A Lot of Murders. . . in cities with strict gun control

[daveman]

So let's do this mathematically: What would the murder rates be for these countries if you took out the following cities: Moscow, Mumbai, Delhi, Mexico City and Bogota, London, Paris and Rome?

Nice try, but you are short of critical thinking skills and long on blogger ogling.

P.S. I would mention Tokyo but Japan has what is statistically referred to as zero death by guns.
The Japan lesson: Can America learn from the country that has almost zero gun deaths?

An', an', an' if we took out ALL the murders, the US would be the safest place in the world!


If you applied some of those critical thinking skills you claim other people lack, you'd realize that the reason the US is so high on the list of murder rates is:

*drumroll*

...GUN CONTROL.

Way to go, liberals. Once again, your policies are proven a complete failure.

If the US is high on the list of murder rates because of gun control...why is it that the US has more guns in private ownership than any other country by a large margin.
Shouldn't they be the lowest on the list of murder rates?

Am I missing something here?

You usually are. Why should this time be any different?

Read the synopsis of the study RetiredGySgt posted. It shows gun control has no effect on crime.

 

[idb]

An', an', an' if we took out ALL the murders, the US would be the safest place in the world!


If you applied some of those critical thinking skills you claim other people lack, you'd realize that the reason the US is so high on the list of murder rates is:

*drumroll*

...GUN CONTROL.

Way to go, liberals. Once again, your policies are proven a complete failure.

If the US is high on the list of murder rates because of gun control...why is it that the US has more guns in private ownership than any other country by a large margin.
Shouldn't they be the lowest on the list of murder rates?

Am I missing something here?

You usually are. Why should this time be any different?

Read the synopsis of the study RetiredGySgt posted. It shows gun control has no effect on crime.

Then explain it to me.
Why does the US have the highest private gun ownership in the world and one of the highest murder rates?
It makes no sense if guns prevent crimes.

Also, why are there murders in areas without gun control?
If deaths in cities with gun control proves that gun control doesn't work, why don't deaths in places with lax control prove that guns don't keep you safe?

 

[idb]

An', an', an' if we took out ALL the murders, the US would be the safest place in the world!


If you applied some of those critical thinking skills you claim other people lack, you'd realize that the reason the US is so high on the list of murder rates is:

*drumroll*

...GUN CONTROL.

Way to go, liberals. Once again, your policies are proven a complete failure.

If the US is high on the list of murder rates because of gun control...why is it that the US has more guns in private ownership than any other country by a large margin.
Shouldn't they be the lowest on the list of murder rates?

Am I missing something here?

You usually are. Why should this time be any different?

Read the synopsis of the study RetiredGySgt posted. It shows gun control has no effect on crime.

I read it.
How does it reach those conclusions?
Does it only relate to the US, or any country?
Is it only referring to the possibility of gun control laws being effective now that there are so many guns in private ownership in the US?

In other words, what are the circumstances in which the conclusions are true?

 

[daveman]

If the US is high on the list of murder rates because of gun control...why is it that the US has more guns in private ownership than any other country by a large margin.
Shouldn't they be the lowest on the list of murder rates?

Am I missing something here?

You usually are. Why should this time be any different?

Read the synopsis of the study RetiredGySgt posted. It shows gun control has no effect on crime.

Then explain it to me.
Why does the US have the highest private gun ownership in the world and one of the highest murder rates?
It makes no sense if guns prevent crimes.

Also, why are there murders in areas without gun control?
If deaths in cities with gun control proves that gun control doesn't work, why don't deaths in places with lax control prove that guns don't keep you safe?

Will there ever be zero gun deaths in places with lax gun control?

No. And no one's claiming that.

As the OP shows, the cities with strict gun control have high gun death rates. Once those are removed, the rest of the nation that has less strict gun control has fewer numbers of deaths.

Gun-grabbers insist legal gun ownership inevitably leads to high gun death rates. This is simply not fact.

 

[daveman]

If the US is high on the list of murder rates because of gun control...why is it that the US has more guns in private ownership than any other country by a large margin.
Shouldn't they be the lowest on the list of murder rates?

Am I missing something here?

You usually are. Why should this time be any different?

Read the synopsis of the study RetiredGySgt posted. It shows gun control has no effect on crime.

I read it.
How does it reach those conclusions?
Does it only relate to the US, or any country?
Is it only referring to the possibility of gun control laws being effective now that there are so many guns in private ownership in the US?

In other words, what are the circumstances in which the conclusions are true?

Guess you'll have to buy the study, won't you?

