every single one??? This desperation is tiresome...

I doubt it....that's 48 children who are wounded or killed per day...

We already know that defensive gun use drastically outnumbers firearm misuse resulting in death.

That's not opinion, that's fact, and nothing you say or post will make that fact suddenly disappear.

It appears you just want to silence viewpoints which you disagree with.


Not.Gonna.Happen.

are used so often for self protection....its just very disrespectful of those that have died...just because you think someone is coming for your gun.

The days of you guys running the show and controlling the dialogue here are over.

Go hide behind the NRA! They will protect you from the truth!

I can handle anti-gun folks all by my lonesome, with very little effort expended. Your impotent outrage and ridiculous hyperbole are all the evidence of that, that anyone needs.

You don't show any evidence of even being able to debate the gun issue, which is a win for me, by default.

go pull out statistics spoon fed to you from the NRA!

and what is tiresome...is this limp attempt to prove that guns are sooo wonderful why they "save more lives"...its pathetic! And so easily provable false to anyone that isn't feeling so "unpowerful"

I haven't cited any sources in this thread what so ever.

You on the other hand, have cited a source which relies heavily on the VPC, which is not a credible or an accurate source, and even many anti-gun folks admit that.

Besides, you're the one posting in rage at a self defense firearm use.

Bzzt. Try again.

You'd rather see posts about people shot and killed so you can uphold a narrative? That seems...disrespectful.

Its disgusting......and despicable and if you had any decency you would be ashamed.

May you never face the gunshot death of your child or grandchild.....just to have it rubbed in you face by "enthusiasts" who pretend to believe guns are used for defense more often than it costs them....

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

By the way....my 15 yr old cousin died cleaning a gun his "responsible gun owning father" meant to get rid of because it kept misfiring....he bled out in his fathers lap on the way to the hospital....

Here's the thing, children die every single day of many things, yet you choose to dwell on children that die by firearms and lambast firearm owners who had nothing to do with those deaths.
How about the other children that die by other means? Like auto accidents? Poisoning? Drowning?

by pretending guns protect more lives than they take...

disgust me....and its disrespectful of the dead.

He was 15 yrs old!

and NO you are not SORRY at about his death at all...if you were...we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Just because I defend my right to keep and bear arms in no way is it defending the deaths of those children.
What's disgusting here is your lying about what we think.

I defend your right to a musket and musket balls. Go get one of those...

every 4.4 days....another BABY...not a 15 yr old....a TODDLER dies....

and this posting of every imaginable dgu to defend it...is despicable.

and you DARE tell me you are sorry for my cousin's death.....what a horrible lie!

then I defend your right to post via quill pen and ink, which were used the same time as the musket and musket balls.

Funny how you dwell on just those children that die by firearms but don't say word one about the other children that die by other means.

Can you say hypocrite?

isn't killing another baby every 4.4 days!

How many babies are dying of bullet holes in Australia these days?

GWB's ink pen sure did a bang up job of killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians, including untold numbers of Iraqi children.

How many children are dying every day due to auto accidents? Of drownings? Of poisonings? Of diseases?

so its the old...But babies die everyday defense????

pathetic....and sickening.

Other countries have done exactly that. Australia enacted a mandatory gun buyback that achieved that goal, and saw firearm suicides fall as a result. But the reforms those countries enacted are far more dramatic than anything US politicians are calling for — and even they wouldn't get us to where many other developed countries are.

Think about it this way. In 2013, the US had 106.4 gun deaths per million people. In 2011, the last year for which we have numbers, the UK endured 146 gun deaths total — or 2.3 gun deaths per million people.

To get to UK levels, we'd need to reduce gun deaths by nearly 98 percent. Even if we wanted to reach the same levels as Finland — another developed country with a relatively high rate of gun deaths — we'd need to drop from 106.4 deaths per million to 35 — more than a 67 percent reduction.

http://www.vox.com/2015/10/5/9454161/gun-violence-solution

Now run along and go find an NRA funded source to tell you otherwise....so you can sleep at night.


meanwhile my cousin...STILL dead!

which in a country of 320 million, is a miniscule number.
And the UK or Australia are small in population in relation to the US, so your comparing the % to ours is bunk.

