Another Shooting

C

Cackalacky

Guest
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">When Nickelodeon has more moral courage than your Congressman... <a href="https://t.co/3vfdr42YNK">pic.twitter.com/3vfdr42YNK</a></p>— Dan Ward (@DanWardVA07) <a href="https://twitter.com/DanWardVA07/status/973926947611971584?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 14, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
C

Cackalacky

Guest
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Atlanta students take a knee as part of gun violence protest <a href="https://t.co/Imt9seLAzz">https://t.co/Imt9seLAzz</a> <a href="https://t.co/zPpUU56bx8">pic.twitter.com/zPpUU56bx8</a></p>— The Hill (@thehill) <a href="https://twitter.com/thehill/status/973935569469394944?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 14, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Cmon guys..... dont protest like that.
 

IrishLax

Something Witty
Staff member
Messages
37,546
Reaction score
29,009
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">A young man I knew was murdered at the top of my block yesterday: Shahid Smith. <br><br>He was killed by an assault weapon that does not belong on my block or any street.<br><br>Shahid lived below me in Brick Towers where I lived for 8 years. <br><br>His life mattered.<br>His death must matter.</p>— Cory Booker (@CoryBooker) <a href="https://twitter.com/CoryBooker/status/973645552473772034?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 13, 2018</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 

connor_in

Oh Yeeaah!!!
Messages
11,433
Reaction score
1,006
This article has a couple of years age on it (August 2015) but was wondering what you thought about it:

National Review: An Open Rant Aimed at Those Who Would Repeal the Second Amendment By CHARLES C. W. COOKE

Talk is cheap, but persuading Americans to surrender their rights will be expensive, difficult, and time-consuming.
A few hours after yesterday’s shooting hit the news, the comedian Rob Delaney penned this tweet:

The @NRA & the politicians they own must not know this T. Jefferson quote. The 2nd Amendment is a FUCKING BOY’S COAT. pic.twitter.com/cKR0Nk4Uwm

— rob Delaney (@robdelaney) August 26, 2015

For ease of viewing, here is that Jefferson quotation in full (it’s adapted from a July 12, 1816, letter to Samuel Kercheval):

I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.

We should be absolutely clear about what Delaney is arguing here: He is a) agreeing with Jefferson that “laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind,” b) contending that “progress” suggests that the individual right to keep and bear arms is now counterproductive, and c) concluding that it is time therefore to make a “change in law and constitution” — in other words, to repeal the Second Amendment. This, it is true, is not a mainstream position on the American Left — at least, it is not one that is argued openly. But it is a reasonably popular one on social media, it has strong support within the more leftward-leaning parts of the political commentariat, it is often implied by the casual manner in which progressives such as President Obama refer to “Australia” and other heavily regulated nations, and it enjoys indirect approval from around one quarter of the American public. When the likes of Rob Delaney and Bill Maher and Keith Ellison say that we need to get rid of the Second Amendment, they are not speaking in a vacuum but reflecting the views of a small but vocal portion of the American population. And they mean it.

That being so, here’s the million-dollar question: What the hell are they waiting for? Go on, chaps. Bloody well do it.

Seriously, try it. Start the process. Stop whining about it on Twitter, and on HBO, and at the Daily Kos. Stop playing with some Thomas Jefferson quote you found on Google. Stop jumping on the news cycle and watching the retweets and viral shares rack up. Go out there and begin the movement in earnest. Don’t fall back on excuses. Don’t play cheap motte-and-bailey games. And don’t pretend that you’re okay with the Second Amendment in theory, but you’re just appalled by the Heller decision. You’re not. Heller recognized what was obvious to the amendment’s drafters, to the people who debated it, and to the jurists of their era and beyond: That “right of the people” means “right of the people,” as it does everywhere else in both the Bill of Rights and in the common law that preceded it. A Second Amendment without the supposedly pernicious Heller “interpretation” wouldn’t be any impediment to regulation at all. It would be a dead letter. It would be an effective repeal. It would be the end of the right itself. In other words, it would be exactly what you want! Man up. Put together a plan, and take those words out of the Constitution.

