Jimmy Kimmel Continues Prove He's a Fool

[2aguy]

No, the problem is that all guns can never be regulated. There are people who build guns themselves, and there are people who don't operate through legal channels, such as the black market. The best way to keep Americans safe is for all of them to be armed. People are far less likely to commit crimes if their potential victims are armed. Physical boundaries, much like gun laws, would only disarm people who follow the law.

It's true. But the issue is that in the UK there isn't much of a problem, is there? Gun deaths in the UK? 23 in 2013. Out of a population of 65 million people. The equivalent in the US would be about 2,000 murders.

Which is better, 23 murders or 2,000 murders?

Oh look, you cited no sources for that claim, I'm so surprised. Besides that, Dapperton already debunked the number of gun murders in the US in the video.

You want sources huh?

Guns in the United Kingdom — Firearms, gun law and gun control

Click Death and Injury, click Gun Homicides. You'll see:

"2013: 23
2012: 12
2011: 38
2010: 33
2009: 26
2008: 40
2007: 15
2006: 61
2005: 38
2004: 36
2003: 29
2002: 39
2001: 38
2000: 71
1999: 45
1998: 33
1997: 45
1996: 84"

Guns in the United States — Firearms, gun law and gun control

Do the same:

"2014: 10,945"

List of countries and dependencies by population - Wikipedia

Click on United Kingdom and you will see 65,648,100
Click on USA and you will see 325,902,000

Open your calculator and divide the US's population by the UK's population. You will find 4.964378253140609

Take 10,945 and divide it by 4.964378253140609 and you will get 2,204.707103669201

That means the US murder rate would be 2,204 if it were in the UK. The UK murder rate was 23 for the year before.

As for Dapperton, I'm not arguing with Dapperton.

Yet the most recent piece of gun legislation was passed in the 1990s, meaning gun control has nothing to do with their murder rate. Beyond that, the US states with the highest murder rates are those with the strictest gun control, like California, for example.

Gun laws in the United States by state - Wikipedia
Murder in the United States by state - Wikipedia

Not only that, the latest mass murder in the UK was with an illegal firearm. A fat lot of good their Gun Control is doing. Just like everything the most recent mass shooter did in America was ALSO illegal. Gun control is worthless.

That's a ridiculous thing to say.

The UK introduced gun control in the 1990s to deal with the Dunblaine Massacre at a primary school. The actual law didn't have much impact at all because most people didn't have guns in the first place. It probably helped to reduce gun crime in the future.

What you're looking for is "gun control implemented on this date, gun murders dropped radically after this date" to prove that gun control works. Which ignores almost all of the reality of what that gun control was, and what the gun control was before this.

You also seem to have an attitude that if gun murders go up or down without there having been a piece of legislation to make it so, that gun control doesn't work.

The problem is there are various things that can lead to higher or lower fluctuations of gun murders. A gun law implemented doesn't mean that there will be a specific number of murders in a year. That's ridiculous.

For example in the UK there was a problem with gun violence in the early 2000s, and they didn't need more gun control to try and deal with the problem. The gun laws in place helped the police to deal with the problem, hence why gun murders went down.

A law doesn't do anything. You can make all the laws you like, if no one is A) enforcing them and B) being proactive in dealing with crime in the first place, then there's no point.

You say that the places with the highest murder rates are the places with the strictest gun control. That's complete bullshit. The fact that you haven't actually backed up your claim is telling, because I bet you have no idea what the statistics actually are. You just made it up hoping that I'm a stupid idiot who'll accept your bullshit.

List of U.S. states by homicide rate - Wikipedia

Here are the statistics.

Number one is Louisiana with a murder rate of 10.3

Louisiana is not a liberal state, it has the highest prison population IN THE WORLD. It has lax gun laws, it has a murder rate double most of the USA including, ironically, California which you claimed has the highest murder. (Probably because you're looking at number of murders rather than murder rate which is really amateur)

How Many Gun Owners Live in Your Home State?

Here are the state rankings for murders, and their ranking for the percentage of owners of guns.

1. Louisiana - 13th
2. Mississippi - 6th
3. Missouri - 21st
4. South Carolina - 18th
5. Maryland - 42nd

Now, the top four also have a high percentage of gun owners. Maryland is different, but then I'm going to bet that a lot of guns are in the hands of people who shouldn't have them, but get them because it's easy to get illegal guns.

Gun control is worthless.

Well, tell that to the 2,977 British people who don't die EVERY YEAR because of gun control.

Here you go...this drives the gun crime rate in Missouri, not law abiding gun owners...

Rise in Murders Has St. Louis Debating Why

Jennifer M. Joyce, the city’s circuit attorney, or prosecutor, an elected position, complains that in St. Louis, the illegal possession of a gun is too often “a crime without a consequence,” making it difficult to stop confrontation from turning lethal.

At the same time, deeper social roots of violence such as addiction and unemployment continue unchecked. And city officials also cite what they call a “Ferguson effect,” an increase in crime last year as police officers were diverted to control protests after a white officer shot and killed Michael Brown, an unarmed black teenager in the nearby suburb on Aug. 9.

-----------

Now, an overstretched department is forced to pick one neighborhood at a time to flood with officers. Last month, Chief Dotson even asked the state highway patrol if it could lend a dozen men to help watch downtown streets; the agency declined.

 

[2aguy]

No, the problem is that all guns can never be regulated. There are people who build guns themselves, and there are people who don't operate through legal channels, such as the black market. The best way to keep Americans safe is for all of them to be armed. People are far less likely to commit crimes if their potential victims are armed. Physical boundaries, much like gun laws, would only disarm people who follow the law.

It's true. But the issue is that in the UK there isn't much of a problem, is there? Gun deaths in the UK? 23 in 2013. Out of a population of 65 million people. The equivalent in the US would be about 2,000 murders.

Which is better, 23 murders or 2,000 murders?

Oh look, you cited no sources for that claim, I'm so surprised. Besides that, Dapperton already debunked the number of gun murders in the US in the video.

You want sources huh?

Guns in the United Kingdom — Firearms, gun law and gun control

Click Death and Injury, click Gun Homicides. You'll see:

"2013: 23
2012: 12
2011: 38
2010: 33
2009: 26
2008: 40
2007: 15
2006: 61
2005: 38
2004: 36
2003: 29
2002: 39
2001: 38
2000: 71
1999: 45
1998: 33
1997: 45
1996: 84"

Guns in the United States — Firearms, gun law and gun control

Do the same:

"2014: 10,945"

List of countries and dependencies by population - Wikipedia

Click on United Kingdom and you will see 65,648,100
Click on USA and you will see 325,902,000

Open your calculator and divide the US's population by the UK's population. You will find 4.964378253140609

Take 10,945 and divide it by 4.964378253140609 and you will get 2,204.707103669201

That means the US murder rate would be 2,204 if it were in the UK. The UK murder rate was 23 for the year before.

