The Gun Control Laws The United States Needs

[Daryl Hunt]

Unfortunately, the current gun control laws are not saving enough lives. What I propose will save thousands of lives a year eventually. Tighter Gun control laws have saved many lives in Europe, Canada, Australia, Japan, and New Zealand. The United States needs to reduce its death rate from firearms down to levels similar to Western Europe, Canada, and Japan. The United States is the wealthiest country in the world and its intolerable to have the firearm death rate we have, when so many other 1st world developed country's have a much lower rate.

I'm more interested in saving lives than protecting the so called "rights" of the minority gun owning nerds.

No, they haven't. The peaceful culture of European countries before World War 2 kept criminals from murdering people...that has changed.....so will their violent crime rate, just ask the Swedes...

We have the gun murder rate because democrats keep letting repeat gun offenders out of jail, over and over.

You don't want to save lives.....you want more victims of crime....Americans use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to save lives, stopping rapes, robberies and murders...that is according to research by the Centers for Disease Control....

I see you are back to using the Klek lie as a quote once more. Do you really want to go through this again? Do the friggin math. 1.1 million times each year. Break it down to each month, then to each day. Then to each hour and finally, to each minute. The streets would be more like a bloody video game each and every time you left your fortress. Turn off the Video Game, shut off the TV, and get outside more often. Enjoy real life.

Provide evidence that Kleck lied.

Here we go again. You guncrazies grasp anything you can to try and justify a lie.

I notice that 2boy is claiming 1.1 mil a year and Kleck is the source. Kleck actually claimed 2.5 million DGUs or Defense Gun uses per year. Well start out breaking it down. And each one MUST be verifiable and not from someone imagination. Kleck claimed to have gotten his figures from a CDC report. That CDC report was never released as it was deemed inappropriate under Bush, Jr. to side with gun regulators. So until 2017, CDC didn't release any information. I finally saw the original CDC report and it didn't say what Kleck claimed it did. Kleck didn't just misinterpret the data, he outright lied about it.

So, let's use the "Corrected" figure that 2boy quoted which is less than half of what Kleck actually claimed.

1.1 million per year
91 thousand a month (rounded down)
3,555 per day
127 per hour
2.12 per minute

Simple math alone says that 2guy is a liar. And when you use Klecks original figures before it's been deflated to make the lie sound better, Kleck is still a liar and a fake. He made the report during a panic and banked on that no one would question him. 2boy makes his claims hoping that everyone would forget to check the math. You come back and.....I have no idea why you are doing this since the whole thing is based on the original lie that Kleck began. Almost all of these types of claims can be traced directly back to the Kleck studies.


Here is the rebuttals of his "Studies". You should read this. It's damned informative. But beware, it does come with a disclosure. "Reading this may make your head explode".

Simple math says no, he is not. You claim that Kleck is a liar. Provide evidence for your claim. Showing a picture of some poor person is an appeal to emotion which is a typical prog logic fail when you've got nothin'.

Just how many times do you have to ignore this cite. You want proof, there is is, AGAIN.

Contradictions of Kleck

 

[2aguy]

No, they haven't. The peaceful culture of European countries before World War 2 kept criminals from murdering people...that has changed.....so will their violent crime rate, just ask the Swedes...

We have the gun murder rate because democrats keep letting repeat gun offenders out of jail, over and over.

You don't want to save lives.....you want more victims of crime....Americans use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to save lives, stopping rapes, robberies and murders...that is according to research by the Centers for Disease Control....

I see you are back to using the Klek lie as a quote once more. Do you really want to go through this again? Do the friggin math. 1.1 million times each year. Break it down to each month, then to each day. Then to each hour and finally, to each minute. The streets would be more like a bloody video game each and every time you left your fortress. Turn off the Video Game, shut off the TV, and get outside more often. Enjoy real life.

Provide evidence that Kleck lied.

Here we go again. You guncrazies grasp anything you can to try and justify a lie.

I notice that 2boy is claiming 1.1 mil a year and Kleck is the source. Kleck actually claimed 2.5 million DGUs or Defense Gun uses per year. Well start out breaking it down. And each one MUST be verifiable and not from someone imagination. Kleck claimed to have gotten his figures from a CDC report. That CDC report was never released as it was deemed inappropriate under Bush, Jr. to side with gun regulators. So until 2017, CDC didn't release any information. I finally saw the original CDC report and it didn't say what Kleck claimed it did. Kleck didn't just misinterpret the data, he outright lied about it.

So, let's use the "Corrected" figure that 2boy quoted which is less than half of what Kleck actually claimed.

1.1 million per year
91 thousand a month (rounded down)
3,555 per day
127 per hour
2.12 per minute

Simple math alone says that 2guy is a liar. And when you use Klecks original figures before it's been deflated to make the lie sound better, Kleck is still a liar and a fake. He made the report during a panic and banked on that no one would question him. 2boy makes his claims hoping that everyone would forget to check the math. You come back and.....I have no idea why you are doing this since the whole thing is based on the original lie that Kleck began. Almost all of these types of claims can be traced directly back to the Kleck studies.


Here is the rebuttals of his "Studies". You should read this. It's damned informative. But beware, it does come with a disclosure. "Reading this may make your head explode".

Simple math says no, he is not. You claim that Kleck is a liar. Provide evidence for your claim. Showing a picture of some poor person is an appeal to emotion which is a typical prog logic fail when you've got nothin'.

