Three killed, four injured in Paris

[Missourian]

Had I wanted this thread in the Europe Forum I would have POSTED it in the Europe Forum.

It is posted here as a statement AGAINST anti-second amendment gun control.

Leave my threads alone.

Ex-con arrested in Paris shooting that killed three, injured three

An ex-con was arrested after opening fire in central Paris, killing three people and wounding three others during a bloody rampage at a Kurdish cultural center in the city.

nypost.com

If only they had strict gun control...

EXPLAINED: How gun control laws work in France

France has strict gun control laws, but illegal weapons are widespread and these have been used in most of the deadly terror attacks in the country in recent years - here are the rules and the reality on gun ownership in France.

web.archive.org

 

[Moonglow]

France doesn't have the second amendment.

 

[odanny]

Derp.

 

[Missourian]

Derp.

The cerebral liberal rebuttal, the well reasoned and articulated responses from our friends on the left that give them their intellectual flair.

 

[skye]

And BTW....diversity is grand isn't it?

Paris, France – Chaos and violence erupted on Friday after 3 people were killed and several others injured by a Kurdish gunman.

Angry Kurds clashed with riot police around Rue d’Enghien, near the center of Paris, after a 69-year-old man opened fire on a Kurdish cultural center.

 

[Failzero]

The Religion Of peace ?

 

[2aguy]

The Religion Of peace ?

Are kurds muslim?

 

[Captain Caveman]

France doesn't have the second amendment.

The thing is, a gun nut believes that any gun incident in any country should not happen because -

1 - Guns everywhere outside of America are believed to be banned.

2 - They believe any regulation in place for anything, means an incident cannot happen.

3 - Having a 2nd Amendment is the answer to the few gun incidents countries suffer, despite a 2nd Amendment ranking the US near the top of the gun incident league.

If Ukraine win against Russia, they will claim the Ukrainians right to bear arms won it for them, plus, America won that war because they sent money and equipment.

In every country, we all live in a society. Anyone wanting to live individualistic, go buy a remote island. Regulation steers social behaviour. So to make society safer for the majority, regulations control vehicles, health & safety at work, electrical compliance, gun regulations, healthcare etc.. Regulation is everywhere. So that covers the majority of people, but there's a flaw in humans, we are all not honest, we all don't comply. So this is where "incidents" occur in different areas covered by different regulations. Unfortunately the majority have to walk as slow as the slowest to keep society moving forward.

And rational people know this, the vast majority know this is common sense and how life in society works. And because of this, the only way to kill a conversation on guns is to mouth froth, "2nd Amendment". That is the only defence, the only get out clause a gun nut can get away from reality, from the common sense.

Why a gun nut always defaults to gun bans is either just the usual shite rhetoric they use, or they dip into quadrant 3.

But this is the circle of the gun debate, and the above just gets repeated the same number of times to these fucking pointless gun threads.

 

[2aguy]

The thing is, a gun nut believes that any gun incident in any country should not happen because -

1 - Guns everywhere outside of America are believed to be banned.

2 - They believe any regulation in place for anything, means an incident cannot happen.

3 - Having a 2nd Amendment is the answer to the few gun incidents countries suffer, despite a 2nd Amendment ranking the US near the top of the gun incident league.

If Ukraine win against Russia, they will claim the Ukrainians right to bear arms won it for them, plus, America won that war because they sent money and equipment.

In every country, we all live in a society. Anyone wanting to live individualistic, go buy a remote island. Regulation steers social behaviour. So to make society safer for the majority, regulations control vehicles, health & safety at work, electrical compliance, gun regulations, healthcare etc.. Regulation is everywhere. So that covers the majority of people, but there's a flaw in humans, we are all not honest, we all don't comply. So this is where "incidents" occur in different areas covered by different regulations. Unfortunately the majority have to walk as slow as the slowest to keep society moving forward.

And rational people know this, the vast majority know this is common sense and how life in society works. And because of this, the only way to kill a conversation on guns is to mouth froth, "2nd Amendment". That is the only defence, the only get out clause a gun nut can get away from reality, from the common sense.

