You really are WAY out of your league in this matter and everyone can see it plain as day, Why dont you quit embarrassing yourself ? Smart people stop digging when they find themselves neck deep in a hole, you and others like you simply double down and call for a steam shovel.
if you dont like the nra then get the heck off this page no one is making you be here go watch some other video and dont ruin it for the ppl who do want to listen to this video. please and thank you
I politely pointed out that every single one of your sources has a well known, and well documented reputation for intentionally misleading, omitting opposing facts and in many, many cases out right LYING about Gun Control. Continuing to cite such corrupt sources as LCAV, The Brady Campaign and others, when there is a mountain of evidence to prove their deception is precisely why the gun control movement has lost nearly any shred of credibility amongst the Citizens. Keep it up.
@MrTrailrated92 The reason that u have said my sources are lying is that the failed to mention one paper written in a single collage review almost 20 years ago that hardly seems like a smoking gun to me. And ud think that if a law was ineffective then the gouverneur who repealed it would say that very loudly especially when the law was brought in by a gouvereur of the opposing part but he didn't he said "the law is no longer needed because federal restrictions have proven effective."
@MrTrailrated92 The fact that ur saying sources like ABC, The New York Times and the ATF have "well documented reputation for intentionally misleading, omitting opposing facts and in many, many cases out right LYING about Gun Control." Makes u seem like a nut too by the way seeing as there well respected institutions
@Horneyhic2 RIGHT, you really are delusional. The NY Times ? The same New York Times who once employed Jason Blair, the reporter who was fired because he was caught flat out INVENTING stories out of thin air ? The ATF ? The Govt Agency that is in the middle of a HUGE scandal because they were caught helping to arm the Drug Cartels in Mexico ? If I say someone is lying its because they have a reputation for it and I and many others can and have proven it !
@Horneyhic2 You know what even smarter people realize ? Guns are just like any other tools, specific ones for specific tasks. Or do you use a sledgehammer to hand a picture hook and drive a nail ?
@MrTrailrated92 You've provided wat 2 pieces of evidence to support ur opinion? and I've provided close to a dozen sources with dozens of stats and quotes? i notice uve completely ignored wat i said about the "one handgun a month repeal in virginia" haven't tried to discredit my source on that one either wat got no dirt on ABC?
@Horneyhic2 Not to mention the fact that you just employed another tried and true Anti Gun tactic of twisting someones quote and misrepresenting it. I said if YOU continued to use sources like LCAV and the Brady Campaign as sources, when they have been proven to have a "well documented reputation for intentionally misleading, omitting opposing facts and in many, many cases out right LYING about Gun Control." Somehow you morphed that into the NY Times, ATF and ABC
"There is no academic research by criminologists or economists that shows that one-gun-a-month regulations reduce crime in either the states that pass them or their neighbors. The laws have merely inconvenienced honest Americans who want to buy guns. "
"The book “More Guns, Less Crime,” the only peer-reviewed research on one-gun-a-month restrictions, from the University of Chicago Press, shows the laws either have no effect or a detrimental effect on violent crime. "
@MrTrailrated92 The rate of firearm deaths in the United States (14.24 per 100 000) exceeds that of its economic counterparts (1.76) eightfold and that of UMI countries (9.69) by a factor of 1.5. "...the absence of mass shooting events in the UK since the near total banning of handguns in response to the 1996 Dunblane massacre. This being in marked contrast to the US over the same period."
"Figures compiled by the anti-gun group Handgun Control Inc. show that the percentage of guns used in crime and traced back to Virginia gun dealers fell by 61 percent for guns recovered in New York, 67 percent for guns recovered in Massachusetts and 38 percent for guns recovered in New Jersey."
"Carrico said the law is no longer needed because federal restrictions have proven effective.
Opponents of the bill said it makes no sense to repeal a law that has been working." (this goes to show the reason it was canceled was not ineffectiveness)
In 1995, a pro-gun lawmaker gave the Virginia State Crime Commission the task of studying the limit’s impact. The commission found that the law had significantly reduced the number of Virginia guns found at crime scenes beyond its borders. A contemporaneous study by the Center to Prevent Handgun Violence showed that the limit reduced by 66 percent the number of Virginia-bought guns recovered from crimes scenes in the Northeast corridor.
The authors of the study, which was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, concluded that it “provides evidence that restricting handgun purchases to 1 per month is an effective means of disrupting the illegal interstate transfer of firearms.” Rounding things out, the ATF knocked Virginia off the top of the list of leading exporter of crime guns; Georgia claimed the top spot."
Everyone needs to be anti-gun! If you want a gun, join the army idiot. What we don't need are untrained, trigger happy civilians out there just waiting to use a gun during a violent conflict. If you morons want to carry a gun, join the police or armed forces. You see how effective carry a firearms is, violent crime is at an all time high. Civilians have NO justification for carrying any firearms. All this does is strokes their egos. Probably most would not pass the psych tests. IDIOTS!
i always love how you americans get so bent out of shape from a simple registry and yet HUAC trampled your 1st amendment rights to bits for 37 years and was completely accepted for more then half of that
@Horneyhic2 You do know that the Canadian Long Gun Registry was scrapped last week as being completely ineffective at solving a single crime and an enormous waste of Canadian Tax Payer money right ? I would love to hear how you think anything we have been discussing is somehow going to help your clear Anti Gun, Pro Victimhood position
@MrTrailrated92 "Edgar MacLeod, former president of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police states that "while the cost of the registry had become an embarrassment, the program works and provides a valuable service. In a typical domestic violence situation, he says, investigating police officers rely on the registry to determine if guns are present. Onboard computers in police cruisers, or a call to central dispatch, alerts officers to any firearms registered to occupants of the house"
@Horneyhic2 First, the Supreme Court has already ruled that any registry in the US would be Un Constitutional. Second, give me a break about the cops being in favor of it, because I dont care. Cops have dangerous jobs, if they dont want to deal with the danger, while also protecting peoples rights, then no one is forcing them to be cops and they can get a different job. I am sick to death of hearing how people should give up rights so cops feel safer and my brother is a cop.
@Horneyhic2 No it didnt. Why do you think the statement was made that the registry DID NOT HELP SOLVE a SINGLE crime was made ? Even your quoted retired policeman didnt make that claim. How exactly does having a registry help STOP a crime ? Lets say you break into a house and steal a gun the registry wont stop you from committing a crime with that gun because the police wont know you have until AFTER you commit a crime and leave the gun behind and that still wont prove it was YOU
@MrTrailrated92 74% of general duty cops are in favour of the registry. And its passed the the house but hasn't been accepted by the senate yet so not yet scraped
@MrTrailrated92 oh i no its dead at least while the conservatives are in power and it was a fiscaly terribly exicuted registry but at least it was something
The second amendment isn't for hunting weapons. It's for the citizens to be prepared to protect themselves from tyrants, hunting weapons are just a by product. And no, Obama isn't the tyrant I speak of.
the only "view" that liberals and other anti-firearm NUTJOBs need to have is the one that involves looking down the barrel of a loaded .44. Now go cry that you feel threatened, and start the usual anti-firearm bullshit....
Does the fact that your country has 3rd world levels of gun violence and a murder rate that makes it the least safe 1st world country on the planet mean nothing to you people? Does that mean you should just continue on the path your on? You don't even have to be trailblazers every other 1st world country is doing it better then you if you would just follow their examples you would have a safer country
@Horneyhic2 but i disagree with your argument, guns are good. i dont really care what the government thinks, steve harper can kiss my ass, but ya were canuks alright
@Horneyhic2 WOW ! You obviously dont realize that actual " automatic weapons " have been HEAVILY restricted and essentially completely out of reach for all but the wealthiest collectors since the National Firearms Act of 1934. The ONLY crime ever committed on record in the modern age with an actual machine gun, was committed by a COP, who are always exempted from gun control laws anyway.
