https://www.cato.org/publications/comme ... -realities
Have at it. This will answer all your questions.
Have at it. This will answer all your questions.
AR-15s, M240s, M16s, M4s and the Like
- Thread starter Original_Belladonna
- Start date
- Status
X2X-EllLllLllAllBllUllRllG-X2X said:
Current 2018 Death Toll in US
Abortion - 137,080
Tobacco - 43,934
Obesity - 38,537
Medical Errors - 31,565
Alcohol - 12,553
Suicide - 5,369
Drunk Driving- 4,244
Poisoning - 3,987
All Drug Abuse - 3,139
Prescription Drugs - 1,883
Murder by Guns - 1,443
2/3 of Murder by Guns is from suicide
We can talk about banning what causes the most death or we can stay on guns which is on the bottom of that list. You want to bring in cars I’ll bring in the biggest govt funded murdering organization around.
Original_Belladonna
Well-Known Member
Domo, so it’s a low number, does that make it any less of a problem? I like your copy/paste stat list though. 
X2X-EllLllLllAllBllUllRllG-X2X
Well-Known Member
Nice figure Domo ... third of the way thru the year , so roughly 6000 people a year murdered by guns ... do you find that an acceptable number ?
D3Fi-The_P3-ISS-DirtyDugan_ISS
Well-Known Member
Kasama said:
Your question is a loaded question but I'll answer it for you anyways.
The real answer is inconclusive. There is evidence that supports both sides of the argument. However, let's look at the examples that are available to us.
Let's look at Mexico. Gun ownership in Mexico is strictly regulated by the government. Most types of calibers are restricted and reserved to military and law enforcement only.
Private citizens who wish to acquire firearms and ammunition are required by law to follow strict guidelines. These restrictions begin with applying for a firearm acquisition permit by submitting the following:
1. Proof of legal status (there are different rules for males under 40 and females or males over 40).
2. Proof of income.
3. Criminal background check.
4. Proof of address (head of household must sign documentation authorizing firearms and ammunition are allowed in the home).
5. Copy of government-issued photo identification.
6. Indicate the intentions of ownership (if for hunting you must belong to a club). This is limited to six factors.
These are just the requirements in terms of documentation and do not explain the process to obtain. These laws and rules were adopted in 1971 by reform to Article 10 of the Mexican constitution as well as the enactment of the Federal Law of Firearms and Explosives reform of the same year.
It is estimated that as of 2014, gun ownership in Mexico is 15 guns per 100 citizens. These numbers cover both legal and illegal gun ownership. NOTE: AR-15s ARE ILLEGAL TO OWN IN MEXICO BASED ON THE .223 CALIBER.
Now with Mexico having so many restrictions it's obvious that gun related deaths wouldn't be an issue, right? Wrong, but don't take my word for it, let's look at the statistics according to GunPolicy.org.
This list will first identify the year, then the total number of gun deaths and then the rate of all gun deaths per 100,000 people for Mexico:
2014: 13,505, 11.23
2013: 16,119, 13.57
2012: 18,598, 15.86
2011: 20,870, 18.04
2010: 20,491, 17.96
2009: 14,661, 13.04
2008: 10,434, 9.41
2007: 6,787, 6.21
2006: 6,989, 6.48
2005: 6,419, 6.02
2004: 6,177, 5.87
2003: 6,523, 6.28
2002: 6,620, 6.46
2001: 6,890, 6.81
2000: 6,951, 6.97
1999: 8,253, 8.38
1998: 9,272, 9.55
Now let's compare 2014 Mexico to 2014 USA...in Mexico the total, per 100,000 gun related deaths was 11.23. While in the USA, that number was 10.45. In Mexico, 6.34 incidents per 100,000 were homicides. In the USA, 3.5 incidents per 100,000 were homicides. In Mexico, 0.44 incidents per 100,000 were suicides. While in the USA, 6.69 incidents per 100,000 were suicides. Again, these are from GunPolicy.org. They are hosted by the Sydney School of Public Health.
We should also note how many guns are in ownership (illegal and legal) per 100 of both countries.
In Mexico, there are an estimated 15 guns in ownership per 100. In the USA, that number is estimated at an astounding 101.05.
But I'm guessing you don't like those facts...
Check these out. Again, using the data from GunPolicy.org, we find that Guatemala ranks 3rd in the world for rate of homicide per 100,000 people. This is despite having a law that that makes it completely illegal to own/obtain fully automatic weapons, military firearms or weapons of war. As of 2015, that rate is 38.33. The estimated gun ownership is 11.57 guns per 100 people.