Just how many times do you have to ignore this cite. You want proof, there is is, AGAIN.

Contradictions of Kleck

Moron....they can't touch his research....

Kleck's most recent defense of his work...

Defensive Gun Use Is Not a Myth

In a recent Politico Magazine article, Evan DeFilippis and Devin Hughes resuscitate criticisms of a survey on defensive gun use that I conducted with my colleague Marc Gertz way back in 1993—the National Self-Defense Survey (NSDS). The authors repeat, item for item, speculative criticisms floated by a man named David Hemenway in 1997 and repeated endlessly since. The conclusion these critics drew is that our survey grossly overestimated the frequency of defensive gun use (DGU), a situation in which a crime victim uses a gun to threaten or attack the offender in self-defense. But what DeFilippis and Hughes carefully withheld from readers is the fact that I and my colleague have refuted every one of Hemenway’s dubious claims, and those by other critics of the NSDS, first in 1997, and again, even more extensively, in 1998 and 2001. Skeptical readers can check for themselves if we failed to refute them—the 1998 version is publicly available here. More seriously motivated readers could acquire a copy of Armed, a 2001 book by Don Kates and me, and read chapter six.

If DeFilippis and Hughes could refute any of our rebuttals, that would be news worth attending to. They do not, however, identify any problems with our refutations, such as errors in our logic, or superior evidence that contradicts any of our rebuttals. Instead, they just pretend they are not aware of the rebuttals, even though our first systematic dismantling of Hemenway’s speculations was published in the exact same issue of the journal that published Hemenway's 1997 critique, on the pages immediately following the Hemenway article.
---

The reality that survey experts are familiar with, however, is that surveys of the general public simply do not overestimate crime-related experiences.

In order for a survey respondent to report a typical DGU, she or he must be willing to report all three of the following elements of the event: (1) a crime victimization experience, (2) his or her possession of a gun, and (3) his or her own commission of a crime. The last element is relevant because most DGUs occur away from the user’s home, and only about 1 percent of the population in 1993, when we conducted our survey, had a permit that allowed them to legally carry a gun through public spaces. Thus, although survey-reported defensive gun uses themselves rarely involve criminal behavior (that is, the defender did not use the gun to commit a criminal assault or other offense), most (at least back in 1993) involved unlawful possession of a gun in a public place by the defender.

So what does research on the flaws in surveys of crime-related behaviors tell us? It consistently indicates that survey respondents underreport (1) crime victimization experiences, (2) gun ownership and (3) their own illegal behavior. While it is true that a few respondents overstate their crime-related experiences, they are greatly outnumbered by those who understate them, i.e. those who falsely deny having the experience when in fact they did. In sum, research tells us that surveys underestimate the frequency of crime victimizations, gun possession and self-reported illegal behavior. Yet DeFilippis and Hughes somehow manage to conclude that defensive gun uses—incidents that always involve the first two of those elements, and usually the third as well—are overestimated in surveys.

Like Hemenway, DeFilippis and Hughes fail to understand the most fundamental logical issue regarding whether surveys under or overestimate the frequency of defensive gun use. The point at issue is not whether there are “false positive” responses, i.e. respondents saying “yes, they used their gun defensively” when the correct answer was “no.” No one has ever disputed that there are some false positives in these surveys. But this by itself can tell us nothing about whether DGU estimates are too high or too low overall. Even if false positives were numerous, false negatives (when a respondent falsely denies a DGU that actually occurred) could be (and, according to extensive research, are) even more common. In that case, survey estimates of DGU frequency would be too low, not the enormous overestimate that DeFilippis and Hughes believe in. Since neither of those authors nor Hemenway—nor any other critics for that matter—have ever made the slightest effort to estimate the number of false negatives, they cannot possibly know whether false positives outnumber false negatives and therefore have no logical foundation whatsoever for their claims that erroneous responses to DGU questions result in an overestimate of DGU frequency.

The authors’ discussion of possible flaws in survey estimates of DGU frequency is conspicuously one-sided, addressing only supposed flaws that could make the estimates too high—but none that could make the estimates too low. As mentioned above, they say nothing about the well-documented failure of many survey respondents to report criminal victimization, gun ownership or their own crimes. Likewise, they do not mention that our estimates did not include any DGUs by adolescent crime victims, even though adolescents are more likely to be crime victims than adults, and just as likely to carry guns, albeit illegally.

 

[HenryBHough]

Sorry, but the Constitution says otherwise.

ut the fucking idiit doesn't know that because he/she/it is not allowed by his/her/it Democrat party to read.

 

[2aguy]

No, they haven't. The peaceful culture of European countries before World War 2 kept criminals from murdering people...that has changed.....so will their violent crime rate, just ask the Swedes...

We have the gun murder rate because democrats keep letting repeat gun offenders out of jail, over and over.

You don't want to save lives.....you want more victims of crime....Americans use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to save lives, stopping rapes, robberies and murders...that is according to research by the Centers for Disease Control....

I see you are back to using the Klek lie as a quote once more. Do you really want to go through this again? Do the friggin math. 1.1 million times each year. Break it down to each month, then to each day. Then to each hour and finally, to each minute. The streets would be more like a bloody video game each and every time you left your fortress. Turn off the Video Game, shut off the TV, and get outside more often. Enjoy real life.

Provide evidence that Kleck lied.

Here we go again. You guncrazies grasp anything you can to try and justify a lie.

