The Right Scoop
New Record-Wow! Congratulations Chicago!
Bringing in the knee banging moron, Louie Farickhand was a great idea! Maybe you could bring in more Islamic murderers to help keep the peace. It's obvious you are wasting your time with your police department. Why not turn them all into school, hallway monitors guards and stop wasting everyone's time?
More of this Democrats! More of this, please! Nothing I love more than reading about murder in Chicago. It makes my day!
This sound callas of me I know but since the repeal or overturning by the Judge in this case, murders have dropped sharply. Sounds like this is a great poster for Gun advocacy as well as wholly against any kind of communist gun control.
Around 500 murders/year doesn't seem real high. In the 1st half of the 1990s, there were about 900 murders per year (about same pop.).
After I left in 1995, murders dropped to about 750/year for the rest of the decade.
Do you think the media might say I was the cause of a lower murder rate? They so often make the mistake of correlation & causation.
I am quite sure you are a pretty good fella Randall. However to even remotely tout the idea of any amount of murders in any city in this nation as "NOT TO HIGH" means that you are at least half way Manchurianized by the very people you claim are hurting you. So is it your contention to have things both ways, or are you simply not that intelligent after all?
I did not type anything to your meaning "any amount of murders in any city in this nation as "NOT TO HIGH".
Did you read something else too & get things mixed up? You made no connection to the meaning of my substance.
I made a simple statistical data observation on how the murders have been declining in Chicago & a relative comparison.
I made no claims on people harming me.
I made no contention to having any "ways" whatever the hell you're referring to, so certainly not "both ways." What does that mean & how is that even possible when I moved from Chicago?
Inaccurate use of "Manchurian." Hints: it has to do with a person's actions & being controlled. Seems like you used it related to a supposed impression of having no concern for murders, which is not the case.
You clearly misunderstood. Please improve your comprehension, spelling, vocabulary perception & grammar skills & stop making assumptions. Amazing that you made multiple mistakes in so many areas in typing almost 3 times what I typed (only the 1st sentence/40% of my post).
Why do have to vent your frustration & insecurity form your piss poor, real life social skills faults & be incredibly wrong with a bad attitude? Do you prefer anonymity because you're tired of people immediately realizing that you are an unpleasant, rude ignoramus? It's highly likely that you are shunned, hit, referred to as dumbass & called asshole often.
You said. 500 not to high. I say any amount to high. Which indicates that some killings are acceptable. Which is utterly wrong and backward. I am pleased to announce that your statement is indefencable at best and that you must live with the fact that you, personally believe SOME KILLINGS are alright. Live with it !! debased creature.
If thugs could actually hit the other thug they were trying to kill, the murder rate would double.
The trouble instead is thugs killing of innocent bystanders and not each other.
Instead of banning guns from law abiding citizens, I think they should ban all the inner city sludge!
A Chicago judge interpreting and APPLYING the law correctly. There is a person with guts right there....ignoring the status quo in a state, the ONLY state out of 50, that says the 2nd Amendment ends at the front door of your house, period.
It's amazing the stories that don't make it into the WaPo these days, thank God for RS, Daily Caller, and Drudge...
Hey Mayor Rahm Emanuel - 500 homicides in one year and you have a good shot at the record of 512 !!!
Best of luck to you and the morons in Chicago who voted for you.
And you will do better in 2013, I am certain . . .
With love,
The TEA Party
well.. one good thing.. if the keep killing each other off like that in Chicago.. maybe we wont have to worry about another Obmama comming out of the gutter..
If my former home state of Illinois is this stupid to ban guns... well...
Nice to see there's one sane judge in that state.
Why would anyone stay? It's a cesspool.
Everywhere you look where Democrats have ruled for years, it's a Dump. Detroit, LA to name two.
http://library.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/GUNS/GUNSTAT.html
Read this and tell me it is not the guns.
Franky Baby, with all due respect, why wouldn't we just go ahead and get straight to the freaking answer? Morals? Respect for life? Respect for ones self? Can we tackle those first? Why treat the symptoms? The disease is rotting the soul of this country. It seems that some folks want their cake and eat it too. Free love and slapping ho's and then you expect some kind of utopia on a cloud. Guns have been around a long time but a sadistic society like this hasn't been.
It doesn't matter what any of us think really though. The Constitution of the United States of America says we are not only allowed to bear arms but encourages it. It also says that that cant be infringed upon. The men who wrote this were very wise men. Plus common sense.
Ever have a car engine problem? Did you blame your wrench? A leaky faucet? Again, that danged wrench. Light won't go on? car won't start? Well, it's clearly the fault of your key.
Frank SHOULD be wearing a helmet and have someone chaperone him. I fear he may walk into walls on occassion.
So all your yapping about responding to all your incredible stas that are fantastic, and you come up with a survey haha that itself claims a half million person margin of error hahaha and a seventeen year old report.
You are pathetic, and yes I am a Conservative, that can think.
So what is your point, what is germane about your report it is from 1996. Are you suggesting the Brits are fudging there numbers today from the stats I am providing. What exactly.
Your gun ban happened in 1997, which you keep quoting. UK crime has skyrocketed since then. Why was I not surprised you simply pooh-pooh it without reading it.
Frank, I hate to be the bearer of bad news to you, but you have proven yourself to be a troll of the first order, not worthy of a discussion of important matters. Now go have your mommy wipe your nose (again) and go out and play before vacation is over and you're forced to go back to school. I'm sorry she didn't get you that toy gun you wanted for Christmas, but that's no reason to pout.
Nukeman, you are quoting a report that is nearly 17 years old, even if it were true do you not think they would have revised it by now.
You are a true simpleton, did you graduate high school, that is a serious question.
Heh, ok, Frank. Even though I already gave you that reference a week ago, and I realize you don't really look at them, plus I also have come to realize you don't know how to use copy and paste (not to mention google search), I'm feeling a little sorry for you today, so I will give it to you again.
