In a world without guns...the strong and the many can brutally beat the weak and outnumbered...

[Brain357]

That's 2....19,998...the rest you just made up...right Brain...?

Those gun accidents didn't happen...you just made them up to push your anti gun agenda...right? Since you only listed 2...and made up the 19,998...you are way behind....

Firearms Account for Less Than 0.5 of All Unintentional Fatalities - The Truth About Guns

Do you not understand the difference between real statistics and a survey?

 

[2aguy]

Do you not understand the difference between real statistics and a survey?

Lies, damned lies.........and statistics.....you have been duped Brain....obviously you can't prove there are 20,000 accidental gun deaths since you can't post all of them to this site....it should be easy for you...yet you can't...so either you are lying, or you are a dupe of the anti gun agenda having made up stats to push their agenda...

Which one are you?

 

[2aguy]

So far...you have posted 2 accidents....so only 2 accidents with guns each year...right? Or will you post more...if not...again...are you intentionally lying or are you a dupe of the anti gun lobby?

 

[Brain357]

So far...you have posted 2 accidents....so only 2 accidents with guns each year...right? Or will you post more...if not...again...are you intentionally lying or are you a dupe of the anti gun lobby?

And so far you have been very childish. We both know I can post lots and lots of accidental shootings as I have before. But like I said those are a real statistic. You take a survey of what 5,000 people and you believe that somehow can be calculated to 1.4 million a year? When you can only come up with about 50 stories a year? When there are only about 230 justifiable homicides per year with a gun? So even though the few stories I do read often lead to a dead criminal your 1.4 mil means a dead criminal .0002% of the time? That is just silly.

Here learn something:
Less Guns Less Crime- Debunking the Self-Defense Myth Armed With Reason

 

[Saigon]

Darkwind -

It is not a lie that schools and workplaces are safer in Europe than they are in the US.

I call that a sign of freedom.

I have absolutely idea no idea what you mean with all of this nonsense about people being told what time to get out of bed in the morning - maybe that happens at your Mom's house, but not in Europe.

Again - we have a great degree of freedom here, because we live in a safer and more inclusive society.

 

[Saigon]

Time for another run at this chart from the Washington Post (not that it is a US source)...again, so far not one single poster has been able to stand to comment on it.

The only stats that count are the FBI numbers

And just what is "gun related"? a person is either killed by a gun or not killed by a gun.

It seems now is a good time to mention that the UK doesn't count a crime as a murder unless there has been an actual conviction. How many other countries do that as well?

But as I said at this point we are talking cultural differences and America is NOT Europe nor do we want to be.

SO you foreigners can talk all you want, preach all you want but do you really think we are going to listen?

I think more and more Americans are listening and talking about this.

The number of gun owners in the US drops each year, and that tells us something.

At the moment the NRA control this issue and all of the politics around it, but they may not last forever.

 

[Saigon]

Guns per capita & homicides per capita:

USA : 90 guns per 100 people
Holland: 3.9

USA 4.7
Holland: 0.9

And another myth bites the dust.....

What's Holland's black population? I'll wait.

Seriously??!! Have you ever been to Holland??!!

My god man....I cannot believe you just posted that!!!

Put it this way - around 50% of the population of Rotterdam have parents born outside Holland. Most of them are Indonesian, Congolese or Surinamese. Does that answer oyr question?!

 

[Yarddog]

Okay, then your turn...tell me....why is it that Russia, with almost no guns in private hands has a murder rate far higher than we do...dittos all the latin American countries...?

Genocide...Ruwanda...committed genocide with little or no use of guns, most deaths from machete attacks...

The other guys are right...most of American gun violence...about 80% is confined to democrat controlled inner cities where welfare policies have created breeding grounds for drug gangs....

Fix the gang problem...and you fix the gun problem...if you remove murders by gang members our murder rate drops to about 1.4 per 100,000...

And keep in mind...guns save more lives than they take in this country...

guns prevent genocide as well. An armed population cant be rounded up like cattle and slaughtered.

 

[Saigon]

guns prevent genocide as well. An armed population cant be rounded up like cattle and slaughtered.