As for Dapperton, I'm not arguing with Dapperton.

Yet the most recent piece of gun legislation was passed in the 1990s, meaning gun control has nothing to do with their murder rate. Beyond that, the US states with the highest murder rates are those with the strictest gun control, like California, for example.

Gun laws in the United States by state - Wikipedia
Murder in the United States by state - Wikipedia

Not only that, the latest mass murder in the UK was with an illegal firearm. A fat lot of good their Gun Control is doing. Just like everything the most recent mass shooter did in America was ALSO illegal. Gun control is worthless.

That's a ridiculous thing to say.

The UK introduced gun control in the 1990s to deal with the Dunblaine Massacre at a primary school. The actual law didn't have much impact at all because most people didn't have guns in the first place. It probably helped to reduce gun crime in the future.

What you're looking for is "gun control implemented on this date, gun murders dropped radically after this date" to prove that gun control works. Which ignores almost all of the reality of what that gun control was, and what the gun control was before this.

You also seem to have an attitude that if gun murders go up or down without there having been a piece of legislation to make it so, that gun control doesn't work.

The problem is there are various things that can lead to higher or lower fluctuations of gun murders. A gun law implemented doesn't mean that there will be a specific number of murders in a year. That's ridiculous.

For example in the UK there was a problem with gun violence in the early 2000s, and they didn't need more gun control to try and deal with the problem. The gun laws in place helped the police to deal with the problem, hence why gun murders went down.

A law doesn't do anything. You can make all the laws you like, if no one is A) enforcing them and B) being proactive in dealing with crime in the first place, then there's no point.

You say that the places with the highest murder rates are the places with the strictest gun control. That's complete bullshit. The fact that you haven't actually backed up your claim is telling, because I bet you have no idea what the statistics actually are. You just made it up hoping that I'm a stupid idiot who'll accept your bullshit.

List of U.S. states by homicide rate - Wikipedia

Here are the statistics.

Number one is Louisiana with a murder rate of 10.3

Louisiana is not a liberal state, it has the highest prison population IN THE WORLD. It has lax gun laws, it has a murder rate double most of the USA including, ironically, California which you claimed has the highest murder. (Probably because you're looking at number of murders rather than murder rate which is really amateur)

How Many Gun Owners Live in Your Home State?

Here are the state rankings for murders, and their ranking for the percentage of owners of guns.

1. Louisiana - 13th
2. Mississippi - 6th
3. Missouri - 21st
4. South Carolina - 18th
5. Maryland - 42nd

Now, the top four also have a high percentage of gun owners. Maryland is different, but then I'm going to bet that a lot of guns are in the hands of people who shouldn't have them, but get them because it's easy to get illegal guns.

Gun control is worthless.

Well, tell that to the 2,977 British people who don't die EVERY YEAR because of gun control.

Maryland....the same problems....and they aren't normal, law abiding gun owners...

Notice...the same problem in all of these cities.....controlled by democrats...

----Light sentences for repeat gun offenders......democrats fight to keep this..

---police under staffed

---police under attack and responding with the Ferguson effect and ending Pro-active policing...

---Gangs.....

Maryland governor proposes "truth in sentencing" rules for gun crimes - Hot Air

What Governor Hogan is focusing on is the relatively light sentences that persons convicted of gun crimes receive, many of whom do no time in jail at all.
----


Afterward, Hogan said he was frustrated that violent repeat offenders are not receiving long prison sentences.

“We keep putting the same exact violent people on the streets,” Hogan said. “We’ve got to get them off the streets.”



----



Some of the statistics that the Governor and the Police Chief are highlighting are truly alarming.

The majority of the murders involve gang members as both the perpetrator and the victim.

And on average, these shooting victims have themselves been arrested ten times previously. How on Earth do criminals have that many contacts with the legal system and not wind up being taken off the battlefield?

In any event, Hogan announced that he wants the state legislature to step in and do what the city tried, but failed to accomplish. They need tougher sentencing for gun crimes and those sentences need to mean something. Hogan was quoted as saying, “if you say you’re going to get this number of years, you’re going to get that number of years.” And presumably he means that you’re actually going to do that number of years.

He’s not going to have an easy time of it. Maryland’s Attorney General, Brian Frosh, came out right after Hogan’s remarks and contradicted most of them. He claims to never have agreed to any sort of truth in sentencing law and immediately pivoted to blaming their crime problem on…. Donald Trump.

 

[2aguy]

No, the problem is that all guns can never be regulated. There are people who build guns themselves, and there are people who don't operate through legal channels, such as the black market. The best way to keep Americans safe is for all of them to be armed. People are far less likely to commit crimes if their potential victims are armed. Physical boundaries, much like gun laws, would only disarm people who follow the law.

It's true. But the issue is that in the UK there isn't much of a problem, is there? Gun deaths in the UK? 23 in 2013. Out of a population of 65 million people. The equivalent in the US would be about 2,000 murders.

Which is better, 23 murders or 2,000 murders?

Oh look, you cited no sources for that claim, I'm so surprised. Besides that, Dapperton already debunked the number of gun murders in the US in the video.

You want sources huh?

Guns in the United Kingdom — Firearms, gun law and gun control

Click Death and Injury, click Gun Homicides. You'll see:

"2013: 23
2012: 12
2011: 38
2010: 33
2009: 26
2008: 40
2007: 15
2006: 61
2005: 38
2004: 36
2003: 29
2002: 39
2001: 38
2000: 71
1999: 45
1998: 33
1997: 45
1996: 84"

Guns in the United States — Firearms, gun law and gun control

Do the same:

"2014: 10,945"

List of countries and dependencies by population - Wikipedia

Click on United Kingdom and you will see 65,648,100
Click on USA and you will see 325,902,000

Open your calculator and divide the US's population by the UK's population. You will find 4.964378253140609

Take 10,945 and divide it by 4.964378253140609 and you will get 2,204.707103669201

That means the US murder rate would be 2,204 if it were in the UK. The UK murder rate was 23 for the year before.

As for Dapperton, I'm not arguing with Dapperton.

Yet the most recent piece of gun legislation was passed in the 1990s, meaning gun control has nothing to do with their murder rate. Beyond that, the US states with the highest murder rates are those with the strictest gun control, like California, for example.

Gun laws in the United States by state - Wikipedia
Murder in the United States by state - Wikipedia

Not only that, the latest mass murder in the UK was with an illegal firearm. A fat lot of good their Gun Control is doing. Just like everything the most recent mass shooter did in America was ALSO illegal. Gun control is worthless.

That's a ridiculous thing to say.

The UK introduced gun control in the 1990s to deal with the Dunblaine Massacre at a primary school. The actual law didn't have much impact at all because most people didn't have guns in the first place. It probably helped to reduce gun crime in the future.

