Why America needs guns

[Geaux4it]

https://tribunist.com/news/teenager-accidentally-kills-marine-after-shooting-at-road-sign/

"
Teenager Accidentally Kills Marine After Shooting at Road Sign"

"A teenage boy, shooting a pistol at a road sign, ended up killing a retired Marine who was sitting on the front porch of his house."

Yeah, with MORE GUNS this event wouldn't have happened because the person who shot the sign, and then killed the retired Marine, would ALREADY BE DEAD.

More guns.

We don't "need them" ...... yet

We want them....

That's all that matters

-Geaux

 

[frigidweirdo]

And why are you asking this?

Well, you don't think that skews the "gun violence" statistics just a tad bit?

Not really. Because I'm only looking at gun murder statistics. There it's about 5 times higher than other first world countries.

But don't let me stop you trying to eliminate gang murders and immigrant murders to try and get the rate down.

Back the train up. What do your "gun murder statistics" tell you?
How many deaths per year are attributed to murder via firearm?

What's your point?

My point is very simple, how many MURDERS are attributed to guns each year?

I'm sure you're being rather pedantic here, aren't you?

Whatever figure I'll give, you'll say "but guns don't kill people, people do."

Which ignores the fact that people with guns are much more powerful killers than people without guns, hence why soldiers are given guns to fight in wars, and why the US murder rate is 3/4 gun murders.

 

[MisterBeale]

Let's get rid of cars.

There would be far less accidents.

Yes there would. But people would still need to get around. And there'd still be accidents.

People don't need to shoot signs.

Also, if measure were taken to reduce deaths on the road, that would work. Because it works in countries which actually have a proper government.

The US has 10.6 road fatalities per 100,000 people.

Norway has 2.2
Switzerland 2.6
Sweden 2.8
UK 2.9
Netherlands 3.4
Denmark 3.5

Well, let's see who shares a similar rate to the US.

Lithuania
Montenegro
The Philippines
Serbia

Yeah, poorer former eastern European countries and the Philippines.

But people would still need to get around

Yeah, well some people still need to defend themselves.

maybe your fortunate enough to not live in South Central LA, but for those who do ..... they should have the freedom of choice. Be able to defend themselves or depend on the police to show up after the fact.

Yes, defend themselves from fuckers shooting signs. Wait, how do you defend yourself from a redneck shooting signs when you can't even see him.

I know, let's ask former marines how to do it.

When I almost died of a fatal medical malady, it just happened, out of the blue.

I had no choice.

When some people get struck and killed by lightening, they have no choice, it just happens.

To use freak accidents as an excuse to limit the rights of hundreds of millions of people just doesn't make logical sense to most of us. I do understand your anxiety though, and many famous philosophers throughout our civilization have too.

Freedom can be damn scary man, it is the price we pay for living truly authentic lives. Really, if you wish, there are less free societies you could choose to live in. Rather than trying to convince the majority to be less free, why not consider picking up and moving to a less free community if you can not handle so much freedom?

I do agree with you though, living with freedom does entail more risk.

 

[2aguy]

https://tribunist.com/news/teenager-accidentally-kills-marine-after-shooting-at-road-sign/

"
Teenager Accidentally Kills Marine After Shooting at Road Sign"

"A teenage boy, shooting a pistol at a road sign, ended up killing a retired Marine who was sitting on the front porch of his house."

Yeah, with MORE GUNS this event wouldn't have happened because the person who shot the sign, and then killed the retired Marine, would ALREADY BE DEAD.

More guns.

No, it's why people need to be CAREFUL with guns, not playing with them like a toy and properly keeping them from kids. If you want to move to a gun free land move to England its perfectly safe there.... no guns.
Someone might throw acid in your face however, so maybe you can work on eliminating unnecessary acid.

But the problems is, some people can't be CAREFUL with guns, can they?

There are guns in England, actually.

But then when around immigrants, all you need to be is be careful, right?

