Oh BOY, the Ignorant Foreign Anti-Gunner Store is having a two-for-one sale!
I’ll start with @egalitarian-metalhead’s comment and then address @stereoslut’s paranoid ranting in turn.
If you don’t have a gun, and you want to kill someone, you choose a knife.
Or, you know, any number of deadly blunt objects. OH, and bombs. You also disingenously skipped over the part where they go get a cheap, unlicensed gun because banning shit doesn’t keep criminals from getting those things.
It’s also much harder to go on a killing spree with a knife ( if you bring up that recent one, fuck you, because they are so incredibly rare and you just want an argument to have an argument).
“Don’t mention the recent knife attack because it puts a hole in my argument and I don’t like that!”
No, sir - fuck you. Not only are knife attacks NOT the only way mass killings have been achieved without guns, but they tend to have body counts in the double digits as well as leaving just as many people horribly injured.
After every mass shooting anti-gun groups blame the availability of firearms and promote their standard list of gun laws whether relevant or not. But guns are just one tool of mass murder, not the most efficient tool, and NOT a motivation. i.e. no one suddenly realizes that they can legally buy a gun, and because of it decide to go to the mall and murder everyone they see.
The fact is that a murderer decides to commit murder and THEN chooses his tool from what is available. They often do choose a gun of one type or another, but if guns are not available there are many other effective weapons that are. And as can be seen below, the largest mass murders in every category were committed not with firearms, but with explosives.The main reason for this gruesome statistic is the same lesson learned by the armies of the world and the major terrorist groups; firearms are designed for personal defense, and ordinance (explosives) are many times more effective for attacking a large force or group of people.
Worst School Massacre in US history: Bath, Michigan School Massacre. 1927. Murder accomplished with explosives. 44 victims (equal to the Columbine and Virginia Tech massacres combined).
Worst Domestic Terrorist Attack in US History: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building bombing. 4/19/95. Murder accomplished with a rental truck full of fertilizer based explosives. 168 dead (including many children in an onsite day care).
Worst Foreign based Terrorist Attack in US History: September 11, 2001 attacks on NYC, PA, Pentagon. Murder accomplished with box cutters and commerical airliners. ~3,000 people dead.
Arson, Stabbing Rampage in Seoul South Korea : 10/20/2008. 6 people dead, 5 from stabbing. 7 others wounded, 4 seriously. An angry man felt people “looked down on him.”
Anti-police stabbing spree in Shanghai, China: 7/2008. 6 Police Officers stabbed to death, 4 wounded. 28 year old man angry at police attacked a police station with a knife.
Akihabara Massacre, Chiyoda City, Tokyo, Japan: 6/8/2008. 7 people killed (3 struck by car, 4 by stabbing), many more injured. Man slammed into a crowd with his car, then jumped out and began stabbing people to death.
18 year old slashes 4 to death in Sitka, Alaska, US: 3/25/2008. 4 people killed. 18 year old (old enough to purchase a rifle over the counter) kills 4 people, related to him, with a 5 inch knife.
Stabbing Spree kills 2, Tsuchiura, Japan: 3/23/2008. 2 killed, 7 wounded. Man “just wanted to kill anyone.”
Stabbing spree wounds 41, 6 seriously in Berlin Train Station:5/26/2006. 41 wounded, 6 seriously. Thankfully no one died in this attack, but not for lack of trying on the part of the drunk 16 year old.
4 killed in stabbing spree in London, UK: 9/2004. 4 killed, 2 wounded. Mentally ill man attacks mostly older people.
6 killed over Xbox dispute in Deltona, Florida, US: 8/6/2004. 6 killed. 4 men (all old enough to legally purchase firearms) bludgeon 6 people to death with baseball bats over purloined Xbox.
Daegu subway fire, Daegu, South Korea: 2/18/2003. 198 killed, 147 injured. A 56 year old unemployed taxi driver, dissatisfied with his medical treatment, sets fire to a crowded train.
