America's Gun Violence Problem Explained in 18 Charts
- Thread starter thodisipagal
- Start date
The NY Times article is spot on.
You are no more likely to get mugged in the US than anywhere else. The problem is the mugger will have a gun and may kill you.
If you get in a bar fight in Vancouver you may get a broken nose. In Miami the guys will end up shooting each other.
The US is awash in guns, any violent encounter will involve guns.
So many people, good and bad, have guns that people feel they need a gun for protection.
It's a self reinforcing feedback loop.
Obviously they need to reduce the number of guns in circulation, but nobody can agree on how.
You are no more likely to get mugged in the US than anywhere else. The problem is the mugger will have a gun and may kill you.
If you get in a bar fight in Vancouver you may get a broken nose. In Miami the guys will end up shooting each other.
The US is awash in guns, any violent encounter will involve guns.
So many people, good and bad, have guns that people feel they need a gun for protection.
It's a self reinforcing feedback loop.
Obviously they need to reduce the number of guns in circulation, but nobody can agree on how.
Hmmm guns I dislike them But to lighten things up
Trumps first night in the whitehouse he gets visited by the ghost of George Washington "oh George, What do I have to do to be a good President... Be an honest Man, Always tell the Truth... Oh dear, I don't think I can really do that... The second night it was Ben Franklin... Same question... Be a president for the common people not just the wealthy... Oh dear I don't think I can do that... On the Third night Abraham Lincoln Same Question.... Abe Says "Go to the Theater... "
Trumps first night in the whitehouse he gets visited by the ghost of George Washington "oh George, What do I have to do to be a good President... Be an honest Man, Always tell the Truth... Oh dear, I don't think I can really do that... The second night it was Ben Franklin... Same question... Be a president for the common people not just the wealthy... Oh dear I don't think I can do that... On the Third night Abraham Lincoln Same Question.... Abe Says "Go to the Theater... "
Video still has some bias. Most U.S. states require you to have a license to purchase. There's usually a cooling off period as well. They should have stated clearly the difference between homicide and murder.
There's a large group of politicians that want to address the gun problem, but they aren't educated on the subject and don't want to address the underlying issues.
Gun bans don't work. The people of the U.S. have made it very clear to the politicians they do not want further gun control.
The people in California recently won against the state on the issue of magazine capacity restrictions. California could not come up with any research showing that limiting magazine capacity had any effect on the outcome of shootings.
Concealed carry has been expanding and is now allowed in most U.S. States.
The best thing Government can actually do in the U.S. is nothing. Obama became the greatest gun salesman in U.S. history when he pushed for more gun control. He caused ammunition shortages and some gun companies had 18 month order backlogs. Now that pro gun Trump is in office, gun companies are struggling. Remington is filing for bankruptcy. Ammunition companies like Federal and Norma have made layoffs. Other companies like Savage and Smith and Wesson are putting rebates out on their products.
If gun control is a no-go, then what about ammo control? Each owner can buy 50 rounds a year (maybe 100 in some counties) and any excess is taxed @ 1000%, plus it has to be approved by the local police department. PD also has the option to waive the 1000% tax. Resale is prohibited.
Gun clubs and ranges are tax-exempt but all rounds purchased must be expended on the grounds.
Sure you have the right to bear arms, but it's gonna cost ya.
Gun clubs and ranges are tax-exempt but all rounds purchased must be expended on the grounds.
Sure you have the right to bear arms, but it's gonna cost ya.
Limiting magazine capacity may be a start ,in getting a handle on the nations gun worship mind set.
Start with small limitations, and enforce them...in 100 years, they may start to get control of it.
Or.......just move to Canada.
Proper background checks should eliminate the irrational and insane especially this guy who had threatening behavior. There are so many guns nothing will work because if you want one you can get it no problem.
That is the larger problem...the sheer number of firearms in the US ,would make it an almost an impossibility.
The elephant in the room is the NRA. It's not purely about donations from the NRA, it's the fear of not getting re-elected if congress or Senate don't toe the line.
NRA gave $55M to Republicans in the last elections. The Democrats are the only ones who want to make changes and the Republicans are ok with continually "sending thoughts and prayers" to grieving families.
Every Democratic proposal under Obama was shut down by Republicans. No matter how logical an idea, it never made it through Congress.
Making the waiting period longer to check out the mental stability of the new gun licence went no where.
Decreasing the Mag size for non LEO or non Mil went no where.
Eliminating the purchases from Flea Markets - no go.
It seems this second amendment thing drawn up hundreds of years ago is something etched in stone with these gun owners. I'm sure if there were AR15's, high cap mags and 50 Cals back when the 2nd amnendment was drawn up the Fore Fathers would have had the brains to exclude them to the public.
