Which is more important to you, human life or your guns?

[g5000]

Murder rate per 100,000.

The Top Ten:

Louisiana: 11.8
Alabama: 8.4
Missouri: 8.8
Illinois: 8.2
Maryland: 8.0
Mississippi: 8.0
Nevada: 7.6
South Carolina: 7.4
Arkansas: 7.2
Alaska: 7.0

 

[g5000]

Murder Rates Nationally and By State | Death Penalty Information Center

Yes leave it to a far left drone to find a hyper partisan site for their "facts"..

In other words they have nothing! Just far left religious dogma!

They cite the FBI stats, idiot. There are links directly to the FBI crime reports on that page.

Can you get more willfully stupid? Really?

 

[Kosh]

Murder Rates Nationally and By State | Death Penalty Information Center

Yes leave it to a far left drone to find a hyper partisan site for their "facts"..

In other words they have nothing! Just far left religious dogma!

They cite the FBI stats, idiot. There are links directly to the FBI on that page.

Can you get more willfully stupid? Really?

If that were the case then why not use the FBI site, instead of a hyper partisan site?

In other words you have nothing, other than just posting links that do not support anything you post.

It is the far left way of life!

 

[Kosh]

Murder rate per 100,000.

The Top Ten:

Louisiana: 11.8
Alabama: 8.4
Missouri: 8.8
Illinois: 8.2
Maryland: 8.0
Mississippi: 8.0
Nevada: 7.6
South Carolina: 7.4
Arkansas: 7.2
Alaska: 7.0

So you going to provide a link? or are these arbitrary numbers that prove nothing?

 

[MrShangles]

One easy question, where was God?

The old same reply, he had other plans for those folks. Really


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[task0778]

A couple dozen people slaughtered in a church is a small price to pay for our second amendment freedoms

And a few dozen people in Vegas, and a few dozen somewhere else next week or the week after.

But why is it that when it comes to terrorists, nothing is a small price to pay for freedoms? Why is religious freedom not a price to pay?

Some innocent people may be killed

But at least we have our guns

Collateral damage

Please tell me how having me give up or forcing me to give up my firearms will prevent anyone from being killed

Those advanced nations which have banned guns have a much lower homicide rate than we do.

As a general rule, those states with laxer gun laws have higher homicide rates.

We have to be honest and admit that banning guns would result in a lower homicide rate. But that would require the repeal of the Second Amendment.

So it really is a choice between a higher homicide rate and liberty. It is completely dishonest to deny this.

I would disagree. There are a number of factors involved in a nation's homicide rate besides their gun laws, and to unequivocally state that banning guns altogether in this country would without question lower homicide rates is wrong, or at best unknown. What works elsewhere may not necessarily have the same effect here. Does anyone think that banning all guns in the USA would be acceptable and complied with to a large extent? Pretty sure the gangs and crooks won't give up their weapons, and the terrorists won't either. And a large number of gun owners won't either.

 

[jc456]

And a few dozen people in Vegas, and a few dozen somewhere else next week or the week after.

But why is it that when it comes to terrorists, nothing is a small price to pay for freedoms? Why is religious freedom not a price to pay?

Some innocent people may be killed

But at least we have our guns

Collateral damage

Please tell me how having me give up or forcing me to give up my firearms will prevent anyone from being killed

Those advanced nations which have banned guns have a much lower homicide rate than we do.

As a general rule, those states with laxer gun laws have higher homicide rates.

We have to be honest and admit that banning guns would result in a lower homicide rate. But that would require the repeal of the Second Amendment.

So it really is a choice between a higher homicide rate and liberty. It is completely dishonest to deny this.

and you know that is factually incorrect. been debunked in here again and again. but that is who you are, posting lies. why don't you post statistics that agree with your position? don't ask me or anyone else to debunk again. You post it this time.

can you give me your links? if i look up by state, california and illinois isn't where i'd have thought.

