So, Dems, what exactly are you hoping to get out of this in terms of gun control?
« prev   misc   next »

3
4

So, Dems, what exactly are you hoping to get out of this in terms of gun control?

By anonymous following x   2017 Oct 3, 10:52am 3,828 views   175 comments   watch   quote     share    


Realistically. (No loony shit, please.)

And what would you be willing to trade for it?

I have a proposal, but I'll hold on to it for now.

UPDATE: Please refrain from virtue signalling in this thread - we have plenty of that in other threads related to LV shooting already.

« First    « Previous     Comments 63 - 102 of 148     Next »     Last »

63   bob2356   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 4, 5:37pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Quigley says
bob2356 says
From 1993 to 1998 firearms ownership went up 10% and firearms homicides dropped by 50%. Since 1998 firearms ownership has gone up over 50% yet firearms homicides have decreased 5%. Do you have some kind of point because there certainly isn't any correlation to


Sure, I can explain it very neatly. Roe v. Wade in the 70s resulted in mass infanticide of black unborn babies over the concurrent years. The last black generation unaffected by this holocaust matured to young adulthood in the early 90s. After then, a large number of "missing" black youth weren't around to commit a disproportionate number of gun homicides.


If you want to sit at the table with the adults then you have to pay better attention. This has zero to do the the claim that ever increasing numbers of guns results in ever decreasing gun homicides.
64   bob2356   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 4, 5:39pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

me123 says
bob2356 says
Since 1998 firearms ownership has gone up over 50% yet firearms homicides have decreased 5%.


Do you know the difference between up and down(decreased)?


Yep perfectly. I'm not going to try to explain such a simple concept to you though. You have zero math or numbers skills as proven many, many times. .
65   Booger   ignore (0)   2017 Oct 4, 5:49pm   ↑ like (6)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Ban mass shootings!
66   errc   ignore (2)   2017 Oct 4, 6:11pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

As an Independent, I’d like to see the #FakeNews media stop with the propaganda. All they ever show is a seemingly endless stream of stories about gun violence. Why don’t they show equal airtime of all the stories where Great Americans defended themselves with their guns?
67   joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 4, 6:15pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

>errc says
As an Independent, I’d like to see the #FakeNews media stop with the propaganda. All they ever show is a seemingly endless stream of stories about gun violence. Why don’t they show equal airtime of all the stories where Great Americans defended themselves with their guns?


Agreed. When is CNN going to start showing the feel good stories about real Americans shooting bad cops? If that nurse in Utah had only had a gun, the cop wouldn't have dared falsely arrest her.
68   errc   ignore (2)   2017 Oct 4, 7:17pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

joeyjojojunior says
>errc says
As an Independent, I’d like to see the #FakeNews media stop with the propaganda. All they ever show is a seemingly endless stream of stories about gun violence. Why don’t they show equal airtime of all the stories where Great Americans defended themselves with their guns?


Agreed. When is CNN going to start showing the feel good stories about real Americans shooting bad cops? If that nurse in Utah had only had a gun, the cop wouldn't have dared falsely arrest her.


There are no bad cops, you Crumb Bumb Lush Creep!

I’m talking about the millions of Great Americans who have all these guns for protection. We never get to hear all the countless stories of them defending themselves with their guns. What gives? Why only an endless stream of instances of people falling victim to gun crimes?
69   Sniper   ignore (8)   2017 Oct 4, 7:25pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

errc says
We never get to hear all the countless stories of them defending themselves with their guns.


Start here:

https://www.americanrifleman.org/the-armed-citizen
70   Quigley   ignore (0)   2017 Oct 5, 7:07am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

iwog says
Quigley says
Sure, I can explain it very neatly. Roe v. Wade in the 70s resulted in mass infanticide of black unborn babies over the concurrent years. The last black generation unaffected by this holocaust matured to young adulthood in the early 90s. After then, a large number of "missing" black youth weren't around to commit a disproportionate number of gun homicides.