Why a gun nut always defaults to gun bans is either just the usual shite rhetoric they use, or they dip into quadrant 3.

But this is the circle of the gun debate, and the above just gets repeated the same number of times to these fucking pointless gun threads.

Shithead...we have thiusands of gun laws in the U.S., and it isnt normal gun iwners shooting p

The thing is, a gun nut believes that any gun incident in any country should not happen because -

1 - Guns everywhere outside of America are believed to be banned.

2 - They believe any regulation in place for anything, means an incident cannot happen.

3 - Having a 2nd Amendment is the answer to the few gun incidents countries suffer, despite a 2nd Amendment ranking the US near the top of the gun incident league.

If Ukraine win against Russia, they will claim the Ukrainians right to bear arms won it for them, plus, America won that war because they sent money and equipment.

In every country, we all live in a society. Anyone wanting to live individualistic, go buy a remote island. Regulation steers social behaviour. So to make society safer for the majority, regulations control vehicles, health & safety at work, electrical compliance, gun regulations, healthcare etc.. Regulation is everywhere. So that covers the majority of people, but there's a flaw in humans, we are all not honest, we all don't comply. So this is where "incidents" occur in different areas covered by different regulations. Unfortunately the majority have to walk as slow as the slowest to keep society moving forward.

And rational people know this, the vast majority know this is common sense and how life in society works. And because of this, the only way to kill a conversation on guns is to mouth froth, "2nd Amendment". That is the only defence, the only get out clause a gun nut can get away from reality, from the common sense.

Why a gun nut always defaults to gun bans is either just the usual shite rhetoric they use, or they dip into quadrant 3.

But this is the circle of the gun debate, and the above just gets repeated the same number of times to these fucking pointless gun threads.

A few things you refuse to understand.

1) We have thousands of gun laws in the U.S.

2) Normal gun owners in the U.S. are not the ones using their guns for crime and murder.

Those are two things you do not understand and refuse to understand.

90% of murderers in the U.S. are criminals with long histories of crime and violence going back to their teen years. They average at least 3 felony crimes before they commit their first murder.

Our gun crime problem is a direct result of the policies of the left wing, democrat party. The policy of the democrat party of attacking the police has made it impossible for the police to do their jobs, which has now created huge shortages of police in the cities the democrat party controls.

On top of that, the democrat party has a policy of "De-carceration," where they do whatever they can as judges, prosecutors and politicians to get even the most dangerous and violent criminals released pre-trial on no cash bail, drop gun charges to reduce sentences, no matter how many crimes the criminal committed, and changing laws in order to reduce sentences for even the most violent gun crimes.

Those are things you don't understand and those are the things that actually drive our gun crime rate, and they have nothing to do with private gun ownership or gun carrying in the U.S.......

At the same time, those countries you think are just awesome?

In the 1920s those countries began a campaign to register, ban and confiscate guns. They used the same arguments that you are using today......giving up guns makes you safer......the government will keep you safe.

By the mid 1930s, the German socialists and the countries under their control began the process of murdering 15 million innocent men, women and children........and in 6 years of slaughter, they murdered more people than have been murdered with guns in the entire 246 year history of the United States.

15 million innocent men, women and children murdered in about 6 years, by their own governments after they gave up their guns.

In the U.S....in 246 years, total gun murder number is about 2,460,000.........

Meanwhile, Switzerland, a country that didn't confiscate guns from their citizens....was not invaded by the German socialists and did not participate in the mass murder of their citizens.

So you really have no idea what you are talking about...........

 

[2aguy]

The thing is, a gun nut believes that any gun incident in any country should not happen because -

1 - Guns everywhere outside of America are believed to be banned.

2 - They believe any regulation in place for anything, means an incident cannot happen.

3 - Having a 2nd Amendment is the answer to the few gun incidents countries suffer, despite a 2nd Amendment ranking the US near the top of the gun incident league.

If Ukraine win against Russia, they will claim the Ukrainians right to bear arms won it for them, plus, America won that war because they sent money and equipment.

