Theater Shootings remind America of Obama's broken Gun Control promises

www.examiner.com...

It's not shameless politicizing of the event. It's a fact that Obama has not done what he said during the 2008 campaign and after Gabby Giffords was shot.

www.examiner.com...

I'm going to have to respectfully disagree. I love guns. I love my guns. I love how my county has eased the restrictions on CCWs. Despite good arguments to the contrary, I still believe that if everybody was armed, this place would be a lot more peaceful.

I am sick and tired of americans expecting the federal gov't to do everything for them

WE NEED TO FIX THIS !!!!!!!!!

reply to post by ChicagOpinion


How is gun control working in Chicago???? Doesn't seem to be working at all considering all of the violent crimes being commited there! Who has the guns??? Criminals that get them illegally do! So I guess gun control in Chicago can pretty much prove that when you take away guns from law abiding citizens that the criminals will soon take over!

Broken. The government messing with our rights make these things more likely to happen. You think he would have walked in there like that if it was common knowledge managers behind the counter have a pistol handy? A few states have stripped the people down to the nanny states but I see states with little to no gun restrictions have a marginally lower crime rates. You can't argue the numbers.
Gun Owners of America
The following is a sarcastic, yet thought provoking. Seeker1963
www.kc3.com...

it all seems a bit odd. As this is a conspiracy site, can I chuck my conspiratorial hat into the ring and offer a somewhat tangible hypothesis ?

What if this was a govenrment controlled event, put into action to help bulldoze america into a gun free citizens country. Less troublesome populace, so to speak. I'm not saying I beleive this hypothesis, but it would be very scary if it were true.

If you believe everything a politician says, I have some wonderful swampland in Florida to sell you.

Washington D.C. and the idiotic sock puppets elected to waste our tax dollars can do nothing about our culture of violence and lack of respect for life. That has to start from a popular grass-roots movement, in which we don't glorify violence, don't worship it in movies, on television and in those horrific shoot-em-up video games.

Don't look to the head puppet to do anything but serve his masters, and they are not us.

P.S. Gutting the second amendment will not do anything but leave law abiding citizens vulnerable to whatever thug has a gun and wants to use it, whether that thug is a common criminal, a lone nut, an MK Ultra operative, or your local friendly cop.

with out guns we wouldnt have killing & war we could all ride unicorns to work and share our gum drops

reply to post by seeker1963


Let's look at some numbers.

Most gun restrictive states:

California
Gun deaths per 100,000: 9
Permissive gun laws: 50th out of 50

New Jersey
Gun deaths per 100,000: 5.2
Permissive gun laws: 49th out of 50

Massachusetts
Gun deaths per 100,000: 3.6
Permissive gun laws: 48th out of 50

Most gun permissive states:

Arizona
Gun deaths per 100,000: 15
Permissive gun laws: 1st out of 50

Idaho
Gun deaths per 100,000: 12.5
Permissive gun laws: 2nd out of 50

Vermont
Gun deaths per 100,000: 8.4
Permissive gun laws: 3rd out of 50

As for Chicago and the state of Illinois:
Illinois
Gun deaths per 100,000: 8
Permissive gun laws: 45th out of 50
Source.

Statistically, you're safer in Illinois than you are in Vermont or California.

I really want to change my username on this site because I rarely post regarding Chicago-specific - if ever. But, probably because of my ChicagOpinion username, people think I'm talking about Chicago sometimes.

Myself, I'm about ready to give up on Chicago and its crime/murder rate under the leadership of Rahm Emanuel. The man has a one-track "money-grabbing" mind and should be doing something innovating to reduce the murder rate.

As far a government's involvement with gun control. At this point, could it hurt?

reply to post by links234


Are all those "gun deaths" related to criminals using the guns on innocent people or innocent people protecting themselves?

Is it both?


Where is the source of your data so the rest of us can review for clarity.

"gun deaths" is a very broad term.

Edit:
Oh I see

Your source is nothing more than a opinion piece based on an anti-gun lobby smartgunlaws.org...