Osaka School Massacre, Osaka Japan: 6/8/2001. 8 children dead, 13 other children and 2 teachers wounded. Committed by 37 year old former janitor armed with a kitchen knife.
You also don’t seem to be capable of thinking that a stressed out teacher won’t reach for their gun if pushed too hard by a particularly bad student.
And you seem incapable of determining the difference between a hypothetical and an actual event.
Is it possible? Of course it is. Just like it’s currently possible for that same stressed out teacher to simply bring a gun to school and do the exact same thing - only, they don’t seem to be doing that. Believe it or not, going on a mass shooting is NOT the way the vast majority of people react to stress.
It’s not even the way the vast majority of those “psycho redneck ammosexual” gun owners respond to stress.
I’ll also ask you this, will every teacher get taught how to use their gun? Will every teacher who isn’t eligible to own a gun (medical reasons, etc.) just be fired because they can’t have a gun, no matter how good of a teacher they are? Will every teacher who refuses to take a gun be fired because they don’t want to carry a gun with them? There are more questions and even more variables that all equate to one answer: people won’t want to become teachers. As someone that wanted to be a teacher for a very long time, if even just one person had to carry a gun in a school, I would avoid them like the plague.
Who said anything about arming every single teacher? Or firing the ones that can’t legally own a firearm? In fact - since the factors that would bar an individual from owning a firearm are a criminal background or severe mental health issues that make them a danger to themselves or others, why the fuck would they be teaching in the first place?
And again, “what about the teachers who don’t want to be armed”, who said they’d be forced to be? And question - if a CWP is good enough for an individual to concealed carry out in public, why would schools not allow staff with a valid CWP and training to carry? According to you, the scarcity of knife attacks allows you to dismiss them as non-issues, does that logic apply to how many gun crimes are EVER committed by individuals with CWP licenses?
People wouldn’t want to be teachers? Too bad. You wouldn’t want to be a teacher? TOO fucking BAD. Suddenly your comfort trumps trained, licensed adults on campuses, where the “gun free” zones guarantee none of the victims have any chance of defending themselves? Frankly, I don’t give a fuck about your “people won’t want to be teachers” argument.
Shotguns are legal in the UK, so please tell me why you don’t get school shootings with shotguns in my country. Or rather, haven’t had a single school shooting since 1996. Your arguments all fall flat.
See this is a fun qualifier because it allows you to weed out *all* other mass killings comitted with weapons other than guns - see the above point, that guns are less efficient than bombs - like the 2016 murder-suicide in Spalding, the 2010 Cumbria shootings, and the 2005 London bombings (700+ dead).
Furthermore, it’s interesting that you bring up the 1996 school shooting and fail to take into account that, like I’ve said, being a GUN FREE zone assured that nobody inside had any chance of stopping him - and waiting for the police took far longer because the shooter cut the lines to all the houses across the street from the school, which also serviced the school itself.
Knives were used in more than 14,000 robberies in the UK in 2007 alone.
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/violent-crime/violent-crime
If the mantra “more guns equal more death and fewer guns equal less death” were true, broad cross-national comparisons should show that nations with higher gun ownership per capita consistently have more death. Nations with higher gun ownership rates, however, do not have higher murder or suicide rates than those with lower gun ownership. Indeed many high gun ownership nations have much lower murder rates.
http://hominishostilis.tumblr.com/post/146703833678/ancaporado-thats-a-non-gang-firearms-homicide
http://hominishostilis.tumblr.com/post/146558798288/fast-facts-so-you-can-educate-yourself-a-tiny-bit
http://hominishostilis.tumblr.com/post/145535681943/whatdoallthesewordsmean-therevenantrising
http://hominishostilis.tumblr.com/post/140246490408/cerebralzero-poedameron-tony-cerebralzero
“Your arguments all fall flat”, oh the irony.
This next bit is directed to @stereoslut:
“Putting my two cents in as both a citizen of the US and UK - guns are fucking stupid.”
Thankfully, your opinion on what is “stupid” isn’t a qualifier for our constitutional rights.
