With gun violence down, is America arming against an imagined threat?

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

Kinda makes one wonder if all the newly armed citizenry might be making the criminals think twice before committing a criminal act.

Clever response, but that's about all it is. Doesn't take much for the trained seals on this board to sit up and clap. This table is going to be compressed, but you can go to the link and compare crimes by year since 1960 through 2011. Not that any NRA gun nut is going to do that.

Year Population Total Violent Property Murder Rape Robbery assault Burglary Theft Auto Theft
1960 179,323,175 3,384,200 288,460 3,095,700 9,110 17,190 107,840 154,320 912,100 1,855,400 328,200
2011 311,591,917 10,266,737 1,203,564 9,063,173 14,612 83,425 354,396 751,131 2,188,005 6,159,795 715,373

United States Crime Rates 1960 - 2011

 

[The Rabbi]

Kinda makes one wonder if all the newly armed citizenry might be making the criminals think twice before committing a criminal act.

Clever response, but that's about all it is. Doesn't take much for the trained seals on this board to sit up and clap. This table is going to be compressed, but you can go to the link and compare crimes by year since 1960 through 2011. Not that any NRA gun nut is going to do that.

Year Population Total Violent Property Murder Rape Robbery assault Burglary Theft Auto Theft
1960 179,323,175 3,384,200 288,460 3,095,700 9,110 17,190 107,840 154,320 912,100 1,855,400 328,200
2011 311,591,917 10,266,737 1,203,564 9,063,173 14,612 83,425 354,396 751,131 2,188,005 6,159,795 715,373

United States Crime Rates 1960 - 2011

Was there a point to that post?

 

[Saigon]

So, nothing Sigon? Another gun thread where the gun control advocates simply leave when the debate starts to get tough?

Um....what is it you want a response to?

I lost interest in this thread when it seemed to just degenerate into spam and gibberish, so may have missed a question, but posting "So nothing, Saigon" doesn't give me a lot to work with.

Lost interest=lost face.
That's what happens when you post uninformed crap. You want the U.S. to be like other countries but are selective as to what those countries are. Hint: we are not Canada or Australia. You also play fast and loose with definitions. Hint: inner city American blacks are not immigrants.
Your debating skills suck. Your knowledge base is poor. And your opinions are illogical and easily disproved.

Rabbi -

Well, I put it this way - at the beginning of this thread I posted around a dozen charts, sets of stats and academic studies.

You rebutted none of them at all - didn't even address any of them. Saying "We are not Germany" is not a point, it's avoidance. Saying there is less crime in France because there are less Mexicans in France is not an argument, it's a concession of defeat.

I have seen not a single post from you on this thread that amount to more than self-aggrandisement, actually.

Let's remember your key insight:

The stats here don't matter.

If that is not an admission of defeat, I don't know what is!

A couple of stronger posters did take in a couple of points raised, but you were not one of them.

By all means go back and address some of the key points I raised in the first 5 - 10 pages of this thread - the ones you ducked the first time around!

 

[rightwinger]

on the lighter side :

In 1863 a democrat shot and killed abraham lincoln, president of the united states .

In 1983 a registered democrat shot and wounded ronald reagan.

In 2007 a registered democrat named seung-hui cho shot and killed 32 people in virginia tech.

In 2010 a mentally ill registered democrat named jared lee loughner shot rep. Gabrielle giffords and killing 6 others.

In 2011 a registered democrat named james holmes went into a movie theater and shot and killed 12 people.

In 2013 a registered democrat named adam lanza shot and killed 26 people in a school.

One could go on, but you get the point, even if the media does not.

Clearly, there is a problem with democrats and guns.

Solution: It should simply be illegal for democrats to own guns. Best idea i’ve seen.

good points

highlights the need for stricter gun controls

no, you don't get it. We had stricter gun control. Between 1863 and the present gun control has increased tremendously. But so has gun violence (ok, gun violence is down dramatically over the lst 20 years but who's counting). gun control leads to gun violence. We need less gun control.

lol>>>>

 

[The Rabbi]

Um....what is it you want a response to?