1. You are butchering (and stealing) the example from Freakenomics which is not racist in the least. Poor violent white trash got abortions too.

2. That doesn't address the graph at all. You are offering an alternative explanation for the steep drop in homicides without acknowledging the nearly straight line data of gun acquisition resulting in a slightly climbing murder rate from 2000 to 2006 and a slightly falling rate after that. Since both data sets are per capita, CLEARLY the increase in guns (and btw th...


1. Glad to see you also read books. Then you agree with the authors? This explains the drop-off in violent crime?

2. No one factor can explain the graph. I think the increase in gun sales can be explained by one main factor: Leftist campaigning for enhanced gun control. The more people hear that they maybe can't have something soon, the more people rush out to get it before they can't anymore. Gun shops love it when Leftists go on another legislative push for "gun control." And of course, Obama was the best gun salesman of the millennia.
71   anonymous   ignore (4)   2017 Oct 5, 9:33am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

bob2356 says
From 1993 to 1998 firearms ownership went up 10% and firearms homicides dropped by 50%. Since 1998 firearms ownership has gone up over 50% yet firearms homicides have decreased 5%. Do you have some kind of point because there certainly isn't any correlation to be seen here.


You seem to be having issues with percentages. Also, why did you not post this other chart from that page?

http://www.aei.org/publication/chart-of-the-day-more-guns-less-gun-violence-between-1993-and-2013/
It shows homicide rates went down -49%, not the -5% like you stated.
72   joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 5, 9:37am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

anonymous says
You seem to be having issues with percentages. Also, why did you not post this other chart from that page?


Actually, you seem to be having trouble with dates. 1993 is different than 1998.
73   HEY YOU   ignore (7)   2017 Oct 5, 9:38am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Republicans banning bump stocks.
74   bob2356   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 5, 1:16pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

anonymous says
bob2356 says
From 1993 to 1998 firearms ownership went up 10% and firearms homicides dropped by 50%. Since 1998 firearms ownership has gone up over 50% yet firearms homicides have decreased 5%. Do you have some kind of point because there certainly isn't any correlation to be seen here.


You seem to be having issues with percentages. Also, why did you not post this other chart from that page?

http://www.aei.org/publication/chart-of-the-day-more-guns-less-gun-violence-between-1993-and-2013/
It shows homicide rates went down -49%, not the -5% like you stated.


Ah yes CIC math again. Not only can you not do numbers you can't even do dates. That is the chart I posted and the percentages are clear. There is no correlation between firearms ownership and firearms homicides. The firearms homicide rate has barely moved in 20 years while ownership has skyrocketed. Why doesn't the chart go back another 20 years? Firearm ownership didn't go up much in those 20 years but firearms homicides dropped a lot. It's only if you look at a couple very specific dates and fudge the numbers around that you get the results claimed.

I'm not having any trouble at all with percentages. You are having your usual problem with the concept of changes in the rate of change.

Very odd. The AEI chart doesn't jive at all with the Bureau of ATF manufacturing chart. Anyone want to defend where AEI gets their numbers from? The numbers don't even match the source (congressional research service) they claim as their basis. Having 357 million guns for 315 million people isn't 1.45 guns per person it's 1.1. CIC works for AEI now I guess. Something is very fishy with this chart..



75   bob2356   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 5, 3:04pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

me123 says
The bottom line, bobby, is that your whole narrative of "more guns = more homicides" is just crap. Your own charts prove it. Unfortunately, you want to play semantics with percentages, but sadly, it doesn't change the big false narrative.


Where did I say that? Making shit up as usual. The only false narrative is your favorite chart that claims increased gun ownership correlates to reduced gun homicides. The percentages don't work, not that you have a clue what percentages are. What semantics? Gun homicides have gone down 5.5% in 20 years while ownership has gone up 40%. Right from the chart you posted. It's only if you start with a statistical aberration in the early 90's that the claim of correlation can be made.

