Will more guns create a safer society?

[Ellipsis]

As studies show:
An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

Sounds like a personal problem.

Anyway, yes, if you have firearms in your home there's a greater chance of having an incident with firearms. We can argue the exact numbers 'till the cows come home but the general principal is sound. If you have something in your home you might get harmed by it. The same goes for any and everything you put in your home from electricity to kitchen knives to a pool in the backyard. If you drive a car you're at a greater risk of being in an auto accident. Same thing.

We don't ban things just because having them puts us at a greater risk of harm. Having the item gives us some benifit which off-sets that harm. That's the way it is in the modern world.

 

[Saigon]

actually, more people are owning guns....less people are reporting owning guns in telephone surveys...because they know that they don't want the police or the government to know they have them....which is also why gun owners object to doctors asking about gun ownership....since medical records are now being digitized...try to keep up....

Jesus wept....I have just TWICE proven exactly the opposite.

Try and post with a little common sense and basic honesty. Just repeating the same myth without any proof or evidence is not compelling.

You are wrong, and you have been proven wrong.

 

[2aguy]

Saigon...you have read the pro gun posters...do you really think they would tell a telephone survey that they owned guns, how many they had and where they live....really...this is from the New York times story you posted....

the General Social Survey, a public opinion survey conducted every two years that asks a sample of American adults if they have guns at home, among other questions.

Some stranger calls up and asks if you have a gun in the home.....what informed gun owner is going to say yes....considering we have a scam in our area right now where criminals are calling senior citizens claiming to be the IRS and telling them they have to make a payment or they are going to be in trouble.....

Please...try to apply some sense to your arguments....

 

[Saigon]

Billc -

I'll come back to this thread when you address the info posted.

Here it is from another source:

Despite a recent trend showing Americans flocking to buy firearms, a recent poll found that the number of US homes with a gun has steadily declined since the 1970s.

Only 34 percent of US households reported owning a gun in 2012, which is a drastic decline from the 50 percent who reported owning one in the 1970s, according to the General Social Survey. The most significant gun ownership declines were reported in the South and Western mountain states, traditionally conservative areas that boast a deep support for Second Amendment rights.

Gun ownership in US on decline RT USA

 

[2aguy]

And here is John Lott addressing the survey....

Has Gun Ownership in American Homes Really Decreased This Dramatically TheBlaze.com

Gun expert John Lott addressed this issue and the Times report in a recent blog post, seemingly dismissing the GSS as being potentially biased against guns. He wrote:

The New York Times cites the General Social Survey to claim that the gun ownership rate is low and falling. Here is something that I wrote in my 2003 book The Bias Against Guns.

A few years ago, while I was doing research at the University of Chicago, I had lunch with Tom Smith, who is the director of the General Social Survey at the National Opinion Research Center (NORC). This private organization conducts many important national surveys for the government as well as other clients. During lunch Tom mentioned how important he thought the General Social Survey was. He felt the large drop in gun ownership implied by his survey would “make it easier for politicians to do the right thing on guns” and pass more restrictive regulations.

His surveys have traditionally shown one of the lowest gun ownership rates among any of the surveys: for example, almost 20 percentage points lower than recent polling by John Zogby. . . .Tom Smith is still the director of the GSS. It is interesting to note that both the JAMA study this week as well as Tom Smith have received funding from the Joyce Foundation.

The Joyce Foundation embraces gun control initiatives, as implied by Lott’s comments.

Perhaps differences in the question being asked by Gallup and the GSS could be at the root of the statistical disagreement. While the GSS asked 2,000 respondents the gun question between March and September 2012 (margin of sampling error plus or minus three percentage points), Gallup surveyed 1,005 people in October 2011 (margin of sampling error plus or minus four percentage points).

Here’s the GSS question, based on the 2010 survey, as the 2012 version is not yet available online: “Do you happen to have in your home (IF HOUSE: or garage) any guns or revolvers?” The Gallup version is a bit more expansive, also asking if guns are present inside one’s vehicle. It reads, “Do you have a gun in your home? (If no: Do you have a gun anywhere else on your property, such as in your garage, barn, shed, or in your car or truck?).

