A Perspective on Shootings That Liberals Won't Discuss

[frigidweirdo]

Liberals are hostile to American Principle across the board. Their hostility against firearms is PURELY due to their hostility to American Principle... .

They can't move forward to REALLY grab power, with 250 million heavily armed Americans, stopping them.

What is "American Principle".

 

[NYcarbineer]

I believe the primary reason left wing whackos don't want us to have guns is that they don't want us to be able to defend ourselves when they exert control over our possessions and our bodies. The reason they fear armed people is because they're afraid armed people will object to being controlled, or harassed and killed, by authoritarian pukes like themselves.

That is the very reason we put the 2nd amendment in place.

Some liberals are claiming that mass shooters have a specific target and that is not always the case. The Colorado shooter and the recent church shooter chose places that were gun-free zones.

Schools have been gun-free zones and those with mental problems and feel they don't fit in are simply going to the place where they feel they were victimized. If they weren't gun-free zones or had armed security, I doubt the shooters would go through with it.

And mass shooters are stopped all the time by armed civilians. But the anti-American, progressive press corps refuse to report on it.

Can you list 100 cases of mass shooters being stopped by armed civilians?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Really? What presumption of guilt is made in a background check?

What presumption of guilt is made when a gun must be registered?

For one, felons so not have to register guns....a Supreme Court case said that that would violate their right against self incrimination...

We are against registration because it is the first step to banning or forced turn ins and that has been proven historically.......and criminals won't register their guns...defeating the purpose, and mass shooters will gladly register their guns, then go out and kill lots of people, again defeating your purpose...it is again just a needless layer of paperwork and money against law abiding gun owners......

What is the reason to register gun owners? Again...it is not needed to arrest someone who commits a crime with a gun...right? And it is not needed to arrest a felon who is caught in possession of a gun, right? We can arrest them right now without registration.

If you sell a gun to a felon.....when you catch the felon with a gun...you can arrest that felon..right now, without registration.

Registration is simply the first step to finding out which law abiding citizen has a gun, so they can later be gathered up when the left has the political power to do it.....that is what happened in Germany, Britain and Australia......we are going to keep it from happening here....

The question is, how do you stop guns getting into the hands of criminals? The only way really seems to be to have guns as a rare item. In the US they're just not. People get them easily, so do criminals. To use one isn't such a big deal. You lose one gun, just go get another one.

Until the US can stop this happening then gun violence will still be high. But then some people seem to think this is just great.

Arrest criminals caught with guns and put them in jail a long time.....that fixes the problem, they won't want to be caught in possession of a gun, or commit a crime with a gun...that way you focus on the problem...criminals, not law abiding gun owners who don't use guns to break the law.....

As I pointed out, European criminals get guns as easily as our criminals do...even easier since they get fully automatic rifles whenever they want....so their gun laws are no more effective than our gun laws are at Preventing gun violence........

So it's kind of like there's no point in building a border fence because the illegals will find a way in anyway...

...that sort of reasoning?

No...when they cross the fence you arrest them. It is Also much easier to smuggle a gun into a country that a full size human...they need at least water for the trip......did you see the video of the guy who stashed 17 glock pistols in the center console of his car........and as opposed to gun laws, the border fence works, it works in Israel and it works on our border...where it is up. And getting into our country is not a right for foreigners...........where as guns are a Right for Americans.....

I see, it's always a different set of principles when you like the law.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"A Perspective on Shootings That Liberals Won't Discuss"

This fails as a straw man fallacy, and is clearly a lie.

As already correctly noted, 'gun control' is not something 'unique' to 'liberals,' where appropriate firearms regulatory measures are both warranted and Constitutional.

'Liberals' support Heller/McDonald, consider it settled and accepted precedent, and are making no efforts to overturn or render void those rulings.

'Liberals' support the right of individuals to possess firearms for lawful self-defense, they are themselves gun owners, and enjoy the shooting sports.

The OP and others on the right are seeking to propagate a ridiculous lie completely devoid of fact or merit.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

CLEMENTINE SAID:

“ I think liberals are all about gun control, or maybe banning guns is more accurate.”

This is as ignorant as it is wrong.

No one is advocating that guns be 'banned,' to seek to do so would violate the Second, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments to the Constitution, the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause in particular.

Given this and other posts, it's clear you don't 'think' at all.

 

[2aguy]

Sorry...you are blaming law abiding people, you say it in your second sentence in this quote.....it isn't normal people that are stealing guns and using them....and of the 320 million guns in private hands only 8,454 were used to commit murder and those murders were not committed as "First Crimes" by normal people who just decided to kill someone. They were committed by career, violent criminals, mainly in inner city gangs and drug dealers in small, tiny, geographic areas in inner cities......


