The numbers don’t lie: banning guns means more crime; more innocent victims and the L

[Wehrwolfen]

The numbers don’t lie: banning guns means more crime; more innocent victims and the Left knows it​

By: Kevin “Coach” Collins
DECEMBER 18TH, 2012

As threatened as the Second Amendment looks right now, in the end new attacks on our freedom to own guns will fail. The numbers will once again prove the Left’s arguments are built on lies and distortions.

In the coming weeks disingenuous liberals will try to use the tragic murders of 20 children and 6 staff at a Connecticut grade school to justify curtailing our Second Amendment rights to own firearms. That this horrific crime was committed by a likely paranoid schizophrenic will mean nothing to the gun grabbers.

That the ACLU recently defeated a Connecticut law which might have involuntarily put the monster that killed these innocent victims in an institution safely away from the rest of us, will mean nothing to them either.

In knee jerk fashion they will claim anyone who does not want to limit Second Amendment rights must be in favor of killing innocent children and the media will run with these lies.

Both the liberals and their media mouthpieces will ignore any evidence (however strong) that derails their cherished ultimate goal of confiscating all guns in America.

They want to bring us closer to the “enlightened” position on firearms ownership held around the world and especially Europe.

The Left will ignore the data from Kennesaw Georgia where a city ordinance which has been in effect for thirty years requires each home to have a gun.

Kennesaw consistently reports crime rates below those of the national average.

Moreover during the years immediately following the 1982 passage of its firearms requirement, home burglary rates dropped by 82% and other crimes followed suit.

There will be no discussion of the mass murders of innocent unarmed people in gun control happy Norway where 77 people were methodically slain by a single armed killer…..


(Excerpt)
Read more:
The numbers don

 

[Truthmatters]

cherry picking the facts is not going to change them.

the facts are NOT on your side

 

[NYcarbineer]

So Lanza wouldn't have had to steal his mother's guns, he have had his own, in fact, he would have been required to have his own.

 

[Oddball]

So Lanza wouldn't have had to steal his mother's guns, he have had his own, in fact, he would have been required to have his own.

In that scenario, he quite possible wouldn't have made it past the principal.

 

[OKTexas]

cherry picking the facts is not going to change them.

the facts are NOT on your side

Do you think the left isn't cherry picking the facts. explain how Columbine happened in the middle of the last ban. Also explain your dear leaders and others on the left apparent amnesia on the Ft Hood shooting, have you heard anyone mention it? Why would they so conveniently forget about Ft Hood, could it be it happened where guns are more closely regulated than most any other and doesn't fit your skewed narrative?

 

[Truthmatters]

cherry picking will not win you any election on this subject

 

[Some Guy]

I think pro-gun people need to watch it when they suggest that everyone be issued a gun, or have a gun, or what not. That's fine under the assumption that everyone is perfectly responsible with it and quite the marksman.

But, picture this. Someone goes into a mall and starts shooting. Everyone has a gun but only a handful of people know who initiated the firing. The initial gunmen is taken out by a good Samaritan while another good Samaritan is hitting the deck. Shots are continually fired, someone turns around, sees one person shooting another, whips out his gun and shoots that person, which happened to be the good Samaritan shooting the gunman. Chain reaction, innocent people die by innocent people's guns. It would be no less of a tragedy. Common citizens aren't soldiers who know how to handle these types of situations. And of course, you run the risk of stray bullets hitting children. We don't want a Wild West type atmosphere.

Yet still, it would have all started with the one person who decided to go nuts and start shooting. That's what needs to be addressed first and foremost. How can that person get help or get quarantined before he/she decides to do something like that?

 

[Duped]

News Flash - liberals don't give a fuck about the math - ideology trumps everything!

 

[bripat9643]

cherry picking the facts is not going to change them.

the facts are NOT on your side

Yes they are, shit-for-brains.

Here are two facts that are irrefutable arguments against gun control

Nazi Germany: 10 million innocent civilians sent to concentrations camps to be exterminated.

Soviet Union: 20 million innocent civilians sent to labor camps to be worked to death. 20 million Kulaks starved to death in Ukraine by taking their harvests.

Does anyone believe these deaths would have occurred if these people had been armed?

 

[bripat9643]

So Lanza wouldn't have had to steal his mother's guns, he have had his own, in fact, he would have been required to have his own.

Someone at the school should have been armed. Gun free zones are the dumbest idea since the income tax.

 

[bripat9643]

cherry picking the facts is not going to change them.

the facts are NOT on your side

Do you think the left isn't cherry picking the facts. explain how Columbine happened in the middle of the last ban. Also explain your dear leaders and others on the left apparent amnesia on the Ft Hood shooting, have you heard anyone mention it? Why would they so conveniently forget about Ft Hood, could it be it happened where guns are more closely regulated than most any other and doesn't fit your skewed narrative?