Heck, I'll even go one click better and give you the reference and the link. That way, like usual, you won't have to do anything at all except whine and cry. You really must learn how to follow references. Your middle school debate club may not insist on it, but when you get to high school, they will be disappointed in you if you haven't figured it out by then. If you ever read a book higher than Horton Hears a Who (which I'm sure you enjoyed, by the sounds of your comment about it), it will have references in it and you may just have to be forced to look them up.
Quote: "Comparing crime rates between America and Britain is fundamentally flawed. In America, a gun crime is recorded as a gun crime. In Britain, a crime is only recorded when there is a final disposition (a conviction). All unsolved gun crimes in Britain are not reported as gun crimes, grossly undercounting the amount of gun crime there. To make matters worse, British law enforcement has been exposed for falsifying criminal reports to create falsely lower crime figures, in part to preserve tourism."
Reference: Fear in Britain, Gallant, Hills, Kopel, Independence Institute, July 18, 2000
Link: http://www.allsafedefense.com/news/International/BritainFear.htm
Reference: Crime Figures a Sham, Say Police, Daily Telegraph, April 1, 1996
Link: http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/3/21/205139.shtml
Now, I realize that this isn't enough for you (there are many more), but that's to be expected. You are just babbling an argumentative stance and not really debating the issues. I won't give you any more, as I don't need to do your work for you (let your mommy do it). No one is reading this thread anymore, so there's no purpose in playing with your limited viewpoint, anyway.
One last point - about the difference in cars and guns. You pointed out guns were the number one method of killing. I replied that cars cause more deaths than guns (as you are never accurate in your statements), to which you replied car deaths were just accidental. Since you consider them merely accidental, I pointed out there is such a thing as vehicular homicide. You then are the one who came up with the scenario of wanting to buy a car to kill, so make sure you get your facts straight. You will have to find the link, as it was your story and fabrication.
It doesn't matter to me that you look foolish, but a lot of people on this site are really laughing - I suppose you do serve a purpose after all, then.
Have a nice day, Frank. No one else here is following your posts, and sadly for you, I don't really want to be your friend, so this should be the end. But I doubt it.
Frank, I hate to be the bearer of bad news to you, but you have proven yourself to be a troll of the first order, not worthy of a discussion of important matters. Now go have your mommy wipe your nose (again) and go out and play before vacation is over and you're forced to go back to school. I'm sorry she didn't get you that toy gun you wanted for Christmas, but that's no reason to pout. (this last paragraph will be the only response I give to you on further posts.)
Come on Nukeman show me were the Brits don't quote there homicide rates properly. I can't find it, but you have that special way of making stuff up. Come on if there is a big word call your Daddy to tell you what it is. Or sound it out.
Listen I will help you find the guy who bought a car to kill someone just give me a decade...hahahahaha.
Oh and more links ppplleeaassee!!!!
Come on Nukeman give me the link with the English not counting stats would love it I am sure it would be just like all your other facts hilarious. More links please I love making you look like an idiot. Oh and the guy who bought the car to kill someone still looking. HAHAHAHA Did you like my Family Fued thing, come on that was funny.
It's interesting that your only stat deals with the English government not counting all the gun deaths in their stats. I wonder why that is? Come to think of it, I wonder why you can't respond to all the facts and links that have been thrown at you? Is it too tough? I realize you need a friend, but I can't help you.
Perhaps, if you put mommy on, I could explain it to her.
Hey nukeman I was thinking what is that show Family Fued they do surveys don't the. Survey says. Why don't you go there and see if they did any survey on gun control. hahahahahha
Oh and did you find they guy who bought the car to kill someone yet. HAHAHA Come on more links please
he and his type will expect others to put their lives on the line.
and probably sue if they fail.
'I like talking to some one who pulls all his statements out of his a@#' - frank
You do? Do you talk to people like that often? Are they in the books you like to read such as Horton Hears a Who you mentioned last week? Wow. Interesting.
If you would talk more often on this site, you may start thinking more clearly. Dump those friends of yours that talk through their derrieres. Oh, and I might add, you learn more by listening than talking, but I bet you didn't hear that, did you?
Frank finally fessed up that he is a Cannuck. Now there are many Cannucks on this site and I love them all because they support our country, well except Frank. He has no respect for the USofA or our Constitution.
Greg, first thank you for your service. Second, I think Frank would shield himself with his wife and kids, piddling on the floor. One of Mike's gun-toting ladies would scare the piddle out of him too.
Puff, oh yes, along with Little Jacky Paper, and Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds, and then, Along Comes Mary..Frank has all his friends!!
Thanks, Ryan. I've been AWOL a bit lately and have missed seeing some of your posts. I enjoy your stuff too. Mutual admiration, Brother.
guess i was to hard on ole Frank.. the guy just gets under my skin.. lol.. oh well.. yah your right.. Im afraid its going to come down to having to take this country back. Thats why they want to get rid of the guns to control the people from defending the 1st Admendment .. Thats why we have the 2nd one.
Absolutely. It is one of my favorite hobbies, the butt chewing of a troll. LOL
If I scare him now, he should here my idea for handling the worlds muslim problem. Much like cockroaches and Nazis, they need to be exterminated and outlawed, period.
Semper Fi my Brother.. would love to take Frank on a patrol once .. make him point man.. yah it is fun isnt it.
Semper Fi, Greg. Yeah, I know he's a lost cause and a pinhead but I have a very bad habit of enjoying to poke the dumb liberals. I just can't help myself. LOL
Mike..( Im a fellow Vet) .. Frank is the kind of guy that wont defend his family.. he is a coward.. we know what that is.. Im sure he would rather see his wife or family k i l l ed than giving his own life to protect the.. He would run.. So he will continue to argue and throw a fit.. because simply he is a dumbazzz coward..
