How American gun deaths and gun laws compare to Canada's

[JoeB131]

Maybe we should outlaw guns to Jew haters?

"Billy, don't draw on the wall with Crayons!"

"WHY DO YOU HATE ME!!!!!!"

Yeah, that's kind of what you sound like, Jew-boy.

 

[JoeB131]

"Again, only your bizarre interpretation of the constitution, not a practical one".

Nope, that would be according to the legal (Supreme Court) interpretation. Your's would be a violation of civil rights.

Actualy, no, most of our history, the government has had the right to regulate who has gun, how many guns they can have, and what kind of guns they can have.

The bizarre intrepretation of gun ownership being a right is a recent invention, mostly bought by the Gun Industry who want to move product now that most folks realize hunting is cruel and stupid.

 

[9thIDdoc]

"Again, only your bizarre interpretation of the constitution, not a practical one".

Nope, that would be according to the legal (Supreme Court) interpretation. Your's would be a violation of civil rights.

Actualy, no, most of our history, the government has had the right to regulate who has gun, how many guns they can have, and what kind of guns they can have.

The bizarre intrepretation of gun ownership being a right is a recent invention, mostly bought by the Gun Industry who want to move product now that most folks realize hunting is cruel and stupid.

Sorry but you don't get to make up history to suit yourself. The Constitution has always assured the right to keep and bear arms. Get someone who understands English to read it to you. Hunting is also a right in my State. You are delusional.

 

[2aguy]

Civilians shoot bad guys two times more often than cops do. So maybe you should ban cops from having guns too.

Did you mean that cops shoot bad guys more often than civilians?

Number of justifiable homicides by civilians - 232 in 2010

Expanded Homicide Data Table 15

Line of duty homicides by law enforcement. - 385

Expanded Homicide Data Table 14

So it strikes me that if out of 33,000 gun fatalities, you only have 232 cases where CIVILIANS with guns kill bad guys, the guns aren't providing the protection you guys claim they do.

Of course you have to lie....it is the only way to push your anti gun agenda.....232 cases of the criminal pushing the attack to the point where the civilian has to pull the trigger on him.......according to bill clinton and backed up by 2013 research by obama's CDC, Americans use guns to stop violent criminal attack 1.5 million times a year. That means that Americans are not trigger happy and that they only take the life of a violent criminal when there is no other way out.

There were 21,175 gun suicides, 8,124 gun murders of criminals murdering other criminals for the most part, and 505 accidental gun deaths....in a country of over 357 million guns in private hands....

That is the truth, the facts and the reality......try posting some of those things in the future.

 

[2aguy]

Why do you guys always say this.......as if we have ever tried to make or defend that idea?

No....no.......we have laws that say you can't use a gun to commit a crime....so when someone breaks the law, you arrest them and put them in jail....

What part of that dynamic do you not understand?

The part where we already throw two million people in jail, but the criminals can still get guns because thanks to the NRA, there are so many loopholes like private sales and gun shows and a weak background check system that these crazy people have no problem getting their hands on guns.

Criminals do not get their guns from private sales they get them from stealing them or buy using straw purchasers who can pass background checks twit...and you know that and the fact that you keep lying about it shows you are a vile human. If a straw purchaser can pass a background check they can buy a gun anywhere, legally, at a gun store, a gun show or from an individual no matter how many background checks they get....

And the muslim assassin who tried to murder the police officer should have been in jail since he had already been arrested multiple times for gun offenses including carrying a gun illeally as a criminal, and the gun he had was stolen from the police....

 

[2aguy]

Nope...it is mostly mentally ill people ending their own lives, and the tool does not matter...since Japan, south Korea and China have zero access to guns and commit suicide at higher rates than we do...dittos many countries in Europe......

Asian cultures see suicide as honorable, American culture sees it as cowardly and a sin... so, no, not even comparable.

Would you eliminate all suicides by getting rid of the guns? Nope. Would you reduce a lot of them, yup.

But some people have more important priorities. Like compensating for Tiny Dicks.

Poland does not have a culture of suicide and they have a higher rate of suicide than we do as do other countries in Europe...and again...

