There is no catastrophe so ghastly that we will reform our gun laws

[NoNukes]

good one stupid

because people that want to kill will always find a way?

in socialist norway a couple years ago a guy killed SEVENTY-SEVEN people

and it's harder to get a gun there

libs are obscene losers using a tragedy for political gain

Yup. Guns don't kill people. PEOPLE kill people.

Anyone wanting to kill will get a gun despite all the gun laws currently on the books and there are tons of gun laws on the books.

If you take the guns they will still find guns on the blackmarket, street corners or anywhere else. Someone will always be selling guns to those who want to buy them.

You can blame guns all you want but its the people using the guns who are at fault. A gun is an inanimate object until someone picks it up and uses it.

GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE. PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE.

End of story.

People with guns kill people

30 people in England killed with guns vs 8800 in the US

Disgraceful: 30 Murders by Guns in England 2012 vs. 8,855 in U.S. | Alternet

I wonder how many of those 30 in England were criminals killing criminals. That is the case with most of the gun murders here in Ireland.

 

[NoNukes]

So many false assumptions, so little time.

So i guess you avoid police officers as well?

No, As a matter of fact, I am a uniformed Sheriff Auxiliary Volunteer.

Now, what was it that you were saying about assumptions?

So you get to keep your gun, and I would have to give up mine. I figured you were a cop, guns for thee and not for me.

I assume if comprehensive gun control were passed, you would lock your gun up in the precinct every night when you went home, right?

It works in civilized countries, so America should give it a try.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Some recent proposed gun control measures were appropriate, others not.

Seeking to help the states report and update the NICS database more timely and comprehensively was one of the good proposals; background checks are both Constitutional and effective in keeping guns out of the hands of felons and those adjudicated mentally ill, as well as other prohibited persons – provided the database is kept current.

Seeking to ban ‘assault weapons’ and high capacity magazines would be examples of inappropriate proposed measures.

In fact, assault weapons are already subject to sufficient restrictions, as the AR 15, AK 47, and other similar semi-automatic rifles available to the general public are in no way ‘assault weapons,’ where their ban would be pointless.

Moreover, rifles of all types represent less than 2 percent of gun crimes, ARs and AKs alone likely constitute an even smaller amount. Consequently, ‘banning’ these types of rifles would have little or no effect on reducing overall gun deaths in America, in addition to being Constitutionally problematic given the lack of evidence that their prohibition would have the desired effect of enhancing public safety in the context of a compelling governmental interest.

Mental health issues is the cause of these tragedies, with firearms merely the symptom, and it’s pointless to treat only the symptom while ignoring the actual cause of the problem.

 

[JoeB131]

There is no catastrophe so ghastly that America will reform its gun laws - The Week

Look, we've collectively decided, as a country, that the occasional massacre is okay with us. It's the price we're willing to pay for our precious Second Amendment freedoms. We're content to forfeit the lives of a few dozen schoolkids a year as long as we get to keep our guns. The people have spoken, in a cheering civics-class example of democracy in action.

It's hard to imagine what ghastly catastrophe could possibly change America's minds about guns if the little bloody bookbags of Newtown did not. After that atrocity, it seemed as if we would finally enact some obvious, long-overdue half-measures. But perfectly reasonable, moderate legislation expanding background checks and banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines was summarily killed in the Senate for no reason other than that a sufficient number of United States senators are owned by the NRA. It made our official position as a nation nakedly explicit: we don't care about any number of murdered children, no matter how many, or how young. We want our guns.

If a very powerful politician lost his daughter/son in one of these massacres with a democrat in the White House, you may see some traction...

Short of that; nothing. It's too politically costly for anyone to be the grown up and point out the idiocy of the right wing on this.

Meh. I don't even think that will happen. Gabby Gifford got shot, and yet her fellow Congressmen didn't think that was a big enough deal.

 

[bedowin62]

oh look; the guy that denigrates the military service of others is here!1

left-wing nutjob JoeB

 

[Skull Pilot]

The gun laws don't need to be reformed. Violent criminals need to be left to rot in prison.
It is well documented that 8% of the criminal population commits 80% of the violent crime.

Why do you keep letting them out?

The only law we need is one that mandates life in federal prison with no chance of parole for any and all crimes committed with a gun even if that gun was not discharged.

Okay, but boy would that soldier in Mexico be screwed eh?

He didn't commit a crime in this country did he?

