Senators Introduce Bill To Permanently Close Gun Loophole Used By Texas Shooter

There is a certain value of US women murdered by guns. It's 55% of the total number of homicide victims. It's also 11 times the figure of women murdered by guns in some other countries. 11 goes into 55% 5 times. (1 - 55%) times total number of victims is the number of US female homicide victims not murdered by guns. 5 goes into (1 - 0.55) nine times. According to the data that BB provided, that means if we have 11 times the gun homicide victims then our non-gun victims are 9 times the gun victims.

 

Ambiguity on whose part? The military already knows this.

 

Bowerbird did not provide any information about non-gun homicides in other countries.

 

That's what the law is now. What is the ambiguity?

This is simply grandstanding.

 

So people should put their names on something that accomplishes nothing? Perhaps they don't think it necessary to participate in an action that is simply a publicity stunt designed to excite their gullible constituency.

 

Saving lives "accomplishes nothing" according to those who are scared of the NRA?

 

If the law already requires what the new law is stating, how is that saving lives?

 

Why don't you ask the 26 dead people in the Texas church?

 

There is no loophole. The military has been required to report and it screwed up. You think this gesture they have made will eliminate the human error that occurred?

It makes a nice headline, and as you're proving, puts smiles on the target audience, but it does nothing. So, save your "saving lives" meme for some other gullible soul, closing a loophole that doesn't exist doesn't move the needle for me.

 

Why did the Airforce fail to comply for the past decade if this loophole did not exist?

 

Good question. How would doubling down insure they won't ignore their duty again?

 

I didn't compare our non-gun deaths to their non-gun deaths. I compared our non-gun deaths to their gun deaths.

"Since 45% of US adult female homicide victims are killed by means other than guns according to CDC WISQARS data, that means that US women are also about 9 times more likely to be murdered by knives, clubs or hands than women in other countries would be murdered by guns. "

 

That's not really a meaningful comparison. It's like comparing car accident death rates in the US to airplane crash death rates in other countries.

 

"The problem dates back decades. In 1996, the inspector general found that the Army, Navy and Air Force were failing to report the vast majority of convictions to the F.B.I.

Federal agencies, unlike state and local ones, are required by law to report criminal records to the F.B.I. But in 2014, the inspector general found that the Defense Department still was not doing so."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/07/us/texas-shooting-background-checks.html

Failure to comply, not loophole.

 

No, it says that our society is so dangerous to women that even our non-firearm homicides kill at a rate 9 times higher than the gun homicide rates in some western societies.

 

No, it says that gun control laws in other countries are extremely effective at reducing gun violence.

 

The "Gun Show Loophole" comes to mind in which private sales of firearms are outlawed.
I'm not going to sell to some stranger about whom I know nothing because if he shoots up someplace:
1. I'll feel guilty & responsible
2. It is likely to come back & bite me.

 

If only gun violence was the issue, our non-gun homicides should be much, much lower. Instead, they're responsible for 45% of the deaths of adult female homicide victims.

 

No, that's not what it says.

I'm sorry, but all the claims about how "effective" European gun control is are utter nonsense. Once again: these nations ALREADY had low gun violence rates when they enacted gun control. Gun control was enacted in those countries for political reasons; for example, England enacted its first stringent gun control out of fear of a Soviet-style workers' uprising, not to control crime. It was, in short, about CONTROL, not about guns.

At no point did any of the gun controls enacted result in reductions in crime or violence in those nations. Nations with sky-high violence rates that enacted gun control STILL had sky-high violence rates after those laws were enacted.

All gun control would achieve here is leaving people vulnerable to violent crime and stripping them of their right of self-defense.

 

Your straw man is noted.

 

It's my argument - I'm not claiming anyone else is making it.

 

smart people all believe that. Criminals almost never buy guns from people who don't know they are criminals BTW

 

I can't think of anyone I know who might rob a store or shoot up someplace, however, I do know of some people I wouldn't sell or lend a gun to because of their carelessness

 

Sure now, no humor, eh? That and the response was to the idea of passing a new law against something already illegal. That you didn’t get that in it’s context says something of you as well; others got it.

 

https://mises.org/wire/theres-no-such-thing-american-homicide-rate


Interesting data on the homicide rate relevent to the discussion