America's Gun Violence

18384868889602

Comments

  • mcgruff10 said:

    mcgruff10 said:

    mickeyrat said:

    update. all from the same IMMEDIATE family. Divorced parents ,adult children and grandchildren(assume thats the 16 yr old). still no direct appearance of murder/suicide.

    Wow that s nuts. Is this something like the hatfields and McCoy's?!
    This is what I was thinking.

    Organized crime is the other scenario. Is there a third?
    definitely could be organized crime. drug related....who the hell knows. all i know is this is fucking nuts.
    how was hawaii?
    Needed it. The kid was in recovery mode so we weren't as busy as we normally were, but man I love that place.

    Thanks for asking.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 16,437

    After she was questioned she was released.

    Why released? Is that not negligence? Guns are supposed to be secured in a locker and separate from the ammunition... not loaded and ready to rock inside your fanny pack.

    F**k... this case- like all the others that are so similar- begs for reform measures. Simply put, people are too f**king stupid to own guns.

    Make IQ tests part of the gun licensing procedure. If it is revealed you're a f**king idiot... you get a license for a box of rubber bands.
    Would only solve 1 part of the problem. The other part is far too many people are too stupid to have kids....and yet they keep having them. And we can't do anything about that!!!

    So I guess the IQ test for guns is the only way to go!!
    hippiemom = goodness
  • After she was questioned she was released.

    Why released? Is that not negligence? Guns are supposed to be secured in a locker and separate from the ammunition... not loaded and ready to rock inside your fanny pack.

    F**k... this case- like all the others that are so similar- begs for reform measures. Simply put, people are too f**king stupid to own guns.

    Make IQ tests part of the gun licensing procedure. If it is revealed you're a f**king idiot... you get a license for a box of rubber bands.
    Would only solve 1 part of the problem. The other part is far too many people are too stupid to have kids....and yet they keep having them. And we can't do anything about that!!!

    So I guess the IQ test for guns is the only way to go!!
    I hear what you're saying.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 16,437
    Shooting outside a Prom in Wisconsin.


    Man - I hope we all wake up before it's too late. Sad thing is that after all these shootings, we as a country are still at step one in a lot of cases....denial.
    hippiemom = goodness
  • dudemandudeman Posts: 3,060
    Pot growing operations were connected to the Ohio and Georgia shootings.
    If hope can grow from dirt like me, it can be done. - EV
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Posts: 49,947
    Likely never would have happened if pot were legalized then.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • BentleyspopBentleyspop Posts: 10,757
    PJ_Soul said:

    Likely never would have happened if pot were legalized then.

    Nope
    Pot related crimes still happen in states with legal pot.
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Posts: 49,947
    edited April 2016

    PJ_Soul said:

    Likely never would have happened if pot were legalized then.

    Nope
    Pot related crimes still happen in states with legal pot.
    Some but not much. Massive reduction and generally closer to what you see with cigarettes. I think it's pretty safe to assume this mass murder likely wouldn't have happened if it were legal.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • jeffbrjeffbr Posts: 7,177
    PJ_Soul said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    Likely never would have happened if pot were legalized then.

    Nope
    Pot related crimes still happen in states with legal pot.
    Some but not much. Massive reduction and generally closer to what you see with cigarettes. I think it's pretty safe to assume this mass murder likely wouldn't have happened if it were legal.
    Agreed.

    Marijuana Legalization in Colorado After One Year of Retail Sales and Two Years of Decriminalization
    Arrests and Judicial Savings

    According to data from the Colorado Court
    System, marijuana possession arrests have
    dropped 84% since 2010. In 2010, 9,011 people
    were arrested for marijuana possession. Using
    the same data we are projecting 1,464
    possession arrests for 2014. Given that arrests
    such as these cost roughly $300 to adjudicate, it
    is reasonable to infer that the state is saving
    millions in adjudicatory costs for possession
    cases alone in 2014 compared to 2010. Over the
    same period, arrests for cultivating and
    distributing marijuana have also dropped by more
    than 90%.