 

[Skull Pilot]

I would be happy if we could get our gun murders down to 30

Why wouldn't you?

80% of those are gang related and let's not fall into the trap of comparing absolute numbers when we have 7 times the population of the UK.

Got stats?

7 x 30 is 210. Not 8000

National Vital Statistics Reports
Volume 61, Number 6

you can get the pdf

 

[candycorn]

There is no catastrophe so ghastly that America will reform its gun laws - The Week

Look, we've collectively decided, as a country, that the occasional massacre is okay with us. It's the price we're willing to pay for our precious Second Amendment freedoms. We're content to forfeit the lives of a few dozen schoolkids a year as long as we get to keep our guns. The people have spoken, in a cheering civics-class example of democracy in action.

It's hard to imagine what ghastly catastrophe could possibly change America's minds about guns if the little bloody bookbags of Newtown did not. After that atrocity, it seemed as if we would finally enact some obvious, long-overdue half-measures. But perfectly reasonable, moderate legislation expanding background checks and banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines was summarily killed in the Senate for no reason other than that a sufficient number of United States senators are owned by the NRA. It made our official position as a nation nakedly explicit: we don't care about any number of murdered children, no matter how many, or how young. We want our guns.

If a very powerful politician lost his daughter/son in one of these massacres with a democrat in the White House, you may see some traction...

Short of that; nothing. It's too politically costly for anyone to be the grown up and point out the idiocy of the right wing on this.

Meh. I don't even think that will happen. Gabby Gifford got shot, and yet her fellow Congressmen didn't think that was a big enough deal.

Its different with sons and daughters; you think twice about taking that check from the NRA if your child is mowed down by a perfectly legal purchase of multiple handguns by someone you'd classify as clinically insane. Then you realize you no longer have to toe the line and preach their gospel of hate.

 

[bedowin62]

If a very powerful politician lost his daughter/son in one of these massacres with a democrat in the White House, you may see some traction...

Short of that; nothing. It's too politically costly for anyone to be the grown up and point out the idiocy of the right wing on this.

Meh. I don't even think that will happen. Gabby Gifford got shot, and yet her fellow Congressmen didn't think that was a big enough deal.

Its different with sons and daughters; you think twice about taking that check from the NRA if your child is mowed down by a perfectly legal purchase of multiple handguns by someone you'd classify as clinically insane. Then you realize you no longer have to toe the line and preach their gospel of hate.

oh the "hate" card


lemming

 

[candycorn]

Not that I'm saying it means anything per se, but i thought it was interesting to note: of the 18 cities actually named on that map 17 have a democrat for a mayor:

Detroit - Mike Duggan (D)
Portland - Charlie Hales (D)
San Francisco - Ed Lee (D)
San Jose - Chuck Reed (D)
Los Angeles - Eric Garcetti (D)
San Diego - Ed Harris (D)
Phoenix - Greg Stanton (D)
Minneapolis - Betsy Hodges (DFL)
Chicago - Rahm Emanuel (D)
Austin - Lee Leffingwell (D)
Houston - Annise Parker (D)
New Orleans - Mitch Landrieu (D)
Miami - Tomás P. Regalado ( R)
Atlanta - Muhammad Kasim Reed (D)
Baltimore - Stephanie C. Rawlings-Blake (D)
New York - Bill de Blasio (D)
Boston - Marty Walsh (D)
Buffalo - Byron Brown (D)

Also interesting on that map they are comparing the homicide rate with a firearm of an entire nation to the homicide rate in urban centers in the USA. Urban centers are obviously going to have a rate higher than their nation's as a general rule. So we ought to probably compare similar stats to each other instead right?

These numbers are from this report compiled by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime: http://www.unodc.org/documents/gsh/pdfs/2014_GLOBAL_HOMICIDE_BOOK_web.pdf

USA
Homicide rate per 100,000 people including all intentional homicides: 4.7
Percentage of homicides commited using a firearm: 60%
Extrapolated homicide rate per 100,000 using a firearm: 2.82

Honduras
Homicide rate per 100,000 people including all intentional homicides: 90.4
Percentage of homicides commited using a firearm: 84%
Extrapolated homicide rate per 100,000 using a firearm: 75.9

These next numbers are interesting too. They come from here: All countries compared for Crime > Violent crime > Gun crime > Guns per 100 residents

USA
Guns per 100 residents: 88.8

Honduras
Guns per 100 residents: 6.2

Now, I might be missing it, but I'm not seeing the direct correlation between the number of guns and the number of homicides. There must be something else going on here.

