Would banning firearms lower murder and suicide rates?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

marincounty

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2005
3,227
5
76
I'd also like to point out the bias of the study's authors, who likely had their conclusions before they did the study.

* Don B. Kates (LL.B., Yale, 1966) is an American criminologist and constitutional 
lawyer associated with the Pacific Research Institute, San Francisco. 

Text

'Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy', is a think tank founded in 1979 whose stated vision is the promotion of "the principles of individual freedom and personal responsibility. The Institute believes these principles are best encouraged through policies that emphasize a free economy, private initiative, and limited government." The institute is a 501(c)3 non-profit corporation, and had $4.9M in revenue in 2005. [1] The Pacific Research Institute has associated with other think-tanks like the American Enterprise Institute and the Cato Institute.

PRI head Sally Pipes, a Canadian residing in the United States, frequently speaks and writes against universal health care. Her bio lists as healthcare topics she had addressed "the false promise of a single-payer system as exists in Canada, pharmaceutical pricing, solving the problem of the uninsured, and strategies for consumer-driven health care." She also authored a 2004 book titled, "Miracle Cure: How to Solve America?s Health Care Crisis and Why Canada Isn?t the Answer." [1
Corporations (contributing to them)
Altria
ChevronTexaco
Cypress Semiconductor
Exxon Mobil Corporation
Freedom Communications
Microsoft
Pfizer
PhRMA
SBC (now AT&T)
Verizon
White House Writers Group
Text
Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy has received $530,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998.

Publishes an annual "Index of Leading Environmental Indicators" on Earth Day, asserting that the environment is improving and there's no need to worry about global warming. The index is a collaborative project with the American Enterprise Institute.
Source: Pacific Research Institute documentary "A Convenient Fiction" website 2007




 Gary Mauser (Ph.D., University of California, Irvine, 1970) is a Canadian crimi-
nologist and university professor at Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC Canada. 

Text

Gary Mauser is Professor at the Faculty of Business Administration and the Institute for Urban Canadian Research Studies at Simon Fraser University in Burnaby, British Columbia.

He is also a Senior Fellow with the conservative Canadian think tank, the Fraser Institute. His particular research interest is in critiquing gun control policies as being ineffective at reducing crime. His work has been criticised for inaccurately citing statistics

Text
Above is a graph of the "horrifying increase in violent crime over the past decade" in Canada. If you compare the violent crime rate now with that of ten years ago, you'll see that it has actually gone down. There has been no increase, let alone a "horrifying" one. And guess where this graph comes from? His own Fraser Institute Study.. He even refers to it in his letter.

And look at the graph in Mauser's paper immediately before the one showing violent crime rates. In his letter Mauser writes "in contrast violent crime and homicide rates are plummeting in the United States". But his own graph shows that homicide rates are dropping in Canada in parallel with those in the US.

. Of course, my readers will be well aware that Ayres and Donohue's more comprehensive study has shown that crime has actually tended to fall faster in the states without carry laws, and that Lott's results go away when his coding errors are corrected. Mauser is well aware of Ayres and Donohue's work---we discussed it at great length in 2002 and 2003 on the firearmsregprof list, a mail list that Mauser is on, and yet he does not mention their work at all. In fact he doesn't cite any critics of Lott at all


Also, don't forget: George W. Bush, Harvard MBA
 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,441
86
91
I think it would increase both murders and suicides. The murder rate would increase because thugs know the general populace would not be armed. Regular law abiding citizens would get depressed from all the thug killings that they may start killing themselves at an increasing rate.

Yeh simplistic answer. But as Gonad pointed out... the problems are with people.

Here in Tennessee we have a C&C law. There was a big fight in the state legislature as to whether these concealed weapons would be allowed in public parks. It was passed but local governments have the ability to opt out of state law. In Hendersonville, TN there was already an armed robbery in one of the parks that opted out. The thugs knew no one would be packing. A one time anomaly or a new trend? Only time will tell.
 

