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 (Page 4)

Showing posts 61 - 80 of5,070
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“Constitutionist/ SAF”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61
Mar 8, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

WeTheSheeple wrote:
<>
I only make the comparision to demonastrate that less guns equals less gun deaths.
Europe, Australia, Japan, and England all have violent crime. Their lack of guns only lowers one violent crime statistic (murder by gun).

And those countries don't compare to the living standards of America. "We have the most freedom and the most guns." Life isn't better in those countries.

“Happiness comes through giving”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#62
Mar 8, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

August wrote:
Skewered stats make for interesting 'facts.' The liberal agenda and those who push it are truly laughable!
And bonebrains like you are pitiable.

“Happiness comes through giving”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#63
Mar 8, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Tory II wrote:
<quoted text>Those are homes in the ghettos or low income/high poverty homes.
You're comparing the most irresponsible people to the remainder of the country.
There are ninety million gun owners - if gun injury probability was 40%, there would be millions of injuries by gun.
You're a psycho-babbler.
And you are a bullshitter. I wonder if you'd care to provide proof of your distorted allegation.

Try this arithmetic example. If something occured one out of ten times, and you compared that to its occuring two out of 10 times, that would be a 50% increase. Ownership of guns in the home is around 40%. Let us suppose that among non-owners of guns in the home, gun injuries amounted to 1,000 per year, and that among homes with guns, gun injuries amounted to 2,000 per year. That would amount to a 50% increase of gun injuries among gun-owning homes. Whether at the real 40% increase, or even the 50% increase in this hypothetical example, that would amount to far fewer gun injuries than the millions of injuries you project in your absurdly flawed arithmetic.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#64
Mar 8, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

FormerParatrooper wrote:
<quoted text>
You are just as dead regardless of the weapon or method.
Nuclear weapons, tanks, aircraft and the like are tools of States, individual weapons, rifles, shotguns and handguns are tools of free people.
Free people have the right of self defense. That right does not come from government or anyone else, it is a natural right. Until I misuse my rights, you have no moral authority to deny me those rights.
So defend yourself with a knife or a baseball bat.

I don't need moral authority, just legislative or constitutional authority.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65
Mar 8, 2013
 
Tory II wrote:
<quoted text>Europe, Australia, Japan, and England all have violent crime. Their lack of guns only lowers one violent crime statistic (murder by gun).
And those countries don't compare to the living standards of America. "We have the most freedom and the most guns." Life isn't better in those countries.
Never said life was better; only that they have less gun violence because they have stricter gun control laws.

It's easier to kill someone with a gun than with a knife. Why make it easier?
senior citizen

Granite City, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#66
Mar 8, 2013
 
TonyT1961 wrote:
<quoted text>
FYI - my corporate headquarters, located in St.Louis, MO., has very lax gun laws - and many weapons entering Illinois come through Missouri. Just a ride over the bridge - been there - not a great place, especially north St.Loiui;
http://www.gunlawsbystate.com/ #!/states/missouri-gun-laws/cr iminal-provisions/
Also, Kentucky, on the bottom border of Illinois, have EXTREMELY lax gun regulatiions. Take this into consideration sir.
You are talking about the THUGS not the honest gun owner. We (Illinois) have to have an F.O.I.D card and there is a background check to buy guns. The thugs come over the river to Illinois. The real truth to the matter will be if the honest gun owners have to give up their guns then only the THUGS will have them.
Cat74

Mchenry, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#67
Mar 8, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

You cannot look at all the killing in Chicago, Gary, Philly, Boston plus all the other big city killing fields and pretend the Government is enforcing their gun control laws. Most of the killing is in our big city ghettos where there are no solid family units.
August

Belleview, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68
Mar 8, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Cat74 wrote:
Most of the killing is in our big city ghettos where there are no solid family units.
Careful! You're telling the truth!