    Decrease in Crime Rates

    According to data released by the city of Denver,
    violent crime and property crime in Denver
    decreased in 2014.i
    Violent crime in Denver went
    down by 2.2% in the first 11 months of 2014,
    compared with the first 11 months of 2013. In the
    same period, burglaries in Denver decreased by
    9.5% and overall property crime decreased by
    8.9%.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • mcgruff10mcgruff10 Posts: 28,489
    PJ_Soul said:

    Likely never would have happened if pot were legalized then.

    10000000000000000% agreed.
    I'll ride the wave where it takes me......
  • BentleyspopBentleyspop Posts: 10,757
    I live in Colorado
    Medical Marijuana has been legal for years
    Recreational has been legal for 2+ years
    Is the overall crime rate down? Yes
    Is marijuana related crime rate down? Yes
    Are people still being killed in marijuana related crimes? Yes
    Would that family still be alive today if marijuana was legal? Maybe
  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 16,437
    PJ_Soul said:

    Likely never would have happened if pot were legalized then.

    Right cause no one has ever killed for $ ;)
    hippiemom = goodness
  • callencallen Posts: 6,388
    PJ_Soul said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    Likely never would have happened if pot were legalized then.

    Nope
    Pot related crimes still happen in states with legal pot.
    Some but not much. Massive reduction and generally closer to what you see with cigarettes. I think it's pretty safe to assume this mass murder likely wouldn't have happened if it were legal.
    Agree.

    10-18-2000 Houston, 04-06-2003 Houston, 6-25-2003 Toronto, 10-8-2004 Kissimmee, 9-4-2005 Calgary, 12-3-05 Sao Paulo, 7-2-2006 Denver, 7-22-06 Gorge, 7-23-2006 Gorge, 9-13-2006 Bern, 6-22-2008 DC, 6-24-2008 MSG, 6-25-2008 MSG
  • mcgruff10mcgruff10 Posts: 28,489
    Big speculation right now that it was Mexican drug cartels that executed those people in Ohio.
    I'll ride the wave where it takes me......
  • callencallen Posts: 6,388
    2 year old.
    10-18-2000 Houston, 04-06-2003 Houston, 6-25-2003 Toronto, 10-8-2004 Kissimmee, 9-4-2005 Calgary, 12-3-05 Sao Paulo, 7-2-2006 Denver, 7-22-06 Gorge, 7-23-2006 Gorge, 9-13-2006 Bern, 6-22-2008 DC, 6-24-2008 MSG, 6-25-2008 MSG
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 38,529
    dudeman said:

    Pot growing operations were connected to the Ohio and Georgia shootings.

    connected? not proven yet for ohio.
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • pureocpureoc Posts: 2,383
    2 children in the car and nether were in car seats. When you do stupid things like that don't be surprised by results like this.
    Alpine Valley 6/26/98, Alpine Valley 10/8/00, Champaign 4/23/03, Chicago 6/18/03, Alpine Valley 6/21/03, Grand Rapids 10/3/04
    Chicago 5/16/06, Chicago 5/17/06, Grand Rapids 5/19/06
    Milwaukee 6/29/06, Milwaukee 6/30/06, Lollapalooza 8/5/07
    Eddie Solo Milwaukee 8/19/08, Toronto 8/21/09, Chicago 8/23/09
    Chicago 8/24/09, Indianapolis 5/7/10, Ed Chicago 6/29/11, Alpine Valley 9/3/11 and 9/4/11, Wrigley 7/19/13, Moline 10/18/14, Milwaukee 10/20/14
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 38,529
    edited April 2016
    pureoc said:

    2 children in the car and nether were in car seats. When you do stupid things like that don't be surprised by results like this.
    boyfriend is or was a security guard. left it in the car
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • pureocpureoc Posts: 2,383
    mickeyrat said:

    pureoc said:

    2 children in the car and nether were in car seats. When you do stupid things like that don't be surprised by results like this.
    boyfriend is or was a security guard. left it in the car
    Yup, he should be fired and serve some jail time, imo.
    Alpine Valley 6/26/98, Alpine Valley 10/8/00, Champaign 4/23/03, Chicago 6/18/03, Alpine Valley 6/21/03, Grand Rapids 10/3/04
    Chicago 5/16/06, Chicago 5/17/06, Grand Rapids 5/19/06
    Milwaukee 6/29/06, Milwaukee 6/30/06, Lollapalooza 8/5/07
    Eddie Solo Milwaukee 8/19/08, Toronto 8/21/09, Chicago 8/23/09
    Chicago 8/24/09, Indianapolis 5/7/10, Ed Chicago 6/29/11, Alpine Valley 9/3/11 and 9/4/11, Wrigley 7/19/13, Moline 10/18/14, Milwaukee 10/20/14
  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 9,359
    I've asked this question to friends in a friendly conversation about gun control and never get a serious answer. I'm not trying to persuade anyone with this, but want a real answer. Because in my mind I don't see how you can be for one but against another.
    According to CDC there were 9,967 DUI deaths in 2014. According to the FBI website there was 8,775 gun homicides in 2010.

    I know the years are different, those were just the first available results when I searched their websites. I also know most sources will quote gun deaths at much higher. Those include suicides and other forms, this number from the FBI is strictly homicides...Just don't want anyone thinking I am purposely misrepresenting data.

    How can you be anti gun without wanting a ban on alcohol? More are killed from DUI accidents than are murdered with a gun. The only answer I've received was "alcohol isn't designed to kill people." True that alcohol is not designed to kill people-but in reality neither are most guns. More guns are designed with target practice, hunting or self defense in mind. And 99.9% of gun owners follow the law (completely made up that stat by the way). So if you want to ban guns to save lives, why not ban alcohol?

    Look the stats up
    http://www.cdc.gov/MotorVehicleSafety/Impaired_Driving/impaired-drv_factsheet.html
    https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10shrtbl08.xls
  • mace1229 said:

    I've asked this question to friends in a friendly conversation about gun control and never get a serious answer. I'm not trying to persuade anyone with this, but want a real answer. Because in my mind I don't see how you can be for one but against another.
    According to CDC there were 9,967 DUI deaths in 2014. According to the FBI website there was 8,775 gun homicides in 2010.

    I know the years are different, those were just the first available results when I searched their websites. I also know most sources will quote gun deaths at much higher. Those include suicides and other forms, this number from the FBI is strictly homicides...Just don't want anyone thinking I am purposely misrepresenting data.

    How can you be anti gun without wanting a ban on alcohol? More are killed from DUI accidents than are murdered with a gun. The only answer I've received was "alcohol isn't designed to kill people." True that alcohol is not designed to kill people-but in reality neither are most guns. More guns are designed with target practice, hunting or self defense in mind. And 99.9% of gun owners follow the law (completely made up that stat by the way). So if you want to ban guns to save lives, why not ban alcohol?

    Look the stats up
    http://www.cdc.gov/MotorVehicleSafety/Impaired_Driving/impaired-drv_factsheet.html
    https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10shrtbl08.xls

    As soon as you said guns are really designed for target practice... you lost your point (even though it was failing from the outset).

    Guns are designed to kill. Period.

    Hunting to kill animals? Yes. So... long rifles and shotguns... absolutely (to qualified owners). Self defence? Yes... so again... shotguns are great for self defence (exceptional stopping power and even a poor shot could use it for such a purpose).

    Handguns? To someone demonstrating need? For sure. The suburbanite doesn't need one though even though they're pretty damn fancy.

    Assault rifles? Urban assault rifles poorly designed for killing animals at typical distances found in the hunting setting and excellent for killing many things at short distances in rapid succession? Even they're really fancy too... No. Just no. Except for military and initial response teams in law enforcement.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 16,437
    mace1229 said:

    I've asked this question to friends in a friendly conversation about gun control and never get a serious answer. I'm not trying to persuade anyone with this, but want a real answer. Because in my mind I don't see how you can be for one but against another.
    According to CDC there were 9,967 DUI deaths in 2014. According to the FBI website there was 8,775 gun homicides in 2010.