While these slight differences may impact results, others who support the GSS’s findings maintain that urbanization and changing demographics (increasing numbers of Hispanics and women-headed households — both of which are less likely to own guns) is helping fuel the decrease.

And again....pro gun people are aware that there are politicians who want to ban guns...and work to restrict gun ownership wherever possible...as the new gun registration law shows....modern gun owners are not going to report their guns to a random, anonymous person on the phone....

Get real....

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Billc -

I'll come back to this thread when you address the info posted.

Here it is from another source:

Despite a recent trend showing Americans flocking to buy firearms, a recent poll found that the number of US homes with a gun has steadily declined since the 1970s.

Only 34 percent of US households reported owning a gun in 2012, which is a drastic decline from the 50 percent who reported owning one in the 1970s, according to the General Social Survey. The most significant gun ownership declines were reported in the South and Western mountain states, traditionally conservative areas that boast a deep support for Second Amendment rights.

Gun ownership in US on decline RT USA

While we wait consider the fact that guns are but a mere symptom of more serious, deep rooted problems – where additional laws and restrictions on firearms will address only the symptoms, without bringing resolution to the actual problems.

 

[Saigon]

And here is John Lott addressing the survey....

Has Gun Ownership in American Homes Really Decreased This Dramatically TheBlaze.com

Great -

So from your own link:

While household ownership of guns among elderly Americans remained virtually unchanged from the 1970s to this decade at about 43 percent, ownership among young Americans plummeted. Household gun ownership among Americans under the age of 30 fell to 23 percent this decade from 47 percent in the 1970s. The survey showed a similar decline for Americans ages 30 to 44.

“There are all these claims that gun ownership is going through the roof,” Webster told the Times. “But I suspect the increase in gun sales has been limited mostly to current gun owners. The most reputable surveys show a decline over time in the share of households with guns.”

So I think we can consider this point proven beyond any reasonable doubt.

 

[2aguy]

So I think we can consider this point proven beyond any reasonable doubt.

You would like that to be true...but again...you are wrong....but hold onto that....it seems to be your best argument...."you guys...I win, you lose...so stop arguing and pointing out the truth backed up by common sense and those little things called facts."...

You aren't debating libs....you know...the ones who bought the lie about obamacare...the lies Johnathen Gruber said they told to sell obamacare...you are dealing with normal people, pro gun people...who don't believe liberal crap....

 

[2aguy]

Only 34 percent of US households reported owning a gun in 2012, which is a drastic decline from the 50 percent who reported owning one in the 1970s, according to the General Social Survey.

The irrational gun control people were just ramping up in the 1970s....now, gun owners who know the issue are prepared, and have seen their tactics....so no, they are not going to tell an anonymous, telephone caller they have a gun in their home....

Why you would think they would...after reading our posts here on U.S. message, just shows you are a slow learner...

 

[2aguy]

A look at the new gun owners in the U.S.....women....

Disarming Realities As Gun Sales Soar Gun Crimes Plummet - Forbes

Those attendees weren’t all guys either…not by a long shot. Last year, the National Shooting Sports Foundation reported that participation by women increased both in target shooting (46.5%) and hunting (36.6%) over the past decade. Also, 61% of firearm retailers responding to a NSSF survey reported an increase in female customers. A 2009 NSSF survey indicated that the number of women purchasing guns for personal defense increased a whopping 83 percent.

Is John Lott, the author of “More Guns, Less Crime”right? Does the rapid growth of gun ownership and armed citizens have anything to do with a diminishing gun violence trend? His expansive research concludes that state “shall issue” laws which allow citizens to carry concealed weapons do produce a steady decrease in violent crime. He explains that this is logical because criminals are deterred by the risk of attacking an armed target, so as more citizens arm themselves, danger to the criminals increases.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

They always leave out Mexico....where the government, the police and the cartels work together to murder innocent Mexican citizens...just ask the 43 student teachers murdered by police and cartel members...

as well as the rest of Latin America, Nigeria, Kenya...Russia....lots of gun control....and only the bad guys have guns...and the murder rates are a lot higher than the U.S.

