E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Mel Evans / AP
Officers from the Mercer County Prosecutor's Office work at a two-day gun buyback event in Trenton, N.J., on Jan. 26. People were allowed to drop off weapons with no questions asked.
On average, about 86 people a day are killed by firearms in America, or 31,672 per year, according to the Centers for Disease Control tally for 2010, the latest year available.
A special weeklong examination of gun violence, gun ownership and gun legislation. NBC News journalists will report across "NBC Nightly News," "TODAY," MSNBC, CNBC, NBCNews.com, and more. The conversation will also extend across NBC News and MSNBC's social media platforms using the hashtag #GunsInUSA.
That year, the CDC counted 19,392 gun deaths by suicide, 11,078 homicides with firearms, 606 deaths by accidental shootings and 596 with other or undetermined cause. (Read the full report.)
A child aged 5 through 14 in America is about 13 times more likely to be murdered with a gun than children in Japan, Italy or other industrial countries, according to the Harvard School of Public Health. (Watch the Harvard forum on gun violence.)
Larry W. Smith / EPA
Guns lie in a chair at the First Presbyterian Church parking garage in Dallas during a gun buyback program on Jan. 19, 2013. Across the street, gun-rights advocates were offering to auction off guns at higher prices.
Guns are used in about seven out of 10 murders in the U.S., according to FBI statistics. The weapons of choice are guns, 68 percent; knives, 13 percent; fists or feet, 6 percent; other, 6 percent; and unknown, 7 percent. (See other statistics in a chart from The Dallas Morning News.)
The crime rate has been declining steadily for firearm crimes. In 1993 and 1994, for example, the rate was above seven firearm crimes for every 1,000 people age 12 or older. It has fallen pretty consistently to 1.8 in 2011, the most recent year for which statistics have been tallied, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics.
Even in Chicago, which has a strict gun control law and received a lot of publicity in recent months for a spike in homicides, the number of killings has declined sharply over the past 20 years. The number was consistently above 800 in the early 1990s, but fell to the 700s, to the 600s in the early 2000s, and near 500 or below for every year since 2004, according to a report by the Chicago Police Department.
There is considerable disagreement among researchers, however, on whether the high-rate of U.S. gun ownership has a direct correlation to violent crimes and, if so, what it's impact might be. Here's a recent analysis by FactCheck.org that does a good job covering that terrain.
Related story
A look at some nations' gun ownership rates.
Death takes no holiday: Tracking gun violence over one long January weekend
Thirty-three percent of American households have a gun. That rate varies from Georgia's 41 percent down to New Jersey's 11 percent, according to a 2002 federal survey.
Here are some civilian firearm ownership percentages for selected countries, according to The Small Arms Survey: Germany, 30 per 100 residents; Iceland, 30; Austria, 30; Canada, 31; Iraq, 34; Saudi Arabia, 35; Switzerland, 46; Yemen, 55; United States, 89.
More from Open Channel:
- Obama administration deliberating more cuts in nuclear weapons, sources say
- EXCLUSIVE: Justice Department memo reveals legal case for drone strikes on Americans
- After ethics complaint, Sen. Menendez pays $58,500 for flights to Dominican Republic
Follow Open Channel from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook
Leave a Comment:
Yemen is second only to US! Is that a good indicator for Yemen or a bad one for US?
I don't think anyone really knows whether that's good or bad, that's the problem... we don't track statistics for things like how many people were mentally ill when they committed murders, or whether the gun was obtained legally vs. illegally when a murder was committed with it. Statistics don't mean anything at this point because we really don't know how much the current law has contributed to or hindered the drop in overall gun violence in the US, hence the disparity of results among current research.
I sure hope they don't look at drunk driving and how many people own cars. Between gun deaths and DUI deaths, I think the drunks are winning......
Hello folks, we live in a glass bubble when the biggest purveyor of weapons in the world is the US.
Our military budget outspends all other countries combined. We have military bases in more foreign countries than all other countries combined.
Since the demise of the Soviet Union, the United States has dominated the global arms market. We are the sales leader by far with 55% of global arms exports, quadruple the share of its closest competitor.
We are arming Al Qaeda in Libya and Syria to destabilize the Middle East. We force countries to arm themselves against the "terrorist" organizations that we arm.
The aim of all this media attention is support for an attack on our 2nd Amendment.
Consider the Sandy Hook school shooting. This shooting serves as an excuse for anti gun lobbyists to express their hatred of guns and the NRA and to advance their gun control agenda. Few if any of those hyperventilating over the tragedy know any of the parents of the murdered children. They have shown no similar response to the US government’s murder of countless thousands of Muslim children. The Clinton regime alone killed 500,000 Iraqi children with illegal sanctions, and Clinton’s immoral secretary of state Madeleine Albright, a feminist hero, said that she thought the sanctions were worth the cost of one half million dead Iraqi children. The Bush regime is just as guilty.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4PgpbQfxgo
Suddenly, 20 US children become of massive importance to “progressives.” Why? Because the deaths foster their agenda–gun control in the US.
Fed-up with Crime....so what is your point ? Guess you feel that 40,000 deaths don't matter, because some people die from other causes ? You make no sense.
So none of you know the defination of criminal.... they do not care what laws you pass they will do what every they need to get what they want.....
Numbers don't lie, but they sure can be creatively used. This article is a very good example of using data to give the wrong impression.
86 die per day by a gun. Wow, that is really bad. But wait. 53 of those gun deaths per day are suicides. So 62% of the gun deaths are suicide. Ban guns and they will use a rope, or drugs, or something else including suicide by cop which is not only on the rise, but also gets reported as a gun death.
Look at the numbers another way. There were 11,078 murders. The vast majority of these were drug related, but set that argument aside for a moment and consider that these 11,078 murders for a year amount to 30 murders per day in a nation of 350,000,000 people. Two things to pay attention to even with this statistic.
First, the majority of these murders are gang against gang on our streets as a result of our failed policies pertaining to our "war on drugs" where drugs are illegal by choice, which results in the illegal activity and much the murders. We really need to have a discussion about how well the war on drugs has worked out. If you look closely, the successes of this policy are mostly larger and more numerous prisons, larger and more lethal police departments, and more people in prison in this country than any other country in the world. Are these really the markers of a successful policy? I don't think so. We as a nation need to have a discussion about this war on drugs that we have been waging with open borders and crime on our streets for over 40 years. What have we accomplished with all the bloodshed, all the spent treasure, and the bloating of police departments around the country?
Second, even after ignoring the drug related murders, and treating all murders as simply murder, we have .00000008571 murders per person per day. That is a lot of zeros. You could also say we have .008571 murders per hundred thousand, or .0857 per million. Still a relatively small number as to cause of death. Then, when you reconsider that these are mostly drug related and gang related as a result of the drug trade that finances a big percentage of the gang activity, our murder rate is not all that bad by other comparisons.
Finally, the other statistic that is ignored by those that want to spin facts, is that the rate of murder in this country has been on a decline for some time as stated in this article, Yes, Chicago is having a bad time with a murder rate of 500 last year, but that is still much better than the 800 per year in their recent past. So whatever we are doing is working, and the murder rate is dropping. So why are we talking about doing something else than what we are doing such as banning guns?
Government's war on drugs is a total fiasco that costs the taxpayers tens of billions of dollars per year in extra police, prisons, military hardware for civilian police departments, etc., even drones. This is where we need to try something else. But government, being very STUPID, won't change this obviously bad policy and will insist instead on changing the policies of gun ownership that has vastly increased while crime has clearly decreased. Let me state that once again. Gun ownership has drastically increased while the murder rate has drastically decreased. And we are now talking about banning guns? I guess the murder rate is now too low?
