Should ANY weapons be banned?

[math is hard]

I posted one a while back. Gun violence breaks down into three chunks. A few accidents. A bit of domestic violence. And a ****load of drug, gang, and street crime contained largely in coastal mega cities with serious poverty issues and, come to find out, a lot of lead. Outside of this we are dealing with fractional anomalies. Just like the electoral maps we were looking at a few months back. City mouse vs Country mouse.

Where did you post it? I don't want to wade through every post you've made in the past month.

Also, my point was that I wanted Jackel to source his 'facts' for once in his life.

[rear naked mole rat]

Using Data from national center for health statistics, and http://library.med.utah.edu/WebPath/...S/GUNSTAT.html, http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/guns.cfm http://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/gun-...ce/welcome.htm we see

62% suicide
36% homicide
2% accident

1% of total deaths were from a form of long gun

About 80% of people arrested without a gun but had one elsewhere, got their gun through illegal means.
15% of state and 13% of federal inmates were busted with a gun on their person, only 2% of them had a non handgun

94% (it varies to as high as 97% but hangs around here) of the homicides are gang-on-gang

So basically assault weapons are responsible for next to nothing. If you look at non gang on gang, Canada has just under 200 murders for their 9.95 million guns, the US has 550 for their 270 million guns. Honestly it seems like or gun laws work just fine in comparison. 1.75% are non suicide, non gang, and not counting for self defense... Close enough to an exclusive being suicide and gangs for me

Sorry for any formatting issues, sent this from tablet

a) you said "Gun deaths are almost exclusively the result of criminal-on-criminal activity", so guns deaths in general is what was being questioned. how those deaths break down in terms of the type of gun used is irrelevant.

2) from your own link: http://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/gun-...ce/welcome.htm
"by 1993, nearly all gang-related homicides involved guns (97 percent)" ... " "The percentage of gang-related homicides caused by guns fell slightly to 94 percent in 2004"
so it says that of the homicides that are gang related, up to 97% involved guns. what it does NOT say is that 97% of homicides caused by guns are gang-related. none of your links, from what i see, give a breakdown of what % of homicides are directly gang related or what % of victims were "criminals".

d) shut the **** up, jackel.

[ocmmafan]

As has been stated repeatedly throughout this thread, gun violence is a product of a specific demographic and every statistic supports it. What statistics may not tell you (without in depth research) is that the people murdered in gun violence are often criminals themselves. Criminals shoot other criminals with handguns. We do NOT have a national crisis with people hunting down children with assault rifles. Altering the size of a magazine will not stop anything. Creating new registration requirements won't either.

As usual, a few buffoons can't understand this after being lead astray by John Stewart and Bill Maher.

[Jackel585]

Because that paragraph doesn't say what you said, although it is a particularly poorly written paragraph, so I don't blame you for misreading it.

****, thanks for pointing that out. Learned my lesson about trying to work through **** on the tablet like that. Maybe a font change will help. I did blend some of the numbers though since the data covered a couple of years but didn't change too much (besides a decrease in homicides and increase in suicides). I didn't think twice about that 90-ish% # because I remember in my 400-level criminology class learning that it was up around 75% in the early 2000s. Anyways I got to go shopping, I'll try to find a more accurate breakdown of gun-deaths related to gangs in respect to the total gun deaths. I really want to try to find a self-defense % too, but according to one of those links, it would be about 16% of the homicides are at-home self-defense. To me that seems a bit high though, as I'd expect the total self-defense # to be up around that, not just at-home.

The big problem though is that statistics are so manipulable that both sides of the argument will be able to pull up something supporting their side, so debates get into a hash of your numbers are wrong. Why can't we agree on taking guns away from people at risk for mental health, with violent criminal records, preventing both from getting them, and letting everyone else have them?

[Jackel585]

a) you said "Gun deaths are almost exclusively the result of criminal-on-criminal activity", so guns deaths in general is what was being questioned. how those deaths break down in terms of the type of gun used is irrelevant.

In the US, Suicide makes you a criminal. Sad but true.

[Makalu G]

Where did you post it? I don't want to wade through every post you've made in the past month.

Maybe you can just search in this thread a few pages back...

[math is hard]

****, thanks for pointing that out. Learned my lesson about trying to work through **** on the tablet like that. Maybe a font change will help. I did blend some of the numbers though since the data covered a couple of years but didn't change too much (besides a decrease in homicides and increase in suicides). I didn't think twice about that 90-ish% # because I remember in my 400-level criminology class learning that it was up around 75% in the early 2000s. Anyways I got to go shopping, I'll try to find a more accurate breakdown of gun-deaths related to gangs in respect to the total gun deaths. I really want to try to find a self-defense % too, but according to one of those links, it would be about 16% of the homicides are at-home self-defense. To me that seems a bit high though, as I'd expect the total self-defense # to be up around that, not just at-home.

I'll save you the trouble on that last point: they (the FBI, at least) don't count justifiable self-defense shootings as homicides. It's a separate category.

The big problem though is that statistics are so manipulable that both sides of the argument will be able to pull up something supporting their side, so debates get into a hash of your numbers are wrong. Why can't we agree on taking guns away from people at risk for mental health, with violent criminal records, preventing both from getting them, and letting everyone else have them?

Yeah, that's a whole other conversation. I just wanted you to back up your assertion with some facts. Or a single fact. Any sort of evidence would be nice.

[math is hard]

In the US, Suicide makes you a criminal. Sad but true.

That is a fucking bullshit sidestep.

[Time Warner]

Jackel is upsetting the Canadians by rebelling against lord Obama. I'm about to grab some pop-corn, should be fun.

Btw anyone who thinks that the majority of gun related deaths were done by law-abiding citizens, is retarded and never visited America. Perhaps those people come from a land where even the ghetto'est black people are not much ghetto'er than Jamie Kennedy from Malibu's Most Wanted.

[math is hard]

Jackel is upsetting the Canadians by rebelling against lord Obama. I'm about to grab some pop-corn, should be fun.

Ok, now you're just trolling. You've been here long enough to know how completely full of shit Jackel is.