Fact - Every day in the US four or more people are killed by one gunman. Every Day
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/12/...ords-show.html?referer=https://www.google.ca/
NRA gave $55M to Republicans in the last elections. The Democrats are the only ones who want to make changes and the Republicans are ok with continually "sending thoughts and prayers" to grieving families.
Every Democratic proposal under Obama was shut down by Republicans. No matter how logical an idea, it never made it through Congress.
Making the waiting period longer to check out the mental stability of the new gun licence went no where.
Decreasing the Mag size for non LEO or non Mil went no where.
Eliminating the purchases from Flea Markets - no go.
It seems this second amendment thing drawn up hundreds of years ago is something etched in stone with these gun owners. I'm sure if there were AR15's, high cap mags and 50 Cals back when the 2nd amnendment was drawn up the Fore Fathers would have had the brains to exclude them to the public.
Fact - Every day in the US four or more people are killed by one gunman. Every Day
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/12/...ords-show.html?referer=https://www.google.ca/
I can't believe people are still saying limit magazine capacity.
I wrote that California could not come up with any empirical evidence that magazine capacity was a factor and lost in court.
It's clear the people who have suggested a magazine limit have never used a firearm. If they had, they'd know how easily magazines can be modified back to their standard capacity, and how fast a magazine can be changed, negating the limit if they chose to obey a capacity law when committing a crime (highly unlikely). New York and Chicago have magazine limits, and they are some of the highest crime cities in the U.S.
100 round a year limit? Unrealistic. 100 rounds of ammunition is nothing. You need to fire 1000's of rounds before you can become proficient. Limit ammunition use to approved ranges? Impossible. You would be handicapping a large proportion of the rural population where mass shootings don't occur. 100 rounds is a single precision rifle match or a third of an IPSC course of fire. Very few countries limit ammunition purchases, yet still have low gun violence.
The NRA has no influence on the number of guns or ammunition that is purchased, nor do they sell to people. They never issue propaganda to buy more guns. Doesn't explain how come the population buys massive quantities of guns when threatened with legislative changes.
The Civilian Marksmanship Program, which does sell guns and ammunition, has and still is responsible for selling thousands upon thousands of surplus U.S. government military rifles and pistols to the public for decades, but no one is going after them.
No gun purchases at flea markets? There is no such thing as a "gun show loophole".
Type of firearm does not matter. A 5.56 bullet out of a non restricted gun is just as lethal as a restricted gun.
When the second amendment was written, it included all of the state of the art firearms of they day, so it's highly unlikely they would have excluded anything. They wanted people to have firearms because they wanted people to defend their new country.
Only explanation is that Americans just plain don't want gun control.
The only real solution offered that someone suggested was to move out of the U.S. Places like Canada, Switzerland, Norway and Finland have high rates of gun ownership and much fewer problems. Switzerland even gives their conscripts rifles, which they are allowed to keep when they have completed their military service.
I wrote that California could not come up with any empirical evidence that magazine capacity was a factor and lost in court.
It's clear the people who have suggested a magazine limit have never used a firearm. If they had, they'd know how easily magazines can be modified back to their standard capacity, and how fast a magazine can be changed, negating the limit if they chose to obey a capacity law when committing a crime (highly unlikely). New York and Chicago have magazine limits, and they are some of the highest crime cities in the U.S.
100 round a year limit? Unrealistic. 100 rounds of ammunition is nothing. You need to fire 1000's of rounds before you can become proficient. Limit ammunition use to approved ranges? Impossible. You would be handicapping a large proportion of the rural population where mass shootings don't occur. 100 rounds is a single precision rifle match or a third of an IPSC course of fire. Very few countries limit ammunition purchases, yet still have low gun violence.
The NRA has no influence on the number of guns or ammunition that is purchased, nor do they sell to people. They never issue propaganda to buy more guns. Doesn't explain how come the population buys massive quantities of guns when threatened with legislative changes.
The Civilian Marksmanship Program, which does sell guns and ammunition, has and still is responsible for selling thousands upon thousands of surplus U.S. government military rifles and pistols to the public for decades, but no one is going after them.
No gun purchases at flea markets? There is no such thing as a "gun show loophole".
Type of firearm does not matter. A 5.56 bullet out of a non restricted gun is just as lethal as a restricted gun.
When the second amendment was written, it included all of the state of the art firearms of they day, so it's highly unlikely they would have excluded anything. They wanted people to have firearms because they wanted people to defend their new country.
Only explanation is that Americans just plain don't want gun control.
The only real solution offered that someone suggested was to move out of the U.S. Places like Canada, Switzerland, Norway and Finland have high rates of gun ownership and much fewer problems. Switzerland even gives their conscripts rifles, which they are allowed to keep when they have completed their military service.
