Jump to content

What is better, no guns, or more guns?


Recommended Posts

🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯

 

Shoot up schools… hospitals… music festivals… grocery stores…

 

These insecure males just listen to Tucker about tanning their balls and the assault on masculinity 

 

 

7 hours ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

 

Can we all stop pretending these Ds are not full blown Commie fascist Anti American trash that mock all them slippery slope calls.  

 

I can't imagine this all ending well.


Irony is f’n dead

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, BillStime said:

🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯

 

Shoot up schools… hospitals… music festivals… grocery stores…

 

These insecure males just listen to Tucker about tanning their balls and the assault on masculinity 

 

 


Irony is f’n dead

 

 

 

Can't wait for President DeSantis to issue an Executive Order stating the First Amendment isn't absolute and the Founders had no idea that Twitter accounts like @TeaPainUSA would do such harm to society, and have them banned permanently.  

 

We're going after all "news" outlets.

 

We're going full News Grab.  Gone.  Only DeSantis approved media we declare safe to consume.  

 

Like Tucker and ball tanning.  

 

Edited by Big Blitz
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, T master said:

But when the TV commercials & adds come out & say if suicidal thoughts or what some professionals have found, but don't address that as part of the problem it's just the guns !! 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtrLBYwIOZs

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIxcMIBhHS4

 

Can't you do both?  I keep a glock 17 and a Remington shotgun in my house.  Have always pretty conservative when it comes to guns.  My mind has changed somewhat when it comes to assault rifles though as two 18 year olds within a week legally purchased AK-15's and killed a total of 32 unlucky people including 19 children.  I'm open to raising the age to own an assault rifles to 21 nationally, more comprehensive background checks including mandatory training to own an assault weapon like an AR-15, spending more money on security at public places, and doing the best to put more resources in addressing the mental health component.  

Edited by Doc Brown
  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ALF said:

This is another issue for States rights to deal with , if it works other states will follow.

 

I'd have to disagree here. Living here in Chicago, around 60% of the guns used for crimes here were obtained outside of the state. Illinois and Chicago can put in whatever stringent gun laws they want but people can drive a couple miles out of the city to Gary, Indiana, load up on guns and bring them into Chicago. Despite this, Indiana is not acting to reduce the gun trafficking nor enacting stricter controls on gun sales.

 

If we don't take a comprehensive approach across the country, we will continue to have problems with people obtaining guns in less restrictive states and bringing them into more restrictive states to circumvent the laws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trying to get 60 Senators and the NRA to back gun safety so far is a exercise in futility. Something done by some states is better then nothing. Chicago is in a very bad location for outside guns. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

 

I'd have to disagree here. Living here in Chicago, around 60% of the guns used for crimes here were obtained outside of the state. Illinois and Chicago can put in whatever stringent gun laws they want but people can drive a couple miles out of the city to Gary, Indiana, load up on guns and bring them into Chicago. Despite this, Indiana is not acting to reduce the gun trafficking nor enacting stricter controls on gun sales.

 

If we don't take a comprehensive approach across the country, we will continue to have problems with people obtaining guns in less restrictive states and bringing them into more restrictive states to circumvent the laws.

I'll assume what you're saying is true. But if so, then shouldn't there also be rampant gun violence in Gary, Indiana....and all across Indiana for that matter? (I have no idea if there is.)

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

I'll assume what you're saying is true. But if so, then shouldn't there also be rampant gun violence in Gary, Indiana....and all across Indiana for that matter? (I have no idea if there is.)

 

 

Exactly 

 

And Mexico - I guess Arizona, Texas, New Mexico can continue to easily gain access from South of the border

 

 

 

Watching them morph into "no one needs those kinds of guns to hunt" to "yea f it just ban them all" is astounding and yet not surprising in the least.

 

It's why they should never ever ever be trusted with power.  

