Residents of states with the highest rates of gun ownership and political conservatism are at greater risk of suicide than those in states with less gun ownership and less politically conservative leanings, according to a study by University of California…professor Augustine Kposowa…
Suicide was the 11th leading cause of death for all ages in the United States in 2007, the most recent year for which complete mortality data was available at the time of the study. It was the seventh leading cause of death for males and the 15th leading cause of death for females. Firearms are the most commonly used method of suicide by males and poisoning the most common among females.
“Many studies show that of all suicide methods, firearms have the highest case fatality, implying that an individual who selects this technique has a very low chance of survival,” Kposowa said. Guns are simply the most efficient method of suicide, he added.
With few exceptions, states with the highest rates of gun ownership — for example, Alaska, Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, Alabama, and West Virginia — also tended to have the highest suicide rates. These states were also carried overwhelmingly by George Bush in the 2000 presidential election…
Kposowa is the first to use a nationally representative sample to examine the effect of firearm availability on suicide odds. Previous studies that associated firearm availability to suicide were limited to one or two counties. His study also demonstrates that individual behavior is influenced not only by personal characteristics, but by social structural or contextual attributes. That is, what happens at the state level can influence the personal actions of those living within that state.
The sociologist said that although policies aimed at seriously regulating firearm ownership would reduce individual suicides, such policies are likely to fail not because they do not work, but because many Americans remain opposed to meaningful gun control…“Even modest efforts to reform gun laws are typically met with vehement opposition. There are also millions of Americans who continue to believe that keeping a gun at home protects them against intruders, even though research shows that when a gun is used in the home, it is often against household members in the commission of homicides or suicides,” Kposowa said.
About time we had some good news about guns. Yeah, I know – facetious.
Har.
Oh, I see what you’re doing. The next thing you would say is most gun owner’s are conservatives and therefore it would follow that most people that kill themselves with guns are conservative. Thereby giving credence to the fact that guns don’t kill people, conservatives kill people.
Darwinism at work?
So is it the guns, or the religion?
My money is on religion. It’s beating the crap out of guns in number of dead people.
“Firearm ownership, conservatism (measured by percentage voting for former President George W. Bush in the 2000 election)”
So this clown thinks that everyone who voted for Bush were all conservatives? That’s very broad assumption, guess he believes that everyone who voted for Obama in 2008 were all liberals.
I’m sorry, but this smells to high heaven of a political hack job…
From a California Liberal. How’s your state doing by the way?
Legendary Troll is legendary. Keep up the good work.
I like when people see things in positive light.
Why are Teapubs so negative?
Easy for you to say, your state isn’t circling down the toilet.
So George Bush causes gun suicides? Get over it people. Next you’ll be saying he was responsible for starting two wa…oh I see, never mind.
Most recent data from 2007… Conservatives saw that they actually re-elected that Bozo-in-Chief, and offed themselves.
Whether they were acts of contrition for their votes or apologies with the guarantee to never do it again only they and their hairdressers know.
This quote said:
>> poisoning the most common among females
And this quote said:
>> policies aimed at seriously regulating firearm ownership would reduce individual suicides
So… How did you connect those dots again?
If a gun is not the women’s choice, it isn’t going to make much difference there now, is it.
Smells of ulterior “gun control” motive to me.
And regarding males, if a gun were not available they would just use another method, like poisoning, razor blades, swan dive from a tall building, …
If someone is bent on killing themselves or someone else, they will use whatever tool is the most handy. All that “gun control” does is change what tool is used. This fact is very well established.
There are a number of countries around the world that have strict gun control, how’s that working for them at lowering their suicide rates?
I think with a gun available suicide is more likely than with a knife. Now if we had more movies of people in their bathtub, then perhaps not. A gun is an easy suicide. To say that restricting guns would not reduce suicide rate, you have to convince us that there are other easy suicides, that are very well known to the potential suiciders.
All one needs to do is start at Wikipedia of all places: http://tinyurl.com/bg8zt
United Kingdom suicide rate is 12th highest cause of death and is 1% of to all deaths.
USA suicide is is 1.7% of all deaths and 11th highest cause.
It looks significant to me but where’s a statistitionwhen you need one?
http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/top-20-causes-of-death-by-country
Sorry touch screen is too clumsy and slow.
YUP!!!!
Easy availability of guns makes suicide more likely. Now having this happen in the most conservative states is also reasonable, because we know that liberals get miserable when they can’t force other people to do what they say. So we are seeing in the most conservative states, with the easiest to get a gun, that liberals are killing themselves out of depression. Best solution is not restrictive gun laws, but rather expanding internet availability so they can commiserate with other liberals far away.
