Gun control debate (merged)

#20,126
#20,126
Vol8188 said:
I used per capita numbers. How’s that a problem?

If there’s a gun problem in the US, why is it not reflected in the white homicide rate as compared to the “comparable” European countries you specifically mentioned?

Is it because the problem isn’t the guns? If the problem is the guns, the burden is on you to explain why the homicide rates are the same instead of elevated. Otherwise you have no correlation to point to
Click to expand...
Are you serious??
You are comparing per capita numbers of a segment of the population of our country to per capita numbers for the total population of other counties.
You are not comparing equal populations.
 
#20,129
#20,129
luthervol said:
Are you serious??
You are comparing per capita numbers of a segment of the population of our country to per capita numbers for the total population of other counties.
You are not comparing equal populations.
Click to expand...

I'm really not following right now. What do you mean by I'm "not comparing equal populations"?

Equal in terms of...?
 
#20,130
#20,130
Vol8188 said:
I'm really not following right now. What do you mean by I'm "not comparing equal populations"?

Equal in terms of...?
Click to expand...
I never saw you give any subgroups from other countries. You are comparing a subgroup from our country to the entire population of other counties, That's a useless comparison.
Compare the US by race to other countries by race - that's fair
Compare the US by economic levels to other countries by economic levels - that's fair
Compare the US by rural v urban to other counties by rural v urban - that's fair

You will find the US has a much higher homicide rate in all comparisons of the same subgroups.
 
#20,132
#20,132
C-south said:
Well you don’t use those countries in your comparisons and the say to be careful about bringing race into the equation. Of course we all know you and the looney left don’t like inconvenient truths.
Click to expand...
I said the countries most comparable to the US.
How about you give me the five countries you view as most comparable and will look at those numbers.
 
#20,133
#20,133
luthervol said:
I never saw you give any subgroups from other countries. You are comparing a subgroup from our country to the entire population of other counties, That's a useless comparison.
Compare the US by race to other countries by race - that's fair
Compare the US by economic levels to other countries by economic levels - that's fair
Compare the US by rural v urban to other counties by rural v urban - that's fair

You will find the US has a much higher homicide rate in all comparisons of the same subgroups.
Click to expand...

The other countries that you want to use are far more homogenous than our own. So it seems very fair to compare a country that's only 2% black like Canada to our white population. But why do you think only comparing people of the same race would make a difference? What are you saying?

Plus this is your claim to prove. Not mine. You are claiming we have a gun problem. I'm telling you the data doesn't show that. White American's have great access to guns, yet the same homicide rates as those living in European countries.

But if you wanted to compare states to countries with similar demographics you'd find places around 1-2% black such as Maine have roughly the same overall homicide rate as Canada. Why is that? Don't people in Maine have more guns and less gun laws?
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland
#20,134
#20,134
luthervol said:
I said the countries most comparable to the US.
How about you give me the five countries you view as most comparable and will look at those numbers.
Click to expand...

What criteria do you use to determine which countries are comparable? We have a FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT to bear arms. Do all the countries you listed have the same? There are more guns in this country than people. Which countries share that same metric? Maybe you should do every country and then break them all down by race.
 
#20,135
#20,135
Vol8188 said:
The other countries that you want to use are far more homogenous than our own. So it seems very fair to compare a country that's only 2% black like Canada to our white population. But why do you think only comparing people of the same race would make a difference? What are you saying?

Plus this is your claim to prove. Not mine. You are claiming we have a gun problem. I'm telling you the data doesn't show that. White American's have great access to guns, yet the same homicide rates as those living in European countries.
Click to expand...

No it's not fair because it almost completely factors out economic levels.
Compare our lowest 20% economically to any of the other countries' lowest 20% economically.
Then filter out data for the black homicide rate among the black population that is in the top 80% economically.
Compare that homicide rate to the homicide rate of the rest of the black population.
The data does most certainly shows that we have a gun problem. The homicide rate in our country is 3 to 4 times higher than the most comparable countries.
 
