Hmmm...Massachusetts gun control laws had no impact on gun crime rates.....who saw that coming? Well, we did........

[JoeB131]

Yawn???

Real cited / sourced / quoted stats bore you huh?

They do when they come from gun nuts... yeah. You guys look at the carnage caused by your fetish and always find an excuse... "Oh, those are suicides, that doesn't count." "Oh, that person got in trouble with the law once, he doesn't count, either."

And it kind of works, unfortunately... the only time you guys have to really work for it is when a bunch of white people get shot up in a mall or a preschool.

The absolute last thing you want is for the 78% of us who don't own guns to say, "Why the fuck are we putting up with this?"

 

[Blues Man]

Yawn...

Reality- Most people are killed by people they know... you know it, I k now it. You try to write it off as "those people" (except you won't let those people pass gun laws intheir own communities.

Does everyone you know live with you in your home?

I know hundreds of people to varying degrees that doesn't mean any of them are part of my domestic life.

Domestic Violence

www.justice.gov

The term “domestic violence” includes felony or misdemeanor crimes of violence committed by a current or former spouse or intimate partner of the victim, by a person with whom the victim shares a child in common, by a person who is cohabitating with or has cohabitated with the victim as a spouse or intimate partner, by a person similarly situated to a spouse of the victim under the domestic or family violence laws of the jurisdiction receiving grant monies, or by any other person against an adult or youth victim who is protected from that person’s acts under the domestic or family violence laws of the jurisdiction.

 

[2aguy]

Does everyone you know live with you in your home?

I know hundreds of people to varying degrees that doesn't mean any of them are part of my domestic life.

Domestic Violence

www.justice.gov

The term “domestic violence” includes felony or misdemeanor crimes of violence committed by a current or former spouse or intimate partner of the victim, by a person with whom the victim shares a child in common, by a person who is cohabitating with or has cohabitated with the victim as a spouse or intimate partner, by a person similarly situated to a spouse of the victim under the domestic or family violence laws of the jurisdiction receiving grant monies, or by any other person against an adult or youth victim who is protected from that person’s acts under the domestic or family violence laws of the jurisdiction.

Yeah....and he knows those aren't the most common murders.....criminals shooting each other for turf, reputation, insults, girlfriends, and then members of their family or friends getting hit in the crossfire are the most common murders in the U.S...

 

[Blues Man]

Yeah....and he knows those aren't the most common murders.....criminals shooting each other for turf, reputation, insults, girlfriends, and then members of their family or friends getting hit in the crossfire are the most common murders in the U.S...

Only 1 in 5 murders involve an intimate partner

And unfortunately most of those victims are women.

But 80% of all murder victims are men there is just no way that most are domestic violence related. And as we can see by the FBI definition they aren't.

 

[Abatis]

They do when they come from gun nuts... yeah.

There aren't one set of facts and statistics for anti-gunners and another set for gun rights supporters; there are only the facts and statistics. You presented your pretend, faked "facts" and I disputed them and challenged you to support your claims . . . You refused which can only be described as a failure to support your statements.

I rebutted you claims with true, cited, linked FBI-UCR percentage breakdowns of murder victim / offender relationship that prove your "facts" are bullshit at best and blatant lies at worst.

Feel free to hold whatever dumbass unsupported OPINION you want, just don't be such a douche and demand you have the privilege granted, of operating within your own set of anti-gun "facts" and "statistics".

You guys look at the carnage caused by your fetish and always find an excuse... "Oh, those are suicides, that doesn't count." "Oh, that person got in trouble with the law once, he doesn't count, either."

And it kind of works, unfortunately... the only time you guys have to really work for it is when a bunch of white people get shot up in a mall or a preschool.

The absolute last thing you want is for the 78% of us who don't own guns to say, "Why the fuck are we putting up with this?"

I have no interest debating your feelings or even trying to discuss your emotional tripe. Feel free to spout all that nonsense you want and project whatever hostility and insecurity you need to, to prop-up your anti-intellectual positions . . . Just stay away from lying, faking and misrepresenting facts and statistics.