The USA ranks 20th in the world for gun related homicides while ranking number 1 for gun ownership. The most interesting fact is found when you compare number 1 through 19 for gun related homicides and find that they ALL HEAVILY restrict gun ownership especially in regard to automatic weapons and "weapons of war."
Does that answer your loaded question?
X2X-EllLllLllAllBllUllRllG-X2X
Well-Known Member
ISS_The_DirtyDugan_ISS said:
That's excellent work Dirty, now do a comparison between Australia's succesful gun reform and the US as per deaths per 100,000 people
Original_Belladonna
Well-Known Member
illIIlIHOLYIlIIlDOMOIlIlIIi said:Original_Belladonna said:Domo, so it’s a low number, does that make it any less of a problem? I like your copy/paste stat list though.
Isn’t the debate about stats more than emotional stats ?
No, the debate is: What is the need for these types of weapons?
D3Fi-The_P3-ISS-DirtyDugan_ISS
Well-Known Member
X2X-EllLllLllAllBllUllRllG-X2X said:
Actually, I already have analyzed the numbers and made the comparisons, and the impact hasn't been what you think it would be. However, I'm not intellectually lazy, and I'm not going to do your work for you. If you have a point to make, I encourage you to use facts, rather than fallacies and opinions to express your point of view.
I'm more interested in finding out if you are going to respond to these numbers? Will you take a shot at explaining that despite limiting the sale, ownership and possession of all the guns named in the title of this post the top 19 countries on the list experience the highest homicide by gun statistics?
D3Fi-The_P3-ISS-DirtyDugan_ISS
Well-Known Member
X2X-EllLllLllAllBllUllRllG-X2X said:
You also wrote that crime stats don't concern you....I just want to make sure we remain consistent if we're going to have a real discussion.
If your position has changed, I'm good with that. I would just ask that you respond to my previous two posts.
X2X-EllLllLllAllBllUllRllG-X2X
Well-Known Member
I said American crime stats dont concern me , but there you posted American stats
I have already looked at my countries figures and hence i challenged you to post them knowing full well that you wouldn't cause they dont fit your agenda
I can post them on here for you and you can make some half arsed excuses to try and justify your position
Maybe bring up another 3rd world countries stats that stack up nicely for you
I have already looked at my countries figures and hence i challenged you to post them knowing full well that you wouldn't cause they dont fit your agenda
I can post them on here for you and you can make some half arsed excuses to try and justify your position
Maybe bring up another 3rd world countries stats that stack up nicely for you
D3Fi-The_P3-ISS-DirtyDugan_ISS
Well-Known Member
Original_Belladonna said:illIIlIHOLYIlIIlDOMOIlIlIIi said:Original_Belladonna said:Domo, so it’s a low number, does that make it any less of a problem? I like your copy/paste stat list though.
Isn’t the debate about stats more than emotional stats ?
No, the debate is: What is the need for these types of weapons?
I don't believe you're being honest here. You posted why you asked the question later in the thread. You posted the rules even about how self defense wasn't a viable answer. You're not looking for a debate, you're looking to make a statement.
This is clearly seen in your second post...
Original_Belladonna said:I have read through all of these comments and honestly wish I could like, or thumbs up or down certain comments. I never expected this post to grow like it did. I am very interested in all of your viewpoints. I understand my OP was vague and probably not the best worded, according to some, but let me assure you I worded it that way for dialogue purposes.
With that dialogue opened up, I have seen many views. I have also seen some not so mature behavior from some of you. I would love for this conversation to continue. Getting viewpoints from the mass is the only way to a solution. And we clearly need a solution to this problem in the United States.
My stance is this: I believe in the second amendment and believe you should own a firearm if you want. However, I think there should be stricter regulations regarding certain types of firearms. As many of you said, it’s a tool. You are correct, it is a tool used. Each one has a different purpose just like your regular garden tools or garage tools. Now, with that in mind, not everyone should be handling certain types of tools. I wouldn’t handle a fully automatic weapon just as I wouldn’t handle a jackhammer.
The regulations I would like to see implemented are: a 14 day waiting period, must be 21 years old to purchase a firearm, must pass a mental health check and background check with both being mandatory, banning of certain accessories like the bump stock, require an individual to go through an extensive training/safety course, and have yearly re-registry and background check/mental health check.
Even just one child dying in a school shooting is too much. And we have to look at the one critical fact: All mass shootings happen with a firearm. The firearm is the common denominator in every shooting, whether it be from suicide, robbery, murder, etc.