“…liberals get miserable when they can’t force other people to do what they say.” …and which group wants to control whether a woman can terminate a pregnancy?
Although total suicide rates in the U.S. are not much higher than in other Western countries, without changes in gun-ownership policies “the United States is poised to remain a very armed and potentially dangerous nation for its inhabitants for years to come.”
Awwwwwriiiight!
I know of two people that chose to dramatically end their lives with a gun.
My brother-in-law shot himself in the mouth in front of his wife and two preteen children. I suppose he was making a point. He was a religious fundamentalist and an avid hunter and gun enthusiast.
An acquaintance in the neighborhood shot himself in the head shortly after his wife died. I don’t know much about him except he voted for George W. Bush. Twice. (That would be enough to cause me to think about suicide.)
My brother-in-law shot himself in the mouth in front of his wife and two preteen children. I suppose he was making a point. He was a religious fundamentalist and an avid hunter and gun enthusiast.
An acquaintance in the neighborhood shot himself in the head shortly after his wife died. I don’t know much about him except he voted for George W. Bush. Twice. (That would be enough to cause me to think about suicide.)
Correlation is causation?
The US government is buying guns and ammunition at unprecedented rates. And I’m pretty sure that government is controlled by Liberals.
Who are the gun lovers again?
Rumor has it that those agencies are buying on behalf of the DOD or other agencies because they have not had fiscal cuts as badly.
Reminds me of a study done by Norway I believe that concluded women who had abortions were at a significantly higher risk for suicide.
Strangely the liberal media didn’t want to report those findings.
He forgot to mention that states with the highest forms of gun control also have the highest incidents of violent crime. Coincidence?
Master of the Obvious!!! They make a great form of home defense too! As well as hunting if you like to do so.
Hopefully he’s not implying that firearms are what caused suicidal people to carry out their suicide.
ROFLMAO. Another master of the obvious moment. Strangely he wants to tie this in with politics. If there are greater incidents of gun ownership in an area, is it realistic to think that gun-related anything could also go up?
Is he concluding that if you come from a state that happens to be Conservative that the suicide victim is also automatically conservative?
And policies aimed at serious gun control tends to foster a spiking of violent crimes. Strange how he’s leaving things out.
Oh! He’s trying to reduce preventable deaths? So if there’s no firearm the suicidal person will give up thinking about suicide?
He’s also ignoring how under-reported foiled crimes are averted by those using a firearm against the criminal.
What about tubs and pools? More children die of drowning in those than by gun fire. Surely if someone as concerned as he is about un-necessary preventable deaths would suggest the outlawing of pools and tubs. It is afterall about preventing deaths…. right? That’s if the numbers matter.
Obama Administration has passed new regulations for swimming pools, insisting they be made more handicap accessible. The regulations were postponed during election season, but they will be brought back.
Don’t screw with Legal Gun Owners & go after the Illegal Gun Users!
http://youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=N1ABw6IMKn0
Hmm, perhaps I was wrong with my theory that it is liberals in conservative states committing suicide. Looking at the list, it doesn’t appear very thorough. There are many other very conservative states, far more than West Virginia and Montana, which have had 2 Democratic Senators as well as Democratic governors in the past decade.
“The only way you’ll get my gun is to pry it from my cold dead hands.” //// Rather obliging I’d say.
It really is just an application of including guns in your review of possibilities, aka “Gun Culture,” aka Conservative, aka Gun Nut, aka stupid.
You gotta love the McGuyver though. Anti gun nut position is criticized as mere correlation and not causation whereas the anti-abortion position is proven using the same kind of correlations.
I can hear it now: “I didn’t say that!”===>> Ha, ha. Poor McGuyver never really does say anything. All those words but a correlation.
Having never read anything on point, I’ll bet suicide by gun is more strongly correlated to issues other than poliltical affiliation….. but I won’t kill myself if I’m wrong. Gee–there was an example of a maybe right there!
Or I was pointing out hypocrisy. Strange how your ideology gets in the way something as simple as that. But you see what you want to see.
But sure, you can pretend that if you make firearms less available that those who are suicidal will give up or not be successful in carrying out their wishes.
Typical liberal mantra. Punish the masses over the actions of a few because it supports your ideologies. You guys do that for everything where you want government to micromanage the masses.
Ha!