I'll just always reserve the right to expose your lies and misrepresentations when you present your special double-secret decoder ring anti-gun "facts" for support of your bankrupt positions.

.

 

[JoeB131]

Only 1 in 5 murders involve an intimate partner

And unfortunately most of those victims are women.

But 80% of all murder victims are men there is just no way that most are domestic violence related. And as we can see by the FBI definition they aren't.

Yes, they include people who kill their children, people who kill their freeloading in laws over who ate the last strip of bacon, people who shoot their neighbors over the dog shitting on their lawn. All made possible by guns! The rest of the world simply doesn't have this problem.. because they limit who can have a gun.

There aren't one set of facts and statistics for anti-gunners and another set for gun rights supporters; there are only the facts and statistics. You presented your pretend, faked "facts" and I disputed them and challenged you to support your claims . . . You refused which can only be described as a failure to support your statements.

I've posted the links dozens of times...

The problem with gun nutters is that you ALWAYS find a way to say, "those people don't count."

Naw, we only count a Mass Shooting if five people DIE, not if two or more people are injured.
We don't count suicides
we don't count murders if anyone involved had any kind of police record.

And frankly, it works. We all look at the 43,000 gun deaths a year and tolerate it, unless it's something really horrible like Sandy Hook

 

[Blues Man]

Yes, they include people who kill their children, people who kill their freeloading in laws over who ate the last strip of bacon, people who shoot their neighbors over the dog shitting on their lawn. All made possible by guns! The rest of the world simply doesn't have this problem.. because they limit who can have a gun.



I've posted the links dozens of times...

The problem with gun nutters is that you ALWAYS find a way to say, "those people don't count."

Naw, we only count a Mass Shooting if five people DIE, not if two or more people are injured.
We don't count suicides
we don't count murders if anyone involved had any kind of police record.

And frankly, it works. We all look at the 43,000 gun deaths a year and tolerate it, unless it's something really horrible like Sandy Hook

You are proven wrong by definition.

 

[JoeB131]

You are proven wrong by definition.

I guess if you want to keep redefining it as "those folks don't count because XXX"

Every lost life is a tragedy. We lose too many to gun violence because the gun industry wants to make a profit selling a product YOU DON'T NEED.

 

[Blues Man]

I guess if you want to keep redefining it as "those folks don't count because XXX"

Every lost life is a tragedy. We lose too many to gun violence because the gun industry wants to make a profit selling a product YOU DON'T NEED.

No I am using the FBI definition.

Merely knowing someone does not make any crime "domestic" violence.

And it's not up to you to tell people what they need or don;t need.

The FACT is that only an infinitesimal percentage of people who legally own guns will commit murder.

Murder is in the most part an urban occurence.

And in fact even within city limits murder is concentrated invariably into the poorest areas where de facto segregation, poor schools, and an active drug trade are common.

Of course you don;t know this because you never lived in the shit end of a city.

I grew up on the streets of one of these hyper- violent areas and I know way more about crime, violence, the apathy of state and local governments and law enforcement.

You don;t know shit about it.

 

[Abatis]

I've posted the links dozens of times...

Uhhhhhh, remember, I'm the one that reviewed and reread and linked to damn near every goddamned time you used any permutation of your "83% . . ." or "domestic violence" lie or just the "most people killed" misrepresentation over the last year . . .

You didn't link anything, you couldn't because you do not rely on any actual sources; all you have is your wishful thinking and what you think you remember from opinion pieces on HuffPo or Axios or memes from Occupy Democrats.

STOP LYING!

The problem with gun nutters is that you ALWAYS find a way to say, "those people don't count."

I have never said that. I consider every murder, every untimely and unjustified death a tragedy. I just don't think it is proper to use those deaths to disingenuously advance a bankrupt political agenda to disarm American citizens that aren't the problem.

Naw, we only count a Mass Shooting if five people DIE,

STOP LYING! . . . 5 or more killed is Australia's and New Zealand's criteria, not the USA; the USA does not have any official criteria for "mass shooting" . . .

not if two or more people are injured.