I notice that 2boy is claiming 1.1 mil a year and Kleck is the source. Kleck actually claimed 2.5 million DGUs or Defense Gun uses per year. Well start out breaking it down. And each one MUST be verifiable and not from someone imagination. Kleck claimed to have gotten his figures from a CDC report. That CDC report was never released as it was deemed inappropriate under Bush, Jr. to side with gun regulators. So until 2017, CDC didn't release any information. I finally saw the original CDC report and it didn't say what Kleck claimed it did. Kleck didn't just misinterpret the data, he outright lied about it.

So, let's use the "Corrected" figure that 2boy quoted which is less than half of what Kleck actually claimed.

1.1 million per year
91 thousand a month (rounded down)
3,555 per day
127 per hour
2.12 per minute

Simple math alone says that 2guy is a liar. And when you use Klecks original figures before it's been deflated to make the lie sound better, Kleck is still a liar and a fake. He made the report during a panic and banked on that no one would question him. 2boy makes his claims hoping that everyone would forget to check the math. You come back and.....I have no idea why you are doing this since the whole thing is based on the original lie that Kleck began. Almost all of these types of claims can be traced directly back to the Kleck studies.


Here is the rebuttals of his "Studies". You should read this. It's damned informative. But beware, it does come with a disclosure. "Reading this may make your head explode".

Simple math says no, he is not. You claim that Kleck is a liar. Provide evidence for your claim. Showing a picture of some poor person is an appeal to emotion which is a typical prog logic fail when you've got nothin'.

Just how many times do you have to ignore this cite. You want proof, there is is, AGAIN.

Contradictions of Kleck

Moron.....I see where you got the stupid idea that Kleck included defense against animals and police and military gun use...he didn't...read his study you moron..

Of course you used a moronic source...you are a moron...

Contradictions of Kleck

Kleck’s survey also included gun uses against animals and did not distinguish civilian uses from military of police uses.

Kleck's actual paper, you moron........


https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/24c4/f535e8c05a916ecddd0c9c5ae20ec93f53bf.pdf

Questions about the details of DGU incidents permitted us to establish whether a given DGU met all of the following qualifications for an incident to be treated as a genuine DGU:

(1) the incident involved defensive action against a human rather than an animal, but not in connection with police, military, or security guard duties;

(2) the incident involved actual contact with a person, rather than merely investigating suspicious circumstances, etc.;

(3) the defender could state a specific crime which he thought was being committed at the time of the incident;

(4) the gun was actually used in some way-at a minimum it had to be used as part of a threat against a person, either by
========



Each interview began with a few general "throat-clearing" questions about problems facing the R's community and crime. The interviewers then asked the following question: "Within the past five years, have you yourself or another member of your household used a gun, even if it was not fired, for self-protection or for the protection of property at home, work, or elsewhere?

Please do not include military service, police work, or work as a security guard." Rs who answered "yes" were then asked: "Was this to protect against an animal or a person?"

Rs who reported a DGU against a person were asked: "How many incidents involving defensive uses of guns against persons happened to members of your household in the past five years?" and "Did this incident [any of these incidents] happen in the past twelve
------
months?" At this point, Rs were asked "Was it you who used a gun defensively, or did someone else in your household do this?" All Rs reporting a DGU were asked a long, detailed series of questions establishing exactly what happened in the DGU incident. Rs who reported having experienced more than one DGU in the previous five years were asked about their most recent experience. When the original R was the one who had used a gun defensively, as was usually the case, interviewers obtained his or her firsthand account of the event.


When the original R indicated that some other member of the household was the one who had the -experience, interviewers made every effort to speak directly to the involved person, either speaking to that person immediately or obtaining times and dates to call back. Up to three call-backs were made to contact the DGU-involved person. We anticipated that it would sometimes prove impossible to make contact with these persons, so interviewers were instructed to always obtain a proxy account of the DGU from the original R, on the assumption that a proxy account would be better than none at all. It was rarely necessary to rely on these proxy accountsonly six sample cases of DGUs were reported through proxies, out of a total of 222 sample cases. While all Rs reporting a DGU were given the full interview, only a one-third random sample of Rs not reporting a DGU were interviewed. The rest were simply thanked for their help. This procedure helped keep interviewing costs down. In the end, there were 222 completed interviews with Rs reporting DGUs, another 1,610 Rs not reporting a DGU but going through the full interview by answering questions other than those pertaining to details of the DGUs. There were a total of 1,832 cases with the full interview. An additional 3,145 Rs answered only enough questions to establish that no one in their household had experienced a DGU against a human in the previous five years (unweighted totals).


These procedures effectively undersampled for non-DGU Rs or, equivalently, oversampled for DGU-involved Rs. Data were also weighted to account for this oversampling.



Questions about the details of DGU incidents permitted us to establish whether a given DGU met all of the following qualifications for an incident to be treated as a genuine DGU: (1) the incident involved defensive action against a human rather than an animal, but not in connection with police, military, or security guard duties; (2) the incident involved actual contact with a person, rather than merely investigating suspicious circumstances, etc.; (3) the defender could state a specific crime which he thought was being committed at the time of the incident; (4) the gun was actually used in some way-at a minimum it had to be used as part of a threat against a person, either by

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Go fuck yourself with a cactus.

Gun laws the US needs:

All able-bodied people not convicted of a felony need to open carry and put put down any vermin that try to attack other people or the heritage of the US.