Not "first criminals."



And again....criminals in Europe get their guns as easily as our criminals get their guns, and they get fully automatic rifles and 30 round magazines, hand grenades, pistols and rocket propelled grenades...easily.


That they don't use them as often is culture, not access to guns. Even before the gun bans in Europe they were less violent than the United States.

I'm a little confused. Firstly, I said there is a problem, I didn't say I was blaming people. I said people having guns was a problem. It is. That doesn't mean it's their fault that things happen. But things do happen.


It's not "normal" that people are stealing guns. I don't see what "normal" has to do with this. It's happening. And it's not just stealing guns, there are other ways for guns to end up in the illegal supply chain. You know this. I know this. Unless you tackle these problems then you're always going to have issues with criminals having easy access to guns.


Criminals in Europe get guns as easily as in the US. I don't believe you. You've not backed anything up. I believe that criminals in Europe can get a hold of guns if they're willing to pay quite a bit for them, but many don't bother, because the expense for a gun is higher and criminals are far less likely to risk losing their guns.


I'm going to assume you don't have much personal experience with trying to get an illegal gun in Europe. Or even a legal one for that matter.

They lead to guns being used by criminals far more often.

No..this is not why American criminals use guns more often, they use guns more often because of the criminal culture in the United States, fueled by single teenage mothers raising children who then have children...without adult role models teaching impulse control, and civilized behavior....that causes the high gun murder rate..not guns.

Divorce happens in both countries. Single parents exist in both countries.
In the UK there are 2 million single parents to 14 million in the US. So the US has a higher rate of single parents, but that much higher. 1/4 of all families with dependent children are single parent in the UK, in the US it's about 10,000 families as single parent with a child under 18 from 35,000 families. So again, a slightly higher rate, but nothing that suggests a 5 times higher murder rate to me.


Gingerbread - Statistics - Research statistics facts and figures exploding myths stereotypes single parent work family unmarried poverty campaign

Single Parent Statistics - What Do They Tell Us - Single Parent Center

Family households F table series - People and Households - U.S. Census Bureau


I think there must be something else, not just single parent families. I would say poverty is a big part of this. Single parent families are more likely to struggle. The more help they get from the state then the easier their task. In the US help is a lot less available, and I'd suggest in certain states in the US it's almost non-existent and I'd be betting these states also have higher levels of crime. Again we go back to education and how it functions. Education in the UK is far more inclusive than education in the US.


http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/figures/images/figure-coi-2.gif

Black kids are less likely to graduate from high school. Poverty plays a part, as does single parent families which isn’t helped by poverty either.

Compare the two, they’re almost a reverse of each other. The number of kids graduating compared to the number of murders.

In the UK the system works differently, you need GCSEs which you take at about 16 years old.

“In 2010/11 79.6% of pupils in their last year of compulsory education in the UK achieved 5 or more GCSE grades A*-C or equivalent.”

So, nearly 80% of kids left school with the qualifications they need to go to the next level of education. In the US the rate is 80% of kids actually leaving education. No doubt many of those kids who leave school in the US, are in poverty.

Criminals in Europe get guns as easily as in the US. I don't believe you.

Don't have to believe me, I get my info. from European law enforcement....

This story tracks gun smuggling in Europe.....lots of it....

European Police Face Being Outgunned by Jihadists WIth Assault Rifles

But although the police quickly traced the weapons source in the Paris attacks, stopping criminals and other jihadist cells in Europe from acquiring assault weapons for further attacks might not be so easy, according to police officials.


Many of the weapons circulating in Europe hail from southeastern Europe, where big military arsenals were left abandoned during the collapse of Yugoslavia and the Balkan wars of the 1990s. At least a million other weapons are believed to have been looted during an outbreak of anarchy in Albania in 1997. “There are stockpiles in the Balkans of 2 [million] to 3 million [weapons] left over from the 1990s, available for recycling,” says Donald.

French police believe rifles are on sale in French cities for between €1,000 and €1,500. Earlier this month, Philippe Capon, head of the French police union UNSA, told Bloomberg News, “The French black market for weapons has been inundated with eastern European war artillery and arms.” A French police source told TIME that the weapons from the Charlie Hebdo attack came from the Balkans.


aanother story on ease terrorists get guns....

Getting a gun legally in Europe may be hard but terrorists have little trouble - The Washington Post

Here in Denmark, handguns and semiautomatic rifles are all but banned. Hunting rifles are legally available only to those with squeaky-clean backgrounds who have passed a rigorous exam covering everything from gun safety to the mating habits of Denmark’s wildlife.

