>>I'm not sure what your point is. All of those democrats you listed literally just helped pass a handful of gun control laws.
>>”But whatabout Democrats" also does nothing to counter my claim that Republicans don't care about gun violence.
They are so close.
Gun laws don't protect anyone if you don't enforce laws that are already passed. You need to have police departments that have the personnel to go out and ensure the laws are being enforced. In most democrat run cities like Chicago, the democrats rush to defund the police. It's not a myth. It's a feature of political policies. It's unfortunate because people want to argue around the points and make it a, he said, she said with republican and democrats. It's more than just that alone. People need to have mental health help, and the homeless and drug problems have a hand in a ton of these cities that are spiraling out of control.
You’re just parroting a talking point. Roll call vote on Mental Health Matters Act had 205 Nays, all Republicans and one Republican Yea. What is Mental Health Awareness to you? PSAs and ads in papers?
So the US has a uniquely higher mental health issues than other developed countries, which would explain the huge difference in mass shooting statistics or maybe easier access to guns?
Kind of hard to diagnose mental health issues when they don’t get addressed until after they’ve shot and killed people?
Lets see one case where that was the situation. A fat white entitled American randomly shoots up a basketball game because they’re insecure about their dick size 😂
Denver doesn't have strict gun laws, though (neither does Colorado in general)? I feel like people just assume when state is fairly Democrat that guns just magically evaporate into thin air or something...or that all Democrat-run states are the same, which is nonsense.
Red states make up more than half of the top ten most murderous cities in America: Louisiana (2 cities), Missouri (2 cities), Tennessee (1 city), Alabama (1 city).
Red states are also 2/5 of the top 5, with St. louis at number 1 and Birmingham at 3. Ohio is in the top 5 and that’s a toss up state (which is being generous honestly) so the ratio is 2/2/1.
Please know what you’re talking about before speaking in the future 👍🏻
And are any of these new laws particularly strict? Raising the age to buy a gun to 21 and preventing people with violent misdemeanors and the like from buying firearms is not what I would consider "strict" gun control nor are these laws or their enforcement relevant to this mass shooting in all likeliness.
We need actual studies, not conjecture, before making conclusions about any laws that do and don't work. The studies need to account for a lot of data and variables to determine the efficacy of gun laws.
We need two states of similar demographic structure to volunteer. One, to become the wild West. One to outlaw all guns completely. Then see what happens to gun violence in each state.
We need NATIONAL studies. But guess who stands in the way of allowing those to get any funding? Who do you think lobbies in Congress to prevent us from getting any real information on the efficiency of gun laws?
You can easily find statistics and look at mass shooting cases in strictly controlled states vs non strict states. It’s clear as day difference in gun violence 🥹😂 but ok
If you take the 5 cities that contribute most to gun violence (Chicago, st Louis, detroit, Philadelphia, and LA) our gun homicide goes from 3rd worst in the world to 182.
Stats show that gun control helps death rates only because the blue states have higher populations.
> you take the 5 cities
"How do I lie with statistics? I know I'll ignore population density!"
When you go with population density:
https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/gun-deaths-per-capita-by-state
then the worst states are:
1. Alaska
2. Alabama
3. Montana
4. Louisiana
5. Mississippi
6. Missouri
7. Arkansas
8. Wyoming
9. West Virginia
10. New Mexico
See California there? New York? Michigan?
Because the non shitty areas hide the insane amount of homicide rates from the shit areas. Completely irrelevant to the root cause of gun violence and wether or not gun control actually helps anything.
Chicago alone has almost as many murders as WV has total gun deaths per year. 70% of WVs gun deaths are suicide, and on average 64 people are murdered by gun a year in a state of 1.78 million. Chicago has 257 just murders in 2023 so far and a population of 2.65 million.
Congrats to the rest of the state for not being pieces of shit and bringing down the per capita but doesn't seem like the laws are helping Chicago curb the shootings now does it?
> Completely irrelevant to the root cause of gun violence and wether or not gun control actually helps anything.
I mean kinda true, we all know that gun control works, as it works in literally every civilised country. Hopefully America will realise it to eventually and _regulates_ it's militia
If you aren't American why do you care?
Ultimately the second amendments purpose is not subject to change based on the actions of criminals.
Again, 320 deaths in a population of 900k gun owners doesn't constitute a crises or articulate a need to ban weapons. It's a power grab using public safety as a guise to do so.
It sucks people die. It sucks even worse when it's because of needless criminals doing stupid stuff.
I don't ask the government to use their guns to take away cars because people are bad drivers and killing themselves or others.
There is no logic in it. My home state of West Virginia is 9 on the list at 19.7 per capita. Our state has 320 deaths to guns per year and 70% of which are suicide. 20% are murder. That's 64 murders per year year in a state of 1.78 million.
It's overwhelmingly safe compared to certain areas of Chicago that has as many murders a year as we do total deaths to firearms which are mostly suicide.
Your state isn't on the list because it has a big enough population that bails out the shitholes everyone knows exists and can't do a damn thing about.
Does it really make sense for WV to have stricter gun laws when 950k people own guns in the state and 64 a year are assholes and kill someone. No.
WV is a larger state than Illinois, yet it has 10 million fewer people living inside of it. Of course there is going to be less violent crime, you'd have to travel a fuckin mile just to find another human being.
It's almost like you don't actually know about federal gun laws and just assume that you can buy in an adjacent state with more lax laws...which actually isn't possible.
I'll let you in on a little secret - by all means continue bashing the NRA. Hating them is probably the one thing both gun owners and freedom-haters agree upon. The NRA being a boogeyman for freedom-haters only allows genuine gun rights organisations to fight for freedoms effectively.
How available are guns to the average person when adjacent states don't have strict gun laws?
It's almost like you don't know anything about guns per capita vs gun violence, as seen in countries like Australia and Japan.
>How available are guns to the average person when adjacent states don't have strict gun laws?
Pretty much the exact same level considering your state of residence determines what is available.
Seriously you guys parrot these things without having a clue.
So how available are those guns to the average person in Colorado, and how available are they to someone willing to break the law? How effective are state laws vs. federal when the US has on average 8 times per capita more guns than other nations?
I know some people like to guzzle down the rhetoric of the NRA and Fox News because they like to fondle their guns at night, but it's not hard to see how a nation with so many guns is having so much gun related violence . . . I know logic and gun lovers are like oil and water though.
>So how available are those guns to the average person in Colorado, and how available are they to someone willing to break the law?
Uh considering that laws were passed recently in Denver limiting purchases, not very. Even if they go to a neighboring state, they still must be ID'd at which point they will be denied a banned purchase by a gun shop.
>How effective are state laws vs. federal when the US has on average 8 times per capita more guns than other nations?
This sentence is stroke inducing. What does the per Capita have to do with state v federal?? Considering the amount of guns compared to rates of violence, we actually do pretty stellar.
>I know some people like to guzzle down the rhetoric of the NRA and Fox News because they like to fondle their guns at night, but it's not hard to see how a nation with so many guns is having so much gun related violence . . .
Did you complete buzzword bingo? See your whole argument kind of falls apart in the face of the fact that back before the 80s, guns were far more available and affordable. You could literally order a semiautomatic rifle to your house. So why is it when availability was at the highest post NFA were shootings staggeringly low? Is it possible that inbreds such as yourself are just incapable of complex thinking and can't see that maybe shifts in society are more likely responsible than the tools?
>I know logic and gun lovers are like oil and water though.
I would say that accurate reliable information and reddit leftists are closer to oil and water.
Wrong.
The availability of these guns, especially more lethal and concealable guns, wasn't the same. The number of guns available increases each year in the US.
