Should we allow 30,000 deaths a year so 500 people can defend their TV sets?

[LuddlyNeddite]

There are 30,000 deaths by gun violence a year. Key Gun Violence Statistics | Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence

The NRA says that this is acceptable, since the number of cases with self defense by guns is higher. This is PURE BS.

Want to know the real numbers? There were 500 self defense cases in the United States last year. FBI — Expanded Homicide Data Table 14

In case you can't math, the number of unjustified deaths caused by guns per year is SIXTY times higher than the number of self defense cases. 60!

And here's the whammy: not all of those 500 self defense incidents a year were in defense of life or limb. I'd bet that more than half of them were some guy beating somebody who tried to steal his TV, or his car, where the person doing the "self defense" was not in any real danger.

So let me ask you, my fellow citizens this: is is acceptable that we are fine with 30,000 gun deaths a year so that 500 people a year can use guns to defend their TV sets or their jewelry?

 

[OrphanSlug]

I see a toilet in this thread's future...

 

[Linc]

I see a toilet in this thread's future...

Once seeing your post. I knew who the OP was.
And can guess who the flusher will be .

 

[Anagram]

Your link seems to show the yearly justifiable homicides by law enforcement officers, not by private citizens.

Justifiable homicides are not the only way felonies are stopped do to guns.

You can't just assume that gun violence deaths will drop to zero or even close to it even if you're suggesting implementing some full-fledged confiscation program.

 

[TurtleDude]

There are 30,000 deaths by gun violence a year. Key Gun Violence Statistics | Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence

The NRA says that this is acceptable, since the number of cases with self defense by guns is higher. This is PURE BS.

Want to know the real numbers? There were 500 self defense cases in the United States last year. FBI — Expanded Homicide Data Table 14

In case you can't math, the number of unjustified deaths caused by guns per year is SIXTY times higher than the number of self defense cases. 60!

And here's the whammy: not all of those 500 self defense incidents a year were in defense of life or limb. I'd bet that more than half of them were some guy beating somebody who tried to steal his TV, or his car, where the person doing the "self defense" was not in any real danger.

So let me ask you, my fellow citizens this: is is acceptable that we are fine with 30,000 gun deaths a year so that 500 people a year can use guns to defend their TV sets or their jewelry?

another idiotic anti gun rant that is probably reeking of POE

more than half are SUICIDES

80% of the murders are caused by people who cannot legally own guns and perhaps more since JUVENILE records are not available

80% of those murdered are people with felony records

so when we get factor out suicides and mopes killed by other mopes, the "gun deaths" are rather low

is it acceptable to give up our freedom to cater to people who wet their beds thinking that others own guns? of course not

 

[Bodi]

Eleminate the guns and eliminate the gun related deaths... pretty simple.

 

[pbrauer]

People can legally own a gun for sport and protection, the are guarenteed the right via the Second Amendment. There are millions of guns in this country and there is NOTHING you can do about it. I don't like guns and would never own one, but I support the right of people to own one.

 

[TurtleDude]

Eleminate the guns and eliminate the gun related deaths... pretty simple.

that worked really well with eliminating drugs hasn't it

try to eliminate guns and lots of politicians and cops are going to die

 

[Bodi]

that worked really well with eliminating drugs hasn't it

try to eliminate guns and lots of politicians and cops are going to die

Are they going to die by gun shots? Seems to make my point even stronger...

 

[TurtleDude]

Are they going to die by gun shots? Seems to make my point even stronger...

How do you suggest eliminating 400 million guns currently owned by Americans

I advocate if that happens, gun owners hunt down the soft targets first

 

[gdgyva]

.

There are 30,000 deaths by gun violence a year. Key Gun Violence Statistics | Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence

The NRA says that this is acceptable, since the number of cases with self defense by guns is higher. This is PURE BS.

Want to know the real numbers? There were 500 self defense cases in the United States last year. FBI — Expanded Homicide Data Table 14

In case you can't math, the number of unjustified deaths caused by guns per year is SIXTY times higher than the number of self defense cases. 60!

And here's the whammy: not all of those 500 self defense incidents a year were in defense of life or limb. I'd bet that more than half of them were some guy beating somebody who tried to steal his TV, or his car, where the person doing the "self defense" was not in any real danger.

So let me ask you, my fellow citizens this: is is acceptable that we are fine with 30,000 gun deaths a year so that 500 people a year can use guns to defend their TV sets or their jewelry?

Tell you what.....

I will think about, repeat think about, letting you have mine, the day you have collected every gun from every criminal in the U.S.

Until then.....talk to the hand

 

[Redress]

There are 30,000 deaths by gun violence a year. Key Gun Violence Statistics | Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence

The NRA says that this is acceptable, since the number of cases with self defense by guns is higher. This is PURE BS.

Want to know the real numbers? There were 500 self defense cases in the United States last year. FBI — Expanded Homicide Data Table 14

In case you can't math, the number of unjustified deaths caused by guns per year is SIXTY times higher than the number of self defense cases. 60!

And here's the whammy: not all of those 500 self defense incidents a year were in defense of life or limb. I'd bet that more than half of them were some guy beating somebody who tried to steal his TV, or his car, where the person doing the "self defense" was not in any real danger.

So let me ask you, my fellow citizens this: is is acceptable that we are fine with 30,000 gun deaths a year so that 500 people a year can use guns to defend their TV sets or their jewelry?

2nd Amendment. /Thread.

Don't like it, you got to amend the constitution, and you are not going to have any luck with that.