At some point, we the people need to start asking more questions of our government, like "Why are you doing this?""
Just my 2 cents on a Sunday evening. God bless this country with new leadership before we screw it up completely.
I don't care how many guns They have.
I only care how many I have to protect my family with and that is none of your damn business.
TrustVerify----The AR and the shot gun was left in the car. Four hand guns used inside. Why are they attacking the AR platform?? Hand guns have always been the better choice. It's kinda hard to hide a rifle. Let those that do not like guns protect themselves with a cell phone. I prefer Mr. Smith and Wesson.
None of this has to do with anything other than attacking the second amendment. That amendment was placed there for a purpose.
According to this article, information from the CDC shows that the U.S. has the highest number of firearms at 89 per 100 per resident. Yemen is second with 55 per 100 residents, and Switzerland comes in third at 46 per 100 residents. According to this article, for the entire year of 2010 in the U.S., the CDC counted 11,078 homicides with firearms. ( I did not include gun suicides or gun accidents, as Switzerland does not and you have to compare Apples to Apples.)
Ready for the reason to believe guns are not the root cause for our violence? Here it is: In 2010, Switzerland had a total of 40 firearm homicides total! Not in one DAY...but all of 2010. Sure their rate of firearms per 100 residents is 46 compared to our 89, anyone should be able to see that it is not the number of guns that is the core reason for our high homicide rate. It is a lot more complex than that. Check my numbers out for yourself at... GunPolicy dott org...Switzerland.
There is more to it than the firearm. Switzerland requires ALL citizens between the ages of 20-35 to keep a fully automatic (a real 'assault rifle') and a stock of ammo in their home. After 35 they can keep their rifle after it has been sent to make it semi-automatic, and not a fully automatic military assault rifle.
I think the answer to reducing our firearm violence in a significant way could be learned by finding the reason for their low firearm violence.
Smokie 788412 Get a clue. According to the State of Connecticut coroner, ALL of the slugs retrieved from those tiny bodies (and there were an obscene number) were from an AR-15.
Pointstoponder... That law in Switzerland was repealed a decade ago! Switzerland has no standing army and therefore required assault weapons be kept by citizens just in case. They realized that this law posed a threat to innocent people and repealed it. It amazes me how many citations by gun groupies are decades out of date!
FYI, just like Mexico..in Yemen citizens may NOT own guns..It just happens to be a war zone with jihadists trying to take over the country.
If this is true it is very interesting......I'm sure we as a nation will continue to keep our heads in the sand about gun violence in our society.........
Americans would love to believe that the problem is GUNS - but the truth is much uglier than that - it is PEOPLE who are the problem. We glorify violence everywhere - from the topmost levels of government (we spend more on defense than the rest of the world combined, we started more wars and military interventions in the last 50 years than any other country) to our popular culture with the most violent movies and games ever created, to the violent rap songs in our inner city subculture.
Here's a great blog post that pits rhetoric against fact. The fact is that contrary to the rhetoric that more guns means more gun violence, in the period between 2001 and 2010 40 million new guns were sold in the US while -- as this article notes -- the rate of gun violence plummeted (by 15% in that 10 years alone).
Lets see the figures showing race and gang/drug related.. I would bet that a few of the argument and random unknown ones on the list are gang/drug related as well.. We have a huge problem with gang violence that is not being addressed by the Socialist in Chief.. Guess he is far to busy trying to circumvent the Constitution and create his Communist Paradise.. A full 2/3 of the total are suicide so they just don't count at all.. Take away the gang numbers and you have around 4000 out of 300 million people is extremely low..
So while we are distracted with this non issue how is that government dealing with our out of control spending and the budget?? 99% of us subjects of our masters in Washington can live within a budget so why can't they?? Obama has no problem handing out guns to Mexican drug cartels.. He is also fine with guns, explosives and man portable anti aircraft missiles in the hands of revolutionary Jihadists.. Yemen interdicted a shipment of stuff that is exactly what our CIA was handing out in Libya, Big Coincidence hugh?? Fast and furious but with the Taliban???
US High in Gun Ownership, Low in Murder Rate
Several reports on gun ownership around the world clearly refute the
assertion that the abundance of guns in the United States leads to a high rate
of firearm homicides.
Americans are the biggest gun owners by far, with an estimated 270 million
civilian firearms, in addition to those used by law enforcement and the
military. That’s according to the Small Arms Survey of 178 nations conducted by
the Switzerland-based Graduate Institute of International and Development
Studies.
In sheer numbers of civilian firearms, the No. 2 nation, surprisingly, is
India with 46 million, followed by China (40 million), Germany (25 million),
Pakistan (18 million), and Mexico (15 million).
The United States also leads in gun ownership rate, with about 88 firearms
per 100 people, according to the most recent Small Arms Survey compiled in 2007.
That is far ahead of No. 2 Yemen, which has 55 firearms per 100 people.
Switzerland is third with 46 per 100 people, followed by Finland (45), Serbia
(38), Cyprus (36), Saudi Arabia (35), and Iraq (34).
But when it comes to the firearm homicide rate, the United States doesn’t
even make the top 25.
According to figures collected by the United Nations’ Office on Drugs and
Crime through its annual crime survey, 9,146 Americans were victims of a firearm
homicide in the most recent year. That translates to a rate of 2.97 firearm
homicides per 100,000 population, only the 27th highest rate in the world.
The highest rate by far can be found in Honduras, 68 homicides per 100,000,
followed by El Salvador (40), Jamaica (39), Venezuela (38.9), Guatemala (34),
and Colombia (27).
For America’s neighbors, the rate in Mexico is 9.9 per 100,000, and in
Canada, 0.5 per 100,000.
It is interesting to note that not only does the United States have a
relatively low homicide rate compared to its gun ownership rate, but
Switzerland, which ranks third in the civilian gun ownership rate, has only the
46th highest homicide rate, and Finland, with the fourth highest ownership rate,
is 63rd on the list.
“The most obnoxious liberal talking points on guns involve the idea that
guns, in and of themselves, cause gun violence,” writes CNS News commentator
Stephen Gutowski. “In other words, more guns must mean more gun violence.”
But in light of the ownership and homicide figures, he observes: “More guns
do not, in fact, mean more gun violence. Guns can be, and commonly are, used in
a responsible manner, especially here in the United States.”
in comparing other countries.. this article ignores cultural differences...
for example, it sites Japan as having a much lower rate of death by firearms for children... but Japan has an even lower violence rate against children overall because of their culture... Japanese parents often send their 5 year olds to school alone via subway and things like that because violence against children is abhorrent to them.. they've got a much more peaceful society overall by nature... not because of a lower firearm ownership rate.
my point being... the US is a unique case in every way, the nature of our constitution, the wide proliferation of gun ownership, the lack of a previous government who confiscated firearms being in the popular memory, a tradition of an armed citizenry, unstudied areas of gun violence like violent crime that was avoided by display... all kinds of things....
it is definitely, totally not a simple... ban firearms and deaths will go down, because it almost certainly will not. Australia banned most firearms and their armed robberies against homeowners went up from 220 a year to 1600 a year... up 600%.. so violence going down because of bans is BS.
but a lot can be done on background checks to purchase etc. which most gun owners... like me... support
Just another "creative" article on NBC's news site. Just like Michael Moore, they calculate statistics a certain way to push a completely different metric. Considering most of the "gun violence" comes from suicides, it seems that their numbers are a bit off. It's estimated that over half of the actual gun-related homicides in America are by gangs (who don't pay attention to the law anyhow). That means less than 5,000 deaths per year are gun homicides that pertain to law-abiding citizens. That's actually really low in a country of 350,000,000 people- something like 1 in 70,000... See, it's possible to classify statistics in the other direction too.
