Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
We also know that mass murders are a small percentage of overall crimes, and thus focusing on them ignores the main criminal acts being performed. Its like working on the plumbing to a sink while the titanic is sinking.
True, but we both know that countries without a significant number of guns have less total murders than the US does.
When we compare gun-related and non-gun related homicides, what we find is that the US rate of gun-related homicide is ten times that of many EU countries, while the non gun-related homicide rates is "only" four times that of the EU countries.
This tells us that some murderers will find another way to kill, as you suggest. But most will not.
If the US reduced the number of guns, the number of homicides would drop proportionally, as would suicides.
Thats an assumption, and a big one.
This is a lie.True, but we both know that countries without a significant number of guns have less total murders than the US does.
When we compare gun-related and non-gun related homicides, what we find is that the US rate of gun-related homicide is ten times that of many EU countries, while the non gun-related homicide rates is "only" four times that of the EU countries.
This tells us that some murderers will find another way to kill, as you suggest. But most will not.
If the US reduced the number of guns, the number of homicides would drop proportionally, as would suicides.
Thats an assumption, and a big one.
Yes, it is, but it is based on solid statistical research; most of which can be considered proven mathematical fact.
True, but we both know that countries without a significant number of guns have less total murders than the US does.
When we compare gun-related and non-gun related homicides, what we find is that the US rate of gun-related homicide is ten times that of many EU countries, while the non gun-related homicide rates is "only" four times that of the EU countries.
This tells us that some murderers will find another way to kill, as you suggest. But most will not.
If the US reduced the number of guns, the number of homicides would drop proportionally, as would suicides.
Thats an assumption, and a big one.
Yes, it is, but it is based on solid statistical research; most of which can be considered proven mathematical fact.
For instance - if there are less guns, will there be less deaths from gun accidents?
Of course. We all know there will be.
Even with suicide rates, we have mathematical models on how much the rates might drop, and over what time line, based on the Australian experience.
Fact of the matter:M14 -
This is the point you seem to be missing:
The reason we do not consider the number of guns is obvious - a person owning 25 guns is not 25 times more likely to commit murder than a person owning 1 gun, and a person owning 25 guns is unlikely to kill 25 people, one with each gun.
Thus, it makes more sense to establish the rate of homicide per person, or per gun owner.
In both cases, the US has the worst record in the developed world.
The fact a lot of nutcases have massive stockpiles of weapons you wish to use to skew the stats does not make for a strong or valid case.
But if there are less guns in the hands of private citizens, wouldnt criminals be emboldened by the lack of resitance?
You assume that the criminals will remain static in this situation, which is not the case.
Nothing you say here chages the fact that you have lied, continue to lie, and choose to fail.M14 -
I see that you have conceded the debate, and from this point on will simply troll the thread with abuse and diversions.
If you wish to debate the topic sensibly, you know where to find us.
But if there are less guns in the hands of private citizens, wouldnt criminals be emboldened by the lack of resitance?
You assume that the criminals will remain static in this situation, which is not the case.
No, not at all - because the criminals don't have guns either. You just need decent police.
Go to a country like England, France or Germany, and they still have plenty of crime - but they do not have armed criminals.
But if there are less guns in the hands of private citizens, wouldnt criminals be emboldened by the lack of resitance?
You assume that the criminals will remain static in this situation, which is not the case.
No, not at all - because the criminals don't have guns either. You just need decent police.
Go to a country like England, France or Germany, and they still have plenty of crime - but they do not have armed criminals.
But if there are less guns in the hands of private citizens, wouldnt criminals be emboldened by the lack of resitance?
You assume that the criminals will remain static in this situation, which is not the case.
No, not at all - because the criminals don't have guns either. You just need decent police.
Go to a country like England, France or Germany, and they still have plenty of crime - but they do not have armed criminals.
You might have been brainwashed to think that but I'd rather not wait for the cops to show up and analyze my blood spatter patterns.
So a criminal can't be armed with a knife, a bat, a pipe, brass knuckles a sapper, a night stick, steel toe boots etc ad infinitum.
Saigon has no intention of addressing your post with any degree of honesty.But if there are less guns in the hands of private citizens, wouldnt criminals be emboldened by the lack of resitance?
You assume that the criminals will remain static in this situation, which is not the case.
No, not at all - because the criminals don't have guns either. You just need decent police.
Go to a country like England, France or Germany, and they still have plenty of crime - but they do not have armed criminals.
yes, they have assault rates higher than the US because the Gobs know they get some limited stomping time before the police can show up.
You basically get rule by the strongest and the youngest in the streets. No thank you.
And if the tough tough gun laws are working in england, why is gun possesion by criminals on the rise?
Answer that one.
Skull Pilot -
You might have been brainwashed to think that but I'd rather not wait for the cops to show up and analyze my blood spatter patterns.
You live in a country with 5 times as many gun-related homicides than I do.
You seem to consider this a fine state of affairs.
I call that the result of brainwashing.
Americans need to ask themselves WHY the rate of homicide is so high, and what freedoms might be achieved by lowering it.
So a criminal can't be armed with a knife, a bat, a pipe, brass knuckles a sapper, a night stick, steel toe boots etc ad infinitum.
Of course they can.
People in England and France still get beaten up in bar fights just as they do in the US - they just don't die doing so.
So a criminal can't be armed with a knife, a bat, a pipe, brass knuckles a sapper, a night stick, steel toe boots etc ad infinitum.
Of course they can.
People in England and France still get beaten up in bar fights just as they do in the US - they just don't die doing so.
That would be Siagon's preferred solution, yes.So a criminal can't be armed with a knife, a bat, a pipe, brass knuckles a sapper, a night stick, steel toe boots etc ad infinitum.
Of course they can.
People in England and France still get beaten up in bar fights just as they do in the US - they just don't die doing so.
A fight is not necessarily a violent crime.
A 6 foot 3 guy assaulting a 5 foot two woman is. I suppose she should just lie there and get raped and brutalized until the fucking cops show up instead of plugging the fucking rapist right?
Marty -
I care about being staying alive. You should do.
