America's Gun Violence

i_lov_it

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

i_lov_it said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

i_lov_it said:

And is it the Guns fault that someone got Murdered or the Murderer's fault?

The murderer's fault 100%.

But because we know people suck... let's try and limit the amount of sucking. Don't ya think?

Have we seen the last mass murder where some shitbagger uses an ar15 to rapidly shoot a ton of people? You know... the gun who's very designer has said it was designed for military use? Every time one occurs... the same lame arguments will get trotted out and once again... the whole world will sit there saying to themselves, "Wow. How f**king stupid can you be?"

In the event you're feeling homicidal... I actually saw them in sale at a Big 5 Sporting Goods in Washington. No shit. 20% off (likely due to a manufacturer's incentive- come on retailers... sell our tools of death).

Yee Haw!

Don't get me wrong I have a problem with Guns...and yeah some People suck but Guns or not they're going to suck right?...and also I'm sure if someone is feeling Homicidal it's not going to make a difference whether there's a Gun around or not.

And I'm not attacking you.

I'm saying we should limit the capacity for carnage. I'm not saying get rid of all guns... I'm saying let's get rid of the guns that truly have no practical use and make handguns challenging to get.

You could grandfather all guns in existence with a registry. If someone acting poorly has a gun that could become dangerous... we could take it from them before they feel the temptation to use it.

Whatever could be done... won't be done. Gun nuts don't need to worry. Their 'precious' (Gollum accentuation) is going nowhere soon. Sooo... common sense gun reform advocates can go pound sand- the inmates run the asylum, f**kers!

Yeah I absolutely agree...it's just common sense isn't it.

tempo_n_groove

Why is it the places with the strictest gun laws have the most gun violence?

i_lov_it

tempo_n_groove said:

Why is it the places with the strictest gun laws have the most gun violence?

Not in Australia...we have some of the strictest Gun Laws in the World.

Gern Blansten

tempo_n_groove said:

Why is it the places with the strictest gun laws have the most gun violence?

What a ridiculous statement.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

tempo_n_groove said:

Why is it the places with the strictest gun laws have the most gun violence?

Oh... maybe because neighbouring states don't?

Or maybe those places need even stricter gun laws?

Australia was mentioned. Look at the UK or Canada as well for countries with strict and universal gun laws that work.

Gern Blansten

http://www.newsweek.com/gun-control-what-we-can-learn-other-advanced-countries-379105

I’ve been researching gun violence—and what can be done to prevent it—in the U.S. for 25 years. The fact is that if NRA claims about the efficacy of guns in reducing crime were true, the U.S. would have the lowest homicide rate among industrialized nations instead of the highest homicide rate (by a wide margin).

The U.S. is by far the world leader in the number of guns in civilian hands. The stricter gun laws of other “advanced countries” have restrained homicidal violence, suicides and gun accidents—even when, in some cases, laws were introduced over massive protests from their armed citizens.

Gern Blansten

Gun control around the world

As an academic exercise, one might speculate whether law could play a constructive role in reducing the number or deadliness of mass shootings.

Most other advanced nations apparently think so, since they make it far harder for someone like the Charleston killer to get his hands on a Glock semiautomatic handgun or any other kind of firearm (universal background checks are common features of gun regulation in other developed countries).

Germany: To buy a gun, anyone under the age of 25 has to pass a psychiatric evaluation (presumably 21-year-old Dylann Roof would have failed).
Finland: Handgun license applicants are only allowed to purchase firearms if they can prove they are active members of regulated shooting clubs. Before they can get a gun, applicants must pass an aptitude test, submit to a police interview, and show they have a proper gun storage unit.
Italy: To secure a gun permit, one must establish a genuine reason to possess a firearm and pass a background check considering both criminal and mental health records (again, presumably Dylann Roof would have failed).
France: Firearms applicants must have no criminal record and pass a background check that considers the reason for the gun purchase and evaluates the criminal, mental, and health records of the applicant. (Dylann Roof would presumably have failed in this process).
United Kingdom and Japan: Handguns are illegal for private citizens.
While mass shootings as well as gun homicides and suicides are not unknown in these countries, the overall rates are substantially higher in the United States than in these competitor nations.