Now, go find another VPC/Bloomberg/Brady Org. funded source to tell you otherwise....so you can rant and rave some more.

because as I just proved....when Australia removed guns.....suicides went down....so yeah..suicides count. Do you know how many teenagers commit suicide by gun for example? NO because you ONLY accept date from NRA funded research...

Guess what...the NRA doesn't care about you (or dead babies)....it cares about GUN Manufacturers!


Plenty of research has found a strong correlation between the amount of guns in an area and its gun homicide rate. Countries with more guns have more gun homicides. States with more guns have more gun homicides. Individuals with guns in the house are likelier to be killed or to kill themselves with guns.

Period...

Notice you didn't cite Japan suicide rates.
Japan, where it's virtually impossible to legally own a firearm, has a higher suicide rate than the US, why is that?

And they started out as a penal colony..

shame on you!

Evaluations after the reforms suggest that they saved lives. A study by Andrew Leigh of Australian National University and Christine Neill of Wilfrid Laurier University estimated that buying back 3,500 guns per 100,000 people led to a statistically significant drop in firearm suicides — 74 percent, in fact, with no parallel increase in non-firearm suicides. While gun control opponents have tried to rebut those results, those responses have been riddled with methodological flaws, and even some of the study's critics have conceded that the laws likely cut down on suicides.

BOOM!


But the homicide and mass shooting results are almost beside the point. Nearly two-thirds of gun deaths in the US are suicides. If we can reduce them by 74 percent, we'd be saving more than 15,000 lives every year. That doesn't get us to where most developed countries are, but it gets us in the ballpark of Finland.

I never denied that Aus. suicide rates have declined.
Funny how you refuse to address Japan's suicide rate.
Why is that?

that is the stats I am using....

The fastest growing suicide demographic is young men. It is now the single biggest killer of men in Japan aged 20-44.
And the evidence suggests these young people are killing themselves because they have lost hope and are incapable of seeking help.
The numbers first began to rise after the Asian financial crisis in 1998. They climbed again after the 2008 worldwide financial crisis.
Experts think those rises are directly linked to the increase in "precarious employment", the practice of employing young people on short-term contracts.

Japan was once known as the land of lifetime employment.
But while many older people still enjoy job security and generous benefits, nearly 40% of young people in Japan are unable to find stable jobs..

Japan's suicide rate is higher than the US, yet in Japan, it's almost impossible to legally own a firearm.

YOU are the one that claimed that Australia had a "different culture"...

there is NO denying that reducing firearms reduces suicides...

The US has a low rate per capita, of suicides compared to the most of the rest of the world.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate

Suicide rates per country (per 100,000)
Country Total Female Male
Republic of Korea 28.9 18 41.7
Hungary 19.1 7.4 32.4
Japan 18.5 10.1 26.9
Poland 16.6 3.8 30.5
Belgium 14.2 7.7 21.0
Finland 14.8 7.5 22.2
France 12.3 6.0 19.3
Austria 11.5 5.4 18.2
Czech Republic 12.5 3.9 21.5
United States 12.1 5.2 19.4
United Kingdom 6.2 2.6 9.8


notice that last one? That is what is called a low rate...

Now if we took on Guns....we WOULD be in that low rate category wouldn't we?

has a much higher rate that the US.
The fact is that those that want to off themselves will find a way to do so, firearm or not.
Better health care would go a long ways towards lowering those numbers.

It is recorded as five suicides.

semi automatic and pump long guns. While the suicide by firearm rate did decrease, the suicide rate didn't other than what was already decreasing. Gun ownership in Australia, and the number of guns is actually higher now than before.

The UK had lower levels when they had no gun control laws at all. If you are using the Home Office numbers, they only count murder convictions.

and you and the NRA know that!

like I said...despicable..

I got that from a Brit academic paper written by a Metro London aka Scotland Yard police official.

let me guess....an NRA cop in Scotland yard!

here is a pretty picture for you...

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compareyears/10/total_number_of_gun_deaths

the NRA-UK isn't the same as the NRA here. For one thing, it is about two decades older
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Rifle_Association_of_the_United_Kingdom
At any rate, that is the Home Office policy since 1967. We were talking about murder rates. Some countries have high murder rates, just not with guns. See Russia and Mexico.