They're always harping on so-called "assault weapons," but they aren't used in most of these mass shootings.

 

[OKTexas]

I think pro-gun people need to watch it when they suggest that everyone be issued a gun, or have a gun, or what not. That's fine under the assumption that everyone is perfectly responsible with it and quite the marksman.

But, picture this. Someone goes into a mall and starts shooting. Everyone has a gun but only a handful of people know who initiated the firing. The initial gunmen is taken out by a good Samaritan while another good Samaritan is hitting the deck. Shots are continually fired, someone turns around, sees one person shooting another, whips out his gun and shoots that person, which happened to be the good Samaritan shooting the gunman. Chain reaction, innocent people die by innocent people's guns. It would be no less of a tragedy. Common citizens aren't soldiers who know how to handle these types of situations. And of course, you run the risk of stray bullets hitting children. We don't want a Wild West type atmosphere.

Yet still, it would have all started with the one person who decided to go nuts and start shooting. That's what needs to be addressed first and foremost. How can that person get help or get isolated before he/she decides to do something like that?

Your kidding, right? Our major cities are more like the "wild west" than the wild west was. You've watched way too much TV and movies, the "wild west" in many ways more civilized than today.

 

[Truthmatters]

they are finding out that they cant have their OWN facts.

good morning all you gun nutters.

glad to see you wake up

 

[OKTexas]

cherry picking will not win you any election on this subject

If we lose our Constitution who gives a shit about elections, they wouldn't matter much would they?

 

[Wry Catcher]

The numbers don’t lie: banning guns means more crime; more innocent victims and the Left knows it​

By: Kevin “Coach” Collins
DECEMBER 18TH, 2012

As threatened as the Second Amendment looks right now, in the end new attacks on our freedom to own guns will fail. The numbers will once again prove the Left’s arguments are built on lies and distortions.

In the coming weeks disingenuous liberals will try to use the tragic murders of 20 children and 6 staff at a Connecticut grade school to justify curtailing our Second Amendment rights to own firearms. That this horrific crime was committed by a likely paranoid schizophrenic will mean nothing to the gun grabbers.

That the ACLU recently defeated a Connecticut law which might have involuntarily put the monster that killed these innocent victims in an institution safely away from the rest of us, will mean nothing to them either.

In knee jerk fashion they will claim anyone who does not want to limit Second Amendment rights must be in favor of killing innocent children and the media will run with these lies.

Both the liberals and their media mouthpieces will ignore any evidence (however strong) that derails their cherished ultimate goal of confiscating all guns in America.

Only liars, fools and those who profit from the sale of guns, ammo, etc. keep repeating this line of bullshit - there is no effort to confiscate the guns of law abiding citizens.

They want to bring us closer to the “enlightened” position on firearms ownership held around the world and especially Europe.

The Left will ignore the data from Kennesaw Georgia where a city ordinance which has been in effect for thirty years requires each home to have a gun.

Kennesaw consistently reports crime rates below those of the national average.

Moreover during the years immediately following the 1982 passage of its firearms requirement, home burglary rates dropped by 82% and other crimes followed suit.

There will be no discussion of the mass murders of innocent unarmed people in gun control happy Norway where 77 people were methodically slain by a single armed killer…..


(Excerpt)
Read more:
The numbers don

There is no reasonable effort underway to take firearms from citizens; the Second Amendment is safe and will remain safe from efforts of repeal if and only if the NRA and the gun huggers work with others to enforce reasoned efforts to prevent the horror of mass murder in America.

 

[Truthmatters]

cherry picking will not win you any election on this subject

If we lose our Constitution who gives a shit about elections, they wouldn't matter much would they?

This current right wing scotus has already said gun laws are constitutional

 

[WillowTree]

they are finding out that they cant have their OWN facts.

good morning all you gun nutters.

glad to see you wake up

You are sicker than the kid who did the shooting!

 

[Some Guy]

I think pro-gun people need to watch it when they suggest that everyone be issued a gun, or have a gun, or what not. That's fine under the assumption that everyone is perfectly responsible with it and quite the marksman.

But, picture this. Someone goes into a mall and starts shooting. Everyone has a gun but only a handful of people know who initiated the firing. The initial gunmen is taken out by a good Samaritan while another good Samaritan is hitting the deck. Shots are continually fired, someone turns around, sees one person shooting another, whips out his gun and shoots that person, which happened to be the good Samaritan shooting the gunman. Chain reaction, innocent people die by innocent people's guns. It would be no less of a tragedy. Common citizens aren't soldiers who know how to handle these types of situations. And of course, you run the risk of stray bullets hitting children. We don't want a Wild West type atmosphere.

Yet still, it would have all started with the one person who decided to go nuts and start shooting. That's what needs to be addressed first and foremost. How can that person get help or get isolated before he/she decides to do something like that?

