• Lenient gun control leads to greater homicide rates.
    400 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38403998]I am confident that guns usually tend to kill more than cars, given that they are designed for that.[/QUOTE] Funny how you are confident about that but pretty clearly haven't done any research on the topic (because you would be wrong)
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38403998]I am confident that guns usually tend to kill more than cars, given that they are designed for that.[/QUOTE] Here's a fun interactive map comparing automobile deaths to gun deaths per capita. [url]http://www.datamasher.org/mash-ups/firearm-deaths-vs-vehicle-deaths[/url]
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;38404199]There were 33,808 car related deaths in the US in 2009, there were 11,493 firearms related homicides in the US in 2009. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year[/url] [url]http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm[/url] Cars tend to kill more than guns, whether intended or not. Ban cars or regulate them properly.[/QUOTE] Yes but less car owners use cars for murder purposes than firearm owners use firearms for murder purposes. Plus car owners tend to be saner.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38404240]firearm owners use firearms for murder purposes.[/QUOTE] I haven't used my firearm for "murder purposes", it turns out. No one on this forum has either. I think you're confusing the term "Firearm Owners" for "Criminals"
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38404240]Yes but less car owners use cars for murder purposes than firearm owners use firearms for murder purposes.[/QUOTE] That's debatable. Can you cite that claim? Because it's a heck of a lot easier for someone to obtain a car, than a gun. And a hell of a lot easier to kill or maim dozens of people than with a firearm.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38404240]Yes but less car owners use cars for murder purposes than firearm owners use firearms for murder purposes.[/QUOTE] Can you actually prove that or are you pulling statistics [b]directly[/b] out of your ass again? [b]EDIT:[/B] Seriously man, you can't be serious with this shit. I own five rifles and a few handguns and I've never had a homicidal thought cross my mind, and I have dozens of friends and relatives who are exactly the same. You're a fool if you think gun ownership instantly makes you have a homicidal mentality.
[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;38404198]it links to unbiased sources with the same data. You can't discount a source because it has "gun" in the name.[/QUOTE] The actual guy writing himself is a biased crook. He frequently accuses the huffington post writer of being anti-gun and he makes attacks on "antis".
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38404240]Yes but less car owners use cars for murder purposes than firearm owners use firearms for murder purposes. [B]Plus car owners tend to be saner.[/B][/QUOTE] Hate to be a broken record, but "you sure about that?"
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38404267]The actual guy writing himself is a biased crook.[/QUOTE] [B][U]HOW DO YOU FUCKING KNOW IF HE IS A CRIMINAL OR NOT[/U][/B] That's as sane as me saying Obama was born in Kenya, and Cameron is a Jewish Alien!
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;38404246]I haven't used my firearm for "murder purposes", it turns out. No one on this forum has either. I think you're confusing the term "Firearm Owners" for "Criminals"[/QUOTE] Not at all. All firearms owners who use guns for murder purposes are criminals.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38404267]The actual guy writing himself is a biased crook. He frequently accuses the huffington post writer of being anti-gun and he makes attacks on "antis".[/QUOTE] In his defense, HuffPo IS anti gun.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38404277]Not at all. All firearms owners who use guns for murder purposes are criminals.[/QUOTE] But the amount of firearm owners who murder people in first-world countries is so ridiculously low.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38404240]Yes but less car owners use cars for murder purposes than firearm owners use firearms for murder purposes. Plus car owners tend to be saner.[/QUOTE] you missed one of the tables in my source (or probably all of them, I doubt you even read it) [url]http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/05/bruce-krafft/comparing-car-and-gun-fatalities-is-misleading-and-irrelevant/[/url]
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38404277]Not at all. All firearms owners who use guns for murder purposes are criminals.[/QUOTE] There's a difference though. You could have saved yourself the trouble and just said "criminals with firearms". There are plenty of criminals who own cars too.
[QUOTE=Ridge;38404284]In his defense, HuffPo IS anti gun.[/QUOTE] That still doesn't excuse him from attacking HuffPo in a criminal manner.