While NRA supporters frequently challenge me on these statistics saying that this is only because “American blacks are so violent,” it is important to note that white murder rates in the U.S. are well over twice as high as the murder rates in any of these other countries.

Gern Blansten

Australia hasn’t had a mass shooting since 1996

The story of Australia, which had 13 mass shootings in the 18-year period from 1979 to 1996 but none in the succeeding 19 years, is worth examining.

The turning point was the 1996 Port Arthur massacre in Tasmania, in which a gunman killed 35 individuals using semiautomatic weapons.

In the wake of the massacre, the conservative federal government succeeded in implementing tough new gun control laws throughout the country. A large array of weapons were banned—including the Glock semiautomatic handgun used in the Charleston shootings. The government also imposed a mandatory gun buy back that substantially reduced gun possession in Australia.

The effect was that both gun suicides and homicides (as well as total suicides and homicides) fell. In addition, the 1996 legislation made it a crime to use firearms in self-defense.

When I mention this to disbelieving NRA supporters they insist that crime must now be rampant in Australia. In fact, the Australian murder rate has fallen to close to one per 100,000 while the U.S. rate, thankfully lower than in the early 1990s, is still roughly at 4.5 per 100,000—over four times as high. Moreover, robberies in Australia occur at only about half the rate of the U.S. (58 in Australia versus 113.1 per 100,000 in the U.S. in 2012).

How did Australia do it? Politically, it took a brave prime minister to face the rage of Australian gun interests.

John Howard wore a bullet-proof vest when he announced the proposed gun restrictions in June 1996. The deputy prime minister was hung in effigy. But Australia did not have a domestic gun industry to oppose the new measures, so the will of the people was allowed to emerge. And today, support for the safer, gun-restricted Australia is so strong that going back would not be tolerated by the public.

That Australia hasn’t had a mass shooting since 1996 is likely more than merely the result of the considerable reduction in guns—it’s certainly not the case that guns have disappeared altogether.

I suspect that the country has also experienced a cultural shift between the shock of the Port Arthur massacre and the removal of guns from every day life as they are no longer available for self-defense and they are simply less present throughout the country. Troubled individuals, in other words, are not constantly being reminded that guns are a means to address their alleged grievances to the extent that they were in the past, or continue to be in the U.S.

And keep in mind that the majority of NRA members favor stricter background checks in the USA. Their own organization lobbies against the wishes of its members.

rgambs

tempo_n_groove said:

Why is it the places with the strictest gun laws have the most gun violence?

First, do you have any data to validate that?
Sure, everyone points to Chicago, but that is an anecdotal observation, not a data-backed piece of valued information.

Second, if true, it is a very easy question to answer.
Places with a high level of violence enact stricter laws in order to curb the high levels of PRE-EXISTING violence. The gun laws don't cause the violence, that is an absurdly silly idea. Not saying you said that, but the Nugents of the world say it all the time, and it is nothing short of moronic.
The stricter gun laws don't work because a few hundred miles from most, if not all, of the high violence areas are states with laws that allow enterprising criminals to buy as many guns as they want without documentation or background checks.
If you come to Ohio, I could sell you a .22 long rifle, a handgun or even an assault rifle at my front door if you have the cash on hand. No paperwork, no records, no laws broken.
4 hour drive from Chicago, 6 hour drive from Newark.

It's not a complicated subject if you look at it objectively and eliminate personal bias.

catefrances

Gern Blansten said:

Australia hasn’t had a mass shooting since 1996

The story of Australia, which had 13 mass shootings in the 18-year period from 1979 to 1996 but none in the succeeding 19 years, is worth examining.

The turning point was the 1996 Port Arthur massacre in Tasmania, in which a gunman killed 35 individuals using semiautomatic weapons.

