Did you vote today?

[dont know nothin]

guess 2 wrote:

<quoted text>Any gun control law, just helps out the criminal. Chicago had over 500 gun deaths in 2012 and they have the strictest gun laws in the U S. It ain't working.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/...

you might learn something.

[dont know nothin]

#1, Mississippi
Gun deaths per 100,000: 18.3
Permissive gun laws: 4th out of 50
#2, Arizona
Gun deaths per 100,000: 15
Permissive gun laws: 1st out of 50
#3, Alaska
Gun deaths per 100,000: 17.6
Permissive gun laws: 11th out of 50
#4, Arkansas
Gun deaths per 100,000: 15.1
Permissive gun laws: 7th out of 50
#5, Louisiana
Gun deaths per 100,000: 19.9
Permissive gun laws: 23rd out of 50
#6, New Mexico
Gun deaths per 100,000: 15
Permissive gun laws: 6th out of 50
#7, Alabama
Gun deaths per 100,000: 17.6
Permissive gun laws: 27th out of 50
#8, Nevada
Gun deaths per 100,000: 16.2
Permissive gun laws: 22nd out of 50
#9, Montana
Gun deaths per 100,000: 14.5
Permissive gun laws: 10th out of 50
#10, Wyoming
Gun deaths per 100,000: 14.5
Permissive gun laws: 8th out of 50
#11, Kentucky
Gun deaths per 100,000: 14.4
Permissive gun laws: 5th out of 50
#12, West Virginia
Gun deaths per 100,000: 14.8
Permissive gun laws: 25th out of 50
#13, Tennessee
Gun deaths per 100,000: 15
Permissive gun laws: 31st out of 50
#14, Oklahoma
Gun deaths per 100,000: 13.4
Permissive gun laws: 17th out of 50
#15, Idaho
Gun deaths per 100,000: 12.5
Permissive gun laws: 2nd out of 50
#16, Georgia
Gun deaths per 100,000: 13.1
Permissive gun laws: 13th out of 50
#17, Missouri
Gun deaths per 100,000: 12.9
Permissive gun laws: 12th out of 50
#18, South Carolina
Gun deaths per 100,000: 13.4
Permissive gun laws: 20th out of 50
#19, North Carolina
Gun deaths per 100,000: 12.3
Permissive gun laws: 28th out of 50
#20, Florida
Gun deaths per 100,000: 12.5
Permissive gun laws: 41st out of 50
#21, Kansas
Gun deaths per 100,000: 10.5
Permissive gun laws: 14th out of 50
#22, Indiana
Gun deaths per 100,000: 10.6
Permissive gun laws: 21st out of 50
#23, Texas
Gun deaths per 100,000: 10.7
Permissive gun laws: 32nd out of 50
#24, Michigan
Gun deaths per 100,000: 10.9
Permissive gun laws: 39th out of 50
#25, Maryland
Gun deaths per 100,000: 12.1
Permissive gun laws: 44th out of 50
#26, Colorado
Gun deaths per 100,000: 10.4
Permissive gun laws: 24rd out of 50
#27, Pennsylvania
Gun deaths per 100,000: 10.7
Permissive gun laws: 40th out of 50
#28, Virginia
Gun deaths per 100,000: 10.7
Permissive gun laws: 35th out of 50
#29, Utah
Gun deaths per 100,000: 9.5
Permissive gun laws: 18th out of 50
#30, Vermont
Gun deaths per 100,000: 8.4
Permissive gun laws: 3rd out of 50
#31, Oregon
Gun deaths per 100,000: 10.4
Permissive gun laws: 30th out of 50
#32, North Dakota
Gun deaths per 100,000: 8.9
Permissive gun laws: 15th out of 50
#33, Ohio
Gun deaths per 100,000: 9.6
Permissive gun laws: 29th out of 50
#34, Maine
Gun deaths per 100,000: 8.1
Permissive gun laws: 9th out of 50
#35, Delaware
Gun deaths per 100,000: 9.2
Permissive gun laws: 33rd out of 50
#36, Wisconsin
Gun deaths per 100,000: 8.7
Permissive gun laws: 34th out of 50
#37, Nebraska
Gun deaths per 100,000: 8
Permissive gun laws: 19th out of 50
#38, South Dakota
Gun deaths per 100,000: 6.5
Permissive gun laws: 16th out of 50
#39, Washington
Gun deaths per 100,000: 8.5
Permissive gun laws: 37th out of 50
#40, California
Gun deaths per 100,000: 9
Permissive gun laws: 50th out of 50
#41, New Hampshire
Gun deaths per 100,000: 5.9
Permissive gun laws: 26th out of 50
#42, Minnesota
Gun deaths per 100,000: 6.6
Permissive gun laws: 36th out of 50
#43, Illinois
Gun deaths per 100,000: 8
Permissive gun laws: 45th out of 50
#44, Iowa
Gun deaths per 100,000: 5.3
Permissive gun laws: 38th out of 50
#45, New York
Gun deaths per 100,000: 5.1
Permissive gun laws: 43rd out of 50
#46, New Jersey
Gun deaths per 100,000: 5.2
Permissive gun laws: 49th out of 50
#47, Connecticut
Gun deaths per 100,000: 4.3
Permissive gun laws: 46th out of 50
#48, Rhode Island
Gun deaths per 100,000: 3.5
Permissive gun laws: 42nd out of 50
#49, Massachusetts
Gun deaths per 100,000:3.6
Permissive gun laws: 48th out of 50
#50, Hawaii
Gun deaths per 100,000:2.8
Permissive gun laws: 47th out of 50

deadliest gun states in order

[BARNEYII]

guess 2 wrote:

<quoted text>Any gun control law, just helps out the criminal. Chicago had over 500 gun deaths in 2012 and they have the strictest gun laws in the U S. It ain't working.

500 Murders yes, 500 by gun in 2012, absolute lye.
..........

Chicago experienced its 500th murder of the year on Thursday night, when a 40-year-old man was shot to death in the Austin neighborhood. It was only the second time in the last ten years the city has reached that mark. In 2008, 513 people were murdered.

Source: http://www.nbcchicago.com/blogs/ward-room/Wha ...

By Edward McClelland

Friday, Dec 28, 2012 | Updated 7:15 a.m. CST

I bet you would like us to think those 500 murders were by gun too , don't you.

How about76% were by fire arms.

That would be 380 murders caused by firearms in a city with a population of over 2.7 million people in 2012.

That means that only 0.00014074074% of the population of Chicago were victims of gun violence.

And you say gun laws don't work, the numbers say they do.

[BARNEYII]

dont know nothin wrote:

<quoted text> http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/...
you might learn something.

Thanks for the link, it was interesting.

[Observer]

BARNEYII wrote:

<quoted text>
500 Murders yes, 500 by gun in 2012, absolute lye.
..........
Chicago experienced its 500th murder of the year on Thursday night, when a 40-year-old man was shot to death in the Austin neighborhood. It was only the second time in the last ten years the city has reached that mark. In 2008, 513 people were murdered.
Source: http://www.nbcchicago.com/blogs/ward-room/Wha ...
By Edward McClelland
Friday, Dec 28, 2012 | Updated 7:15 a.m. CST
I bet you would like us to think those 500 murders were by gun too , don't you.
How about76% were by fire arms.
That would be 380 murders caused by firearms in a city with a population of over 2.7 million people in 2012.
That means that only 0.00014074074% of the population of Chicago were victims of gun violence.
And you say gun laws don't work, the numbers say they do.

But based on 2011 figures of less than 9000 fire arm related deaths in the USA and a population in excess of 300 million, that would put the Chicago rate at about 5 times the national rate. You can prove anything you want with statistics, except that you have a clue as to the real world.

[BARNEYII]

Observer wrote:

<quoted text>
But based on 2011 figures of less than 9000 fire arm related deaths in the USA and a population in excess of 300 million, that would put the Chicago rate at about 5 times the national rate. You can prove anything you want with statistics, except that you have a clue as to the real world.

hold on a minute, let's have a look at that'


Chicago rate avg per CIT.--0.00014074074


National rate(Inc CHI) 8583 deaths caused by gun shot.

2011 Census USA POP 3.5 million
8583/3.5 million = 0.0002764251


looks like to me Chicago is still O.00013568436 % below the National avg.

What happen to your real world 5%?

BTW you really do not want to get into a comparison game with this conversation>

[BARNEYII]

BARNEYII wrote:

<quoted text>
hold on a minute, let's have a look at that'
Chicago rate avg per CIT.--0.00014074074
National rate(Inc CHI) 8583 deaths caused by gun shot.
2011 Census USA POP 3.5 million
8583/3.5 million = 0.0002764251
looks like to me Chicago is still O.00013568436 % below the National avg.
What happen to your real world 5%?
BTW you really do not want to get into a comparison game with this conversation>

There you go boys,I butchered than one for you , that should keep you busy Barney bashing for a while and be correct for once at the same time,

who says I am not a generous guy?


See YA Later kids

[Guest]

I have one question for you retards... When the mentally ill cant buy a gun how in the world could a democrat ever purchase one legally!? That sums it up.

[Observer]

BARNEYII wrote:

<quoted text>
hold on a minute, let's have a look at that'
Chicago rate avg per CIT.--0.00014074074
National rate(Inc CHI) 8583 deaths caused by gun shot.
2011 Census USA POP 3.5 million
8583/3.5 million = 0.0002764251
looks like to me Chicago is still O.00013568436 % below the National avg.
What happen to your real world 5%?
BTW you really do not want to get into a comparison game with this conversation>

Let us back into your stats, three hundred million divided by two point seven million, one hundred eleven. Chicago has how many murders, something like three eighty, now three eighty multiplied by one hundred eleven would make the national death toll something like forty two thousand, I think you haven't mastered the decimal point yet. Chicago has less than one percent of the population but over four percent of the gun related murders, you do the math Einstein.

