Indiana doesn't have a gun crime problem like Chicago.
Leftists will never understand something so simple and obvious. States like Montana, Wyoming, and West Virginia are covered up with guns, with nearly every person having one or two guns. Yet they have among the lowest violent crime and gun violence in the nation.
Guns are just a tool . If you hypothetically were able to take all the guns out of places like Chicago or Baltimore, they would still have among the highest murder rates in the nation...but would just be killing each other with knives, or crowbars. Crime is a MORAL issue. It's not a tool issue. It's related to the type of people you have in society -- their beliefs/morals/ethics.
cut it out.
If Illinois allowed guns, the surrounding states would have an economic collapse
Leftists will never understand something so simple and obvious. States like Montana, Wyoming, and West Virginia are covered up with guns, with nearly every person having one or two guns. Yet they have among the lowest violent crime and gun violence in the nation.
Guns are just a tool . If you hypothetically were able to take all the guns out of places like Chicago or Baltimore, they would still have among the highest murder rates in the nation...but would just be killing each other with knives, or crowbars. Crime is a MORAL issue. It's not a tool issue. It's related to the type of people you have in society -- their beliefs/morals/ethics.
Violence has to do with density of population. Stats say sharks barely kill people therefore they aren’t violent, but you put 1 shark in a full swimming pool and the density of population changes
Yeah, such a weak comparison.
Chicago: 2.7million people in 232 sq.miles
Montana, Wyoming, West Virginia: 3.4 million people in 267,000 sq. miles.
And don't start into the moral/ethics arguments. If anything we've seen from "righties" the past 8 years is ethics/morals/decency/intellect goes out the window when they cheer and support pumpkin head during his "hate every American that doesn't support MA GA" rallies
Indiana doesn't have a gun crime problem like Chicago.
Leftists will never understand something so simple and obvious. States like Montana, Wyoming, and West Virginia are covered up with guns, with nearly every person having one or two guns. Yet they have among the lowest violent crime and gun violence in the nation.
Guns are just a tool . If you hypothetically were able to take all the guns out of places like Chicago or Baltimore, they would still have among the highest murder rates in the nation...but would just be killing each other with knives, or crowbars. Crime is a MORAL issue. It's not a tool issue. It's related to the type of people you have in society -- their beliefs/morals/ethics.
This wasn't a random crime. The mother in law was going to kill her one way or another. The gun really had nothing to do with this.
Here are your typical top 5 in terms of homicide rates: Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, New Mexico, and Missouri. Do you see a trend? To finish off the top 10 (things do change from year to year, which is why I say typical) we have: South Carolina, Arkansas, Tennessee, Illinois (the only "deep blue" state in the bunch), and Maryland (by the way, Indiana is top 15). And you are 100% correct, guns are just tools. They are tools that are designed to kill animals (including people). You and those like you are hopelessly naive. Guns make killing really easy.
If they could eliminate the leftwing cities in those states the murder rate would be damn near zero. Put that in your crackpipe and smoke it.....son.
Wasn't what I was expecting when I saw it was a child custody situation. I assumed the father shot the mother or vice versa. Did not expect Granny Oakley would be the shooter.
Indiana doesn't have a gun crime problem like Chicago.
Leftists will never understand something so simple and obvious. States like Montana, Wyoming, and West Virginia are covered up with guns, with nearly every person having one or two guns. Yet they have among the lowest violent crime and gun violence in the nation.
Guns are just a tool . If you hypothetically were able to take all the guns out of places like Chicago or Baltimore, they would still have among the highest murder rates in the nation...but would just be killing each other with knives, or crowbars. Crime is a MORAL issue. It's not a tool issue. It's related to the type of people you have in society -- their beliefs/morals/ethics.
I think it's you that has a problem understanding.
Here's the firearm mortality rate, per 100K people:
Leftists will never understand something so simple and obvious. States like Montana, Wyoming, and West Virginia are covered up with guns, with nearly every person having one or two guns. Yet they have among the lowest violent crime and gun violence in the nation.
Guns are just a tool . If you hypothetically were able to take all the guns out of places like Chicago or Baltimore, they would still have among the highest murder rates in the nation...but would just be killing each other with knives, or crowbars. Crime is a MORAL issue. It's not a tool issue. It's related to the type of people you have in society -- their beliefs/morals/ethics.
I think it's you that has a problem understanding.
Here's the firearm mortality rate, per 100K people:
Here are your typical top 5 in terms of homicide rates: Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, New Mexico, and Missouri. Do you see a trend? To finish off the top 10 (things do change from year to year, which is why I say typical) we have: South Carolina, Arkansas, Tennessee, Illinois (the only "deep blue" state in the bunch), and Maryland (by the way, Indiana is top 15). And you are 100% correct, guns are just tools. They are tools that are designed to kill animals (including people). You and those like you are hopelessly naive. Guns make killing really easy.
