-D-
Banned
And this self professed "smart dood" wants the right to own any and all firearms:lmao:
It's more fun to watch 'these fires' burn than put them out.
It's fun watching stupid burn, the slower the more entertaining.
50 shot dead - Orlando shooting
- Thread starter -D-
- Start date
And this self professed "smart dood" wants the right to own any and all firearms:lmao:
It's more fun to watch 'these fires' burn than put them out.
It's fun watching stupid burn, the slower the more entertaining.
-D-
Banned
I did not check the videos, just trying to figure out if you two are on the same side of the issue.
In 2012 there were 258 justifiable homicides and 8,855 criminal homicides. Work with those. They are hard numbers from here: https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/u...orcement/expanded-homicide/expandhomicidemain
I was referring to this https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/u...able_8_murder_victims_by_weapon_2010-2014.xls
The overwhelming majority of firearms homicides in the US are handguns. 5% are rifles, of which an unknown percentage aren't "black" at all. 248 homicides by rifle in 2014, and the president has the audacity to authoritatively beg for another assault weapons ban as a knee-jerk reaction to a (relatively) isolated incident? Even with the Orlando shooting, the numbers may inch up to 300 rifle homicides for 2016? That's worthy of blanket bans? That's pathetic. It's such a political misdirection, it's not even funny. More people are literally beaten to death with fists each year. More people are killed by simple blunt objects.
The overwhelming majority of firearms homicides in the US are handguns. 5% are rifles, of which an unknown percentage aren't "black" at all. 248 homicides by rifle in 2014, and the president has the audacity to authoritatively beg for another assault weapons ban as a knee-jerk reaction to a (relatively) isolated incident? Even with the Orlando shooting, the numbers may inch up to 300 rifle homicides for 2016? That's worthy of blanket bans? That's pathetic. It's such a political misdirection, it's not even funny. More people are literally beaten to death with fists each year. More people are killed by simple blunt objects.
The thing is that you know for a fact that the number is inaccurate.
There are 262 by shotgun, 93 by "other" guns, and a whopping 1,959 where the type is not stated.
The margin of error is almost eight times the original number.
But the point is taken that handguns make up around at least two times the number of long guns.
What do you suggest that they do instead, if inaction is not a viable choice?
The numbers are accurate. Rifles make up 4% of the KNOWN firearms used in homicides while handguns account for 90%. It stands to reason that this percentage carries over into the 1,959 unknown firearms used as well. Fine, I'll concede it. That would then be an additional 98 homicides by rifle to bring the total to roughly 350 people, instead of the 250 I quoted. Marginal and completely irrelevant to the point made.
Nobody is talking about banning shotguns. Obama wants to reinstate the AWB. If he was successful, and also magically able to snap his fingers and disappear the existing "assault weapons" in private hands, would at maximum account for 350 saved lives.... assuming that the people who would've used rifles to kill someone wouldn't then bother to use a different gun. The reality is different - the assault weapons ban wouldn't actually eliminate any guns, and wouldn't make a lick of difference in the already-low number of people killed by these rifles each year.
What do I suggest? Nothing. I don't care. I'm Canadian and it doesn't bother me if they wanna shoot eachother. What I can say with utmost confidence is that their problem is social, cultural, and economic. If you divvy up the homicides by race, for instance, you'll find that they're predominantly committed by minorities - this can further be expanded to encompass a largely low-income subset of Americans. But Obama isn't gonna talk about that, he wants to talk about some assault weapons ban to pacify the masses who need him to come out and "do something", which in reality will amount to nothing.
I'm more interested in the number of suicides and accidental shootings, myself.
If there are lots of weapons available, it would be hard to keep them out of the wrong hands, but you could at least make sure that owners are trained in their safe use.
Many of the European countries have a mandatory service requirement, but I doubt that the U.S. would ever adopt that type of approach.
-D-
Banned
You spend a lot of time defending the 2nd amendment for someone that does not care what happens in the US.
Suicides are intentional. If a person wants to end their life its an individual choice. I fail to see why it's relevant.
Accidental deaths are negligent. Again, personal accountability. They're tragic, especially when kids are involved, but I'm gonna go with Darwin on that one regardless.
Europe doesn't compare. It cant compare. No other country or region can, because on this topic the US is completely and totally unique. Its a first world country, a world superpower, and it has more privately owned guns than its total population.
Accidental deaths are negligent. Again, personal accountability. They're tragic, especially when kids are involved, but I'm gonna go with Darwin on that one regardless.
Europe doesn't compare. It cant compare. No other country or region can, because on this topic the US is completely and totally unique. Its a first world country, a world superpower, and it has more privately owned guns than its total population.
A buddy of mine lives in Rochester NY. He's big on being able to defend himself against all the bad people in the world.
About 10 years, he owned 5 handguns just to be sure that he could in fact defend himself. The only problem is, he works in a bank and the bank's policy prohibits employees bringing their weapons to work.
One day he comes home from work to find his home has been broken into. Five handguns are missing. He buys a couple more to replace them.
A couple of years later he is at work at his bank, and as usual his latest handguns were stored safe and sound at home, hidden and locked up better this time because he can't bring them to work. And of course the bank gets robbed and shots are fired.
A year later an armed bank robber was arrested in Rochester, and a gun recovered. It turns out that recovered gun was not only one of his stolen guns, but was also the one used in teh robbery and shooting at his own bank branch. The other four stolen hand guns were not recovered.
A few months after that, his home was broken into again and now three guns were stolen out of his home by the thieves.
He no longer works at the bank. Or lives in Rochester. Too many loose guns out on the street there.
This gun arguement is stupid, if all guns were illegal in the states which never happen anyways, these ****ed up people will just buy it illegally or use other means. Should we ban cleaning supplies and chemicals from Home Depot? Because you can walk in there and come out with ingredients for a bomb that can do just as much harm as a loony with an AR
If you're going to jump into an argument, then you should at least be able to spell the word.
Are you trying to say that people committing suicide would blow themselves up if there were no guns?
Kids would accidentally blow each other up, making bombs while playing?
Why so concerned about suicide? I can understand the negligent/accidental deaths when kids are involved but why suicide? Of all the serious circumstances which surround an individual choosing to end his or her life, you care about the tool used? It's so irrelevant.