One of the details you have not a single clue about is that, and this is not a threat, just a statement of fact, I could kill you with my bare hands. I don't need a gun to do that. There are bunch of ladies at this site I love like family and when you consider the possibility of a 250 pound animal from, say Chicago has a go at one of my ladies, let's say 5'2", 125 lbs stands zero chance in hand to hand against that monster.
But, if we put a snub nosed .380 in her purse, suddenly size means nothing. Guns are not the problem. Ignorance is the problem. Lack of respect for life is the problem.
People like you, with your knee jerk reactions, are the other part of the problem. If you set a gun on your floor in your house, do you know how many times that gun will shoot somebody? Answer, ZERO, unless, of course, YOU pick it up and fire it.
Yea you scare the hell out of me. Any other statements today that you have no knowledge of there veracity. I like talking to some one who pulls all his statements out of his a@#
Howdy, time for my troll snack for the afternoon and I see that our special ed. helmet wearing student "Fred is back>" I wonder if he brought his pet dragon ,Puff the Magic....." with him today.
if a killer has no gun he will kill you with a screwdriver or with a broken bottle or a knife or a baseball bat or a razor or..............
CAPISCE????
It's the human scum, not the tool/equipment/arms/wood.
Speaking of store clerks, we had one kidnapped many years back. She wasn't shot but she was killed. All that was found of her was a tooth. Makes ya think doesn't it.
Firstly, would you stop calling me names. Secondly, I don't know how much you travel but let's say what you say would happen. Why do countries with far more restrictive gun control laws not experience these very happenings.
Travel to London, Toronto or Paris there stores are fully staffed. You can buy your gas and then pay for it at any hour of the day. No one works behind bullet proof glass and in far greater numbers people return home peacefully.
They are actually far safer by the numbers then Americans.
I'm sorry but liberal thinking is so paper thin. What if you did stop a mad man by banning guns? No what would happen simpleton? You would have thousands more dead. How you say? Because more people would get killed in smaller numbers. There would be more people coming home to a burglar and get shot. Convenient store clerks would be extinct. More people would be killed, just in smaller increments. Sink in?
There were NOT 31,513 deaths from firearms. There were 31,513 deaths from a human being that pulled a trigger. There is a huge difference. Lefties will never understand that a firearm is an inanimate object, incapable of acting on it's own.
Using your logic, my Cross pen is stupid because it wrote a failing grade term paper (years ago). Isn't that really dumb???
I have heard an idiot on the radio saying recently
that an SUV killed two women........................Bad car! Bad car!
On many issues state laws can and do work, and I totally understand and agree with your position. On certain issues they don't and can't work due to the fact you don't have borders between juisdictions.
Gun laws are the perfect example, you can pass all the gun laws you want but if they are not enforceable due to no borders they become useless.
So by hanging on to this position you are simply hanging on to a postion that makes your opinion neutered. So your whole state or country may believe in a postion but it becomes impossible to legislate. So you are cutting your nose off to spite your face.
You must have misunderstood. I never said that our state laws are useless. Our Constitution provides for laws established at the State level not shoved down our throats by the federal gov't. States may have reciprocity of background checks and permits, which is the case between many. National laws violate our Constitution and we will not stand for a tyrranous government.
Sure give me a link to your point this fun, I can only imagine how many surveys are out there.
Oh and can you give me a name of a single person who bought a car to kill someone the list of people who bought a gun to kill someone is endless. Just one, who bought a car to kill, one just one and more links please.
Dancing again, I see. Wonderful. Tell me more about how you debuked all the dozens of points against you. I didn't seem to hear it. Or was it there at all? Hmmm...
Oh, never mind, Frank. It's not going to happen, now, is it?
HAHAHA you are funny, if you can make some silly link between cars and guns keep going the whole world would say you are crackers. Hey but don't ruin my fun get me some more of your links for your goofy stats. when I tell people they can't believe you actually believe this stuff they are roaring, come on more links.
You make the point for us, Frankieboy. Vehicular homicide is a felony. The government doesn't take away cars from all the law-abiding drivers out there because of it. You will try to distract from this analogy, but the facts remain - cars don't kill, people kill. Guns are the same way, no matter how much you rant and rave with your faulty reasoning.
It's nice to see that you can see the difference, now move on up to junior high. You have just graduated from grade school.
Everyone that passes a background check should be able to get a gun. People that can't handle one are smart enough to know and don't get one. And, yes, it is safter for people to have guns because it's not the law abiding citizens using them for crime or murder, and that's who you want to take them away from.
We have a Constitution that protects our rights. Keep your business to your own affairs and stay out of ours.
OMG... it's a survey oh I phoned a whole bunch of people and they said oh yea I saved my families life once....ooohhhh that means 2.5 million people have been saved hahahaha no crime stats no evidence to examine fact based examples. Where did you go to school the university of we don't grant degrees.
If the left offered this pap up it would be derided and laughed out of town, saw alot of surveys saying Romney would win the election.....guess that didn't work. I phoned 5000 people and conclude 2.5 million people were saved because they had a gun. Give me a break.
Frank, I gave you the links a week ago. You will always ignore or disclaim anything that differs from your point of view, so continuing to post the same links or even more links is useless against an uninformed source such as yourself.
Tell me Frank, when are you going to answer the dozens of replies to you that showed your reasoning to be faulty? They don't exist? They are recorded on Disqus, so they never go away. Your responses, however, seem, glaringly lacking. I wonder why?
Frank, we realize that you are internet deficient. I don't know if it is your mom's internet service that is lacking or just a lack of ability on your part, but please try to keep up. You can find the stat just about anywhere (except where you look, of course). But just one more time, to help you out, here is one link. There are many, many more.
http://rense.com/general76/univ.htm
Now, go ignore it, or call it crazy madeup, or whatever you want. I will violate Scoop's comments policy for this one time, because you have proven to be extremely dense. Frank, you are an idiot. Enough said. I'm tired and bored.
