public
Captain Slow Charging
The Oklahoma bombing in 1995 was done with a rental truck.
Yeah, par the course for lefties to not realize that PEOPLE kill people, not objects. Hence why no one is calling for a ban on trucks (just like there shouldn't be a ban on guns).
Wrong right off the bat, around 60% of those are suicides.300,000,000 guns in the hands of people will kill 30,000 people each year.
That's true for poisonings, car accidents, heart disease, etc... the longer the timeline and the larger the population the more people will die from various things.
So 91% of people murdered in Germany and 69.5% of people murdered in Canada are murdered without any guns whatsoever. You are literally proving the point that guns don't kill people....64 % of all murders in America are being committed with a gun. In Canada it's 30,5 %, in Germany 9%.
A gun has never taught people to go kill. Islam has and continues to do so.Religions don't kill people either.
Except that you're factually wrong. It's estimated that more than half of WY residents own guns, yet the murder rate is one of the lowest in the country; in NY only about 10% own gun and it's in the top ten for murder. For an example closer to home, look at Switzerland.It's not even worth a discussion, it's a mathematical certainty that when you have more guns, there will be more people getting shot. Period.
A gun has never taught people to go kill. Islam has and continues to do so.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a truck is a good guy with a bigger truck! This would happen regardless, things will continue happening no matter what. There will be situations where being armed will give you a better chance, there will be situations where it wouldn't matter. But of course if he used guns there would be a ton of screaming about gun control, I don't see much about UBC for truck rentals though....
Or a bollard!
Imagine if that had guns on it!
Par for the course.
Yeah, par the course for lefties to not realize that PEOPLE kill people, not objects. Hence why no one is calling for a ban on trucks (just like there shouldn't be a ban on guns).
Wrong right off the bat, around 60% of those are suicides.
That's true for poisonings, car accidents, heart disease, etc... the longer the timeline and the larger the population the more people will die from various things.
For an example closer to home, look at Switzerland.
Well you completely ignored my example within the actual US but anyways:And suicides don't count because...?
So what you're saying is that the 1,500,000 victims of gun shots would also have died from other causes if there hadn't been so many guns? That's an extremely bold theory. Care to elaborate?
It's interesting that you ignore the simplest of logic but bring up Switzerland. Good example. Let me elaborate.
A) Guns per 100 inhabitants:
- USA: 89
- Switzerland: 46 (hightest rate in Europe)
B) Deaths by guns per 1 million inhabitans:
- USA: 29.7
- Switzerland: 7.7
So despite the fact that the Swiss have roughly 50 % the guns per capita as the Americans, the Americans somehow manage to kill 3.86 times as many people with them.
So, it seems like the Swiss can handle their guns much more responsibly than the Americans can. You're right. It's not the guns, it's just trigger-happy Americans.
One more reason to pull their toys away from thm.
Because they are self harming, I don't care about people harming themselves.And suicides don't count because...?
So what you're saying is that the 1,500,000 victims of gun shots would also have died from other causes if there hadn't been so many guns? That's an extremely bold theory. Care to elaborate?
What I'm saying is that you have no point, so more people died from *something* than in all wars since *some time*. That tells you literally nothing, maybe involvement in those wars was very limited, maybe extremely high population growth skewed the absolutes. You have 0 proof that those people would not have died if it weren't for guns, just as I have 0 proof they would have died from something else*
*Well I'm sure plenty would have died of natural causes but we are talking homicides I'm guessing.
If that includes suicides you can half that stat right there.It's interesting that you ignore the simplest of logic but bring up Switzerland. Good example. Let me elaborate.
A) Guns per 100 inhabitants:
- USA: 89
- Switzerland: 46 (hightest rate in Europe)
B) Deaths by guns per 1 million inhabitans:
- USA: 29.7
- Switzerland: 7.7
So despite the fact that the Swiss have roughly 50 % the guns per capita as the Americans, the Americans somehow manage to kill 3.86 times as many people with them.
So, it seems like the Swiss can handle their guns much more responsibly than the Americans can. You're right. It's not the guns, it's just trigger-happy Americans.
One more reason to pull their toys away from thm.
Thank you for making our point for us, it has little to do with availability of guns and a lot to do with culture and socieconomic conditions. This is further evidenced by the fact that if you actually drill down into these statistics instead of taking the aerial view of it you'd see that something like 90% of this violence happens in a very small number of inner city neighborhoods. Incidentally they tend to be what we refer to as projects/ghetto, aka low income housing.
They got the kids wrong.
I don't see the connection between a racist POS murderer and a gubernatorial candidate. That is the most tasteless ad I've ever seen.Where would they ever get that kind of... oh, wait.
*Well I'm sure plenty would have died of natural causes but we are talking homicides I'm guessing.
This is further evidenced by the fact that if you actually drill down into these statistics instead of taking the aerial view of it you'd see that something like 90% of this violence happens in a very small number of inner city neighborhoods. Incidentally they tend to be what we refer to as projects/ghetto, aka low income housing.
A gun has never taught people to go kill. Islam has and continues to do so.
That's completely not what I was saying. I'll try to break it down a little better.Oh man, I hope you really didn't mean it how it sounds.
It sounds like you're saying: "They died of gunshots? So what? They would have died anyway."
As I wrote above: I really hope you didn't mean it as cynical as it reads.
You have an interesting way of reading things sometimes. What I was attempting to illustrate is that, despite what media would have you believe, gun violence in the US is a very local problem that is mainly confined to areas where all crime is high. It's not the guns, it's the people and their socieconomic and cultural realities that cause crime.So... you're saying that the fact they lived in slums makes their deaths less significant, and that all is well as long as the more wealthy people remain save in their neighborhoods or what?
Again, I really hope you didn't mean it as it reads.