Robb Elementary School shooting

[marke]

Name them, with links to sources.


Link to source.

The US has 89 guns for every 100 people. Its homicide rate is 6.3 murders per 100,000 people.
Venezuela has 10.7 guns for every 100 people. Its homicide rate is 36.7 murders per 100,000 people.
El Salvador has 5.8 guns for every 100 people. Its homicide rate is 37.2 murders for every 100,000 people.
Jamaica has 8.1 guns per 100 people. Its homicide rate is 44.7 murders for every 100,000 people.

Number of guns per capita by country

This is a list of countries by guns per capita (number of privately owned small firearms divided by number of residents).[1][2][3][4] The numbers are based on the average of figures provided by the Small Arms Survey, in the Small Arms Survey 2007,[3] unless other sources are provided, and are an...

military-history.fandom.com

List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Idolater]

Every single person should have a concealed carry permit and carry concealed all the time.

Or openly. In fact I'd prefer openly, and not like, there's one guy in the whole mall with a rifle, but that there are like one in every ten guys with a rifle, something like how many people where masks now, that's how many openly carried rifles I want to see.

 

[User Name]

The US has 89 guns for every 100 people. Its homicide rate is 6.3 murders per 100,000 people.
Venezuela has 10.7 guns for every 100 people. Its homicide rate is 36.7 murders per 100,000 people.
El Salvador has 5.8 guns for every 100 people. Its homicide rate is 37.2 murders for every 100,000 people.
Jamaica has 8.1 guns per 100 people. Its homicide rate is 44.7 murders for every 100,000 people.

The USA is not comparable to Venezuela, El Salvador or Jamaica because they are like 3rd world nations in comparison to us. You have to compare 1st World nations with 1st, and when you do so, you see that among such countries, those with stricter gun control have much less gun crime and much less murder in general compared to us.

 

[Idolater]

The problem with cherry-picking data to support bad ideas is those bad ideas are not improved by support from cherry-picked data. Leftists in America propagate the false narrative that reducing the number of guns increases the safety and security of citizens.

Lefties are wrong to think decreasing the number of guns in a nation will lower its homicide rates. The US has about 1 gun for every citizen in the nation and its homicide rate is around 6.6 murders for every 100,000 people. Nigeria has about 1.5 guns for every 100 people and its homicide rate is around 34.5 murders for every 100,000 people.

Yes, but your figure is wrong for the US, latest data I've seen has it at 120 civilian owned guns in America per 100 Americans. 120 per 100, or 1.2 per capita civilian owned guns in America.

Next closest is like 0.50 guns per capita, maybe, and that's Yemen. This is just all from memory, these are rough, but I know for sure America's gun ownership rate is at least 1.2 guns per capita, and there is NO close second among all the nations of the world.

Your point is true, more guns don't mean more murders, not even close. In fact if it were true, Americans should be murdered like 10 times more than we are, maybe more.

And the only conclusion from such a fact is that, it's not the guns.

But I'm not leaving it there. If it's not the guns, what is it?

It's the murderers. Murderers per capita correlates very strongly to murders per capita. But I know, correlation doesn't prove causation. Can't jump to conclusions.

 

[Idolater]

The USA is not comparable to Venezuela, El Salvador or Jamaica because they are like 3rd world nations in comparison to us. You have to compare 1st World nations with 1st, and when you do so, you see that among such countries, those with stricter gun control have much less gun crime and much less murder in general compared to us.

Thanks for admitting to the cherrypicking.

 

[User Name]

Thanks for admitting to the cherrypicking.

You're a fool if you try to compare the USA to Venezuela or El Salvador, which have been experiencing political turmoil and violence for decades. Compare the USA to the advanced nations of Europe or Asia, because that is the category we are in. You are the one who is cherry-picking.

 

[Idolater]

... One thing I haven't heard about with this mass murderer yet, is whether there were any red flags or warning signs or altercations with the law or any threats or episodes of menacing or intimidation that his neighbors or family or anybody ever witnesses, recently. I'm watching for news like that.

I haven't read this yet.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1529608110326915073

 

[Idolater]

You're a fool if you try to compare the USA to Venezuela or El Salvador, which have been experiencing political turmoil and violence for decades. Compare the USA to the advanced nations of Europe or Asia, because that is the category we are in. You are the one who is cherry-picking.

Your defense to my accusation that you're cherrypicking, is that I'm the one who's cherrypicking, because I am not cherrypicking?

What a mess!

 

[User Name]

Your defense to my accusation that you're cherrypicking, is that I'm the one who's cherrypicking, because I am not cherrypicking?

