own a firearm experience DRASTICALLY less crime on EVERY measure than the national average?

According to you guys it should be the Wild West over there.

 

I bet if you asked that victim whether they would have rather had been armed when they were robbed and the VAST majority of them would say yes. Unequivocally.

That number would be exponentially higher from people who had experienced violent crime.

 

I don't know where this town you speak of is located but it sure ain't Texas where prit'near everyone does own a firearm and where shootings are the highest in the whole USA. Maybe you would care to name this mandatory gun-slinging town? It would make the discussion much more intelligent than just poking holes in the air with your finger.

 

Speaking of facts.

Do we really have a gun and violence problem? As I pointed out in another thread, if we remove blacks from the gun violence statistics, our gun violence is comparable to every other first world nation and better in many cases.

So do we need laws restricting guns? Or laws restricting guns for blacks?

 

If we remove poor people the stats look even better

 

Sure cowboy.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ao...merican-cities-that-require-you-to-own-a-gun/

5 towns. All of which have comparably less crime.

Yeehaw

 

You can’t remove “poor” people. That’s a comparative term. In other words when you remove all the poor you simply change the “poor” to the next income level. So your middle class then become poor.

 

Right. So if you have laws restricting poor people the problem is solved.....right?

 

That is hilarious

 

Why would you need to do that when you can solve the problem simply by focusing on one group of poor?

It’s not all poor who are disproportionately affecting the statistics. It’s one group.

 

No, I think you will find that if you ask those victims they will say that they do not wish to be armed. But I'll betcha' they wish they had higher fences, lived in some other neighbourhood, or lived in some other country. Go ahead ... ask them.

I am a war Vet. According to your theory, I should be armed to the teeth but I stay as far away from firearms as possible.

 

Well no we are all individuals. But I’m fairly confident in saying that the huge majority of veterans don’t hold your position. Because they understand the only way to stop a determined bad guy with a gun is a determined good guy with a gun.

And fences? Seriously? Barriers are only effective when there is someone on the other side defending it.

 

Why focus on blacks when it is not all blacks? The poor commit the most crime.