Please keep the discussion going, I offered my view as to how we can possibly try to curb some of this violence. If there’s something you disagree with or agree with, post about it. I’m intrigued to keep listening to your viewpoints. But be mature, we don’t need name calling and saying someone is butt-hurt. Be civilized and understand that everyone has a viewpoint and is most likely different than yours. Similar sometimes, but not quite the same.
In my first post I asked what your agenda was here for this very reason. From what I've seen, you've made it clear.
If I'm wrong, explain why I, a law abiding USA citizen shouldn't be allowed to exercise a constitutional civil right. Don't generalize, don't do anything but focus on why DirtyDugan shouldn't be allowed to own one.
Let's get real here. Is this conversation about the ownership of AR-15s, gun ownership (your post above appears to target ALL guns), or school shootings in the USA?
Original_Belladonna
Well-Known Member
Dugan, if you’re a law abiding citizen, fully responsible to own a weapon, why the fear of further regulations to weed out the ones who shouldn’t have them?
D3Fi-The_P3-ISS-DirtyDugan_ISS
Well-Known Member
X2X-EllLllLllAllBllUllRllG-X2X said:
You just can't do it, can you? You said well before I made the post you didn't care about our crime stats. Now it matters because I've mentioned it?
If you THINK you can make a rational point and join the adults table than do it. But honestly haven't been able to yet.
I accepted someone's challenge and responded. You haven't done the same. You have not offered any rebuttal to my response other than some lazy request for an analysis of Australia and how 3rd world countries shouldn't be considered in the discussion.
What the hell do you even mean? Are you implying the lives in those places mentioned don't have value? Are you saying it's not the guns to blame, that perhaps there are other reasons for the violence?
I was pretty damned clear with my point.
I also haven't posted my agenda or even offered an answer to the original question. I've simply argued against those who believe the answer is limiting freedom rather than addressing the issue at its core. If you have a point to make and feel like you can make it with statistics like I have or examples of court cases, than do it!!!
Quit ducking and dodging and man up, because at this point you're really boring and not very intelligent. All is not lost however, I can accept your ignorance because you make the choice to be so.
Oh god, there's no way I'll be able to reply to all this.
I'm out.
But you guys provided some form of evidence and another guy joined the debate so I'm glad.
I don't dislike any of your guy'ses points, infact I welcome the opportunity to discuss intellectual topics.
I had fun guys.
I'm out.
But you guys provided some form of evidence and another guy joined the debate so I'm glad.
I don't dislike any of your guy'ses points, infact I welcome the opportunity to discuss intellectual topics.
I had fun guys.
Original_Belladonna
Well-Known Member
ISS_The_DirtyDugan_ISS said:
Dugan, and that’s a lot of the problem we are seeing. People aren’t answering the original question nor looking at solutions in a non-biased way. Any effort towards a solution is progress, and we should all be aiming towards that. It shouldn’t be about limiting firearms or freedoms, but I’m sure you can agree with me that just because you have a right to bear an arm, that doesn’t give you the right to use it on someone in an unprovoked way. We wouldn’t be limiting your right, as you are a law-abiding citizen that is mentally capable of owning your firearm. We would be limiting those that are prone to violence.
X2X-EllLllLllAllBllUllRllG-X2X
Well-Known Member
ISS_The_DirtyDugan_ISS said:
Lol , check & mate .... have i touched a nerve ?
That is such a epic sook fest there Dugan , thank god your a law abiding citizen who has access to multi firing firearms with such a volatile temper
Anywho seeing as though your such a stats man , i will help you out as you seem to have forgotten your US stats for the same site you referenced GunPolicy.org
Listed in the exact context and content you have supplied
X2X-EllLllLllAllBllUllRllG-X2X
Well-Known Member
Total number of gun death total for USA and as gun deaths per 100,000 people
2016: 38,658 @ 11.96
2015: 36,247 @ 11.30
2014: 33,599 @ 10.54
2013: 33,636 @ 10.63
2012: 33,563 @ 10.69
2011: 32,351 @ 10.38
2010: 31,672 @ 10.26
2009: 31,347 @ 10.22
2008: 31,593 @ 10.39
2007: 31,224 @ 10.37
2006: 30,896 @ 10.35
2005: 30,694 @ 10.39
2004: 29,569 @ 10.10
2003: 30,136 @ 10.39
2002: 30,242 @ 10.51
2001: 29,573 @ 10.38
2000: 28,663 @ 10.19
1999: 28,874 @ 10.35
That's up just under 10,000 people in a 17 year time frame , so as you say your countries gun policy is actually working
