New Chicago Handgun Law was approved

[classy]

Odd, you say that, especially since nearly every post I've made in this thread includes facts from reputable sources.

CDC, not reputable? LOL

 

[classy]

So now tell me again how MORE GUNS are suppose to help?

 

[nick1985]

CDC, not reputable? LOL

Please stop deflecting and address post 147. Also, I've asked you 3 times now to address your post about Canada having lower crime. Got anything to say for that or are you admitting defeat on that front?

 

[nick1985]

So now tell me again how MORE GUNS are suppose to help?

Gun bans have done nothing but RAISE violent crime whenever they are implemented. This is fact.

 

[classy]

Please stop deflecting and address post 147. Also, I've asked you 3 times now to address your post about Canada having lower crime. Got anything to say for that or are you admitting defeat on that front?

LOL yeah thats what I am talking about. You can't deny those official, reputable, and undeniable CDC reports.

 

[nick1985]

LOL yeah thats what I am talking about. You can't deny those official, reputable, and undeniable CDC reports.

Oh dear God, you arnt this dumb.

My post points out the fact that other places with gun bans have WORSE suicide problems than the US. The point is, guns have nothing at all to do with suicide rates.

 

[HumblePie]

Those are the CDC numbers, not mine, you can call them though. As far as suicides is concerned, maybe if they didn't have a gun? You think its possible. Your last paragraph is my argument. But you guys have argued that buying all the guns for home protection is for the criminal breaking in your house. I have said and posted numbers to back up what I said, you will probably shoot someone you know. And don't gloss over the part of the report I posted about the circumstances. You are more likely to kill your best friend over an argument with a gun, then shoot some criminal. But hey I guess the CDC is just lying............

I'll give you a clue classy.

a) suicide rates would remain the same regardless of guns being the implement of choosing or not. without guns, people determined to commit suicide will regardless. They just chose a different implement of their destruction. Primarily in the past it would be either poison or jumping/hanging. That was what is was before guns were ever invented.

b) Again, most crimes committed by those known to the victim would be committed REGARDLESS of the presence of a gun. Again, this statistic has remained true throughout all of human history. Guns do not change this immutable fact. These most prolific crimes happen because they are crimes of passion or vengence and there is no deterrent to ever stop them. They happen for stupid reasons like you stole someone's man/woman or were caught cheating with another man/woman or both. Be they premeditated or done on the spot the fact that a gun may or may not be involved does nothing to adjust the number of these types of crimes. Period.


So what do guns do for law-abiding citizens?

c) they deter the RANDOM acts of violence. They lessen the likely hood of being a victim of a random rampage shooting spree. The more likely hood a group of law-abiding citizens are going around armed, the less likely hood of a random act of violence ensuing in that place with armed people. It's more or less herd protection. It's like immunizations. The more people vaccinated and immunized in a populace, the less likely people who are not will get sick. The more good guys carrying guns, the less likely those good guys not carrying will be victims of random crime.


Point C is the only relevant statistic in this whole entire fucking thread/argument. The rest is about as pointless as arguing my dad can beat up your dad.

 

[Amused]

LOL yeah thats what I am talking about. You can't deny those official, reputable, and undeniable CDC reports.

Classy, what you FAIL to note is that a suicide is NO MORE LIKELY in a home with firearms than a home without.

Now this is tricky, try to pay attention: You are posting a stat that shows guns are the weapon of choice in suicide. NOT that guns CAUSE suicide. When no gun is available, people choose other ways BUT THE SUICIDE STILL OCCURS.

Guns do NOT make people kill themselves. Period.

Guns no more cause violence than cars cause accidents or drugs cause addictions. All require the intent and actions of humans.

You are taking the simplistic, authoritarian approach and blaming the inanimate object while absolving humans of all responsibility.

History has proven, time and time again, that this line of thinking is a complete failure.

Prohibition proved it.

The war on drugs proved it.

The abstinence movement proved it.

And the anti-gun movement has proved it on other countries and cities with gun bans. Banning guns NEVER lowers crime OR suicide rates.

