Gun culture or parenting culture?

[BULLDOG]

Jamaica's murder rate climbed significantly after implementing gun control.

So, I don't think that gun control does much of anything.

However, gun control has historically been used by tyrants, they disarmed Natives, and Black slaves in the USA, while they disarmed Holocaust Jews in Nazi Germany, the Islamic Turks disarmed the Armenians during the Armenian genocide, the British disarmed India during their India genocides, and Soviets disarmed citizens too, as did Communist China, and countless others.

So, it seems that gun control does nothing but empower tyrants.

So you think reasonable gun control is the same as disarming the country. Typical gun nut.

I actually don't own any guns, as of yet.

So, no I'm no gun nut.

However, I fail to see any correlation between gun control, and decreased murders.

Actually, if we look at gun ownership by country, if anything the exact opposite pattern occurs, with murder being higher in the nations with less guns on the whole.

I know that's what you have been told.

Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Small Arms Survey

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It's time to talk about reasonable hammer control, because these Ukrainian serial killers used hammers in bags to kill 21 people.

Dnepropetrovsk maniacs - Wikipedia

It's time to talk about reasonable truck control, because this Islamic terrorist used a truck to kill 86 people.

2016 Nice attack - Wikipedia

UK police behind effort to ban knives to end ‘knife violence’

They failed....

Gun crime in London increases by 42% - BBC News

Gun crime offences in London surged by 42% in the last year, according to official statistics.

The Met Police's figures showed there were 2,544 gun crime offences from April 2016 to April 2017 compared to 1,793 offences from 2015 until 2016.

Knife crime also increased by 24% with 12,074 recorded offences from 2016 to 2017.
============

"Liberals measure success by intent. Conservatives measure success by results."
Rush Limbaugh

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Jamaica's murder rate climbed significantly after implementing gun control.

So, I don't think that gun control does much of anything.

However, gun control has historically been used by tyrants, they disarmed Natives, and Black slaves in the USA, while they disarmed Holocaust Jews in Nazi Germany, the Islamic Turks disarmed the Armenians during the Armenian genocide, the British disarmed India during their India genocides, and Soviets disarmed citizens too, as did Communist China, and countless others.

So, it seems that gun control does nothing but empower tyrants.

So you think reasonable gun control is the same as disarming the country. Typical gun nut.

I actually don't own any guns, as of yet.

So, no I'm no gun nut.

However, I fail to see any correlation between gun control, and decreased murders.

Actually, if we look at gun ownership by country, if anything the exact opposite pattern occurs, with murder being higher in the nations with less guns on the whole.

I know that's what you have been told.
View attachment 123003
Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Small Arms Survey

El Salvador has low rates of gun ownership, though.

 

[2aguy]

Jamaica's murder rate climbed significantly after implementing gun control.

So, I don't think that gun control does much of anything.

However, gun control has historically been used by tyrants, they disarmed Natives, and Black slaves in the USA, while they disarmed Holocaust Jews in Nazi Germany, the Islamic Turks disarmed the Armenians during the Armenian genocide, the British disarmed India during their India genocides, and Soviets disarmed citizens too, as did Communist China, and countless others.

So, it seems that gun control does nothing but empower tyrants.

So you think reasonable gun control is the same as disarming the country. Typical gun nut.

I actually don't own any guns, as of yet.

So, no I'm no gun nut.

However, I fail to see any correlation between gun control, and decreased murders.

Actually, if we look at gun ownership by country, if anything the exact opposite pattern occurs, with murder being higher in the nations with less guns on the whole.

I know that's what you have been told.
View attachment 123003
Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Small Arms Survey

And of course he lies........he has to compare apples to oranges to get his figures.....here is a more accurate comparison...car accidents to gun accidents....to gun murder.....

Keep in mind....of the 9,616 gun murders in the U.S. in 2015.....70-80% of the victims were other criminals. Of the rest of the victims...many were the friends and family of criminals...gang members and drug dealers caught in the lifestyle of the criminal in their peer group or family......

