Another Mass Shooting In Las Vegas

[old_hippie]

Originally Posted by goodolboy

You have to do the math to convert the data to homicide rate per 100K. All you need is the 2010 census population for the state you want to convert. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s...ables/table-20


Or it is already done for you in this article toward the end in a graph by state. http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/no...rticle/2573353.

Thanks for the links. I only looked at the second link because I'm not in the mood to do math. My brain is fried. I've had a rough day.

Anyway, so looking the last graph you referred to none of that surprised me. I don't know if you've ever been to DC but yeah, it's a shithole. The problem I have with that graph is it only shows murders committed with guns. Not total gun deaths. That is shown on the first graph. That graph actually shows 2 things.
1. California and Maryland has a lower rate of gun deaths than Texas. It doesn't show DC but I'm pretty sure that would be higher than Texas.
2. The higher the percentage of gun ownership, the higher the rate of gun deaths.

But more to the question you were asking about gun laws, I would like to share with you 2 links. The first link shows the 10 states that is considered to have the toughest gun laws. The second link show the 10 states with the LEAST amount of gun deaths.

You will find that 7 of the 10 states with the toughest laws are among the 10 states with the least amount of gun deaths.

So what does that all mean? Well, it means that we can pick and chose what data to look at to support our arguments. But we both knew that right?

https://www.deseretnews.com/top/1428...-gun-laws.html
http://247wallst.com/special-report/...un-violence/2/

[old_hippie]

Originally Posted by Tx Noob

Just want to let you know that the Bill of Rights are comprised of the first ten amendments of the Constitution; therefore the 6th amendment is definitely part of the Bill of Rights.

Yes, you are correct. Thanks for the clarification.

[suiram77]

Originally Posted by old_hippie

I just want to a a tidbit of information I discovered about red light cameras that contradicted something I said earlier. I thought that the cost of installing these cameras would limit its use. But it's actually a revenue generator! Those sneaky bastards! Another reason why I hate them.

Right lol

[Roy Wally]

[goodolboy]

Originally Posted by old_hippie

Thanks for the links. I only looked at the second link because I'm not in the mood to do math. My brain is fried. I've had a rough day.

Anyway, so looking the last graph you referred to none of that surprised me. I don't know if you've ever been to DC but yeah, it's a shithole. The problem I have with that graph is it only shows murders committed with guns. Not total gun deaths. That is shown on the first graph. That graph actually shows 2 things.
1. California and Maryland has a lower rate of gun deaths than Texas. It doesn't show DC but I'm pretty sure that would be higher than Texas.
2. The higher the percentage of gun ownership, the higher the rate of gun deaths.

But more to the question you were asking about gun laws, I would like to share with you 2 links. The first link shows the 10 states that is considered to have the toughest gun laws. The second link show the 10 states with the LEAST amount of gun deaths.

You will find that 7 of the 10 states with the toughest laws are among the 10 states with the least amount of gun deaths.

("The problem I have with that graph is it only shows murders committed with guns. Not total gun deaths. ")

Yes, suicides are 65% of the other graphs finds for gun deaths. I think most of us can agree that gun violence, and murder are different than someone choosing to take their own life. BTW, Japan as a example has no privately owned firearms by citizens, but their suicide rate is roughly DOUBLE of the USA which has hundreds of millions of guns.



("That graph actually shows 2 things.
1. California and Maryland has a lower rate of gun deaths than Texas. It doesn't show DC but I'm pretty sure that would be higher than Texas.
2. The higher the percentage of gun ownership, the higher the rate of gun deaths.")

I don't believe that to be true, CA, MD, DC, and IL all have "assault weapons bans and licensing requirements to even purchase guns, TX does not. Please show your evidence to prove your point.

In fact By the FBI numbers and the 2010 census,the murder by firearm rate in TX is 3.04 gun homicides per 100K people, For CA it is 3.45, for MD it is 3.60, IL is 3.45 and for DC it is 12.14, or four times higher than TX. Even with all their assault weapons bans and various gun control schemes TX has a lower gun homicide rate than the big gun control states. If all this gun control works it sure doesn't show in the statistics. Can you explain why??
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s...bles/table-20/

Link to 2010 census population. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_States_Census

[rexdutchman]

Thank you TX NOOB for correcting OLD HIPPIE , As for red light citations I have won in court with the 6 amendment issue (earlier typo my bad (5 a) Office from agency was there I only had 1 question - Did you witness No case dismissed if you have the time. ( that's why city now make a lesser fine and no points so people will just pay not right but)
Back to guns the liberals want you to think more gov regulation tax's is the way to stop violence Hasn't worked with anything so far , just saying

[grean]

Originally Posted by old_hippie

Ah, the Confrontation Clause. That falls under the 6th Amendment of the Constitution, not the Bill of Rights.

What?

--------

Old hippie,

Let's say no one can buy guns legally in the United States starting today.

Tell me how that stops guns from being aquired illegally?

[goodolboy]

Originally Posted by grean

What?

--------

Old hippie,

Let's say no one can buy guns legally in the United States starting today.