 

[classy]

I'll give you a clue classy.

a) suicide rates would remain the same regardless of guns being the implement of choosing or not. without guns, people determined to commit suicide will regardless. They just chose a different implement of their destruction. Primarily in the past it would be either poison or jumping/hanging. That was what is was before guns were ever invented.

b) Again, most crimes committed by those known to the victim would be committed REGARDLESS of the presence of a gun. Again, this statistic has remained true throughout all of human history. Guns do not change this immutable fact. Period.


So what do guns do for law-abiding citizens?

c) they deter the RANDOM acts of violence. They lessen the likely hood of being a victim of a random rampage shooting spree. The more likely hood a group of law-abiding citizens are going around armed, the less likely hood of a random act of violence ensuing in that place with armed people. It's more or less herd protection. It's like immunizations. The more people vaccinated and immunized in a populace, the less likely people who are not will get sick. The more good guys carrying guns, the less likely those good guys not carrying will be victims of random crime.


Point C is the only relevant statistic in this whole entire fucking thread/argument. The rest is about as pointless as arguing my dad can beat up your dad.

Why post paragraph c. The CDC reports clearly showed that bs you just posted is not true at all. Dummy.

Look you guys have nothing. The CDC reports dispel and totally wreck most of the reasons given for owning a gun. Period, I'll let you guys sort it out. nicolette doesn't want to talk about the all the reports, mofbane says it doesn't matter, and you are now quoting my argument and things that are clearly shown to be a complete lie in a report done 1 year ago. Its legal to own a gun, but all the other bs is just that, bs.

Look at the picture and applied to yourself and the many others

 

[classy]

Classy, what you FAIL to note is that a suicide is NO MORE LIKELY in a home with firearms than a home without.

Now this is tricky, try to pay attention: You are posting a stat that shows guns are the weapon of choice in suicide. NOT that guns CAUSE suicide. When no gun is available, people choose other ways BUT THE SUICIDE STILL OCCURS.

Guns do NOT make people kill themselves. Period.

Guns no more cause violence than cars cause accidents or drugs cause addictions. All require the intent and actions of humans.

You are taking the simplistic, authoritarian approach and blaming the inanimate object while absolving humans of all responsibility.

History has proven, time and time again, that this line of thinking is a complete failure.

Prohibition proved it.

The war on drugs proved it.

The abstinence movement proved it.

And the anti-gun movement has proved it on other countries and cities with gun bans. Banning guns NEVER lowers crime OR suicide rates.

Look you can pull out just the suicide all you want. But those reports talk about the homicides, gun usage, and even relationship which you can't deny unless you are calling the CDC a bunch of liars.

 

[xj0hnx]

Why post paragraph c. The CDC reports clearly showed that bs you just posted is not true at all. Dummy.

Look you guys have nothing. The CDC reports dispel and totally wreck most of the reasons given for owning a gun.

You have been raped repeatedly in this thread. You are the biggest failure at comprehension I have ever seen. You are the typical loony leftist pretending statistics in a bubble mean what you wish they did.

If you want to see why you are such a failure, look where most of your murders with guns took place. You are going to find that they happened in your meccas of liberal anti-gun bliss. You are proving over and over the case for more guns, and less stirct ownership requirements for law abiding citizens and are too stupid to even see it, comedy gold.

 

[Amused]

Look you can pull out just the suicide all you want. But those reports talk about the homicides, gun usage, and even relationship which you can't deny unless you are calling the CDC a bunch of liars.

Classy, the CDC reports are not false, just one sided and do not offer a realistic contrasting comparison of defensive gun uses.

As for homicides, we have a higher rate than other western countries across the board. Not just firearms. Homicide is a people/culture problem, Classy, not a hardware problem. Guns do not make people kill others any more than cars make people crash or drive drunk.

Again, authoritarianism is a complete failure. Trying to ban/limit access to alcohol, drugs and sex failed completely. They did NOTHING to address the issues. ONLY education ever had an effect.

It is the same with firearms. A 500 year old technology that you CANNOT make go away. Banning or limiting access will have about the same effect it had on drugs and alcohol: None.

