Change Your Gun Laws, America

[Yeraza_Bats]

Angela, you make good points, but in America there is a deficit of common sense. See in America if you want to bomb hundreds of thousands of people to death based on a lie, that's considered totally rational. If you want to let the government spy on your own people, which is against the law, that's considered totally rational. If you want to let the government keep giving mass guns to mostly Islamic third world nations to turn against you another day, totally rational.

But if you want to have the government protect it's own people and get guns out of the hands of criminals and try to stop the epidemic of gun deaths, suicides, and accidents, then you must be a totalitarian Nazi communist muslim according Americans' illogic.

Whoa, where are you getting that Americans who support the right to bear arms are supportive of making war on other nations and arming terrorists organizations? Those are things that like the majority of gun owners I know are totally against? You cant just accuse people who have guns with supporting random evil in order to make your case.





Btw, Ive recently learned that people who want stricter gun laws are actually sympathetic to Hitlers cause, guys.

 

[notuptome]

America should be more like Israel. Compulsory military training including the proper operation of firearms. The loons fear guns but have no knowledge of how to handle a gun. The criminals have guns because they lack the personal worth necessary to become productive citizens.

Citizens own guns, subjects do not. Foreign governments fear America because it has an armed citizenry. Our government is working feverishly to disarm us so that we can be occupied and made subjects against our will.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

Our attitude seems to be one of fatalism. Another day, another mass shooting. Which is almost literally true. The Web site shootingtracker.com documents that in the first 207 days of 2015, the nation had 207 mass shootings.

This is a bogus claim by a bogus website. The authors of these "statistics" have used multiple news stories in at least two cases to report the same crime. Virtually all of the shootings they list are gang-related, and regardless of what is done to try to take guns out of the hands of gangs, it will not work. If they can't buy them, they will steal them in burglaries and truck hijackings. Of the countries with the absolutely strictest gun laws in the world, guns are still rampant among organized crime members, gangs, and terrorists. There is nothing to be done, thus far, that has actually worked.

After one of these takes place now, everyone goes through a ritual of shock and horror, and then moves on, aware that nothing will change, accepting that this is just one of those quirks of American life. But it is 150,000 deaths. Almost three Vietnams.

The countries with the five highest murder rates -- with and without guns -- are Honduras (90.4 per 100K), Venezuela (53.7), Belize (44.7), El Salvador (41.2), and Guatemala (49.9). You want a civilized country among the Top 25? Brazil ranks 17th, at 25.2. The United States is not even in the Top 25. It isn't even in the Top 50, coming in barely in Top 100, at #91, with 4.7. Yes, the European nations are around 1.0 to 1.3, obviously lower. Canada is at 1.6. Russia? 9.2. Pakistan, 7.7. Iraq, 8.1. Afghanistan, 6.7. And no, those aren't war casualties in the latter three nations. Those are just homicides.

So the question becomes, why are we so concerned with a murder rate that is far less than most of the world? The reality is, it is a fallen world, and sin runs rampant. You want to change something, get upset and angry about 1.5 million babies murdered every year through abortion! "No guns" won't stop murders. Murders are going to happen regardless of whether guns are available or not.

Guns don't cause murders. Availability of guns don't increase murders. Murders are best predicted by measuring poverty, working-class stress, availabilityof weapons to high schoolers, inequality, unemployment, and illegal drug use. You want to drastically decrease murders? Get off business' back and let them create jobs, educate kids on the use and danger of guns, stop "diversity" programs that do nothing to relieve ethnic divisions but instead emphasize and increase them, and do something to treat drug abusers and keep dealers locked up. Then you'll see a decrease in murders. Not be outlawing guns. That's ridiculous.

 

[Angela53510]

This is a bogus claim by a bogus website. The authors of these "statistics" have used multiple news stories in at least two cases to report the same crime. Virtually all of the shootings they list are gang-related, and regardless of what is done to try to take guns out of the hands of gangs, it will not work. If they can't buy them, they will steal them in burglaries and truck hijackings. Of the countries with the absolutely strictest gun laws in the world, guns are still rampant among organized crime members, gangs, and terrorists. There is nothing to be done, thus far, that has actually worked.

