Study: Gun waiting periods prevent hundreds of homicides

[Marion Morrison]

Your time's up cvntface. You claim to own a Marlin .22 yet can't say what model it is, where it was made, or how many rounds it holds? You're lying. I quite well know the model of my Marlin .22

Unfortunately, I don't have it anymore, and long for another just like it.

I used to set off shotgun shells and top out saplings with it.

You are funny.

It is a model 60.

And it holds how many rounds? (Within 2 minutes) Also tell where it was made.

This is it. 14 shot. I believe Kentucky.

No bitch. real Marlin model 60s are from Connecticut and are either 16 or 18-round semi-automatic rifles.

That qualifies as a "Weapon of mass destruction" according to you.

As does your HiPoint 9mm Semi-automatic Carbine. I know about those, my cousin showed me his 6 years ago.

I was fairly impressed.

My Marlin model 60 held 18 rounds and I paid $60 for it. Suck balls, leftist anti-gun faggot!

 

[BlackSand]

This is it. 14 shot. I believe Kentucky.

Hmm ... I have a Marlin Glenfield Model 60 that was manufactured in New Haven, CT and holds 18 bullets.

.

 

[Brain357]

Your time's up cvntface. You claim to own a Marlin .22 yet can't say what model it is, where it was made, or how many rounds it holds? You're lying. I quite well know the model of my Marlin .22

Unfortunately, I don't have it anymore, and long for another just like it.

I used to set off shotgun shells and top out saplings with it.

You are funny.

It is a model 60.

And it holds how many rounds? (Within 2 minutes) Also tell where it was made.

This is it. 14 shot. I believe Kentucky.

No bitch. real Marlin model 60s are from Conneticut and are either 16 or 18-round semi-automatic rifles.

You sure got me.

15 or 18 rounds; tubular magazine capacity is either 17 rounds (before the late 1980s) or 14 rounds (since the late 1980s)

 

[miketx]

Your time's up cvntface. You claim to own a Marlin .22 yet can't say what model it is, where it was made, or how many rounds it holds? You're lying. I quite well know the model of my Marlin .22

Unfortunately, I don't have it anymore, and long for another just like it.

I used to set off shotgun shells and top out saplings with it.

You are funny.

It is a model 60.

And it holds how many rounds? (Within 2 minutes) Also tell where it was made.

This is it. 14 shot. I believe Kentucky.

No bitch. real Marlin model 60s are from Conneticut and are either 16 or 18-round semi-automatic rifles.

You sure got me.

15 or 18 rounds; tubular magazine capacity is either 17 rounds (before the late 1980s) or 14 rounds (since the late 1980s)

You have to take the plug out and it will hold more.

 

[Brain357]

Your time's up cvntface. You claim to own a Marlin .22 yet can't say what model it is, where it was made, or how many rounds it holds? You're lying. I quite well know the model of my Marlin .22

Unfortunately, I don't have it anymore, and long for another just like it.

I used to set off shotgun shells and top out saplings with it.

You are funny.

It is a model 60.

And it holds how many rounds? (Within 2 minutes) Also tell where it was made.

This is it. 14 shot. I believe Kentucky.

No bitch. real Marlin model 60s are from Connecticut and are either 16 or 18-round semi-automatic rifles.

That qualifies as a "Weapon of mass destruction" according to you.

As does your HiPoint 9mm Semi-automatic Carbine. I know about those, my cousin showed me his 6 years ago.

I was fairly impressed.

The HiPoint is fun, but I only have 10 round magazines. So no, not a weapon of mass destruction.

 

[Brain357]

You are funny.

It is a model 60.

And it holds how many rounds? (Within 2 minutes) Also tell where it was made.

This is it. 14 shot. I believe Kentucky.

No bitch. real Marlin model 60s are from Conneticut and are either 16 or 18-round semi-automatic rifles.

You sure got me.

15 or 18 rounds; tubular magazine capacity is either 17 rounds (before the late 1980s) or 14 rounds (since the late 1980s)

You have to take the plug out and it will hold more.

My point being either is really right.

 

[miketx]

And it holds how many rounds? (Within 2 minutes) Also tell where it was made.

This is it. 14 shot. I believe Kentucky.

No bitch. real Marlin model 60s are from Conneticut and are either 16 or 18-round semi-automatic rifles.

You sure got me.

15 or 18 rounds; tubular magazine capacity is either 17 rounds (before the late 1980s) or 14 rounds (since the late 1980s)

You have to take the plug out and it will hold more.

My point being either is really right.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Your time's up cvntface. You claim to own a Marlin .22 yet can't say what model it is, where it was made, or how many rounds it holds? You're lying. I quite well know the model of my Marlin .22

Unfortunately, I don't have it anymore, and long for another just like it.

I used to set off shotgun shells and top out saplings with it.

