Forums

[mafeki]

japan is known for reporting murders as suicides when the killer kills himself, hence they have a way above average suicide rate* that japan sees. explain why the US crime rate in general and the murder rates specifically are
dropping in the US when there's millions more guns being sold in the country each year.

[-Alex]

japan is known for reporting murders as suicides when the killer kills himself, hence they have a way above average suicide rate* that japan sees.

Really? So a Newtown style shooting in Japan would be reported as 17 suicides? Can you cite a source for that?

And you are purporting that if Japan had guns, these suicides would be less common? Can you cite a source?

explain why the US crime rate in general and the murder rates specifically are
dropping in the US when there's millions more guns being sold in the country each year.

There's many reasons that could contribute, but correlation won't mean causation: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13799616

[mafeki]

Really? So a Newtown style shooting in Japan would be reported as 17 suicides? Can you cite a source for that?

And you are purporting that if Japan had guns, these suicides would be less common? Can you cite a source?

japan, a land that's virtually banned private gun ownership now seeks more
gun control, seems we're being led astray about the violence in japan

http://www.politicalaffairs.net/shootin ... n-control/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Habikino_shooting
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8345953.stm
http://www.todayszaman.com/news-142980- ... oting.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7257072.stm
http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/news/23506
http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/02/07/idUST252568
http://www.gunpolicy.org/jupgrade/firearms/news/26074



of course it's not as though you need a gun to commit mass murder
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osaka_school_massacre
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akihabara_massacre
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... Japan.html
http://teleset1.blogspot.com/2012/03/ja ... mpage.html

There's many reasons that could contribute, but correlation won't mean causation: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13799616

sure... the obama election, that's what did it...
http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas ... 065602.php
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/11/11/obama.gun.sales/

1991 guns sales spike after the LA/rodney king riots
http://www.marysvilleonline.net/article ... 404246.txt
http://articles.latimes.com/1992-06-05/ ... _gun-sales


but yeah... you just keep believing

[-Alex]

japan, a land that's virtually banned private gun ownership now seeks more
gun control, seems we're being led astray about the violence in japan

Are we? How are we being led astray? Is gun violence really in the thousands like here? I disnt see that said in any of your links, could you tell me which one said Japan is more dangerous because it has less guns? That Is what yoi want us to believe despite facts, right?

And I am still waiting for the source on your claim about murders being reported as mass suicides. Or was that a lie that you are shutting up about because you got called out?

of course it's not as though you need a gun to commit mass murder

No, nor do you need a gun here. But with knives you have a lot more people surviving, being just injured. Imagine how many more would be dead if a gun was used. More than half survived in those three, and none died in the last.

but yeah...you just keep believing

I'm fine, you believe enough bull to cover all of us!

[awirewhip]

Taking guns away from law abiding citizens isn't how we fix an poverty and mental health issue. Once these rights are taken away they are not given back until the next revolution.

Once again, how are china and russia doing btw? China civilians can't own guns. That's a society I want to live in . But hey, at least they have access to the internet and information. OH wait, they don't. And the government can restrict freedom of speech/information because no one is armed. They are servants to the Communist government.

So far after reading this thread I've been able to conclude this. More guns has not proven a safer society conclusively. On the other hand more guns has absolutely nothing to do with crime rates since they have dropped nearly every year for decades as the number of guns goes up by the millions. So, i'm pretty sure it's safe for me to say that I will never, ever sell my 2nd amendment to feel safer. Anyone who does is a fool buying into liberal horse ****. Surprise! The democrats are a bunch of lying politicians just like the republicans. They say what gets them elected and not what's ethical or moral.