“There’s a book about 1,000 pages thick,” said Tonni Rigby, one of only two licensed firearms dealers in Copenhagen. “You have to know all of it.”


But if you want an illicit assault rifle, such as the one used by a 22-year-old to rake a Copenhagen cafe with 28 bullets on Saturday, all it takes are a few connections and some cash.


“It’s very easy to get such a weapon,” said Hans Jorgen Bonnichsen, a former operations director for the Danish security service PET. “It’s not only a problem for Denmark. It’s a problem for all of Europe.”

******************

In the case of the Paris attackers, they were able to obtain an entire arsenal: AK-47 assault rifles, pistols, a Skorpion submachine gun and even a rocket-propelled-grenade launcher. All of it was purchased in Brussels for about $5,000, according to Belgian media reports.

The availability of such weapons in the heart of Western Europe isn’t new. The flood of high-powered weaponry began with the dissolution of the Soviet Union and continued through the 1990s as war raged across the Balkans. Many of the weapons from those periods are still circulating. They have lately been supplemented by an influx from the turmoil in North Africa, with weapons smuggled on ships across the Mediterranean.

 

[sealybobo]

Fact is that only .00007% of gun owners are even likely to consider going on a shooting spree. When they do, they will choose a gun-free zone nearly every time. Even though the liklihood of being shot by a mass murderer is less than the chance of getting hit by lightning or way less than the chances of being killed in a car accident, the liberals are in a constant state of alarm just because people are allowed to own guns. Most murders are committed with knives. And more people die due to medical malpractice than any other, but liberals focus on the one thing that tyrants hate- armed citizens. Sorry, but if it was about safety, they would be up in arms about other things and not the right of citizens to own guns. Tyrants only fear people who are able to fight back against tyranny. And it's no coincidence that the left focuses on the 2nd amendment over other things that are far more likely to harm or kill people. They claim it's a safety issue, but I call bullshit considering the things they ignore.

If the left had gotten their way with gun control, those mass shootings would still have occurred. It would just mean a few more laws broken. I know many on the left actually would ban guns if they could. Some are honest about that, though I believe that is the endgame with most. Crazies and criminals never have trouble getting their hands on weapons. The theater shooter could have just as easily pipe bombed the theater or set it on fire and hurt even more people. If a mass murderer was going around tossing bombs, would the media get as upset as they do with guns? You'd think that people doing something illegal would be the biggest complaint and not the means they happen to choose. Murdering, in any fashion, should be the focus, but liberals only focus on shootings, particularly by white males. We don't see the same coverage when it's a Muslim shooting people at a base or a gang member with lots of kills under their belt.

The law abiding citizens, especially NRA members, are constantly told they are responsible whenever a mass shooting happens.

Funny that the auto companies don't get blamed for all the accidents and drunk drivers.

Cell phone companies don't get blamed for all the accidents caused by a driver texting. Hell, in that case, the government made sure they handed out more phones. Are they trying to kill people? I hope they know they will be responsible when a driver with an Obamaphone is texting and crosses the center line and kills someone.

Stores don't get called names for selling knives, rope, lighter fluid and other things often used in murders.

Only the NRA gets blamed for shootings, as if they have anything to do with the criminals and insane people who misuse their weapons. Luckily, it has been very few. Despite it being a rare occurrence, the left and the media act as if it's an epidemic. They ignore the real epidemics, which is gangs, and human or drug trafficking. How many people have died of drug overdoses and how many young girls have disappeared because of human trafficking? The left's answer is to legalize drugs. They likely want prostitution legalized. Not much is being done about the human traffickers because they are 10 steps ahead of law enforcement. Those problems occur every day and yet the media isn't sounding the alarms on that. They are too busy bashing the average gun owner because they disapprove of one of our rights.



"It is a sad truth that there are likely more mentally ill individuals in our nation who will one day get their hands on guns, legally or illegally, and take the lives of some innocent souls.

But some perspective is needed.

Let’s take that figure for the number of people killed in the last 30 years during a mass shooting of 560 and add another nine to it. That makes 569.

Now compare that number to 10,076. According to MADD, that’s the number of people killed during drunk driving crashes in 2013 alone. In fact, every day in America, another 28 people die in drunk driving crashes. Every. Single. Day.

Using the liberal logic of banning guns because of tragic (and thankfully, comparatively rare) mass shootings undertaken by crazy white folks (and some not so white), should we not then ban cars?

Cars clearly cause many more fatalities in terms of numbers each day than whack nuts with a gun.

Heck, we should ban bathtubs too. Because 341 people die from drowning and submersion while in or falling into bathtubs. And floors. We need to ban floors too, because 565 people die each year from slipping, tripping or falling.

