States with strict gun laws found to ...

States with strict gun laws found to have fewer shooting deaths

There are 5076 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.

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#4788 May 12, 2013
One Who Knows Stuff wrote:
<quoted text>
Davey you been boring topix readers for years with your copy/paste and your paranoid delusions. Do you really think you've helped America by showing everyone what a broken down goon you are?
ALL of the current 'gun control laws' are UNCONSTITUTIONAL:

For direct evidence:

Why were there NO 'gun control laws' from 1791 all the way up to 1934?

WHY would it take the government that long to pass a 'gun control law', if it actually felt it had the 'power' to?

Even after a CIVIL WAR?

After which the 14th amendment was passed in order, among other rights, to give the freed slave the Right to Keep and Bear arms?

EXPLAIN THAT, you treasonous pos.
Are you

Santa Fe, NM

#4789 May 12, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>

EXPLAIN THAT,
asking why you haven't done anything yet about your tourettes or why you are so stupid?

Since: Apr 09

Elmont, Long Island NY

#4790 May 12, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
ALL of the current 'gun control laws' are UNCONSTITUTIONAL:
For direct evidence:
Why were there NO 'gun control laws' from 1791 all the way up to 1934?
WHY would it take the government that long to pass a 'gun control law', if it actually felt it had the 'power' to?
Even after a CIVIL WAR?
After which the 14th amendment was passed in order, among other rights, to give the freed slave the Right to Keep and Bear arms?
EXPLAIN THAT, you treasonous pos.
as for why were there no gun control laws until 1934, that easy. because up to around then, most guns were simple rifles. Then came along the thompson sub machine gun and the BAR. It took a while, but the gov't soon realized it needed to control automatic firearms.

as for the 2nd amendment, most of you wack jobs have it wrong. The founding fathers didn't add that amendment to threaten the Federal gov't if it didn't behave, but to protect it. The 2nd amendment came about because of Shay' rebellion. The gov't needed a militia to protect it.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#4792 May 12, 2013
Karma is a_______ wrote:
<quoted text>
as for why were there no gun control laws until 1934, that easy. because up to around then, most guns were simple rifles.
There have been gun control laws in the USA for two hundred years.

You forget: every time GayDavy opens his mouth, he lies.

Whatever he says: it's a lie.

Remember: he lies so much he has to change his alias every month.

Remember the westerns where cowboys where told they had to hang up their guns before entering town?

Remember: Gay Davy doesn't know what he is talking about and he lies with every post.

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#4793 May 12, 2013
Karma is a_______ wrote:
<quoted text>
as for
LIAR. Shay's was the reason We The People DEMANDED the 2nd Amendment. Because the perverse government of Massachusetts DISARMED those that participated in the Rebellion. Which caused fellow patriots from surrounding states to come flying, with arms in hand, To FORCE Massachusetts to overturn the perverse law. WHICH WAS THEN DONE BY THE GOVERNOR.

As for the rest of your ignorant drooling:

"If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government ... The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms..."--Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers No. 28.

"...Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the PEOPLE AT LARGE, than to have them properly ARMED and EQUIPPED .... but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, LITTLE, if at ALL, INFERIOR to them in discipline and the USE OF ARMS, who stand ready to DEFEND THEIR OWN RIGHTS, and those of their fellow citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army; and the best possible security against it, if it should exist."--Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist No. 29, Independent Journal, Wednesday, January 9, 1788.

"Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes .... Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion, that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in actual possession, than the debased subjects of arbitrary power would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors. Let us rather no longer insult them with the supposition that they can ever reduce themselves to the necessity of making the experiment, by a blind and tame submission to the long train of insidious measures which must precede and produce it."--James Madison, The Federalist Papers No. 46, Tuesday, January 29, 1788.

Take a hike, you lying treasonous troll.

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#4794 May 12, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
lies with every post.
Why are you joined in the conspiracy to overthrow We The People's Constitution? And this by defending the tyrannical usurpations perpetrated by our perverse public servants in governments? In order to betray your fellow citizens into slavery? What was the price paid to you for your treachory? Was it more than the thirty pieces of silver paid to Judas?
zeek

Collinsville, VA

#4795 May 13, 2013
One Who Knows Stuff wrote:
<quoted text>
Davey you been boring topix readers for years with your copy/paste and your paranoid delusions. Do you really think you've helped America by showing everyone what a broken down goon you are?
So you work for the feds? your obamanite dissinfo posts when truth is told shows

“Sharia, NOT!”

Since: Jul 10

Chesapeake, VA

#4796 May 13, 2013
tha Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
"Refute the facts?" You present only irrelevant historical cut n' pastes. What's to "refute?" They say nothing about MODERN gun laws, death statistics, the experiences of OTHER countries in gun control, etc.
Just irrelevant twaddle, as I've said. You've got nothing.
Irrelavant history?

I see your irrelavant history and raise you one "Bush's fault"!
LOL

“Sharia, NOT!”

Since: Jul 10

Chesapeake, VA

#4797 May 13, 2013
tha Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
I've worked all my life, if anyone here's the "parasite" it's you, boy.
Um, I don't know of any liberal arts education that PRODUCES. Thus, you are the parasite. Or, on the other hand, you could very well be blue collar because you're just too stupid to get an education that that produces things that makes America excel in any industry.

And on a VERY remote chance you are a lawyer,(I can't even say this with a straight face) then you are definitely a parasite because a good lawyer would be for protecting the rights of individuals and not crying to take them away.