Meanwhile, while you wait for the Japanese to invade and try and round everyone up, Americans are being slaughtered every day, in rates between 4 times and 10 times the numbers that are murdered in ANY other developed nation.

 

[Saigon]

But there's no evidence that the decrease in their murder rates was solely as a consequence of banning firearms.

Not solely, no.

When we can rank a dozen countries by gun ownership and see an almost perfect match with a ranking of homicide rates, then obviously safety-based gun laws are the first and most essential step in lowering murder rates, but I agree that this cannot be the only step.

In the US there also needs to be improved mental health services and training for teachers to identify potentially trouble teens, for instance, and also a different approach to dealing with gangs. More work would need to be done on blocking imports of illegal weapons and indentifying the factors that go with gun crime: urbanisation, gangs, domestic violence etc.

 

[auditor0007]

Jesus wept....

Perhaps the OP can explain why countries with very few guns invariably also have very few murders?

No, of course he can't.

Carry on.

People murder people.

And our gun murder rate is more directly tied to our inner city gang problems than it is to legal gun ownership.

Americans do not believe the rights of law abiding people should be curtailed because some people will choose to break the law.

So if all those inner city gangs actually could not get their hands on guns, then the murder rate would drop dramatically. See how that works? I realize you do not value those lives, but they are still lives lost. I'm not arguing for or against gun bans; just stating a fact that guns kill people. It really is that simple.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Jesus wept....

Perhaps the OP can explain why countries with very few guns invariably also have very few murders?

No, of course he can't.

Carry on.

People murder people.

And our gun murder rate is more directly tied to our inner city gang problems than it is to legal gun ownership.

Americans do not believe the rights of law abiding people should be curtailed because some people will choose to break the law.

So if all those inner city gangs actually could not get their hands on guns, then the murder rate would drop dramatically. See how that works? I realize you do not value those lives, but they are still lives lost. I'm not arguing for or against gun bans; just stating a fact that guns kill people. It really is that simple.

Sorry, I don't see how that works:

The killers showed no mercy: They didn't spare women and children, or even a 4-day-old baby, from their machetes. On Monday, women wailed in the streets as a dump truck carried dozens of bodies past burned-out homes toward a mass grave.

Rubber-gloved workers pulled ever-smaller bodies from the dump truck and tossed them into the mass grave. A crowd began singing a hymn with the refrain, "Jesus said I am the way to heaven." As the grave filled, the grieving crowd sang: "Jesus, show me the way."

At least 200 people, most of them Christians, were slaughtered on Sunday, according to residents, aid groups and journalists. The local government gave a figure more than twice that amount, but offered no casualty list or other information to substantiate it.

An Associated Press reporter counted 61 corpses, 32 of them children, being buried in the mass grave in the village of Dogo Nahawa on Monday. Other victims were being buried elsewhere.
​

You think guns MAKE blacks kill each other?

 

[MaxGrit]

Harvard
Harvard Gun Study Claims Banning Weapons Doesn t Decrease Violence
A study comparing international gun laws shows that getting rid of firearms might not be the solution to reducing overall violence.

By Steve Annear | Boston Daily | August 30, 2013 4:17 pm
Share Share More
SHARE

PHOTO VIA FLICKR.COM/SLOTH2048

As Boston—and the country as a whole—looks for ways to reduce gun-related deaths and violence, a study from 2007 published in a Harvard University journal is suddenly regaining increased attention for its claims that more control over firearms doesn’t necessarily mean their will be a dip in serious crimes.

In an independent research paper titled “Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?,” first published in Harvard’s Journal of Public Law and Policy, Don B. Kates, a criminologist and constitutional lawyer, and Gary Mauser, Ph.D., a Canadian criminologist and professor at Simon Fraser University, examined the correlation between gun laws and death rates. While not new, as gun debates nationwide heat up, the paper has resurfaced in recent days, specifically with firearm advocates.“International evidence and comparisons have long been offered as proof of the mantra that more guns mean more deaths and that fewer guns, therefore, mean fewer deaths. Unfortunately, such discussions [have] all too often been afflicted by misconceptions and factual error and focus on comparisons that are unrepresentative,” the researchers wrote in their introduction of their findings.

