Rongone wrote:

Common Sense wrote:

Rongone wrote:

I repeat my post #8 on this topic: "We have more guns per capita than any other country in the world. Just how many guns does every man, woman and child need?"


"massive increase in weapons sales, ammo sales and application to carry between now and the end of the year."

Man, talk about overkill.
 

I think they want more than you want them to have?  What is a "acceptable' number for them to have?

Acceptable numbers: zero assault style automatic or semi-automatic weapons with a clip capacity of more than seven rounds. Assault style weapons such as these are designed for military operations with the sole purpose to inflict maximum casualties in a kill zone. They have no purpose for civilian operations.

Weapons owned for hunting with proper licensing: as many as one person can fire at one time with weapons designed for this purpose specifically related to the prey you are seeking to kill, excluding human beings.

All weapons must be subject to stringent pre-purchase background checks which includes mental stability certification. Completion of authorized safety training would be required prior to purchase and yearly update certification would be required. All approved private owner weapons must be registered and the owner must obtain insurance prior to purchase and maintain liability insurance for each weapon owned and registered. Upon sale or loss of a privately owned weapon, the owner must transfer the title for that weapon to the new owner and notify insurance carrier of the transfer. Records of ownership will be kept and maintained by the state department of revenue. Costs for maintaining state records will be paid for with a tax levied on weapons buy/sell transactions which must take place in an authorized transfer office. The amount of the tax will be set by the state in which the buyer resides. Weapons manufacturers would be required to offer owner safe smart weapons in their public offerings. Smart weapons would receive discounted rates on the owner required liability insurance.

In short, a perspective civilian owner of weapons may own as many authorized weapons as they wish, as long as they pay the price, maintain the records, and keep their safety certification up-to-date.
 

Thanks for your answer. No offense to you but this will never happen. What are you going to do with 350 million weapons that are out there now? A rifle that will kill a specific thing? Never heard of one that will do that?
How much are we going to charge for your first amendment right?  No need to answer these questions.

Rongone wrote:

Common Sense wrote:

Just Fred wrote:

This is freakin' nuts!  I can see it all now .................. Bob suspects Wally is a terrorist.  Bob pulls out his gun.  Wally now thinks Bob is a terrorist, so he pulls his gun.  A shootout in the parking lot ensues.  Wally is killed, the police show up and kill Bob.  In the meantime, 7 bystanders are shot and wounded while 4 are killed.  Neither Wally nor Bob turn out to be terrorists, but hey, Wally looked a bit suspicious pushing a shopping cart loaded with stuff that looked like pipe bombs.  Turned out he just bought a bunch of candles for his kid's Christmas play.

Excuse me again, I need to bang my head against the wall for the second time this morning.

This is the same thing we heard time after time when state after state passed carry laws. Go look at the FBI stats!
Violent crime has been on a down trend for years as more people carry and that is a fact. (There has been an up tick of violent crime in major cities this summer as we have seen on TV.)There were a total of 167,656 licenses to carry firearms issued as reported in
PA in 2011.
 

CS, do you think a massive increase in the proliferation of weapons and ammo among the citizens of the U.S., as you stated, will result in a measurable ongoing decrease in violent crime, including mass/spree killings?
 

YES!  And it all ready has..... look at the FBI stats!
Did you know that according to official FBI and U.S. Department of Justice reports, the rates of violent crime in the U.S. are now at their lowest level in 40 years? http://www.wanttoknow.info/g/violent_crime_rates_reduction

Defensive gun use (DGU) is the use of a firearm in self-defense or defense of others. The frequency of defensive firearms incidents, and their effectiveness in providing safety and reducing crime is a controversial issue in gun politics and criminology.[1]:64 Different authors and studies employ different criteria for what constitutes a defensive gun use which leads to controversy in comparing statistical results. Perceptions of the number of DGUs dominate discussions over gun rights, gun control, and concealed carry laws.

Estimates over the number of defensive gun uses vary wildly, depending on the study's definition of a defensive gun use, survey design, population, criteria, time-period studied, and other factors.Low end estimates are in the range of 55,000 to 80,000 incidents per year, while high end estimates reach of 4.7 Million incidents per year. Discussion over the number and nature of DGU and the implications to gun control policy came to a head in the late 1990s.[2][/url][url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_gun_use#cite_note-3][3]
 

Violent crime has decreased in recent years.
Gun sales are high.
True. True. And unrelated.

Common Sense wrote:

Rongone wrote:

Common Sense wrote:

This is the same thing we heard time after time when state after state passed carry laws. Go look at the FBI stats!
Violent crime has been on a down trend for years as more people carry and that is a fact. (There has been an up tick of violent crime in major cities this summer as we have seen on TV.)There were a total of 167,656 licenses to carry firearms issued as reported in
PA in 2011.
 

CS, do you think a massive increase in the proliferation of weapons and ammo among the citizens of the U.S., as you stated, will result in a measurable ongoing decrease in violent crime, including mass/spree killings?
 