And as the stats actually show, as more Americans own and carry guns, our gun accidental death rate went down, not up...showing again, you don't know what you are talking about...

https://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/leading_causes_death.html


2016 495
2015...489http://webappa.cdc.gov/cgi-bin/broker.exe

2014.....461

2013 ..... 505
2012 ..... 548
2011 ..... 591
2010 ..... 606
2009 ..... 554
2008 ..... 592
2007..... 613
2006..... 642
2005 ..... 789
2004 ..... 649
2003 ..... 730
2002 ..... 762
2001 ..... 802
2000 ..... 776
1999 ..... 824

 

[2aguy]

Let's get rid of cars.

There would be far less accidents.

Yes there would. But people would still need to get around. And there'd still be accidents.

People don't need to shoot signs.

Also, if measure were taken to reduce deaths on the road, that would work. Because it works in countries which actually have a proper government.

The US has 10.6 road fatalities per 100,000 people.

Norway has 2.2
Switzerland 2.6
Sweden 2.8
UK 2.9
Netherlands 3.4
Denmark 3.5

Well, let's see who shares a similar rate to the US.

Lithuania
Montenegro
The Philippines
Serbia

Yeah, poorer former eastern European countries and the Philippines.

But people would still need to get around

Yeah, well some people still need to defend themselves.

maybe your fortunate enough to not live in South Central LA, but for those who do ..... they should have the freedom of choice. Be able to defend themselves or depend on the police to show up after the fact.

Yes, defend themselves from fuckers shooting signs. Wait, how do you defend yourself from a redneck shooting signs when you can't even see him.

I know, let's ask former marines how to do it.

The CDC shows that Americans use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to stop violent criminal attack. Shooting at signs is generally not in that group of violent crimes stopped 1.1 million times a year.

 

[2aguy]

Well, you don't think that skews the "gun violence" statistics just a tad bit?

Not really. Because I'm only looking at gun murder statistics. There it's about 5 times higher than other first world countries.

But don't let me stop you trying to eliminate gang murders and immigrant murders to try and get the rate down.

Back the train up. What do your "gun murder statistics" tell you?
How many deaths per year are attributed to murder via firearm?

What's your point?

My point is very simple, how many MURDERS are attributed to guns each year?

I'm sure you're being rather pedantic here, aren't you?

Whatever figure I'll give, you'll say "but guns don't kill people, people do."

Which ignores the fact that people with guns are much more powerful killers than people without guns, hence why soldiers are given guns to fight in wars, and why the US murder rate is 3/4 gun murders.

No...we have more murders because our country wasn't destroyed by 2 world wars and we have no history of feudalism. The culture created by those events removed huge numbers of young males from their societies, created an obsessive impulse to respect authority, and created no need for their criminals to murder their victims. They have guns in Britain, as you pointed out...criminals get all the guns they want, they just don't use them to murder people. That is changing as their social welfare states can no longer civilize their young males, males raised by single teenage mothers without fathers in the home.

 

[2aguy]

Said dumbass teenager could have just as easily plowed his car into an innocent victim because he was texting on his phone. Kids do dumb shit. Let's ban cars because "stupid people". You game?

Yes, and therefore you might want to consider why the US has a car death rate 3 times higher than many other first world countries.

I don't disagree with the issue of dealing with BOTH gun deaths (4-5 times higher than other first world countries) AND road deaths (3 times higher than other first world countries).

But no, this is the US where nothing ever gets done about anything that white men like.

Mah car and mah guns are my masqueuelinahteee.

Serious question: Are you aware that 67% of our "gun deaths" are suicides?

And why are you asking this?

Well, you don't think that skews the "gun violence" statistics just a tad bit?

Not really. Because I'm only looking at gun murder statistics. There it's about 5 times higher than other first world countries.

But don't let me stop you trying to eliminate gang murders and immigrant murders to try and get the rate down.

Those other first world countries suffered the cultural set backs of two world wars....they are now catching up as their increasing violent crime rates show...

 

[frigidweirdo]

Let's get rid of cars.

There would be far less accidents.

Yes there would. But people would still need to get around. And there'd still be accidents.

People don't need to shoot signs.

