she couldn't care less about your Rights, or mine either. She is only concerned with her self-centered beliefs. As far as the US spreading stuff across the internet, I wonder if she thinks only the anti-gunners should have the1st A Right. So see, she doesn't even give a rats ass about you because you are spewing filth and degenerate lies. I'll stand with you instead of her. I could not trust her in a fight
Those who know nothing of inalienable and inherent rights that have been endowed to us Americans by our Creator (read: not by government or individual decree), would do well not to waste their time and ours posting ridiculous threads on the subject. In short, no matter what rhetoric, lies and misguided/falsified data and statistics one adheres to and presents, it doesn't make a tinker's damn because our Bill of Rights guarantees our right to bear arms; and no one man, entity or government is ever going to take that inherent right from us. Not without a fight. The Bill of Rights has endured for over two centuries despite the socialists/collectivists twisted interpretations of it and hatred of it. I see no reason why it won't last several more centuries; and outlast just as many or more dissenters and haters, too.
I can hear it coming already: it's because those other countries don't have nigras and mexicans and assorted other criminal elements.
UNODC released a report on it. In the Annex of the report, they have a chart showing that illegal drugs are twice as great in the US as it is in other nations. http://americangunfacts.com/
Great, can you provide a link? Ok, that's a pretty funny propoganda page based on the "work" of Kleck and Gertz back in 1995. Of course, their study has been debunked many times over... http://www.gunsandcrime.org/dgufreq.html http://home.uchicago.edu/~ludwigj/papers/JPAM_Cook_Ludwig_Hemenway_2007.pdf http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/bad-science-3/
Really? Please illustrate what in our modern background check system prevents a person without a record from purchasing a firearm and reselling it to someone who would not pass a background check. 1) Only while the home owners are home, otherwise unsecured firearms would make a tempting target. 2) ...and how do you think those guns get "on the street" to start with? http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/gun-threats-and-self-defense-gun-use-2/ "Criminal court judges who read the self-reported accounts of the purported self-defense gun use rated a majority as being illegal, even assuming that the respondent had a permit to own and to carry a gun, and that the respondent had described the event honestly from his own perspective." "...firearms are used far more often to frighten and intimidate than they are used in self-defense." http://archive.is/K985B "...we find that criminal gun use is far more common than self-defense gun use. This result is consistent with findings from other private surveys and the National Crime Victimization Surveys. In this survey, all reported cases of criminal gun use and many cases of self-defense gun use appear to be socially undesirable. There are many instances of gun use, often for intimidation, that are not reported to the police and may not appear in official crime statistics." http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9715182 "For every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides." "Guns kept in homes are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal accidental shooting, criminal assault, or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense."Seems like, on average, having a gun around family members is 4 times more likely to result in an accidental shooting (generally of a friend or one of those family members) than defense against a potential threat... Great, so why not implement standards (training and safe storage) to ensure people are responsible?
This does NOT address the OP - merely regurgitates tired old cliches which have no real meaning I am pretty sure the "creator" did not mean for there to be so many gun deaths in the USA
So, if your rights come from God - and God created everyone - doesn't that mean everyone in the world has the same rights? Wait a minute... I thought your rights came from God, not from the first part of the Constitution. All sounds like empty rhetoric to me.
so, if you own a gun you automatically are a racist....simple minded approach, real simple-minded. You won't be able to shame us with false accusations. Leave that crap at home.
Well then, I'll leave it up to you to explain why we had 12,000 gun deaths last year and Canada had 72. Proceed.
Because our inner cities are filled with gang bangers and desperate crack head criminals. Take the time to analyze the stats. You will see where the bulk of the gun crime statistics comes from. The truth is the truth.
Isn't that what I said? Like clockwork. We have 12,000 gun deaths per year because of the nigras and messicans. We can blame the rest on loony whites aged 19 to 25.
Britain has a ban on all guns. Also these countries do not have a constitution protecting the right to bear arms. What makes America more dangerous as a whole is society and how it has become accepted in a lot of communities to resort to violence. If it wasn't accepted the neighborhoods would crack down on it. Doing nothing is the same as acceptance
Explain to me why when the District of Columbia banned guns, the crime rate skyrocketed why the rest of the nations crime rate went down. Explain to my why the city with the strictest gun control in the nation, has a higher fatality rate than Afghanistan! You are honestly stating that guns have an aura around them that causes people to commit suicide? Most guns acquired by criminals come from across the Mexican border, or are stolen. Crime has gone down in this country while the rest of the worlds crime has escalated. I hear stories every day of somebody using their gun for self defense. Intimidation or simply showing the gun is considered a self defense method! Most guns are secured by their owners and regulation of training and storage is ridiculous! I would much rather live here with my gun and be safe, than to be in New York or Chicago without one! Guns have made my community safer and many safer. Cities who go so far as mandate gun ownership have seen crime drop well below the state and national average. The Problem in society today is lack of responsibility, too many drugs, the collapse of the family structure, and the presence of poverty! Guns are an object and nothing more. a gun increases the rate of an accidental shooting just like owning a car increases the rate of having a car accident! That is completely ridiculous.
http://www.unodc.org/unodc/secured/wdr/wdr2013/World_Drug_Report_2013.pdf Just like the 40% non background check has also been debunked numerous times. The Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council released the results of their research through the CDC last month. Researchers compiled data from previous studies in order to guide future research on gun violence, noting that almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year. Most felons report obtaining the majority of their firearms from informal sources, adds the report, while stolen guns account for only a small percentage of guns used by convicted criminals. http://cnsnews.com/news/article/cdc-study-use-firearms-self-defense-important-crime-deterrent Would you like some "Propaganda" from the CDC?