    I know the years are different, those were just the first available results when I searched their websites. I also know most sources will quote gun deaths at much higher. Those include suicides and other forms, this number from the FBI is strictly homicides...Just don't want anyone thinking I am purposely misrepresenting data.

    How can you be anti gun without wanting a ban on alcohol? More are killed from DUI accidents than are murdered with a gun. The only answer I've received was "alcohol isn't designed to kill people." True that alcohol is not designed to kill people-but in reality neither are most guns. More guns are designed with target practice, hunting or self defense in mind. And 99.9% of gun owners follow the law (completely made up that stat by the way). So if you want to ban guns to save lives, why not ban alcohol?

    Look the stats up
    http://www.cdc.gov/MotorVehicleSafety/Impaired_Driving/impaired-drv_factsheet.html
    https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10shrtbl08.xls

    Really?
    hippiemom = goodness
  • hedonisthedonist Posts: 24,524
    I'm not down with the if banning guns, ban alcohol mindset. Might as well ban some people from society (which, frankly, given what I've seen of some people and their idiocy - to put it mildly - might not be a bad thing).

    Education, responsibility, common sense...anyone?
  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 9,359

    mace1229 said:

    I've asked this question to friends in a friendly conversation about gun control and never get a serious answer. I'm not trying to persuade anyone with this, but want a real answer. Because in my mind I don't see how you can be for one but against another.
    According to CDC there were 9,967 DUI deaths in 2014. According to the FBI website there was 8,775 gun homicides in 2010.

    I know the years are different, those were just the first available results when I searched their websites. I also know most sources will quote gun deaths at much higher. Those include suicides and other forms, this number from the FBI is strictly homicides...Just don't want anyone thinking I am purposely misrepresenting data.

    How can you be anti gun without wanting a ban on alcohol? More are killed from DUI accidents than are murdered with a gun. The only answer I've received was "alcohol isn't designed to kill people." True that alcohol is not designed to kill people-but in reality neither are most guns. More guns are designed with target practice, hunting or self defense in mind. And 99.9% of gun owners follow the law (completely made up that stat by the way). So if you want to ban guns to save lives, why not ban alcohol?

    Look the stats up
    http://www.cdc.gov/MotorVehicleSafety/Impaired_Driving/impaired-drv_factsheet.html
    https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10shrtbl08.xls

    As soon as you said guns are really designed for target practice... you lost your point (even though it was failing from the outset).

    Guns are designed to kill. Period.

    Hunting to kill animals? Yes. So... long rifles and shotguns... absolutely (to qualified owners). Self defence? Yes... so again... shotguns are great for self defence (exceptional stopping power and even a poor shot could use it for such a purpose).

    Handguns? To someone demonstrating need? For sure. The suburbanite doesn't need one though even though they're pretty damn fancy.

    Assault rifles? Urban assault rifles poorly designed for killing animals at typical distances found in the hunting setting and excellent for killing many things at short distances in rapid succession? Even they're really fancy too... No. Just no. Except for military and initial response teams in law enforcement.
    I admit saying guns weren't designed to kill was a poor choice of words. I was thinking more something along the lines of the intended purpose when bought. Moving from a state (CA) where I was the only gun owner at my work in a building of about 40 people, to a state where about 90% of my coworkers own guns. (That had nothing to do with the reason for the move by the way, CA just got too expensive. My mortgage, tax and insurance on my 5 bedroom house on 1/3 acre is about $2 more than what I was paying for my half of the rent in a 2 bedroom apartment). Anyway, I know quite a few people with a wide range of firearms. A few were bought for self defense reasons, a few for hunting (killing yes, but not other people) but almost all were just for target shooting regardless of the type of firearm. All of the guns I own were purchased solely for target practice and are kept locked up with the ammo in a separate room. The last time I shot anything living was a bird in the 8th grade with a BB gun and my dad made me volunteer all summer at an animal rescue center for my punishment.
    I am for gun laws, but just ones that makes sense. Some laws and restrictions are needed. Many guns in CA are banned simply because they "look mean" though and for no other reason.
  • jnimhaoileoinjnimhaoileoin Posts: 2,682
    mace1229 said:

    I've asked this question to friends in a friendly conversation about gun control and never get a serious answer. I'm not trying to persuade anyone with this, but want a real answer. Because in my mind I don't see how you can be for one but against another.
    According to CDC there were 9,967 DUI deaths in 2014. According to the FBI website there was 8,775 gun homicides in 2010.

