States with strict gun laws found to ...

States with strict gun laws found to have fewer shooting deaths

There are 5075 comments on the Reuters story from Mar 7, 2013, titled States with strict gun laws found to have fewer shooting deaths. In it, Reuters reports that:

States that have more laws restricting gun ownership have lower rates of death from shootings, both suicides and homicides, a study by researchers at Boston Children's Hospital and Harvard University found.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Reuters.

GunShow1

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#4498 May 3, 2013
tha Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
Lies and smears and false allegations, the hallmark of the modern GOPee, Teabagger Party, and noisy Rightedia.
You're all filth. Here's to you shooting each other with your "freedom weapons" and leaving the nation clean once again.
"First Lady Rosalynn Carter also personally met with Jones on multiple occasions, corresponded with him about Cuba, and spoke with him at the grand opening of the San Francisco DEMOCRATIC Party Headquarters where Jones garnered louder applause than Mrs. Carter."

Vote demonRat and drink the kool-aid!

GunShow1

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#4499 May 3, 2013
tha Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
Ninety percent or better support extended background checks, which the GOPee in the Senate obstructed and prevented from passing.
Why?
Dead schoolkids = Freedom, that's why.
USA TODAY Poll: Public support for gun control ebbs
Susan Page, USA TODAY8:14 a.m. EDT April 23, 2013

WASHINGTON -- Four months after the shooting rampage at Sandy Hook Elementary School, a USA TODAY Poll finds support for a new gun-control law ebbing as prospects for passage on Capitol Hill seem to fade.

Americans are more narrowly divided on the issue than in recent months, and backing for a bill has slipped below 50%, the poll finds. By 49%-45%, those surveyed favor Congress passing a new gun-control law. In an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll in early April, 55% had backed a stricter gun law, which was down from 61% in February.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2...

slipped below 50%

slipped below 50%

slipped below 50%

slipped below 50%

slipped below 50%

slipped below 50%

slipped below 50%

slipped below 50%

GunShow1

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#4500 May 3, 2013
spocko wrote:
<quoted text>
“your guns must be in your hands, on your hips or in your gunsafe – no exceptions”
It's been proposed years ago by responsible gun owners, it's simple and it's very easy to understand but most importantly it's the single most effective thing we can do! Yet, f-ing loons like you can't even get behind something as simple and effectual as this - you sorry-ass gunloons have no shame or sense of community – just as long as you can play with your guns!
"The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms shall NOT be infringed".

Infringed

pp. Broken; violated; transgresses.

I'm sure you understand what "shall NOT" means. Having heard it from all those little school kids all your life.

Now get back in line and drink you kool-aid.

Since: Apr 09

Elmont, Long Island NY

#4501 May 3, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
"The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms shall NOT be infringed".
Infringed
pp. Broken; violated; transgresses.
I'm sure you understand what "shall NOT" means. Having heard it from all those little school kids all your life.
Now get back in line and drink you kool-aid.
Now please explain how background checks infringe on the right of Americans to bear arms?

Well except for convicted felons, mentally unstable Americans that is???

Since: Nov 11

United States

#4503 May 3, 2013
Karma is a_______ wrote:
<quoted text>Now please explain how background checks infringe on the right of Americans to bear arms?

Well except for convicted felons, mentally unstable Americans that is???
And Liberals!

Since: Apr 09

Elmont, Long Island NY

#4504 May 3, 2013
martinezjosei wrote:
<quoted text>
And Liberals!
dude, I have a newsflash for you. I'm a LIBERAL with a large collection of weapons, including a M-1 Garand, M-48 Mauser,'03 Springfield, some nice hunting rifles and a number of sidearms.

I am also very much in favor of background checks. I really don't understand the opposition to them. Having kooks and felons get their hands on weapons give us responsible gun owners a bad name and makes it harder to own them.

Its kinda like the Police code where they don't rat bad cops out. That really doesn't make sense to me. If I'm a good cop, why would want to protect some scumbag bad cop? They only give police departments a bad rep.

so maybe you can be serious and explain the opposition to background checks to me??

GUN CONTROL: KEEPING YOUR ROUNDS IN THE BLACK

“Stop the Brain Rot”

Since: Jan 12

Take a Looonng Vacation

#4505 May 3, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
"First Lady Rosalynn Carter also personally met with Jones on multiple occasions, corresponded with him about Cuba, and spoke with him at the grand opening of the San Francisco DEMOCRATIC Party Headquarters where Jones garnered louder applause than Mrs. Carter."
Vote demonRat and drink the kool-aid!
Mindless, repetitive off-topic postings winning your battle for you, gunny? LOL

GunShow1

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#4506 May 3, 2013
Karma is a_______ wrote:
<quoted text>
Now please explain how background checks infringe on the right of Americans to bear arms?
Well except for convicted felons, mentally unstable Americans that is???
What part of "shall NOT be infringed" do you NOT understand? Our governments are EXPRESSLY FORBIDDEN from contravening that right in ANY way, shape, or form. The ONLY power they have related to the subject. Is to provide punishment for abuse or misuse of a Constitutionally SECURED right.

