Democrats demanding USA has Mexico's murder rate

There are many, many examples of people in houses who are surprised by a break-in defending themselves with firearms.

It's you claim that you absolutely cannot back up other than say it is laughable for anyone to agree with what you made up and all known instances prove exactly the opposite.

 

You logic makes exactly no sense. If have a firearm prevents 99 assaults, but does not stop 1, you claim your logic proves guns do not protect people when exactly the opposite is proven.

Again, give any ACTUAL instance of what you claim is your theoretical actually happening.

3 thugs leering at some fella's GF. If the see the GF and/or BF has a firearm, they will not attack even if they do have guns. Criminals seek out easy opportunity and a person with a firearm isn't. I person without a firearm is.

 

It is not about people to him, not really. It is about hating guns.

Understand the statistics anti-gunner use. When the police finally got the Dallas shooter or Orlando shooter or Vegas shooter - whether killing the shooter directly or the shooter shooting himself not to be captured, anti-gunners will count those 3 deaths in their stats as wrongful gun deaths. They absolutely NEVER count lives saved by guns because it is not about lives, it is about their hating guns and wanting no one else to have them either.

 

And of course the usual rebuttal of unsubstantiated personal rhetoric!

 

Statistically Califorpornia makes the case that crazy strict gun laws do pretty much NOTHING in stopping gun violence

 

Using cherry picked examples and claiming statistical relevance is not an argument for much.

What is the ratio of times where things turned out good vs things that turned out bad. Further, I have never argued that one should not be able to carry a gun in the first place.

I don't think guns should be allowed (for the general populace) in places like bars and schools/universities. I also think that Assault rifles should be as easy to obtain as they currently are.

Reality is that if someone with a brain wants to do something to you, they will not give you a chance to go for your gun. Its called the element of surprise.

 

Since I did not say there were not such examples .. you have created a big strawman.

 

What I have given you is not cherry picking, it is a consistent theme taken from news reports. You seem to give common criminals too much credit for intelligence. Also, if they actually know you have a gun, they would tend to avoid you. If you were some sort of a prime target, say, an armed diamond courier, it might be worth the risk to have a go at you, but the common thug you are liable to meet is not a Hollywood master criminal plotting to boost a gold depository.

Also, it is your right NOT to have a gun. Enjoy!

 

I am not against owning guns. The idea you are touting however (that owning a gun makes you more safe) is highly contested.

https://ww2.kqed.org/science/2017/10/05/does-gun-ownership-really-make-you-safer-research-says-no/

If we look at the macro perspective ..it is rather obvious that societies that do not have guns would be more safe than one's that do. There are numerous other factors to consider but, when you look at countries like Japan, Canada, most of Europe and first world nations (and most second world nations) in general, nations where regular people are not allowed to own handguns .. gun crime is way lower.

That said, I am against using the actions of one or a few crazy individuals, to make social policy. Why should the vast majority of sane individuals be punished for a few insane or deluded nut job ?

In addition, there are a number of other variable that lead to our high crime rate ... such as bad law. We put more people in prison (many on the basis of bad law) than an other first world nation.

Bad law creates bad people (or rather people that are viewed as bad). Prohibition is one example. When the Gov't prohibited alcohol it created a whole new class of criminals and increased violent crime. Not only did it criminalize those that sought to profit from the ban (Al Capone and so on) it criminalized a large number of people that wanted to consume alcohol.

Clearly this was an affront to the main principle on which this nation was founded "respect for individual liberty and Limited Gov't power).

If the Gov't does not respect individual liberty of others ... what is this teaching our youth and society in general?
What is also true is that through 12 years of school we manage not to teach our kids the main principle on which this nation was founded - "respect for individual liberty"

Now give someone who has little respect for individual liberty a gun. Now give someone who comes from a disadvantaged background - and with little other options turns to selling pot (something which is widely consumed and desired by a large segment of the population) a gun. Now have a another individual (or group of individuals) in the same situation fighting over the same turf.

Now put a cop in the middle of this turf war. A dumb cop as there are places in our cities where cops do not go .. and certainly not at night unless they are with a swat team and even this seems rare.

Now have this fellow live in an area where his race is targeted on a regular basis such that he has been subject to violations of his liberty - arbitrary detainment and search ( violations of individual liberty justified on the basis of bad law "the drug war" - violations that would not exist if the bad law was not there to begin with). Does this individual have respect for the individual liberties (life in particular ) of the cop.

Rather than focus on guns ... we need to be focusing on "Bad Laws" and other factors.

 

You babel a lot about irrelevancies. Keep it simple, human nature is what it is and our society has gone down hill since Liberals came up with a better idea. We tried banning alcohol, hard drugs, and "assault rifles". None of that worked. So, we are saddled with low-information voters and criminals that have "rights". I'll carry my gun and you can wander off down the street in a blissful fog.

 

No .. I actually give rational, justification and specific examples that back up my claims rather than make generalized simplistic comments - "Society has gone own hill" in order to try and justify a deep felt resentment for the principles on which this nation was founded - respect for individual liberty - which one of the main causes of the "downfall of society"

 

Your rationality does not work in our current reality. Liberals thought it would be a good idea to pay women a greater amount of welfare if they had babies without a father present. Liberals thought it was a good idea to undermine Christianity and religion. Liberals thought it was a good idea to teach kids that having two mommies is normal. Liberals thought it was compassionate to release dangerous criminals back into society. Liberals thought it was a good idea to take apart a functioning mental health care system and dump mentally unstable people out on the streets. I'll keep carrying my gun, thank you.

 

There is not a single part of that statement that is correct. Not one. What a remarkable achievement! A testimony to the complete fantasy world inhabited by American Conservatives.

First, we did not outlaw 'much of private gun ownership' in 1996 (I assume the OP is referring to that, though who can really tell).

Gun murder rates did not 'soar'. Quite the reverse. Rates have dropped dramatically, as have absolute numbers.

Murder rates have more than halved since 1996.

Violent crime rates are lower than pre-1996.

Suicide rates declined after 1996.

The number of police did not double in that period. They increased modestly.

Lie about your own nation all you want. Don't lie about mine to cover for the disastrous impact of poor policy in your nation.