You are funny.

It is a model 60.

And it holds how many rounds? (Within 2 minutes) Also tell where it was made.

This is it. 14 shot. I believe Kentucky.

No bitch. real Marlin model 60s are from Connecticut and are either 16 or 18-round semi-automatic rifles.

That qualifies as a "Weapon of mass destruction" according to you.

As does your HiPoint 9mm Semi-automatic Carbine. I know about those, my cousin showed me his 6 years ago.

I was fairly impressed.

The HiPoint is fun, but I only have 10 round magazines. So no, not a weapon of mass destruction.

Because there's no drum magazine and bump stock available for it, right?

Or is there?

 

[Brain357]

You are funny.

It is a model 60.

And it holds how many rounds? (Within 2 minutes) Also tell where it was made.

This is it. 14 shot. I believe Kentucky.

No bitch. real Marlin model 60s are from Connecticut and are either 16 or 18-round semi-automatic rifles.

That qualifies as a "Weapon of mass destruction" according to you.

As does your HiPoint 9mm Semi-automatic Carbine. I know about those, my cousin showed me his 6 years ago.

I was fairly impressed.

The HiPoint is fun, but I only have 10 round magazines. So no, not a weapon of mass destruction.

Because there's no drum magazine and bump stock available for it, right?

Or is there?

Haven't looked, so couldn't say.

 

[9thIDdoc]

A study tracking handgun laws on wait periods over a 45-year period found that a delay in obtaining a firearm after purchase reduced gun homicides by 17 percent. That breaks down to about 36 homicides per year for the average state. As of 2014, such laws in 16 states and the District of Columbia prevented about 750 gun homicides per year. If all 50 states required a wait, around 910 more lives could be spared, the authors report.

Gun waiting periods prevent hundreds of homicides, according to 45-year study

Bullshit. From your link:

"But the study saw no significant change in homicides from the switch. And the question of wait periods’ effect on gun homicides has lingered, leaving many policy makers to think that they are ineffective."

Do you of any reason to believe this anything but another attempted con job from the far left?

 

[Brain357]

A study tracking handgun laws on wait periods over a 45-year period found that a delay in obtaining a firearm after purchase reduced gun homicides by 17 percent. That breaks down to about 36 homicides per year for the average state. As of 2014, such laws in 16 states and the District of Columbia prevented about 750 gun homicides per year. If all 50 states required a wait, around 910 more lives could be spared, the authors report.

Gun waiting periods prevent hundreds of homicides, according to 45-year study

Bullshit. From your link:

"But the study saw no significant change in homicides from the switch. And the question of wait periods’ effect on gun homicides has lingered, leaving many policy makers to think that they are ineffective."

Do you of any reason to believe this anything but another attempted con job from the far left?

The link explains:
Malhotra and his colleagues argue that this is not the case. They note that the 2000 JAMA study found no effect because the study mis-coded 16 states. Those states were identified as being impacted by the Brady Act even though they previously had wait-period laws on the books. “As a result,” the authors conclude, “the coding of Brady states in the study by Ludwig and Cook fails to capture all states that had preexisting waiting periods,” Malhotra and co-authors concluded.

 

[9thIDdoc]

A study tracking handgun laws on wait periods over a 45-year period found that a delay in obtaining a firearm after purchase reduced gun homicides by 17 percent. That breaks down to about 36 homicides per year for the average state. As of 2014, such laws in 16 states and the District of Columbia prevented about 750 gun homicides per year. If all 50 states required a wait, around 910 more lives could be spared, the authors report.

Gun waiting periods prevent hundreds of homicides, according to 45-year study

Bullshit. From your link:

"But the study saw no significant change in homicides from the switch. And the question of wait periods’ effect on gun homicides has lingered, leaving many policy makers to think that they are ineffective."

Do you of any reason to believe this anything but another attempted con job from the far left?

The link explains:
Malhotra and his colleagues argue that this is not the case. They note that the 2000 JAMA study found no effect because the study mis-coded 16 states. Those states were identified as being impacted by the Brady Act even though they previously had wait-period laws on the books. “As a result,” the authors conclude, “the coding of Brady states in the study by Ludwig and Cook fails to capture all states that had preexisting waiting periods,” Malhotra and co-authors concluded.

No, that merely states that there are those who think the study should have been interpreted differently. I think that's called an attempt to spin.

 

[2aguy]

That study is not directly tied to firearms regulations and ownership.
For instance ... Over thee last two years there has been a serious increase in violent crime in cities like Chicago (that affect the national average).
Chicago has some of the strictest gun control laws.

.

Chicago doesn't have walls. It is still easy to get guns in. Chicago and Milwaukee both got concealed carry in recent years. Not going well...

so how do you plan on keeping illegal guns out of the hands of criminals? and whats not going well? law abiding citizens are now robbing stores and banks because they are allowed to carry guns? is that what you are trying to sell here?