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#69
Mar 8, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

senior citizen wrote:
<quoted text>
You are talking about the THUGS not the honest gun owner. We (Illinois) have to have an F.O.I.D card and there is a background check to buy guns. The thugs come over the river to Illinois. The real truth to the matter will be if the honest gun owners have to give up their guns then only the THUGS will have them.
Not if the cops did their job......
Responsibility

Burlingame, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#70
Mar 8, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

senior citizen wrote:
<quoted text>
You are talking about the THUGS not the honest gun owner.
Mrs. Lanza probably thought she was an "honest gun owner" but perhaps those 26 massacred slaughtered folks would question that premise.
FormerParatroope r

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#71
Mar 8, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
So defend yourself with a knife or a baseball bat.
I don't need moral authority, just legislative or constitutional authority.
You don't have Constitutional authority unless the Constitution is repealed. Legislative authority comes from the Constitution.

The advice of using a knife or baseball bat, is that the same advice you would give my petite wife?

At least you admit you do not have moral authority, which is the most honest answer anyone has given. However, without moral authority, how do you propose legislation that denies natural rights?
Gary

Bellingham, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#72
Mar 8, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Dr-Sniper wrote:
<quoted text>
Y'all are going about this all wrong. Tell ya what, look at the States with the highest gun murders. Now look at the States with the most Black Citizens.
What do ya know? They match up!
Alaska?

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#73
Mar 8, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

FormerParatrooper wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't have Constitutional authority unless the Constitution is repealed. Legislative authority comes from the Constitution.
The advice of using a knife or baseball bat, is that the same advice you would give my petite wife?
At least you admit you do not have moral authority, which is the most honest answer anyone has given. However, without moral authority, how do you propose legislation that denies natural rights?
There is no natural right to own a gun, since guns never existed in nature. Guns are manmade as is the right to own one. Those rights can easily be removed the same way they were given.
Gary

Bellingham, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#74
Mar 8, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Dr-Sniper wrote:
<quoted text>
Y'all are going about this all wrong. Tell ya what, look at the States with the highest gun murders. Now look at the States with the most Black Citizens.
What do ya know? They match up!
However, the spree killers are almost all white men:

1.
Blacksburg, Virginia, 2007
Seung-Hui Cho kills 32 on the campus of Virginia Tech. Commits suicide.

2.
Killeen, Texas, 1991
George Jo Hennard drove his truck into Luby’s diner, then killed 23 with a pair of pistols before committing suicide.

3.
San Ysidro, California, 1984
James Oliver Huberty killed 21 in a local McDonald’s with a submachine gun and rifle before being killed by police.

4.
Edmond, Oklahoma, 1986
Patrick Sherrill, an angry postal worker, killed 14 at the post office before killing himself.

5.
Austin, Texas, 1966
Charles Whitman kills 14 at the University of Texas with a rifle before being killed by a police sniper.

6.
Fort Hood - Killeen, Texas, 2009
Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan is accused of killing 13 and wounding 30 before bring brought down by a police officer.

7.
Camden, NJ, 1949
Howard Unreh, a WWII veteran, kills 13 with a captured Luger. He was arrested and committed to an asylum for the insane. He died in 2009. He is considered by some criminologists to be the first “spree” killer in modern US history.

8.
Littleton, Colorado, 1999
Eric Harris and Dylon Klebold shoot thirteen before killing themselves.

9.
Geneva County, Alabama, 2009
Michael McLendon kills ten, and then himself with a handgun and rifle.

10.
Red Lake, Minnesota, 2005
Jeff Wiese kills nine and then himself on the Red Lake reservation. Seven were killed at a school.
FormerParatroope r

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#75
Mar 8, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no natural right to own a gun, since guns never existed in nature. Guns are manmade as is the right to own one. Those rights can easily be removed the same way they were given.
Rights were not given, they were recognized as pre existing. At least you understand firearms are a right. How do remove a pre existing right bestowed by being?

Question is what is your motivation against owning firearms?