Now for a country who gun reforms obviously hasn't worked Australia
2016: 238 @ 1.04
2015: 218 @ 0.96
2014: 239 @ 1.06
2013: 210 @ 0.94
2012: 231 @ 1.05
2011: 190 @ 0.87
2010: 241 @ 1.12
2009: 230 @ 1.08
2008: 235 @ 1.12
2007: 237 @ 1.14
2006: 245 @ 1.20
2005: 221 @ 1.09
2004: 243 @ 1.22
2003: 289 @ 1.46
2002: 292 @ 1.49
2001: 326 @ 1.69
2000: 324 @ 1.70
1999: 347 @ 1.84
At the time of the Port Arthur massacre in 1996
516 @ 2.84
Now if your math isn't that sharp , like you seem to be , that more than a 50% decrease
Australian government introduced a gun buy back scheme where any firearm legal or illegal could be handed in and the Government would purchase it , no questions asked ,661,000 were handed in
The government implement a policy in regards to private ownership of automatic, semi automatic, military and shot guns and there has not been a massacre here in 22 years
The emphasis was always on the individual to hand in firearms if they felt they wanted to or register and keep in secure and locked location with ammunition to be stored in a separate location to the firearm
Now you can ***** and moan and cry about anything stated here , but is there a need for a semi automatic or automatic weapons for home defense ... no there isnt
Statistics show that they are not necessary , figures show that in Australia our rate and numbers of death by firearms is going down and has stabilized where in the states its increasing
So tell yourself whatever makes you feel safe and cozy in your murderous gun cultured country Dugan , it always comes back to the individual and you sir are one scared little man
2016: 38,658 @ 11.96
2015: 36,247 @ 11.30
2014: 33,599 @ 10.54
2013: 33,636 @ 10.63
2012: 33,563 @ 10.69
2011: 32,351 @ 10.38
2010: 31,672 @ 10.26
2009: 31,347 @ 10.22
2008: 31,593 @ 10.39
2007: 31,224 @ 10.37
2006: 30,896 @ 10.35
2005: 30,694 @ 10.39
2004: 29,569 @ 10.10
2003: 30,136 @ 10.39
2002: 30,242 @ 10.51
2001: 29,573 @ 10.38
2000: 28,663 @ 10.19
1999: 28,874 @ 10.35
That's up just under 10,000 people in a 17 year time frame , so as you say your countries gun policy is actually working
Now for a country who gun reforms obviously hasn't worked Australia
2016: 238 @ 1.04
2015: 218 @ 0.96
2014: 239 @ 1.06
2013: 210 @ 0.94
2012: 231 @ 1.05
2011: 190 @ 0.87
2010: 241 @ 1.12
2009: 230 @ 1.08
2008: 235 @ 1.12
2007: 237 @ 1.14
2006: 245 @ 1.20
2005: 221 @ 1.09
2004: 243 @ 1.22
2003: 289 @ 1.46
2002: 292 @ 1.49
2001: 326 @ 1.69
2000: 324 @ 1.70
1999: 347 @ 1.84
At the time of the Port Arthur massacre in 1996
516 @ 2.84
Now if your math isn't that sharp , like you seem to be , that more than a 50% decrease
Australian government introduced a gun buy back scheme where any firearm legal or illegal could be handed in and the Government would purchase it , no questions asked ,661,000 were handed in
The government implement a policy in regards to private ownership of automatic, semi automatic, military and shot guns and there has not been a massacre here in 22 years
The emphasis was always on the individual to hand in firearms if they felt they wanted to or register and keep in secure and locked location with ammunition to be stored in a separate location to the firearm
Now you can ***** and moan and cry about anything stated here , but is there a need for a semi automatic or automatic weapons for home defense ... no there isnt
Statistics show that they are not necessary , figures show that in Australia our rate and numbers of death by firearms is going down and has stabilized where in the states its increasing
So tell yourself whatever makes you feel safe and cozy in your murderous gun cultured country Dugan , it always comes back to the individual and you sir are one scared little man
Original_Belladonna said:
More regulations is an encroachment on to the 2nd amendment. Who’s rights are you actually trying to weed out ? Ordinary citizens cant go around and point out who they believe shouldn’t have rights. Can’t look into medical records because that’s illegal and opinionated. You also cant speculate who will commit a crime just by the way they look.
This thread was mainly written in the wake of the Florida school shooting. The laws are in place and it was the duty for that sheriffs department to enforce them. The department was called out to the kids home numerous times for domestic disturbance. If they had charged him with that the kid would not have been able to either legally obtain a firearm and or would have had to surrender all firearms by law. The Sheriff didn't require his deputies to follow protocol because of the Obama school policy of keeping the charges down to a minimum. So what more regulations would have stop this complete departmental screw up ?
- Status