By the way, the most that "gun grabbers" can hope for are background checks. Even that is probably not going to happen. AR-15's and 30 round mags? Forget about it.
Com-on NBC Opinionaters, tell the REAL STORY about gun violence...particularly GANGS and how they acquire ILLEGAL WEAPONS.
Here are a few links to get a NBC Opinionater on the right track:
Why is it OK for people in gangs to kill each other with guns? I mean, I don't have a lot of sympathy for gang people. I wish there were no gangs. Anyone stupid enough to be in a gang is a loser.
But why is it OK for them to kill each other with guns? A place where gang people are killing each other is not a safe place. Why do you tolerate that? Why is that OK in your country?
I also don't have a lot of sympathy for people who want to commit suicide. Hey, you want to kill yourself? Bye bye. But, why is it of no consequence to you that so many are killing themselves with guns? Feeling a little sad? Hmm, isn't there a gun around here someplace? Yeah, that'll solve all my problems. Easy peasy.
Yes, it's hard to believe that there are so few gun deaths. When a child is killed in school, that counts as 1. Only 1 killed! That is something we can all feel good about.
Yes, statistics are fun!
OH really?Well how about this?
So are you all going to start moaning about that finally? I didn't think so... Some agency parades a bunch of statistics in front of people and they feel as if it's some national crisis, while some of the real issues with our country go unmentioned.
Wake up people. We have many more pressing issues than just Gun Control. If you tackle one then commit to tackle them all, don't be led into a crusade simply based on the news of the day. Put up or shut up instead of being a puppet to those who lead you into taking on THEIR issues.
I think there is a lot of room for improvement with respect to guns. I don't know if there is a lot of room for improvement regarding prescription drugs.
Guns are easy to understand. I am content to leave prescription drugs to the MDs and the pharmacists -- very qualified professionals.
What is more pressing than keeping sick people from killing children?
Since very few children are killed by guns and more die from accidental poisoning and eating pills and car crashes and being killed by their mother and so on.. It makes sense to discuss these preventable causes.. Please do not include gang kids in you gun death totals because this is a group that falls under the declining social structure in the inner city.. This misleading data that pukes out of the liberal government propaganda mill is as bad as the attack on semi auto rifles.. Since the number used in homicides and crimes in general are less then 3% Finestein is on a witch hunt..
Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way. Let me give you an example...
On September 11, 2001, terrorists flying hijacked commercial airplanes crashed into the WTC and Pentagon, killing approx. 3,000 people.
Now, I don't have to tell you that very, very few people a year are killed by terrorists flying hijacked commercial airplanes. But, do you know what the United States of America did in response to the events of Sept. 11?
Two wars. Restructured US gov't. Revised airport procedures. Massive debt. etc.
Now, if you want to talk about accidental poisoning and eating pills and car crashes, you go find someplace to talk about that. You will find the discussions in an advanced state, and very little disagreement.
We're talking about guns here.
Because "gun control" laws making it more difficult for law-abiding people to own guns is like making it more difficult for sober people to own cars, is one explanation.
And far more people die from other causes than "gunshot" each year is probably the bigger point--which you obviously missed. Guns are not the problem here, nor the cause of violence, they are only a tool.
Funny how the "media" can't seem to get enough of these "look how awful gun crime is" stories, but never seems to do a story about the countless citizens who are alive today because they had a gun to protect themselves from a criminal. I guess they have to protect the tribe, and protect the narrative. Funny as well how they never seem to be able to tell us exactly what law congress might pass that would have prevented any of the mass shootings that have occurred in the past... Hand wringing bleeding hearts with absolutely no solution...
Sixty-six percent of U.S. households DO NOT have a gun. Many of us do not feel the need to "protect ourselves" from criminals. If there are 89 firearms per 100 residents in the U.S, that 33% of households with guns includes a lot of people with many firearms.!! I don't think gun registration is a threat to legitimate gun ownership. If it saves the life of one child it is worth it.
The number of households that have guns is closer to 45% by the most recent studies I have read. If you do not understand the perils of gun registration - you are ignorant of history. Again and again, registration has led to full on confiscation. It IS a threat to legitimate ownership. The government does not have the right to determine whether or not Americans can own weapons that would be commonly used in defense of the "state" - SCOTUS has ruled that this is a guaranteed right - not one that is granted. Giving up your rights to save one child is not, in my opinion, worth it. You want to save a child's life - figure out a way to protect them that does not violate the rights of millions of legal gun owners.
"If it saves the life of one child it is worth it."
Sorry, but no.
"I don't think gun registration is a threat to legitimate gun ownership. If it saves the life of one child it is worth it."
I would agree, but I can't see any reason why a piece of paper stuffed in a bureaucrat's file cabinet is going to protect a child. Registration, as others have pointed out, is a solution to nothing, rather it's a method of identifying the people that have guns. And, we've seen what can happen with that already when gun owners were posted in a newspaper.
Everyone wants to forget that part of the second amendment that says, "shall not be infringed"
Has anyone else noticed that every single day NBC posts something about guns hurting people? Why don't they report car wrecks as well?
Can you say, "Trying to sway opinion?"
How is registration going to stop someone from a criminal act???????? Criminals do not obey the law do you not understand the defination of crimial... they do not care.... get it.....
I guess reality is a threat to the gun obsessed. How dare they report those statistics and make us look like fools infront of our children and neighbors!
Maybe I'm missing something, but wouldn't registration be helpful in figuring out trends in where criminals get their hands on guns?
Criminals do not obey some laws. No one breaks all the laws. All of us break some laws.
Some laws just make it difficult to get something. And that can be effective. Try to get a machine gun tomorrow.
OK, how about this...Joe Citizen buys a hand gun, and registers it. All nice and legal. Two years later, Joe does something that makes him ineligible to own a hand gun. A quick cross check is done and the judge sees that Joe owns a hand gun. The judge dispatches a constable to Joe's residence to confiscate the hand gun.
Or, after purchasing a new hand gun, the registration process shows that Joe has purchased 752 hand guns in the past two months. Hmmmm.
Gun owners have guns to protect themselves from criminals with guns. The question should be how do we keep guns out of the hands of criminals? An estimated 50,000 guns are stolen yearly in the US. A large number of states require virtually no real check on who is buying guns, which means criminals and the mentally insane can buy their guns and ammo no questions asked. I believe in an honest citizen's right to own guns, but we are practically giving guns away to criminals. Every time there's a high profile shooting by a nutcase, gun sales go through the roof. Why don't we do better to keep guns out of the hands of those who should never have them?
hell's bells go ahead and out law guns I will just start selling drugs and Obama will give me weapons, just like in Mexico hey.
Ok all of you none gun people come on up to the north woods and we and go for a walk and see all of the pretty coyotes and wolves in packs. I'll have my gun and you have your laws and see which one of us will walk out of the woods.
@Teacher1 - "I don't think gun registration is a threat to legitimate gun ownership. If it saves the life of one child it is worth it."
If you truly want to save "one" life, ask the Congress to ban alcohol. cars, knives, baseball bats, golf clubs, hands, feet, axes, picks, shovels, and the multitude of othe items that have been used to take lives. Obama and Biden have already admitted that the proposed gun control legislation will not stop violence. In effect, they have admitted that not one life will be saved by the proposed gun control legislation.
The anti-gun movement must be traumitized by the reality that a former police officer, trained and evaluated as mentally stable, has taken to using a gun to get his retribution. Traumatized because they wanted police officers, and the military to be the only ones to own semi-automatic weapons. Traumitized because their feeble excuses for banning or restricting access to guns has been shown to be ineffective at stopping violence.
