The Anti Gun movement kills its own arguments

The anti gun movement tries to dismiss the huge number of guns that have been bought in the USA over the last 25 years as NOT INDICATIVE of increased numbers of Americans owning guns. Rather, we are told, less Americans are gun owners and the increased gun sales only means current gun owners bought more and more guns.

Yet this argument, which cannot be proven (since there is no registration of guns nationally) and relies on telephone polls and requires those so asked to answer honestly, kills many of the anti gun arguments being floated around.

For example, several anti gun advocates claim a "waiting period" would allegedly prevent almost every homicide where the perpetrator bought the gun legally. One Study claims a reduction of gun homicides by 17%: and given less than 20% of unlawful homicide by gunshot involve a defendant who was able to own a gun legally at the time of the crime, that is almost a complete eradication of homicides perpetrated by a gun that was legally purchased.

yet, these same anti gun advocates claim almost all the guns being bought these days are by people who already own guns. Maybe one of those waiting period advocates would tell us how to reconcile this assertion of few new gun buyers with the claim that waiting periods will stop almost every case of homicide (such as the Vegas shooting) where the guns were purchased legally

we then have to look at how many cases was the killing instrument bought within say three days of the homicide. That didn't happen in the Las Vegas killings, nor Virginia Tech, nor most of the other major massacres perpetrated by someone without a record.

that 17% reduction is pretty much complete nonsense, it seems

 

The study consisted of two parts: The first looked at differences in gun death rates between states that had waiting periods and those that did not over the period between 1970 and 2014. The second part consisted of looking at changes in gun death rates in states that enacted waiting periods after passage of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act in 1994, which essentially forced all states to enact waiting periods.

Results from the first part of the study showed on average 17 percent fewer gun-related deaths for states with a waiting period (and approximately 10 percent fewer gun-related suicides). Results from the second part of the study nearly mirrored the first—the trio found that gun-related homicide deaths following passage of the Brady Bill dropped on average 17 percent while gun-related suicides dropped approximately 6 percent.

The researchers suggest their findings indicate that if the U.S. were to implement a nationwide waiting period for gun purchases, the country as a whole could reduce annual gun deaths by approximately 1,700 a year.



Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2017-10-periods-deaths-guns.html#jCp

 

It's nice when someone on this board takes the time to dig up the real facts. All Turtledude has is speculation.

 

Thank you. The evidence is clear. Gun control saves lives

 

Someone can commit suicide by using their own gun, jump off a bridge, smoke and die etc.. But they harmed/killed themselves. More legislation comes out to control passive smoking, well, certainly in the UK.

The issue with guns, they're a deadly weapon. Guns, knives, vans etc.. can be/are used as dangerous weapons. Often, others are seriously hurt or killed, innocent bystanders, children etc... So how do we reduce the loss of innocent lives, assuming that that's what people want.

If everyone was responsible, no legislation is needed, but that's not the case. Stricter knife laws come in and the problem with terrorists and vehicles. So barriers/bollards are installed and extra armed police at events. In either case, it's obvious that removing all knives and vehicles from society is not feasible.

With guns, I wouldn't want to see the removal of all guns from society, I would like to see the vast majority removed as they're not needed. But it's a cultural step, it can't happen over night. Past generations need guns, future generations don't. Over time, generations should/can be weaned off guns. Gradual restrictions over the decades would be required.

Does a kid need a gun? If you look at terrorist propaganda videos, they have 5 and 6 year olds shooting automatic rifles. They're brought up on guns and it becomes their nature to own one. In the UK, kids don't get brought up with guns so they never need a gun. We have shot guns and air rifles, they're controlled, but you still get a once in a blue moon tragedy.

But in America, the deaths are many thousands. There are more deaths in Russia from a fraction of the number of guns but 70 to 80 % are domestic abuse, between family members in the same household, so you are greatly much more likely to be shot on the streets of America than in Russia.

So the pro gunners should ask themselves, do they want to reduce deaths to a few handful a year and if so, what do they suggest could be done to achieve that?

 

dismissed for lack of evidence

since you cannot define "gun control" that could mean EFFECTIVE programs like Project EXILE which target armed CRIMINALS or worthless crap like waiting periods or registration that only targets those least likely to misuse guns

 

I'd like to reduce the number of gun banners being elected to office. I'd like the courts to start actually enforcing the second amendment to the point that those who try to interfere with it are tried for treason. the UK means nothing to me. Its laws, its society, its cowardly fear of armed citizens, its hatred of self defense, etc is inapplicable to our country.

 

give it a shot Ron

how many gunshot homicides (in term of percentages-there are about 11K a year) are caused by those who were legally able to buy/own a gun at the time of the crime?

I bet you won't attempt to answer that easy question

 

Those topics are already being discussed on other threads.

 

You post facts not in evidence. Dismissed

 

But you're an example of what I just covered, you were brought up on guns, you've used guns, you need guns.

The unborn future generation, doesn't need them.

 

instead of robotic childish" Dismissed" blather how about telling us what gun control plans actually decreases what with proof. we already have proven that the 17% reduction that article you cited is impossible to back up. it would mean almost every homicide committed by a person legally able to buy a gun at the time of the crime

 

people like you who want to tell others what they need are one of the reasons why I am well armed, and my son is well trained in the use of most civilian available weapons. One of these days I expect we will have a civil war over our rights and I plan on being on the winning side if it comes to that. Hopefully our courts will wake up and crush the anti gun nonsense as unconstitutional idiocy but who knows

 

Gun deaths per 100,000

UK - 0.23
USA - 10.54

UK response to a death by shooting - tighter laws, more types banned, surrender weapon days.

USA response - we need more guns, promotes safer society, deaths in the many thousands, we have the right to have them because of what society was like 300 years ago.

 

this is also due to the USA being a very sick society.

 

Civil war? A very old fashioned mentality.

 

Seriously, you guys need to STOP fantasizing about violent civil war.

Makes the NRA look unhinged and erratic.

 

so you hate the inner city black culture that causes most of those deaths?

interesting Ron

 

Boy you sure talk about blacks a lot

 

and our crime rate is going down and your country is getting more and more violent

 

anyone who understands gun violence in the USA understands that your schemes-directed at mainly whites, is worthless to deal with gun violence

 

Again facts without evidence.

 

Yeah poor whites....they just can't catch a break

 

I am an expert on this issue. I know that 80% or more of all homicides by gunshot are perpetrated by those who were not legally able to buy guns. So waiting periods don't apply to them. less than 20% of murders involving firearms are perpetrated by those who owned the weapon legally. Most of those did not buy the gun within 3 days of the homicide.

so how can a waiting period (which would not have stopped

Virginia Tech
Aurora
Fort Hood
Las Vegas
Orlando
Charleston Church Shooting (Dylan Roof)
Luby's Texas
Huberty Massacre at San Ysidro McDonalds)

prevent almost every case of someone who bought a gun through legal channels from committing murder?

 

that's rich-you deny crime is going down? LOL