I lost interest in this thread when it seemed to just degenerate into spam and gibberish, so may have missed a question, but posting "So nothing, Saigon" doesn't give me a lot to work with.

Lost interest=lost face.
That's what happens when you post uninformed crap. You want the U.S. to be like other countries but are selective as to what those countries are. Hint: we are not Canada or Australia. You also play fast and loose with definitions. Hint: inner city American blacks are not immigrants.
Your debating skills suck. Your knowledge base is poor. And your opinions are illogical and easily disproved.

Rabbi -

Well, I put it this way - at the beginning of this thread I posted around a dozen charts, sets of stats and academic studies.

You rebutted none of them at all - didn't even address any of them. Saying "We are not Germany" is not a point, it's avoidance. Saying there is less crime in France because there are less Mexicans in France is not an argument, it's a concession of defeat.

I have seen not a single post from you on this thread that amount to more than self-aggrandisement, actually.

Let's remember your key insight:

The stats here don't matter.

If that is not an admission of defeat, I don't know what is!

A couple of stronger posters did take in a couple of points raised, but you were not one of them.

By all means go back and address some of the key points I raised in the first 5 - 10 pages of this thread - the ones you ducked the first time around!

France drinks more red wine than we do. That might account for its lower rate of gun crime. Japan eats more rice and fish than we do. That might account for its lower gun crime,but higher suicide rate.
Those are every bit as a valid as what you posted. Gun laws don't matter to gun crime. This has been pointed out over and over again. Some places have very strict laws and high crime rates. Other places have very lax laws and low crime rates. Different cities in the same state in the US vary greatly, despite having identical laws.
All of this adequately refutes your graphs and charts. That is why I say the stats don't matter. You are assuming causation where there obviously is none.

You have had you ass handed to you with every post you make. All you can do is bleat "Canada has lower crime rates." Canada also has a completely different culture and population mix.

 

[The Rabbi]

good points

highlights the need for stricter gun controls

no, you don't get it. We had stricter gun control. Between 1863 and the present gun control has increased tremendously. But so has gun violence (ok, gun violence is down dramatically over the lst 20 years but who's counting). gun control leads to gun violence. We need less gun control.

lol>>>>

People laugh at what they dont understand.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Kinda makes one wonder if all the newly armed citizenry might be making the criminals think twice before committing a criminal act.

Clever response, but that's about all it is...

Nothing you posted here refutes the facts claimed in the UP.

Of course, you're well known for offering a red herring when you know you cannot refute facts that don't fit your mindless, bigoted, partisan narrative.

 

[Saigon]

Rabbi -

If at some point you wish to discuss this subject sensibly, by all means get back to us then.

Your constant diversions are entertaining, but only inasumuch as they reveal how unwilling you are to debate the topic.

I will ignore all further off-topic nonsense from you.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Rabbi -
If at some point you wish to discuss this subject sensibly, by all means get back to us then.

You ignore facts that run contrary to your pre-determined storyline.
How can you expect anyone to discuss anything sensibly when you refuse to discuss anything honestly?

 

[Saigon]

M14 -

If you do not present any facts, there is nothing to ignore. Post something, and I'll look at it.

Meanwhile - how do you feel about this?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Good points

Highlights the need for stricter gun controls

Looks to me like a need for strict democrat control.

Leftists are prone to violence.

 

[Uncensored2008]

People laugh at what they dont understand.

RW is a troll - he has nothing to offer.

 

[Kondor3]

America is arming against an imagined threat?

I doubt it, but, even if it's true... so what?

The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States guarantees the right of Americans to arm against any ol' damned thing they want to arm against...

Up to and including the pending invasion of Illegal Alien Easter Bunnies from the Land of Weally Big Wabbits Somewhere Over the Rainbow...

What they're arming against doesn't matter a damn...

That they guard and preserve their right TO arm is the end-all-be-all of this Constitutional Question... ;-)

----------

I know... I know... "Thank you Captain Obvious"... but every so often, it's good to say the words anyhow...