HAhahhahahhahahahahhha...are these your alledged stats hahaahhah ok source please hahhaha this is so made up
Orange I am answering on this post sorry. I think you sort of made my point. City or State regulations are useless due to the fact there are no borders. There needs to be a nationwide law.
This would mean your state and every other state would need to have a permit to buy a gun at a gun show. Otherwise your state law is virtually unenforceable.
Right so in the world according to Kong, everyone should carry a concealed semi automatic weapon and therefore the whole world would be safer. Except that the country that is closest to that model of first world nations is the US.
Which is the most dangerous and has the highest related gun deaths, by a country mile 31,000. So stop laughing and pick up your a@#
"100's of millions of people seem to live a productive life free of fear from sodomizing gun owning gangs.
Ok, you made me laugh my a** off. I was making a point, though. People are victimized every day, and the weak especially need something to level the playing field. If you get mugged and someone puts a knife to your throat, you would wish you had a gun to blow the s.o.b.'s head off. That's my only point. That happened here, and the mugger with the knife lost. Because the intended victim had a gun, the entire group of four or five of the thieves ran away. The guy with the knife is dead. If not for the gun, the results could have been the victim being killed instead.
Liberal dreams of stopping violent criminals doesn't justify disarming people trying to protect themselves.
Why haven't you addressed all the points people have given to you and debunked your theories of gun banning being good? Is it because you are afraid, Frank? Don't be afraid. We won't hurt you. But we will help save you, if only you could come a little closer to the light.
You're wasting your time with me, Frankie. I hear mommy calling you now. Better hurry up and finish.
You seem to have a small man complex. I know why you don't link, oldest trick in the book. Selective research, I link all my sources so keep wailing and gnashing and buy some platform shoes.
Debby, I wasn't complaining about you, it was the ones that followed you. You are right it was a bit of lecture. Having said that truly have a nice day.
It is very difficult to measure different nations and there number of guns and the restrictions that apply. For example Switzerland has a high gun ownership and a low gun death rate. So they would seem to fit your example but with further investigation you discover that yes they have a high gun rate but it is nearly impossible to buy the ammunition so it really doesn't work.
What is proven gun control does have a positive effect.
As far as smuggling we in Canada have exactly that problem, many crimes in our border cities are committed with guns smuggled in from the US. We decided it was far easier to control at our borders rather then trying to control with different laws in every province.
Your third point does not hold true when held up against other nations.If it were true places like Canada would be the wild wild west yet our gun homicide rate is considerably less then the US. The same argument could be used for all first world nations.
I just don't buy your last point, it is always the final point offered and 100's of millions of people seem to live a productive life free of fear from sodomizing gun owning gangs.
Why haven't you addressed the multiple times people have debunked your statements, Frank? What's the problem? You claim to be a conservative (cough, cough), but ignoring people who prove you wrong is a liberal technique. Haven't they taught you that yet in your middle school debate class?
So what else is new, son? You've ignored every single stat that anyone has posted and you haven't been able to respond to any of them. All my stats have references. Whether you wish to look them up or not is immaterial to me. You will ignore them anyway. You haven't debunked any stats and you haven't addressed any points that people make.
Knock yourself out. Ignore. Most people here are already ignoring you and have been from the start. You're irrelevent and inconsequential - much like a gnat that is easily swatted away. I've responded only because you are humorous to me.
I realize now that your mommy doesn't give you enough time on the 'puter to be able to copy and paste a reference into google (oops, did I give away a technique? sorry, didn't mean to), so I would recommend spending less time here and more time on your fb games.
You're really quite defensive, where on Earth do you get that I was lecturing you? That chip on your shoulder must be getting heavy............let it go! And the "mommy, she's hitting me" 3rd grade attitude isn't very becoming either.
Now that WAS kinda lecture I guess Anyway, have a nice day, it's beautiful outside my window. A brand new blanket of snow is falling. Looks just like a Norman Rockwell painting complete with a bright red cardinal. Nothing can ruin that, not even nasty comments.
UK gun homicide rate 18 so yes they have other ways to kill but total homicides in UK last year 551. So the numbers pale in death rates, there are assaults but far fewer deaths.
But they still have gun homicide rates, lower granted, but they still have them. Again, only the criminals have them, so only the innocent suffer. Also, they also have higher assault with knives and other forms of weaponry.
It wouldn't let me reply to your last comment, so I'll add on here.
You ignored the fact that a Harvard study showed that nations with high gun control laws have higher murder rates. Gun control will not prevent murders. The gun is ony a tool.
You say we can't compare states because they can get guns in one state and take them into another. Well, ban guns in all 50 states and that same movement will be from Mexico to the states. Guns will still be available.
You also ignore the fact that people are saved very often because they had a gun at their disposal. There would be many, many more dead victims if you ban guns because they can't fend off the attack. Even if they wouldn't have been killed, a woman should have the right to point her gun at a wannabe rapist and avoid getting savagely raped and beaten. Oh, but you don't give a flying fu** about them, do you?
Well, I don't give a flying fu** about you. We have a right to defend ourselves and other people we see getting victimized. If you ever get cornered by a bunch of gang members or criminals, I'd love to see you squirm while you were being beaten, cut up and sodimized, and whatever they feel like doing because you are defenseless. Your mouth will get you nowhere.
But every first world nation has stricter gun related laws and proves your statement to be completely false, because everyone has a significantly lower gun homicide rate.
Yes, but the same idiot who doesn't follow laws will still manage to get his hands on illegal firearms and sane law abiding citizen will be helpless. Sure, the can call 9-1-1. Remember, when seconds count, help is just minutes away.
http://kdvr.com/2012/12/18/5-dead-in-longmont-murder-suicide/
1.I have shown many gun related deaths per 100,000 people UK 1.2 US 4.2 that takes into acount population.
2. It is pointles to compare American states because gun movement is free between cities and states there are no borders to enforce different laws in different jurisdiction.
