Mass shooting: At Least 11 Shot At Gilroy Garlic Festival

[RealDave]

There we go. Now we're on the same page again.

And here is an example...

More Minnesotans Own Guns, Violent Crime Remains Low | Ryan McMaken

Like numerous northern states with fairly high rates of gun ownership, Minnesota also enjoys very low homicide rates.

First of all, as noted here at mises.org, homicide rates in the United States vary considerably by state and region. Claims about homicide and violence "in the United States" are usually meaningless because of the large variations from place to place in the United States.

In Minnesota, the homicide rate in 2016 was 1.8 per 100,000. That's about equal to the homicide rate in British Columbia, Canada.
------

Secondly, it is also true nationwide that homicide rates do not increase with increasing gun ownership. In fact, as we've shown here at mises.org, from 1994 to 2013, gun ownership increased substantially, while homicide rates fell. Moreover, homocide rates are now near 50-year lows, and have falled considerably from the 1980s and 1990s.

This is the same argument all over again. We already agreed that a reason for the declining crime rates and homicide rates is the police, among other reasons.

However, when we remove the time period and just compare gun ownership rates to violent crime rates, there's a slightly positive correlation. This number negates the effects of police efforts over time and just looks at gun ownership vs violent crime rates.

And now....to throw in Concealed carry laws and gun ownership.....they do, in fact, help to decrease gun crime.....

You can't take away the fact that more guns did not lead to more gun crime......you want to, but you can't. You aren't factoring everything you need to make that conclusion.....

Normal people who own guns are not using those guns for crime...that is a fact.....so the mere existence of guns does not equal higher gun crime rates......... Lax policies toward criminals are not in your equation.... the effect of single parent homes and violence is not in your equation.....there are so many variables you can't account for, that your number fails to be even remotely accurate.

I haven't said anything about concealed carry laws. I'm not sure this applies to what I've said.

States with more gun owners have a positive correlation with violent crime. That's a fact. I'm not implying anything other than what I said in that sentence. That sentence is a fact.

I didn't say "gun crime". I said "violent crime". I haven't run the numbers with gun crime.

Things you are not taking into account......

Here Are 8 Stubborn Facts on Gun Violence in America

• The rate of gun ownership is higher among whites than it is among African-Americans, but the murder rate among African-Americans is significantly higher than the rate among whites.
• -------

6. There is no clear relationship between strict gun control legislation and homicide or violent crime rates.

• The Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence ironically makes this clear with its ratings for states based on gun laws. “Gun freedom” states that score poorly, like New Hampshire, Vermont, Idaho, and Oregon, have some of the lowest homicide rates. Conversely, “gun-control-loving” states that received high scores, like Maryland and Illinois, experience some of the nation’s highest homicide rates.
• The Crime Prevention Research Center notes that, if anything, the data indicate that countries with high rates of gun ownership tend to have lower homicide rates—but this is only a correlation, and many factors do not necessarily support a conclusion that high rates of gun ownership cause the low rates of homicide.
• Homicide and firearm homicide rates in Great Britain spiked in the years immediately following the imposition of severe gun control measures, despite the fact that most developed countries continued to experience a downward trend in these rates. This is also pointed out by noted criminologist John Lott in his book “The War on Guns.”
• Similarly, Ireland’s homicide rates spiked in the years immediately following the country’s 1972 gun confiscation legislation.
• Australia’s National Firearms Act appears to have had little effect on suicide and homicide rates, which were falling before the law was enacted and continued to decline at a statistically unremarkable rate compared to worldwide trends.
• According to research compiled by John Lott and highlighted in his book “The War on Guns,” Australia’s armed and unarmed robbery rates both increased markedly in the five years immediately following the National Firearms Act, despite the general downward trend experienced by other developed countries.
• Great Britain has some of the strictest gun control laws in the developed world, but the violent crime rate for homicide, rape, burglary, and aggravated assault is much higher than that in the U.S. Further, approximately 60 percent of burglaries in Great Britain occur while residents are home, compared to just 13 percent in the U.S., and British burglars admit to targeting occupied residences because they are more likely to find wallets and purses.
• It is difficult to compare homicide and firearm-related murder rates across international borders because countries use different methods to determine which deaths “count” for purposes of violent crime. For example, since 1967, Great Britain has excluded from its homicide counts any case that does not result in a conviction, that was the result of dangerous driving, or in which the person was determined to have acted in self-defense. All of these factors are counted as “homicides” in the United States.

States without major cities have lower crime rates but you can pretend it is about the guns

Crime rates are not gun violence rates.

Mass killings are not typical murders.

Homicides include people killing people because of relationships, people killing people while committing crimes and gang violence and then tyou ave people wanting to kill as many people as they can. It is these killings we are talking about & your bullshit attempts of burying statistics is obvious & dishonest.

So shove your homicide rates & pretend crime rates are down because a bunch of gun lovers decide to own 30 guns. The ban of assault rifles reduced deaths due to mass killings. You can pout, & stomp tour feet & spew irrelevant statistics and stories but it does not change that these weapons feed these mass killings usually of innocent children & women.

 

[RealDave]

What are they used for that requires a detachable magazine that could not be accomplished without a built in, limited size magazine.

Doesn't matter. What matters is how they are actually used now and 99.999% magazine fed firearms will never be used to commit any crimes.

The fact that a minuscule fraction of people will use a gun for violence is not reason enough to put restrictions on everyone

It does matter.

To ban something that leads to mass killings that has no other use is a nobrainer.

So what can't to do with a built in smaller magazine that you can do with a detachable larger magazine?



.

The gun doesn't lead to mass killings.

If the AR 15 led to mass killings there would be a hell of a lot more of them since there are over 8 million AR 15s in private hands.

What percentage of privately owned Ar 15s are used to commit murder?

Backwards thinking and deceptive by looking at murder rates instead of mass killings.

The availability of the AR-15 leads those who decide to do mass killing a powerful weapon to enable the high body counts they want.

If the assault type rifle was not available, would they have have made the attack? Would they have had the courage? Would law enforcement more aggressively go after these shooters if they were not so well armed?

People are breing slaughtered because a bunch of gun nuts want their toy. And it is a toy because there is no need for them in the general public.

Let's look at mass public shootings....

US mass shootings, 1982-2019: Data from Mother Jones’ investigation

2018.....12......how many involved a rifle....? 3 of them used a semi-auto rifle....

There are close to, if not over, 18 million of these rifles in public hands....

18,000,000 vs. 3 used for mass shootings, out of 12 shooting that year...

Keep in mind, in one of those shootings an AR-15 owned by a legal gun owner stopped the shooter......

93 people were killed in the entire 12 shootings......

So excuse us if these numbers don't prove to us that you aren't irrational in your fear of these weapons....

A rental truck in Nice, France was used to kill 86 and wound 435......so again, don't tell us these rifles pose a serious threat when you look at these actual numbers....

