NR-tarded

[kentonio]

I'm also skeptical of the whole gun-totin' hero stops the spree killing theory. I don't think there is a convincing case of its accuracy. But spree killings are such a tiny percentage of gun violence, I honestly think they are an issue that shouldn't be worried about. They are deeply tragic when they occur but honestly don't hurt that many people.

Does it really not concern you that you have such an insanely high proportion of the worlds spree killings? Of the 25 worst mass killings of the last 50 years, you know how many were in the US? 15 ffs. Finland came second with 2.

Shame there's no obvious culprit here..

With less than 5% of the world's population, the United States is home to roughly 35–50 per cent of the world's civilian-owned guns

Gee, you must need them for all that freedom, right?

Instead, we need to focus on helping poor kids in inner cities and keep them from getting involved in gangs.

Yes, because that's a nice vague goal that people can feel all fuzzy about, without actually having to do anything or give anything up.

The real tragedy in this country is that we have a permanent underclass in our inner cities unaware that there is a way out. They live short, violent lives of crimes because they don't have schools, they often have absent parents, and we don't take care of them. This might sound melodramatic, but of all the social ills in this country, that one really makes me mad. Maybe if we actually did something that would alleviate inner city poverty, rather than more chuck-money-at-problems government welfare programs, we could do something about gun violence and give these kids a chance.

Ah, so you want to deal with the vast problems that contribute to inner city poverty and decay, but you don't want to actually spend any money doing it? I actually agree with you that it requires far more than handouts to solve those problems, but when your political allies simply want to cut off the money, preach about values and obstruct any attempts to keep guns off the streets of Americas most violent cities, it's hard to see it as anything more than a naive day dream.

[Dauphin]

Does it really not concern you that you have such an insanely high proportion of the worlds spree killings? Of the 25 worst mass killings of the last 50 years, you know how many were in the US? 15 ffs. Finland came second with 2.

The population of Finland is about one sixtieth of the U.S. population. So Finland is over seven times worse than the U.S. for spree killings according to your quoted statistic.

[Dr Strangelove]

Some of you may be happy to know that Liberty University has just announced that it will permit students with legal concealed carry permits to be in their buildings armed.

There has never been a school shooting at Liberty, however their students have committed felonies, including armed robbery, in the neighboring communities.

[kentonio]

The population of Finland is about one sixtieth of the U.S. population. So Finland is over seven times worse than the U.S. for spree killings according to your quoted statistic.

You know Finnish people are crazy, right?

[Felch]

Novelty baseball bats? Jesus christ.

I know, right?

[DinoDoc]

There has never been a school shooting at Liberty, however their students have committed felonies, including armed robbery, in the neighboring communities.

Concealed carry permit holders statistically appear to rarely be the source of criminal activity. So what's your issue?

[Aeson]

I'm also skeptical of the whole gun-totin' hero stops the spree killing theory. I don't think there is a convincing case of its accuracy. But spree killings are such a tiny percentage of gun violence, I honestly think they are an issue that shouldn't be worried about. They are deeply tragic when they occur but honestly don't hurt that many people. Instead, we need to focus on helping poor kids in inner cities and keep them from getting involved in gangs. The real tragedy in this country is that we have a permanent underclass in our inner cities unaware that there is a way out. They live short, violent lives of crimes because they don't have schools, they often have absent parents, and we don't take care of them. This might sound melodramatic, but of all the social ills in this country, that one really makes me mad. Maybe if we actually did something that would alleviate inner city poverty, rather than more chuck-money-at-problems government welfare programs, we could do something about gun violence and give these kids a chance.

I agree with everything in this paragraph ... my only problem with it is that it is just one paragraph. But well done HC

[MRT144]

Some of you may be happy to know that Liberty University has just announced that it will permit students with legal concealed carry permits to be in their buildings armed.

There has never been a school shooting at Liberty, however their students have committed felonies, including armed robbery, in the neighboring communities.

I would like to buy your rock

[Felch]

Gee, you must need them for all that freedom, right?

