How far will Anti's take it?

[LaMidRighter]

What the facts show: The more guns per capita, the more the more intentional homicides by firearms.

Guns, uninterrupted: beyond Alabama killings, onto Virginia and National Parks | The Kaufmann Governance Post

So the contention that guns make's a country's citizens safer doesn't hold water.

Do you know the difference between homicide, intentional homicide and murder? Do you realize that even with the statistically signifigant higher ownership there isn't a percentage difference in the numbers you threw up? And do you also realize that the deaths per million in the U.S. was less than a fraction of a percent of the population?

 

[ThePlayDrive]

Fear is a nasty disease, and can cause weak and/or overly emotional people to lose complete control of rational logic.

I know, like saying we should arm all teachers.

 

[LaMidRighter]

What PRIOR RESTRAINT? You just made up some stuff and tried to pass it off as fact. So not one law we have ever passed in this area has done any good? Absurdity to the max.

Unlike you I don't make stuff up. The prior restraint based laws haven't done ****, but then again it's not about effectiveness with your side but politics.

 

[SMTA]

I know, like saying we should arm all teachers.

Nope - that is common sense.

Had the discussion with my son's elementary school principal today, who would fully support a couple of armed teachers.

 

[ThePlayDrive]

Nope - that is common sense.

Had the discussion with my son's elementary school principal today, who would fully support a couple of armed teachers.

Of course you think it's common sense.

 

[Catawba]

Do you know the difference between homicide, intentional homicide and murder? Do you realize that even with the statistically signifigant higher ownership there isn't a percentage difference in the numbers you threw up? And do you also realize that the deaths per million in the U.S. was less than a fraction of a percent of the population?

You comments lead me to believe you do not know the definition of the term, per capita. Here you go - Per capita - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

 

[wolfman24]

Based off the logic that nothing based on the constitutionally prohibited prior restraint has done dick so far. Remember that thing about what makes criminals criminals? Yeah, they don't follow laws that's why they are called CRIMINALS.

Like the gunnies who carry into legally marked no gun zones just to prove they can do it? WHy do they do that? EGO, arrogance or is it they just ignore a law they don't want to follow? Well can you name another group in you post that doesn't follow the law because they don't want to? HMMM?

 

[haymarket]

Unlike you I don't make stuff up. The prior restraint based laws haven't done ****, but then again it's not about effectiveness with your side but politics.

What prior restraint laws are you ranting against?

And what is it you are falsely accusing me of making up?

 

[LaMidRighter]

What prior restraint laws are you ranting against?

And what is it you are falsely accusing me of making up?

Let's see, magazine bans, waiting periods, automatics bans, cosmetics bans.

 

[LaMidRighter]

You comments lead me to believe you do not know the definition of the term, per capita. Here you go - Per capita - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Actually, I do know them. Homicide is taking of human life, intentional homicide is that which requires intent, murder is the willfull taking of human life without the right to do so. If you studied this more you would realize that defensive homicide is intentional homicide and that murder is also intentional homicide, so throwing out "homicide by gun" is such a fallacy without breaking down the catagorical numbers that all I can do is laugh at the statistic.

 

[Muddy Creek]

Authorities crack down on copycat threats after Newtown | The Lookout - Yahoo! News

This story got me wondering. If the anti gun nuts won't be happy with whatever comes
out of congress early next year how far will they take it - are these threats from people
pushing an anti gun hysteria over a cliff? I've seen some pretty sick comments from the
anti's including one who told a pro gun writer she hoped her kids die in the next attack
"soon."

There's no more an anti-gun crowd than a pro-abortion crowd. if you don't stop listening to FOX you will not only NOT know what's going on, you will CONTINUALLY be the most MISINFORMED person on the forum.

 

[BretJ]

Like the gunnies who carry into legally marked no gun zones just to prove they can do it? WHy do they do that? EGO, arrogance or is it they just ignore a law they don't want to follow? Well can you name another group in you post that doesn't follow the law because they don't want to? HMMM?

I have carried for nearly 15 years and have, on a couple occasions, carried in an area that was a posted "gun free" zone. It was a matter of not wanting to leave a weapon in my vehicle. No ego involved. No criminal intent. In many states, only areas specified by the law are "no gun" zones. A business can post a "gun free" sign here in Florida, but it has no real legal weight. If someone in the store were to spot my concealed weapon and call the police, they would simply ask you to leave the establishment. No harm no foul. Question for you. Out of all the theatres in the Aurora area, many larger or closer to his home, why did the shooter choose that particular theatre? Maybe because it's the only one that has posted "no guns permitted"? Perhaps he did not want to risk being shot and it was safer to carry out his plan in an area less likely to be frequented by someone else carrying a weapon. We cannot know but it does make you wonder.

