19 year old shot and killed outside theater,in Britain, which british gun law stopped this shooting?

[RetiredGySgt]

Gun crime in London rises by 42%

Pfft. We have 2,544 gun incidents A MONTH.

there are only 65 million people in all of the United Kingdom to include Northern Ireland. That is 1/5th the population of the USA. so their 2500 would be 12500 to us. And unlike us where gun crime is decreasing theirs is INCREASING as an exponential rate.

 

[2aguy]

D.C, Chicago and L.A. are cities controlled by Democrats and have all the laws that you would impose on all of us. Those laws don't work. And, while you claim we "suck" at protecting our citizens, according the the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, we are 92 in the world in intentional homicide

They do work. The reason those cities have gun crime is because guns are trafficked there from shitty gun law states and areas.

And LA is crime-ridden? Since when?

and yet the states they get the gun from don't have the murder rates where the gang member take them...you are such a moron...it isn't the guns, it is the democrat policieis that allow criminals to be released from prison over and over again...

 

[2aguy]

And each year Americans use their guns to stop 1,500,000 criminal attacks

Eh...not really. Kind of a made-up number there, one that was ripped out of context from an Obama report that you misrepresent.

No....wrong again, that number comes from the bill clinton Department of Justice Study done to refute Dr. Gary Kleck's work......obama then confirmed the number with his CDC study in 2013........here are all the studies..



The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....notice the bill clinton and obama defensive gun use research is highlighted.....

GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, military)

DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)

L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)

Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops, military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million ( the bill clinton study)

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."

(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])

Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer


-------------------------------------------

Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..

*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....

The study you're using is from 1994 which was twenty four years ago and prior to the assault weapons ban.

The Assualt weapon ban did nothing.....they actually studied the impact and it had none, you doofus....

 

[2aguy]

obama then confirmed the number with his CDC study in 2013

No he didn't. Like usual, you are misrepresenting what was actually concluded. Beware of Conservative bearing statistics because more often than not, those statistics are cherry picked and have no context.

From WaPo:
The study (available as a PDF) calls the defensive use of guns by crime victims "a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed." While it might be as high as 3 million defensive uses of guns each year, some scholars point to the much lower estimate of 108,000 times a year. "The variation in these numbers remains a controversy in the field," the study notes.​

The authors also say gun ownership might be good for defensive uses, but that benefit could be canceled out by the risk of suicide or homicide that comes with gun ownership. The depth of the relationship is unknown "and this is a sufficiently important question that it merits additional, careful exploration."

Another point gun-rights activists make about the National Academies's report is that "the key finding the president was no doubt seeking — that more laws would result in less crime — was missing."

And they're right. The key finding is missing. But that's because we don't know the answer -- one way or the other.

That, some would say, is exactly why the CDC needs to conduct research.​

The CDC never stopped doing the research numb nuts......and the 108,000 is the lowest number out of all the studies for a reason...it comes from the National Crime Victimization Survey.....not an actual gun self defense study.....they don't ask one question about defensive gun use and they don't even have the word "gun" in the survey, and even with that, they get 108,000...........

And at 108,000, numb nuts.....gun murder in 2016?

11,004.....

Can you tell which number is bigger, doofus?

And even if you throw in gun accidents?

495


Can you tell which number is bigger...

Defensive gun use from the study that doesn't ask about defensive gun use, or use the word gun....

108,000

Gun murder and accidental gun death...

11,499

Can you tell which number is bigger.....?

Fatal Injury Data | WISQARS | Injury Center | CDC

2016

Gun.....495

Car.......38,748

poisoning......58,335

falling.......34,673

suffocation...6,610

drowning......3,786




Expanded Homicide Data Table 4

Rifles....374

knives....1,604

blunt objects....472

bare hands....656

Total gun murder .....11,004

 

[2aguy]

obama then confirmed the number with his CDC study in 2013

No he didn't. Like usual, you are misrepresenting what was actually concluded. Beware of Conservative bearing statistics because more often than not, those statistics are cherry picked and have no context.

From WaPo:
The study (available as a PDF) calls the defensive use of guns by crime victims "a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed." While it might be as high as 3 million defensive uses of guns each year, some scholars point to the much lower estimate of 108,000 times a year. "The variation in these numbers remains a controversy in the field," the study notes.​

The authors also say gun ownership might be good for defensive uses, but that benefit could be canceled out by the risk of suicide or homicide that comes with gun ownership. The depth of the relationship is unknown "and this is a sufficiently important question that it merits additional, careful exploration."