In every country, we all live in a society. Anyone wanting to live individualistic, go buy a remote island. Regulation steers social behaviour. So to make society safer for the majority, regulations control vehicles, health & safety at work, electrical compliance, gun regulations, healthcare etc.. Regulation is everywhere. So that covers the majority of people, but there's a flaw in humans, we are all not honest, we all don't comply. So this is where "incidents" occur in different areas covered by different regulations. Unfortunately the majority have to walk as slow as the slowest to keep society moving forward.

And rational people know this, the vast majority know this is common sense and how life in society works. And because of this, the only way to kill a conversation on guns is to mouth froth, "2nd Amendment". That is the only defence, the only get out clause a gun nut can get away from reality, from the common sense.

Why a gun nut always defaults to gun bans is either just the usual shite rhetoric they use, or they dip into quadrant 3.

But this is the circle of the gun debate, and the above just gets repeated the same number of times to these fucking pointless gun threads.

Now some more truth.....


The Criminology of Firearms

In 2004, the National Academy of Sciences reviewed 253 journal articles, 99 books, 43 government publications and some empirical research of its own about guns. The Academy could not identify any gun restriction that had reduced violent crime, suicide or gun accidents.

Christoffel, et al., are utterly wrong. The whole corpus of criminological research dating back to the 1890'sshows murderers "almost uniformly have a long history of involvement in criminal behavior," and that "[v]irtually all" murderers and other gun criminals have prior felony records — generally long ones.

While only 15 percent of Americans have criminal records, roughly 90 percent of adult murderers have prior adult records — exclusive of their often extensive juvenile records — with crime careers of six or more adult years including four major felonies. Gerald D. Robin, writing for the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences,notes that, unlike ordinary gun owners, "the average murderer turns out to be no less hardened a criminal than the average robber or burglar."
=============

Most murder victims in big cities have criminal record

A review of murder statistics across America shows that in many large cities, up to 90 percent of the victims have criminal records.
-------
The report concludes that “of the 2011 homicide victims, 77 percent (66) had a least one prior arrest and of the known 2011 homicide suspects 90 percent (74) had at least one prior arrest.”
----------
In early 2012, after pressure put on the police by murder victims’ families in New Orleans, the police department stopped revealing whether or not the murder victim had a prior record.
---------------
Though data is no longer published in Baltimore, USA Today reported in 2007 that 91 percent of the then-205 murder victims in the city between Jan. 1 and Aug. 31, 2007, had criminal records.
---------
A WND review of the Philadelphia Police Department Murder and Shooting Analysis for 2011 shows a similar pattern to that of other large cities in America – a majority of the murder victims have prior records.

--------
In Philadelphia in 2011, of 324 murders, 81 percent (263) of the victims had at least one prior arrest; 62 percent (164) had been arrested for a violent crime prior to their murder.
----------
In Newark, N.J., long considered one of America’s most dangerous cities, 85 percent of the 165 murder victims between 2009 and 2010 had serious arrest histories.
Anthony Braga, a professor with the Rutgers-Newark School of Criminal Justice, told the Newark Star-Ledger that 85 percent of 165 murder victims in Newark between 2009 and 2010 had been arrested at least once before they were killed.
Those victims, he said, had, on average, 10 prior arrests on their criminal records.
A WND review of the Chicago Police Department Murder Analysis reports from 2003 to 2011 provides a statistical breakdown of the demographics of both the victims and offenders in the 4,265 murders in Chicago over that time period.


***************

D.C. study...
A study finds that suspects in violent crime in the District share a lot of characteristics.

The National Institute for Criminal Justice Reform looked at the numbers for homicides and nonfatal shooting in D.C. in 2019 and 2020, and found that “most gun violence is tightly concentrated on a small number of very high-risk young Black male adults that share a common set of risk factors.”