BurnItDwn

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
26,368
1,879
126
Originally posted by: marincounty
Originally posted by: AAjax
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
There are way too many in circulation to ban them. In addition most of the time those who use guns to commit premeditated crimes have illegal guns so they can't be back to the Perp.

As far as suicides are concerned, most aren't done by firearms and if a person wants to off himself there are plenty of ways to do it without a gun.

What would be lowered is accidental deaths by fire arms, especially amongst children but what's a few children's lives when it comes to the Second Amendment.

More children are killed in bicycle accidents than gun accidents. But what what are a few children's lives when compared to the bicycle industry?

:confused:

Bullshit. Unless you show some credible links you are a liar.

Text

698 bicyclists reportedly died on US roads in 2007.

In a typical year over 90 percent of cyclists killed on US roads die in crashes with motor vehicles.

Text
Nationwide for 2006, gun violence killed 3,218 American children and teens ages 19 and under, an increase of 6.3% from the nationwide 2005 total of 3,027 this means that in the U.S. an average of 9 young people are killed each day by guns.

(Numbers obtained from CDC National Center for Health Statistics mortality report online, 2009.)

"Gun accidents" is a very very small subset of "gun violence." AAjax is indeed correct about "gun accidents."
Very biased source, however, I believe it to be accurate information.
University of Michigan source, I'd think more than credible.

Death by bicycle is about 3x as high as "accidental" gun death ....
but ... add "intentional" gun violence ... and it's a completely different story.

It would be great if we could rid the world of all guns, but, banning them would not "rid us of them." I'm keeping my gun. I don't "need" one, but it's my right to have one.
 

miketheidiot

Lifer
Sep 3, 2004
11,060
1
0
Originally posted by: BurnItDwn
Originally posted by: marincounty
Originally posted by: AAjax
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
There are way too many in circulation to ban them. In addition most of the time those who use guns to commit premeditated crimes have illegal guns so they can't be back to the Perp.

As far as suicides are concerned, most aren't done by firearms and if a person wants to off himself there are plenty of ways to do it without a gun.

What would be lowered is accidental deaths by fire arms, especially amongst children but what's a few children's lives when it comes to the Second Amendment.

More children are killed in bicycle accidents than gun accidents. But what what are a few children's lives when compared to the bicycle industry?

:confused:

Bullshit. Unless you show some credible links you are a liar.

Text

698 bicyclists reportedly died on US roads in 2007.

In a typical year over 90 percent of cyclists killed on US roads die in crashes with motor vehicles.

Text
Nationwide for 2006, gun violence killed 3,218 American children and teens ages 19 and under, an increase of 6.3% from the nationwide 2005 total of 3,027 this means that in the U.S. an average of 9 young people are killed each day by guns.

(Numbers obtained from CDC National Center for Health Statistics mortality report online, 2009.)

"Gun accidents" is a very very small subset of "gun violence." AAjax is indeed correct about "gun accidents."
Very biased source, however, I believe it to be accurate information.
University of Michigan source, I'd think more than credible.

Death by bicycle is about 3x as high as "accidental" gun death ....
but ... add "intentional" gun violence ... and it's a completely different story.

It would be great if we could rid the world of all guns, but, banning them would not "rid us of them." I'm keeping my gun. I don't "need" one, but it's my right to have one.

it woudl get rid of them, it would just take a long time for the existing supply to dry up.


people always point to say, the DC gun ban as proof that gun bans fail, but is it really much of a gun ban when you already have illegal weapons essentially stockpiled and in possession of criminals, who have sources of more guns only a few minutes drive away in neighboring states. I have no real problem with guns (except large caliber rifles and fully auto, which i am inclined to put very strict limits on), but such stupid examples and rigged studies really don't give the pro-gun side much credibility. Its pretty clear that if you get rid of guns (completely) that crime will go down. The problem of course would be to effectively get rid of guns.
 

nobodyknows

Diamond Member
Sep 28, 2008
5,474
0
0
Originally posted by: BurnItDwn
Originally posted by: marincounty
Originally posted by: AAjax
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
There are way too many in circulation to ban them. In addition most of the time those who use guns to commit premeditated crimes have illegal guns so they can't be back to the Perp.

