13517821:Monsieur_Patate said:
The homicide ratio per 100,000 population in the US is 71 times higher than in the UK, 18 times higher than Germany, 24 times higher than Spain, etc. It's basically a buttload more than in any other developed country, and that rate goes even higher if you consider suicides and unintentional deaths. And here you are saying gun control laws don't work. That's why there is no point in debating this any further.
You must be one of those guys who also denies global warming. And the earth is the center of the universe and is also flat, right?
I think there are a lot of variables to take into consideration. And its clear that over the past 20 years our violent crime rate in the US has decreased 50% while our murder rate has decreased 47%, these are statistics that no one seems to take credit for. We know where the crime is coming from; in metropolitan areas with a population greater than 200,000, we know where the shootings are happening, we know that the UK has a higher violent crime rate, we also know that we have six times more metropolitan areas than they do.
All of these factors have to be considered and the straight-shooting fact is that the media and the politicians do not constitute for said variables. The fact of the matter is that we have politicians already introducing legislation before they even understand what the problem is.
For example, why is Dianne Feinstein pinpointing the AR-15? In 2011 out of the homicides that were caused be firearms, only 3.5% were caused by rifles and the AR-15 is a ‘subset' of a rifle. Doesn’t make any sense.
We need to mandate the gun laws that are already in place. I would also like to point out that not only has violent crime decreased by 51% from 1991-2011 and murder rate 54% but nonfatal firearm related crime has decreased from 1993 to 2011, 69%!!
Furthermore, the anti-gun propaganda has worked marvelously. 55% of Americans think gun-related crime has increased, while only 12% of Americans think gun-related crimes has decreased. Reality tells us that crime is way down but the perception is that violence is up. There’s a disconnection here and this disconnect prevents us from having an honest dialogue about what causes violence and what we can do to fix it. This misperception is utilized to justify legislation without understanding the problem, which more often than not infringes on our individualistic rights. Stop choosing between two extremities and start piecing together the problems with logic and reality. It seems as if we have dehumanized gun violence and instead humanized guns. Violence most often than not follows a logic.
There’s a logic to violent crime. What drives violence?
We engage in violence to elevate and maintain a status quota. A social outcast, someone who doesn’t fit in; the mainstream media rewards violence, infamy and an almost immediate celebrity. Violence just might be an attractive choice. It simply follow a logic.
This is all about the perception of threat. The quest for survival is one of the key drives of state sponsored violence. Violence can rectify survival.
Moreover, protection is a rational for violence. People will rectify violence to protect their political status, obsessions, interests, loved ones, investments, property, domicile, offspring, etc. If one perceives a threat to any of these aforementioned things violence can be instigated.
Is violence justified, I’m not saying that it is or isn’t what I’m saying is that there is a logic to violence.
Maybe we ought to make policies that mitigate logical violence, if of course we understand that logic. Defining that logic can be utilized for policy making to bite back violence but instead we are focused on a tool; a gun, which is utilized to commit violence. You can not fix a problem from within that problem.
There’s a good chance 10 violent crimes have been committed in the time of me writing this. There’s also a good chance that none of those violent crimes involved a gun. However, theres a very good chance that all of these crimes followed a logic.
In addition, with current ITAR registration costs through the roof, small gun and ammo manufacturers do not stand a chance against the giant corporations that think $2,000 a year is chump change. Blue Bunny ammo was unilaterally shut down by the feds even though they had a license to manufacture ammunition with the ATF. Why? The oppressive nature of ITAR registration. Less competition to the big boys in the ammo industry means more money toward their sales.
"Assault Weapons Bans"
Remington, Smith and Wesson, Sig Saur, among the GIGANTIC weapons manufacturers don't give a crap if they sell you an AR15 with a collapsible stock, 30 round mag, flash hider, and a bayonet mount, or a watered down AR15 with a fixed stock, 10 round mag, welded muzzle brake, and remove the bayonet lug.
Last but not least, the government and government agencies will continue to promise HUGE contracts to gun and ammo suppliers, regardless of how eroded our individual liberties have become. In other words, gun control was never about guns!!
Instead, it is about control. It is about attaining some illusory safety in exchange for restricting liberties.
Bloomberg wants to see the incremental disarmament of the people. Might I be paranoid to think that politicians want to ban ALL guns.
Feinstein told the Associated Press, “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up everyone of them... ‘Mr and Mrs. American turn them all in,’ I would have done it”
Eric Holder in an interview stated, that we have to brainwash the American people into thinking about guns in a negative way.
I find it hypocritical that Eric Holder who is against guns and gun related violence let the ATF "purposely allow licensed firearms dealers to sell weapons to illegal straw buyers, hoping to track the guns to Mexican drug cartel leaders and arrest them, under code name Operation Fast and Furious/Operation Gunrunner."
This failed operation allowed 2000+ guns to cross the border, was not done with the knowledge and approval of Mexican authorities and led to 400+ people dead.
I also find it hypocritical that we have to be lectured by an individual who basically has a platoon of armed individuals that protect him and his family and rightfully so. While he expects us ordinary, law-abiding citizens to outsource their personal safety to the US government.
Now lets delve further into there agenda shall we.
Here’s a leaked wikileaks email sent to Michael Bloomberg from Sony pictures:
http://wikileaks.org/sony/emails/
"Dear Michael Bloomberg,
Thanks so much for getting together this week, It was a total pleasure, and I look forward to working together. In the end this has to be about the safety of our kids and grandchildren, and not about the 2nd Amendment. Your offer to help means a lot to us."
That email was sent from Michael Bloomberg’s anti-gun group to the CEO of Sony pictures. These emails illustrate that powerful people in the anti-gun movement and powerful people in Hollywood want to enact their agenda. Just like the PDF document linked above, they want to make sure that the national conversation is not about the 2nd amendment but instead controlled by overly emotional rhetoric in regards to safety and children.
Furthermore, one could make the assumption that more equality=less guns overall. More unequal income inequality results in a high demand for guns for criminal purposes.
Where there is demand, there is someone to supply that demand regardless of the Laws in place.
Look at Jamaica for example, they have virtually banned civilian gun ownership but the fact that guns are in very high demand results in a lot of guns being smuggled into the country, hence a firearm-related death rate per 100,000 population per year of 39.74.
In conclusion, all of these massacres are conveniently exploited to breathe new life into a cause that would otherwise be obsolete. They attract supporters by inspiring fear and promoting knee-jerk reactions. The "Could you imagine if this were your child?" propaganda really hits home.