All rifle types are used to murder fewer people each and every year than knives, clubs and bare hands.....

Expanded Homicide Data Table 8


Rifles..... 403

Knives.....1,591

Hands and feet......696

Clubs.....467

You are irrational....

There you go again, citiing homicide rates. Please, your game is obvious. Just STFU & keep supporting the slaughter of our children because you assfucks need to own a toy.

I suspect that most AR-15 uses involve drinking beer & shooting targets - usually beer cans & bottles.

 

[2aguy]

And here is an example...

More Minnesotans Own Guns, Violent Crime Remains Low | Ryan McMaken

Like numerous northern states with fairly high rates of gun ownership, Minnesota also enjoys very low homicide rates.

First of all, as noted here at mises.org, homicide rates in the United States vary considerably by state and region. Claims about homicide and violence "in the United States" are usually meaningless because of the large variations from place to place in the United States.

In Minnesota, the homicide rate in 2016 was 1.8 per 100,000. That's about equal to the homicide rate in British Columbia, Canada.
------

Secondly, it is also true nationwide that homicide rates do not increase with increasing gun ownership. In fact, as we've shown here at mises.org, from 1994 to 2013, gun ownership increased substantially, while homicide rates fell. Moreover, homocide rates are now near 50-year lows, and have falled considerably from the 1980s and 1990s.

This is the same argument all over again. We already agreed that a reason for the declining crime rates and homicide rates is the police, among other reasons.

However, when we remove the time period and just compare gun ownership rates to violent crime rates, there's a slightly positive correlation. This number negates the effects of police efforts over time and just looks at gun ownership vs violent crime rates.

And now....to throw in Concealed carry laws and gun ownership.....they do, in fact, help to decrease gun crime.....

You can't take away the fact that more guns did not lead to more gun crime......you want to, but you can't. You aren't factoring everything you need to make that conclusion.....

Normal people who own guns are not using those guns for crime...that is a fact.....so the mere existence of guns does not equal higher gun crime rates......... Lax policies toward criminals are not in your equation.... the effect of single parent homes and violence is not in your equation.....there are so many variables you can't account for, that your number fails to be even remotely accurate.

I haven't said anything about concealed carry laws. I'm not sure this applies to what I've said.

States with more gun owners have a positive correlation with violent crime. That's a fact. I'm not implying anything other than what I said in that sentence. That sentence is a fact.

I didn't say "gun crime". I said "violent crime". I haven't run the numbers with gun crime.

Things you are not taking into account......

Here Are 8 Stubborn Facts on Gun Violence in America

• The rate of gun ownership is higher among whites than it is among African-Americans, but the murder rate among African-Americans is significantly higher than the rate among whites.
• -------

6. There is no clear relationship between strict gun control legislation and homicide or violent crime rates.

• The Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence ironically makes this clear with its ratings for states based on gun laws. “Gun freedom” states that score poorly, like New Hampshire, Vermont, Idaho, and Oregon, have some of the lowest homicide rates. Conversely, “gun-control-loving” states that received high scores, like Maryland and Illinois, experience some of the nation’s highest homicide rates.
• The Crime Prevention Research Center notes that, if anything, the data indicate that countries with high rates of gun ownership tend to have lower homicide rates—but this is only a correlation, and many factors do not necessarily support a conclusion that high rates of gun ownership cause the low rates of homicide.
• Homicide and firearm homicide rates in Great Britain spiked in the years immediately following the imposition of severe gun control measures, despite the fact that most developed countries continued to experience a downward trend in these rates. This is also pointed out by noted criminologist John Lott in his book “The War on Guns.”
• Similarly, Ireland’s homicide rates spiked in the years immediately following the country’s 1972 gun confiscation legislation.
• Australia’s National Firearms Act appears to have had little effect on suicide and homicide rates, which were falling before the law was enacted and continued to decline at a statistically unremarkable rate compared to worldwide trends.
• According to research compiled by John Lott and highlighted in his book “The War on Guns,” Australia’s armed and unarmed robbery rates both increased markedly in the five years immediately following the National Firearms Act, despite the general downward trend experienced by other developed countries.
• Great Britain has some of the strictest gun control laws in the developed world, but the violent crime rate for homicide, rape, burglary, and aggravated assault is much higher than that in the U.S. Further, approximately 60 percent of burglaries in Great Britain occur while residents are home, compared to just 13 percent in the U.S., and British burglars admit to targeting occupied residences because they are more likely to find wallets and purses.
• It is difficult to compare homicide and firearm-related murder rates across international borders because countries use different methods to determine which deaths “count” for purposes of violent crime. For example, since 1967, Great Britain has excluded from its homicide counts any case that does not result in a conviction, that was the result of dangerous driving, or in which the person was determined to have acted in self-defense. All of these factors are counted as “homicides” in the United States.

States without major cities have lower crime rates but you can pretend it is about the guns

Crime rates are not gun violence rates.

Mass killings are not typical murders.

Homicides include people killing people because of relationships, people killing people while committing crimes and gang violence and then tyou ave people wanting to kill as many people as they can. It is these killings we are talking about & your bullshit attempts of burying statistics is obvious & dishonest.

So shove your homicide rates & pretend crime rates are down because a bunch of gun lovers decide to own 30 guns. The ban of assault rifles reduced deaths due to mass killings. You can pout, & stomp tour feet & spew irrelevant statistics and stories but it does not change that these weapons feed these mass killings usually of innocent children & women.

So shove your homicide rates & pretend crime rates are down because a bunch of gun lovers decide to own 30 guns.

Bzzzzzzzz, wrong answer....

Your theory...not mine......

More Guns = More Gun crime......

26 years...more gun ownership in this country, more people carrying guns...

Result:

gun murder down 49%
gun crime down 75%

Your theory is that regardless of any other factor....simply adding guns to a society increases gun murder and gun crime......

The exact opposite happened...does this mean guns helped lower those rates.....that isn't the argument for this point......you point, again.....simply adding guns will increase those rates.....

The exact opposite happened....

In science, when you have a theory, then conduct an experiment to prove that theory.......and the exact opposite happens....in science, that means your theory is completely wrong......

 

[2aguy]

Doesn't matter. What matters is how they are actually used now and 99.999% magazine fed firearms will never be used to commit any crimes.

The fact that a minuscule fraction of people will use a gun for violence is not reason enough to put restrictions on everyone

It does matter.

To ban something that leads to mass killings that has no other use is a nobrainer.

So what can't to do with a built in smaller magazine that you can do with a detachable larger magazine?



.

The gun doesn't lead to mass killings.

If the AR 15 led to mass killings there would be a hell of a lot more of them since there are over 8 million AR 15s in private hands.

What percentage of privately owned Ar 15s are used to commit murder?

Backwards thinking and deceptive by looking at murder rates instead of mass killings.

The availability of the AR-15 leads those who decide to do mass killing a powerful weapon to enable the high body counts they want.

