Yes.....gun ownership went through the roof.....and gun crime went down...
There are studies that support the belief that guns in private hands helped lower the crime rate....I have linked to those in earlier posts....
But the real problem for you......moron.......is that the last 21 years have shown that the basic, the fundamental argument that you guys make......is wrong.....and has no basis in reality....
You guys claim that More Guns = More Gun Crime....that is your entire argument.....
And it has been proven wrong over 21 years ........as more Americans bought and carried guns....the gun crime rates went down, not up...showing that you have nothing....your arguments are based on false premises and a lack of understanding.......
We went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 16.3 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2017...guess what happened...
--
gun murder down 49%
--gun crime down 75%
--violent crime down 72%
Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware
Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.
More Guns......less crime.....you have nothing....
You are just spamming the same crap over and over again.
The source you yourself used - Pew even said that there were MANY factors involved in declining crime rates and that increased gun ownership was
not necessarily causal in the rates going down.
Mobile phone ownership increased during that time. As mobile phone ownership went up - violent crime went down. Hmmm....according to your logic...it must be causal.
Yes.....you now have to run from the fact that the fundamental argument you guys make....
More Guns = More Gun Crime....
Is disproven by those 21 years of Americans buying more and more guns...and more and more Americans carrying those guns for self defense...showing for all the world to see that normal. law abiding people, owning and carrying guns does not increase the gun crime rate...at all.....and that the gun murder rate went down 49%....the gun crime rate went down 75%....and the violent crime rate went down 72%...
Which is the exact oppososite of what you anti gun extremists said would happen......
You have no argument....facts, research, and real world experience show you have no argument......you just want to ban guns because you are emotionally afraid of guns...
There is a direct correlation between the availability of guns (more guns) and increased gun crimes. I'm not emotionally afraid of guns. I have a gun. I just don't worship it and feel I need to drag it everywhere with me like a kid. It's a tool I use when my husband and I go target shooting. Otherwise, it's put away like my other tools.
And, speaking of "have no argument" - you're building a strawman. I don't want to ban guns. You make exactly the kind of argument that I was complaining about in my first post in this thread.
You present it as only two options: ban guns or no restrictions whatsoever on guns. Those are the only two positions you seem to see. Is there anything in between those extremes that you would consider reasonable?
Moron
There is a direct correlation between the availability of guns (more guns) and increased gun crimes.
Baltimore has all of the extrem gun control laws you want....fingerprinting, registering guns, assault weapon ban, magazine limits......every single one...
Houston....in a border state next to the drug cartel regions of Mexico......has gun stores on every corner, and people carry guns easily..........
Murder rate 2017
Baltimore......343
Population of cities 2016:
Houston........2.3 million
Baltimore......620,961
Murder rate 2016:
Houston .......301
Baltimore......318
Moron......you don't know what you are talking about......
Is that really comparable?
Cities with the worst rates of violent crimes try to solve that with greater restrictions on firearms - so it's a chicken and egg approach - which came first?
Crime rates among cities are affected by a number of factors - do you agree or disagree or do you think it's soley down to gun laws? Is it that simplistic?
Top 30 US Cities for murder rates (as of Nov 2017):
The 30 cities with the highest murder rates in the US
St. Louis, MO
Baltimore MD
Detroit MI
New Orleans LA
Birmingham AL
Jackson MS
Baton Rouge LA
Hartford CT
Salinas CA
Milwaukee LA
Washington DC
Kansas City MO
Savannah GA
Cincinnatti OH
West Palm Beach FL
Memphis TN
Oakland CA
San Bernadino CA
Atlanta GA
Richmond VA
Kansas City KA
Pittsburgh, PA
Dayton OH
Philadelphia PA
Chicago, IL
North Charleston, SC
Miami, FL
Indianapolis, IN
South Bend, IN
Waco TX
They are spread across MO, IN, PA, IL, FL, TX, OH, KA, VA, GA, TN, SC, DC, LA, MS, MI, MD....
Most gun control laws are at the state level.
Among states with the
least restrictive gun laws we have Kansas, Missouri, Mississippi, Louisiana....and 6 of the 30 most violent cities.
Among states with
the most restrictive gun laws we have Illinois, Maryland, Connecticut, California....and another 6 of the 30 most violent cities.
Some of those cities have lost jobs and industries - all of which contribute to violent crime rates. Others have big problems in drugs and drug trafficking - which brings violence in with it. Another factor - poverty.
So given that the top most violent cities occur in states with strict gun laws and states with the least strict gun laws - and many inbetween - how can you claim causation?
(moron)