[Observer]

BARNEYII wrote:

<quoted text>
There you go boys,I butchered than one for you , that should keep you busy Barney bashing for a while and be correct for once at the same time,
who says I am not a generous guy?
See YA Later kids

i slept thru this reply but I agree you generally butcher numbers but in your favor

[Billy Bob]

Guest wrote:

I have one question for you retards... When the mentally ill cant buy a gun how in the world could a democrat ever purchase one legally!? That sums it up.

Funny thing is you Republicans bitch when democrats get in and say its bad for the country but when the Democrats are in the commerce from gun sales goes through the roof and gun shop owners are making a killing.

[Reality Check]

dont know nothin wrote:

<quoted text>That decision is between a woman and her doctor. It may save the womans life. It may be because she was raped. There are many other factors. Before abortion clinics came along women were having abortions on their own and sometimes killing or severaly injuring themselves in the process. Who are you to tell someone what they can or cannot do with their own body before a predetermined time agreed by the general populous and a vast majority of the United States?

Do whatever you want to your own body. It's the body of the baby I'm concerned with. If the baby gets killed, why do you care how? Murder or abortion, does it really matter? Is the baby less dead in an abortion. Who are you telling someone that they can justify murder simply because it's their body? Oh I forgot, liberals think when an abortion is performed, what comes out is just a mass of human tissue since the mother decided she didn't want a baby.

[Eleanor Rigby]

BARNEYII wrote:

<quoted text>
hold on a minute, let's have a look at that'
Chicago rate avg per CIT.--0.00014074074
National rate(Inc CHI) 8583 deaths caused by gun shot.
2011 Census USA POP 3.5 million
8583/3.5 million = 0.0002764251
looks like to me Chicago is still O.00013568436 % below the National avg.
What happen to your real world 5%?
BTW you really do not want to get into a comparison game with this conversation>

Here is a prime example of why one should never go full retard. The USA population is much more than 3.5 million, my special friend. The last I heard it was well over 300 million. So, your national rate should have been (8583/300,000,000).00002861, which is a bit smaller than .00013568436. 

[blue]

Eleanor Rigby wrote:

<quoted text>
Here is a prime example of why one should never go full retard. The USA population is much more than 3.5 million, my special friend. The last I heard it was well over 300 million. So, your national rate should have been (8583/300,000,000).00002861, which is a bit smaller than .00013568436. 

Eleanor Rigby did the thought that he coud be screwing with you morons when he posted that, read it agaim. LMAO, and you fell face into it.

[Old Army]

Statistics don't lie, but Barney uses statistics to lie. Hypocrite.

[blue]

Eleanor Rigby wrote:

<quoted text>
Here is a prime example of why one should never go full retard. The USA population is much more than 3.5 million, my special friend. The last I heard it was well over 300 million. So, your national rate should have been (8583/300,000,000).00002861, which is a bit smaller than .00013568436. 

Another thing, you would need to remove the Chicago murderds to compare the total 8083/300.000 0.00002694333
Which is a bit higher! 3712.0014414 %

[BARNEYII]

Observer wrote:

<quoted text>
Let us back into your stats, three hundred million divided by two point seven million, one hundred eleven. Chicago has how many murders, something like three eighty, now three eighty multiplied by one hundred eleven would make the national death toll something like forty two thousand, I think you haven't mastered the decimal point yet. Chicago has less than one percent of the population but over four percent of the gun related murders, you do the math Einstein.

and another fell for his tricks, you not see you were bein made fun of when he said this'

"There you go boys,I butchered than one for you , that should keep you busy Barney bashing for a while and be correct for once at the same time,

who says I am not a generous guy?"

See YA Later kids ..

Damn, you idiots are giving us republicans bad names.

[Old Army]

Billy Bob wrote:

<quoted text>Funny thing is you Republicans bitch when democrats get in and say its bad for the country but when the Democrats are in the commerce from gun sales goes through the roof and gun shop owners are making a killing.

Huh? Could you repeat that rambling statement in English.

[Observer]

BARNEYII wrote:

<quoted text>
and another fell for his tricks, you not see you were bein made fun of when he said this'
"There you go boys,I butchered than one for you , that should keep you busy Barney bashing for a while and be correct for once at the same time,
who says I am not a generous guy?"
See YA Later kids ..
Damn, you idiots are giving us republicans bad names.

You were either mistaken or lying, we are used to both from you.

[Gietz]

see allot of NUMBERS being tossed around! numbers are funny animals, they can lead you to think allot of things. However if one understands the numbers he is looking at ~ then some good assumptions can be made: Death by GUN would include all deaths caused by a GUN, like if one hunter shoots another hunter (on purpose or by real accident) So to see if GUN CONTROL LAWS work I would guess you would like to see the numbers for those deaths by a gun when the killer was out to do harm? RIGHT