It’ll be tough explaining to suburban families that their established conception of American liberty is wrong. You might even suffer at the polls because of it. But that’s what it’s going to take.

This will involve hard work, of course. You can’t just sit online and preen to those who already agree with you. No siree. Instead, you’ll have to go around the states — traveling and preaching until the soles of your shoes are thin as paper. You’ll have to lobby Congress, over and over and over again. You’ll have to make ads and shake hands and twist arms and cut deals and suffer all the slings and arrows that will be thrown in your direction. You’ll have to tell anybody who will listen to you that they need to support you; that if they disagree, they’re childish and beholden to the “gun lobby”; that they don’t care enough about children; that their reverence for the Founders is mistaken; that they have blood on their goddamn hands; that they want to own firearms only because their penises are small and they’re not “real men.” And remember, you can’t half-ass it this time. You’re not going out there to tell these people that you want “reform” or that “enough is enough.” You’re going there to solicit their support for removing one of the articles within the Bill of Rights. Make no mistake: It’ll be unpleasant strolling into Pittsburgh or Youngstown or Pueblo and telling blue-collar Democrat after blue-collar Democrat that he only has his guns because he’s not as well endowed as he’d like to be. It’ll be tough explaining to suburban families that their established conception of American liberty is wrong. You might even suffer at the polls because of it. But that’s what it’s going to take. So do it. Start now. Off you go.


And don’t stop there. No, no. There’ll still be a lot of work to be done. As anybody with a passing understanding of America’s constitutional system knows, repealing the Second Amendment won’t in and of itself lead to the end of gun ownership in America. Rather, it will merely free up the federal government to regulate the area, should it wish to do so. Next, you’ll need to craft the laws that bring about change — think of them as modern Volstead Acts — and you’ll need to get them past the opposition. And, if the federal government doesn’t immediately go the whole hog, you’ll need to replicate your efforts in the states, too, 45 of which have their own constitutional protections. Maybe New Jersey and California will go quietly. Maybe. But Idaho won’t. Louisiana won’t. Kentucky won’t. Maine won’t. You’ll need to persuade those sovereignties not to sue and drag their heels, but to do what’s right as defined by you. Unfortunately, that won’t involve vague talk of holding “national conversations” and “doing something” and “fighting back against the NRA.” It’ll mean going to all sorts of groups — unions, churches, PTAs, political meetings, bowling leagues — and telling them not that you want “common-sense reforms,” but that you want their guns, as in Australia or Britain or Japan. Obviously, the Republicans aren’t going to help in this, so you’ll need to commandeer the Democratic party to do it. That means you’ll need their presidential candidates on board. That means you’ll need to make full abolition the stated policy of the Senate and House caucuses. That means you’ll need the state parties to sign pledges promising not to back away if it gets tough. And if they won’t, you’ll need to start a third party and accept all that that entails.

And when you’ve done all that and your vision is inked onto parchment, you’ll need to enforce it. No, not in the namby-pamby, eh-we-don’t-really-want-to-fund-it way that Prohibition was enforced. I mean enforce it — with force. When Australia took its decision to Do Something, the Australian citizenry owned between 2 and 3 million guns. Despite the compliance of the people and the lack of an entrenched gun culture, the government got maybe three-quarters of a million of them — somewhere between a fifth and a third of the total. That wouldn’t be good enough here, of course. There are around 350 million privately owned guns in America, which means that if you picked up one in three, you’d only be returning the stock to where it was in 1994. Does that sound difficult? Sure! After all, this is a country of 330 million people spread out across 3.8 million square miles, and if we know one thing about the American people, it’s that they do not go quietly into the night. But the government has to have their guns. It has to. The Second Amendment has to go.

