Gun laws..
- Started
- Last post
- 344 Responses
- detritus0
I posted this in the Colorado Shooting thread.
Should've put it here.
And yes, I am quite aware this is from the UKm but we have crime and humans here too, oddly.
http://www.economist.com/node/21…
- CanHasQBN0
albums, I never got a response on this post:
- - - - "So just because your weapon of choice (a gun) statistically kills less than another weapon of choice (a car), does that justify it's existence? Was Saddam's regime justifiable because Hitler actually killed more innocent people than Saddam?" - - - -
Your continued inane comparisons, and your mentality that gun deaths are justified because OTHER things in this world also cause death is absurd. Basically, in your mind, as long as there's something else that statistically kills more people than guns, then gun deaths are justified. How stupid is that? I laugh every time you post stats.
Since you keep comparing guns to cars, here's are some stats for you:
239,800,000 cars in the USA
32,885 car deaths in 2010
=0.0137135%80,000,000 gun owners in the USA
11493 gun deaths (your stat)
=0.01436625%The death percentage rate is lower per car owner than it is per gun owner. Statistically, cars are safer than guns.
There are more car deaths in quantity only because more people own cars than they do guns. And one can understand that, because people need cars to function and to get to work on a daily basis in this country. You do not need a gun to function daily, people do not use their guns on a daily basis..... and yet the gun death % rate is STILL higher than the car death % rate. Funny huh?
Personally, I hate cars. But your comparisons against them versus guns hold no water.
- oh noes.. albums didnt respond to a question.. what is QBN coming to..autoflavour
- i want a car that is a gunautoflavour
- or a tank, which ever is easier to driveautoflavour
- auto wants some attention..?CanHasQBN
- ban statistical facts!fooler
- well you can take your fact and shove it up your! Amerika is not build on fact but faith!!pango
- Fact it to him! Fact X Importance = NewsqTime
- CanHasQBN0
^ And that 0.01436625% figure is something you keep touting and are so proud of.
- yurimon0
First off all, Most of the High profile shootings have Prescription drugs written all over them. Columbine, Giffords, and the batman shooting. You dont see people trying to shut down the pharmaceutical industry.
The Batman shooting took place in a town with strict gun laws. people were unarmed and helpless.
You never hear in the news instances where guns prevented robbery or saved people even thought is more common. Crime is down with gun sales are up... So that theory.
Historically if the US guns get taken away get your passport and run.. Remember germany and turkey in 1100AD. historically any society that was disarmed tyranny followed. its an unavoidable fact of life if you cant defend yourself then you will be a slave to the one who can...
Need open up your brain neurons there buddy. stop listening to main stream garbage.
- CanHasQBN0
Actually, you do see people trying to shut down (or at least try to heavily regualte) the pharma companies. Are you that ignorant? There is a huge amount of anomosity toward these companies within the public. It will never happen though. Not a chance, because just like the gun industry, the pharma companies put their money into the hands of our lawmakers, making it impossible to change anything.
If everyone in the audience was armed, there would be triple the deaths. Imagine 100 people trying to shoot at a target they are unable see (it's dark, smokey, incredibly chaotic, and people are running in all directions). Yeah, sounds like a good idead huh? Maybe it's you who should "open up your brain neurons".
You cannot presume that events where guns prevented crime are happening just because the news doesn't cover them. There is no flow of logic there. Your theory that stations intentionally do not air these storied is ridiculous. In fact, news stations would LOVE a story like that for which they can spend 10 minutes sensationalizing. Even in the rare chance that a gun did prevent crime, what does it matter? The use of guns used FOR crime far outweighs the use of guns to PREVENT crime.
You are talking about 1100 AD, where any armed militia could combat it's national military. Weapons were equal. Times have changed drastically, and that argument is obsolete. You and your homemade militias stand no chance in today's world against your nation's military if it turned against you. Their technology is so vast and powerful, they could wipe you out with the flip of a switch if they wanted to. Face it, you are not a hero who's going to stand up against a real army. You are an ant.
I'm not listening to "main stream garbage" (it sound like something a low-information teabagger would say). I'm looking at statistics, which are listed and cited all up and down the posts of this thread.
- Ramanisky20
well there you have it
- yurimon0
Yeah thats b00shyit.
Not a liberal or conservative...