Quick note on studies and other such things on this subject. Studies will always be slightly biased towards on particular thing depending on the writer. I am an avid gun owner and work with firearms as my job. I have [I]never[/I] committed a felony, and don't intend to. I use my firearms for hunting and target shooting, but if needed I will defend myself and my loved ones. I feel that the laws that we currently have are sufficient. However, I do feel that the current gun laws could be enforced better. We have no need for more laws and restrictions upon firearms than we already have.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38404304]That still doesn't excuse him from attacking HuffPo in a criminal manner.[/QUOTE] Criminal manner. For the last goddamned time, what makes him a criminal. That he has a different opinion than you do? Well tough shit, son.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38404304]That still doesn't excuse him from attacking HuffPo in a criminal manner.[/QUOTE] "In a criminal manner" ???????
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;38404319]For the last goddamned time, what makes him a criminal. That he has a different opinion than you do? Well tough shit, son.[/QUOTE] No, it's that the source is hilariously biased and can't be used to back up the idea that "more guns = less crime".
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38404332]No, it's that the source is hilariously biased and can't be used to back up the idea that "more guns = less crime".[/QUOTE] And that makes him a [I]criminal???[/I]
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38404332]No, it's that the source is hilariously biased and can't be used to back up the idea that "more guns = less crime".[/QUOTE] Do you know what biased means? Because a source has a different opinion than you doesn't mean it's "biased." The term you're looking for, which is somehow the exact thing you're missing, is education.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38404304]That still doesn't excuse him from attacking HuffPo in a criminal manner.[/QUOTE] I must have missed something. Did he physically assault somebody there?
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38404267]The actual guy writing himself is a biased crook. He frequently accuses the huffington post writer of being anti-gun and he makes attacks on "antis".[/QUOTE] I own a total of 16 guns. This does not make me a criminal. You might argue for paranoid, but the reality is that I just love target shooting. And more than that, I love target shooting with semi-automatic rifles. High caliber ones too, I'm planning on getting a CETME eventually. I put holes in paper, not people. If that makes me crazy, I don't want to be sane.
[QUOTE=Protocol7;38404344]Do you know what biased means? Because a source has a different opinion than you doesn't mean it's "biased." The term you're looking for, which is somehow the exact thing you're missing, is education.[/QUOTE] Of course it's biased, the site itself heavily promotes guns and the author of the source reads like a man from the loony bin wearing a tinfoil hat. [QUOTE=ButtsexV3;38404349]I own a total of 16 guns. This does not make me a criminal.[/QUOTE] Although depending on geographic location it does.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38404357]Although depending on geographic location it does.[/QUOTE] completely irrelevant.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38404357]Of course it's biased, the site itself heavily promotes guns and the author of the source reads like a man from the loony bin wearing a tinfoil hat. Although depending on geographic location it does.[/QUOTE] The site promotes gun EDUCATION. He cites his facts he uses to back up his arguments (some people on here could learn from that).
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38404357]Of course it's biased, the site itself heavily promotes guns and the author of the source reads like a man from the loony bin wearing a tinfoil hat.[/QUOTE] it doesn't matter, his numbers are correct. Completely and 100% factual.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38404357] Although depending on geographic location it does.[/QUOTE] Aaaannnnd what does this have to do with the United States and it's gun laws? [I][B][U]Absolutely nothing![/U][/B][/I]
[QUOTE=Ridge;38404370]The site promotes gun EDUCATION. He cites his facts he uses to back up his arguments (some people on here could learn from that).[/QUOTE] Except his argument is heavily slanted, poor, biased, and misinterprets the original writer. He's a conspiracy loony.
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;38404377]I would like to point out that while guns are designed for the sole purpose of being a destructive device, they don't have to be used for killing human beings. In this way knives are designed for the sole purpose of cutting things, be it chicken or human, so by the logic of gun control, I should have to go through a background check to get a set of kitchen knives, just because it has the potential to kill another human being. Also all knives should have serial numbers while we're at it.[/QUOTE] Butter has rights too!
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.