#related#You’re going to need a plan. A state-by-state, county-by-county, street-by-street, door-to door plan. A detailed roadmap to abolition that involves the military and the police and a whole host of informants — and, probably, a hell of a lot of blood, too. Sure, the ACLU won’t like it, especially when you start going around poorer neighborhoods. Sure, there are probably between 20 and 30 million Americans who would rather fight a civil war than let you into their houses. Sure, there is no historical precedent in America for the mass confiscation of a commonly owned item — let alone one that was until recently constitutionally protected. Sure, it’s slightly odd that you think that we can’t deport 11 million people but we can search 123 million homes. But that’s just the price we have to pay. Times have changed. It has to be done: For the children; for America; for the future. Hey hey, ho ho, the Second Amendment has to go. Let’s do this thing.
 

IrishLax

Something Witty
Staff member
Messages
37,546
Reaction score
29,009
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The United States is 3rd in murders throughout the world. If you remove<br>1) Chicago<br>2) Detroit<br>3) Washington DC<br>4) St Louis<br>5) New Orleans<br>the United States is then 189th out of 193 countries in the entire world. Also, all 5 cities have STRICT Gun Control Laws.</p>— Ryan Fournier (@RyanAFournier) <a href="https://twitter.com/RyanAFournier/status/974458374845853696?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 16, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

I dunno who this guy is, was re-tweeted into my timeline by an ND guy I follow. I'm assuming he's a right-winger... can anyone fact check this? On its face, I'd imagine if you removed every other country's worst city or two their murder rates would also drop precipitously...
 

loomis41973

Banned
Messages
4,055
Reaction score
203
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The United States is 3rd in murders throughout the world. If you remove<br>1) Chicago<br>2) Detroit<br>3) Washington DC<br>4) St Louis<br>5) New Orleans<br>the United States is then 189th out of 193 countries in the entire world. Also, all 5 cities have STRICT Gun Control Laws.</p>— Ryan Fournier (@RyanAFournier) <a href="https://twitter.com/RyanAFournier/status/974458374845853696?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 16, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

I dunno who this guy is, was re-tweeted into my timeline by an ND guy I follow. I'm assuming he's a right-winger... can anyone fact check this? On its face, I'd imagine if you removed every other country's worst city or two their murder rates would also drop precipitously...



No Baltimore?

Looks fishy
 

Irishize

Well-known member
Messages
4,531
Reaction score
461
So everytime Chicago’s murder rate is brought up despite their strict gun laws, Leftists invariably claim that all those guns come in from neighboring Indiana. Assuming they’re correct..so what?

All it tells me is that regardless of how strict the gun control is in a given city, the criminals will find a way to access them through other means. It doesn’t address the question, “Why Chicago?”
 

Legacy

New member
Messages
7,871
Reaction score
321
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The United States is 3rd in murders throughout the world. If you remove<br>1) Chicago<br>2) Detroit<br>3) Washington DC<br>4) St Louis<br>5) New Orleans<br>the United States is then 189th out of 193 countries in the entire world. Also, all 5 cities have STRICT Gun Control Laws.</p>— Ryan Fournier (@RyanAFournier) <a href="https://twitter.com/RyanAFournier/status/974458374845853696?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 16, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

I dunno who this guy is, was re-tweeted into my timeline by an ND guy I follow. I'm assuming he's a right-winger... can anyone fact check this? On its face, I'd imagine if you removed every other country's worst city or two their murder rates would also drop precipitously...

Clicked on his Twitter link and he self-identifies as "Political Commentator and Analyst - Chairman of @TrumpStudents & President of @UseOpenPoll - @FoxNews"

As for his murder facts, in 2016 there were 17,250 murders in the U.S.
In the nation’s 50 biggest cities in 2016, there were 5,863 homicides in 2016.

-- So, the nation's 50 biggest cities accounted for only 33.98% (5,863/17,250) of all murders in the U.S. in 2016. The other 66% of murders were in smaller cities, towns or rural areas.

The top five cities with the most total murders in 2017 are:
Chicago (650), Baltimore (343), Philadelphia (317), NYC (290), LA (286).
Total - 1886

-- So, the top five cities with the most murders account for 10.9% (1886/17,250). Conclusion: eliminating those 10.9% of all murders wouldn't drop the U.S. from third to 189th in the world.