I want protection from pharmaceutical industry. legal medication with side effects. lol...Anywho these dialogues are always limited and coincide with UN treaty crap... Why dont you make a big deal about people who use guns to prevent or protect themselves?
boosheeeit
In an ideal world with peace and love and gov knows it limitation and people in power are responsible with power. maybee i think about it. lol
- You're like... 32% coherent.CanHasQBN
- more like 5%Ramanisky2
- but 100% american.yurimon
- prophetone0
WIRED: kids open gun safes with paper clips, straws or even nothing
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel…- need better safes.yurimon
- what good is a gun if it's in a safe?monospaced
- yurimon0
This is how its done son...
jrewish stylee.
http://jpfo.org/- dont mis this link..
http://jpfo.org/file…yurimon - lolukit2
- dont mis this link..
- orrinward20
Why are you looking back to 1100AD for post-disarmament tyranny.
Just look at figures for violent crime in the majority of guns-are-illegal countries. You'll not only see the rather-obvious-but-still-valid drop in gun-related crime but you typically see a trend of a decline in violent crime in general.
If you look at Switzerland, which is a country where you are legally allowed to keep the rifle you are given during compulsory military service. Their crime rate is incredibly low but most Swiss people wouldn't tout gun-ownership as the reason for that.
Most of the views expressed here pro-guns seems to be reasoned with:
- Poor logic that mass weapons ownership reduces crime
- "The 2nd amendment" which is largely irrelevant. Having firearms will do little for you if the government with the biggest most equipped army in the world turns itself on you. It's also an attitude driven by paranoia, not a great way to live.
- The "people get killed by other things so it's ok"
- GeorgesII0
can't wait for some more sever gun laws,
so things like will happen more quietly
-
- IRNlun60
Regarding militias and the constitution, congress has the right to:
"To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;"
and...
"The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States..."
Sorry to blow up your militia bubble but that wasn't put in place to overthrow the US government.
- melq0
@CanHasQBN, just a couple notes on your points
1) Drugs/Pharma—Not specific to your statements above, but it should be noted when discussing gun crime in America, the percentage of it that is drug-related is very high.
2) Armed Citizens—Individuals that have invested the time and money to obtain a firearm and permit to carry it also invest in the time to practice using it correctly. They aren't rootin'-tootin' cowboys. They aren't going to start randomly firing in any direction because a shot went off. There would not have been "triple the deaths". There would have been a) no change in the outcome; or b) less deaths.
3) Guns and Crime Prevention—http://www.reddit.com…...
4) Citizens and Their Government—Ask the folks in Syria if they'd prefer to be unarmed.
5) Main Stream Garbage—http://www.youtube.com /watch?v=1N29vkIT3eo
- Broken reddit link:
http://www.reddit.co…melq - Broken YouTube link:
http://www.youtube.c…melq
- Broken reddit link:
- section_0140
- It reduces ease of access and stricter laws over violent crime heighten the barrier to it.orrinward2
- I mean really, this is the level of thinking they're on. A very low one.CanHasQBN
- aaux0
@melq
1) Any stats to back this up?
2) Any stats to back this up? I can walk into any sporting goods store here and buy an assault-rifle style weapon today, with no training required. Also, taking a handgun down to the range once a month would not be anything remotely close to the training needed to handle a situation like that in Colorado.
3) Any real stats to back this up? Not just anecdotal posts from Reddit.
4) Speculation and they're being quite readily armed by outside governments.
- 1) Look at U.S. incarceration statistics. 2) Based on personal experience/common sense. 3) Those are actual published news stories. 4) Just making a point. 5) You skipped five.melq
- ...published news stories. 4) Just making a point. 5) You skipped five.melq
- Based on personal experience/common sense != actual realityaaux
- And I also didn't feel like following the broken link you posted to a music video, sorry.aaux
- I understand your point in note #3. Perhaps you'll agree that there's maybe a bit of truth to my statement, too?melq
- And, sorry about the Mainstream Garbage joke. It is, obviously, the wrong thread to be a bit silly in.melq
- CanHasQBN0
@melq
1) LOL. You proved my point. Yes, drugs do contribute to gun crime. So why make guns more accessible to people on drugs or who deal drugs? Put greater restrictions on guns. You imply it's people on drugs are the ones who do the shooting... so your next idea is to allow guns to be as easily accessible as possible??? Please try to be a LITTLE bit logical. Please.