You have me confused with someone else. I'm not in favor of gun control. Never said a word in favor of gun control. If people want to spend their money on guns then more power to them, provided they are reasonably sane. I used to own and shoot but don't have time or interest any more. The only control I would like is for everyone to have a back round check for all sales, especially private sales, and all sales to be recorded in a federal data base. If the track disappears with you and the gun is used for a crime then you go to jail.

What I'm in favor of is keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. The people pipe lining guns to criminals should be in jail. Period. Any reason you and the NRA are so opposed to doing that? Feeling guilty about something maybe? Who have you sold guns to?
76   Sniper   ignore (8)   2017 Oct 5, 3:33pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

bob2356 says
What I'm in favor of is keeping guns out of the hands of criminals.


How many of the criminals in Chicago are buying their guns legally with background checks?

bob2356 says
The people pipe lining guns to criminals should be in jail.


Is this really a problem, what "percentage" of criminals buy their guns this way?
80   TwoScoopsMcGee   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 6, 6:57pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

bob2356 says
From 1993 to 1998 firearms ownership went up 10% and firearms homicides dropped by 50%. Since 1998 firearms ownership has gone up over 50% yet firearms homicides have decreased 5%. Do you have some kind of point because there certainly isn't any correlation to be seen here.



Uh, I was going to respond
me123 says
The bottom line, bobby, is that your whole narrative of "more guns = more homicides" is just crap. Your own charts prove it. Unfortunately, you want to play semantics with percentages, but sadly, it doesn't change the big false narrative.


But it was already done.

At the very, very least, it suggests More Guns != More Homicide.

There are countries with far fewer firearms in private hands per capita that have a far higher homicide rate than the USA.
81   anonymous   ignore (4)   2017 Oct 6, 7:49pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

That’s funny
Booger says
82   TwoScoopsMcGee   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 6, 8:29pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      



US Population 1993: 260M
US Population 2015: 320M


Per capita, the civilian gun stock has roughly doubled since 1968, from one gun per every two persons to one gun per person.
:
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32842.pdf Page 14.

So: ~ 25-30% Larger Population, more Guns per capita, yet the Homicide Rate - AND the Firearm Homicide Rate - got cut just about in half.
84   bob2356   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 7, 6:39am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

me123 says
TwoScoopsMcGee says
So: ~ 25-30% Larger Population, more Guns per capita, yet the Homicide Rate - AND the Firearm Homicide Rate - got cut just about in half.


Ya know, you're really going to make bobby and dan cry (or go all out on personal attack and call you a liar).


God I love right wingnut math. Looks like thunderlips has been taking math lessons from cic. Perfect.

The population size is irrelevant to the per capita rate dumbasses.

Why doesn't this table match up to CICs chart? The numbers are different even though it's supposed to be from the same source. OMG if we start at 1998 The murder rate only drops 20%. Start in 1999 and it only drops 5%.

Why was the magic year 1993 chosen by the wingnut/gun nut crowd I wonder? Let's look at a little bigger time frame say 1960 on.



http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

Well look at that. The murder rate tripled while the number of guns was going up up up 1960 to 1993. But but but how can that be? The murder rate only goes down when the number of guns goes up. I will be waiting for an explanation from our 2 resident math geniuses on this. Not that anyone will ever see it.

Oh my more fun facts. At this point 3% of the people own over 50% of the guns. https://qz.com/1095899/gun-ownership-in-america-in-three-charts/ The number of households with guns has been dropping steadily since the magic 1993 date. But but but I was told murders went down because lots of people were buying guns to protect themselves. Bullshit. The big spike in gun ownership rate is actually a small number of people buying lots and lots of guns. Again an explanation from the calculus twins would be nice, but not going to happen.



The gun industry rakes in billions while saps like cic and thunderlips defend and promote them for free. If you look around the poker table and can't find the sucker it's you.
85   TwoScoopsMcGee   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 7, 10:37am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

bob2356 says
The population size is irrelevant to the per capita rate dumbasses.


hahahahahah.

Not only did the population increase, the guns per capita in private hands increased as well.