His top five for 2017 has only one (Chicago) of the top five cities with the highest murder count in 2016. His other four, which supposedly if eliminated would drop the U.S. to 189th in the world, have these murder totals for 2017: Detroit (267), St. Louis (199), New Orleans (158), DC (116).

-- So, the guy only knows one of the top five cities with the highest number of murders in the U.S.

Even allowing for the fact that he swims in the Twitter universe as "Chairman of @TrumpStudents & President of @UseOpenPoll - @FoxNews" can't absolve him of a failure to do basic research while he sits at a computer in search of followers and retweets, though it may go a long way to explaining his shortcomings.
 
Last edited:

SonofOahu

King Kamehameha
Messages
1,835
Reaction score
228
Clicked on his Twitter link and he self-identifies as "Political Commentator and Analyst - Chairman of @TrumpStudents & President of @UseOpenPoll - @FoxNews"

As for his murder facts, in 2016 there were 17,250 murders in the U.S.
In the nation’s 50 biggest cities in 2016, there were 5,863 homicides in 2016.

-- So, the nation's 50 biggest cities accounted for only 33.98% (5,863/17,250) of all murders in the U.S. in 2016. The other 66% of murders were in smaller cities, towns or rural areas.

The top five cities with the most total murders in 2017 are:
Chicago (650), Baltimore (343), Philadelphia (317), NYC (290), LA (286).
Total - 1886

-- So, the top five cities with the most murders account for 10.9% (1886/17,250). Conclusion: eliminating those 10.9% of all murders wouldn't drop the U.S. from third to 189th in the world.

His top five for 2017 has only one (Chicago) of the top five cities with the highest murder count in 2016. His other four, which supposedly if eliminated would drop the U.S. to 189th in the world, have these murder totals for 2017: Detroit (267), St. Louis (199), New Orleans (158), DC (116).

-- So, the guy only knows one of the top five cities with the highest number of murders in the U.S.

Even allowing for the fact that he swims in the Twitter universe as "Chairman of @TrumpStudents & President of @UseOpenPoll - @FoxNews" can't absolve him of a failure to do basic research while he sits at a computer in search of followers and retweets, though it may go a long way to explaining his shortcomings.

Legacy is why you don't bring a knife to a gun fight.
 

IrishLax

Something Witty
Staff member
Messages
37,546
Reaction score
29,009
Clicked on his Twitter link and he self-identifies as "Political Commentator and Analyst - Chairman of @TrumpStudents & President of @UseOpenPoll - @FoxNews"

As for his murder facts, in 2016 there were 17,250 murders in the U.S.
In the nation’s 50 biggest cities in 2016, there were 5,863 homicides in 2016.

-- So, the nation's 50 biggest cities accounted for only 33.98% (5,863/17,250) of all murders in the U.S. in 2016. The other 66% of murders were in smaller cities, towns or rural areas.

The top five cities with the most total murders in 2017 are:
Chicago (650), Baltimore (343), Philadelphia (317), NYC (290), LA (286).
Total - 1886

-- So, the top five cities with the most murders account for 10.9% (1886/17,250). Conclusion: eliminating those 10.9% of all murders wouldn't drop the U.S. from third to 189th in the world.


His top five for 2017 has only one (Chicago) of the top five cities with the highest murder count in 2016. His other four, which supposedly if eliminated would drop the U.S. to 189th in the world, have these murder totals for 2017: Detroit (267), St. Louis (199), New Orleans (158), DC (116).

-- So, the guy only knows one of the top five cities with the highest number of murders in the U.S.

Even allowing for the fact that he swims in the Twitter universe as "Chairman of @TrumpStudents & President of @UseOpenPoll - @FoxNews" can't absolve him of a failure to do basic research while he sits at a computer in search of followers and retweets, though it may go a long way to explaining his shortcomings.

Thanks, seemed absurd on it's face. Going to go against my better judgment here and call some people out on Twitter.
 