In the 46-page study, which can be read in its entirety here, Kates and Mauser looked at and compared data from the U.S. and parts of Europe to show that stricter laws don’t mean there is less crime. As an example, when looking at “intentional deaths,” or murder, on an international scope, the U.S. falls behind Russia, Estonia, and four other countries, ranking it seventh. More specifically, data shows that in Russia, where guns are banned, the murder rate is significantly higher than in the U.S in comparison. “There is a compound assertion that guns are uniquely available in the United States compared with other modern developed nations, which is why the United States has by far the highest murder rate. Though these assertions have been endlessly repeated, [the latter] is, in fact, false and [the former] is substantially so,” the authors point out, based on their research.

Kates and Mauser clarify that they are not suggesting that gun control causes nations to have higher murder rates, rather, they “observed correlations that nations with stringent gun controls tend to have much higher murder rates than nations that allow guns.”

The study goes on to say:

…the burden of proof rests on the proponents of the more guns equal more death and fewer guns equal less death mantra, especially since they argue public policy ought to be based on that mantra. To bear that burden would at the very least require showing that a large number of nations with more guns have more death and that nations that have imposed stringent gun controls have achieved substantial reductions in criminal violence (or suicide). But those correlations are not observed when a large number of nations are compared across the world.

The paper resurfaced at a time when Boston itself has been looking for ways to combat gun violence, and gun-related deaths, after a sharp uptick in shootings in the city this year.

As of July, more than 100 people had been impacted by shootings in Boston in some way, and more than 17 people had been killed in the city by someone with a firearm. The increase in incidents showed a nearly 30 percent increase in gun-related deaths compared with the same time period in 2012. That number has gone up slightly since then.

In order to quell the violence, officials have been mulling a gun buyback program, and increasing community outreach, but based on Harvard’s latest findings, that may not be the answer.

While the research published by Harvard may show a direct correlation between lower gun-related incidents and less stringent laws, and Boston, specifically, is experiencing an alleged gun crisis, overall, stricter rules on firearms in Massachusetts has seemingly led to fewer deaths, according to the latest data available, putting the state in the second to last slot for the lowest number of reported fatalities nationwide.

But when it comes to examining nations as a whole, the Harvard study suggests otherwise. “If more guns equal more death and fewer guns equal less death, areas within nations with higher gun ownership should in general have more murders than those with less gun ownership in a similar area. But, in fact, the reverse pattern prevails,” the authors wrote.

ADVERTISMENT

Correction:
August 30, 6:00 p.m.: A previous version of this story labeled this study as "new," when in fact, it was first published in 2007. The study has regained the attention of gun advocates in recent days and is being used as an argument for less stringent laws in the U.S.

 

[Rikurzhen]

But there's no evidence that the decrease in their murder rates was solely as a consequence of banning firearms.

Not solely, no.

When we can rank a dozen countries by gun ownership and see an almost perfect match with a ranking of homicide rates, then obviously safety-based gun laws are the first and most essential step in lowering murder rates, but I agree that this cannot be the only step.

It must be fantastic to be a leftist, making up facts to support your version of reality. Notice the slope.

In the US there also needs to be improved mental health services and training for teachers to identify potentially trouble teens, for instance, and also a different approach to dealing with gangs. More work would need to be done on blocking imports of illegal weapons and indentifying the factors that go with gun crime: urbanisation, gangs, domestic violence etc.

It must be great to be a leftist, to have the power to conjure up imaginary solutions to issues.

HOW do teacher identify POTENTIALLY troubled teens? Have you been watching Tom Cruise in Minority Report lately? Your pre-crime suggestion sure is innovative. What do you suggest teachers tell parents "your son said the word "yellow" and we believe that this signals that he has the potential to be a mass murderer, so we're kicking him out of school in order to keep the other students safe from his future, potential, possible, on a good day, make that a bad day, killing spree which we think might happen, maybe, if we're right about people using the word "yellow" as a subconscious signal that they're thinking of shooting up everyone they see.