What you're looking for is "gun control implemented on this date, gun murders dropped radically after this date" to prove that gun control works. Which ignores almost all of the reality of what that gun control was, and what the gun control was before this.

You also seem to have an attitude that if gun murders go up or down without there having been a piece of legislation to make it so, that gun control doesn't work.

The problem is there are various things that can lead to higher or lower fluctuations of gun murders. A gun law implemented doesn't mean that there will be a specific number of murders in a year. That's ridiculous.

For example in the UK there was a problem with gun violence in the early 2000s, and they didn't need more gun control to try and deal with the problem. The gun laws in place helped the police to deal with the problem, hence why gun murders went down.

A law doesn't do anything. You can make all the laws you like, if no one is A) enforcing them and B) being proactive in dealing with crime in the first place, then there's no point.

You say that the places with the highest murder rates are the places with the strictest gun control. That's complete bullshit. The fact that you haven't actually backed up your claim is telling, because I bet you have no idea what the statistics actually are. You just made it up hoping that I'm a stupid idiot who'll accept your bullshit.

List of U.S. states by homicide rate - Wikipedia

Here are the statistics.

Number one is Louisiana with a murder rate of 10.3

Louisiana is not a liberal state, it has the highest prison population IN THE WORLD. It has lax gun laws, it has a murder rate double most of the USA including, ironically, California which you claimed has the highest murder. (Probably because you're looking at number of murders rather than murder rate which is really amateur)

How Many Gun Owners Live in Your Home State?

Here are the state rankings for murders, and their ranking for the percentage of owners of guns.

1. Louisiana - 13th
2. Mississippi - 6th
3. Missouri - 21st
4. South Carolina - 18th
5. Maryland - 42nd

Now, the top four also have a high percentage of gun owners. Maryland is different, but then I'm going to bet that a lot of guns are in the hands of people who shouldn't have them, but get them because it's easy to get illegal guns.

Gun control is worthless.

Well, tell that to the 2,977 British people who don't die EVERY YEAR because of gun control.

The criminals have guns, they don't use them to murder their victims....dumb ass....

 

[2aguy]

The homicide rate is going up in Britain....they have imported killers, and now they are going to pay the price...

And like our democrat cities...they will spend their tax money on everything but police.....

Crime rise is biggest in a decade, ONS figures show

The accelerating rise in crime comes as Home Office figures show a further fall of 924 in the past year in the number of police officers, to 123,142 in England and Wales. This is the fewest officers in England and Wales since 1985. Policenumbers have fallen by 20,592 since 2010.

----

Ministers will also be concerned that the country is becoming increasingly violent in nature, with gun crime rising 23% to 6,375 offences, largely driven by an increase in the use of handguns.

Knife crime has also jumped by 20% to 34,703 incidents – the highest level for seven years. The largest increase in knife crime came in London, which accounted for 40% of the rise.

 

[BULLDOG]

Keep your hopes up. If trump gets his way, there will only be state approved teleivision available.

Wouldn't it be in the lefty benefit , ya know before right wing talk radio when the fairness doctrine was in place?


Why do you even try me?

.

The fairness doctrine would help the country

You are soooo correct, Fallon, Kimmel and Colbert are all left wing crackpots.
We need a late night TV talk show host who is mainstream so things would be fair.

Wonder why there're no Right Wing Nuts on late at night.

Because conservatives have to get up early to go to work...

Those aluminum cans aren't going to pick themselves up.

 

[BULLDOG]

So, the guy who is doing the commenting says no laws would have prevented this.

Right, so... this happens in the UK? Yeah, when did it ever happen in the UK? Let's try.... NEVER. It never happened because this guy would have struggled to get all those guns, he'd have struggled to get one gun, let alone TEN.

And the commentators response is "don't have concerts between tall buildings", right.

So, guns don't kill people, but people between tall building get killed because they're between tall buildings. BAN TALL BUILDING PEOPLE.

Apparently you didn't listen to the video, he pointed out that no laws prevented it, and there were laws in place that made what he did illegal. Didn't stop him. Of course, the only people who believe making guns illegal would stop criminals, are those who believe criminals follow laws. Gun regulation doesn't work in Chicago, either, it's a shining example of the leftist mentality of disarming law-abiding citizens.

Why are you opposed to laws? No law is 100% effective at preventing crime. Common sense-------try to get some.

Laws like protecting classified information? Does that law count?

-Geaux

No law is 100% effective. That's why gun nuts say we shouldn't have any.

No...we say we have all the laws we need......you can't use a gun to commit a crime, if you do you get arrested......if you are a felon and caught in mere possession of a gun, you get arrested....then the democrats will let you back on the street to murder people....

We have the laws we need to deal with criminals...you want more gun laws to deal with law abiding gun owners, to strip them of their Right to self defense....see the difference? Twit. Our way stops crime, your way is what assholes do.....

You idiot. At least a third of murders in US are not solved. Higher numbers of other crimes. What fool told you "you can't use a gun to commit a crime, if you do you get arrested" they were as crazy as you.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Not at all.

You said you don't believe in gun control, then you said you believe in gun control. It's getting a little confusing.

Are you or are you not a believer in gun control?

No, you're creating a strawman because you couldn't debate your way out a wet paper bag. Prisoners have no rights whatsoever, and should have access to nothing but bread and water, and in a lot of cases, should just be executed entirely.

No, I'm not creating a strawman at all. You said you were against gun control. I then asked you a question and you said you were for gun control.

Prisoners DO have rights. You don't understand the theory of rights. Prisoners don't have their rights taken away, they have them INFRINGED UPON.

I never said I was for gun control. Prisoners have 'their rights infringed upon', that's not control on guns, that's control on prisoners. Your word salad won't win you anything.

It's a simple fact, if you want to control guns, then you're for gun control. It's that simple. If you prevent prisoners from having guns, that's gun control.

You call it word salad, I call it being articulate.

It's word salad. You're trying to twist my words because you have no argument.

How am I trying to twist your words?

Gun control is the controlling of guns. Preventing criminals from having guns is gun control. Preventing the insane from having guns is gun control. That is a reality.

You said you were against gun control. That means ALL GUN CONTROL. That means you think people can have guns whenever, wherever they like, and it doesn't matter who they are.

This is something so fundamental and so simple it's ridiculous.

The problem you have is that you aren't really thinking about what you want. You want to be someone who opposes gun control because that's what your side SUPPOSEDLY does. And so you've been brainwashed into thinking that you don't want gun control. You've been told it enough times. So you believe it.

Now I'm telling that you've been duped. And you can handle that.

 

[frigidweirdo]

It's true. But the issue is that in the UK there isn't much of a problem, is there? Gun deaths in the UK? 23 in 2013. Out of a population of 65 million people. The equivalent in the US would be about 2,000 murders.

Which is better, 23 murders or 2,000 murders?

Oh look, you cited no sources for that claim, I'm so surprised. Besides that, Dapperton already debunked the number of gun murders in the US in the video.