And if you are wondering if I own any guns, I do not. I sold my handguns and all my rifles. I recently purchased an AR-15 lower receiver which is by law the registered part of the gun. It is not functioning since half of it is missing. I refuse to give over any right that was secured by the constitution. These rights were not granted to me. I was born with them because I believe the right to self defense is a natural born right. We live in a society where the army has assault weapons. For me to "reasonably" defend myself against an assault weapon I am born with the right to own a semi automatic rifle with a standard magazine (thirty rounds). Even then I am at a huge disadvantage owning a sporting model of an assault rifle. My point being, the AR-15 or any other civilian model of an assault rifle is the bare standard for self defense in 2013. Sorry that's the way humans have evolved. If you do not wish to own a gun for personal reasons then I completely understand. I sold mine because I have no family to defend and live alone. I'd rather take my chances for now, but I will not risk my natural born rights because some fucking idiot in congress needs to get cancer ASAP. We are not European. We will not or want to create social programs the way they have. Therefore, we cannot disarm our citizens when crime is so rampant. 4% of guns used in crime are legally obtained. 3.5% of murders are committed with rifles or shotguns. More people are murdered with hammers and bats than rifles every year. **** your fears and accept that the price for freedom comes from a few hundred people dying. Your chances of getting hit by lightening is higher than dying in a mass murder shooting (3 or more people).

dude. Illegal guns are EVERYWHERE and they only way for people to protect themselves is to have access to those guns. If you want to reduce the number of guns fine, I totally agree that should be done. It doesn't start by taking them away me and you. It starts by addressing what is causing gun violence, which isn't guns!

, including 300 assault weapons.

They confiscated 300 automatic military rifles, or are you incorrectly referring to a semi automatic rifle as an assault rifle?

n 2012 police confiscated more than 7,400 guns, including 300 assault weapons

How many hundred of millions of guns do we have? How many 100% builds happen on a daily basis aka guns made from raw aluminum at home. Guns are here to stay, and putting laws in place to take limit civilian legal gun ownership which is 99.9% of gun ownership is not going to eliminate the hundreds of millions that exist. How could you possibly come on a

Banning "assault" rifles aka medium powered sporting rifles = banning cars that go over 65mph.

OH ya surprise, the "assault weapon" ban includes shot guns and pistols.

let me quote myself again here. People are wrong. It happens. In this case, that's you. I've been wrong many times, but I didn't ignorantly stick by my position. I learned and grew from the experience and guess what. No one even remembered me being wrong because no one cares. What matters is that you have shut your brain off to the truth.

So far after reading this thread I've been able to conclude this. More guns has not proven a safer society conclusively. On the other hand more guns has absolutely nothing to do with crime rates since they have dropped nearly every year for decades as the number of guns goes up by the millions. So, i'm pretty sure it's safe for me to say that I will never, ever sell my 2nd amendment to feel safer. Anyone who does is a fool buying into liberal horse ****. Surprise! The democrats are a bunch of lying politicians just like the republicans. They say what gets them elected and not what's ethical or moral.

Guns does not equal violence. Rifles do not equal violence. People's personalities equal violence. Why are we so violent? Because we are the freest group of people in the world. we have rights secured by us in the constitution. That coupled with the fact that we are capitalists and not social-democracies with small populations means there is going to be a group of VERY poor people with NO education who have STOLEN firearms from legal gun owners and turned those guns against them. Instead of blaming them you want to blame the people who are not using their guns for nothing but good. Your attention is in the wrong area. Why aren't you advocating that people who use rifles in a crime automatically get a 20 year prison sentence? You want to address the gun violence why don't you attack the people who actually use the guns for something other than protecting themselves and their family. How can you come in here advocating restrictions when it's been proven to you that gun ownership or the type of gun has zero to do with violence.

If you really think that turning legal gun owners into criminals by creating restrictive gun laws is going to do anything then you are in a big fucking surprise. You think people are going to suddenly turn over their guns or stop buying guns illegally? Yeah lets turn all the middle class voters into criminals because they are paying $4000 for a $400 handgun to protect their family.