 

[TurtleDude]

.


Tell you what.....

I will think about, repeat think about, letting you have mine, the day you have collected every gun from every criminal in the U.S.

Until then.....talk to the hand

its funny-these gun banners pretend that there is no other use to owning a gun but to kill a criminal and then stack that usage against the 30,000 deaths that are mainly suicides and mopes killing mopes

Their lying bias ignores all the good things people do with guns. They also ignore all the jobs that would be lost if hunting and shooting sports were to be banned

and most importantly, they ignore all the deaths that would happen if guns were to be banned. and I would suspect many of the dead would be the yapping gun banners if the government tried to confiscate the 400 million privately owned guns by force. If it comes to that sort of a war-I certainly will advocate targeting the aiders and abettors first.

 

[OrphanSlug]

Eleminate the guns and eliminate the gun related deaths... pretty simple.

Not in this nation. "Eliminate the guns" means going after those you know about, meaning criminals keep what they have and our problems in Chicago, NY, LA, DC, Atlanta, Detroit, etc. all get worse.

 

[TurtleDude]

I voted yes even though the biased poll question oozes dishonesty

30,000 hardly are innocent. more than half are suicides so they died due to their own intent. and 80% of those murdered are felons. maybe more since juvi records are not accessible

so his claim of 30K innocents is complete and utter oozing bovine excrement

 

[LuddlyNeddite]

People can legally own a gun for sport and protection, the are guarenteed the right via the Second Amendment. There are millions of guns in this country and there is NOTHING you can do about it. I don't like guns and would never own one, but I support the right of people to own one.

Here's the thing:

When President Hillary takes office in 2017, she will probably be tasked with appointing two new supreme court justices in her first term.

She will replace the gun nut justices with people who have common sense and respect the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." which guns take away.

Heller vs. DC will be overturned as soon as Hillary appoints her new justices.

Now there is nothing the gun nuts can to do to stop anything ranging from background checks to full confiscation

 

[LuddlyNeddite]

2nd Amendment. /Thread.

Don't like it, you got to amend the constitution, and you are not going to have any luck with that.

Here's the thing:

When President Hillary takes office in 2017, she will probably be tasked with appointing two new supreme court justices in her first term.

She will replace the gun nut justices with people who have common sense and respect the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." which guns take away.

Heller vs. DC will be overturned as soon as Hillary appoints her new justices.

Now there is nothing the gun nuts can to do to stop anything ranging from background checks to full confiscation

 

[LuddlyNeddite]

Eleminate the guns and eliminate the gun related deaths... pretty simple.

A common sense statement said by somebody from a country which has zero guns and zero gun crime. Thank you for being the voice of reason

 

[Redress]

Here's the thing:

When President Hillary takes office in 2017, she will probably be tasked with appointing two new supreme court justices in her first term.

She will replace the gun nut justices with people who have common sense and respect the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." which guns take away.

Heller vs. DC will be overturned as soon as Hillary appoints her new justices.

Now there is nothing the gun nuts can to do to stop anything ranging from background checks to full confiscation

Even without gun nut justices, you still have the second amendment, which means that any limitations to gun ownership have to rather small.

Look, i do not own a gun, I don't have a small penis, I don't live in fear. If the 2nd did not exist, I would not be bothered by a complete gun ban. But it does exist, and you may not like it, but it is the law of the land.

 

[LuddlyNeddite]

Even without gun nut justices, you still have the second amendment, which means that any limitations to gun ownership have to rather small.

Look, i do not own a gun, I don't have a small penis, I don't live in fear. If the 2nd did not exist, I would not be bothered by a complete gun ban. But it does exist, and you may not like it, but it is the law of the land.

After Hillary replaces gun nut justices with people who have common sense, the second amendment would still be there, but it would be interpreted as actual "militias" such as state police and the national guard, not random people off the street.

The second amendment will still be there, but the individual right to have a gun will not.

 

[Bodi]

A common sense statement said by somebody from a country which has zero guns and zero gun crime. Thank you for being the voice of reason

I am an American

 

[LuddlyNeddite]

I am an American

Aren't you from New Zealand?

 

[Kal'Stang]

Here's the thing:

When President Hillary takes office in 2017, she will probably be tasked with appointing two new supreme court justices in her first term.

She will replace the gun nut justices with people who have common sense and respect the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." which guns take away.

Heller vs. DC will be overturned as soon as Hillary appoints her new justices.

Now there is nothing the gun nuts can to do to stop anything ranging from background checks to full confiscation

The woman is a certified crook. You'd vote her in just to push your agenda of banning guns?

 

[LuddlyNeddite]

The woman is a certified crook. You'd vote her in just to push your agenda of banning guns?

Guns are the highest preventable cause of death in the United States. If Hillary is willing to severely restrict them, she is a-ok in my book.

Also, she has been First Lady, Secretary of State, and Senator. She knows how to lead.

 

[TurtleDude]

Here's the thing:

When President Hillary takes office in 2017, she will probably be tasked with appointing two new supreme court justices in her first term.

She will replace the gun nut justices with people who have common sense and respect the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." which guns take away.

Heller vs. DC will be overturned as soon as Hillary appoints her new justices.

Now there is nothing the gun nuts can to do to stop anything ranging from background checks to full confiscation

Kagan swore that Heller was controlling precedent and should not be overturned

and the worst thing that could happen to the Dems would be that

many people publicly stated that Heller was one of the best things that happened for Obama before he won the election.