That is true ... The map below provided by the United Nations identifies the countries with the highest homicide rates in dark blue.



The darkest blue countries have some of the most strict gun laws or incredibly low guns per capita rates.

.

Um....no they don't.

Most of Europe has MUCH tighter gun laws than the US - and FAR less murders. Ditto Australia and New Zealand.

Where such gun laws would have little effect in the United States, if any. Unlike the other countries noted, the United States is a considerably more violent society, unlike those other countries noted, American culture condones violence and perceives violence as a legitimate means of conflict resolution.

Those are the issues in need of being addressed, among others, not the number or availability of guns.

 

[2aguy]

American culture condones violence and perceives violence as a legitimate means of conflict resolution.

Actually, what you should say is the sub culture of inner city gangs condones violence and percieves violence as a legitimate means of conflict resolution.......and of the 8-9,000 gun murders annually....80% are due to gang violence....

While great expanses of the United States are peaceful.....

 

[Saigon]

BillC -

Please acknowledge that the number of US households is down, as proven by your own link.

 

[2aguy]

You didn't read the whole link...John Lott, an expert in the field disputes the claim....as do I ....a phone survey, taken in the last 10 years will not be accurate...it is as simple as that...and more NCIS checks are occurring, and while some are repeat purchases...not all of them are.....and more and more women are buying guns for protection...

You are wrong as is this survey...

 

[Saigon]

Bill C -

Yes, I did read the whole link, and despite what the NRA spokesperson claimed, I think we all know that the number of households with guns is dropping.

I have no idea why you are suggesting otherwise, except for the fact that it entirely undermines your argument.

 

[2aguy]

I have no idea why you are suggesting otherwise, except for the fact that it entirely undermines your argument.

I suggest otherwise because the only data they have to show this is a telephone survey asking gun owners if they have a gun....in the current environment where doctors were taken to court to keep them, medical professionals, from asking if their own patients had a gun....and yet you think that gun owners, knowing the tactics of gun grabbers, will willingly admit that they own guns....

Gun instructor training through the NRA is up....NCIS background checks are up....women buying guns is up....and yet you claim gun ownership is going down....based on an anonymous survey....

And it wan't just the NRA spokesman but John Lott, an expert in the field, who also points out that the guy conducting the survey has an anti gun political agenda, and is supported by the Joyce Foundation, an anti gun foundation....

A few years ago, while I was doing research at the University of Chicago, I had lunch with Tom Smith, who is the director of the General Social Survey at the National Opinion Research Center (NORC). This private organization conducts many important national surveys for the government as well as other clients. During lunch Tom mentioned how important he thought the General Social Survey was. He felt the large drop in gun ownership implied by his survey would “make it easier for politicians to do the right thing on guns” and pass more restrictive regulations.

Tom Smith is still the director of the GSS. It is interesting to note that both the JAMA study this week as well as Tom Smith have received funding from the Joyce Foundation.
The Joyce Foundation embraces gun control initiatives, as implied by Lott’s comments.

So yeah...you are wrong...again....

 

[Saigon]

BillC -

At the point that you know that you are wrong - it's a fairly good bet that everyone else does too.

In this case there are plenty of other studies showing much the same thing, so it's hardly as if the findings here ar anything new.

I'll leave it there.

 

[Derideo_Te]

The Founders made sure that the PEOPLE would have access to guns to ensure that when our government switched from being legitimate to illegitimate, we could do something about it.

The Founders also passed a law requiring that all firearms be registered.

They did? Where? I see nothing requiring registration weapons that at that time didn't have anything even resembling a serial number. How can you possibly register a weapon that has no identification marks?