I'll agree to a 10 round magazine limit when the media agrees to 10 word limit news articles. It only seems fair to limit one"right" as long as another "right" is limited as well.
I keep reading that 60% of households do not have guns. Question, if this is accurate, then is this something to be proud of? If a household does not have a gun for protective purposes, then that household is relying on the police to protect them more so than the household with a gun. I am not going to go into the stupidity of believing in the myth of police protection, but instead approach this as a fiscal matter.
I think it is time for everyone to have to check a box on their tax return that they either do, or do not have a gun for protection, and if they do not, then they should have to pay a tax penalty of $1,000 per year to help finance the added protection supplied to them by the police that is not required by the households that have a gun for protection.
If you are afraid that this check box is a form of registration, then you could always check the "don't have" box and pay the penalty to stay off the books so to speak.
The benefit of this approach would be that very soon, the majority of households would have a gun, and in so doing, crime would fall even further, resulting in the end to the ridiculous debate over whether or not guns cause crime.
Finally, to Obama, Biden, Pelosi, Feinstein, et. al., what part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand. This is the meaningful phrase in the 2nd Amendment that you are all violating. The 2nd Amendment is part of the Constitution. The Constitution is what you took an oath on your honor (yeah, right, like you have honorl) to follow, protect, and defend. So how do you now violate your oath of office, and violate the 2nd Amendment, and keep your honor intact?
You elected representatives of we the people are the worst of the worst. You are liars. You cannot be trusted because you have no honor. Your oath of ofice is all show and no substance no matter how many people attend. Therefore your oath of office is meaningless because you lied when you took that oath. Which means in your own evil eyes, the Constitution does not limit the power of YOUR office as was intended by our founding fathers. This is why you people feel free to grab power whenever you feel like it. Which is what you are doing. I submit to one and all that you people are the real enemies of the Constitution and are therefore very dangerous people. At some point, there will be a price to be paid for this lack of honor, when real honor is present. And to Congress, you took an oath to protect the Constitution as well. So get off your ass and do it, or resign. And in the mean time, stop wearing the flag pins on your lapels. You dishonor the flag when you do so and fail to protect the Constitution.
Some of the anti-gun movement apparently don't understand some of tyhe facts regarding legal gun sales.
When a gun is being purchased from a legal dealer, there is the background check. The information is given to the NICs. If NICs is not storing that information, then that's a problem with the feds, not the citizen. Filling out the form for the background check is in effect a registration. It contains all the info regarding the buyer and the weapon.
As for mental illness issues...who determines who is a risk? Under Obama care doctors have been asked to inquire about weapons in you household. Are they the new branch of the ATF? How many of these same doctors have mental and drug issues of their own? What ever happend to due process in a court of law?
As for purchasing 752 guns in two months...the current system is supposed to flag someone who purchases a certain number within a defined timeline, and that quantity is very small. If the feds can't identify someone who violated that restriction, then the problem is the feds, not the citizen.
What's the point of debating gun ownership? It's called the 2nd Ammendment. It's here to stay. You're not going to change it and if you really can't live with that fact then do us all a favor and move to another country. It's really that simple.
Do you believe in the right to own grenades? No? Move to another country please.
Muskets and blunderbuss are fine.
You should read the Bill of Rights, grenades are not protected.... apple and oranges....
How about fully automatic weapons?
Apples and oranges ARE protected. Ban semi-automatic weapons and high capacity magazines.
takenaka - you do realize that there are 10 shot revolvers out there don't you? Four such revolvers in the hands of a criminal can put out more bullets that one 30 round magazine, are easier to conceal, and are a lot more easily pointed in close quarters, and are not semi-automatic.
Please educate youself about firearms and stop falling for the anti-gun movement rhetoric that banning semi-automatic weapons will save lives. Obama and Biden, have both stated that the proposed gun control legislation will not stop violence.
The point is not the 2nd Amendment. Nobody is arguing that. The only people arguing that are the fanatics that must have the status quo which is a system full of loopholes, haphazardly fashioned that allows anyone to obtain whatever hand or long gun they want. All the majority of people want is a system that makes it tougher for criminals to get guns. Surely we can figure it out. If not then we are in serious trouble, including gun owners and non-gun owners. And we need to start somewhere. But the most important thing is that we need to start now.
The Bill of Rights says "arms," which simply means "weapons." It does NOT specify the type. Grenades are a type of weapon. It is illegal legislation and improper court decisions which have undermined the 2nd Amendment--not the wording of the 2nd Amendment itself.
If you want to get down to it, the 2nd Amendment covers ALL weapons. You still have to be able to maintain any arms that you own safely, and regulating THAT is in the public interest. Sorry, but an apartment dweller should not be stashing a pile of grenades in their room--that's a public safety hazard. Not saying they can't own the grenades, but they can be prohibited from STORING them in an area where it presents a public safety hazard. That's where safety and zoning regulations come into play.
Same goes for fully automatic weapons--which were available at the local hardware store until the (unconstitutional) NFA of 1934.
Oh my gosh! People die rock climbing. Let's ban it! A child died as a result of being in a car while his dad cleared the snow from around the vehicle: let's ban snow shovels and snow shoveling by any but licensed snow shovelers.
Life has it's inherent dangers. Shall we all be restricted from ANY perilous pursuits?
Don't forget: your 2A gun RIGHTS were one of the few rights the founders chose to specifically enumerate in order to emphasize your ability and right to resist an over-reaching gov't.
Home of the brave, indeed...
More people died of rock climbing than grenades ever did in this country, 2A allows for grenades and would help in overreaching goverments. Let's be brave and allow grenades.
Banning and reasonable control are quite different things.
you know guns dont kill people do so how do we teach the people not two someone tell me now if the gun got up and killed its owner that would be news to tell
James James Madison Madison Wetherby George Duprey, took good care of his mother,thou he was only three."not two someone now if" WHAT? Are you trying to say Ban handguns?
People decry the fact that their are more and more guns yet the gun crimes rate has dropped every year to 1.8 per thousand in 2011. Maybe the fact that there are more law abiding citizens with guns has something to do with those numbers. Seems to me a criminal is a lot more cautious about attacking someone they think has a way to fight back.
Funny this trend is the same in my country (Canada) and we have very tight gun control laws.
Have you tried to buy a gun or ammo lately? The more the gun wimps talk, the more are sold. Keep talking, keep bending the statistics, and we will keep buying. Gun stores have no guns, no ammo. I was at a range on Saturday, and was told they sold 10,000 rounds on Friday, almost as they came off of the truck. Are you catching on? Keep shouting about gun control, and we will keep buying and hoarding. Have a nice day. I will.
Jo - Funny, you just proved there is no correlation between the gun control law and the incidence of violence. If a country with "strict" laws and a country with "loose" laws have the same outcome - namely reduction in gun violence over time - there must be another reason for said reduction besides the law.
I read through every incident reported here. All of them are tragic. All of them are senseless. As reported, only ONE of them could POSSIBLY have been prevented by ANY of the proposed gun control legislation under discussion today.
Guns aren't the problem-- PEOPLE are the problem and until they fundamentaly change, no legislation stands any hope of making any significant difference.
We need many more and larger prisons. Put the animals on the other side of the bars!
Yeah but don't tax us to pay for them.
@Theo - I have always advocated making prisoners pay for their own upkeep. Make them go out on chain gangs and clean up roadsides, grow some of their own food on prison farms, and generally work to pay for their crimes.
I've said this before, I'll support anything that will make a difference that doesn't violate my 2A rights.......so far, nothing but nonsense.
Hello fellow Minnesotan. Agree totally. If you read the Star/Trib the metro area is the biggest crap hole in the state, they can't even clean their own house yet want us to disarm. Pffft.