Those factors include involvements in street crews, a previous criminal justice history and connection to a recent shooting. Often, they’ve been the victims of crime themselves. While the motive for the shooting “may not be a traditional gang war,” the report says, “often shootings are precipitated by a petty conflict over a young woman, a simple argument, or the now-ubiquitous social media slight.”
---------
More than 90% of victims and suspects in 2019 and 2020 were male and about 96% were Black.

The study also found that another 86% of victims and suspects have been involved with the criminal justice system and the average age of victims is 31, while the average age of suspects is 27 years old.

They found that, in terms of prior arrests, “victims and suspects were remarkably similar.”

http://[URL='https://wtop.com/dc/20...dc-gun-crimes-involve-small-number-of-people/

[/URL]


Bonus content.......the actual study...

About 96 percent of victims and suspects in both homicides and nonfatal shootings were Black, despite Black residents comprising only 46 percent of the overall population in the District (Table 1).
-----
Approximately 86 percent of homicide victims and suspects were known to the criminal justice system prior to the incident.

Among all victims and suspects, about 46 percent had been previously incarcerated (Figure 2).

At least 23.3 percent of all homicide victims and suspects were under active supervision (i.e., CSOSA, PSA, or DYRS)1. At least 64 percent of all victims and suspects had been under any prior or active supervision and at least 76% of homicide suspects had active or prior supervision.
------
Overall, most victims and suspects with prior criminal offenses had been arrested about 11 times for about 13 different offenses by the time of the homicide. This count only refers to adult arrests and juvenile arrests were not included.
-------

In Washington, DC, most gun violence is tightly concentrated on a small number of very high risk young Black male adults that share a common set of risk factors, including: involvement in street crews/groups; significant criminal justice history including prior or active community supervision; often prior victimization; and a connection to a recent shooting (within the past 12 months).
While the majority of people involved in shootings, as victim or suspect, are members or associates of street groups/gangs, the motive for the shooting may not be a traditional gang war. Often shootings are precipitated by a petty conflict over a young woman, a simple argument, or the now ubiquitous social media slight.
-----
This small number of very high risk individuals are identifiable, their violence is predictable, and therefore it is preventable. Based on the assessment of data and the series of interviews conducted, NICJR estimates that within a year, there are at least 500 identifiable people who rise to this level of very high risk, and likely no more than 200 at any one given time. These individuals comprise approximately 60-70% of all gun violence in the District. Nealy 250 specific individuals were identified through the GVPA process but more importantly, the risk factors that make someone at very high risk has been identified in order to develop an on-going process to focus intervention efforts on those at very high risk.

https://cjcc.dc.gov/sites/default/f... Violence Problem Analysis Summary Report.pdf
========

 

[2aguy]

The thing is, a gun nut believes that any gun incident in any country should not happen because -

1 - Guns everywhere outside of America are believed to be banned.

2 - They believe any regulation in place for anything, means an incident cannot happen.

3 - Having a 2nd Amendment is the answer to the few gun incidents countries suffer, despite a 2nd Amendment ranking the US near the top of the gun incident league.

If Ukraine win against Russia, they will claim the Ukrainians right to bear arms won it for them, plus, America won that war because they sent money and equipment.

In every country, we all live in a society. Anyone wanting to live individualistic, go buy a remote island. Regulation steers social behaviour. So to make society safer for the majority, regulations control vehicles, health & safety at work, electrical compliance, gun regulations, healthcare etc.. Regulation is everywhere. So that covers the majority of people, but there's a flaw in humans, we are all not honest, we all don't comply. So this is where "incidents" occur in different areas covered by different regulations. Unfortunately the majority have to walk as slow as the slowest to keep society moving forward.

And rational people know this, the vast majority know this is common sense and how life in society works. And because of this, the only way to kill a conversation on guns is to mouth froth, "2nd Amendment". That is the only defence, the only get out clause a gun nut can get away from reality, from the common sense.

Why a gun nut always defaults to gun bans is either just the usual shite rhetoric they use, or they dip into quadrant 3.

But this is the circle of the gun debate, and the above just gets repeated the same number of times to these fucking pointless gun threads.

Chicago.........