YES!  And it all ready has..... look at the FBI stats!
Did you know that according to official FBI and U.S. Department of Justice reports, the rates of violent crime in the U.S. are now at their lowest level in 40 years? http://www.wanttoknow.info/g/violent_crime_rates_reduction

Defensive gun use (DGU) is the use of a firearm in self-defense or defense of others. The frequency of defensive firearms incidents, and their effectiveness in providing safety and reducing crime is a controversial issue in gun politics and criminology.[1]:64 Different authors and studies employ different criteria for what constitutes a defensive gun use which leads to controversy in comparing statistical results. Perceptions of the number of DGUs dominate discussions over gun rights, gun control, and concealed carry laws.

Estimates over the number of defensive gun uses vary wildly, depending on the study's definition of a defensive gun use, survey design, population, criteria, time-period studied, and other factors.Low end estimates are in the range of 55,000 to 80,000 incidents per year, while high end estimates reach of 4.7 Million incidents per year. Discussion over the number and nature of DGU and the implications to gun control policy came to a head in the late 1990s.[2][/url][url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_gun_use#cite_note-3][3]
 

 

Great . . . That's refreshing news.

Unfortunately, we have a lot of room for improvement:


The U.S. Is A World Leader In Gun Deaths

Imagine picking up the U.S. and dropping it into a different part of the world. How would its record of gun deaths compare to its neighbors?

In the wake of the mass shootings of the past few weeks, I decided to look into that question. I used a handy tool from the University of Washington's Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. It turns out, the U.S. doesn't fare too well. In five out of six regions, it would be right near the top in terms of gun deaths per 100,000 people. Only in one region is it near the bottom.

There are two important things to note. First, the IHME data exclude deaths from armed conflicts. So casualties from the ongoing conflict in Syria, for example, are not counted.

Second, data from some parts of the world are not the most reliable. "The number of gun deaths in many countries are underreported," says Dr. Ali Mokdad, a professor of global health and epidemiology at the University of Washington. IHME makes adjustments for countries where underreporting is likely.

We should also point out that each list below includes only the 10 countries in the region with the highest rate of gun deaths; in the Americas, the U.S. ranked lower, but we included it for the sake of comparison.

Here's the breakdown:

Western Europe: The U.S. Is No. 1 (Out Of 23)

If the U.S. were in Western Europe, it would have the highest rate of gun deaths by a wide margin. The U.S. has more than five times the number of gun deaths as the top Western European nation: Portugal has 0.66 deaths per 100,000 people compared with 3.55 in the U.S.

"If we compare the U.S. to Western Europe, which is a fair comparison in terms of socioeconomics, we are simply way, way higher," Mokdad says.

Central And Eastern Europe: The U.S. Is No. 2 (Out Of 21)

Countries that were part of the Soviet Union have relatively high levels of gun violence. But even in this region, the U.S. ranks right near the top. Only Albania has higher levels of gun deaths, with 5.86 per 100,000 people.

There's also an interesting correlation with a popular recreational substance. "In Eastern Europe and Russia, gun deaths are more closely associated with alcohol use, not drug abuse," Mokdad says.

The Americas: The U.S. Is No. 13 (Out Of 20)

Compared with its neighbors in North, South and Central America, the U.S. has a relatively low rate of gun violence. The U.S. ranks 13th out of 20 countries in terms of gun deaths — far behind El Salvador (52.39), Colombia (35.08) and Venezuela (32.66). Just six major countries in the Americas have lower rates of gun death than the U.S. — ranging from Argentina (3.08) to Canada (0.49).

Overall, gun violence is far worse in Central America than anywhere else in the world. And it's largely due to one problem, says Mokdad. "In El Salvador and Honduras, there are a lot of gangs and drug trafficking, especially among younger men, and that has resulted in a big increase in gun violence."

North Africa And The Middle East: The U.S. Is No. 2 (Out Of 21)

This might be the most surprising statistic of all: If the United States were in the Middle East, it would have the second-highest rate of gun deaths of any nation — more than Libya, Egypt, Sudan and Israel combined. (Again, these numbers do not include deaths in armed conflicts.) In fact, only Iraq has a higher level of non-conflict-related gun deaths.

Sub-Saharan Africa: The U.S. Is No. 8 (Out Of 43)

In areas of sub-Saharan Africa where there is not armed conflict, death rates from guns are relatively low. If the U.S. were on the continent, it would have the eighth-highest number of gun deaths. It would be well ahead of most countries, including several with a violent reputation: the Democratic Republic of Congo, Rwanda, Somalia and South Sudan.

Southeast Asia, East Asia And Australasia: The U.S. Is No. 3 (Out Of 19)

Only two countries in this part of the world have higher levels of gun violence than the U.S.: Thailand and the Philippines. By contrast, in Japan and Singapore, gun deaths are virtually nonexistent.

Mokdad says many nations in this part of the world are providing young men with a better safety net and more educational opportunities, which might help reduce gun-related violence. "If you have an education and have a future," he says, "there is no reason to belong to a gang or to get a gun."

Last edited by Rongone (12/08/2015 1:47 pm)