@Horneyhic2 BS. I have been a shooter for 30 years and an Instructor, Range Safety Officer and Gun smith for over a decade and have shot with all types of military and law enforcement. I have YET to see a single person that claims its so easy to turn semi auto rifles into full auto ones " with only a file " actually be able to even describe the process, let alone perform it. Its overheated fearmongering rhetoric, nothing more.
@13craj i don't think they should sell weapons whose only purpose is to shoot at other ppl to anybody other than law enforcement agencies or the military (target shooting ones are ok and so are side arms of law enforcement personnel) what purpose does an assault weapon or a sawn off shot gun serve other than killing other ppl? You can't use it to hunt there not accurate enough and if u miss that many time your a danger with a gun anyway
@Horneyhic2 I target shoot and compete with my evil semi automatic black rifles on a regular basis. Its called the Bill of Rights, not the Bill of Needs. You dont "need " a computer or a cell phone to exercise your right to Free Speech. "Need" is not a legal standard, its totally subjective based on individuals. Maybe I think no one "needs " to own any car capable of exceeding the speed limit, but you dont see people advocating to stop people from buying Super Cars do you ?
@Horneyhic2 WOW, you totally missed the point of the car analogy and the absurdity of basing someones rights on what you or anyone else thinks they "need " The very height of arrogance, that was my point. Maybe YOU dont feel you "need" to own XYZ, but I do. You will NEVER hear or see me advocating for restricting someone's rights based on what I think they need.
@13craj I already told you that doesnt happen and hasnt except for very wealthy collectors since 1934. The Second Amendment is NOT about " hunting " or " target shooting " or " recreation ". That all those things come from it has nothing to do with its existence. The Second Amendment is there to ensure that the Citizens have the ability to defend themselves from the Govt.
@Horneyhic2 Obviously thats a practical impossibility for any number of reasons. But no,, and frankly its really a trite comparison, Nuclear weapons and small, man portable arms arent even the same realm of capability. Horneyhic2 trots out "assault" weapons are the same as nukes because they are both "weapons of mass destruction " in 3....2....1......
@MrTrailrated92 there not even close to the same they are however both unnessiary overkill how many times do u need to shoot that intruder? is once not enough? and suppose u miss with 6 or 7 shots from ur high powered semi-auto weapon and hit ur neighbour walking by on the street? or suppose god forbid someone breaks into ur home when nobody is there and steals the assault weapon that is ur right to own?
@Horneyhic2 I need to shoot the attacker as many times as it takes to make them stop the attack. That could be once or it could be ten times. There are any number of reports of criminals being hit 12, 13 , 15 ,19 times before they cease what their doing. What if there are multiple attackers ? The ONLY stores that weren't looted and burned to the ground during the Rodney King Riots in LA were the ones that were being protected by their owners with guns
@MrTrailrated92 "In addition to the immediate trigger of the Rodney King verdicts, a range of other factors were cited as reasons for the unrest. Anger over Korean American shop-owner Soon Ja Du's weak sentence for fatally shooting a black teenager Latasha Harlins was pointed to as a potential reason for the riots, particularly for aggression toward Korean Americans"
@Horneyhic2 And what does that have to do with anything I said ? It doesnt change the FACT that the only stores that werent looted and burned to the ground were the ones where the owners had scary looking semi automatic rifles to defend them with.
@MrTrailrated92 Guns were part of the cause of those riots after some research in the 2nd amendment (seeing as its not my constitution i didn't learn it in school) it seems as if James Madison help write it as "a potential check against tyranny" so that the common ppl would never be afraid of wat was then not just a new government but a form of governance entirely and while those were pretty large concerns in the late 1700 these days your government is nearly 250years old and changing a country
@Horneyhic2 How did guns " cause the riots " are you kidding ? So because ONE Korean shot ONE person that means that 1000's of people had carte blanche to attack a whole innocent group of people that had NOTHING to do with that other incident, steal from them, assault them, engage in vandalism and arson against them ? You cant possibly be serious. Thats no different then the " logic " that says a woman wearing revealing clothing gets what she deserves if she's raped
@MrTrailrated92 1 crazy man shot 1 archduke in 1914 and caused 2 world wars that doesn't give the ppl involved a carte blanche no but is the guy who said "lets roll this rock down the hill" any less responsible for the ppl the rock hits then the ppl who pushed it?
@Horneyhic2 Yea, under the law he certainly is less responsible, because people have the free will to decide for themselves to listen to him or not. And if they choose to listen to him and actively participate in causing that act to occur then of course their significantly more culpable then the person who only says to do it.
@Horneyhic2 WOW, another tried and true Anti tactic, Goodwin's Law in full effect. And as repugnant as it sounds, the answer is YES. The people that actually decide to commit the physical act of violence are ALWAYS more directly responsible then anyone that merely voices the idea. Which is why soldiers have every right and moral obligation to refuse to follow or carry out immoral orders.
@MrTrailrated92 and yet the guards were rarely charged in war crimes tribunals but the generals were so obviously the international community disagrees with u
@Horneyhic2 Are we talking about WWII specifically or not ? Because if we're talking about WWII the majority of the guards were killed in combat or field expedient firing squads. A small number survived the war, only to be hunted down by the Israeli's. The higher up Officer were tried at Nuremburg, convicted and hanged.
@Horneyhic2 And I should care about what the " International Community " thinks why exactly ? Youtube comments are hardly the proper venue to get into an epic length debate over my feelings about the absurdity of the concept of the standards of the " international community "
@Horneyhic2 changed topics again I see. The whole " international community " thing is something you tossed out after I answered numerous times that the people directly involved in making the choice to commit violence were more responsible then those that only suggested it, now your using the "international community " argument for something else entirely, violent crime stats, that dont take into account numerous factors that skew those results in a number of ways
@MrTrailrated92 wat "skews" those #s in countries that are "economically and politically similar" that badly? and u asked why you should care about the international community thats why
@MrTrailrated92 private property to do that and I never did say treat them like cars i simply said that u have to licence cars because of the potential do guns not have them same potential and that study was done for "The american journal of public health" and published in december 1994
@Horneyhic2 Thanks for the McDowall source. Since you seem honestly interested in exploring the opposing views ( a refreshing change from the norm of nearly all gun control advocates) , I suggest you Google GUNS AND PUBLIC HEALTH: EPIDEMIC OF
VIOLENCE OR PANDEMIC OF PROPAGANDA? Written by several Doctors and a Constitutional Law expert (Don Kates) which destroys not only McDowall's work, but the entire premise of "public health advocacy for gun control"
@MrTrailrated92 Using there own stats america has the highest homicide rate on that list and handguns are responsible for more then there share of accidents. The suicide rates don't really matter if somebody wants to kill themselves they'll find away. And this quote doesn't really help either of our arguements but it nullifies the last chart on there "Criminologist Gary Kleck compared various survey and proxy measures and found no correlation between overall firearm ownership and gun violence."
@MrTrailrated92 "Regulations that limit the number of handgun sales in the primary, regulated market to one handgun a month per customer have been shown to be effective at reducing illegal gun trafficking by reducing the supply into the "secondary market."