You raised a lot of points here (bordering on Gish Gallop). I'll attempt to address them all: A) comparing crime in a single city with no border protection or customs enforcement (so contraband can be freely carried in and out of the area) to a country that does have those measures (so it is only a small % of the population who will successfully move contraband in and out of the area) is a strawman. B) A person committing suicide is generally highly emotional and irrational. Most people don't stay highly emotional and irrational indefinately, they calm down after after a bit of time. A quick and easy way to commit suicide (or homocide for that matter) is the last thing you need around a person while they are in that state of mind. I'm not saying that there would be no suicide without firearms, that would be a stupid assertion. I am saying that there would be fewer because people who have to take the time to tie a noose, slowly bleed to death, wait for pills to take effect, suffocate themselves, etc have an increased opportunity to come to their senses. C) I'd like to see some evidence for your claim that "Most guns acquired by criminals come from across the Mexican border, or are stolen." If anything, everything I've read about guns going across the Mexican border says they tend to be travelling south... D) What kind of crime is escalating in "the rest of the world"? I'd be interested in seeing your source on that. E) With the exception of premeditated murder, most criminals also use a gun primarily to intimidate. F) Why would it be ridiculous to mandate safe storage and training? If most lawful gun owners are already doing these things, it would have no effect on them. G) Since you want to compare gun ownership to car ownership, how about having similar licensing and training requirements?
Looking at page 20, it seems injecting drugs is less common in North America as it is in Europe, and half as common as in central Asia and Transcaucasia... Other than that, I don't see a whole lot of difference between the US and the rest of the world in this report. I must admit, I didn't realize how prevelant pot smokers were elsewhere in the world. That seems to be saying that the NRC didn't actually conduct any new research, they just compiled research from previous studies... I wonder, given the historical political pressure from the NRA, which studies were allowed to continue... http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/26/us/26guns.html?_r=0 Great! Now let's define "informal sources"... Since the guns aren't stolen, are they purchased and then sold to criminals (staw purchase)? If so, what measures would stop that from happening?
1.) Comparing a location with a high level of crime rate, well funded city police, and high gun control measures is a legitimate argument considering that these cities are the ones who have given the US the high crime rate in the first place. 2.) It takes time to load a gun too. Again, it is the responsibility of the family to keep these things out of reach. Background checks also cover mental history. I have friends who have thought taking their life who do own guns, none have taken their own life or harmed those around them. 3.) "Fast and Furious" was a bad gun running operation done by the US government to track the guns going to the black market, where criminals and cartels exchange drugs, money, and guns. It was botched and Brian Terry was killed, no one was charged.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...oney-buy-guns-sold-Mexican-drugs-cartels.html 4.) I assume you did not hear about the gang drive-by that killed 13 people in Chicago at a basketball court right? or was that intimidation. 5.) It is sometimes not economically possible for some families to afford a safe or training and restricts their right to own a firearm. This, however, is rare. Even so, it should not be mandated. I wish for people to be trained, but it is not always available to people and that would restrict them of their right to own the firearm. 6.) Registration leads to Confiscation. Examples are, New York, Canada, and the Weimar Republic of Germany before the Nazis came to power.
Once again: That comparison for "violent crime" is like comparing APPLES AND ORANGES, as the TYPE of crime falling under "violent crime" differs between countries. Stealing a purse, without the person being hurt or even touched is a "violent crime" in the UK. It is NOT in the US. So, you can't comparer "violent crime" per capita because it would be like measuring your garage with a tape measure in INCHES and comparing it with the garage of your neighbor measured in CENTIMETERS! Here is a good graphic explanation of the US's true love story with guns, and the consequences: http://www.businessinsider.com/americas-gun-problem-explained-2013-4?op=1
Comparing a city to a country is not valid, no matter how you cut it. Why not compare the US to other first-world democracies? You're assuming it's not already loaded? Relevance to the topic? Yeah, the people pulling the triggers didn't plan to drive there and shoot anyone ahead of time... Oh, so firearms should be free? After all, some people can't afford them. None of which had the 2A to prevent the registration from becoming confiscation. Then again, neither does Australia or Switzerland and they haven't had confiscations.
Once again you are totally wrong. As stated in the UK User Guide to Home Office Crime Statistics, things such as stealing a purse are NOT contained in the "violent crime" category for comparible crimes. For comparison purposes, most developed nations including the US, UK, Canada, and Australia, create equivalent crime categories for international comparison.
You are wrong. But it is your right! Why don't we just make it simple for all, and compare APPLES WITH APPLES. . .let's look at FIREARM Crime (death and injuries from firearm) in ANY country . . .ANY other crime (whether or not it is qualified under "violent crime" in any country) would be secondary from death by firearm. . .or, if you prefer, let's compare EVERY type of VIOLENT DEATH, by firearm or ANY other weapon.
No matter how many times you claim crine data cannot be compared, the world still proves you wrong. Everyone from universities to the UN to nations compare crime data every day. Because the results don't agree with your agenda doesn't change the facts. And it is always amusing that people (like you) claim that you cannot compare crime data when the data doesn't go your way, and then want to compare crime data that you think will go your way. Where do you think that firearm data comes from - the tooth fairy? It comesd form the exact same source as all crime data. How about the UNODC data on 170 nations, the US is #1 in firearm ownership but #85 in murder rate. And the data shows a good correlation between firearm ownership and lower murder rates. Oh, I know, that data is no good because you can't compare data between nations when it goes against your anti-gun bias.