If the assault type rifle was not available, would they have have made the attack? Would they have had the courage? Would law enforcement more aggressively go after these shooters if they were not so well armed?

People are breing slaughtered because a bunch of gun nuts want their toy. And it is a toy because there is no need for them in the general public.

Let's look at mass public shootings....

US mass shootings, 1982-2019: Data from Mother Jones’ investigation

2018.....12......how many involved a rifle....? 3 of them used a semi-auto rifle....

There are close to, if not over, 18 million of these rifles in public hands....

18,000,000 vs. 3 used for mass shootings, out of 12 shooting that year...

Keep in mind, in one of those shootings an AR-15 owned by a legal gun owner stopped the shooter......

93 people were killed in the entire 12 shootings......

So excuse us if these numbers don't prove to us that you aren't irrational in your fear of these weapons....

A rental truck in Nice, France was used to kill 86 and wound 435......so again, don't tell us these rifles pose a serious threat when you look at these actual numbers....

All rifle types are used to murder fewer people each and every year than knives, clubs and bare hands.....

Expanded Homicide Data Table 8


Rifles..... 403

Knives.....1,591

Hands and feet......696

Clubs.....467

You are irrational....

There you go again, citiing homicide rates. Please, your game is obvious. Just STFU & keep supporting the slaughter of our children because you assfucks need to own a toy.

I suspect that most AR-15 uses involve drinking beer & shooting targets - usually beer cans & bottles.

Yes.....I am showing you actual facts, truth and reality.....you are spewing emotions and feelings.......

 

[2aguy]

Doesn't matter. What matters is how they are actually used now and 99.999% magazine fed firearms will never be used to commit any crimes.

The fact that a minuscule fraction of people will use a gun for violence is not reason enough to put restrictions on everyone

It does matter.

To ban something that leads to mass killings that has no other use is a nobrainer.

So what can't to do with a built in smaller magazine that you can do with a detachable larger magazine?



.

The gun doesn't lead to mass killings.

If the AR 15 led to mass killings there would be a hell of a lot more of them since there are over 8 million AR 15s in private hands.

What percentage of privately owned Ar 15s are used to commit murder?

Backwards thinking and deceptive by looking at murder rates instead of mass killings.

The availability of the AR-15 leads those who decide to do mass killing a powerful weapon to enable the high body counts they want.

If the assault type rifle was not available, would they have have made the attack? Would they have had the courage? Would law enforcement more aggressively go after these shooters if they were not so well armed?

People are breing slaughtered because a bunch of gun nuts want their toy. And it is a toy because there is no need for them in the general public.

Let's look at mass public shootings....

US mass shootings, 1982-2019: Data from Mother Jones’ investigation

2018.....12......how many involved a rifle....? 3 of them used a semi-auto rifle....

There are close to, if not over, 18 million of these rifles in public hands....

18,000,000 vs. 3 used for mass shootings, out of 12 shooting that year...

Keep in mind, in one of those shootings an AR-15 owned by a legal gun owner stopped the shooter......

93 people were killed in the entire 12 shootings......

So excuse us if these numbers don't prove to us that you aren't irrational in your fear of these weapons....

A rental truck in Nice, France was used to kill 86 and wound 435......so again, don't tell us these rifles pose a serious threat when you look at these actual numbers....

All rifle types are used to murder fewer people each and every year than knives, clubs and bare hands.....

Expanded Homicide Data Table 8


Rifles..... 403

Knives.....1,591

Hands and feet......696

Clubs.....467

You are irrational....

There you go again, citiing homicide rates. Please, your game is obvious. Just STFU & keep supporting the slaughter of our children because you assfucks need to own a toy.

I suspect that most AR-15 uses involve drinking beer & shooting targets - usually beer cans & bottles.

Yes.....I am guilty of using facts and truth.....you got me....

 

[2aguy]

And here is an example...

More Minnesotans Own Guns, Violent Crime Remains Low | Ryan McMaken

Like numerous northern states with fairly high rates of gun ownership, Minnesota also enjoys very low homicide rates.

First of all, as noted here at mises.org, homicide rates in the United States vary considerably by state and region. Claims about homicide and violence "in the United States" are usually meaningless because of the large variations from place to place in the United States.

In Minnesota, the homicide rate in 2016 was 1.8 per 100,000. That's about equal to the homicide rate in British Columbia, Canada.
------

Secondly, it is also true nationwide that homicide rates do not increase with increasing gun ownership. In fact, as we've shown here at mises.org, from 1994 to 2013, gun ownership increased substantially, while homicide rates fell. Moreover, homocide rates are now near 50-year lows, and have falled considerably from the 1980s and 1990s.

This is the same argument all over again. We already agreed that a reason for the declining crime rates and homicide rates is the police, among other reasons.

However, when we remove the time period and just compare gun ownership rates to violent crime rates, there's a slightly positive correlation. This number negates the effects of police efforts over time and just looks at gun ownership vs violent crime rates.

And now....to throw in Concealed carry laws and gun ownership.....they do, in fact, help to decrease gun crime.....

You can't take away the fact that more guns did not lead to more gun crime......you want to, but you can't. You aren't factoring everything you need to make that conclusion.....

Normal people who own guns are not using those guns for crime...that is a fact.....so the mere existence of guns does not equal higher gun crime rates......... Lax policies toward criminals are not in your equation.... the effect of single parent homes and violence is not in your equation.....there are so many variables you can't account for, that your number fails to be even remotely accurate.

I haven't said anything about concealed carry laws. I'm not sure this applies to what I've said.

States with more gun owners have a positive correlation with violent crime. That's a fact. I'm not implying anything other than what I said in that sentence. That sentence is a fact.

I didn't say "gun crime". I said "violent crime". I haven't run the numbers with gun crime.

Things you are not taking into account......

Here Are 8 Stubborn Facts on Gun Violence in America

• The rate of gun ownership is higher among whites than it is among African-Americans, but the murder rate among African-Americans is significantly higher than the rate among whites.
• -------