B

Buster Bluth

Guest
Additionally, cities having strict gun laws doesn't mean jack when you can just drive to the suburbs. Or in Chicago's case, Indiana. Most guns used in crimes in Chicago and New York come from outside the city.

Given that most gun murders are via handgun and from males 18-24, seems like raising the age to buy/possess a handgun to 21 would put a dent in these numbers. Numbers that have, of course, been cut in half over the last 25 years.

(And also, if reading between the lines, points to gun murders as really an inequality/economic opportunity/education/social issue.)
 
Last edited:

MJ12666

New member
Messages
794
Reaction score
60
Clicked on his Twitter link and he self-identifies as "Political Commentator and Analyst - Chairman of @TrumpStudents & President of @UseOpenPoll - @FoxNews"

As for his murder facts, in 2016 there were 17,250 murders in the U.S.
In the nation’s 50 biggest cities in 2016, there were 5,863 homicides in 2016.

-- So, the nation's 50 biggest cities accounted for only 33.98% (5,863/17,250) of all murders in the U.S. in 2016. The other 66% of murders were in smaller cities, towns or rural areas.

The top five cities with the most total murders in 2017 are:
Chicago (650), Baltimore (343), Philadelphia (317), NYC (290), LA (286).
Total - 1886

-- So, the top five cities with the most murders account for 10.9% (1886/17,250). Conclusion: eliminating those 10.9% of all murders wouldn't drop the U.S. from third to 189th in the world.

His top five for 2017 has only one (Chicago) of the top five cities with the highest murder count in 2016. His other four, which supposedly if eliminated would drop the U.S. to 189th in the world, have these murder totals for 2017: Detroit (267), St. Louis (199), New Orleans (158), DC (116).

-- So, the guy only knows one of the top five cities with the highest number of murders in the U.S.

Even allowing for the fact that he swims in the Twitter universe as "Chairman of @TrumpStudents & President of @UseOpenPoll - @FoxNews" can't absolve him of a failure to do basic research while he sits at a computer in search of followers and retweets, though it may go a long way to explaining his shortcomings.

I don't disagree with your conclusions but it is also not fair to only look at the absolute numbers with comparing murders by country. Of course the US with a population of 300 mil + when compared to, for example, Paraguay (which has a population of approximately 7 mil.). The US will obviously have more total murders, but, according to the World Bank (link below) the US had a murder rate of 5 per 100,000 in 2015. This is approximately 50% Paraguay's rate of 11. In reviewing the World Bank list, the US is not even in the top 50.

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/VC.IHR.PSRC.P5
 

Irish YJ

Southsida
Messages
25,888
Reaction score
1,444
Just some facts....

Top 10 Countries in terms of guns per person, and the homicide rank in () out of 219 countries.

1. US (94)
2. Serbia (175)
3. Yemen (80)
4. Cyprus (172)
5. Saudi Arabia (164)
6. Iraq (65)
7. Uruguay (59)
8. Norway (206)
9. France (162)
10. Canada (158)


Top 10 Countries in homicide rate, and guns per person rank in ()
1. El Salvador (89)
2. Honduras (87)
3. Venezuela (58)
4. Virgin Islands (NR to small)
5. Jamaica (71)
6. Lesotho (120)
7. Belize (61)
8. South Africa (48)
9. Saint Kits and Nevis (NR to small)
10. Guatemala (47)


I'm all for some additional common sense gun control laws, but folks who are off the hook gun Nazis need to look at all the info out there.

The glaring example is Norway which is a top 5% in gun ownership, and bottom 10% in homicide rate. Of the top 10, none are in the top 50 homicidal countries.

Another obvious one.... of the top 10 or 5% highest homicidal countries, only 2 are barely in the top 50 countries in terms of gun per person ownership.
 

Legacy

New member
Messages
7,871
Reaction score
321
Just some facts....

Top 10 Countries in terms of guns per person, and the homicide rank in () out of 219 countries.