The most often used criteria for "mass shootings" by DEMedia and auhoritarian politicians is the tally maintained by the Gun Violence Archive. That organization uses a criteria of 4 or more shot or killed in one incident, not counting the offender. That loose definition is how we get to numbers that anti-gunners love throwing out there for shock value like the "more mass shootings than days, so far his year" headlines.

Anti-gunners ignore "mass shootings" tally's like Mother Jones', which only counts "indiscriminate rampages in public places resulting in four or more victims killed by the attacker" and "exclude shootings stemming from more conventionally motivated crimes such as armed robbery or gang violence." That tighter criteria makes for a much lower total and much less opportunity for leftist histrionics and anti-gun propaganda.

How many fewer??? The Gun Violence Archive shows 693 "mass shooting" incidents for 2021, Mother Jones puts the number of "mass shooting" incidents in 2021 at 6 (six).

That's why anti-gunners hate Mother Jones . . .

We don't count suicides

Why would we?

we don't count murders if anyone involved had any kind of police record.

Dude, can you say anything about his topic without lying?

And frankly, it works. We all look at the 43,000 gun deaths a year and tolerate it, unless it's something really horrible like Sandy Hook

More like if it is the direct product of leftist policy.

.

 

[2aguy]

Uhhhhhh, remember, I'm the one that reviewed and reread and linked to damn near every goddamned time you used any permutation of your "83% . . ." or "domestic violence" lie or just the "most people killed" misrepresentation over the last year . . .

You didn't link anything, you couldn't because you do not rely on any actual sources; all you have is your wishful thinking and what you think you remember from opinion pieces on HuffPo or Axios or memes from Occupy Democrats.

STOP LYING!



I have never said that. I consider every murder, every untimely and unjustified death a tragedy. I just don't think it is proper to use those deaths to disingenuously advance a bankrupt political agenda to disarm American citizens that aren't the problem.



STOP LYING! . . . 5 or more killed is Australia's and New Zealand's criteria, not the USA; the USA does not have any official criteria for "mass shooting" . . .



The most often used criteria for "mass shootings" by DEMedia and auhoritarian politicians is the tally maintained by the Gun Violence Archive. That organization uses a criteria of 4 or more shot or killed in one incident, not counting the offender. That loose definition is how we get to numbers that anti-gunners love throwing out there for shock value like the "more mass shootings than days, so far his year" headlines.

Anti-gunners ignore "mass shootings" tally's like Mother Jones', which only counts "indiscriminate rampages in public places resulting in four or more victims killed by the attacker" and "exclude shootings stemming from more conventionally motivated crimes such as armed robbery or gang violence." That tighter criteria makes for a much lower total and much less opportunity for leftist histrionics and anti-gun propaganda.

How many fewer??? The Gun Violence Archive shows 693 "mass shooting" incidents for 2021, Mother Jones puts the number of "mass shooting" incidents in 2021 at 6 (six).

That's why anti-gunners hate Mother Jones . . .



Why would we?



Dude, can you say anything about his topic without lying?



More like if it is the direct product of leftist policy.

.

Yep, that is also why I use Mother Jones......Mother Jones is a rabidly anti-gun, left wing news source.........they use the FBI definition of mass public shooting...it used to be 4 or more killed, but as you can see from the low number, obama ordered them to reduce the number to 3 or more killed......If you want the link to that I can post it....

 

[JoeB131]

Uhhhhhh, remember, I'm the one that reviewed and reread and linked to damn near every goddamned time you used any permutation of your "83%

Well, no, because I've said it more than the ten or so times you found...

I don't do links unless I am interested. I've posted the links a bunch of times... just not interested because you guys have changed your tact from "rationalizing" (they were all poor people, so they don't count) to "denial" (you can't provide a link every single time I ask for it).

More like if it is the direct product of leftist policy.

If that were the case, Europe and Japan would have a LOT more crime than we do... as they have the kind of leftist societies American Liberals can only dream of.

 

[Abatis]

Yep, that is also why I use Mother Jones......Mother Jones is a rabidly anti-gun, left wing news source.........they use the FBI definition of mass public shooting...it used to be 4 or more killed, but as you can see from the low number, obama ordered them to reduce the number to 3 or more killed......If you want the link to that I can post it....

