Concealed Permit Holder Stops Attempted Mass Shooting in Chicago

[Jacque67 7,328]

I would agree with your second point if you had +1'd my post.

You just described the CHEST forum.

Oops I did it again!

[DavenMaura 62]

Mass Shootings under the Last Five Presidents

Ronald Reagan: 1981-1989 (8 years) 11 mass shootings

Incidents with 8 or more deaths = 5

George H. W. Bush: 1989-1993 (4 years) 12 mass murders

Incidents with 8 or more deaths = 3

Bill Clinton: 1993-2001 (8 years) 23 mass murders

Incidents with 8 or more deaths = 4

George W. Bush: 2001-2009 (8 years) 20 mass murders

Incidents with 8 or more deaths = 5

Barrack H. Obama: 2009-2015 (in 7th year) 162 mass murders

Incidents with 8 or more deaths = 18

http://wearechange.org/why-have-there-been-more-mass-shootings-under-obama-than-the-previous-four-presidents-combined/

That's a lot of incidents.

[Teddy B 17,252]

This is definitely a new tactic. You don't want people to bother posting different opinions but you also don't want them bother researching and posting facts.

How is this discussion supposed to work then? Do we all just read you opinions and admire them from afar?

You know that's what you do with all of my posts.

[Teddy B 17,252]

It would be more accurate to say that I am opposed to Nanny State restrictions which erode personal and societal liberties. Too often, these restrictions are inflicted on Citizens without an understanding of the long term consequences. California, Colorado and Connecticut demonstrate one consequence of restricting the rights of Citizens to purchase, own and carry firearms. Pennsylvania, Arizona and Florida, states with considerably less restrictive firearms laws, have not experienced the same level of carnage. Food for thought...

Criminals and terrorists will always have access to firearms; restrictive firearms laws do not restrict their access. The ability of law abiding Citizens to protect themselves in emergent situations is directly proportional to their ability to legally obtain and use firearms. Again, food for thought...

I'm not sure what you qualify as "carnage", but Florida and Pennsylvania are well above average in annual gun deaths and Arizona is just about average. In 2014 Florida had 687 homicides by gun, PA had 453 and AZ had 153. I used the FBI stats for PA and AZ and the Fla dept of Law Enforcement site for the Fla stats, for whatever reason Fla does not report their stats to the FBI. The gun death average per state is roughly 176. (8,811 gun deaths in the US in 2014 divided by 50). California is way above average with 1162 gun deaths, but CO and CT are well below average at 91 and 51 respectively.

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2014/crime-in-the-u.s.-2014/tables/table-20

http://www.fdle.state.fl.us/Content/getdoc/332e1b3d-2648-4b06-8be5-d322f340c95d/1971_fwd_murder_firearms.aspx

[DavenMaura 62]

It's against common sense to argue that more guns means less death by gun.

As far as I know the only way guns reduce crime is if martial law is declared

[lostinblue 1,989]

It's against common sense to argue that more guns means less death by gun.

As far as I know the only way guns reduce crime is if martial law is declared

And what would your martial law do ? Gang bangers will still be killing gang bangers..

[DavenMaura 62]

Martial law means the army is on the streets enforcing a shoot/arrest on sight curfew

[GandD 5,966]

Mass Shootings under the Last Five Presidents

Ronald Reagan: 1981-1989 (8 years) 11 mass shootings

Incidents with 8 or more deaths = 5

George H. W. Bush: 1989-1993 (4 years) 12 mass murders

Incidents with 8 or more deaths = 3

Bill Clinton: 1993-2001 (8 years) 23 mass murders

Incidents with 8 or more deaths = 4

George W. Bush: 2001-2009 (8 years) 20 mass murders

Incidents with 8 or more deaths = 5

Barrack H. Obama: 2009-2015 (in 7th year) 162 mass murders

Incidents with 8 or more deaths = 18

http://wearechange.org/why-have-there-been-more-mass-shootings-under-obama-than-the-previous-four-presidents-combined/

I think you're giving the role of president a bit more credit than it deserves.

[Advanced Aardvark 82]

There's no mistake. You think yourself an expert because you've looked up random statistics on the Web and think it proves what you happen to already believe.

The Internet is not university and unless you collected these numbers yourself you only think you know what you're talking about. This venue is all about opinion.

Of course, but there is informed opinion and uninformed opinion. My data sources are documented. You do not seem to have any data sources.

[Advanced Aardvark 82]

I'm not sure what you qualify as "carnage", but Florida and Pennsylvania are well above average in annual gun deaths and Arizona is just about average. In 2014 Florida had 687 homicides by gun, PA had 453 and AZ had 153. I used the FBI stats for PA and AZ and the Fla dept of Law Enforcement site for the Fla stats, for whatever reason Fla does not report their stats to the FBI. The gun death average per state is roughly 176. (8,811 gun deaths in the US in 2014 divided by 50). California is way above average with 1162 gun deaths, but CO and CT are well below average at 91 and 51 respectively.

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2014/crime-in-the-u.s.-2014/tables/table-20

http://www.fdle.state.fl.us/Content/getdoc/332e1b3d-2648-4b06-8be5-d322f340c95d/1971_fwd_murder_firearms.aspx

Using a simple average distorts the numbers when you have large differences in population. For this reason, incident numbers are customarily reported in units per 100,000 of population. This offers a view that is more apples to apples.

In example, the 2010 census lists CA population at 37.3 million while CT had a population of 3.6 million. California's number could be ten times greater than Connecticut's, yet the number of incidents per 100,000 of population would be roughly equivalent. If you consider that Vermont had 2010 population of about 626,000, the distortion induced by using simple percentages is even more dramatic.

Slinging numbers can be fun; slinging them correctly can be informative.

[Sousuke 1,214]

All I can say is that the overall gun homicide rate will likely continue to fall no matter what happens to guns.

[smilesammich 10,727]

All I can say is that the overall gun homicide rate will likely continue to fall no matter what happens to guns.

fluoride works wonders!

[Ban Hammer 13,713]

fluoride works wonders!

playstation and xbox too!

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

Of course, but there is informed opinion and uninformed opinion. My data sources are documented. You do not seem to have any data sources.

The views of the Westboro Baptist church are documented, and they are loons What does something being documented prove. Hitler is documented.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

You really need to utilize some fact checking before you post RWNJ fallacies. Your numbers from the no doubt highly reputable wearechange.org are already dismissed by Snopes as utter bull pucky.

http://www.snopes.com/mass-shootings-obama/

​

Reliance on the RWNJ Echo Chamber for your sources often ends up with such problems.

Mass Shootings under the Last Five Presidents

Ronald Reagan: 1981-1989 (8 years) 11 mass shootings
Incidents with 8 or more deaths = 5

George H. W. Bush: 1989-1993 (4 years) 12 mass murders
Incidents with 8 or more deaths = 3

Bill Clinton: 1993-2001 (8 years) 23 mass murders
Incidents with 8 or more deaths = 4

George W. Bush: 2001-2009 (8 years) 20 mass murders
Incidents with 8 or more deaths = 5

Barrack H. Obama: 2009-2015 (in 7th year) 162 mass murders
Incidents with 8 or more deaths = 18

http://wearechange.org/why-have-there-been-more-mass-shootings-under-obama-than-the-previous-four-presidents-combined/