Agreed the overbearing city dwellers in MSP keep trying to control the lives of the rest of the state. I wonder how long they would last without the food we grow for the lazy libs down their. At the above story shows the murder rates have fallen without the help of the liberal agenda. Some things are being done right in many places maybe instead of blaming guns we could look at what is being done right and what can possibly be done better.
Here we go again with the far left news media giving their anti-gun propaganda. They say 86 people per day die from a gun shot, well what they don't tell you is that's a very low amount if you count how many people are in the United States. Be careful about believing a groups statistics.
HA!! Is this comment serious? The US has the highest death rate in the developed WORLD, by FAR, per capita ("per capita", just to make sure you understand, takes into account the number of people) and is about 20 times the average. In the US its about 3 per 100,000 people. Enjoy:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/files/2012/12/firearm-OECD-UN-data3.jpg
The next chart includes the non "developed world". So there are a few countries in the world which do have a higher gun death rate per capita, like... Swaziland and El Salvador.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
In the UK: England & Wales (asone) and Scotland (Scotland has a separate legal system, amongst other things).
For the year 2011, the murder rate per 100,000 people for England & Wales was 1.35 and for Scotland 2.34. In the US the rate is 4.8 per 100,000 citizens for 2011.
I find it amazing that 4 states; Hawaii, Vermont, New Hampshire and Rhode Island have a lower murder rate per 100,000 population then England & Wales. Another six which are lower than Scotland, those being Minnesota, Iowa, Utah, Maine, Oregon and Idaho, with Wisconsin, Washington and South Dakota not far behind.
Wow Vermont with almost no gun laws, they don't even require a permit to concealed carry. New Hampshire, Minnesota, Iowa, Utah, Maine, Oregon, Idaho, Wisconsin, Washington and South Dakota, with
the exception of Hawaii and Rhode Island most are states with some pretty lax gun laws. Yet some have less homicides than England & Wales do withoutguns. A few more states have less homicides than Scotland with its tough gun laws and three more states pretty much just in the same group as it.
So, it is certainly the case that the UK, taken as a whole, is less dangerous murder-wise, than the US,
taken as a whole, but then this was always the case, including back in the days when guns were freely available and unrestricted in the UK.
Ban assault weapons and high capacity magazines.
Ban dishpits who post the same infantile one liner on every story.
Good job Obama administration for creating all the hysteria based on the insistence of banning guns!
Just another day of failed policies from this group running this country into the ground!
That's the main goal, get the public so afraid of something then its that much easier to pass a law against it.
Yeah exactly how we got the Patriot Act.
Typical NBC... using only the facts they WANT to use.... I've noticed lately that NBC has a headline for ANY shooting... how about making headlines for ANY accident or death caused by drugs (which are illegal) or drunk drivers hurting or killing someone (which is illegal) or any of the OTHER data points that are of much more concern than "the right to bear arms"... our 2nd Amendment... which is LEGAL..... just wondering.... or how about the fact that in the UK and Australia, home invasions have skyrocketed (way higher than in the U.S.) because they have such stringent gun owning laws?? So it is easy prey to make a home invasion... no one there can shoot you.... and if you try to protect your home... you might end up going to jail.... hmmmmm
With these statistics they're fairly right only in that there are 86 deaths from guns per day to about 27 DUI deaths per day and they use this technique instead of saying yearly or something else because it sounds more threatening to the average person.
Cowboy - You are misinformed regarding the UK and Australia.
While it is true that hardened criminals will always be able to obtain illegal guns the Newtown and Columbia boy shooters would have no idea how to obtain a prohibited weapon. None of us are so naive to think we can stop ALL gun violence but any reduction would be welcome, wouldn't it?
Top leading causes of death in the US:
But you'd think it (gun violence) was number 1 if you take the media seriously as your only source of critical thinking and uncensored, unbiased data.
Deaths from all of America's War's (including independence) = 1,200,000
Deaths by Gun Violence since 1960 = 1,400,000
You haven't added the war on drugs I bet where most of these homicides originate. So without going to was we would have saved 1.2 million lives. Talk to the administration about this.
Maxxxxxxx - And we're constantly looking for new ways to reduce the deaths from 1 through 14 on your list.
Guns benefiting society!!!
crooks killed during the commission of a crime???
gang bang'ers killing each other???
Gov't going to make it illegal;
to be stupid (no accidents)
commit suicide (don't worry be happy)
We wouldn't even be having a gun debate if the politicians, lawyers, and judges in this country would stop turning violent, repeat offenders back on the streets.
Over 80% of gun deaths are gang related.
77% of the perpetrators of gun violence have an arrest record.
77% of the "victims" of gun violence have an arrest record.
Put an end to low prosecution rates, light sentences, and early paroles and leave the law-abiding, tax paying, responsible members of this society alone. We are tired of paying for the actions of the criminals, gang members, mentally ill, and weak-willed society that refuses to punish proven criminals.
I agree with you. In February 2006, a twice convicted felon, with a 20 year long criminal record, killed the driver of another car by driving head-on into it while on meth and alcohol. a passenger in that car was permanently brain-damaged. Sad part is that during the previous 5 months, he had been arrested several times and released on bond for felon in possession of a firearm, credit card fraud, fleeing the scene of another near head-on accident, driving a stolen vehicle, and possession of drugs. Even worse id the fact that he was released on bond for the fatal accident, was arrested 4 months later for driving without a license, released on bond again, and spent 17 months awaiting trial. Had the Courts and the DA held him without bond on the first arrest for the firearm charge, ONE life would have been saved. But hey, the anti-gun movement doesn't really care about saving lives, just taking control of them.
The article title used the word :dterrent", but the article did not address that point. Based on a recent report by the Congressional Research Service - "How Often Are Firearms Used in Self-Defense? According to BJS, NCVS data from 1987 to 1992 indicate that in each of those years, roughly 62,200 victims of violent crime (1% of all victims of such crimes) used guns to defend themselves. Another 20,000 persons each year used guns to protect property. Persons in the business of self-protection (police officers, armed security guards) may have been included in the survey. Another source of information on the use of firearms for self-defense is the National Self-Defense Survey conducted by criminology professor Gary Kleck of Florida State University in the spring of 1993. Citing responses from 4,978 households, Dr. Kleck estimated that handguns had been used 2.1 million times per year for self-defense, and that all types of guns had been used approximately 2.5 million times a year for that purpose during the 1988-1993 period."
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32842.pdf
Even the lowest number in this report shows a lot more people being saved by firearms than killed by them. Putting all the emotion aside, as long as bad people have guns, good people will need to own them as well.
If guns kill people, do cameras create child pornography?
Isn't it obvious? cameras that can take more than 10 photos without needing to be recharged should be banned at once!
We MUST TRACK ALL GUNS!
All cars have VIN numbers
All Guns should have VIN Numbers
All Cars are Registered
ALL GUNS Must be Registered .
YES YES YOU CAN KEEP YOUR GUNS- WE don't care UNLESS it used to Harm & Kill -
Than we will TRACK DOWN ALL WHO DID NOT FOLLOW THE LAW AND CHARGE THEM WITH THE FULL CRIME INCLUDING THE MANUFACTURING COMPANY
All guns have serial numbers. And many have had one round through them at the factory in case the gun is ever used in a crime. When you buy a pistol, it's registered to you. If you pawn a rife and go to pick it up, the serial number and your name go to the feds. They have to clear you to pick up the weapon. Enough for you?
Go hide in your basement pbGR. The 2nd Amendment is there to keep the govt from taking away your right to protect yourself against tyrants. when they knock on your door and ask for your weapon you will no longer have your protection against tyranny.