6. There is no clear relationship between strict gun control legislation and homicide or violent crime rates.

• The Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence ironically makes this clear with its ratings for states based on gun laws. “Gun freedom” states that score poorly, like New Hampshire, Vermont, Idaho, and Oregon, have some of the lowest homicide rates. Conversely, “gun-control-loving” states that received high scores, like Maryland and Illinois, experience some of the nation’s highest homicide rates.
• The Crime Prevention Research Center notes that, if anything, the data indicate that countries with high rates of gun ownership tend to have lower homicide rates—but this is only a correlation, and many factors do not necessarily support a conclusion that high rates of gun ownership cause the low rates of homicide.
• Homicide and firearm homicide rates in Great Britain spiked in the years immediately following the imposition of severe gun control measures, despite the fact that most developed countries continued to experience a downward trend in these rates. This is also pointed out by noted criminologist John Lott in his book “The War on Guns.”
• Similarly, Ireland’s homicide rates spiked in the years immediately following the country’s 1972 gun confiscation legislation.
• Australia’s National Firearms Act appears to have had little effect on suicide and homicide rates, which were falling before the law was enacted and continued to decline at a statistically unremarkable rate compared to worldwide trends.
• According to research compiled by John Lott and highlighted in his book “The War on Guns,” Australia’s armed and unarmed robbery rates both increased markedly in the five years immediately following the National Firearms Act, despite the general downward trend experienced by other developed countries.
• Great Britain has some of the strictest gun control laws in the developed world, but the violent crime rate for homicide, rape, burglary, and aggravated assault is much higher than that in the U.S. Further, approximately 60 percent of burglaries in Great Britain occur while residents are home, compared to just 13 percent in the U.S., and British burglars admit to targeting occupied residences because they are more likely to find wallets and purses.
• It is difficult to compare homicide and firearm-related murder rates across international borders because countries use different methods to determine which deaths “count” for purposes of violent crime. For example, since 1967, Great Britain has excluded from its homicide counts any case that does not result in a conviction, that was the result of dangerous driving, or in which the person was determined to have acted in self-defense. All of these factors are counted as “homicides” in the United States.

States without major cities have lower crime rates but you can pretend it is about the guns

Crime rates are not gun violence rates.

Mass killings are not typical murders.

Homicides include people killing people because of relationships, people killing people while committing crimes and gang violence and then tyou ave people wanting to kill as many people as they can. It is these killings we are talking about & your bullshit attempts of burying statistics is obvious & dishonest.

So shove your homicide rates & pretend crime rates are down because a bunch of gun lovers decide to own 30 guns. The ban of assault rifles reduced deaths due to mass killings. You can pout, & stomp tour feet & spew irrelevant statistics and stories but it does not change that these weapons feed these mass killings usually of innocent children & women.

Mass public shootings in 2018....

12

Deaths...

93

Knives kill over 1,500 people every single year......

According to your logic, we must ban all knives.....they kill more people.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You're right, of course. Limiting guns alone is NOT going to be the answer.

Limiting the rights of the law abiding is not part of the answer at all.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The CDC has some of the smartest people in the country working for it. As a government agency, it has some of the best access to information from various places and the ability to carry out some real research into what in hell is causing so much gun violence in our country. If it isn't guns, what is it?

The CDC is free to, and is funded to, collect information and do research on gun violence.
Not sure why you refuse to understand this.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Backwards thinking and deceptive by looking at murder rates instead of mass killings.
The availability of the AR-15 leads those who decide to do mass killing a powerful weapon to enable the high body counts they want.

1982-Present
15 (out of 10-12 million) AR15s were used to in mass shootings to kill 253 people, for an average of 6.74 per year.
Your knee-jerk, hyper-reactionary, bigoted conclusion: SEE!!!!! BAN THEM!!!!!!

 

[M14 Shooter]

Then what was the Dickey Amendment for, if not to specifically stop gun studies that might conclude guns have something to do with gun violence?

If you actually read the Dickey amendment, you'd know.

 

[RealDave]

This is the same argument all over again. We already agreed that a reason for the declining crime rates and homicide rates is the police, among other reasons.

However, when we remove the time period and just compare gun ownership rates to violent crime rates, there's a slightly positive correlation. This number negates the effects of police efforts over time and just looks at gun ownership vs violent crime rates.

And now....to throw in Concealed carry laws and gun ownership.....they do, in fact, help to decrease gun crime.....

You can't take away the fact that more guns did not lead to more gun crime......you want to, but you can't. You aren't factoring everything you need to make that conclusion.....

Normal people who own guns are not using those guns for crime...that is a fact.....so the mere existence of guns does not equal higher gun crime rates......... Lax policies toward criminals are not in your equation.... the effect of single parent homes and violence is not in your equation.....there are so many variables you can't account for, that your number fails to be even remotely accurate.

I haven't said anything about concealed carry laws. I'm not sure this applies to what I've said.

States with more gun owners have a positive correlation with violent crime. That's a fact. I'm not implying anything other than what I said in that sentence. That sentence is a fact.

I didn't say "gun crime". I said "violent crime". I haven't run the numbers with gun crime.

Things you are not taking into account......

Here Are 8 Stubborn Facts on Gun Violence in America

• The rate of gun ownership is higher among whites than it is among African-Americans, but the murder rate among African-Americans is significantly higher than the rate among whites.
• -------

6. There is no clear relationship between strict gun control legislation and homicide or violent crime rates.

• The Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence ironically makes this clear with its ratings for states based on gun laws. “Gun freedom” states that score poorly, like New Hampshire, Vermont, Idaho, and Oregon, have some of the lowest homicide rates. Conversely, “gun-control-loving” states that received high scores, like Maryland and Illinois, experience some of the nation’s highest homicide rates.
• The Crime Prevention Research Center notes that, if anything, the data indicate that countries with high rates of gun ownership tend to have lower homicide rates—but this is only a correlation, and many factors do not necessarily support a conclusion that high rates of gun ownership cause the low rates of homicide.
• Homicide and firearm homicide rates in Great Britain spiked in the years immediately following the imposition of severe gun control measures, despite the fact that most developed countries continued to experience a downward trend in these rates. This is also pointed out by noted criminologist John Lott in his book “The War on Guns.”
• Similarly, Ireland’s homicide rates spiked in the years immediately following the country’s 1972 gun confiscation legislation.
• Australia’s National Firearms Act appears to have had little effect on suicide and homicide rates, which were falling before the law was enacted and continued to decline at a statistically unremarkable rate compared to worldwide trends.
• According to research compiled by John Lott and highlighted in his book “The War on Guns,” Australia’s armed and unarmed robbery rates both increased markedly in the five years immediately following the National Firearms Act, despite the general downward trend experienced by other developed countries.
• Great Britain has some of the strictest gun control laws in the developed world, but the violent crime rate for homicide, rape, burglary, and aggravated assault is much higher than that in the U.S. Further, approximately 60 percent of burglaries in Great Britain occur while residents are home, compared to just 13 percent in the U.S., and British burglars admit to targeting occupied residences because they are more likely to find wallets and purses.
• It is difficult to compare homicide and firearm-related murder rates across international borders because countries use different methods to determine which deaths “count” for purposes of violent crime. For example, since 1967, Great Britain has excluded from its homicide counts any case that does not result in a conviction, that was the result of dangerous driving, or in which the person was determined to have acted in self-defense. All of these factors are counted as “homicides” in the United States.

States without major cities have lower crime rates but you can pretend it is about the guns

Crime rates are not gun violence rates.

Mass killings are not typical murders.

Homicides include people killing people because of relationships, people killing people while committing crimes and gang violence and then tyou ave people wanting to kill as many people as they can. It is these killings we are talking about & your bullshit attempts of burying statistics is obvious & dishonest.