I also like to cite Mother Jones, if only because the criteria MJ uses aligns with what regular people consider a "mass shooting" to be -- a public, indiscriminate / random / spree attack where more than a couple people are killed. As you point out, that number is low, too low for disingenuous anti-gunners to really capitalize on and cultivate and market for political effect.

Which is why, honestly, I have no problem using the Gun Violence Archive tally. No doubt, 693 "mass shootings" in 2020 is shocking and depressing and we know the DEMedia and leftist politicians love to hold it up and wave it around in front of the cameras but really it exposes the utter rot in their OVERALL agenda.

GVA's criteria used, "4+ shot in one incident, excluding the perpetrator(s), at one location, at roughly the same time" is a big net that catches a lot of incidents that blend into the NORMAL everyday violence that happens a few times a week where Democrats wield absolute power. These crimes just happen to ring the bell of, "4+ shot in one incident, excluding the perpetrator(s), at one location, at roughly the same time".

They are the drug corner drive-by's, the drug house rip squads, retaliation shootings at candlelight vigils for other shooting victims and just general mayhem of thug life. Most of these "mass shootings" are what so many shootings are, inner-city young guys shooting inner-city young guys over stupid shit that nobody but inner-city young guys care about . . .

My position is, (and yours too I presume), there ain't any gun control law that will EVER slow or reverse that, it is a rot in culture that celebrates the criminal lifestyle and has zero respect for life . . . If it was just "guns" than the ridiculous disparity between the races would not be so stark . . .

In 2019, young Black males aged 15-29 were murdered at 17X the rate of White males aged 15-29.

That is shocking to me . . . To put it another way, if young Black males aged 15-29 were murdered at the same rate of White males aged 15-29 in 2019, (80.31/100K vs. 4.63/100K), there would've been 257 instead of 4,450 young Black males being murdered in 2019, a 94.22% reduction.

It is preposterous to me that anti-gunners feel gun control will alter this condition. The promotion of gun control exposes how conniving and dishonest they are, only employing crime as a pretext to sell and then enforce citizen disarmament. The crime statistics and inner workings and utter failures of the justice system are really of no interest; they don't need to know any of that. The most vocal anti-gunners get by just fine only demonstrating the most superficial knowledge and are quite content just misrepresenting and lying about the rest.

.Here's a mural of 2021's "mass shooting suspects:

 

[Abatis]

Well, no, because I've said it more than the ten or so times you found...

And again I'll say, your wide variance with the wording and construction of the claim, demonstrates you really have no solid backing for it. Anyone who uses / cites a particular stat that often is usually very familiar with the source and have the precise terms ingrained in their memory and know exactly where to go to prove the claim. That you fail all these steps proves you are misrepresenting / lying /pretending knowledge and familiarity you do not possess.

I don't do links unless I am interested. I've posted the links a bunch of times...

In the 3 dozen times I have found you posting some variation of the claim of "most" and "83%", you have never posted any cite or quote from a trusted source. You did post a pie chart with victim / offender relationship a few times, of course it had no attribution.

just not interested because you guys have changed your tact from "rationalizing" (they were all poor people, so they don't count)

And that is something someone would say when challenged to prove a simple and oft-repeated claim that they have been lying about for over a year . . .

to "denial" (you can't provide a link every single time I ask for it).

I'm just asking for you to prove your claim with a respected source. You have baldly claimed it dozens of times, compelling you to prove it isn't unfair and it definitely doesn't mean I'm in denial. I owe no deference or respect to an claim that I know is bullshit and that you refuse to support.

Why should anyone be interested in what you have to say when you boldly admit you have no interest in supporting your statements?

 

[Abatis]

If that were the case, Europe and Japan would have a LOT more crime than we do... as they have the kind of leftist societies American Liberals can only dream of.

Wow. You don't understand any of this do you?

Yes, nations with longstanding (multiple generations if not multiple centuries) citizen disarmament practices do not experience large instances of gun crime today. Those citizen disarmament objectives were not instituted as crime control measures, they were enacted for political control.