And then...Bull Dog has to throw in suicides to get the number even higher...even though China, Japan, and South Korea only allow criminals and police to have guns, for the most part, and yet have higher suicide rates than we do.....

This is the reason he doesn't want to say what he thinks are "Reasonable Gun Control Laws" ........we actually look at he truth, the facts and the reality of those laws....

Leading Causes of Death | WISQARS | Injury Center | CDC


Total car accidental death....

2015....36,161
2014....33,736
2013....33,804
2012....34,935


Leading Causes of Death | WISQARS | Injury Center | CDC
Total car accidental death....

2015....36,161--------- Gun murder 9,616
2014....33,736 -------- Gun murder 8,312
2013....33,804-------- Gun murder 8,454
2012....34,935 ------- Gun murder 8,897


Accidental gun deaths...the apples to apples comparison....

Leading Causes of Death | WISQARS | Injury Center | CDC

2015...489________accidental car deaths....36,161

2014.....486
2013 ..... 505
2012 ..... 548
2011 ..... 591
2010 ..... 606
2009 ..... 554
2008 ..... 592
2007..... 613
2006..... 642
2005 ..... 789
2004 ..... 649
2003 ..... 730
2002 ..... 762
2001 ..... 802
2000 ..... 776
1999 ..... 824






Guns don't actually kill as many Americans as cars

It didn't happen in 2014 because gun deaths didn't rise as quickly as anticipated in the CDC's 10-year average and because car deaths didn't fall as quickly as projected. And the missed convergence doesn't merely delay the inevitable until next year's figures arrive.

Firearm deaths have plateaued over the past three years, while early estimates show traffic fatalities will increase by 8 to 14 percent, the sharpest year-over-year rise in more than six decades. It's possible the lines won't cross for the foreseeable future.

A 137-death difference aside, you still might be tempted to interpret the numbers to mean the likelihood of dying in a motor-vehicle crash is approximately the same as dying at the hands of a gunman. In the abstract, that's correct.


But none of the 33,736 killed in motor-vehicle crashes intended to die when they departed on their morning commutes or stepped off the curb to cross the street. The total number of gun deaths reported, however, includes those who used firearms to commit suicide.

Suicides comprised 71.6 percent of the total number of firearm deaths in 2014. If you remove those 21,334 deaths from the comparison and only examine unintentional deaths, you get a far different idea of your chances of dying in a traffic crash versus at the hands of a gunman.

Evaluate those 33,736 motor-vehicle deaths against the 12,265 non-suicide gunshot deaths – those that include homicides, "legal interventions" (as the CDC calls them), accidental shootings, and undetermined deaths – and it would appear that traffic fatalities, in sheer number, are a much greater blight upon America than non-suicide gun deaths.

That's not what you'd expect, of course. Traffic deaths get scant attention, usually relegated to the inside pages of a local newspaper unless they're particularly unusual. But our narrow focus on how people die has led us astray from the sheer number of people dying via one method or the other, and as such, distorted our perception and response to the threats.

Terrorism, for example, caused zero deaths on US soil in 2014, according to CDC figures, and only three deaths in the five-year stretch between 2010 and 2014.

Yet the Department of Homeland Security's budget reached $59.9 billion in 2014. TheNational Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the federal agency charged with keeping motorists safe, received $819 million.

Lest you think gun deaths and motor vehicle crashes are vying for the dubious title of top cause of unintentional fatalities in America, that distinction belongs to drug overdoses, which killed a whopping 42,032 Americans in 2014, mostly from prescription pain medications, according to the National Safety Council. "The United States is in the midst of a prescription painkiller overdose epidemic," the CDC said in a recent report.

 

[BULLDOG]

Jamaica's murder rate climbed significantly after implementing gun control.

So, I don't think that gun control does much of anything.

However, gun control has historically been used by tyrants, they disarmed Natives, and Black slaves in the USA, while they disarmed Holocaust Jews in Nazi Germany, the Islamic Turks disarmed the Armenians during the Armenian genocide, the British disarmed India during their India genocides, and Soviets disarmed citizens too, as did Communist China, and countless others.