Last edited:
no, actually empirically americans do want stiffer gun controls:
news.gallup.com
no, the US has far more guns per capital than any other country in the world, those countries you mention don't even come close:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country
when the second amendment was written the best they had were muskets. that argument is like saying "well, if they had rocket launchers they would'a made sure people could have those too! yahoo!":
https://www.ranker.com/list/firearms-in-1791/rachel-souerbry
the NRA does have influence on the number and types of weapons that are sold to people because they influence the law makers that decide what types of weapons are allowed. when they were able to ensure that assault weapon restrictions were lifted then the number of assault weapon sales went from zero to some number larger than zero! but yeah, victims of gun violence need to push hard to remove the legal restrictions that have been put in place preventing them from seeking financial restitution from gun sellers and manufacturers. law makers and the NRA have made damn sure that they attempt to wall that up. its what brought tobacco down.
no, the gunshow loophole does exist:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_show_loophole
Polls don't mean anything. If they did, TRUMP would not have won the election. People buy guns, not the NRA, and the people have spoken by buying hundreds of millions of firearms.
I stated other countries have high rates of gun ownership, which is correct. I never said that they have gun ownership rates as high as the U.S.
The argument I stated about the second amendment was correct. There were only a handful of laws at that time. The country was brand new.
It's clear you don't know anything about firearms. You know what the difference between a pre ban and post ban assault weapon is? Purely cosmetic items that have no effect on the accuracy, rate of fire or type of ammunition fired. A firearm missing a flash hider, bayonet lug and pistol grip is no less lethal. As well, you seem to be ignoring the tiny little fact that firearm deaths have been consistently trending downwards over the decades despite the lifting of the ban and more firearms being in the U.S. now than in any point in history.
People think an AR15 is an assault weapon, but a Ruger Mini 14 isn't because of no flash hider, bayonet lug an no pistol grip, yet both fire the same cartridge, both have 30 round magazines available, and both are semi auto. Both are equally lethal, only the AR15 is somehow more dangerous because ignorant people are scared of how it looks.
Did you even read the article about gun show loophole? You are not afforded any special exception buying a firearm at a gun show. It's just a private sale that happens to be at a gun show.
http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/22/ccw-weekend-the-myth-of-the-gun-show-loophole/
You're a victim of the mass media.
More guns, more gun violence... Pretty straight forward! The reasons don't matter.
The notion that a good guy with a gun will stop a bad guy with a gun is a romanticized vision of the nature of violent crime.
"It's long past time to start emphasizing the "well-regulated" phrase in the 2nd Amendment." Well said.
The notion that a good guy with a gun will stop a bad guy with a gun is a romanticized vision of the nature of violent crime.
"It's long past time to start emphasizing the "well-regulated" phrase in the 2nd Amendment." Well said.
It is obvious who is brainwashed here.
The NRA is so good at it!
By the way, before you go yammering about people not knowing anything about guns: there are several here who carried them for years. They were shot at and shot back.
The NRA is so good at it!
By the way, before you go yammering about people not knowing anything about guns: there are several here who carried them for years. They were shot at and shot back.
i'd additionally like to point out the selective ignorance of gun nuts.
they're quite fine to concede that the more motor vehicles a nation has then the more people driving in that nation.
the more bicycles a nation has then the more people are riding bicycles.
the more blenders a nation has then the more smoothies people are drinking.
that nuclear weapon proliferation is a bad thing.
but no, when provided that the more guns a nation has then the more homicides that nation experiences... somethings suddenly wrong with that equation! or that one firearm that can dispense with six bullets needs to be reloaded after... six bullets. and that multiple firearms with high capacity magazines provides a far more efficient homicide model.
gun ownership does not need to be outlawed. we just need to ensure that not everybody is allowed to have them and the type and nature of firearm possession should come with hurdles that ensure that the right people possess them. 19 year olds with a history of mental health and school disciplinary actions for example.
they're quite fine to concede that the more motor vehicles a nation has then the more people driving in that nation.
the more bicycles a nation has then the more people are riding bicycles.
the more blenders a nation has then the more smoothies people are drinking.
that nuclear weapon proliferation is a bad thing.
but no, when provided that the more guns a nation has then the more homicides that nation experiences... somethings suddenly wrong with that equation! or that one firearm that can dispense with six bullets needs to be reloaded after... six bullets. and that multiple firearms with high capacity magazines provides a far more efficient homicide model.
gun ownership does not need to be outlawed. we just need to ensure that not everybody is allowed to have them and the type and nature of firearm possession should come with hurdles that ensure that the right people possess them. 19 year olds with a history of mental health and school disciplinary actions for example.
