I am beginning to think having 300 million +guns in the country isn't working out...

How many shootings in schools is that 11 in 23 days? Great job!

Schools are gun free zones. Great job!
Whatever, dupe. There are shootings everywhere concerts theaters night clubs take a break with the brainwashing...

The 2nd Amendment was passed in 1791. Up until 1965, or, for 174 years, where were the mass shootings? Per capita, guns were more prevalent; including the school teacher who kept a gun in the classroom. What happened in 1965, someone shot up the University of Texas. For the next 50 plus years, school and other random mass killings have taken place. What changed? Why the shift? Start with personal accountability. There is none. Next, how about Hollywood and Arts glorifying gun violence? Failed gun free zones plus the increase of non-gun mass killings where knives and cars are being used.

Maybe your wet dream fantasy of guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens will prevail but the trend towards mass killings is a culture shift; not a gun shift.


What happened was the Great Society and the destruction of the family through the welfare state. This left single, teenage girls to raise young males without husbands and young males without Fathers.......decades of this dynamic have no created 15 year old, stone cold killers.......
 
"Sure. But people with guns kill more easily than people without guns."

Absolutely. Which is what makes it possible for somebodies' little old grandmother to successfully defend herself from a big burly ax murderer. Also makes it possible for armed employees to defend schoolchildren.Gun free zones only serve to attract crazies.

Also, why do far more police officers die in the line of duty in the US than the UK? The unarmed police officers in the UK are just potential victims, whereas the armed police officers in the US can defend themselves, so they shouldn't actually die. Right?

Somehow I suspect there are far more of both police officers and criminals in the US than in the UK and that there are far more lives protected with firearms.

The problem is, if you look at the statistics, it's better to not be able to defend yourself with a gun at the risk of being attacked by a gun.

3/4 of all murders in the US happen with guns. The US murder rate is 4 times higher than the UK murder rate. So the UK murder rate is about the same as the US non-gun murder rate. Coincidence?

Somehow you suspect?

So you don't know? So you're literally taking the facts that I've presented and ignoring them because it's inconvenient for your narrative and making stuff up to fill the gaps?

Oh, wow.

Far more police officers means what?

List of American police officers killed in the line of duty - Wikipedia

In 2016 there were 140 US police officers, with guns, killed in the line of duty.

List of British police officers killed in the line of duty - Wikipedia

In 2016 there were 0 UK police officers killed in the line of duty.

By the Numbers: How Many Cops Are There In the USA?

This guy estimates that there are at least 900,000 police officers in the US.

List of countries and dependencies by number of police officers - Wikipedia

Wikipedia estimates 913,000.

England and Wales has 198,000, plus 17,000 for Scotland and 7,000 for Northern Ireland. That's like 220,000 police officers which would be about comparible with the US per capita. They have 284 per 100,000 in the US and 302 in England and Wales though it's hard to define what is and what isn't a police officer and how much it impacts crime etc. So, we're almost in the same ballpark.

Are there more criminals? Certainly there are more locked up. But then you'd have to ask why the US has more criminals. I could give lots of suggested answers, like the US just doesn't give a shit.

But here's the reality. If guns save lives, why is the US murder rate higher, and why do FAR MORE police officers die every year?

140 in the US, this would be 28 police officers killed in the UK per year in order to be at the same level. You have to go back to October 1999 in order to achieve this level. That's 19 years. This means in the US a police officer is 19 times more likely to die doing their job than a British police office.
Also a US citizen if 4 times more likely to die than a UK citizen.

These are the facts. You can't dress them up with anything.

Having guns in society is more dangerous.

Somehow you suspect?

So you don't know? So you're literally taking the facts that I've presented and ignoring them because it's inconvenient for your narrative and making stuff up to fill the gaps?

Untrue. Most of the "facts" you've presented are no such thing. Lies, spin, irrelevant, invalid and/or unsupported comparisons, and begging the question.

"The problem is, if you look at the statistics, it's better to not be able to defend yourself with a gun at the risk of being attacked by a gun."

Lie. Which is likely the reason why you fail to link or otherwise support your alleged "fact"
You claim that guns attack people and still pretend to deal with facts. How idiotic.


"3/4 of all murders in the US happen with guns. The US murder rate is 4 times higher than the UK murder rate. So the UK murder rate is about the same as the US non-gun murder rate. Coincidence?"

Unsupported, off topic and pointless..