You want sources huh?

Guns in the United Kingdom — Firearms, gun law and gun control

Click Death and Injury, click Gun Homicides. You'll see:

"2013: 23
2012: 12
2011: 38
2010: 33
2009: 26
2008: 40
2007: 15
2006: 61
2005: 38
2004: 36
2003: 29
2002: 39
2001: 38
2000: 71
1999: 45
1998: 33
1997: 45
1996: 84"

Guns in the United States — Firearms, gun law and gun control

Do the same:

"2014: 10,945"

List of countries and dependencies by population - Wikipedia

Click on United Kingdom and you will see 65,648,100
Click on USA and you will see 325,902,000

Open your calculator and divide the US's population by the UK's population. You will find 4.964378253140609

Take 10,945 and divide it by 4.964378253140609 and you will get 2,204.707103669201

That means the US murder rate would be 2,204 if it were in the UK. The UK murder rate was 23 for the year before.

As for Dapperton, I'm not arguing with Dapperton.

Yet the most recent piece of gun legislation was passed in the 1990s, meaning gun control has nothing to do with their murder rate. Beyond that, the US states with the highest murder rates are those with the strictest gun control, like California, for example.

Gun laws in the United States by state - Wikipedia
Murder in the United States by state - Wikipedia

Not only that, the latest mass murder in the UK was with an illegal firearm. A fat lot of good their Gun Control is doing. Just like everything the most recent mass shooter did in America was ALSO illegal. Gun control is worthless.

That's a ridiculous thing to say.

The UK introduced gun control in the 1990s to deal with the Dunblaine Massacre at a primary school. The actual law didn't have much impact at all because most people didn't have guns in the first place. It probably helped to reduce gun crime in the future.

What you're looking for is "gun control implemented on this date, gun murders dropped radically after this date" to prove that gun control works. Which ignores almost all of the reality of what that gun control was, and what the gun control was before this.

You also seem to have an attitude that if gun murders go up or down without there having been a piece of legislation to make it so, that gun control doesn't work.

The problem is there are various things that can lead to higher or lower fluctuations of gun murders. A gun law implemented doesn't mean that there will be a specific number of murders in a year. That's ridiculous.

For example in the UK there was a problem with gun violence in the early 2000s, and they didn't need more gun control to try and deal with the problem. The gun laws in place helped the police to deal with the problem, hence why gun murders went down.

A law doesn't do anything. You can make all the laws you like, if no one is A) enforcing them and B) being proactive in dealing with crime in the first place, then there's no point.

You say that the places with the highest murder rates are the places with the strictest gun control. That's complete bullshit. The fact that you haven't actually backed up your claim is telling, because I bet you have no idea what the statistics actually are. You just made it up hoping that I'm a stupid idiot who'll accept your bullshit.

List of U.S. states by homicide rate - Wikipedia

Here are the statistics.

Number one is Louisiana with a murder rate of 10.3

Louisiana is not a liberal state, it has the highest prison population IN THE WORLD. It has lax gun laws, it has a murder rate double most of the USA including, ironically, California which you claimed has the highest murder. (Probably because you're looking at number of murders rather than murder rate which is really amateur)

How Many Gun Owners Live in Your Home State?

Here are the state rankings for murders, and their ranking for the percentage of owners of guns.

1. Louisiana - 13th
2. Mississippi - 6th
3. Missouri - 21st
4. South Carolina - 18th
5. Maryland - 42nd

Now, the top four also have a high percentage of gun owners. Maryland is different, but then I'm going to bet that a lot of guns are in the hands of people who shouldn't have them, but get them because it's easy to get illegal guns.

Gun control is worthless.

Well, tell that to the 2,977 British people who don't die EVERY YEAR because of gun control.

What you mean to say is that it had no effect at all because gun legislation doesn't work.

I was looking at general murders, not gun murders. Gun murders is a worthless statistic, abused by gun-grabbing leftist nutjobs to push their propaganda whilst ignoring that their legislation doesn't work.

Actually, what I looked at to come to my conclusion was population size increases and decreases, police force increases and decreases, date of legislation, and the statistics for the MURDER RATE you linked. The murder rate barely changed, and it was such a long time after the legislation passed that the legislation couldn't have been the cause. Especially since mass murders with illegal firearms didn't cease. On the other hand, if everyone was armed, all it would have taken for the gunman to be stopped was one person. He probably wouldn't have murdered anyone. Good thing the UK took steps to disarm their populace.

The other things that lead to fluctuations are whether or not the 'homicides' included in the statistics are taking into account self defense, which they're not, because there's no way to differentiate. Other things influencing the difference in statistics are what America and the UK arm their police with, since the UK police aren't typically armed with guns, and aren't allowed to use them unless specifically authorized, and also that the UK has almost completely disarmed their populace, leading to significantly fewer deaths as a result to self defense. Considering that the statistics don't bother to differentiate between justified and unjustified homicide, it makes sense that statesthat allow their populace to defend themselves would have more deaths.

Yes, gun control is worthless~ unless you like seeing dead innocents, or prefer your subjects on their knees, as most governments do.

No, that's not what I wanted to say.

The problem here is, is that if you're going to act simple, you going to see simple. And it's not simple. The UK has a gun murder rate about 100 times lower than the US. I'd say that works.

Now you're fucking around telling me that the gun murder rate is worthless because... because you don't find it convenient.

Look, I'm sorry, but I'm interested in debating on a higher level than this. If you're interested in PROPER debate, then let me know, but this bullshit isn't worth my time.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

No, you're creating a strawman because you couldn't debate your way out a wet paper bag. Prisoners have no rights whatsoever, and should have access to nothing but bread and water, and in a lot of cases, should just be executed entirely.

No, I'm not creating a strawman at all. You said you were against gun control. I then asked you a question and you said you were for gun control.

Prisoners DO have rights. You don't understand the theory of rights. Prisoners don't have their rights taken away, they have them INFRINGED UPON.

I never said I was for gun control. Prisoners have 'their rights infringed upon', that's not control on guns, that's control on prisoners. Your word salad won't win you anything.

It's a simple fact, if you want to control guns, then you're for gun control. It's that simple. If you prevent prisoners from having guns, that's gun control.

You call it word salad, I call it being articulate.

It's word salad. You're trying to twist my words because you have no argument.

How am I trying to twist your words?

Gun control is the controlling of guns. Preventing criminals from having guns is gun control. Preventing the insane from having guns is gun control. That is a reality.

You said you were against gun control. That means ALL GUN CONTROL. That means you think people can have guns whenever, wherever they like, and it doesn't matter who they are.

This is something so fundamental and so simple it's ridiculous.

The problem you have is that you aren't really thinking about what you want. You want to be someone who opposes gun control because that's what your side SUPPOSEDLY does. And so you've been brainwashed into thinking that you don't want gun control. You've been told it enough times. So you believe it.