The McGuyver failing to ever think past the talking points says:
4/8/2013 at 1:58 pm
Or I was pointing out hypocrisy. /// No, you did not point out any hypocrisy except for your own. Correlation is usually the first indication of causation and must be proven otherwise most often. Life is like that. YOU SAID death by gun and conservatism was not proven and only a causation. Then YOU SAID suicide post abortion was proven by the same kind of post facto survey. All your hypocrisy belongs to YOU!! Not even smart enough to quibble! ((Ha, ha!))
Strange how your ideology gets in the way something as simple as that. But you see what you want to see. /// Yes, yes. All truths necessarily point to all of us, to one degree or another. Analysis for what is said/meant/CONTEXT necessary to tweeze that out. Course—NO REFLECTION AT ALL is pretty easy to see. Most “neener, neener” responses reveal that.
But sure, you can pretend that if you make firearms less available that those who are suicidal will give up or not be successful in carrying out their wishes. /// Most studies don’t show that==correlations? How you gonna “test” a subject like this except by correlation?
Typical liberal mantra. Punish the masses //// Poor little gun nut. Wants to equate reasonable gun restrictions as punishment when the PROBLEM BEING ADDRESSED IS PEOPLE BEING MURDERED. Hard to be more self centered than this, although you Pukes accomplish and demonstrate this psychological correlation more than any other group except 8 month olds off the teat.
over the actions of a few because /// 30K per year in the USA. Yes–its not you….so screw everyone else. Talk about your Mantra!
it supports your ideologies. You guys do that for everything where you want government to micromanage the masses. /// You do or you don’t===the same amount of management, micro or otherwise.
Oh McGuyver===you so dumb, you are almost cute.
McGuyver has his, screw all you all!
Ha, ha. What a goon.
The point I was making is the liberals will embrace correlative evidence if it supports their ideologies while ignoring others that challenge them.
Whatever else you interpret from that is of your own doing. But by all means please point out where I’m being hypocritical. 🙂
No I didn’t.
No I didn’t. Sounds to me you made a poor attempt at reading in between the lines and jumped to a conclusion.
LOL. Sorry, couldn’t help but laugh over your reading comprehension and jumping to conclusions issue. 😀
If you can’t test, then what EXACTLY can you conclude? An intellectually honest person would be a bit introspective and try to see where their theory falls apart.
So suicide is now murder? Also you do realize that suicide is voluntary? And if you increase gun control, you do realize you disarm the citizenry while criminals will continue on with their use of guns? In the mean time how does this affect those who want to commit suicide (aka murder in your book)?
I’m not registered to any political party. Another demonstration of you committing a logical fallacy.
Out of how many Americans? There’s nearly 314 million people in this country. That’s a whopping 0.0095% of the population.
Or about ~ 9.6 people for every 100K. Wow!!! Thanks for shedding some light on the gravity of the matter.
Strange. I had no idea personal responsibility fostered being micromanaged by the government.
So you have a flair for the dramatics. You believe that government should coerce change 100k people for ever 9.6 individuals. And if someone points out such power grabs by the government given the magnitude of the situation, you play the “screw you all” card? LOL.
There you go confusing Bobbo with facts again. Tsk, tsk.
He really hates to be held accountable. 🙂
If you have firearms in your house then you are much more likely to die a violent death. If you are a woman in a house with firearms then you are more likely to die a violent death and be the victim of assault and rape.
It doesn’t matter what your political stripe is, that’s just the sobering facts.
So conversely speaking Captain Obvious, if you’re in a country / state that has strong gun controls, you’re saying that you’re less likely to die a violent death, rape, or assault?
Regardless of political stripe of course.
Using your same logic, does having a knife in your house with a blade longer than 2″ increase your chances for murder, rape, stabbing, or assault?
Regardless of political stripe was kind of directed at Eideard’s headline. It’s nice to see you’re on the same page.
If you’re not sure why a woman would be at greater risk for all types of violence in a household (notice I didn’t country or state) with firearms then you should probably ask a woman you know. She will connect the dots for you.
I know you didn’t mention anything about country or state. But if your logic is consistent, then EVERY country that has strong / strict gun control regulations should demonstrate consistently lower rates of such violent crimes. You’re implying a universal claim.
One only needs to come up with examples where your claim doesn’t hold true.
Captain Obvious said:
If you have firearms in your house… blah blah blah…
This is complete garbage.
I’ve heard it quoted before, and it is garbage.
I grew up in rural northern Canada (in the early 60’s).