What a mess!

Politically and economically, El Salvadore, Venezuela, and such nations are hardly comparable to the US. Can you understand why?

 

[ok doser]

Murderers per capita correlates very strongly to murders per capita.

As a professional statistician I approve of this message!

But I know, correlation doesn't prove causation.

As a teacher of statistics I applaud you for avoiding the mistakes many make when making that statement!

Can't jump to conclusions.

Not unless you're getting paid well enough

 

[marke]

The USA is not comparable to Venezuela, El Salvador or Jamaica because they are like 3rd world nations in comparison to us. You have to compare 1st World nations with 1st, and when you do so, you see that among such countries, those with stricter gun control have much less gun crime and much less murder in general compared to us.

I don't think you can support your contention that when governments confiscate the guns of citizens the crime rate goes down.

Harvard Study: Banning Guns Will Increase Crime

Don't believe banning guns will increase crime? Read this Harvard study, which calmly and rationally shows gun ownership has no relationship to violence.

blog.gunassociation.org

Banning Guns Will Increase Crime | Harvard Study Overview​

 

[marke]

Politically and economically, El Salvadore, Venezuela, and such nations are hardly comparable to the US. Can you understand why?

You should not respect leftist lies based upon erroneous ideas and backed by manipulated data. Russia's murder rate is 7.3 murders per 100,000 citizens while the U.S. murder rate is 6.3 per 100,000. How do guns figure in to this? The U.S. has about one gun for every citizen. Russia has 9 guns for every 100 citizens.

https://www.npr.org/sections/parall...u-s-has-more-guns-but-russia-has-more-murders

The U.S. Has More Guns, But Russia Has More Murders​

 

[User Name]

You should not respect leftist lies based upon erroneous ideas and backed by manipulated data. Russia's murder rate is 7.3 murders per 100,000 citizens while the U.S. murder rate is 6.3 per 100,000. How do guns figure in to this?

Russia is not a stable democracy with a thriving economy. The US is. Therefore, you are making a false equivalence between the two.

Instead, compare the USA to other stable democracies with strong economies. When you do so, you'll immediately notice two things:

1) Guns are allowed to proliferate in the USA.
2) Gun crimes/mass shootings are far more common in the USA.

 

[Jefferson]

Russia is not a stable democracy with a thriving economy. The US is. Therefore, you are making a false equivalence between the two.

Instead, compare the USA to other stable democracies with strong economies. When you do so, you'll immediately notice two things:

1) Guns are allowed to proliferate in the USA.
2) Gun crimes/mass shootings are far more common in the USA.

We still have this pesky thing called The Second Amendment. Oh yeah, I forgot. Libs hate The Bill of Rights. My bad.

 

[ok doser]

We still have this pesky thing called The Second Amendment. Oh yeah, I forgot. Libs hate The Bill of Rights. My bad.

Fascinating. Earlier I commented to Mank that he was focusing on two variables and ignoring 100 others. Here we have the village idiot dismissing a variable and focusing on three others, while ignoring 100 others.

This is an argument you can never win with these people who have already made up their minds. It is a phenomenon that is worth investigating and considering, but not with morons like UN.

 

[User Name]

We still have this pesky thing called The Second Amendment. Oh yeah, I forgot. Libs hate The Bill of Rights. My bad.

Ah, but that all depends on how judges/lawmakers interpret said document. For example, the Second Amendment even as it is currently interpreted does not allow you as a private citizen to own nuclear weapons or fully automatic AK-47s, and even with legal weapons there are all sorts of regulations and restrictions in place at both the federal and state levels, so your right to keep and bear arms is curtailed in numerous ways. The Second Amendment is subject to interpretation and change according to the will o;f the people and our legal representatives in government.

 

[Jefferson]

Ah, but that all depends on how judges/lawmakers interpret said document.

They're supposed to interpret it according to how the founding fathers would have interpreted it. Not like this:

 

[Stripe]

Given that the loser murderer got swift justice and it wasn't televised, can his home be burned to the ground?

 

[Idolater]

Given that the loser murderer got swift justice and it wasn't televised, can his home be burned to the ground?

A brutal way to handle this, but it would get results. These mass murderers are scum of the Earth. But it might deter them if our policy is to brutally punish their surviving family. It would work, but it would be immoral and evil.

Sound familiar?

 

[Stripe]

A brutal way to handle this, but it would get results. These mass murderers are scum of the Earth. But it might deter them if our policy is to brutally punish their surviving family. It would work, but it would be immoral and evil.

Sound familiar?

What?

No. We'd let them know in advance. How long would they need to run out?