The Gun Ownership by household contradicts manufacturer reported arms sales. However, there are more divorced female households today than before, that generally don't have firearms like married people that used to be far more common.

bob2356 says
Well look at that. The murder rate tripled while the number of guns was going up up up 1960 to 1993. But but but how can that be? The murder rate only goes down when the number of guns goes up. I will be waiting for an explanation from our 2 resident math geniuses on this. Not that anyone will ever see it.

God Bob, you're a math denialist.

Gun Ownership began exploding in the 80s in reaction the Baby-Boomer crime wave. Since the early 90s, the homicide rate has been tanking while the number of civilian firearms sold continues to grow.

Starting in the 90s, concealed firearms laws expanded, by the end of the 90s, the Assault Weapons Ban expired and was not renewed. In the late 2000s gun sales hit all-time records, there was even a .22LR shortage not long ago.

There's absolutely no doubt that the US has the most civilian firearms in the World, and that guns per capita has expanded over the past 40 years, and much of it over the past 25 years as gun laws become more permissive and SCOTUS trims excessive anti-2A laws, like in DC. And yet, our homicide is half of what it was 25 years ago.

We're #1 in the world by far for firearms ownership but nowhere near #1 in homicide.
86   TwoScoopsMcGee   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 7, 10:40am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

bob2356 says
Why was the magic year 1993 chosen by the wingnut/gun nut crowd I wonder? Let's look at a little bigger time frame say 1960 on.


Why isn't the magic years of the 2000s chosen by gun control advocates? Is it because guns became even more plentiful, Concealed Carry laws even more permissive and widespread, yet homicides collapsed?
87   bob2356   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 7, 11:26am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

TwoScoopsMcGee says
bob2356 says
The population size is irrelevant to the per capita rate dumbasses.


hahahahahah.

Not only did the population increase, the guns per capita in private hands increased as well.

The Gun Ownership by household contradicts manufacturer reported arms sales. However, there are more divorced female households today than before, that generally don't have firearms like married people that used to be far more common.


Like I said the population increase is irrelevant to the per capita number. It's not a hard concept to grasp. Get another math lesson from CIC and I'm sure you will have it. Math concept that is beyond you number 2 is that the number of households can decrease while the guns per capita increases. It means fewer people are buying guns but buying more of them. This stuff really isn't hard. What is it about rate changes that is simply impossible for you and CIC to grasp.
88   bob2356   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 7, 11:33am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

TwoScoopsMcGee says
Gun Ownership began exploding in the 80s in reaction the Baby-Boomer crime wave. Since the early 90s, the homicide rate has been tanking while the number of civilian firearms sold continues to grow.

Starting in the 90s, concealed firearms laws expanded, by the end of the 90s, the Assault Weapons Ban expired and was not renewed. In the late 2000s gun sales hit all-time records, there was even a .22LR shortage not long ago.

There's absolutely no doubt that the US has the most civilian firearms in the World, and that guns per capita has expanded over the past 40 years, and much of it over the past 25 years as gun laws become more permissive and SCOTUS trims excessive anti-2A laws, like in DC. And yet, our homicide is half of what it was 25 years ago.

We're #1 in the world by far for firearms ownership but nowhere near #1 in homicide.


Show me where gun ownership exploded in the 80's. It's not in any of the charts anyone has posted. The charts show a nice steady climb. Lie number 1.
Show me where the assault ban made any difference in gun ownership rates. Lie number 2.

Let's summarize here. Guns sales and ownership rates have climbed steadily since the 40's. From the 60's to 1993 murder rates tripled. From 1993 to 2015 murder rates dropped by 50%. In your pink sky world that represent a correlation between gun ownership rates and murder rates. HaHaHaHaHa.
89   bob2356   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 7, 11:43am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

TwoScoopsMcGee says
bob2356 says
Why was the magic year 1993 chosen by the wingnut/gun nut crowd I wonder? Let's look at a little bigger time frame say 1960 on.