Whatever lower crime that's being realized in modern times is merely the ancillary benefit of cultivating a nation of compliant, obedient subjects.

Over "there" the political work is completed, the population accepts strict gun control without any justification required, the history of why it began is forgotten and a new public benefit purpose has been invented and written as new Gospel and has been exported and repackaged for the USA.

The fatal problem for your gun control goal in the USA is that the process is backwards from your exemplars. They disarmed the people first to enforce government's absolute authority / superiority and the subjects obliged.

In the USA, the task of implementing gun control here has to be reverse engineered, predicated / camouflaged as crime control to ultimately achieve the leftist / statist political end. In the USA, the people and their rights are superior and government's demands for power over the people must yield

Thankfully most Americans and our Courts denounce your collectivist, authoritarian subterfuge and will reject your attempts to restrict their rights.

.

 

[JoeB131]

I also like to cite Mother Jones, if only because the criteria MJ uses aligns with what regular people consider a "mass shooting" to be -- a public, indiscriminate / random / spree attack where more than a couple people are killed. As you point out, that number is low, too low for disingenuous anti-gunners to really capitalize on and cultivate and market for political effect.

Yup, if you keep trying to move the goalposts, you could probably get the ZERO.

Which is why, honestly, I have no problem using the Gun Violence Archive tally. No doubt, 693 "mass shootings" in 2020 is shocking and depressing and we know the DEMedia and leftist politicians love to hold it up and wave it around in front of the cameras but really it exposes the utter rot in their OVERALL agenda.

Actually ALL the gun numbers are depressing. 43,000 gun deaths, 16,000 gun homicides, 70,000 gun injuries, 400,000 gun crimes (and no, that doesn't include some black dude merely HAVING a gun, which is what you want to throw them into a jail cell we don't have), 213 BILLION in gun-related expenses, the completely loss of civil liberties in this country trying to accommodate a few fetishists....

Wow. You don't understand any of this do you?

Yes, nations with longstanding (multiple generations if not multiple centuries) citizen disarmament practices do not experience large instances of gun crime today. Those citizen disarmament objectives were not instituted as crime control measures, they were enacted for political control.

Whatever lower crime that's being realized in modern times is merely the ancillary benefit of cultivating a nation of compliant, obedient subjects.

Uh, guy, get real. The Europeans have more freedom than we do. They don't have millions of people in prison or cops who shoot hundreds of suspects every year. In Japan, women can go out alone at night in Tokyo, as opposed to America, where that's pretty much an open invitation to be raped.

The difference is that those countries don't have a gun industry that openly encourages the carnage because they can profit off of it. And, no, this is a recent phenomenon, not a century old thing. Most of history, most Americans didn't own guns and didn't need them. The NRA was founded because a Union General was horrified by how little Americans knew about guns and marksmanship.

As late as the 1960's, the NRA and Sensible Republicans were passing common sense gun laws.

Silly Darkie, "Rights" are for White People.

So what happened was that in the 1970's, the crazies hijacked the NRA, and the gun industry flooded our streets with cheaper, more deadly guns. When the CDC showed that gun proliferation WAS the problem, Congress passed the Dickey Act to keep the CDC from studying gun violence. When the victims of the DC Snipers successfully sued the gun sellers and makers, Congress passed a law exempting them from civil liability.

 

[2aguy]

Yup, if you keep trying to move the goalposts, you could probably get the ZERO.



Actually ALL the gun numbers are depressing. 43,000 gun deaths, 16,000 gun homicides, 70,000 gun injuries, 400,000 gun crimes (and no, that doesn't include some black dude merely HAVING a gun, which is what you want to throw them into a jail cell we don't have), 213 BILLION in gun-related expenses, the completely loss of civil liberties in this country trying to accommodate a few fetishists....



Uh, guy, get real. The Europeans have more freedom than we do. They don't have millions of people in prison or cops who shoot hundreds of suspects every year. In Japan, women can go out alone at night in Tokyo, as opposed to America, where that's pretty much an open invitation to be raped.

