There were no credible threats that military recruiting offices were under a threat from terrorism.
So far, there is no evidence that this was a terrorist act choreographed by ISIS, al-Qaeda, Syria or Gina.
It's obvious that the answer to protecting ourselves against organized terrorist attacks, drunks, criminals, crazies, or lone wolf gunmen is clearly more guns, everywhere. Schools, churches, banks, courthouses, street corners. The other industrialized nations of the world with strict gun laws and exponentially lower gun related deaths are clearly on the wrong path.
There were no credible threats that military recruiting offices were under a threat from terrorism.
So far, there is no evidence that this was a terrorist act choreographed by ISIS, al-Qaeda, Syria or Gina.It's obvious that the answer to protecting ourselves against organized terrorist attacks, drunks, criminals, crazies, or lone wolf gunmen is clearly more guns, everywhere. Schools, churches, banks, courthouses, street corners.
Not to mention gun free zones, which are religiously adhered to by crazed gunmen.
Thought this guy made some good points. and was funny to boot
[Edited on 7/23/2015 by Bill_Graham]
[Edited on 7/23/2015 by Bill_Graham]
Suggested reading for Mr. Jefferies...
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/04/02/guns_save_lives_117747.html
Suggested reading for Mr. Jefferies...
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/04/02/guns_save_lives_117747.html
You figure it offsets the fact that we have close to double the average gun deaths then any other country?
So according to that chart, some quick math reveals that roughly 10 deaths result per 89,000 firearms. You don't think far more lives than 10 are SAVED? You still fail to see the trade off involved?
It depends on what you mean when you say saved. Aren't there more suicides committed with guns than homicides?
In other countries less guns means less people killed. How does your "guns save lives" thesis fit into those pictures? If your statement is true than it should hold up across other societies.
I'm sure suicides are included in the 10 deaths per 89,000 firearm stats. Now that you
mention suicide, unless it can be proven that NO other method would have been employed,
those shouldn't even be included in the stats.
How do you know that guns aren't saving lives in other societies? Can you prove it?
So according to that chart, some quick math reveals that roughly 10 deaths result per 89,000 firearms. You don't think far more lives than 10 are SAVED?
Nope.
How do you know that guns aren't saving lives in other societies? Can you prove it?
Can you prove they are? And then can you explain the disparity of gun deaths in the United States compared to the countries with stricter gun control. Less innocent people are being killed by guns in those countries. Isn't that a good thing?
Let's break down some numbers. According to Dr. Sowell 4-6% of respondents used a gun
for defensive purposes over the last five years. We'll just use 5%. Then use the 86,000 x
(.05) which comes to 4,300, Then account for the five year period by division.
4,300 / 5 = 860
860 to 10. The ten lost are very tragic, but I'll take that trade-off every day of the week.
Just to be fair, lets say that out of the 860 incidents nine of ten survived. That's still 86 to
10. Another no-brainer.
Can you prove they are? And then can you explain the disparity of gun deaths in the United States compared to the countries with stricter gun control. Less innocent people are being killed by guns in those countries. Isn't that a good thing?
Lots of info out there about the incredible number of people killed in the US per 1,000 population than other countries, which is a much more meaningful stat. Just for an example, there are 10.25 firearm related fatalities in the US per 1,000 people. In the UK there are .24 firearm related fatalities per 1,000 people.
Despite these figures it's obvious that the answer to protecting ourselves against organized terrorist attacks, drunks, criminals, crazies, or lone wolf gunmen is clearly more guns, everywhere. Schools, churches, banks, courthouses, street corners. The other industrialized nations of the world with strict gun laws and exponentially lower gun related deaths are clearly on the wrong path.
How do you know that guns aren't saving lives in other societies? Can you prove it?
Can you prove they are? And then can you explain the disparity of gun deaths in the United States compared to the countries with stricter gun control. Less innocent people are being killed by guns in those countries. Isn't that a good thing?
You mean countries like Russia, Mexico, Brazil, all with tighter gun laws and far more gun deaths. Can you explain that?
