5 year old kills 2 year old sister... with a birthday present.

[Nate505]

That list is about murders. Not about gun related crimes/injuries.

Ok, here is the gun related homicides per 100k. The US is 8th.

https://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_gun_vio_hom_fir_hom_rat_per_100_pop-rate-per-100-000-pop

Not great, but not as bad as it's made out to be, especially when the difference between 8th and 20th dwarfs the difference between the top 3.

That being said in the vast majority of crime is the US is localized in very small specific areas, so I'm not sure what guns or gun control matters in one instance or another. There are rural areas where everyone owns a gun and crime is unheard of, then there are areas in Detroit that are like war zones. Gun control won't apply to these areas since they aren't exactly gung ho about obtaining guns legally, and like everything else in life, if there is a demand and the product in demand isn't something extremely limited like enriched uranium, then the supply will follow.

 

[Stoked]

Why would god believer's need a gun for protection? Just pray. This mere life on Earth for god believer's is just introduction to eternal heaven anyway.

Haha. It does not work that way but you already knew that.

Also I can go buy a gun for any nonsense reason I want. Such as I think they look cool or I want a new paper weight.

@ One Brow. Assuming that man intended to kill is a reasonable conclussion.

 

[Stoked]

Are you really trying to equate believing in god with carrying guns? Is god not a peaceful being in most religions? If you would like to say "us" god believers, then don't include any conjecture about what all people who believe in god believe. Belief is diverse, and it certainly does not mean that we are gun toting bush supporters just because we believe in god. Sure, for some people that is the case, but to lump everyone who believes in god into a constriction like you did is ignorant to say the least. I believe in god, and I value life, therefore I support comprehensive background checks on firearms, that is my opinion.

Please do not lump Pearlwatson in with the rest of us.

 

[Gameface]

I have no respect for that type of petty ignorance.

Yeah, Pearl likes to keep things civilized when she's talkin' bout God-denying un-American liberal cultists.

 

[One Brow]

Is that even true? Here is a list of the murders per 100K in the world. Which of these countries don't have strict gun control? What exactly is your definition of strict gun control?

Do you think that when people say gun reduces the murder rate, that means the only significant factor is the level of gun control? If not, why would such a list be meaningful?

 

[One Brow]

They've managed to successfully prohibit something? They figured out how to stop the law of supply and demand? Wow.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/08/02/did-gun-control-work-in-australia/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Australia

 

[One Brow]

So wait you admit that guns don't increase the rate of murders?

Assaults with guns are deadlier than assaults with other weapons. Suicide attempts with guns are deadlier than suicide attempts by other means.

However, there are many more influences in the rate of murder than just the level of gun control present in a country.

 

[One Brow]

The point that has apparently eluded you is that guns are a tool that is used in murder but murders will find other tools to murder with if they don't get guns.

What eluding you is that other methods are less effective than guns.

If you compare the statistical data the murder rates in places with better gun laws is not lower.

After you control for other factors that increase the homicide rate, it is lower.

However having guns actually helps prevent violent crime as criminals are less likely to do violent crime knowing that they could potentially be shot at (look at that Harvard paper I linked).

The Harvard paper made no attempt to look at confounding factors, and explicitly denies the claim you just made (it say gun control laws have no effect at all).

 

[One Brow]

@ One Brow. Assuming that man intended to kill is a reasonable conclussion.

If he intended to kill, but wound up killing no one, what does that say about the effectiveness of knives vs. guns? If he had a gun, don't you think it's likely one of those two people would be dead?

 

[Stoked]

If he intended to kill, but wound up killing no one, what does that say about the effectiveness of knives vs. guns? If he had a gun, don't you think it's likely one of those two people would be dead?

Nice attempt to spin off into something else. We are not talking about the effectiveness of guns v. knives in killing. We are talking about a particular case where a man was stabbing people and acting in an extremely violent way. A CC holder pulled his gun and stopped him. Assuming that the man using the knife was intending to kill people is a very reasonable assumption. Kudos to the CC holder.

 

[Surely]

I thought this little video was pretty insightful considering the discussion at hand.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_T-F_zfoDqI

I liked where he said that some people think the best way to stop the leopard from hunting the gazelle is the cut the horn s off the gazelle.

 

[The Black Swordsman]

Chicago accounts for more then 75% of Illinois population. Nice try trying to blame 25% for distorting general numbers. You unsuccessfully tried to blame strict Chicago laws for their supposed "highest firearm death rates in USA" which is not true. Illinois, including Chicago is not even in top 30!
Epic fail. But you never admit when you are wrong so why I am even arguing here.

I would quickly admnit I am wrong, it just hasn't happened.

Once again.

"States that allow law-abiding citizens to carry concealed handguns enjoy a 60 percent decrease in multiple-victim public shootings and a 78 percent decrease in victims per attack.”

The facts speak for themselves. Taking away citizen's freedom is not the answer.

 

[MVP]

"States that allow law-abiding citizens to carry concealed handguns enjoy a 60 percent decrease in multiple-victim public shootings and a 78 percent decrease in victims per attack.”

The facts speak for themselves. Taking away citizen's freedom is not the answer.

False statement. I see no data proving it.
Taking away citizens freedom to have guns works just fine in Japan.

 

[Stoked]

False statement. I see no data proving it.
Taking away citizens freedom to have guns works just fine in Japan.

Good for Japan. I will not give up my guns. period.

 

[One Brow]

Nice attempt to spin off into something else. We are not talking about the effectiveness of guns v. knives in killing.

You are not. Others arguing against gun control have raised that point. However, I respect your decision not to engage in that tangent.

 

[Stoked]

You are not. Others arguing against gun control have raised that point. However, I respect your decision not to engage in that tangent.

All I saw was that they raised the point that you can use knives to kill as well. Where did they get into a comparison of which is more efficient?

 

[scootsy]

Just curious, what is the solution? Stricter gun control laws, or taking the right to bear arms away altogether? Wasn't the reason we were given the right a form of protection against a standing army? Haven't a hundred or so countries existed under military dictatorships in the last 100 years and this is America's protection against that? Just wondering.

 

[One Brow]

All I saw was that they raised the point that you can use knives to kill as well. Where did they get into a comparison of which is more efficient?

When you claim that gun control does not reduce the rate of homicides, the implication is that the other homicide methods will be just as efficient.

 

[One Brow]

Just curious, what is the solution? Stricter gun control laws, or taking the right to bear arms away altogether? Wasn't the reason we were given the right a form of protection against a standing army? Haven't a hundred or so countries existed under military dictatorships in the last 100 years and this is America's protection against that? Just wondering.

Do you have any evidence that more guns means a dictatorship is less likely? Dictatorships seem to spring up, or not, regardless of the levels of guns in the population.

 

[Stoked]

When you claim that gun control does not reduce the rate of homicides, the implication is that the other homicide methods will be just as efficient.

I see it as saying that gun control is simply ineffective.