The definitive guide to the 2nd Amendment

[Skull Pilot]

Awful...thanks to failed progressive policy. They banned firearms. How is that working out?

They have concealed carry moron. And crime is going up.

Wrong...dipstick....law abiding people carrying their legal guns is not driving the crime rate anywhere in the country, not even in Wisconsin...

Milwaukee drives the gun crime rate in Wisconsin...because their democrat mayor is mishandling the police..but even so.....it is lower than it was before they had concealed carry.....moron..

Wisconsin 2016.......

As another violent year ends, memories of homicide victims live on

Milwaukee's per capita homicide rate was 23.7 per 100,000 residents — a lower rate than the 26.27 per 100,000 residents in 1991.


“You’re seeing a rebirth:” Crime rates in Milwaukee’s Amani neighborhood down significantly

The data shows crime in 2016 compared with 2015 was down in the Amani neighborhood by 10.42%. For the city as a whole, the decline was 4.66%.

---

Over the past four years: crime in the Amani neighborhood declined 26.36% -- for the city: 10.86%.

Crime in Milwaukee has increased since getting concealed carry.

so what?

5 years of concealed carry: Law obscures impact

“It’s hard to create any kind of causal relationship between the law and what’s happening because we aren’t able to look specifically at the individuals who have been carrying concealed weapons,” said Jeri Bonavia, executive director of the Wisconsin Anti-Violence Effort. “When someone commits a murder, when a man shoots his wife and his kids, when shots are fired in road rage — is that person a concealed carry permit holder? We don’t know, because the law prevents us from having that information.”

so we have even more evidence that your correlation of concealed carry and crime is dubious at best

Here's a little more just for fun

“The story kind of is that there is no story,” Attorney General Brad Schimel said. “I’m not aware of evidence of statistical significance that there are people who gain a permit who are committing crime with guns … and there’s not a lot of evidence of people using guns to protect themselves or others.”

Crime stats show little change

About 320,000 Wisconsinites now have a concealed carry permit, and police outside of Milwaukee say they have seen little impact for better or worse.

“We only give permits to people who are law-abiding, who have no record of anything that disqualifies them from seeking that firearm, and those people don’t tend to commit crimes with the guns,” Schimel said.

Statewide, firearm injuries per capita rose slightly to an average of 513 after the passage of concealed carry, according to National Vital Statistics Reports from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

But that was consistent with growth in the national average, and Wisconsin’s ranking relative to the rest of the country actually dropped by one over that period.

Changes in violent crime (a category that includes murder, rape, robbery and aggravated assault) also tracked exactly with national trends, according to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report.

Homicides in Wisconsin have been generally consistent as well. The 71 counties excluding Milwaukee County averaged a total of 37 homicides per year in the four years before 2011 and the four years after.

Milwaukee County has been a different story, seeing the number of homicides jump from an average of 68 in the four years before concealed carry to 94 in the four years after, according to death certificate tallies from the Wisconsin Department of Health Services. That spike continued this year.

James Palmer, executive director of the 10,000-member Wisconsin Professional Police Association, said he doesn’t see any connection between crime stats and the advent of concealed carry.

“Any fluctuations in crime, increase or otherwise, involve individuals utilizing guns who don’t have the lawful ability to do so,” he said.

Crime has increased every year since they got concealed carry. Fact.

It seems you can't read either . Why don't you follow along with your finger and move your lips as you read this

Crime stats show little change

Statewide, firearm injuries per capita rose slightly to an average of 513 after the passage of concealed carry, according to National Vital Statistics Reports from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.



But that was consistent with growth in the national average, and Wisconsin’s ranking relative to the rest of the country actually dropped by one over that period.


See that last sentence? WI countrywide ranking actually dropped after the concealed carry laws were passed.

 

[danielpalos]

When was the last school shooting in the UK?

When was the last time people in England were able to defend themselves? Oops...

Homicide and knife crime rates 'rising'

FBI: Violent crime increases for second straight year

you don't even read the articles you post do you?

"Chicago accounted for more than 20% of the nationwide murder increase in 2016, despite being home to less than 1% of the U.S. population,"

So your "strong gun control" bastion of Chicago accounted for the single largest increase in the national murder rate

Chicago has concealed carry. Hardly strong gun control.

Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the country as does CA and the crime rate in UT which has some of the least restrictive gun laws has far less crime than either so it seems your argument is proven wrong yet again

demographics accounts for that.

high population States tend to have more social issues simply due to the law of large numbers.