I don’t mean to be flippant, or to trivialize this terrible tragedy. But as the stories fly around in the next few days regarding this event, you can be darn tootin’ liberals will begin pushing their agendas."

http://allenbwest.com/2015/06/heres-what-the-mainstream-media-wont-tell-you-about-mass-shootings/

Your post was too long to read the entire thing. Why can't you realize that the vast majority of liberals and Democrats don't want to outlaw guns in fact we all own guns. What we don't like is a guy goes into a gun show orders thousands and thousands of rounds of ammunition and an Arsenal and no background check and that guy ends up killing someone. We're just trying to solve a problem that this country clearly has with guns but all we need from you is defensive opposition

 

[sealybobo]

"Gun control" has nothing to do with Liberals. See if you can aim juuuuust slightly higher than Allen Fucking West for a clue.

Sheeeesh.

The article was not written by West, not that it matters. He's still better than half the lunatics in the liberal media. Why don't you learn how to read. Sheeeesh.

I think liberals are all about gun control, or maybe banning guns is more accurate. It's always the liberals crying about the 2nd amendment.

Wrong stupid. Do you think its us bring this subject up? Simple evidence is who posted this thread? So you see it's not us bringing up this issue. I've told you Republican idiots over and over again that they use these issues as issues to divide the middle class. They win over the middle class and poor Americans with wedge issues like God gays guns racism and this is one of them obviously. So consider it your side the powerful people that control you that bring this issue up because they use it to divide us you're an idiot this is proof

 

[sealybobo]

Can any Republican tell me which Democrat in government wants to ban guns? Outlaw them. Collect them and burn them who?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Gun control" has nothing to do with Liberals.

No, of course not. That's why they're always the ones who are calling for it. It's just a red herring.

What constitutes 'gun control' – the Supreme Court has held that all manner of regulatory policies comport with the Second Amendment:

“Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER

Is Scalia a 'liberal,' are 'liberals' wrong for supporting the same regulatory measures the Heller Court deemed to be necessary, proper, and Constitutional.

The issue isn't 'gun control,' the issue is what measures are appropriate, warranted, and Constitutional and what measures are not – but it is a fact of Constitutional law that the Second Amendment authorizes government to enact gun control measures.

 

[2aguy]

European Police Face Being Outgunned by Jihadists WIth Assault Rifles

As Europe struggles to crack down on illegal weapons, some police recruits face a new training exercise: Go buy a Kalashnikov rifle. Donald says that in “a city in Europe,” which he would not name, “very young officers with no training or experience” were recently told to go find an assault weapon on the streets from an illegal arms dealer. “One came back two hours later with an AK-47,” Donald says. “He bought it for €1,000.”

 

[sealybobo]

In fact I believe if they poll the American people more people than not want common sense gun legislation passed but good luck getting that by the NRA.

 

[LeftofLeft]

Any pro-gun rant that assumes all liberals want to totally ban guns is misinformed and should be disregarded.

True. Liberals want to restrict gun ownership to the State and the ruling elite.

That would be completely anti-Liberal. Try again.
Or was that satire? Can't tell.

Michael Moore and many liberal elite 1 percenters run around telling US that there are too many guns, that gun ownership is a problem yet he and other elites depend on personal firearms for their safety. In the case of Michael Moore, while he does not carry a personal firearm, he uses body guards - proxies-that do carry firearms.

 

[2aguy]

Because our culture is becoming less violent, except in the inner cities controlled by democrat social welfare policies, law enforcement policies, and economic and education policies...fix those...and you will reduce crime in the murder capitals of this country.....chicago, detroit, new orleans, baltimore.....

And keep in mind...Baltimore has all the gun control you want....finger printing gun owners, assault weapon ban, magazine limits, universal background checks, no gun show "loophole" and there murder rate is spiking.....

Detroit, the Chief of police is telling residents to get guns and carry them...and their murder rate is the lowest in 47 years....

You're making the assumption that a state which takes guns out of circulation is going to have no guns. This isn't true. The problem is that guns in many states means guns in all states. It is a problem of trying to do something in a state where you can't control the borders.

Also, I'm not saying that guns can't help to reduce certain types of crime.

Detroit.

Crime in Detroit - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Homocide, 54.6, from a murder rate of 4.5 in 2013 US average.

"Annual increases in homicides, combined with a shrinking population, have made Detroit competitive with New Orleans for the highest murder rate in the nation"

Murders are going down in Detroit, so too is the population. The city went from 1.8 million people in the 1950s, to 1 million in the 1990s to 950,000 in 2000 and is now somewhere around 680,000 people. A great way to reduce crime is to see your population leave. I mean in 15 years to lose 250,000 people reduces crime no end.

