pickupyourpistol:charcoalbuddy:pickupyourpistol:charcoalbuddy:pickupyourpistol:charcoalbud
pickupyourpistol: charcoalbuddy: pickupyourpistol: charcoalbuddy: pickupyourpistol: charcoalbuddy: pickupyourpistol: h6p28d9p: durkin62: h6p28d9p: dermoosealini: hey America, how those thoughts and prayers working out? Not good, @dermoosealini . Turns out emotional sentiments that don’t suggest any type of preventative action are pretty useless. In other news, politicians have discovered that they can’t get their way a hundred percent of the time and they might have to resort to the horrors of “compromise.” Only time will tell if this train of realizations continue and politicians realize that a majority of society will always place more importance about their fellow living beings than the ownership of an inanimate object. Until then, back to you with news and hot takes. More guns is correlated with less murders. Gun free zones account for virtually all mass attacks. Someday people will learn that sacrificing, lives, freedoms, and responsibility isn’t worth the false sense of security that comes with capitulation to the state. Hahaha, tell that to the 17th century when gun dueling was allowed. So many people died. The most notable among they were; Charles Dickson, Charles Lucas, Stephen Decatur, and Jonathan Cilley. President Jackson’s duel and kill count ranges on anywhere from 5 to a hundred, depending on what source you consult! It got so bad that they had to pass several laws prohibiting it. This included the 1728 Mass. Acts 516 and Article II, Section 9 of the Oregon constitution. So no, guns do not lead to less murder. 1728 Mass. Acts 516: https://law.duke.edu/gunlaws/1728/massachusetts/467694/ Article II, Section 9 Oregon Constitution:https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/Pages/OrConst.aspx Dude. When you have to reference shootings from 400 years ago it an indication that you truly do not understand gun statistics. The chart above clearly shows that while gun ownership in America is at an all time high, gun homicides are at a 20 year low. This chart compares the number of accidental firearm fatalities. The red line is the number of private firearms in the United States, in units of 100,000. At the end of 2013, the estimate was 363.3 million. The green line is the number of fatal firearm accidents, or unintentional firearm fatalities, in the United States. The number in 2013 was the lowest recorded, 505. The absolute numbers are important, but the rate of unintended firearm fatalities per 100,000 population is a better measure of safety. Please post a chart showing the percentage of americans who possess firearms, compared with the crime/homicide/death rates. Number of guns is an absolutely useless statistic. Plot the number of Americans who possess firearms against the crime/homicide/death rate? And do you know what it would show? Heres a hint: If there was a single gun owner or 70 trillion gun owners it would show the EXACT same gun homicide drop over the past 20 years! Jesus folks, this isn’t rocket science. That’s some stellar data analysis right there. Look it up. The percentage of Americans who own guns is dropping slowly but surely over time. As is homicide rates, suicide, all that other stuff. I know the statistics on gun ownership. It’s still estimated that 100,000,000 Americans own 350,000,000 firearms. What is the statistical significance if 90,000,000 or 110,000,000 people owned 350,000,000 firearms? It doesn’t change the fact that the number of firearms in the US is at an all time high and gun homicides have dropped to an all time low over 20 years. A 10% variation in the number of Americans owning guns isn’t going to result in a 50% drop in gun homicides, is it? Or are just the killers giving up their guns? The point is the rate is dropping, which contradicts your charts. Why are you not understanding this? If the rate of homicides, suicides, gun violence are decreasing, and the percentage of armed Americans is decreasing, that’s called a correlation. Causation? Not necessarily. but correlation yes. Contrary to your charts, which show a useless comparison that is a demonstrably false correlation. BTW, this chart does not contradict my chart. My chart depicts the number of guns in the US. Your chart proclaims the number of gun owners has gone down (which no one believes). You don’t have to spend much time on google to understand firearms sales in the US skyrocketed under oblomo. Yes, some people went and bought guns because of Obama, but that was primarily people who already owned guns and thought he was coming to take their guns away. Obama might have been one reason, but he wasn’t the primary reason it spiked.It started increasing after 2004. This is because of the expiration of the Assault Weapons Ban, allowing the design, manufacture, and sale of tons of new weapons like AR15′s. New guns flooded the marketplaceIt’s not just AR15′s and other rifles either, it’s all firearm types. There are simply more companies making guns, and a huge variety of different guns available. How many single-stack 9mm handguns, specifically market for CCW, are there today? How many were there 10 years ago? And yeah, sorry but anyone who doesn’t believe ownership rates are down has never look at the research. There are fewer gun owners. That’s just a fact. Every study I’ve ever seen on the topic of ownership rates shows a downward trend in % of households with guns. Gun owners just happen own a lot more guns than they used to.For example, how many guns do you own? How many, on average, do your friends own? What percentage of gun owners do you know are currently looking for the next gun they want to get?Regarding your other commend asking about the 10% between 1994 and 2004 - yeah that’s probably correct. The Brady Bill and Assault Weapons Ban went into effect in 1994. -- source link