Run, Sparky! (U2Edge ) This means you>

My ancestors didn't build this country for bullshit like you.

You need sent out into the woods for a week or two.

Would you want a gun, or not? I'll tell you right now, you're a tard if you don't.

Under the gun control laws I suggest, civilians can still own Shotguns or Air Rifles if they pass the tests and background checks.

Get the fuck out of my country, you commie traitor.

So just because you disagree with someone on an issue, you call them a commie traitor and tell them to leave the country. Wonderful logic.

You advocate stupidity, so then yes, we ask you leave the country that you wish to destroy.

So you think the United States would be destroyed if civilians were only allowed to purchase shotguns or Air Rifles?

You don't know enough about firearms to even make such statements.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The Gun Control Laws The United States Needs

In order to purchase a firearm, an individual must do the following:

01. Attend three month class on firearms

02. Pass a written test when the class has been completed

03. Achieve at least 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test

04. Pass a Mental Health evaluation at a hospital

05. Pass a background check in which the government digs into their criminal record

06. Pass a background check involving interviews with friends and family

07. Only shotguns and Air Rifles may be purchased, no handguns

08. New magazines can only be purchased by trading in empty ones

09. When a gun owner dies, their relatives must surrender the deceased members firearms

10. Every three years, the individual must pass the above tests and investigations

Ok tell us how you going to get rid of the 2nd besides in your little peanut head.

The founding fathers set up the mechanism to get rid of any amendment provided you have enough votes.

Go for it! Just don't wet your panties when you fail!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

No you're the enemy because your ideology is ignorant we already have gun control laws we also have motor vehicle laws that make it illegal to drive under the influence how does that work out?
Also we have laws making it illegal to sell drugs on the street.

Unfortunately, the current gun control laws are not saving enough lives. What I propose will save thousands of lives a year eventually. Tighter Gun control laws have saved many lives in Europe, Canada, Australia, Japan, and New Zealand. The United States needs to reduce its death rate from firearms down to levels similar to Western Europe, Canada, and Japan. The United States is the wealthiest country in the world and its intolerable to have the firearm death rate we have, when so many other 1st world developed country's have a much lower rate.

I'm more interested in saving lives than protecting the so called "rights" of the minority gun owning nerds.

No, they haven't. The peaceful culture of European countries before World War 2 kept criminals from murdering people...that has changed.....so will their violent crime rate, just ask the Swedes...

We have the gun murder rate because democrats keep letting repeat gun offenders out of jail, over and over.

You don't want to save lives.....you want more victims of crime....Americans use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to save lives, stopping rapes, robberies and murders...that is according to research by the Centers for Disease Control....

I see you are back to using the Klek lie as a quote once more. Do you really want to go through this again? Do the friggin math. 1.1 million times each year. Break it down to each month, then to each day. Then to each hour and finally, to each minute. The streets would be more like a bloody video game each and every time you left your fortress. Turn off the Video Game, shut off the TV, and get outside more often. Enjoy real life.

You don't have to shot a gun to use it in self defense so that kills your math equation

That's the old "If a Tree Falls in the Forrest and no one is around to hear it, did it make a sound?" argument. Doesn't hold water.

The other night after midnight I stopped by a convenience store on my way home. I merely look like a person who would carry. A group of teenagers were harassing the clerk because the cash registers were downloading the end of the day and would not be available for about 5 minutes. They started getting mouthy as I walked up to the register. One noticed me and silently gave the old, "Look who is behind you, dumbass!" look to his buddy who was backtalking the cashier. His tone changed immediately, they dropped their intended purchases on the counter and left a trail of fire out the door of that store. They were scared to death they were running their alligator mouth but had a canary ass.

Did that make it in the stats? No.

BTW, Forrest Gump, the word is "forest". Stupid is as stupid does!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Unfortunately, the current gun control laws are not saving enough lives. What I propose will save thousands of lives a year eventually. Tighter Gun control laws have saved many lives in Europe, Canada, Australia, Japan, and New Zealand. The United States needs to reduce its death rate from firearms down to levels similar to Western Europe, Canada, and Japan. The United States is the wealthiest country in the world and its intolerable to have the firearm death rate we have, when so many other 1st world developed country's have a much lower rate.

I'm more interested in saving lives than protecting the so called "rights" of the minority gun owning nerds.

No, they haven't. The peaceful culture of European countries before World War 2 kept criminals from murdering people...that has changed.....so will their violent crime rate, just ask the Swedes...

We have the gun murder rate because democrats keep letting repeat gun offenders out of jail, over and over.

You don't want to save lives.....you want more victims of crime....Americans use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to save lives, stopping rapes, robberies and murders...that is according to research by the Centers for Disease Control....

I see you are back to using the Klek lie as a quote once more. Do you really want to go through this again? Do the friggin math. 1.1 million times each year. Break it down to each month, then to each day. Then to each hour and finally, to each minute. The streets would be more like a bloody video game each and every time you left your fortress. Turn off the Video Game, shut off the TV, and get outside more often. Enjoy real life.

Moron....it was the CDC that said 1.1 million, Kleck's research put it at close to 2.5 million.....you are an idiot.....

