Guns used in 67% of murders in US

With all the arguments lately about gun control, it seems that people are purposely overlooking the fact that guns create a huge amount of suffering and death. 67% of murders in the US are caused by guns.

www.justfacts.com...

That is a staggering figure, over 2/3rds. Then you have to add in the thousands of accidental gun deaths that happen each year, many of which include children. You would think that people concerned about protecting peoples' lives would come to the obvious conclusion that getting rid of guns (or at least cheap and easy access to guns) would do a lot of good and save tons of lives.

Like so many other threads, this one lacks purpose or clarity.

Can you elaborate and give some meaning behind your argument?

My post is not intended to shoot you down, though statistics are on my side.

Guess what statistics prove nothing. 100% of murders are caused by other humans. 100% of people that drink water die.

90% of murders in non-gun based culture are caused by knifes. Lets ban knifes. Hey, guess what happened, blunt objects now are at the source of most murders.

Im annoyed this morning. All arguments for and against guns are irrelevant. If you live in the US then guns are part of your society, if members of said society are misusing them then thats an issue with the individual/society not the instrument.

Next argument point, "there will be less deaths". Yes, of course there will be but this does not mean a lessening of intent to harm.

Why not try address the real issues. Social inequality, inadequate healthcare, levels of poverty that rival some so called third world countries and a penal system that locks individuals into a life of crime by ensuring that released criminals are pretty much unemployable.

As an addition, don't you think that living in a culture where you encouraged to best your fellow man/women somehow erodes the core element of humanity. We are a tribal species that has been forced to act as individuals. Can we really be surprised that disconnected members of our society see no worth in the beings that inhabit it when they are taught from birth that consumption and betterment through the exploitation of others is what we should strive for.

This pattern is evident all throughout history. Its what we are, what we have become.

Guns are the least of your worries.

PS sorry OP, having a bad day.

reply to post by CB328


So, if the US had no guns these people would not have been murdered? Is that your argument?

Thugs are committing more than 350 knife assaults every day across England and Wales, latest crime figures reveal.

Results from the British Crime Survey showed nearly 130,000 attacks took place last year - a figure which does not include those against under-16s.

Separate figures recorded by police forces reveal 22,000 serious knife assaults including 231 attempted murders, almost 14,000 robberies and more than 8,000 woundings.


Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk...
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

www.dailymail.co.uk...

And further, guns do not murder people, people murder people.

reply to post by CB328


With all the arguments lately about gun control, it seems that people are purposely overlooking the
fact that governments create a huge amount of suffering and death when they disarm their
populations--in the last century over 50 million men, women, and children have been murdered
within twenty years of relinquishing their guns to their government.

That is a staggering figure, over 50 million people. Then you have to add in the thousands of people
displaced, abused, and tortured, many of which were children. You would think that people concerned
about protecting peoples' lives would come to the obvious conclusion that getting rid of their guns
would be the stupidest most naive thing they could ever do, putting tons of lives at risk .

So, if the US had no guns these people would not have been murdered? Is that your argument?

A lot of them would not have been, obviously. Guns are easier to kill people with, and most other weapons don't have the long range that guns do. Besides, a lot of people wouldn't be brave enough to attack people without their guns.

Originally posted by CB328
With all the arguments lately about gun control, it seems that people are purposely overlooking the fact that guns create a huge amount of suffering and death. 67% of murders in the US are caused by guns.

www.justfacts.com...

That is a staggering figure, over 2/3rds. Then you have to add in the thousands of accidental gun deaths that happen each year, many of which include children. You would think that people concerned about protecting peoples' lives would come to the obvious conclusion that getting rid of guns (or at least cheap and easy access to guns) would do a lot of good and save tons of lives.

edit on 31-12-2012 by CB328 because: typo

Here is the most glaring flaw in your argument...

NO ONE says, "Ooh...a gun! Now I can go kill someone!"

The decision to murder, is a human decision! The weapon used, is but an afterthought. Meaning, murder was contemplated and carried out, BEFORE guns were invented, and murder will occur the same way, even if the world COMPLETELY rid herself of them!

Pay attention now...I'L 'splain it to you difurnt...

people....=.....murder
gun (and subsequently anyone who doesn't get this)....=....tool

PS....Please post the exact location of the aforementioned "cheap and easy" guns for sale!!!

