Strict gun control in france.

[Thumpalumpacus]

The statistic above wasn't a per captia murder rate. Why do people think that gun murders are the same as per capita murder stats. Oh yeah, because they are purposefully and manipulatively presented that way.

What is the most efficient means of murder? And can you show another country having similar per-capiia murder rates where guns are outlawed or greatly restricted?

Also this whole site has people who let their agenda be their mental filler. I'm not even particularly pro-gun, I don't own guns I would never give money to the NRA. I'm sick of the anti-gun people on here constantly using propaganda rather than examining actual causes of violence and the effect guns have on them. I've brought it up several times and several threads and nobody has ever replied: The UK passed it's gun laws in 1964. They didn't have a noticable effect on the murder rate. The UK has always had a lower murder rate than the US.

I'm not anti-gun, I am simply anti-gun-nut. Accusing me of falling afoul of propaganda is simply a personal attack.

[CapnAwesome]

The statistic above wasn't a per captia murder rate. Why do people think that gun murders are the same as per capita murder stats. Oh yeah, because they are purposefully and manipulatively presented that way.

What is the most efficient means of murder?  And can you show another country having similar per-capiia murder rates where guns are outlawed or greatly restricted?

Also this whole site has people who let their agenda be their mental filler. I'm not even particularly pro-gun, I don't own guns I would never give money to the NRA. I'm sick of the anti-gun people on here constantly using propaganda rather than examining actual causes of violence and the effect guns have on them. I've brought it up several times and several threads and nobody has ever replied: The UK passed it's gun laws in 1964. They didn't have a noticable effect on the murder rate. The UK has always had a lower murder rate than the US.

I'm not anti-gun, I am simply anti-gun-nut. Accusing me of falling afoul of propaganda is simply a personal attack.

I apologize if it seems like a personal attack. Not my intent at all. I think lots of people have run afoul of propaganda, not just you. I think that the use of 'gun violence' as a substitution for per capita murder (people interchange them as though they mean the same thing alll the time and you directly saying per capita murder when the stat was for 'gun deaths' is just one of dozens of examples that I see on here on every thread about guns. I'm frustrated that people who are otherwise rational would do that. I'm not even particularly pro-gun. I don't own guns and probably won't. I don't think guns reduce crime, like the NRA claims, or as people egregiously suggested in that thread, I've never suggested that guns would have prevented 9/11. The people who said that and dozen people who kudoed it were avoiding a real intellectual discussion on it (also ironic, since there is nowhere in the US with greater gun control than the airport.) This topic doesn't really seem to be leaving this forum and as long as it's around I consider it my job to make the discussion a more fact based one, not one that's blinded by emotional arguments, propaganda statistics and devoid of actual discussions.

As for countries where guns are outlawed and have much higher per capita murders, Russia and Mexico instantly come to mind. (Obviously there is much more to it than just that, but you asked for examples.) There are of course, dozens more. The world is a large a varied place, made up of a lot of countries that aren't western Europe and the United States. The constant comparison is a false one, since the UK has always had a lower murder rate than the US, even before their gun laws went into effect.

I'd also still love a comment from anyone about how the UK's murder rate post 1968 (I mistakenly said 64 before) didn't drop with their gun control. If the argument is that gun control will produce this epic drop in crime, surely there would be examples from the numerous countries that have enacted gun control laws. There isn't.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I notice you still haven't addressed my point about not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. You had asked, "What good are gun laws?" Aside from the fact that gun laws provide for extra charges to be laid against assholes who use guns in crimes, a further point to be made against your question -- a point which I implicitly made, and you ignored -- is that any argument maintaining that disobeyed laws should be stricken, or not enacted at all, is clearly an argument for no laws whatsoever. Theft is against the laws, yt people steal. Perjury is against the law, yet people lie under oath. Murder is illegal (no matter the weapon), yet people are still murdered.

Arguing that because laws aren't always followed, they shouldn't be enacted, is to my mind silly. You would forfeit the legislative capacity of government to criminals, who could pick and choose which laws they wanted stricken, by breaking them.

Gun laws, of which we have plenty, and plenty in need of stricter enforcement, serve the good of (incompletely) preventing crazies from arming up.

I apologize if it seems like a personal attack. Not my intent at all. I think lots of people have run afoul of propaganda, not just you.

So it's not personal. I'm just one of a group who have fallen prey to propaganda?

How is that an apology?

I think that the use of 'gun violence' as a substitution for per capita murder (people interchange them as though they mean the same thing alll the time and you directly saying per capita murder when the stat was for 'gun deaths' is just one of dozens of examples that I see on here on every thread about guns.

I stand corrected; that's a fair point.

Now, to follow your own logic, could you please take gun murders out of American homicide rates and present some numbers? If gun restrictions were enacted, how many crimes might hypothetically be affected? Have you run those numbers?

This topic doesn't really seem to be leaving this forum and as long as it's around I consider it my job to make the discussion a more fact based one, not one that's blinded by emotional arguments, propaganda statistics and devoid of actual discussions.

Which is great, so long as you make sure that you yourself aren't misguided by rhetoric.

As for countries where guns are outlawed and have much higher per capita murders, Russia and Mexico instantly come to mind. (Obviously there is much more to it than just that, but you asked for examples.) There are of course, dozens more. The world is a large a varied place, made up of a lot of countries that aren't western Europe and the United States. The constant comparison is a false one, since the UK has always had a lower murder rate than the US, even before their gun laws went into effect.

I'm not sure why you think that I think the only reason is different gun laws, but I don't believe that, and haven't said that.

I do wish you'd quit trying to paste me with all the other arguments you have a problem with; it's like you're treating me as a stereotype rather than a person, and I don't appreciate it.

I'd also still love a comment from anyone about how the UK's murder rate post 1968 (I mistakenly said 64 before) didn't drop with their gun control. If the argument is that gun control will produce this epic drop in crime, surely there would be examples from the numerous countries that have enacted gun control laws. There isn't.

How many murders in the UK before 1968 were committed with guns? Should there have been an expectation of a dropoff based on that answer?

[Homeless Nutter]

[...]I'd also still love a comment from anyone about how the UK's murder rate post 1968 (I mistakenly said 64 before) didn't drop with their gun control. If the argument is that gun control will produce this epic drop in crime, surely there would be examples from the numerous countries that have enacted gun control laws. There isn't.

I'm sorry, but what leads you to believe that before the 1968 Firearms Act UK didn't have gun control legislation? What about 1903 Pistols Act, 1920 Firearms Act, 1937 Firearm Act, which were brought together under one statute and updated in 1968? You make it seem like UK was Wild West before then, which it wasn't.