Oddly enough places with more concentrations of people also tend to be more liberal in ideology
and latching on random correlations (what greyparrot has done).
It's not random. That correlation has been valid for decades. If you defund the police and reward criminals, the unintended consequence is more crime and murders, regardless of how many gun-free zones you allocate. No sane person with the means would willingly choose to live outside a gated community in a Democrat dystopian city.
I should remind you that local ordinances do not supersede state-level laws.
No sane person with the means would willingly choose to live outside a gated community in a Democrat dystopian city.
Which just means that gun violence is a complicated issue that can't simply be explained by pointing at numbers and latching on random correlations
why aren't non-gun murders wildly out of control in the usa?
do you agree that non-gun murders *should* be wildly out of control if this is just a bad person problem, and not a gun problem too?
You can tell this is a gun problem, not just a bad person problem as the gun lobby says
also, whatever your argument is.... do you agree that non-gun murders *should* be wildly out of control if this is just a bad person problem, and not a gun problem too?
An estimated 287,400 prisoners had possessed afirearm during their offense. Among these, more thanhalf (56%) had either stolen it (6%), found it at thescene of the crime (7%), or obtained it off the streetor from the underground market (43%). Most ofthe remainder (25%) had obtained it from a familymember or friend, or as a gift. Seven percent hadpurchased it under their own name from a licensedfirearm dealer.
also, switzerland has more gun control than we do. and, even if it didn't, it's still the exception to the rule. you can find an example or exception to fit any argument... but i cited a harvard literature review, that says the prescence of gun correlates to murder. that means that's the general rule.
School shootings are one of the ugliest global occurrences. That's my two cents. I imagine you've all had this argument a thousand times and not moved an inch.
Just add me to the list of gun murders if your intent is to take my gun. Simple as that. No debate required. I will defend my firearms to the death.
7 days later
Not necessarily. Saying that bad people are the problem doesn't mean that they don't have choices in tools they use to commit crimes. Bad people are choosing to use guns to do bad things.
And your Harvard source states that the only variable that was included was gun ownership rates. So, they don't even know if x causes y or y causes x. In simple terms, countries with more crime might increase gun ownership for self-defense purposes. They said that the only factor for controlling other variables was that all of the countries were developed.... That was it.
incorrect. if this is a bad person problem and guns dont make the situation worse, there should be wildly out of control non-gun murder rates too. you are correct, that it's technically possible that people are just choosing to use guns, and by some coincidence, non-gun murders are normal here... but that's counterintuitive and would be a fluke of science.
princplles of science dont just change, unless there's a reason for it. if more guns means more murder fifteen years ago, we have no reason to assume things are different. it's not just this study either, look at the opening post... police are more likely to die with gun around as are women, and so many other metrics. you and your loved ones are more likley do die if you have a gun, that sorta stuff. if there was just one study we might consider it could be flawed, the implications. but look at the totality of the science out there.what i have on my side of the argument is the totality of the sicnece. i also have common sense. i defy you to argue from common sense that everyone carrying around guns wouldn't cause the murder rate to sky rocket.
The belief that more guns lead to fewer crimes is founded on the idea that guns are dangerous when bad guys have them, so we should get more guns into the hands of good guys. Yet Cook, the Duke economist, says this good guy/bad guy dichotomy is a false and dangerous one. Even upstanding American citizens are only human—they can “lose their temper, or exercise poor judgment, or misinterpret a situation, or have a few drinks,” he explains, and if they're carrying guns when they do, bad things can ensue. In 2013 in Ionia, Mich., a road rage incident led two drivers—both concealed carry permit holders—to get out of their cars, take out their guns and kill each other.
As I drove from Scottsboro to Atlanta to catch my flight home, I kept turning over what I had seen and learned. Although we do not yet know exactly how guns affect us, the notion that more guns lead to less crime is almost certainly incorrect. The research on guns is not uniform, and we could certainly use more of it. But when all but a few studies point in the same direction, we can feel confident that the arrow is aiming at the truth—which is, in this case, that guns do not inhibit crime and violence but instead make it worse.
The popular gun-advocacy bumper sticker says that “guns don't kill people, people kill people”—and it is, in fact, true. People, all of us, lead complicated lives, misinterpret situations, get angry, make mistakes. And when a mistake involves pulling a trigger, the damage can't be undone. Unlike my Glock-aided attack on the zombie at the gun range, life is not target practice.
More Blacks died from "mass" school shootings than whites