What is going well? Violent crime is up. We have regular mass shootings and they are getting worse. Law enforcement are killed weekly...

I didn't say anything is going well, you did claim conceal and carry was not going well, are trying to say law abiding citizens are now committing crime because of conceal and carry?

I'm saying we have too many guns. Criminals have more guns because of that. Would you try to rob someone unarmed? We have an arms race between citizens and criminals. Gun control has proven to greatly reduce mass shootings. It is also unheard of for law enforcement to be gunned down weekly in civilized countries with gun control.

No....gun control hasn't reduced mass shootings in Britain or Australia.....Britain averaged 1 every 10 years....they are still on track for that...and Australia has had about a dozen incidents where an individual with a gun went to a public space, and simply didn't shoot enough people, or the people he shot didn't die....and didn't make the level of a mass public shooting. Their gun control didn't stop these from happening.

 

[2aguy]

View attachment 154993

Funny that most of Europe has good gun control and their police aren't being shot and killed regularly. They don't have regular mass killings. They have much lower homicide rates...

Their criminals are not shooting to kill and they don't target police. Their gun control laws haven't stopped their criminals from getting guns, their criminals don't use them to murder cops.

 

[2aguy]

so how do you plan on keeping illegal guns out of the hands of criminals? and whats not going well? law abiding citizens are now robbing stores and banks because they are allowed to carry guns? is that what you are trying to sell here?

What is going well? Violent crime is up. We have regular mass shootings and they are getting worse. Law enforcement are killed weekly...

I didn't say anything is going well, you did claim conceal and carry was not going well, are trying to say law abiding citizens are now committing crime because of conceal and carry?

I'm saying we have too many guns. Criminals have more guns because of that. Would you try to rob someone unarmed? We have an arms race between citizens and criminals. Gun control has proven to greatly reduce mass shootings. It is also unheard of for law enforcement to be gunned down weekly in civilized countries with gun control.

Now your not just grasping at straws but struggling to grasp at them,

Would you try to rob someone unarmed?

first off why don't you just go ahead and say it is impossible to rob someone if guns are banned and see how ridiculous that claim is...and second, a thief is far more likely to rob someone he his 100% sure is unarmed...far more likely...way more likely...let me hear you say you disagree with that, just to make the folly complete

Yet crime in countries with low gun ownership rates is much lower than ours.

And has nothing to do with their gun control laws....since Britain and Australia are now experiencing increased gun crime...and they both banned and confiscated guns....and we have lower gun murder rates, lower gun violence rates and lower violent crime rates as we increased legal gun ownership and gun carrying by law abiding people.

 

[2aguy]

A study tracking handgun laws on wait periods over a 45-year period found that a delay in obtaining a firearm after purchase reduced gun homicides by 17 percent. That breaks down to about 36 homicides per year for the average state. As of 2014, such laws in 16 states and the District of Columbia prevented about 750 gun homicides per year. If all 50 states required a wait, around 910 more lives could be spared, the authors report.

Gun waiting periods prevent hundreds of homicides, according to 45-year study

Yeah those criminals wait a long time for those background checks met me tell you.

And the guy who decides he's going to kill his wife but can legally buy a gun?

Drew Peterson didn't use a gun and neither do countless others. If a man decides to kill his wife, he probably will do so whether he owns a gun or not.
You want to trample the Constitution because of some future crime that hasn't happened yet?

Even Scalia admitted the 2nd amendment has limits. It isn't trampling the constitution to limit weapons for mass killing.

Yes.....Scalia said felons can't own guns, the dangerously mentally ill can't own guns....and there you have it...

 

[2aguy]

Yet crime in countries with low gun ownership rates is much lower than ours.

Some of the countries (like Sierra Leone) with the lowest gun ownership per capita have the worst record for violent crime and gun deaths.

Those countries are usually the ones where only the government and militants have firearms.
The most common form of homicide in those countries is war crimes and genocide.

.

There are certainly other factors than just gun ownership rates. I don't think Sierra Leone is very good to compare to the USA. Certainly Germany is more politically and economically stable to compare to the us. Same with other countries in Europe.

We can just look at the border with Mexico......where the same area on their side of the border has extreme gun control and out of control gun murder, and our side of the border has the 2nd Amendment and lower gun murder.......

