Premila Lal, 18, shot dead after jumping out of closet to surprise friend

[OnePercenter]

Everyone should be able to own a gun, but not everyone is responsible enough to own a gun.

 

[JoeB131]

[

I just looked up murder rates by country. I didn't specify.

I don't doubt that the prevalence of guns in the US is a factor in our murder rates. I question if the supposed 'gun culture' of this country is causal, however.

Well, it is important to specify.

the problem with the folks who try to pretend the US doesn't have a serious problem is that they want to throw countries we never would want to emulate into the mix and say, "Well, at least we're better off than THAT country".

We are the last superpower and a first world, advanced industrialized nation. The first and foremost comparison we need to make are to OTHER G-7 countries, which is the UK, France, Italy, Germany, Japan and Canada. That's our peer group for all practical purposes.

All those countries either ban private gun ownership or severely restrict it.

All of them are still democracies. (In fact, Germany had more widespread gun ownership under the Nazis, which is partially how the Nazis were able to bully their way into power.)

All of them have severely lower crime rates. Not only far less murders, but far less of a need to lock up their fellow citizens. We imprison 2 million people with another 7 million on probation or parole, compared to Germany that only locks up 78,000.

In short- We're doing it wrong. If the purpose of gun ownership is self-defense and freedom, and that makes 32,000 gun deaths and 78,000 gun injuries a year acceptable, then we are doing it wrong if these other comparable countries are acheving vastly better results without widespread gun ownership.

 

[Skull Pilot]

People have killed other people before guns were invented.

People kill other people without guns all the time.

People will always kill other people even if you destroy every gun on the planet,

You are stupid beyond belief if you think otherwise.

It's a lot easier to kill someone with a gun than without one.

Which is why 68% of murders in this country happen- with guns.

And countries without guns only have a fraction of our murder rate.


11,101 gun murders in the US.
11 gun murders in Japan

Hmmmmm... Makes you wonder what the Japanese are doing right.

Australia same thing.

How do those countries report murders?

Is it like the US where every death not of natural causes or suicide is reported as a murder?

Or is it like the UK where murders are only reported after there is a conviction?

Get an apples to apples comparison then we'll compare.

 

[Skull Pilot]

[

Of course guns make killing easier.

However, I'd like to see where you get your statistics that countries 'without guns' have a fraction of our murder rate.

Everything I have been able to find shows the US as being no higher than middle of the pack when it comes to international rates of murder. I haven't seen it broken down by rate of gun ownership or anything like that, however.

the only way you get the US in the "Middle" of a pack if the Pack includes third world countries or countries that are very poor and have high crime rates.

Compared to other, industrialized Democracies, we are in terrible shape.

I just looked up murder rates by country. I didn't specify.

I don't doubt that the prevalence of guns in the US is a factor in our murder rates. I question if the supposed 'gun culture' of this country is causal, however.

Read this before you put too much faith in those reported murder rates.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-and-justice-system/311735-comparing-murder-rates.html#post7796786

 

[JoeB131]

Yes, the old tired, "Well, they are counting differently" excuse that the right uses when the US shows up really badly in a comparison.

Yeah, that'll work.

We had 11,101 gun murders, the UK had 48.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Yes, the old tired, "Well, they are counting differently" excuse that the right uses when the US shows up really badly in a comparison.

Yeah, that'll work.

We had 11,101 gun murders, the UK had 48.

It's not an excuse.

It's a significant variable.

Anyone with a brain can see that.

And the UK had 48 convictions of gun murders. How many gun murders did not end with a conviction and therefore were not reported?

Only by accounting for those differences will your argument be valid. Until then it's just it's just control freak ranting.

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/html/cjusew96/cpp.cfm

You'll see the murder conviction rate in the UK is much lower per 100,000 than in the US.

 

[The Gadfly]

Yes, the old tired, "Well, they are counting differently" excuse that the right uses when the US shows up really badly in a comparison.