No, it was Kleck that said 2.3 million but his partner in crime said later one after the BS was called on Kleck that it was really 1.1 mil. Either one, the math doesn't add up. I went to the store and bought a steak and did an outdoor BBQ. I did it without taking a weapon of any kind. Not one single sidearm or long gun. In all that time not one defensive shooting, no robberies, no rapes, nothing but stupid drivers. Using the Kleck and his runni9ng mate, I would have had at least a shooting in the Safeway parking lot. Or two or three. I would have had to duck and dodge all the way in and all the way out. And maybe had to duck behind a counter or two inside the store. I already posted the number per minute using the 1.1 mil. And the CDC showed the total homicides and it was a fraction of the 1.1 million. They had no way of knowing the DGU rate. It's a made up figure in your case

I let you out of the box. But it looks like you are still a foul mouthed little kid so back in the box you go.

You just keep pulling things out of your ass.....

He apparently likes things in his ass. That's why in his avatar he is wearing assless chaps, but it doesn't show. John Wayne would be ashamed of him.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Unfortunately, the current gun control laws are not saving enough lives. What I propose will save thousands of lives a year eventually. Tighter Gun control laws have saved many lives in Europe, Canada, Australia, Japan, and New Zealand. The United States needs to reduce its death rate from firearms down to levels similar to Western Europe, Canada, and Japan. The United States is the wealthiest country in the world and its intolerable to have the firearm death rate we have, when so many other 1st world developed country's have a much lower rate.

I'm more interested in saving lives than protecting the so called "rights" of the minority gun owning nerds.

No, they haven't. The peaceful culture of European countries before World War 2 kept criminals from murdering people...that has changed.....so will their violent crime rate, just ask the Swedes...

We have the gun murder rate because democrats keep letting repeat gun offenders out of jail, over and over.

You don't want to save lives.....you want more victims of crime....Americans use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to save lives, stopping rapes, robberies and murders...that is according to research by the Centers for Disease Control....

I see you are back to using the Klek lie as a quote once more. Do you really want to go through this again? Do the friggin math. 1.1 million times each year. Break it down to each month, then to each day. Then to each hour and finally, to each minute. The streets would be more like a bloody video game each and every time you left your fortress. Turn off the Video Game, shut off the TV, and get outside more often. Enjoy real life.

You don't have to shot a gun to use it in self defense so that kills your math equation

That's the old "If a Tree Falls in the Forrest and no one is around to hear it, did it make a sound?" argument. Doesn't hold water.

The other night after midnight I stopped by a convenience store on my way home. I merely look like a person who would carry. A group of teenagers were harassing the clerk because the cash registers were downloading the end of the day and would not be available for about 5 minutes. They started getting mouthy as I walked up to the register. One noticed me and silently gave the old, "Look who is behind you, dumbass!" look to his buddy who was backtalking the cashier. His tone changed immediately, they dropped their intended purchases on the counter and left a trail of fire out the door of that store. They were scared to death they were running their alligator mouth but had a canary ass.

Did that make it in the stats? No.

BTW, Forrest Gump, the word is "forest". Stupid is as stupid does!

I can relate, went to a quikie Mart like you did a few years ago just got paid my first check (no direct deposit) had a wad of cash in my wallet put it on the counter two punks saw it..

One on my left the other on my right.

The one on my left looked the one on my right side looked at my eyes..

He just looked at his friend and shook his head and mouthed " no way"

.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

No you're the enemy because your ideology is ignorant we already have gun control laws we also have motor vehicle laws that make it illegal to drive under the influence how does that work out?
Also we have laws making it illegal to sell drugs on the street.

Unfortunately, the current gun control laws are not saving enough lives. What I propose will save thousands of lives a year eventually. Tighter Gun control laws have saved many lives in Europe, Canada, Australia, Japan, and New Zealand. The United States needs to reduce its death rate from firearms down to levels similar to Western Europe, Canada, and Japan. The United States is the wealthiest country in the world and its intolerable to have the firearm death rate we have, when so many other 1st world developed country's have a much lower rate.

I'm more interested in saving lives than protecting the so called "rights" of the minority gun owning nerds.

No, they haven't. The peaceful culture of European countries before World War 2 kept criminals from murdering people...that has changed.....so will their violent crime rate, just ask the Swedes...

We have the gun murder rate because democrats keep letting repeat gun offenders out of jail, over and over.

You don't want to save lives.....you want more victims of crime....Americans use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to save lives, stopping rapes, robberies and murders...that is according to research by the Centers for Disease Control....

I see you are back to using the Klek lie as a quote once more. Do you really want to go through this again? Do the friggin math. 1.1 million times each year. Break it down to each month, then to each day. Then to each hour and finally, to each minute. The streets would be more like a bloody video game each and every time you left your fortress. Turn off the Video Game, shut off the TV, and get outside more often. Enjoy real life.

Moron....it was the CDC that said 1.1 million, Kleck's research put it at close to 2.5 million.....you are an idiot.....

No, it was Kleck that said 2.3 million but his partner in crime said later one after the BS was called on Kleck that it was really 1.1 mil. Either one, the math doesn't add up. I went to the store and bought a steak and did an outdoor BBQ. I did it without taking a weapon of any kind. Not one single sidearm or long gun. In all that time not one defensive shooting, no robberies, no rapes, nothing but stupid drivers. Using the Kleck and his runni9ng mate, I would have had at least a shooting in the Safeway parking lot. Or two or three. I would have had to duck and dodge all the way in and all the way out. And maybe had to duck behind a counter or two inside the store. I already posted the number per minute using the 1.1 mil. And the CDC showed the total homicides and it was a fraction of the 1.1 million. They had no way of knowing the DGU rate. It's a made up figure in your case

I let you out of the box. But it looks like you are still a foul mouthed little kid so back in the box you go.