 

[danielpalos]

Well regulated militia are declared necessary to the security of a free State.

Pretending like you’ve ever actually read the U.S. Constitution is necessary for you to convince yourself you have credibility.

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

The right belongs to the people, snowflake. Not to a militia.

Only the right wing habitually appeals to ignorance while proclaiming their subscription to the "gospel Truth" of any given issue.

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for few public officials." (George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 425-426)

 

[P@triot]

Criminals are neither Right or Left. They are criminals.

That’s absurd. Because one is a criminal they don’t have political views? Come on. The overwhelming majority of criminals are left-wing for a slew of reasons.

For starters - the left is extremely soft on crime. They want to blame the gun, not the criminal. They want to blame the border, not the criminal. And they want to make sure the criminal can get out of prison as soon as possible. What would your ideology be if you were a criminal?

Secondly - criminals show no income in many cases. Which means they get to supplement their illegal income with government benefits.

 

[Flash]

The entire left-wing narrative about firearms is a lie. It’s all built on a political agenda rather than on data.

The report states that investigators posing online as gun buyers who were not legally able to purchase a firearm were completely unsuccessful when attempting to purchase firearms from private sellers. In fact, the report states that investigators tried 72 times — and each time they failed.

That’s right - 0% of the ATF investigators were able to make an illegal purchase. Not even one.

Investigators test how well gun laws work online — and find shocking results that undermine liberals

When I hear the stupid Democrats rail about "on line" gun purchases I just laugh. They are either the dumbest mutherfvckers in the country or the most dishonest. Of course in their case it is probably both.

They have never got the "gun show loophole" or "on line gun purchases" correct. Just like their stupidity on "assault weapons" and background checks.

Of course their agenda is not the truth. Their despicable agenda is curtailment of the right to keep and bear arms.

Democrats are morons.

 

[Skull Pilot]

When was the last time people in England were able to defend themselves? Oops...

Homicide and knife crime rates 'rising'

FBI: Violent crime increases for second straight year

you don't even read the articles you post do you?

"Chicago accounted for more than 20% of the nationwide murder increase in 2016, despite being home to less than 1% of the U.S. population,"

So your "strong gun control" bastion of Chicago accounted for the single largest increase in the national murder rate

Chicago has concealed carry. Hardly strong gun control.

Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the country as does CA and the crime rate in UT which has some of the least restrictive gun laws has far less crime than either so it seems your argument is proven wrong yet again

demographics accounts for that.

high population States tend to have more social issues simply due to the law of large numbers.

Which is why murder stats are given as a ratio and are not reported in absolute numbers.
Ratios take population density into account.

So a state with 3 million people can have a murder rate of 3 per 100000 and a state with 1 million can have the same rate but have less total murders.

But a state with 3 million people can have a lower murder rate than a state with 1 million or vice versa

It is the murder RATE that is important not the number of total murders

Or don't you understand that?

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Criminals are neither Right or Left. They are criminals.

That’s absurd. Because one is a criminal they don’t have political views? Come on. The overwhelming majority of criminals are left-wing for a slew of reasons.

For starters - the left is extremely soft on crime. They want to blame the gun, not the criminal. They want to blame the border, not the criminal. And they want to make sure the criminal can get out of prison as soon as possible. What would your ideology be if you were a criminal?

Secondly - criminals show no income in many cases. Which means they get to supplement their illegal income with government benefits.

You still have not shown that criminals are one or the other. They aren't. They are criminals, period. There are more RW criminals locked up in the Red areas than Dems. The same is for the LW areas where there are more LW locked up than RW. It's about what the makeup of the region. But they have only one thing in common. They are criminals.

Now, show me the proof of what you are spewing.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Hey Patriot,
When will I have the right to have a machine gun and a tank?

Here are the restrictions from owning a Machine Gun
is a felon

• is a felon
• has been convicted of any crime punishable by more than a year in prison (whether or not they were ever sentenced to or served a day in prison)
• is under indictment for any crime punishable by more than a year in prison
• is a fugitive
• is an unlawful user of any controlled substance
• has been adjudicated as a mental defective
• has been committed to a mental institution
• is an illegal alien
• has a dishonorable discharge from the military
• has renounced their U.S. citizenship
• is the subject of a restraining order restraining the person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or the child of an intimate partner, or
• who has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence

If you are not in the above list, you can apply, pay 200 bucks for the permit and own almost any machine gun made prior to 1986. The State can block you of course. But it's the Federals that issue that permit. There are other things that have to be met like Secure Storage and such. Usually, a good metal Gun Cabinet meets that criteria. And you have to use it responsibly in an authorized area.