In the wake of the massacre, the conservative federal government succeeded in implementing tough new gun control laws throughout the country. A large array of weapons were banned—including the Glock semiautomatic handgun used in the Charleston shootings. The government also imposed a mandatory gun buy back that substantially reduced gun possession in Australia.

The effect was that both gun suicides and homicides (as well as total suicides and homicides) fell. In addition, the 1996 legislation made it a crime to use firearms in self-defense.

When I mention this to disbelieving NRA supporters they insist that crime must now be rampant in Australia. In fact, the Australian murder rate has fallen to close to one per 100,000 while the U.S. rate, thankfully lower than in the early 1990s, is still roughly at 4.5 per 100,000—over four times as high. Moreover, robberies in Australia occur at only about half the rate of the U.S. (58 in Australia versus 113.1 per 100,000 in the U.S. in 2012).

How did Australia do it? Politically, it took a brave prime minister to face the rage of Australian gun interests.

John Howard wore a bullet-proof vest when he announced the proposed gun restrictions in June 1996. The deputy prime minister was hung in effigy. But Australia did not have a domestic gun industry to oppose the new measures, so the will of the people was allowed to emerge. And today, support for the safer, gun-restricted Australia is so strong that going back would not be tolerated by the public.

That Australia hasn’t had a mass shooting since 1996 is likely more than merely the result of the considerable reduction in guns—it’s certainly not the case that guns have disappeared altogether.

I suspect that the country has also experienced a cultural shift between the shock of the Port Arthur massacre and the removal of guns from every day life as they are no longer available for self-defense and they are simply less present throughout the country. Troubled individuals, in other words, are not constantly being reminded that guns are a means to address their alleged grievances to the extent that they were in the past, or continue to be in the U.S.

And keep in mind that the majority of NRA members favor stricter background checks in the USA. Their own organization lobbies against the wishes of its members.

it might be well to note that in Australia now, there are more firearms then there were at the time of the port arthur massacre.
but its more than how armed the people are. we have a different mentality. our culture surrounding guns is different from that of the US.. always has been, always will be. we have no bill of rights enshrining our god given right to bear arms. we are not a country founded on war. sure we have a legacy of bushrangers, but it was never the wild west of american lore (fact or myth). we were founded as a penal colony, (in fact only one of our states was founded as free state) so right from the get go our mentality was one of submission to law, degradation( for the convicts), and for the indigenous population dispossession. if there was to be a massacre in this country tomorrow the reaction would be one of absolute genuine shock. we certainly wouldn't think it was a price to be paid for our freedoms.
as for criminals... they will always get firearms, no matter how strict a country's gun laws are. and tbh im ok with them shooting each other... you live by the sword, you die by the sword so to speak. it goes without saying im not ok with criminals weapons being turned against the general public but fortunately those incidents aren't all that common. its certainly not a nightly news story. is it because of our strict gun laws? maybe. it cant have hurt to remove superfluous weapons from the public. i just feel, as ive stated previously, access to firearms isn't he only factor to consider.

muskydan

tempo_n_groove said:

Why is it the places with the strictest gun laws have the most gun violence?

How dare you ask a question like that tempo....Don't you know where you are at???? Flush

i_lov_it

What about the Military and Police?...surely they've killed more People with Guns then Individuals or Citizens...here in Australia they Unarmed the Public while the Police are getting more Militarised...

Godfather.

Gern Blansten said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Why is it the places with the strictest gun laws have the most gun violence?

What a ridiculous statement.

then please explain. it's a fair question.

Godfather.

rgambs

Godfather. said:

Gern Blansten said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Why is it the places with the strictest gun laws have the most gun violence?

What a ridiculous statement.

then please explain. it's a fair question.

Godfather.

First, do you have any data to validate that?
Sure, everyone points to Chicago, but that is an anecdotal observation, not a data-backed piece of valued information.