You are not guaranteed the right to drive a car buy the 2nd amendment. Driving is a privilege. Gun ownership is a right. Got it libtard?
rusty-jarhead...Where do you get this nonesense ? 40% of guns are sold with no background check and most are sold with no registration. Those are the ones that end up in the wrong hands. Legit gun owners have no reason to fear background checks and reasonable controls. They all have a seriel number, but there is no chain of ownership ( as there is with cars, boats, jet ski's, motorcycles, etc ) They do have the ability to test fire and record info and identify rounds, but NRA has fought their doing that so there is no way to trace a round to a gun or to an owner in most cases.
How is registration going to stop someone from a criminal act???????? Criminals do not obey the law do you not understand the defination of crimial... they do not care.... get it.....
R-738279
Okay, I guess there is no point in laws - if criminals don't obey them.
Registration helps LEO's solve crimes by tracing guns used in a crime back to their owners. A solved crime typically ends up putting a criminal in jail thus reducing crime. Using your logic, all laws should be abolished bc after all, some people don't obey them. Did you graduate from high school?
Biden: We 'don't have the time' to prosecute gun buyers who lie on background checks.
Out of more than 76,000 firearms purchases denied by the federal instant check system, only 62 were referred for prosecution and only 44 were actually prosecuted. Proposing more gun control laws – while failing to enforce the thousands we already have – is not a serious solution to reducing crime.
This is the equivalent of saying something is illegal. Not even arresting someone for it. Then saying well the laws don't work we need new ones.
What if that illegal thing was stealing or worse rape? Would a simple "We 'don't have the time'" cut it then. But it is some how OK when felons, you know the people that commit the crimes, try to buy a gun so they can go to work. Then to say well the law doesn't work we need another.
Leaves me with two simple questions. If you didn't enforce the first set of laws, are you going to the second set? Who is this second set directed towards, since criminals don't obey laws (kind of the definition of criminal)?
pbGR,
Using your misguided logic then the car companies should be held responsible for the accidents, as well as pharmacies or drug companies for suicide.
But we can take it a step further since you appear to be pro socialism, using your logic then the war machine of the US government should be held accountible as well.
What did that misplaced comedian say Chris Rock, Obama is like your father and you always listen to your father. Amusingly that would make the Congress the grandfather and as Chris Rock put it you always listen to your father.
By the way as a comedian Chris Rock is mediocre at best, as back up for the political issues of this country he has proved to be even less than that of a comedian, so stick with the slapstick Chris...
You miss my point, laws only work if we are willing to obey them. Criminals do not obey the laws... If criminals do not obey the law then you have to use other methods to deter them. Registration only affects the law abider.
@MM-584706 - If the feds are claiming that they have no idea how legal firearms are out there, where does that 40% number come from? It seems quite ficticious.
I can tell you that 100% of people that use guns to kill people, with criminal intent, have committed crimes. That is a real number.
Typical stupid comment. Guns are manufactured to kill,so how can you blame a manufacturer for their product doing what it is supposed to do?
There are many other reasons for crime rates to be falling besides a more heavily armed populace. Better trained police, more police, heavier penalties for crimes committed with guns.... Until someone collects statistics about how many armed intruders are fended off by gun owners, how many armed villains shot on the street by citizens carrying a concealed weapon, etc. I don't think anyone can give increasing personal arsenals credit for the drop in crime. The numbers that DO impress are the number of suicides, children being shot and gun related crimes compared to other developed countries. Those are not numbers to be proud of.
Actually, the FBI did collect stats on how many crimes are stopped by legally used guns every year, they came up with 1.5 million.
More senseless rhetoric by the pansy-assed, tree-hugging, kumbaya-singing libtards. If you want to look at more serious, more inherently dangerous, HIGHER FATALITY and Completely preventable deaths, why don't we look at this little tidbit...
Or perhaps this little factoid
or perhaps REAL DATA from the CDC on the leading causes of Death in the US
Of course, we wouldn't want to do something realistic in terms of controlling what we put into our mouths, our veins, up our noses, or for that matter have to engage in some behavior modification that didn't involve those evil firearms now would we. And just for the sake of education for these pacifist libtards who seem to think regulating firearms is the answer, how about we look at the real deterrent of violent crime - capital punishment. That's right tree huggers, the thing that deters the most is what we fear the most. In fact, The U.S. Department of Justice estimates that convicted criminals free on parole and probation . . . commit ‘at least’ 84,800 violent crimes every year, including 13,200 murders, 12,900 rapes, and 49,500 robberies." American Guardian, May 1997, pg. 26. Incredibly, this slaughter does not include violent crimes committed by repeat offenders who are released and who are not on "supervision".
9-15% of those on death row committed, at least, one additional murder, prior to that murder (or those murders) which has currently put them on death row; 67% had a prior felony conviction; 42% had an active criminal justice status when they committed their capital offense; 14% of those sentenced to death from 1988-94, had received two or more death sentences ("Capital Punishment 1994", BJS 1995 & JFA).
For a criminal justice system to have credibility and deterrent value, two factors are required: (1) a high rate of
arrest and (2) punishment which reflects the severity of the crime, the criminal’s record and the demand for justice. The U.S. system has neither. Of the 10.3 million violent crimes in 1993, only 100,000 of those victimizations, or 1%, resulted in an actual jail sentence. Only 6.2% of all violent crimes result in arrest. (Prof. John J. DiIulio, Jr., Princeton Univ. 1995, The State of Violent Crime in America, 1/96 and Criminal Victimization 1993 , BJS, 1995.) The human rights of victims and future victims are consistently ignored.
With no death penalty and only life without parole (LWOP), there is no deterrent for LWOP inmates killing others while in prison or after escape. Indeed, there is actually a positive incentive to murder if a criminal has committed a LWOP offense and had not yet been captured. Currently, there are a number of inmates who have killed numerous people in prison or after escape. Their punishment could not be increased because there
is no death penalty in those states. Therefore, they will never be punished for those crimes. Never. Totally unacceptable, by any standard. Not surprisingly, death penalty opponents believe that LWOP is more severe than the death penalty. Hamilton, V., & Rakin, L.:"Interpreting the 8th Amendment", Bedau, H., & Pierce, C., ed., Capital Punishment in the United States, New York, AMS, 1976.
The most conclusive evidence that criminals fear the death penalty more than life without parole is provided by convicted capital murderers and their attorneys. 99.9% of all convicted capital murderers and their attorneys argue for life, not death, in the punishment phase of their trial. When the death penalty becomes real, murderers fear it the most. While it is obvious that the fear of execution did not deter those murderers from
committing a capital crime, it is also clear that such fear is reduced because executions are neither swift nor sure in the U.S. However, as the probability of that punishment rises for those murderers, even they show a great fear of the death penalty. Although you will never deter all murderers, the effect of deterrence will rise as the probability of executions rise. Because, as the probability of executions rises, the fear of that punishment will also rise. And, that which we fear the most deters the most. Indeed, prisoners rate the death penalty as the most feared punishment, much more so than life without parole. Sehba, L. & Nathan, G., "Further Explorations in the Scale of Penalties", British Journal of Criminology, 24:221-249, 1984.
and finally,
The individual deterrent effect is proven by many, perhaps thousands, of individual, fully documented cases where criminals have admitted that the death penalty was the specific threat which deterred them and/or others from committing murder. Indeed, one study showed that criminals, by a 5:1 ratio, believed that capital punishment was a significant enough deterrent to prevent them and/or others from murdering their victims
(People vs. Love, 56 Cal 2d 720 (1961), McComb, J. dissenting. see also: (A)"Controversy Over Capital Punishment", Congressional Digest, Jan.,’73, p. 13; (B) L.A.P.D. study within Aikens vs. Ca., No. 68-5027, Oct.
