Is the news media biased, or just stupid on firearms?

[monovillage]

Cops have guns also.

Take all the guns from the Police first.

Police and thieves in the streets..................

 

[piasabird]

The real problem is we are tolerant of violent behaviour. We have turned freedom of speach into abusive languange with no limits. Then we have turned that into violence that is not punished. This is a breakdown in morals and standards of conduct.

 

[piasabird]

Death penalty for all gun crimes.

 

[xj0hnx]

But is dons't fit with reality.
The gun law in the US dosn't make you more safe.
Just the opposite...the relaxed laws means that you are 20 times more likely to get shot.

Do you deny the data?

You don't have any data. It is a fact that areas here with more relaxed gun control have less, and decreasing crime, and that the epicenters for gun crime are the cities with the most stringent gun control in place, LA, Chicago, NY, DC, Baltimore, etc ...You wouldn't know data if it punched you in the face.

 

[xj0hnx]

Death penalty for all gun crimes.

Death penalty for all stupid internet post.

 

[mect]

But is dons't fit with reality.
The gun law in the US dosn't make you more safe.
Just the opposite...the relaxed laws means that you are 20 times more likely to get shot.

First of all, where are you getting the 20x number from? I get 6 times more likely.
And lets follow your logic. If loose gun laws are what lead to this decrpency, it should also play out within the US. I've already done a comparison of states, so lets look at a couple of cities with vastly different approaches to gun laws. Lets look at homicide rates in Chicago compared to Kennesaw, Georgia. In Kennesaw citizens are required to own a gun, and there hasn't been a homicide there for 25 years. It's violent crime rates are significantly below the national average. If we take the homicide rate for Denmark (0.85/100k people per year according to wiki), they would have expected 5 homicides during this time. So here we have a city that requires citizens to own a gun, and they have lower homicide rates than Denmark. Now lets look at Chicago. Chicago, with their extra registration requirements, fees, fingerprinting, etc has a homicide rate of 15/100k. Maybe there are other factors besides gun regulation which play a roll. So much for gun laws being the factor which lead to that "20x" chance of getting shot in the US.

 

[HypX]

You don't have any data. It is a fact that areas here with more relaxed gun control have less, and decreasing crime, and that the epicenters for gun crime are the cities with the most stringent gun control in place, LA, Chicago, NY, DC, Baltimore, etc ...You wouldn't know data if it punched you in the face.

That's not true internationally. The countries with the strongest gun policies also have the fewest gun crimes. It's misleading to mention large cities as proof that gun laws don't work, as large cities naturally have higher murder rates.

 

[EXman]

yes

 

[xj0hnx]

That's not true internationally. The countries with the strongest gun policies also have the fewest gun crimes. It's misleading to mention large cities as proof that gun laws don't work, as large cities naturally have higher murder rates.

We aren't talking about countries, we are talking about the US, and in the US you can't just look at the overall rates because there are many different areas with many different laws. While there are some big cities, like Dallas, that have high statistics and more relaxed Texas gun laws, it generally holds true, and is backed up by data that the more stringent the gun laws are for an area in the US, the more gun violence there is.

Found an article that had an interesting sentence in it, one that I think defines the anti-gun movement.

there were 12,996 murders in the US. Of those, 8,775 were caused by firearms.

This is how mindless they are. Sorry, but no, guns did not "cause" anything, criminals did.

 

[HypX]

We aren't talking about countries, we are talking about the US, and in the US you can't just look at the overall rates because there are many different areas with many different laws. While there are some big cities, like Dallas, that have high statistics and more relaxed Texas gun laws, it generally holds true, and is backed up by data that the more stringent the gun laws are for an area in the US, the more gun violence there is.

Found an article that had an interesting sentence in it, one that I think defines the anti-gun movement.



This is how mindless they are. Sorry, but no, guns did not "cause" anything, criminals did.

Look at that Japan article. The murder rate from guns is nearly zero. Guns do cause one thing, and getting rid of them did solve it.