So, it seems that gun control does nothing but empower tyrants.

So you think reasonable gun control is the same as disarming the country. Typical gun nut.

I actually don't own any guns, as of yet.

So, no I'm no gun nut.

However, I fail to see any correlation between gun control, and decreased murders.

Actually, if we look at gun ownership by country, if anything the exact opposite pattern occurs, with murder being higher in the nations with less guns on the whole.

So you aren't one of those cowards that are too afraid to leave home without a gun? Good for you.

And you call cowardice where it is actually simply being prepared. People use seat belts, fire extinguishers and burglar alarms and those who carry a gun with them put it on their belt with the same emotion as they do their cell phone and with the same emotion they use when they lock their front door when they leave......

that you call them cowards is actually psychological projection.....you are the coward, yet you call others coward to cover for it...

Yep you;re still here spouting the same tired lines, and your mind is still closed to anything but those same tired lines. I have no need or desire to deal with your closed mind.

 

[2aguy]

Jamaica's murder rate climbed significantly after implementing gun control.

So, I don't think that gun control does much of anything.

However, gun control has historically been used by tyrants, they disarmed Natives, and Black slaves in the USA, while they disarmed Holocaust Jews in Nazi Germany, the Islamic Turks disarmed the Armenians during the Armenian genocide, the British disarmed India during their India genocides, and Soviets disarmed citizens too, as did Communist China, and countless others.

So, it seems that gun control does nothing but empower tyrants.

So you think reasonable gun control is the same as disarming the country. Typical gun nut.

I actually don't own any guns, as of yet.

So, no I'm no gun nut.

However, I fail to see any correlation between gun control, and decreased murders.

Actually, if we look at gun ownership by country, if anything the exact opposite pattern occurs, with murder being higher in the nations with less guns on the whole.

So you aren't one of those cowards that are too afraid to leave home without a gun? Good for you.

And you call cowardice where it is actually simply being prepared. People use seat belts, fire extinguishers and burglar alarms and those who carry a gun with them put it on their belt with the same emotion as they do their cell phone and with the same emotion they use when they lock their front door when they leave......

that you call them cowards is actually psychological projection.....you are the coward, yet you call others coward to cover for it...

Yep you;re still here spouting the same tired lines, and your mind is still closed to anything but those same tired lines. I have no need or desire to deal with your closed mind.

Yes.....you don't want to state what you think are reasonable gun laws...because you know they are not reasonable, or successsful at stopping criminals...and you don't want us to actually address the laws you support with the truth, facts or reality....

 

[2aguy]

Jamaica's murder rate climbed significantly after implementing gun control.

So, I don't think that gun control does much of anything.

However, gun control has historically been used by tyrants, they disarmed Natives, and Black slaves in the USA, while they disarmed Holocaust Jews in Nazi Germany, the Islamic Turks disarmed the Armenians during the Armenian genocide, the British disarmed India during their India genocides, and Soviets disarmed citizens too, as did Communist China, and countless others.

So, it seems that gun control does nothing but empower tyrants.

So you think reasonable gun control is the same as disarming the country. Typical gun nut.

I actually don't own any guns, as of yet.

So, no I'm no gun nut.

However, I fail to see any correlation between gun control, and decreased murders.

Actually, if we look at gun ownership by country, if anything the exact opposite pattern occurs, with murder being higher in the nations with less guns on the whole.

So you aren't one of those cowards that are too afraid to leave home without a gun? Good for you.

And you call cowardice where it is actually simply being prepared. People use seat belts, fire extinguishers and burglar alarms and those who carry a gun with them put it on their belt with the same emotion as they do their cell phone and with the same emotion they use when they lock their front door when they leave......

that you call them cowards is actually psychological projection.....you are the coward, yet you call others coward to cover for it...

Yep you;re still here spouting the same tired lines, and your mind is still closed to anything but those same tired lines. I have no need or desire to deal with your closed mind.