Top 30 Highest Murder Rate Cities in the U.S. 2017 - NeighborhoodScout - cities
List of U.S. states by homicide rate - Wikipedia - states
.Death by gun: Top 20 states with highest rates - specific to guns

kinda a mixed bag but i don't see a lot to point one way or another in relation to the laws of the state.

not for banning guns at all. that isn't going to happen and asking is only going to make ANY compromise impossible. just looking for more relevant stats.

Report: Murder Rates Remain Same in Tough Gun Law States

"Surprised by Findings The head of the center, Sarah Brady, is married to James Brady, for whom the act is named. Brady was the press secretary wounded and paralyzed in the 1981 assassination attempt on President Reagan.

As implemented in 1994, the Brady Act required licensed dealers to perform background checks and observe a five-day waiting period before selling handguns. In 1998, instant background checks replaced the waiting period requirement.

Eighteen states already met the Brady requirements in 1994.

The lead authors of the study, Georgetown University policy analyst Jens Ludwig and Philip Cook of Duke University, examined national statistics from 1985 through 1997 to compare the Brady law’s impact on crime in the 32 states that had to toughen their laws.

The authors noted that homicide and suicide rates had already begun to decline nationwide before 1994, but they assumed those rates would fall faster in “treatment states” — those that had to adopt new laws to comply."

Gun Laws vs Gun Deaths
"Firearm legislation is a much discussed issue these days, and there are many opinions that surround it. Statistics can even be unpacked to adhere to certain viewpoints on the topic. For example, the U.S. has the highest rate of gun violence when compared with Western Europe, but falls around the median when compared with countries in North and South America.

Similarly, some states have more issues with firearms than others. The South, in particular, is a consistently high-risk area for firearm violence, while California and much of the Northeast have per capita rates that pale in comparison. However, some states with strict gun laws, such as Illinois, can still have significant rates of gun deaths, while states with extremely lax gun legislation, such as Arizona, aren’t quite as high on the list as you might expect.

Knowing the facts about firearms, crime trends in the U.S., and the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of gun legislation are a vital part of staying safe and informed. Continue reading to see the relationship between gun laws and gun deaths in the U.S."

 

[g5000]

List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia

Homicide rates by country.

Norway: 0.56
Netherlands: 0.61
Ireland: 0.64
Spain: 0.66
Germany: 0.85
United Kingdom: 0.92
Australia: 0.98
Sweden: 1.15
France: 1.58
Canada: 1.68
United States: 4.88

 

[jc456]

A couple dozen people slaughtered in a church is a small price to pay for our second amendment freedoms

And a few dozen people in Vegas, and a few dozen somewhere else next week or the week after.

But why is it that when it comes to terrorists, nothing is a small price to pay for freedoms? Why is religious freedom not a price to pay?

Some innocent people may be killed

But at least we have our guns

Collateral damage

Please tell me how having me give up or forcing me to give up my firearms will prevent anyone from being killed

Those advanced nations which have banned guns have a much lower homicide rate than we do.

As a general rule, those states with laxer gun laws have higher homicide rates.

We have to be honest and admit that banning guns would result in a lower homicide rate. But that would require the repeal of the Second Amendment.

So it really is a choice between a higher homicide rate and liberty. It is completely dishonest to deny this.

I would disagree. There are a number of factors involved in a nation's homicide rate besides their gun laws, and to unequivocally state that banning guns altogether in this country would without question lower homicide rates is wrong, or at best unknown. What works elsewhere may not necessarily have the same effect here. Does anyone think that banning all guns in the USA would be acceptable and complied with to a large extent? Pretty sure the gangs and crooks won't give up their weapons, and the terrorists won't either. And a large number of gun owners won't either.

correct, create a gun law to disarm the criminal, then come tell the law abiding citizens to turn theirs in.

 

[Hellbilly]

And a few dozen people in Vegas, and a few dozen somewhere else next week or the week after.

But why is it that when it comes to terrorists, nothing is a small price to pay for freedoms? Why is religious freedom not a price to pay?

Some innocent people may be killed

But at least we have our guns

Collateral damage

Please tell me how having me give up or forcing me to give up my firearms will prevent anyone from being killed

Those advanced nations which have banned guns have a much lower homicide rate than we do.