 

[idb]

You usually are. Why should this time be any different?

Read the synopsis of the study RetiredGySgt posted. It shows gun control has no effect on crime.

I read it.
How does it reach those conclusions?
Does it only relate to the US, or any country?
Is it only referring to the possibility of gun control laws being effective now that there are so many guns in private ownership in the US?

In other words, what are the circumstances in which the conclusions are true?

Guess you'll have to buy the study, won't you?

I'm not the one using a conclusion without context to make a point.
So know, I won't.

 

[daveman]

I read it.
How does it reach those conclusions?
Does it only relate to the US, or any country?
Is it only referring to the possibility of gun control laws being effective now that there are so many guns in private ownership in the US?

In other words, what are the circumstances in which the conclusions are true?

Guess you'll have to buy the study, won't you?

I'm not the one using a conclusion without context to make a point.
So know, I won't.

Of course you won't.

 

[idb]

You usually are. Why should this time be any different?

Read the synopsis of the study RetiredGySgt posted. It shows gun control has no effect on crime.

Then explain it to me.
Why does the US have the highest private gun ownership in the world and one of the highest murder rates?
It makes no sense if guns prevent crimes.

Also, why are there murders in areas without gun control?
If deaths in cities with gun control proves that gun control doesn't work, why don't deaths in places with lax control prove that guns don't keep you safe?

Will there ever be zero gun deaths in places with lax gun control?

No. And no one's claiming that.

As the OP shows, the cities with strict gun control have high gun death rates. Once those are removed, the rest of the nation that has less strict gun control has fewer numbers of deaths.

Gun-grabbers insist legal gun ownership inevitably leads to high gun death rates. This is simply not fact.

Will there ever be zero gun deaths in places with lax gun control?

No. And no one's claiming that.

Maybe not, but the gun-lobby are quick to point out any gun-related deaths in areas with high gun-control to prove conclusively that gun-control doesn't work.
Why doesn't that argument go both ways.

As far as the point made by the OP, it isn't hard to find studies and statistics to prove any point you want.

States with more gun laws have fewer gun-related deaths, according to a new study released Wednesday by Boston Children's Hospital.....Fleegler and researchers from Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School and Harvard School of Public Health studied information from all 50 states between 2007 to 2010, analyzing all firearm-related deaths reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and data on firearm laws compiled by the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.

States with the most laws had a mortality rate 42% lower than those states with the fewest laws, they found. The strong law states' firearm-related homicide rate was also 40% lower and their firearm-related suicide rate was 37% lower.

Specifically, Fleeger pointed to states with many gun laws like Massachusetts, which had 3.4 gun-related deaths per 100,000 people, and New Jersey, which had 4.9 gun-deaths per 100,000 people. Conversely, he focused on states with less laws like Louisiana, which had 18 deaths per 100,000 individuals and Alaska, which had 17.5 deaths per 100,000 individuals.

The study also found that laws requiring universal background checks and permits to purchase firearms were most clearly associated with decreasing rates of gun-related homicides and suicides.

 

[idb]

Guess you'll have to buy the study, won't you?

I'm not the one using a conclusion without context to make a point.
So know, I won't.

Of course you won't.

No, of course not

 

[M14 Shooter]

So let's do this mathematically: What would the murder rates be for these countries if you took out the following cities: Moscow, Mumbai, Delhi, Mexico City and Bogota, London, Paris and Rome?
Nice try, but you are short of critical thinking skills and long on blogger ogling.

I really enjoy the way you completele ignore the point.
Of course, given that you have no way to effectivly counter it, I'm not surprised.

Thank you for helping to prove that anti-gun loons can only argue from emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.

 

[M14 Shooter]

It isn't very hard to simply leave the city limits and purchase a gun and then re-enter the city.

Usually, purchase AND possession is regulated, so arguing that you can just go outside the city and buy a gun does not in any way diminish the fact that the strict gun control laws in that city clearly do not work.

 

[Survivalist]

So let's do this mathematically: What would the murder rates be for these countries if you took out the following cities: Moscow, Mumbai, Delhi, Mexico City and Bogota, London, Paris and Rome?

Nice try, but you are short of critical thinking skills and long on blogger ogling.

P.S. I would mention Tokyo but Japan has what is statistically referred to as zero death by guns.
]

I don't quite agree with the OP's post, but he is certainly more honest about the reality of gun control in America than you are.

Do you support the false premise that more guns = more crime? If that is true than it most hold true in almost all cases in all the nations around the world.

 

[longknife]

An ancillary thought on the matter -

The "Wild, Wild West" wasn't so wild after all.