Almost every household had/has guns in it here.
There is no correlation from owning guns –>> to being violent. Buying or owning a firearm does not immediately make you violent.
Note that I did not state that there is no correlation from being violent –>> to owning guns — that is entirely different.
Two of the BIG correlations –>> to violence in the household and against women are: Alcohol and Drugs.
In my more than 50 years I don’t personally know of a single person who is a gun owner that was violent just because they owned a firearm (“me got gun, me go kill!”).
There were only those few cases of violence where drugs or alcohol were the mitigating factor.
Been a while since I’ve read such a transparently calculating post to highlight the correctness of the opposing position.
Turning quibbling adjectives into little suppositories of the shitting truth.
Funny when that happens.
I was thinking the same thing. Are you an english teacher?
No, but it was on my short list of careers to consider….. then life intervened.
Looking forward===always nervous and upset over the uncertainties and choices before me.
Looking back===its all good.
aka: why worry.
Stating that:
Got a gun = You are a violent person/wife beater
is the same as saying:
Got a penis = You are a rapist
Got white sheets = You belong to KKK
You can’t be that daft to believe that are you?
You can’t be that daft to believe that are you?
Just take a look at the medical research of plain old police data (e.g. John Hopkins, University of Florida, etc). A woman owning a gun or living in a home with a gun is a significant risk factor. Risks range from 50% more to 20 times more likely depending on the circumstances.
Sorry that’s just simple stats. However, if you want to imply that your penis makes you a rapist, that’s your own problem.
Going to a hospital makes you substantially more likely to die. Just the facts.
Wow! So MEDICAL research was needed to prove your theory? Fascinating.
Do the rates follow in lockstep with the “risk factors”?
I once heard a medical researcher say that 98% of all stats are lies.
Captain Obvious said:
Just take a look at the medical research of plain old police data
There are countries where things like honor killings have been going on for centuries.
They have high rates of violence against women.
And no guns in the house.
According to you (and your “stats”) that would not be possible then.
So your “stats” are meaningless.
“Statistics” can be twisted to show anything you want them to, everyone knows that.
If a man wants to be violent against a women, it is not the gun sitting in the house that made him do it.
Trying to blame an inanimate object for a person’s violent or antisocial behavior is false.
You really must be a hoplophobe.
And murder has been around long before guns were invented.
If there were a direct correlation between murder and guns, then countries with strict gun control (like Mexico for example, or even the UK) would have a near-zero murder rate.
Go look at their “police data”.
Your argument is completely false.
I grew up in rural northern Canada (in the early 60′s).
Gosh, that makes you an expert. Screw the neurobiologists and forensic psychologists. But that Diefenbaker was one heck of a fella.
There is no correlation from owning guns –>> to being violent. Buying or owning a firearm does not immediately make you violent.
We all know correlation doesn’t implies causality. Or causality disproves correlation. Or causality causes causality, or something.
There were only those few cases of violence where drugs or alcohol were the mitigating factor.
True, a doob totally makes me chill. Next time I’ll try donuts which should be a contributing factor.
So according to you (and your “forensic psychologists”), guns = violence.
Then how do you explain that countries with strict gun control (like Mexico or the UK) have high levels of violence, crime, and murder?
Remove the guns, remove the violence, right?
But guns seem like the correct “causality” for a hoplophobe.
I looked at the definition for hoplophobe on google and the 7th result leads to this website. Read some of the comments and the signatures.
Who here identifies with target practice on 2/3 of an acre?
http://www.usacarry.com/forums/general-firearm-discussion/25990-my-first-hoplophobe-encounter.html
Of course they’re more likely to off themselves.
They have guns and when they wake up one morning and realize that they are leading narrow lives where their conservatism has alienated everyone but other embittered souls trapped in the echo chamber or their own rage, what else can they do but suck on the business end of a hand gun?
This is a non-issue.
My advice is to use a large enough caliber and dum-dum bullets.
You don’t want your body to survive the hot explosive gasses taking out most of your cognitive capacity while leaving a small exit wound.
So what’s the point here? Personal responsibility? Freedom? No need for name-calling Bobbo. I’ve heard them all from you. Just summarize the gist of it for us in your indubitable way.
I actually enjoy his style of writing. Reminds me of a teacher I once had. No one respected him but he was a nice guy. I guess he used verbage to try to reach his students in a non-traditional way but all the female teachers used to laugh at him because he was ugly, hehe.