Two things;

Again, not that it matters but for over a decade, NYC was run by republican mayors not Democrats. As I recall, the current mayor was elected recently.

Also, comparing the cities to the nations is helpful when you consider patrolling the geography of a nation is quite difficult compared to an urban metropolis where you can install cameras, have vehicles patrolling, street lights, communication, etc...

Wouldn't you think that with all of the technology, the presence of the constabulary by the local, county, and state police, the tabs we keep on criminals, and the simple publicity that murders get through our mass media that our death-by-gun rate would be lower?

Actually it isn't helpful at all to compare a city in one country to an entire other country. A city is an entirely different thing than a country. Just look at the huge difference between one urban center in the US compared to the US itself. New Orleans' firearm homicide rate per your map was over 60 per 100,000. The US's rate is 2.8 per 100,000. Obviosuly population centers must not be so much easier to control crime in after all.

If the percentage of people who own guns is really the problem, then why does Wyoming have the highest gun ownership percentage and one of the lowest gun homicide rates? And why does Louisiana (which has the highest gun homicide rate) not even break top ten in gun ownership percentage?

Must be something else going on again.

Gun violence in the United States by state - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Isn't Wyoming 50th in population? There may be a clue for you...

 

[bedowin62]

Two things;

Again, not that it matters but for over a decade, NYC was run by republican mayors not Democrats. As I recall, the current mayor was elected recently.

Also, comparing the cities to the nations is helpful when you consider patrolling the geography of a nation is quite difficult compared to an urban metropolis where you can install cameras, have vehicles patrolling, street lights, communication, etc...

Wouldn't you think that with all of the technology, the presence of the constabulary by the local, county, and state police, the tabs we keep on criminals, and the simple publicity that murders get through our mass media that our death-by-gun rate would be lower?

Actually it isn't helpful at all to compare a city in one country to an entire other country. A city is an entirely different thing than a country. Just look at the huge difference between one urban center in the US compared to the US itself. New Orleans' firearm homicide rate per your map was over 60 per 100,000. The US's rate is 2.8 per 100,000. Obviosuly population centers must not be so much easier to control crime in after all.

If the percentage of people who own guns is really the problem, then why does Wyoming have the highest gun ownership percentage and one of the lowest gun homicide rates? And why does Louisiana (which has the highest gun homicide rate) not even break top ten in gun ownership percentage?

Must be something else going on again.

Gun violence in the United States by state - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Isn't Wyoming 50th in population? There may be a clue for you...

liberal cities are the places you're most likely to be mowed down with a gun; legal or otherwise]

libs are morons; who lie to themselves

 

[dannyboys]

Actually it isn't helpful at all to compare a city in one country to an entire other country. A city is an entirely different thing than a country. Just look at the huge difference between one urban center in the US compared to the US itself. New Orleans' firearm homicide rate per your map was over 60 per 100,000. The US's rate is 2.8 per 100,000. Obviosuly population centers must not be so much easier to control crime in after all.

If the percentage of people who own guns is really the problem, then why does Wyoming have the highest gun ownership percentage and one of the lowest gun homicide rates? And why does Louisiana (which has the highest gun homicide rate) not even break top ten in gun ownership percentage?

Must be something else going on again.

Gun violence in the United States by state - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Isn't Wyoming 50th in population? There may be a clue for you...

liberal cities are the places you're most likely to be mowed down with a gun; legal or otherwise]

libs are morons; who lie to themselves

The reason places like Wyoming have such a low gun/homicide rate is simple. The driveways leading up to the ranch houses are VERY LONG. Picture a bunch of simian 'gang-bangers' cruising around in rural Wyoming looking to commit a few crimes. 100% guaranteed whoever is in the ranch house is well armed and can blow any criminal's head off at two hundred yards.

 

[WinterBorn]

Americans love our guns...

Nothing can change that

We had JFK, RFK, MLK, Reagan shot and we just sighed and said too bad
We had Columbine, Aurora, Virginia Tech and finally Newton and we did nothing
Our murder rate is triple of that in similar countries...we do nothing

We have our second amendment and are willing to put up with some bloodshed. It is the price of freedom

Or perhaps the gun buffs understand that the danger is the lunatic, not the tool he uses.

Timothy McVeigh didn't use a gun.

 

[hunarcy]

Or perhaps the gun buffs understand that the danger is the lunatic, not the tool he uses.