As a general rule, those states with laxer gun laws have higher homicide rates.

We have to be honest and admit that banning guns would result in a lower homicide rate. But that would require the repeal of the Second Amendment.

So it really is a choice between a higher homicide rate and liberty. It is completely dishonest to deny this.

and you know that is factually incorrect. been debunked in here again and again. but that is who you are, posting lies.

It is also a fact that the states which have the loosest gun laws have the highest homicide rates.

Let's see the data.

Sent from my SM-J727VPP using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

 

[g5000]

Some innocent people may be killed

But at least we have our guns

Collateral damage

Please tell me how having me give up or forcing me to give up my firearms will prevent anyone from being killed

Those advanced nations which have banned guns have a much lower homicide rate than we do.

As a general rule, those states with laxer gun laws have higher homicide rates.

We have to be honest and admit that banning guns would result in a lower homicide rate. But that would require the repeal of the Second Amendment.

So it really is a choice between a higher homicide rate and liberty. It is completely dishonest to deny this.

and you know that is factually incorrect. been debunked in here again and again. but that is who you are, posting lies. why don't you post statistics that agree with your position? don't ask me or anyone else to debunk again. You post it this time.

can you give me your links? if i look up by state, california and illinois isn't where i'd have thought.

Top 30 Highest Murder Rate Cities in the U.S. 2017 - NeighborhoodScout - cities
List of U.S. states by homicide rate - Wikipedia - states
.Death by gun: Top 20 states with highest rates - specific to guns

kinda a mixed bag but i don't see a lot to point one way or another in relation to the laws of the state.

not for banning guns at all. that isn't going to happen and asking is only going to make ANY compromise impossible. just looking for more relevant stats.

Report: Murder Rates Remain Same in Tough Gun Law States

"Surprised by Findings The head of the center, Sarah Brady, is married to James Brady, for whom the act is named. Brady was the press secretary wounded and paralyzed in the 1981 assassination attempt on President Reagan.

As implemented in 1994, the Brady Act required licensed dealers to perform background checks and observe a five-day waiting period before selling handguns. In 1998, instant background checks replaced the waiting period requirement.

Eighteen states already met the Brady requirements in 1994.

The lead authors of the study, Georgetown University policy analyst Jens Ludwig and Philip Cook of Duke University, examined national statistics from 1985 through 1997 to compare the Brady law’s impact on crime in the 32 states that had to toughen their laws.

The authors noted that homicide and suicide rates had already begun to decline nationwide before 1994, but they assumed those rates would fall faster in “treatment states” — those that had to adopt new laws to comply."

Gun Laws vs Gun Deaths
"Firearm legislation is a much discussed issue these days, and there are many opinions that surround it. Statistics can even be unpacked to adhere to certain viewpoints on the topic. For example, the U.S. has the highest rate of gun violence when compared with Western Europe, but falls around the median when compared with countries in North and South America.

Similarly, some states have more issues with firearms than others. The South, in particular, is a consistently high-risk area for firearm violence, while California and much of the Northeast have per capita rates that pale in comparison. However, some states with strict gun laws, such as Illinois, can still have significant rates of gun deaths, while states with extremely lax gun legislation, such as Arizona, aren’t quite as high on the list as you might expect.

Knowing the facts about firearms, crime trends in the U.S., and the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of gun legislation are a vital part of staying safe and informed. Continue reading to see the relationship between gun laws and gun deaths in the U.S."

You deliberately buried the lead:

A new study finds that murder and suicide rates did not drop any faster in states that had to toughen their laws to comply with the 1994 Brady Act to regulate handguns.

The study also reports, however, that fewer people 55 and older used guns to kill themselves after the act took effect.

The study is about states which had to tighten their laws to meet the Brady Law. The Brady Law does not make the guns laws in all the states equal.

So, gee, what a surprise that those states which were LAX and which "toughened" their laws to the bare minimums of the Brady Law didn't see as great a change as tougher states.