 

You can't continue to give lip service on massive issues - claim its your only position and say "no one is saying take or ban all the guns..." only to immediately flip "um.....about that......we actually do want to ban them all."

 

 

Trash.  They're trash communist thugs.  Fascism communism maoist use whatever freaking term you want It's 2022 not 1922 it's a bit more nuanced.  We have 100 years of historical evidence of what a disaster their world view leads to.  But since we don't teach history anymore - well at least teach it properly - we have a bunch of privileged entitled leftists under 30 that have no clue about any of that history.

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

I'll assume what you're saying is true. But if so, then shouldn't there also be rampant gun violence in Gary, Indiana....and all across Indiana for that matter? (I have no idea if there is.)

 

Correct. Here are the numbers as of 2019 (the most recent FBI crime data I could pull up)

 

Gary, Indiana has a population of 75,000 and had 57 homicides in 2019 (FBI data table for Indiana) for a homicide rate of 76 homicides per 100,000 people.

 

Chicago has a population of 2,707,064 and had 492 homicides in 2019 (FBI data table for Illinois) for a homicide rate of 18 homicides per 100,000 people. 

 

Gary, Indiana has a much higher homicide rate than Chicago and that violence gets exported to Chicago through guns moving into the city.

 

Chicago gets all of the national headlines because the sheer total is large due to the size of the population. But depending how you define "city" (in terms of population and boundaries), Chicago is far from the most deadly city in the US. Here's one listing from last year that has Chicago in 10th, with a homicide rate that's a little more than 1/3rd the rate of St. Louis: https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-city-rankings/cities-with-most-murders 

  • Thank you (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

 

Correct. Here are the numbers as of 2019 (the most recent FBI crime data I could pull up)

 

Gary, Indiana has a population of 75,000 and had 57 homicides in 2019 (FBI data table for Indiana) for a homicide rate of 76 homicides per 100,000 people.

 

Chicago has a population of 2,707,064 and had 492 homicides in 2019 (FBI data table for Illinois) for a homicide rate of 18 homicides per 100,000 people. 

 

Gary, Indiana has a much higher homicide rate than Chicago and that violence gets exported to Chicago through guns moving into the city.

 

Chicago gets all of the national headlines because the sheer total is large due to the size of the population. But depending how you define "city" (in terms of population and boundaries), Chicago is far from the most deadly city in the US. Here's one listing from last year that has Chicago in 10th, with a homicide rate that's a little more than 1/3rd the rate of St. Louis: https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-city-rankings/cities-with-most-murders 

Thanks…and is the homicide weapon of choice an ‘assault rifle’? Mind you, I’m not a gun guy in the slightest. My questions are honest ones. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Thanks…and is the homicide weapon of choice an ‘assault rifle’? Mind you, I’m not a gun guy in the slightest. My questions are honest ones. 

 

The FBI data doesn't go into that much detail, but most homicides via firearms are by handgun. We generally only talk about gun violence after mass shootings, which are disproportionately via rifle (like the AR-15) but if we actually want to do something to reduce gun deaths, we need to also focus on handguns, suicides and accidental gun deaths.

Edited by ChiGoose
Clarification
  • Agree 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

 

The FBI data doesn't go into that much detail, but most homicides via firearms are by handgun. We generally only talk about gun violence after mass shootings, which are disproportionately via rifle (like the AR-15) but if we actually want to do something to reduce gun deaths, we need to also focus on handguns, suicides and accidental gun deaths.

Thanks…And in the spirit of grown up conversation, what would you suggest? 
 

For example…I have no objection to raising the age to purchase a firearm to 21. 

Edited by SoCal Deek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Thanks…And in the spirit of grown up conversation, what would you suggest? 
 

For example…I have no objection to raising the age to purchase a firearm to 21. 

The two things that do surprise me is that we don't raise the age to buy a gun to 21, since we acknowledge that 18 years are stupid, and red flag laws have not passed in every state. If you threaten to shoot a place up then you should not be allowed a gun. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...