That's nice. Russia has almost no gun murders, yet has a higher murder rate as the US. Mexico and most of the island countries in the Caribbean have stricter laws than Australia and the UK, yet have astronomical murder rates. Most of Europe is not as restrictive as the UK, yet have lower murder rates.
New Zealand gun laws, where silencers are unregulated and they really do use ARs for hunting, are not as strict yet have a lower murder rate than Australia.
Iceland, Sweden, Switzerland, Norway, Canada, all have about the same rate of gun ownership as we do, about one in three homes. Finland is about one in two homes.

EXACTLY as I said...you DON'T give a shit about the fact the WE have a baby die...every 4.4 days by bullet hole.

This discussion is not about "criminals" (though you seem to be inordinately obsessed with all the "criminals" around you...paranoia will destroy ya)

Sounds like an uneducated irresponsible gun owner. Perhaps the government should sponsor some PSA ads to educate like they do with prescription drug access in the houses with children.

and THAT is the problem...they ALL think they are "responsible"....

until they aren't!

By the way...it was a hunting rifle that killed my cousin. And again...YOUR reaction is disgusting and despicable.

I see PSAs about aids, texting, DUI, prenatal care, birth control, food safety....

Why not firearm safety?

its pretty elementary.

When will the criminals and gang members start turning them in?

Have you noticed how quickly smoking has fallen but using regulations?

seems to have worked in Australia...

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compareyears/10/total_number_of_gun_deaths

At the rate police and government lose guns only criminals will have guns. The public and government need to be mutually disarmed otherwise a police state will evolve.

the journey of a 1000 miles...starts with the first step...and every step could be a saved life.

their gang bangers being worse shots than here. They are not harder to get between thefts from police, smuggling, and illegal manufacture. Community guns are not that unusual or unique. It has been a fairly common practice in the US. Renting crime guns was a common practice among the urban criminal class in the US 19th century.
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/100-shootings-and-counting-merrylands-tops-driveby-list-20120911-25psc.html

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2014/06/16/australian-police-10-firearms-seized-homemade/

because the "firearmblog" tells you so!

utter hogwash! Again...the depths to which you will plunge is despicable...for shame.

thats a damn lie!

I wish someone could post a picture of every dead child....just to show you how disgusting it is...

I eagerly await Kang citing the statistics, and you failing to refute them.

To conclude:

Statistically speaking, guns are rarely used in self-defense, and thus cannot be defended on the grounds that they can reliably defuse crimes while they are happening.

The NRA bases its claim that guns are used millions of times a year in self-defense on a discredited study from 1995 that has not been validated in a single academic paper.

Concealed Carry Laws are not associated with decreases in crime, and sophisticated analyses show that, in some cases, there is an increase in aggravated assaults associated with concealed carry laws.

The best studies to date, using proxies to estimate gun availability, show that more guns lead to more crime.

http://www.armedwithreason.com/less-guns-less-crime-debunking-the-self-defense-myth/

Bzzt. Try again.

You're bringing blanks to a gunfight.

Since 1970, more Americans have died from guns than died in all U.S. wars going back to the American Revolution.

have cited them plenty of times. Maybe it's YOU that's "hiding behind the NRA"??

YOU seem to be well versed in their indoctination, whereas *I* have never had any use for them. Iwas taught gun safety, and how to shoot, by my Navy Veteran father and an uncle who was an Air Force Fighter Pilot in Vietnam. We also had Hunters Safety and Boaters Safety classes taught in our school each year by the local Game Warden. No NRA needed then, NO NRA needed NOW!

Peace,

Ghost

We are not stupid people...

Follow the money...

But the numbers are unarguable: fewer than 1.4 million war deaths since 1775, more than half in the Civil War, versus about 1.45 million gun deaths since 1970 (including suicides, murders and accidents).

If that doesn’t make you flinch, consider this: In America, more preschoolers are shot dead each year (82 in 2013) than police officers are in the line of duty (27 in 2013), according to figures from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the FBI.



if only those 82 children had had a gun of their own to defend themselves!!!

but the study was never discredited. The only challenger to it was Hemenway who speculated on why the numbers would be high and harped on false positives, but provided no evidence to back up his claims. The Kleck study verifies several previous studies and was verified by later studies including one by Phil Cook. Oh, and the study and resulting book was awarded the 1993Michael J. Hindelang Award from the American Society for Criminology.
Meanwhile, Hemenway was given an award by the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence for his activism.
Have you noticed that none of the studies that claim to debunk that study never appear in peer review criminology journals?

