States with strict gun laws found to have fewer shooting deaths

Mar 7, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Reuters

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.

Comments
3,361 - 3,380 of 5,070 Comments Last updated Aug 27, 2013

“So long to you, Righties”

Since: Jan 12

keep suckin' and whiffin'!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4179
Apr 22, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Shelly Bl wrote:
<quoted text>That is the talking point. But, in reality, 90% of those polled support expanded background checks. That is 1,110 people. Less than 0.000005% of Americans. Which probably blows the 90% of all Americans claim out of the water.
If 90% of ALL Americans wanted expanded background checks Senator's phones, Email & snail mail would have been swamped. None of this happened. So the agenda belongs to the push pull poll buyers (as with ANY poll). Lies, damn lies & statistics.
IOW, if you don't like the conclusions then just blame statistics. If you DO like them, then tell us how great, how SCIENTIFIC statistics are.

LOL (shaking head)

“So long to you, Righties”

Since: Jan 12

keep suckin' and whiffin'!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4180
Apr 22, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

4

Robert Newell wrote:
<quoted text>
You get BS info from the anti-gun crowd and believe it. The NRA represents it millions of members. Yes, the gun and ammo manufacturers support the NRA, but nothing like its members do.
__________
"the anti gun control crowd's claim that gun control means the gov't is going to seize your guns."
__________
The government is not going to seize guns, but there are many elected officials that openly admit they wish they could. That is why this POS's need to be put in their place.
Not half as much BS as we get from the PRO-gun crowd and the lobbyists at the NRA.

The NRA wants to help its supporters sell and buy guns, whether to Joe Hunter or Jose Drug Gang Assassin. Money talks, that's their rule.

Since: Feb 13

Amarillo, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4181
Apr 22, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

tha Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
IOW, if you don't like the conclusions then just blame statistics. If you DO like them, then tell us how great, how SCIENTIFIC statistics are.
LOL (shaking head)
I have NEVER paid any attention to polls, whether I am for or against the cause and results. They are easily manipulated. No matter WHAT the cause. As previously mentioned, feel free to say 90% of those polled want expanded background checks and you are right. But to say 90% of ALL Americans want expanded background checks is obviously not a valid statement. Can you honestly say, with a straight face, that if 90% of ALL Americans wanted the same thing the Email, phone calls & snail mail wouldn't have been over the edge with support for it at EVERY Senator's office. No matter WHAT the "thugs" at the NRA did or said.

I also am shaking my head at your tunnel vision on this. Your "IOW" summation of what I stated is not even close.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4182
Apr 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

tha Professor wrote:
<quoted text>Except that I just proved that 90% of the American people WANTED background checks, doofus, which blows your claims out of the water.

The "agenda" here is yours and the thugs at the NRA...
How did you prove that? You never post anything that proves what you say. You always post as if your words are gospel.

Since: Feb 06

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4183
Apr 22, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

tha Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
Not half as much BS as we get from the PRO-gun crowd and the lobbyists at the NRA.
The NRA wants to help its supporters sell and buy guns, whether to Joe Hunter or Jose Drug Gang Assassin. Money talks, that's their rule.
You have no idea what the NRA does.
Go pound sand

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4184
Apr 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
stomp stomp stomp rubber...glue...anything you say dear
"The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms shall NOT be infringed".

"...What is a Constitution? It is the form of government, delineated by the mighty hand of the people, in which certain first principles of fundamental laws are established. The Constitution is certain and fixed; it contains the permanent will of the people, and is the supreme law of the land; it is paramount to the power of the Legisature, and can be revoked or altered only by the authority that made it. The life-giving principle and the death-doing stroke must proceed from the same hand. What are Legislatures? Creatures of the Constitution; they owe their existence to the Constitution: they derive their powers from the Constitution: It is their commission; and, therefore, all their acts must be conformable to it, or else they will be void. The Constitution is the work or will of the People themselves, in their original, sovereign, and unlimited capacity. Law is the work or will of the Legislature in their derivative and subordinate capacity. The one is the work of the Creator, and the other of the Creature. The Constitution fixes LIMITS to the exercise of legislative authority, and prescribes the orbit within which it MUST move. In short, gentlemen, the Constitution is the sun of the political system, around which all Legislative, Executive and Judicial bodies MUST revolve. Whatever may be the case in other countries, yet in this there can be no doubt, that every act of the Legislature, repugnant to the Constitution, as absolutely VOID."--Justice Patterson, U.S. Supreme Court, VANHORNE'S LESSEE v. DORRANCE, 2 U.S. 304 (1795), 2 U.S. 304 (F.Cas.) 2 Dall. 304.