Your gun laws are so reasonable that you dare not post what they are....they will so impress us with their reasonableness.....

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Jamaica's murder rate climbed significantly after implementing gun control.

So, I don't think that gun control does much of anything.

However, gun control has historically been used by tyrants, they disarmed Natives, and Black slaves in the USA, while they disarmed Holocaust Jews in Nazi Germany, the Islamic Turks disarmed the Armenians during the Armenian genocide, the British disarmed India during their India genocides, and Soviets disarmed citizens too, as did Communist China, and countless others.

So, it seems that gun control does nothing but empower tyrants.

So you think reasonable gun control is the same as disarming the country. Typical gun nut.

I actually don't own any guns, as of yet.

So, no I'm no gun nut.

However, I fail to see any correlation between gun control, and decreased murders.

Actually, if we look at gun ownership by country, if anything the exact opposite pattern occurs, with murder being higher in the nations with less guns on the whole.

I know that's what you have been told.
View attachment 123003
Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Small Arms Survey

Your list may put Scotland near the bottom of the list.

But, fails to inform us that Scotland has some nasty knife crime waves.

Scotland's actually the lowest gun ownership rate region of Western Europe, and has the highest murder rate in Western Europe.
Unless we include Finland as Western Europe, which I wouldn't they're North-East of Poland which is considered Eastern Europe, and they're Finno-Ugric, which all other Finno-Ugrics live in Eastern Europe.

 

[Rustic]

Jamaica's murder rate climbed significantly after implementing gun control.

So, I don't think that gun control does much of anything.

However, gun control has historically been used by tyrants, they disarmed Natives, and Black slaves in the USA, while they disarmed Holocaust Jews in Nazi Germany, the Islamic Turks disarmed the Armenians during the Armenian genocide, the British disarmed India during their India genocides, and Soviets disarmed citizens too, as did Communist China, and countless others.

So, it seems that gun control does nothing but empower tyrants.

So you think reasonable gun control is the same as disarming the country. Typical gun nut.

I actually don't own any guns, as of yet.

So, no I'm no gun nut.

However, I fail to see any correlation between gun control, and decreased murders.

Actually, if we look at gun ownership by country, if anything the exact opposite pattern occurs, with murder being higher in the nations with less guns on the whole.

So you aren't one of those cowards that are too afraid to leave home without a gun? Good for you.

And you call cowardice where it is actually simply being prepared. People use seat belts, fire extinguishers and burglar alarms and those who carry a gun with them put it on their belt with the same emotion as they do their cell phone and with the same emotion they use when they lock their front door when they leave......

that you call them cowards is actually psychological projection.....you are the coward, yet you call others coward to cover for it...

Yep you;re still here spouting the same tired lines, and your mind is still closed to anything but those same tired lines. I have no need or desire to deal with your closed mind.

2017 Real Time Death Statistics in America

 

[frigidweirdo]

Why do you need commercials promoting two parent families? For me that would seem to be a massive waste of money.

Certainly I've seen problems with this kind of promoting where people believe something will happen, and then they don't work at it.

What is needed is education. Where people talk and discuss the issues, try and make sense of the world they live in, try and understand what the issues are in relationships so they can enter into them with knowledge, with a thought process, with a sense of what is right and what is wrong.

The same with parenting. What food should kids eat? How much TV and computer games should they play? How do they want their kids to turn out? What issues are there? Things like this should be taught in education to make people aware. You do this and you'll see lower single parent families, less problems with kids, better educational achievement.

Saying that it's all natural and people should just know it, when they clearly don't, isn't going to get you anywhere.

What is wrong with morals of an older era? Well... they represent a different world. People turn off, these morals aren't about them any more. So what are their morals? Well they don't really know, so there aren't really any morals.

What morals are there in the Bible about the internet? None, because it didn't exist. The world has changed, until you accept that everything else changes with it, you'e going to be fixing the aircon unit as if it were a paper fan. It isn't going to work.

