The U.S. Supreme Court has announced that it's going to "decide whether the constitutional right of individuals to own firearms trumped state and local laws."
It stems from challenges by individuals and guns rights activist groups over laws in Chicago, specifically.
Check out these statistics:
"Eighty percent of Chicago's 510 murders in 2008 were committed with guns -- among them 34 Chicago schoolchildren."
But hey, let's fight for our gun rights. Us having guns individually is far more important than trying to tamp down the number of people who are shot and killed in the city, right?
I know the arguments, too--I can hear it now. The people for shooting down the state and local laws are going to say that it's not the law-abiding people who will shoot and kill people--it's the "outlaws" and criminals who we need to defend ourselves against.
But the statistics show otherwise, frankly, and I'm not going to get into that here.
The city governments will come out against these state and local laws being found unconstitutional.
The state governments are going to come out against dropping these things, of course.
The police departments will be squarely against this, of course. (But what do the police know, right?).
Churches? Most likely the same way--against it.
But, much as I hate to say it, I'd put money on this Supreme Court coming out for knocking down these state and local laws that restrict guns and gun ownership and, instead, for individuals gun rights.
I hope I'm wrong but doubt it strongly.
And that's sad.
And unfortunate.
"More guns for everybody!"
It's the NRA way.
Link: http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE58T44S20090930
Posts
Overcrowded KCI Reveals Sketchy Planning For Pedestrians
14 minutes ago
6 comments:
Greetings I am a person in favor of an individuals right to keep and bear arms. I do take exception at something you stated, first:
Check out these statistics:
You list only one statistic, that 80% of the 510 murders a gun was used in the commission of the crime. And among those murdered, 34 were children. That works out to 6% of the 510. Please I am interested to hear more statistics to back your claim.
Here's one for you, in 2005 there were 789 accidental deaths from firearms here in the U.S., that works out to .30 % per 100,000 people.
In 2003 children 14 and under suffered 56 fatal gun accidents. In that same time frame 86 children drowned in bathtubs and 285 children dorwned in pools. So, with the significantly higher rate of death with bathtubs and pools, shouldn't we ban man made bodies of water?
Also you state, "But the statistics show otherwise, frankly, and I'm not going to get into that here."
Please. you and I are not going to convince one another on what we feel. However, if you present facts and statistics, I'll take a look at them.
As you said, we aren't going to convince one another but here's a couple statistics:
We have 11.66 firearm-related deaths per 100,000 as of 2004. That's nearly double the next-closest country, Finland (at 6.86 per).
The fact is, we kill each other more than any other nation. Fact.
My opinion is that we are a very violent, gun-centric country with a "wild west" attitude and it's not healthy, that's all. And adding more guns to our society is not a good way to reduce those deaths, intentional or accidental, either way.
And please. Bathtubs don't kill people while people with guns do.
Don't demean yourself or your argument with inanities.
I mean that in the nicest way, I swear.
Besides, it isn't the accidental deaths by firearms that are the big killer of people, though it's certainly I don't take lightly. It's the approximate 10,000 people each year in the United States that is the real and bigger issue. Too many of those are out of rage and/or crimes of passion. That's the real issue and killer.
I appreciate your calm, quiet approach to requesting data here, too, I will say.
Finally, check the last link, below, that I list as it shows statistical evidence from 2008 that the state of Hawai'i reduced its gun deaths with gun control laws.
Statistical, hard, real-life proof that it can, in fact, help.
Besides, no one is talking about taking all guns away so don't suggest anyone is talking about that, either, please.
Sources for statistics:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
http://archives.starbulletin.com/2008/04/26/editorial/editorial01.html
Thank you. I am interested in the facts. Here's one that shows a sampling of ten states vs all fifty states. The VPC picked ten states and the total gun rates for states with "Strong" gun laws is 4.09 percent vs total gun rates in "weak" states is 17.12, a 318 percent differemce.
When all fifty states are factored, strong states are 8.4 vs 11.90 for weak states. That correlates to a 41.6 percent difference in the rate of death. A much closer figure than if you cherry pick your data. And for states that the VPC considers has strong gun laws the death by gun rate doubles when you include all fifty states. The death rate in 'weak' states actually falls by approximately a third when all fifty states are figured.
"Cherry pick my data"?
Are you kidding?
You "cherry-picked", when you called out only 10 states. I'm looking at the bigger, broader picture of the entire United States while you're only looking at a few states.
And what, exactly, are you talking about?
Your words:
"The VPC picked ten states and the total gun rates for states with "Strong" gun laws is 4.09 percent vs total gun rates in "weak" states is 17.12, a 318 percent differemce.
When all fifty states are factored, strong states are 8.4 vs 11.90 for weak states."
What the heck is this? What are you talking about? Who is the VPC? What are these numbers you believe are supporting your cause? They are completely without any description of what, exactly, you think you're describing.
Don't get me wrong--it's as you said--neither of us is going to convince the other. My statistics and supporting documents meant nothing to you.
I have just one question for you.
Can you demonstrate one time or place, throughout all history, where the average person was made safer by restricting access to handheld weapons?
I await your answer
To repeat: statistical evidence from 2008 shows that the entire state of Hawai'i reduced its gun deaths with gun control laws.
That does it.
http://archives.starbulletin.com/2008/04/26/editorial/
Post a Comment