As far as suicides are concerned, most aren't done by firearms and if a person wants to off himself there are plenty of ways to do it without a gun.

What would be lowered is accidental deaths by fire arms, especially amongst children but what's a few children's lives when it comes to the Second Amendment.

More children are killed in bicycle accidents than gun accidents. But what what are a few children's lives when compared to the bicycle industry?

:confused:

Bullshit. Unless you show some credible links you are a liar.

Text

698 bicyclists reportedly died on US roads in 2007.

In a typical year over 90 percent of cyclists killed on US roads die in crashes with motor vehicles.

Text
Nationwide for 2006, gun violence killed 3,218 American children and teens ages 19 and under, an increase of 6.3% from the nationwide 2005 total of 3,027 this means that in the U.S. an average of 9 young people are killed each day by guns.

(Numbers obtained from CDC National Center for Health Statistics mortality report online, 2009.)

"Gun accidents" is a very very small subset of "gun violence." AAjax is indeed correct about "gun accidents."
Very biased source, however, I believe it to be accurate information.
University of Michigan source, I'd think more than credible.

Death by bicycle is about 3x as high as "accidental" gun death ....
but ... add "intentional" gun violence ... and it's a completely different story.

It would be great if we could rid the world of all guns, but, banning them would not "rid us of them." I'm keeping my gun. I don't "need" one, but it's my right to have one.

We're waiting for you MarinCounty, to admit your the one full of BS.

<crickets>
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
i always laugh when people say ban guns. i tell them to look at the UK where they are banning knives and some wanted to ban KITCHEN knives.
 

AAjax

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2001
3,798
0
0
Originally posted by: marincounty
Originally posted by: AAjax
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
There are way too many in circulation to ban them. In addition most of the time those who use guns to commit premeditated crimes have illegal guns so they can't be back to the Perp.

As far as suicides are concerned, most aren't done by firearms and if a person wants to off himself there are plenty of ways to do it without a gun.

What would be lowered is accidental deaths by fire arms, especially amongst children but what's a few children's lives when it comes to the Second Amendment.

More children are killed in bicycle accidents than gun accidents. But what what are a few children's lives when compared to the bicycle industry?

:confused:

Bullshit. Unless you show some credible links you are a liar.

Text

698 bicyclists reportedly died on US roads in 2007.

In a typical year over 90 percent of cyclists killed on US roads die in crashes with motor vehicles.

Text
Nationwide for 2006, gun violence killed 3,218 American children and teens ages 19 and under, an increase of 6.3% from the nationwide 2005 total of 3,027 this means that in the U.S. an average of 9 young people are killed each day by guns.

(Numbers obtained from CDC National Center for Health Statistics mortality report online, 2009.)

Well trying to argue a point with someone who has a 3rd grade reading comprehension level may be an uphill battle but here it go's

I said gun accidents, not deaths.

Ok?
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
Banning of anything does little to stop the behavior that was the reason for the banning.
If you want to lower murder rates not only from firearms but across the board then you have to solve the problem of why the person killed. Someone does not kill because they own a gun. I doubt anyone wakes up and says, oh I have a gun, I should go kill someone with it. Ban everything possible and people would still kill even if it was just sticks and stones. Instead focus on why people kill and why they think it is okay to kill and you solve a lot of problems and not just with murder rates.
 

AAjax

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2001
3,798
0
0
Originally posted by: Perknose
OP, why do you claim this is a Harvard study? Neither author nor any of the other contributors are in any way associated with Harvard.

Just asking, is all. Did you pull it out of your ass, or what?

From the PDF:

WOULD BANNING FIREARMS REDUCE MURDER AND SUICIDE?
A REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL AND SOME DOMESTIC EVIDENCE

DON B. KATES* AND GARY MAUSER**

* Don B. Kates (LL.B., Yale, 1966) is an American criminologist and constitutional
lawyer associated with the Pacific Research Institute, San Francisco. He may be contactedat dbkates@earthlink.net; 360-666-2688; 22608 N.E. 269th Ave., Battle Ground,
WA 98604.