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4185
Apr 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

tha Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
Not half as much BS as we get from the PRO-gun crowd and the lobbyists at the NRA.
The NRA wants to help its supporters sell and buy guns, whether to Joe Hunter or Jose Drug Gang Assassin. Money talks, that's their rule.
"The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms shall NOT be infringed".

"We condemn, and with arms in our hands,--a resource which Freemen will never part with,--we oppose the claim and exercise of unconstitutional powers"--Journals of the Continental Congress, Dec. 6, 1775.

You do understand the meaning of the word "free", don't you? So if "Jose Drug Gang Assassin" is walking free, why isn't our government going after him? Instead of trying to blatantly violate our Constitution?

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4186
Apr 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

tha Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
Your website isn't coming up too good. And if you'd read post #4080, you'd have seen me make these two cites:
Quinnipiac University poll, March 26-April 1, 2013. "Do you support or oppose requiring background checks for all gun buyers?" Support: 91 percent. Oppose: 8 percent.
CBS News poll, March 20-24, 2013. "Would you favor or oppose background checks on all potential gun buyers?" Favor: 90 percent. Oppose: 8 percent.
Meaningless:

"The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms shall NOT be infringed".

"...Surely no. As to these points there was no devolution of power; the authority was purposely WITHHELD, and RESERVED by the people to themselves. If the Legislature had passed an act declaring, that, in future, there should be no trial by Jury, would it have been obligatory? No: It would have been VOID for want of jurisdiction, or constitutional extent of power. The right of trial by Jury is a fundamental law, made sacred by the Constitution, and CANNOT be legislated away. The Constitution of a State is stable and permanent, NOT to be worked upon by the temper of the times, NOR to rise and fall with the tide of events: notwithstanding the competition of opposing interests, and the violence of contending parties, it remains FIRM and IMMOVEABLE, as a mountain amidst the strife of storms, or a rock in the ocean amidst the raging of the waves. I take it to be a clear position; that if a legislative act oppugns a constitutional principle, the former MUST give way, and be REJECTED on the score of REPUGNANCE. I hold it to be a position equally clear and found, that, in such case, it will be the DUTY of the Court to ADHERE to the Constitution, and to declare the act NULL and VOID. The Constitution is the BASIS of legislative authority; it lies at the foundation of ALL law, and is a RULE and commission by which both Legislators and Judges are to proceed. It is an important principle, which, in the discussion of questions of the present kind, ought NEVER to be lost sight of, that the Judiciary in this country is not a subordinate, but co-ordinate, branch of the government...."--Justice Patterson, U.S. Supreme Court, VANHORNE'S LESSEE v. DORRANCE, 2 U.S. 304 (1795), 2 U.S. 304 (F.Cas.) 2 Dall. 304.

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4187
Apr 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Robert Newell wrote:
<quoted text>
You get BS info from the anti-gun crowd and believe it. The NRA represents it millions of members. Yes, the gun and ammo manufacturers support the NRA, but nothing like its members do.
__________
"the anti gun control crowd's claim that gun control means the gov't is going to seize your guns."
__________
The government is not going to seize guns, but there are many elected officials that openly admit they wish they could. That is why this POS's need to be put in their place.
Then kindly explain why the governments in; California, Chicago, Ill., New Orleans - after Katrina, and New York have ALL "seized guns" already?(Three of those examples being the highest population centers in our country).

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4188
Apr 22, 2013
 
Robert Newell wrote:
<quoted text>
You have no idea what the NRA does.
Go pound sand
America's largest gun control organization

by Vin Suprynowicz

On Jan. 16, 1968, in an address to the New York State University law school in Buffalo, Sen. Robert Kennedy, D-N.Y., stated: "I think it is a terrible indictment of the National Rifle Association that they haven't supported any legislation to try and control the misuse of rifles and pistols in this country."

NRA Executive Vice President Franklin L. Orth took great umbrage at this remark in the October 1968 issue of the NRA's magazine, The American Rifleman, terming Sen. Kennedy's accusation "a great smear of a great American organization." Mr. Orth then went on to point out, "The National Rifle Association has been in support of workable, enforceable gun control legislation since its very inception in 1871."

Really? But the NRA has always been portrayed in the mainstream press as a radical anti-gun-control organization. Is it? Has it ever been?

In that 1968 issue of The American Rifleman, associate editor Alan C. Webber picked up the defense of the NRA's gun-control credentials. I quote again from the NRA's own, official organ:

"Item: The late Karl T. Frederick, an NRA president, served for years as special consultant with the Commissioners on Uniform State Laws to frame the Uniform Firearms Act of 1930.... Salient provisions of the Act require a license to carry a pistol concealed on one's person or in a vehicle; require the purchaser of a pistol to give information about himself which is submitted by the seller to the local police authorities; specify a 48-hour time lapse between application for purchase and delivery."