As for the usefulness of a firearm for self defense, I can attest to that personally. I would not be here today were it not for my right to be armed. And 1.5-3 million people EVERY YEAR, according to the Justice Dept, can say the same.

In short, no matter what you do, criminals will get guns. To disarm the law abiding is to merely put targets on them.

 

[classy]

Classy, what you FAIL to note is that a suicide is NO MORE LIKELY in a home with firearms than a home without.

Now this is tricky, try to pay attention: You are posting a stat that shows guns are the weapon of choice in suicide. NOT that guns CAUSE suicide. When no gun is available, people choose other ways BUT THE SUICIDE STILL OCCURS.

Guns do NOT make people kill themselves. Period.

Guns no more cause violence than cars cause accidents or drugs cause addictions. All require the intent and actions of humans.

You are taking the simplistic, authoritarian approach and blaming the inanimate object while absolving humans of all responsibility.

History has proven, time and time again, that this line of thinking is a complete failure.

Prohibition proved it.

The war on drugs proved it.

The abstinence movement proved it.

And the anti-gun movement has proved it on other countries and cities with gun bans. Banning guns NEVER lowers crime OR suicide rates.

And you know in leaving, let me just tear this post apart.

How do you know the person would still kill themselves without a gun? Maybe they wouldn't. You don't know that they would or not, no one knows that.

And all the other stuff is irelevant. Guns are a leading cause of death. What part of that you don't get. I don't know Amused, maybe instead of two friends shooting each other, maybe the duke it out, heal up the next day, and fix their friendship.

You can apply any comparison or analogy you like, but a lot of people are dying because someone has a gun.

I don't care about other countries, our culture is way different than any other on the planet. The same rules are not always the same here as elsewhere.

Maybe there is better solutions to fixing a problem than getting a gun to blow someone away. You guys are so clownish its a joke. You ain't Bob Lee Swagger and this is not damn movie.

Now call the CDC and call them a bunch of liars.

 

[Amused]

And you know in leaving, let me just tear this post apart.

How do you know the person would still kill themselves without a gun? Maybe they wouldn't. You don't know that they would or not, no one knows that.

And all the other stuff is irelevant. Guns are a leading cause of death. What part of that you don't get. I don't know Amused, maybe instead of two friends shooting each other, maybe the duke it out, heal up the next day, and fix their friendship.

You can apply any comparison or analogy you like, but a lot of people are dying because someone has a gun.

I don't care about other countries, our culture is way different than any other on the planet. The same rules are not always same here as elsewhere.

Maybe there is better solutions to fixing a problem than getting a gun to blow someone away. You guys are so clownish its a joke. You ain't Bob Lee Swagger and this is not damn movie.

Now call the CDC and call them a bunch of liars.

You tore nothing apart.

Again, I said to post the stat that a suicide is more likely in a home with firearms than a home without.

You failed. You know why? Because it's not true. A gun CANNOT form intent, Classy.

As for your argument against allowing guns, I ask this: How's that drug ban going? Hows the crack problem? Hows the meth problem?

Banning something won't make it go away, nor has ANY locality that banned guns seen ANY decrease in violence. Not one.

The CDC aren't liars, Classy. You just lack the ability to critically understand statistics and put them into perspective. You simplistically leap to "BAN THEM" when you hear people are harmed by firearms.

Again, how well did that work for drugs, alcohol and sex, Classy?

 

[mect]

Look you can pull out just the suicide all you want. But those reports talk about the homicides, gun usage, and even relationship which you can't deny unless you are calling the CDC a bunch of liars.

No one is calling the CDC liars, they are just appalled at your ability to interpret data. It's like a person releasing a balloon and saying, "Look, it is rising away from the earth, I've just disproved gravity!" Then others point out that it is really due to the air displaced by the balloon and its buoyancy, but the person just keeps saying, "It is rising away from the earth, gravity isn't real". See, the problem is that to make the point you want to make, the data must not be closely examined. You can't separate out all the specific deaths caused by guns, because if you begin to really examine the data, it is evident that truly accidental deaths caused by guns are extremely rare.