 

[xj0hnx]

Look at that Japan article. The murder rate from guns is nearly zero. Guns do cause one thing, and getting rid of them did solve it.

And? They still have a bunch of homicides. The point is that the guns do not commit the crimes, the guns do not murder people, and getting rid of guns is not going to get rid of homicide.

 

[OCGuy]

Look at that Japan article. The murder rate from guns is nearly zero. Guns do cause one thing, and getting rid of them did solve it.

Yea the problem with that....it is against the law for the government to get rid of private guns. <3 2nd.

 

[HypX]

And? They still have a bunch of homicides. The point is that the guns do not commit the crimes, the guns do not murder people, and getting rid of guns is not going to get rid of homicide.

I think they have one of the lowest homicide rates on Earth. There's certainly something to be said here.

 

[xj0hnx]

I think they have one of the lowest homicide rates on Earth. There's certainly something to be said here.

Yea, that Japan has a completely different culture, and history than America, and can not be compared.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

Look at that Japan article. The murder rate from guns is nearly zero. Guns do cause one thing, and getting rid of them did solve it.

We have looked at Japan in many other threads and when discussing the same topic over and over again ad nauseum. Each and every time we see a lack of historical personal weapon ownership culture (which includes firearms) and in fact there is a greater tradition of government confiscation of personal weapons in Japan vs the US.

We also discover that the Japanese people lean more toward supporting greater power and trust being placed in the hands of law enforcement and government officials vs what even the most ardent of leftists would ever tolerate in the US, and lastly we see that culturally, socially and racially the Japanese people are completely homogeneous vs the US. All of these aspects of Japan (along with any other cultural, social and historical aspects I've left out) and within the Japanese people play a far greater role in curbing gun related crimes and crime in general then what we see in the US and especially in cities that have some of the strictest gun control policies around but ironically are plagued with rampant crime in their inner city neighborhoods. Thus a comparison between Japan and the US is flawed to say the least.

A better comparison would be to look across US states and cities and make a comparison between gun laws in Texas vs California vs Vermont or Utah,etc and then take a look at these guns laws along with the state/local culture and history along with racial and wealth demographics, etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state

 

[OCGuy]

We should test this Elitist (white) liberal idea of "Gun Control" by making them walk down a city street at night in the places with the most gun control (let's say Chicago or DC) versus one with arguably the most lax (pick one in Montana).

 

[HypX]

We should test this Elitist (white) liberal idea of "Gun Control" by making them walk down a city street at night in the places with the most gun control (let's say Chicago or DC) versus one with arguably the most lax (pick one in Montana).

Again that is very misleading. Chicago or DC have a much higher natural crime rate than Montana.

An similar analogy would be number of cops per capita. Chicago has a greater number of cops than Montana per capita. By some people's logic, more cops means more more murders, so the solution is have fewer cops in Chicago and therefore murders will drop to Montana levels.

Clearly wrong logic, but it is being applied to gun control laws in this thread.

 

[OCGuy]

Again that is very misleading. Chicago or DC have a much higher natural crime rate than Montana.

An similar analogy would be number of cops per capita. Chicago has a greater number of cops than Montana per capita. By some people's logic, more cops means more more murders, so the solution is have fewer cops in Chicago and therefore murders will drop to Montana levels.

Clearly wrong logic, but it is being applied to gun control laws in this thread.

That doesn't work. I have to believe there are more guns per capita in Montana. In fact, there are:

NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 25,745

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2010/06/28/states-with-the-most-guns.html


So that is supporting the theory that it isnt the guns, it is the people who are the problem.

Your cop analogy doesn't even have any logic behind it.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

That doesn't work. I have to believe there are more guns per capita in Montana. In fact, there are:

NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 25,745

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2010/06/28/states-with-the-most-guns.html


So that is supporting the theory that it isnt the guns, it is the people who are the problem.

Your cop analogy doesn't even have any logic behind it.

A rough example which I would believe would provide a better example would be to compare D.C. to another city of equal population or higher population in a state with strict gun control laws such as California.