You're making the assumption that a state which takes guns out of circulation is going to have no guns. This isn't true. The problem is that guns in many states means guns in all states. It is a problem of trying to do something in a state where you can't control the borders.

Sorry....I'm not making that argument....you guys are....you guys tell us....if we have strict gun control laws then our gun violence rates will go down....and then when you have cities with the exact laws you want......and the gun murder rates are through the roof, you blame other places that have less strict laws...you guys are telling us stricter laws reduce gun violence, so when it doesn't it shows you are wrong.....the claim is made by you and it isn't true...

Puerto Rico....has the strictest gun control laws anywhere in the United States and it's territories...it is an island nation and you can't just drive across a border to bring guns in...so it is a perfect example of strict gun control with the ability to limit cross border traffic....do your theories work....no.....

Puerto Rico, according to VICE t.v. is the gun murder capital of the world........

so you are just wrong.....

And the real point to Detroit and New Orleans....they have both been run by democrats for decades.....

 

[2aguy]

In fact I believe if they poll the American people more people than not want common sense gun legislation passed but good luck getting that by the NRA.

We already have enough common sense gun legislation, what we don't have are prosecutors who will lock up criminals who use guns to commit crimes. The 7 year old who was killed here in chicago over the 4th of july...his father was the target of the shooting. He is a high ranking gang leader with over 40 arrests, and was recently arrested in possession of a gun......he was released the next day....that is the problem...not law abiding citizens with guns....

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Fact is that only .00007% of gun owners are even likely to consider going on a shooting spree. When they do, they will choose a gun-free zone nearly every time. Even though the liklihood of being shot by a mass murderer is less than the chance of getting hit by lightning or way less than the chances of being killed in a car accident, the liberals are in a constant state of alarm just because people are allowed to own guns. Most murders are committed with knives. And more people die due to medical malpractice than any other, but liberals focus on the one thing that tyrants hate- armed citizens. Sorry, but if it was about safety, they would be up in arms about other things and not the right of citizens to own guns. Tyrants only fear people who are able to fight back against tyranny. And it's no coincidence that the left focuses on the 2nd amendment over other things that are far more likely to harm or kill people. They claim it's a safety issue, but I call bullshit considering the things they ignore.

If the left had gotten their way with gun control, those mass shootings would still have occurred. It would just mean a few more laws broken. I know many on the left actually would ban guns if they could. Some are honest about that, though I believe that is the endgame with most. Crazies and criminals never have trouble getting their hands on weapons. The theater shooter could have just as easily pipe bombed the theater or set it on fire and hurt even more people. If a mass murderer was going around tossing bombs, would the media get as upset as they do with guns? You'd think that people doing something illegal would be the biggest complaint and not the means they happen to choose. Murdering, in any fashion, should be the focus, but liberals only focus on shootings, particularly by white males. We don't see the same coverage when it's a Muslim shooting people at a base or a gang member with lots of kills under their belt.

The law abiding citizens, especially NRA members, are constantly told they are responsible whenever a mass shooting happens.

Funny that the auto companies don't get blamed for all the accidents and drunk drivers.

Cell phone companies don't get blamed for all the accidents caused by a driver texting. Hell, in that case, the government made sure they handed out more phones. Are they trying to kill people? I hope they know they will be responsible when a driver with an Obamaphone is texting and crosses the center line and kills someone.

Stores don't get called names for selling knives, rope, lighter fluid and other things often used in murders.

Only the NRA gets blamed for shootings, as if they have anything to do with the criminals and insane people who misuse their weapons. Luckily, it has been very few. Despite it being a rare occurrence, the left and the media act as if it's an epidemic. They ignore the real epidemics, which is gangs, and human or drug trafficking. How many people have died of drug overdoses and how many young girls have disappeared because of human trafficking? The left's answer is to legalize drugs. They likely want prostitution legalized. Not much is being done about the human traffickers because they are 10 steps ahead of law enforcement. Those problems occur every day and yet the media isn't sounding the alarms on that. They are too busy bashing the average gun owner because they disapprove of one of our rights.



"It is a sad truth that there are likely more mentally ill individuals in our nation who will one day get their hands on guns, legally or illegally, and take the lives of some innocent souls.

But some perspective is needed.

Let’s take that figure for the number of people killed in the last 30 years during a mass shooting of 560 and add another nine to it. That makes 569.

Now compare that number to 10,076. According to MADD, that’s the number of people killed during drunk driving crashes in 2013 alone. In fact, every day in America, another 28 people die in drunk driving crashes. Every. Single. Day.