Also, if measure were taken to reduce deaths on the road, that would work. Because it works in countries which actually have a proper government.

The US has 10.6 road fatalities per 100,000 people.

Norway has 2.2
Switzerland 2.6
Sweden 2.8
UK 2.9
Netherlands 3.4
Denmark 3.5

Well, let's see who shares a similar rate to the US.

Lithuania
Montenegro
The Philippines
Serbia

Yeah, poorer former eastern European countries and the Philippines.

But people would still need to get around

Yeah, well some people still need to defend themselves.

maybe your fortunate enough to not live in South Central LA, but for those who do ..... they should have the freedom of choice. Be able to defend themselves or depend on the police to show up after the fact.

Yes, defend themselves from fuckers shooting signs. Wait, how do you defend yourself from a redneck shooting signs when you can't even see him.

I know, let's ask former marines how to do it.

When I almost died of a fatal medical malady, it just happened, out of the blue.

I had no choice.

When some people get struck and killed by lightening, they have no choice, it just happens.

To use freak accidents as an excuse to limit the rights of hundreds of millions of people just doesn't make logical sense to most of us. I do understand your anxiety though, and many famous philosophers throughout our civilization have too.

Freedom can be damn scary man, it is the price we pay for living truly authentic lives. Really, if you wish, there are less free societies you could choose to live in. Rather than trying to convince the majority to be less free, why not consider picking up and moving to a less free community if you can not handle so much freedom?

I do agree with you though, living with freedom does entail more risk.

Freak accidents that happen because of stupidity are not the same as heart attacks.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Yes, and therefore you might want to consider why the US has a car death rate 3 times higher than many other first world countries.

I don't disagree with the issue of dealing with BOTH gun deaths (4-5 times higher than other first world countries) AND road deaths (3 times higher than other first world countries).

But no, this is the US where nothing ever gets done about anything that white men like.

Mah car and mah guns are my masqueuelinahteee.

Serious question: Are you aware that 67% of our "gun deaths" are suicides?

And why are you asking this?

Well, you don't think that skews the "gun violence" statistics just a tad bit?

Not really. Because I'm only looking at gun murder statistics. There it's about 5 times higher than other first world countries.

But don't let me stop you trying to eliminate gang murders and immigrant murders to try and get the rate down.

Those other first world countries suffered the cultural set backs of two world wars....they are now catching up as their increasing violent crime rates show...

Really? You can show this trend of increasing violent crime rates over a period of time from the 1940s then? And show the US is going the other way, I suppose.

I bet you can't.

 

[2aguy]

No, it's why people need to be CAREFUL with guns, not playing with them like a toy and properly keeping them from kids. If you want to move to a gun free land move to England its perfectly safe there.... no guns.
Someone might throw acid in your face however, so maybe you can work on eliminating unnecessary acid.

But the problems is, some people can't be CAREFUL with guns, can they?

There are guns in England, actually.

But then when around immigrants, all you need to be is be careful, right?

What are you talking about Immigrants for ? Immigrants who come here legally are not a problem. There may be a problem however with guns which are sold illegally and that falls into a seperate category along with illegal immigrants

Keep up.

I'm talking about immigration because I'm showing COMPARTMENTALIZATION.

This is when people start using one argument for one topic, then completely go against that argument for the next topic.

With immigration - we can't let immigrants in because they kill people.

With guns - we can't ban guns even though the end up causing people's deaths.

Again your completely off. There is a reason for legal immigration. Its been gone over how many tens of thousands of times here? Legal immigration allows you to simply know who it is coming into your country which is why every country in the world has an immigration policy.

last I checked we are letting in like 1,000,000 legal immigrants a year. So why do you insist on them coming illegaly.

Just because you don't have a reason to protect yourself or your family by owning a gun doesn't mean someone else has a different circumstance than yourself.

I'm really not sure where you're going with this.

The question here is this.

Is it better to have guns, and to be able to protect yourself with those guns, or is it better not to have guns and not have people being able to protect themselves with guns?

The stats say the latter is better in civilized countries.