Have a wonderful day.
spocko

Oakland, CA

#4798 May 13, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
ALL of the current 'gun control laws' are UNCONSTITUTIONAL:
For direct evidence:
Why were there NO 'gun control laws' from 1791 all the way up to 1934?
WHY would it take the government that long to pass a 'gun control law', if it actually felt it had the 'power' to?
Even after a CIVIL WAR?
After which the 14th amendment was passed in order, among other rights, to give the freed slave the Right to Keep and Bear arms?
EXPLAIN THAT, you treasonous pos.
You gunloons are doing your tiny base’s bidding, not America’s. No matter how many times, or how long you keep doing this, eventually you will have to accept that it is “your” reality – not the country’s!

“Sharia, NOT!”

Since: Jul 10

Chesapeake, VA

#4799 May 13, 2013
spocko wrote:
<quoted text>
You gunloons are doing your tiny base’s bidding, not America’s. No matter how many times, or how long you keep doing this, eventually you will have to accept that it is “your” reality – not the country’s!
It is estimated that 55% of Americans own guns. So to say that the base is "tiny" might be a wrong.
The reality is: libbies are afraid of freedom. And that IS a tiny base.
another

Santa Fe, NM

#4800 May 13, 2013
Socialism is for Sissies wrote:
<quoted text>It is estimated that 55% of Americans own guns.
.
lie.

And 90%+ want background checks.

It is the sissy that is afraid to leave the house without a gun

“Sharia, NOT!”

Since: Jul 10

Chesapeake, VA

#4801 May 13, 2013
another wrote:
<quoted text>
lie.
And 90%+ want background checks.
It is the sissy that is afraid to leave the house without a gun
Give me a fact number then....
90% want background checks during elections as well.
Motor-voter law was passed by Dems and now they don't want to use the very resource they touted to register voters...interesting.

BTW, you do understand the term "estimated" I hope.

Since: Nov 11

Westerville, OH

#4802 May 13, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>Not treasonous however, such as is the case with you and your kind.

Your 'master' obama is a traitor to We The People. He is subversive, in addition to being an outright liar. And you, and others like >you<, are equally guilty. For you have joined in his subversive activities. And have promoted the treason; aiding and abetting it. Which of course makes you just as guilty of treason as your 'master'. And subject to the same punishment.
Obama is undermining America in order to enforce martial law and THEN Shariah Law, his final goal.

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#4803 May 13, 2013
spocko wrote:
<quoted text>
You gunloons are doing your tiny base’s bidding, not America’s. No matter how many times, or how long you keep doing this, eventually you will have to accept that it is “your” reality – not the country’s!
Yeah, that's why you freaks have been SLAMMED down for the last twelve years, eh? And why the USURPreme Kourt ruled it IS an individual right, NOT associated with the militia. As well as 'incorporating' it into the Constitution. Making it the right of every American citizen.(Which had ALREADY been done in 1791).

Go drink some more of your 'masters' kool-aid, traitor-troll.

Since: Nov 11

Westerville, OH

#4804 May 13, 2013
tha Professor wrote:
<quoted text>You don't know what "treason" means, any more than you know what common sense is. You're a noisy Rightie asshat and gun-nut. You have no credibility.
Liberals finally admit they are ALWAYS wrong!

http://m.weeklystandard.com/blogs/cbs-anchor-...

Since: Nov 11

Westerville, OH

#4805 May 13, 2013
tha Professor wrote:
<quoted text>Plenty of irrelevant twaddle is all you have to offer, loser. Quit wasting bandwidth with your cut n' pastes.
You had not proven any single point!

GunShow is schooling you!

Here is my evidence:(try this):

Liberals finally admit they are ALWAYS wrong!

http://m.weeklystandard.com/blogs/cbs-anchor-...

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#4806 May 13, 2013
another wrote:
<quoted text>
lie.
And 90%+ want background checks.
It is the sissy that is afraid to leave the house without a gun
Mindless lying drool:

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...

Since: Nov 11

Westerville, OH

#4807 May 13, 2013
Socialism is for Sissies wrote:
<quoted text>Give me a fact number then....
90% want background checks during elections as well.
Motor-voter law was passed by Dems and now they don't want to use the very resource they touted to register voters...interesting.

BTW, you do understand the term "estimated" I hope.
You got him good!

Liberals want papers from Americans but not from illegals!

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#4808 May 13, 2013
another wrote:
<quoted text>
lie.
And 90%+ want background checks.
It is the sissy that is afraid to leave the house without a gun
Support for gun control slips below 50 percent after Senate vote
By Justin Sink - 04/23/13 11:16 AM ET

Fewer than 50 percent of Americans say they support stricter gun controls, according to a survey released Tuesday — the first time since December's Newtown, Conn., elementary school shooting that less than half of those surveyed say they would back a new gun law.

According to the USA Today survey, 49 percent of Americans say they support passing a new gun control law while 45 percent oppose new legislation. That's down from 55 percent who supported new regulations in April and 61 percent in February.

Last week, Senate Democrats failed to win the 60 votes necessary to move forward on a compromise bill that would have expanded background checks and instituted new penalties on so-called straw purchasers. Senate leaders had already acknowledged they were unlikely to win enough votes on an assault weapons ban or legislation limiting the size of magazine capacities — two suggestions of President Obama's gun violence commission.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/n...

How's that nice COLD SLAP in the face, traitor-troll? Now go scurry back underneath the baseboard before you get stepped on.

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.

Barack Obama Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 4 min woodtick57 1,251,696
News SC state senator refers to candidate as 'raghead' (Jun '10) 4 min Reagan Amnesty 1,177
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 5 min jh4freedom 192,273
News Activist takes down Confederate flag outside So... 21 min Northern Ireland 140
News The President has failed us (Jun '12) 1 hr woodtick57 332,967
News Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say (Jul '10) 1 hr litesong 34,384
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 3 hr IBdaMann 53,987
More from around the web