Yes, I know what the OP is about, and it's like asking a question which ignores the actual problem. So I'm talking about the actual ways to solve the actual problem, rather than pretending the problem is really simple and the solution too.

What you fail to understand is you can't educate people that have no interest in being educated. What are you going to do, put handcuffs on them and drag them into a class?

These people just don't care. They have children and expect them to raise themselves. It's like I told you about my neighbor and his stupid basketball hoop. Education is not why those kids were out all night, it's because the mothers could care less if they were out all night.

Education for the kid? As far as the mother is concerned, her duty is to make sure the kid gets on the school bus. There.....she did her part for her kids education, and some don't even do that.

I didn't say you couldn't educate people who have no interest in being educated at all, so where the fuck you came up with the idea that I'm somehow failing to understand such a thing I don't know.

What I do know is that most kids can be educated. Sometimes there are issues which mean a kid struggles with being educated, but most can be.

Also, with your wild assumptions here, I am talking about trying to change SOCIETY, not change every individual. Statistics. Put something in place and so many percent will change. Not every single person, but hopefully enough for society to see positive results.

So, if you have parents who think they don't have much of a role in their kid's education, then what are you going to do?

You could:

A) do the right wing way, which is say "we can't do anything, it's too hard and it'll cost money, so fuck it, let these kids rot in hell" or...
B) You can try and educate these kids. You can try and stop the cycle of poverty that pervades society. You can give the kids an education that matters, you can teach them stuff that will stop the cycle of poverty in as many as you can.

I know you favor A. But hey, not everyone has a "can't do" attitude.

So what kids are not being educated and why?

And don't say the schools. If you took upper middle-class students, and put them in those same lower cost schools, those kids will still learn and pass with A's. And if you took those lower income students, put them in the upper-middle class school, they will still have the same failure rate.

I attended a private Catholic school when I was a kid. It was totally funded by the church parishioners which meant we didn't have a lot of money.

We had no classes to switch to, the school was too small. We had no free lunch because we didn't even have a cafeteria or lunch room. We ate our homemade lunch at our desk. We didn't have college educated union teachers. Most of the teachers were nuns. To support our own school, we had bake sales the mothers contributed to, rummage sales, we went door to door selling cookies.

But I would put our class against any public school class for a contest to see which class was more educated.

Yes, yes I know. The lefts solution to everything is keep throwing more money at it, but trust me, it won't help in this situation.

Kids aren't being educated properly because the govt, elected by the people, does seem to want to think about education in terms of producing an educated workforce. Too many people on sites like this get into hysterics any time anyone comes out with a decent idea.

We know sugar fucks with people's brains and makes them study less well, makes them moody, makes them lose concentration a lot, ie, produces bad students, so Michelle Obama says "hey, how about we reduce ketchup sachets to one per student?" My personal view is that ketchup sachets shouldn't be anywhere near schools in the first place, let alone pizza, French (excuse me, Freedom) Fries, hamburgers and all that other shit, but holy crap, the right went BALLISTIC on this matter. Some went crazy because they think schools shouldn't give any food to any kid, others went crazy because they think this is the govt telling their kids what to do, and others just went ballistic because it was a black women saying things.

Either way, you have something that would have a mildly positive impact on studying, and the right is totally opposed to this. It beggars belief, it really does.

So, you have politicians pandering to the extremes on both sides, you have partisan politics which takes in even more of the politicians, you have a system where politicians need the money to get elected/re-elected and they're willing to prostitute themselves for that money, and all the time nothing gets done for the people that actually makes any sense.

Then you have schools which teach traditional subjects. Why? Why is a kid who is going to end up working on cars his whole life doing literature and other things which are completely irrelevant to their life at 13, completely irrelevant to their life at 23, 33, 43 and the rest?

Education is supposed to be about intelligence, logic, progress, and yet people who run education seem to be of the opinion that it's all about making them look good. It's bullshit.

Yes, there are those who throw money at things, that isn't my view. Money can be important, but it needs to be directed in the right way.

As for your school being "more educated" than other schools, education cannot be quantified in the first place. Those who do it, the politicians, make education worse in many cases.