Second, if true, it is a very easy question to answer.
Places with a high level of violence enact stricter laws in order to curb the high levels of PRE-EXISTING violence. The gun laws don't cause the violence, that is an absurdly silly idea. Not saying you said that, but the Nugents of the world say it all the time, and it is nothing short of moronic.
The stricter gun laws don't work because a few hundred miles from most, if not all, of the high violence areas are states with laws that allow enterprising criminals to buy as many guns as they want without documentation or background checks.
If you come to Ohio, I could sell you a .22 long rifle, a handgun or even an assault rifle at my front door if you have the cash on hand. No paperwork, no records, no laws broken.
4 hour drive from Chicago, 6 hour drive from Newark.

It's not a complicated subject if you look at it objectively and eliminate personal bias.

Godfather.

rgambs said:

Godfather. said:

Gern Blansten said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Why is it the places with the strictest gun laws have the most gun violence?

What a ridiculous statement.

then please explain. it's a fair question.

Godfather.

First, do you have any data to validate that?
Sure, everyone points to Chicago, but that is an anecdotal observation, not a data-backed piece of valued information.

Second, if true, it is a very easy question to answer.
Places with a high level of violence enact stricter laws in order to curb the high levels of PRE-EXISTING violence. The gun laws don't cause the violence, that is an absurdly silly idea. Not saying you said that, but the Nugents of the world say it all the time, and it is nothing short of moronic.
The stricter gun laws don't work because a few hundred miles from most, if not all, of the high violence areas are states with laws that allow enterprising criminals to buy as many guns as they want without documentation or background checks.
If you come to Ohio, I could sell you a .22 long rifle, a handgun or even an assault rifle at my front door if you have the cash on hand. No paperwork, no records, no laws broken.
4 hour drive from Chicago, 6 hour drive from Newark.

It's not a complicated subject if you look at it objectively and eliminate personal bias.

the facts of high gun violence areas would be easy to bring up the interweb if you can find a reliable source that does not swing one way or the other but awesome reply thank you.

here's what I think about stricter gun laws...how much stricter can they get ? in my opinion if we don't fight these anti gun people it will be just a matter of time before we lose all gun rights, I know that they tell us "we don't want to take away your guns" but in my opinion they left out the word "yet" and when a government wants to disarm it's people and uses the media to turn us against each other over the 2nd amendment.....I see something much bigger than a simple gun law, no not a military take over but definitely trying to gain more control over the people....if we give a little they will take a little more....and more and more, so this is why I oppose new gun laws and also why I don't vote strictly by party, unions want Dem's for support....what support ? the reason we have unions is the support we can create as a group for each other and the support in acting as a whole to demand fare working environments and pay/benefits and in fact unions set the standard for pay and benefits nation and even world wide and not any government official would do that for us without profiting from it in some way.

Godfather.

Gern Blansten

Godfather. said:

Gern Blansten said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Why is it the places with the strictest gun laws have the most gun violence?

What a ridiculous statement.

then please explain. it's a fair question.

Godfather.

uh...because it's a completely false statement. Come on man

Godfather.

Gern Blansten said:

Godfather. said:

Gern Blansten said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Why is it the places with the strictest gun laws have the most gun violence?

What a ridiculous statement.

then please explain. it's a fair question.

Godfather.

uh...because it's a completely false statement. Come on man

that all depends where we gather our information from right ? as I just stated in the last post I have a different idea about these gun laws.

Godfather.

Gern Blansten

Godfather. said:

Gern Blansten said:

Godfather. said:

Gern Blansten said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Why is it the places with the strictest gun laws have the most gun violence?

What a ridiculous statement.

then please explain. it's a fair question.

Godfather.

uh...because it's a completely false statement. Come on man

that all depends where we gather our information from right ? as I just stated in the last post I have a different idea about these gun laws.

Godfather.

Sure if you gather it from a place that is wrong then you will be wrong.

It was a ridiculous statement. The evidence backs me up.

tempo_n_groove

Gern Blansten said:

Godfather. said:

Gern Blansten said:

Godfather. said:

Gern Blansten said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Why is it the places with the strictest gun laws have the most gun violence?