Different approach to dealing with gangs. You sound like a liberal education theorist declaring that we need a new approach to deal with black underachievement. What exactly is this new approach to dealing with gangs? Should we send gang-bangers to Emily Post Etiquette School, or maybe to ballroom dancing classes because all the other approaches liberals have tried have failed.

Identifying the factors that go with crime? Oh, we already know that:

 

[Saigon]

Guns do not make people kill.

Guns enable people to kill.

There is a big difference there.

 

[Saigon]

It must be fantastic to be a leftist, making up facts to support your version of reality.

I have no idea - I suggest you find whatever "a leftist" is and ask him.

For my part, I am not going to respond to any off-topic spamming, name calling or abuse. I'm only here to discuss the topic sensibly.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Time for another run at this chart from the Washington Post (not that it is a US source)...again, so far not one single poster has been able to stand to comment on it.

The only stats that count are the FBI numbers

And just what is "gun related"? a person is either killed by a gun or not killed by a gun.

It seems now is a good time to mention that the UK doesn't count a crime as a murder unless there has been an actual conviction. How many other countries do that as well?

But as I said at this point we are talking cultural differences and America is NOT Europe nor do we want to be.

SO you foreigners can talk all you want, preach all you want but do you really think we are going to listen?

I think more and more Americans are listening and talking about this.

The number of gun owners in the US drops each year, and that tells us something.

At the moment the NRA control this issue and all of the politics around it, but they may not last forever.

You people like to overestimate the NRA.

And as long as the second amendment remains in tact Americans will own guns,

We Americans don't really care if you accept that or not

 

[Skull Pilot]

Guns do not make people kill.

Guns enable people to kill.

There is a big difference there.

People kill without guns all the time.

In fact according to the FBI more people are killed with fists and feet than they are by any kind of rifle including so called "assault rifles"

 

[Saigon]

Guns do not make people kill.

Guns enable people to kill.

There is a big difference there.

People kill without guns all the time.

In fact according to the FBI more people are killed with fists and feet than they are by any kind of rifle including so called "assault rifles"

Yes, absolutely, and I totally agree.

But if you think of events like Columbine or Sandy Hook or any other mass shooting - how many people could the culprits have killed with fists and feet?

Likewise a lot of accidental deaths that occur with guns would not occur with knives.

That's what I mean by 'enabling killing' - guns are very effective, whereas knives and fists are nowhere near as effective as tools for killing. Not unless you're Steven Seagal, anyway!

 

[Rotagilla]

Well I have known lots of people who have never needed one and neither have I. Heck I don't know anyone who has used one for defense. I'm really not sure why so many people think they need one. You are far more likely to be accidently shot than murdered with a gun. A study showed you are far more likely to be shot if you carry a gun. Stop being so paranoid and scared.

Yeah..well, that's all quite vague.."a study showed..."..I've seen THAT before..LMAO

Like I said, if you are ever in a situation where you need to defend yourself, I hope you remember all the people you know who never used a gun for self defense..I'm sure that will give you a feeling of moral superiority as the criminals beat the shit out of you....or rape/rob/carjack your wife/sister/mother/grandmother/daughter....

Look, I've never used a fire extinguisher to put out a fire in my house....but I still keep 2 handy.

Here you go.
Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed - science-in-society - 06 October 2009 - New Scientist

So because of all those things that are very unlikely to happen I should have a gun? Even though you are far more likely to be accidentally shot than ever need a gun for those reasons I should carry a gun? Even though carrying a gun makes you more likely to be shot?

How many times have people been killed by accidental fire extinguisher?

When that Vegas couple shot those cops and then went to the Walmart the only guy they killed was the armed guy. Having a gun isn't always a good thing.

Whatever, brain...you're right everyone else is wrong.
I hope you remember what you said here if you or a family member ever get attacked by criminals.

Who is everyone? I'm going on statistics and studies. Sorry but I won't be scared into anything especially when I have the statistics on my side. I suggest you also stop being so scared and paranoid.

sure, brain..whatever.....now you want to play word games...have fun!