Which of course explains why South Carolina and more recently Virginia , both scrapped their One Gun a Month Law, leaving one State left that has one ( New Jersey ) which is currently being sued over it, since it is clearly an UN Constitutional restriction on an enumerated and protected right and the Supreme Court has previously ruled in multiple cases that any laws that involve " prior restraint " on the exercise of a right are fundamentally Un Constitutional
@Horneyhic2 No , your post shows nothing more then an unattributed quote, with no source, making an assertion that has proven to be patently false to the point that only ONE State out of fifty continues to have it on the books
@MrTrailrated92 "Weil, Douglas S., Rebecca C. Knox (1996). "Effects of Limiting Handgun Purchases on Interstate Transfer of Firearms". Journal of the American Medical Association" my source for you
@MrTrailrated92 Also as of 2012 New Jersey, California and Maryland still have and enforce 1 handgun per month laws which, and correct me if I'm wrong here, is not 1 state but 3
@Horneyhic2 In poking around, I realized that several of your recent quotes, including the McDowall one last night and the Kleck one tonite are cut and pasted from Wikipedia, hardly an infallible source when anyone can edit it. And as I showed earlier, the paper done by several Doctors and Don Kates show conclusively the inherent and documented bias, based on political ideology found in anything coming from JAMA. I havent used any NRA sources, how about you doing the same
@MrTrailrated92 I mentioned wikipedias reliability in another post and in all of my quotes (where I've been asked to source) i have provided the source wikipedia used so yes the wording is cut and pasted from wiki but the facts are from outside sources. If you wish to use the NRA as your cut and paste as long as you can also provide their legitimate source i would have no objection
@Horneyhic2 I'm just gonna shoot straight to the base of this argument here, you are proposing to restrict the law abiding, whilst criminals don't give a fuck about laws further restrictions will not stop criminals. It is easily verifiable that countries such as the United States and Switzerland which posses more firearms have less crime.
Australia, England had tremendous spikes in crime and homicides when they took heir citizens firearms and Canada finding after twenty years that their registration was completely ineffective removed their registration system
@mrvalidus1 "Similarly statistics from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) show that the number of homicides per 100,000 in the UK at 1.14 as of 2006, was considerably below that of the US (5.62 per 100,000) in 2006, and again far below the rate of homicides in the US specifically using a firearm (3.36 per 100,000 people) in the same year"
@mrvalidus1 they only removed the Long gun registry everything else still must be register and it was canceled because of the cost not the effectiveness
@Horneyhic2 your facts are woefully wrong, the UN is not known for keeping an honest records they have an agenda to take all citizens firearms. I get my facts from the sources. And you are still ignoring the fact that the criminals, the ones responsible for the killings are not going to be deterred by registration or any other gun control, and guns are not responsible for the majority of murders. GC just makes it harder for citizens to arm and protect themselves.
@Horneyhic2 your facts are woefully wrong, the UN is not known for keeping an honest records they have an agenda to take all citizens firearms. I get my facts from the sources. And you are still ignoring the fact that the criminals, the ones responsible for the killings are not going to be deterred by registration or any other gun control, and guns are not responsible for the majority of murders. GC just makes it harder for citizens to arm and protect themselves.
@mrvalidus1 Accually the US does not have less crime as I've repeatedly pointed out and Switzerland almost all of the guns are long guns or military service weapons
@Horneyhic2 Do the research as I have you have the time you won't believe me anyways but dig deeper than google, TV, and wikipedia. The factor in crime is not guns just like pencils are not the cause of misspelled words. Now do thorough research and shut your ill informed yap
@mrvalidus1 You understand nothing about a debate uve provided nothing but ur own opinion and ur assertion that there are facts yet you are unable or unwilling to provide them is this how lazy you americans have become? u won't even provide evidence to support ur statements? And to think u try and call urself "the greatest nation on earth" this kind of seer laziness is why ur losing that title
@Horneyhic2 Don't judge from a couple short paragraphs, i know from experience to not waste my time debating with those unwilling to listen, you won't believe me so as I said go to FBI the have the stats on crime find it yourself. Don't tell us what we should do with our country, I didn't claim it but I will now WE ARE THE GREATEST NATION and its because of our freedom and those willing to defend a timeless document.
@HOrnydumb fuck now i am gonna break from my patience with you stop frequenting and polluting this wall if you don't like what the song is about then don't fucking look for it. Get off your ill informed judgmental anti-American ass and get a life. You have a clear lack of understanding of our government, the media, and what it is to be American. Your sources are insanely inaccurate as can be found when going to the source such as FBI database. So rant else where fuckstick
@Horneyhic2 Showing your ignorance again. The 1st Amendment ( just like the rest of the Bill of Rights ) is a restriction on GOVT suppression of speech. People are free to say whatever they like, no one is forcing you to listen
@Horneyhic2 Already given, maybe you should go back a page or three and read through every thing to find it, Im not doing your homework for you, sorry
@MrTrailrated92 Are you high? Cause you just answered my question with an even more vague answer the statement i was asking about. You realize this thing doesn't tell me which of my comments your responding to right?
@Horneyhic2 If anyone is high around here its you. There is nothing about my previous post to you that should be confusing to anyone with two brain cells to rub together. You asked for an example of where you said two different things. I replied that those examples had already been given and suggested you go back a page or three and read through the back and forth exchanges and locate said examples. What is so confusing for you about that concept ?
@MrTrailrated92 Uh no i asked for wat you were talking about when u said this "Care to provide an example ? Cause I have no idea what your referring to."
@Horneyhic2 If you are not an American Citizen you are not protected by Our Bill of Rights. Secondly the first amendment does not guarantee the right to be heard nor does it protect speech on private property or to individuals.
@MrTrailrated92 They do the same for Canada to we have similar illegal problems we just don't have a land boarder with a 3rd world country like you do
@Horneyhic2 Oh yes we are in shit right now, cause of idiots that talk like you vote and we have a huge fucking mess, but we are still the leading economy debt ridden or not and we will pull through. The medical issue is not an issue buddo
@MrTrailrated92 Here a tried and true tactic lets forget everything but logic for a second forget the 2nd amendment. You have to register your car because it is capable of being a danger to the public by causing harm when used improperly why should u not have to register a firearm which when used properly is DESIGNED to cause harm.
@Horneyhic2 LOL. I am SO glad you brought up the car thing, since I just did an entire column on how ridiculous the "treat guns like cars " argument is last week You'll have to Google Search the phrase " Treating Firearms Like we do Cars ? Yeah Lets do that ! so you can find it Suffice to say, you DO NOT " have to register a car because its capable of being a danger to the public ". In fact, you dont have to register a car at all if its only used on private property
@Horneyhic2 I am SOOO Glad you brought up the car thing, since I just did an entire column on how ridiculous that argument is. You'll have to Google Search the title " Treating Firearms like we do cars ? Yeah lets do that " in order to read it. And NO you dont not have to register a car at ALL as long as its used on private property
@MrTrailrated92 i read ur column and i actually agree with it however theres a few holes in it like unless ur gun dealer does personal deliveries how do u expect to get ur gun home without taking it off private property? and ur right i don't think there should be any restrictions on wat you do on private property provided the bullets also stay on private property as for taking them from state to state well unless u adjacent property on both sides of a state line ur going to have to take it off
@Horneyhic2 LOL, the media ? You have got to be joking. There is more then sufficient evidence to PROVE beyond any reasonable doubt the " media " is almost completely in the tank for the left and routinely passes off lies and opinion as fact. Hell, Media Matters just got caught that they have been essentially writing the coverage for MSNBC for years now. And tyranny ? You have NO idea how much of that is going on as we speak You think because you dont see the Gestapo its not ?
@Horneyhic2 And your point is ? Just because Bush II was a Republican doesnt mean he wasnt a Progressive. And just because the NRA MIGHT support something doesnt mean I would automatically always agree with them.
