Movie theatre shooting in Louisiana

[connexion123]

Originally Posted by jhutter

The United States on average has nearly six times more gun related homicides per 100,000 than Canada, Australia, and Great Britain combined.

Ummmm. Population differencd and illegal aliens?

[Badgerbadger]

Originally Posted by connexion123

Ummmm. Population differencd and illegal aliens?

No

[connexion123]

Originally Posted by Badgerbadger

No

Uh. ya.

350 million vs 33 million?

Not only that, although it may appear that there is far more shootings, the FBI's own statistics show that where 2nd ammendment carry increases, crime decreases.

You going to honestly compare two gang bangers in chicago to law abiding citizens? A mental patient DENIED ccw by the Arkansas police who shot UNARMED people (because THEY obeyed the law) in a GUN FREE ZONE. Going to compare him to what? To what? Any of these shootings has a theme. Mentally unstable on drugs.

Would you rather have it like those gun free zones, and if you find yourself in that situation, you could just urinate on yourself and perhaps get shot.

Wake up people and turn off the cnnabcfoxmsnbc crap and stop believing the spin doctors who make this to be a national tradgedy.

[Badgerbadger]

Originally Posted by connexion123

Uh. ya.

350 million vs 33 million?

Not only that, although it may appear that there is far more shootings, the FBI's own statistics show that where 2nd ammendment carry increases, crime decreases.

You going to honestly compare two gang bangers in chicago to law abiding citizens? A mental patient DENIED ccw by the Arkansas police who shot UNARMED people (because THEY obeyed the law) in a GUN FREE ZONE. Going to compare him to what? To what? Any of these shootings has a theme. Mentally unstable on drugs.

Would you rather have it like those gun free zones, and if you find yourself in that situation, you could just urinate on yourself and perhaps get shot.

Wake up people and turn off the cnnabcfoxmsnbc crap and stop believing the spin doctors who make this to be a national tradgedy.

"per 100 000" or "per capita" or other such phrases account for differences in population sample size.

There are violent and unstable people all over the world.

In Canada, we are effectively in "gun free zones".

[hillbillyreefer]

Mexico, a supposedly gun free zone has a homicide rate of 22/100000. 4 times higher than the U.S.

[Luxor]

Originally Posted by hillbillyreefer

Mexico, a supposedly gun free zone has a homicide rate of 22/100000. 4 times higher than the U.S.

On the travel show "Parts Unkown" w/ Anthony Bourdain in Mexico he looked at this issue.
Mexico has had 80 000 homicides in 7yrs.
Drug trafficking is huge.
So dont tell me that Trump is arse backwards when addressing Mexican issues !!!

Wrong thread for this lol

[hillbillyreefer]

Venezuela has a homicide rate of 82/100000 almost 14 times that of the U.S. Private ownership of firearms and ammunition have been banned.

Maybe it isn't the tool, maybe it's the nutcase?

[midgetwaiter]

Originally Posted by connexion123

A mental patient DENIED ccw by the Arkansas police who shot UNARMED people (because THEY obeyed the law) in a GUN FREE ZONE.

This guy, who in addition to what you noted above also had restraining orders filed against him by his wife, adult child and parents was still able to legally purchase a handgun.

Can you really look at that and not think something is wrong?

[uglyelk]

Originally Posted by TanksNHank

Hey fellas you can't carry guns into any movie theatres in Canada, Australia or Great Britain for that matter. How many mass shootings have there been in any of these regions?

You can't carry a gun anywhere in Canada, everywhere is a gun free zone, so nut jobs are spared the expense of buying a ticket to commit mass murder. What was your point? Nut job and cowards choose victims in gun free zones because the odds of folks shooting back are slim to none. We don't get many reports of mass shootings at gun ranges do we.

[JamesB]

Originally Posted by jhutter

The United States on average has nearly six times more gun related homicides per 100,000 than Canada, Australia, and Great Britain combined.

I am not sure what this is supposed to mean. The US has a rate of 5, UK and Australia 1 and Canada 2. So, the US rate is 2.5x ours. What does a combined rate of three different countries look like or mean?

As far as the US and the world, have a look: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/VC.IHR.PSRC.P5

They are far from the worst and many(most) of the countries with higher rates have strict gun control.
Countries homicide rates are a result of many socio economic factors, not just gun ownership. Stop taking what the press offers as fact or even reasonable. They are biased against gun ownership and it is pretty apparent when these things happen. There have been a spate of stabbings with more fatalities in both the US and Canada recently. Yet a shooting in a theatre makes the 24hr news cycle. Why is that do you suppose?

[Wild&Free]

Originally Posted by midgetwaiter

This guy, who in addition to what you noted above also had restraining orders filed against him by his wife, adult child and parents was still able to legally purchase a handgun.