#20,137
#20,137
luthervol said:
I never saw you give any subgroups from other countries. You are comparing a subgroup from our country to the entire population of other counties, That's a useless comparison.
Compare the US by race to other countries by race - that's fair
Compare the US by economic levels to other countries by economic levels - that's fair
Compare the US by rural v urban to other counties by rural v urban - that's fair

You will find the US has a much higher homicide rate in all comparisons of the same subgroups.
Click to expand...

If your entire argument is that these much whiter, much more homogenous populations have lower homicide rates than us because of guns (not because of their whiteness) shouldn't the US white population have a higher homicide rate than their total populations given the greater access to guns?

Unless the problem isn't guns?
 
#20,138
#20,138
luthervol said:
No it's not fair because it almost completely factors out economic levels.
Compare our lowest 20% economically to any of the other countries' lowest 20% economically.
Then filter out data for the black homicide rate among the black population that is in the top 80% economically.
Compare that homicide rate to the homicide rate of the rest of the black population.
The data does most certainly shows that we have a gun problem. The homicide rate in our country is 3 to 4 times higher than the most comparable countries.
Click to expand...

How does "all white" factor out economic levels? Are the plurality of welfare recipients not white?

It's hilarious you still call these pearly white countries "comparable" yet refuse to compare them to our white population. It's almost as if you realize the problem isn't access to guns.

We could take a state like New Hampshire for example. One of the highest poverty rates in the US (higher than Canada) and compare it to Canada (roughly the same black population % also) and an even higher population density. Would that be a fair comparison?
 
#20,141
#20,141
0nelilreb said:
You assume a don’t know anything about depression , or personality disorders . ( you shouldn’t do that ) . What we should focus on is what I said and you seem to ignore , root causes . Again being a GenX’er from the south , I have had the experience of living with and around people from a very poor economic area , with WW2 , Korean and Vietnam, vets , where “ guns” were a normal part of life with no stigma attached to them , kids were taught daily about them and the dangers they pose , not on a computer or out of book , but by hands on experience. We worked for our parents , grandparents , aunts and uncles , neighbors because they needed help not because we demanded a new $300 pair of kicks or a new iPhone . I can go on and on with this and you know it but I won’t , I’ll say it one more time in case you missed it the first time .. WE DONT HAVE A GUN PROBLEM. The root cause is obvious .
Click to expand...
I tend to lean toward what you posted regarding guns being a normal part of life and grew up that way as well, but we've had a couple of incidents that say some segments of society are moving away from that responsible stance. I think the Nashville waffle house guy had his firearms released to his parents who gave them back to him. There was the Michigan kid who had been acting crazy, but his parents bought him a gun anyway, then refused to come get him after he made threats. The kind of people you are talking about wouldn't give a gun to a known psycho.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland
#20,143
#20,143
luthervol said:
I've never not understood the oft repeated claim....it's not the gun, it's the person.
I find it equally relative each time, which is hardly at all.
Click to expand...
Thats a pretty way of saying It’s not my belief so therefore I disregard it. I’m for the written words in the constitution. I’m even more anti-infringement than most here.
I don’t infringe on others rights and expect mine to be respected also.
You may not understand or be able to separate a violent person from the weapon they choose but I can. The violence starts inside a violent mind, or there would be no need for mental health to be addressed. We could just ban all guns and have peace and serenity with zero deaths? No. Evil intent starts in the heart and mind, not in a chamber. It starts with misguided youths, bad parenting and mental health issues.