What a ridiculous statement.

then please explain. it's a fair question.

Godfather.

uh...because it's a completely false statement. Come on man

that all depends where we gather our information from right ? as I just stated in the last post I have a different idea about these gun laws.

Godfather.

Sure if you gather it from a place that is wrong then you will be wrong.

It was a ridiculous statement. The evidence backs me up.

Put to mind that Australia has only 24 million people whereas America has 325 million people.

That's not a lot of people spread out in a country the same size of the US...

josevolution

Ahh nothing like another college on lockdown and a couple of dead people to start the summer shooting season good ol'e America !!!

FoxyRedLa

Yes. UCLA. Murder suicide. Sick.

Gern Blansten

tempo_n_groove said:

Gern Blansten said:

Godfather. said:

Gern Blansten said:

Godfather. said:

Gern Blansten said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Why is it the places with the strictest gun laws have the most gun violence?

What a ridiculous statement.

then please explain. it's a fair question.

Godfather.

uh...because it's a completely false statement. Come on man

that all depends where we gather our information from right ? as I just stated in the last post I have a different idea about these gun laws.

Godfather.

Sure if you gather it from a place that is wrong then you will be wrong.

It was a ridiculous statement. The evidence backs me up.

Put to mind that Australia has only 24 million people whereas America has 325 million people.

That's not a lot of people spread out in a country the same size of the US...

If we were comparing total gun murders you would have a point

The comparison is done as a % of population....so you don't have a point

josevolution

Don't worry gun lovers Trump is coming to save you & your precious weapons he will make sure everybody has a fare shot at purchasing any weapon you might fancy , woot woot Make America safe again !!

Gern Blansten

josevolution said:

Don't worry gun lovers Trump is coming to save you & your precious weapons he will make sure everybody has a fare shot at purchasing any weapon you might fancy , woot woot Make America safe again !!

Unless you are on one of his properties...then you can't have that gun

tempo_n_groove

I tried to find good data for cities with high gun crime but there are cities that have strict gun laws with high murders and lax gun laws with high murders. The info is all over the place.

tempo_n_groove

Gern Blansten said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Gern Blansten said:

Godfather. said:

Gern Blansten said:

Godfather. said:

Gern Blansten said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Why is it the places with the strictest gun laws have the most gun violence?

What a ridiculous statement.

then please explain. it's a fair question.

Godfather.

uh...because it's a completely false statement. Come on man

that all depends where we gather our information from right ? as I just stated in the last post I have a different idea about these gun laws.

Godfather.

Sure if you gather it from a place that is wrong then you will be wrong.

It was a ridiculous statement. The evidence backs me up.

Put to mind that Australia has only 24 million people whereas America has 325 million people.

That's not a lot of people spread out in a country the same size of the US...

If we were comparing total gun murders you would have a point

The comparison is done as a % of population....so you don't have a point

I brought up population because of social aspects.

josevolution

Ahh the good o'le not in my house logic but he stated that when his POTUS there will be no more gun free zones , he wants everybody to have a fair shot lol lol !!!

tempo_n_groove

josevolution said:

Ahh the good o'le not in my house logic but he stated that when his POTUS there will be no more gun free zones , he wants everybody to have a fair shot lol lol !!!

I'm all for firearms but did he really say that?

josevolution

tempo_n_groove said:

josevolution said:

Ahh the good o'le not in my house logic but he stated that when his POTUS there will be no more gun free zones , he wants everybody to have a fair shot lol lol !!!

I'm all for firearms but did he really say that?

Yep he stated with him Prez there will be no more gun free zones !!

Gern Blansten

tempo_n_groove said:

I tried to find good data for cities with high gun crime but there are cities that have strict gun laws with high murders and lax gun laws with high murders. The info is all over the place.

right and as mentioned above a city with strict gun laws is lame when you can buy a gun across city lines and bring it back to the city