** Gary Mauser (Ph.D., University of California, Irvine, 1970) is a Canadian criminologist
and university professor at Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC Canada.
He may be contacted at www.garymauser.net, mauser@sfu.ca, and 604-291-3652.

The Pacific Research Institute is a well known right wing organ.

The Pacific Research Institute (PRI) or officially the 'Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy', is a think tank founded in 1979 whose stated vision is the promotion of "the principles of individual freedom and personal responsibility. The Institute believes these principles are best encouraged through policies that emphasize a free economy, private initiative, and limited government." The institute is a 501(c)3 non-profit corporation, and had $4.9M in revenue in 2005. [1] The Pacific Research Institute has associated with other think-tanks like the American Enterprise Institute and the Cato Institute.

No Harvard found OP.

Shucks, you may have a point, though I found it on the Harvard Law server (in the URL)
 

Underclocked

Platinum Member
Oct 9, 1999
2,042
1
76
They'll have to pry my guns out of my hands with their cold dead fingers.

Shall not be infringed... pretty complex concept apparently.
 

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126
Originally posted by: miketheidiot
people always point to say, the DC gun ban as proof that gun bans fail, but is it really much of a gun ban when you already have illegal weapons essentially stockpiled and in possession of criminals, who have sources of more guns only a few minutes drive away in neighboring states. I have no real problem with guns (except large caliber rifles and fully auto, which i am inclined to put very strict limits on), but such stupid examples and rigged studies really don't give the pro-gun side much credibility. Its pretty clear that if you get rid of guns (completely) that crime will go down. The problem of course would be to effectively get rid of guns.

I'm not sure if the crime rate as a whole would go down - but murder in specific probably would. That seems to be the case in Britain after their comprehensive gun ban (see "Chapter 2 ? Extent and trends").

Of course it's pretty weak to conclude there's a direct relation between the gun ban and a rise in crime - many other factors including the shape of the nation's economy during that period play into it.

UK Crime Statistics Hit Record High

In the UK, there are 2,034 offenses per 100,000 people, way ahead of second-place Austria at 1,677. The U.S. has a rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents, Canada has 935, Australia has 92, and South Africa has 1,609.

Yes ? the UK has a larger problem with violent crime than South Africa.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
Originally posted by: marincounty
I'd also like to point out the bias of the study's authors, who likely had their conclusions before they did the study.

* Don B. Kates (LL.B., Yale, 1966) is an American criminologist and constitutional 
lawyer associated with the Pacific Research Institute, San Francisco. 

Text

'Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy', is a think tank founded in 1979 whose stated vision is the promotion of "the principles of individual freedom and personal responsibility. The Institute believes these principles are best encouraged through policies that emphasize a free economy, private initiative, and limited government." The institute is a 501(c)3 non-profit corporation, and had $4.9M in revenue in 2005. [1] The Pacific Research Institute has associated with other think-tanks like the American Enterprise Institute and the Cato Institute.

PRI head Sally Pipes, a Canadian residing in the United States, frequently speaks and writes against universal health care. Her bio lists as healthcare topics she had addressed "the false promise of a single-payer system as exists in Canada, pharmaceutical pricing, solving the problem of the uninsured, and strategies for consumer-driven health care." She also authored a 2004 book titled, "Miracle Cure: How to Solve America?s Health Care Crisis and Why Canada Isn?t the Answer." [1
Corporations (contributing to them)
Altria
ChevronTexaco
Cypress Semiconductor
Exxon Mobil Corporation
Freedom Communications
Microsoft
Pfizer
PhRMA
SBC (now AT&T)
Verizon
White House Writers Group
Text
Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy has received $530,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998.

Publishes an annual "Index of Leading Environmental Indicators" on Earth Day, asserting that the environment is improving and there's no need to worry about global warming. The index is a collaborative project with the American Enterprise Institute.
Source: Pacific Research Institute documentary "A Convenient Fiction" website 2007




 Gary Mauser (Ph.D., University of California, Irvine, 1970) is a Canadian crimi-
nologist and university professor at Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC Canada. 