As more Americans own and carry guns our gun murder rate went down 49%, our violent crime rate went down 75%, our violent crime rate went down 72%.....any intelligent human would answer your question with the fact that guns have made us safer.

Americans use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to stop rapes, robberies and murders....all of which would have been completed without those guns.


Since you are asking questions.....answer this one.....

Would you prefer that a woman is raped, and murdered and buried in the woods, or that she is able to use a gun that she can carry to save her own life?

Answer that one, genius.

 

[2aguy]

What are you talking about Immigrants for ? Immigrants who come here legally are not a problem. There may be a problem however with guns which are sold illegally and that falls into a seperate category along with illegal immigrants

Keep up.

I'm talking about immigration because I'm showing COMPARTMENTALIZATION.

This is when people start using one argument for one topic, then completely go against that argument for the next topic.

With immigration - we can't let immigrants in because they kill people.

With guns - we can't ban guns even though the end up causing people's deaths.

Again your completely off. There is a reason for legal immigration. Its been gone over how many tens of thousands of times here? Legal immigration allows you to simply know who it is coming into your country which is why every country in the world has an immigration policy.

last I checked we are letting in like 1,000,000 legal immigrants a year. So why do you insist on them coming illegaly.

Just because you don't have a reason to protect yourself or your family by owning a gun doesn't mean someone else has a different circumstance than yourself.

I'm really not sure where you're going with this.

The question here is this.

Is it better to have guns, and to be able to protect yourself with those guns, or is it better not to have guns and not have people being able to protect themselves with guns?

The stats say the latter is better in civilized countries.

Theoretically it would be better, yes, if no one needed guns but the reality is you cant make it happen. You can take guns away from law abiding citizens, outlaw guns at which point they would become a black market item increasing the profits for smugglers... gangs are still going to have a high demand for them whatever you try to do legally.

So looking at it realistically? I'm going to have to say no... dont take away law abiding citizens chance to defend themselves. You do that and youll see an increase of home invasions

You can limit guns. That's what the UK does. Yes there are sometimes gun problems, but very rarely.

Britain limited gun for law abiding people.......their criminals have more guns now than they did before....gun crime is factually up 42% last year in London, and up 23% across England and wales on top of the yearly increases that came before.......

Violent crime is up 95% in some areas of Britain and going up every single day.... your solution is leading to more death and violence in Britain...

 

[Pete7469]

`
I use guns; a) To hunt, b) to shoot varmints like squirrels, rabbits, sea gulls, etc and c) since I have a CCL, I occasionally carry one to certain urban areas.
`

See...

I knew you weren't a complete imbecile...

We just need to fix the part that is.

.

 

[2aguy]

Serious question: Are you aware that 67% of our "gun deaths" are suicides?

And why are you asking this?

Well, you don't think that skews the "gun violence" statistics just a tad bit?

Not really. Because I'm only looking at gun murder statistics. There it's about 5 times higher than other first world countries.

But don't let me stop you trying to eliminate gang murders and immigrant murders to try and get the rate down.

Those other first world countries suffered the cultural set backs of two world wars....they are now catching up as their increasing violent crime rates show...

Really? You can show this trend of increasing violent crime rates over a period of time from the 1940s then? And show the US is going the other way, I suppose.

I bet you can't.

I don't have to go back 40 years for the U.S. since the movement to have more concealed carry took off in the 1990s.....

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 17.25 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2018...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.

 

[Pete7469]

Let's get rid of cars.

There would be far less accidents.

I like where you're going with this however you're thinking too small.

Let's get rid of people, not only will there be less accidents but traffic will be a hell of a lot better as well.

I say we just need to get everyone who believes human production of CO2 is going to make the planet uninhabitable to stop exhaling for 12 hours a day. That will cut their carbon footprint in half and make the world a much cooler place to live in.

.

 

[2aguy]

Let's get rid of cars.

There would be far less accidents.

Yes there would. But people would still need to get around. And there'd still be accidents.

People don't need to shoot signs.

Also, if measure were taken to reduce deaths on the road, that would work. Because it works in countries which actually have a proper government.