They don't even bother posting the methodology of their results because they know there would be questions like the ones I asked above.

Booooooo!

reply to post by projectvxn


The source was The Daily Beast:

Our methodology was simple: Rather than measure the number of guns, we measured the measure of gun deaths per capita in each state, using the most recent data available from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. That counted for 75 percent of the ranking. The other 25 percent was derived from the Legal Community Against Violence's state-by-state comparison of firearm laws, which ranks all 50 states by their relatively severity, incorporating everything from policies on mental-health background checks to whether loaded guns are allowed in bars.

So you're 25 percent correct.

Edit: You can find the data for firearm deaths (accidental, intentional, etc.) at the CDC site National Violent Death Reporting System

reply to post by links234


No. The source the daily beast used is the site I posted. Maybe you should read the article.

And the methodology, as usual, does not separate criminal acts from acts of self defense. If that were the case I'm betting the numbers would look very differently.

So you wanna post numbers huh? Ok I'm game

Number of Defensive Uses of Guns per year:

* Roughly 16,272 murders were committed in the United States during 2008. Of these, about 10,886 or 67% were committed with firearms.[11]

A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 0.5% of households had members who had used a gun for defense during a situation in which they thought someone "almost certainly would have been killed" if they "had not used a gun for protection." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 162,000 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard."[12]

* Based on survey data from the U.S. Department of Justice, roughly 5,340,000 violent crimes were committed in the United States during 2008. These include simple/aggravated assaults, robberies, sexual assaults, rapes, and murders.[13] [14] [15] Of these, about 436,000 or 8% were committed by offenders visibly armed with a gun.[16]

* Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18]

* A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 3.5% of households had members who had used a gun "for self-protection or for the protection of property at home, work, or elsewhere." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 1,029,615 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard."[19]

reply to post by projectvxn


So based on that data can you tell me which states have the most restrictive gun laws? Which states have the highest deaths by firearm per capita? Can you tell me how and if they're related?

All you're showing is that a few people use guns to commit crimes, you're not telling me where they're doing it, you're not telling me why they do it, you're not telling me whether it's safer to have more guns widely available or fewer guns available.

Originally posted by pot8er
it all seems a bit odd. As this is a conspiracy site, can I chuck my conspiratorial hat into the ring and offer a somewhat tangible hypothesis ?

What if this was a govenrment controlled event, put into action to help bulldoze america into a gun free citizens country. Less troublesome populace, so to speak. I'm not saying I beleive this hypothesis, but it would be very scary if it were true.

It may not be a govenrment controlled event, but, I been watching CBS report on Auror like oh it’s so sad...which it is...then they right away at the end of the report, go right into what are we going to do to stop guns...from getting into the people’s hands....

All I can say... get prepared here it comes!

KEEP AN EYE ON THE BIG PICTURE; that should be tangible enough... its all in their plan, now my hats in with yours.

reply to post by links234


Your sources are the ones that are not differentiating from criminal uses of guns and legitimate uses. Only "gun deaths". My sources show that armed civilians use guns defensively even more so than criminals use them in the course of the crime. This adds balance to the equation and shows the bias in the sources you use. It didn't break it down by state or by laws, only by incidents which is far more telling. Your sources take an extremely broad view and provide no substance at all. It isnt hard to extrapolate the fact that places that allow gun ownership without California style bans and restrictions (not just on guns but on their use as well) have higher instances of guns being used to defend onself. If you take those numbers and add them to the number of criminal use of guns that result in death then you are purposefully skewing the numbers for political purposes. And your source is all too obvious in this effort, as I have clearly demonstrated.

reply to post by syrinx high priest


you wanna fix this? you can start with me. anyone who tries to disarm me is my enemy and one of us will die in the process. this is swear before God. you want to stop senseless bloodshed? Try to ban guns, the bloodshed will be equal to the last civil war. If you want to live in a gun free country, you are free to leave.

If you outlaw guns only outlaws will have guns...

I may be missing something here but wasnt it already against the law to kill people?

Just saying...