Would 'Gun Control' Reduce Murder?

[Care4all]

Well, well, well.....we just got the answer.
And, from Harvard, no less.


1. " A study published in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy this spring calls into question the conventional wisdom behind arguments for more strict gun control. Namely, the idea that fewer guns would equal less deadly violence.

2. Will a Harvard man listen to Harvard research?

Probably not, if the Harvard man is Barack Obama, and what Harvard’s saying flies in the face of liberal pieties – and misconceptions and lies – about gun ownership, gun violence and gun control...

3 .Like the recently reported CDC study about gun violence Obama commissioned himself, the message to gun grabbers is clear:

They’re wrong.




4. A Harvard study released in the spring .... focused on the prevalence of gun ownership in the United States versus those strict gun-control countries in Europe the left is so fond of talking about.

5. Looking at historical patterns in the United States from the colonial and post-colonial days, and in Europe going back to the time before guns were even invented, ...a clear conclusion:

“Nations with higher gun ownership rates … do not have higher murder or suicide rates than those with lower gun ownership…”

a. Russia. Under communist rule, the former Soviet union was largely disarmed by the government for the better part of a century, has a homicide rate four times higher than the U.S.




6. .... if guns aren’t the true source of the problem, we’d best be honest and open about that, so we can better focus on finding real solutions.

7. ... solutions have much more to do with reversing the breakdown of the two-parent family, and our culture’s wide-armed embrace of moral relativism."
Harvard Study: Banning Guns Would Not Reduce Murder






8. "Heavily armed Norwegians, where gun ownership is highest in Western Europe, have the continent’s lowest homicide rate, researchers Don Kates and Gary Mauser wrote.

9. In the United States, homicide rates were relatively low, despite periods when firearms were widely available – the colonial era, when Americans were the world’s most heavily armed population, the post-Civil War years, when the country was awash in surplus guns and filled with men trained to use them.

10. And today?

Communities where gun-ownership rates are highest are where the homicide rates are lowest,...."
Harvard study proves gun-grabbers? argument dead wrong - BizPac Review





How often are Liberals going to be proven wrong, and conservatives correct, before folks on the Left learn???


Avagadro's number comes to mind.....

Your op states that this gun study was done by Harvard in the Spring of 2013, this year?

Can you provide a link from Harvard for this Study by them that was done this year, in 2013?

I can't find one that was done THIS YEAR, and I have searched and searched for it!

Why is every one of these rightwing blogs LYING and saying the study was done this year by Harvard?

I found this, stating this gun study was done in 2007 by Harvard...

PDF]WOULD BANNING FIREARMS REDUCE MURDER AND SUICIDE ...

www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/.../Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.p...*
Jan 1, 2007 - WOULD BANNING FIREARMS REDUCE. MURDER AND SUICIDE? A REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL AND. SOME DOMESTIC EVIDENCE.

But I can't find a single thing on this study being done by Harvard in 2013???

So again, why are the two links that you used and the op writers of those links, along with a gazillion other rightwing rags, STATING THAT THIS STUDY was done by Harvard THIS YEAR?

What was their PURPOSE for lying about it and saying it was done by Harvard this year?

I don't understand why they have to LIE about when it was created and done???

What am I missing?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Okay, then here are my statistics:

The U.S. firearm homicide rate is 3.60 per hundred thousand

The U.S. gun ownership rate is 94 guns per 100 residents

The Canadian firearm homicide rate is .5 per hundred thousand

The Canadian per gun ownership rate is 30 guns per 100 residents

...so, did I prove that Canada has fewer gun murders because they have fewer guns?

Number of guns per capita by country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

List of countries by firearm-related death rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cherry picking again, what a surprise. Next you will lie and tell me that no one is trying to ban guns, and that no one is saying it will make people safer if we do, even though you just argued that it makes people safer.

By the way, gun ownership in Russia is 1 in 4,000, homicide rate 20.54 per 100,000. How do you explain that given your premise that less guns makes people safer?

Do you have a link to the firearm homicide rate in Russia being 21 in 100,000?

There you go again.

Want to point out where I said a fucking thing about the firearm murder rate anywhere? Why do you keep talking about firearms whenever someone mentions murder? Are you stupid?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Okay, then here are my statistics:

The U.S. firearm homicide rate is 3.60 per hundred thousand

The U.S. gun ownership rate is 94 guns per 100 residents

The Canadian firearm homicide rate is .5 per hundred thousand

The Canadian per gun ownership rate is 30 guns per 100 residents

...so, did I prove that Canada has fewer gun murders because they have fewer guns?