Using the liberal logic of banning guns because of tragic (and thankfully, comparatively rare) mass shootings undertaken by crazy white folks (and some not so white), should we not then ban cars?

Cars clearly cause many more fatalities in terms of numbers each day than whack nuts with a gun.

Heck, we should ban bathtubs too. Because 341 people die from drowning and submersion while in or falling into bathtubs. And floors. We need to ban floors too, because 565 people die each year from slipping, tripping or falling.

I don’t mean to be flippant, or to trivialize this terrible tragedy. But as the stories fly around in the next few days regarding this event, you can be darn tootin’ liberals will begin pushing their agendas."

http://allenbwest.com/2015/06/heres-what-the-mainstream-media-wont-tell-you-about-mass-shootings/

The majority of mass gun shootings happen at schools or people's place of employment, or former employment. The reason people go to these places to shoot and kill people is because they are pissed off at someone. They don't choose those places because they are gun free zones. They choose them because their targets are at those places.

Yeah....so who was the movie theatre shooter pissed off at? Oh yeah...he chose that place because of the fact they advertised themselves as gun free. Why did the ft. Hood shooter choose the cafeteria? Oh yeah because he knew nobody was armed.

There are exceptions to everything. As for Holmes, he picked a movie theater that was close to his home. Actually it was the closest large theater to his home. Did The Aurora Shooter Seek Out A Gun Free Zone GUNFAQ.ORG So again, there is not real proof that Holmes chose this particular theater because it didn't allow guns. Ad for the Ft. Hood shooter, military personnel are not permitted to carry guns on base period, so he went to the cafeteria because that is where the most people were gathered all in one location. So basically, you have nothing.

Correct.

The notion that 'gun free zones' are the 'cause' of gun crimes in public places fails as a post hoc fallacy.

Just as false is the notion that armed citizens could have 'prevented' mass shootings, which is nothing more than a pathetic, ridiculous myth.

Citizens have the right to carry concealed firearms for lawful self-defense, not to act in some 'law enforcement' capacity.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Don't have to believe me, I get my info. from European law enforcement....

This story tracks gun smuggling in Europe.....lots of it....

European Police Face Being Outgunned by Jihadists WIth Assault Rifles

But although the police quickly traced the weapons source in the Paris attacks, stopping criminals and other jihadist cells in Europe from acquiring assault weapons for further attacks might not be so easy, according to police officials.


Many of the weapons circulating in Europe hail from southeastern Europe, where big military arsenals were left abandoned during the collapse of Yugoslavia and the Balkan wars of the 1990s. At least a million other weapons are believed to have been looted during an outbreak of anarchy in Albania in 1997. “There are stockpiles in the Balkans of 2 [million] to 3 million [weapons] left over from the 1990s, available for recycling,” says Donald.

French police believe rifles are on sale in French cities for between €1,000 and €1,500. Earlier this month, Philippe Capon, head of the French police union UNSA, told Bloomberg News, “The French black market for weapons has been inundated with eastern European war artillery and arms.” A French police source told TIME that the weapons from the Charlie Hebdo attack came from the Balkans.


aanother story on ease terrorists get guns....

Getting a gun legally in Europe may be hard but terrorists have little trouble - The Washington Post

Here in Denmark, handguns and semiautomatic rifles are all but banned. Hunting rifles are legally available only to those with squeaky-clean backgrounds who have passed a rigorous exam covering everything from gun safety to the mating habits of Denmark’s wildlife.

“There’s a book about 1,000 pages thick,” said Tonni Rigby, one of only two licensed firearms dealers in Copenhagen. “You have to know all of it.”


But if you want an illicit assault rifle, such as the one used by a 22-year-old to rake a Copenhagen cafe with 28 bullets on Saturday, all it takes are a few connections and some cash.


“It’s very easy to get such a weapon,” said Hans Jorgen Bonnichsen, a former operations director for the Danish security service PET. “It’s not only a problem for Denmark. It’s a problem for all of Europe.”

******************

In the case of the Paris attackers, they were able to obtain an entire arsenal: AK-47 assault rifles, pistols, a Skorpion submachine gun and even a rocket-propelled-grenade launcher. All of it was purchased in Brussels for about $5,000, according to Belgian media reports.

The availability of such weapons in the heart of Western Europe isn’t new. The flood of high-powered weaponry began with the dissolution of the Soviet Union and continued through the 1990s as war raged across the Balkans. Many of the weapons from those periods are still circulating. They have lately been supplemented by an influx from the turmoil in North Africa, with weapons smuggled on ships across the Mediterranean.

It's not the info I have a problem with. It's the interpretation of this info I have a problem with.