However, nationally, the firearm homicide rate plunged after the Brady law went into effect in 1993:

 

[g5000]

Some innocent people may be killed

But at least we have our guns

Collateral damage

Please tell me how having me give up or forcing me to give up my firearms will prevent anyone from being killed

Those advanced nations which have banned guns have a much lower homicide rate than we do.

As a general rule, those states with laxer gun laws have higher homicide rates.

We have to be honest and admit that banning guns would result in a lower homicide rate. But that would require the repeal of the Second Amendment.

So it really is a choice between a higher homicide rate and liberty. It is completely dishonest to deny this.

and you know that is factually incorrect. been debunked in here again and again. but that is who you are, posting lies.

It is also a fact that the states which have the loosest gun laws have the highest homicide rates.

Let's see the data.

Sent from my SM-J727VPP using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

I've been posting it, willfully blind monkey.

 

[g5000]

So as I was saying, and just proved, an honest person will admit that confiscating all guns will cause the homicide rate to plummet.

It just requires us to repeal the Second Amendment and become an even bigger police state than we already are.

The decision is between lower homicide rates or liberty.

Everything else is bullshit.

 

[Cellblock2429]

A simple question.

Yesterday 26 people were shot and killed, some of them kids.

Life is going down the drain for lots of people in the US due to guns.

Which would you prefer, to keep your guns or to keep your life?

/----/In the photo attached, can you spot the person who kept his gun and the ones who lost their lives? Take a few minutes to decide.

 

[g5000]

Our homicide rate is three times higher than Canada, and nearly five times higher than Australia.

Australia had a mandatory gun confiscation back in the 90s.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

And a few dozen people in Vegas, and a few dozen somewhere else next week or the week after.

But why is it that when it comes to terrorists, nothing is a small price to pay for freedoms? Why is religious freedom not a price to pay?

Some innocent people may be killed

But at least we have our guns

Collateral damage

Please tell me how having me give up or forcing me to give up my firearms will prevent anyone from being killed

Those advanced nations which have banned guns have a much lower homicide rate than we do.

As a general rule, those states with laxer gun laws have higher homicide rates.

We have to be honest and admit that banning guns would result in a lower homicide rate. But that would require the repeal of the Second Amendment.

So it really is a choice between a higher homicide rate and liberty. It is completely dishonest to deny this.

and you know that is factually incorrect. been debunked in here again and again. but that is who you are, posting lies.

Nope. It has never been debunked.

It is a fact that advanced countries which give up their guns see a drop in the homicide rate in the long term.

It is also a fact that the states which have the loosest gun laws have the highest homicide rates.

No they don't in fact Britain is seeing an INCREASE and has been for several years. And they are an ISLAND with complete control over what enters
As for France it is totally illegal to own possess or use a weapon yet terrorists get fully automatic rifles and hand guns with NO problem and commit murder there. And when they dont feel like getting a rifle? They just rent a truck.

 

[hazlnut]

Freedom isn't free. Period.

If you're saying the children murdered yesterday are the "price" we must pay, then you are a horrible person and likely stupid beyond help.

 

[g5000]

Murder Rates Nationally and By State | Death Penalty Information Center

I'm not sure what I'm reading with your link. what is it you're trying to prove? I thought it was about guns. you deflecting as usual. I see.

You asked for data which proves homicide rates are higher in lax gun control states, and now you are pretending you don't konw what that link proves?

This is where your willful blindness takes effect when your ass is getting kicked.

I provided the relevant information in the post I made right after that one.

Of the top ten homicide states, the vast majority are red states with loose gun control.

 

[hazlnut]

Guns are an acceptable risk to be American. Bill of Rights ensures we shall not be disarmed

-Geaux

Nobody wants to disarm you.

The mentally unstable dishonorable discharge wife beater…. Yes. Take his guns away.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

So as I was saying, and just proved, an honest person will admit that confiscating all guns will cause the homicide rate to plummet.

It just requires us to repeal the Second Amendment and become an even bigger police state than we already are.

The decision is between lower homicide rates or liberty.

Everything else is bullshit.

Ok IDIOT how do you plan to confiscate firearms from criminals?