----------

( all this from someone who hasn't fired a gun in decades since his Army days and who doesn't own a gun due to kids, etc. )

 

[Uncensored2008]

Rabbi -

If at some point you wish to discuss this subject sensibly, by all means get back to us then.

Your constant diversions are entertaining, but only inasumuch as they reveal how unwilling you are to debate the topic.

I will ignore all further off-topic nonsense from you.

He can't discuss the subject sensibly because he is responding to Rightwinger, who is a troll.

You know I like you Saigon. You're one of the few lefties here able to hold a conversation.

Rightwinger isn't in that boat - he has no interest in an actual conversation.

 

[FA_Q2]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...gainst-an-imagined-threat-17.html#post7224923
Still unanswered but I think I also need to respond to this:

M14 -

If you do not present any facts, there is nothing to ignore. Post something, and I'll look at it.

Meanwhile - how do you feel about this?

Yes, lets talk about that. First, the comparison has nothing to do with gun law whatsoever. That is base fact. The reality here is that if you are to do anything even remotely connected with discovering why one set of data is different than another, you MUST CONTROL AS MANY VARIABLES AS POSSIBLE. I have covered this a dozen times and I believe that I have even covered this with you. Please stop making these terrible conclusions that somehow, even though it cannot be displayed in the individual countries, gun laws account for murder rate differences. There are literally HUNDREDS of variables here. Population density, population diversity, culture, traditions, laws (not just gun law), social challenges (aka impoverished level) borders, TCN’s, gang activity, drug activity etc. etc. etc. To compare our homicide rate with other nations and then relate it to gun law is immensely misrepresenting the facts. Simply put, there is no way whatsoever that such comparisons can be made. The only way to objectively look at gun laws is to compare homicide and crime rates in a given area before and after gun laws have been passed. I thought that you understood this when we were discussing the UK but apparently not. This kind of comparison only serves to hide the truth, not illuminate it.

 

[Saigon]

FAQ2 -

You make some good points there, and of course I agree that there are a half-dozen major variables in play here - of which drugs, gangs, poverty, urbanisation and possibly immigration are all valid factors.

That is why I see no point comparing the US with Japan, Mexico,Russia or a hundred other countries where those factors are not in play.

However, when we compare the US with Canada, Germany, France and the UK, those factors are in play - to some extent, anyway.

If guns were not a factor in homicide rates, then the total homicide rate in the US might be rouhgly comparable with those countries. After all, France was terrible gangs, drugs, immigrants....try the outskirts of Paris and you'll see what I mean. Not to fotget Marseille!

But the fact is that the US sits alone on every chart - it is totally alone.

So what sets the US apart from France?

Guns.

There are 10 times the number of guns - and 10 times the number of murders as a result.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Yes, lets talk about that. First, the comparison has nothing to do with gun law whatsoever. That is base fact.

Proven by the fact that if you subtract out the gun-related murders in the US, our murder rate is still higer than most of those countries.

Proven also by the fact that if you comapre the number of guns and the number of gun murders of all those countries, our murder per gun rate (0.003%) is lower.

 

[M14 Shooter]

So what sets the US apart from France?
Guns.
There are 10 times the number of guns - and 10 times the number of murders as a result.

This is a lie.

 

[Saigon]

Yes, lets talk about that. First, the comparison has nothing to do with gun law whatsoever. That is base fact.

Proven by the fact that if you subtract out the gun-related murders in the US, our murder rate is still higer than most of those countries.

That is true, and proves my point very well.

The non-gun murder rate for the murder rate is slightly higher than other countries - but only slightly.

Remove guns from the equation, and the US would likely have a gun-homicide rate higher than that of France by the same proportion as it is higher in non-gun homocides.

It makes total logical sense, doesn't it?

 

[Spoonman]

M14 -

If you do not present any facts, there is nothing to ignore. Post something, and I'll look at it.

Meanwhile - how do you feel about this?

what does that have to do with gun control though?