Any Study Of 'Gun Violence' Should Include How Guns Save Lives

Sure, how you catch a cold has nothing to do with its prevention.
Yours is another statement devoid of facts and awash in wishful thinking. Facts are inconvenient to your narrative, contrary to what serious people believe. You’re not serious.

 

TDS or GOP FOS.

 

The difference is, you know nothing about medicine, chipper.

 

The difference is I wont allow you to deflect from the point, which is about black markets generally black market heroin particularly.
Try harder

 

Not caring where 80% of a black market comes from because it means it’s more a white suburban problem with suppliers from US drug makers and China then Mexico and inner cities is naive.
Btw, it’s laughable what you will or will not allow.
Where’s your badge Mr internet policeman.

 

Black market heroin does not come from pharmacies champ. Keep trying

 

Unbelievable many are so naive. Opiates are human drug company made opioids as is natural made heroine from poppies, they have the same market, they are sold by the same people on the street.

Heroin users also market in illegal scripted drugs. There are fewer straight heroine users and all these drugs are interchangeable in the illegal drug trade where the vast majority use SCRIPTED DRUGS. Illegal drug dealers don’t just sell heroine dah person, they market in all of it with 80% starting from scripted drugs....

To call this a heroine black market problem and limit it to heroin is really uninformed.
No one in the real world does it .

 

Black tar heroin and hydrocodone are not comparable.

And again: it's a point about black markets dear.

 

Point taken. You know less then I thought and are just trolling now.
And the black market deals more in scripted drugs and opiates, from China and drug companies then heroin dear.

 

If gun control really was objectively intended to control violent crime-and actually does achieve that goal, you'd expect that lots of non-gun owning moderates and conservatives would support such laws.

BUT THEY DO NOT-almost every anti gun law that is proposed, is the spawn of the left. EVERY single federal gun control law (and I mean by that-laws that restrict lawful gun owners from doing something) was sponsored and authored by dems and dems provided the majority of the votes in congress for the law. And every one of them-save the Hughes Amendment (which was a poison pill attached to a PRO GUN bill)-was signed into law by a DEMOCRAT

 

So what? Politicians are afraid of the NRA. Why don't you look at public opinion polls instead in order to gauge support for gun control? Even many gun owners support some level of gun control:

 

The difference is, those who are convicted felons and other prohibited individuals, have lost their constitutional rights through due process of law, in line with the protections of the fifth amendment of the united states constitution.

What is being proposed beyond these specific groups of individuals, does not recognize, utilize, or even allow for due process of law.

 

Is anyone going out of their way to feloniously distribute the cold virus?

The facts of the matter is that your position pertaining to prohibited individuals and background checks are devoid of any basis in reality.

To require a prohibited individual to undergo a background check in a private firearms transaction, the law must first recognize that a prohibited individual can legally possess a firearm to begin with. Otherwise the proposal on the part of yourself is nothing more than demanding that criminals first ask permission to commit a crime before actually committing a crime.

 

The supposed "data" being presented is flawed and falsified.

 

That poll is as false as they come and it's two years old.

 

It seems logical. States and countries that have stronger gun laws on average, have less gun violence. Given that the left relies on facts and the right on hyperbole, it seems logical the left would do the correct thing more often then the hysterical right which spends their time whining and complaining like a bunch of tinker bells.

 

Why is the firearm-related homicide rate of the nation of Venezuela so much higher than that of the united states?

 

How about Benghazi.

 

If firearm-related restrictions supposedly work so well at preventing firearm-related homicides and violence, why are there any countries in the world where such is not the case? Why are there any countries with strict firearm-related restrictions, and extremely high levels of firearm-related violence?

 

ignorant opinions mean nothing to me. I bet 90% of the people who support "banning assault weapons" have no clue what that means

 

Like Mexico and South Africa? The left doesn't rely on facts and the gun control movement in the USA is the most dishonest political movement going. It doesn't even admit what its main motivations are

 

"Any Study Of 'Gun Violence' Should Include How Guns Save Lives"

yes it should, 100% agree, police should be required to put all gun deaths in a federal database with the reasons and gun types\accessories so they can be reviewed, good or bad

 

Any gun related death is already recorded. In fact any reported gun related wound is recorded as required by law if medical help is sought. What isn’t recorded are all the far more frequent instances where a gun saves a life or stops a serious crime but isn’t discharged and isn’t reported.

 

then how come the stats are not available, from what I understood there is not a federal database, but many places just put this on paper and file

 

The numbers are tracked by the FBI, available from the DOJ, and NCVS (National Crime Victimization Survey)
They are the sources that allow annual reporting to be done...
https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fv9311.pdf

These were sources used in the 2013 CDC Study on Gun violence, which reported GDU levels always ignored by GCAs.

Again, what is relevant but, but not tracked are instances guns prevent crime but aren’t discharged or reported.