Bang, Bang, Yer Dead!

[laklak]

In our county we had 11 murders in 2011. All but one occurred in the Newtown area, which is the black ghetto. Of those 10 murders, 7 were young black men (i.e. gang related), 2 were British tourists who inadvertently wandered into the ghetto late at night and were shot by a 16 year old gang member (i.e. gang related), and the remaining was a black woman who got caught in a drive-by (i.e. gang related). The one remaining murder was a guy who was abducted at an ATM and killed.

http://sarasota.patch.com/articles/mapp ... -s-murders

As I've said before, I honestly don't give a shit how many gangbangers get dead, they're useless criminal scum and we're better off without them. If you remove those 10 gang murders that leaves 1 murder in a metropolitan county with a population of over 380,000 people. That translates to a murder rate of about .25 per 100,000. Hardly a blood bath and better than any stats for any other country posted in this thread.

So why is our murder rate, when adjusted for inconsequential gang murders, so low? Could it be that a large percentage of us are armed? What do y'all think?

[Pensioner]

In our county we had 11 murders in 2011. All but one occurred in the Newtown area, which is the black ghetto. Of those 10 murders, 7 were young black men (i.e. gang related), 2 were British tourists who inadvertently wandered into the ghetto late at night and were shot by a 16 year old gang member (i.e. gang related), and the remaining was a black woman who got caught in a drive-by (i.e. gang related). The one remaining murder was a guy who was abducted at an ATM and killed.

http://sarasota.patch.com/articles/mapp ... -s-murders

As I've said before, I honestly don't give a shit how many gangbangers get dead, they're useless criminal scum and we're better off without them. If you remove those 10 gang murders that leaves 1 murder in a metropolitan county with a population of over 380,000 people. That translates to a murder rate of about .25 per 100,000. Hardly a blood bath and better than any stats for any other country posted in this thread.

So why is our murder rate, when adjusted for inconsequential gang murders, so low? Could it be that a large percentage of us are armed? What do y'all think?

In York we have a Population 174,000 Lak, in my life time we have never had a murder with a gun.

[Seth]

Wear your chains lightly, slave-boy.

No chains in Canada, chum. You wear ones of your own making, and will never be free. Watch your back, the tyrant's minions are keeping an eye on you...

Really? Why don't you go to the police station and make a disparaging remark about a cripple or an Indian and let us know what happens?

Or, why don't you try to possess a gun without your government's permission to do so.

Your chains are invisible, but very strong. They've wiped your mind of the concept of true freedom. You live, work and play only on the sufferance of your masters, and you own nothing that does not belong to the Crown.

Seth, what is true freedom to you? I could go 100 miles north of here and never pay taxes or abide by social conventions.

And freeze to death and be eaten by wolves...

I have no desire to own a handgun, because I think they are unnecessary where I live, we do not have any ghettos here.

Fine by me. You get to make that choice and I respect it. What I don't respect are those who try to impose that decision upon ME, or anyone else. That's immoral.

There is crime, but the 3 or 4 murders that we get seem to be tribally motivated or drug-related. I fear nothing anywhere I go. I think that people who get into trouble mostly ask for it by acting like cunts. I own guns- for hunting. If I lived somewhere where I needed a personal sidearm to feel safe I'd move. A society that harbors predators to such extent has failed its mandate. That's where I would advocate Libertarian policy, at least until the crime was contained.

Glad to hear it, but not everyone can have your experience. Your choices are your own, and are valid, but when you authorize government to infringe on OTHER PEOPLE'S rights because YOU don't think YOU need a handgun, then you go far beyond what is socially acceptable.

Each individual has a natural, inherent and unalienable right to determine for themselves what risk level is acceptable and how to go about minimizing such risks. No person, persons or government has any business interfering with that decision making so long as the individual in question does not abuse those rights by initiating force or fraud on another. If they do, then society is justified in constraining their exercise of rights because they have proven to be untrustworthy. But for government, with you approval, to simply assume that everyone is untrustworthy and therefore must be closely controlled and regulated, constitutes tyranny of the worst sort.

[Svartalf]

how many with feet, fists, sticks, knives, tools and garden implements, not to mention the exotica like toxics?

[Blind groper]

We're too busy focusing on the reality of the harm done by too strict gun laws, which is far, far worse.

Just ask the Jews.

Or the residents of the Road of Bones.

Or the victims of violent crime in Chicago.

Or those who suffer under tyranny anywhere on the planet.

Seth,

You do a wonderful imitation of an ostrich.

The free countries of the world, the wealthy west, do not have problems of tyranny, or Jewish genocide.

The greatest death toll is right there, in the USA, with all those hand guns, and 8,000 people each year killed by them.

[Blind groper]

how many with feet, fists, sticks, knives, tools and garden implements, not to mention the exotica like toxics?

In any country other than the USA, with its terrible toll from hand guns, the answer is bugger all!

[Seth]

In our county we had 11 murders in 2011. All but one occurred in the Newtown area, which is the black ghetto. Of those 10 murders, 7 were young black men (i.e. gang related), 2 were British tourists who inadvertently wandered into the ghetto late at night and were shot by a 16 year old gang member (i.e. gang related), and the remaining was a black woman who got caught in a drive-by (i.e. gang related). The one remaining murder was a guy who was abducted at an ATM and killed.

http://sarasota.patch.com/articles/mapp ... -s-murders

As I've said before, I honestly don't give a shit how many gangbangers get dead, they're useless criminal scum and we're better off without them. If you remove those 10 gang murders that leaves 1 murder in a metropolitan county with a population of over 380,000 people. That translates to a murder rate of about .25 per 100,000. Hardly a blood bath and better than any stats for any other country posted in this thread.