Borderland Homicides Show Mexico's Gun Control Has Failed

Big Differences on Different Sides of the Border

Let's now turn our attention to the problematic north.
It's not an accident that some of the highest homicide rates are found along the border. Mexican drug cartels have an incentive to ensure they maintain control of drug supplies moving norther to where the demand is (in the United States.)
However, those drugs still need to be moved on the northern side of the border. So, do homicide rates continue onto the northern side? It turns out they don't. Using the same color coding (and the same data source) as the homicide map above, the border states (two states deep) on both sides look like this:

Source: OECD. Map by Ryan McMaken
On the other hand, Chihuahua and Texas are very big places. Perhaps if we take a more detailed look at the counties right on the border, we'll get a better feel for how things look at the border.
Thanks to Omar Garcia Ponce and Hannah Postel at the Center for Global Development, the work's already been done for me. Here is a map of the border at the county/municipality level:


Source: Center for Global Development
The general scenario remains the same. In fact, the borderland on the US side of the border have fewer homicides than the US overall. The authors note:
The map [above] illustrates the striking disparity between homicide rates on each side of the border. In 2012 (the most recent year available for all locations), Mexican border municipalities experienced 34.5 murders for every 100,000 people. By contrast, the homicide rate in US border counties was only 1.4, far below the US national average (4.7), and a tiny fraction of that experienced by their Southern neighbors. While almost half of the Mexican municipalities along the border experienced more than 40 murders per 100,000 people in 2012 (176 in Tamaulipas’ Ciudad Mier), the highest homicide rate in the US border counties was 12.9 (Yuma, AZ). The next most violent county experienced only 5.4 murders per 100,000 people. Notably, some of the safest locations in the United States are contiguous to many of the most dangerous places in Mexico. Most striking is the contrast between Ciudad Juárez and El Paso, two large cities that constitute a binational metropolitan area. Once called “the murder capital of the world,” Mexico’s Ciudad Juárez is only 300 feet from El Paso, “America’s safest city.” In 2012, Ciudad Juárez had 58 homicides per 100,000 people, while El Paso experienced fewer than one (0.6).

 

[Skull Pilot]

A study tracking handgun laws on wait periods over a 45-year period found that a delay in obtaining a firearm after purchase reduced gun homicides by 17 percent. That breaks down to about 36 homicides per year for the average state. As of 2014, such laws in 16 states and the District of Columbia prevented about 750 gun homicides per year. If all 50 states required a wait, around 910 more lives could be spared, the authors report.

Gun waiting periods prevent hundreds of homicides, according to 45-year study

 

[Brain357]

A study tracking handgun laws on wait periods over a 45-year period found that a delay in obtaining a firearm after purchase reduced gun homicides by 17 percent. That breaks down to about 36 homicides per year for the average state. As of 2014, such laws in 16 states and the District of Columbia prevented about 750 gun homicides per year. If all 50 states required a wait, around 910 more lives could be spared, the authors report.

Gun waiting periods prevent hundreds of homicides, according to 45-year study

Bullshit. From your link:

"But the study saw no significant change in homicides from the switch. And the question of wait periods’ effect on gun homicides has lingered, leaving many policy makers to think that they are ineffective."

Do you of any reason to believe this anything but another attempted con job from the far left?

The link explains:
Malhotra and his colleagues argue that this is not the case. They note that the 2000 JAMA study found no effect because the study mis-coded 16 states. Those states were identified as being impacted by the Brady Act even though they previously had wait-period laws on the books. “As a result,” the authors conclude, “the coding of Brady states in the study by Ludwig and Cook fails to capture all states that had preexisting waiting periods,” Malhotra and co-authors concluded.

No, that merely states that there are those who think the study should have been interpreted differently. I think that's called an attempt to spin.

You realize they are talking about a different study right? The author of this study is explaining why a study in 2000 was not accurate...

 

[Brain357]

Chicago doesn't have walls. It is still easy to get guns in. Chicago and Milwaukee both got concealed carry in recent years. Not going well...

so how do you plan on keeping illegal guns out of the hands of criminals? and whats not going well? law abiding citizens are now robbing stores and banks because they are allowed to carry guns? is that what you are trying to sell here?

What is going well? Violent crime is up. We have regular mass shootings and they are getting worse. Law enforcement are killed weekly...

I didn't say anything is going well, you did claim conceal and carry was not going well, are trying to say law abiding citizens are now committing crime because of conceal and carry?

I'm saying we have too many guns. Criminals have more guns because of that. Would you try to rob someone unarmed? We have an arms race between citizens and criminals. Gun control has proven to greatly reduce mass shootings. It is also unheard of for law enforcement to be gunned down weekly in civilized countries with gun control.

No....gun control hasn't reduced mass shootings in Britain or Australia.....Britain averaged 1 every 10 years....they are still on track for that...and Australia has had about a dozen incidents where an individual with a gun went to a public space, and simply didn't shoot enough people, or the people he shot didn't die....and didn't make the level of a mass public shooting. Their gun control didn't stop these from happening.

Show me where any civilized country with gun control has anywhere near as many mass shootings as we do.

And today:
Man Shoots 6, 3 Fatally, at Two Places He Worked, Police Say

Too many guns.