The countries with the five highest murder rates -- with and without guns -- are Honduras (90.4 per 100K), Venezuela (53.7), Belize (44.7), El Salvador (41.2), and Guatemala (49.9). You want a civilized country among the Top 25? Brazil ranks 17th, at 25.2. The United States is not even in the Top 25. It isn't even in the Top 50, coming in barely in Top 100, at #91, with 4.7. Yes, the European nations are around 1.0 to 1.3, obviously lower. Canada is at 1.6. Russia? 9.2. Pakistan, 7.7. Iraq, 8.1. Afghanistan, 6.7. And no, those aren't war casualties in the latter three nations. Those are just homicides.

So the question becomes, why are we so concerned with a murder rate that is far less than most of the world? The reality is, it is a fallen world, and sin runs rampant. You want to change something, get upset and angry about 1.5 million babies murdered every year through abortion! "No guns" won't stop murders. Murders are going to happen regardless of whether guns are available or not.

Guns don't cause murders. Availability of guns don't increase murders. Murders are best predicted by measuring poverty, working-class stress, availabilityof weapons to high schoolers, inequality, unemployment, and illegal drug use. You want to drastically decrease murders? Get off business' back and let them create jobs, educate kids on the use and danger of guns, stop "diversity" programs that do nothing to relieve ethnic divisions but instead emphasize and increase them, and do something to treat drug abusers and keep dealers locked up. Then you'll see a decrease in murders. Not be outlawing guns. That's ridiculous.

Apples and oranges quoted here!

You are comparing a first world country - the USA to 3rd world countries, including Brazil. When you actually look at Canada and European countries, you do come up with MUCH LOWER gun casualties.

So since most things being equal in 1st world countries, what accounts for the difference? The only thing I can see is the easy access to guns. Or that the US isn't really a civilized 1st world country, which takes us back to the unnamed topic mentioned on page one. I am not racist, but we also have a population in Canada that is responsible for most of the gun deaths, but I can't mention for fear of being called racist.

I guess we can agree on that one, sadly.

 

[Desdichado]

If you have a healthy respect for human life, then you will accept American gun culture and the 2nd Amendment for what they are.

It seems like all gun control advocates think that it would be a docile affair.

 

[Angela53510]

​to the op-

I'm sorry, you're probably not going to like my response, but here it is.

America was founded on Guns, Guts and Glory. We fought our way to freedom, and aren't going down without a fight, whether the Left likes it or not.
We have basically two sides of the coin in America. One side are virtual Thugs. These are the ones you see causing all the trouble in our nation, when it comes to guns. They just think they are bada$$e$. Period. They are the ones who make a good point for others to point out that America needs to get rid of their naughty guns. And they know it.

Problem is, if the legal gun owners (it's a known fact that legal gun owners are not criminals, but concerned citizens exercising our second amendment right of the Constitution to bear arms.) And I am very aware that our present leadership flagrantly ignores the Constitution at will.

You see, people in the large cities are the kind who cater to this junk, because it will make the news there. The United States Media, unfortunately has a terrific grip on what happens in our country. Our political system is no longer the simple one we were taught about it school, it's a whole 'nuther beast...Look at Chicago, for instance. Gun-free zone..hooray, right?

Wrong, more crime there than most anywhere. Why? Because the Guilty know there will be no fight, by the time the cops come all will be done. Come out to a country house and try that! That doesn't make the news (of course!) but it makes Facebook. The thugs who come in and hold Grandparents hostage, rape the kids...and get shot dead by Grandpa!! End of story. We won't have to pay to house him in jail the rest of his life, he's gone. Too darn bad. If others see this, maybe they think twice...ya think...