Can you really look at that and not think something is wrong?

it's funny that smart gun control laws are ignored because any talk of gun control makes you an anti and instantly polarizes people.

[pinelakeperch]

Originally Posted by JamesB

I am not sure what this is supposed to mean. The US has a rate of 5, UK and Australia 1 and Canada 2. So, the US rate is 2.5x ours. What does a combined rate of three different countries look like or mean?

As far as the US and the world, have a look: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/VC.IHR.PSRC.P5

They are far from the worst and many(most) of the countries with higher rates have strict gun control.
Countries homicide rates are a result of many socio economic factors, not just gun ownership. Stop taking what the press offers as fact or even reasonable. They are biased against gun ownership and it is pretty apparent when these things happen. There have been a spate of stabbings with more fatalities in both the US and Canada recently. Yet a shooting in a theatre makes the 24hr news cycle. Why is that do you suppose?

Perhaps the statistics I found were different than yours. The statistics that I found were:

Homicides Per 100,000

United States: 3.55
Canada: 0.51
Australia: 0.11
United Kingdom: 0.05

My mistake, the actual number is 5.29 times the three others combined. I originally did it in my head and thought it was closer to 5.7, thus rounding it up to 6.

I completely agree that socio economic factors play a huge role in gun violence and that the media sensationalizes the issue disproportionately versus other forms of violence. The fact remains that gun homicides in the United States are disproportionately higher than that of comparable western democratic states.

I don't have a dog in this fight and am genuinely curious to hear anyone's explanation for it.

[pinelakeperch]

Originally Posted by Badgerbadger

"per 100 000" or "per capita" or other such phrases account for differences in population sample size.

There are violent and unstable people all over the world.

In Canada, we are effectively in "gun free zones".

Originally Posted by hillbillyreefer

Venezuela has a homicide rate of 82/100000 almost 14 times that of the U.S. Private ownership of firearms and ammunition have been banned.

Maybe it isn't the tool, maybe it's the nutcase?

It's important to compare apples with apples. Venezuela is not a developed country comparable to the United States. They have a GDP of nearly 9 times less than that of the United States and up until 2 years ago were ruled by a dictatorial regime.

Generally speaking, Canada is the most comparable country to the United States. Our histories, demographics, economics, and political systems though not identical, are definitely comparable.

Our homicide rate per capita is seven times less than theirs.

[JamesB]

Originally Posted by jhutter

Perhaps the statistics I found were different than yours. The statistics that I found were:

Homicides Per 100,000

United States: 3.55
Canada: 0.51
Australia: 0.11
United Kingdom: 0.05

My mistake, the actual number is 5.29 times the three others combined. I originally did it in my head and thought it was closer to 5.7, thus rounding it up to 6.

I completely agree that socio economic factors play a huge role in gun violence and that the media sensationalizes the issue disproportionately versus other forms of violence. The fact remains that gun homicides in the United States are disproportionately higher than that of comparable western democratic states.

I don't have a dog in this fight and am genuinely curious to hear anyone's explanation for it.

Your rates are either wrong or are "firearm" rates which should not only be suspect but are immaterial as only the overall rate has any meaning.

[JamesB]

Originally Posted by jhutter

It's important to compare apples with apples. Venezuela is not a developed country comparable to the United States. They have a GDP of nearly 9 times less than that of the United States and up until 2 years ago were ruled by a dictatorial regime.

Generally speaking, Canada is the most comparable country to the United States. Our histories, demographics, economics, and political systems though not identical, are definitely comparable.

Our homicide rate per capita is seven times less than theirs.

Why do you figure Canada is most comparable to the USA? I would suggest that Russia is as they are both large, industrialized, and much more populous than Canada. We get compared to the US lots by the antis because we are neighbours, but our nations are significantly different. In fact you mention GDP as a reason Venezuela should not be considered. Well guess what, our GDP is 1/10 of the US too.

Oh and Russia has a homicide rate double that of the US.

[score]

Originally Posted by hillbillyreefer

Mexico, a supposedly gun free zone has a homicide rate of 22/100000. 4 times higher than the U.S.

Originally Posted by hillbillyreefer

Venezuela has a homicide rate of 82/100000 almost 14 times that of the U.S. Private ownership of firearms and ammunition have been banned.

Maybe it isn't the tool, maybe it's the nutcase?

hillbillyreefer, you seem to be forgetting a very important aspect whenever these situations arise and the usual suspects engage in these conversation......

**The United States is the root of all evil**!!! and the application of any amount of logic or common sense or fact, will only result in frustration and a complete waste of one's efforts to either educate or at least attempt to point out reality.