The US has 10.6 road fatalities per 100,000 people.

Norway has 2.2
Switzerland 2.6
Sweden 2.8
UK 2.9
Netherlands 3.4
Denmark 3.5

Well, let's see who shares a similar rate to the US.

Lithuania
Montenegro
The Philippines
Serbia

Yeah, poorer former eastern European countries and the Philippines.

But people would still need to get around

Yeah, well some people still need to defend themselves.

maybe your fortunate enough to not live in South Central LA, but for those who do ..... they should have the freedom of choice. Be able to defend themselves or depend on the police to show up after the fact.

Yes, defend themselves from fuckers shooting signs. Wait, how do you defend yourself from a redneck shooting signs when you can't even see him.

I know, let's ask former marines how to do it.

When I almost died of a fatal medical malady, it just happened, out of the blue.

I had no choice.

When some people get struck and killed by lightening, they have no choice, it just happens.

To use freak accidents as an excuse to limit the rights of hundreds of millions of people just doesn't make logical sense to most of us. I do understand your anxiety though, and many famous philosophers throughout our civilization have too.

Freedom can be damn scary man, it is the price we pay for living truly authentic lives. Really, if you wish, there are less free societies you could choose to live in. Rather than trying to convince the majority to be less free, why not consider picking up and moving to a less free community if you can not handle so much freedom?

I do agree with you though, living with freedom does entail more risk.

Freak accidents that happen because of stupidity are not the same as heart attacks.

600 million guns in private hands in the U.S......over 17.5 million people who can carry guns for self defense...

Accidental gun death number for 2016? 495. In a country with over 320 million people....

Accidental car death? 38,748



You have no argument for banning guns in this country, nothing you post is intelligent, based in fact or based in reality. You have a hatred of guns...that's it.

Fatal Injury Data | WISQARS | Injury Center | CDC

2016

Gun.....495

Car.......38,748

poisoning......58,335

falling.......34,673

suffocation...6,610

drowning......3,786

 

[NightFox]

Let's get rid of cars.

There would be far less accidents.

I like where you're going with this however you're thinking too small.

Let's get rid of people, not only will there be less accidents but traffic will be a hell of a lot better as well.

I say we just need to get everyone who believes human production of CO2 is going to make the planet uninhabitable to stop exhaling for 12 hours a day. That will cut their carbon footprint in half and make the world a much cooler place to live in.

.

LOL,

-- OR--
OPTION B

We can turn all the members of the Church of Global Warming into human CO2 scrubbers.....

"The new pure CO2 diet! cleans the atmosphere and gets rid of that unsightly fat in no time, two birds, one stone"

 

[Skull Pilot]

https://tribunist.com/news/teenager-accidentally-kills-marine-after-shooting-at-road-sign/

"
Teenager Accidentally Kills Marine After Shooting at Road Sign"

"A teenage boy, shooting a pistol at a road sign, ended up killing a retired Marine who was sitting on the front porch of his house."

Yeah, with MORE GUNS this event wouldn't have happened because the person who shot the sign, and then killed the retired Marine, would ALREADY BE DEAD.

More guns.

Yes we should outlaw absolutely every product and activity that can cause accidental deaths

 

[grainbely]

Let's get rid of cars.

There would be far less accidents.

THE stupidest anti gun control argument ever. Thanks.

 

[grainbely]

Does the word "accidentally" escape you?
How about the murder rate in Chicago? Tracking Chicago shooting victims

Yeah, accidentally someone died. If there weren't guns, if idiots shooting signs didn't happen, then that former Marine would still be alive. Right?

What about the murder rate in Chicago? Is it ******* high? Does it point to the fact that guns in society is a bad thing TOO?

Nonsense. Guns are why you even HAVE a society.

Guns didn't exist until the mid 1000s. How did society exist before that based on your retarded delusions?

 

[theHawk]

If we had no guns the Marine never would had been born because our country would had been obliterated by Communists, Japanese Imperialist, Nazis, fascists, or Muslims long ago, take your pick.