Text

Gary Mauser is Professor at the Faculty of Business Administration and the Institute for Urban Canadian Research Studies at Simon Fraser University in Burnaby, British Columbia.

He is also a Senior Fellow with the conservative Canadian think tank, the Fraser Institute. His particular research interest is in critiquing gun control policies as being ineffective at reducing crime. His work has been criticised for inaccurately citing statistics

Text
Above is a graph of the "horrifying increase in violent crime over the past decade" in Canada. If you compare the violent crime rate now with that of ten years ago, you'll see that it has actually gone down. There has been no increase, let alone a "horrifying" one. And guess where this graph comes from? His own Fraser Institute Study.. He even refers to it in his letter.

And look at the graph in Mauser's paper immediately before the one showing violent crime rates. In his letter Mauser writes "in contrast violent crime and homicide rates are plummeting in the United States". But his own graph shows that homicide rates are dropping in Canada in parallel with those in the US.

. Of course, my readers will be well aware that Ayres and Donohue's more comprehensive study has shown that crime has actually tended to fall faster in the states without carry laws, and that Lott's results go away when his coding errors are corrected. Mauser is well aware of Ayres and Donohue's work---we discussed it at great length in 2002 and 2003 on the firearmsregprof list, a mail list that Mauser is on, and yet he does not mention their work at all. In fact he doesn't cite any critics of Lott at all


Also, don't forget: George W. Bush, Harvard MBA

Does that mean 1. the study was made up, or 2. the data is cherry picked? Links?
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,029
2
81
Originally posted by: miketheidiot
Its pretty clear that if you get rid of guns (completely) that crime will go down. The problem of course would be to effectively get rid of guns.

I think prohibition of alcohol and now drugs proves beyond any doubt that we could never get rid of guns.
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
Originally posted by: miketheidiot
it woudl get rid of them, it would just take a long time for the existing supply to dry up.


people always point to say, the DC gun ban as proof that gun bans fail, but is it really much of a gun ban when you already have illegal weapons essentially stockpiled and in possession of criminals, who have sources of more guns only a few minutes drive away in neighboring states. I have no real problem with guns (except large caliber rifles and fully auto, which i am inclined to put very strict limits on), but such stupid examples and rigged studies really don't give the pro-gun side much credibility. Its pretty clear that if you get rid of guns (completely) that crime will go down. The problem of course would be to effectively get rid of guns.

thats just idiotic.

people do not cause crimes because they have guns. it would do nothing to reduce crime at all. in fact im willing to bet it would go up severly since criminals wouldnt be the ones giving up the guns.

ok. say we get ride of all the guns. Knife crimes would skyrocket.

banning guns, knives, bats or whatever is not going to reduce crime.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
Originally posted by: waggy
Originally posted by: miketheidiot
it woudl get rid of them, it would just take a long time for the existing supply to dry up.


people always point to say, the DC gun ban as proof that gun bans fail, but is it really much of a gun ban when you already have illegal weapons essentially stockpiled and in possession of criminals, who have sources of more guns only a few minutes drive away in neighboring states. I have no real problem with guns (except large caliber rifles and fully auto, which i am inclined to put very strict limits on), but such stupid examples and rigged studies really don't give the pro-gun side much credibility. Its pretty clear that if you get rid of guns (completely) that crime will go down. The problem of course would be to effectively get rid of guns.

thats just idiotic.

people do not cause crimes because they have guns. it would do nothing to reduce crime at all. in fact im willing to bet it would go up severly since criminals wouldnt be the ones giving up the guns.

ok. say we get ride of all the guns. Knife crimes would skyrocket.

banning guns, knives, bats or whatever is not going to reduce crime.

Correct. But this is because we are a reactive society. In fact, I would say as a race, we are. It is simply a cycle to give those in power something to campaign on. Ban guns, then all of a sudden deaths by <insert something legal here> will increase. Then THAT will be the news. "Here ye hear ye! Deaths by <the new thing> increased 23%! We need to fight this <new thing>!"