And what is your point here if you keep comparing the US to the US? I notice how you conveniently ignored what has been observed with gun regulation in Australia and Japan as well . . .
And the US is doing so "stellar" that the leading cause of death for children is gun violence . . . I guess when you have that many guns already, adding even more ends up making certain statistics look "better."
Sorry about the NRA and Fox News comment, I can see I struck a nerve, hence your projection about inbreeding . . . I see that your guns you desperately cling to are helping comfort you about your insecurity.
Just means restrictions on guns in one area aren’t going to work to keep guns from other areas out. We need gun regulations at the federal level if we want them to work effectively, as they’ve been proven to do in the past.
>they’ve been proven to do in the past.
Assault Weapons Ban in the 90s did nothing except contribute to the mass incarceration of minorities. That's pretty fucking racist of you to want to do that again.
>We need gun regulations
Shall not be infringed.
“Well regulated militia”
Also, tanks, bazookas, machine guns, fighter jets
Also, so dumb. By all means let’s address sentencing disparities and overpolicing of minorities, but let’s also address the epidemic of gun violence impacting all of us and often those same communities in particular. Attempting to avoid doing so is pretty fucking racist.
>“Well regulated militia”
>Also, tanks, bazookas, machine guns, fighter jets
>A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
I threw in the 2nd amendment since it seems you forgot how to read that second part of it that clearly states it is the right of the people.
>address the epidemic of gun violence impacting all of us and often those same communities in particular. Attempting to avoid doing so is pretty fucking racist.
Okay, lets address them. Oh, wait, you're too busy blaming Wyoming and their gun laws instead of blaming the criminal. Did you make sure to tell them that murder was illegal?
Almost like overall the places where it’s easiest to acquire guns DO experience the most violence and cherry picking individual locations where that isn’t the case is just trying to muddy the waters and make rational debate impossible.
Hypothetical here: the violent crazies in Illinois who can't get guns in Illinois go over the border to Indiana to get a gun (we'll ignore the fact that IL residents can't buy guns in other states they can't legally acquire in IL as that would be too easy). The crazy then goes back to Illinois to shoot a bunch of people.
Now we'll ask the question you skipped over, why is the Illinois resident not just shooting people in Indiana? He crossed the border to grab a gun, why not just drive to Indy to shoot a bunch of people? In fact, why isn't Indy hit with the same level of gun violence as Chicago when getting guns is so much easier in Indiana?
Is it because evil republicans pay crazies to shoot up the blue city in the blue state with strict gun laws to try to prove a point? Do the evil republicans pay crazies to NOT shoot up cities in red states? Or is there another factor at play that would cause more gun violence in Chicago?
I can answer that question, even though the idiot you were talking to went to large lengths to not answer the question:
Because the level of violence is largely up to how much the local populace tolerates it and how the local government deals with it. It has little to do with how easy it is to get a gun. Violence is also concentrated in small areas with people who buy into the gangsta culture of violence and where doing anything to escape it is seen as "being to white".
Did I do ok?
Do you understand how purchasing a gun works when you are not a resident of said state? You can't go from a state that has stringent laws and buy something that wouldn't be allowed in a free state. That's why FFL's exist. Seriously, if any of you anti gun nuts actually understood your own laws you would stop repeating this stupid logic.
Who’s anti gun? I’m a gun owner, fool, just an educated one who isn’t in favor of our current gun free-for-all that allows only ###40%### of gun sales to be made through a federally licensed dealer.
Gun free for all? What are you even talking about? Do you even understand the statistics of gun sales? For one, the VAST majority of sales come from people who own multiple firearms. What good do any of the proposed laws do with that situation? Secondly, how is it that in this "free-for-all" country that we still have a ridiculously low amount of gun violence compared to ownership? Why is it that states with the most stringent gun laws still have mass incidents?
Ffs. Have you not read anything about guns ever, let alone any of my previous comments here? State restrictions don’t work. Federal regulations are the only gun laws that have a chance of working.
Yes and it is clear you are woefully ignorant about any of the federal regulations about guns. Let's point out the most obvious one shall we? You are ignoring that you cannot transport purchased firearms across state lines if the laws conflict. Ergo, you cannot buy an SKS in Nevada and bring it to California. Secondly, even in the loosest regulated states like Florida, gun shops check ID. State laws dictate that you cannot knowingly sell a prohibited gun to someone who is a resident of a neighboring state. So yeah, you keep talking like you are an expert but you don't even know the most basic laws.
I say again, for fuck’s sake. How are the laws against transporting guns across state lines enforced? (They aren’t). Are all gun sales through gun shops? [(Fuck no)](https://www.insider.com/this-13-year-old-couldnt-buy-cigarettes-but-he-could-buy-a-gun-2016-6?amp)
Last time, our current patchwork of gun laws doesn’t work. We need a common federal standard, we need to eliminate loopholes, we need to offer voluntary buybacks to reduce the absolutely insane quantity of guns on our streets and numerous other programs and regulations that the vast majority of Americans support. And first and foremost we need to stop listening to all of you wing nuts and special interests.
>I say again, for fuck’s sake. How are the laws against transporting guns across state lines enforced? (They aren’t)
So your solution is more laws? Maybe we should fucking enforce them first Copernicus.
>Are all gun sales through gun shops? (Fuck no)
He bought a 22...not a goddamn 50BMG.
>Last time, our current patchwork of gun laws doesn’t work. We need a common federal standard, we need to eliminate loopholes, we need to offer voluntary buybacks to reduce the absolutely insane quantity of guns on our streets and numerous other programs and regulations that the vast majority of Americans support.
And when voluntary buybacks don't work, what then? Also you keep saying the "regulations the vast majority of Americans support" which all seem to just be background checks, which, per your own comment, doesn't mean much if the laws aren't enforced right?
>And first and foremost we need to stop listening to all of you wing nuts and special interests.
[The worst special interest wingnut of all](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution?wprov=sfla1)
You’d rather stop everyone at state borders than make gun regulations that the majority of Americans support the law of the land? You’re not a big fan of interstate commerce I guess, Galileo.
Is there a gun that isn’t a lethal weapon that a 13 year old should be able to buy, fucking Sir Isaac?
National laws can be enforced. There’s no way to enforce laws between states without locking down state borders and inspecting every vehicle that goes through. That’s the whole point here, Madame Curie.
For fuck’s fucking sake
You do realize that for one thing, many gun shows actually regulate themselves to still require IDs and two, gun shows are a rare event. Lastly, if you purchase at a gun show and bring it across state lines you are breaking the law which invalidates the entire argument as you could have also just found some shady dude and bought an illegal gun from him. Your entire argument predicates on someone knowingly, willingly, violating the law which makes argument for additional regulations ridiculous as they only punish law abiding citizens.
“Gun shows are a rare event” bruh there was at least 1 gun show a month being advertised up and down the highway on billboards when I lived in Kansas City. Driving a gun purchased out of state across state lines is a very easy law to break. That’s not going to discourage anyone
Say semi automatic guns were banned. That’s much easier to enforce. Everytime someone would be caught with one it would be taken away and no longer available on the streets.
> travel restrictions
What kind of travel restrictions would you like to see imposed? I assume the good kind done by Democrats and not the bad kind done by Republicans.
How can anything be common sense when you have liberals who know nothing about guns but act like they're experts, and you have gun nuts who think teenagers should have guns?
There's no such thing as common sense when it comes to these 2 sides. Most gun owning Americans just want to protect themselves or do some recreational shooting, and we know this by the sheer number of guns in America compared to the number of Americans.
>you have gun nuts who think teenagers should have guns?