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#77
Mar 8, 2013
 
Gary wrote:
<quoted text>Alaska?
Again, population density is going to alter the numbers which are published in gun deaths per 100,000.
Put it this way, if Manhattan Island had the same population density of Alaska, it would have a population of 42. If one of those 42 were killed with a gun, there would be a publication of 2,381 gun deaths per 100,000.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#78
Mar 8, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Gary wrote:
<quoted text>However, the spree killers are almost all white men:

1.
Blacksburg, Virginia, 2007
Seung-Hui Cho kills 32 on the campus of Virginia Tech. Commits suicide.

2.
Killeen, Texas, 1991
George Jo Hennard drove his truck into LubyÂ’s diner, then killed 23 with a pair of pistols before committing suicide.

3.
San Ysidro, California, 1984
James Oliver Huberty killed 21 in a local McDonaldÂ’s with a submachine gun and rifle before being killed by police.

4.
Edmond, Oklahoma, 1986
Patrick Sherrill, an angry postal worker, killed 14 at the post office before killing himself.

5.
Austin, Texas, 1966
Charles Whitman kills 14 at the University of Texas with a rifle before being killed by a police sniper.

6.
Fort Hood - Killeen, Texas, 2009
Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan is accused of killing 13 and wounding 30 before bring brought down by a police officer.

7.
Camden, NJ, 1949
Howard Unreh, a WWII veteran, kills 13 with a captured Luger. He was arrested and committed to an asylum for the insane. He died in 2009. He is considered by some criminologists to be the first “spree” killer in modern US history.

8.
Littleton, Colorado, 1999
Eric Harris and Dylon Klebold shoot thirteen before killing themselves.

9.
Geneva County, Alabama, 2009
Michael McLendon kills ten, and then himself with a handgun and rifle.

10.
Red Lake, Minnesota, 2005
Jeff Wiese kills nine and then himself on the Red Lake reservation. Seven were killed at a school.
True, for the most part.

Do you think Seung-Hui Cho, San Ysidro, and Nidal Malik Hasan were white?
see the light

El Paso, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#80
Mar 8, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Wannabe Marine-Yes we love guns because when it comes down to a criminal trying to kill me I'm gonna fight back. Since your'e so against guns-you would gladly give your life up, if someone was trying to hurt you. I love life too much to die .

“Constitutionist/ SAF”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#82
Mar 8, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

63

Excessive gun violence is a symptom of the govt's failed war on drugs. Banning or restricting guns (of good responsible people) won't stop the violence.
Tory II wrote:
Those are homes in the ghettos or low income/high poverty homes.
You're comparing the most irresponsible people to the remainder of the country.
There are ninety million gun owners - if gun injury probability was 40%, there would be millions of injuries by gun.
You're a psycho-babbler.
Lawrence Wolf wrote:
<>And you are a bullshitter. I wonder if you'd care to provide proof of your distorted allegation.
Try this arithmetic example. If something occured one out of ten times, and you compared that to its occuring two out of 10 times, that would be a 50% increase. Ownership of guns in the home is around 40%. Let us suppose that among non-owners of guns in the home, gun injuries amounted to 1,000 per year, and that among homes with guns, gun injuries amounted to 2,000 per year. That would amount to a 50% increase of gun injuries among gun-owning homes. Whether at the real 40% increase, or even the 50% increase in this hypothetical example, that would amount to far fewer gun injuries than the millions of injuries you project in your absurdly flawed arithmetic.
You are still referring to the most irresponsible people and comparing them to responsible people. And,

There's a good chance the irresponsible people are leaving loaded guns accessibble to children because of a deliberate tactic to get them to do so (without them knowing it).

People who live in ghettos (IMO) don't resolve their anger as well as others.

“Constitutionist/ SAF”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#83
Mar 8, 2013
 
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<...It's easier to kill someone with a gun than with a knife. Why make it easier?
It's easier to murder twenty kids with a sword (or machete) than with a loud gun. Slice their throats and they'll bleed to death in minutes.

"Why make it easier?" I've already answered that. America has guns because it has freedom, and the tradeoff is worth it. Nutjobs like you (hoplophobes and communists) want everyone to think it's not, but it is.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 61 - 80 of5,070
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
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.

•••
•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••