(06-18-2015 06:23 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  If you want gun homicides to go down, do the opposite of what they are doing in an area where gun homicides are high. Like Chicago. High gun homicide rate. They have severe gun control laws. So do the opposite. Problem solved.

No, the only reason they have gun control laws is because gun crime is so severe there, not the other way around. And their most severe gun control laws got shot down as unconstitutional anyway.

(06-18-2015 06:29 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(06-18-2015 06:23 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  If you want gun homicides to go down, do the opposite of what they are doing in an area where gun homicides are high. Like Chicago. High gun homicide rate. They have severe gun control laws. So do the opposite. Problem solved.

No, the only reason they have gun control laws is because gun crime is so severe there, not the other way around. And their most severe gun control laws got shot down as unconstitutional anyway.

Are gun homicides going up or down since the severe laws were passed?

Gun control laws only affect LAW ABIDING people. If thugs and other non-law abiding people are using guns to kill, the last thing you do is to restrict guns to law abiding citizens.

(06-18-2015 06:31 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(06-18-2015 06:29 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(06-18-2015 06:23 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  If you want gun homicides to go down, do the opposite of what they are doing in an area where gun homicides are high. Like Chicago. High gun homicide rate. They have severe gun control laws. So do the opposite. Problem solved.

No, the only reason they have gun control laws is because gun crime is so severe there, not the other way around. And their most severe gun control laws got shot down as unconstitutional anyway.

Are gun homicides going up or down since the severe laws were passed?

Gun control laws only affect LAW ABIDING people. If thugs and other non-law abiding people are using guns to kill, the last thing you do is to restrict guns to law abiding citizens.

Not if the gun control laws don't restrict guns to law-abiding citizens. And why would they? Unless you're talking about a complete ban on guns, which is a different story.

We have a first-class, urban, gang, underclass that the rest of the world can only envy.

They drag all of our statistics down. And no one cares about that problem because it doesn't make money for anyone like the rare and lucrative white-on-black crime does.

Make sure everyone has a gun and knows how to use it

(06-18-2015 06:55 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  We have a first-class, urban, gang, underclass that the rest of the world can only envy.

They drag all of our statistics down. And no one cares about that problem because it doesn't make money for anyone like the rare and lucrative white-on-black crime does.

I think there are a couple of Central American countries have us beat in that regard.

(06-18-2015 07:54 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(06-18-2015 06:55 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  We have a first-class, urban, gang, underclass that the rest of the world can only envy.

They drag all of our statistics down. And no one cares about that problem because it doesn't make money for anyone like the rare and lucrative white-on-black crime does.

I think there are a couple of Central American countries have us beat in that regard.

Let's not emulate them.

(06-18-2015 07:54 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(06-18-2015 06:55 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  We have a first-class, urban, gang, underclass that the rest of the world can only envy.

They drag all of our statistics down. And no one cares about that problem because it doesn't make money for anyone like the rare and lucrative white-on-black crime does.

I think there are a couple of Central American countries have us beat in that regard.

Agreed.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/organi...ion-n83026
Combine this with our porous borders and easy access to guns and you have some answers to the OP.

(06-18-2015 04:20 PM)hoopfan Wrote:  another misleading chart.

how about all nations? or unwealthy nations? or any weapon used to kill fellow citizens?

That would be a valid argument....if you think our standards should be on par with the likes of Rwanda rather than the developed world.

Ask BHO about Chicago each week or perhaps Eric Holder about Fast & Furious. .

(06-18-2015 04:00 PM)Hitch Wrote:  How do we get this number down?

Erase the negative stigma that gun ownership and concealed carry laws have. It really is as simple as making sure that criminals don't have an easier path to gun ownership than law abiding citizens.

If we get rid of all males over 50 then this will solve our problems ️

(06-18-2015 07:17 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Make sure everyone has a gun and knows how to use it

The answer right here.

(06-18-2015 04:11 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  I don't think we do. Guns are simply a part of our culture. It is easier to kill someone with a gun so when an assault might be the result of an altercation in countries were guns aren't a part of their culture, here somebody often gets killed.

Guns are part of the Canadian culture...probably even more so.

Have less people in America. More people might result in more crazies and a higher chance of shootings.

Plus, our culture was built on gun use to further settlement.

(06-18-2015 11:27 PM)PlainTiger Wrote:  

(06-18-2015 07:17 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Make sure everyone has a gun and knows how to use it

The answer right here.

EVERYONE????

We should disarm all white, cishet, heterosexual males.

(06-19-2015 09:17 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(06-18-2015 11:27 PM)PlainTiger Wrote:  

(06-18-2015 07:17 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Make sure everyone has a gun and knows how to use it

The answer right here.

EVERYONE????

EVERYONE would be a bit extreme if you are including criminals and such, but the end result would still be an improvement.

(06-19-2015 10:13 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(06-19-2015 09:17 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(06-18-2015 11:27 PM)PlainTiger Wrote:  

(06-18-2015 07:17 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Make sure everyone has a gun and knows how to use it

The answer right here.

EVERYONE????

EVERYONE would be a bit extreme if you are including criminals and such, but the end result would still be an improvement.

Based on what evidence? I'm sure there are LOTS of people that don't own a gun, that also are not responsible people, but are not major criminals (yet). You'd be giving them guns and expecting them to suddenly act responsibly?

(06-18-2015 04:20 PM)hoopfan Wrote:  another misleading chart.

how about all nations? or unwealthy nations? or any weapon used to kill fellow citizens?

How about just nations that don't have restrictive gun laws?