Its never ending. We as humans like a cause, and we dont have a history of actually fixing the problem, but rather we treat the symptom. Then the problem morphs and new symptoms of the same problem arise in a new and shiny color. But it all comes down to the same problem:

hate and intolerance.
 

Perknose

Forum Director & Omnipotent Overlord
Forum Director
Oct 9, 1999
46,927
10,791
147
Originally posted by: Underclocked
They'll have to pry my guns out of my hands with their cold dead fingers.

Shall not be infringed... pretty complex concept apparently.

Lol, Richard, damn good to see you posting here, but you got the quote wrong. :p

Folks, most of you probably don't know, but underclocked was the guy who FIRST hipped ALL of us to Value America.

Prolonged and gleeful looting of same ensued! :thumbsup:

 

BeauJangles

Lifer
Aug 26, 2001
13,941
1
0
Originally posted by: waggy
Originally posted by: miketheidiot
it woudl get rid of them, it would just take a long time for the existing supply to dry up.


people always point to say, the DC gun ban as proof that gun bans fail, but is it really much of a gun ban when you already have illegal weapons essentially stockpiled and in possession of criminals, who have sources of more guns only a few minutes drive away in neighboring states. I have no real problem with guns (except large caliber rifles and fully auto, which i am inclined to put very strict limits on), but such stupid examples and rigged studies really don't give the pro-gun side much credibility. Its pretty clear that if you get rid of guns (completely) that crime will go down. The problem of course would be to effectively get rid of guns.

thats just idiotic.

people do not cause crimes because they have guns. it would do nothing to reduce crime at all. in fact im willing to bet it would go up severly since criminals wouldnt be the ones giving up the guns.

ok. say we get ride of all the guns. Knife crimes would skyrocket.

banning guns, knives, bats or whatever is not going to reduce crime.

I agree with you, except in one case: suicides. Studies have shown that with the presence of firearms, the chances of a person with suicidal thoughts actually killing themselves goes through the roof because a gun is an "easy" solution. Pull the trigger and it's over.

Now, before anybody jumps down my throat, guns of course aren't the only problem. There was a study a few years ago that focused on one bridge in Washington state (I believe). Anyway, this place was a jumping hot-spot. The town erected a suicide barrier and, despite the fact there is another bridge only a few miles away, the number of suicides plunged.

When most people go to kill themselves, they look for an easy answer. If something happens to prevent that first attempt from working, the rate of a second attempt is radically lower. Hence guns present a real problem when they're readily accessible: People use them to blow their heads off.

I have a feeling that the same sort of thing happens elsewhere, but to a much lesser degree. Carrying a weapon, particularly a firearm, emboldens people I believe and may lead to crimes being committed that wouldn't otherwise happen. There's no evidence to show that, and I'm certainly not suggesting that we should just ban firearms.

It's just food for thought.
 

Carmen813

Diamond Member
May 18, 2007
3,189
0
76
Well, I'm convinced. Rather than universal healthcare, I now support universal gun ownership, including a public option that basically hands out military firearms to those who cannot afford them. I'm sure this will have a net positive impact on crime.


P.S. Dibs on a M-14.
 
Aug 23, 2000
15,509
1
81
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
There are way too many in circulation to ban them. In addition most of the time those who use guns to commit premeditated crimes have illegal guns so they can't be back to the Perp.

As far as suicides are concerned, most aren't done by firearms and if a person wants to off himself there are plenty of ways to do it without a gun.

What would be lowered is accidental deaths by fire arms, especially amongst children but what's a few children's lives when it comes to the Second Amendment.

How many children do you think are killed every year by firearms?

