Gun-related Deaths in America Eclipse Terrorism

[IAMX 3,055]

6 minutes ago, 8bit_Theatre said:

There has not been a terrorist attack on that scale in the western world for 16 years. If you notice, they are going for smaller softer targets and the US hasn't seen the same quantity as the EU.

Indeed. With such extremism fostering and gaining global presence, though, it's presenting a trend that needs to be addressed before the US even becomes like Europe, never mind MENA. This requires an extremely aggressive stance toward those most likely to support it, i.e. Muslims.

Edited August 18, 2017 by IAMX

[8bit_Theatre 64]

1 minute ago, IAMX said:

Indeed. With such extremism fostering and gaining global presence, though, it's presenting a trend that needs to be addressed before the US even becomes like Europe, never mind MENA. This requires an extremely aggressive stance toward those most likely to support it, i.e. Muslims.

I disagree with targeting muslims, but that is a topic for another thread.

[IAMX 3,055]

5 minutes ago, 8bit_Theatre said:

I disagree with targeting muslims, but that is a topic for another thread.

A lot better odds than targeting gun owners for mass/school shooters.

[JimandChristy 1,689]

2 hours ago, jg121783 said:

The left likes to spout off all these statistics but they won't address the fact that most of these shootings happen in victim disarmament zones.

There are disarmament zones all over the UK but it only has around 50 gun deaths a year.

[8bit_Theatre 64]

9 minutes ago, JimandChristy said:

There are disarmament zones all over the UK but it only has around 50 gun deaths a year.

If you compare US and UK homicide rates before gun control (prior to 1920) you will find something very interesting. They are relatively unchanged. The UK has always had a rate of about 1 per 100k whereas the US started the early 20th century at about 4 (it skyrocketed during prohibition) and its about 4 today.

[IAMX 3,055]

14 minutes ago, JimandChristy said:

There are disarmament zones all over the UK but it only has around 50 gun deaths a year.

People there have accepted government as the rulers of their lives, and it sort of works for them, except for terrorism. 

 

Won't work for the USA. Violence is as much a part of USA culture as is the second amendment.

Edited August 18, 2017 by IAMX

[CaliCat 3,957]

1 minute ago, 8bit_Theatre said:

If you compare US and UK homicide rates before gun control (prior to 1920) you will find something very interesting. They are relatively unchanged. The UK has always had a rate of about 1 per 100k whereas the US started the early 20th century at about 4 (it skyrocketed during prohibition) and its about 4 today.

 

And that's the point of this thread. Gun violence kills far more people than terrorism, and as a country we seem unable or unwilling to talk about it. 

 

[8bit_Theatre 64]

4 minutes ago, CaliCat said:

 

And that's the point of this thread. Gun violence kills far more people than terrorism, and as a country we seem unable or unwilling to talk about it. 

 

Well the point of that statement was that with or without gun laws the US and UK rates haven't really changed. Basically people in the UK just don't kill each other at the same rate...before or after guns.

 

IE prior to 1920 people in the UK were unregulated when it came to guns.

Edited August 18, 2017 by 8bit_Theatre

[IAMX 3,055]

1 minute ago, 8bit_Theatre said:

Well the point of that statement was that with or without gun laws the US and UK rates haven't really changed. Basically people in the UK just don't kill each other at the same rate...before or after guns.

Pretty much. 

[CaliCat 3,957]

4 minutes ago, 8bit_Theatre said:

Well the point of that statement was that with or without gun laws the US and UK rates haven't really changed. Basically people in the UK just don't kill each other at the same rate...before or after guns.

 

True, but shouldn't we then pay as much, if not more attention, to a problem that kills more people than terrorism?

 

[jg121783 3,921]

2 hours ago, CaliCat said:

 

The statistics are true. The numbers are real (as in real-facts, not alternate facts). The damage is also true. The deaths are real.

 

You can shoot the messenger, and help me prove my initial point. 

I fail to see what your point is. You tell us how many gun deaths there have been but fail to tell us most of the shootings happen in "gun control" areas. What are you proposing here? That we turn the whole country into a victim disarmament zone where criminals have a monopoly on gun ownership?

[CaliCat 3,957]

1 minute ago, jg121783 said:

I fail to see what your point is. You tell us how many gun deaths there have been but fail to tell us most of the shootings happen in "gun control" areas. What are you proposing here? That we turn the whole country into a victim disarmament zone where criminals have a monopoly on gun ownership?

 

I know, and that is what I am highlighting in this thread. There are a lot of people that look at the statistics, and shrug.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

Take away the three or four inner cities democratic paradises, our crime rates are some of the lowest in the world 

[CaliCat 3,957]

Just now, Nature Boy Flair said:

Take away the three or four inner cities democratic paradises, our crime rates are some of the lowest in the world 

 

So should we just shrug and carry on with more than 9,000 deaths by gun each year?

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

Just now, CaliCat said:

 

So should we just shrug and carry on with more than 9,000 deaths by gun each year?

I dont know. How do you think we can get the inner city minorities in the places guns are banned to stop shooting each other ?

 

Taking away my my magnificent and to be quite honest, splendid cache of scary look guns sure isn't going to help anything