Proposed Gun Law Changes by Students:

[Pray_4_War]

Anti-gun Mark Zuckerberg arrives in Washington DC with a team of armed bodyguards.

Gun control for thee, but not for me.

[illuminati]

Anti-gun Mark Zuckerberg arrives in Washington DC with a team of armed bodyguards.

Gun control for thee, but not for me.

It’s beyond hilarious it’s so hypocritical

Why doesn’t he try and explain that 

[NarcissisticDeity]

Mr Anti-gun himself De Blasio aide busted with gun in car

https://nypost.com/2018/04/08/director-of-citys-office-of-criminal-justice-busted-for-gun-possession/

[WalterWhite]

Mr Anti-gun himself De Blasio aide busted with gun in car

https://nypost.com/2018/04/08/director-of-citys-office-of-criminal-justice-busted-for-gun-possession/

Another hypocrital libtard who says what the communists want to hear.

[Pray_4_War]

American citizens - Your little lives aren't worth protecting with guns.  Your children aren't valuable enough to protect with guns.

Only billionaires, politicians, and Hollywood celebrities are worthy of that......along with their property and money.  Even their pets are more important than you.

You are nothing.  Your lives are meaningless.  Do as we say, not as we do.  We are above the law.  You have only the rights and freedom that we allow you to have.

Fuck you.

[illuminati]

American citizens - Your little lives aren't worth protecting with guns.  Your children aren't valuable enough to protect with guns.

Only billionaires, politicians, and Hollywood celebrities are worthy of that......along with their property and money.  Even their pets are more important than you.

You are nothing.  Your lives are meaningless.  Do as we say, not as we do.  We are above the law.  You have only the rights and freedom that we allow you to have.

Fuck you.

It certainly appears that way

Well Said.

[Conker]

Moron , we have twice as many guns as we did 50 years ago and the homicide and murder rate with them have falling dramatically ,.I.e more guns DO NOT mean more deaths. I will shove this diwn your fucking throat until you fucking choke on it 

although i've already thrashed your little feeble ramblings into the ground with 7 studies showing gun ownership makes you and your family less safe. i should just point that the number of guns may have gone up but looking at the data it's unlikely the number of gun owners has changed very much.

percentage of households in the US with a firearm in 1972 was 43% in 2018 42%

https://www.statista.com/statistics/249740/percentage-of-households-in-the-united-states-owning-a-firearm/

[NarcissisticDeity]

although i've already thrashed your little feeble ramblings into the ground with 7 studies showing gun ownership makes you and your family less safe. i should just point that the number of guns may have gone up but looking at the data it's unlikely the number of gun owners has changed very much.

percentage of households in the US with a firearm in 1972 was 43% in 2018 42%

https://www.statista.com/statistics/249740/percentage-of-households-in-the-united-states-owning-a-firearm/

You've done absolutely NOTHING at all You've addressed NOTHING. When push comes to shove you do what you've , bail out. And the link you posted is junk , it's a pay site. 

You glossed right over the fucking Harvard study that says plain as day , NO banning guns wouldn't reduce murders or suicides.

Post all the junk links and anti-gun propaganda you can , when you start posting facts I'll entertain you.

Recap

Banning guns will NOT stop murders or suicides , Banning guns means you'll get get stabbed like your hometown  Hey no more school shootings , just some lunatic driving into packs of children leaving school , but hey at least they're not getting shot  Bath school massacre 45 dead no guns https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

[chaos]

although i've already thrashed your little feeble ramblings into the ground with 7 studies showing gun ownership makes you and your family less safe. i should just point that the number of guns may have gone up but looking at the data it's unlikely the number of gun owners has changed very much.

percentage of households in the US with a firearm in 1972 was 43% in 2018 42%

https://www.statista.com/statistics/249740/percentage-of-households-in-the-united-states-owning-a-firearm/

What was the number of households in 1972 vs 2018, cuck?

[Conker]

You've done absolutely NOTHING at all You've addressed NOTHING. When push comes to shove you do what you've , bail out. And the link you posted is junk , it's a pay site. 

You glossed right over the fucking Harvard study that says plain as day , NO banning guns wouldn't reduce murders or suicides.

Post all the junk links and anti-gun propaganda you can , when you start posting facts I'll entertain you.

Recap

Banning guns will NOT stop murders or suicides , Banning guns means you'll get get stabbed like your hometown  Hey no more school shootings , just some lunatic driving into packs of children leaving school , but hey at least they're not getting shot  Bath school massacre 45 dead no guns https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

i glossed over your "study" ?

you produced one highly dubious "study" . from a non peer reviewed journal.

an extract from that "study" which tries to blame russia for fudging international murder figures to make the US look bad!

"Since at least 1965, the false assertion that the United States has
the industrialized world’s highest murder rate has been an artifact
of politically motivated Soviet minimization designed to hide the
true homicide rates."

really ?!

i produced several peer reviewed studies showing that gun owners are more at risk of harm .

you didn't gloss over them , you tried to lie about their content. claiming they all said only suicides rates were heightened by guns. when all of them said the risk of homicide, suicide and accidental death were all increased with gun ownership.

btw statistica is a highly respected statistics database. it is a corporate partner of the dow jones and many other internationally respected organisations. because it's a "paid site" that means it's "garbage"... what a fkin numskull you are. the FT and forbes are also paid sites...are they garbage too?

have a look around there is plenty of data showing that while the number of guns may have increased the number of gun owners has not at anywhere near the same rate, if at all. gun owners are just tending to own more guns each.

let's face it ND you are degenerate moron of the highest order and you have been totally destroyed here with actual factual evidence. something you are incapable of producing to support your argument.  

[NarcissisticDeity]

i glossed over your "study" ?

you produced one highly dubious "study" . from a non peer reviewed journal.

an extract from that "study" which tries to blame russia for fudging international murder figures to make the US look bad!

"Since at least 1965, the false assertion that the United States has
the industrialized world’s highest murder rate has been an artifact
of politically motivated Soviet minimization designed to hide the
true homicide rates."

really ?!

i produced several peer reviewed studies showing that gun owners are more at risk of harm .

you didn't gloss over them , you tried to lie about their content. claiming they all said only suicides rates were heightened by guns. when all of them said the risk of homicide, suicide and accidental death were all increased with gun ownership.

btw statistica is a highly respected statistics database. it is a corporate partner of the dow jones and many other internationally respected organisations. because it's a "paid site" that means it's "garbage"... what a fkin numskull you are. the FT and forbes are also paid sites...are they garbage too?

have a look around there is plenty of data showing that while the number of guns may have increased the number of gun owners has not at anywhere near the same rate, if at all. gun owners are just tending to own more guns each.

let's face it ND you are degenerate moron of the highest order and you have been totally destroyed here with actual factual evidence. something you are incapable of producing to support your argument.  

i glossed over your "study" ?

This says everything we need to know about you. You admittedly didn't read it at all look for anything you can find wrong and write it all off. You're intellectually bankrupt. And that's not the only link I've posted moron. I like how you glossed over all of those and never once commented. Typical.

i produced several peer reviewed studies showing that gun owners are more at risk of harm .

Risk of harm and harm are two very different things stupid. Owning a swimming pool increases the risk of accidental drowning doesn't mean you're going to.

btw statistica is a highly respected statistics database. it is a corporate partner of the dow jones and many other internationally respected organisations. because it's a "paid site" that means it's "garbage"... what a fkin numskull you are. the FT and forbes are also paid sites...are they garbage too?

It's garbage because I cannot access the data you're trying to link stupid.  

have a look around there is plenty of data showing that while the number of guns may have increased the number of gun owners has not at anywhere near the same rate, if at all. gun owners are just tending to own more guns each.

Entertaining that we still have more guns than ever and the gun violence has fallen dramatically http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/07/18108298-gun-violence-in-us-has-fallen-dramatically-over-past-20-years-justice-dept-report-finds So much for all the peer reviewed links you posted , Risk of harm and harm and two different things.

let's face it ND you are degenerate moron of the highest order and you have been totally destroyed here with actual factual evidence. something you are incapable of producing to support your argument.  

Says the guy who " glossed over it "   Someone who ignored every link I've posted   Someone who is hopelessly lost in a debate he doesn't even comprehend   You're taking a bad beating in this thread and not just by me by everyone   and with all your lies the facts still haven't changed  

Run along stupid before you continue to get bitch slapped with facts & figures.  

[NarcissisticDeity]

You ban guns you create scores of victims who use guns to protect themselves , facts

The National
Survey of Private
Ownership of
Firearms found
approximately
1.5 million
defensive gun
uses per year.

https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/WP-Tough-Targets.pdf

Gun Control: Myths and Realities
By David Lampo
May 13, 2000
The number of well-publicized public shootings during the past few years, especially the tragedy at Columbine High School, has re-energized the gun control movement. As a show of strength, a coalition of gun control groups has organized a “Million Mom March” to be held in Washington, D.C. on Mother’s Day, an event designed to stir up emotions rather than promote rational thought. And when one looks at the facts about gun control, it’s easy to see why the anti-gun lobby relies on emotion rather than logic to make its case.
Think you know the facts about gun control? If your only source of information is the mainstream media, what you think you know may not be correct. Take the quiz below and test your knowledge.

1. Thousands of children die annually in gun accidents.

False. Gun accidents involving children are actually at record lows, although you wouldn’t know it from listening to the mainstream media. In 1997, the last year for which data are available, only 142 children under 15 years of age died in gun accidents, and the total number of gun-related deaths for this age group was 642. More children die each year in accidents involving bikes, space heaters or drownings. The often repeated claim that 12 children per day die from gun violence includes “children” up to 20 years of age, the great majority of whom are young adult males who die in gang-related violence.

2. Gun shows are responsible for a large number of firearms falling into the hands of criminals.

False. Contrary to President Clinton’s claims, there is no “gun show loophole.” All commercial arms dealers at gun shows must run background checks, and the only people exempt from them are the small number of non-commercial sellers. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, at most 2 percent of guns used by criminals are purchased at gun shows, and most of those were purchased legally by people who passed background checks.

3. The tragedy at Columbine High School a year ago illustrates the deficiencies of current gun control laws.

False. Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold violated close to 20 firearms laws in amassing their cache of weapons (not to mention the law against murder), so it seems rather dubious to argue that additional laws might have prevented this tragedy. The two shotguns and rifle used by Harris and Klebold were purchased by a girlfriend who would have passed a background check, and the TEC-9 handgun used by them was already illegal.

4. States that allow registered citizens to carry concealed weapons have lower crime rates than those that don’t.

True. The 31 states that have “shall issue” laws allowing private citizens to carry concealed weapons have, on average, a 24 percent lower violent crime rate, a 19 percent lower murder rate and a 39 percent lower robbery rate than states that forbid concealed weapons. In fact, the nine states with the lowest violent crime rates are all right-to-carry states. Remarkably, guns are used for self-defense more than 2 million times a year, three to five times the estimated number of violent crimes committed with guns.

5. Waiting periods lower crime rates.

False. Numerous studies have been conducted on the effects of waiting periods, both before and after the federal Brady bill was passed in 1993. Those studies consistently show that there is no correlation between waiting periods and murder or robbery rates. Florida State University professor Gary Kleck analyzed data from every U.S. city with a population over 100,000 and found that waiting periods had no statistically significant effect. Even University of Maryland anti-gun researcher David McDowell found that “waiting periods have no influence on either gun homicides or gun suicides.”

6. Lower murder rates in foreign countries prove that gun control works.

False. This is one of the favorite arguments of gun control proponents, and yet the facts show that there is simply no correlation between gun control laws and murder or suicide rates across a wide spectrum of nations and cultures. In Israel and Switzerland, for example, a license to possess guns is available on demand to every law-abiding adult, and guns are easily obtainable in both nations. Both countries also allow widespread carrying of concealed firearms, and yet, admits Dr. Arthur Kellerman, one of the foremost medical advocates of gun control, Switzerland and Israel “have rates of homicide that are low despite rates of home firearm ownership that are at least as high as those in the United States.” A comparison of crime rates within Europe reveals no correlation between access to guns and crime.

The basic premise of the gun control movement, that easy access to guns causes higher crime, is contradicted by the facts, by history and by reason. Let’s hope more people are catching on.

Where you at Conker you moron? 

[NarcissisticDeity]

Mass shootings rivet national attention, but are a small share of gun violence

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/09/17/mass-shootings-rivet-national-attention-but-are-a-small-share-of-gun-violence/

Where you at stupid?   

[NarcissisticDeity]

THE TRUTH ABOUT AR-15 RIFLES AND MASS SHOOTINGS

https://barbwire.com/2018/02/23/truth-about-ar-15-rifles-mass-shootings/

Facts

[SF1900]

Conker is correct. The 2007 Harvard study was not in a peer reviewed journal. It was in a student edited law reviews.

The Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy describes itself as “one of the most widely circulated student-edited law reviews and the nation’s leading forum for conservative and libertarian legal scholarship.”

Did a 2007 Harvard University study prove that areas with higher rates of gun ownership have lower crime rates?

There was no such official Harvard “study.”

It is true, however, that gun rights advocates Gary Mauser and Don Kates co-authored a 2007 paper in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, arguing that higher rates of gun ownership correlated with lower crime rates, Snopes.com notes.

The paper, however, was not peer-reviewed, Harvard University does not consider it a study, and it misrepresented separate research to draw unsupported conclusions.

[NarcissisticDeity]

Conker is correct. The 2007 Harvard study was not in a peer reviewed journal. It was in a student edited law reviews.

The Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy describes itself as “one of the most widely circulated student-edited law reviews and the nation’s leading forum for conservative and libertarian legal scholarship.”

Did a 2007 Harvard University study prove that areas with higher rates of gun ownership have lower crime rates?

There was no such official Harvard “study.”

It is true, however, that gun rights advocates Gary Mauser and Don Kates co-authored a 2007 paper in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, arguing that higher rates of gun ownership correlated with lower crime rates, Snopes.com notes.

The paper, however, was not peer-reviewed, Harvard University does not consider it a study, and it misrepresented separate research to draw unsupported conclusions.

Irrelevant because the point still stands Just because it's not peer reviewed . Banning guns will not reduce murders and suicides. So he's right about it not being peer reviewed and that it. And he never addressed ANY of the other topics I posted , which he can't , the best he could manage was increased risk 

You look at the points above , total silence

[NarcissisticDeity]

6 reasons gun control will not solve mass shootings
https://www.yahoo.com/news/6-reasons-gun-control-not-150300262.html

Where you at? Facts

[Conker]

Irrelevant because the point still stands Just because it's not peer reviewed . Banning guns will not reduce murders and suicides. So he's right about it not being peer reviewed and that it. And he never addressed ANY of the other topics I posted , which he can't , the best he could manage was increased risk  

You look at the points above , total silence

it wasn't just not "peer reviewed" it was not even a "study". and as SF stated it misrepresented existing data and drew unsupported conclusions...in other words it was "garbage" lmao

come on lets see if you're actually capable of providing ONE actual peer reviewed study that supports your argument here. i have produced several to back mine and can provide more.

and btw the studies i cited concluded that gun owners/families were at increased risk of homicide, suicide and accidental death....not just risk of harm. you absolute cretin.

you have been destroyed so completely in this thread. if you were a horse the only compassionate thing to do at this stage would be to put a bullet in your head. (pardon the pun!)

[NarcissisticDeity]

it wasn't just not "peer reviewed" it was not even a "study". and as SF stated it misrepresented existing data and drew unsupported conclusions...in other words it was "garbage" lmao

come on lets see if you're actually capable of providing ONE actual peer reviewed study that supports your argument here. i have produced several to back mine and can provide more.

and btw the studies i cited concluded that gun owners/families were at increased risk of homicide, suicide and accidental death....not just risk of harm. you absolute cretin.

you have been destroyed so completely in this thread. if you were a horse the only compassionate thing to do at this stage would be to put a bullet in your head. (pardon the pun!)

Peer reviewed? What there is an increased risk?? That's the best you managed?? Lmfao you've addressed absolutely NOTHING  Your whole premise is pathetic , you've accomplished zero. Congrats there is an increased  "risk " LMAO


Your whole premise is not proven , you've accomplished nothing. You're clueless on the subject , come back when have something other than risk. 

[Kazan]

Peer reviewed? What there is an increased risk?? That's the best you managed?? Lmfao you've addressed absolutely NOTHING  Your whole premise is pathetic , you've accomplished zero. Congrats there is an increased  "risk " LMAO


Your whole premise is not proven , you've accomplished nothing. You're clueless on the subject , come back when have something other than risk. 

Why do you argue with someone who is afraid of an inanimate object? I have come to the conclusion why leftist want to get rid of guns, they have no self control and\or take personal responsibility for their actions, so they assume no one else will.   

[chaos]

Conker is correct. The 2007 Harvard study was not in a peer reviewed journal. It was in a student edited law reviews.

The Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy describes itself as “one of the most widely circulated student-edited law reviews and the nation’s leading forum for conservative and libertarian legal scholarship.”

Did a 2007 Harvard University study prove that areas with higher rates of gun ownership have lower crime rates?

There was no such official Harvard “study.”

It is true, however, that gun rights advocates Gary Mauser and Don Kates co-authored a 2007 paper in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, arguing that higher rates of gun ownership correlated with lower crime rates, Snopes.com notes.

The paper, however, was not peer-reviewed, Harvard University does not consider it a study, and it misrepresented separate research to draw unsupported conclusions.

Link?

[Las Vegas]

ND, Conker is too busy watching what he says on the internet for fear of being arrested.

Lmao,  - and considering whether to call for a ban on knives (idk if he was serious, i hope not).

[NarcissisticDeity]

LMAO he keeps calling me hurtful names I'll have his ass arrested for " hate speech " 

[Pray_4_War]

Fuck you, come and take them.

[NarcissisticDeity]

Fuck you, come and take them.

They're going to try and paradoxically they're going to need jack boot thugs with guns to get them.