@Horneyhic2 Are you talking about the debate last Fall over Rand Paul's amendment to the Patriot Act ? If so, then the NRA OPPOSED it with good reason. If not, then please provide the source for your claim that the NRA supported the original Patriot Act back in 2001, because now Im curious
@MrTrailrated92My point in bringing up nukes was that your second amendment says "arms" technically "arms" could be anything from a knife to a nuke the reason that ur more dangerous weapons are banned is public safety
@Horneyhic2 Only someone completely ignorant of Colonial History could try to twist the word "arms" to mean " everything from knives to nukes ". The Founders wanted and intended for the Citizenry to have access to the same level and quality of weapons as the British soldiers had. Many Colonials even owned cannons and "privateer " warships that were contracted out to the rebels. We have the professional Military to take care of handling the big weapons, like tanks and nukes
@MrTrailrated92 and aircraft carriers and everything else that isnt man portable. Thus, my statement still is correct and accurate that the Founders clear intent was for the Citizenry to be armed just as equally as foot soldiers on the other side would be, which today means the same weapons available to Law Enforcement and individual Soldiers.
@Horneyhic2 see below about the nukes. However, I do believe that it was absolutely the intent of the Founders and the Citizens have a protected right to own the same types of firearms as the police and individual soldiers do.
@Horneyhic2 Bah, it was a post you made from yesterday that claimed firearms were only used in self defense .02 percent of the time. The FBI, CDC, National Academy Of Sciences and every major peer reviewed study has found anywhere from a low of 100,000 times annually to potentially as high as a couple million times a year. With the average falling somewhere in the 500,000 to 750,000 times each year. Hell, even Anti gun researchers have found that defensive gun use is very common
@MrTrailrated92 "Between 1987 and 1990, David McDowall found that guns were used in defense during a crime incident 64,615 times annually. This equates to two times out of 1,000 incidents (0.2%) that occurred in this time frame" "During this same time period, 1987 and 1990, there were 46,319 gun homicides,and the National Crime Victimization Survey estimates that 2,628,532 nonfatal crimes involving guns occurred."
@Horneyhic2 Who did David McDowall do this study for ? Cause Google doesnt return anything remotely like what you posted, so I need more information. Are you suggesting Mr McDowall is right and the FBI is wrong ? Also I already pointed out to you last night that the vast majority of gun homicides are criminal on criminal violence that have nothing to do with actual innocent people being killed. The true number of innocent deaths is significantly LOWER then what you believe it is
In 2005, 75% of the 10100 homicides committed using firearms in the United States were committed using handguns, compared to 4% with rifles, 5% with shotguns, and the rest with a type of firearm not specified. The mortality rate for gunshot wounds to the heart is 84%, compared to 30% for people who sustain stab wounds to the heart.
Gun-related homicide rates in the United States are twenty to thirty-five times higher than they are in countries that are economically and politically similar to it
@Horneyhic2 You left out the part where 80 percent of those homicides were criminal on criminal killings ( drug gang turf wars ) and others where at least one, if not both people involved already had criminal records, often for previous violent offenses. Someone explain to me why exactly I should care if criminals want to kill each other ? Saves me tax money from not having to pay to house them in prison
most crimes in the us are committed with an unregistered gun....so we should take away the registered weapons of those who are responsible and use them as they should? We will NEVER control the black market weapons in this nation which are the real problem so why disarm those who not only enjoy sporting with them but have one next to their bed to stop those low lifes who have the serial numbers scratched off of theirs....
@zfaylor ur right they are mostly committed with unregistered guns and that is the best argument that the anti gun control crowd has and i don't no how these other countries have found a way to curb there illegal gun sales but the have otherwise the US wouldn't be 28th in the world for least murder so before u take and action u should look at the laws of the top 10 to see wat works cause something obvously does work better then wat ur doing
@Horneyhic2 Thats the truth, gun owners of america and nra members aren't the problem, were the ones that follow the laws. Thats why gun control will never work- criminals dont follow the laws
@Horneyhic2 my reply mite have went to the wrong person, I was agreeing that majority of gun issues are unregistered guns, so taking them from us law abiding citizens is stuppid - hence the reason gun control does not work
St. Louis Baby!!!!!
Potatoman171 2 days ago
Sun get my Gun.
rickysrejects 2 days ago
20 douche bags dont like the outdoor life
countryboy202hu 2 days ago 3
Stop arguing about Canada/USA. Gotta love both they are the 2 greatest places to be on earth.
bpieprzak 2 days ago 2
You really are WAY out of your league in this matter and everyone can see it plain as day, Why dont you quit embarrassing yourself ? Smart people stop digging when they find themselves neck deep in a hole, you and others like you simply double down and call for a steam shovel.
MrTrailrated92 3 days ago
if you dont like the nra then get the heck off this page no one is making you be here go watch some other video and dont ruin it for the ppl who do want to listen to this video. please and thank you
snoopy51500 3 days ago
ill die before theyll take my guns.. im proud to live in NRA country!
MrCoonhunter2010 3 days ago
Comment removed
MrCoonhunter2010 3 days ago
Why isn't this on iTunes?
FrostedCanuck 3 days ago
Horneyhic2
I politely pointed out that every single one of your sources has a well known, and well documented reputation for intentionally misleading, omitting opposing facts and in many, many cases out right LYING about Gun Control. Continuing to cite such corrupt sources as LCAV, The Brady Campaign and others, when there is a mountain of evidence to prove their deception is precisely why the gun control movement has lost nearly any shred of credibility amongst the Citizens. Keep it up.
MrTrailrated92 3 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 Exactly
mrvalidus1 3 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 The reason that u have said my sources are lying is that the failed to mention one paper written in a single collage review almost 20 years ago that hardly seems like a smoking gun to me. And ud think that if a law was ineffective then the gouverneur who repealed it would say that very loudly especially when the law was brought in by a gouvereur of the opposing part but he didn't he said "the law is no longer needed because federal restrictions have proven effective."
Horneyhic2 3 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 The fact that ur saying sources like ABC, The New York Times and the ATF have "well documented reputation for intentionally misleading, omitting opposing facts and in many, many cases out right LYING about Gun Control." Makes u seem like a nut too by the way seeing as there well respected institutions
Horneyhic2 3 days ago
@Horneyhic2 RIGHT, you really are delusional. The NY Times ? The same New York Times who once employed Jason Blair, the reporter who was fired because he was caught flat out INVENTING stories out of thin air ? The ATF ? The Govt Agency that is in the middle of a HUGE scandal because they were caught helping to arm the Drug Cartels in Mexico ? If I say someone is lying its because they have a reputation for it and I and many others can and have proven it !
MrTrailrated92 3 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 smart ppl realize its awful hard to shoot more guns then u have hands to and yet u claim to own more that 30
Horneyhic2 3 days ago
@Horneyhic2 You know what even smarter people realize ? Guns are just like any other tools, specific ones for specific tasks. Or do you use a sledgehammer to hand a picture hook and drive a nail ?
MrTrailrated92 3 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 We have a saying in my trade "its easier to swing a big hammer lightly then to swing a little hammer hard"
Horneyhic2 2 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 You've provided wat 2 pieces of evidence to support ur opinion? and I've provided close to a dozen sources with dozens of stats and quotes? i notice uve completely ignored wat i said about the "one handgun a month repeal in virginia" haven't tried to discredit my source on that one either wat got no dirt on ABC?
Horneyhic2 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Horneyhic2 Not to mention the fact that you just employed another tried and true Anti Gun tactic of twisting someones quote and misrepresenting it. I said if YOU continued to use sources like LCAV and the Brady Campaign as sources, when they have been proven to have a "well documented reputation for intentionally misleading, omitting opposing facts and in many, many cases out right LYING about Gun Control." Somehow you morphed that into the NY Times, ATF and ABC
MrTrailrated92 3 days ago
From the Washington Times
"There is no academic research by criminologists or economists that shows that one-gun-a-month regulations reduce crime in either the states that pass them or their neighbors. The laws have merely inconvenienced honest Americans who want to buy guns. "
"The book “More Guns, Less Crime,” the only peer-reviewed research on one-gun-a-month restrictions, from the University of Chicago Press, shows the laws either have no effect or a detrimental effect on violent crime. "
MrTrailrated92 4 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 The rate of firearm deaths in the United States (14.24 per 100 000) exceeds that of its economic counterparts (1.76) eightfold and that of UMI countries (9.69) by a factor of 1.5. "...the absence of mass shooting events in the UK since the near total banning of handguns in response to the 1996 Dunblane massacre. This being in marked contrast to the US over the same period."