So why is our murder rate, when adjusted for inconsequential gang murders, so low? Could it be that a large percentage of us are armed? What do y'all think?

In York we have a Population 174,000 Lak, in my life time we have never had a murder with a gun.

Red herring and strawman. Have you had a murder? Or an assault. or any other type of violent crime that might have been thwarted if the victim had been armed. This notion that only murders count is asinine. I have a right not to be mugged, not to be threatened with a knife, club or gun even if the intent is just to steal my wallet. A simple mugging can easily and quickly turn into an assault or a murder, and I have a right to respond to an armed assailant as if my life is in peril, irrespective of the intent of the criminal.

Concealed handguns prevent all manner of violent crimes in this country every single day, from burglary to robbery to rape to attempted murder.

The fact that no one in your community used a gun to murder anyone doesn't mean they didn't use a knife, gun or other deadly weapon to perpetrate a crime that could have become a murder, or rape, in a heartbeat.

Threaten me with a gun, I will shoot you without a moment's hesitation. Threaten me with a knife from closer than 21 feet and I'll do the same. The same goes for a rock, a baseball bat, a golf club, a tire iron, a broken bottle or any other deadly weapon. And I'll be legally justified in doing so.

[Svartalf]

how many with feet, fists, sticks, knives, tools and garden implements, not to mention the exotica like toxics?

In any country other than the USA, with its terrible toll from hand guns, the answer is bugger all!

You know groper, that one got you down a few notches in my regard... would be murderers without guns will still do it, and statistics on killings in places with restrictive policies are significant.

[Seth]

We're too busy focusing on the reality of the harm done by too strict gun laws, which is far, far worse.

Just ask the Jews.

Or the residents of the Road of Bones.

Or the victims of violent crime in Chicago.

Or those who suffer under tyranny anywhere on the planet.

Seth,

You do a wonderful imitation of an ostrich.

The free countries of the world, the wealthy west, do not have problems of tyranny, or Jewish genocide.

The greatest death toll is right there, in the USA, with all those hand guns, and 8,000 people each year killed by them.

No, it's not. The greatest death toll for an individual country is probably Communist China, where Mao murdered some 60 million of his own (disarmed) people, followed by Stalin who murdered 40 million of his own (disarmed) people, then Hitler who murdered 12 million (unarmed) people, and Pol Pot, who murdered about 2 million (unarmed) people.

And as I recall, the "free countries of the world," specifically all of Europe, has, since 1915, twice had a rather large problem with tyranny and Jewish genocide, a problem that's required the intervention of the US on both occasions to keep all the ignorant fucks over there from speaking German and saluting the swastika. And then there's the whole Cold War thingy, where American troops and tanks, along with our nuclear arsenal, kept the Communists at bay for 50 years, without which Europe would be speaking Russian and saluting the hammer and sickle.

And then there's the tyranny of the EU, the one that's just getting started and is already showing signs of despotism.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

You are forgetting the Taiping Rebellion, ~20,000,000 because some Chinese dude thought he was the second coming of Christ. "Religion does no harm."

[Blind groper]

No, it's not. The greatest death toll for an individual country is probably Communist China,

OK. I admit making an error of carelessness. I should have said the greatest toll in the modern free world....

I apologise for the error.

[Seth]

No, it's not. The greatest death toll for an individual country is probably Communist China,

OK. I admit making an error of carelessness. I should have said the greatest toll in the modern free world....

I apologise for the error.

Yes, you should apologize for setting up such a strawman argument in the first place. Artificially limiting your statement to the "modern free world" is merely a convenient way to ignore the rest of the planet, where people in second and third world countries live under oppression and despotism because they have no arms (sometimes literally because theirs have been cut off with machetes) with with to regain their freedom or protect against criminals.

And the right to be armed for self defense does not just apply in shithole banana republics or African hell-holes, it applies to each and every human being on the planet, no matter where they reside.

[Seth]

You are forgetting the Taiping Rebellion, ~20,000,000 because some Chinese dude thought he was the second coming of Christ. "Religion does no harm."

And I suppose the Quing Dynasty imperial troops had nothing whatever to do with it?

[Blind groper]

Artificially limiting your statement to the "modern free world" is merely a convenient way to ignore the rest of the planet,

No.

It is a way to make a comparison that actually means something.

If I chose to compare the USA to Swaziland, it would be a major insult to Americans everywhere. I am assuming that the USA is civilised. As such, I compare it to other civilised nations. I exclude Asians from the comparison, not because they are not civilised (they were among the first nations on planet Earth to become civilised) but simply because they have substantially different cultures, making a comparison tenuous. In order to make a proper "apples with apples" comparison, I compare the USA with its peer group - other free, civilised, western countries.

[laklak]

Wouldn't insult me, Mrs. Lak is from Swaziland and I lived there for several years. I like it there and would go back except - big except here - they're making it more and more difficult to own a gun. Pretty much impossible, actually, unless you already own one. Getting a new weapons permit is almost impossible, even if you bribe everybody all the way up the food chain. Used to be pretty much everyone owned at least one and crime was practically non-existent. Different story now, burglaries are an every day occurrence and I personally know several people who were hurt badly in home invasions. Same goes for South Africa.

On the issue of 8000 handgun deaths - if the statistics I quoted for our county hold across the country then about 7200 of those will be gang related. That leaves 800 handgun murders/accidents/suicides for a population of over 300 million. That is a negligible number and it's ridiculous to suggest banning them based on that. The gang murders are NOT going to stop, period. They'll kill each other with knives, baseball bats or fingernails, assuming they won't just continue to buy black market weapons. The only thing banning or restricting handguns will do is disarm the law abiding population, leading to a massive increase in violent crime. Just like Swaziland.