I just thought Bobbo had arrested development. 😀
Is it liberals trapped in conservative states committing suicide? That would make sense…
Let me guess…you’re a redneck in a southern state.
In related news
http://cnn.com/2013/04/08/us/tennessee-gun-death/index.html
Your link should shut everyone up defending the point that guns in the home are not a danger, only the bad guys with guns are. The comments disbelieving any or all statistics and polls should wake up to the fact that handguns in particular are human killing pieces of metal and plastic. I have seen first hand how alcoholism and guns can tear a family apart.
Yup. Thousands of innocent people are shot dead in the home every year.
The NRA only reports the one homeless guy per year that was shot dead for breaking in and stealing a sandwich …oh, and was gonna rape grandma afterwards.
It makes sense to me considering the current crop of assholes running the country.
Stands to reason that the more guns per capita, the more likely people will have access to them as tools with which to suicide themselves.
In other news, there are more car accident deaths in places where there are more cars.
People who are scared of firearms need to stop pretending they care about people being killed by said firearms. You all don’t give a rats ass about them. You are frauds. If you did care you’d buy a firearm yourself and overthrow the government, who is the single entity that has killed more people, using guns, than any other.
Your last paragraph removed the benefit of a doubt that you’re a crazy loon.
How so?
I think this gave you the crown of “King of Loons,” at least until Alfie gets more than an afternoon pass: “If you did care you’d buy a firearm yourself and overthrow the government, who is the single entity that has killed more people, using guns, than any other.”
At least 4 moronic assumptions/statements in one medium length sentence.
If you can rewrite any of the sentiments expressed to re-enter the land of the living, you would impress us all.
I thought you of all people would understand what I posted, damn bobbo! C’mon! I’ve seen you see through less cryptic comments.
Now Bobbo, you clearly made at least 10 such statements yesterday at 2:09.
Such humility! 😀
A forum is no place for sarcasm unless like a syphilitic penis–it is dripping.
People who are scared of firearms need to stop pretending they care about people being killed by said firearms. You all don’t give a rats ass about them. You are frauds. If you did care you’d buy a firearm yourself and overthrow the government, who is the single entity that has killed more people, using guns, than any other
* Wrong : being ‘scared’ or unsympathetic to widespeard ownership of firearms is unrelated to how one feels about tragedy because of firearms.
* Wrong : I don’t pretend.
* Wrong : I do care about gun fatalities
* Wrong : I give a rats ass
* Wrong : I’m not a fraud
* Wrong : I do care and see no need to provide it by buying a firearm.
* Wrong : I do care and still don’t want to overthrow the government.
Your last ‘point’ is bizarre but probably accurate.
I’ve never seen seven wrong statements and a bonus bizarre point in one paragraph.
Gun Teapubs don’t like to talk about the thousands of dead kids, other fatal accidents and rage shootings by gun owners. Instead , they point to the 4 instances per year where a handgun was used to scare away a homeless guy stealing a sandwich.
Never mind the idiocy of high capacity clips. That is totally stupid and merely satisfies the urge to pretend to be GI Joe
You don’t care about those kids either. And there is no such thing as a high capacity clip. It’s a magazine.
What about the multitude more of “fatal accidents” by vehicle drivers?
Or the higher numbers of violence and deaths by alcohol and drugs?
Where is your scorn and disdain towards those?
Your comment on “4 instances per year … stealing a sandwich” is so far from the truth that there isn’t a face-palm big enough.
Everyone has disdain towards fatal auto crashes, more so when the driver is drunk or on some other drug. He/she that was the driver under the influence most times walks away and kills children and others in the vehicle. I lost a cousin and another cousin is paralyzed from the waist down because of a drunk driver. The drunk driver walked away, meanwhile his wife and their two girls were killed in the wreck.
Now, I’m all for gun rights, but handguns in the wrong hands are just plain dangerous. This ongoing argument about how many cartridges in a rifle magazine should be allowed by law seems to be an overblown reaction to Sandy Hook.
The government is not coming to take away your guns, so stop behaving like gun nuts and squirreling away all the weapons and ammo you can. Get yourself a samurai sword for the zombie apocalypse.
If you are TRULY concerned about senseless deaths of children, then surely you’re more concerned about accidental drownings in pools or tubs since they kill more children than firearms. Shouldn’t you be equally (if not more so) passionate about controlling tub / pool sales?
That is if the numbers matter….. unless you’re not actually concerned and are only using children to promote your ideology when there are other things that are associated with more deaths.
Which is it?