Horneyhic2 4 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 from "the legal community against violence"
"A study of Virginia’s one-gun-a-month law demonstrated that the law was effective in reducing the number of crime guns traced to Virginia dealers."
Horneyhic2 4 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 from "the new york times"
"Figures compiled by the anti-gun group Handgun Control Inc. show that the percentage of guns used in crime and traced back to Virginia gun dealers fell by 61 percent for guns recovered in New York, 67 percent for guns recovered in Massachusetts and 38 percent for guns recovered in New Jersey."
Horneyhic2 4 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 From ABC news
"Carrico said the law is no longer needed because federal restrictions have proven effective.
Opponents of the bill said it makes no sense to repeal a law that has been working." (this goes to show the reason it was canceled was not ineffectiveness)
Horneyhic2 4 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 And from "the washinton post"
In 1995, a pro-gun lawmaker gave the Virginia State Crime Commission the task of studying the limit’s impact. The commission found that the law had significantly reduced the number of Virginia guns found at crime scenes beyond its borders. A contemporaneous study by the Center to Prevent Handgun Violence showed that the limit reduced by 66 percent the number of Virginia-bought guns recovered from crimes scenes in the Northeast corridor.
Horneyhic2 4 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 Washington post continued
The authors of the study, which was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, concluded that it “provides evidence that restricting handgun purchases to 1 per month is an effective means of disrupting the illegal interstate transfer of firearms.” Rounding things out, the ATF knocked Virginia off the top of the list of leading exporter of crime guns; Georgia claimed the top spot."
Horneyhic2 4 days ago
@LFDA54 I'd like to see you touch my guns cause ill shove a 12 gauge so far up your ass you wont know what to do
jonza1229 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Everyone needs to be anti-gun! If you want a gun, join the army idiot. What we don't need are untrained, trigger happy civilians out there just waiting to use a gun during a violent conflict. If you morons want to carry a gun, join the police or armed forces. You see how effective carry a firearms is, violent crime is at an all time high. Civilians have NO justification for carrying any firearms. All this does is strokes their egos. Probably most would not pass the psych tests. IDIOTS!
LAFD54 4 days ago
you all are faggots quit arguing about shit nobody gives a fuck about. USA!!!
ifishhuntsurvive94 4 days ago
@ifishhuntsurvive94 Gee that was intelligent
MrTrailrated92 4 days ago
@ifishhuntsurvive94 its ppl like that make the rest of the world think americans are inbred idiots
Horneyhic2 4 days ago
i always love how you americans get so bent out of shape from a simple registry and yet HUAC trampled your 1st amendment rights to bits for 37 years and was completely accepted for more then half of that
Horneyhic2 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 Ahh a classic Anti Gun tactic, move the goalposts/switch topics when your losing the original debate
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
if you dont like firearms why would you come to watch this video just to argue.... puzzles me. keyboard warriors
seth1913 5 days ago
@seth1913 because a similar debate is happening in Canada right now and its always good to know ur opponents argument before hand
Horneyhic2 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 You do know that the Canadian Long Gun Registry was scrapped last week as being completely ineffective at solving a single crime and an enormous waste of Canadian Tax Payer money right ? I would love to hear how you think anything we have been discussing is somehow going to help your clear Anti Gun, Pro Victimhood position
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 "Edgar MacLeod, former president of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police states that "while the cost of the registry had become an embarrassment, the program works and provides a valuable service. In a typical domestic violence situation, he says, investigating police officers rely on the registry to determine if guns are present. Onboard computers in police cruisers, or a call to central dispatch, alerts officers to any firearms registered to occupants of the house"
Horneyhic2 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 First, the Supreme Court has already ruled that any registry in the US would be Un Constitutional. Second, give me a break about the cops being in favor of it, because I dont care. Cops have dangerous jobs, if they dont want to deal with the danger, while also protecting peoples rights, then no one is forcing them to be cops and they can get a different job. I am sick to death of hearing how people should give up rights so cops feel safer and my brother is a cop.
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 it didn't only make them safer it made it easier to track a gun used in a crime
Horneyhic2 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 No it didnt. Why do you think the statement was made that the registry DID NOT HELP SOLVE a SINGLE crime was made ? Even your quoted retired policeman didnt make that claim. How exactly does having a registry help STOP a crime ? Lets say you break into a house and steal a gun the registry wont stop you from committing a crime with that gun because the police wont know you have until AFTER you commit a crime and leave the gun behind and that still wont prove it was YOU
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 74% of general duty cops are in favour of the registry. And its passed the the house but hasn't been accepted by the senate yet so not yet scraped
Horneyhic2 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 Uh yea , it is done. You cant possibly think the Senate isnt going to pass the repeal
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 oh i no its dead at least while the conservatives are in power and it was a fiscaly terribly exicuted registry but at least it was something
Horneyhic2 5 days ago
I really like these lyrics, but I just can not stand this new country music. It's too pop.
dmattfittysix 5 days ago
The second amendment isn't for hunting weapons. It's for the citizens to be prepared to protect themselves from tyrants, hunting weapons are just a by product. And no, Obama isn't the tyrant I speak of.
ftheccjake 6 days ago
the only "view" that liberals and other anti-firearm NUTJOBs need to have is the one that involves looking down the barrel of a loaded .44. Now go cry that you feel threatened, and start the usual anti-firearm bullshit....
ConfederateGold 6 days ago
Does the fact that your country has 3rd world levels of gun violence and a murder rate that makes it the least safe 1st world country on the planet mean nothing to you people? Does that mean you should just continue on the path your on? You don't even have to be trailblazers every other 1st world country is doing it better then you if you would just follow their examples you would have a safer country
Horneyhic2 6 days ago
@Horneyhic2 Yankee
jwttyson 6 days ago
@jwttyson Yankees are ppl in the northern states. We're Canuks
Horneyhic2 6 days ago
@Horneyhic2 hell ya we are
13craj 6 days ago
@Horneyhic2 but i disagree with your argument, guns are good. i dont really care what the government thinks, steve harper can kiss my ass, but ya were canuks alright
13craj 6 days ago
@13craj i have no problem with hunting weapons its handguns and automatic weapons and guns modified to have no purpose other then shooting at ppl
Horneyhic2 6 days ago
@Horneyhic2 WOW ! You obviously dont realize that actual " automatic weapons " have been HEAVILY restricted and essentially completely out of reach for all but the wealthiest collectors since the National Firearms Act of 1934. The ONLY crime ever committed on record in the modern age with an actual machine gun, was committed by a COP, who are always exempted from gun control laws anyway.
MrTrailrated92 6 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 really cause I'm not even a gun owner an d i now how to turn a semi-automatic into a fully automatic weapon with only a file
Horneyhic2 6 days ago
@Horneyhic2 BS. I have been a shooter for 30 years and an Instructor, Range Safety Officer and Gun smith for over a decade and have shot with all types of military and law enforcement. I have YET to see a single person that claims its so easy to turn semi auto rifles into full auto ones " with only a file " actually be able to even describe the process, let alone perform it. Its overheated fearmongering rhetoric, nothing more.