    I know the years are different, those were just the first available results when I searched their websites. I also know most sources will quote gun deaths at much higher. Those include suicides and other forms, this number from the FBI is strictly homicides...Just don't want anyone thinking I am purposely misrepresenting data.

    How can you be anti gun without wanting a ban on alcohol? More are killed from DUI accidents than are murdered with a gun. The only answer I've received was "alcohol isn't designed to kill people." True that alcohol is not designed to kill people-but in reality neither are most guns. More guns are designed with target practice, hunting or self defense in mind. And 99.9% of gun owners follow the law (completely made up that stat by the way). So if you want to ban guns to save lives, why not ban alcohol?

    Look the stats up
    http://www.cdc.gov/MotorVehicleSafety/Impaired_Driving/impaired-drv_factsheet.html
    https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10shrtbl08.xls

    I would be quite happy with a ban on alcohol
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 38,529
    mace1229 said:

    mace1229 said:

    I've asked this question to friends in a friendly conversation about gun control and never get a serious answer. I'm not trying to persuade anyone with this, but want a real answer. Because in my mind I don't see how you can be for one but against another.
    According to CDC there were 9,967 DUI deaths in 2014. According to the FBI website there was 8,775 gun homicides in 2010.

    I know the years are different, those were just the first available results when I searched their websites. I also know most sources will quote gun deaths at much higher. Those include suicides and other forms, this number from the FBI is strictly homicides...Just don't want anyone thinking I am purposely misrepresenting data.

    How can you be anti gun without wanting a ban on alcohol? More are killed from DUI accidents than are murdered with a gun. The only answer I've received was "alcohol isn't designed to kill people." True that alcohol is not designed to kill people-but in reality neither are most guns. More guns are designed with target practice, hunting or self defense in mind. And 99.9% of gun owners follow the law (completely made up that stat by the way). So if you want to ban guns to save lives, why not ban alcohol?

    Look the stats up
    http://www.cdc.gov/MotorVehicleSafety/Impaired_Driving/impaired-drv_factsheet.html
    https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10shrtbl08.xls

    As soon as you said guns are really designed for target practice... you lost your point (even though it was failing from the outset).

    Guns are designed to kill. Period.

    Hunting to kill animals? Yes. So... long rifles and shotguns... absolutely (to qualified owners). Self defence? Yes... so again... shotguns are great for self defence (exceptional stopping power and even a poor shot could use it for such a purpose).

    Handguns? To someone demonstrating need? For sure. The suburbanite doesn't need one though even though they're pretty damn fancy.

    Assault rifles? Urban assault rifles poorly designed for killing animals at typical distances found in the hunting setting and excellent for killing many things at short distances in rapid succession? Even they're really fancy too... No. Just no. Except for military and initial response teams in law enforcement.
    I admit saying guns weren't designed to kill was a poor choice of words. I was thinking more something along the lines of the intended purpose when bought. Moving from a state (CA) where I was the only gun owner at my work in a building of about 40 people, to a state where about 90% of my coworkers own guns. (That had nothing to do with the reason for the move by the way, CA just got too expensive. My mortgage, tax and insurance on my 5 bedroom house on 1/3 acre is about $2 more than what I was paying for my half of the rent in a 2 bedroom apartment). Anyway, I know quite a few people with a wide range of firearms. A few were bought for self defense reasons, a few for hunting (killing yes, but not other people) but almost all were just for target shooting regardless of the type of firearm. All of the guns I own were purchased solely for target practice and are kept locked up with the ammo in a separate room. The last time I shot anything living was a bird in the 8th grade with a BB gun and my dad made me volunteer all summer at an animal rescue center for my punishment.
    I am for gun laws, but just ones that makes sense. Some laws and restrictions are needed. Many guns in CA are banned simply because they "look mean" though and for no other reason.
    what is really the main point or goal of target shooting or practice?
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 13,576
    mace1229 said:

    I've asked this question to friends in a friendly conversation about gun control and never get a serious answer. I'm not trying to persuade anyone with this, but want a real answer. Because in my mind I don't see how you can be for one but against another.
    According to CDC there were 9,967 DUI deaths in 2014. According to the FBI website there was 8,775 gun homicides in 2010.

    I know the years are different, those were just the first available results when I searched their websites. I also know most sources will quote gun deaths at much higher. Those include suicides and other forms, this number from the FBI is strictly homicides...Just don't want anyone thinking I am purposely misrepresenting data.

    How can you be anti gun without wanting a ban on alcohol? More are killed from DUI accidents than are murdered with a gun. The only answer I've received was "alcohol isn't designed to kill people." True that alcohol is not designed to kill people-but in reality neither are most guns. More guns are designed with target practice, hunting or self defense in mind. And 99.9% of gun owners follow the law (completely made up that stat by the way). So if you want to ban guns to save lives, why not ban alcohol?

    Look the stats up
    http://www.cdc.gov/MotorVehicleSafety/Impaired_Driving/impaired-drv_factsheet.html
    https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10shrtbl08.xls

    mace1229 said:

    I've asked this question to friends in a friendly conversation about gun control and never get a serious answer. I'm not trying to persuade anyone with this, but want a real answer. Because in my mind I don't see how you can be for one but against another.
    According to CDC there were 9,967 DUI deaths in 2014. According to the FBI website there was 8,775 gun homicides in 2010.

    I know the years are different, those were just the first available results when I searched their websites. I also know most sources will quote gun deaths at much higher. Those include suicides and other forms, this number from the FBI is strictly homicides...Just don't want anyone thinking I am purposely misrepresenting data.

    How can you be anti gun without wanting a ban on alcohol? More are killed from DUI accidents than are murdered with a gun. The only answer I've received was "alcohol isn't designed to kill people." True that alcohol is not designed to kill people-but in reality neither are most guns. More guns are designed with target practice, hunting or self defense in mind. And 99.9% of gun owners follow the law (completely made up that stat by the way). So if you want to ban guns to save lives, why not ban alcohol?

    Look the stats up
    http://www.cdc.gov/MotorVehicleSafety/Impaired_Driving/impaired-drv_factsheet.html
    https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10shrtbl08.xls

    This is a fallacy. Banning guns or alcohol isn't the smart solution to either problem.
    A reasonable gun owner like me would be fine with accepting control measures like tighter control of sales, insurance, registration and harsh penalties for malfeasance just like a reasonable driver like me would be fine accepting one of those breathalyzer car locks, vehicle registration, insurance, and harsh penalties for malfeasance.

    No banning necessary, just common sense...you won't find much of that in the gun nut crowd.
    Cold dead hands and all that BS
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • dudemandudeman Posts: 3,060
    The problem is that the proposed "common sense" gun control measures are not likely to reduce violence.

    The argument will be made that the new laws don't go far enough and then there will be a push for confiscation. That's why the "gun nuts" oppose new legislation.

    "Common Sense Gun Laws" will effect lawful gun owners, not criminals.

    Something interesting about the words "common sense" is that those were the words used extensively by those who supported Eugenics. At the time, if you spoke up against Eugenics, you would be ridiculed by your peers for not possessing "common sense".

    Just saying...
    If hope can grow from dirt like me, it can be done. - EV
  • dudemandudeman Posts: 3,060
    edited April 2016
    Messed up quote. My apologies.
    Post edited by dudeman on
    If hope can grow from dirt like me, it can be done. - EV
This discussion has been closed.