Let say: San Jose, CA with a population of 967,487 vs Washington D.C. with a population of 617,996

By far Washington D.C. (108 homicides for 2011) outstrips the rate and number of homicides found in San Jose, California in (39 for 2011). So we see no actual correlation between gun laws reducing overall homicides and in fact if we were to delve closer into each cities gun laws we'd see that D.C. has tighter gun laws then even San Jose, CA. So one could roughly concluded there are indeed many other factors which have a greater effect on homicide rates and firearm related homicides then just gun laws.

 

[Lithium381]

A rough example which I would believe would provide a better example would be to compare D.C. to another city of equal population or higher population in a state with strict gun control laws such as California.

Let say: San Jose, CA with a population of 967,487 vs Washington D.C. with a population of 617,996

By far Washington D.C. (108 homicides for 2011) outstrips the rate and number of homicides found in San Jose, California in (39 for 2011). So we see no actual correlation between gun laws reducing overall homicides and in fact if we were to delve closer into each cities gun laws we'd see that D.C. has tighter gun laws then even San Jose, CA. So one could roughly concluded there are indeed many other factors which have a greater effect on homicide rates and firearm related homicides then just gun laws.

San Jose is going to be 967,486 pretty soon. The taxes and gun laws of this state are driving me to GTFO. I just ordered a new gun though. Got a Springfield Armory XD9SC. A 9mm sub-compact gun. 10rds. If i lived elsewhere id' come standard with a 13rd mag... ..

 

[HypX]

That doesn't work. I have to believe there are more guns per capita in Montana. In fact, there are:

NICS background checks per 100,000 residents: 25,745

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2010/06/28/states-with-the-most-guns.html


So that is supporting the theory that it isnt the guns, it is the people who are the problem.

Your cop analogy doesn't even have any logic behind it.

It's the same claim some are making with gun laws, only with the "cops" in its place instead of "gun laws". It's an example of why the idea that gun laws increases the murder rate is wrong logic.

I don't think you can use gun ownership rates like you are doing. A lot of the guns are not registered.

 

[xj0hnx]

It's the same claim some are making with gun laws, only with the "cops" in its place instead of "gun laws". It's an example of why the idea that gun laws increases the murder rate is wrong logic.

I don't think you can use gun ownership rates like you are doing. A lot of the guns are not registered.

Comparing police to guns is ridiculous, they are two completely different things, with completely different functions. What you, and the rest of the anti-gun crowd do not seem to be able to understand, is that more gun laws is not going to do anything to stop people that DO NOT FOLLOW THE LAW. How hard is that to understand? It seems like something you could explain to a first grader and they would have a complete understanding of what you are saying. Is it that your emotions on this subject are just too overwhelming and you can't quite get it?

 

[HypX]

Comparing police to guns is ridiculous, they are two completely different things, with completely different functions. What you, and the rest of the anti-gun crowd do not seem to be able to understand, is that more gun laws is not going to do anything to stop people that DO NOT FOLLOW THE LAW. How hard is that to understand? It seems like something you could explain to a first grader and they would have a complete understanding of what you are saying. Is it that your emotions on this subject are just too overwhelming and you can't quite get it?

You can say the same about cops as well. More cops will not stop people who don't follow the laws either. However, under the right circumstances, it can make it a lot hard to break the law.

 

[xj0hnx]

You can say the same about cops as well. More cops will not stop people who don't follow the laws either. However, under the right circumstances, it can make it a lot hard to break the law.

Right, and when those criminals that are busy not following the gun laws you wanted are robbing, and raping your family, where are the cops? Oh that's right no where to be found because law abiding citizens don't have a personal police officer.

 

[HypX]

Right, and when those criminals that are busy not following the gun laws you wanted are robbing, and raping your family, where are the cops? Oh that's right no where to be found because law abiding citizens don't have a personal police officer.

Then you proved my point. No (realistic) quantity of cops can stop all crimes. That isn't a reason to believe that more cops mean the crime rate will increase.