You raise a valid point, some are not suicides, I postulated some deaths due to much other information and related cases and Corroboration of witnesses, that Organized Crime, Mafias had threatened other family members sufficiently for a coerced suicide, the famed Roman bath or hemlock equivalent, they wanted an open casket, Catholics really oppose suicide, a Mortal sin, and use of a firearm is too difficult to conceal as are other means and a fantastic Mortician on the payroll.
Simply because the city of London has now admitted to more confirmed murders than the city of New York, does not mean the city of New York qualifies as actually being safe. A full twenty-four hour period that passes without someone being reported as murdered is considered big news in the state of New York, and has actually made the headlines.
That would depend largely on how dedicated law enforcement is to getting justice, as opposed to merely closing a case because it is convenient. Not simply just in the united states, but also around the world. For all that is known, the nation of Japan could actually have a very low suicide rate, but an extremely high homicide rate, and the influence and reach of the yakuza could be motivating the incidents being classified as they currently are.
In Japan many people have their family threatened and commit suicide rather than see harm befall them. Suicide as a way to save face is seen culturally different as well. There is mo motivation to investigate suicides and disturb the status quo. Here in the U.S. the don't push it attitude exists in Police work, if it reasonably seems a suicide, it will be classified a suicide, the television Detectives noting a clue and discovering it was murder is actually discouraged in real Police work, don't stir the pot, or raise mud in otherwise clear water.
too bad FDR and his minions didn't and with it-80 years of the Democrat party ignoring the tenth amendment
I will ask this question again, one I have asked at least a dozen times of gun control advocates, receiving no credible answer, what specifically constitutes ‘good training’ and what are the specific elements of ‘an exam’? Simply parroting and repeating what seems to you to be a good idea is meaningless without that context. Knowing you advocate for federal law in this regard, describe a specific training program and test elements that would pass muster for qualification. I have over 50 years of experience with guns, extensive firearms knowledge, extensive experience in gunsmithing, and conducting training ranging from basic courses through force on force with simunition and scenario context training, tactics experimentation and recommendations development with specific scenarios not to mention surviving actual combat. Who is going to train and qualify me? Funny, I took a ccw course to get my permits (I have more than one) and not only knew more than the certified instructor that conducted the class, ultimately helping to teach, but repaired the instructor’s Colt Mustang. Basically, I learned nothing, not even in regard to the law; it was an excersize in paying a fee to a third party and filling in time.