Your kidding, right? Our major cities are more like the "wild west" than the wild west was. You've watched way too much TV and movies, the "wild west" in many ways more civilized than today.

Well, when you say "wild west", i bet a lot more people will have the same vision of it as i do, taking what they've seen from movies. But instead of focusing on that one statement, you could look at the point of the post. Everyone having guns isn't necessarily the answer either.

If you're going to make the argument that liberals are politicizing this tragedy in order to push the idea of taking the guns out of as many people's hands as possible, then the reverse would also be true: conservatives pushing the idea that putting guns into as many people's hands as possible is the solution. Both are just proposals to treat the symptom of the real problem: why someone would want to go to a school (or any public place) and kill people seemingly for no reason.

 

[OKTexas]

The numbers don’t lie: banning guns means more crime; more innocent victims and the Left knows it​

By: Kevin “Coach” Collins
DECEMBER 18TH, 2012

As threatened as the Second Amendment looks right now, in the end new attacks on our freedom to own guns will fail. The numbers will once again prove the Left’s arguments are built on lies and distortions.

In the coming weeks disingenuous liberals will try to use the tragic murders of 20 children and 6 staff at a Connecticut grade school to justify curtailing our Second Amendment rights to own firearms. That this horrific crime was committed by a likely paranoid schizophrenic will mean nothing to the gun grabbers.

That the ACLU recently defeated a Connecticut law which might have involuntarily put the monster that killed these innocent victims in an institution safely away from the rest of us, will mean nothing to them either.

In knee jerk fashion they will claim anyone who does not want to limit Second Amendment rights must be in favor of killing innocent children and the media will run with these lies.

Both the liberals and their media mouthpieces will ignore any evidence (however strong) that derails their cherished ultimate goal of confiscating all guns in America.

Only liars, fools and those who profit from the sale of guns, ammo, etc. keep repeating this line of bullshit - there is no effort to confiscate the guns of law abiding citizens.

They want to bring us closer to the “enlightened” position on firearms ownership held around the world and especially Europe.

The Left will ignore the data from Kennesaw Georgia where a city ordinance which has been in effect for thirty years requires each home to have a gun.

Kennesaw consistently reports crime rates below those of the national average.

Moreover during the years immediately following the 1982 passage of its firearms requirement, home burglary rates dropped by 82% and other crimes followed suit.

There will be no discussion of the mass murders of innocent unarmed people in gun control happy Norway where 77 people were methodically slain by a single armed killer…..


(Excerpt)
Read more:
The numbers don

There is no reasonable effort underway to take firearms from citizens; the Second Amendment is safe and will remain safe from efforts of repeal if and only if the NRA and the gun huggers work with others to enforce reasoned efforts to prevent the horror of mass murder in America.

You seem to think the Constitution is negotiable, it's not. The senate may pass something but it will never fly in the house. The gun grabbing commies will lose in the courts even if by some miracle legislation gets passed.

 

[OKTexas]

I think pro-gun people need to watch it when they suggest that everyone be issued a gun, or have a gun, or what not. That's fine under the assumption that everyone is perfectly responsible with it and quite the marksman.

But, picture this. Someone goes into a mall and starts shooting. Everyone has a gun but only a handful of people know who initiated the firing. The initial gunmen is taken out by a good Samaritan while another good Samaritan is hitting the deck. Shots are continually fired, someone turns around, sees one person shooting another, whips out his gun and shoots that person, which happened to be the good Samaritan shooting the gunman. Chain reaction, innocent people die by innocent people's guns. It would be no less of a tragedy. Common citizens aren't soldiers who know how to handle these types of situations. And of course, you run the risk of stray bullets hitting children. We don't want a Wild West type atmosphere.

Yet still, it would have all started with the one person who decided to go nuts and start shooting. That's what needs to be addressed first and foremost. How can that person get help or get isolated before he/she decides to do something like that?

Your kidding, right? Our major cities are more like the "wild west" than the wild west was. You've watched way too much TV and movies, the "wild west" in many ways more civilized than today.

Well, when you say "wild west", i bet a lot more people will have the same vision of it as i do, taking what they've seen from movies. But instead of focusing on that one statement, you could look at the point of the post. Everyone having guns isn't necessarily the answer either.

If you're going to make the argument that liberals are politicizing this tragedy in order to push the idea of taking the guns out of as many people's hands as possible, then the reverse would also be true: conservatives pushing the idea that putting guns into as many people's hands as possible is the solution. Both are just proposals to treat the symptom of the real problem: why someone would want to go to a school (or any public place) and kill people seemingly for no reason.

You seem to think carrying a concealed weapon is easy, many people that have a CHL don't carry much of the time, but just the fact that a bad guy may encounter an armed citizen as proven to be a strong deterrent. People who have a CHL are trained to be aware of their surroundings, could your far fetched scenario happen, theoretically yes, similar things have happened with highly trained police officers, but it's not likely.