"England and Wales has 198,000, plus 17,000 for Scotland and 7,000 for Northern Ireland....""If guns save lives, why is the US murder rate higher, and why do FAR MORE police officers die every year?"

Fact: If you have far more police policing a far larger population it is altogether reasonable to expect more on the job deaths. And again you fail to provide support for your claims.

"Having guns in society is more dangerous"

Untrue unproven unsupported and (even if true) off topic. And who makes the claim that a more strictly controlled society is preferable to one that is more free?



So what have I said that is false?

I mean, you've not attacked a single fact of mine for being wrong.

No, I don't claim guns attack people.

The fact that you're saying this after quoting me having said

"Sure. But people with guns kill more easily than people without guns."

and then you go off and insult.

You're deflecting, not debating. So, until you stop acting like a child, we're through.

"Sure. But people with guns kill more easily than people without guns."

True. But that truth does not support the idea that there are too many guns in our society and I gave an examples of why that is true.

No, I don't claim guns attack people.

No? You didn't write?:
" ...it's better to not be able to defend yourself with a gun at the risk of being attacked by a gun."
As I said before that whole statement is a lie. What part of that did you not understand?

As also noted the comparison of the raw numbers of officers killed in the US to those killed in the UK has little meaning because of the great difference in the numbers of police officers on the job in both places.

"Statistics say" does not prove a point and doesn't even count as evidence if you don't provide a link or direct quote that can be checked. Claiming something as fact just because you say so doesn't fly.

True. Yes, this is what I said, not what you claimed I said.

So why did you claim it?

Yes, I wrote it's better to be without a gun than with a gun. Why?

gun-ownership-study-state-map.png


There are various factors which lead to a place having more crime etc, so you're never going to find a definitive answer, Alaska has the highest rape rate in the US and the highest gun ownership rate in the US too. New Jersey has the lowest rape rate and the 3rd lowest gun ownership rate.

Surely having a gun would prevent rape. Or maybe it empowers rapers.

Most other western countries restrict firearms a lot more than the US and have lower murder rates.

Again, lots of things point to the US having a problem with guns that leads to more gun crime.

Then you're saying it's all a lie. No, this is you using the English language badly. Just because you don't agree with something, doesn't make it a lie.

But then your argument isn't very solid, so you use such language to avoid having to make a decent argument.


And as it was pointed out to you...having a rifle or shotgun in your home, often locked in a safe or gun cabinet is not going to allow you to stop a rapist at the bus stop......

So you guys do everything you can to prevent concealed carry of guns...then, when women are not allowed to have a gun on them to stop a rape...you claim that more guns do not stop rape...you are vile assholes.....

Criminal culture is different around the world...but you have to ignore that to push your gun control agenda....British criminals have guns...they are getting more guns....they do not use those guns to murder their criminal rivals or their victims....American criminals not only shoot more they stab more as well.....our knife murder rate is also higher than the knife murder rate in Britain...is that because we have more knives here, genius?


Guns do not empower rapists.....a man can physically beat a woman into submission or simply use a knife......a woman can't physically defeat one or more men, and throwing a weapon into the equation makes the woman an even easier target for the criminal...


A gun is the most effective means at stopping a rape......


Guns Effective Defense Against Rape


However, most recent studies with improved methodology are consistently showing that the more forceful the resistance, the lower the risk of a completed rape, with no increase in physical injury. Sarah Ullman's original research (Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1998) and critical review of past studies (Criminal Justice and Behavior, 1997) are especially valuable in solidifying this conclusion.

I wish to single out one particular subtype of physical resistance: Use of a weapon, and especially a firearm, is statistically a woman's best means of resistance, greatly enhancing her odds of escaping both rape and injury, compared to any other strategy of physical or verbal resistance. This conclusion is drawn from four types of information.

First, a 1989 study (Furby, Journal of Interpersonal Violence) found that both male and female survey respondents judged a gun to be the most effective means that a potential rape victim could use to fend off the assault. Rape "experts" considered it a close second, after eye-gouging.

Second, raw data from the 1979-1985 installments of the Justice Department's annual National Crime Victim Survey show that when a woman resists a stranger rape with a gun, the probability of completion was 0.1 percent and of victim injury 0.0 percent, compared to 31 percent and 40 percent, respectively, for all stranger rapes (Kleck, Social Problems, 1990).

