2nd amendment erosion. Voting democrat

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: Sargeras

"Weapons aren't getting more vicious, and shootings are not getting more common. "

Did they have magazine fed guns on the streets at the time of the 2nd amendment, 1791?

Shootings are getting more common, you are just immune to it.

No, the FBI stats are clear, gun crimes are in decline per capita nationwide.

a reply to: Jordan River

Just to clarify, Hillary has suggested an Australian style 'buyback', which was not voluntary, but rather compulsory and carried a potential prison sentence for failure to comply.

Bernie Sanders is wrong on 2A because he wants to ban the very types of weapons that the 2nd Amendment was designed to protect (those suitable to militia use). However, I'll give him a little bit of credit for calling Hillary out a few days ago in the debate regarding her support for repealing the PLCAA, which specifies for the firearms industry a protection that is generally considered true of ALL industries. If she were successful in that, it would put the domestic firearms industry out of business in short order. That law is designed to protect the industry from people like Hillary who would bleed the manufacturers and dealers dry and put them out of business by forcing them to spend millions of dollars defending a multitude of pointless, frivolous, unwinnable lawsuits against them arising from criminal misuse of product. On that point, Bernie Sanders is absolutely correct.

a reply to: Sargeras


How do you know?

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: Sargeras


How do you know?

The decline in violent crime and homicides during the last 25 years is well-documented. Overall firearm homicides have dropped by several thousand per year as compared to the early 1990s. You can find that information on page 6 of the attached PDF from the Bureau of Justice Statistics linked here.

a reply to: vor78

That is from 6 year ago, so it is not accurate.

a reply to: awareness10

If you don’t want government to intervene anywhere, you’re an extremist

Disagree. YOu would be a libertarian . Oh , wait. In that case you would be an extremist in everyone's eyes. Disagreement redacted.

a reply to: MOMof3


Do you have more up to date information to share?


Not "for the babies" drivel, but hard facts that gun crimes are increasing in the United States.


I would seriously be interested in this information if you have it. Thanks.

a reply to: 200Plus

Yeah. My own two eyes and reading ability.

No one can find accurate stats, and I could not find any for the past 5 yrs. Odd. Laws are made to not do studies on gun crime, the way the data is collected from police is inaccurate. I will believe what I see and read.

a reply to: MOMof3

It'll be true through 2014 (the 2015 stats I'm finding are all still preliminary) Here are the overall homicide numbers for 2014...which I might add are the lowest in decades. Likewise, here you can find the data on which ones involved firearms on a state-by-state basis. Adding up the state totals, I came up with 8,124...which is significantly lower than the 2011 total from the link I posted above, showing again, that the trend is downward.

The 2015 data may show an uptick, especially given how much ****-stirring the media and the administration have done in the last year or so, but the overall long-term trend had previously shown sharp declines in firearm-related homicides.

a reply to: Sargeras

Because as should be obvious, laws won't stop criminals, and if allowed, this won't be the last time they cut more out.

True the obvious is obvious.

People have to commit a crime first.

Instead of trying to criminalize people that do nothing wrong.

a reply to: vor78

I will wait for the 2016 stats. There was another mass killing in PA.

All crimes committed with guns are committed by Human criminals.



micromanagers need not apply.

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: vor78

I will wait for the 2016 stats. There was another mass killing in PA.

Why?

There is a law that 'forbids' the action of killing someone else.

That doesn't stop it. Neither has 75 years of constitutional infringements.

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: 200Plus

Yeah. My own two eyes and reading ability.

No one can find accurate stats, and I could not find any for the past 5 yrs. Odd. Laws are made to not do studies on gun crime, the way the data is collected from police is inaccurate. I will believe what I see and read.

More recent stats are available just google it. The FBI publish one every year for the previous year. So the latest one is for 2014. Which still shows a decline in Gun violence. Check it out if you want on the FBI site or just believe in what you read or watch from the MSM and hope it is the whole truth.

I found this for this year. I don't believe it counts just the normal every day to day killing, suicides, accidents.

"So far in 2016, 49 mass shootings in the United States have left 73 people dead and 178 wounded, according to data collected from a Reddit thread that chronicles gun violence through crowdsourcing news reports. The subreddit’s criteria counts a shooting if a minimum of four people are wounded by gunfire. The combined total is up by one-third compared to the same time last year."

www.pbs.org...

originally posted by: Jordan River

This will hurt the countries militias all around the states. I really do believe a lot of militias have the american public on mind in case of invasion or any other terror attack.

I say this as a staunch supporter of the right to own; King George is dead and not coming back, and no militia has yet to successfully respond to a terror attack.

a reply to: Jordan River

Keep in mind that there have been numerous court rulings that say that onerous limitations or requirements to own firearms are unconstitutional. Also remember that the president, no matter what their agenda on guns, simply approves or disapproves legislation passed on to them from Congress. They cannot just write laws, regardless of what the current administration is doing, and they cannot use Executive Orders that go against the Constitution...again, regardless of what is currently happening.

It is the Congress and the Senate that controls what hits the president's desk, and so that is where you need to focus your concern on people's agendas. All of this fear of campaign pledges to do this and that is misguided.

a reply to: MOMof3

I don't see any real point in waiting for the 2016 data, although you're certainly within your rights to do that, if you want. We won't know the finalized 2016 data until sometime next year, perhaps even late next year.

As for the mass killings, while those are certainly a problem, and perhaps one that is increasing in frequency, they're still only a very small component of the overall firearm-related homicides in the country.

originally posted by: MOMof3
I found this for this year. I don't believe it counts just the normal every day to day killing, suicides, accidents.

"So far in 2016, 49 mass shootings in the United States have left 73 people dead and 178 wounded, according to data collected from a Reddit thread that chronicles gun violence through crowdsourcing news reports. The subreddit’s criteria counts a shooting if a minimum of four people are wounded by gunfire. The combined total is up by one-third compared to the same time last year."

www.pbs.org...

Was that in Chicago ?

Ya know the gun control capital of this country.

Only Democrats include gun control as part of their platform. It has lead to political suicide in the past, and will continue to do so for Representatives and Senators except those in progressive areas. HRC has been a supporter for gun control, except in the case of the people who protect her.