UN Global Gun Ban?

Originally posted by Phoenix2001
The fact of what? That guns kill people? Why can't a club or a kitchen knife do the same? Oh, yea, that's right, someone has to be holding the club or the kitchen knife to kill anyone. And why compare only those countries? The United States by itself is twice the size of most of those countries you listed, and much more populated.

How silly is this? Double the numbers for the other countries, then. Triple it. More. See what you get. Oh... look, the US is STILL enormously higher! By a staggeringly huge margin!

And as the figures I just printed shows, you are living in a fantasy if you think these murders would get done anyway by other means. Horseshit. They are ONLY there because of the guns.

With thousands of people coming across the border each day, and a good many of them joining gangs, what do you expect? 11 out of 11 gangs in my hometown of Gainesville, Georgia, originated in Mexico.
And yes, they use guns.

Repeat- all these countries have their ethnic and gang related problems. It is fantasy for you to think your problems there are unique.

Repeat- if that was the explanation, ALL violent crime in the US would be as inflated. It is not- it is the gun crime only.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
But if you WANT to put the figures in wider context:

Here are some indicators of homicide rates per 100000 people:

England and Wales: 1.61
Germany: 1.17
France: 1.79
Canada: 1.76
Australia: 1.81

US: 5.64

You are some three times more likely to be murdered in the US than in any other Western country. Why? Because of the US's enormous gun murder rate which does not exist elsewhere!

No, but nor can you stop the rest of the world forming an opinion that condemns you. Which is what this is about.

Originally posted by debbiejo
Well then let the US deal with their own problems........We don't need anyone else telling us what to do.

Wow, what an incredibly mature attitude to an incredibly serious problem. Although the whole issue of a U.N. gun ban is ridiculous, so is your attitude.

By the way, are you finally convinced that whob and smart guy are the same person?

😂 HAHAHAHAHA..............he was really good though...........that took some talent.....

You're just mad cause I said nobody lives in Canada.....

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Repeat- if that was the explanation, ALL violent crime in the US would be as inflated. It is not- it is the gun crime only.

Gang members are lazy, they won't choke you to death with a jump rope or hit you upside the head with a hickory switch. They need to get the job done quick, so guns seem to work best.

Originally posted by debbiejo
😂 HAHAHAHAHA..............he was really good though...........that took some talent.....[/QUOTE

No he wasn't good, because everyone, but you, figured it out pretty damn quick. For one so slow on the uptake you seem very willing to throw around your opinion.

[QUOTE=6559124]Originally posted by debbiejo
You're just mad cause I said nobody lives in Canada.....

No, I just ignored that as the thought turd that it was and that you seem intent on dropping on almost an hourly basis.

Well, I didn't read far enough back, that's all...........I came in in the middle..........

Originally posted by Ushgarak
How silly is this? Double the numbers for the other countries, then. Triple it. More. See what you get. Oh... look, the US is STILL enormously higher! By a staggeringly huge margin!

And as the figures I just printed shows, you are living in a fantasy if you think these murders would get done anyway by other means. Horseshit. They are ONLY there because of the guns.

Now look who's being the silly one.

Horseshit my ass. You're living in a fantasy if you think MURDERS in general would not get done anyway by other means.

You'd have to fix those numbers so they'd be in proportion with the population of the country. And considering how large the United States is, containing almost three hundred million people, it would be totally obvious why the crime rate in america is so much higher... to every other country.

*sigh*

I still don't think people understand the problem. Illegal guns are going to find their way into the hands of criminals however much more illegal you make them. The solution isn't going to be to ban guns, the solution is going to be to stop the manufacturing of guns. And that isn't going to happen. So while criminals can get guns to kill people, so should regular citizens to protect themselves.

Maybe you need to live in the United States to actually understand how ****ing EASY it is to get an illegal gun illegally. In NYC alone, I'm willing to bet that the ratio of illegal guns to legal guns about 10:1. At least. And we have the third or fourth highest crime rate of the nation, yet the ones with legal guns aren't the ones commiting the crimes. Hell, it's a liberal city, most of it is anti-gun!

Originally posted by Arachnoidfreak
So while criminals can get guns to kill people, so should regular citizens to protect themselves.

I think that this is not a great idea. I guarantee the murder rate would quadruple with this course of action.

Please remember, that over 90% of the world is made up of complete fricken' idiots. To give them firearms is to court disaster.

Originally posted by Phoenix2001
So... less guns=less gun related killings, right? Wrong. Well, maybe atleast with a gun

Arghahahahahahaha...

Originally posted by Soleran
Here let's help you yet again understand what a gun ban really does. It gets rid of the guns that LAWFUL citizens would attain. Criminals still get guns they don't care about the law.

If guns are banned, then it would also make it harder for criminals to get them. It's simple logic, but you don't seem to get it.

Originally posted by Soleran
I guess throughout history when there were no guns, crimes just didn't exist. Please tell me of a country where there are gun bans and ZERO gun related crimes.

Well, if you are being explicitly extreme: if no-one has any guns, then no-one would get killed by guns. You can't deny that. However, obviously (to those of us with cognitive function) the total eradication of all gun-ownership is impossible, but the less guns there are the less gun-related deaths there are. The less guns there are, the less gun-related deaths there are. The less guns there are, the less gun-related deaths there are. How can you and your cowboy posse fail to comprehend this blatent truth? Oh, wait a minute...Yeah, I know...

Originally posted by NineCoronas
I'll take a page from Ushgarak hear, and say you're "retarded".

Wow! That's a good one! I'm impressed and offended. I guess no-one could accuse you of not having a 'grandiose lexicon'.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Arghahahahahahaha...

If guns are banned, then it would also make it harder for criminals to get them. It's simple logic, but you don't seem to get it.

Well, if you are being explicitly extreme: if no-one has any guns, then no-one would get killed by guns. You can't deny that. However, obviously (to those of us with cognitive function) the total eradication of all gun-ownership is impossible, but the less guns there are the less gun-related deaths there are. The less guns there are, the less gun-related deaths there are. The less guns there are, the less gun-related deaths there are. How can you and your cowboy posse fail to comprehend this blatent truth? Oh, wait a minute...Yeah, I know...

Wow! That's a good one! I'm impressed [B]and offended. I guess no-one could accuse you of not having a 'grandiose lexicon'. [/B]

................. are we on the same subject here? Obviously not, because I'm talking about crime in all of its forms. You apparently are speaking about crime involving only guns.

I agree that if there are no guns there will be no gun related deaths, that is simple logic of course.... but tell me... what's the difference between murder done by bare hands, and murder done by guns? There is none.

Originally posted by Soleran
Krunk did say 0, I quoted him saying it. Now can you prove his comment to be true?

Krunk'd said that if there were no guns there were no gun related crimes...I subscribe to that 100%...you don't?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Krunk'd said that if there were no guns there were no gun related crimes...I subscribe to that 100%...you don't?

But are you talking about crime or gun related crime? Make your point clear.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Krunk'd said that if there were no guns there were no gun related crimes...I subscribe to that 100%...you don't?

Originally posted by Phoenix2001
But are you talking about crime or gun related crime? Make your point clear.

Are you blind? I meant what I said.

Originally posted by botankus
Kind of like during Prohibition when there was no alcohol in existence, right?

That's not the point, although I appreciate your input.

Now easy thing: If there are NO guns (yes no guns, stop changing my examples...no guns...not some guns..no guns....like none at all) then there are no gun related crimes...get it? Sweet.