Third, a recent paper (Southwick, Journal of Criminal Justice, 2000) analyzed victim resistance to violent crimes generally, with robbery, aggravated assault and rape considered together. Women who resisted with a gun were 2.5 times more likely to escape without injury than those who did not resist and 4 times more likely to escape uninjured than those who resisted with any means other than a gun. Similarly, their property losses in a robbery were reduced more than six-fold and almost three-fold, respectively, compared to the other categories of resistance strategy.

Fourth, we have two studies in the last 20 years that directly address the outcomes of women who resist attempted rape with a weapon. (Lizotte, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1986; Kleck, Social Problems, 1990.) The former concludes,"Further, women who resist rape with a gun or knife dramatically decrease their probability of completion." (Lizotte did not analyze victim injuries apart from the rape itself.) The latter concludes that "resistance with a gun or knife is the most effective form of resistance for preventing completion of a rape"; this is accomplished "without creating any significant additional risk of other injury."

The best conclusion from available scientific data, then, is when avoidance of rape has failed and one must choose between being raped and resisting, a woman's best option is to resist with a gun in her hands.

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

So, again a woman's best chance for stopping the rape and ultimately surviving the situation is to use a gun.....
 
How many shootings in schools is that 11 in 23 days? Great job!
Yeah, back in the 70s it was good old fashioned stabbings.
You apparently grew up in a nice neighborhood...I didn't.


Yes...in leading up to the 1960s crime wave we saw an increase in stabbings...followed later by more gun crime and murder...if you are willing to stab someone, shooting them isn't going to be a problem......and the crime wave was created by our new and improved welfare state under the Great Society creating single teenage mothers, raising young males without husbands and fathers.....

What are we seeing right now in Britain...massive increase in knife crime and stabbings, with their welfare state finally destroying their families.......check out the book "Life at the Bottom" a look at the British under class where single teenage girls are creating young sociopaths because they are raising young males without husbands and fathers....
 
When the government raids my house with Abrams tanks, I am going to exercise my constitutional right to stop them dead in their tracks with my 9 cartridge 9 MM!


No, you would drop to your knees and offer to suck dick and spread some lube on your anus because you are a gutless wonder.

Vandalshandal SEZ????? "You can't defeat da gubermint so just surrender and submit!!!!"

Right off of the top of my head I can think of six million Jewish folks that wish that they could have fought back had they been armed and the death that they would have suffered for doing so at the very least, would not have been one of starvation and torture. Fuck you and your liberal commie fuckwads.......want the guns of the people? Put your scrawny ass in the front of the line and demand it. I would wager that you will get the ammo in the form of empty shells fired first.

Seriously, liberal pussies like you make me sick to my stomach.............maybe some day your nads will drop.


Looking at the Polish Ghetto fight shows this to be true...the Jews in the Ghetto were practically unarmed.....and the Germans had to divert large amounts of resources to purge the Ghetto once the street fighting started....if you had an armed European population, the way the Swiss were armed, 435,000 armed citizens with military rifles.......the Germans could never have held the territory they took, and the death camps would likely not have happened.....
 
When the government raids my house with Abrams tanks, I am going to exercise my constitutional right to stop them dead in their tracks with my 9 cartridge 9 MM!


No, you would drop to your knees and offer to suck dick and spread some lube on your anus because you are a gutless wonder.

Vandalshandal SEZ????? "You can't defeat da gubermint so just surrender and submit!!!!"

Right off of the top of my head I can think of six million Jewish folks that wish that they could have fought back had they been armed and the death that they would have suffered for doing so at the very least, would not have been one of starvation and torture. Fuck you and your liberal commie fuckwads.......want the guns of the people? Put your scrawny ass in the front of the line and demand it. I would wager that you will get the ammo in the form of empty shells fired first.

Seriously, liberal pussies like you make me sick to my stomach.............maybe some day your nads will drop.
Right off the top of your brainwashed head it was the first thing that popped into your brain, dupe. The NRA and the GOP have brainwashed you fools until you think guns rule the country not law.


Mexico has laws......and 29,000 unarmed people were murdered by the drug cartels and their government allies....
 
How many shootings in schools is that 11 in 23 days? Great job!

Schools are gun free zones. Great job!
Whatever, dupe. There are shootings everywhere concerts theaters night clubs take a break with the brainwashing...