1. US (94)
2. Serbia (175)
3. Yemen (80)
4. Cyprus (172)
5. Saudi Arabia (164)
6. Iraq (65)
7. Uruguay (59)
8. Norway (206)
9. France (162)
10. Canada (158)


Top 10 Countries in homicide rate, and guns per person rank in ()
1. El Salvador (89)
2. Honduras (87)
3. Venezuela (58)
4. Virgin Islands (NR to small)
5. Jamaica (71)
6. Lesotho (120)
7. Belize (61)
8. South Africa (48)
9. Saint Kits and Nevis (NR to small)
10. Guatemala (47)


I'm all for some additional common sense gun control laws, but folks who are off the hook gun Nazis need to look at all the info out there.

The glaring example is Norway which is a top 5% in gun ownership, and bottom 10% in homicide rate. Of the top 10, none are in the top 50 homicidal countries.

Another obvious one.... of the top 10 or 5% highest homicidal countries, only 2 are barely in the top 50 countries in terms of gun per person ownership.

Of course, gun ownership is generally an estimate, more accurate is countries that register sales and require permits than those who do not. Rates of homicide are per capita.

Should someone with to draw the conclusions that higher gun ownership is associated with lower homicide rates or to attribute it to smaller areas - states and cities - needs to assume or account for how porous borders are.

Also to make the case about developed countries with high gun ownership like Norway, Canada and France who have low homicide rates, it's important to look at their laws for gun control.

Overview of gun laws by nation

In these individual cases:
Norway Gun Laws
Firearms in Norway are regulated by the Firearm Weapons Act,[89] with a new secondary law in effect 1 July 2009 providing more detailed regulation.[90] A firearms licence for rifles or shotguns can be issued by police to "sober and responsible" persons 18 years of age or older, with a clean police record, who document a need for the weapon. This may require first obtaining a hunting license or sports-shooting licence. For handguns, the minimum ownership age is 21. The firearms or their vital components must be stored securely in the residence, and the police may make inspections after a 48-hour notice.

Canada Gun Laws
Canada's firearm laws are stated in the Firearms Act. The possession and acquisition licence (PAL) is distributed by the RCMP (federal police) and requires taking a firearms safety course and passing a test, a background check, and reference interviews. The PAL allows purchase of most popular sporting rifles and shotguns. A Restricted-PAL (RPAL) has an additional course for restricted weapons, which have increased storage requirements.[17] The two main reasons for owning firearms are target shooting and hunting. Carrying firearms for self-defense against human threats is prohibited, but a "wilderness carry permit" can be obtained for protection against wild animals.[18]

There is an authorization to transport (ATT) requirement for restricted and prohibited weapons, which must be registered. Non-citizens may obtain a non-resident firearms declaration from a customs officer, for a temporary 60-day authorization to bring a non-prohibited firearm into Canada.[17]

In Canada, firearms fall into one of three categories:[19]

Non-Restricted: Long guns with an overall length greater than 26 inches (660 mm) and semi-automatics with a barrel longer than 18.5 inches (470 mm). These can be possessed with an ordinary PAL, and are the only class of firearms which can be used for hunting.
Restricted: This includes handguns with barrel lengths greater than 4.1 inches (105 mm), and long guns which do not meet the length requirements for non-restricted but are not prohibited. These guns require ATTs, so can only be discharged at ranges.
Prohibited: These weapons generally cannot be possessed by civilians, and include fully automatic weapons and many military arms, and handguns with barrel length equal to or shorter than 4.1 inches (105 mm), and those chambered for .25 and .32 cartridges. Normally, the only way to possess these is by being grandfathered in or through inheritance. Most magazines for semi-automatic long guns capable of holding more than 5 centerfire cartridges or 10 rounds for handguns are prohibited.

France Gun Laws
In France, a hunting licence or a shooting sport license is needed to purchase a firearm. In September 2015, firearms were divided into four categories that determine the regulations that apply to their possession and use.[111] Category C firearms can be obtained with a hunting licence or affiliation with a shooting range, and a medical certificate. Category B firearms additionally require completing at least three shooting sessions with an instructor.