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 ya that gets me too, i dont see why they sell automatic weapons to non police or militay people
13craj 5 days ago
@13craj i don't think they should sell weapons whose only purpose is to shoot at other ppl to anybody other than law enforcement agencies or the military (target shooting ones are ok and so are side arms of law enforcement personnel) what purpose does an assault weapon or a sawn off shot gun serve other than killing other ppl? You can't use it to hunt there not accurate enough and if u miss that many time your a danger with a gun anyway
Horneyhic2 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 I target shoot and compete with my evil semi automatic black rifles on a regular basis. Its called the Bill of Rights, not the Bill of Needs. You dont "need " a computer or a cell phone to exercise your right to Free Speech. "Need" is not a legal standard, its totally subjective based on individuals. Maybe I think no one "needs " to own any car capable of exceeding the speed limit, but you dont see people advocating to stop people from buying Super Cars do you ?
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 that because those super cars usually only kill the guy driving it not everybody around them
Horneyhic2 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 WOW, you totally missed the point of the car analogy and the absurdity of basing someones rights on what you or anyone else thinks they "need " The very height of arrogance, that was my point. Maybe YOU dont feel you "need" to own XYZ, but I do. You will NEVER hear or see me advocating for restricting someone's rights based on what I think they need.
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@13craj I already told you that doesnt happen and hasnt except for very wealthy collectors since 1934. The Second Amendment is NOT about " hunting " or " target shooting " or " recreation ". That all those things come from it has nothing to do with its existence. The Second Amendment is there to ensure that the Citizens have the ability to defend themselves from the Govt.
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 so u believe all americans have the right to bear "arms" does that include nuclear arms?
Horneyhic2 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 Obviously thats a practical impossibility for any number of reasons. But no,, and frankly its really a trite comparison, Nuclear weapons and small, man portable arms arent even the same realm of capability. Horneyhic2 trots out "assault" weapons are the same as nukes because they are both "weapons of mass destruction " in 3....2....1......
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 there not even close to the same they are however both unnessiary overkill how many times do u need to shoot that intruder? is once not enough? and suppose u miss with 6 or 7 shots from ur high powered semi-auto weapon and hit ur neighbour walking by on the street? or suppose god forbid someone breaks into ur home when nobody is there and steals the assault weapon that is ur right to own?
Horneyhic2 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 I need to shoot the attacker as many times as it takes to make them stop the attack. That could be once or it could be ten times. There are any number of reports of criminals being hit 12, 13 , 15 ,19 times before they cease what their doing. What if there are multiple attackers ? The ONLY stores that weren't looted and burned to the ground during the Rodney King Riots in LA were the ones that were being protected by their owners with guns
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 And the owners were armed with scary looking semi automatic rifles
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 "In addition to the immediate trigger of the Rodney King verdicts, a range of other factors were cited as reasons for the unrest. Anger over Korean American shop-owner Soon Ja Du's weak sentence for fatally shooting a black teenager Latasha Harlins was pointed to as a potential reason for the riots, particularly for aggression toward Korean Americans"
Horneyhic2 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 And what does that have to do with anything I said ? It doesnt change the FACT that the only stores that werent looted and burned to the ground were the ones where the owners had scary looking semi automatic rifles to defend them with.
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 Guns were part of the cause of those riots after some research in the 2nd amendment (seeing as its not my constitution i didn't learn it in school) it seems as if James Madison help write it as "a potential check against tyranny" so that the common ppl would never be afraid of wat was then not just a new government but a form of governance entirely and while those were pretty large concerns in the late 1700 these days your government is nearly 250years old and changing a country
Horneyhic2 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 with your history and todays media into something that would considered tyrannical would be pretty damn difficult
Horneyhic2 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 How did guns " cause the riots " are you kidding ? So because ONE Korean shot ONE person that means that 1000's of people had carte blanche to attack a whole innocent group of people that had NOTHING to do with that other incident, steal from them, assault them, engage in vandalism and arson against them ? You cant possibly be serious. Thats no different then the " logic " that says a woman wearing revealing clothing gets what she deserves if she's raped
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 1 crazy man shot 1 archduke in 1914 and caused 2 world wars that doesn't give the ppl involved a carte blanche no but is the guy who said "lets roll this rock down the hill" any less responsible for the ppl the rock hits then the ppl who pushed it?
Horneyhic2 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 Yea, under the law he certainly is less responsible, because people have the free will to decide for themselves to listen to him or not. And if they choose to listen to him and actively participate in causing that act to occur then of course their significantly more culpable then the person who only says to do it.
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 Hitler only told his subordinates to kill jews he didn't do it himself does that make him less responsible to?
Horneyhic2 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 WOW, another tried and true Anti tactic, Goodwin's Law in full effect. And as repugnant as it sounds, the answer is YES. The people that actually decide to commit the physical act of violence are ALWAYS more directly responsible then anyone that merely voices the idea. Which is why soldiers have every right and moral obligation to refuse to follow or carry out immoral orders.
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 and yet the guards were rarely charged in war crimes tribunals but the generals were so obviously the international community disagrees with u
Horneyhic2 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 Are we talking about WWII specifically or not ? Because if we're talking about WWII the majority of the guards were killed in combat or field expedient firing squads. A small number survived the war, only to be hunted down by the Israeli's. The higher up Officer were tried at Nuremburg, convicted and hanged.
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 And I should care about what the " International Community " thinks why exactly ? Youtube comments are hardly the proper venue to get into an epic length debate over my feelings about the absurdity of the concept of the standards of the " international community "
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 because as a whole (at least among those similar to the US) the international community is better off crime wise then you are
Horneyhic2 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 changed topics again I see. The whole " international community " thing is something you tossed out after I answered numerous times that the people directly involved in making the choice to commit violence were more responsible then those that only suggested it, now your using the "international community " argument for something else entirely, violent crime stats, that dont take into account numerous factors that skew those results in a number of ways
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 wat "skews" those #s in countries that are "economically and politically similar" that badly? and u asked why you should care about the international community thats why
Horneyhic2 5 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 private property to do that and I never did say treat them like cars i simply said that u have to licence cars because of the potential do guns not have them same potential and that study was done for "The american journal of public health" and published in december 1994
Horneyhic2 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 Thanks for the McDowall source. Since you seem honestly interested in exploring the opposing views ( a refreshing change from the norm of nearly all gun control advocates) , I suggest you Google GUNS AND PUBLIC HEALTH: EPIDEMIC OF
VIOLENCE OR PANDEMIC OF PROPAGANDA? Written by several Doctors and a Constitutional Law expert (Don Kates) which destroys not only McDowall's work, but the entire premise of "public health advocacy for gun control"
MrTrailrated92 4 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 Using there own stats america has the highest homicide rate on that list and handguns are responsible for more then there share of accidents. The suicide rates don't really matter if somebody wants to kill themselves they'll find away. And this quote doesn't really help either of our arguements but it nullifies the last chart on there "Criminologist Gary Kleck compared various survey and proxy measures and found no correlation between overall firearm ownership and gun violence."
Horneyhic2 4 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 "Regulations that limit the number of handgun sales in the primary, regulated market to one handgun a month per customer have been shown to be effective at reducing illegal gun trafficking by reducing the supply into the "secondary market."