Again not all gun defensive actions are reported to the police it's not reported if you don't discharge a cartridge. Just showing it will stop a crime from happening.

 

[NoVote]

Stop the crap. Only people who did their time in the military should carry outside of hunting season.

 

[Blues Man]

Yes, most likely.
Any government imposed, arbitrary prohibition is always guaranteed to fail.
It just increases the Black Market, while destroying the credibility of the current government.
Gun control is just evil or incredibly stupid.
It can not possibly ever do any good at all.

Australia gun buyback cut gun deaths nearly in half.

UK's approach resulted in no more than 60 gun deaths per year in a population of 56 million.

Japan has only 10 gun deaths per year across 127 million people.

Norway has a 3rd of the guns per person as the US, but just 1/10th of the gun deaths.

You are wrong....research shows that Australia's gun murder rate was going down before they banned guns...and illegal guns are now flooding the country...

The U.K. had that lower gun murder rate before they banned guns....and it didn't change after they banned guns.....so gun control wasn't the issue....the fact that the criminal culture in Britain didn't engage in murder was the issue.....

Japan stopped gun crime by imposing a life sentence on any criminal act using a gun....with a 95% conviction rate, and 10 years for mere possession of an illegal gun....

In the U.S....democrat judges are releasing repeat gun offenders on bond, and out of prison in less than 3 years...that is our problem...not John and Jane citizen owning and carrying a gun for self defense.....

The anti-gun theory and argument.....

More Guns = More Gun crime regardless of any other factors.

Actual Result:

In the U.S....as more Americans own and carry guns over the last 26 years, gun murder down 49%, gun crime down 75%, violent crime down 72%

The result: Exact opposite of theory of anti-gunners....

In Science when you have a theory, when that theory is tested....and the exact opposite result happens...that means your theory is wrong. That is science....not left wing wishful thinking.

So your argument wasn't that crime goes up, crime goes down....your theory, your argument is More Guns (regardless of any other factors) = More Gun Crime

Whatever the crime rate does......as more Americans owned more guns the crime rate did not go up....so again...

The exact opposite of your theory happened....in science that means your theory is wrong.
Britain...
More Guns = More Gun Crime
Britain had access to guns before they banned them.....they had low gun crime, low gun murder.
They banned guns, the gun murder rate spiked for 10 years then returned to the same level...
Your Theory again....
More guns = More Gun Crime
Guns Banned creates no change? That means banning guns for law abiding gun owners had no effect on gun crime.
When your theory states one thing, and you implement your theory, and nothing changes....in science, that means your theory is wrong...

no clear correlation whatsoever between gun ownership rate and gun homicide rate.

States with stricter gun control regulations have fewer mass shootings

Fewer than what states?

UT has pretty loose gun laws so do VT and NH so if this were true then wouldn't these states have more mass shootings than CA?

Comparing a right to a privilege

No one has the right to drive on public roads it is a privilege granted by the states and that privilege can be revoked at any time for any reason

 

[Blues Man]

No, drugs tend to make people relaxed, happy, and complacent.
It is the War on Drugs that causes murders.

Look at the statistics.

The last time we had a peak like we do now, what Prohibition of Alcohol.
And it caused a massive murder spike for the same reason.
Once you make something illegal that people do not believe should be illegal, its use increases.
There are higher profits, more sellers, etc., but they also can not use banks or call police.
So there are more turf wars, thefts, murders, etc.
The estimates are that 90% of the US murders are due to the War on Drugs.

Then by the same logic, prohibitions on firearms would also cause a spike in the rate of shootings, just as the prohibition on alcohol and drugs caused a spike in bootlegging, gang activity, and drug use and sales.

True?

Yes, most likely.
Any government imposed, arbitrary prohibition is always guaranteed to fail.
It just increases the Black Market, while destroying the credibility of the current government.
Gun control is just evil or incredibly stupid.
It can not possibly ever do any good at all.

Australia gun buyback cut gun deaths nearly in half.

UK's approach resulted in no more than 60 gun deaths per year in a population of 56 million.

Japan has only 10 gun deaths per year across 127 million people.

Norway has a 3rd of the guns per person as the US, but just 1/10th of the gun deaths.

You are wrong....research shows that Australia's gun murder rate was going down before they banned guns...and illegal guns are now flooding the country...

The U.K. had that lower gun murder rate before they banned guns....and it didn't change after they banned guns.....so gun control wasn't the issue....the fact that the criminal culture in Britain didn't engage in murder was the issue.....

Japan stopped gun crime by imposing a life sentence on any criminal act using a gun....with a 95% conviction rate, and 10 years for mere possession of an illegal gun....

In the U.S....democrat judges are releasing repeat gun offenders on bond, and out of prison in less than 3 years...that is our problem...not John and Jane citizen owning and carrying a gun for self defense.....

The anti-gun theory and argument.....

More Guns = More Gun crime regardless of any other factors.

Actual Result:

In the U.S....as more Americans own and carry guns over the last 26 years, gun murder down 49%, gun crime down 75%, violent crime down 72%

The result: Exact opposite of theory of anti-gunners....

In Science when you have a theory, when that theory is tested....and the exact opposite result happens...that means your theory is wrong. That is science....not left wing wishful thinking.