A person cannot own more than 12 centerfire firearms, and cannot own more than 10 magazines and 1,000 rounds of ammunition per firearm. A one-year carry license may be issued for persons "exposed to exceptional risks to their life" allowing to carry a handgun and a maximum of 50 rounds. Such authorizations are extremely rare, as the state would provide police protection. Since November 2015, police officers have been allowed to carry their firearms while off-duty.

Mexico has a homicide rate per capita of 6.34 (U.S. is 3.5). But most of their guns cross the borders from the U.S. obtained by cartels and gangs.

Mexico%20guns.png

Where do Mexican drug cartels get their guns? The US.

How much do we contribute indirectly to their homicide rate? Norway, France and, to some extent, Canada - the other developed countries on the top ten gun ownership list - and their low homicide rate may arguably be impacted by gun control laws in surrounding countries.

Total gun ownership rates also include all firearms some of which may be more regulated or prohibited in Norway, France or Canada. Are they "gun Nazis"? Arguably, we may be able to lower our homicide rate with similar regulations. Or would the Central American countries at the top of the homicide list lower that rate from a large influx of more guns?
 
Last edited:

Irish YJ

Southsida
Messages
25,888
Reaction score
1,444
Of course, gun ownership is generally an estimate, more accurate is countries that register sales and require permits than those who do not. Rates of homicide are per capita.

Should someone with to draw the conclusions that higher gun ownership is associated with lower homicide rates or to attribute it to smaller areas - states and cities - needs to assume or account for how porous borders are.

Also to make the case about developed countries with high gun ownership like Norway, Canada and France who have low homicide rates, it's important to look at their laws for gun control.

Overview of gun laws by nation

In these individual cases:
Norway Gun Laws


Canada Gun Laws


France Gun Laws


Mexico has a homicide rate per capita of 6.34 (U.S. is 3.5). But most of their guns cross the borders from the U.S. obtained by cartels and gangs.

Mexico%20guns.png

Where do Mexican drug cartels get their guns? The US.

How much do we contribute indirectly to their homicide rate? Norway, France and, to some extent, Canada - the other developed countries on the top ten gun ownership list - and their low homicide rate may arguably be impacted by gun control laws in surrounding countries.

Total gun ownership rates also include all firearms some of which may be more regulated or prohibited in Norway, France or Canada. Are they "gun Nazis"? Arguably, we may be able to lower our homicide rate with similar regulations. Or would the Central American countries at the top of the homicide list lower that rate from a large influx of more guns?

Like I said, I'm good with more common sense regs. I'm not OK with folks that are simply anti gun. Believe me, I have a ton of friends in Canada and it's pretty damn easy for them to get guns. They think we are just a bunch of violent people (which is true).

The US supplying guns to MX.... Perhaps better border security would cut down on that. I love it when people who are for open borders get mad when shit goes across them. MX has strict gun control laws, which only shows if bad people want guns, they will get them. Belize has the same problem. I also know for a fact that most guns come into Belize via Honduras. MX also gets a ton of guns from Honduras. It's kinda the gun expo country of Central America. Panama is also a huge gun store for Central and South America.

BTW I'm looking at intentional homicide rates. US is 4.88 and MX 16.35

Canada shares a border with the US. So you're actually arguing against your own point. Point is, two countries share a border with us. Both have stricter gun control laws than the US. One country is 16.35, the other 1.68. So why is that? Blame the US for MX homicide, while not giving the US credit for Canada's low homicide? I'm not at all saying that MX isn't smuggling US firearms over the border, but I don't blame the US for something Mexican citizens are doing illegally.

I'm good with raising the age on handguns, closing loopholes, outlawing bumpstocks and other stuff like that. I am not however going to listen to the anti gun crazies out there.

main-qimg-338c55a9f9968d5ea2d1adabb5649021


Also, countries where it's easiest to own a firearm (from Guns and Ammo :)
1. US
2. Czech Rep
3. Switzerland
4. Panama
5. Norway
6. Canada
7. Sweeden
8. Serbia
9. Finland
10. Honduras

Compare the murder rate to the above..... At some point, people need to look at culture and other characteristics when trying to understand the problem. Some countries do fine with guns. Others don't.
 