Japan, South Korea and china have 0 access to guns for citizens and their suicide rate is higher than ours is...they do not use guns.......

And 19,974 people committed suicide in the United States without guns. So guns are not the issue.

 

[2aguy]

Canada doesn't have black gangs.

they are importing muslim gangs though.....

Only 13% of homicides are gang related in this country. So that argument doesn't fly.

Wrong....13% of crimes that are defined as gang activity...gang members commit all kinds of murder not directed by their bosses in the gangs......if they shoot each other at parties or in revenge over a slight that isn't designated gang activity twit. if they break into a home and murder the people that isn't gang activity either......

 

[2aguy]

A stark truth that gun grabbers refuse to face is that there are enough highly durable used guns already in this country that nobody who really wants one needs to go without even if ALL new gun sales stopped tomorrow. "Smart" guns? Nobody is going to throw away money making them if nobody is going to buy them.
The fact that guns make suicides easy and (if used correctly) painless is a very good thing.

That's why you outlaw possession of a dumb gun. Not all at once, mind you. State that all guns must be converted to smart technology within 10 years. The gun industry can even get a windfall producing the retrofitting kits for them.

Easy-peasy.

No.......smart guns do not work......and I would never trust one with my life or the life of my family....that the anti gunners are making it mandatory in New Jersey once the first ones hit the market is another reason not to trust them..........and the smart gun companies are giving money to obama.....

 

[2aguy]

[
Bullshit, suicides are not due to availability of guns as people will do what ever works. And I dont think anyone missed you lack of link

age.

actually, the gun homicide rate is closer to 11,000 a year.

And according to the National Gang Center, the agency tasked with tracking gang activity, only

Request Rejected

• The total number of gang homicides reported by respondents in the NYGS sample averaged nearly 2,000 annually from 2007 to 2012. During roughly the same time period (2007 to 2011), the FBI estimated, on average, more than 15,500 homicides across the United States (www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-1). These estimates suggest that gang-related homicides typically accounted for around 13 percent of all homicides annually.

The FBI, the law enforcement agency puts the number at 8,124 gun murders for 2014.....the CDC has an anti gun agenda and can't be trusted with simple gun research.

 

[2aguy]

Outlawing dumb guns would be a violation of the Constitution and you would never get enough support for amendment.

Again, only your bizarre interpretation of the constitution, not a practical one.

Hey, here's an idea. How about we only allow free access to the kinds of "arms" the Founding Slave Rapists actually knew about. So you are free to own a muzzle-loading Musket to your heart's content. That sounds reasonable.

As soon as you ban computers and movies...since the founders actually couldn't forsee them and they weren't around at the founding so according to you are not protected by the first Amendment.....

You are free to use books...and tell stories...but computers that are used for identity theft, stealing state secrets, sex crimes and any number of other crimes should be banned...right?

And movies that glorify gun use and violence....should never be made and obama can do that with a stroke of his pen...since movies are not covered by the First Amendment according to your twisted logic.....

 

[2aguy]

Smart gun owner to attacker: "I forgot to change the fucking battery! Could you wait for a minute? I'm sure I have a spare battery somewhere in one of these drawers".

Even better....wait....I have to pull out the batteries and reboot the chip.....it will only take 10 minutes or so....so keep raping my wife and go through my house looking for stuff...I'll be ready in 10......

 

[Dr Grump]

that might be in your case subject

but not mine

Why do the words matter?

I am a 'subject <chortle, chortle>, yet I am more free than you. Go figure...

unlikely

Very likely.

 

[westwall]

"Again, only your bizarre interpretation of the constitution, not a practical one".

Nope, that would be according to the legal (Supreme Court) interpretation. Your's would be a violation of civil rights.

Actualy, no, most of our history, the government has had the right to regulate who has gun, how many guns they can have, and what kind of guns they can have.

The bizarre intrepretation of gun ownership being a right is a recent invention, mostly bought by the Gun Industry who want to move product now that most folks realize hunting is cruel and stupid.