[beenthereanddonethat]

Well that was pretty long winded! So, I'm pegged here as a dreaded liberal and own in excess of 100 weapons. Responsible gun ownership is a no brainer. Common sense remedys that do not touch the sacred 2nd ammendment are in order. Right now I could buy, within the hour, any weapon with no background check. I can't buy dynamite without a permit and sign for it but I can buy all the 50 cal ammo I want!

[mafeki]

Yeah that was pretty intense, Not sure I'd even want to have to reply to that wall of text.

@Alex- I thought I heard about it someplace, still sorta looking for a source.

[Grandma Lynn]

Well that was pretty long winded! So, I'm pegged here as a dreaded liberal and own in excess of 100 weapons. Responsible gun ownership is a no brainer. Common sense remedys that do not touch the sacred 2nd ammendment are in order. Right now I could buy, within the hour, any weapon with no background check. I can't buy dynamite without a permit and sign for it but I can buy all the 50 cal ammo I want!

You can buy the makings for a form of dynamite,
can't you? I'm thinking of the Oklahoma bombing.

[-Alex]

Taking guns away from law abiding citizens isn't how we fix an poverty and mental health issue.

And nobody said it is. Taking guns away is how we can help fix a gun violence issue.

I refuse to give over any right that was secured by the constitution.

Is the right to own an AR-15 granted by the Constitution? Is that next to the part where bazookas are a protected right?

We live in a society where the army has assault weapons. For me to "reasonably" defend myself against an assault weapon I am born with the right to own a semi automatic rifle with a standard magazine (thirty rounds).

The army has a hell of a lot more than assault weapons. According to your logic, your natural born right to "reasonably" defend yourself extends to way more than an assault weapon, doesn't it? Where would it stop, if at all?
Let's skip this blah blah blah that the natural born right means whatever weapons you can conceive of, and let's be reasonable.

They confiscated 300 automatic military rifles, or are you incorrectly referring to a semi automatic rifle as an assault rifle?

I'm sorry, you're going to have to ask Chicago Police Supt. Garry McCarthy, it was from his speech: “Weak guns laws is what separates Chicago from other large, urban cities. In 2012 we took nine guns off the street for every one gun in New York. In total, the Chicago police confiscated 7,400 guns in 2012 including 300 assault weapons."
Read more: http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20130103 ... z2HGjRiVpa

Guns are here to stay, and putting laws in place to take limit civilian legal gun ownership which is 99.9% of gun ownership is not going to eliminate the hundreds of millions that exist.

Is that 99.9% an actual number, or were you just making it up for hyperbole? And I do believe laws can, do, and have in other places addressed the guns that exist.

People are wrong. It happens. In this case, that's you.

You're free to believe that.

I've been wrong many times, but I didn't ignorantly stick by my position.

Nor did I, when I have been wrong.

What matters is that you have shut your brain off to the truth.

I understand that you must believe that, but also that your belief does not make it true.

Instead of blaming them you want to blame the people who are not using their guns for nothing but good.

I'm sorry, did I miss where people blamed those who use their weapons for good? Please quote someone.

You want to address the gun violence why don't you attack the people who actually use the guns for something other than protecting themselves and their family.

You think these people are being ignored?

How can you come in here advocating restrictions when it's been proven to you that gun ownership or the type of gun has zero to do with violence.

Because that hasn't been proven. You come out of nowhere, saying it's been proven, but it hasn't. Quite the contrary.

If you really think that turning legal gun owners into criminals

Nobody said anything about turning legal gun owners into criminals. But keep telling yourself that.

You think people are going to suddenly turn over their guns or stop buying guns illegally?

No, not suddenly at all. As I've said many times.

[-Alex]

@Alex- I thought I heard about it someplace, still sorta looking for a source.

Ok, well let me know if you take it back after not being able to find any source for it, or if you find out it's true.

And then maybe in the meantime, we can reiterate the question I posed - If guns make us safer, than why isn't America safer than most other countries, namely Japan?