Timothy McVeigh didn't use a gun.

Well said!

 

[hadit]

Life is ALL about trade-offs. We accept risk in order to gain something we hold valuable. Here's a reality check for those who insist that no price is too high to pay in order to save even one life and for those who castigate others for valuing the right to self defense.

We could save tens of thousands of lives every year with one simple modification to the law, yet we will never do it. We glorify in our popular media an act that ends those lives. We set age and impairment limits on those who participate in the act, yet people still die. We spend enormous sums and time to make safer the implements of the act instead of doing the one thing that would render them safest. We fight to prevent the loss of the privilege to do the act. What is it?

You know, of course, that it's driving fast. Set the national speed limit at 35 mph or less and limit all vehicles to that speed save for a burst to enable passing and we would save many, many lives, to say nothing of natural resources. Are we willing to pay that price? No, absolutely not. We value being able to drive faster than the next guy more than we do the lives lost as a result.

 

[Mathbud1]

Two things;

Again, not that it matters but for over a decade, NYC was run by republican mayors not Democrats. As I recall, the current mayor was elected recently.

Also, comparing the cities to the nations is helpful when you consider patrolling the geography of a nation is quite difficult compared to an urban metropolis where you can install cameras, have vehicles patrolling, street lights, communication, etc...

Wouldn't you think that with all of the technology, the presence of the constabulary by the local, county, and state police, the tabs we keep on criminals, and the simple publicity that murders get through our mass media that our death-by-gun rate would be lower?

Actually it isn't helpful at all to compare a city in one country to an entire other country. A city is an entirely different thing than a country. Just look at the huge difference between one urban center in the US compared to the US itself. New Orleans' firearm homicide rate per your map was over 60 per 100,000. The US's rate is 2.8 per 100,000. Obviosuly population centers must not be so much easier to control crime in after all.

If the percentage of people who own guns is really the problem, then why does Wyoming have the highest gun ownership percentage and one of the lowest gun homicide rates? And why does Louisiana (which has the highest gun homicide rate) not even break top ten in gun ownership percentage?

Must be something else going on again.

Gun violence in the United States by state - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Isn't Wyoming 50th in population? There may be a clue for you...

I would probably agree that population or population density might play a role. But look at this one:

New Jersey has the most gun owners per square mile of any state at 147 gun owners / sqmi. They also have the highest normal population density at 1189 people / sqmi. They are only ranked 21st in the country for gun murders at 2.8 per 100,000 people.

Louisiana on the other hand which is first in the country for gun murder rate with 7.7 per 100,000 people is 23rd for gun owner population density with 46 gun owners / sqmi and 24th for normal population density with 105 people / sqmi.

And New Mexico only has 5 gun owners / sqmi. Yet they rank 13th for gun murders with 3.3 / 100,000.

Not as tight a correlation as I might have expected. Still gotta say there must be something else going on.

 

[dannyboys]

Actually it isn't helpful at all to compare a city in one country to an entire other country. A city is an entirely different thing than a country. Just look at the huge difference between one urban center in the US compared to the US itself. New Orleans' firearm homicide rate per your map was over 60 per 100,000. The US's rate is 2.8 per 100,000. Obviosuly population centers must not be so much easier to control crime in after all.

If the percentage of people who own guns is really the problem, then why does Wyoming have the highest gun ownership percentage and one of the lowest gun homicide rates? And why does Louisiana (which has the highest gun homicide rate) not even break top ten in gun ownership percentage?

Must be something else going on again.

Gun violence in the United States by state - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Isn't Wyoming 50th in population? There may be a clue for you...

I would probably agree that population or population density might play a role. But look at this one:

New Jersey has the most gun owners per square mile of any state at 147 gun owners / sqmi. They also have the highest normal population density at 1189 people / sqmi. They are only ranked 21st in the country for gun murders at 2.8 per 100,000 people.

Louisiana on the other hand which is first in the country for gun murder rate with 7.7 per 100,000 people is 23rd for gun owner population density with 46 gun owners / sqmi and 24th for normal population density with 105 people / sqmi.

And New Mexico only has 5 gun owners / sqmi. Yet they rank 13th for gun murders with 3.3 / 100,000.

Not as tight a correlation as I might have expected. Still gotta say there must be something else going on.

The 'something else' that is going on is very very simple to understand. The gun owner stats are based on people possessing LEGAL guns. Factor in the illegal guns out there and your stats will make sense to any one with an IQ higher than a slice of Wonder bread.