The stories of wild bunches of cowboys riding into town and terrorizing everyone is nothing but fiction!

After western town had a population who had all sorts of guns, everything from pistols to rifles and shotguns. Ten or twenty hotshots ride into town looking for "fun" would be met by dozens of guns, carried by the women as well as the men.

Just go back and read some of the newspapers of the time and you'll see this to be fact.

 

[eflatminor]

Thanx to Political Pistachio blog.

I do not believe it is true that the US is 3rd in the world for murders. We don't make the list of the top 100 countries by the rate of homicide.

 

[eflatminor]

An ancillary thought on the matter -

The "Wild, Wild West" wasn't so wild after all.

The stories of wild bunches of cowboys riding into town and terrorizing everyone is nothing but fiction!

After western town had a population who had all sorts of guns, everything from pistols to rifles and shotguns. Ten or twenty hotshots ride into town looking for "fun" would be met by dozens of guns, carried by the women as well as the men.

Just go back and read some of the newspapers of the time and you'll see this to be fact.

This is true. The rate of homicide is FAR greater today in Chicago than it was during the old west.

 

[007]

 

[eflatminor]

Then explain it to me.
Why does the US have the highest private gun ownership in the world and one of the highest murder rates.

Not true. The US doesn't make the top 100 list of countries by murder rate. Many of the countries with higher murder rates than the US have very few firearms in the hands of the general public, many have outright bans on civilian firearm ownership.

For all our firearms, we should have the highest murder rate, but we're not even close. Kinda blows your argument out of the water.

 

[auditor0007]

So let's do this mathematically: What would the murder rates be for these countries if you took out the following cities: Moscow, Mumbai, Delhi, Mexico City and Bogota, London, Paris and Rome?

Nice try, but you are short of critical thinking skills and long on blogger ogling.

P.S. I would mention Tokyo but Japan has what is statistically referred to as zero death by guns.
The Japan lesson: Can America learn from the country that has almost zero gun deaths?

An', an', an' if we took out ALL the murders, the US would be the safest place in the world!


If you applied some of those critical thinking skills you claim other people lack, you'd realize that the reason the US is so high on the list of murder rates is:

*drumroll*

...GUN CONTROL.

Way to go, liberals. Once again, your policies are proven a complete failure.

You are an idiot. Here is some critical thinking for you. If all guns were banned, the murder rate would drop. I am not proposing that we ban all guns because we have a Constitution that says we have a right to own guns. What is ridiculous is to say that by adding more guns, there would be less murders. That's just plain stupid. Of course, you will use an example of some small town that is 99% white and where everyone owns a gun, and they have zero or very few murders per year. Towns like that have low murder rates because they don't have ghettos full of poor people selling drugs.

If Chicago had no gun control laws, how many murders would that stop? None, that's how many. The vast majority of deaths are gang related or pre-meditated murders. It's extremely rare that someone breaks into a person's house to rob them and then kills them because they didn't have a gun. One last thing; the murder rate in Chicago during the 90's was double what it is now. Please explain that one to all of us if gun control laws are the reason for high murder rates.

 

[Survivalist]

[
You are an idiot. Here is some critical thinking for you. If all guns were banned, the murder rate would drop. I am not proposing that we ban all guns because we have a Constitution that says we have a right to own guns. What is ridiculous is to say that by adding more guns, there would be less murders. That's just plain stupid. Of course, you will use an example of some small town that is 99% white and where everyone owns a gun, and they have zero or very few murders per year. Towns like that have low murder rates because they don't have ghettos full of poor people selling drugs.

If Chicago had no gun control laws, how many murders would that stop? None, that's how many. The vast majority of deaths are gang related or pre-meditated murders. It's extremely rare that someone breaks into a person's house to rob them and then kills them because they didn't have a gun. One last thing; the murder rate in Chicago during the 90's was double what it is now. Please explain that one to all of us if gun control laws are the reason for high murder rates.

Rates for murder in Chicago are about as high now as they were in the 90's during the height of drug wars. Rates dropped only slightly, then went back up again soon after the big gun laws were passed there.

Why do the states with the most guns per household, like North Dakota and Wyoming also have the lowest murder rates?

Wouldn't you think that a rich gun collector with a hundred guns in his house is going to be in more danger than a house with 10 crack addicts and one stolen gun?

 

[eflatminor]

If all guns were banned, the murder rate would drop.

Of course, the exact opposite happened in England and Australia after they virtually banned civilian firearm ownership. Guns are pretty much banned in Mexico...how's that working out?