Suck it, lib.

That chart starts right at the end of the Reagan/Bush homicide peak

By global standards I think we are a solid #2 amongst 1st world nations with a pretty good gap to the #3 which just makes the gap with the US that much more stark.

I think Canada basically has a gun for each adult who is legal to own one whereas the US has a gun for every single man, women and child, legal to own one of not. Murica, **** ya.

Worldwide, homicides have declined since the beginning of time. In the USA, the only country where you have an inherent right to DEFEND yourself, the amount of guns have SKYROCKETED.

There have been longitudinal studies done by city, state, and even COUNTRY. There is NO correlation between the availability of firearms and firearm homicides.

To top it off, Democrats want LESS resources into border control, which would INCREASE black market firearm sales in the event of a nationwide ban.

Sometimes I can't believe just how stupid they are.

Another realtor kept safe by gun ownership!

By the same logic that you shouldn't give a crazy person a gun we shouldn't be giving Americans guns. The correlation of concern is between proportions of crazy people and availability for violent expression of that crazy. Our society is producing people with mental problems at a phenomenal, increasing rate. You might be one of them. There are all kinds of mass shooter vibes coming off the combination of your chosen photo and your rhetoric. Do you have PTSD diagnosis?

The reasons this country is churning out violent crazies are not definitely knowable. Everyone has their theory. But there is no reason to expect the situation to spontaneously improve. If our economics and the culture it produces has anything to do with it - and it seems very likely it does - things are going to get a lot worse before they get better. I get the whole "guns don't kill people, people kill people" argument. It's true, but until we stop producing the sort of people who use guns to murder people at such a scale the only variable we can control is access to guns.

Trust me, when all the babies who were not aborted due to the upcoming decision are running around unloved, abused, and with no means to assimilate into society you will be thankful for any gun restrictions we might adopt. Or if you aren't many others who actually care about human life will be thankful.

Thanks for bringing us this tweet from Ben "Arabs like to bomb crap and live in open sewage" Shapiro AKA The Virgin Ben.

There are a million obvious reasons why Ben's point here doesn't refute the ideas it purports to (or, to put it less politely, Ben's tweet is really ****ing dumb and you are dumb for posting it here), but The King of Reason and Logic and his incel acolytes will never ever accept what a complete intellectual fraud he is, so what's the point ...

There's a whole lot of feelings and "vibes" in this point, and no facts. Imagine I said you give me a commie vibe and I think you should be wiped off the face of the Earth. See how stupid you are?

Even if your mental illness theory is valid, incel mass shootings represent a very small percentage of gun homicides. The vast majority of them are from Democrat controlled, gang-infested cities, where I can assure you, guns are not bought legally.

You used an ad hominem fallacy, and it will be dismissed as such. If Hitler says 2 + 2 =4, it's still true. There's a million obvious reasons, but you've failed to name one.

Be gone, child.

Well at least the Realtor is safer, amiright?


School shootings are becoming more frequent, after a lull during the pandemic.

...20 schools shootings since Aug 1, 2021...

Edit:

Appears the mother was a true gem with a number of Open Letters to Trump she had posted online.

US homicide rate is much higher than peer nations. Availability of guns is an indisputable causal factor for that.

One of the main reasons is that trauma care has improved significantly over the last thirty years. You are much more likely to survive a gunshot today than you would have been in the mid 90s.

It's pretty easy to imagine you saying something like that, because of your mass shooter vibes.

Here is another opinion: people at large don't care that much about gang members shooting each other but the nation definitely cares about children being gun downed at school. That public mass shootings represent a small percentage of a ballooning number of total gun deaths only matters to people who don't care about children being gunned down, that is, reprehensible people like yourself. People are tired of seeing horrific tragedies unfold just so clowns like you can maintain you fantasies of sovereignty against the government. You don't need weapons of war to protect your house. You don't need to have an AR15 and you shouldn't have one.

Here are some facts:

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...hs-in-the-u-s/
In my opinion that's Republican, Republican, Republican, Republican, Republican and Republican, and Republican.


https://ajph.aphapublications.org/do...PH.2013.301409
There need to be limits on how much firepower an individual can easily get access. You don't think people should be allowed to own nukes, do you? So then there are limits on self defense and on firepower people should be allowed to own. I don't think you need a Black Hawk chopper either. So the question is where to draw the line. We should start with military style firepower, take that away then see how things work out.