The 2nd Amendment was passed in 1791. Up until 1965, or, for 174 years, where were the mass shootings? Per capita, guns were more prevalent; including the school teacher who kept a gun in the classroom. What happened in 1965, someone shot up the University of Texas. For the next 50 plus years, school and other random mass killings have taken place. What changed? Why the shift? Start with personal accountability. There is none. Next, how about Hollywood and Arts glorifying gun violence? Failed gun free zones plus the increase of non-gun mass killings where knives and cars are being used.

Maybe your wet dream fantasy of guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens will prevail but the trend towards mass killings is a culture shift; not a gun shift.


These Moon Bat hate the concept of personal responsibility. They would rather take away the liberty of the right to keep and bear arms than to admit that some humans are simply assholes.

The sad thing is that taking away guns from law abiding Americans will do little or nothing to stop gun violence. We see that every day in places like Chicago that has tremendously high crime rates and very strict gun control laws.

Gun control doesn't stop crime. It just robs people of liberty. Too bad the Moon Bats are too stupid to understand things like that.
 
So I'm in favor of a dictatorship that owns all business and industry, and I I am in favor of a right-wing corporatist dictatorship at the same time? You have no idea what you're talking about..

You are a democrat.

Listen closely retard,

There is nothing even remotely "right wing" about the economic system of Mussolini. The head of the Italian Bolshevik party stopped taking orders from Lenin and formed Il Fascisti, his own brand of socialism.

You should take a remedial history class and try to learn something.
 
[

So what have I said that is false?

I mean, you've not attacked a single fact of mine for being wrong.

No, I don't claim guns attack people.

The fact that you're saying this after quoting me having said

"Sure. But people with guns kill more easily than people without guns."

and then you go off and insult.

You're deflecting, not debating. So, until you stop acting like a child, we're through.


One of the greatest mass slaughters in modern times was done with Machetes, Comrade.

Rwandan genocide - Wikipedia

You seek to disarm the peasants as a matter of control, you nor any other Bolshevik gives a shit about kids shot.
 
[

So what have I said that is false?

I mean, you've not attacked a single fact of mine for being wrong.

No, I don't claim guns attack people.

The fact that you're saying this after quoting me having said

"Sure. But people with guns kill more easily than people without guns."

and then you go off and insult.

You're deflecting, not debating. So, until you stop acting like a child, we're through.


One of the greatest mass slaughters in modern times was done with Machetes, Comrade.

Rwandan genocide - Wikipedia

You seek to disarm the peasants as a matter of control, you nor any other Bolshevik gives a shit about kids shot.


While the U.N. troops did nothing.....
 
I have asked this question over and over and still haven't had an anti gunner answer it.

If you are someone who is against normal citizens owning and carrying guns, then it is your view that it is better that a woman is rape, tortured and murdered, instead of that woman using a gun to stop it....

Ask that question to anti gunners and all of a sudden they stop posting....
 
it always disturbs me how easily the Left use dead Kids to push a agenda yet ignores the millions killed by abortion.... Which in this country has killed more kids in the last 50 years you think? Abortion or Guns crime? I am betting abortion.
 
it always disturbs me how easily the Left use dead Kids to push a agenda yet ignores the millions killed by abortion.... Which in this country has killed more kids in the last 50 years you think? Abortion or Guns crime? I am betting abortion.


drowning, suffocation, cars.....the anti gunners are mentally ill.....it isn't the number of dead kids that bother them, since so many other things kill more children than guns....and your point about abortion is telling as well.....it is the object that sets them off......

More people are killed in cars, more kids are killed by cars....and drugs and alcohol...but tell them you want to ban drugs and they all scream...."Prohibition....didn't work....." but for some reason they think it would work on guns, when the Mexican drug cartels, supported by their Mexican government allies, will happily move guns across the border to supply our gangs in democrats run cities.....
 
No kidding, I would have thought people kill people. Don't ya just hate when you go to clean your gun and you find out it went out to kill someone.

Go see my previous post. #159


Sure, you may want to forward your insight to someone line Rob Emanuel.

13 Charts Put America's Gun Violence in Perspective

So you have nothing to say.

It's always nice when you know your arguments are so water tight, that people can't argue against them.

Was just about ready to ask you the same question.

Funny that, seeing as I didn't ask a question....

Look, either talk about the topic or go away.

Sorry dood, had to catch a flight, don't get your panties in a bunch.
 
How many shootings in schools is that 11 in 23 days? Great job!

Schools are gun free zones. Great job!
Whatever, dupe. There are shootings everywhere concerts theaters night clubs take a break with the brainwashing...