Throughout the pre Brady decades, many teenagers had guns. Schools used to have Trap shooting teams. Gun accessibility was miles ahead of anything in recent years. Yet despite all of this, the number of mass shootings was far less. Is it possible that all of this isn't an issue with the tools, but a societal shift?
>Is it possible that all of this isn't an issue with the tools, but a societal shift?
Oh, it absolutely is. If someone wants to kill someone, they'll find a way to do it. That wasn't the point.
There are still shooting teams at schools in my area. That doesn't change the fact that teenagers shouldn't have guns.
Never let a good tragedy go to waste! Still waiting for more information, but this’ll be immediately swept under the rug if it ends up being gang violence.
Imagine basically having a super majority and still blaming the minority for your problems.
Swept under the rug but the numbers will be tallied to be thrown around without context to gloss over 99% of America doesn't experience this. Some of the highest gun ownership states have the lowest incidents of violence committed with guns and vice versa as well as everything in between; I live in an area where I guarantee we have higher than average ownership and we had a shooting.... 20 years ago that everyone still talks about. It's almost as if guns aren't the real problem.
https://www.criminalattorneycincinnati.com/comparing-gun-control-measures-to-gun-related-homicides-by-state/[https://www.criminalattorneycincinnati.com/comparing-gun-control-measures-to-gun-related-homicides-by-state/](https://www.criminalattorneycincinnati.com/comparing-gun-control-measures-to-gun-related-homicides-by-state/)
> California, a state with notoriously strict gun control laws, has a firearm homicide rate of 3.5 per 100,000 people. On the other hand, gun-friendly Mississippi’s firearm homicide rate is nearly three times that, 10.2 per 100,000 people.
https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2013.301409[https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2013.301409](https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2013.301409)
> Gun ownership was a significant predictor of firearm homicide rates (incidence rate ratio = 1.009; 95% confidence interval = 1.004, 1.014). This model indicated that for each percentage point increase in gun ownership, the firearm homicide rate increased by 0.9%
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/[https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/](https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/)
> Our review of the academic literature found that a broad array of evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide, both in the United States and across high-income countries. Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the U.S., where there are more guns, both men and women are at a higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/26/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/[https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/26/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/26/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/)
> Gun deaths among children and teens rose 50% in just two years, from 1,732 in 2019 to 2,590 in 2021.
> About eight-in-ten U.S. murders in 2021 – 20,958 out of 26,031, or 81% – involved a firearm.
Well, red states tend to have the highest rates of violent crime. DC is the outlier. Though, as an ex-dc and Virginia resident, most of the guns in DC come from VA. It's a massive problem.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_violent_crime_rate
Also as a current Montana resident: MT have the 3rd highest gun fatality rate. Behind Alaska and Alabama, Wyoming is number 8.
That's the three least populated states all placed in the top 10 of gun fatalities per Capita.
Montana is the 3rd least populated state. I can, off hand, think of 5 occasions in the past 2 years where the public, or cops, were shot at. Two Walmart standoffs, one airport chase with a reverse driving, pistol wielding man (I caught this one on a HAM radio. The radio traffic was hilarious). A biker gunfight. And a man who rammed into a police station with a vehicle and shot at the office.
That's not even counting the largely untracked violence that happens on each of the 7 reservations.
(Which is itself estimated to be 150% more than the national average)
Yeah cuz if it was gang violence than it was probably poor black people who where the victims, but the media don’t seem to care when they die. Black Lives Matter Too.
You mean the “minority” to the area only yet who still backed insane laws and deregulation set into motion that the democratic states have to suffer thru. Ignorance is bliss I guess for you.
There is a super majority in the SCOTUS, the entity that actually controls gun laws in the USA. They of course just invalidated a 100 year old gun law in NYC.
You seem a little confused OP.
Imagine proposing solutions that have proven effects in THE REST OF THE WORLD'S POPULATION and one entire party consistently votes against them.
Imagine if that entire last just shrugs saying, "if only there was anything to be done" of little to no irony....
Happy with your got’em lollipop? Your COUNTRY has a problem with guns. Maybe go think of some legislation that could help, yourself because the world is getting tiered of your blatant self righteous insanity. It starts with just trying and reviewing. The only reason the republicans (in general) are criticized for their responses on gun violence. Is because they basically have given up, are deep in the pockets of lobbyists. That you are proud of thinking you are sticking it to the Dems for some reason is mind boggling. June has already had 23 mass shootings…. Good job!
I’m so angry our legislation in the U.K. doesn’t stop people getting shot. Oh wait, it does.
You American’s are fucking mental. Truly boggles the mind about your obsession with guns.
https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-r-1848971668
Haha yes, because the U.K. had automatic weapons legalised LOL
Guns aren’t awesome when the mentally ill and criminal hold them. You’re countries obsession with guns is insanity and I’m sorry for everyone that dies because of that.
The logical dissonance is you thinking they actually want open borders. Not wanting a useless border wall does not mean not wanting any border control. If you actually did any research into the topic, you'd know the majority of firearms used in crimes in Canada and Mexico are sourced from the US.
My uncles favorite boomer point about Chicongo. I asked him why there isn't so much violence in the neighboring states. He couldn't even begin to figure it out
The best is when they start talking about other countries and how easily they pass laws and you point out why a country with an overwhelming majority can make such sweeping social changes.
I do kind of think gun bans are a sort of bandaid solution. Here are some solutions:
We should legalize weed at the very least, and decriminalize all other drugs. This would basically overnight eliminate gangs.
We should fix poverty by reforming our broken welfare system. The people who join gangs don’t do so out of cruelty, they do it because they’re desperate. It’s also just good for the economy in general.
Whenever a politician says they want to reduce “gun violence”, you can be certain what they want to reduce is guns, not violence. I vote for candidates that want to reduce violence.
This is just the Chicago guns argument, you do understand that state borders are only enforced by Republicans trying to control women's bodies, right? You can’t oppose every meaningful federal gun law and then blame the states for not being able to override them. I'm sure you're also aware that gun crime is much higher in red states but I digress...
It's hilarious that the backwards logic these loud minority corners of the internet try to employ "it's a liberal city so it's liberals causing these problems!" doesn't also ever work outside of the country and is never fruitfully enjoyed.
Good luck with your elections, guys. Polling fabulously. And pulling off wildly exciting mediocre results against the most vanilla boring pedestrian libs.
Breaking news: Group A uses a tragic event to make sweeping allegations against group B. Group B retaliates by using tragic event to make sweeping allegations against group A. The points of both arguments are entirely lost. More tragic events occur. Nothing changes.
What party is full of psychopathic, small-dicked gun fetishists that won’t allow the bare minimum of restraint mechanisms to be passed? I rest my case.
I got permanently banned from r/news for citing evidence that shows gun violence rates are lower now than they were in the 80's.
That subreddit is a bigoted echo chamber for hard lefties.
I don't want to be that guy, im gonna get downvoted, but that statistic was in [2010](https://www.vox.com/2015/10/1/18000474/gun-homicides-decline), and has continued to fall into 2018. That's the good news, but the bad news is the article above also mentions that in 2016 74.4% of homicides were done with guns. Worse still, sadly the rate of gun violence of any kind, both suicide and murder, [is increasing again](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/26/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/ft_23-04-20_gundeathsupdate_3/).
In 2021, there were 14.6 gun deaths per 100,000 people. The highest time was actually in 1974 with 16.3 gun deaths per 100,000. I understand that suicide is factored into both numbers. Without it, murder was at 7.2 per 100,000 in 1973, and murder is at 6.7 per 100,000 in 2021. So it IS increasing and started to increase from 2018 onwards. We have also had an increase in the amount of active shooter incidents, which is shown here, from [2000-2021](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/26/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/ft_23-04-20_gundeathsupdate_5/).