Austrailia has lost their right to bear arms, and look at the results! I did a report on this, one segment of Aussies had a 70% increase in crime. 70 percent!! If criminals have no fear, if they are the only ones who are armed, heck why not just let the thugs have everything? Does anyone truly believe that way? Cause if they do I've got some oceanfront prperty in Arizona I will sell, and move away rich!

You see, thugs will be thugs. Armed citizens or not. But don't make the citizens helpless to these cowards by taking out only defense til' the police come. Please...

Like I think I said in another thread. The use and having of guns reminds me too much of the wild, wild west in the 18th century. And yes, a nation birthed in violence.

Don't you think it is time for America to grow up and leave behind these infantile preoccuptions? Join the rest of the civilized world, and admit that unrestricted access to guns is causing more deaths, more havoc than in any other 1st world country?

Of course, if you want to remain a violent nation, with the media constantly plastered with the latest gun deaths, from mass murders to gunning down of cops, innocent civilians, keep going in the direction you are going.

PS. Your Australia stats are SO WRONG!

"In 2012, Australia saw 40 murders by firearm, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics. This was a five-year high. Australia's gun homicide rate for the year was .20 per 100,000 residents, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, or UNODC.Compare that to the United States, which according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, saw 11,622 homicides by firearm in 2012. The U.S. gun homicide rate for the year was 2.2 per 100,000 residents, according to UNODC."

Australia – Total Number of Gun Deaths

When will the US learn from Australia? Stricter gun control laws save lives | Rebecca Peters | Comment is free | The Guardian

""Not only were Australia's post-Port Arthur gun laws followed by a decade in which the crime they were designed to reduce hasn't happened again, but we also saw a life-saving bonus: the decline in overall gun deaths accelerated to twice the rate seen before the new gun laws," says study lead author, Professor Simon Chapman."From 1996 to 2003, the total number of gun deaths each year fell from 521 to 289, suggesting that the removal of more than 700,000 guns was associated with a faster declining rate of gun suicide and gun homicide," said Adjunct Associate Professor Philip Alpers, also from the School of Public Health at the University of Sydney. "This was a milestone public health and safety issue, driven by an overwhelming swing in public opinion, and promptly delivered by governments."

After 112 people were shot dead in 11 mass shootings* in a decade, Australia collected and destroyed categories of firearms designed to kill many people quickly. In his immediate reaction to the Port Arthur massacre, Prime Minister John Howard said of semi-automatic rifles and shotguns: "There is no legitimate interest served in my view by the free availability in this country of weapons of this kind… That is why we have proposed a comprehensive package of reforms designed to implement tougher, more effective and uniform gun laws."

As study co-author Philip Alpers points out: "The new legislation's first declared aim was to reduce the risk of similar gun massacres. In the 10½ years since the gun buy-back announcement, no mass shootings have occurred in Australia."

"On top of that, and despite the new gun laws not being designed to reduce gun suicide, domestic shootings, and the much less common 'stranger danger' individual gun homicides, firearm fatalities in the three largest categories - total firearm deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides - all at least doubled their previous rates of decline following the revised firearm legislation."

While the rates per 100,000 of total firearm deaths, firearm suicides and firearm homicides were already reducing by an average of 3 per cent each year until 1996, these average rates of decline doubled to 6 per centeach year (total gun death), and more than doubled to 7.4 per cent(gun suicide) and 7.5 per centeach year (gun homicide) following the introduction of new gun laws.

By 2002/03, Australia's rate of 0.27 firearm-related homicides per 100,000 population had dropped to one-fifteenth that of the United States.
The authors conclude that "The Australian example provides evidence that removing large numbers of firearms from a community can be associated with a sudden and on-going decline in mass shootings, and accelerating declines in total firearm-related deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides."
News | The University of Sydney



So despite all the hysterical defense and misuse of statistics here, the evidence provided by gun control in pretty much every other country in the world, is that gun control significantly reduces deaths due to guns!