Number of guns per capita by country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

List of countries by firearm-related death rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cherry picking again, what a surprise. Next you will lie and tell me that no one is trying to ban guns, and that no one is saying it will make people safer if we do, even though you just argued that it makes people safer.

By the way, gun ownership in Russia is 1 in 4,000, homicide rate 20.54 per 100,000. How do you explain that given your premise that less guns makes people safer?

Actually the rate in Russia is 8.9 guns per 100 residents.

Number of guns per capita by country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Do you understand the difference between number of guns per person and gun ownership per person? Is this another attempt to cherry pick the data in order to prove how stupid you are?

FYI, my data comes from the OP, not Wiki, which used this as a source.

http://www.smallarmssurvey.org/file...l-Arms-Survey-2007-Chapter-02-annexe-4-EN.pdf

If you look at that chart, which I really don't expect you to do, you will see that they estimate that there are between 6.5 and 19 million firearms in civilian hands in Russia.

Anyone that thinks that is a reliable study raise their hands.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

If you are claiming that 'shall not be infringed' constitutes an inviolable absolute, getting by that is easy...

...reasonable people don't believe that, and never have.

Only an unreasonable, power hungry, asshole could read "shall not be infringed" and conclude that infringements are justified.

Since you have openly admitted you believe in NO GOVERNMENT, you are hardly qualified to instruct anyone on what is or isn't reasonable.

What was that comment about character you used to neg me?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Your big central government via the 2nd amendment is protecting your right to own guns. But no right is or should be unlimited.

except the right to bear arms, which should not be infringed

Freedom of the press may not be abridged either. Does that make outlawing child pornography unconstitutional?

What does child pornography have to do with the freedom to say bad things about the government? Are you easily confused?

Sorry, forgot who I was talking to.

 

[NYcarbineer]

except the right to bear arms, which should not be infringed

Freedom of the press may not be abridged either. Does that make outlawing child pornography unconstitutional?

What does child pornography have to do with the freedom to say bad things about the government? Are you easily confused?

Sorry, forgot who I was talking to.

The 1st amendment says freedom of the press cannot be abridged. Period. According to constitutional fundamentalists like yourself and Vox, that is an absolute. Like no infringements on gun rights is an absolute.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Cherry picking again, what a surprise. Next you will lie and tell me that no one is trying to ban guns, and that no one is saying it will make people safer if we do, even though you just argued that it makes people safer.

By the way, gun ownership in Russia is 1 in 4,000, homicide rate 20.54 per 100,000. How do you explain that given your premise that less guns makes people safer?

Do you have a link to the firearm homicide rate in Russia being 21 in 100,000?

There you go again.

Want to point out where I said a fucking thing about the firearm murder rate anywhere? Why do you keep talking about firearms whenever someone mentions murder? Are you stupid?

BECAUSE THAT'S THE POINT!!!!!!!!!!!

That's the flaw in the OP's study. Beating someone to death with a giant black rubber dildo (name the movie reference for a prize!)

has nothing to do with guns. Why are those statistics in the study???

Other than to scam the study?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Freedom of the press may not be abridged either. Does that make outlawing child pornography unconstitutional?

What does child pornography have to do with the freedom to say bad things about the government? Are you easily confused?

Sorry, forgot who I was talking to.

The 1st amendment says freedom of the press cannot be abridged.

It says no such thing, and pornography is not freedom of the press. That is two lies in one sentence, which is a pretty good track record for a guy that accused me of not having any character when I told the truth about your viewpoints.

Period. According to constitutional fundamentalists like yourself and Vox, that is an absolute. Like no infringements on gun rights is an absolute.

If child pornography did not involve molesting children you might have a point. As it is you are just confused.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Do you have a link to the firearm homicide rate in Russia being 21 in 100,000?

There you go again.

Want to point out where I said a fucking thing about the firearm murder rate anywhere? Why do you keep talking about firearms whenever someone mentions murder? Are you stupid?

BECAUSE THAT'S THE POINT!!!!!!!!!!!

That's the flaw in the OP's study. Beating someone to death with a giant black rubber dildo (name the movie reference for a prize!)

has nothing to do with guns. Why are those statistics in the study???

Other than to scam the study?

I suggest you pull your head out of Obama's ass for a bit and read the study in the OP.