I know there are guns in the EU. I know some criminals have guns. I know, if you have the money, it's not difficult to get one.

Here are some questions. How much does it cost a criminals to get an illegal gun in the US? How much does it cost to get one in the EU?

You're using the term "easy" in regards to getting a gun. How easy is it for a US criminal and how easy for an EU criminal to get a gun? We know they can get guns.

You have some estimates at €1,000. Is this cheap? Is this something that someone might be willing to risk on a small job, like holding up a 7/11 or something? Probably not. How much would the same thing cost in the EU?

This is where I'm having a problem. Not the fact that there are guns, but with the statement that it's "easy" to get a gun, and also that it's cost efficient to get a gun and use it as they are used in the US.

My argument is that guns costs more in Europe, criminals are less likely to use them on small jobs, less likely to use them in petty disputes, and also that many criminals would not bother to get a gun because the cost just isn't worth it, whereas in the US they're considered almost essential because they really are easy to get, they're cost effective, everyone has one so you need one to be considered a decent criminal, and this is all because the US has a massive amount of guns in the country.

 

[2aguy]

Don't have to believe me, I get my info. from European law enforcement....

This story tracks gun smuggling in Europe.....lots of it....

European Police Face Being Outgunned by Jihadists WIth Assault Rifles

But although the police quickly traced the weapons source in the Paris attacks, stopping criminals and other jihadist cells in Europe from acquiring assault weapons for further attacks might not be so easy, according to police officials.


Many of the weapons circulating in Europe hail from southeastern Europe, where big military arsenals were left abandoned during the collapse of Yugoslavia and the Balkan wars of the 1990s. At least a million other weapons are believed to have been looted during an outbreak of anarchy in Albania in 1997. “There are stockpiles in the Balkans of 2 [million] to 3 million [weapons] left over from the 1990s, available for recycling,” says Donald.

French police believe rifles are on sale in French cities for between €1,000 and €1,500. Earlier this month, Philippe Capon, head of the French police union UNSA, told Bloomberg News, “The French black market for weapons has been inundated with eastern European war artillery and arms.” A French police source told TIME that the weapons from the Charlie Hebdo attack came from the Balkans.


aanother story on ease terrorists get guns....

Getting a gun legally in Europe may be hard but terrorists have little trouble - The Washington Post

Here in Denmark, handguns and semiautomatic rifles are all but banned. Hunting rifles are legally available only to those with squeaky-clean backgrounds who have passed a rigorous exam covering everything from gun safety to the mating habits of Denmark’s wildlife.

“There’s a book about 1,000 pages thick,” said Tonni Rigby, one of only two licensed firearms dealers in Copenhagen. “You have to know all of it.”


But if you want an illicit assault rifle, such as the one used by a 22-year-old to rake a Copenhagen cafe with 28 bullets on Saturday, all it takes are a few connections and some cash.


“It’s very easy to get such a weapon,” said Hans Jorgen Bonnichsen, a former operations director for the Danish security service PET. “It’s not only a problem for Denmark. It’s a problem for all of Europe.”

******************

In the case of the Paris attackers, they were able to obtain an entire arsenal: AK-47 assault rifles, pistols, a Skorpion submachine gun and even a rocket-propelled-grenade launcher. All of it was purchased in Brussels for about $5,000, according to Belgian media reports.

The availability of such weapons in the heart of Western Europe isn’t new. The flood of high-powered weaponry began with the dissolution of the Soviet Union and continued through the 1990s as war raged across the Balkans. Many of the weapons from those periods are still circulating. They have lately been supplemented by an influx from the turmoil in North Africa, with weapons smuggled on ships across the Mediterranean.

It's not the info I have a problem with. It's the interpretation of this info I have a problem with.

I know there are guns in the EU. I know some criminals have guns. I know, if you have the money, it's not difficult to get one.

Here are some questions. How much does it cost a criminals to get an illegal gun in the US? How much does it cost to get one in the EU?

You're using the term "easy" in regards to getting a gun. How easy is it for a US criminal and how easy for an EU criminal to get a gun? We know they can get guns.

You have some estimates at €1,000. Is this cheap? Is this something that someone might be willing to risk on a small job, like holding up a 7/11 or something? Probably not. How much would the same thing cost in the EU?

This is where I'm having a problem. Not the fact that there are guns, but with the statement that it's "easy" to get a gun, and also that it's cost efficient to get a gun and use it as they are used in the US.

My argument is that guns costs more in Europe, criminals are less likely to use them on small jobs, less likely to use them in petty disputes, and also that many criminals would not bother to get a gun because the cost just isn't worth it, whereas in the US they're considered almost essential because they really are easy to get, they're cost effective, everyone has one so you need one to be considered a decent criminal, and this is all because the US has a massive amount of guns in the country.