Tell me how that stops guns from being aquired illegally?

It worked for meth,heroin,coke and illegal aliens.

[grean]

Originally Posted by old_hippie

Thanks for the links. I only looked at the second link because I'm not in the mood to do math. My brain is fried. I've had a rough day.

Anyway, so looking the last graph you referred to none of that surprised me. I don't know if you've ever been to DC but yeah, it's a shithole. The problem I have with that graph is it only shows murders committed with guns. Not total gun deaths. That is shown on the first graph. That graph actually shows 2 things.
1. California and Maryland has a lower rate of gun deaths than Texas. It doesn't show DC but I'm pretty sure that would be higher than Texas.
2. The higher the percentage of gun ownership, the higher the rate of gun deaths.

But more to the question you were asking about gun laws, I would like to share with you 2 links. The first link shows the 10 states that is considered to have the toughest gun laws. The second link show the 10 states with the LEAST amount of gun deaths.

You will find that 7 of the 10 states with the toughest laws are among the 10 states with the least amount of gun deaths.

So what does that all mean? Well, it means that we can pick and chose what data to look at to support our arguments. But we both knew that right?

https://www.deseretnews.com/top/1428...-gun-laws.html
http://247wallst.com/special-report/...un-violence/2/

Correlation does not mean causation.

Why not say Alaska with 20 guns deaths per 100k, largely due to suicude, is more to do with that fact it is just fucking depressing there. Hawaii has a shit ton of guns but low gun death ratio because maybe it isn't depressing there.

They were suicidal. Better ban Tylenol & Jim Beam. That can kill you too. They'd use that if they didn't have a gun.

California has a low per capita but the absolute highest raw number of gun deaths. They have strict laws. "But if they didn't get them from Texas...." that simply says they will obtain them illegally from some where.

[old_hippie]

Originally Posted by goodolboy

("The problem I have with that graph is it only shows murders committed with guns. Not total gun deaths. ")

Yes, suicides are 65% of the other graphs finds for gun deaths. I think most of us can agree that gun violence, and murder are different than someone choosing to take their own life. BTW, Japan as a example has no privately owned firearms by citizens, but their suicide rate is roughly DOUBLE of the USA which has hundreds of millions of guns.

I agree with your statement above. Murder and suicide are different problems and require different solutions. But I don't agree that the availability of guns have no effect on suicide deaths. Studies have shown that suicidal people with easy access to guns are 3 times more likely to commit suicide. And the idea that people who attempt suicide will find another way is mostly true. But what is overlooked in the argument is how lethal guns are. People who attempt suicide by guns are successful over 90% of the time. Whereas people who attempt suicide by poison for example, are successful only 4% of the time. And of those that attempted suicide and were unsuccessful, only 10% will die from subsequent attempts.

If you are wondering where I'm getting these numbers, here are a few links.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graph...suicide-rates/
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/09/u...-suicides.html
http://www.suicide.org/suicide-statistics.html

Originally Posted by goodolboy

("That graph actually shows 2 things.
1. California and Maryland has a lower rate of gun deaths than Texas. It doesn't show DC but I'm pretty sure that would be higher than Texas.
2. The higher the percentage of gun ownership, the higher the rate of gun deaths.")

I don't believe that to be true, CA, MD, DC, and IL all have "assault weapons bans and licensing requirements to even purchase guns, TX does not. Please show your evidence to prove your point.

I was referring to the first graph that includes all gun deaths. I think that is more relevant than looking at just murders because of what I stated above. You may disagree and that's fine. We all have our point of view.

[old_hippie]

Originally Posted by grean

Old hippie,

Let's say no one can buy guns legally in the United States starting today.

Tell me how that stops guns from being aquired illegally?

Would it stop all illegal guns? No. And anyone who thinks so is fooling themselves.

How effective would such a ban be? That's hard to answer. I think it would depend on how the ban is implemented and enforced.

[old_hippie]

Originally Posted by grean

Correlation does not mean causation.

Why not say Alaska with 20 guns deaths per 100k, largely due to suicude, is more to do with that fact it is just fucking depressing there. Hawaii has a shit ton of guns but low gun death ratio because maybe it isn't depressing there.

They were suicidal. Better ban Tylenol & Jim Beam. That can kill you too. They'd use that if they didn't have a gun.

California has a low per capita but the absolute highest raw number of gun deaths. They have strict laws. "But if they didn't get them from Texas...." that simply says they will obtain them illegally from some where.

Please see my response to goodolboy regarding suicides.

[suiram77]

Well I said that it will be more mass shootings in 2018, and no one will be able to stop them. It didn’t take long just 3 weeks later a small mass shooting In Edmond MD guy shot 3 of his co workers and 2 random ppl was arrested this week. SMHD it will continue.

[rexdutchman]

Look at the news -AX ATTACK IN SWITZERLAND, I guess the libertarts will be after knife's and ax's and 2x4 s because What they say always works !!!!!!!

[jayt4567]

We about to strip search like its TSA all day.