Gun owners have negative laws against the constitutions clear language passed all the time. NY case about to come up in the SCOTUS is a big case. Legislators often get outside their power in negative gun laws. It’s insidious, planned and has a goal. If we can get this by let’s try something more restrictive and see who defends it. It has been this way for years. The jockeying to wear people out in the court system. The constitution provides for an amendment process to 2A, they can’t get it done the way a republic would do it, so they are working the back door infringement method. A sprinkle of restriction here and there, making a right a permission so they have adhesion contracts to fall back on in prosecution, anyone not paying attention doesn’t notice it.
You know what an adhesion contract is Luther? You have several you participate in daily. Let me know just how many rights you have adjudicated to government via adhesion contract.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#20,145
#20,145
luthervol said:
It's not and I think he knows that.
They only have so many bullets in the chamber......
Guns don't kill people, people do.
Trucks kill people, I guess we should ban all trucks.
A rock can be used as a weapon.
A criminal is not going to follow the law.
Don't punish the law abiding citizen because of what criminals do.
Just enforce the laws we already have in place.

That's pretty much it. They will pick whichever of the 6 seems to fit best.
Click to expand...
And in all those cases, who gets charged in court? The driver, the user of the implement, the criminal, the one holding the rock, gun, knife. I’ve never seen charges brought against the implement.
 
#20,146
#20,146
luthervol said:
You were guaranteed the right to keep and bear arms. How are you being denied that right?
Can you keep arms? Can you bear arms?
What rights that I have are free of restrictions?
Click to expand...
The same restrictions. The government should never hold different standards for different rights. As we see that is how they will deny rights to some and not others. It's funny how the inequality of gun laws never come up in a nation so focused on equality.

And no I can not keep nor bear the arms you/the government wont let me buy. And that goes beyond your purchase limit.

Until or unless you can accept all the government enforced restrictions on guns on all your other rights, they are absolutely infringements. There is no way to argue otherwise.
 
#20,147
#20,147
luthervol said:
It's not and I think he knows that.
They only have so many bullets in the chamber......
Guns don't kill people, people do.
Trucks kill people, I guess we should ban all trucks.
A rock can be used as a weapon.
A criminal is not going to follow the law.
Don't punish the law abiding citizen because of what criminals do.
Just enforce the laws we already have in place.

That's pretty much it. They will pick whichever of the 6 seems to fit best.
Click to expand...
And you cant address any of them.

You also forgot ITS A RIGHT. For someone who fights volunteers being the only ones to give water out to voters it's amazing how ready you are to restrict this right.
 
#20,148
#20,148
luthervol said:
There is a gun problem and the statistics prove that. You've yet to adequately dispute that.
Click to expand...
Ok let's talk stastics.
45k gun deaths.
43k car deaths.
At least 400,000,000 guns, its actual far far higher than that.
Around 150,000,000 registered cars.

I really dont see how you can argue guns are a statistical problem but not cars.

0.01% of guns if we assume one gun per death.
0.02% of cars if we assume one car per death.

What would be your actual numerical threshold for acceptability. Talking stastics here. Give me a real number, not just a generic "less" that could be applied to anything. At what point are you going to stop pushing more gun control?

This has been asked several times over the years, you should have an answer by now.
 
#20,149
#20,149
Vol8188 said:
If your entire argument is that these much whiter, much more homogenous populations have lower homicide rates than us because of guns (not because of their whiteness) shouldn't the US white population have a higher homicide rate than their total populations given the greater access to guns?

Unless the problem isn't guns?
Click to expand...
Not at all, because you are factoring out the most economically and socially disadvantaged which is where you will find the highest homicide rate IN EVERY SINGLE COUNTRY.
 
#20,150
#20,150
luthervol said:
WTH??? Why would we isolate white?
Click to expand...
You were the one who brought up stastics.

@Vol8188 would you mind doing a weighted average to make the demographics used for our violent crime rate similar to this vague nation luther wants to refer too. Let's use Sweden, that seems to be a popular one.

So if they are 95% white, we count 95% of white violent crime, and then we count the 5% of ther various "other", or whatever it may be.

You know for luther to actually have stastics. Since that is what he is going with this time.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top