As for Tanks, anyone can own a tank. You don't even need a permit to own one if the barrel is blocked. It's considered a SUV. But to have one with a larger than 50 cal bore that is active you will need the initial 200 bucks for the Tank, and additional 200 bucks for each round of ammo. And a place to park it and a State that allows it. Not all states do. But you WILL have to shell out that initial 200 bucks for a permit to buy or possess it even if you don't have any rounds to fire from it.

On correction on this list.

is an unlawful user of any controlled substance has a clause in it. It pertains to Grass. No Grass uses can own, possess or use firearms. It specifically mentions Grass even Medical. If you are using Medical MJ the the government can come in and seize all your weapons. But if you are using Medical Valium then they can't. Just who the hell wrote this anyway? And where are your RW nutjobs saying that the law is fair. Be careful, even RW Nutjobs use MJ. They can come into your home and seize all your weapons.

 

[P@triot]

You still have not shown that criminals are one or the other.

You still have not shown that they aren't. You made the claim that they aren't - back that shit up or shut up. I just presented indisputable facts which proves that they are overwhelmingly left-wing. You've yet to add a single fact or even make a compelling argument with your opinion. You've pretty much just babbled argumentatively.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

You still have not shown that criminals are one or the other.

You still have not shown that they aren't. You made the claim that they aren't - back that shit up or shut up. I just presented indisputable facts which proves that they are overwhelmingly left-wing. You've yet to add a single fact or even make a compelling argument with your opinion. You've pretty much just babbled argumentatively.

One cannot prove a negative. You made the statement that they are Left Wingers. Now prove it. Or are you just yapping yer Ultra RW Nutjob lips again.

 

[P@triot]

One cannot prove a negative.

Then one should not idiotically make "negative" claims. Only a fool adamantly declares something he cannot support or prove (as you just did).

For the record - one can absolutely prove a "negative". Stop running from your own idiotic statement and own that shit. For instance, when I said Trump didn't collude with the Russians to impact our election, I proved it by showing all of the evidence that proves it was Hitlery Clinton, Christopher Steele, James Comey, etc. who were all doing the colluding.

 

[danielpalos]

FBI: Violent crime increases for second straight year

you don't even read the articles you post do you?

"Chicago accounted for more than 20% of the nationwide murder increase in 2016, despite being home to less than 1% of the U.S. population,"

So your "strong gun control" bastion of Chicago accounted for the single largest increase in the national murder rate

Chicago has concealed carry. Hardly strong gun control.

Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the country as does CA and the crime rate in UT which has some of the least restrictive gun laws has far less crime than either so it seems your argument is proven wrong yet again

demographics accounts for that.

high population States tend to have more social issues simply due to the law of large numbers.

Which is why murder stats are given as a ratio and are not reported in absolute numbers.
Ratios take population density into account.

So a state with 3 million people can have a murder rate of 3 per 100000 and a state with 1 million can have the same rate but have less total murders.

But a state with 3 million people can have a lower murder rate than a state with 1 million or vice versa

It is the murder RATE that is important not the number of total murders

Or don't you understand that?

How does what you claim about gun control apply to a list of States by homicide rate?

List of U.S. states by homicide rate - Wikipedia

 

[Daryl Hunt]

One cannot prove a negative.

Then one should not idiotically make "negative" claims. Only a fool adamantly declares something he cannot support or prove (as you just did).

For the record - one can absolutely prove a "negative". Stop running from your own idiotic statement and own that shit. For instance, when I said Trump didn't collude with the Russians to impact our election, I proved it by showing all of the evidence that proves it was Hitlery Clinton, Christopher Steele, James Comey, etc. who were all doing the colluding.

So you can't prove which party a criminal belongs to. Chances are, they don't belong to any party. They are too busy in their full time job of being a criminal. So, since you can't, you try and change the subject. Thank you for using the old "Hey, look over there" routine.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

you don't even read the articles you post do you?

"Chicago accounted for more than 20% of the nationwide murder increase in 2016, despite being home to less than 1% of the U.S. population,"

So your "strong gun control" bastion of Chicago accounted for the single largest increase in the national murder rate

Chicago has concealed carry. Hardly strong gun control.

Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the country as does CA and the crime rate in UT which has some of the least restrictive gun laws has far less crime than either so it seems your argument is proven wrong yet again

demographics accounts for that.

high population States tend to have more social issues simply due to the law of large numbers.

Which is why murder stats are given as a ratio and are not reported in absolute numbers.
Ratios take population density into account.

So a state with 3 million people can have a murder rate of 3 per 100000 and a state with 1 million can have the same rate but have less total murders.

But a state with 3 million people can have a lower murder rate than a state with 1 million or vice versa

It is the murder RATE that is important not the number of total murders

Or don't you understand that?

How does what you claim about gun control apply to a list of States by homicide rate?

List of U.S. states by homicide rate - Wikipedia

What it shows is that the top 5 State Murder Capitols are in Red States. Imagine that. That may Ultra Rightwing Nutjobs running around with guns. Thank you for proving that Gun Control has nothing to or little to do with the Murder Rate.

 

[2aguy]

Criminals are neither Right or Left. They are criminals.

That’s absurd. Because one is a criminal they don’t have political views? Come on. The overwhelming majority of criminals are left-wing for a slew of reasons.

For starters - the left is extremely soft on crime. They want to blame the gun, not the criminal. They want to blame the border, not the criminal. And they want to make sure the criminal can get out of prison as soon as possible. What would your ideology be if you were a criminal?

Secondly - criminals show no income in many cases. Which means they get to supplement their illegal income with government benefits.

You still have not shown that criminals are one or the other. They aren't. They are criminals, period. There are more RW criminals locked up in the Red areas than Dems. The same is for the LW areas where there are more LW locked up than RW. It's about what the makeup of the region. But they have only one thing in common. They are criminals.

Now, show me the proof of what you are spewing.

Wrong...

Are the 'overwhelming majority of violent criminals' Democrats? Ted Cruz said so

For instance, in New York, about one-third of felons released from prison registered to vote after their release. Of those, about 62 percent registered as Democrats and 9 percent registered as Republicans, with 26 percent registering as independents or with other parties.

In North Carolina, about a quarter of those who were released registered after their release. Of those, 52 percent registered as Democrats, 19 percent as Republicans and 22 percent as independents or with other parties.

And in New Mexico, 41 percent of those who were released registered to vote. Of those, 55 percent registered as Democrats, 10 percent as Republicans and 18 percent as independents or with other parties.

-----

It’s hard to separate these figures from overall demographics.

It’s no secret that, statistically, African-Americans are disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system. It’s also no secret that African-Americans are overwhelmingly Democratic. Put these two together and it’s not surprising to find higher percentages of Democratic registrations among ex-felons.

Indeed, in a 2010 paper -- "Did Disfranchisement Laws Help Elect President Bush? New Evidence on the Turnout Rates and Candidate Preferences of Florida’s Ex-Felons" -- Traci Burch of Northwestern University found that African-American ex-felons did overwhelmingly register as Democrats. But the paper also found that white ex-felons did not follow the same pattern.

Meredith and Morse said they have looked at updates of the data Birch studied and found that while African-American ex-felons still overwhelmingly identify as Democratic, non-African-Americans were only slightly more likely to identify as a Democrat than as a Republican.

 

[2aguy]

Chicago has concealed carry. Hardly strong gun control.

Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the country as does CA and the crime rate in UT which has some of the least restrictive gun laws has far less crime than either so it seems your argument is proven wrong yet again

demographics accounts for that.

high population States tend to have more social issues simply due to the law of large numbers.

Which is why murder stats are given as a ratio and are not reported in absolute numbers.
Ratios take population density into account.

So a state with 3 million people can have a murder rate of 3 per 100000 and a state with 1 million can have the same rate but have less total murders.

But a state with 3 million people can have a lower murder rate than a state with 1 million or vice versa

It is the murder RATE that is important not the number of total murders

Or don't you understand that?

How does what you claim about gun control apply to a list of States by homicide rate?

List of U.S. states by homicide rate - Wikipedia

What it shows is that the top 5 State Murder Capitols are in Red States. Imagine that. That may Ultra Rightwing Nutjobs running around with guns. Thank you for proving that Gun Control has nothing to or little to do with the Murder Rate.

The poltical control of those cities is democrat....for decades if not longer......the cities with the highest murder rates are all run by democrats......even in Red states...

 

[2aguy]

you don't even read the articles you post do you?