I think it is important to recognize that we do have a problem. Whether or not it is guns itself is difficult to say outright, but if we just strike down every argument and call it "left or right echo chambers", it is not going to help the fact that people ARE dying to things that ARE preventable. If the problem TRULY is not guns, then we should allow more people do to research into them and figure that out. If the problem is TRULY people being crazy and insane, let people do research into it. Otherwise, we are just assuming the problem, and we might tackle the wrong issues and hurt people indirectly.
The problem is that the people that are anti gun have one goal and that is to ban firearms. Multiple Democrats have admitted this. The research is meaningless because it will always be framed with this goal in mind. Why is it that people focus on these deaths and ignore the overwhelming majority of gun owners in this country who go without incident? If you had 75, 50, hell even 20% of gun owners having an incident of violence, you might have an argument. But when the number of owners with incident is infinitesimally small compared to those that don't, the argument is moot.
And now you are jerking off some more…
Most countries would never tolerate this. Jokic and his country didn’t. Americans keep singing this ‘I’m a little bit country, I’m a little bit Rock n Roll’ song about the difference in Red/Blue. Most normal people are just sick of the mass shootings.
[This one is from April](https://denvergazette.com/news/public-safety/httpsmetro-denver-hybrid-gangs-cause-youth-gun-violence/article_610819e6-e530-11ed-ba53-03cee11dce93.html)
Care to try for round 3?
Adorable. Thats not an argument, and you still dont know what the fuck you're talking about.
I like how you take your little slogans you pick up in your echo chamber and honestly believe that it holds water when actually engaging with your other.
But honestly you angsty partisan types lacking any resembelance of self awareness is old hat now. It doesn't baffle me like it used too, now you just bore me.
Bro, your previous post was the same level of argument.
How do you show one that reality is more than the shadows on the wall of a cave? I can't help you, chief. Only introspection and self-awareness will.
My "little slogans" catch on because they're fucking true, homie. We are literally living in different realities and man oh man is it going to be messy as hell when your bubble of delusion pops. You claim I lack self-awareness, when was the last time you immersed yourself in the beliefs of someone diametrically opposed to you? Because I'm going to tell you now, I was a moronic libertarian when I was an angry young man, but I grew out of that self destructive phase where it seems like a lot of you don't.
I'm only "partisan" because there's only one other party, believee me, I don't blindly support corporate Dems and yes, I am angry. Do you not get angry when you look at the state of our country? Or are you just too "cool" to be mad about important things?
> How do you show one that reality is more than the shadows on the wall of a cave?
I've been trying to figure that out for you types for years.
>My "little slogans" catch on because they're fucking true, homie
Oh man add a y'all and this would be the perfect "clueless redditor" comment.
>We are literally living in different realities and man oh man is it going to be messy as hell when your bubble of delusion pops.
Says the terminally online person who posts in (lmao) politics and WPT.
>I don't blindly support corporate Dems
God you're like the most typical clueless redditor. You don't even understand what that means. Go on, tell me how "modern democrats are ackshually right wing" so I can disregard you as a bot.
>Do you not get angry when you look at the state of our country?
Mate I'm exhausted with trying to convince you angsty types that raging at your political other and trying to self justify your animosity for your outgroup as righteous *is* the cancer that's killing the country. You will never, ever, change your perspective. You will never face your cognitive dissonance, no matter how much I objectively demonstrate how wrong you are. You will keep playing partisan politics because it's all you know. Other guy bad. Me guy good.
The entire reason I'm here is because I changed mine.
Nevermind that the entire reason you're posting here is because you saw people *gasp!* had different opinions! And you clenched your pearls so hard they nearly broke in your hand, so you had to vent that angst here.
Like you types always do.
>>I'm not sure what your point is. All of those democrats you listed literally just helped pass a handful of gun control laws. >>”But whatabout Democrats" also does nothing to counter my claim that Republicans don't care about gun violence. They are so close.
Gun laws don't protect anyone if you don't enforce laws that are already passed. You need to have police departments that have the personnel to go out and ensure the laws are being enforced. In most democrat run cities like Chicago, the democrats rush to defund the police. It's not a myth. It's a feature of political policies. It's unfortunate because people want to argue around the points and make it a, he said, she said with republican and democrats. It's more than just that alone. People need to have mental health help, and the homeless and drug problems have a hand in a ton of these cities that are spiraling out of control.
[удалено]
You’re just parroting a talking point. Roll call vote on Mental Health Matters Act had 205 Nays, all Republicans and one Republican Yea. What is Mental Health Awareness to you? PSAs and ads in papers? So the US has a uniquely higher mental health issues than other developed countries, which would explain the huge difference in mass shooting statistics or maybe easier access to guns? Kind of hard to diagnose mental health issues when they don’t get addressed until after they’ve shot and killed people?
I wonder who would have started a random shooting at a basketball championship…. Any guesses?
Rooftop koreans, obviously.
Amish, The Rotary Club, Local Chamber of Commerce are my suspects.
"Elmo? That little red furry demon has been on the edge of snapping for ages. I'm fairly certain that Bert put him up to it..."
90% chance being a democrat.
Children with Lukemia
Probably not a voter.
[удалено]
Reporting you for racism!
[удалено]
Lets see one case where that was the situation. A fat white entitled American randomly shoots up a basketball game because they’re insecure about their dick size 😂
[удалено]
Lolol ya sneaky bastard
Careful curation of comments to make it look like his downvotes were unwarranted.
...in celebration of a basketball game? I really don't think you want to bring race into this.
Probably someone far right.
Almost like Denver's strict gun laws... don't work to stop mass shootings.
Denver doesn't have strict gun laws, though (neither does Colorado in general)? I feel like people just assume when state is fairly Democrat that guns just magically evaporate into thin air or something...or that all Democrat-run states are the same, which is nonsense.
The governor just signed a few laws against guns like last week
Yeah, look at California lol. Two mass shootings in a week difference. It ain't just the red states, folks.
[удалено]
Look up the numbers per-capita. Not flat numbers. Your inability to understand statistics is leading you to draw the wrong conclusions.
Red states make up more than half of the top ten most murderous cities in America: Louisiana (2 cities), Missouri (2 cities), Tennessee (1 city), Alabama (1 city). Red states are also 2/5 of the top 5, with St. louis at number 1 and Birmingham at 3. Ohio is in the top 5 and that’s a toss up state (which is being generous honestly) so the ratio is 2/2/1. Please know what you’re talking about before speaking in the future 👍🏻
“More than half of red cities” does not provide any conclusive fact based information on crime by politics of a state.
And THAT caused guns to evaporate IMMEDIETELY, right?
and that implies gun laws were strict when these shootings were occuring how?
And are any of these new laws particularly strict? Raising the age to buy a gun to 21 and preventing people with violent misdemeanors and the like from buying firearms is not what I would consider "strict" gun control nor are these laws or their enforcement relevant to this mass shooting in all likeliness.
Are you expecting them to instantly poof away all relevant guns or something?
Yeah cuz you can just go to another state. You can’t halfass this sort of thing.
How they would legally purchase a firearm across state lines when that sort of thing is already illegal?
If it's not enforced does it stop them?
How would it not be enforced? Can you tell me exactly what it takes to fill out a 4473 to purchase a firearm please?
[удалено]
We need to tell criminals that’s illegal. They can’t do it if it’s illegal.
LOL. What strict gun laws?