3.Many Europeon countries allow guns, but the restrictions on where they are kept and who can buy them is significantly more restrictive then the states.
All those frist world nations have these restrictive laws and all have a far lower gun related deaths the the US.In fact they are significantly lower. The one common denominator is the US has the most liberal gun related laws of any of them.
Yes, there's a difference. I'm not arguing that. I'm saying that libs claim guns don't have a purpose other than to kill people and that's a lie. They are used for protection all the time.
You know how often there are stories of elderly that are beaten to death and robbed in their own home? Then there's the stories of elderly who are alive and made the criminal call the law on himself...because they had a gun to stop him.
You are so tunnel visioned into seeing only the few who get killed in mass killings, and not the thousands that will be victimized because you take their guns away and the criminals have their way.
Hey Frank.................whatever. I read the entire thread, the people on this site are all about information and we're all entitled to our opinion...........even you. Your comments were just getting tedious to read.............in my opinion. We will never agree, so I was moving on.
That's a state issue not a federal issue. My state requires purchase permit at a gun show.
I posted the link somewhere here, there are many guns sold at gun shows with absolutely no background check. NRA even agrees this is a problem.
The number one way of killing is with a gun when you point and shoot a gun at someone you are trying to kill them. An auto accident is just that an accident, the comparison is even beneath you nukeman a child could understand it.
Yet here you are 15 hours later. There are other stories folks have moved onto.
It might be best if you read the whole thread the one who started the sarcasam was you friend Debby. If she doesn't want to be treated with sarcasam she should stop doing it herself.
I liked what they had to say- not necessarily the name calling. I agreed with their points what they were getting across.
The human rights commission is a politically correct as those who call for tolerance for one group yet have none for others.
You don't know what you're talking about. The facts are there, you just aren't looking for them......
Nations with stringent anti-gun laws generally have substantially higher murder rates than those that do not. The study found that the nine European nations with the lowest rates of gun ownership (5,000 or fewer guns per 100,000 population) have a combined murder rate three times higher than that of the nine nations with the highest rates of gun ownership (at least 15,000 guns per 100,000 population).
SOURCE: http://theacru.org/acru/harvard_study_gun_control_is_counterproductive/
States that allow registered citizens to carry concealed weapons have lower crime rates than those that don’t.
SOURCE: http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/gun-control-myths-realities
Of course, there's Chicago, where gun control is high but gun murders are also STILL extremely high.
Then there's this town, where guns are manditory and crime rates have dropped through the floor....
http://rense.com/general9/gunlaw.htm
I've heard the left bring up the U.K., but .....
Most data produced by the left doesn't consider population, but rather total numbers...which is disingenuous.
Yes we have a Human rights commission, they do not restrict free speech but yes we have limitations to freedom of speech. So do every free country in the world including the US. You have some limitations on free speech as well. By the way when those people were calling me names you were marked done as having liked the comment before you suggested I should stop calling them names.
Man up and admit it you appear to have been rather selective in your enforcement.
The same idiots that run our universities run yours. This guy Alan Rock says many things that doesn't mean it is true.
Unless you are going to link your crazy a@# stats I am going to start ignoring you. I am not spending my day chasing down your made up stats online so link it or stop yapping.
John, you are to simple to understand the ease at which someone can be killed with a gun. Try and kill with a screwdriver, the degree of difficulty increases considerably.
Ergo success and speed of killing is reduced less killing.
The trouble with you arguement is it does not have any foundation in fact. Many nations have instituted strict gun control legislation and none of what you said happened.
"you little naive imbecile"
I couldn't have said it better myself. My addition to your statement is that criminals will be able to get guns on the black market even if guns are completely banned. Open borders will make sure of that.
That may seem logical, but it's unrealistic and dead wrong. You're not going to stop criminals from getting guns....period....even if you completely ban any type of gun. Especially not with open borders.
Even if we could, we shouldn't impose gun bans. We have the right in the constitution to own guns. We were given that right so people could protect themselves from criminals and from tyranny.
So true Kong. Some wackos use the car intentionally to kill others drink & drive, talk & drive and text & drive and people die.
People also use cars to intentionally kill people, but I don't see them wanting to ban cars. Libs have told me that's because cars have a legitimate purpose, but guns have one purpose and that's to kill people. They're wrong. They're used to protect someone from violent criminals with or without a gun.
Lol, news flash....as if you think you're smarter than anyone here and you're going to teach us something.
Gun control doesn't work. Many on the left are equating law abiding citizens that use guns for possible protection (if need be) to cold blooded killers. That stupid newspaper that published all the names and addresses of law abiding citizens (who own guns) was dispicable. Most people have no intention of ever using their gun and they pray they don't have to. However, many people have been saved because someone had a gun in the vicinity of a violent crime taking place. That happens a lot more than someone's life being taken by an irresponsible idiot that gets drunk and uses it to shoot his wife....which is rare. You might save a few lives with gun bans via the nutball that uses a registered gun to commit an un-planned murder because he went over the edge, but you will be creating many more murder victims than that by career violent criminals who will never be stopped like they are on many occasions now (because the intended victim had a gun).
As for the criminals, you can ban guns completely and it won't matter. Drugs are illegal. How's the law working? We do not make any efforts to control what comes across the border. We have criminals with guns come across the border every day. Hardcore criminals get their guns on the black market, and they will continue to get them on the black market after bans are imposed. The law will not stop gun violence from criminals, and it will embolden them because they search for weak targets. I've seen multiple interviews with prisoners saying they like gun bans because it makes their job much easier. No one can stop them.
You libs think you know so freaking much, but you don't. You don't think beyond the knee-jerk lame brain feel good solution.....which has unintened consequences.....that you on the left just never saw coming.