The difference is that those countries don't have a gun industry that openly encourages the carnage because they can profit off of it. And, no, this is a recent phenomenon, not a century old thing. Most of history, most Americans didn't own guns and didn't need them. The NRA was founded because a Union General was horrified by how little Americans knew about guns and marksmanship.

As late as the 1960's, the NRA and Sensible Republicans were passing common sense gun laws.

View attachment 590335
Silly Darkie, "Rights" are for White People.

So what happened was that in the 1970's, the crazies hijacked the NRA, and the gun industry flooded our streets with cheaper, more deadly guns. When the CDC showed that gun proliferation WAS the problem, Congress passed the Dickey Act to keep the CDC from studying gun violence. When the victims of the DC Snipers successfully sued the gun sellers and makers, Congress passed a law exempting them from civil liability.

The Europeans murdered 15 million unarmed, innocent men, women and children....the Japanese murdered over 3 million unarmed, innocent, men, women and children.....

That is what gun control created.....more deaths in 6 years than 87 years of gun murder in the U.S.....innocent people murdered by their government, versus criminals murdering other criminals with guns...

330 million Americans

600 million guns in the U.S.

Well over 21.5 million Americans can carry guns legally for self defense in public...

Gun murder.....which means criminals murdering other criminals...70-80% of the victims are the actual criminals, and of the rest the vast majority are associated with the criminals....friends, family, associates.....

10,258 gun murders in the U.S. in 2019 before the democrats war on police took full effect......

Expanded Homicide Data Table 8

ucr.fbi.gov

Fatal gun accidents......with over 21.5 million Americans actually carrying guns in public for self defense....legally....

486

Fatal Injury and Violence Data | WISQARS | Injury Center | CDC

WISQARS fatal injury data shows the number of injury deaths and death rates by intent and mechanism. The fatal injury applications include Fatal Injury Reports, Leading Causes of Death, Cost of Injury Reports, and Fatal Injury Data Visualization.

www.cdc.gov

Gun suicide...which do not count since any other method would achieve the same goal...

23,941....

.and Japan, South Korea, China, Scotland and many other European countries have higher rates of suicide, and extreme gun control...

CDC WISQARS - Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System

Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System

wisqars.cdc.gov

Then we have the benefits of guns...

15 million innocent men, women and children, 3 million innocent men, women and children not murdered by their governments....

NAZI GENOCIDE AND MASS MURDER

hawaii.edu

According to the Centers for Disease Control....Americans use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to stop rapes, robberies, murders, mass public shootings, stabbings and beatings......

The Dept. of Justice showed the number to be 1.5 million times a year.....

Lives saved....based on research? By law abiding gun owners using guns to stop criminals?



Case Closed: Kleck Is Still Correct





that makes for at least 176,000 lives saved—



Money saved from people not being beaten, raped, murdered, robbed?.......





So figuring that the average DGU saves one half of a person’s life—as “gun violence” predominantly affects younger demographics—that gives us $3.465 million per half life.

Putting this all together, we find that the monetary benefit of guns (by way of DGUs) is roughly $1.02 trillion per year. That’s trillion. With a ‘T’.

I was going to go on and calculate the costs of incarceration ($50K/year) saved by people killing 1527 criminals annually, and then look at the lifetime cost to society of an average criminal (something in excess of $1 million).


But all of that would be a drop in the bucket compared to the $1,000,000,000,000 ($1T) annual benefit of gun ownership.

When compared to the (inflation adjusted from 2002) $127.5 billion ‘cost’ of gun violence calculated by by our Ludwig-Cook buddies, guns save a little more than eight times what they “cost.”

Which, I might add, is completely irrelevant since “the freedom to own and carry the weapon of your choice is a natural, fundamental, and inalienable human, individual, civil, and Constitutional right — subject neither to the democratic process nor to arguments grounded in social utility.”

So even taking Motherboard’s own total and multiplying it by 100, the benefits to society of civilian gun ownership dwarf the associated costs.