 

[Catawba]

Actually, I do know them. Homicide is taking of human life, intentional homicide is that which requires intent, murder is the willfull taking of human life without the right to do so. If you studied this more you would realize that defensive homicide is intentional homicide and that murder is also intentional homicide, so throwing out "homicide by gun" is such a fallacy without breaking down the catagorical numbers that all I can do is laugh at the statistic.

My guess is, you are trying to make some kind of point here, but I cannot find it in that statement. Please rephrase.

 

[BretJ]

My guess is, you are trying to make some kind of point here, but I cannot find it in that statement. Please rephrase.

His point is simple. The statistic does not differentiate between murder (intentional homicide with malice) and self defense homicide (justifiable intentional homicide). Pretty straight forward.

 

[Catawba]

His point is simple. The statistic does not differentiate between murder (intentional homicide with malice) and self defense homicide (justifiable intentional homicide). Pretty straight forward.

If that was his point, it is irrelevant to my claim, which was:

"The more guns per capita, the more the more intentional homicides by firearms"

 

[haymarket]

Let's see, magazine bans, waiting periods, automatics bans, cosmetics bans.

What about those things am I making up?

 

[Jerry]

Authorities crack down on copycat threats after Newtown | The Lookout - Yahoo! News

This story got me wondering. If the anti gun nuts won't be happy with whatever comes
out of congress early next year how far will they take it - are these threats from people
pushing an anti gun hysteria over a cliff? I've seen some pretty sick comments from the
anti's including one who told a pro gun writer she hoped her kids die in the next attack
"soon."

Gun control is not about guns. The gun is just the gimmick, the surrogate argument, the viral delivery system for the drug.

Gun control is about controlling people, about taking away your ability to say "no".

Pro-control will never be satisfied, which is why they are not to be negotiated with.

They will take it past the point you say 'no'. They will war with you until you either give in or die.

Therefore we must be the same

 

[Jerry]

What about not allowing convicted felons or those convicted of gun crimes to buy or own a gun?

Criminals buy them anyway.

 

[BretJ]

If that was his point, it is irrelevant to my claim, which was:

"The more guns per capita, the more the more intentional homicides by firearms"

While that may be technically true, by using those statistics as justification for gun control you are in essence stating that all homicide is equal. Fact is that a criminal using a firearm in the commission of a crime is not the moral equal to a woman killing an attacker while defending herself. Given the crime statistics of other countries, you could state that fewer firearms per capita equates to the higher possibility of being the victim of a violent crime pretty easily.

 

[Catawba]

While that may be technically true, by using those statistics as justification for gun control you are in essence stating that all homicide is equal. Fact is that a criminal using a firearm in the commission of a crime is not the moral equal to a woman killing an attacker while defending herself. Given the crime statistics of other countries, you could state that fewer firearms per capita equates to the higher possibility of being the victim of a violent crime pretty easily.

You have provided no documentation to show the numeric distinction.

 

[TurtleDude]

I am STRONGLY hoping and praying that the NRA makes that their dominant theme from her on out before the American people.

this post proves one of my central points

the anti gun movement is anti NRA and anti lawful gun ownership due to political reasons-rather than being anti gun crime and anti criminal.

 

[LaMidRighter]

My guess is, you are trying to make some kind of point here, but I cannot find it in that statement. Please rephrase.

"Intentional homicide" is any case where the action was intended to kill, it's not a criminal charge. Murder is the willfull killing of another human being without justification, both defensive homicide and murder are homicide and both are intentional homicide. Not that difficult to understand. So listing "intentional homicide by gun" without differentiation is not honest if you are trying to make a point based upon gun violence.

 

[LaMidRighter]

While that may be technically true, by using those statistics as justification for gun control you are in essence stating that all homicide is equal. Fact is that a criminal using a firearm in the commission of a crime is not the moral equal to a woman killing an attacker while defending herself. Given the crime statistics of other countries, you could state that fewer firearms per capita equates to the higher possibility of being the victim of a violent crime pretty easily.

Absolutely, crime statistics from many first world countries confirm a rise in violent crimes among multiple catagories post gun control, the data would bear that assumption out.

 

[BretJ]

You have provided no documentation to show the numeric distinction.

Data

My point is that there is more to the issue than simple statistics. The numbers are all over the board and to base an opinion on those numbers is pretty simplistic. There is a lot more to the issue than simple numbers.

 

[Catawba]

Data

My point is that there is more to the issue than simple statistics. The numbers are all over the board and to base an opinion on those numbers is pretty simplistic. There is a lot more to the issue than simple numbers.

This doesn't show the numeric distinction you claimed.