Now I'm telling that you've been duped. And you can handle that.

You're easily twisting my words, you have no argument.

I don't agree with preventing the mentally ill from having guns, they're only responsible for a very small percentage of murders.

If you want to take it that way and run with it, I'm actually against the government having their own prisons in the first place, I believe all prisons should be privatized, in which case no laws would be needed to prevent prisoners from having guns, it would be up to the private prisons entirely.

I know exactly what I want. The problem is that you don't understand politics in the first place, much like the rest of the left. You don't even know what my "side" is

Ironic that you're telling someone else that they've been duped..

 

[Pumpkin Row]

Oh look, you cited no sources for that claim, I'm so surprised. Besides that, Dapperton already debunked the number of gun murders in the US in the video.

You want sources huh?

Guns in the United Kingdom — Firearms, gun law and gun control

Click Death and Injury, click Gun Homicides. You'll see:

"2013: 23
2012: 12
2011: 38
2010: 33
2009: 26
2008: 40
2007: 15
2006: 61
2005: 38
2004: 36
2003: 29
2002: 39
2001: 38
2000: 71
1999: 45
1998: 33
1997: 45
1996: 84"

Guns in the United States — Firearms, gun law and gun control

Do the same:

"2014: 10,945"

List of countries and dependencies by population - Wikipedia

Click on United Kingdom and you will see 65,648,100
Click on USA and you will see 325,902,000

Open your calculator and divide the US's population by the UK's population. You will find 4.964378253140609

Take 10,945 and divide it by 4.964378253140609 and you will get 2,204.707103669201

That means the US murder rate would be 2,204 if it were in the UK. The UK murder rate was 23 for the year before.

As for Dapperton, I'm not arguing with Dapperton.

Yet the most recent piece of gun legislation was passed in the 1990s, meaning gun control has nothing to do with their murder rate. Beyond that, the US states with the highest murder rates are those with the strictest gun control, like California, for example.

Gun laws in the United States by state - Wikipedia
Murder in the United States by state - Wikipedia

Not only that, the latest mass murder in the UK was with an illegal firearm. A fat lot of good their Gun Control is doing. Just like everything the most recent mass shooter did in America was ALSO illegal. Gun control is worthless.

That's a ridiculous thing to say.

The UK introduced gun control in the 1990s to deal with the Dunblaine Massacre at a primary school. The actual law didn't have much impact at all because most people didn't have guns in the first place. It probably helped to reduce gun crime in the future.

What you're looking for is "gun control implemented on this date, gun murders dropped radically after this date" to prove that gun control works. Which ignores almost all of the reality of what that gun control was, and what the gun control was before this.

You also seem to have an attitude that if gun murders go up or down without there having been a piece of legislation to make it so, that gun control doesn't work.

The problem is there are various things that can lead to higher or lower fluctuations of gun murders. A gun law implemented doesn't mean that there will be a specific number of murders in a year. That's ridiculous.

For example in the UK there was a problem with gun violence in the early 2000s, and they didn't need more gun control to try and deal with the problem. The gun laws in place helped the police to deal with the problem, hence why gun murders went down.

A law doesn't do anything. You can make all the laws you like, if no one is A) enforcing them and B) being proactive in dealing with crime in the first place, then there's no point.

You say that the places with the highest murder rates are the places with the strictest gun control. That's complete bullshit. The fact that you haven't actually backed up your claim is telling, because I bet you have no idea what the statistics actually are. You just made it up hoping that I'm a stupid idiot who'll accept your bullshit.

List of U.S. states by homicide rate - Wikipedia

Here are the statistics.

Number one is Louisiana with a murder rate of 10.3

Louisiana is not a liberal state, it has the highest prison population IN THE WORLD. It has lax gun laws, it has a murder rate double most of the USA including, ironically, California which you claimed has the highest murder. (Probably because you're looking at number of murders rather than murder rate which is really amateur)

How Many Gun Owners Live in Your Home State?

Here are the state rankings for murders, and their ranking for the percentage of owners of guns.

1. Louisiana - 13th
2. Mississippi - 6th
3. Missouri - 21st
4. South Carolina - 18th
5. Maryland - 42nd

Now, the top four also have a high percentage of gun owners. Maryland is different, but then I'm going to bet that a lot of guns are in the hands of people who shouldn't have them, but get them because it's easy to get illegal guns.

Gun control is worthless.

Well, tell that to the 2,977 British people who don't die EVERY YEAR because of gun control.

What you mean to say is that it had no effect at all because gun legislation doesn't work.

I was looking at general murders, not gun murders. Gun murders is a worthless statistic, abused by gun-grabbing leftist nutjobs to push their propaganda whilst ignoring that their legislation doesn't work.

Actually, what I looked at to come to my conclusion was population size increases and decreases, police force increases and decreases, date of legislation, and the statistics for the MURDER RATE you linked. The murder rate barely changed, and it was such a long time after the legislation passed that the legislation couldn't have been the cause. Especially since mass murders with illegal firearms didn't cease. On the other hand, if everyone was armed, all it would have taken for the gunman to be stopped was one person. He probably wouldn't have murdered anyone. Good thing the UK took steps to disarm their populace.

The other things that lead to fluctuations are whether or not the 'homicides' included in the statistics are taking into account self defense, which they're not, because there's no way to differentiate. Other things influencing the difference in statistics are what America and the UK arm their police with, since the UK police aren't typically armed with guns, and aren't allowed to use them unless specifically authorized, and also that the UK has almost completely disarmed their populace, leading to significantly fewer deaths as a result to self defense. Considering that the statistics don't bother to differentiate between justified and unjustified homicide, it makes sense that statesthat allow their populace to defend themselves would have more deaths.

Yes, gun control is worthless~ unless you like seeing dead innocents, or prefer your subjects on their knees, as most governments do.

No, that's not what I wanted to say.

The problem here is, is that if you're going to act simple, you going to see simple. And it's not simple. The UK has a gun murder rate about 100 times lower than the US. I'd say that works.

Now you're fucking around telling me that the gun murder rate is worthless because... because you don't find it convenient.

Look, I'm sorry, but I'm interested in debating on a higher level than this. If you're interested in PROPER debate, then let me know, but this bullshit isn't worth my time.

I already pointed out that the "gun murder rate" is just a talking point. There's no way to differentiate between justified 'murder' and actual murder, and the police in the UK not having any guns unless specifically authorized. The fact that the populace can't defend themselves and that the police can't defend anyone unless authorized lowers "gun murder". The fact that you're calling me simple and refuse to look at the different factors within the statistic shows a certain lack of self awareness.

I just pointed out the flaw in your argument. It includes self defense. It would be even more worthless if you were using the "Gun Death" rate, which includes suicide.

Of course you have no time for me proving you wrong, much like any other leftist who doesn't want to admit it in such a situation.