 

[PrinceofWands]

I don't care about Japan, Switzerland, or any other country. The CDC numbers show slearly gun ownership ain't no blessing. Guns are one of the leading causes of death. But its ok, I am sure you will email the CDC and tell them they don't know how to do their job. hehehehehehehehe

Actually they don't, in any way, as has been shown in numerous posts.

You just choose to believe what you choose to believe, regardless of the actual facts. The only person owned in this thread by the things you've posted is yourself.

 

[MotF Bane]

No one is calling the CDC liars, they are just appalled at your ability to interpret data. It's like a person releasing a balloon and saying, "Look, it is rising away from the earth, I've just disproved gravity!" Then others point out that it is really due to the air displaced by the balloon and its buoyancy, but the person just keeps saying, "It is rising away from the earth, gravity isn't real". See, the problem is that to make the point you want to make, the data must not be closely examined. You can't separate out all the specific deaths caused by guns, because if you begin to really examine the data, it is evident that truly accidental deaths caused by guns are extremely rare.

lol

 

[xj0hnx]

You tore nothing apart.

Again, I said to post the stat that a suicide is more likely in a home with firearms than a home without.

You failed. You know why? Because it's not true. A gun CANNOT form intent, Classy.

As for your argument against allowing guns, I ask this: How's that drug ban going? Hows the crack problem? Hows the meth problem?

Banning something won't make it go away, nor has ANY locality that banned guns seen ANY decrease in violence. Not one.

The CDC aren't liars, Classy. You just lack the ability to critically understand statistics and put them into perspective. You simplistically leap to "BAN THEM" when you hear people are harmed by firearms.

Again, how well did that work for drugs, alcohol and sex, Classy?

You're arguing with a turnip, at least you might as well be.

 

[classy]

You tore nothing apart.

Again, I said to post the stat that a suicide is more likely in a home with firearms than a home without.

You failed. You know why? Because it's not true. A gun CANNOT form intent, Classy.

As for your argument against allowing guns, I ask this: How's that drug ban going? Hows the crack problem? Hows the meth problem?

Banning something won't make it go away, nor has ANY locality that banned guns seen ANY decrease in violence. Not one.

The CDC aren't liars, Classy. You just lack the ability to critically understand statistics and put them into perspective. You simplistically leap to "BAN THEM" when you hear people are harmed by firearms.

Again, how well did that work for drugs, alcohol and sex, Classy?

Understand stats? They are black and white, plain as day. I read most of the entire report. The numbers are so clear and they are listed in graphs with clear explanation. You have a problem with them, I don't. The CDC is not pro-gun or anti-gun. As for suicide, I included those numbers, because its just not accidental shootings we have to deal with when a gun is in the home. I am ok with people being pro-gun, what I don't like is people being fracking liars and making shit up.

 

[xj0hnx]

I am ok with people being pro-gun, what I don't like is people being fracking liars and making shit up.

Don't hate yourself too much, loonymoony will rant about how your self-hate is going to turn you into a republican.

 

[classy]

You tore nothing apart.

Again, I said to post the stat that a suicide is more likely in a home with firearms than a home without.

Report from 2007

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/17/health/17risk.html

When they looked at the 15 states with the highest firearm ownership, the researchers found that twice as many people committed suicide as in the six states with the lowest firearm ownership. The population in each group of states was about the same, the researchers said.

http://journals.lww.com/jtrauma/pag...=2007&issue=04000&article=00031&type=abstract

Results: US residents of all ages and both sexes are more likely to die from suicide when they live in areas where more households contain firearms. A positive and significant association exists between levels of household firearm ownership and rates of firearm and overall suicide; rates of nonfirearm suicide were not associated with levels of household firearm ownership.

Conclusion: Household firearm ownership levels are strongly associated with higher rates of suicide, consistent with the hypothesis that the availability of lethal means increases the rate of completed suicide.

You can buy the whole abstract yourself. Let me guess, either I have misinterpreted their findings, or these people are liars too. Or excuse me, they have an anti-gun agenda.