Term, 1971, U.S. Supreme Court; ( C ) Carol Vance, "The Death Penalty After Furman", The Prosecutor, vol. 9, no. 4 (1973), p. 703; (D)Carrington, F., Neither Cruel Nor Unusual, Pgs. 92-100(1978); (E) Don Hooloschultz, "Gunman Slain, Hostages O.K.", Washington Star News, 8/23/73, p.A-1; (F) Jim Landers, "4 Guilty in Holdup Sentence", Washington Post, 12/8/73,p.B-1; (G) Larry Derryberry, "It Is The Fear That Death May Be The Punishment That Deters", Police Digest, Spring/Summer 1973, p.27, col.2. ; (H) "Langley says Texas death penalty affected his actions during escape", by Stephen Martin, The Daily Democrat (Ft. Madison, Iowa), /8/97, pg 1. Indeed, prisoners rate the death penalty as a much more severe penalty than they do life without parole (B.12).
Just food for thought folks, just food for thought...
Will the Watcher.......So I guess you feel that if there were no vehicle registrations, no driver licensing, no restrictions on driving drunk that there would be fewer innocent people killed ?
No MM. The point I am making is there are MORE common deaths that result every year and in higher frequency than those that are committed by gun violence. And in fact, IF we take the same knee jerk reaction people are taking towards guns and applied it to the 10 or so HIGHER incidents of preventable deaths, then we would reinstate prohibition, make cheese burgers illegal, and a host of other assinine things the same as the knee jerk reaction occurring with firearms.
It is important to realize that there is NO DETERRENT for those who committ violent crime. In fact, IF you bother to look at the statistics less than 1% of those that committ violent crime are punished for that crime. All you need to do is wait for the next execution and watch all the brain dead morons holding a Save the Killer vigil or some gutless Governor granting a stay and you can see WHO wins. For sure, it is NEVER the victim of the crime. But keep fooling yourself about guns being the cause, when they are merely a tool in the hands of a criminal. And once you start regulating tools, and engaging in the prohibition of tools, you might as well add baseball bats, hammers, kitchen knives, cars, and the miriad of other things people use to kill each other. And while we are at it, perhaps we should just all wrap ourselves in bubble wrap, strap on a suit of armor, lock the doors, and never leave the house.
The ONLY way you can get a grip on violent crime - is from deterrence. And the only real deterrence you have (because let's be honest here, our judicial system is a complete failure) is the armed citizen who exacts that justice on the spot. I for one would rather read about an armed citizen wasting some piece of @!$%# criminal than to have to read about how someone got victimized because THEY obeyed the law, and made it easier for thier assailant to victimize them.
Take it easy, Will. You're confusing people with the facts. They are so unused to facts, their heads may explode.
Don't hurt yourself by patting yourself on the back too much.
You seem to be under the impression that we need to focus our attention on the thing that causes the most death. And, that if we focus our attention on an action/activity that results in fewer deaths, that we are wasting our time.
Do I have that right?
Bzzt! Wrong, but thanks for playing.
We focus on the things that terrify us, that shock us, that horrify us.
A cheeseburger does not terrify us. Although, I would never eat one of them.
I don't think that is not correct. And I'm not sure it makes sense. I am sure that there are people who would commit a violent crime that do not because of the consequences. I am sure that there are examples of that.
Just as I am sure that there are people who would be rude, but choose not to be rude, because of the consequences.
The Right Tool for The Job!
Yeah, we might as well ban all of those things. Except for one thing. No one wants to ban cars (well, environmentalists). No one wants to ban hammers. Are you sure that you are thinking clearly?
I think I just got the answer to my question.
I see. I see. And, have you engaged in any of that activity? Killed anyone lately?
News Flash...the USA will never be a country of citizens walking around in public with firearms. Fewer than 1/2 of Americans own firearms. Fewer still own a hand gun. Fewer than that walk around in public with hand guns. Hmm, could it be that Americans do not want to live in a war zone?
If you want to live in a war zone, move to Iraq.
Hey Davey, I served in Iraq. Served in multiple countries where people armed themselves and crimes against those people are LOWER than they are here. Likewise, just a tidbit for ya, in those countries there are nearly ZERO incidents of repeat offenders. You know why? Because UNLIKE in this country where you have brain dead morons more worried about the rights of the criminal - they are dealt with in a harsh, expedient, and terrifying manner. They loose hands for theft, they are whipped for graffiti or property crimes, they are beheaded for rape and murder. But not in this country. No, instead we make them celebrities and make excuses for them, like they weren't breast fed, or they came from a broken home, or johnny's mommy didn't hug him enough as a kid, or they are too fat to execute. Well, I don't care HOW damned fat someone is. If they kill, an axe will take that head clean off. I have seen it personally in Saudi Arabia. And the only thing your money can buy you there after your conviction is a better spot in line to make sure you get the sharp axe.
Deterrence chief keeps people in line. Here, all we have is hand holding, molly coddling, and excuses. Rights only matter for those that committ a crime. They don't mean @!$%# for the victim. Keep that in mind the next time you read, hear, or see a plea bargain, or a stay of execution, or some other wrangling that keeps the criminal from being held 100% fully accountable for thier crime. And if you doubt we don't make celebrities of these jackasses, think again. Someone paid big money for the Una Bomber's 1 room cabin. People pay big money to read books about these killers and rapists. And you still have brain dead people flocking and corresponding with the likes of Charles Manson, and the host of other well known killers. And you think I have a problem.... WOW.
Well, you do seem a bit tense. Your main gripe seems to be the US criminal justice system.
I know it's not perfect. OJ was acquitted of murdering his wife. That says it all.
So, why are you so upset about it? Why is it hurting you?
I just heard the segment "flashpoint guns in America on Sunday NBC nightly news. On their first story of this series NBC was reporting a story about gun violence in New Orleans.NBC pointed out that the vast majority of these shootings were done by young black men using handguns....NBC did not use the term "gangs" and more then likely the majority of these shootings are gang related. NBC also didn't mention that the guns these thugs use are probably obtained illegally. I was also surprised to hear how some of the New Orleans officials say that these thugs are "important too" even if they kill and hurt people !!..OMG..These dregs are the scourge of humanity they think nothing of shooting one another or the innocent...and instead of pandering to these thugs New Orleans should crack down hard with stop and frisk tactics that has been successful in New York city. The straw buyer laws should be strongly enforced with severe punishment to those buyers who turn around and sell those guns to thugs By far the most shootings are done by criminals shooting other thugs with illegal handguns.. I fear the NBC week long series "Flashpoint guns in America, will not be be unbiased and instead will be just more liberal pro gun control propaganda by either spinning facts and blacking out other important facts. Even in this story NBC failed to mention victims who are shot and killed with rifles are less in number then those killed with hammers and blunt objects,and instead lumped all guns together in one misleading category.This is the FBI link proving these statistics...http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8 In my opinion NBC cannot be trusted for an unbiased report because of their liberal biased agenda, and should be taken with a grain of salt.
none of the news media can be trusted today. they all are too busy kissing Odumbos A$$ for fear of being called racist if they disagree with him. As long as a minority is in the White House you will never have unbiased news. You will only hear them parrot our muslim loving, pompous president.
Handguns need to be restricted as well. NO ONE should have a carry permit for a concealed handgun. Allow them for home protection but they don't leave the owner's property.
leroy.... People who legally carry handguns are not the problem, it's the thugs with illegal handguns who are the problem.....And everyday somewhere people who legally carries saves themselves from violent attacks and many times without a shot fired and just the presence of the gun was all that was needed.
If I have a retail business and have to make a daily or nightly visit to the bank I will carry so that the thugs don't rob me blind. You don't want a gun, don't buy one.