“Yes it wouldn’t be easy to ban guns altogether but if it saved a few children’s lives from a school shooting, that’s worth it in my book. You realize that they put this procedure into motion in Australia right? Twenty years ago Australia passed legislation banning guns following a mass shooting known as the Port Arthur massacre. You know how many shootings there have been since then? Zero.”
Whenever an anti-gunner brings up Australia as a “gotcha” argument in favor of banning guns, you know they don’t know jack shit about what they’re talking about.
LOL why do you anti-gun Einsteins always point to Australia?
[this segment brought to you by @lee-enfeel ]
People die Australia as a result of firearms violence at almost the same rate they did prior to the firearms act, and some sources state that more than a quarter million illicit firearms exist in Australia currently.
The total firearms death rate in 1995 - the year before the massacre and the laws introduced - was 2.6 per 100,000 people. The total firearms murder rate that year was 0.3/100,000. From 1980-1995, Australian firearms deaths dropped from 4.9/100,000-2.6/100,000 without the implementation of firearms laws. This is a rate of decline that has remained fairly constant; Looking at 1996-2014, in which the rate has dropped from 2.6-0.86, it shows that the decline has been slower in a longer period of time since the law’s passing. Likewise, homicides declined more quickly in the 15 years prior to the firearms laws (0.8-0.3) than in the 18 years since it (0.3-0.1). This just indicates that firearms deaths haven’t been noticeably affected by the legislation you’ve claimed has done so much to decrease gun crime.
It should also be noted that around the same time, New Zealand experienced a similar mass shooting, but did not change their existing firearms laws, which remain fairly lax; even moreso than some American states like California, New York, or Connecticut. Despite this, their firearms crime rate has declined fairly steadily as well, and they haven’t experienced a mass shooting since.
The “australia banned guns and now they’re fine” argument is really old and really poorly put together. Gun control is little more than a pink band-aid on the sucking chest wound that is America’s social and economic problems. It’s a ‘quick fix’ issue used by politicians to skirt around solving the roots of the violence problem in the United States, which are primarily poverty, lack of opportunities, and lack of education.
You could ban guns tomorrow nationwide and gun violence and overall violent crime would not be reduced at all.
[this segment brought to you by cerebralzero]
In 2005 the head of the New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, Don Weatherburn,noted that the level of legal gun ownership in NSW increased in recent years, and that the 1996 legislation had had little to no effect on violence
In 2006, the lack of a measurable effect from the 1996 firearms legislation was reported in the British Journal of Criminology. Using ARIMA analysis, Dr Jeanine Baker and Dr Samara McPhedran found no evidence for an impact of the laws on homicide.
A study coauthored by Simon Chapman found declines in firearm‐related deaths before the law reforms accelerated after the reforms for total firearm deaths (p=0.04), firearm suicides (p=0.007) and firearm homicides (p=0.15), but not for the smallest category of unintentional firearm deaths, which increased.[43]
Subsequently, a study by McPhedran and Baker compared the incidence of mass shootings in Australia and New Zealand. Data were standardised to a rate per 100,000 people, to control for differences in population size between the countries and mass shootings before and after 1996/1997 were compared between countries. That study found that in the period 1980–1996, both countries experienced mass shootings. The rate did not differ significantly between countries.
Since 1996-1997, neither country has experienced a mass shooting event despite the continued availability of semi-automatic longarms in New Zealand. The authors conclude that “the hypothesis that Australia’s prohibition of certain types of firearms explains the absence of mass shootings in that country since 1996 does not appear to be supported… if civilian access to certain types of firearms explained the occurrence of mass shootings in Australia (and conversely, if prohibiting such firearms explains the absence of mass shootings), then New Zealand (a country that still allows the ownership of such firearms) would have continued to experience mass shooting events.”[44]
We see the same result in The UK.