Yeah, that'll work.

We had 11,101 gun murders, the UK had 48.

It's not an excuse.

It's a significant variable.

Anyone with a brain can see that.

And the UK had 48 convictions of gun murders. How many gun murders did not end with a conviction and therefore were not reported?

Only by accounting for those differences will your argument be valid. Until then it's just it's just control freak ranting.

Bureau of Justice Statistics Crime and Justice in the U.S. and England and Wales: Convictions per 1,000 population

You'll see the murder conviction rate in the UK is much lower per 100,000 than in the US.

Don't confuse Joe with the facts; his mind is made up.

 

[JoeB131]

Yes, the old tired, "Well, they are counting differently" excuse that the right uses when the US shows up really badly in a comparison.

Yeah, that'll work.

We had 11,101 gun murders, the UK had 48.

It's not an excuse.

It's a significant variable.

Anyone with a brain can see that.

And the UK had 48 convictions of gun murders. How many gun murders did not end with a conviction and therefore were not reported?

Only by accounting for those differences will your argument be valid. Until then it's just it's just control freak ranting.

Bureau of Justice Statistics Crime and Justice in the U.S. and England and Wales: Convictions per 1,000 population

You'll see the murder conviction rate in the UK is much lower per 100,000 than in the US.

No, what is lower is the MURDER RATE, period.

Honestly, this has to be the most retarded argument you've made yet.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

And this would be better for you gun-nutters, how, exactly?

The story doesn't make sense.

If you can't see that because you're obsessed with guns that's your problem.

And if I'm right and I probably am all it means is that there are violent people in the world and people need to protect themselves.

And a gun is an excellent tool for self defense.

Actually, it makes perfect sense.

You give guns to stupid crackers, eventually they end up shooting people.

Less then 800 deaths a year due to accidents with firearms. Ya that is so many that we should strip the rights from 100's of millions. A tragedy indeed but not worthy of new laws.

 

[JoeB131]

The story doesn't make sense.

If you can't see that because you're obsessed with guns that's your problem.

And if I'm right and I probably am all it means is that there are violent people in the world and people need to protect themselves.

And a gun is an excellent tool for self defense.

Actually, it makes perfect sense.

You give guns to stupid crackers, eventually they end up shooting people.

Less then 800 deaths a year due to accidents with firearms. Ya that is so many that we should strip the rights from 100's of millions. A tragedy indeed but not worthy of new laws.

They pull food dyes out of circulation for causing cancer in RATS.

I think 32,000 gun deaths with no corresponding benefit is more than a good enough reason to pull them.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Actually, it makes perfect sense.

You give guns to stupid crackers, eventually they end up shooting people.

Less then 800 deaths a year due to accidents with firearms. Ya that is so many that we should strip the rights from 100's of millions. A tragedy indeed but not worthy of new laws.

They pull food dyes out of circulation for causing cancer in RATS.

I think 32,000 gun deaths with no corresponding benefit is more than a good enough reason to pull them.

Then change the Constitution. That is your only recourse.

 

[JoeB131]

Less then 800 deaths a year due to accidents with firearms. Ya that is so many that we should strip the rights from 100's of millions. A tragedy indeed but not worthy of new laws.

They pull food dyes out of circulation for causing cancer in RATS.

I think 32,000 gun deaths with no corresponding benefit is more than a good enough reason to pull them.

Then change the Constitution. That is your only recourse.

No, the constitution is pretty clear.

Well Regulated Militia.

You ain't in the militia, you don't need a gun.

Simple, no.

 

[Katzndogz]

Japan doesn 't have too many incidents of thugs beating, robbing and burning 85 year old women alive.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

They pull food dyes out of circulation for causing cancer in RATS.

I think 32,000 gun deaths with no corresponding benefit is more than a good enough reason to pull them.

Then change the Constitution. That is your only recourse.

No, the constitution is pretty clear.