Horneyhic2 4 days ago
@Horneyhic2
Which of course explains why South Carolina and more recently Virginia , both scrapped their One Gun a Month Law, leaving one State left that has one ( New Jersey ) which is currently being sued over it, since it is clearly an UN Constitutional restriction on an enumerated and protected right and the Supreme Court has previously ruled in multiple cases that any laws that involve " prior restraint " on the exercise of a right are fundamentally Un Constitutional
MrTrailrated92 4 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 Uhh my post says that laws has proven effective
Horneyhic2 4 days ago
@Horneyhic2 No , your post shows nothing more then an unattributed quote, with no source, making an assertion that has proven to be patently false to the point that only ONE State out of fifty continues to have it on the books
MrTrailrated92 4 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 even if wat u said was true ur 1st response still didn't make sense to what i said
Horneyhic2 4 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 "Weil, Douglas S., Rebecca C. Knox (1996). "Effects of Limiting Handgun Purchases on Interstate Transfer of Firearms". Journal of the American Medical Association" my source for you
Horneyhic2 4 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 Also as of 2012 New Jersey, California and Maryland still have and enforce 1 handgun per month laws which, and correct me if I'm wrong here, is not 1 state but 3
Horneyhic2 4 days ago
@Horneyhic2 In poking around, I realized that several of your recent quotes, including the McDowall one last night and the Kleck one tonite are cut and pasted from Wikipedia, hardly an infallible source when anyone can edit it. And as I showed earlier, the paper done by several Doctors and Don Kates show conclusively the inherent and documented bias, based on political ideology found in anything coming from JAMA. I havent used any NRA sources, how about you doing the same
MrTrailrated92 4 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 I mentioned wikipedias reliability in another post and in all of my quotes (where I've been asked to source) i have provided the source wikipedia used so yes the wording is cut and pasted from wiki but the facts are from outside sources. If you wish to use the NRA as your cut and paste as long as you can also provide their legitimate source i would have no objection
Horneyhic2 4 days ago
@Horneyhic2 I'm just gonna shoot straight to the base of this argument here, you are proposing to restrict the law abiding, whilst criminals don't give a fuck about laws further restrictions will not stop criminals. It is easily verifiable that countries such as the United States and Switzerland which posses more firearms have less crime.
mrvalidus1 4 days ago
Australia, England had tremendous spikes in crime and homicides when they took heir citizens firearms and Canada finding after twenty years that their registration was completely ineffective removed their registration system
mrvalidus1 4 days ago
@mrvalidus1 "Similarly statistics from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) show that the number of homicides per 100,000 in the UK at 1.14 as of 2006, was considerably below that of the US (5.62 per 100,000) in 2006, and again far below the rate of homicides in the US specifically using a firearm (3.36 per 100,000 people) in the same year"
Horneyhic2 4 days ago
@mrvalidus1 they only removed the Long gun registry everything else still must be register and it was canceled because of the cost not the effectiveness
Horneyhic2 4 days ago
@Horneyhic2 and all swiss ammo must be registered unless sold at a range and if sold at a range it must stay there
Horneyhic2 4 days ago
@Horneyhic2 your facts are woefully wrong, the UN is not known for keeping an honest records they have an agenda to take all citizens firearms. I get my facts from the sources. And you are still ignoring the fact that the criminals, the ones responsible for the killings are not going to be deterred by registration or any other gun control, and guns are not responsible for the majority of murders. GC just makes it harder for citizens to arm and protect themselves.
mrvalidus1 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Horneyhic2 your facts are woefully wrong, the UN is not known for keeping an honest records they have an agenda to take all citizens firearms. I get my facts from the sources. And you are still ignoring the fact that the criminals, the ones responsible for the killings are not going to be deterred by registration or any other gun control, and guns are not responsible for the majority of murders. GC just makes it harder for citizens to arm and protect themselves.
mrvalidus1 4 days ago
@mrvalidus1 Accually the US does not have less crime as I've repeatedly pointed out and Switzerland almost all of the guns are long guns or military service weapons
Horneyhic2 4 days ago
@Horneyhic2 INCORRECTLY pointed out
mrvalidus1 4 days ago
@mrvalidus1 You have provided no fact or stats or sources other then ur opinion so exude me if i take the UNs word over your
Horneyhic2 3 days ago
@Horneyhic2 Do the research as I have you have the time you won't believe me anyways but dig deeper than google, TV, and wikipedia. The factor in crime is not guns just like pencils are not the cause of misspelled words. Now do thorough research and shut your ill informed yap
mrvalidus1 3 days ago
@mrvalidus1 You understand nothing about a debate uve provided nothing but ur own opinion and ur assertion that there are facts yet you are unable or unwilling to provide them is this how lazy you americans have become? u won't even provide evidence to support ur statements? And to think u try and call urself "the greatest nation on earth" this kind of seer laziness is why ur losing that title
Horneyhic2 3 days ago
@Horneyhic2 Don't judge from a couple short paragraphs, i know from experience to not waste my time debating with those unwilling to listen, you won't believe me so as I said go to FBI the have the stats on crime find it yourself. Don't tell us what we should do with our country, I didn't claim it but I will now WE ARE THE GREATEST NATION and its because of our freedom and those willing to defend a timeless document.
mrvalidus1 3 days ago
@HOrnydumb fuck now i am gonna break from my patience with you stop frequenting and polluting this wall if you don't like what the song is about then don't fucking look for it. Get off your ill informed judgmental anti-American ass and get a life. You have a clear lack of understanding of our government, the media, and what it is to be American. Your sources are insanely inaccurate as can be found when going to the source such as FBI database. So rant else where fuckstick
mrvalidus1 3 days ago
@mrvalidus1 wow so much respect for the 1st amendment u have there
Horneyhic2 3 days ago
@Horneyhic2 Showing your ignorance again. The 1st Amendment ( just like the rest of the Bill of Rights ) is a restriction on GOVT suppression of speech. People are free to say whatever they like, no one is forcing you to listen
MrTrailrated92 3 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 I notice u ignored wat i said to you and attacked something i said to someone else
Horneyhic2 2 days ago
@Horneyhic2 Care to provide an example ? Cause I have no idea what your referring to.
MrTrailrated92 2 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 Example of wat i said 2 completely different things to u
Horneyhic2 2 days ago
@Horneyhic2 Already given, maybe you should go back a page or three and read through every thing to find it, Im not doing your homework for you, sorry
MrTrailrated92 2 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 Are you high? Cause you just answered my question with an even more vague answer the statement i was asking about. You realize this thing doesn't tell me which of my comments your responding to right?
Horneyhic2 2 days ago
@Horneyhic2 If anyone is high around here its you. There is nothing about my previous post to you that should be confusing to anyone with two brain cells to rub together. You asked for an example of where you said two different things. I replied that those examples had already been given and suggested you go back a page or three and read through the back and forth exchanges and locate said examples. What is so confusing for you about that concept ?
MrTrailrated92 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrTrailrated92 Uh no i asked for wat you were talking about when u said this "Care to provide an example ? Cause I have no idea what your referring to."
Horneyhic2 1 day ago
@Horneyhic2 If you are not an American Citizen you are not protected by Our Bill of Rights. Secondly the first amendment does not guarantee the right to be heard nor does it protect speech on private property or to individuals.
mrvalidus1 3 days ago
@mrvalidus1 Canadian citizens have the same right and are u claiming this wall is private property?
Horneyhic2 2 days ago
@mrvalidus1 ur broke, owned by foreigners and god forbid you need medical care cause it will bankrupt you yep greatest nation alright
Horneyhic2 3 days ago
@Horneyhic2 Which totally explains why people from all over the World are risking their lives to make it to America.
MrTrailrated92 3 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 They do the same for Canada to we have similar illegal problems we just don't have a land boarder with a 3rd world country like you do
Horneyhic2 2 days ago
@Horneyhic2 Oh yes we are in shit right now, cause of idiots that talk like you vote and we have a huge fucking mess, but we are still the leading economy debt ridden or not and we will pull through. The medical issue is not an issue buddo
mrvalidus1 3 days ago
@Horneyhic2 Broke or not we are still the Leading World Economy
mrvalidus1 3 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 as reported on Jan 31,2012 by "the Washington Post'
Horneyhic2 4 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 times*
Horneyhic2 4 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 Here a tried and true tactic lets forget everything but logic for a second forget the 2nd amendment. You have to register your car because it is capable of being a danger to the public by causing harm when used improperly why should u not have to register a firearm which when used properly is DESIGNED to cause harm.