 

[frigidweirdo]

No, I'm not creating a strawman at all. You said you were against gun control. I then asked you a question and you said you were for gun control.

Prisoners DO have rights. You don't understand the theory of rights. Prisoners don't have their rights taken away, they have them INFRINGED UPON.

I never said I was for gun control. Prisoners have 'their rights infringed upon', that's not control on guns, that's control on prisoners. Your word salad won't win you anything.

It's a simple fact, if you want to control guns, then you're for gun control. It's that simple. If you prevent prisoners from having guns, that's gun control.

You call it word salad, I call it being articulate.

It's word salad. You're trying to twist my words because you have no argument.

How am I trying to twist your words?

Gun control is the controlling of guns. Preventing criminals from having guns is gun control. Preventing the insane from having guns is gun control. That is a reality.

You said you were against gun control. That means ALL GUN CONTROL. That means you think people can have guns whenever, wherever they like, and it doesn't matter who they are.

This is something so fundamental and so simple it's ridiculous.

The problem you have is that you aren't really thinking about what you want. You want to be someone who opposes gun control because that's what your side SUPPOSEDLY does. And so you've been brainwashed into thinking that you don't want gun control. You've been told it enough times. So you believe it.

Now I'm telling that you've been duped. And you can handle that.

You're easily twisting my words, you have no argument.

I don't agree with preventing the mentally ill from having guns, they're only responsible for a very small percentage of murders.

If you want to take it that way and run with it, I'm actually against the government having their own prisons in the first place, I believe all prisons should be privatized, in which case no laws would be needed to prevent prisoners from having guns, it would be up to the private prisons entirely.

I know exactly what I want. The problem is that you don't understand politics in the first place, much like the rest of the left. You don't even know what my "side" is

Ironic that you're telling someone else that they've been duped..

First.
I'm not twisting your words. You said you were against gun control, did you not? Then I asked you a question and you said you were for gun control.

Second.
There's a reason why the insane are prevented from having guns. That preventing them from having guns reduces their chances of killing people is a good thing. Your argument here is basically: because the insane are prevented from having guns, and they don't kill that many people, therefore we shouldn't prevent them from having guns, because when they don't have guns they don't kill people, so when they do have guns they won't kill people either, because without guns they don't kill many people.

What?

Okay, try this out for size. I made a thread about mental illness

Mental Health Day - some get lucky, some don't.

25% of people have some sort of mental health problems. 50% of people in US prisons have some sort of mental health problems.

33% of prisoners have Depressive disorders of some kind or worse. Of these 12% have Manic Depression, Bipolar disorders, mania. They see things, they think people are out to get them.


Mental Health By the Numbers | NAMI: National Alliance on Mental Illness

1 in 25 American people suffer serious mental illness during a given year.

1.1% of Americans suffer Schizophrenia, 5% of people in prison have schizophrenia. So, if you have schizophrenia, you're 5 times more likely to end up in prison.

2.6% of Americans suffer from Bipolar Disorders, 12% of prisoners in US prisons suffer. That's a 4.6 times higher rate of ending up is US prisons.

6.9% of people had depression, 21% of prisoners suffer from depression. That's 3 times more likely chance of ending up is prison.

50% of people who suffer from substance abuse suffer from a mental disorder.

Estimated 26% of homeless people suffer from mental problems.

70% of youths in juvenile detention suffer from at least 1 mental health problem, and 20% have serious mental health problems.

"More than 90% of children who die by suicide have a mental health condition."

You say that the insane don't kill anyone. You didn't provide any proof. Not a surprise seeing as you have no idea what you're even talking about.

Homicides by mentally ill - Mental Illness Policy Org

"If the Dawson and Langan study is correct, there would have been 889 homicides (20,680 x 4.3%) caused by mentally ill individuals in the United States in 1988."

 

[frigidweirdo]

You want sources huh?

Guns in the United Kingdom — Firearms, gun law and gun control

Click Death and Injury, click Gun Homicides. You'll see:

"2013: 23
2012: 12
2011: 38
2010: 33
2009: 26
2008: 40
2007: 15
2006: 61
2005: 38
2004: 36
2003: 29
2002: 39
2001: 38
2000: 71
1999: 45
1998: 33
1997: 45
1996: 84"

Guns in the United States — Firearms, gun law and gun control

Do the same:

"2014: 10,945"

List of countries and dependencies by population - Wikipedia

Click on United Kingdom and you will see 65,648,100
Click on USA and you will see 325,902,000

Open your calculator and divide the US's population by the UK's population. You will find 4.964378253140609

Take 10,945 and divide it by 4.964378253140609 and you will get 2,204.707103669201

That means the US murder rate would be 2,204 if it were in the UK. The UK murder rate was 23 for the year before.

As for Dapperton, I'm not arguing with Dapperton.

Yet the most recent piece of gun legislation was passed in the 1990s, meaning gun control has nothing to do with their murder rate. Beyond that, the US states with the highest murder rates are those with the strictest gun control, like California, for example.

Gun laws in the United States by state - Wikipedia
Murder in the United States by state - Wikipedia

Not only that, the latest mass murder in the UK was with an illegal firearm. A fat lot of good their Gun Control is doing. Just like everything the most recent mass shooter did in America was ALSO illegal. Gun control is worthless.

That's a ridiculous thing to say.

The UK introduced gun control in the 1990s to deal with the Dunblaine Massacre at a primary school. The actual law didn't have much impact at all because most people didn't have guns in the first place. It probably helped to reduce gun crime in the future.

What you're looking for is "gun control implemented on this date, gun murders dropped radically after this date" to prove that gun control works. Which ignores almost all of the reality of what that gun control was, and what the gun control was before this.

You also seem to have an attitude that if gun murders go up or down without there having been a piece of legislation to make it so, that gun control doesn't work.

The problem is there are various things that can lead to higher or lower fluctuations of gun murders. A gun law implemented doesn't mean that there will be a specific number of murders in a year. That's ridiculous.

For example in the UK there was a problem with gun violence in the early 2000s, and they didn't need more gun control to try and deal with the problem. The gun laws in place helped the police to deal with the problem, hence why gun murders went down.

A law doesn't do anything. You can make all the laws you like, if no one is A) enforcing them and B) being proactive in dealing with crime in the first place, then there's no point.

You say that the places with the highest murder rates are the places with the strictest gun control. That's complete bullshit. The fact that you haven't actually backed up your claim is telling, because I bet you have no idea what the statistics actually are. You just made it up hoping that I'm a stupid idiot who'll accept your bullshit.

List of U.S. states by homicide rate - Wikipedia

Here are the statistics.

Number one is Louisiana with a murder rate of 10.3

Louisiana is not a liberal state, it has the highest prison population IN THE WORLD. It has lax gun laws, it has a murder rate double most of the USA including, ironically, California which you claimed has the highest murder. (Probably because you're looking at number of murders rather than murder rate which is really amateur)

How Many Gun Owners Live in Your Home State?

