'The' Gun Thread (Page 21)

scorpio516 - 2013-04-05 1:43 PM

Not just down.  WAY down.  From just January to June 2012, murders in metropolitan counties (and I guess towns in VA) are down >18%

Since 1993, murder rates are down more 50% - from 9.5 (0.0095% of Amreicans were murdered in 93 by any means) to 4.7 (0.0047%).  Not only that, in raw numbers, there were about 55 million more Americans in 2011 than in 93, yet 10,000 fewer murders.

If you want to talk just violent crime, that's down about 50% since 92 - from 757.7 (0.7577%) to 386.3 (0.3863%).  Again, raw numbers coincide with much less violence today versus the early 90s - 700,000+ fewer violent crimes happened in 2011 than 92.

Just since 2002, violent crime rate is down almost 22% and murder rate is down almost 17%.

Want even more proof?  Violent crime rate hasn't been as low as it is today since 1970!  Murder rate hasn't been as low as it is today since 1963!

1963!

It's been 50 years since you've been as safe as you are in 2013 America (in the US that is).  It's been 43 years since you've been less likely to get intentionally injured.

 

Gun violence is ALSO down.  In 2007, 67.9% of murders were committed with a firearm.  In 2011, it was down to 67.7%.  A small decline, but a decline none the less.  In addition, murders committed with rifles (including scary black ones) are down at a much greater rate - in 07 4.4% of murders used a rifle, in 2011, it was 3.7%, a 16% decline.

DanielG - 2013-04-05 11:15 AM



I'm interested in seeing your exhibition about all the lives saved by someone with a firearm since then as well. I'm sure you'll do one as you wouldn't want to only show one side of the issue, right?

That includes all those who call the cops for a situation. If they call people with guns, that's either protection with a firearm or a hypocrite.

jmk-brooklyn - 2013-04-05 2:40 PM Wait, so just to be clear, who are we calling hypocrites here? Anyone who doesn't own a gun but calls the police is a hypocrite?

Brock Samson - 2013-04-05 2:02 PM

 

??? Seriously? Group think land...  Let's see: I disagree with you.  You assert that the pending gun legislation is needed to prevent violence, I point out that the method of effectuating reducing violence is focused on an assault weapons ban which the government says previously was ineffective and which based upon homicide rates accounts for 1% of 1% of gun homicides.  Thus, I am asserting that the government's ban on assault weapons is not rationally related to the stated compelling government interest.  Then I argue in favor of protecting all constitutional rights based upon the notion of protection from those in power and from tyranny of the majority.

Yup..."group think"  So bottom line, if someone disagrees with you, based upon non-personal rational arguments, grounded in legal and Constitutional principles I am guilty of group think....

I wish I could say that I was surprised, but the reality of this gun debate and the pro-gun control lobby has really just been boiled down to that exchange in a microcosmic.   Disagree with those calling for gun legislation and get called names....

 

So much for a reasoned debate on the issue,

Pector55 - 2013-04-05 2:34 PM

 

In fairness, he gave you an either or scenario there.  You either agree that the gun saves lives or you do not.  If you do not, yet you call a cop to come save your life with his gun, then it would be ironic.

Personally, I have no issue with anyone who doesn't own a firearm as long as they are not infringing upon my right to own mine.  I would also have no problem responding to a friend's call for help, using my firearm to defend him/her if needed.  My only rules, consitent with my state laws, is that guns are to be used to defend people, not "stuff."  If you are stealing my car, I'm not pulling out a gun.  If you are my size and unarmed, I'lll take you on and take my chances. 

jmk-brooklyn - 2013-04-05 2:40 PM



Wait, so just to be clear, who are we calling hypocrites here? Anyone who doesn't own a gun but calls the police is a hypocrite?

Pector55 - 2013-04-05 1:34 PM

 

In fairness, he gave you an either or scenario there.  You either agree that the gun saves lives or you do not.  If you do not, yet you call a cop to come save your life with his gun, then it would be ironic.