Horneyhic2 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 LOL. I am SO glad you brought up the car thing, since I just did an entire column on how ridiculous the "treat guns like cars " argument is last week You'll have to Google Search the phrase " Treating Firearms Like we do Cars ? Yeah Lets do that ! so you can find it Suffice to say, you DO NOT " have to register a car because its capable of being a danger to the public ". In fact, you dont have to register a car at all if its only used on private property
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 I am SOOO Glad you brought up the car thing, since I just did an entire column on how ridiculous that argument is. You'll have to Google Search the title " Treating Firearms like we do cars ? Yeah lets do that " in order to read it. And NO you dont not have to register a car at ALL as long as its used on private property
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 i read ur column and i actually agree with it however theres a few holes in it like unless ur gun dealer does personal deliveries how do u expect to get ur gun home without taking it off private property? and ur right i don't think there should be any restrictions on wat you do on private property provided the bullets also stay on private property as for taking them from state to state well unless u adjacent property on both sides of a state line ur going to have to take it off
Horneyhic2 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 LOL, the media ? You have got to be joking. There is more then sufficient evidence to PROVE beyond any reasonable doubt the " media " is almost completely in the tank for the left and routinely passes off lies and opinion as fact. Hell, Media Matters just got caught that they have been essentially writing the coverage for MSNBC for years now. And tyranny ? You have NO idea how much of that is going on as we speak You think because you dont see the Gestapo its not ?
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 If your talking about the Patriot Act u should remember it was an NRA supported and republican President that brought that one in
Horneyhic2 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 And your point is ? Just because Bush II was a Republican doesnt mean he wasnt a Progressive. And just because the NRA MIGHT support something doesnt mean I would automatically always agree with them.
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 Are you talking about the debate last Fall over Rand Paul's amendment to the Patriot Act ? If so, then the NRA OPPOSED it with good reason. If not, then please provide the source for your claim that the NRA supported the original Patriot Act back in 2001, because now Im curious
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 i can't comment on those amendments cause i no nothing about them and can't seem to find any legitimate literature on them
Horneyhic2 5 days ago
@MrTrailrated92My point in bringing up nukes was that your second amendment says "arms" technically "arms" could be anything from a knife to a nuke the reason that ur more dangerous weapons are banned is public safety
Horneyhic2 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 Only someone completely ignorant of Colonial History could try to twist the word "arms" to mean " everything from knives to nukes ". The Founders wanted and intended for the Citizenry to have access to the same level and quality of weapons as the British soldiers had. Many Colonials even owned cannons and "privateer " warships that were contracted out to the rebels. We have the professional Military to take care of handling the big weapons, like tanks and nukes
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 and aircraft carriers and everything else that isnt man portable. Thus, my statement still is correct and accurate that the Founders clear intent was for the Citizenry to be armed just as equally as foot soldiers on the other side would be, which today means the same weapons available to Law Enforcement and individual Soldiers.
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 see below about the nukes. However, I do believe that it was absolutely the intent of the Founders and the Citizens have a protected right to own the same types of firearms as the police and individual soldiers do.
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 and u didn't answer my question
Horneyhic2 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 What question didnt I answer ?
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 Uhhh , try again. The US has a higher NON Firearm related homicide rate then most other Countries where guns are banned already
MrTrailrated92 6 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 so ur saying ur country is just naturally more violent then other similar countries
Horneyhic2 6 days ago
@Horneyhic2
yep
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
NRA life time member... I'm gonna exercise my 2nd amendment right no matter what ya'll say
gideup409 6 days ago
There are roughly 40x more crimes committed with guns then stopped buy guns
Horneyhic2 6 days ago
@Horneyhic2 Have anything to back up your claim other then your ignorant conjecture ? Cause I can PROVE your claim is nonsense
MrTrailrated92 6 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 i have stats which were already posted
Horneyhic2 6 days ago
Giving up your gun is like giving up everything to a criminal that breaks in at night.
TheClanRebel 1 week ago
@TheClanRebel you realize that guns are used in self protection in 0.2% of crimes annually
Horneyhic2 6 days ago
@Horneyhic2 Not even CLOSE to being true, keep trying
MrTrailrated92 6 days ago
@Horneyhic2 Whats your source ? Because even the FBI says your wrong by a LONG shot
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 wrong on wat?
Horneyhic2 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 Bah, it was a post you made from yesterday that claimed firearms were only used in self defense .02 percent of the time. The FBI, CDC, National Academy Of Sciences and every major peer reviewed study has found anywhere from a low of 100,000 times annually to potentially as high as a couple million times a year. With the average falling somewhere in the 500,000 to 750,000 times each year. Hell, even Anti gun researchers have found that defensive gun use is very common
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 "Between 1987 and 1990, David McDowall found that guns were used in defense during a crime incident 64,615 times annually. This equates to two times out of 1,000 incidents (0.2%) that occurred in this time frame" "During this same time period, 1987 and 1990, there were 46,319 gun homicides,and the National Crime Victimization Survey estimates that 2,628,532 nonfatal crimes involving guns occurred."
Horneyhic2 5 days ago
@Horneyhic2 Who did David McDowall do this study for ? Cause Google doesnt return anything remotely like what you posted, so I need more information. Are you suggesting Mr McDowall is right and the FBI is wrong ? Also I already pointed out to you last night that the vast majority of gun homicides are criminal on criminal violence that have nothing to do with actual innocent people being killed. The true number of innocent deaths is significantly LOWER then what you believe it is
MrTrailrated92 5 days ago
umm....what album? cause im goin to buy this
albridges32 1 week ago
In 2005, 75% of the 10100 homicides committed using firearms in the United States were committed using handguns, compared to 4% with rifles, 5% with shotguns, and the rest with a type of firearm not specified. The mortality rate for gunshot wounds to the heart is 84%, compared to 30% for people who sustain stab wounds to the heart.
Gun-related homicide rates in the United States are twenty to thirty-five times higher than they are in countries that are economically and politically similar to it
Horneyhic2 1 week ago
@Horneyhic2 You left out the part where 80 percent of those homicides were criminal on criminal killings ( drug gang turf wars ) and others where at least one, if not both people involved already had criminal records, often for previous violent offenses. Someone explain to me why exactly I should care if criminals want to kill each other ? Saves me tax money from not having to pay to house them in prison
MrTrailrated92 6 days ago
@MrTrailrated92 because these criminals are often not very goos shots and innocent bystanders are hit
Horneyhic2 6 days ago
most crimes in the us are committed with an unregistered gun....so we should take away the registered weapons of those who are responsible and use them as they should? We will NEVER control the black market weapons in this nation which are the real problem so why disarm those who not only enjoy sporting with them but have one next to their bed to stop those low lifes who have the serial numbers scratched off of theirs....
zfaylor 1 week ago
@zfaylor ur right they are mostly committed with unregistered guns and that is the best argument that the anti gun control crowd has and i don't no how these other countries have found a way to curb there illegal gun sales but the have otherwise the US wouldn't be 28th in the world for least murder so before u take and action u should look at the laws of the top 10 to see wat works cause something obvously does work better then wat ur doing
Horneyhic2 1 week ago
@Horneyhic2 Thats the truth, gun owners of america and nra members aren't the problem, were the ones that follow the laws. Thats why gun control will never work- criminals dont follow the laws
rclark1292 1 week ago
@rclark1292 are u saying the US has 20-35X more criminals then other countries like it?
Horneyhic2 1 week ago
@Horneyhic2 my reply mite have went to the wrong person, I was agreeing that majority of gun issues are unregistered guns, so taking them from us law abiding citizens is stuppid - hence the reason gun control does not work
rclark1292 6 days ago