"Background checks" are a form of PRIOR RESTRAINT. Which is Constitutionally REPUGNANT. And acts as a form of 'control' of a right the government has NO delegated authority to encroach upon. For it provides the government the means of knowing who has arms, how many, and what type. Which arms, are intended to be employed as a check on the governments themselves. In the event they become usurpers or tyrannical.

WOULD YOU LET YOUR POTENTIAL ENEMY KNOW WHAT WEAPONS YOU HAVE. WEAPONS WHICH ARE INTENDED TO BE EMPLOYED AGAINST THAT ENEMY?

NO. Only a complete fool would.

GunShow1

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#4507 May 3, 2013
tha Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
Mindless, repetitive off-topic postings winning your battle for you, gunny? LOL
By showing that the enemy are kool-aid drinking fools? Must have STUNG you freaks quite a bit, eh?
Wall Street Government

Sebastian, FL

#4508 May 3, 2013
But teabaggers didn't say a peep when George signed the "Patriot" Act violating the rest of our rights, in fact they defended it.

STUPID teabaggers.

GunShow1

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#4509 May 3, 2013
Karma is a_______ wrote:
<quoted text>
dude, I have a newsflash for you. I'm a LIBERAL with a large collection of weapons, including a M-1 Garand, M-48 Mauser,'03 Springfield, some nice hunting rifles and a number of sidearms.
I am also very much in favor of background checks. I really don't understand the opposition to them. Having kooks and felons get their hands on weapons give us responsible gun owners a bad name and makes it harder to own them.
Its kinda like the Police code where they don't rat bad cops out. That really doesn't make sense to me. If I'm a good cop, why would want to protect some scumbag bad cop? They only give police departments a bad rep.
so maybe you can be serious and explain the opposition to background checks to me??
GUN CONTROL: KEEPING YOUR ROUNDS IN THE BLACK
Then you are NOT a TRUE "liberal". Rather, you have joined among the ranks of the PHONY communist-socialist STYLED LIE-berals.

WHAT PART OF "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" DO >YOU< NOT UNDERSTAND?
Your

Huntsville, AL

#4510 May 3, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>

WOULD YOU LET YOUR POTENTIAL ENEMY KNOW WHAT WEAPONS YOU HAVE. WEAPONS WHICH ARE INTENDED TO BE EMPLOYED AGAINST THAT ENEMY?

.
potential enemy?

Coo-Koo, coo-koo

Another armed lunatic terrorist

Since: Apr 09

Elmont, Long Island NY

#4511 May 3, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
What part of "shall NOT be infringed" do you NOT understand? Our governments are EXPRESSLY FORBIDDEN from contravening that right in ANY way, shape, or form. The ONLY power they have related to the subject. Is to provide punishment for abuse or misuse of a Constitutionally SECURED right.
"Background checks" are a form of PRIOR RESTRAINT. Which is Constitutionally REPUGNANT. And acts as a form of 'control' of a right the government has NO delegated authority to encroach upon. For it provides the government the means of knowing who has arms, how many, and what type. Which arms, are intended to be employed as a check on the governments themselves. In the event they become usurpers or tyrannical.
WOULD YOU LET YOUR POTENTIAL ENEMY KNOW WHAT WEAPONS YOU HAVE. WEAPONS WHICH ARE INTENDED TO BE EMPLOYED AGAINST THAT ENEMY?
NO. Only a complete fool would.
so you are for unrestricted access for everyone to own and possess guns
does that include
the mentally insane
the criminally insane
self admitted American born Muslim Terrorists
children
felons
gang bangers
rapists
manic depressives
your average run of the mill psycho

so in your opinion citizens should have the right to possess
flamethrowers
anti-tank missiles
portable SAM's
tanks
155mm artillery howitzers
claymore mines
105mm recoiless rifles
a Maw-Deuce

Since: Apr 09

Elmont, Long Island NY

#4512 May 3, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Then you are NOT a TRUE "liberal". Rather, you have joined among the ranks of the PHONY communist-socialist STYLED LIE-berals.
WHAT PART OF "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" DO >YOU< NOT UNDERSTAND?
the part where we prevent mentally incompetent people, ex-felons, terrorists, drug dealers, gang-bangers from legally purchasing guns.