Here's the thing. We've got 35-50% of the guns, but not 35-50% of the world's gun killings. So the simplistic notion that guns cause crime is clearly not true. Especially when you consider that the areas in the US with the highest gun crime, aren't even the areas with the most guns.

On a per capita basis, we have more than ten times as many guns in the US than you have in the UK, and many of our guns are semi-automatic rifles, pistols, and other firearms that are generally unavailable in your country. But we don't have ten times as much overall crime. We certainly have more gun crimes, but there's not the night and day difference between our societies that one would expect if gun control were a panacea.

I believe that ending the War on Drugs would prevent more murders than banning guns. And it would do so by expanding human freedom instead of restricting it.

[kentonio]

Here's the thing. We've got 35-50% of the guns, but not 35-50% of the world's gun killings. So the simplistic notion that guns cause crime is clearly not true.

That's pretty stupid. Sorry, but that really is pretty goddamn stupid.

On a per capita basis, we have more than ten times as many guns in the US than you have in the UK, and many of our guns are semi-automatic rifles, pistols, and other firearms that are generally unavailable in your country. But we don't have ten times as much overall crime. We certainly have more gun crimes, but there's not the night and day difference between our societies that one would expect if gun control were a panacea.

Our homicide rate is 1.2 per 100,000, yours is 4.8. Enjoy.

I believe that ending the War on Drugs would prevent more murders than banning guns.

I'll agree that it would massively help. The only way it would help more than banning guns however is if you're a realist and accept that banning guns wouldn't remove most of the guns from your gun soaked society.

[kentonio]

Here's the thing. We've got 35-50% of the guns, but not 35-50% of the world's gun killings. So the simplistic notion that guns cause crime is clearly not true.

That's pretty stupid. Sorry, but that really is pretty goddamn stupid.

On a per capita basis, we have more than ten times as many guns in the US than you have in the UK, and many of our guns are semi-automatic rifles, pistols, and other firearms that are generally unavailable in your country. But we don't have ten times as much overall crime. We certainly have more gun crimes, but there's not the night and day difference between our societies that one would expect if gun control were a panacea.

Our homicide rate is 1.2 per 100,000, yours is 4.8. Enjoy.

I believe that ending the War on Drugs would prevent more murders than banning guns.

I'll agree that it would massively help. The only way it would help more than banning guns however is if you're a realist and accept that banning guns wouldn't remove most of the guns from your gun soaked society.

[Dauphin]

Our homicide rate is 1.2 per 100,000, yours is 4.8. Enjoy.

Suicide by gun is twice as common as homicide by gun in the U.S.. If we extrapolate from that standalone stat, with no other point of reference, we can say that all gun owners will be dead before non-gun owners. Rejoice!

[Felch]

That's pretty stupid. Sorry, but that really is pretty goddamn stupid.

So facts that don't match your personal biases are stupid?

Our homicide rate is 1.2 per 100,000, yours is 4.8. Enjoy.

They're in the same ballpark. On the other hand there are dozens of countries with murder rates ten times higher than yours, with far fewer guns than us. So clearly guns are less of an issue than a zillion other factors. Violence has more to do with social and economic factors than the availability of firearms.

I'll agree that it would massively help. The only way it would help more than banning guns however is if you're a realist and accept that banning guns wouldn't remove most of the guns from your gun soaked society.

So if I'm a realist, what are you?

[Sava]

Virginia Tech's "armed security force" sat on its hands while that dude blasted through campus with two 10-round pistols and a ****ton of mags. They were scared of being shot so they waited.

wrong
because guns prevent mass shootings
they stopped the gunman before he killed anyone

right?

[Dr Strangelove]

They're in the same ballpark. On the other hand there are dozens of countries with murder rates ten times higher than yours, with far fewer guns than us. So clearly guns are less of an issue than a zillion other factors. Violence has more to do with social and economic factors than the availability of firearms.
So facts that don't match your personal biases are stupid?

Most of the countries you're talking about, the nations of Central America, West Africa and Central Africa are areas that have seen extensive guerilla warfare in the present or recent past so they've got enormous quantities of military grade weapons floating around supplied courtesy of the CIA or the Soviet Union.