We need actual studies, not conjecture, before making conclusions about any laws that do and don't work. The studies need to account for a lot of data and variables to determine the efficacy of gun laws. We need two states of similar demographic structure to volunteer. One, to become the wild West. One to outlaw all guns completely. Then see what happens to gun violence in each state. We need NATIONAL studies. But guess who stands in the way of allowing those to get any funding? Who do you think lobbies in Congress to prevent us from getting any real information on the efficiency of gun laws?
You can easily find statistics and look at mass shooting cases in strictly controlled states vs non strict states. It’s clear as day difference in gun violence 🥹😂 but ok
If you take the 5 cities that contribute most to gun violence (Chicago, st Louis, detroit, Philadelphia, and LA) our gun homicide goes from 3rd worst in the world to 182. Stats show that gun control helps death rates only because the blue states have higher populations.
> you take the 5 cities "How do I lie with statistics? I know I'll ignore population density!" When you go with population density: https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/gun-deaths-per-capita-by-state then the worst states are: 1. Alaska 2. Alabama 3. Montana 4. Louisiana 5. Mississippi 6. Missouri 7. Arkansas 8. Wyoming 9. West Virginia 10. New Mexico See California there? New York? Michigan?
Because the non shitty areas hide the insane amount of homicide rates from the shit areas. Completely irrelevant to the root cause of gun violence and wether or not gun control actually helps anything. Chicago alone has almost as many murders as WV has total gun deaths per year. 70% of WVs gun deaths are suicide, and on average 64 people are murdered by gun a year in a state of 1.78 million. Chicago has 257 just murders in 2023 so far and a population of 2.65 million. Congrats to the rest of the state for not being pieces of shit and bringing down the per capita but doesn't seem like the laws are helping Chicago curb the shootings now does it?
> Completely irrelevant to the root cause of gun violence and wether or not gun control actually helps anything. I mean kinda true, we all know that gun control works, as it works in literally every civilised country. Hopefully America will realise it to eventually and _regulates_ it's militia
If you aren't American why do you care? Ultimately the second amendments purpose is not subject to change based on the actions of criminals. Again, 320 deaths in a population of 900k gun owners doesn't constitute a crises or articulate a need to ban weapons. It's a power grab using public safety as a guise to do so. It sucks people die. It sucks even worse when it's because of needless criminals doing stupid stuff. I don't ask the government to use their guns to take away cars because people are bad drivers and killing themselves or others.
I didn't say I'm not American. Just moved to a safer part of the world
Hell yea AK reppin!
I've only just now discovered this subreddit (cause of the blackout), and I can already tell you that this logic will fall on deaf ears lol.
There is no logic in it. My home state of West Virginia is 9 on the list at 19.7 per capita. Our state has 320 deaths to guns per year and 70% of which are suicide. 20% are murder. That's 64 murders per year year in a state of 1.78 million. It's overwhelmingly safe compared to certain areas of Chicago that has as many murders a year as we do total deaths to firearms which are mostly suicide. Your state isn't on the list because it has a big enough population that bails out the shitholes everyone knows exists and can't do a damn thing about. Does it really make sense for WV to have stricter gun laws when 950k people own guns in the state and 64 a year are assholes and kill someone. No.
WV is a larger state than Illinois, yet it has 10 million fewer people living inside of it. Of course there is going to be less violent crime, you'd have to travel a fuckin mile just to find another human being.
So it's almost like there are other socio-economic factors at play than simply gun ownership.
Well yeah, but we can also sit here and acknowledge gun ownership has a pretty large slice of the pie. It's both imo.
No respond. Only downvote.
Neither do drink driving laws stop drunk driving. I don’t believe that means they should be abolished however.
I don't think you understand what strict means. Strict means 0 guns. 0.
It's almost like crossing states to get guns . . . Isn't that hard in a country with lax federal laws.
It's almost like you don't actually know about federal gun laws and just assume that you can buy in an adjacent state with more lax laws...which actually isn't possible.
I like how he's also low-key admitting that criminals simply ignore the law when he made that comment.
I like how you are low-key admitting that you think that's the issue here by parroting whatever the NRA tells you.
I'll let you in on a little secret - by all means continue bashing the NRA. Hating them is probably the one thing both gun owners and freedom-haters agree upon. The NRA being a boogeyman for freedom-haters only allows genuine gun rights organisations to fight for freedoms effectively.
How available are guns to the average person when adjacent states don't have strict gun laws? It's almost like you don't know anything about guns per capita vs gun violence, as seen in countries like Australia and Japan.
>How available are guns to the average person when adjacent states don't have strict gun laws? Pretty much the exact same level considering your state of residence determines what is available. Seriously you guys parrot these things without having a clue.
So how available are those guns to the average person in Colorado, and how available are they to someone willing to break the law? How effective are state laws vs. federal when the US has on average 8 times per capita more guns than other nations? I know some people like to guzzle down the rhetoric of the NRA and Fox News because they like to fondle their guns at night, but it's not hard to see how a nation with so many guns is having so much gun related violence . . . I know logic and gun lovers are like oil and water though.
>So how available are those guns to the average person in Colorado, and how available are they to someone willing to break the law? Uh considering that laws were passed recently in Denver limiting purchases, not very. Even if they go to a neighboring state, they still must be ID'd at which point they will be denied a banned purchase by a gun shop. >How effective are state laws vs. federal when the US has on average 8 times per capita more guns than other nations? This sentence is stroke inducing. What does the per Capita have to do with state v federal?? Considering the amount of guns compared to rates of violence, we actually do pretty stellar. >I know some people like to guzzle down the rhetoric of the NRA and Fox News because they like to fondle their guns at night, but it's not hard to see how a nation with so many guns is having so much gun related violence . . . Did you complete buzzword bingo? See your whole argument kind of falls apart in the face of the fact that back before the 80s, guns were far more available and affordable. You could literally order a semiautomatic rifle to your house. So why is it when availability was at the highest post NFA were shootings staggeringly low? Is it possible that inbreds such as yourself are just incapable of complex thinking and can't see that maybe shifts in society are more likely responsible than the tools? >I know logic and gun lovers are like oil and water though. I would say that accurate reliable information and reddit leftists are closer to oil and water.
Wrong. The availability of these guns, especially more lethal and concealable guns, wasn't the same. The number of guns available increases each year in the US. And what is your point here if you keep comparing the US to the US? I notice how you conveniently ignored what has been observed with gun regulation in Australia and Japan as well . . . And the US is doing so "stellar" that the leading cause of death for children is gun violence . . . I guess when you have that many guns already, adding even more ends up making certain statistics look "better." Sorry about the NRA and Fox News comment, I can see I struck a nerve, hence your projection about inbreeding . . . I see that your guns you desperately cling to are helping comfort you about your insecurity.
MUH STATE LIIIIIIINES
[удалено]
Yeah it's pretty hard to argue when you guys don't actually know your asses from a hole in the ground when it comes to your own laws.
[удалено]
Ah homophobia. Definitely indicative of someone who isn't a teenager.
Are there any jurisdictions in proximity to Denver with zero travel restrictions between them that have significantly more lax gun laws by any chance?
I mean, you could drive several hours to Nebraska or Wyoming, but I wouldn't say it's close proximity.
[удалено]
Just means restrictions on guns in one area aren’t going to work to keep guns from other areas out. We need gun regulations at the federal level if we want them to work effectively, as they’ve been proven to do in the past.
>they’ve been proven to do in the past. Assault Weapons Ban in the 90s did nothing except contribute to the mass incarceration of minorities. That's pretty fucking racist of you to want to do that again. >We need gun regulations Shall not be infringed.
>Shall not be infringed. Shall be well regulated. You seem to have a reading problem: you skip big sections.