But go ahead and live in the wild, wild west, or the American Revolutionary times, if you don't care to join the rest of the world in the 21st century. And keep on rationalizing that losing guns would leave the criminals with them. Or, maybe the US has a different ethos that the rest of the third world, and that is the truth!

 

[KennethC]

Here is a good read as it shows stricter gun laws does not mean lower crime rate.

Gun Facts | Gun Control and Crime in non-US Countries

 

[Desdichado]

But go ahead and live in the wild, wild west, or the American Revolutionary times, if you don't care to join the rest of the world in the 21st century. And keep on rationalizing that losing guns would leave the criminals with them. Or, maybe the US has a different ethos that the rest of the third world, and that is the truth!

Wow, you've actually made a pretty attractive argument for most American conservatives.

No, I do not want to join this morally and intellectually sterile "first world" that cannot even see fit to have a replacement birth-rate, embrace a sane economic policy, or support the plight of Israel.

No ma'am. Give me Liberty.

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

Apples and oranges quoted here!

You are comparing a first world country - the USA to 3rd world countries, including Brazil. When you actually look at Canada and European countries, you do come up with MUCH LOWER gun casualties.

Hardly. Brazil is not a third-world country. It is an emerging industrialized nation, and for you to call them "third-world" is an insult to their culture, society, government, and people. The different per 100,000 people in Great Britain, France, Canada, etc. is negligible -- three people per, and all are small numbers. For that matter, Brazil's numbers are small, too -- just larger than the U.S.'s totals. It is a comparison fallacy that doesn't hold up when shown for what it actually represents.

So since most things being equal in 1st world countries, what accounts for the difference?

Culture, more than anything, and the fact that the U.S. is a far more diverse nation relative to socioeconomic and ethnic differences, there is more poverty, there is more ethnic tension. What you also fail to understand, apparently, is that black-on-black crime accounts for the vast majority of the murderers in the U.S. Per 100,000, black-on-black murders are at a horrendous 17.6. Black men account for the commission of 77% of the murders in the U.S., and 83% of the murder victims in the U.S. are young black men between 17 and 24, killed by other young black men in the same age group.

The only thing I can see is the easy access to guns.

Then you are not looking at the real cause.

Or that the US isn't really a civilized 1st world country, which takes us back to the unnamed topic mentioned on page one. I am not racist, but we also have a population in Canada that is responsible for most of the gun deaths, but I can't mention for fear of being called racist.

I guess we can agree on that one, sadly.

I am not afraid of saying it, as two paragraphs ago proves. They can call me a "racist" all they want, but the name doesn't stick in light of facts.

 

[atwhatcost]

As a patriotic, love-my-country, red-white-and-blue American who does NOT own a gun. This is what guns means to me.

-- venison for less than $18 a pound. (And that was the price back in the 80's. Couldn't afford it then, so haven't kept up with it since.)

-- hasenfeffer -- don't knock it, unless you've tried it.

-- braised squirrel with carrots and onions. (Sauerkraut optional, but only because my stomach can't handle cabbage anymore.)

-- quail at reasonable prices. (pluck, pluck, pluck them feathers -- the price!)

-- pheasant with no reason for glass.

-- Canada goose. (Hey, nothing personal. They don't belong to your country, they just like it there in summertime. lol)

-- wild turkey -- meh. Taste changed. I liked it as a kid. Too gamy now.)

-- boar -- never had it. Bummer. Can't eat it now.

-- knocking off cans at a great distance.

-- making holes in targets.

-- making created targets spin.

-- the ability to stop anyone from thinking they can suppress us -- terrorists or government!!!

We are NOT Canada.

 

[atwhatcost]

This is a bogus claim by a bogus website. The authors of these "statistics" have used multiple news stories in at least two cases to report the same crime. Virtually all of the shootings they list are gang-related, and regardless of what is done to try to take guns out of the hands of gangs, it will not work. If they can't buy them, they will steal them in burglaries and truck hijackings. Of the countries with the absolutely strictest gun laws in the world, guns are still rampant among organized crime members, gangs, and terrorists. There is nothing to be done, thus far, that has actually worked.

