Topic: What's your opinion of gun control? - page 125. (Read 450551 times)

Stated by whom? I would love to see you back up that bullshit number. Either you aren't bothering to look very hard or you don't have a clue how statistics work and are just repeating what some gun control freak said. I have produced statistics to back up my arguments, now you give it a try, but I know you won't because you can't, because those numbers are a fabrication.

The right to bear arms is NOT about hunting and target shooting, it is about having the people be armed so that the government can be prevented from turning completely tyrannical, and preserving the individual's right to self defense. All the gang violence in the world can't match the death and suffering created by an unchecked tyrannical government. It would be great if we could keep the "wrong" people from getting guns, but that is just a fantasy like the tooth fairy, and indulging that fantasy will cost MORE LIVES. Just because it is a positive concept does not mean it is viable to be implemented in REALITY. There are so many holes in your logic it is not even funny, but that is a common theme with gun control freaks who are motivated wholly by emotions and just skip over the inconvenient logic part required to actually attain those goals.

1. Collect underpants
2. ? ? ?
3. Profit

You cry and cry about #3 but never have a viable plan for #2.

Can't be that many. It's only about 1 a day in Chicago.   

^

It was stated that gang violence and homicides are excluded else the US would have like 100-150 k deaths per year through gun violence alone.

Btw. Im actually for having guns but even more for tight enough gun controls that no wrong people get it. Also i believe strongly that there is no need to have "war making" weapons legal. (Semi to full automatic weapons)
Go hunting and on shooting tournaments all you want i just dont want to see ppl with g36 or uzis running around on the street thanks.

The problem with your logic is that in the US gun rights are inalienable because they are there primarily to protect the people FROM the government. If the government is the one dictating those strict regulations you are calling for then that protection from totalitarianism is lost.




So you get to exclude terrorist activity, but the gang violence which is the VAST MAJORITY of gun violence in the US still should be included?

Thank you for showing this study and chart.

Americans more than any country except tiny Switzerland have gun freedom. Americans came from, and have the family training of, people from most of these countries on the chart. Assuming that the chart is accurate, it is totally incorrect to suggest that it is gun freedom that is doing it. Here's the way it works.

People with ancestry from all these other countries
+ people with gun freedom
+ people with high mass shootings
+ few gun-control countries with anywhere near these high mass shooting stats
+ government and one-worlders wanting to take away gun freedom worldwide
= inside jobs, all of them, in America.

Can you tell me what happens if the study goes longer then 6 years especially when in this 6 years most of the mass shootings were caused by IS terrorist?

Norway is nr 1 with 77 deaths - anyone remember breivik?

Let us see a study from 1966-2012:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-leads-world-in-mass-shootings-1443905359




Edit

One more article which gives more information about the studies:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/12/03/obamas-inconsistent-claim-on-the-frequency-of-mass-shootings-in-the-u-s-compared-to-other-countries/

In America, the government is of the people. If someone takes action against these people who love owning guns, it can't be the government.

To me, it does not seem unreasonable to suggest that gun control should be implemented. The government should take strict actions against the person who do not know how to use the tool. Definitely it can make fear on others. Also we should be alert on kids. It should be strictly banned in each and every country.

That is a poor control your country have. In our country where freedom is given to you, you can buy guns without going legal process and you can fire anybody and nobody will suit you because our government does not know how to get rid of this aholes.

The vast majority of what you just described is already law on a national level in the USA. Those quotes are largely bullshit designed to make it sound as if most of those controls are not already in place.

Gun control is a tool to control the population, it doesn't prevent crime that is a load of shit, it punishes and makes victims of good law abiding people.

I unfortunately reside in a country with strict "gun control"
there's still shootings, home invasions and violent crime committed daily, it's a tremendous failure & I could go and buy an illegal gun tonight if it's what I desired.

Generally, those who support gun control are usually stereotyped as being liberals and Democrat. Some say that the Republicans own the anti gun control issue, as the Democrats own pro gun control. So, who does have ownership? Does one side fully advocate one position?

Those that support gun control argue that there need to be stricter laws and regulations on who and why someone should own a gun. “Many people that are for gun control laws believe that getting a gun is too easy.  Individuals with misdemeanor criminal convictions, DUI offenses, past domestic abuse restraining orders, and histories of voluntary commitment to psychiatric institutions can and do obtain permits legally” (The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence). These people believe that stricter gun regulations should be made and enforced, and that people with criminal backgrounds or troubling psychological history should not be able to own a gun. Many people are petitioning for a criminal background check if someone wants to purchase a gun. “There are bills pending on Capitol Hill that would force checks for all sales, and there is considerable bipartisan support for this kind of measure” (The New Yorker). People that are pro gun control believe that the United States will be safer if less people are able to acquire guns.

I think people in general should have the right to protect themselves. If owning a gun is the way to do it, then so be it.

That's kind of tricky. They are all we ever get nowadays. 

People need discipline. Gun control is pointless if people have bad anger issues.

Gun control has to be given much importance to the American countries than Asian countries. Because you could see most incidents taking place were in the America and western nations. Also the persons were mostly teenagers. Only such unnecessary use can be avoided only if strong regulations were made at the right moment.

None of your argument changes the fact that banning something is not effective in eliminating it. All that happens is a black market is created and the contraband still flows.

As far as your second "point", I am sure that the fact that the vast majority of these shootings happen in "Gun Free Zones" has absolutely nothing to do with this. Also you have zero understanding of how statistics work. Of course there are more mass shootings in the US than other countrys. WE HAVE OVER 350 FUCKING MILLION PEOPLE HERE. When adjusted for population, the US has comparable rates of mass shooting deaths to many European countries, and is not the worst by far. Therefore your claim that the US has more mass shootings is shown to be false once adjusted for the difference in population. This claim is along the lines of idiots who compare the gun deaths in the US to the gun deaths in the UK without adjusting for population difference and think they are making a valid point.



http://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/comparing-death-rates-from-mass-public-shootings-in-the-us-and-europe/
Ban guns, people start stabbing each other. The data shows that criminals are more willing to cut or stab some one with a knife than to fire a gun at them in a robbery, as a result you will just have more knife violence rather than criminals using guns as a prop to threaten people. Additionally banning guns would threaten our ability to defend our bodies, and what gives you the right to tell people they can not defend themselves? Criminals will always have access to guns, it is a fact. If only the criminals would just obey the laws we would all be safe!

Great. But a tool designed solely in order to kill or harm someone is called... A weapon. With your argument we could totally say "we should legalize missile ownership. It's a tool.
? What? How taking a gun away can make them more violent?
The very little difference being that you have much less victims and much highest chances to survive if they use a knife than if they use a gun...
Yeah because comparing alcohol to weapons is totally legit. I mean absolutely everyone can build dozens of firearms in there garage like they produces alcohol during prohibition  
Experience prove you wrong. In gun free countries, the vilains of course still have guns. But on average they have much less, much less dangerous, and use them much less than in USA.
Of course outlaws will have guns. Difference being only 10% of them will have one. And only small handgun for 98% of those 10%. That makes a difference you know?

Difference between guns and drugs, which is incredibly subtle I know, please try to think about it with your little amount of intelligence, is that drugs are made for yourself. Whereas guns are made to shoot at others.
In the first case you take the decision to harm yourself. But it's your body, why couldn't you do whatever the fuck you want with it?
In the second case, you're going to use a gun, which means you're a potential threat to absolutely anyone...

And on your little first picture, you forgot the "we get most mass shooting that all the other Western countries in the world added since 2000 but we don't see any correlation with guns" part ^^