So your argument wasn't that crime goes up, crime goes down....your theory, your argument is More Guns (regardless of any other factors) = More Gun Crime

Whatever the crime rate does......as more Americans owned more guns the crime rate did not go up....so again...

The exact opposite of your theory happened....in science that means your theory is wrong.
Britain...
More Guns = More Gun Crime
Britain had access to guns before they banned them.....they had low gun crime, low gun murder.
They banned guns, the gun murder rate spiked for 10 years then returned to the same level...
Your Theory again....
More guns = More Gun Crime
Guns Banned creates no change? That means banning guns for law abiding gun owners had no effect on gun crime.
When your theory states one thing, and you implement your theory, and nothing changes....in science, that means your theory is wrong...

In 1977, 50% of U.S. households had a gun in the house. In 2014, only 31% of U.S. households had a gun in the house. That's why gun murders have gone down. The percentage of people owning firearms is declining.

Wrong again.

Most murders are committed by people who are already legally prohibited from owning firearms.

And the murder rate in 1960 was just about what it is today

There was a world wide spike in murders in the 80's and 90's

Homicide Rate (per 100,000), 1950–2014

 

[Blues Man]

The Gun Control Laws The United States Needs

In order to purchase a firearm, an individual must do the following:

01. Attend three month class on firearms

02. Pass a written test when the class has been completed

03. Achieve at least 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test

04. Pass a Mental Health evaluation at a hospital

05. Pass a background check in which the government digs into their criminal record

06. Pass a background check involving interviews with friends and family

07. Only shotguns and Air Rifles may be purchased, no handguns

08. New magazines can only be purchased by trading in empty ones

09. When a gun owner dies, their relatives must surrender the deceased members firearms

10. Every three years, the individual must pass the above tests and investigations

Go fuck yourself with a cactus.

Gun laws the US needs:

All able-bodied people not convicted of a felony need to open carry and put put down any vermin that try to attack other people or the heritage of the US.

Run, Sparky! (U2Edge ) This means you>

My ancestors didn't build this country for bullshit like you.

You need sent out into the woods for a week or two.

Would you want a gun, or not? I'll tell you right now, you're a tard if you don't.

Under the gun control laws I suggest, civilians can still own Shotguns or Air Rifles if they pass the tests and background checks.

Get the fuck out of my country, you commie traitor.

So just because you disagree with someone on an issue, you call them a commie traitor and tell them to leave the country. Wonderful logic.

you're called a commie because you are proposing laws that Comrade Stalin would have been proud of

 

[Blues Man]

Keep preaching your fantasy.

.

Every time one of your buddies in the gun owning civilian population goes out murders someone, or commits one of these mass shootings, it moves the country in this direction and brings it closer to being a reality.

01. Most people don't own guns.

02. Gun control has the support of the media.

Hate to break it to you....not one of my "buddyies" has gone out and murdered someone...or committed one of those mass shootings.
You are not too good at deflection and completely ignored my content. typical.

There are 300 million guns in America....I would say a lot of people own guns.
Who gives a fuck about the media?

Its a lot and it needs to be reduced. In 1977 50% of households had a gun in the house. Today that figure is down to 31%. Now the non-gun owning population has the political potential and power to change the laws to restrict and remove many of the guns from the minority.

When I used the word buddies, I was referring to any civilian that owned a gun.

Over 99.9 % of the population can be trusted with guns, so society is much better off if they are armed.
When it comes to fascist dictatorships, that is ALWAYS created by a corrupt government that used a corrupt police force and corrupt military.
So the very last things any sane or honest people should want is gun control, that gives the police and military a monopoly on all power.

You are NEVER going to disarm criminals with gun control laws because criminals will NEVER be willing to abide by them.
All you will do is to disarm the honest people, and create a fascist dictatorship.

Well, Japan's gun control laws have reduced firearm deaths to just 10 per year with a population of 127 million people. Gun control works well in Canada and many other European nations.

Most people in the United States don't have guns, and more of them don't want their civilian counterparts who own guns to have them either.

Yeah and the only difference between Japan and the US is their gun laws right?

 

[Blues Man]

The Gun Control Laws The United States Needs

In order to purchase a firearm, an individual must do the following:

01. Attend three month class on firearms

02. Pass a written test when the class has been completed

03. Achieve at least 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test

04. Pass a Mental Health evaluation at a hospital

05. Pass a background check in which the government digs into their criminal record

06. Pass a background check involving interviews with friends and family

07. Only shotguns and Air Rifles may be purchased, no handguns

08. New magazines can only be purchased by trading in empty ones

09. When a gun owner dies, their relatives must surrender the deceased members firearms

10. Every three years, the individual must pass the above tests and investigations

Go fuck yourself with a cactus.

Gun laws the US needs:

All able-bodied people not convicted of a felony need to open carry and put put down any vermin that try to attack other people or the heritage of the US.

Run, Sparky! (U2Edge ) This means you>

My ancestors didn't build this country for bullshit like you.

You need sent out into the woods for a week or two.

Would you want a gun, or not? I'll tell you right now, you're a tard if you don't.

Under the gun control laws I suggest, civilians can still own Shotguns or Air Rifles if they pass the tests and background checks.

Under the gun control laws you suggest, I suggest you be imprisoned for going against the Constitution of The United States. If not outright hanged, because you're a useless POS.