So shove your homicide rates & pretend crime rates are down because a bunch of gun lovers decide to own 30 guns. The ban of assault rifles reduced deaths due to mass killings. You can pout, & stomp tour feet & spew irrelevant statistics and stories but it does not change that these weapons feed these mass killings usually of innocent children & women.

So shove your homicide rates & pretend crime rates are down because a bunch of gun lovers decide to own 30 guns.

Bzzzzzzzz, wrong answer....

Your theory...not mine......

More Guns = More Gun crime......

26 years...more gun ownership in this country, more people carrying guns...

Result:

gun murder down 49%
gun crime down 75%

Your theory is that regardless of any other factor....simply adding guns to a society increases gun murder and gun crime......

The exact opposite happened...does this mean guns helped lower those rates.....that isn't the argument for this point......you point, again.....simply adding guns will increase those rates.....

The exact opposite happened....

In science, when you have a theory, then conduct an experiment to prove that theory.......and the exact opposite happens....in science, that means your theory is completely wrong......

False assumptions;

1) The increase of guns purchased is increase of gun owners. You actually no data on the number of gun owners. How any people bought guns that did not require any registration?

2) You think the reduction of gun violence (if true) is due to this increase in gun sales.

 

[pismoe]

And now....to throw in Concealed carry laws and gun ownership.....they do, in fact, help to decrease gun crime.....

You can't take away the fact that more guns did not lead to more gun crime......you want to, but you can't. You aren't factoring everything you need to make that conclusion.....

Normal people who own guns are not using those guns for crime...that is a fact.....so the mere existence of guns does not equal higher gun crime rates......... Lax policies toward criminals are not in your equation.... the effect of single parent homes and violence is not in your equation.....there are so many variables you can't account for, that your number fails to be even remotely accurate.

I haven't said anything about concealed carry laws. I'm not sure this applies to what I've said.

States with more gun owners have a positive correlation with violent crime. That's a fact. I'm not implying anything other than what I said in that sentence. That sentence is a fact.

I didn't say "gun crime". I said "violent crime". I haven't run the numbers with gun crime.

Things you are not taking into account......

Here Are 8 Stubborn Facts on Gun Violence in America

• The rate of gun ownership is higher among whites than it is among African-Americans, but the murder rate among African-Americans is significantly higher than the rate among whites.
• -------

6. There is no clear relationship between strict gun control legislation and homicide or violent crime rates.

• The Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence ironically makes this clear with its ratings for states based on gun laws. “Gun freedom” states that score poorly, like New Hampshire, Vermont, Idaho, and Oregon, have some of the lowest homicide rates. Conversely, “gun-control-loving” states that received high scores, like Maryland and Illinois, experience some of the nation’s highest homicide rates.
• The Crime Prevention Research Center notes that, if anything, the data indicate that countries with high rates of gun ownership tend to have lower homicide rates—but this is only a correlation, and many factors do not necessarily support a conclusion that high rates of gun ownership cause the low rates of homicide.
• Homicide and firearm homicide rates in Great Britain spiked in the years immediately following the imposition of severe gun control measures, despite the fact that most developed countries continued to experience a downward trend in these rates. This is also pointed out by noted criminologist John Lott in his book “The War on Guns.”
• Similarly, Ireland’s homicide rates spiked in the years immediately following the country’s 1972 gun confiscation legislation.
• Australia’s National Firearms Act appears to have had little effect on suicide and homicide rates, which were falling before the law was enacted and continued to decline at a statistically unremarkable rate compared to worldwide trends.
• According to research compiled by John Lott and highlighted in his book “The War on Guns,” Australia’s armed and unarmed robbery rates both increased markedly in the five years immediately following the National Firearms Act, despite the general downward trend experienced by other developed countries.
• Great Britain has some of the strictest gun control laws in the developed world, but the violent crime rate for homicide, rape, burglary, and aggravated assault is much higher than that in the U.S. Further, approximately 60 percent of burglaries in Great Britain occur while residents are home, compared to just 13 percent in the U.S., and British burglars admit to targeting occupied residences because they are more likely to find wallets and purses.
• It is difficult to compare homicide and firearm-related murder rates across international borders because countries use different methods to determine which deaths “count” for purposes of violent crime. For example, since 1967, Great Britain has excluded from its homicide counts any case that does not result in a conviction, that was the result of dangerous driving, or in which the person was determined to have acted in self-defense. All of these factors are counted as “homicides” in the United States.

States without major cities have lower crime rates but you can pretend it is about the guns

Crime rates are not gun violence rates.

Mass killings are not typical murders.

Homicides include people killing people because of relationships, people killing people while committing crimes and gang violence and then tyou ave people wanting to kill as many people as they can. It is these killings we are talking about & your bullshit attempts of burying statistics is obvious & dishonest.

So shove your homicide rates & pretend crime rates are down because a bunch of gun lovers decide to own 30 guns. The ban of assault rifles reduced deaths due to mass killings. You can pout, & stomp tour feet & spew irrelevant statistics and stories but it does not change that these weapons feed these mass killings usually of innocent children & women.

So shove your homicide rates & pretend crime rates are down because a bunch of gun lovers decide to own 30 guns.

Bzzzzzzzz, wrong answer....

Your theory...not mine......

More Guns = More Gun crime......

26 years...more gun ownership in this country, more people carrying guns...

Result:

gun murder down 49%
gun crime down 75%

Your theory is that regardless of any other factor....simply adding guns to a society increases gun murder and gun crime......

The exact opposite happened...does this mean guns helped lower those rates.....that isn't the argument for this point......you point, again.....simply adding guns will increase those rates.....

The exact opposite happened....

In science, when you have a theory, then conduct an experiment to prove that theory.......and the exact opposite happens....in science, that means your theory is completely wrong......

False assumptions;

1) The increase of guns purchased is increase of gun owners. You actually no data on the number of gun owners. How any people bought guns that did not require any registration?

2) You think the reduction of gun violence (if true) is due to this increase in gun sales.

--------------------------------- no ones Business but the individual gun buyer and gun owners business RDave.

 

[M14 Shooter]

False assumptions;
1) The increase of guns purchased is increase of gun owners. You actually no data on the number of gun owners. How any people bought guns that did not require any registration?

If the claim is more guns = more gun (x), the increase/decrease in gun owners doesn't matter.

The huge majority of people who buy guns do not register them; the huge majority of guns are unregistered.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Same day in Brooklyn 11 were shot by one. Why no press on that? Does not fit the White Supremecy angle you want to publish?

I just want you to know.....I have an alibi!

 

[pismoe]

False assumptions;
1) The increase of guns purchased is increase of gun owners. You actually no data on the number of gun owners. How any people bought guns that did not require any registration?

If the claim is more guns = more gun (x), the increase/decrease in gun owners doesn't matter.

The huge majority of people who buy guns do not register them; the huge majority of guns are unregistered.

----------------------------------------------- Yeah REGISTER , maybe I should keep my mouth shut but where and in which States are guns OFFICIALLY Registered RDave ???