LOL, everyone throwing away all those keystrokes on guns.
We'll always have guns, hundreds of millions of them. Nothing involving guns in America will ever change. Ever.
The possibility of dying as a victim of gun violence is just something we have to live with. Sacrifice made for the conditions of freedom in our country.
LOL, everyone throwing away all those keystrokes on guns.
We'll always have guns, hundreds of millions of them. Nothing involving guns in America will ever change. Ever.
The possibility of dying as a victim of gun violence is just something we have to live with. Sacrifice made for the conditions of freedom in our country.
And that is just the truth.
Lots of info out there about the incredible number of people killed in the US per 1,000 population than other countries, which is a much more meaningful stat. Just for an example, there are 10.25 firearm related fatalities in the US per 1,000 people.
Oh please, Doug. Over what time period, every 100 years? Your figure comes to over 9,000 a day.
[Edited on 7/23/2015 by alloak41]
LOL, everyone throwing away all those keystrokes on guns.
We'll always have guns, hundreds of millions of them. Nothing involving guns in America will ever change. Ever.
The possibility of dying as a victim of gun violence is just something we have to live with. Sacrifice made for the conditions of freedom in our country.
I am hoping you were being sarcastic but just in case......Does freedom equal having the right to own a gun? Does that mean the British and Japanese and other countries that have strict gun controls are less free as a result?
But I do agree the genie is out of the bottle and we can never go back.
LOL, everyone throwing away all those keystrokes on guns.
We'll always have guns, hundreds of millions of them. Nothing involving guns in America will ever change. Ever.
The possibility of dying as a victim of gun violence is just something we have to live with. Sacrifice made for the conditions of freedom in our country.
And that is just the truth.
Absolutely. Life is full of risks, some say you can even die from it.
Does freedom equal having the right to own a gun?
Yes, in America, absolutely.
Does that mean the British and Japanese and other countries that have strict gun controls are less free as a result?
No. By means of comparison, no one anywhere has to own a gun if they choose not to. I don't own a gun and would not feel any less free no matter where I was. Am I more "free' if I own a gun? That's a wash.
How do you know that guns aren't saving lives in other societies? Can you prove it?
Can you prove they are? And then can you explain the disparity of gun deaths in the United States compared to the countries with stricter gun control.
My guess would be suicide. Do you feel your safety is threatened by a guy 20 miles away
shooting himself? Should the public at large view that scenario as a safety concern?
Can you prove they are? And then can you explain the disparity of gun deaths in the United States compared to the countries with stricter gun control. Less innocent people are being killed by guns in those countries. Isn't that a good thing?
Lots of info out there about the incredible number of people killed in the US per 1,000 population than other countries, which is a much more meaningful stat. Just for an example, there are 10.25 firearm related fatalities in the US per 1,000 people. In the UK there are .24 firearm related fatalities per 1,000 people.
Despite these figures it's obvious that the answer to protecting ourselves against organized terrorist attacks, drunks, criminals, crazies, or lone wolf gunmen is clearly more guns, everywhere. Schools, churches, banks, courthouses, street corners. The other industrialized nations of the world with strict gun laws and exponentially lower gun related deaths are clearly on the wrong path.
Stats are per year, per country, per 1,000 residents.
How do you know that guns aren't saving lives in other societies? Can you prove it?
Can you prove they are? And then can you explain the disparity of gun deaths in the United States compared to the countries with stricter gun control.
My guess would be suicide. Do you feel your safety is threatened by a guy 20 miles away
shooting himself? Should the public at large view that scenario as a safety concern?
You really think THAT scenario is the concern when it comes to guns and suicide?
Suggested reading for Mr. Jefferies...
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/04/02/guns_save_lives_117747.html
You should have read that before you posted it. There are a lot of claims with no backing info. Oh wait, that is exactly what you do. Never mind. 😛
Does freedom equal having the right to own a gun?
Yes, in America, absolutely.
Does that mean the British and Japanese and other countries that have strict gun controls are less free as a result?