Actual report on shootings in chicago...


http://urbanlabs.uchicago.edu/attac...cagoCrimeLab+Gun+Violence+in+Chicago+2016.pdf


1/19/17 Shooters in Chicago criminal record research from U of C






Nearly 40 percent of victims had more than 10 prior arrests, while the share with more than 20 prior arrests rose from 14 to 18 percent in 2016.

The share of victims with a current or prior gang affiliation as recorded by CPD was about the same in both years (53 and 54 percent).
And now the shooters . . .

Individuals arrested for a homicide or shooting in Chicago in 2016 and 2015 had similar prior criminal records: around 90 percent had at least one prior arrest, approximately 50 percent had a prior arrest for a violent crime specifically, and almost 40 percent had a prior gun arrest.

 

[2aguy]

The thing is, a gun nut believes that any gun incident in any country should not happen because -

1 - Guns everywhere outside of America are believed to be banned.

2 - They believe any regulation in place for anything, means an incident cannot happen.

3 - Having a 2nd Amendment is the answer to the few gun incidents countries suffer, despite a 2nd Amendment ranking the US near the top of the gun incident league.

If Ukraine win against Russia, they will claim the Ukrainians right to bear arms won it for them, plus, America won that war because they sent money and equipment.

In every country, we all live in a society. Anyone wanting to live individualistic, go buy a remote island. Regulation steers social behaviour. So to make society safer for the majority, regulations control vehicles, health & safety at work, electrical compliance, gun regulations, healthcare etc.. Regulation is everywhere. So that covers the majority of people, but there's a flaw in humans, we are all not honest, we all don't comply. So this is where "incidents" occur in different areas covered by different regulations. Unfortunately the majority have to walk as slow as the slowest to keep society moving forward.

And rational people know this, the vast majority know this is common sense and how life in society works. And because of this, the only way to kill a conversation on guns is to mouth froth, "2nd Amendment". That is the only defence, the only get out clause a gun nut can get away from reality, from the common sense.

Why a gun nut always defaults to gun bans is either just the usual shite rhetoric they use, or they dip into quadrant 3.

But this is the circle of the gun debate, and the above just gets repeated the same number of times to these fucking pointless gun threads.

The thing is, a gun nut believes that any gun incident in any country should not happen because -

1 - Guns everywhere outside of America are believed to be banned.

2 - They believe any regulation in place for anything, means an incident cannot happen.

3 - Having a 2nd Amendment is the answer to the few gun incidents countries suffer, despite a 2nd Amendment ranking the US near the top of the gun incident league.

If Ukraine win against Russia, they will claim the Ukrainians right to bear arms won it for them, plus, America won that war because they sent money and equipment.

In every country, we all live in a society. Anyone wanting to live individualistic, go buy a remote island. Regulation steers social behaviour. So to make society safer for the majority, regulations control vehicles, health & safety at work, electrical compliance, gun regulations, healthcare etc.. Regulation is everywhere. So that covers the majority of people, but there's a flaw in humans, we are all not honest, we all don't comply. So this is where "incidents" occur in different areas covered by different regulations. Unfortunately the majority have to walk as slow as the slowest to keep society moving forward.

And rational people know this, the vast majority know this is common sense and how life in society works. And because of this, the only way to kill a conversation on guns is to mouth froth, "2nd Amendment". That is the only defence, the only get out clause a gun nut can get away from reality, from the common sense.

Why a gun nut always defaults to gun bans is either just the usual shite rhetoric they use, or they dip into quadrant 3.

But this is the circle of the gun debate, and the above just gets repeated the same number of times to these fucking pointless gun threads.

Why a gun nut always defaults to gun bans is either just the usual shite rhetoric they use, or they dip into quadrant 3.

Europe, Asia, Australia, Canada.......gun bans.

Hmmmmm.....yes...I wonder why normal people who own guns think that gun bans might happen? And, of course, before they banned and actually confiscated guns, those countries first registered guns...under the concept that the government simply wanted to know who owned them....then, years later, they used those registration lists for bans or "Mandatory Buy Backs," taking guns from people who don't use guns for crime.