After I left private school I went to a public high school. I couldn't believe the dopes in there. Anyway, we had a vocational school that served several communities. You spent over half of your day there if you were lucky enough to be accepted.

Problem is by the time you spent two years in vocational school, everything they taught you was outdated already. From what I was told, some employers would not recognize vocational school as proper training and some couldn't get a job in the field of work they chose.

I just came home from grocery shopping. I ran into some friends of mine over there and we started BSn a little bit. He told me his company was looking for workers but couldn't find any because they either couldn't do simple addition or they couldn't pass a drug test. He said they ever lowered the qualifications by allowing them to use a calculator, and some of them couldn't even do that. How do you graduate high school without the ability to do simple arithmetic?

I do think there should be a financial class in high schools. Kids come out of school without knowing a thing about credit cards, interest, how to write a check, what the stock market is about, the commodities market, the real estate market, opening up your own business. For kids that will never make it to college, such a course would be very beneficial.

Fine, in some places they make you do vocational stuff and it's not of the required standard. That doesn't mean it doesn't work.

I've worked in Austria in a technical school as well as a Gymnasium, like an English Grammar School, for kids of a higher level.

Höhere Technische Lehranstalt - Wikipedia

Here is the wikipedia article for the HTL system. One of the important things is they don't make it lower than the Gymnasium. Some of the subjects in the HTL are extremely difficult. You study your vocational stuff alongside the skills you need. Everyone learns English, but those studying Civil Engineering will learn English based around Civil Engineering, the teachers will make the subject fit the course.

The HTL system is extremely effective, kids are coming out of school and able to walk into jobs.

Again, it's a case of whether people the right people are able to have an input into the system, so the system works. The HTL has teachers who are part of the profession that they're teaching.

Yes, basic skills are essential, and there are ways to deal with students who don't get those basis skills, and that is to keep the behind a year if they can't achieve the success they need to pass the year.

 

[BULLDOG]

Jamaica's murder rate climbed significantly after implementing gun control.

So, I don't think that gun control does much of anything.

However, gun control has historically been used by tyrants, they disarmed Natives, and Black slaves in the USA, while they disarmed Holocaust Jews in Nazi Germany, the Islamic Turks disarmed the Armenians during the Armenian genocide, the British disarmed India during their India genocides, and Soviets disarmed citizens too, as did Communist China, and countless others.

So, it seems that gun control does nothing but empower tyrants.

So you think reasonable gun control is the same as disarming the country. Typical gun nut.

I actually don't own any guns, as of yet.

So, no I'm no gun nut.

However, I fail to see any correlation between gun control, and decreased murders.

Actually, if we look at gun ownership by country, if anything the exact opposite pattern occurs, with murder being higher in the nations with less guns on the whole.

I know that's what you have been told.
View attachment 123003
Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Small Arms Survey

Your list may put Scotland near the bottom of the list.

But, fails to inform us that Scotland has some nasty knife crime waves.

Scotland's actually the lowest gun ownership rate region of Western Europe, and has the highest murder rate in Western Europe.
Unless we include Finland as Western Europe, which I wouldn't they're North-East of Poland which is considered Eastern Europe, and they're Finno-Ugric, which all other Finno-Ugrics live in Eastern Europe.

Not discussing knives.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Jamaica's murder rate climbed significantly after implementing gun control.

So, I don't think that gun control does much of anything.

However, gun control has historically been used by tyrants, they disarmed Natives, and Black slaves in the USA, while they disarmed Holocaust Jews in Nazi Germany, the Islamic Turks disarmed the Armenians during the Armenian genocide, the British disarmed India during their India genocides, and Soviets disarmed citizens too, as did Communist China, and countless others.

So, it seems that gun control does nothing but empower tyrants.

So you think reasonable gun control is the same as disarming the country. Typical gun nut.

I actually don't own any guns, as of yet.

So, no I'm no gun nut.

However, I fail to see any correlation between gun control, and decreased murders.