No, I'm not saying the writer at armedwithreason is a liar, just not a critical thinker. His source, VPC, is a liar.

prove it!

But the numbers are unarguable: fewer than 1.4 million war deaths since 1775, more than half in the Civil War, versus about 1.45 million gun deaths since 1970 (including suicides, murders and accidents).

If that doesn’t make you flinch, consider this: In America, more preschoolers are shot dead each year (82 in 2013) than police officers are in the line of duty (27 in 2013), according to figures from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the FBI.

see that part about the CDC and the FBI???

from an advocacy group and treats them as an knowledgeable and objective source without question proves that his critical thinking skills suck. Also, the use of "reason" is like "fair and balanced". If it is part of your advertising, chances are, you aren't.
He proved it himself.

BTW, look up the VPC's director's name and the address for VPC. Then type the numbers not marked with x in the ATF search form for this FFL number
1-54-000-01-8C-00725
https://www.atfonline.gov/fflezcheck/fflSearch.do;jsessionid=5384cc2332937aaacc5ffc4ab2273c7d11d3a68c97b688e973fbe235c667fdca.e34PaNePb3iTb40LbxySah4TbxiTe0

This is what the numbers mean
http://www.gunclubofamerica.com/articles/education/what-you-need-to-know-about-your-federal-firearms-license/

Please tell my, why does the director of VPC, Josh Allen Sugarmann, have a gun dealers license?
It expires in 2017. He has had it for at least ten years.

BTW, your rant isn't relevant to the discussion and probably not true.

"Guns in the News", blah, blah, blah various other headings.

The "Cut and Paste Google Dump" of any story that has the word "gun" or "shooting" in it is pretty much covered by a current player who goes back years if they need to for blog posts, old articles, anything they can post to keep their name high on the thread list.

Aside from the fact that this group has an SoP and is about gun laws and RKBA issues, gun control people don't seem to be bright enough to tell the difference between a crime that belongs in the True Crime group like an armed robbery and a gun control/RKBA issue.

What happens is what always happens with control minded folks. They keep it up for a week or so, then they get distracted by a shiny piece of tinfoil or a squirrel and gradually drift away.

Or, as a few have, they get upset when they are contradicted or made fun of, lose it and wind up getting TS'd ... or banned by our host for stepping over the line like another group host was after being a jerk repeatedly to DU members here.

No staying power, kind of like the the hosts in the other safe haven gun group that keep "recommitting" themselves to gun control activism and usually last about 2 weeks before drifting away again.

bullshit!

I wish I could list their names here every day!

More children have died in the last couple decades from guns....than all the wars...

boom indeed...

pathetic "statistics" you have there....so outrageous ANYONE can tell its bullshit!

ridiculous!

The 'that' in this case being your assertion, since you haven't cited anything to back it up, other than being foul mouthed which, contrary to anti-gun dogma, doesn't count.

But in 2003, Congress barred the government from publishing such information.

Call congress right fucking now!$%#!#$%^!

does the NRA control the Republican Congress or not?

Because EVERY Democrat KNOWS that is true!

This is pure comedy gold!!

Do you have any idea of how childish you sound?

I don't live in fear....I'm not a baby!

neither do I, but you still sound childish.

Totally transparent.

It's not like we haven't seen this behavior before.

You're just fishing for a hide, but you aren't going to get one from me, sorry.

As far as the nra:

A poll this year found that majorities even of gun-owners favor universal background checks; tighter regulation of gun dealers; safe storage requirements in homes; and a 10-year prohibition on possessing guns for anyone convicted of domestic violence, assault or similar offenses.

We should also be investing in “smart gun” technology, such as weapons that fire only with a PIN or fingerprint. We should adopt microstamping that allows a bullet casing to be traced back to a particular gun. We can require liability insurance for guns, as we do for cars.

It’s not clear that these steps would have prevented the Oregon shooting. But Professor Webster argues that smarter gun policies could reduce murder rates by up to 50 percent — and that’s thousands of lives a year. Right now, the passivity of politicians is simply enabling shooters.

