Login or register
Anonymous comments allowed.
#22 - comradewinter
Reply +6 123456789123345869
(01/17/2013) [-]
If just about any 1st World Country has a lower murder rate than the US whilst banning guns, isn't that a sign they are used more for attacking? You can argue all you want, but statistics show legally owned guns are more likely used to kill rather than protect.
#347 to #22 - spacelubber
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/18/2013) [-]
No. No. The stupid in that argument is so pungent it hurts.

Yeah, guns are used to kill people. Absolutely. That's what they are there for: either protection or destruction.

A gun's use is not determined by its capabilities. An assault rifle is no more dangerous than a handgun in the hands of a responsible citizen.

This whole "just about any 1st world country" argument is ridiculous. Practically every family in Switzerland has a firearm in their house due to compulsory military service. Switzerland's murder rate is nearly as low as Great Britain's (the country famous for banning weapons completely). There were actually significantly more stabbings in Switzerland in 2009 than there were gun-related murders.

Let's also look to some other forms of crime. Australia banned weapons back in the '90s. Since then, there has been a 69% increase in armed robberies and a 44% increase in home invasions. Banning weapons just flaunts the fact that people no longer have guns to protect themselves.

So basically - learn a little more about causation before you spew stupidity across the web. Look up a few more statistics. The issue America has with firearms is not an issue with firearms, but an issue with the American mentality on firearms. We see them as acceptable tools in a crime. We fail to take care of our mentally challenged. We do not provide adequate support for teenagers trying to figure out how to live their lives.

Let's tell Congress to focus on these issues instead. Let's tell them to start programs designed to help alleviate the mental issues people run into. Let's focus on improving the lives of people rather than banning an integral part of our culture.
User avatar #49 to #22 - eddio
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(01/17/2013) [-]
Im going to sound ridiculous, but owning a gun should be compulsory, and maybe be compulsory to carry.

When was the last time anybody that wasn't a complete idiot decided to rob a gun store? or go on a killing spree at a gun exhibition?

All of these recent killings, such as at the batman premier, or the killing of those nursery school children (I dont live in the US but whatever) all happened when everyone else was defenceless. If people could carry their guns into that cinema, he would not have killed nearly as many people. Hell, he wouldn't have done it at all if he had any rational thought left.
User avatar #45 to #22 - Keleth
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(01/17/2013) [-]
ive seen that 90% of gun murders are commited by previous felons...who cannot legally own a weapon!!!
CRIMINALS BREAK THE LAW...whats the point in making more laws to stop them!!!
#71 to #45 - comradewinter
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/17/2013) [-]
This is false. 2/3 of all gun related murders are done on impulse, which means they weren't planned. It's a more likely scenario that you come home and see your wife in bed with another man and you flip out and kill them, rather than having a massacre at your hands or a gang fight (unless in very apparent gang territory).

If you could just snap your fingers and cause someone to die, you would more likely kill someone with that rather than having to do it with a baseball bat or a knife. It gets more personal. A gun has a trigger that you pull. Pull it once and hit what you aim at and you're done.

It would be more sensible to sell flashbangs than guns, as they are mostly harmless and are great if you need to get away from something.
User avatar #44 to #22 - Keleth
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(01/17/2013) [-]
actually if you legally own a weapon and have a CCW, there is a .1% chance youll murder someone with it. the weapons they are trying to ban in this law kill VERY few people every year. easily concealed 22 and 25 caliber handguns are MUCH more widely used in crime due to how cheap and easy to conceal they are
User avatar #42 to #22 - bulbakip
Reply -3 123456789123345869
(01/17/2013) [-]
What right does anyone have to tell someone else that they cannot own something?
#78 to #42 - anon id: befa6d34
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/17/2013) [-]
Herp a derp derp, how come I can't own a nuke?
User avatar #38 to #22 - thatguywhohasbacon
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/17/2013) [-]
I'm pretty sure I've never seen a statistic showing how many people use a gun for self defense without killing anybody... But that would be in the MILLIONS every year compared to a few hundred thousand crimes every year...
User avatar #23 to #22 - DerpScout
Reply -13 123456789123345869
(01/17/2013) [-]
That's not how you use statistics.
#24 to #23 - comradewinter
Reply +15 123456789123345869
(01/17/2013) [-]
Yes, it is. If legally owned weapons are reported to be more likely to be used in commiting murders rather than prevent them, something is off.
User avatar #25 to #24 - DerpScout
Reply -7 123456789123345869
(01/17/2013) [-]
Right, but chances are if you are looking at statistics that show the gun murders in the US chances are those statistics might be including "justified murders"

At any rate you shouldn't be for or against guns purely based on statistics because statistics are manipulated by both side of the argument for and against guns to make it look like the other is wrong.
#30 to #25 - comradewinter
Reply +9 123456789123345869
(01/17/2013) [-]
There are no justified murders. You can kill someone in self defense, but that's not considered murder, it's manslaughter. If your intention was to simply kill the person, you have commited a crime.

Government statistics show that there are more counts of first degree murders than self-defense manslaughters, which leads to the conclusion that guns are indeed not very healthy to society.

The same statistics apply to other countries aswell, however, gun usage in those countries is regulated and thus make deaths caused by firearms significantly lower.
#362 to #30 - spacelubber
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/18/2013) [-]
********, sir. Justifiable homicide is used in the American court system as an alternative to manslaughter. Manslaughter is an accidental murder. Justifiable homicide is intended, but, guess what, justified!

Trayvon Martin's death resulted in a jump in the number of court cases that involved justifiable homicide. Stand Your Ground laws typically relate to justifiable homicide cases.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9179162/Trayvon-Marti n-Justifiable-homicide-cases-double-across-US-in-last-decade.html
Some more on justifiable homicide: You need to login to view this link
User avatar #791 to #362 - DerpScout
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/18/2013) [-]
Oh my god someone using logic on funnyjunk? Something must be wrong!
User avatar #57 to #30 - DerpScout
Reply -6 123456789123345869
(01/17/2013) [-]
Right but as I said statistics are all ways manipulated, just because a state has a large amount of lack of gun ownership (or regulation) doesn't mean it can be correlated to its crime rate.
#69 to #57 - comradewinter
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(01/17/2013) [-]
If statistics show men are more likely to rape women than vice versa, I'm sure it means men are more likely to rape members of the opposite sex than the other way around. Guns are more likely to be used for crimes than preventing crimes, and in many situations have they proven to be stupid. The whole Trayvon thing could've been prevented if Zimmerman didn't have a gun. He wouldn't be as straightforward and avoided rushing into battle which he ended with a bang. The problem with most Americans is that they don't realize the power of a gun or the responsibility, which is why people want gun control, which has significantly reduced the murder rate in more or less every country it has been instigated in. Less guns = Less murders.