New Book Founding Fathers Imposed Gun Control - Guns.com

Founding Fathers Imposed Gun Control

Were our founding fathers the gun-loving, pro-second amendment patriots we’ve imagined them to be or did they have a more nuanced position when it came to reconciling the Second Amendment with gun control? ​

This is one of the questions that Adam Winkler, a UCLA Law Professor, investigates in his new book,Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America.

And his answer to that question is, at the very least, compelling. Winkler argues that “gun rights and gun control are not only compatible; they have lived together since the birth of America.”

Winkler goes on to say, “The founding fathers instituted gun control laws so intrusive that no self-respecting member of today’s N.R.A. board of directors would support them. Early Americans denied the right to gun ownership even to law-abiding people if they failed a political test of loyalty to the Revolution. The founders also declared that free white men were members of the militia and, as such, were forced to appear with their guns at public ‘musters’ where government officials would inspect the weapons and register them on public rolls. When pressing public necessity demanded it, the founding fathers were also willing to impress guns from law abiding citizens, even if those citizens were left without guns to defend themselves from a criminal attack.”

Winkler cites some examples of the more strict and extreme regulations the founders supported. He writes, “they supported forcible disarmament of slaves, free blacks, and people of mixed race out of fear that these groups would use guns to revolt against slave masters,” and in Maryland, before the revolution, “at least one colony, Maryland, passed a law barring Catholics from possessing firearms.”

The theme of his book is consistent, that the founding fathers “understood that gun rights had to be balanced with public safety needs.”

Yet more revisionist history? The facts are entirely different from what this "intellectual" is stating. There was another "intellectual" who tried to show that gun ownership in the Colonies was much less than had previously been reported. His book and his methods were summarily destroyed by historians who didn't have a political axe to grind. The same is true here.

Not in the least bit "revisionist".

Congress passed the Militia Act of 1792 wherein it explicitly required inspection and accounting of all firearms to be reported to the President on an annual basis. Oh, and before you go off pop and say that only applied to the militia you should understand that it applied to every male aged 18 to 45 that they must be enrolled in the militia.

The Militia Act of 1792

I. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia,

X. And be it further enacted, That it shall be the duty of the brigade inspector, to attend the regimental and battalion meeting of the militia composing their several brigades, during the time of their being under arms, to inspect their arms, ammunition and accoutrements; superintend their exercise and maneuvres and introduce the system of military discipline before described, throughout the brigade, agreeable to law, and such orders as they shall from time to time receive from the commander in Chief of the State; to make returns to the adjutant general of the state at least once in every year, of the militia of the brigade to which he belongs, reporting therein the actual situation of the arms, accoutrement, and ammunition, of the several corps, and every other thing which, in his judgment, may relate to their government and general advancement of good order and military disciple; an adjutant general shall make a return of all militia of the state, to the Commander in Chief of the said state, and a duplicate of the same to the president of the United States.

​

 

[Derideo_Te]

What is the explicit purpose of a hammer?

To hit nails.

What is the explicit purpose of a chainsaw?

To cut through material.

What is the explicit purpose of a gun?

Lawful self-defense, hunting and sport.

***
Was there a point to your questions?

The explicit purpose of a gun is to kill.

 

[Derideo_Te]

My point. Very funny. Are you really that obtuse or just pretending?

Oh, and BTW, how 'necessary' is it to kill animals for sport?

To the best of my knowledge, steel and clay targets used in sport are not alive. I haven't been keeping track of modern advancements in voodoo technology so if steel or clay targets are now alive please forgive my ignorance.

I just found this thread and haven't caught up yet. Was there a specific point that line of questioning was supposed to demonstrate? Firearms are for killing. I don't think that's a big secret. I carry a personal firearm so that I can kill a person if I need to. A cop carries a firearm so that she can kill a person if she needs to. A soldier carries a firearm so he can kill a person if he needs to. That's pretty much what they're for.

Now what?

Follow the thread back via the links and you will find post #5 where someone tried to disingenuously pretend that guns were no different to hammers and chainsaws.