Why isn't the magic years of the 2000s chosen by gun control advocates? Is it because guns became even more plentiful, Concealed Carry laws even more permissive and widespread, yet homicides collapsed?


Murder rates went for 3.6 to 3.4 in the 2000's. A 5% decrease. This is your idea of collapsed? HaHaHaHa times 2. Go ahead, provide any evidence of any kind correlating concealed carry permits with the homicide rates. Grasping for anything at this point aren't you?

I don't favor gun control. Find anywhere I've posted in favor of gun control I just don't favor bullshit in defence of gun ownership. The only gun control I want is tracking of exactly were guns go from legal owner to a criminal. Then put the person who sold a gun to a criminal in jail. Why would any responsible gun owner (like CIC alleges he is) be opposed to that.? Any reason at that you can think of? Why would you oppose it?

Don't even bother to post the tired bullshit that criminals steal guns. It would just prove once again you have no credibility of any kind.
90   TwoScoopsMcGee   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 7, 1:01pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

BOOM.

.

That's growth. Here's the estimated number:


Tracking sales using Federal Background Checks:


How's that Homicide Rate doin' in comparison? In must be exploding with all these arms sales.


What would really be beneficial is if we could fix 60% of Homicides that are caused by 13% of the population, by getting that 13% closer to the homicide rate of the other 87%

Here's Gallup's Poll of Households... in contrast to the other one favored by the anti-2A Fake News:


No big moves here.

How is the Authoritarian Left doing convincing people guns are the problem?
91   Sniper   ignore (8)   2017 Oct 7, 1:18pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

TwoScoopsMcGee says
The Gun Ownership by household contradicts manufacturer reported arms sales.


Exactly, bobby thinks his chart of ownership is accurate, like people tell Gallup when they call how many guns they own.
92   TwoScoopsMcGee   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 7, 1:20pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Notice no Leftie has dared offer an opinion on HOW to effectively ban firearms, because they know short of warantless house-to-house searches, they really don't have any feasible solution.

And those most likely to voluntarily cooperate are also the least likely to have committed violent crime with those arms.

Don't expect the Jamals, Leroys, and Shaquans who commit 57% of the homicides in the US, to be lining up at 6AM the freezing Chicago morning of January 2nd of the year the law is effective to turn in their mostly stolen or black market .25 Autos and .38 Snub-Noses at the local Chicago PD Station.
93   Sniper   ignore (8)   2017 Oct 7, 1:30pm   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

TwoScoopsMcGee says
BOOM


Very nice job with those charts and data. Sadly bobby still won't understand.
94   bob2356   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 7, 2:07pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

TwoScoopsMcGee says

How's that Homicide Rate doin' in comparison? In must be exploding with all these arms sales.


You are correct. Homicide rate exploded with all the arms sales 1970 to 1993. Gun sales go up, murders go up. Then gun sales go up, murders go down. Thunderlips says this is correlation. gallup poll more accurate? (the same gallup poll you called fake news so often, that gallup poll? but wait CIC says people lie to gallup. you guys really need to get the same page). Weasel much? What happened to you calling a 5% drop in murder rate a collapse? Crickets chirping on that one. Yearly growth? The yearly growth didn't pick up until 2010 which is 10 years after the murder rate dropped. Estimated by NCIS checks? Doesn't go up until 2008, 8 years after the murder rate drops. This is correlation somehow? You guys really are a joke

me123 says
please post the chart that shows how many legal gun owners are selling their guns to criminals.


Been posted time and time again. Been proven time and time again. You have forgotten time and time again. You will certainly be waiting a very long time if you can't remember anything. Sorry but there is nothing I can do about your Alzheimers getting worse and worse. The phrase you really need to know at this point is geriatric specialist.
96   bob2356   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 8, 4:30am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

me123 says
bob2356 says
You are correct. Homicide rate exploded with all the arms sales 1970 to 1993. Gun sales go up, murders go up. Then gun sales go up, murders go down.