"Chicago accounted for more than 20% of the nationwide murder increase in 2016, despite being home to less than 1% of the U.S. population,"

So your "strong gun control" bastion of Chicago accounted for the single largest increase in the national murder rate

Chicago has concealed carry. Hardly strong gun control.

Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the country as does CA and the crime rate in UT which has some of the least restrictive gun laws has far less crime than either so it seems your argument is proven wrong yet again

demographics accounts for that.

high population States tend to have more social issues simply due to the law of large numbers.

Which is why murder stats are given as a ratio and are not reported in absolute numbers.
Ratios take population density into account.

So a state with 3 million people can have a murder rate of 3 per 100000 and a state with 1 million can have the same rate but have less total murders.

But a state with 3 million people can have a lower murder rate than a state with 1 million or vice versa

It is the murder RATE that is important not the number of total murders

Or don't you understand that?

How does what you claim about gun control apply to a list of States by homicide rate?

List of U.S. states by homicide rate - Wikipedia

Yeah....law abiding gun owners carrying guns legally are not driving the homicide rate....

Would Cracking Down on Guns in the U.S. Really Reduce Violence? , by Robert VerBruggen, National Review

There is actually no simple correlation between states’ homicide rates and their gun-ownership rates or gun laws.
This has been shown numerous times, by different people, using different data sets.

A year ago, I took state gun-ownership levels reported by the Washington Post (based on a Centers for Disease Control survey) and compared them with murder rates from the FBI: no correlation.

The legal scholar Eugene Volokh has compared states’ gun laws (as rated by the anti-gun Brady Campaign) with their murder rates: no correlation.

David Freddoso of the Washington Examiner, a former National Review reporter, failed to find a correlation even between gun ownership in a state and gun murders specifically, an approach that sets aside the issue of whether gun availability has an effect on non-gun crime. (Guns can deter unarmed criminals, for instance, and criminals without guns may simply switch to other weapons.)


, I recently redid my analysis with a few tweaks. Instead of relying on a single year of survey data, I averaged three years. (The CDC survey, the best available for state-level numbers, included data on gun ownership only in 2001, 2002, and 2004. Those were the years I looked at.)

And instead of comparing CDC data with murder rates from a different agency, I relied on the CDC’s own estimates of death by assault in those years. Again: no correlation.

------

Left-leaning media outlets, from Mother Jones to National Journal, get around this absence of correlation by reporting numbers on “gun deaths” rather than gun homicides or homicides in general.
More than 60 percent of gun deaths nationally are suicides, and places with higher gun ownership typically see a higher percentage of their suicides committed with a gun.
Focusing on the number of gun deaths practically guarantees a finding that guns and violence go together. While it may be true that public policy should also seek to reduce suicide, it is homicide — often a dramatic mass killing — that usually prompts the media and politicians to call for gun control, and it is homicide that most influences people as they consider supporting measures to take away their fellow citizens’ access to guns.
There are large gaps among the states when it comes to homicide, with rates ranging all the way from about two to twelve per 100,000 in 2013, the most recent year of data available from the CDC. These disparities show that it’s not just guns that cause the United States to have, on average, a higher rate of homicide than other developed countries do. Not only is there no correlation between gun ownership and overall homicide within a state, but there is a strong correlation between gun homicide and non-gun homicide — suggesting that they spring from similar causes, and that some states are simply more violent than others. A closer look at demographic and geographic patterns provides some clues as to why this is.

 

[2aguy]

you don't even read the articles you post do you?

"Chicago accounted for more than 20% of the nationwide murder increase in 2016, despite being home to less than 1% of the U.S. population,"

So your "strong gun control" bastion of Chicago accounted for the single largest increase in the national murder rate

Chicago has concealed carry. Hardly strong gun control.

Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the country as does CA and the crime rate in UT which has some of the least restrictive gun laws has far less crime than either so it seems your argument is proven wrong yet again

demographics accounts for that.

high population States tend to have more social issues simply due to the law of large numbers.

Which is why murder stats are given as a ratio and are not reported in absolute numbers.
Ratios take population density into account.

So a state with 3 million people can have a murder rate of 3 per 100000 and a state with 1 million can have the same rate but have less total murders.

But a state with 3 million people can have a lower murder rate than a state with 1 million or vice versa

It is the murder RATE that is important not the number of total murders

Or don't you understand that?

How does what you claim about gun control apply to a list of States by homicide rate?

List of U.S. states by homicide rate - Wikipedia

And again...law abiding gun owners, who also carry their guns, are not the ones using guns for crime or murder...