 

[pismoe]

And now....to throw in Concealed carry laws and gun ownership.....they do, in fact, help to decrease gun crime.....

You can't take away the fact that more guns did not lead to more gun crime......you want to, but you can't. You aren't factoring everything you need to make that conclusion.....

Normal people who own guns are not using those guns for crime...that is a fact.....so the mere existence of guns does not equal higher gun crime rates......... Lax policies toward criminals are not in your equation.... the effect of single parent homes and violence is not in your equation.....there are so many variables you can't account for, that your number fails to be even remotely accurate.

I haven't said anything about concealed carry laws. I'm not sure this applies to what I've said.

States with more gun owners have a positive correlation with violent crime. That's a fact. I'm not implying anything other than what I said in that sentence. That sentence is a fact.

I didn't say "gun crime". I said "violent crime". I haven't run the numbers with gun crime.

Things you are not taking into account......

Here Are 8 Stubborn Facts on Gun Violence in America

• The rate of gun ownership is higher among whites than it is among African-Americans, but the murder rate among African-Americans is significantly higher than the rate among whites.
• -------

6. There is no clear relationship between strict gun control legislation and homicide or violent crime rates.

• The Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence ironically makes this clear with its ratings for states based on gun laws. “Gun freedom” states that score poorly, like New Hampshire, Vermont, Idaho, and Oregon, have some of the lowest homicide rates. Conversely, “gun-control-loving” states that received high scores, like Maryland and Illinois, experience some of the nation’s highest homicide rates.
• The Crime Prevention Research Center notes that, if anything, the data indicate that countries with high rates of gun ownership tend to have lower homicide rates—but this is only a correlation, and many factors do not necessarily support a conclusion that high rates of gun ownership cause the low rates of homicide.
• Homicide and firearm homicide rates in Great Britain spiked in the years immediately following the imposition of severe gun control measures, despite the fact that most developed countries continued to experience a downward trend in these rates. This is also pointed out by noted criminologist John Lott in his book “The War on Guns.”
• Similarly, Ireland’s homicide rates spiked in the years immediately following the country’s 1972 gun confiscation legislation.
• Australia’s National Firearms Act appears to have had little effect on suicide and homicide rates, which were falling before the law was enacted and continued to decline at a statistically unremarkable rate compared to worldwide trends.
• According to research compiled by John Lott and highlighted in his book “The War on Guns,” Australia’s armed and unarmed robbery rates both increased markedly in the five years immediately following the National Firearms Act, despite the general downward trend experienced by other developed countries.
• Great Britain has some of the strictest gun control laws in the developed world, but the violent crime rate for homicide, rape, burglary, and aggravated assault is much higher than that in the U.S. Further, approximately 60 percent of burglaries in Great Britain occur while residents are home, compared to just 13 percent in the U.S., and British burglars admit to targeting occupied residences because they are more likely to find wallets and purses.
• It is difficult to compare homicide and firearm-related murder rates across international borders because countries use different methods to determine which deaths “count” for purposes of violent crime. For example, since 1967, Great Britain has excluded from its homicide counts any case that does not result in a conviction, that was the result of dangerous driving, or in which the person was determined to have acted in self-defense. All of these factors are counted as “homicides” in the United States.

States without major cities have lower crime rates but you can pretend it is about the guns

Crime rates are not gun violence rates.

Mass killings are not typical murders.

Homicides include people killing people because of relationships, people killing people while committing crimes and gang violence and then tyou ave people wanting to kill as many people as they can. It is these killings we are talking about & your bullshit attempts of burying statistics is obvious & dishonest.

So shove your homicide rates & pretend crime rates are down because a bunch of gun lovers decide to own 30 guns. The ban of assault rifles reduced deaths due to mass killings. You can pout, & stomp tour feet & spew irrelevant statistics and stories but it does not change that these weapons feed these mass killings usually of innocent children & women.

So shove your homicide rates & pretend crime rates are down because a bunch of gun lovers decide to own 30 guns.

Bzzzzzzzz, wrong answer....

Your theory...not mine......

More Guns = More Gun crime......

26 years...more gun ownership in this country, more people carrying guns...

Result:

gun murder down 49%
gun crime down 75%

Your theory is that regardless of any other factor....simply adding guns to a society increases gun murder and gun crime......

The exact opposite happened...does this mean guns helped lower those rates.....that isn't the argument for this point......you point, again.....simply adding guns will increase those rates.....

The exact opposite happened....

In science, when you have a theory, then conduct an experiment to prove that theory.......and the exact opposite happens....in science, that means your theory is completely wrong......

False assumptions;

1) The increase of guns purchased is increase of gun owners. You actually no data on the number of gun owners. How any people bought guns that did not require any registration?

2) You think the reduction of gun violence (if true) is due to this increase in gun sales.

----------------------------------------------- I keep hearing the word Registered so where is it in the USA that GUN's are registered RDave ??----------- just curious RDave .

 

[2aguy]

Backwards thinking and deceptive by looking at murder rates instead of mass killings.
The availability of the AR-15 leads those who decide to do mass killing a powerful weapon to enable the high body counts they want.

1982-Present
15 (out of 10-12 million) AR15s were used to in mass shootings to kill 253 people, for an average of 6.74 per year.
Your knee-jerk, hyper-reactionary, bigoted conclusion: SEE!!!!! BAN THEM!!!!!!

They call us cowards who are afraid....yet they pee their pants for numbers like that and go ape crap just hearing about guns....

 

[2aguy]

And now....to throw in Concealed carry laws and gun ownership.....they do, in fact, help to decrease gun crime.....

You can't take away the fact that more guns did not lead to more gun crime......you want to, but you can't. You aren't factoring everything you need to make that conclusion.....

Normal people who own guns are not using those guns for crime...that is a fact.....so the mere existence of guns does not equal higher gun crime rates......... Lax policies toward criminals are not in your equation.... the effect of single parent homes and violence is not in your equation.....there are so many variables you can't account for, that your number fails to be even remotely accurate.

I haven't said anything about concealed carry laws. I'm not sure this applies to what I've said.

States with more gun owners have a positive correlation with violent crime. That's a fact. I'm not implying anything other than what I said in that sentence. That sentence is a fact.

I didn't say "gun crime". I said "violent crime". I haven't run the numbers with gun crime.

Things you are not taking into account......