Remember, I'm not asking whether you think these are good ideas. I'm asking whether the NRA is the pack of wild-eyed, take-no-prisoners, "pure language of the Second Amendment, take my gun from my cold dead fingers" radical extremists which the national press corps would have us believe. In fact, can the NRA rightly be said to be a "gun rights" organization, at all?

"Item," Editor Webber of The American Rifleman continued back in 1968: "The NRA supported the National Firearms Act of 1934 which taxes and requires registration of such firearms as machine guns, sawed-off rifles and sawed-off shotguns....

"NRA currently backs several Senate and House bills which, through amendment, would put new teeth into the National and Federal Firearms Acts.... "

Nor is there much room to believe the NRA has changed its stripes in the past 23 years....
http://www.citizenreviewonline.org/june_2001/...

“So long to you, Righties”

Since: Jan 12

keep suckin' and whiffin'!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4189
Apr 22, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Shelly Bl wrote:
<quoted text>I have NEVER paid any attention to polls, whether I am for or against the cause and results. They are easily manipulated. No matter WHAT the cause. As previously mentioned, feel free to say 90% of those polled want expanded background checks and you are right. But to say 90% of ALL Americans want expanded background checks is obviously not a valid statement. Can you honestly say, with a straight face, that if 90% of ALL Americans wanted the same thing the Email, phone calls & snail mail wouldn't have been over the edge with support for it at EVERY Senator's office. No matter WHAT the "thugs" at the NRA did or said.
I also am shaking my head at your tunnel vision on this. Your "IOW" summation of what I stated is not even close.
Because something is favored in poll questions doesn't mean everyone's writing/e-mailing/calling Congress. Most of us know they'll do nothing, so why bother? And right-wing cranks do most of the calling.

My "vision" was a non-violent American, but I don't care anymore. Let people shoot each other, makes no difference to me. Most of 'em will be gun nuts anyway, legally or not.

“So long to you, Righties”

Since: Jan 12

keep suckin' and whiffin'!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4191
Apr 22, 2013
 

Judged:

4

4

3

Robert Newell wrote:
<quoted text>
You have no idea what the NRA does.
Go pound sand
Only in the sense that they're probably even BIGGER scumbags than I'd previously thought, Bobby girl.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4192
Apr 22, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Karma is a_______ wrote:
So either you are trying to back away from your claim that I said it is illegal to hunt moose in Canada, which I never did,
Are you mixing up your aliases, Homo One?

Did you miss they twenty or so direct quotes?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4193
Apr 22, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Dr-Sniper wrote:
How did you prove that?
Proved dozens of times, Dr.Deflection.

Rolling around on the floor with your hands over your ears screaming "nah nah nah nah" doesn't mean proof doesn't exist.

Wipe your chin, honey.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4195
Apr 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

tha Professor wrote:
<quoted text>IOW, if you don't like the conclusions then just blame statistics. If you DO like them, then tell us how great, how SCIENTIFIC statistics are.

LOL (shaking head)
So now all statistics are created equal? You think a poll carries as much statistical weight as say, FBI published Statistics, or published Census information?
Typical all or none liberal mentality.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4196
Apr 22, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Dr-Sniper wrote:
<quoted text>
So now all statistics are created equal? You think a poll
Eight polls.

Wipe your chin, Dr.Deflection.

PS: the FBI doesn't carry "statistics" on public opinion re: universal background checks. Those indicate that 90 percent of Americans support universal background checks.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4197
Apr 23, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

You see people, liberals can only imply that you said something you did not say, when faced with the truth. In the process, they make your point, and are too stupid to realize it.
See? Topix is fun!

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4198
Apr 23, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Dr-Sniper wrote:
You see people, liberals can only imply
Poor Dr.Deflection finds comparing apples to oranges doesn't work.

“So long to you, Righties”

Since: Jan 12

keep suckin' and whiffin'!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4199
Apr 23, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Just An Honest Asshat wrote:
So how did that gun control thing work out for you libs?
Aww, look, the gunny is PROUD his side stalled gun law reform. He's gonna be cheering his a-- off for that next mall shooting, celebrity suicide, or slaughter of elementary school kids.

Because those things make him FREE...

“So long to you, Righties”

Since: Jan 12

keep suckin' and whiffin'!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4200
Apr 23, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Dr-Sniper wrote:
<quoted text>
So now all statistics are created equal? You think a poll carries as much statistical weight as say, FBI published Statistics, or published Census information?
Typical all or none liberal mentality.
Show me the "FBI published statisstics or published census information" which shows that the vast majority of Americans didn't support extended background checks at the beginning of this month (April).

Let's see 'em, wiseguy.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••