Well Regulated Militia.

You ain't in the militia, you don't need a gun.

Simple, no.

That argument has been debunked so many times it is insane you keep using it. But lets play your game shall we? EVERY Male age 17 to 45 is in the Militia.

 

[JoeB131]

Then change the Constitution. That is your only recourse.

No, the constitution is pretty clear.

Well Regulated Militia.

You ain't in the militia, you don't need a gun.

Simple, no.

That argument has been debunked so many times it is insane you keep using it. But lets play your game shall we? EVERY Male age 17 to 45 is in the Militia.

Awesome. Now we have the guns out of the hands of kids, women and old people.

Now we get to the "Well-Regulated" part.

When you can have your gun, where you can have your gun, how much ammo you are allowed to have.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

No, the constitution is pretty clear.

Well Regulated Militia.

You ain't in the militia, you don't need a gun.

Simple, no.

That argument has been debunked so many times it is insane you keep using it. But lets play your game shall we? EVERY Male age 17 to 45 is in the Militia.

Awesome. Now we have the guns out of the hands of kids, women and old people.

Now we get to the "Well-Regulated" part.

When you can have your gun, where you can have your gun, how much ammo you are allowed to have.

Nope, sorry buddy the 2nd Amendment says firearms may not be infringed and lists as one reason a militia. It does not tie the right to belonging to said militia. Further the Courts have so ruled.

As to the Militia the US has no intention of regulating the unorganized militia.

You lose on so many levels it is pitiful for you to keep arguing. But you do because you are clinically insane. See a doctor for that they have good medication that can help with your obsession and your paranoia.

Further the Supreme Court has ruled that the 2nd is a right irrespective of belonging to a militia. You lose on all fronts. Constitutionally and legally.

You want change? Amend the Constitution.

 

[peach174]

If she had gone to the football game like she was suppose to, she would not be dead.
Her parents were in the process of moving and the Father had his 15 year old son and a 21 year old family member watching the home.
They thought she was an intruder.

Colorado teen dies after being shot by close family friend in 'prank that went bad' | Fox News

 

[The Gadfly]

No, the constitution is pretty clear.

Well Regulated Militia.

You ain't in the militia, you don't need a gun.

Simple, no.

That argument has been debunked so many times it is insane you keep using it. But lets play your game shall we? EVERY Male age 17 to 45 is in the Militia.

Awesome. Now we have the guns out of the hands of kids, women and old people.

Now we get to the "Well-Regulated" part.

When you can have your gun, where you can have your gun, how much ammo you are allowed to have.

So says the apologist for the authoritarian state. Look, Joe, you want to live in a gilded cage, fine; the world is full of places where you can do that; hell, there's one to the immediate north, called "Canada". You're free to go there, anytime. Meanwhile, some of the rest of us would rather not live in your proposed nanny state and workers paradise. We like our freedom, as guaranteed by the Constitution...and we intend to defend it against ALL enemies (which apparently, includes YOU).

 

[PredFan]

using a beautiful girl as a prop for your agenda = disgusting

That's Zona.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Nope, sorry buddy the 2nd Amendment says firearms may not be infringed and lists as one reason a militia. It does not tie the right to belonging to said militia. Further the Courts have so ruled.

As to the Militia the US has no intention of regulating the unorganized militia.

You lose on so many levels it is pitiful for you to keep arguing. But you do because you are clinically insane. See a doctor for that they have good medication that can help with your obsession and your paranoia.

Further the Supreme Court has ruled that the 2nd is a right irrespective of belonging to a militia. You lose on all fronts. Constitutionally and legally.

You want change? Amend the Constitution.

Guy, for your SCOTUS argument. Scalia dies of a heart attack. After the amazement of doctors that he actually HAD a heart, Obama appoints his successor.

2nd Amendment is about Militias again.

We are all pretty sick and tired of you guys getting kids killed because you need to compensate for your tiny penises.