You don't know that to be true. In the UK with the most restrictive regs. had 18 gun related homicides in 2009. My view is it would sharply decline.' - frank
The gun death rate in the UK hasn't changed in 100 years. In 1990, it was the same number as it was in 2011 (the same number). After the gun ban in 1997-98, gun deaths skyrocketed until 2001-2, when they decided to change the way they classify a gun crime. Then the number went down. Nice way to reduce gun deaths. (you do know that a gun death is not recorded as such unless there's a conviction, don't you? What! You didn't know that?)
The gun ban did nothing in the UK to stymie gun deaths and you should know that because we have been telling you that for over a week and a half.
But then, facts mean nothing to a liberal with an agenda, do they Frank?
Guns are used 2 to 2.5 million times each year for successful defense. You wish to take that away for an 'alleged' reduction in gun deaths. If only 1% of those 2-2.5 million caused a death by them not being able to use a gun for defense, then 20-25 thousand more people would die.
Your argument holds no water and your barrel is empty. Guns have a purpose. They defend us from enemies - both foreign and domestic. Isn't the 2nd Amendment wonderful.
you little naive imbecile:
if a killer has no gun he will kill you with a screwdriver or with a broken bottle or a knife or a baseball bat or a razor or..............
CAPISCE????
It's the human scum, not the tool/equipment/arms/wood.
So says Mayor Bloomberg, who bans such things as salt and 16 oz drinks.
The best information on the informal gun market is based on a survey and is about 15 years old. Current regulations don’t allow direct tallies of sales of this sort. An undercover investigation found a great deal of internet activity, but it was sponsored by a mayor who seeks greater regulation. Hmmm...
The number one method of killing is tobacco. Automobiles rank higher than guns. Have you petitioned to ban cigs and cars?
Oh, you meant the number one method of gun deaths was guns, I see.
http://www.theegglestongroup.com/writing/deathstats/index.php
Research history, England in fact was a tyranny and that is why the United States exists today. It can happen anywhere, including Canada if the moooslims take hold and Sharia is implemented. When that occurs, you will wish you had the 2nd Amendment in your Constitution.
Well that explains it. You do not live by or honor the Constitution of the United States. And by definition you are the very person that should be prohibited from immigrating or visiting our country because you fail to respect its foundation.
Our forefathers fought against the very tyranny Canada still bows to. Our Constitution is not a living and breathing document, it is the foundation of our country that you do not live in and has survived longer than any country's constitution. You are free to remain in your country with your gun restrictions and gun crimes that exceed those in the United States.
It might be best if you take a break from insulting people on this thread and site. DebbyX is entitled to her opinion and should not be subjected to your ridicule. MiketheMarine has seen more in one week defending this country that you will in a lifetime. People have killed with many items including cars, knives and yes straws. I've said this several times, killers always find a way to kill. They even use their bare hands so perhaps hands need to be chopped off to prevent the next murder.
If there is one lesson to be learned on this site, the moderators hold true to the Comment Policy. We oftentimes disagree with one another but personal attacks are prohibited and we respect our moderators for the outstanding work they do and guidance they provide!
Actually I think he should confirm that his house is not lit with a red dot on the NY map :)
There isn't the ability to respond to your UK comment below so I'll do it here. Did you hear about the bombings in London? You know, the ones on the Tubes? Well let me tell you, I was in London shortly after the 1st one and during the 2nd one. I got off the train at Heathrow to law enforcement with high powers guns and it scared the heck out of me. I would rather someone had used a gun than blown up busses and the tubes. When guns become unavailable, the murderer will use something else, in that case BOMBS, which have a much greater capacity to murder!
A gun is a woman's or child's best defense against a rapist and that is the best function ever!
Absolutely correct. I'm unsure of the thread but I posted the automobile stats in the last couple of days.
I couldn't reply to your "background check" comment above. In order to buy a gun at a gun show, you have to have a permit to purchase. That requires a background check!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=7990188
"You will realize that Canadian law puts reasonable limits on the freedom of expression. For example, promoting hatred against any identifiable group would not only be considered inappropriate, but could in fact lead to criminal charges. Outside of the criminal realm, Canadian defamation laws also limit freedom of expression and may differ somewhat from those to which you are accustomed. I therefore ask you, while you are a guest on our campus, to weigh your words with respect and civility in mind." From the University President.
Your knowledge of history is limited. Hitler never won a popular election. When Hindenburg was re-elected in 1933, behind the scenes arm twisting forced Hindenburg to appoint Hitler as Chancellor.
And as Winston Churchill said, democracy is a terrible form of government. We know why.
They refuse to talk abortion because they LOVE abortion....it's so much easier to have all of that free, uncommited sex, doncha know.
Not always. The human rights commission often violates people's freedom of speech.
Sorry, couldn't reply below.
Republics are free, not because politicians are elected by the citizens, but because they are bound by the charters, which limit the responsibilities and powers of the state. People vote for representatives, and the following of the charters, as well as the willingness of the people to live by it, is what keeps people free in a Republic. Democracies are when the majority rule. There is still a restricted group of citizens but the group may delegate specific duties to individuals, like governors for each state, but the ruling force in a democracy is still by the vote of the majority. Democracies are free only if the people know what freedom is and if a majority of the people don’t know this, then a democracy could be just as tyrannical as someone like Hitler, Mussolini or Stalin or any other dictator. A democracy will always become a tyranny, either by majority, or if the majority like we have now who haven't got a clue about how this country was formed, screw things up so badly and a tyrant seizes power while the people's attention is diverted.
The Constitution is our charter, and the Founders intended it to be our Law which neither the president alone, the legislative branch alone or even the judiciary alone could not usurp. That's why they all must swear an oath to uphold it when they are appointed or elected.
We are losing it, because most of our government is not abiding by it or their oaths they swore.
The founders did NOT intend the US to be a democracy. They knew that democracies fail eventually, leading to tyranny. And back to the 2nd Amendment, wrote it because of their knowledge and first hand experiences.
"Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself."
John Adams
"If ever time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin."
Samuel Adams
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!"
Benjamin Franklin
"The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them."