Personally, I have no issue with anyone who doesn't own a firearm as long as they are not infringing upon my right to own mine.  I would also have no problem responding to a friend's call for help, using my firearm to defend him/her if needed.  My only rules, consitent with my state laws, is that guns are to be used to defend people, not "stuff."  If you are stealing my car, I'm not pulling out a gun.  If you are my size and unarmed, I'lll take you on and take my chances. 

jmk-brooklyn - 2013-04-05 3:00 PM



Guns don't save lives. People who are well trained and responsible in the use of their guns save lives. The gun is just a tool.

jmk-brooklyn - 2013-04-05 4:16 PM Nothing? Really? Aw, c'mon, you gotta admit that was funny.

Brock Samson - 2013-04-05 1:02 PM

 

??? Seriously? Group think land...  Let's see: I disagree with you.  You assert that the pending gun legislation is needed to prevent violence, I point out that the method of effectuating reducing violence is focused on an assault weapons ban which the government says previously was ineffective and which based upon homicide rates accounts for 1% of 1% of gun homicides.  Thus, I am asserting that the government's ban on assault weapons is not rationally related to the stated compelling government interest.  Then I argue in favor of protecting all constitutional rights based upon the notion of protection from those in power and from tyranny of the majority.

Yup..."group think"  So bottom line, if someone disagrees with you, based upon non-personal rational arguments, grounded in legal and Constitutional principles I am guilty of group think....

I wish I could say that I was surprised, but the reality of this gun debate and the pro-gun control lobby has really just been boiled down to that exchange in a microcosmic.   Disagree with those calling for gun legislation and get called names....

 

So much for a reasoned debate on the issue,

jmk-brooklyn - 2013-04-05 5:16 PM Nothing? Really? Aw, c'mon, you gotta admit that was funny.

Aarondb4 - 2013-04-05 5:06 PM

Personally I don't have an issue with those who have had a change of heart and no longer wish to own guns. I even go so far as to have a no obligations donation system in place. We are currently accepting all guns including black scary ones.

jmk-brooklyn - 2013-04-05 2:16 PM Nothing? Really? Aw, c'mon, you gotta admit that was funny.

jmk-brooklyn - 2013-04-05 3:16 PM Nothing? Really? Aw, c'mon, you gotta admit that was funny.

Big Appa - 2013-04-08 10:00 AM

tuwood - 2013-04-08 6:41 PM

I saw this posted on a conservative forum and I was curious if it was true, and if it is what are the ramifications to the overall gun debate.  Brock???

I suspect the felon could/would still be charged with possession of a firearm, but wouldn't be able to be convicted of not registering his/her firearm or possession of an unregistered firearm.

Why Convicted Felon 's Don 't/Won 't Have to Register Their [Illegal] Firearms

So, when these gun registration schemes are announced, be aware that only lawful gun-owners are required to register their firearms. Unlawful owners are exempted from registration laws due to their constitutional protection against self-incrimination.

powerman - 2013-04-08 10:15 PM

But I do not see the conflict with that Tony. They are indeed guilty of possession by a prior offender, they just can't be charged with not registering the weapon... the weapon was illegal to begin with. That's how I read it.

And there are infact a lot of laws we law abiding people follow that criminals don't... that's kind of what makes us us and them them. But we will not be registering our firearms anytime soon.

tealeaf - 2013-04-09 5:47 AM

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/08/us/tennessee-gun-death/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

A pistol in the hands of a 4-year-old boy went off during a weekend cookout, killing the wife of a Tennessee sheriff's deputy who was showing his guns to a relative, state police said Monday. No one saw the boy pick up the weapon before the shooting, which occurred Saturday night in Lebanon, east of Nashville, Tennessee Bureau of Investigation spokeswoman Kristin Helm said.

The single shot killed 47-year-old Josephine Fanning, the wife of Wilson County Sheriff's Deputy Daniel Fanning. The couple were hosting family and friends at their house when Daniel Fanning and a relative went into a bedroom to check out some of Fanning's guns, Helm said. Josephine Fanning and the boy walked into the room later, and at some point the boy picked the loaded pistol up off the bed.

No doubt this deputy would have considered himself a so-called "responsible gun owner."

Big Appa - 2013-04-09 8:54 AM

So what would you have done about this tragic event?

Big Appa - 2013-04-09 8:54 AM

So what would you have done about this tragic event?