It's propbably less than you think. Most groups that oppose fireams use studies that classify "children" as being between 0-18 and even sometimes 21 years old.
They also do not differentiate between youths that are killed in gang related violence.
The reality is the numbers gun control groups use are false.
http://www.tincher.to/deaths.htm
 
Aug 23, 2000
15,509
1
81
Originally posted by: miketheidiot


people always point to say, the DC gun ban as proof that gun bans fail, but is it really much of a gun ban when you already have illegal weapons essentially stockpiled and in possession of criminals, who have sources of more guns only a few minutes drive away in neighboring states. I have no real problem with guns (except large caliber rifles and fully auto, which i am inclined to put very strict limits on), but such stupid examples and rigged studies really don't give the pro-gun side much credibility. Its pretty clear that if you get rid of guns (completely) that crime will go down. The problem of course would be to effectively get rid of guns.

Living up to your name.
Go do some research on crime in England. Removing guns does not remove crime.
 

marincounty

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2005
3,227
5
76
Originally posted by: AAjax
Originally posted by: marincounty
Originally posted by: AAjax
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
There are way too many in circulation to ban them. In addition most of the time those who use guns to commit premeditated crimes have illegal guns so they can't be back to the Perp.

As far as suicides are concerned, most aren't done by firearms and if a person wants to off himself there are plenty of ways to do it without a gun.

What would be lowered is accidental deaths by fire arms, especially amongst children but what's a few children's lives when it comes to the Second Amendment.

More children are killed in bicycle accidents than gun accidents. But what what are a few children's lives when compared to the bicycle industry?

:confused:

Bullshit. Unless you show some credible links you are a liar.

Text

698 bicyclists reportedly died on US roads in 2007.

In a typical year over 90 percent of cyclists killed on US roads die in crashes with motor vehicles.

Text
Nationwide for 2006, gun violence killed 3,218 American children and teens ages 19 and under, an increase of 6.3% from the nationwide 2005 total of 3,027 this means that in the U.S. an average of 9 young people are killed each day by guns.

(Numbers obtained from CDC National Center for Health Statistics mortality report online, 2009.)

Well trying to argue a point with someone who has a 3rd grade reading comprehension level may be an uphill battle but here it go's

I said gun accidents, not deaths.

Ok?

Okay, I was wrong. You said gun accidents, not deaths. Gun accidents-642 (in 2006).
Bicycle accidents-698 (in 2007).

How many children use guns daily versus using a bicycle?

And let's not talk about the 16,883 suicides by gun in 2006.

My reading comprehension is fine. Maybe you can comprehend all of the carnage caused by America's gun culture?

And your article is slanted BS put out by pro-gun hacks.
 

bloodugly

Golden Member
Apr 27, 2004
1,187
0
0
Originally posted by: marincounty
Originally posted by: AAjax
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
There are way too many in circulation to ban them. In addition most of the time those who use guns to commit premeditated crimes have illegal guns so they can't be back to the Perp.

As far as suicides are concerned, most aren't done by firearms and if a person wants to off himself there are plenty of ways to do it without a gun.

What would be lowered is accidental deaths by fire arms, especially amongst children but what's a few children's lives when it comes to the Second Amendment.

More children are killed in bicycle accidents than gun accidents. But what what are a few children's lives when compared to the bicycle industry?

:confused:

Bullshit. Unless you show some credible links you are a liar.

Text

698 bicyclists reportedly died on US roads in 2007.

In a typical year over 90 percent of cyclists killed on US roads die in crashes with motor vehicles.

Text
Nationwide for 2006, gun violence killed 3,218 American children and teens ages 19 and under, an increase of 6.3% from the nationwide 2005 total of 3,027 this means that in the U.S. an average of 9 young people are killed each day by guns.

(Numbers obtained from CDC National Center for Health Statistics mortality report online, 2009.)

What I don't get is including 18-19 yr olds in these stats. By law these are adults. I'd also love to see what the numbers are outside of inner-city areas as far as murder among the teen age group with guns. Just curious.
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
The real way to stop the rates is to reduce poverty. Seal the border, and stop letting any more uneducated/unskilled migrants than we need for labor come in. Stop rewarding poor people who pop out multiple kids that are destined to beat up kids on a bus or end up in prison with larger welfare checks for each new kid.