Here are the state rankings for murders, and their ranking for the percentage of owners of guns.

1. Louisiana - 13th
2. Mississippi - 6th
3. Missouri - 21st
4. South Carolina - 18th
5. Maryland - 42nd

Now, the top four also have a high percentage of gun owners. Maryland is different, but then I'm going to bet that a lot of guns are in the hands of people who shouldn't have them, but get them because it's easy to get illegal guns.

Gun control is worthless.

Well, tell that to the 2,977 British people who don't die EVERY YEAR because of gun control.

What you mean to say is that it had no effect at all because gun legislation doesn't work.

I was looking at general murders, not gun murders. Gun murders is a worthless statistic, abused by gun-grabbing leftist nutjobs to push their propaganda whilst ignoring that their legislation doesn't work.

Actually, what I looked at to come to my conclusion was population size increases and decreases, police force increases and decreases, date of legislation, and the statistics for the MURDER RATE you linked. The murder rate barely changed, and it was such a long time after the legislation passed that the legislation couldn't have been the cause. Especially since mass murders with illegal firearms didn't cease. On the other hand, if everyone was armed, all it would have taken for the gunman to be stopped was one person. He probably wouldn't have murdered anyone. Good thing the UK took steps to disarm their populace.

The other things that lead to fluctuations are whether or not the 'homicides' included in the statistics are taking into account self defense, which they're not, because there's no way to differentiate. Other things influencing the difference in statistics are what America and the UK arm their police with, since the UK police aren't typically armed with guns, and aren't allowed to use them unless specifically authorized, and also that the UK has almost completely disarmed their populace, leading to significantly fewer deaths as a result to self defense. Considering that the statistics don't bother to differentiate between justified and unjustified homicide, it makes sense that statesthat allow their populace to defend themselves would have more deaths.

Yes, gun control is worthless~ unless you like seeing dead innocents, or prefer your subjects on their knees, as most governments do.

No, that's not what I wanted to say.

The problem here is, is that if you're going to act simple, you going to see simple. And it's not simple. The UK has a gun murder rate about 100 times lower than the US. I'd say that works.

Now you're fucking around telling me that the gun murder rate is worthless because... because you don't find it convenient.

Look, I'm sorry, but I'm interested in debating on a higher level than this. If you're interested in PROPER debate, then let me know, but this bullshit isn't worth my time.

I already pointed out that the "gun murder rate" is just a talking point. There's no way to differentiate between justified 'murder' and actual murder, and the police in the UK not having any guns unless specifically authorized. The fact that the populace can't defend themselves and that the police can't defend anyone unless authorized lowers "gun murder". The fact that you're calling me simple and refuse to look at the different factors within the statistic shows a certain lack of self awareness.

I just pointed out the flaw in your argument. It includes self defense. It would be even more worthless if you were using the "Gun Death" rate, which includes suicide.

Of course you have no time for me proving you wrong, much like any other leftist who doesn't want to admit it in such a situation.

No, you didn't point to a flaw in my argument. You were clutching at straws.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

I never said I was for gun control. Prisoners have 'their rights infringed upon', that's not control on guns, that's control on prisoners. Your word salad won't win you anything.

It's a simple fact, if you want to control guns, then you're for gun control. It's that simple. If you prevent prisoners from having guns, that's gun control.

You call it word salad, I call it being articulate.

It's word salad. You're trying to twist my words because you have no argument.

How am I trying to twist your words?

Gun control is the controlling of guns. Preventing criminals from having guns is gun control. Preventing the insane from having guns is gun control. That is a reality.

You said you were against gun control. That means ALL GUN CONTROL. That means you think people can have guns whenever, wherever they like, and it doesn't matter who they are.

This is something so fundamental and so simple it's ridiculous.

The problem you have is that you aren't really thinking about what you want. You want to be someone who opposes gun control because that's what your side SUPPOSEDLY does. And so you've been brainwashed into thinking that you don't want gun control. You've been told it enough times. So you believe it.

Now I'm telling that you've been duped. And you can handle that.

You're easily twisting my words, you have no argument.

I don't agree with preventing the mentally ill from having guns, they're only responsible for a very small percentage of murders.

If you want to take it that way and run with it, I'm actually against the government having their own prisons in the first place, I believe all prisons should be privatized, in which case no laws would be needed to prevent prisoners from having guns, it would be up to the private prisons entirely.

I know exactly what I want. The problem is that you don't understand politics in the first place, much like the rest of the left. You don't even know what my "side" is

Ironic that you're telling someone else that they've been duped..

First.
I'm not twisting your words. You said you were against gun control, did you not? Then I asked you a question and you said you were for gun control.

Second.
There's a reason why the insane are prevented from having guns. That preventing them from having guns reduces their chances of killing people is a good thing. Your argument here is basically: because the insane are prevented from having guns, and they don't kill that many people, therefore we shouldn't prevent them from having guns, because when they don't have guns they don't kill people, so when they do have guns they won't kill people either, because without guns they don't kill many people.

What?

Okay, try this out for size. I made a thread about mental illness

Mental Health Day - some get lucky, some don't.

25% of people have some sort of mental health problems. 50% of people in US prisons have some sort of mental health problems.

33% of prisoners have Depressive disorders of some kind or worse. Of these 12% have Manic Depression, Bipolar disorders, mania. They see things, they think people are out to get them.


Mental Health By the Numbers | NAMI: National Alliance on Mental Illness

1 in 25 American people suffer serious mental illness during a given year.

1.1% of Americans suffer Schizophrenia, 5% of people in prison have schizophrenia. So, if you have schizophrenia, you're 5 times more likely to end up in prison.

2.6% of Americans suffer from Bipolar Disorders, 12% of prisoners in US prisons suffer. That's a 4.6 times higher rate of ending up is US prisons.

6.9% of people had depression, 21% of prisoners suffer from depression. That's 3 times more likely chance of ending up is prison.

50% of people who suffer from substance abuse suffer from a mental disorder.

Estimated 26% of homeless people suffer from mental problems.

70% of youths in juvenile detention suffer from at least 1 mental health problem, and 20% have serious mental health problems.

"More than 90% of children who die by suicide have a mental health condition."

You say that the insane don't kill anyone. You didn't provide any proof. Not a surprise seeing as you have no idea what you're even talking about.

Homicides by mentally ill - Mental Illness Policy Org

"If the Dawson and Langan study is correct, there would have been 889 homicides (20,680 x 4.3%) caused by mentally ill individuals in the United States in 1988."

Of course you're twisting my words, and it's plane for all to see.

Except laws don't prevent them from getting guns, obtaining them illegally is easy. Besides that, if everyone was armed, one mentally ill person with a gun wouldn't matter, since everyone can defend themselves, if they even bother committing a crime with it in the first place, which most don't. Besides that, crimes aren't even usually linked to mental disorders, only 3% of crimes are linked to depression, 4% to schizophrenia, and 10% Bipolar.