Oh and BTW I know you conservative are only capable of binary logic, but the world is not black and white, either/or. People with an IQ greater than their shoe size are capable of having a variety of positions that are between the polar extremes.....

GunShow1

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#4514 May 3, 2013
Karma is a_______ wrote:
<quoted text>
so you are for unrestricted access for everyone to own and possess guns
does that include
the mentally insane
the criminally insane
self admitted American born Muslim Terrorists
children
felons
gang bangers
rapists
manic depressives
your average run of the mill psycho
so in your opinion citizens should have the right to possess
flamethrowers
anti-tank missiles
portable SAM's
tanks
155mm artillery howitzers
claymore mines
105mm recoiless rifles
a Maw-Deuce
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."--Albert Einstein

Has 'gun control' EVER worked? NO, it has ALWAYS made things WORSE:

Harvard Study: Gun Control Is Counterproductive
http://gunshowonthenet.blogspot.com/2013/04/h...

United States Crime Rates 1960 - 2011 in relation to Gun Control Laws/NICS Background checks
http://gunshowonthenet.blogspot.com/2013/04/u...

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."--Albert Einstein

I REFUSE to follow the dictates of INSANE kool-aid drinking freaks.

“Stop the Brain Rot”

Since: Jan 12

Take a Looonng Vacation

#4515 May 3, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
By showing that the enemy are kool-aid drinking fools? Must have STUNG you freaks quite a bit, eh?
You and your fellow gun nuts are the enemies of America, and drink NRA's kool-aid, so how do you figure?

Dihonestly as usual, I assume.

“Stop the Brain Rot”

Since: Jan 12

Take a Looonng Vacation

#4516 May 3, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Then you are NOT a TRUE "liberal". Rather, you have joined among the ranks of the PHONY communist-socialist STYLED LIE-berals.
WHAT PART OF "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" DO >YOU< NOT UNDERSTAND?
Jesus, you're either drunk or in need of psychiatric care. You sound like a raging loon...

GunShow1

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#4517 May 3, 2013
Karma is a_______ wrote:
<quoted text>
the part where we prevent mentally incompetent people, ex-felons, terrorists, drug dealers, gang-bangers from legally purchasing guns.
Oh and BTW I know you conservative are only capable of binary logic, but the world is not black and white, either/or. People with an IQ greater than their shoe size are capable of having a variety of positions that are between the polar extremes.....
WHY are the "mentally incompetent people, ex-felons, terrorists, drug dealers, gang-bangers" still on the streets, kool-aid drinker?

That's RIGHT, because of LIE-beral policies!

Get back in the kool-aid line.

“Stop the Brain Rot”

Since: Jan 12

Take a Looonng Vacation

#4518 May 3, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."--Albert Einstein
Has 'gun control' EVER worked? NO, it has ALWAYS made things WORSE:
...EDITED....
Wrong, auto-abuser, it's worked quite well in Australia:

http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2013/...

That's their former CONSERVATIVE PM saying that it's "not a left-right issue, but a public safety issue."

He's smarter than you. Pay attention.

Since: Apr 09

Elmont, Long Island NY

#4519 May 3, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."--Albert Einstein
Has 'gun control' EVER worked? NO, it has ALWAYS made things WORSE:
Harvard Study: Gun Control Is Counterproductive
http://gunshowonthenet.blogspot.com/2013/04/h...
United States Crime Rates 1960 - 2011 in relation to Gun Control Laws/NICS Background checks
http://gunshowonthenet.blogspot.com/2013/04/u...
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."--Albert Einstein
I REFUSE to follow the dictates of INSANE kool-aid drinking freaks.
first, gun control is a joke in the states, and any study is flawed for a multitude of reasons
the biggest being that there is a myriad of different gun control laws in all states. many of the guns used in crimes committed in NY, a state with strict gun control laws come from Virginia. same with California, they come out of Arizona

check out Australia if you want to see if gun control laws work. The had mass shooting in a school. they then passes very strict gun control laws within months. care to guess how many mass shootings they've had in the nearly 20 years????

NONE

care to know what the gun homicide rate is
or the number of crimes committed with guns

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Harvard University Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Yale OKs gender-neutral bathrooms, joining 150+... May 24 Three Days Paleo 1
News Bathroom law puts AG Loretta Lynch in spotlight May 10 david traversa 1
News Your View: James L. O'Brien - Students are the ... May 4 Lindy 1
News Looking Up Longfellow Street May 4 Barbara 1
News Malia Obama to take gap year before entering Ha... May 2 Three Days 2
News Malia Obama to take 'gap year,' enter Harvard i... May 1 Three Days 1
News Study: Employment rate of illegal immigrant men... Mar '16 ronnie 5
More from around the web