Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. U.S. population 324,059,091 as of Wednesday, June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.00925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant! What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death:
• 65% of those deaths are by suicide which would never be prevented by gun laws
• 15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified
• 17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons – gun violence
• 3% are accidental discharge deaths
So technically, "gun violence" is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Well, first, how are those deaths spanned across the nation?
• 480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago
• 344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore
• 333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit
• 119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)
So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.
This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation, or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 1.
Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, so it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So if all cities and states are not created equally, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.
Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of crime. Robbery, death, and sexual assault are all done by criminals and thinking that criminals will obey laws is ludicrous. That's why they are criminals.
But what about other deaths each year?
• 40,000+ die from a drug overdose–Where's the excuse for that?
• 36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths
• 34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide)
Now it gets good:
• 200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer in Chicago than when you are in a hospital!
• 710,000 people die per year from heart disease. It’s time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So what is the point? If Obama and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.). A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides......Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions!
So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns? It's pretty simple.:
Taking away guns gives control to governments.
The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies. It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.
Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution.
So the next time someone tries to tell you that gun control is about saving lives, look at these facts and remember these words from Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, because the whole body of the people are armed and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force at the command of Congress can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power."
Remember, when it comes to "gun control," the important word is “control," not “gun."
Another issue is that, because they are protected by law, guns have always been part of American society. We simply have no idea as to what having a well armed general populace has protected us from that we would have to contend with if the only armed people are the police. It is, on the whole, a benefit to the country to be trained in the use of firearms and to responsibly own them. We need to quit demonizing law abiding gun owners.
The problem is in their distribution.
As far as the constitution is concerned, you can have your own M1 Abram tank. Now, the second someone sells one to someone other than the Federal government, that contractor could be put up on treason charges, and an individual may not have license to manufacture explosives in the event that they want to build their own, but that right to own and lawfully operate is very much the right of an individual citizen. However, if the weapons are used in some sort of illegal activity, sedition or treason activity, including conspiracy, then the Feds have every right to use the full extent of the law against that citizen.
Don't destroy the integrity of the constitution for a perceived flee to safety. It's not going to work. Some dudes in China just used axes to hatchet up a 100 people. That place has very strict controls on these things.
If you feel the need to assert control, do so in the distribution. The constitution does not give you the right to sell weapons and ammunition, that is a commerce activity. Selling/Distributing weapons to a treasonous group or terrorists is a terrible thing. The crux of that issue is two fold:
1. The gun manufacturers don't want roadblocks to selling weapons (and I say that as a shareholder)
2. The organization that has distributed the most weapons in our history to terrorists....is the Federal Government, which at various time armed Ho Chi Minh (Fight Japan), Osama bin Laden (Fight USSR) and Saddam Hussein (Fight Iran)
Until then, it's a protected right. Quit letting our self-indulgent leaders sway your attention with this. Watch THEM.
There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. U.S. population 324,059,091 as of Wednesday, June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.00925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant! What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death:
• 65% of those deaths are by suicide which would never be prevented by gun laws
• 15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified
• 17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons – gun violence
• 3% are accidental discharge deaths
So technically, "gun violence" is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Well, first, how are those deaths spanned across the nation?
• 480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago
• 344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore
• 333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit
• 119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)
So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.
This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation, or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 1.
Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, so it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So if all cities and states are not created equally, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.
Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of crime. Robbery, death, and sexual assault are all done by criminals and thinking that criminals will obey laws is ludicrous. That's why they are criminals.
But what about other deaths each year?
• 40,000+ die from a drug overdose–Where's the excuse for that?
• 36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths
• 34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide)
Now it gets good:
• 200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer in Chicago than when you are in a hospital!
• 710,000 people die per year from heart disease. It’s time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So what is the point? If Obama and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.). A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides......Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions!
So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns? It's pretty simple.:
Taking away guns gives control to governments.
The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies. It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.
Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution.
So the next time someone tries to tell you that gun control is about saving lives, look at these facts and remember these words from Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, because the whole body of the people are armed and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force at the command of Congress can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power."
Remember, when it comes to "gun control," the important word is “control," not “gun."