 

[nick1985]

classy, guns are proven to stop 2.5 million crimes a year. What is more important, stopping those crimes and upholding the Constitution, or banning guns because some emo kids chose firearms as their method for suicide?



Also,

"Gun suicides outnumber gun homicides. In 1999, there were 16,599 gun suicides compared to 10,828 firearm homicides (National Center for Injury Prevention and Control). Guns were the most common method of suicide (57% in 1999).

If we could magically make all guns disappear, would the number of suicides decrease? Probably not. Excerpted from Dr. Gary Kleck's, Targeting Guns: Firearms and Their Control (p 285, Walter de Gruyter, Inc., New York 1997):

The full body of relevant studies indicates that firearm availability measures are significantly and positively associated with rates of firearm suicide, but have no significant association with rates of total suicide.

Of thirteen studies, nine found a significant association between gun levels and rates of gun suicide, but only one found a significant association between gun levels and rates of total suicides. The only study to find a measure of "gun availability" significantly associated with total suicide...used a measure of gun availability known to be invalid.

This pattern of results supports the view that where guns are less common, there is complete substitution of other methods of suicide, and that, while gun levels influence the choice of suicide method, they have no effect on the number of people who die in suicides.

As further evidence that gun ownership is not correlated with total suicide rates see international violent death rate table. For example, Japan, where gun ownership is extremely low (less than 1% of households), total suicide is higher than in a high-gun ownership country like the United States.

From 1972 to 1995 the per capita gun stock in the U. S. increased by more than 50%. Gary Kleck in Targeting Guns (p 265) comments on this huge increase: "This change might be viewed as a sort of inadvertent natural experiment, in which Americans launched a massive and unprecedented civilian armaments program, probably the largest in world history. During this same period, the U.S. suicide rate was virtually constant, fluctuating only slightly within the narrow range from 11.8 to 13.0 suicides per 100,000 population...At most...this huge increase in the gun stock might have caused a mild increase in the percentage of suicides committed with guns, which shifted from 53.3 in 1972 to 60.3 in 1994, and thus a mild corresponding increase in the gun suicide rate." (See gun supply chart).

In 1972 the suicide rate was 11.9 per 100,000. After this "arms build-up" the total suicide rate remained unchanged at 11.9 in 1995."

 

[mect]

"Conclusion: Household firearm ownership levels are strongly associated with higher rates of suicide, consistent with the hypothesis that the availability of lethal means increases the rate of completed suicide. "

That wording is awesome. Firearm ownership associated with rates of suicide (note for the population of this study). Conclusion: Who'd a thunk! People with a way to kill themselves are more likely to do so successfully!

 

[Amused]

Report from 2007

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/17/health/17risk.html





http://journals.lww.com/jtrauma/pag...=2007&issue=04000&article=00031&type=abstract



You can buy the whole abstract yourself. Let me guess, either I have misinterpreted their findings, or these people are liars too. Or excuse me, they have an anti-gun agenda.

Again, Classy, you fail reading comprehension.

Firearms are used in only 5 percent of attempts, the study said, even though, with a 90 percent fatality rate, they cause more than half the deaths. So even a small decline in the number of attempts involving guns could mean many fewer deaths, the researchers said.

The gun does not form the intent, even though it DOES get the job done better.

Your point is moot, as is this study. In fact, out of seven studies I have seen, this is the only one to come to this finding.

 

[ShawnD1]

Shawn, lol, you are scrambling babe. hehehehehehe You can talk about kidnapping and all the other stuff, those CDC numbers just own. Tell me again, how more guns are suppose to help.

Guns are used to kill bad people.

Washington DC has a gun ban, and this was the murder capital of the US for a few years.
New York City has a gun ban. Way too many bad people there too.

Vermont has some of the most relaxed gun laws in the US, and yet the crime rate is very low. Across the board, crime in Vermont is below the national average. Violent crimes in Vermont are about 1/4 the national average.
http://nicic.gov/features/statestats/?state=vt
Maybe people in Vermont are just genetically better than the rest of the US. Who knows.