Texas mother, a vocal gun rights advocate, killed by police after fatally shooting her two daughters - Polidicks

[QUOTE=ScumBunny;50603804]Your own figures prove exactly that: if people were just as likely to try and kill eachother with anything lying around the house, and just as likely to die from it than you would have seen an equal distribution of homicide methods rather than an overwhelming majority of firearm related deaths. On the other hand, if you look at the distribution of homicides in the UK where guns are regulated you'll see [URL="http://www.statista.com/statistics/288166/homicide-method-of-killing-in-england-and-wales-uk-by-gender/"]most murders are knife related[/URL]. Guns are also used much more in other violent crimes than in comparable countries like the UK. The homicide rate in the US is of course [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate#By_country"]four times that of the UK[/URL], despite the rate of violent crimes in the UK being almost double that of the US. [IMG]http://i1.wp.com/www.criminaljusticedegreehub.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Violent-Crime-Hybrid3.jpg?w=900[/IMG] From [URL="http://www.criminaljusticedegreehub.com/violent-crime-us-abroad/"]here[/URL]. [/QUOTE] You need to look at countries historically. [t]http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/04/24/article-2313942-1974D490000005DC-694_634x522.jpg[/t] [t]http://www.hoboes.com/pub/Firearms/Data/England/Violent_Crime/[/t] [t]https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-GISJe-V6Lek/VmpCstb5-uI/AAAAAAAAJFo/TquO1jOWaNo/s1600/england_wales.JPG[/t] UK gun ban was in 1997.

[QUOTE=ScumBunny;50603804]Your own figures prove exactly that: if people were just as likely to try and kill eachother with anything lying around the house, and just as likely to die from it than you would have seen an equal distribution of homicide methods rather than an overwhelming majority of firearm related deaths.[/QUOTE]Or maybe they'll use a gun since it's mechanically simpler and easier to pull a trigger than to heft around a baseball bat. I've said this already. [QUOTE]On the other hand, if you look at the distribution of homicides in the UK where guns are regulated you'll see [URL="http://www.statista.com/statistics/288166/homicide-method-of-killing-in-england-and-wales-uk-by-gender/"]most murders are knife related[/URL].[/QUOTE]Well let's see, a country without guns kills people with knives instead, I'm not sure if you expected me to be shocked but I'm not. [QUOTE]Guns are also used much more in other violent crimes than in comparable countries like the UK. The homicide rate in the US is of course [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate#By_country"]four times that of the UK[/URL], despite the rate of violent crimes in the UK being almost double that of the US.[/QUOTE]Excellent evidence for a previous assertion that I made: gang violence in the United States is one of our largest issues. Tied in with illicit drugs, the vast majority of murders in the United States are [url=http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_06.pdf]gang related[/url] and unsurprisingly the large cities with lots of gang activity [url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/29/chicago-homicide-rate-new-york_n_2378073.html]suffer as a result.[/url] Sure you could argue that the availability of guns enables the types of lethal gang attacks that results in a lot of deaths but I see two problems with this. One, gangs around the world procure firearms illegally anyway (anyone seriously wanting to commit violence will find a means to make it happen) and two, the majority of gang activity itself is enabled and fueled by our criminal justice system in [U]several[/U] ways. I still don't see a good reason for the destruction of citizen's rights.

I think someone ran the numbers once and if you adjust for gang violence (pretending we solved the gang problem) our homicide rate is much more "normal" The majority of firearms violence (discounting suicides, which are often counted in with gun [I]crime[/I] to inflate the number) is gang on gang [editline]27th June 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Duck M.;50602977]Ok what the fuck are you talking about I literally explicitly say that I am not for banning all guns, stop talking out of your ass. [editline]27th June 2016[/editline] You do know that there are regulations and restrictions to owning both of those things right? and again I'm not advocating a ban, come ON people how hard is it to read: How in the world do you people continue to construe my desire for somewhat stricter gun control as "BAN ALL GUNS" (Grenadiac actually said that I was saying this???)[/QUOTE] "Anything for any amount of drop" is a pro-ban position