No, they haven't and as the Supremes have stated the laws that have been passed are for the most part unconstitutional. If it weren't for your pathological lying dude you would have no argument at all would you.... Nope..

 

[flacaltenn]

Outlawing dumb guns would be a violation of the Constitution and you would never get enough support for amendment.

Again, only your bizarre interpretation of the constitution, not a practical one.

Hey, here's an idea. How about we only allow free access to the kinds of "arms" the Founding Slave Rapists actually knew about. So you are free to own a muzzle-loading Musket to your heart's content. That sounds reasonable.

Hey great. That would mean I could own the equivalent of a heavy naval cruiser with 14 cannon.. AND get paid by the govt to go hunt Somali pirates.. Coooool....

 

[JoeB131]

Sorry but you don't get to make up history to suit yourself. The Constitution has always assured the right to keep and bear arms. Get someone who understands English to read it to you. Hunting is also a right in my State. You are delusional.

i checked with someone who reads English, and they see the words WELL REGULATED MILITIA in there, just like I do! Just like the Courts have for 230 years.

 

[JoeB131]

No, they haven't and as the Supremes have stated the laws that have been passed are for the most part unconstitutional. If it weren't for your pathological lying dude you would have no argument at all would you.... Nope..

uh, guy, no. For the most part, the courts have ruled that states and the federal government do have the right to regulate guns. Even Heller, the ABORTION Of a decision that it was, said the government can still regulate things like fully automatic weapons.

The only thing between you and common sense gun laws is that POS Scalia taking a well-deserved dirt nap.

 

[westwall]

No, they haven't and as the Supremes have stated the laws that have been passed are for the most part unconstitutional. If it weren't for your pathological lying dude you would have no argument at all would you.... Nope..

uh, guy, no. For the most part, the courts have ruled that states and the federal government do have the right to regulate guns. Even Heller, the ABORTION Of a decision that it was, said the government can still regulate things like fully automatic weapons.

The only thing between you and common sense gun laws is that POS Scalia taking a well-deserved dirt nap.

Ahhhh yes, the ever popular progressive mantra of death to anyone who doesn't adhere to your beliefs. You truly are a scumbag of the first order aren't you....

 

[Jroc]

Maybe we should outlaw guns to Jew haters?

"Billy, don't draw on the wall with Crayons!"

"WHY DO YOU HATE ME!!!!!!"

Yeah, that's kind of what you sound like, Jew-boy.

Bigots calling people bigots...Kinda hypocritical don't you think sickly boy? You're physically and psychologically sick. Which is why I'll keep reposting your posts, so people know what they're dealing with

 

[JimBowie1958]

No, they haven't and as the Supremes have stated the laws that have been passed are for the most part unconstitutional. If it weren't for your pathological lying dude you would have no argument at all would you.... Nope..

uh, guy, no. For the most part, the courts have ruled that states and the federal government do have the right to regulate guns. Even Heller, the ABORTION Of a decision that it was, said the government can still regulate things like fully automatic weapons.

The only thing between you and common sense gun laws is that POS Scalia taking a well-deserved dirt nap.

Ahhhh yes, the ever popular progressive mantra of death to anyone who doesn't adhere to your beliefs. You truly are a scumbag of the first order aren't you....

That pretty much sums up the libtard record from the Jacobins int he Reign of Terror, to the Stalinists, Maoists and Pol Pot.

Libtards have never had an ideology that would not be willing to engage in genocide for.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Sorry but you don't get to make up history to suit yourself. The Constitution has always assured the right to keep and bear arms. Get someone who understands English to read it to you. Hunting is also a right in my State. You are delusional.

i checked with someone who reads English, and they see the words WELL REGULATED MILITIA in there, just like I do! Just like the Courts have for 230 years.

Did he happen to notice, right after that, “…the right of the people…”, or the statement that that right “…shall not be infringed.”?

Or does he (and you) interpret the phrase “the people” in the Marxist sense, to refer to government or some collective right rather than to individuals. That would be a bit of a trick, of course, given that Karl Marx was not born until well after the Second Amendment was written and ratified, and did not invent this misuse of the term “the people” until well after that.