The “cold hard fact” is that 99% of all our guns are NEVER USED IN A CRIME, and defensive gun use far, far outstrips gun crime. 80% of gun crime is gang-related, 60% of your gun deaths are SUICIDES, and almost no crime is committed with weapons that are legally owned.
http://hominishostilis.tumblr.com/post/146720063403/also
http://hominishostilis.tumblr.com/post/146703833678/ancaporado-thats-a-non-gang-firearms-homicide
http://hominishostilis.tumblr.com/post/146558798288/fast-facts-so-you-can-educate-yourself-a-tiny-bit
http://hominishostilis.tumblr.com/post/145535681943/whatdoallthesewordsmean-therevenantrising
http://hominishostilis.tumblr.com/post/140246490408/cerebralzero-poedameron-tony-cerebralzero
Gun control in Australia has been a complete failure.
There are more guns in Australia than before the buyback/ban.
From a report prepared for the Australian Parliament:
“The buyback resulted in more than 1 million firearms being handed in and destroyed, reducing gun ownership from 3.2 to 2.2 million guns. But since then there has been a steady increase in the number of privately owned guns. By 2010, the total number of privately owned guns was back to the level in 1996.
While Australia’s population grew by 19 percent between 1997 and 2010, the total number of guns soared by 45 percent. If gun control advocates are correct, gun crimes or suicides should have plunged in 1997 but gradually increased after that. But that is not the pattern that we observe.
The pattern from firearm suicides can be seen in Figure A.2 While it is true that firearm suicides did fall after the buyback, they was falling for an entire decade prior to the buyback. Indeed the rate of firearm suicides was falling at about the same rate after the buyback as they were before hand. After the buyback, there was no sudden drop and then an increase.
Figure B shows how homicides have varied over time. This pattern is again inconsistent with what gun control advocates would predict. There is more variability year to year than for suicides. Nonetheless, we can still make out the trend lines. Prior to 1996, there was already a clear downward in firearm homicides, and this pattern continued after the buyback. It is hence difficult to link the decline to the buyback. Again, as with suicides, both non-firearm and firearm homicides fell by similar amounts. In fact, the trend in non-firearms homicides shows a much larger decline between the pre- and post-buyback periods. This suggests that crime has been falling for other reasons. Note that the change in homicides doesn’t follow the change in gun ownership – there is no increase in homicides as gun ownership gradually increased. The reason that some people who look at this data for firearm suicides and homicides conclude that the buyback was beneficial comes from a simple specification error. They look at the average firearm suicide and homicide rates before and after the buyback, but don’t look carefully at the how these rates were declining before the buyback occurred.
Figure C illustrates the frequency of armed robbery before and after the gun buybacks.4 If armed robberies varied positively with the number of guns per capita, robbery should have fallen and then increased. Yet, the opposite happened: the armed robbery rate right soared right after the buyback and then gradually declined. Indeed, over the next eleven years, there is only one year after the buyback where the armed robbery rate was lower than it was in 1995, the year immediately before the buyback.”
Seven shot in the Monash University shooting in 2002.
Seven shot in Hectorville siege in 2011.
5 killed Hunt family in 2014.
Childers Palace Backpackers fire. 23rd of June 2000, Childers, Queensland. Arson attack by Robert Paul Long, which killed 15 international backpackers.
Churchill Fire 7 February 2009, Churchill, Victoria. Arson attack by Brendan Sokaluk that killed 10 people, during the Black Saturday bushfires period.
Lin family murders 18th of July 2009, North Epping, New South Wales. Blunt instrument attack that killed 5 members of the Lin family.
Quakers Hill Nursing Home Arsonry, 18 November 2011, Sydney, NSW
Logan shooting, 22 October 2014 Logan, Victoria
Sydney Siege, 15 - 16 December 2014, Sydney, NSW
Cairns child killings, December 2014
Douglas Crabbe - Truck driver deliberately crashed his truck into a hotel, killing five and badly wounding 16.
Russell Street Bombing - 23 wounded when a car bomb ignites outside a Police Building. One of the wounded, a female police officer, died later of injuries from the explosion.
Sydney Hilton bombing - Two garbage men were killed and 12 passers-by were injured by a bomb planted in a garbage bin outside the Sydney Hilton Hotel in 1978. A police officer who was wounded died later.