Another point gun-rights activists make about the National Academies's report is that "the key finding the president was no doubt seeking — that more laws would result in less crime — was missing."

And they're right. The key finding is missing. But that's because we don't know the answer -- one way or the other.

That, some would say, is exactly why the CDC needs to conduct research.​

The CDC never stopped doing research...dumb ass......

No, The Government Is Not 'Banned' From Studying Gun Violence

Absolutely nothing in the amendment prohibits the CDC from studying “gun violence,” even if this narrowly focused topic tells us little. In response to this inconvenient fact, gun controllers will explain that while there isn’t an outright ban, the Dickey amendment has a “chilling” effect on the study of gun violence.


Does it? Pointing out that “research plummeted after the 1996 ban” could just as easily tell us that most research funded by the CDC had been politically motivated. Because the idea that the CDC, whose spectacular mission creep has taken it from its primary goal of preventing malaria and other dangerous communicable diseases, to spending hundreds of millions of dollars nagging you about how much salt you put on your steaks or how often you do calisthenics, is nervous about the repercussions of engaging in non-partisan research is hard to believe.

Also unlikely is the notion that a $2.6 million cut in funding so horrified the agency that it was rendered powerless to pay for or conduct studies on gun violence. The CDC funding tripled from 1996 to 2010. The CDC’s budget is over six billion dollars today.

And the idea that the CDC was paralyzed through two-years of full Democratic Party control, and then six years under a president who was more antagonistic towards the Second Amendment than any other in history, is difficult to believe, because it’s provably false.

In 2013, President Barack Obama not only signed an Executive Order directing the CDC to research “gun violence,” the administration also provided an additional $10 million to do it. Here is the study on gun violence that was supposedly banned and yet funded by the CDC. You might not have heard about the resulting research, because it contains numerous inconvenient facts about gun ownership that fails to propel the predetermined narrative. Trump’s HHS Secretary Alex Azar is also open to the idea of funding more gun violence research.

It’s not banned. It’s not chilled.

Meanwhile, numerous states and private entities fund peer-reviewed studies and other research on gun violence. I know this because gun control advocates are constantly sending me studies that distort and conflate issues to help them make their arguments. My inbox is bombarded with studies and conferences and “webinars” dissecting gun violence.

The real problem here is two-fold.

One, researchers want the CDC involved so they can access government data about American gun owners. Considering the rhetoric coming from Democrats — gun ownership being tantamount to terrorism, and so on — there’s absolutely no reason Republicans should acquiesce to helping gun controllers circumvent the privacy of Americans citizens peacefully practicing their Constitutional rights.

Second, gun control advocates want to lift the ban on politically skewed research because they’re interested in producing politically skewed research. When the American Medical Association declares gun violence a “public health crisis,” it’s not interested in a balance look at the issue. When researchers advocate lifting the restrictions on advocacy at the CDC, they don’t even pretend they not to hold pre-conceived notions about the outcomes.

-------

There’s no reason to allow activists — then or now — to use the veneer of state-sanctioned science for their partisan purposes. For example, we now know that Rosenberg and others at the CDC turned out to be wrong about the correlation between guns and crime — a steep drop in gun crimes coincided with the explosions of gun ownership from 1996 to 2014.

 

[2aguy]

If only the UK was as safe as the US ?

I cant understand why not one person in the UK thinks it would be great to have everyone owning guns.

The U.K. is more violent than the U.S. and london is more dangerous than New York city...

 

[2aguy]

If only the UK was as safe as the US ?

I cant understand why not one person in the UK thinks it would be great to have everyone owning guns.

You've talked to everyone of them huh? lol

We look at the mess in the US, kids shot up in schools,domestic disputes ending in slaughter and politicians owned by gun nuts. Nobody wants a part of that. Why would anyone ?

You don't have a choice.....your gun crime rates are going up.....your violent crime rates are going up....you are cutting your police manpower and resources to pay for your welfare state....you single teenage girls are having male children without husbands and fathers.....and you are importing violent 3rd world criminals...

You are on the edge of disaster......and unlike the U.S., your people are unarmed and helpless in the face of what is about to happen to them....