Here Are 8 Stubborn Facts on Gun Violence in America

• The rate of gun ownership is higher among whites than it is among African-Americans, but the murder rate among African-Americans is significantly higher than the rate among whites.
• -------

6. There is no clear relationship between strict gun control legislation and homicide or violent crime rates.

• The Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence ironically makes this clear with its ratings for states based on gun laws. “Gun freedom” states that score poorly, like New Hampshire, Vermont, Idaho, and Oregon, have some of the lowest homicide rates. Conversely, “gun-control-loving” states that received high scores, like Maryland and Illinois, experience some of the nation’s highest homicide rates.
• The Crime Prevention Research Center notes that, if anything, the data indicate that countries with high rates of gun ownership tend to have lower homicide rates—but this is only a correlation, and many factors do not necessarily support a conclusion that high rates of gun ownership cause the low rates of homicide.
• Homicide and firearm homicide rates in Great Britain spiked in the years immediately following the imposition of severe gun control measures, despite the fact that most developed countries continued to experience a downward trend in these rates. This is also pointed out by noted criminologist John Lott in his book “The War on Guns.”
• Similarly, Ireland’s homicide rates spiked in the years immediately following the country’s 1972 gun confiscation legislation.
• Australia’s National Firearms Act appears to have had little effect on suicide and homicide rates, which were falling before the law was enacted and continued to decline at a statistically unremarkable rate compared to worldwide trends.
• According to research compiled by John Lott and highlighted in his book “The War on Guns,” Australia’s armed and unarmed robbery rates both increased markedly in the five years immediately following the National Firearms Act, despite the general downward trend experienced by other developed countries.
• Great Britain has some of the strictest gun control laws in the developed world, but the violent crime rate for homicide, rape, burglary, and aggravated assault is much higher than that in the U.S. Further, approximately 60 percent of burglaries in Great Britain occur while residents are home, compared to just 13 percent in the U.S., and British burglars admit to targeting occupied residences because they are more likely to find wallets and purses.
• It is difficult to compare homicide and firearm-related murder rates across international borders because countries use different methods to determine which deaths “count” for purposes of violent crime. For example, since 1967, Great Britain has excluded from its homicide counts any case that does not result in a conviction, that was the result of dangerous driving, or in which the person was determined to have acted in self-defense. All of these factors are counted as “homicides” in the United States.

States without major cities have lower crime rates but you can pretend it is about the guns

Crime rates are not gun violence rates.

Mass killings are not typical murders.

Homicides include people killing people because of relationships, people killing people while committing crimes and gang violence and then tyou ave people wanting to kill as many people as they can. It is these killings we are talking about & your bullshit attempts of burying statistics is obvious & dishonest.

So shove your homicide rates & pretend crime rates are down because a bunch of gun lovers decide to own 30 guns. The ban of assault rifles reduced deaths due to mass killings. You can pout, & stomp tour feet & spew irrelevant statistics and stories but it does not change that these weapons feed these mass killings usually of innocent children & women.

So shove your homicide rates & pretend crime rates are down because a bunch of gun lovers decide to own 30 guns.

Bzzzzzzzz, wrong answer....

Your theory...not mine......

More Guns = More Gun crime......

26 years...more gun ownership in this country, more people carrying guns...

Result:

gun murder down 49%
gun crime down 75%

Your theory is that regardless of any other factor....simply adding guns to a society increases gun murder and gun crime......

The exact opposite happened...does this mean guns helped lower those rates.....that isn't the argument for this point......you point, again.....simply adding guns will increase those rates.....

The exact opposite happened....

In science, when you have a theory, then conduct an experiment to prove that theory.......and the exact opposite happens....in science, that means your theory is completely wrong......

False assumptions;

1) The increase of guns purchased is increase of gun owners. You actually no data on the number of gun owners. How any people bought guns that did not require any registration?

2) You think the reduction of gun violence (if true) is due to this increase in gun sales.

I haven't addressed gun sales and violence reduction...

What I am pointing out is that your theory is wrong...

You and the anti-gunners believe with religious fervor.....

More Guns = More Gun crime... you do not say....yeah, but only if lots of people own them....no your theory, your argument, your faith....

More Guns = More Gun Crime...

Theory is put into practice over 26 years.....from 200 million guns in 1990s in private hands to close to if not over 600 million guns in private hands in 2017....

More Guns

Then...what happened?

Gun murder down 49%

Gun crime down 75%...

Less Gun Crime...

Your Theory....

More Guns = More Gun Crime

Result.....Gun murder down 49%, gun crime down 75%


Less gun crime

In actual science.....you know, real science....when you have a theory, and then you conduct an experiment based on that theory, and then the exact opposite of your theory happens....?

That means your theory is wrong....

 

[RealDave]

I haven't said anything about concealed carry laws. I'm not sure this applies to what I've said.

States with more gun owners have a positive correlation with violent crime. That's a fact. I'm not implying anything other than what I said in that sentence. That sentence is a fact.

I didn't say "gun crime". I said "violent crime". I haven't run the numbers with gun crime.

Things you are not taking into account......

Here Are 8 Stubborn Facts on Gun Violence in America

• The rate of gun ownership is higher among whites than it is among African-Americans, but the murder rate among African-Americans is significantly higher than the rate among whites.
• -------

6. There is no clear relationship between strict gun control legislation and homicide or violent crime rates.

• The Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence ironically makes this clear with its ratings for states based on gun laws. “Gun freedom” states that score poorly, like New Hampshire, Vermont, Idaho, and Oregon, have some of the lowest homicide rates. Conversely, “gun-control-loving” states that received high scores, like Maryland and Illinois, experience some of the nation’s highest homicide rates.
• The Crime Prevention Research Center notes that, if anything, the data indicate that countries with high rates of gun ownership tend to have lower homicide rates—but this is only a correlation, and many factors do not necessarily support a conclusion that high rates of gun ownership cause the low rates of homicide.
• Homicide and firearm homicide rates in Great Britain spiked in the years immediately following the imposition of severe gun control measures, despite the fact that most developed countries continued to experience a downward trend in these rates. This is also pointed out by noted criminologist John Lott in his book “The War on Guns.”
• Similarly, Ireland’s homicide rates spiked in the years immediately following the country’s 1972 gun confiscation legislation.
• Australia’s National Firearms Act appears to have had little effect on suicide and homicide rates, which were falling before the law was enacted and continued to decline at a statistically unremarkable rate compared to worldwide trends.
• According to research compiled by John Lott and highlighted in his book “The War on Guns,” Australia’s armed and unarmed robbery rates both increased markedly in the five years immediately following the National Firearms Act, despite the general downward trend experienced by other developed countries.
• Great Britain has some of the strictest gun control laws in the developed world, but the violent crime rate for homicide, rape, burglary, and aggravated assault is much higher than that in the U.S. Further, approximately 60 percent of burglaries in Great Britain occur while residents are home, compared to just 13 percent in the U.S., and British burglars admit to targeting occupied residences because they are more likely to find wallets and purses.
• It is difficult to compare homicide and firearm-related murder rates across international borders because countries use different methods to determine which deaths “count” for purposes of violent crime. For example, since 1967, Great Britain has excluded from its homicide counts any case that does not result in a conviction, that was the result of dangerous driving, or in which the person was determined to have acted in self-defense. All of these factors are counted as “homicides” in the United States.

States without major cities have lower crime rates but you can pretend it is about the guns

Crime rates are not gun violence rates.