No. By means of comparison, no one anywhere has to own a gun if they choose not to. I don't own a gun and would not feel any less free no matter where I was. Am I more "free' if I own a gun? That's a wash.
That does not answer my question BHawk. Are the British and Japanese less free because they cannot openly buy guns as we can here in America?
And why does owning a gun = feedom here in America?
Not trying to be a d*ck just curious as to your thinking.
So according to that chart, some quick math reveals that roughly 10 deaths result per 89,000 firearms. You don't think far more lives than 10 are SAVED? You still fail to see the trade off involved?
Can you prove that? No? Why not? You demand that everyone else prove their point.
How do you know that guns aren't saving lives in other societies? Can you prove it?
Can you prove they are? And then can you explain the disparity of gun deaths in the United States compared to the countries with stricter gun control. Less innocent people are being killed by guns in those countries. Isn't that a good thing?
Must be a lot of suicides in the US.
Can you prove they are? And then can you explain the disparity of gun deaths in the United States compared to the countries with stricter gun control. Less innocent people are being killed by guns in those countries. Isn't that a good thing?
Lots of info out there about the incredible number of people killed in the US per 1,000 population than other countries, which is a much more meaningful stat. Just for an example, there are 10.25 firearm related fatalities in the US per 1,000 people. In the UK there are .24 firearm related fatalities per 1,000 people.
Despite these figures it's obvious that the answer to protecting ourselves against organized terrorist attacks, drunks, criminals, crazies, or lone wolf gunmen is clearly more guns, everywhere. Schools, churches, banks, courthouses, street corners. The other industrialized nations of the world with strict gun laws and exponentially lower gun related deaths are clearly on the wrong path.
Stats are per year, per country, per 1,000 residents.
That puts the US figure at around 3,382,000 per year. You stand by that?
Can you prove they are? And then can you explain the disparity of gun deaths in the United States compared to the countries with stricter gun control. Less innocent people are being killed by guns in those countries. Isn't that a good thing?
Lots of info out there about the incredible number of people killed in the US per 1,000 population than other countries, which is a much more meaningful stat. Just for an example, there are 10.25 firearm related fatalities in the US per 1,000 people. In the UK there are .24 firearm related fatalities per 1,000 people.
Despite these figures it's obvious that the answer to protecting ourselves against organized terrorist attacks, drunks, criminals, crazies, or lone wolf gunmen is clearly more guns, everywhere. Schools, churches, banks, courthouses, street corners. The other industrialized nations of the world with strict gun laws and exponentially lower gun related deaths are clearly on the wrong path.
Stats are per year, per country, per 1,000 residents.
I need new readers. Stats are per year, per country, per 100,00 residents.
That does not answer my question BHawk. Are the British and Japanese less free because they cannot openly buy guns as we can here in America?
No.
And why does owning a gun = feedom here in America?
I look at it from the other direction. We can own a gun because we are free to do so. Basic rights and freedoms outlined by the people who started the place to begin with included the right to arm yourself, granted, in an 18th Century mindset, but that right remains. You also have the freedom to not own a gun.
Can you prove they are? And then can you explain the disparity of gun deaths in the United States compared to the countries with stricter gun control. Less innocent people are being killed by guns in those countries. Isn't that a good thing?
Lots of info out there about the incredible number of people killed in the US per 1,000 population than other countries, which is a much more meaningful stat. Just for an example, there are 10.25 firearm related fatalities in the US per 1,000 people. In the UK there are .24 firearm related fatalities per 1,000 people.
Despite these figures it's obvious that the answer to protecting ourselves against organized terrorist attacks, drunks, criminals, crazies, or lone wolf gunmen is clearly more guns, everywhere. Schools, churches, banks, courthouses, street corners. The other industrialized nations of the world with strict gun laws and exponentially lower gun related deaths are clearly on the wrong path.
Stats are per year, per country, per 1,000 residents.
I need new readers. Stats are per year, per country, per 100,00 residents.
What in tarnation kinda edumacation all y'all got down there in Tejas? 😮
100,00?
😛
And y'all fixin' ta call all us Sooners dense. Hoooooo-doggies! 