Oh bobby, so sad. Here's a hint, gun sales go up EVERY year and that adds to the cumulative total owned, which means more total available, and many of the past years have seen record additional sales annually. THE number of actual people killed annually has gone DOWN. What don't you understand about that data?
f

So sad. The number of actual people killed annually actually went UP for 25 years while gun sales went up EVERY year before the number of people killed annually started going down. What don't you understand about that data? Are the gun/god nuts now claiming the guns and gun murders didn't exist before 1993?

me123 says
but prove me wrong by reposting it.


Why bother you won't remember it tomorrow or even a couple hours from now.
97   FortWayne   ignore (0)   2017 Oct 8, 10:53am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

murder is illegal
mass shootings are illegal
machine guns are illegal

What else should we make illegal that will cause criminals to suddenly care about laws? That's a thing about the left, they mastered the skill of ignoring reality long ago. Only know how to pound their chests and make demands, but can never get anything figured out or done.
98   TwoScoopsMcGee   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 8, 1:55pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

bob2356 says

You are correct. Homicide rate exploded with all the arms sales 1970 to 1993

You have a chart for that? I don't. Only since 1986. Gun sale growth went up in the last few years of the homicide rate increase; the homicide rate nationally began increasing in the late 1960s.

The more Guns = more homicides is completely wrong for this century, especially.

What else happened in the 60s that might have led to more homicide?
99   TwoScoopsMcGee   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 8, 2:14pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Still no specifics from the Anti-2A crowd on how they would restrict firearms effectively.
100   iwog   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 8, 2:56pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

TwoScoopsMcGee says
Notice no Leftie has dared offer an opinion on HOW to effectively ban firearms


I'll ask the same question and once again burn down your stupid straw man.

Who is advocating banning firearms here? Do you have any fucking idea how stupid it is going after people who own firearms and falsely attributing to them a desire to ban guns??
101   bob2356   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 8, 3:06pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

TwoScoopsMcGee says
You have a chart for that? I don't. Only since 1986. Gun sale growth went up in the last few years of the homicide rate increase; the homicide rate nationally began increasing in the late 1960s.


You posted the chart of murders from 1960 on for christ sakes. Don't you know what you've posted? I posted the data also but in a list. Here is is again. http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm . Murders tripled 1960 to 1993. Go look.Or look at your own frigging chart. The chart of the number of guns in the us since 1942 is already posted also. The number of guns went up up up during the period as did murders. Which makes you and dimbulbs claim that an increasing number guns drives down the murders total bullshit.

There was a small blip in 92/93 of less than 2 million new guns a year above the previous years added to the 250 million guns already in circulation at the time. Are you seriously suggesting that additional gun sales of 0.8% a year for a couple years drove the murder rate down? You want to ride that horse? Really? I know you guys absolutely suck at math but that's beyond absurd. Besides the murder rate was already decreasing by then. Gun sales actually started spiking in 2009-2010, 10 years after the murder rate flat lined. This is all from your own charts, don't you look at them?

Give it up, there is no way to support this turkey.
102   TwoScoopsMcGee   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 8, 3:13pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

bob2356 says

Give it up, there is no way to support this turkey.


Yep, Gun ownership is wayyyy up, compounded year after year. Yet the homicide rate dropped in half as states expanded Concealed Carry, Shall Issue, and the Assault Ban expired. In 2008 firearms sales exploded, yet the homicide rate continued to decline.

What's really remarkable is that the US has the most civilian firearms ownership in the world by far, and the homicide rate does not reflect that.

There is NO link between the increasing prevalence of firearms and the decreasing homicide rate.

Again, if you control for the 13% who commit more than half of the homicides, it's even more dramatic.

Bob, do you want more gun restrictions?

iwog says
Who is advocating banning firearms here? Do you have any fucking idea how stupid it is going after people who own firearms and falsely attributing to them a desire to ban guns??


Are you the only one here, Iwog? Are there no other posters besides you in this thread? Who was last being addressed by the last few posts?

« First    « Previous     Comments 63 - 102 of 148     Next »     Last »


Comment as anon_d133b or log in at top of page: