Unless, of course... they didn't have guns! LOL.

 

GMAN continues to claim:

Nope! 500 murders of ALL ages this year!

I can't even GUESS what stat you are trying to quote here.

I would guess that the majority of those deaths were "gun on gun" violence... as in gangs. So, the dead gangbangers probably HAD guns. How'd that work out for them?

MANY others were accidental killings of innocent people that just happened to be sitting on their porch or mowing their yards when the GUNS came by "ablazin'!"

Of those who might have been killed during a home invasion.... how do you KNOW they didn't (illegally) have a gun but just couldn't get to it in time?

The fact is... Chicago has a high crime/gun death rate, because they have a high POVERTY rate... and because handguns are cheap and plentiful! It is higher than some OTHER cities or towns, because they have a higher population. It's a "per capita" type of thing.

You can't compare the gun violence rate in Chicago to some town of 25,000 in a Red State and then claim it's because of gun laws.

Besides... it's the chicken or the egg dilemma. Do cities/states with more restrictive gun laws have more gun violence because of the laws? Or do they have the laws because they have more gun violence?

Since gun laws are usually strengthened BECAUSE of a certain intolerable level of violence... I give my vote (of reason) to the latter.

So, enough about Chicago okay?

 

At least 30 some odd who didn't survive aren't here to make their views known... or exploited... by you.

 

I edited my post.

 

I am not trying to exploit anything. Just trying to interject some sanity and rational thinking into the discussion.

 

Hobo, whether the 500 Chicago murders were just children or some adults mixed in, it is a lot of deaths. Many would likely have been prevented if residents were allowed to legally own guns so that they could protect themselves. Statistics show that meeting armed resistance does deter criminals from assaulting those they perceive as their victims. I pasted an article which shows just one example of this in another thread. There is a lot of crime in lower income black areas. Poverty and race is not an excuse for criminal behavior. I have been around poor white people who did not go around killing and robbing others, although many do. These poor people need to get an honest job. Staying busy will keep them occupied and off the streets where they can get into trouble. It is well past time for those living off the taxpayers got busy and off the government dole and started earning their own way. There is a direct correlation between anti gun laws and criminal behavior.

 

Bump^

 

i am a noob to the site but gun control is a passion of mine as well..i dont believe in taken away a man's right to have a gun, hell i owned 2 revolvers..but i dont think our fathers was thinking of people owning a small army of assault rifles, ar guns with 100 clips as the right to bear arms..just sayin..imo i think some people just goes overboard...guns dont kill people but idiots and irresponsible owners do.

 

Welcome aboard! With that being said I don't think our founding fathers had the internet,cell phones, land line phones,faxes, radio, tv or even copy machines or off set printing presses in mind either. Should they be banned?

 

Don't know....have ANY of them been used to kill 20 innocent children in one "sunny" afternoon?

Do some google.... and get back to me.