Here's something that the lefty media will NEVER talk about. Broward County School Board created a policy to turn criminal matters into "school matters" for ideological / diversity reasons(!). This policy keeps potential shooters off the radar of the authorities. https://theconservativetreehouse.com...gical-intents/
Also Broward County is a major blue county. They voted about 2 - 1 for Hillary. Don't expect the media to mention this.
Here's something that the lefty media will NEVER talk about. Broward County School Board created a policy to turn criminal matters into "school matters" for ideological / diversity reasons(!). This policy keeps potential shooters off the radar of the authorities. https://theconservativetreehouse.com...gical-intents/
Also Broward County is a major blue county. They voted about 2 - 1 for Hillary. Don't expect the media to mention this.
I have stated this in many of these gun ban etc forums here. They dont care. Its like talking to a drunk.. Their policy failed the students and Cruz, as well as Trayvon/Zimmerman in Dade county which has same type of policy. School Districts taking law into their own hands, much like a sanctuary city...
I have to agree with that. My husband is a retired police sergeant and he wants to see all military style weapons in the hands of military only. We argue this point all the time. The criminals will keep their weapons. Responsible owners will be penalized. There is no easy answer because of the flood of guns out there. The black market will flourish, and those who want them will still get them.
I have two guns and shooting an AR is on my bucket list. I love to target practice but my 22 girlie long is old and needs to be replaced. I told my husband it's time to upgrade He was not amused.
There has to be a happy medium when it comes to not penalizing responsible people and holding people who have criminal intent and those around them accountable. I'm all for tighter regulations, but to take guns away from everyone? I say no. Find a better way to deal with the loopholes and criminal element.
I think there would be a silver lining of the disarmament of america, it would embolden a land invasion of the USA potentially which MAY flush out the elites. The only reason the USA has never been invaded is because we are a heavily armed society. Much time has passed and people think that a few F22's are their saviors (which we cant make anymore of), every lost F22 can not be replaced (at least not easily). People forgot what real war looks like and what the threat of a land invasion looks like because no one alive on earth has seen mainland USA invaded since the revolutionary war.
I think there would be a silver lining of the disarmament of america, it would embolden a land invasion of the USA potentially which MAY flush out the elites. The only reason the USA has never been invaded is because we are a heavily armed society. Much time has passed and people think that a few F22's are their saviors (which we cant make anymore of), every lost F22 can not be replaced (at least not easily). People forgot what real war looks like and what the threat of a land invasion looks like because no one alive on earth has seen mainland USA invaded since the revolutionary war.
That's the sound of 10,000 conservative heads exploding. They can't decide between the two things that they love most in life: to support guns or to support Trump.
There was never much interest in this goofy accessory. Ranges don't allow them for safety reasons.
Even if it is restricted or "banned", there will be another innovation down the road. You can't impede technology.
To respond to your post, I support the President and the gun industry with my vote and wallet.
There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. U.S. population 324,059,091 as of Wednesday, June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.00925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant! What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death:
• 65% of those deaths are by suicide which would never be prevented by gun laws
• 15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified
• 17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons – gun violence
• 3% are accidental discharge deaths
So technically, "gun violence" is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Well, first, how are those deaths spanned across the nation?
• 480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago
• 344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore
• 333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit
• 119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)
So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.
This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation, or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 1.
Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, so it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So if all cities and states are not created equally, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.
Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of crime. Robbery, death, and sexual assault are all done by criminals and thinking that criminals will obey laws is ludicrous. That's why they are criminals.
But what about other deaths each year?
• 40,000+ die from a drug overdose–Where's the excuse for that?
• 36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths
• 34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide)
Now it gets good:
• 200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer in Chicago than when you are in a hospital!
• 710,000 people die per year from heart disease. It’s time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So what is the point? If Obama and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.). A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides......Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions!
So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns? It's pretty simple.:
Taking away guns gives control to governments.
The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies. It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.
Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution.
So the next time someone tries to tell you that gun control is about saving lives, look at these facts and remember these words from Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, because the whole body of the people are armed and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force at the command of Congress can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power."
Remember, when it comes to "gun control," the important word is “control," not “gun."
You will just confuse liberals with facts.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
He was not amused. 