[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50603872]Or maybe they'll use a gun since it's mechanically simpler and easier to pull a trigger than to heft around a baseball bat. I've said this already. Well let's see, a country without guns kills people with knives instead, I'm not sure if you expected me to be shocked but I'm not. Excellent evidence for a previous assertion that I made: gang violence in the United States is one of our largest issues. Tied in with illicit drugs, the vast majority of murders in the United States are [url=http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_06.pdf]gang related[/url] and unsurprisingly the large cities with lots of gang activity [url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/29/chicago-homicide-rate-new-york_n_2378073.html]suffer as a result.[/url] Sure you could argue that the availability of guns enables the types of lethal gang attacks that results in a lot of deaths but I see two problems with this. One, gangs around the world procure firearms illegally anyway (anyone seriously wanting to commit violence will find a means to make it happen) and two, the majority of gang activity itself is enabled and fueled by our criminal justice system in [U]several[/U] ways. I still don't see a good reason for the destruction of citizen's rights.[/QUOTE] So we agree that guns are easier to use than knives and baseball bats, and are therefor, when available, used more often in violent crimes. On the other hand we disagree that guns being used more often in violent crimes leads to more homicides. The reason, according to you, is gangs. Because, what, gangs are better at killing people than regular criminals and the general population? And would kill the same amount of people every year even if they had to do it with baseball bats? That sentiment appears to be expressed by a lot of gun advocates and conservative sites. And indeed the figures do say young blacks are over represented in the violent crime and homicide statistics. Does it mean that they're all gangsters, or just they being over represented in America's lower social classes they're more likely to be involved in violent crime? From [URL="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/evan-defilippis/do-we-have-a-gang-problem_b_5071639.html"]here[/URL]: [QUOTE]So, do we have a gang problem or a gun problem? Data collected by the National Gang Center, the government agency responsible for cataloging gang violence, makes clear that it’s the latter. There were[B] 1,824 gang-related killings in 2011[/B]. This total includes deaths by means other than a gun. The Bureau of Justice Statistics finds this number to be even lower, identifying a little more than 1,000 gang-related homicides in 2008. In comparison, there were [B]11,101 homicides and 19,766 suicides committed with firearms in 2011[/B]. According to the Federal Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), the number of gangs and gang members has been on the rise for some time now, increasing by more than one-third in the past decade. Between 2010 and 2011, for example, there was a 3 percent increase in the number of gangs, but an 8 percent decrease in gang-related homicides. If gang violence was truly driving the gun homicide rate, we should not see gang membership and gun homicide rates moving in opposite directions.[/QUOTE]

You are manipulating the numbers by only counting homicides I care a lot more about the motive to commit a crime than the effect of a crime committed. This entire thread I've been talking about gun violence, not just deaths. There are a fucking ton of gang shootings that result in lots of injuries but no deaths, or very few deaths. There are also a lot of gang shootings that aren't specifically noted as such. For example, shootings among high school aged inner city teenagers are typically not recorded as gang related, even if the shooters identify as a member of a gang.

[QUOTE=ScumBunny;50604543]So we agree that guns are easier to use than knives and baseball bats, and are therefor, when available, used more often in violent crimes.[/QUOTE]I believe that's why they were invented, yes. "Easy" being somewhat of a loaded term, but sure, guns are a trigger pull versus an arm swing so are a bit more easy to use. [QUOTE]On the other hand we disagree that guns being used more often in violent crimes leads to more homicides.[/QUOTE]Somewhat, we're more disagreeing on if motive has a factor which you clearly are dismissing. [QUOTE]The reason, according to you, is gangs. Because, what, gangs are better at killing people than regular criminals and the general population? And would kill the same amount of people every year even if they had to do it with baseball bats?[/QUOTE]Gangs target gangs, but much like the "mass shooting" statistic the general homicide tally includes their activity and the total number is used as an example for why we apparently need gun control. I'm personally of the opinion that [I]all[/I] of it is statistically irrelevant, but I guess since we're already discussing this I guess that doesn't matter. Do I think that they would kill the same amount of people if they had to use baseball bats? No, I think they would kill far, far more. Gangbangers shooting wildly at each other and driving off aren't exactly an example of precision marksmanship, I'd guess that most shots fired don't hit anyone or anything. When they do hit a bystander I have to question if this is truly included in "gang-related killings" or not, I think it should but I'm not sure what the National Gang Center's definition is. [QUOTE]That sentiment appears to be expressed by a lot of gun advocates and conservative sites. And indeed the figures do say young blacks are over represented in the violent crime and homicide statistics. Does it mean that they're all gangsters, or just they being over represented in America's lower social classes they're more likely to be involved in violent crime?[/QUOTE]Wow, what an incredible leap: we go from talking about gang violence, you bring up gun advocates and conservative sites, and now you're asking me if I think all the dead black people are gangbangers. Well there certainly is no secret that gangs spring out of low income environments, particularly those that are decayed and neglected which are also full of minorities. There's reasons for this and it stems from urban policies over the years but the end result is a lot of black people in crappy, run-down areas of a city with little to no economic opportunities and unsurprisingly black gangs and gang [I]culture[/I] sprouts from that. (it's not at all limited to blacks either) Regarding those numbers though I have a [I]hard[/I] time believing that they're counting all the collateral damage from gang violence, especially since the CDC's numbers for the same year are far, far higher than that. I [I]still[/I] don't see a good reason to attack the rights of law-abiding citizens. Especially so since some of them are so dangerously close to a source of violence, if anything your post is a reason why we shouldn't.

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50603951] "Anything for any amount of drop" is a pro-ban position[/QUOTE] Yeah sorry but thats not what I said [QUOTE=Duck M.;50602026]Any decrease makes it worth it to me tbh[/QUOTE] "It" is not "Anything". What I was replying to, and what "it" refers to, is "if guns were regulated further", which is NOT the same as "ANYTHING". Again, your reading comprehension skills continue to impress me.