IrishLax

Something Witty
Staff member
Messages
37,546
Reaction score
29,009
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">BREAKING: St. Mary’s County Public Schools says there has been a shooting at Great Mills High School in Great Mills, Maryland <a href="https://t.co/KgDheMm6II">pic.twitter.com/KgDheMm6II</a></p>— CNN (@CNN) <a href="https://twitter.com/CNN/status/976076690932854784?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 20, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Another one, this one semi-local to me.
 

IrishSteelhead

All Flair, No Substance
Messages
11,114
Reaction score
4,686
Timing seems right. IIRC, theres a big demonstration planned in the next few days.
 

connor_in

Oh Yeeaah!!!
Messages
11,433
Reaction score
1,006
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr"><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/BREAKING?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#BREAKING</a> confirmed with sources at <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/greatmillsshooting?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#greatmillsshooting</a> : 3 students injured. 1 is the shooter. A school resource officer was on duty and took action to end threat. No final word on conditions.</p>— Brad Bell (@ABC7Brad) <a href="https://twitter.com/ABC7Brad/status/976087803250532357?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 20, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 

wizards8507

Well-known member
Messages
20,660
Reaction score
2,661
One student in stable condition. One in critical condition. Shooter deceased, taken down by the school resource officer.
 
C

Cackalacky

Guest
Of course. Maybe everyone can just copy that and then hit CTRL-V everytime for ease of use.

I was being sarcastic if it wasnt clear. I am 100% committed to ending the NRA as a political organization and major reforms to gun ownership.
 

GDomer09

Chronic Dialect
Messages
554
Reaction score
41
I was being sarcastic if it wasnt clear. I am 100% committed to ending the NRA as a political organization and major reforms to gun ownership.

Phork & Cack get over yourselves with that greater than thou hogwash!

"Hey let's be so progressive that we bash people giving there (thoughts and prayers) sympathy". Nobody cares that you guys think you're being original by repeating the same thing every other "Progressive" is saying. Giving their condolences is all most can do.

I'm sure you knuckle heads are making so many changes right now for gun reform on this message board. Keep up the good work.

BTW you can show sympathy and still be for gun reform. It's simple really.
 

GDomer09

Chronic Dialect
Messages
554
Reaction score
41
Additionally, cities having strict gun laws doesn't mean jack when you can just drive to the suburbs. Or in Chicago's case, Indiana. Most guns used in crimes in Chicago and New York come from outside the city.

Given that most gun murders are via handgun and from males 18-24, seems like raising the age to buy/possess a handgun to 21 would put a dent in these numbers. Numbers that have, of course, been cut in half over the last 25 years.

(And also, if reading between the lines, points to gun murders as really an inequality/economic opportunity/education/social issue.)

In that age range (18-24) how many are gang related and how many are school shooting related? Gangs will get guns whether they're illegal or not.

Serious question. Should we also change military age restrictions to be 21? I'm not going to tell an 18yr he must go protect me using firearms, but can't protect himself with said firearms when he's home.
 
C

Cackalacky

Guest
Phork & Cack get over yourselves with that greater than thou hogwash!

"Hey let's be so progressive that we bash people giving there (thoughts and prayers) sympathy". Nobody cares that you guys think you're being original by repeating the same thing every other "Progressive" is saying. Giving their condolences is all most can do.

I'm sure you knuckle heads are making so many changes right now for gun reform on this message board. Keep up the good work.

BTW you can show sympathy and still be for gun reform. It's simple really.
The victims have my sympathy. They always will. I am very active in gun regulation reform BTW. I have been for over 10 years. I walk the walk so I CAN talk the talk. Thoughts and prayers do nothing to solve the problem. Its an out, that is all.
 
Top