So first of all, get fucked because there’s literally nocorrelation between the ban and the decrease in homicides, robberies, or suicides, as per the Australian Crime Prevention Research study on the effects of the gun ban.
This is just a quick rundown and will focus mainly on Australia since people mention them the most:
Gun laws fall short in war on crime
“In 2005 the head of the New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, Don Weatherburn, noted that the level of legal gun ownership in NSW increased in recent years, and that the 1996 legislation had had little to no effect on violence”
The British Journal of Criminology
Gun Laws and Sudden Death: Did the Australian Firearms Legislation of 1996 Make a Difference?
“In 2006, the lack of a measurable effect from the 1996 firearms legislation was reported in the British Journal of Criminology. Using ARIMA analysis, Dr Jeanine Baker and Dr Samara McPhedran found no evidence for an impact of the laws on homicide.”
Social Science Research Network SSRN
Mass Shootings in Australia and New Zealand: A Descriptive Study of Incidence
“That study found that in the period 1980–1996, both countries experienced mass shootings. The rate did not differ significantly between countries. Since 1996-1997,neither country has experienced a mass shooting event despite the continued availability of semi-automatic longarms in New Zealand. The authors conclude that “the hypothesis that Australia’s prohibition of certain types of firearms explains the absence of mass shootings in that country since 1996 does not appear to be supported… if civilian access to certain types of firearms explained the occurrence of mass shootings in Australia (and conversely, if prohibiting such firearms explains the absence of mass shootings), then New Zealand (a country that still allows the ownership of such firearms) would have continued to experience mass shooting events.”
Australian Institute of Criminology
Comparing international trends in recorded violent crime
The cost of the reduction in gun crime here is negligible compared to the increases in all the other crimes.
You can see the violent crime rate (sexual assault, homicide, robbery, and assault) for the United States has been dropping after looser gun laws and higher ownership. England & Wales on the other hand has seen an increase after their ban, along with Australia.Unfortunately, they didnt continue to track these trends past 2004 and compare them (nothing stopping you from getting the numbers yourself and punching them into a new chart), but at least they got 8 years worth of data and the overall 34 year trend to compare it too.
Factors people ignore when pushing Australian, UK, or Japanese gun control
There are many factors anti-gun people like to ignore when propping up their smug “other countries” arguments. Some of those factors are:
Japan, Australia, and the UK are island nations with no bordering countries
Guns and other illegal things like drugs are very difficult to smuggle in compared to the ease of connected countries like USA and Mexico
Different politics and policies
Different issues concerning the country and people
Different history of firearms and civilian ownership and founding
Different rates of gun ownership and guns per capita even when adjusted for population
Different environmental and economic factors
UK and Australia still have firearm problems and home manufacturing
Other crimes are higher and rose after bans (Japan suicide, UK knives, etc)
The cost of reduced gun crime (gun crime goes down slightly, most other crimes increase greatly)
I keep hearing people say that the US should adopt Australia’s gun control policy and I don’t think they have really thought about the big picture of that plan.Australia had far less guns per person and people in their country did not live in a society that was brought up respecting The 2nd Amendment. The culture of Australia is very different than that of the culture of America when it comes to gun ownership and self defense.Because of this,the Australian government was able to buy back 631,000 guns at the estimated price of about $500,000,000. You read that correctly, 500 MILLION.And even after all of that, it still did nothing to prevent violent crime and criminals in Australia still have access to illegal guns, despite being an island country that isn’t bordered by other countries with high violent crime rates and rampant with illegal drug cartels.
There are over 360,000,000 legally owned firearms in America. If we go by Australia’s numbers ($792.39 per gun), these guns would cost our government$285,261,489,698.89to buy back. Almost 300 BILLION dollars, assuming that every gun owner voluntarily turns in their guns… Which is a very slim to nothing chance.