We went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 16.3 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2017...guess what happened...

-- gun murder down 49%

--gun crime down 75%

--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Criminals are neither Right or Left. They are criminals.

That’s absurd. Because one is a criminal they don’t have political views? Come on. The overwhelming majority of criminals are left-wing for a slew of reasons.

For starters - the left is extremely soft on crime. They want to blame the gun, not the criminal. They want to blame the border, not the criminal. And they want to make sure the criminal can get out of prison as soon as possible. What would your ideology be if you were a criminal?

Secondly - criminals show no income in many cases. Which means they get to supplement their illegal income with government benefits.

You still have not shown that criminals are one or the other. They aren't. They are criminals, period. There are more RW criminals locked up in the Red areas than Dems. The same is for the LW areas where there are more LW locked up than RW. It's about what the makeup of the region. But they have only one thing in common. They are criminals.

Now, show me the proof of what you are spewing.

Wrong...

Are the 'overwhelming majority of violent criminals' Democrats? Ted Cruz said so

For instance, in New York, about one-third of felons released from prison registered to vote after their release. Of those, about 62 percent registered as Democrats and 9 percent registered as Republicans, with 26 percent registering as independents or with other parties.

In North Carolina, about a quarter of those who were released registered after their release. Of those, 52 percent registered as Democrats, 19 percent as Republicans and 22 percent as independents or with other parties.

And in New Mexico, 41 percent of those who were released registered to vote. Of those, 55 percent registered as Democrats, 10 percent as Republicans and 18 percent as independents or with other parties.

-----

It’s hard to separate these figures from overall demographics.

It’s no secret that, statistically, African-Americans are disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system. It’s also no secret that African-Americans are overwhelmingly Democratic. Put these two together and it’s not surprising to find higher percentages of Democratic registrations among ex-felons.

Indeed, in a 2010 paper -- "Did Disfranchisement Laws Help Elect President Bush? New Evidence on the Turnout Rates and Candidate Preferences of Florida’s Ex-Felons" -- Traci Burch of Northwestern University found that African-American ex-felons did overwhelmingly register as Democrats. But the paper also found that white ex-felons did not follow the same pattern.

Meredith and Morse said they have looked at updates of the data Birch studied and found that while African-American ex-felons still overwhelmingly identify as Democratic, non-African-Americans were only slightly more likely to identify as a Democrat than as a Republican.

I do like your cite. It shows why we call him "Lyin Ryan". You left off the last sentence. It reads

We rate his statement Mostly False.

Imagine that. From your own cite. I would not even wonder if you have a case of selective reading but it clearly shows you are a liar.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the country as does CA and the crime rate in UT which has some of the least restrictive gun laws has far less crime than either so it seems your argument is proven wrong yet again

demographics accounts for that.

high population States tend to have more social issues simply due to the law of large numbers.

Which is why murder stats are given as a ratio and are not reported in absolute numbers.
Ratios take population density into account.

So a state with 3 million people can have a murder rate of 3 per 100000 and a state with 1 million can have the same rate but have less total murders.

But a state with 3 million people can have a lower murder rate than a state with 1 million or vice versa

It is the murder RATE that is important not the number of total murders

Or don't you understand that?

How does what you claim about gun control apply to a list of States by homicide rate?

List of U.S. states by homicide rate - Wikipedia

What it shows is that the top 5 State Murder Capitols are in Red States. Imagine that. That may Ultra Rightwing Nutjobs running around with guns. Thank you for proving that Gun Control has nothing to or little to do with the Murder Rate.

The poltical control of those cities is democrat....for decades if not longer......the cities with the highest murder rates are all run by democrats......even in Red states...

San Diego has a 7.7 murder rate.run by a primarily Democratic government and Mayor.
Waco, Tx has a 16.74 rate with a primarily Republican Government and Mayor

Waco Tx is one of the highest murder rate in the nation and it's a major city. It's equal to Chicao and we know how bad it is there.

Let's take a look at Kansas for a bit. It's in up to it's ears financially and it's a sold red state. I think the reason that the Dems have twice the number of Mayors as the Republicans is that the Republican has even worse problems running a City as the Democrats. I can understand why. Most Republicans come for the Corporate world. And you can't run a City the way you have to run a Corporation. For one, it will go into the red so quickly iti will boggle your mind. Second, if you try and run a government the way you run a corporation you will end up in prison.