Patrick Henry
"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government -- lest it come to dominate our lives and interests."
Patrick Henry
"It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its government."
Thomas Paine
"Hold on, my friends, to the Constitution and to the Republic for which it stands. Miracles do not cluster, and what has happened once in 6000 years, may not happen again. Hold on to the Constitution, for if the American Constitution should fail, there will be anarchy throughout the world."
Daniel Webster
Barry that is a totally unfair stat. Everyone knows Japan has and had a very serious issue with suicide. I believe last year alone they had 30,000 suicides. Almost 0 gun related homicides.
The suicide issue is cultural and became very clear to the world during the 2nd world war with their pilots.It is almost impossible to legislate suicide away.
Frank, if I may, Japan, a first world nation, had a combined suicide and murder rate 30,825, far more than the U.S. in a country with about half the population. A more accurate figure is per 100,000, and as such, the rate is twice the U.S. rate. In fact, your 30,000 is a bit high. I believe last year was 27,??? Japan has almost no privately held firearms.
You are making a distiction w/o a difference there are many different kinds of democracies but Republics or Parliamentary they are still democracies.
As an immigrant here from Canada, I see it. Knowing folks from places like Communist Poland, who are afraid because they see so many similarities happening now, they see it.
We are not a democracy- we are SUPPOSED to be a Constitutional Republic... which too many politicians have ignored that fact.
Let me assure you in the most vigorous way. The right to freedom of speech is protected in The Charter of Rights and Freedoms in the great Nation of Canada. Help me out with this one American born in Canada
Well I can't convince you you don't have a fear if you believe you do. As an outsider my view there is no chance your government will do that. As there is zero chance the Canadian, British or any number of democracies would.
Russia wasn't a democracy when it occured there, so I will agree Germany elected Hitler, big mistake and you are right on that point.
No, you DON'T have an understanding of the 2nd Amendment.
In your country, there is no free speech protection, either. You didn't learn much from being a former British colony, did you?
"Or the government turning on its own people. I just don't believe that is a legitimate fear today.." Sorry Frank but many of us do see this as a VERY legitimage fear today. More so than at any other time in our nation's history.
And that people see the Constitution as a living and breathing document is the problem. Too many people don't believe in it as the Founders intended, and too many believe that much of it is either irrelevant or something to be changed on a whim. This is not the case. The Constitution is Law. Yes, there has been some changes since, but most of it, is based on God given Rights, Rights which the Founders knew that no government had the right to take away.
Not everyone likes guns. I can agree with that- but the fact is, the Founders had seen tyranny first hand, and knew that even with the best government institution, it could change over time and become tyrannical again.
We have the 2nd Amendment to protect ourselves from tyranny as much from the government of the US, to the crack head down on the street corner. America has been and always will be unique, in that most people will never submit to giving up their rights the way those in places like Nazi Germany or Stalinist Russia did. Not going to happen.
Thank-you Greg, let me say firstly I am Canadian but do have an understanding of the 2nd amendment. I appreciate that there is a deep seeded cultural respect for it in the US.
Let me also say like the Canadian constitution it is a living and breathing document. It will always evolve and must never remain stagnent. It was meant this way to serve a nation as it grew and change when neccessary. All free world constitutions act in the very same way.
I just don't believe the signators of the US constituion could have fortold the types of firearms that are produced today and literally turn one man into a deranged killing machine.
They also had no idea how great a nation they had just created, they gave the 2nd amendment for fear of a takeover by an unfriendly nation. Or the government turning on its own people. I just don't believe that is a legitimate fear today.
I think there needs to be a discussion on how reasonable people can come together to reduce the terrible death rates in the states and I also believe guns need to be part of that disscussion. And I am a Conservative.
Hey maybe you should read his stupid post and then warn me it was ignorant. Further I can only believe you are saying the same things to the people who are insulting me.
You need MEto cooperate?! When you get the criminals to cooperate, then maybe I'll talk cooperation.
Frank i was wrong for calling you names.. Im sorry for that.. but do you know why we have the 2nd Amendment? Really.. you cant believe controlling guns will make crime go down or stop murders? murders that are done with guns are from gun illegally obtained.
How many of those 31,000 were Crips and Bloods, inner city gang member, the backbones of our society? Law-abiding, church-going pillars of the community.
Just curious.
No not virtually impossible for you virtually impossible for the bad guys and we need you to co-operate.
Yea hahaha you are right Debby haha who would ever think about using a knife or a straw hahahahahahahah or getting in a car hohohohohoho Boy you can see right through things hahahahha
You don't know that to be true. In the UK with the most restrictive regs. had 18 gun related homicides in 2009. My view is it would sharply decline.
In the meanwhile make it virtually impossible for law abiding folks to be able to buy.
The most guns sold w/o out background checks are sold at gunshows. Also many are sold online as well.
http://www.csgv.org/issues-and-campaigns/gun-show-loophole
H ELLO!! THERE ARE ALREADY LAWS on buying, transporting, storage and carrying!!!!!!!!!! Since when have any of the laws already in place stopped criminals from getting and using them?!!!
Will you think man!!! All more laws will do is keep those who are law abiding have more restrictions- it will do nothing for criminals who want to steal one and use it.
So, we'll reduce violent gun murders from 31,513 to 29,875 with all of your new regulations. Works so well, doesn't it? Chicago is an example (failure) at work TODAY.
And I, the law-abiding, 2nd Amendment subscriber pay the penalty because over-zealous liberals like you want to restrict my freedoms to satisfy your guilt.
Is is clearing up for you now? Are you starting to see yet???
While I can understand the frustration (or humor) of trying to get points across, please greg, no personal attacks or name calling. Thanks.
Case closed to you. I think in a first world nation it is shameful 31,000 people die every year in gun related deaths.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jul/14/crime-statistics-england-wales
Crime has been going down in the last few years in UK. Homicides have gone down from 638 to 551. That includes all forms of homicides for a country of 90 million people.