Mental Illness Not Usually Linked to Crime, Research Finds

Taking away their second amendment rights not only wouldn't stop them from getting guns if they wanted them, but even if it did, it would have little to no impact. It's just as stupid as taking away the second amendment rights of black people because of the disproportionate amount of crimes committed by them, except to some people, you MAY actually have a case there. 35% of prison inmates are black, and they make up roughly 10% of the population. Why don't you advocate taking away their second amendment rights, too? God forbid anyone be allowed to defend themselves.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

Yet the most recent piece of gun legislation was passed in the 1990s, meaning gun control has nothing to do with their murder rate. Beyond that, the US states with the highest murder rates are those with the strictest gun control, like California, for example.

Gun laws in the United States by state - Wikipedia
Murder in the United States by state - Wikipedia

Not only that, the latest mass murder in the UK was with an illegal firearm. A fat lot of good their Gun Control is doing. Just like everything the most recent mass shooter did in America was ALSO illegal. Gun control is worthless.

That's a ridiculous thing to say.

The UK introduced gun control in the 1990s to deal with the Dunblaine Massacre at a primary school. The actual law didn't have much impact at all because most people didn't have guns in the first place. It probably helped to reduce gun crime in the future.

What you're looking for is "gun control implemented on this date, gun murders dropped radically after this date" to prove that gun control works. Which ignores almost all of the reality of what that gun control was, and what the gun control was before this.

You also seem to have an attitude that if gun murders go up or down without there having been a piece of legislation to make it so, that gun control doesn't work.

The problem is there are various things that can lead to higher or lower fluctuations of gun murders. A gun law implemented doesn't mean that there will be a specific number of murders in a year. That's ridiculous.

For example in the UK there was a problem with gun violence in the early 2000s, and they didn't need more gun control to try and deal with the problem. The gun laws in place helped the police to deal with the problem, hence why gun murders went down.

A law doesn't do anything. You can make all the laws you like, if no one is A) enforcing them and B) being proactive in dealing with crime in the first place, then there's no point.

You say that the places with the highest murder rates are the places with the strictest gun control. That's complete bullshit. The fact that you haven't actually backed up your claim is telling, because I bet you have no idea what the statistics actually are. You just made it up hoping that I'm a stupid idiot who'll accept your bullshit.

List of U.S. states by homicide rate - Wikipedia

Here are the statistics.

Number one is Louisiana with a murder rate of 10.3

Louisiana is not a liberal state, it has the highest prison population IN THE WORLD. It has lax gun laws, it has a murder rate double most of the USA including, ironically, California which you claimed has the highest murder. (Probably because you're looking at number of murders rather than murder rate which is really amateur)

How Many Gun Owners Live in Your Home State?

Here are the state rankings for murders, and their ranking for the percentage of owners of guns.

1. Louisiana - 13th
2. Mississippi - 6th
3. Missouri - 21st
4. South Carolina - 18th
5. Maryland - 42nd

Now, the top four also have a high percentage of gun owners. Maryland is different, but then I'm going to bet that a lot of guns are in the hands of people who shouldn't have them, but get them because it's easy to get illegal guns.

Gun control is worthless.

Well, tell that to the 2,977 British people who don't die EVERY YEAR because of gun control.

What you mean to say is that it had no effect at all because gun legislation doesn't work.

I was looking at general murders, not gun murders. Gun murders is a worthless statistic, abused by gun-grabbing leftist nutjobs to push their propaganda whilst ignoring that their legislation doesn't work.

Actually, what I looked at to come to my conclusion was population size increases and decreases, police force increases and decreases, date of legislation, and the statistics for the MURDER RATE you linked. The murder rate barely changed, and it was such a long time after the legislation passed that the legislation couldn't have been the cause. Especially since mass murders with illegal firearms didn't cease. On the other hand, if everyone was armed, all it would have taken for the gunman to be stopped was one person. He probably wouldn't have murdered anyone. Good thing the UK took steps to disarm their populace.

The other things that lead to fluctuations are whether or not the 'homicides' included in the statistics are taking into account self defense, which they're not, because there's no way to differentiate. Other things influencing the difference in statistics are what America and the UK arm their police with, since the UK police aren't typically armed with guns, and aren't allowed to use them unless specifically authorized, and also that the UK has almost completely disarmed their populace, leading to significantly fewer deaths as a result to self defense. Considering that the statistics don't bother to differentiate between justified and unjustified homicide, it makes sense that statesthat allow their populace to defend themselves would have more deaths.

Yes, gun control is worthless~ unless you like seeing dead innocents, or prefer your subjects on their knees, as most governments do.

No, that's not what I wanted to say.

The problem here is, is that if you're going to act simple, you going to see simple. And it's not simple. The UK has a gun murder rate about 100 times lower than the US. I'd say that works.

Now you're fucking around telling me that the gun murder rate is worthless because... because you don't find it convenient.

Look, I'm sorry, but I'm interested in debating on a higher level than this. If you're interested in PROPER debate, then let me know, but this bullshit isn't worth my time.

I already pointed out that the "gun murder rate" is just a talking point. There's no way to differentiate between justified 'murder' and actual murder, and the police in the UK not having any guns unless specifically authorized. The fact that the populace can't defend themselves and that the police can't defend anyone unless authorized lowers "gun murder". The fact that you're calling me simple and refuse to look at the different factors within the statistic shows a certain lack of self awareness.

I just pointed out the flaw in your argument. It includes self defense. It would be even more worthless if you were using the "Gun Death" rate, which includes suicide.

Of course you have no time for me proving you wrong, much like any other leftist who doesn't want to admit it in such a situation.

No, you didn't point to a flaw in my argument. You were clutching at straws.

Or so you'd like others to believe. Go ahead and run away with your tail between your legs. You didn't even bother replying to 2aguy, and it's because you know you're beaten.

 

[basquebromance]

Jimmy Kimmel started his career doing girls on trampolines videos and campaigning to take away women's vote rights

 

[tycho1572]

Kimmel is just another left wing idiot I ignore.

It’s going to take some time before his level of BS is nothing more than a bad memory.

 

[Political Junky]

Kimmel is just another left wing idiot I ignore.

It’s going to take some time before his level of BS is nothing more than a bad memory.

You can't handle the truth.

 

[tycho1572]

Kimmel is just another left wing idiot I ignore.

It’s going to take some time before his level of BS is nothing more than a bad memory.

You can't handle the truth.

I can accept the winner. I also agree with his focus.

You people can cry all you want. It won’t change my opinion.

 

[tycho1572]

I won’t ask you to give an example of Hillary ever doing anything for anyone that didn’t benefit herself because I know you can’t, Political Junky.

 

[tycho1572]

After 8 years of obama, we’re lucky to have Trump as our president.