Yeah, there is a trend all right. But if I'd say it it'd get deleted.
I suggest you re-read (or read, since you may not have read it yet) the post I was responding to.
That post tried to make the point that, although states like MT, WY and WV are "covered up with guns", they have among the lowest rates of violent crime and gun violence in the nation.
While I have no reason to doubt the poster's assertion that those states are "covered up with guns", that poster is wrong that the rate of gun violence in those states is among the lowest in the nation. It's actually among the highest in the nation, and much higher than NY, where this terrible crime took place.
Now, it may be subtle for you, but we weren't talking about homicide or even criminal conduct; we were talking about gun violence, which would include accidental shootings and, yes, suicide by gun. You were the one who brought up homicide.
And I doubt the suicide rate in MT, WY or WV is so much greater than in NY that it would make a difference in these statistics, even if you wanted to exclude suicide from the conversation.
Leftists will never understand something so simple and obvious. States like Montana, Wyoming, and West Virginia are covered up with guns, with nearly every person having one or two guns. Yet they have among the lowest violent crime and gun violence in the nation.
Guns are just a tool . If you hypothetically were able to take all the guns out of places like Chicago or Baltimore, they would still have among the highest murder rates in the nation...but would just be killing each other with knives, or crowbars. Crime is a MORAL issue. It's not a tool issue. It's related to the type of people you have in society -- their beliefs/morals/ethics.
Violence has to do with density of population. Stats say sharks barely kill people therefore they aren’t violent, but you put 1 shark in a full swimming pool and the density of population changes
I suggest you re-read (or read, since you may not have read it yet) the post I was responding to.
That post tried to make the point that, although states like MT, WY and WV are "covered up with guns", they have among the lowest rates of violent crime and gun violence in the nation.
While I have no reason to doubt the poster's assertion that those states are "covered up with guns", that poster is wrong that the rate of gun violence in those states is among the lowest in the nation. It's actually among the highest in the nation, and much higher than NY, where this terrible crime took place.
Now, it may be subtle for you, but we weren't talking about homicide or even criminal conduct; we were talking about gun violence, which would include accidental shootings and, yes, suicide by gun. You were the one who brought up homicide.
And I doubt the suicide rate in MT, WY or WV is so much greater than in NY that it would make a difference in these statistics, even if you wanted to exclude suicide from the conversation.
How tired is the term "gun violence" -- as if the guns do any violence whatsoever. Sort of like "plane violence" when people happen to die in a plane crash, "car violence" when people are killed by cars, or "water violence" for drownings accidental or otherwise... And let's not forget "pill violence" and "garbage food violence", which kill more people than the rest combined.
Guns are tools. They may save many more than they kill. But those statistics aren't easy to collect and are rarely publicized. And anyway, other far more dangerous killer items don't get the word "violence" appended to them as if they, and not their users, are the things responsible for the killing.
I suggest you re-read (or read, since you may not have read it yet) the post I was responding to.
That post tried to make the point that, although states like MT, WY and WV are "covered up with guns", they have among the lowest rates of violent crime and gun violence in the nation.
While I have no reason to doubt the poster's assertion that those states are "covered up with guns", that poster is wrong that the rate of gun violence in those states is among the lowest in the nation. It's actually among the highest in the nation, and much higher than NY, where this terrible crime took place.
Now, it may be subtle for you, but we weren't talking about homicide or even criminal conduct; we were talking about gun violence, which would include accidental shootings and, yes, suicide by gun. You were the one who brought up homicide.
And I doubt the suicide rate in MT, WY or WV is so much greater than in NY that it would make a difference in these statistics, even if you wanted to exclude suicide from the conversation.
How tired is the term "gun violence" -- as if the guns do any violence whatsoever. Sort of like "plane violence" when people happen to die in a plane crash, "car violence" when people are killed by cars, or "water violence" for drownings accidental or otherwise... And let's not forget "pill violence" and "garbage food violence", which kill more people than the rest combined.
Guns are tools. They may save many more than they kill. But those statistics aren't easy to collect and are rarely publicized. And anyway, other far more dangerous killer items don't get the word "violence" appended to them as if they, and not their users, are the things responsible for the killing.
absurd
no other developed nation has nearly as many guns as the US, so easily obtained and a major political party devoted to putting more guns out into the nation.
as a result
no other developed nation has as high a murder rate . Our murder rate is multiple times that of Europe. Multiple times.
and that's leaving out the suicides that might not have happened w/o the guns.
it's the guns. They are the cause of our very high murder rate.
it's the guns. And the GOP.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.