One thing worked -- once. The Welsh Revival reset a country.

 

[Angela53510]

As a patriotic, love-my-country, red-white-and-blue American who does NOT own a gun. This is what guns means to me.

-- venison for less than $18 a pound. (And that was the price back in the 80's. Couldn't afford it then, so haven't kept up with it since.)

-- hasenfeffer -- don't knock it, unless you've tried it.

-- braised squirrel with carrots and onions. (Sauerkraut optional, but only because my stomach can't handle cabbage anymore.)

-- quail at reasonable prices. (pluck, pluck, pluck them feathers -- the price!)

-- pheasant with no reason for glass.

-- Canada goose. (Hey, nothing personal. They don't belong to your country, they just like it there in summertime. lol)

-- wild turkey -- meh. Taste changed. I liked it as a kid. Too gamy now.)

-- boar -- never had it. Bummer. Can't eat it now.

-- knocking off cans at a great distance.

-- making holes in targets.

-- making created targets spin.

-- the ability to stop anyone from thinking they can suppress us -- terrorists or government!!!

We are NOT Canada.

I have NEVER said I am against guns for the purpose of hunting, and for that matter, defending herds and flocks against predators. I know lots of people who hunt for food. That is the reason people have guns in Canada.

I personally would not eat Canada goose, knowing the kinds of garbage they eat, but that is your choice!

I am against guns which are bought for the soul purpose of killing people. That is simply not Christian. You can argue self defense all you want, but that is simply not in the Bible. (Again not speaking of military and the right of the government to protect its people.)

You can also say all you want if you take away guns, then only the criminals have them, but that hasn't happened in the countries like Japan, Australia or Canada. Again, what direction should civilization go - especially to stop repeating the same mistakes not just over and over, but on a daily basis?

 

[Angela53510]

Here is a good read as it shows stricter gun laws does not mean lower crime rate.

Gun Facts | Gun Control and Crime in non-US Countries

Wow, Kenneth! I am going to bookmark this site. Then, when I want to quote something that has totally twisted not just the statistics but the facts, compared apples to koala bears, and dumped a lot of wishful thinking in, I will have a good example to show people.

Here is the real truth: (in deaths by guns per 100,000 population)

Canada: 2.2
Japan: .06
UK: .26
Aus. .86
Germ 1.24
France 3.01
USA: 10.64

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

So who has the most deaths due to guns in 1st world countries? I leave you to figure it out. The math is right there.

Another interesting fact it brought up was this:

"Fact: The crime rate is 66% higher in four Canadian Prairie Provinces than in the northern US states across the border."

Hmm, I have lived in Canada most of my life, and I would swear there are only THREE Canadian Prairie provinces. Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. In fact, I have lived in Alberta half my life, and this is what I was taught in school.

But moving on from that obvious error, yes, there is a high rate of gun violence in the prairie provinces, especially in Manitoba, and also in the NWT and Nunavut. At the risk of being racist, the fact is that most of that violence is in the aboriginal population. But considering how our native populations have been treated, esp. in the prairies provinces, that is the logical result.

 

[Mitspa]

Why should we change what has made us great and strong? Why should we change the foundation of the greatest republic ever known to the world? Why should honest men a women give up the right to defend themselves against criminals and oprresive government? Foolishness... and it will not happen until satan himself has established his government over the world.

 

[atwhatcost]

I have NEVER said I am against guns for the purpose of hunting, and for that matter, defending herds and flocks against predators. I know lots of people who hunt for food. That is the reason people have guns in Canada.

I personally would not eat Canada goose, knowing the kinds of garbage they eat, but that is your choice!

I am against guns which are bought for the soul purpose of killing people. That is simply not Christian. You can argue self defense all you want, but that is simply not in the Bible. (Again not speaking of military and the right of the government to protect its people.)