Actually, if we look at gun ownership by country, if anything the exact opposite pattern occurs, with murder being higher in the nations with less guns on the whole.

I know that's what you have been told.
View attachment 123003
Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Small Arms Survey

Your list may put Scotland near the bottom of the list.

But, fails to inform us that Scotland has some nasty knife crime waves.

Scotland's actually the lowest gun ownership rate region of Western Europe, and has the highest murder rate in Western Europe.
Unless we include Finland as Western Europe, which I wouldn't they're North-East of Poland which is considered Eastern Europe, and they're Finno-Ugric, which all other Finno-Ugrics live in Eastern Europe.

Not discussing knives.

If there's more murders in Scotland from knives than from guns in the rest of Western Europe , then how DOES IT NOT MATTER?

Many Liberals simply seem to be one track minded, and some Conservatives do too.

But, I think Liberals are more so.

 

[frigidweirdo]

If you are poor, you should take a second job to support your family and upgrade your education so you can get out of your minimum wage job.

No, if you are poor, you shouldn't be having a family you can't support.

How can you work two jobs and be a parent to your children? How can you take classes to get ahead and do homework, work full time, run a house hold and give your children any kind of quality time?

You can't. That's why you don't have kids until you do all those things first.

The problem is "shouldn't" and reality are two very different things.

 

[Rustic]

Jamaica's murder rate climbed significantly after implementing gun control.

So, I don't think that gun control does much of anything.

However, gun control has historically been used by tyrants, they disarmed Natives, and Black slaves in the USA, while they disarmed Holocaust Jews in Nazi Germany, the Islamic Turks disarmed the Armenians during the Armenian genocide, the British disarmed India during their India genocides, and Soviets disarmed citizens too, as did Communist China, and countless others.

So, it seems that gun control does nothing but empower tyrants.

So you think reasonable gun control is the same as disarming the country. Typical gun nut.

I actually don't own any guns, as of yet.

So, no I'm no gun nut.

However, I fail to see any correlation between gun control, and decreased murders.

Actually, if we look at gun ownership by country, if anything the exact opposite pattern occurs, with murder being higher in the nations with less guns on the whole.

I know that's what you have been told.
View attachment 123003
Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Small Arms Survey

Your list may put Scotland near the bottom of the list.

But, fails to inform us that Scotland has some nasty knife crime waves.

Scotland's actually the lowest gun ownership rate region of Western Europe, and has the highest murder rate in Western Europe.
Unless we include Finland as Western Europe, which I wouldn't they're North-East of Poland which is considered Eastern Europe, and they're Finno-Ugric, which all other Finno-Ugrics live in Eastern Europe.

Not discussing knives.

Firearms are relatively harmless in the grand scheme of things, Life is supplied many more dangers than firearms.
2017 Real Time Death Statistics in America

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

If you are poor, you should take a second job to support your family and upgrade your education so you can get out of your minimum wage job.

No, if you are poor, you shouldn't be having a family you can't support.

How can you work two jobs and be a parent to your children? How can you take classes to get ahead and do homework, work full time, run a house hold and give your children any kind of quality time?

You can't. That's why you don't have kids until you do all those things first.

Our government really needs to combat this problem.

Personally I think criminals, idiots, and the poor should be fined for having kids, while the non-criminals, intelligent, and rich should be giving tax incentives for having kids.

 

[Pogo]

Jamaica's murder rate climbed significantly after implementing gun control.

So, I don't think that gun control does much of anything.

However, gun control has historically been used by tyrants, they disarmed Natives, and Black slaves in the USA, while they disarmed Holocaust Jews in Nazi Germany, the Islamic Turks disarmed the Armenians during the Armenian genocide, the British disarmed India during their India genocides, and Soviets disarmed citizens too, as did Communist China, and countless others.

So, it seems that gun control does nothing but empower tyrants.

Uhhhh........ if gun control "doesn't do much of anything" ................... then................. why would it do anything for tyrants?

Can't have it both ways --- either it does or it doesn't. Pick one and stay there.