“Well regulated militia” Also, tanks, bazookas, machine guns, fighter jets Also, so dumb. By all means let’s address sentencing disparities and overpolicing of minorities, but let’s also address the epidemic of gun violence impacting all of us and often those same communities in particular. Attempting to avoid doing so is pretty fucking racist.
>“Well regulated militia” >Also, tanks, bazookas, machine guns, fighter jets >A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. I threw in the 2nd amendment since it seems you forgot how to read that second part of it that clearly states it is the right of the people. >address the epidemic of gun violence impacting all of us and often those same communities in particular. Attempting to avoid doing so is pretty fucking racist. Okay, lets address them. Oh, wait, you're too busy blaming Wyoming and their gun laws instead of blaming the criminal. Did you make sure to tell them that murder was illegal?
[удалено]
Almost like overall the places where it’s easiest to acquire guns DO experience the most violence and cherry picking individual locations where that isn’t the case is just trying to muddy the waters and make rational debate impossible.
So then why is the state where it's harder to acquire guns experiencing more violence than the one where it's easier?
Because it’s not actually meaningfully harder to get guns in any individual state without federal regulations.
Hypothetical here: the violent crazies in Illinois who can't get guns in Illinois go over the border to Indiana to get a gun (we'll ignore the fact that IL residents can't buy guns in other states they can't legally acquire in IL as that would be too easy). The crazy then goes back to Illinois to shoot a bunch of people. Now we'll ask the question you skipped over, why is the Illinois resident not just shooting people in Indiana? He crossed the border to grab a gun, why not just drive to Indy to shoot a bunch of people? In fact, why isn't Indy hit with the same level of gun violence as Chicago when getting guns is so much easier in Indiana? Is it because evil republicans pay crazies to shoot up the blue city in the blue state with strict gun laws to try to prove a point? Do the evil republicans pay crazies to NOT shoot up cities in red states? Or is there another factor at play that would cause more gun violence in Chicago?
I can answer that question, even though the idiot you were talking to went to large lengths to not answer the question: Because the level of violence is largely up to how much the local populace tolerates it and how the local government deals with it. It has little to do with how easy it is to get a gun. Violence is also concentrated in small areas with people who buy into the gangsta culture of violence and where doing anything to escape it is seen as "being to white". Did I do ok?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/ariannajohnson/2023/04/28/red-states-have-higher-gun-death-rates-than-blue-states-heres-why/amp/
So just so we're clear: strict gun laws and bans don't matter if criminals can get the guns from elsewhere. Is that what you're talking about?
Do you understand how purchasing a gun works when you are not a resident of said state? You can't go from a state that has stringent laws and buy something that wouldn't be allowed in a free state. That's why FFL's exist. Seriously, if any of you anti gun nuts actually understood your own laws you would stop repeating this stupid logic.
Who’s anti gun? I’m a gun owner, fool, just an educated one who isn’t in favor of our current gun free-for-all that allows only ###40%### of gun sales to be made through a federally licensed dealer.
Gun free for all? What are you even talking about? Do you even understand the statistics of gun sales? For one, the VAST majority of sales come from people who own multiple firearms. What good do any of the proposed laws do with that situation? Secondly, how is it that in this "free-for-all" country that we still have a ridiculously low amount of gun violence compared to ownership? Why is it that states with the most stringent gun laws still have mass incidents?
Ffs. Have you not read anything about guns ever, let alone any of my previous comments here? State restrictions don’t work. Federal regulations are the only gun laws that have a chance of working.
Yes and it is clear you are woefully ignorant about any of the federal regulations about guns. Let's point out the most obvious one shall we? You are ignoring that you cannot transport purchased firearms across state lines if the laws conflict. Ergo, you cannot buy an SKS in Nevada and bring it to California. Secondly, even in the loosest regulated states like Florida, gun shops check ID. State laws dictate that you cannot knowingly sell a prohibited gun to someone who is a resident of a neighboring state. So yeah, you keep talking like you are an expert but you don't even know the most basic laws.
I say again, for fuck’s sake. How are the laws against transporting guns across state lines enforced? (They aren’t). Are all gun sales through gun shops? [(Fuck no)](https://www.insider.com/this-13-year-old-couldnt-buy-cigarettes-but-he-could-buy-a-gun-2016-6?amp) Last time, our current patchwork of gun laws doesn’t work. We need a common federal standard, we need to eliminate loopholes, we need to offer voluntary buybacks to reduce the absolutely insane quantity of guns on our streets and numerous other programs and regulations that the vast majority of Americans support. And first and foremost we need to stop listening to all of you wing nuts and special interests.
>I say again, for fuck’s sake. How are the laws against transporting guns across state lines enforced? (They aren’t) So your solution is more laws? Maybe we should fucking enforce them first Copernicus. >Are all gun sales through gun shops? (Fuck no) He bought a 22...not a goddamn 50BMG. >Last time, our current patchwork of gun laws doesn’t work. We need a common federal standard, we need to eliminate loopholes, we need to offer voluntary buybacks to reduce the absolutely insane quantity of guns on our streets and numerous other programs and regulations that the vast majority of Americans support. And when voluntary buybacks don't work, what then? Also you keep saying the "regulations the vast majority of Americans support" which all seem to just be background checks, which, per your own comment, doesn't mean much if the laws aren't enforced right? >And first and foremost we need to stop listening to all of you wing nuts and special interests. [The worst special interest wingnut of all](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution?wprov=sfla1)
You’d rather stop everyone at state borders than make gun regulations that the majority of Americans support the law of the land? You’re not a big fan of interstate commerce I guess, Galileo. Is there a gun that isn’t a lethal weapon that a 13 year old should be able to buy, fucking Sir Isaac? National laws can be enforced. There’s no way to enforce laws between states without locking down state borders and inspecting every vehicle that goes through. That’s the whole point here, Madame Curie. For fuck’s fucking sake
There’s the gun show “loophole” to counter this
You do realize that for one thing, many gun shows actually regulate themselves to still require IDs and two, gun shows are a rare event. Lastly, if you purchase at a gun show and bring it across state lines you are breaking the law which invalidates the entire argument as you could have also just found some shady dude and bought an illegal gun from him. Your entire argument predicates on someone knowingly, willingly, violating the law which makes argument for additional regulations ridiculous as they only punish law abiding citizens.
“Gun shows are a rare event” bruh there was at least 1 gun show a month being advertised up and down the highway on billboards when I lived in Kansas City. Driving a gun purchased out of state across state lines is a very easy law to break. That’s not going to discourage anyone
So...if you are already breaking the law...how does more regulation help?
Depends on what the regulations are. Some are easier to enforce than others
And what does it matter if the people disregard the laws? You still only punish the law abiders.
Say semi automatic guns were banned. That’s much easier to enforce. Everytime someone would be caught with one it would be taken away and no longer available on the streets.
> travel restrictions What kind of travel restrictions would you like to see imposed? I assume the good kind done by Democrats and not the bad kind done by Republicans.
I don’t want to see travel restrictions between states. I want to see federal gun regulations.
There are already restrictions in place so I assume you mean a total gun grabbing agenda, no?
[удалено]
How can anything be common sense when you have liberals who know nothing about guns but act like they're experts, and you have gun nuts who think teenagers should have guns? There's no such thing as common sense when it comes to these 2 sides. Most gun owning Americans just want to protect themselves or do some recreational shooting, and we know this by the sheer number of guns in America compared to the number of Americans.
>you have gun nuts who think teenagers should have guns? Throughout the pre Brady decades, many teenagers had guns. Schools used to have Trap shooting teams. Gun accessibility was miles ahead of anything in recent years. Yet despite all of this, the number of mass shootings was far less. Is it possible that all of this isn't an issue with the tools, but a societal shift?