[pinelakeperch]

Originally Posted by JamesB

Your rates are either wrong or are "firearm" rates which should not only be suspect but are immaterial as only the overall rate has any meaning.

Of course they are firearm homicde rates, is the discussion not related to gun violence in the United States?

If we're talking about intentional homicides, the combined rate of Canada, Australia, and Great Britain is 3.7 vs the United States with 4.7.

[pinelakeperch]

Originally Posted by JamesB

Why do you figure Canada is most comparable to the USA? I would suggest that Russia is as they are both large, industrialized, and much more populous than Canada. We get compared to the US lots by the antis because we are neighbours, but our nations are significantly different. In fact you mention GDP as a reason Venezuela should not be considered. Well guess what, our GDP is 1/10 of the US too.

Oh and Russia has a homicide rate double that of the US.

I meant to say GDP per capita when referring to Venezuela, my apologies. My point remains.

Russia is not nearly as industrialized as the United States, they are barely considered a developed country. Sure, some regions are highly industrialized, but the country as a whole is not.

The population comparison means little when you begin to compare statistics that are per capita.

The homicide rate being double of that of the US is very interesting, I did not know that. Consider some factors that may skew those results. Number one, consider trauma care. The United States is the pinnacle of trauma care in the world, Russia most definitely is not. I'd imagine attempted homicides are dealt with much more successfully in the US.

Do your best to be impartial. Using the term "antis" oozes an "us versus them" mentality. It's impossible to learn anything if you let bias creep into your thinking.

[JamesB]

Originally Posted by jhutter

I meant to say GDP per capita when referring to Venezuela, my apologies. My point remains.

Russia is not nearly as industrialized as the United States, they are barely considered a developed country. Sure, some regions are highly industrialized, but the country as a whole is not.

The population comparison means little when you begin to compare statistics that are per capita.

The homicide rate being double of that of the US is very interesting, I did not know that. Consider some factors that may skew those results. Number one, consider trauma care. The United States is the pinnacle of trauma care in the world, Russia most definitely is not. I'd imagine attempted homicides are dealt with much more successfully in the US.

Do your best to be impartial. Using the term "antis" oozes an "us versus them" mentality. It's impossible to learn anything if you let bias creep into your thinking.

The US homicide rate is high only because of a few large cities. Most border states have lower rates than Canada. As you say, the comparisons mean little when you begin to compare statistics that are per capita.
If you pull up the old canards that the antis like to use, it becomes increasingly difficult to be seen as impartial. The typical anti gun fanatic always compares the US to the UK and smugly concludes that guns are the problem in the US. In the grand scheme of things the US does pretty well compared to South America, Africa, and pretty much anywhere but Europe. Furthermore their homicides are very localized, and represent criminal activity which one could argue, thrives due to the freer nature of the US society as much as anything else.

[qwert]

Originally Posted by jhutter

It's important to compare apples with apples.
snip
Generally speaking, Canada is the most comparable country to the United States. Our histories, demographics, economics, and political systems though not identical, are definitely comparable.

Our homicide rate per capita is seven times less than theirs.

IIRC, the definition of and statistical usage of the term 'homicide' varies between USA, Canada, GB, & AU, and the statistical figures are not directly comparable.

In addition to the above, the figures for the US vary widely by region, and many regions (not poor inner city, ethnic, and gang based) have rates of crime and murder that are lower than Canada.

The statistics that all these similar countries report is that murder is far more likely to be committed with 'hands & feet, clubs, or knives' than it is by firearms.
And, in most of these countries the crime and murder committed by CCW (USA) or licensed owners is often at rates lower than that for the local police.
And, that all the combined deaths from criminal violence (and traffic accidents) do not come even close to those caused by medical malpractice and error.

Something about 'lies, damn lies, and statistics'.

[JamesB]

Originally Posted by jhutter

Of course they are firearm homicde rates, is the discussion not related to gun violence in the United States?

If we're talking about intentional homicides, the combined rate of Canada, Australia, and Great Britain is 3.7 vs the United States with 4.7.

Breaking out the firearm homicide rate (and including suicides) is a standard anti ploy to make gun ownership look dangerous. Ignoring all the other homicides (especially when there are proportionally more) is disingenuous. Of course countries that prohibit gun ownership have fewer gun homicides, we don't need a study to know that. The important fact is whether gun ownership causes an increase in homicide. The facts seem to indicate there is no direct correlation.

[pinelakeperch]

Originally Posted by JamesB

Breaking out the firearm homicide rate (and including suicides) is a standard anti ploy to make gun ownership look dangerous. Ignoring all the other homicides (especially when there are proportionally more) is disingenuous. Of course countries that prohibit gun ownership have fewer gun homicides, we don't need a study to know that. The important fact is whether gun ownership causes an increase in homicide. The facts seem to indicate there is no direct correlation.

