How does being allowed to carry a concealed weapon

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/07/gun-homicide-rate-down-49-since-1993-peak-public-unaware/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ited-states-heres-why/?utm_term=.31b064160cf9
Thus, your claim of more guns = more overall gun crimes/violence is disproven.

Fortunately, there will never reach a time where you can test your theory.

 

I agree, as I am pro gun.

But those do not at all address my theory.

If you have almost no guns, yes we will mostly be at the mercy of criminals in the few situations that do occur. But there would undoubtedly overall be less gun deaths/violence.

 

You stated : More guns = more overall gun crimes/violence.
This has been proven false.

If we have no criminals, there will be no crime.
If we have no food, there will be no obesity.
I can go on.

 

It hasn't been proven false.

What you presented and what I am hypothetically proposing are 2 completely different things. Not even close.

 

I showed you a significant period of time where violent crime and gun-related violent crime fell ~50% while the number of guns increased considerably.
If More guns = more overall gun crimes/violence, as you claim, why did the violent not go up over that period of time?

 

Your reply gives the impression that the death of a small child every day is a price worth paying for you to parade around with a gun. Ah, it’s only a small percentage, not worth bothering about. Do you realise how disgusting that sounds?

I quoted figures for very small children i.e. toddlers, however even the unnecessary death of a small child each day of the year due to gun owners leaving loaded guns around their homes should be a concern to everyone.

If you need the statistics for all kids annually there here.

2,624 kids die from gun violence:
14,736 kids survive gun injuries:

Once any government allows the wholesale of firearms to civilians they relinquish all control on them. How many police carry out checks on gun owners homes? Checking for the safe storage of firearms i.e., a steel cabinet with a combination lock and another cabinet for ammunition. Correct me if I’m wrong but I guess there are no checks on safe storage at all.

The police have no duty to protect civilians? Then you must have the worst police force world wide.

 

Why are you quoting gun violence stats, right after railing about gun accidents?

I do agree that the death of a toddler (which I define as 4 and under, even though the common definition is 3 and under) is a tragedy, but accidental firearms deaths by toddlers are rare. According to the WISQARS database, in 2015, there were 26 deaths of kids 4 and under by gun accidents. Per WISQARS, that is .13 per 100,000 children of that age group, or 1.3 in a million. Not sure where you made up that 52 number.


Your kids gun violence stats are incorrect. According to the CDCs WISQARS database, in 2015 (last year they have made available), if you define kids as minors (under 18 ), then you get 791 firearms homicides. If you add in suicide, you get 1347. Please tell me where you made up your data. Now if you define kids as 19 and under, you get your result, but that's treating 18 and 19 year olds as kids, and adding in suicide stats you get 2687. Without the suicide stats, (using 19 and under), you get 1670 dead. Note that the numbers double by treating 18 and 19 year olds as children. IMHO, that's using stats to lie.

https://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_us.html


The police have no duty to protect civilians directly. Their duty is to capture the people who kill others.

 

Which again is not at all the same as what I proposed in a hypothetical situation.

 

Sorry that I'm not swayed by your fallacious appeals to emotion - reasoned people ignore fallacious arguments such as yours.

Its called the RIGHT to keep and bear arms for a reason.

Of course not - mandatory "safe storage" of firearms violates the US constitution, and the police here cannot constitutionally search our houses w/o probable cause or a warrant.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/p...ve-a-constitutional-duty-to-protect.html?_r=0

- - - Updated - - -

I quoted your claim.
You said: More guns = more overall gun crimes/violence
Do you agree that the example I provided indicates that this is not at all necessarily so?

 

You quibble about statistics but they are American, not mine, sure NRA statistics give another view but they are mere propaganda to support gun sales.

Examples – It’s not the gun that kills it’s the man behind it.
Ok, try removing the gun, problem solved.

Cars kill more than guns, so why don’t we ban cars.
Because cars are essential to modern day living, without vehicles we would be back to the horse and cart. There are many Americans who don’t have guns, does that intrude on their day to day life? Of course not because guns have a single function that is in no way essential to day to day living.

If you won’t accept American statistics try the world wide statistics on gun deaths in developed nations where you will find that America is way up the top in every study.

What’s 911 phone number for if its not there to protect the public?

Your quote is actually to protect the police from being sued for not attending.

 

Unsupportable nonsense.

Since that will not happen, your point is moot.

For every gun used to commit a murder in the US yesterday, 16,000,000 were not.
This negates any point you wish to make.

Post-crime processing and prosecution - ie, law enforcement.
As proven, the police had no legal or constitutional mandate to protect you.

 

It's not the guns you need to worry about, it's the bad actors in society. If there were a way to prevent them from traveling from state-to-state, I'd be all for it. But if I were a state like, say, Texas or Michigan, I'd want to make it illegal to drive in my state with a license from one of the following states: CA, CO, CT, DE, HI, IL, MD, NM, NV, UT, VT, WA, DC. If public safety is realyl your concern, you'd support this position. can you guess why?

 

Please cite your statistics.

 

Yeah, but I can drive a car in all 57 states, and the District with a DL from any state.

- - - Updated - - -

Actually there are now 12 states and DC that issues driver licenses to illegal aliens. Many people DO care deeply about that. Why should Minnesota have to accept illegal alien drivers because California gives them a license?

 

Yet I'll bet you support and illegal alien driving in Ohio on a CA license.

 

I blame the ghetto thug trash POS human scum gangstas for gun violence in Chicago.

 

Where do the people in that state get the right to violate my 14th Amendment rights?

 

Be sure to work into the discussion how a state may not deny the privileges and immunities of a same-sex marriage from another state...

 

Correct. That in conjunction with Full Faith and Credit are supposed to insure that all citizens' rights, privileges, and immunities are duly protected.

 

Similarly, if all the people disappeared, leaving only guns, crime and death would cease. Not so,were all the guns removed. As for me, I'm more worried about driving in traffic, than armed bad guys. Everyday my health and life hangs in the balance while driving. And for decades in construction, I feared sliding off a three story roof down onto the pieces of steel rebar, cinder blocks and nail riddled 2x4's skewn helter skelter below. Even with all my care, there were times not so pleasant. But the show must go on.

 

Am I correct that you are committed to never defending anyone else?

You are correct in that the odds are high that you will never need a firearm to defend your family. Yes, you can gamble with their lives in that and in many other ways. But it seems your view that you get to use government to gamble with the lives of everyone else's children too and some of us are willing to defend other people in ways you want prohibited by law.

 

This is the typical mistake of Liberals; they equate gun ownership with criminality. A person with a CCW permit obeys the laws and is not the problem. It is the criminal element that already carries their guns across state lines with intent to endanger citizens. Here in Illinois, we have had our CCW permits for three years this month. Before it became law, the Libs tried every ridiculous thing they could think of to stop it. They literally claimed there would be blood running in the streets and bodies everywhere. Garry Mccarthy, the police superintendent at the time, said his cops wouldn't be able to tell the difference between gangbangers and permitted citizens and would be gunning down those citizens when they went around pointing their guns at cops. Yes, I heard him say that stupid thing. As it turns out, it has been the sound of crickets for three years on the subject of CCW permits. Legally armed citizens are not the problem.

As has been stated in other posts here, equalizing laws across state lines is a benefit to all.

 

More guns - Less Crime. Most gun control schemes just encourage more gun crime.

 

Liberal states actually has more violent crime and homicides.

 

Guns are good. That is why the Big Government faction wants to ban them from law abiding citizens.