The constitution is not set in stone. It can be amended. Non-Gun owners will eventually do what it takes to design and enforce stricter gun control laws. The non-gun owners are in the majority now. They have the votes.

So try to amend it to include your suggestions

That'll be good for a laugh

 

[Blues Man]

The Gun Control Laws The United States Needs

In order to purchase a firearm, an individual must do the following:

01. Attend three month class on firearms

02. Pass a written test when the class has been completed

03. Achieve at least 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test

04. Pass a Mental Health evaluation at a hospital

05. Pass a background check in which the government digs into their criminal record

06. Pass a background check involving interviews with friends and family

07. Only shotguns and Air Rifles may be purchased, no handguns

08. New magazines can only be purchased by trading in empty ones

09. When a gun owner dies, their relatives must surrender the deceased members firearms

10. Every three years, the individual must pass the above tests and investigations

1. Fuck you.

2. Fuck you.

3. Fuck you some more.

4. Fuck off.

5. Fuck you.

6. Fuck off and die.

7. Fuck you.

8 Fuck you some more.

9. Fuck you.

10. I've been fully trained. Licensed and have served my Country.

11. Fuck off and die.

Ahhh, anger and hostility, characteristics often found in those that commit crime.

Oh, getting pissed at fuckers who try to deny rights can't righteous anger, right?

Fuck you. You are the enemy.

.

I'm the enemy because I expressed my opinion for tighter gun control laws in attempt to bring down the huge numbers of deaths and injuries caused by firearms in the United States every year?

I don't think you understand what democracy, liberty and freedom are about if you attack another citizen for simply expressing their opinion on an issue.

.003% of the population are killed by a person with a gun annually

Do you realize how small of a number that is?

 

[NoVote]

More people are killed by what?

Oh, yeah, hammers, I forgot.

 

[SweetSue92]

The Gun Control Laws The United States Needs

In order to purchase a firearm, an individual must do the following:

01. Attend three month class on firearms

02. Pass a written test when the class has been completed

03. Achieve at least 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test

04. Pass a Mental Health evaluation at a hospital

05. Pass a background check in which the government digs into their criminal record

06. Pass a background check involving interviews with friends and family

07. Only shotguns and Air Rifles may be purchased, no handguns

08. New magazines can only be purchased by trading in empty ones

09. When a gun owner dies, their relatives must surrender the deceased members firearms

10. Every three years, the individual must pass the above tests and investigations

Nope.

And if ever I waver on the above just the least, tiny little bit, the Left reminds me why the 2nd amendment is fundamental. Recently, with the movie "The Hunt".

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Unfortunately, the current gun control laws are not saving enough lives. What I propose will save thousands of lives a year eventually. Tighter Gun control laws have saved many lives in Europe, Canada, Australia, Japan, and New Zealand. The United States needs to reduce its death rate from firearms down to levels similar to Western Europe, Canada, and Japan. The United States is the wealthiest country in the world and its intolerable to have the firearm death rate we have, when so many other 1st world developed country's have a much lower rate.

I'm more interested in saving lives than protecting the so called "rights" of the minority gun owning nerds.

No, they haven't. The peaceful culture of European countries before World War 2 kept criminals from murdering people...that has changed.....so will their violent crime rate, just ask the Swedes...

We have the gun murder rate because democrats keep letting repeat gun offenders out of jail, over and over.

You don't want to save lives.....you want more victims of crime....Americans use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to save lives, stopping rapes, robberies and murders...that is according to research by the Centers for Disease Control....

I see you are back to using the Klek lie as a quote once more. Do you really want to go through this again? Do the friggin math. 1.1 million times each year. Break it down to each month, then to each day. Then to each hour and finally, to each minute. The streets would be more like a bloody video game each and every time you left your fortress. Turn off the Video Game, shut off the TV, and get outside more often. Enjoy real life.

Moron....it was the CDC that said 1.1 million, Kleck's research put it at close to 2.5 million.....you are an idiot.....

No, it was Kleck that said 2.3 million but his partner in crime said later one after the BS was called on Kleck that it was really 1.1 mil. Either one, the math doesn't add up. I went to the store and bought a steak and did an outdoor BBQ. I did it without taking a weapon of any kind. Not one single sidearm or long gun. In all that time not one defensive shooting, no robberies, no rapes, nothing but stupid drivers. Using the Kleck and his runni9ng mate, I would have had at least a shooting in the Safeway parking lot. Or two or three. I would have had to duck and dodge all the way in and all the way out. And maybe had to duck behind a counter or two inside the store. I already posted the number per minute using the 1.1 mil. And the CDC showed the total homicides and it was a fraction of the 1.1 million. They had no way of knowing the DGU rate. It's a made up figure in your case

I let you out of the box. But it looks like you are still a foul mouthed little kid so back in the box you go.

Again not all gun defensive actions are reported to the police it's not reported if you don't discharge a cartridge. Just showing it will stop a crime from happening.

We are right back to just making up any fantasy number we want to make up. If it's not reported, it's not on the CDC report. Therefore, Kleck just must have dreamed it up. Shoot, I can dream up figures as well. How about 13 instead of 1.1 mil. Makes about as much sense for reporting purposes. And my figure is probably closer to reality. The real number will fall somewhere between 13 and 1.1 mil i would think but there is no way of verifying it. So I stand by my 13 and you can stand by your 1.1 mil. But the math makes more sense at 13.