You can also say all you want if you take away guns, then only the criminals have them, but that hasn't happened in the countries like Japan, Australia or Canada. Again, what direction should civilization go - especially to stop repeating the same mistakes not just over and over, but on a daily basis?

Guns for the sole purpose of killing people come from two sources:
1. Military contracts.
2. Illegal guns.

The first is totally legal and required.

The second IS the problem and there is no such thing as a law that stops it. It already IS illegal to kill people with or without a gun!

I live in Philly for crying out loud! We average a murder per day. Most are criminals killing criminals, so it's ALL illegal on that point. We only hear the stories when that's not the case. We average 3-5 stories a year about not-the-case murders. We HAVE gun laws up the yin and the yang! (We're number five on that link you provided for gun-control laws.) It DOESN'T WORK!!! Criminals are still killing criminals.

It hasn't happened in those "virtuous" countries only because the hearts of those people are different than criminals. Gee. Big surprise there?

What do you propose we do that's different? (I already gave you what I believe is the difference.)

 

[jeremyPJ]

This is not the actual page I used for my afore-mentioned Aussie rate of murder increase as a result of disarming, but one I quickly pulled up showing that same rate in accordance to Armed Robberies by citizens, of citizens. I still find it disturbing...

Australian Gun Ban Resulted in Higher Gun Crimes, Not Lower!
,
President Obama, Vice President Biden, New York Mayor Bloomberg, and all the other liberal Democrats want to ban guns from private ownership in order to reduce gun violence in the United States. But will it?
In 1996 newly elected Prime Minister John Howard of Australia pushed for stricter gun control. That year the Australian Parliament passed the National Firearms Agreement which banned the private ownership of all semiautomatic rifles and semiautomatic and pump action shotguns. The new law also established more restrictions in the licensing of other firearms.
According to the National Firearms Agreement private citizens were forced to turn over the banned weapons in a government buyback system. Beginning on October 1, 1966 through September 30, 1997, the Australian government spent $500 million in purchasing and destroying more than 631,000 banned guns. Howard and other politicians promised the citizens of Australia that they would be safer now that these horrible weapons had been taken off the streets.
However, that was not the case!
Since Australia banned semiautomatic rifles, shotguns and pump action shotguns the gun crime rates have skyrocketed throughout the country.
§ Murders committed with guns increased by 19%.
§ Home invasions increased by 21%.
§ Assaults committed with guns increased by 28%.
§ Armed robberies skyrocketed with an increase of 69%.
Many former gun owners blame the government and their gun control laws for the increases in crimes. They feel helpless in their own homes, unable to protect themselves. In fact, home invasions were so rare prior to the gun ban that the nation did not even have a legal definition for what a home invasion was.
Seeing the direct results of what the ban on guns did in Australia, they are now warning us not to follow in their footsteps.
With gun control being the number one item on Obama’s agenda, I feel that it is vitally important to share this video with everyone you know, especially your Senator and Representative in Washington and your state capital. Show them that banning guns will only increase crime not reduce it and demand that they take action to prevent the Obama administration from turning us into another Australia.

Read more at Australian Gun Ban Resulted in Higher Gun Crimes, Not Lower!

I will look some more to find my actual assignment with the statement. Basically, it is still a matter of disarming honest citizens and arming the criminals with better weapons to give them an advantage.

 

[dcontroversal]

Per capita the U.S. has less gun violence that 100 other countries.....

 

[jeremyPJ]

 

[jennymae]

And folks have to keep in mind that people killed by guns are mainly restricted to certain areas, geographically and demographically.

 

[Foger]

If you vote against guns you are voting for police action. Like Waco. You are asking police to go to doors of good people you don't know, and take their guns. That is bullying, stealing, and can be assisting in murder.

Would Jesus vote against guns? Christians turn the cheek to evil, but go and ask police to get this good mans guns? Their is no debate for true Christians. Voting, makes you responsible. This goes for anything you vote against.