Brass, George Zimmerman had a carry permit. I hope you aren't a Zimmerdummie. [my word for anyone stupid enough to support that pill popping idiot wannabe cop with control issues who should have never been given a permit in the first place] Also, carrying a handgun is not a very serious crime even if you don't have a permit. 20 years minimum for even having a handgun in your possession outside your home would take an awful lot of them off the street.
leroy..The evidence so far supports that Zimmerman was telling the truth..and besides it's not up to you to be his judge and jury...why is it that those who know the least about what they're talking about when it comes to the gun issue are the ones who are the most vocal ??
Give this article a gander leroy, and tell me what you think...
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2012/12/can_armed_citizens_stop_mass_shootings_examples_of_armed_interventions.html
In my own personal knowledge, I can tell you after speaking with those that have committed robberies, house break-ins, and muggings, the thing these "poor poor wayward souls" specifically noted was "if I knew the "victim" was armed, I would move on to an easier target." THAT chief speaks volumes.
Here is another little tidbit for you to chew on. In the absence of "supply" where a demand is noted, elements seeking to gain a financial advantage will provide that supply. This is called the black market, or more affectionately known as "Organized Crime." We saw it in the 30s with Prohibition of alcohol. We see it today with drug cartels. We see it in prostitution rings. We see it even with commodities that are taxed and regulated - like alcohol and tobacco.
What you and others of your mindset seem to forget, ignore, or otherwise bury you heads in the sand about is a Criminal doesn't give a damn about the law. They don't care about firearm registration, or any legislation that seeks to limit gun ownership. THEY will get thier guns. THEY will modify whatever firearm THEY can get thier hands on to further THIER ends. In fact chief, it doesn't take a rocket scientist or for that matter a person with a college degree to BUILD thier own gun. I can also point out, being a disabled combat vet, that it doesn't take a brain surgeon either to build an improvised explosive devise with commonly obtained household items either. Certainly, if history has shown anything, is that in the ingenuity of human beings can always be counted on to obtain a desired result or invention.
But keep fooling yourself about guns being the root of the problem. Guns do not go off by themselves without HUMAN interaction. The root of the problem is the jackwagon pulling the trigger. And until the penalties are excessive enough for those who commit violent crimes to be a deterrent, all of the libtard, hug everyone mentality only empowers the criminal. If you doubt the truth or the veracity of that statement, one just need look at those that committ violent crimes. MOST have been in the criminal justice system before. MOST have had plea bargains, probation, or have had suspended sentences. MOST have prior felony convictions and a history of violent crimes. But let's keep on playing patty cake with the perpetrators of the acts and the retarded mentality of the inherent goodness of people. Common sense should tell you and others that the only way to rid cancer is to cut that cancer out of the healthy body. And in the case of violent criminals, that surgery is called capital punishment.
Amen , well said
Leroy, The cops in L.A. and Torrance, CA shot up two vehicles last week while looking for a rogue ex-cop. All their training really came through didn't it? Cops have admitted that they can't protect people, and can only go after someone after a crime has been committed.
There have been three incidents in my county where people were accosted a gas stations while filling up their vehicles with gas. The intent was to rob them. In one case, my co-worker had a concealed hand gun license and the perp decided that the screw driver he was intending to use as a weapon wasn't the correct thing to use against a handgun being drawn out of a coat pocket.
So in effect there is two points to make here: 1) something other than a gun can be used to commit an act of violence; and 2) a lawful citizen with a lawfully carried firearm can deter criminals.
That police, fire, and EMTs are "first responders" is a myth. "First responders" are the people at the scene of an incident when it occurs; those at the scene have a moral responsibility for their own safety and the protection of others in their charge. Everyone else arrives late.
Leroy-20year sentence if you take it off your property???? How do you get it there in the first place??? Do you practice in your back yard???? My yard is too small for that....and I am pretty sure that your law would not prevent someone from commiting a murder which is already a serious crime. This kind of statement makes the gun control advocates look like nuts!
Big Question... ???
For all occasions of gun violence, what percent of those occasions is there a deterent gun in the area?
My guess is one time in 10,000 or less is a trained gun owner and his gun available as a deterrent to the gun violence.
So much for the deterrent gun argument often touted by NRA and gun makers.
If a deterrent gun is available, chances are it is in the hands of a policeman and not a private citizen.
We will never know, but as the anti-guns wimps like to say, "if it saves one life then it is worth it"
Your guess is way off.
Bill Clinton's Justice Department estimated that firearms are used in legitimate self-defense 1.5 million times/year. Some estimates put it at 2.5 million. Using the more conservative figure, that's an average of 4,109 times per day. If only one percent of these defensive uses of firearms prevented the deaths of the victims, that's 41 lives saved per day, nearly 15,000 per year.
That being said, this does not actually address the entire deterrent effect of firearms in society. The knowledge that unidentified armed individuals may be at any given public location has a deterrent effect, illustrated by its corollary - knowledge that nobody at a given location is armed (as in phony gun-free zones) invites attack. This deterrent effect is probably impossible to gauge, but criminologists, in their studies of criminals, have confirmed this type of deterrence; it is real.
bicfj-Chances are that you have absolutely no evidence to back up that statement about police guns, despite the fact that you made it with such an air of authority...
Personally being in 2 separate instances where there was a threat, I can say that just the presence of an armed citizen ended a potentially deadly situation. The first one was in a 7-11 in Iowa where a man with an ski mask came in demanding the clerk open his cash drawer. A friend I was with had a carry permit and drew his weapon. The potential robber instantly bolted from the store. NO SHOTS WERE FIRED. The robber claimed he had a gun in his jacket, chances are it was just a pen.
The second was a loud knock on my door at 4am. I got my gun and looked outside. There were 2 men on my porch. One of them demanded to see someone that didn't live there and I didn't know. He approached the door and started pushing against it. I repeated that the person he was looking for did not live there. His buddy pushed against the door as well. I had my gun hidden behind me and I flicked the safety off and just swung it out from behind me. I didn't even point it at them. When they heard the click of the safety and saw that I was armed, they decide to leave...in a hurry. Again, NO SHOTS WERE FIRED.
Just the idea that an armed citizen standing up to a criminal usually makes them re-think their decision to victimize that citizen. In both situations the police were called and it took them almost 30 min. to show up.
Where was the police gun then? I carry now and always will.
This is a common bit of misinformation by the pro gun people. The report is here:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/165476.pdf
Everyone should read it. Especially the section on DGUs.
Given that we know there are about 300 justifiable homicides per year, it is difficult to imagine that guns are being used that often in self defense. If a gun is pulled in a life-threatening situation, the trigger is going to get pulled in some percentage of those situations. And when triggers get pulled, some people will die.
put old sparky or the good old gallows in every courthouse yard and start making examples out of some of these criminals. i bet you could watch the crime stastics fall then. the goverment wants to slap them on the hand and the media makes heros out of them no wonder there are so many copycat killers. start frying their ass and see what happens.
I really get tired of this "America is the center of the universe" logic of use of statistics.
Look, the nation with the highest rate of civilian gun ownership (the US) is neither the nation with the highest crime rate, murder rate, nor is it the highest in gun related crimes.
It does hold the honor have having the highest incarceration rate - so WHY NOT add yet another bunch of laws that will do nothing but toss more law abiding people in prison?
Grow up people - Grow up MSNBC.
Yes - gun control works.... on gun related statistics. But focusing solely on gun related statistics, while ignoring all of the others, is insane.
And to show how completely one sided this type of reporting is - why isn't there a major focus on the most extraordinary "assault weapon" shooting spree this week? Perpetrated by the LAPD against three innocent people? I find it amazing.