How Cant there be no correlation with gun crimes and the number of guns available .

Just by pure accidental death cause by gun are more likely to happen .
Alec Baldwin anyone ?

Wouldn’t be logical that as the numbers of cars increases , more car accidents are likely ?

If I remember correctly , didn’t WW1 was a results notably due to increase of armaments during end of 1800 early 1900 ?
They were so confident in their armaments , it increased the likelihood of happening and they even thought it would not last long with those new weapons ?
Reducing the expectation of the tragedy of wars .

If the goal is to reduce gun homicides, I'm thinking allowing assault weapons etc. and banning handguns would reduce our firearm homicide rate significantly more than what you suggest.

Imho it is better to reduce the amount of damage that can be distributed in a very short time frame , like automatics , to prevent mass murders .

Guns or no , at some point if a person want to kill they will .
I rather have them not holding semi-automatics in that scenario .

What MontrealCorp said, plus it's more practical to ban assault weapons, plus let's let the gun nuts having something to protect them from the invading mongrel hordes in their own minds. The debate needs to be reduced to considering where to draw the line on commercially available individual offensive capability. No tanks outside of military use. Nothing designed to achieve mass casualties.

I know you think what if an entire division of MS13 invades my 2 bedroom house, what will I do then? I say just man up, we all have to go some time. If a Glock isn't going to save you it's just your time.

An AR-15 is simply a semi-automatic rifle, numbnuts. There IS a line, and it's small arms fire. Nice strawmans.

Now break down those states further...Which areas did they occur in? Democrats cities or rural Republican areas? You conveniently broke the pie up just enough to suit your agenda, just like the liberal liars in office. Want a piece of advice? DON'T run from the truth.

Also, the biggest mass shooting was done with PISTOLS.

Liberals have ZERO arguments when it comes to banning AR-15's specifically. It always comes down to WhY Do YoU nEeD aN Ar-15?!?! My feelings!!!

Also, to anyone deeming what right I have/don't have to defend my home with, **** YOU.

I thought the biggest mass shooting in the U.S. was Mandalay Bay, and I thought that shooting involved AR-15s and bump stocks.

The reason why good arguments for gun control don't seem to be as persuasive as they deserve to be, is that there are many people who are in fact persuaded, but pretend not to be, solely because they worry that they themselves will be stopped from arming themselves to the degree they desire. If they somehow knew that they personally would not be affected they would have no trouble abandoning their stated opposition.

Pistols killing more people sounds like a strong argument for banning those as well as assault rifles.

It's super weird logic, for sure. If someone miraculously managed to bring down the world's largest airliner with a high-powered rifle, would NutPeddler drop by to say: "Checkmate libtards. That's why restrictions on civilian ownership of anti-aircraft weaponry are stupid."

I think it's more an artifact of the argument that nearly all of gun deaths are due to pistols, and the people who own AR-15s for whatever reason they choose to, don't feel like they should be punished for the sins of the pistol owners.

I don't own any guns nor do I want to, but I can absolutely see their point, and it's not wrong.

If we decide it's better to irritate literally millions of Americans just to theoretically save a few dozen lives every couple years, then it's also very easy to argue that you're still just picking on the AR-15 when there are so many other more impactful changes that could be made.

Banning AR-15s is absolutely a toothless feel-good measure to take if your stated purpose is to impact gun deaths.

Semi-automatic rifles like the AR-15 have figured prominently in a number of mass shootings, but it is certainly correct that far more people are killed with handguns than with weapons like AR-15s. That's largely because (i) the number of handguns far exceeds the number of semi-automatic rifles; and (ii) a material percentage of handgun deaths are suicides. It's much easier to shoot yourself with a handgun than it is with a rifle.

You got no toes bro?

Rococo, that's the point. AR-15s are an easy target, but an illogical one.

No question that the guy from Mandalay Bay couldn't have done what he did using handguns. But we also have no way of knowing he doesn't take a Boston Bomber approach or any number of other ways of killing dozens of people there are.

I'd bet a sizeable amount of money that as a percentage of total rounds fired from their respective platforms, more pistol rounds have found human targets in the USA in the past decade than those fired from an AR-15.