Ya know, the biggest problem IS the individual people who abuse the guns. That goes without saying. But what can be done to address them? Nothing. At least not in the short term. It's going to take time. What do we do in the meantime?

If you're a parent and you notice that your child likes to poke things in the electrical sockets, what do you do? You put the plastic protectors on the sockets and teach your child not to do that, not just ignore it after you put the protectors on. But you DO put the protectors on.

If your child likes to play close to the stairs, what do you do? You put up baby gates and you teach the child not to play near the stairs, but you still put up the baby gates.

If your dog goes to the vet and has a proceedure done, you put a cone on it so it doesn't pull the stitches out. You take care of the incision and let it heal, but you still put the cone on.

When the baby grows older and learns, you take the coverings and the baby gates away. When the dog heals, you remove the cone.

Right now we have a bunch of babies and neutered dogs running around and the guns need to be kept out of their hands because they don't have enough sense on their own to use them right. They need to be restricted right now because the people don't know how to use them correctly.

Yeah, it stinks, we go to plug something in and have to mess with the little plastic protector. We want to go downstairs, but we have to mess with the baby gate. We want to pet our dog but we have to work around the cone. Guess what, we have to do it or risk losing what's much more important.

I like my guns, I enjoy shooting them, I like the peace of mind of having them around for protection, I enjoy hunting, but at the same time, there are some people out there that aren't responsible with them and damage is caused and lives are lost. We need restrictions on them as well as education. People need to learn the value and the responsibility involved. Until they do, we have to make considerations to protect everyone else.

It comes down to one question. Which is more important, having any gun you want any time you want it or a human life? If you feel the gun is more important than a human life, then you are part of the problem.

Originally posted by SourGrapes
reply to post by CB328

 

So, if the US had no guns these people would not have been murdered? Is that your argument?

Actually, your answer lies here, in this excerpt from the OP...

...[I have] come to the obvious conclusion that getting rid of guns....would do a lot of good and save tons of lives.

Therefore, I believe the OP is stating that anyone who makes successful attempts to irradicate firearms, is both a philanthropist and a medical doctor....Oh, and a Nobel peace prize winner, also...

reply to post by CB328


That's total propaganda and bad propaganda at that.

All stats record that gun crime goes through the roof in areas that persue a gun free policy.

Hear that? Gun crime goes up when you ban guns.

Murder rates rise, gun related crimes rise, house invasions rise, robberies rise...and massacres tend to target, almost exclusively, soft targets in gun free areas.

Banning guns is not something you should do, if you are concerned about rising violent crime rates and massacres, instead gun ownership should be increased and extended...then crime goes down.

All stats record that gun crime goes through the roof in areas that persue a gun free policy

That's only for states that have big cities or large minority populations. Areas with gun control that don't have those do not have high crime.

Originally posted by kthxbai
Ya know, the biggest problem IS the individual people who abuse the guns. That goes without saying. But what can be done to address them? Nothing. At least not in the short term. It's going to take time. What do we do in the meantime?

If you're a parent and you notice that your child likes to poke things in the electrical sockets, what do you do? You put the plastic protectors on the sockets and teach your child not to do that, not just ignore it after you put the protectors on. But you DO put the protectors on.

If your child likes to play close to the stairs, what do you do? You put up baby gates and you teach the child not to play near the stairs, but you still put up the baby gates.

If your dog goes to the vet and has a proceedure done, you put a cone on it so it doesn't pull the stitches out. You take care of the incision and let it heal, but you still put the cone on.

When the baby grows older and learns, you take the coverings and the baby gates away. When the dog heals, you remove the cone.

Right now we have a bunch of babies and neutered dogs running around and the guns need to be kept out of their hands because they don't have enough sense on their own to use them right. They need to be restricted right now because the people don't know how to use them correctly.

Yeah, it stinks, we go to plug something in and have to mess with the little plastic protector. We want to go downstairs, but we have to mess with the baby gate. We want to pet our dog but we have to work around the cone. Guess what, we have to do it or risk losing what's much more important.

I like my guns, I enjoy shooting them, I like the peace of mind of having them around for protection, I enjoy hunting, but at the same time, there are some people out there that aren't responsible with them and damage is caused and lives are lost. We need restrictions on them as well as education. People need to learn the value and the responsibility involved. Until they do, we have to make considerations to protect everyone else.