 

[Divine Wind]

Jamaica's murder rate climbed significantly after implementing gun control.

So, I don't think that gun control does much of anything.

However, gun control has historically been used by tyrants, they disarmed Natives, and Black slaves in the USA, while they disarmed Holocaust Jews in Nazi Germany, the Islamic Turks disarmed the Armenians during the Armenian genocide, the British disarmed India during their India genocides, and Soviets disarmed citizens too, as did Communist China, and countless others.

So, it seems that gun control does nothing but empower tyrants.

So you think reasonable gun control is the same as disarming the country. Typical gun nut.

And yet you throw out the words "reasonable gun control" but are afraid to name what you mean. And then, after not naming what you think is Reasonable Gun control...you call someone a derogatory name....

Agreed. It's a long known, all too common behavior of the anti-gun left.

Next they'll throw out "75% of NRA members agree with 'reasonable gun control'". Heck, I agree with "reasonable gun control", but when the anti-gun Left spells out what they mean by "reasonable gun control", it comes down to gun bans, registration of everything from guns to bullets and restrictions so tight that a father can't let his 12 year old son shoot a .22 rifle without a background check and "transfer" of firearm form.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

So, the fact I know you are armed is justification to shoot you? I think not.

No, pulling it out while in front of a police officer is.

Wasn't it already out? Sorry, but the police officer was too quick to shoot. He had cover and the "suspect" wasn't pointing the gun at him. He had time to take control of the situation.

Three experienced police officers who testified agreed the situation was mishandled: How to Make a Police Shooting Disappear: The Tamir Rice Story

Nonetheless, extremists are all about "all or nothing". I know the anti-gun, anti-police mob is like that. I hope you aren't likewise. There are over 750,000 LEOs in this nation. Mistakes happen, but they shouldn't be covered up. They also shouldn't be extrapolated by a bunch of anti-gun and/or anti-cop assholes to mean one mistake applies to all concerned.

It's hard not to extrapolate when the so called GOOD cops cover for the bad ones. Covering up and excusing such behavior is just as bad as doing it.

If you read the linked article, then you'll know they didn't.

If they didn't in this case, I congratulate them. Sadly, you don't see that too often.

As someone from New York, I think what we really need is minority control.

35.1% of NYC is White, while 2.9% of murderers were White.

(Sources)

Demographics of New York City - Wikipedia

http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downlo...planning/enforcement_report_year_end_2014.pdf




We could lower the murder rate by about 12 X, by eliminating you know who.

 

[Rustic]

Jamaica's murder rate climbed significantly after implementing gun control.

So, I don't think that gun control does much of anything.

However, gun control has historically been used by tyrants, they disarmed Natives, and Black slaves in the USA, while they disarmed Holocaust Jews in Nazi Germany, the Islamic Turks disarmed the Armenians during the Armenian genocide, the British disarmed India during their India genocides, and Soviets disarmed citizens too, as did Communist China, and countless others.

So, it seems that gun control does nothing but empower tyrants.

Uhhhh........ if gun control "doesn't do much of anything" ................... then................. why would it do anything for tyrants?

Can't have it both ways --- either it does or it doesn't. Pick one and stay there.

2017 Real Time Death Statistics in America

Firearms have never been the problem...

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Jamaica's murder rate climbed significantly after implementing gun control.

So, I don't think that gun control does much of anything.

However, gun control has historically been used by tyrants, they disarmed Natives, and Black slaves in the USA, while they disarmed Holocaust Jews in Nazi Germany, the Islamic Turks disarmed the Armenians during the Armenian genocide, the British disarmed India during their India genocides, and Soviets disarmed citizens too, as did Communist China, and countless others.

So, it seems that gun control does nothing but empower tyrants.

Uhhhh........ if gun control "doesn't do much of anything" ................... then................. why would it do anything for tyrants?

Can't have it both ways --- either it does or it doesn't. Pick one and stay there.

Gun control doesn't do much but empower tyrants...

Is that better Mr. OCD?