Annual Defensive Gun Use Savings Dwarf Study's "Gun Violence" Costs - The Truth About Guns

 

[2aguy]

Yup, if you keep trying to move the goalposts, you could probably get the ZERO.



Actually ALL the gun numbers are depressing. 43,000 gun deaths, 16,000 gun homicides, 70,000 gun injuries, 400,000 gun crimes (and no, that doesn't include some black dude merely HAVING a gun, which is what you want to throw them into a jail cell we don't have), 213 BILLION in gun-related expenses, the completely loss of civil liberties in this country trying to accommodate a few fetishists....



Uh, guy, get real. The Europeans have more freedom than we do. They don't have millions of people in prison or cops who shoot hundreds of suspects every year. In Japan, women can go out alone at night in Tokyo, as opposed to America, where that's pretty much an open invitation to be raped.

The difference is that those countries don't have a gun industry that openly encourages the carnage because they can profit off of it. And, no, this is a recent phenomenon, not a century old thing. Most of history, most Americans didn't own guns and didn't need them. The NRA was founded because a Union General was horrified by how little Americans knew about guns and marksmanship.

As late as the 1960's, the NRA and Sensible Republicans were passing common sense gun laws.

View attachment 590335
Silly Darkie, "Rights" are for White People.

So what happened was that in the 1970's, the crazies hijacked the NRA, and the gun industry flooded our streets with cheaper, more deadly guns. When the CDC showed that gun proliferation WAS the problem, Congress passed the Dickey Act to keep the CDC from studying gun violence. When the victims of the DC Snipers successfully sued the gun sellers and makers, Congress passed a law exempting them from civil liability.

The Europeans are not more free than we are and they are becoming less free by the day........sing the song "Kung Fu Fighting," and then get ready to be arrested........

 

[JoeB131]

The Europeans murdered 15 million unarmed, innocent men, women and children....the Japanese murdered over 3 million unarmed, innocent, men, women and children.....

Uh, that's called War... My Native American Ancestors would like to have a word...

The Europeans are not more free than we are and they are becoming less free by the day........sing the song "Kung Fu Fighting," and then get ready to be arrested........

Well, that's a pretty stupid song... sooo

But seriously.

Germany only locks up 75,000 people. The UK 78,000 people... Japan 69,000

The US locks up 2 million people.

Countries Compared by Crime > Prisoners. International Statistics at NationMaster.com

Total persons incarcerated

www.nationmaster.com

 

[Captain Caveman]

A study shows that all of the gun control laws, on top of all the other gun control laws, piled on top of the other gun control laws in Massachusetts......had no impact on their gun crime rates.....

You know, since criminals don't obey gun laws.....

Where I found the first story....

Inconvenient studies get buried by the media

bearingarms.com

Where they found the story.....

Massachusetts gun-control legislation had no impact on violent crime rates

The new gun control measures did not have a "consistent effect" on reducing rates of murder or manslaughter, assault, robbery, and rape.

www.studyfinds.org

A team at American University analyzed the impact of one such measure in Massachusetts and found stricter background checks and licensing policies made little to no difference in curbing violent crimes.
-------

How is Massachusetts cracking down on gun ownership?​

Massachusetts passed new background check requirements for firearms sold at gun shows or through private sales. Lawmakers also created changes to firearm regulations by adopting new gun licensing procedures in 2014. The new law went into effect in January 2015.

No ‘consistent effect’ on crime rates​

Using this approach, the research team was able to estimate, based on percentage of firearms licenses, that one to five percent of adult Massachusetts residents had a gunlicense.


However, results also show the new gun control measures did not have a “consistent effect” on reducing four types of violent crimes — murder or manslaughter, aggravated assault, robbery, and rape.

Notably, a one-percent increase in denied firearm licenses and denied firearm licenses following statutory disqualifications increased robberies by 7.3 and 8.9 percent, respectively.

But.......did these gun control laws prevent criminals from Mis-gendering their victims?

America would have to have buy back schemes on gins that wouldn't comply with new gun regulations and authorities would have to apply procedures robustly. On top of that, you need heavy fines and jail sentences for those who breach regs. And it'll take decades to filter through because of the number of gun nuts you have.