Mass killings are not typical murders.

Homicides include people killing people because of relationships, people killing people while committing crimes and gang violence and then tyou ave people wanting to kill as many people as they can. It is these killings we are talking about & your bullshit attempts of burying statistics is obvious & dishonest.

So shove your homicide rates & pretend crime rates are down because a bunch of gun lovers decide to own 30 guns. The ban of assault rifles reduced deaths due to mass killings. You can pout, & stomp tour feet & spew irrelevant statistics and stories but it does not change that these weapons feed these mass killings usually of innocent children & women.

So shove your homicide rates & pretend crime rates are down because a bunch of gun lovers decide to own 30 guns.

Bzzzzzzzz, wrong answer....

Your theory...not mine......

More Guns = More Gun crime......

26 years...more gun ownership in this country, more people carrying guns...

Result:

gun murder down 49%
gun crime down 75%

Your theory is that regardless of any other factor....simply adding guns to a society increases gun murder and gun crime......

The exact opposite happened...does this mean guns helped lower those rates.....that isn't the argument for this point......you point, again.....simply adding guns will increase those rates.....

The exact opposite happened....

In science, when you have a theory, then conduct an experiment to prove that theory.......and the exact opposite happens....in science, that means your theory is completely wrong......

False assumptions;

1) The increase of guns purchased is increase of gun owners. You actually no data on the number of gun owners. How any people bought guns that did not require any registration?

2) You think the reduction of gun violence (if true) is due to this increase in gun sales.

I haven't addressed gun sales and violence reduction...

What I am pointing out is that your theory is wrong...

You and the anti-gunners believe with religious fervor.....

More Guns = More Gun crime... you do not say....yeah, but only if lots of people own them....no your theory, your argument, your faith....

More Guns = More Gun Crime...

Theory is put into practice over 26 years.....from 200 million guns in 1990s in private hands to close to if not over 600 million guns in private hands in 2017....

More Guns

Then...what happened?

Gun murder down 49%

Gun crime down 75%...

Less Gun Crime...

Your Theory....

More Guns = More Gun Crime

Result.....Gun murder down 49%, gun crime down 75%


Less gun crime

In actual science.....you know, real science....when you have a theory, and then you conduct an experiment based on that theory, and then the exact opposite of your theory happens....?

That means your theory is wrong....

Your interpretation is wrong.

Not more guns, more gun owners.

Really, If I owned 500 guns instead of 5, would that make me commit more crime?

 

[RealDave]

I haven't said anything about concealed carry laws. I'm not sure this applies to what I've said.

States with more gun owners have a positive correlation with violent crime. That's a fact. I'm not implying anything other than what I said in that sentence. That sentence is a fact.

I didn't say "gun crime". I said "violent crime". I haven't run the numbers with gun crime.

Things you are not taking into account......

Here Are 8 Stubborn Facts on Gun Violence in America

• The rate of gun ownership is higher among whites than it is among African-Americans, but the murder rate among African-Americans is significantly higher than the rate among whites.
• -------

6. There is no clear relationship between strict gun control legislation and homicide or violent crime rates.

• The Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence ironically makes this clear with its ratings for states based on gun laws. “Gun freedom” states that score poorly, like New Hampshire, Vermont, Idaho, and Oregon, have some of the lowest homicide rates. Conversely, “gun-control-loving” states that received high scores, like Maryland and Illinois, experience some of the nation’s highest homicide rates.
• The Crime Prevention Research Center notes that, if anything, the data indicate that countries with high rates of gun ownership tend to have lower homicide rates—but this is only a correlation, and many factors do not necessarily support a conclusion that high rates of gun ownership cause the low rates of homicide.
• Homicide and firearm homicide rates in Great Britain spiked in the years immediately following the imposition of severe gun control measures, despite the fact that most developed countries continued to experience a downward trend in these rates. This is also pointed out by noted criminologist John Lott in his book “The War on Guns.”
• Similarly, Ireland’s homicide rates spiked in the years immediately following the country’s 1972 gun confiscation legislation.
• Australia’s National Firearms Act appears to have had little effect on suicide and homicide rates, which were falling before the law was enacted and continued to decline at a statistically unremarkable rate compared to worldwide trends.
• According to research compiled by John Lott and highlighted in his book “The War on Guns,” Australia’s armed and unarmed robbery rates both increased markedly in the five years immediately following the National Firearms Act, despite the general downward trend experienced by other developed countries.
• Great Britain has some of the strictest gun control laws in the developed world, but the violent crime rate for homicide, rape, burglary, and aggravated assault is much higher than that in the U.S. Further, approximately 60 percent of burglaries in Great Britain occur while residents are home, compared to just 13 percent in the U.S., and British burglars admit to targeting occupied residences because they are more likely to find wallets and purses.
• It is difficult to compare homicide and firearm-related murder rates across international borders because countries use different methods to determine which deaths “count” for purposes of violent crime. For example, since 1967, Great Britain has excluded from its homicide counts any case that does not result in a conviction, that was the result of dangerous driving, or in which the person was determined to have acted in self-defense. All of these factors are counted as “homicides” in the United States.

States without major cities have lower crime rates but you can pretend it is about the guns

Crime rates are not gun violence rates.

Mass killings are not typical murders.

Homicides include people killing people because of relationships, people killing people while committing crimes and gang violence and then tyou ave people wanting to kill as many people as they can. It is these killings we are talking about & your bullshit attempts of burying statistics is obvious & dishonest.

So shove your homicide rates & pretend crime rates are down because a bunch of gun lovers decide to own 30 guns. The ban of assault rifles reduced deaths due to mass killings. You can pout, & stomp tour feet & spew irrelevant statistics and stories but it does not change that these weapons feed these mass killings usually of innocent children & women.

So shove your homicide rates & pretend crime rates are down because a bunch of gun lovers decide to own 30 guns.

Bzzzzzzzz, wrong answer....

Your theory...not mine......

More Guns = More Gun crime......

26 years...more gun ownership in this country, more people carrying guns...

Result:

gun murder down 49%
gun crime down 75%

Your theory is that regardless of any other factor....simply adding guns to a society increases gun murder and gun crime......

The exact opposite happened...does this mean guns helped lower those rates.....that isn't the argument for this point......you point, again.....simply adding guns will increase those rates.....

The exact opposite happened....

In science, when you have a theory, then conduct an experiment to prove that theory.......and the exact opposite happens....in science, that means your theory is completely wrong......

False assumptions;

1) The increase of guns purchased is increase of gun owners. You actually no data on the number of gun owners. How any people bought guns that did not require any registration?

2) You think the reduction of gun violence (if true) is due to this increase in gun sales.

----------------------------------------------- I keep hearing the word Registered so where is it in the USA that GUN's are registered RDave ??----------- just curious RDave .

S
So, when you buy a handgun, is it registered? No where is it written down that you bought a handgun & what it is & where you bought it?