Another thing I notice is that any noticeable crime rate drops are often credited to recent gun control measures. But you cant really attribute the drops to the gun control laws when no one bothers to look at previous years crime rate trends. If crime is already dropping without gun control, how can you honestly attribute falling crime rates to gun control after you enact it? Look at the UK for example.
As you can see, England and Wales had already hit their recent all time high in crime and was in the process of their down trend when gun control was passed a year later in 1996. It eventually took them 9 more years to reach average crime levels back in the 80′s when they didnt have their gun bans and crime was much lower.
You may as well blame the weather for causing or reducing crime at this point. Also take into account how they never really mention other countries outside of Japan Australia or the UK. What of Russia? Switzerland? Canada? Mexico? Serbia? Yemen? Finland? There are many countries with total or severe bans with rampant crime including gun crime and there are countries with pretty lax laws with little crime.
They also act like gun crime is the single most important facet of crime in general. Gun crime is rather small everywhere compared to other forms like rape and general homicide including the USA when other crimes are much more common. People praise UK’s gun ban and credit it with dropping gun crime (even though looking at rates prior to ban shows a down trend already happening before the ban) as other crime goes up. People also don’t take into account the differences in crime rates between countries considered to be safe, and the USA.
Despite all our guns, our homicide rate is 4.7 Its not even double that of the UK who sits at 2.6.
The USA has 13x more guns per capita compared to the UK, with only 1.8x more homicide.
This is significant. If guns caused homicide, our rate compared to the UK should have the USA at 34.9 or 44.4 if we compare to Japan.
We would be the 9th and 5th most dangerous country in the world out of 218 countries, beating out Zimbabwe, South Africa Rwanda, Mexico, Nigeria, Colombia and other African and South American nations. Instead we are 111th place. Guns are clearly not the problem.
Australia is an island with very controlled ports that make it nearly impossible to smuggle goods - this isn’t the case with the US.
“So I said, “Just tell me how it really is guys, how do criminals get guns?”Agent Charles Mulham tossed his head as he asked, “Where to begin?”I replied, “How about with how much handguns go for on the black market?”
Agent Mulham said, “Well, a quality pistol like a Glock might go for double or triple retail. Lower-quality guns, however, are often worth only $100 or $200 more than retail.”
Agent Mulham and the other two agents—John Curtis and Jason Zamaloff—all weighed in and agreed there is no precise formula for what handguns go for on the street, but basically guns are so readily available the black-market price is typically just a few hundred dollars more than retail.”
It hasn’t worked for drugs - instead it’s generated a market that makes literal BILLIONS a year and moves so much product that it’s easily produced and moved. The “war on drugs” hasn’t even made a dent.
It hasn’t worked for alcohol - prohibition was such a massive failure that as a result of the black market created for alcohol when it was banned, organized crime not only skyrocketed, in some places entire cities were under the control of crime syndicates.
You’re also so focused on getting rid of the method that you’ve totally blown your ass out ignoring that when guns are illegal, crime continues with other easily attainable weapons, or illegal weapons are simply purchased and used.
Childer Palace Backpackers Hostel fire (arson; 15 dead)
Churchill Fire (arson; 10 dead)
Lin family muirders (blunt instrument; 5 dead)
Quakers Hill Nursing Home fire (arson; 11 dead)
Cairns child killings (stabbing; 8 dead)
Here are some more examples of mass murder done without guns from around the world:
Bath, Michigan - 45 dead and - 58 injured (bomb)
Oklahoma City, OK - 168 confirmed dead - 680+ injured (bomb)
Daegu, South Korea - 192 Dead and 151 injured (arson)
Denver, CO - 45 Dead - (bomb)
Cologne, Germany - 10 Dead - 25 injured (home-made flamethrower)
Apeldoorn, Netherlands - 8 dead - 10 injured (car)
Jerusalem, Israel - 4 Dead - 30+ injured (bulldozer)
Hebei, China - 17 Dead - 20-30 injured (tractor)
Shijiazhuang, China - 108 Dead - 38 injured (bomb)
New York City, New York - 87 Dead - 6 injured (arson)
Honzhong, China - 9 Dead - 11 injured (knife)
Nanping, China - 8 Dead - 5 Injured (knife)
Tokyo, Japan - 7 Dead - 10 Injured (truck and knife)
Seoul, South Korea - 6 Dead - 7 Injured (arson and knife)
Yeah - I’m sure a gun ban will really put the “Days of Columbine” behind us. You’ll be happy to hear that, by the by, the Columbine shooting was perpetrated with one of the cheapest and notorious HAND GUNS in existence, the tech nine, which was in effect a semi-auto pistol with an open bolt - a terrible idea if there ever was one because it made it easily up-gradable to fire full-auto, and was the gun of choice for many gang members back in the day because of how cheap it was to buy. Also completely illegal to modify, but hey - those bans, amirite?