Your asinine train of thought:
"There are lots of crazy people out there on drugs" >> "Let's lessen the restrictions on guns so that they are more accessible"2) The "practice" that these citizens put in at the range (a mellow, controlled environment) is hugely different than a criminal situation. I'm not saying they would be "randomly firing in any direction". I'm saying they will attempt to fire at the criminal, but miss, do to a moving target, smokey environment, inexperience under pressure, and innocent people running in front of one's aim. The variables are endless.
Anyway, there are no requirements that one must take a class in order to own a gun. So are you saying that this additional stipulation be added in order to own a gun? Are you, in fact, pro-regulation?
3) You gave a reddit link with a list of instances where guns prevented crime. 91 instances to be exact. Here's the thing though, I never said "Guns have never prevented a crime". I'm saying that it happens so rarely, that it doesn't compare to the instances where guns are used FOR crime.
4) Even if the Syrians were armed, it would make no difference. The Syrian military has roving tanks and jets flying overhead that can bomb out a city in 3 minutes. Citizens with guns will never put up a fight against a modern army.
As long as we keep over-funding our (US) military, we'll never be able to challenge it. It's funny how it's the right-wing pro-gun people that are the ones who love funding the military as much as possible. These citizens happily give the majority of the nation's tax dollars to the thing they fear most. That's how stupid these people are.
- I'm sorry, but it's almost like you're just trying argue. I'm not. I was just offering some counter points.melq
- I notice you, too, glossed right over the "Stupid Girl" point. I find it telling that you don't find shitty pop music dangerous.melq
- Just trying to argue??? You addressed my earlier points. So I am addressing yours.CanHasQBN
- I didn't even know what you meant by posting that. I'm not going to watch an entire video for some hidden message...CanHasQBN
- Oh you are the type that blames music and video games on crime... holy... shit. These are the kind of people I am arguing against..CanHasQBN
- arguing against on QBN. Wow.CanHasQBN
- Read your text. It's delivered with all the eloquence and style of a conservative talk radio host. "To disagree with me makes you an idiot!"melq
- ...with me makes you an idiot!"melq
- -> Garbage joke
...
-> Your headmelq - Seriously, dude. I was trying to lighten things up with a joke. You're a bit of a job, 'eh?melq
- Maybe you need to work on your ability to give a joke, eh?CanHasQBN
- Why don't you respond to my points instead of bullshitting around in the notes?CanHasQBN
- Sure, take the easy way out. Call someone a "job" and tell them to "lighten up"...CanHasQBN
- I told you, you want to argue, I do not. You had questions, I addressed them. You respond with LOL and ???? and a bunch of stupid shit trying to provoke me. No thanks.melq
- ...bunch of stupid shit trying to provoke a response. No thanks.melq
- So, you are offended by my "LOL" and my multiple question marks?CanHasQBN
- hahahahaha. Amazing.CanHasQBN
- You are the type that posts something, and then runs when someone refutes your points.CanHasQBN
- CygnusZero40
ITT people think laws help anything. Im pretty sure weed is illegal in the US, and how many millions of people are doing it? You put a ban on guns, the importing business will go up and people will still get them.
Plus that fact that most gun murders in the US are done in inner cities with UNREGISTERED weapons.
People just think, "derp, put a law against it and that will fix everything!". No. The problem is people, not weapons. There's a lot of people in the US, and a lot of shit hole cities with degenerates and gangs with illegal weapons. Most licensed gun owners are not shooting theaters up. Most of them are hunters, or collectors, or just enjoy target practice.
Most people that go around shooting other people are not typically using registered weapons, so putting a law against guns sure as shit wont stop them. But all the conservative fucktards think that a law will change anything. Yeah they tried to ban drugs too. That worked out well.
- scruffics0
pretty sure America has shot itself in the foot... over and over again... on more issues than one...
foreign policy, education, healthcare and politics are the first three that immediately jump to mind. guns is just the by-product
- Subversion is a bitch when you deal with a public thats asleepyurimon
- CanHasQBN0
CygnusZero4,
There's a graphic at the very top of this page that says otherwise, regarding guns. Here it is again. I don't know how to make this any more simple for you. You think you can just gloss over stats and facts with your opinions?
- And your weed argument is weak and has been dismantled to death in the previous pages.CanHasQBN
- Who made this graphic will determine the statistical outcome.yurimon
- Here is the website in reference http://www.economist…CanHasQBN
- and If you cannot recognize the correlation here, then nothing will ever get through to you.CanHasQBN