The US in just gun related homicides 11,400. All gun related deaths 31,000 for 300 million people. The comparison is laughable.
Why don't you just face the fact that guns exist, and people are always going to find a way to get them- whether for good or evil use. The United States has a law stating that people have a right to keep and bear arms. As far as I'm concerned, the case is closed. If the corrupt government tries to take the law abiding citizens guns away, the only ones left who will be armed are the criminals and the government. I refuse to accept government disarming the people.
Case closed.
hold on.. let me help you pull your head out of your azzz cuse it cutting off the air to that pea size brain of yours.. dang.. your dumb azz hell.. the best part of you ran down your mamas crack.. im sure you dad is proud as heck..woow.
The point is if there are no background checks, they don't need to buy them on the black market.....sheesh
I might suggest then that you check out the death rates in the UK. After their gun ban, murders skyrocketed! The UK doctors are now calling for a ban on kitchen knives because that's the weapon of choice.
oh got me in the heart with that one dumbazz.. im sure you need a suger titty..be a man dumbazzz grown some balls.. protect your family coward.
they dont go out a buy them on the open market lol.. its black market..lol.. same way with drugs..wooow.. really that dumb?
But those are series of quantum leaps in logic. 31,000 deaths last year with guns your suggestion if there was absolutely no access to guns there would still be 31,000 deaths next year by different means. I quite frankly do not believe that to be true.
So, you trust the police in your part of the country to protect you and your family and want zero responsibility for your OWN protection? I would recommend you research your word, "Idiot" and figure out the actual definition.
I don't trust YOU to step up if you are witnessing a violent crime in front of you and I'm not willing to wait the 2 minutes to 45 minutes it may take a police officer to get there in time to save your life.
I do agree with you on ONE point. I don't think you are intelligent enough to handle a fire arm and don't want YOU to ever own one.
You can never regulate any criminal element away completely but you can regulate to the point of making it as difficult and punitive as possible to commit crimes.
If not a gun, they will accelerate to a bomb or other means. Check out the booby trap set by the theater killer and the OK plan but the planned school attack the same day as the CT shooting, or the NY guy (guns are banned btw) who also used FIRE to murder. Felons in prison kill with a shev. Ban shevs. Oh wait, they are already banned. Guns are not the problem, murderers are and they will use whatever is at their disposal to meet the end goal, killing people!
More people are killed in the US by drunk drivers and people talking and texting on cell phones. So let's ban cars and cell phones.
Truth be told, more babies are aborted in the US in one day than people are killed by gun in one year. So let's ban all Democrats from voting because they are pro-abortion.
Guns have purposes beyond killing people too. YOu may be too ignorant to understand that. BTW, guns are mentioned in the Bill Of Rights, communist. Automobiles are not.....
When you can regulate drunk driving and make it go completely away, then we'll talk about "tightening things."
What a stupid question, because I don't agree with Mikethemoron I secretly desire to watch my wife raped and family murdered. You are a complete idiot.
Most hunt with rifles, having said that I don't call for an all out ban. First better and tougher restrictions on acquiring one. Tougher laws on transporting them, storage and types of weapons also. I am not saying hunting is bad, I am just saying things need to be tightened.
So long as your grocery store doesn't close down or the power grid goes down, you don't need a weapon. How about all of these home invasions we keep reading about? Wouldn't you rather be able to defend your family or do you have a secret desire to watch your wife get raped followed by the murder of your entire family by the CRIMINAL who ignores the laws to begin with and HAS A GUN?
Here is a news flash if the felon can't get a gun he can't shoot someone. Considering 40% of all guns are purchased without any background check, it doesn't appear to be to difficult to get the gun.
A gun isn't functional? So, if you were ever going to go hunt,what would you use, a blow dart?
Zyklon B was used to kill over 6 million. Let's start there.
75-78 out of every 80 shooting are done by felons. Why don't you invite them to a beer summit?
How about a car? How many deaths by automobile happen every year in this country. We, clearly, need to outlaw the making, owning and driving of automobiles. They are FAR to dangerous to allow simple, stupid Americans to own. Want proof? Just look at the stats.
{sarcasm off, though facts are right on}
So since people can kill in many various ways don't examine the number one method of killing. That makes no sence.
All those things have a function in society, a gun doesn't and is a far more effective killing weapon.
Are you willing to consider banning automobiles? I'm serious. They are a FAR GREATER threat to life than guns in this country.
What do you say to that, Frankie Baby?
Excellent point. Ammonium nitrate and diesel fuel. Crafty little device when handled carefully.
You are right on, there. I've never, ever in my life heard a single story of a person being beaten to death or strangled or stabbed with everything from a knife to a pencil to a drinking straw. No one has ever thrown a jar full of acid on someone to kill them either. We really nead to outlaw cars because they cause about 1000 times more deaths every year than guns and that includes deaths from wars around the world.
If the idiot couldn't get a gun, he'd get a knife.. or a bat.. or a car.. or a hammer.. an ax, ice pick, fork, screwdriver...
He couldn't? A baseball bat, a knife, an axe, ad nauseam, ad infinitum.
And why are you suddenly agreeing with me that "he" is an idiot?
Ask the families of the victims of the Oklahoma City bombing, families of the victims of 9/11/01, families of the victims of these famous serial killers: Ted Bundy, the Green River Killer, Zodiac Killer, Jeffrey Dahmer, Son of Sam and I could go on.
And when you are done with that inquiry, why don't you spend some time at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum going through volumes of records on the millions killed with Zyklon B.
Reading that article is like checking a HuffPo poll and expecting truth. Good luck with that.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news...
I suppose that if I had my choice I would prefer knives to guns, although I don't like either.
Now look at gun related deaths UK 551 US 31,000 not much of a debate really.
The same British government who had 130K stabbings, a stabbing ever 4 minutes that required treatment in a ER ranging from stitches all the way to and including death?
Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.