Chances of being shot or killed based on firearm deaths and population count:
Death by gun, suicide excluded:
0.0032%
Death by gun, suicide included:
0.0095%
Death in a mass shooting alone:
0.000032%
Injury by gun, no death:
0.024%
Death of injury by gun including suicide:
0.033%
Gun deaths and injuries etc based off general stats used by anti gun people, rather than exact numbers from each year because its faster and easier to do. Going by exact yearly figures would result in very little change to the average numbers used above.
Guns compared to other ways you can die:
Unintentional fall deaths:
Deaths per 100,000 population: 8.4
Motor vehicle traffic deaths:
Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.9
Unintentional poisoning deaths:
Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.7
Deaths per 100,000 population: 13.9
All Drug poisoning deaths:
Deaths per 100,000 population: 12.4 (2010)
All firearm deaths (suicide included):
Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.3
All firearms deaths (suicide excluded):
Deaths per 100,000 population: 3.6
Firearm deaths broken down completely:
3.6 for homicide
6.3 for suicide
0.30 for unintentional
0.10 undetermined
10.3 for deaths total in general of 3.6 for homicide only. You are more likely to trip and die than be killed by a gun. Cars kill more than guns but are not even protected by the constitution and isn’t a right, and are less regulated than guns.
Many people will also cite mass shootings as a reason that guns are evil and should be banned, but this assertion also falls flat and looks ridiculous when put into perspective. While these stories draw media attention and are absolutely horrible, you seem to have casually and conveniently left out the part where these attacks account for less than even one quarter of 1% of America’s overall murder rate. About 0.2% to be more exact.
Meanwhile, just as deadly mass stabbings as most school shootings.
According to DOJ’s Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. gun-related homicides dropped 39 percent over the course of 18 years, from 18,253 during 1993, to 11,101 in 2011. During the same period, non-fatal firearm crimes decreased even more, a whopping 69 percent. The majority of those declines in both categories occurred during the first 10 years of that time frame. Firearm homicides declined from 1993 to 1999, rose through 2006, and then declined again through 2011. Non-fatal firearm violence declined from 1993 through 2004, then fluctuated in the mid-to-late 2000s.
And where did the bad people who did the shooting get most of their guns? Were those gun show “loopholes” responsible? Nope. According to surveys DOJ conducted of state prison inmates during 2004 (the most recent year of data available), only two percent who owned a gun at the time of their offense bought it at either a gun show or flea market. About 10 percent said they purchased their gun from a retail shop or pawnshop, 37 percent obtained it from family or friends, and another 40 percent obtained it from an illegal source. The March Pew study, drawn from numbers obtained from the Bureau of Justice Statistics and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, also found a dramatic drop in gun crime over the past two decades. Their accounting shows a 49 percent decline in the homicide rate, and a 75 percent decline of non-fatal violent crime victimization. More than 8 in 10 gun homicide victims in 2010 were men and boys. Fifty-five percent of the homicide victims were black, far beyond their 13 percent share of the population.”
So spare me this hysterical, paranoid, reactionary bullshit about “the children!!” and “I’m afraid to go outside because I might be caught in a shooting!!”
“I’m embarrassed to have any relation to your skid mark of a country.”
So don’t, lol. Fuck back off to your nanny-state island.
