U.S. Gun Death Rate Jumps 17 Percent Since 2008 Supreme Court District of Columbia v. Heller

During the handgun prohibition, the district of columbia was classified as being the murder capital of the united states, with most every murder utilizing a handgun that was prohibited from ownership. The same applies for the city of Chicago, with nearly one hundred percent of all their annual murders being committed with handguns that the public could not own during their handgun prohibition period.

 

Firearm related restrictions are not enforced.

 

It's been shown here multiple times that the homicide rate in Australia showed the same rate of decline as was seen in the US starting in 1996. Just how are "rapid firing firearms" more useful for suicides than a single shot firearm?

You do realize that 9mm handguns, the most common type of firearm used in mass shootings in the US, ae still legal to own in Australia, right?

Who exactly did Heller allow to own guns that could not own guns prior to Heller?

 

Not if substitute methods are easily available and effective, as the numbers above suggest.

 

Australian style gun bans won't work here, and the firearms left available to Australians are still effective as they were prior to 1996.

Let's get back to the OP. Who did Heller allow to buy guns that could not do so prior to 2008?

 

Mainly straw purchases, FFL diversions, illegal street sellers supplied by the first two sources and theft.

 

Registration would help reduce those

 

How do those numbers compare the US to Japan or South Korea? What's New Zealand's suicide rate?

 

faith based nonsense. registration is craved by those who want to confiscate guns

 

Registration enabled Australia to confiscate 20% of the guns held by law abiding citizens.

 

Personal experience tells me most are stolen from law abiding gun owners, or stores. More guns for the good guys means more guns for the bad guys.

 

Personal experience is not data. FBI studies show that straw purchases are the largest single source of guns for criminals.

Are you proposing to limit guns to good guys?

 

tell us how a law that only impacts 2% of those who commit homicide with firearms is going to prevent 17% of those homicides

see-deductive reasoning is not particularly friendly to the anti gun biased studies

 

that's the only possible suggestion

 

Oh I see, your personal experiences are an entire data set of where criminals get guns.

Yeah, some get stolen.

That's what makes them criminals.

When a woman gets raped it's just like when a gun is stolen, it's the fault of the victim, right?

So therefore if women didn't go outside a vault and if we kept guns in underground bunkers we couldn't be victimized. We should just ban guns and ban women from leaving the bunker so that criminals can't rape and steal guns.

 

Lax gun laws which make it easy for the good guys to get guns also make it easy for the bad guys to get guns.

 

It would certainly increase accountability.

 

ceteris paribus

 

Oh, good, you're responding. Which people did Heller grant the ability to purchase firearms where previously they could not, and how did those people gaining access have an effect on the homicide rate?

 

You've not shown that.

 

Wasn't that because of the crack cocaine epidemic of the late 1980s which led to an increase in gang violence? But before that the homicide and suicide rates were decreasing in D.C.

 

The homicide rate in DC has decreased significantly since Heller. How do you explain that?

 

Non-sequitur.

 

Of course it would

 

More guns = more gun related murders. Duh.
Oh.. wait...