The 2nd Amendment was passed in 1791. Up until 1965, or, for 174 years, where were the mass shootings? Per capita, guns were more prevalent; including the school teacher who kept a gun in the classroom. What happened in 1965, someone shot up the University of Texas. For the next 50 plus years, school and other random mass killings have taken place. What changed? Why the shift? Start with personal accountability. There is none. Next, how about Hollywood and Arts glorifying gun violence? Failed gun free zones plus the increase of non-gun mass killings where knives and cars are being used.

Maybe your wet dream fantasy of guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens will prevail but the trend towards mass killings is a culture shift; not a gun shift.
Yep always great to have a gun around LOL....Family: Dispute spurred fatal shooting at car wash; 5 dead

Yep always a good idea to have a gun around... Especially with the media crazed population LOL
Family: Dispute spurred fatal shooting at car wash; 5 dead
 
How many shootings in schools is that 11 in 23 days? Great job!

Schools are gun free zones. Great job!
Whatever, dupe. There are shootings everywhere concerts theaters night clubs take a break with the brainwashing...

The 2nd Amendment was passed in 1791. Up until 1965, or, for 174 years, where were the mass shootings? Per capita, guns were more prevalent; including the school teacher who kept a gun in the classroom. What happened in 1965, someone shot up the University of Texas. For the next 50 plus years, school and other random mass killings have taken place. What changed? Why the shift? Start with personal accountability. There is none. Next, how about Hollywood and Arts glorifying gun violence? Failed gun free zones plus the increase of non-gun mass killings where knives and cars are being used.

Maybe your wet dream fantasy of guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens will prevail but the trend towards mass killings is a culture shift; not a gun shift.


What happened was the Great Society and the destruction of the family through the welfare state. This left single, teenage girls to raise young males without husbands and young males without Fathers.......decades of this dynamic have no created 15 year old, stone cold killers.......
BS. More likely it was the Vietnam War the polarized the country and brought drugs. Now of course it's 35 years of pandering to the rich GOP tax rates and policy and the slow ruin of the middle class in the non-rich since Reagan. The new BS GOP and its huge propaganda b******* hate character assassination machine have ruined the country. Our media sucks, has turned into a giant jab and gab Fest that basically ignores the rest of the world besides DC. It's way past time to spend money on foreign offices and reporters and to get back to journalism, that is checking the facts and telling the truth.
 
I don't understand why the anti gun crowd can't realize that, taking guns away from the people really won't affect violent crime in any meaningful way.

Those who would wish to commit such crimes would find another way.

It's not good, law abiding folks who are committing these crimes, it's the psychopath, or deranged types. Those types will not care if you ban guns or not, they will find a way get one, or in today's world, just craft one. Then they will be the only ones with them, as the government will have taken them away from the good, law abiding people.

These gun free restaurants boggle me. They put up signs that say "there are no guns in this building." And then they wonder why places get shot up by a person unopposed...while they empty their clip...
THEN RELOAD, then repeat. Really???? Reload? Another person with a firearm could prevent something like that before they get the chance to reload.

I would argue, if you took guns away from the general public, the murder and crime rates would increase astronomically, as the criminals would see an unopposed path to their actions.
 
How many shootings in schools is that 11 in 23 days? Great job!

Schools are gun free zones. Great job!
Whatever, dupe. There are shootings everywhere concerts theaters night clubs take a break with the brainwashing...

The 2nd Amendment was passed in 1791. Up until 1965, or, for 174 years, where were the mass shootings? Per capita, guns were more prevalent; including the school teacher who kept a gun in the classroom. What happened in 1965, someone shot up the University of Texas. For the next 50 plus years, school and other random mass killings have taken place. What changed? Why the shift? Start with personal accountability. There is none. Next, how about Hollywood and Arts glorifying gun violence? Failed gun free zones plus the increase of non-gun mass killings where knives and cars are being used.

Maybe your wet dream fantasy of guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens will prevail but the trend towards mass killings is a culture shift; not a gun shift.
Yep always great to have a gun around LOL....Family: Dispute spurred fatal shooting at car wash; 5 dead

Yep always a good idea to have a gun around... Especially with the media crazed population LOL
Family: Dispute spurred fatal shooting at car wash; 5 dead

The crazed, motivated killers will always have a gun. Your plan will only take away guns from the law abiding citizens. How is your plan going to keep guns from the unlawful?
 

Forum List

Back
Top