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.
Coinciding with a surge in gun purchases that began shortly before the 2008 elections, violent crime decreased six percent between 2008 and 2009, including an eight percent decrease in murder and a nine percent decrease in robbery.1 Since 1991, when violent crime peaked, it has decreased 43 percent to a 35-year low. Murder has fallen 49 percent to a 45-year low.2 At the same time, the number of guns that Americans own has risen by about 90 million. Predictions by gun control supporters, that increasing the number of guns, particularly handguns and so-called “assault weapons,” would cause crime to increase, have been proven profoundly lacking in clairvoyance.
Not much to add. Gun control activists need to move on to another issue. Perhaps banning sugary drinks from public building?
A step in the right direction but still a very long way to go
“The right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country.”
Again, logic is not something conservatives put much stock in.
One does not necessarily follow the other. "Gun Ownership" and "Lower Crime" are not necessarily connected.
But let's play "Connect any two numbers we want," Ok?
Crime is down because Obama has been in charge since 2008. Therefore, Obama lowers crime.
Crime is down because the Democrats have a majority in the House of Representatives. As soon as Republicans gain a majority, crime will therefore go back up.
Crime is down because the economy is improving under Obama.
See how many random things we can connect? There MUST be a reason why crime has gone down, but you offer no reason why it should be gun ownership, only offer the two disconnected pieces of information, along with a self-satisfied smirk. What do you say during those periods in history when gun ownership goes down along with crime? Nothing, of course.
Perhaps crime is down because over the past two years Obama lowered taxes for 97% of working families? Lower taxes for the masses, lower crime from them as well.
Again, you see the point. Making connections without any facts to back it up gets us nowhere. So knock it off.
Again, logic is not something conservatives put much stock in.
One does not necessarily follow the other. "Gun Ownership" and "Lower Crime" are not necessarily connected.
But let's play "Connect any two numbers we want," Ok?
Crime is down because Obama has been in charge since 2008. Therefore, Obama lowers crime.
Crime is down because the Democrats have a majority in the House of Representatives. As soon as Republicans gain a majority, crime will therefore go back up.
Crime is down because the economy is improving under Obama.
See how many random things we can connect? There MUST be a reason why crime has gone down, but you offer no reason why it should be gun ownership, only offer the two disconnected pieces of information, along with a self-satisfied smirk. What do you say during those periods in history when gun ownership goes down along with crime? Nothing, of course.
Perhaps crime is down because over the past two years Obama lowered taxes for 97% of working families? Lower taxes for the masses, lower crime from them as well.
Again, you see the point. Making connections without any facts to back it up gets us nowhere. So knock it off.
Gun sales went up because America elected a presidential
imposter who's only goal is to socialize America !
But we are just randomly connecting the dots, right?
Be careful with what you say, because although it is clear that you don't agree with what chiaroscuro was saying. You just unintentionally backed up his point. Just a heads up.
Gun sales went up because America elected a presidential
imposter who's only goal is to socialize America !
Guns only have two enemies: rust and politicians.
I don't disagree with gun ownership. I own guns, and they can be a fun pastime. I don't care if you own a million guns, it's one of the least important issues as far as I am concerned.
But don't connect two random statistics and go "Voilà!" Nothing was proven in either the article or the OP. I believe a case CAN be made that gun ownership deters crime. Just, do not misunderstand my point. Those two statistics the article wishes to marry must be linked by reason, or by some logical chain of events that can be empirically demonstrated. Don't just smash them together, all I'm saying.
This is a trend that has been in effect for many years. The anti-gunners have no logical answer to it though. By their reckoning since guns cause crime and the rate of gun ownership keeps increasing, the violent crime rate should be soaring. You know, the old "Blood will run in the streets!" line. This is simply not happening and in fact crime is lower each and every year. Now, this is not just because more people are not willing to be victims, it's just a part of it but it clearly shows how completely wrong the anti-gunners thinking is.
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.