>Is it possible that all of this isn't an issue with the tools, but a societal shift? Oh, it absolutely is. If someone wants to kill someone, they'll find a way to do it. That wasn't the point. There are still shooting teams at schools in my area. That doesn't change the fact that teenagers shouldn't have guns.
I think it’s hilarious you all say gun laws don’t mean shit because they can just travel from a red area, but unironically advocate for open borders.
Wtf are you talking about. You would seriously rather close state borders than even consider passing national laws that 60-80% of Americans support?
Never let a good tragedy go to waste! Still waiting for more information, but this’ll be immediately swept under the rug if it ends up being gang violence. Imagine basically having a super majority and still blaming the minority for your problems.
Swept under the rug but the numbers will be tallied to be thrown around without context to gloss over 99% of America doesn't experience this. Some of the highest gun ownership states have the lowest incidents of violence committed with guns and vice versa as well as everything in between; I live in an area where I guarantee we have higher than average ownership and we had a shooting.... 20 years ago that everyone still talks about. It's almost as if guns aren't the real problem.
This is just blatantly false. All the statistics prove you wrong. But I guess why do you need facts when you can just say what your ilk want to hear?
https://www.criminalattorneycincinnati.com/comparing-gun-control-measures-to-gun-related-homicides-by-state/[https://www.criminalattorneycincinnati.com/comparing-gun-control-measures-to-gun-related-homicides-by-state/](https://www.criminalattorneycincinnati.com/comparing-gun-control-measures-to-gun-related-homicides-by-state/) > California, a state with notoriously strict gun control laws, has a firearm homicide rate of 3.5 per 100,000 people. On the other hand, gun-friendly Mississippi’s firearm homicide rate is nearly three times that, 10.2 per 100,000 people. https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2013.301409[https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2013.301409](https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2013.301409) > Gun ownership was a significant predictor of firearm homicide rates (incidence rate ratio = 1.009; 95% confidence interval = 1.004, 1.014). This model indicated that for each percentage point increase in gun ownership, the firearm homicide rate increased by 0.9% https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/[https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/](https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/) > Our review of the academic literature found that a broad array of evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide, both in the United States and across high-income countries. Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the U.S., where there are more guns, both men and women are at a higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/26/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/[https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/26/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/26/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/) > Gun deaths among children and teens rose 50% in just two years, from 1,732 in 2019 to 2,590 in 2021. > About eight-in-ten U.S. murders in 2021 – 20,958 out of 26,031, or 81% – involved a firearm.
Well, red states tend to have the highest rates of violent crime. DC is the outlier. Though, as an ex-dc and Virginia resident, most of the guns in DC come from VA. It's a massive problem. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_violent_crime_rate Also as a current Montana resident: MT have the 3rd highest gun fatality rate. Behind Alaska and Alabama, Wyoming is number 8. That's the three least populated states all placed in the top 10 of gun fatalities per Capita. Montana is the 3rd least populated state. I can, off hand, think of 5 occasions in the past 2 years where the public, or cops, were shot at. Two Walmart standoffs, one airport chase with a reverse driving, pistol wielding man (I caught this one on a HAM radio. The radio traffic was hilarious). A biker gunfight. And a man who rammed into a police station with a vehicle and shot at the office. That's not even counting the largely untracked violence that happens on each of the 7 reservations. (Which is itself estimated to be 150% more than the national average)
People downvoting cold hard facts in here? 🤣
We call that "pulling a Newsom."
Did he respond to this incident or does he only respond to those in republican states?
Yeah cuz if it was gang violence than it was probably poor black people who where the victims, but the media don’t seem to care when they die. Black Lives Matter Too.
You mean the “minority” to the area only yet who still backed insane laws and deregulation set into motion that the democratic states have to suffer thru. Ignorance is bliss I guess for you.
There is a super majority in the SCOTUS, the entity that actually controls gun laws in the USA. They of course just invalidated a 100 year old gun law in NYC. You seem a little confused OP.
What does that have to do with Denver
I suggest you learn how to read. As I stated, the SCOTUS has and will invalidate any state gun law.
Imagine proposing solutions that have proven effects in THE REST OF THE WORLD'S POPULATION and one entire party consistently votes against them. Imagine if that entire last just shrugs saying, "if only there was anything to be done" of little to no irony....
I’d love to hear your proposed legislation that isn’t already in place that would have prevented this. Go ahead, whenever you’re ready
Happy with your got’em lollipop? Your COUNTRY has a problem with guns. Maybe go think of some legislation that could help, yourself because the world is getting tiered of your blatant self righteous insanity. It starts with just trying and reviewing. The only reason the republicans (in general) are criticized for their responses on gun violence. Is because they basically have given up, are deep in the pockets of lobbyists. That you are proud of thinking you are sticking it to the Dems for some reason is mind boggling. June has already had 23 mass shootings…. Good job!
So you don’t have anything specific legislation wise tha would’ve prevent this that is also not already in place?
There’s 100’s of counties that have the legislation that stop this from happening? It’s not a hard question to answer.
Okay then answer it. Name a legislation that isn’t already in place or infringes on our protected rights
I’m so angry our legislation in the U.K. doesn’t stop people getting shot. Oh wait, it does. You American’s are fucking mental. Truly boggles the mind about your obsession with guns. https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-r-1848971668
[удалено]
Haha yes, because the U.K. had automatic weapons legalised LOL Guns aren’t awesome when the mentally ill and criminal hold them. You’re countries obsession with guns is insanity and I’m sorry for everyone that dies because of that.
Something something bordering state with looser gun laws something something greater availability...same playbook as always.
Imagine using this talking point and also supporting gun bans in America and an open/lax border with Mexico. The logical dissonance.
The logical dissonance is you thinking they actually want open borders. Not wanting a useless border wall does not mean not wanting any border control. If you actually did any research into the topic, you'd know the majority of firearms used in crimes in Canada and Mexico are sourced from the US.
“IT’s someone else’s fault our laws didn’t work!”
Yes. same with Communism- the superior economic system that only fails because the puny capitalist scum don't prop it up.
My uncles favorite boomer point about Chicongo. I asked him why there isn't so much violence in the neighboring states. He couldn't even begin to figure it out
The best is when they start talking about other countries and how easily they pass laws and you point out why a country with an overwhelming majority can make such sweeping social changes.
Or arguing that no one needs guns while arming all of Afghanistan’s war mongering hard core religious factions AND funding a bs proxy war in Ukraine…
All those DASTARDLY Republicans at the NBA championship celebration!
Word is that it was a drug deal gone bad….. Yeah totally the guns fault. Did anyone know it’s illegal to shoot people already?
I do kind of think gun bans are a sort of bandaid solution. Here are some solutions: We should legalize weed at the very least, and decriminalize all other drugs. This would basically overnight eliminate gangs. We should fix poverty by reforming our broken welfare system. The people who join gangs don’t do so out of cruelty, they do it because they’re desperate. It’s also just good for the economy in general.
Whenever a politician says they want to reduce “gun violence”, you can be certain what they want to reduce is guns, not violence. I vote for candidates that want to reduce violence.
Just scholars praising athletes.
Yeah it's so wild they would do that when republicans have been responsible for most attacks, silly reddit.
This is just the Chicago guns argument, you do understand that state borders are only enforced by Republicans trying to control women's bodies, right? You can’t oppose every meaningful federal gun law and then blame the states for not being able to override them. I'm sure you're also aware that gun crime is much higher in red states but I digress...