It comes down to one question. Which is more important, having any gun you want any time you want it or a human life? If you feel the gun is more important than a human life, then you are part of the problem.

I'll take a stab at this one....

Actually, I agree with you....BUT...In response to paragraph:

2) You DO NOT go around and put plastic protectors in every outlet of every other home, who doesn't have kids who have access to outlets and pokey things. Some parents choose to isolate the child from the dangers, rather than leave them in proximity, with an easily defeatable barrier, between them.

3) This one, I actually like. But baby gates won't foil the insane and the criminals. Think about 8 feet taller, times 2...with razor wire...And a few armed guards for good measure.

4) Again, not a bad idea. Temporary restrictions on those who temporarily, should not have access to firearms, is a good idea. AND, is one that is already in place. Judges ALL across this country, make it a point to inquire about firearms, when an arraignee has been charged with a crime that would preclude gun ownership. Making this mandatory, would not be a bad idea.

5) As for your next statement. I do not recall with the exception of prohibition, the Federal Govt. ever returning a priveledge, let alone a right that had been stripped, without the SCOTUS getting involved. And, personally, I don't trust them with my rights, at all!

6) The people, are just fine with using their guns correctly. Unless you are OK with allowing a handful of members of a group, to define the entire body...Which some might call, bigotry, or racism? Or some other term, that defines a very short sighted view of others.

7) Yes. Defenses against the wrong people getting guns, is important. But, there are already many, MANY defenses in place. The problem is, you can write laws until your hand falls off, the bad guys DON'T CARE!
But now, the law-abiders, the ones that must deal with these restrictions, have been so hampered with laws that dont work, that they are suffering immensely for it! And, possibly even a few are losing their own lives, because the restrictions kept, or prolonged THEM from securing the means to protect themselves. And, more innocents will die. Is this acceptable?

8 & 9) Restrictions, that do not continually affect the law-abiding are fine, and necessary! But make it a one time, thorough process and allow those who pass, unlimited access to what they want or need. If, at a later date, they are determined to no longer meet the requirements, then look at measures to restrict them. But, you and I both know that "sensible" is not how the govt. does things. They prefer knee-jerk, and always give more credence to how much money they can make off of it, than how effective or responsible it will be...

Continued:

reply to post by kthxbai


I think, in retribution for ALL that responsible gun owners have had to deal with, to excercize a RIGHT, we should be entitled to compromise, with the legislature. Every new restriction that we must dance around, should be met with a concession, on their part, directly relieving us, from prior laws that would be rendered unnecessary, in light of the new ones.
But, we both know that will never happen.

When this whole debate started I downloaded international gun/homicide data. The number I have for the U.S. is 60% but why quibble over a small difference. But let's look at that number if the larger ontext, shall we? The U.S. ranks #1 in gun ownership. Wouldn't it stand to reason that given such a pervasiveness of guns that we would rank 1st in gun-related homicides? We don't. We rank 26th. As for homicides per firearm (again remembering that we are #1 for firearm ownership) we rank 66th. So let's keep things in perspective. Things are not the way certain groups are trying to make them appear in this country. But why let facts cloud a good mass hysteria?

source data

I am surrounded by guns on a daily basis where i live. We have almost zero gun crime. They are taught gun safety at an early age and they use them to fill their freezers and protect their families. Up north guns are thought of much differently. Comparing the U.K. to the U.S. does not take into account the big picture. We have TV programs that interview gang members and their violence. Obviously they know who they are, round them up so that they are not a plague on society. Taking guns from law abiding citizens would raise the murder rate off the charts. The politicians and Hollywood stars touting gun bans will always have a gun protecting them. On their person or a bodyguard. Ordinary citizens would be murdered at an accelerated rate and the thugs would be giddy with excitement. The narrative for banning guns to protect society does not wash. Their agenda is not as stated.

Originally posted by CB328

people....=.....murder

You mean conservative people=murder

Yes...because no inner-city gang-banger has ever voted! Let alone voted Democrat, right?

IT doesn't matter if it's 60% or 67%, there are way too many people killed with guns in this country, especially considering that we're supposed to be a modern, peaceful, prosperous country.