The gun lobby argues that the problem isn’t firearms; it’s crazy people. Yes, America’s mental health system is a disgrace. But to me, it seems that we’re all crazy if we as a country can’t take modest steps to reduce the carnage that leaves America resembling a battlefield.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/04/opinion/sunday/nicholas-kristof-a-new-way-to-tackle-gun-deaths.html?_r=0

Or were you just going of on an unrelated tangent by accident?

who is in a department funded by Bloomberg,
his papers is referenced in media press releases and etc. What peer review journals have any of his work appeared in? Like say, criminology journals? Were any of them validated? There is no evidence to support any of his claims of what could be based on any known criminal science. BTW, James Bond's custom Walther P99 would be cool. The Lotus Espirit that turns into a submarine in For Your Eyes Only would be nice too. That is where the smart gun idea came from. The insurance idea come from some insurance executive in an article in Fortune or Forbes.
http://www.jhsph.edu/research/centers-and-institutes/johns-hopkins-center-for-gun-policy-and-research/index.html

You are so un love....you cannot accept ANY criticism as valid.

There are a lot of pro-Second Amendment people on here that support those things. I'm all for UBCs and prohibiting felons from owning guns (I assume you are also ok with banning felons from voting - if they can't be trusted with a gun they shouldn't be trusted to pick our leaders). I oppose safe storage laws for the simple reason that they are unenforceable and unneeded. Unenforceable because law enforcement doesn't get to go into someone's home to see if they are complying and unneeded because a person that isn't going to store their gun safely as a matter of commonsense isn't going to comply with this (unenforceable) law. And by the way, I think that most gun owners here will tell you about their safe storage habits. I'm not sure what "tighter regulation on gun dealers" even means - the dealers I know all have to perform background checks so not sure what else you want.

I find the insurance argument to be tiresome -- what exactly is requiring insurance going to do? If the gun is used by a criminal then no insurance company on earth is going to cover the resulting harm. I can't think of a single legitimate reason for requiring insurance and the only reason to do so is to make guns prohibitively expensive.

Who is going to pay for "smart technology"? I hear this from those who favor control but there doesn't seem to be much interest in it. Bloomberg seems to have plenty of money - maybe he should provide the funds for this idea?

does having insurance on cars mean NO ONE drives without it?

If your gun is used by a child or in a crime...the OWNER is responsible...

Yelling "bullshit" with exclamation points in ever post doesn't make you sound any smarter, just desperate.

Try someplace like the CDC or the DoJ as a source instead of the biased VPC, Brady or Everytown.

And while you're at it define what constitutes a "child" in those numbers for the audience.

That way people might not laugh quite as hard at your claims and stories.

But the numbers are unarguable: fewer than 1.4 million war deaths since 1775, more than half in the Civil War, versus about 1.45 million gun deaths since 1970 (including suicides, murders and accidents).

If that doesn’t make you flinch, consider this: In America, more preschoolers are shot dead each year (82 in 2013) than police officers are in the line of duty (27 in 2013), according to figures from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the FBI.

and here is why YOUR statistics are bullshit:

Daniel Webster, a public health expert at Johns Hopkins University, notes that in 1999, the government listed the gun stores that had sold the most weapons later linked to crimes. The gun store at the top of the list was so embarrassed that it voluntarily took measures to reduce its use by criminals — and the rate at which new guns from the store were diverted to crime dropped 77 percent.

But in 2003, Congress barred the government from publishing such information.

The rabbit hole.

We aren't going down it.

Sorry.

bars from being made public?

If your debate methodology is the best your side has to offer, I think I may add a task or two to my multitasking plate.

and so do you...

you guy remind me of those out of shape wingers in camo hanging out in a Taco Bell with their assault babies trying to scare somebody

So typical of the controllers.

You can't KNOW something that isn't factually true.

I don't really bother arguing with gun control people much any more. No point in arguing with people that have already lost and won't admit it.

They (gun Control) have proven to be utterly ineffective, impotent and irrelevant to any real world action legislative or judicial. They can't get any Federal legislation passed in over 2 decades and very little state level laws have passed.

They have lost in the courts repeatedly from appellate to SCOTUS.

In the meantime, concealed carry is now in all 50 states with over 12 million permits issued, not counting the carriers in the 5 or 6 (?) states that have now gone constitutional (permitless) carry and most other states continue to loosen their carry laws.

The only real "achievements" gun control can proudly point to is pushing NRA membership to over 5 million dues paying members and making the AR15 the most popular rifle in America now.

All while the violent crime rate continues to drop to half of what it was in the 70's.