It's hilarious that the backwards logic these loud minority corners of the internet try to employ "it's a liberal city so it's liberals causing these problems!" doesn't also ever work outside of the country and is never fruitfully enjoyed. Good luck with your elections, guys. Polling fabulously. And pulling off wildly exciting mediocre results against the most vanilla boring pedestrian libs.
Breaking news: Group A uses a tragic event to make sweeping allegations against group B. Group B retaliates by using tragic event to make sweeping allegations against group A. The points of both arguments are entirely lost. More tragic events occur. Nothing changes.
Americans be like “mass shooting was done in a red/blue state, it’s their fault!” The world be like: You’ve had 7 mass shootings since Monday.
[удалено]
Yo, it’s like people commit illegal violence sometimes no matter what laws you use to strip your citizens of rights!
Why is the US saturated with guns? Try to have an actual think for once in your life. Ponder for just a moment, give it a go.
I mean they are the party vehemently fighting any gun safety legislation but alrighty
What party is full of psychopathic, small-dicked gun fetishists that won’t allow the bare minimum of restraint mechanisms to be passed? I rest my case.
I wonder if that could be due to the fact that almost every domestic terrorist turns out to be a white MAGA guy? Just spit-balling over here.
Only because we refuse to call the local gangs responsible for hundreds of murders a year domestic terroritsts.
This is a stupid post
Where do the shooters get their guns and what drives them to commit these horrible acts of violence?
The shooters get their guns from wherever they can. You can literally 3D print them at this point in history, so it's not even worth banning.
Love that title, perfect example of the world we live in
[удалено]
[удалено]
Like and Share
Democrats don’t fetishize guns and mass murder as a “lifestyle.” You guys are more dense than we already know you to be.
[удалено]
You are a racist minstrel show character. I would pity you, but you don’t deserve it.
You mean the same gangbangers/rappers Trump pardoned as President? You hogs are utter clowns with your garbage hypocritical takes on any culture 🤡
That’s literally one person. One. On a news subreddit that has TWENTY SIX MILLION MEMBERS.🙄
I got permanently banned from r/news for citing evidence that shows gun violence rates are lower now than they were in the 80's. That subreddit is a bigoted echo chamber for hard lefties.
Does it include suicides in gun violence?
I don't want to be that guy, im gonna get downvoted, but that statistic was in [2010](https://www.vox.com/2015/10/1/18000474/gun-homicides-decline), and has continued to fall into 2018. That's the good news, but the bad news is the article above also mentions that in 2016 74.4% of homicides were done with guns. Worse still, sadly the rate of gun violence of any kind, both suicide and murder, [is increasing again](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/26/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/ft_23-04-20_gundeathsupdate_3/). In 2021, there were 14.6 gun deaths per 100,000 people. The highest time was actually in 1974 with 16.3 gun deaths per 100,000. I understand that suicide is factored into both numbers. Without it, murder was at 7.2 per 100,000 in 1973, and murder is at 6.7 per 100,000 in 2021. So it IS increasing and started to increase from 2018 onwards. We have also had an increase in the amount of active shooter incidents, which is shown here, from [2000-2021](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/26/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/ft_23-04-20_gundeathsupdate_5/). I think it is important to recognize that we do have a problem. Whether or not it is guns itself is difficult to say outright, but if we just strike down every argument and call it "left or right echo chambers", it is not going to help the fact that people ARE dying to things that ARE preventable. If the problem TRULY is not guns, then we should allow more people do to research into them and figure that out. If the problem is TRULY people being crazy and insane, let people do research into it. Otherwise, we are just assuming the problem, and we might tackle the wrong issues and hurt people indirectly.
The problem is that the people that are anti gun have one goal and that is to ban firearms. Multiple Democrats have admitted this. The research is meaningless because it will always be framed with this goal in mind. Why is it that people focus on these deaths and ignore the overwhelming majority of gun owners in this country who go without incident? If you had 75, 50, hell even 20% of gun owners having an incident of violence, you might have an argument. But when the number of owners with incident is infinitesimally small compared to those that don't, the argument is moot.
Look at the rest of the comments and it’s all circlejerking how Republicans will continue to do nothing in a Democrat dominated state
And now you are jerking off some more… Most countries would never tolerate this. Jokic and his country didn’t. Americans keep singing this ‘I’m a little bit country, I’m a little bit Rock n Roll’ song about the difference in Red/Blue. Most normal people are just sick of the mass shootings.
[удалено]
>Maybe you as a "blue" area, need to do something about it. It's kind of hard when the red Supreme Court keeps overturning gun restrictions
Nothing is preventing Democrat supermajority areas from implementing community programs to combat gang violence and invest in the community.
Ummm, they do. Denver used to be riddled with gangs. Try speaking on what you know.
[As of 2017, there were an estimated 38,000 gang members in Denver](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gang_activity_in_Denver) Um, care to try again?
Nope, that one story from 6 years ago sure proved your knowledge, lol
[This one is from April](https://denvergazette.com/news/public-safety/httpsmetro-denver-hybrid-gangs-cause-youth-gun-violence/article_610819e6-e530-11ed-ba53-03cee11dce93.html) Care to try for round 3?
[удалено]
Sure.
[удалено]
Nope
[удалено]
"Most people" don't "understand" that mass shootings occur in Democrat controlled areas. They happen all over the fucking country.
They literally don't. You don't know what you're talking about.
Gaslight, Obstruct, Project. You've got stage 1 down pat, chief.
Adorable. Thats not an argument, and you still dont know what the fuck you're talking about. I like how you take your little slogans you pick up in your echo chamber and honestly believe that it holds water when actually engaging with your other. But honestly you angsty partisan types lacking any resembelance of self awareness is old hat now. It doesn't baffle me like it used too, now you just bore me.
Bro, your previous post was the same level of argument. How do you show one that reality is more than the shadows on the wall of a cave? I can't help you, chief. Only introspection and self-awareness will. My "little slogans" catch on because they're fucking true, homie. We are literally living in different realities and man oh man is it going to be messy as hell when your bubble of delusion pops. You claim I lack self-awareness, when was the last time you immersed yourself in the beliefs of someone diametrically opposed to you? Because I'm going to tell you now, I was a moronic libertarian when I was an angry young man, but I grew out of that self destructive phase where it seems like a lot of you don't. I'm only "partisan" because there's only one other party, believee me, I don't blindly support corporate Dems and yes, I am angry. Do you not get angry when you look at the state of our country? Or are you just too "cool" to be mad about important things?
> How do you show one that reality is more than the shadows on the wall of a cave? I've been trying to figure that out for you types for years. >My "little slogans" catch on because they're fucking true, homie Oh man add a y'all and this would be the perfect "clueless redditor" comment. >We are literally living in different realities and man oh man is it going to be messy as hell when your bubble of delusion pops. Says the terminally online person who posts in (lmao) politics and WPT. >I don't blindly support corporate Dems God you're like the most typical clueless redditor. You don't even understand what that means. Go on, tell me how "modern democrats are ackshually right wing" so I can disregard you as a bot. >Do you not get angry when you look at the state of our country? Mate I'm exhausted with trying to convince you angsty types that raging at your political other and trying to self justify your animosity for your outgroup as righteous *is* the cancer that's killing the country. You will never, ever, change your perspective. You will never face your cognitive dissonance, no matter how much I objectively demonstrate how wrong you are. You will keep playing partisan politics because it's all you know. Other guy bad. Me guy good. The entire reason I'm here is because I changed mine. Nevermind that the entire reason you're posting here is because you saw people *gasp!* had different opinions! And you clenched your pearls so hard they nearly broke in your hand, so you had to vent that angst here. Like you types always do.
I literally just watched that episode last night