The statistics that I was including excluded suicides.

[JamesB]

Originally Posted by jhutter

The statistics that I was including excluded suicides.

Good, but the rest of my post stands. Why break out one form of homicide, is not the total rate what matters?

[qwert]

Originally Posted by jhutter

The statistics that I was including excluded suicides.

Justifiable homicide?
Homicide during the commission of a crime?
Negligent homicide?
Criminal negligence?
Manslaughter?
Accident during the commission of a crime?
Clinical instability?
Suicide by cop? or other?
Suicide not wishing to be legal suicide for insurance?
SELF DEFENSE?
Defense of family or others?
other statistical inclusion?

Homicide is a general term that can be a 'catch all' for those seeking to arrive at a desired conclusion, or to avoid an undesirable one.

[connexion123]

Originally Posted by midgetwaiter

This guy, who in addition to what you noted above also had restraining orders filed against him by his wife, adult child and parents was still able to legally purchase a handgun.

Can you really look at that and not think something is wrong?

Depends what state he bought it in. State laws are all different.

[hillbillyreefer]

Originally Posted by midgetwaiter

This guy, who in addition to what you noted above also had restraining orders filed against him by his wife, adult child and parents was still able to legally purchase a handgun.

Can you really look at that and not think something is wrong?

If he couldn't get a gun legally he would have been able to get it illegally. Where do you think most criminal guns come from? Yup, Obama (fast& furious) and through other crime.

[brslk]

Originally Posted by hillbillyreefer

If he couldn't get a gun legally he would have been able to get it illegally. Where do you think most criminal guns come from? Yup, Obama (fast& furious) and through other crime.

Most often people get guns illegally by stealing them from people who got them legally that had them improperly stored.

[HyperMOA]

Originally Posted by brslk

Most often people get guns illegally by stealing them from people who got them legally that had them improperly stored.

I'm not arguing the fact that illegal weapons originate from where you say. I do have issue with the point that they are mostly improperly stored.

If my front door is locked and they enter my house does any form of storage really help? I mean, legally, my handguns need only be in an opaque-locked case, with a trigger lock. I mean if they entered my house by means of break and enter, do you really think they would walk away from my pistols because they are in those fancy opaque cases? I think they could devise a method to open those too.

Now I also have a gun safe. I watched a video of a guy breaking it open in about 1 minute. So even in a safe its more an inconvenience than a deterrent for someone looking to steal said item. Locks only keep honest people out.

I just don't believe that improper storage has anything to do with the origins of illegal weapons. The origins of illegal weapons come from one source, and one source only; criminals.

[brslk]

Originally Posted by HyperMOA

I'm not arguing the fact that illegal weapons originate from where you say. I do have issue with the point that they are mostly improperly stored.

If my front door is locked and they enter my house does any form of storage really help? I mean, legally, my handguns need only be in an opaque-locked case, with a trigger lock. I mean if they entered my house by means of break and enter, do you really think they would walk away from my pistols because they are in those fancy opaque cases? I think they could devise a method to open those too.

Now I also have a gun safe. I watched a video of a guy breaking it open in about 1 minute. So even in a safe its more an inconvenience than a deterrent for someone looking to steal said item. Locks only keep honest people out.

I just don't believe that improper storage has anything to do with the origins of illegal weapons. The origins of illegal weapons come from one source, and one source only; criminals.

True enough. You may have seen a youtube video of someone breaking into a gun safe in under a minute but the average meth head that breaks into a house isn't looking for guns. They're just looking for something they can grab quick to sell. If they find a gun under a pillow, in the undie drawer or the nightstand drawer they will take it. They don't have the knowledge or time to break into a gun safe if they come across one.
They would much rather grab your laptop and jewelry.

I'm not anti gun. Far from it. I own a few myself.
I keep a shotgun and a 22 at home.
I have two handguns I store and fire at the gun range. That is pretty much the only place they are legally useful anyway.

If you want a gun for home defense, a shotgun is obviously the best choice anyway.

The argument that locks only keep honest people out is wrong. Sure, a thief will steal what he wants if determined enough. Most aren't. Most thefts are crimes of opportunity.

I had a two way radio in my truck for 15 years. Never had it stolen.
I left my truck unlocked once. It got stolen.

Thieves are lazy.

[hillbillyreefer]

Originally Posted by brslk

Most often people get guns illegally by stealing them from people who got them legally that had them improperly stored.

The storage argument is BS. The CRIMINAL stole the gun, it's not the lawful owners fault no matter how the item was stored. Unsafe firearms storage is a lefty dream. Charge the owner For the acts of a criminal. It is insanity.