 

[Mathbud1]

Isn't Wyoming 50th in population? There may be a clue for you...

I would probably agree that population or population density might play a role. But look at this one:

New Jersey has the most gun owners per square mile of any state at 147 gun owners / sqmi. They also have the highest normal population density at 1189 people / sqmi. They are only ranked 21st in the country for gun murders at 2.8 per 100,000 people.

Louisiana on the other hand which is first in the country for gun murder rate with 7.7 per 100,000 people is 23rd for gun owner population density with 46 gun owners / sqmi and 24th for normal population density with 105 people / sqmi.

And New Mexico only has 5 gun owners / sqmi. Yet they rank 13th for gun murders with 3.3 / 100,000.

Not as tight a correlation as I might have expected. Still gotta say there must be something else going on.

The 'something else' that is going on is very very simple to understand. The gun owner stats are based on people possessing LEGAL guns. Factor in the illegal guns out there and your stats will make sense to any one with an IQ higher than a slice of Wonder bread.

I don't doubt that illegal guns play a role, but even if every resident of New Mexico owned a gun there would still only be 16 gun owners / sqmi there. That isn't even close to the number of gun owners / sq mi of a state like New Jersey yet their gun murder rate is already significantly higher than New Jersey's. Granted, I can't say anything significant about the illegal guns that might be in each state, but obviously the number of people with guns in the state legal or not is not a major determining factor or New Jersey would be in big trouble. The number of legal gun owners alone in New Jersey is greater than the entire population of 8 separate states. Add in illegal gun owners and you could probably safely bump that to 15 states.

 

[Redfish]

Actually it isn't helpful at all to compare a city in one country to an entire other country. A city is an entirely different thing than a country. Just look at the huge difference between one urban center in the US compared to the US itself. New Orleans' firearm homicide rate per your map was over 60 per 100,000. The US's rate is 2.8 per 100,000. Obviosuly population centers must not be so much easier to control crime in after all.

If the percentage of people who own guns is really the problem, then why does Wyoming have the highest gun ownership percentage and one of the lowest gun homicide rates? And why does Louisiana (which has the highest gun homicide rate) not even break top ten in gun ownership percentage?

Must be something else going on again.

Gun violence in the United States by state - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Isn't Wyoming 50th in population? There may be a clue for you...

I would probably agree that population or population density might play a role. But look at this one:

New Jersey has the most gun owners per square mile of any state at 147 gun owners / sqmi. They also have the highest normal population density at 1189 people / sqmi. They are only ranked 21st in the country for gun murders at 2.8 per 100,000 people.

Louisiana on the other hand which is first in the country for gun murder rate with 7.7 per 100,000 people is 23rd for gun owner population density with 46 gun owners / sqmi and 24th for normal population density with 105 people / sqmi.

And New Mexico only has 5 gun owners / sqmi. Yet they rank 13th for gun murders with 3.3 / 100,000.

Not as tight a correlation as I might have expected. Still gotta say there must be something else going on.

If you take the gang bangers in New Orleans out of the Louisiana stats, you would get a very different answer. The vast majority of gun deaths in this state is black on black gang violence. Just like every other major city in the country.

The real problem in this country is unemployable, uneducated, fatherless, young black males. Fix that and you reduce the gun deaths significantly.

 

[hunarcy]

Isn't Wyoming 50th in population? There may be a clue for you...

I would probably agree that population or population density might play a role. But look at this one:

New Jersey has the most gun owners per square mile of any state at 147 gun owners / sqmi. They also have the highest normal population density at 1189 people / sqmi. They are only ranked 21st in the country for gun murders at 2.8 per 100,000 people.

Louisiana on the other hand which is first in the country for gun murder rate with 7.7 per 100,000 people is 23rd for gun owner population density with 46 gun owners / sqmi and 24th for normal population density with 105 people / sqmi.

And New Mexico only has 5 gun owners / sqmi. Yet they rank 13th for gun murders with 3.3 / 100,000.

Not as tight a correlation as I might have expected. Still gotta say there must be something else going on.

The 'something else' that is going on is very very simple to understand. The gun owner stats are based on people possessing LEGAL guns. Factor in the illegal guns out there and your stats will make sense to any one with an IQ higher than a slice of Wonder bread.

"illegal guns"???? The only "illegal guns" I am aware of are fully automatic machine guns was manufactured after 1986. Do you suppose there are many of those in civilian hands in this nation?