I know there are guns in the EU. I know some criminals have guns. I know, if you have the money, it's not difficult to get one.

You have just destroyed you argument.......criminals get guns when they want or need them.....law abiding citizens in Europe cannot get guns when they are banned, like fully automatice weapons, grenades, pistols, and rocket propelled grenades.

The Charlie Hebdo killers spent 5,000 American dollars for their weapons......I don't think you could get all the weapons they had for 5,000 dollars in the U.S.

Sorry, our crime in the U.S. is a majority of gang and drug related crime, which means they have plenty of cash to get illegal guns. And wether or not criminals of any kind can get guns is no reason to keep law abiding citizens, who do not break the law, pay the taxes for the police and military from owning guns.

In fact studies show that each year up to 2 million times American citizens use guns to stop or prevent violent criminal attack and save lives, and the other studies I posted show that guns allow women to stop violent rapes. So your own point on easy gun access in Europe, and the fact that law abiding citizens do not use guns to commit crimes shows your arguments are wrong. The benefits of Armed citizens far out weighs the negatives........and then you run into the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, which is why Europe was so easily disarmed.........and why over 12 million innocent people were sent to death camps by the various governments in Europe.

 

[2aguy]

This is the reason we have so much gun crime in these inner cities....the judicial system does not prosecute these criminals in a serious way, unlike their European counter parts...that is what needs to change, not gun laws, which we already have more than enough of to take care of these criminals....

The 7 gang members in this shooting.....all of them career criminals, some awaiting trial for previous murder charges, and the others out after serving time for previous weapons violations..

Out on Bond on Murder Rap Man Charged in Back of the Yards Shooting of 13 - Back of the Yards - DNAinfo.com Chicago

COOK COUNTY CRIMINAL COURTHOUSE — A seventh man has been charged in connection with a September shooting in Cornell Square Park that wounded 13, including a 3-year-old boy.


Quinton Humphries, an alleged getaway driver, was out on bond in a pending murder case when he drove a group of fellow gangbangers bent on revenge to the crowded Cornell Square Park on Sept. 19, authorities said.


There, police said, they unleashed a hail of bullets on the people gathered, wounding 13 — including 3-year-old Devonte Howard — and drew a national spotlight on the issue of Chicago gun violence.


Days after the shooting, four of the suspects were arrested, including Bryon Champ, a 21-year-old member of the Black P Stone Nation gang accused of rounding up friends to take revenge for a bullet that grazed him earlier that day.




Charged with three counts of attempted first-degree murder and three counts of aggravated battery with a firearm, Humphries, 20, was ordered held without bail on Wednesday. Humphries was on the street after being accused of another murder in July, and posting 10 percent of his $500,000 bail.


Little more than three months earlier he was brought before another Cook County judge on murder charges after prosecutors said he and a second man flashed gang signs before fatally shooting Shavonte Howard.


Howard, of the 5300 block of South Hoyne Avenue, was shot in the head about noon on July 4 in the 5600 block of South Western Avenue, police said.


Champ, the "main player" in the Cornell Square Park shooting, had been convicted of gun possession as a felon last year, Chicago Police Supt. Garry McCarthy said at a news conference.


A judge sent Champ to boot camp, and he was released when he completed the program.


“If Bryon Champ is not on the street — as he shouldn’t have been — this incident likely does not occur," said McCarthy, who has advocated stricter sentencing for gun crimes. “He received boot camp for that gun crime and was back out on the streets to be a part of this senseless shooting."


A few days after the initial arrests, a fifth man, David Logan, 22, was arrested in connection with the incident.


Earlier this month, Darren Curtis, 28, was charged in the incident as well.

 

[2aguy]

Now get this....this guy was sentenced to 3 years on a weapon charge....before this shooting took place and was redirected into a Boot Camp instead....on a fucking weapon charge as a known gang member with a history of arrests....

Back of the Yards Gunmen Wanted Revenge for Earlier Shooting Authorities - Back of the Yards - DNAinfo.com Chicago

Champ, the "main player" in the shooting, had been convicted of gun possession as a felon last year. A judge sent him to boot camp, instead of the mandatory three years in prison that McCarthy's been advocating for gun crimes all year as Chicago has continued to struggle with gun violence.

He was out in about 18 months or less.......

So no, it isn't law abiding citizens, it isn't "first criminals" and it isn't access to guns....it is our judicial system that doesn't arrest, and lock up repeat violent monsters...who are released time and again to terrorize these inner city neighborhoods....