Drowning compared to firearms mortality rates for children.
Here’s some charts for you which I”m sure you’ll debunk someway or somehow.
http://childdeathreview.org/statisticsAL.htm
In the context of accidental / preventable child deaths along with firearm suicides, your stats support what I am saying.
More children die from drowning than by those firearm deaths.
What’s the problem? Are you suggesting that homicide should be included as accidental or preventable?
Yes, gun deaths on purpose or by accident are still unnecessary.
How do you prevent homicide? Do you have a logical way to stop criminals from committing crimes?
Or do you suppose that like those who are suicidal individuals, that criminals will continue unabated if you make guns harder for them to commit the crime?
FBI: More People Killed with Hammers, Clubs Each Year than Rifles – http://tinyurl.com/akcqnwo
Guyver says:
4/9/2013 at 2:44 pm
“How do you prevent homicide? Do you have a logical way to stop criminals from committing crimes?”
Maybe start with the gun shows. It’s a show and, if you want that weapon go to your nearest sporting goods store and buy it there.
Ha ha, rifles and hammers. Handguns are the main issue. No respectable conservative would off himself with a long gun.
This is true… but the liberals are insisting rifles, or more specifically rifles that physically look like an assault rifle are the problem.
Or simply wreckless youth / driving. From your own source motor vehicles kills more people than all firearm deaths combined. Might as well mention that since you’re including homicide under the same umbrella as preventable / accidental shootings.
BTW, your own source shows young children are 11 times more likely to die of natural causes than by a firearm.
According to the census bureau, Alabama had a total population of 4,779,745 in 2010. 23.5% of that was under the age of 18 (1,123,240 children in Alabama).
So combining all firearm deaths from your source, 0.00596% of the population under the age of 18 died from a firearm.
Not even one hundredth of a percent. In other words ~ 6 kids died from a firearm for every 100k children.
0.0686% of children in Alabama died of natural causes. ~ 7 children for every 10k children.
Guess you don’t live in the state of NY. http://tinyurl.com/c9tbw2o
Guyver,
I’m not happy about that blaze article you linked. But, if a citizen has a mental illness disorder and the law states no firearms for mental illness patients, then I was wrong about “them” not coming for your firearm. Although I think these laws were in place and just now are being heavily enforced. Especially for handgun permit holders.
I still don’t see the rational for hording firearms and cartridges because you believe the government is gonna do you wrong. Owning a .22 plinker and a deer rifle for hunting shouldn’t be a problem.
It’s the nuts with ten AR’s and a few fake AK’s with thousands of rounds waiting for the insurrection that’s the problem.
I hear that if you’ve been prescribed ANY psychotropic medication that they’re going to take away your 2nd ammendment rights.
What qualifies? Ambien and Ritalin among other things. Given how everyone seems to be on something, and the likelihood it could be psychotropic then this looks to be an interesting way for government to FORCIBLY disarm the masses.
http://tinyurl.com/c7x9b35
The only rationale you should be concerned with is what things you prefer to horde that others may not agree with. Food? P0rn? Movies?
Bloomberg wanted to outlaw 2-liter sodas. NY, CA, and Obama want to push for a sugar excise tax on junk foods because it’s bad for you and you don’t need it. How far are we from a fat tax for consuming fatty foods? When it does pass, will government make exceptions so Blacks and Hispanics don’t cry foul because their foods are typically higher in fats?
How many bureaucrats do you want dictating your wants under the guise that it’s for your benefit? How much personal responsibility do you want to give up so you can empower some Bureaucrat telling you he’s going to make it all better? Guns are an easier target because far fewer people use guns for sport, defense, etc. than people probably drink sodas for breakfast.
No it’s not. Handguns kill the most people in this country. And I’ve demonstrated from your own source, death by firearms is dwarfed by things like natural causes and automobile deaths.
Just because something physically looks like an assault rifle doesn’t make it one.
And like I alo pointed out, hammers and clubs kill more people than rifles. How far do you want to go to promote an ideology while ignoring the very facts you presented to me so you can feel good?
The McGuyver… simply making denials of what he clearly said. Those with a reading retention beyond a single post will see that for the dishonesty it is. But The McGuyver knows that a good Conservative would rather kill himself with a gun than be forced to read more than a bumpersticker.
Knowing your audience.
ROFLMAO. Wow! What an incredible demonstration of intellectual dishonesty. Thanks for demonstrating my point! 🙂
Liberals are blinded by either ideology or intellectual dishonesty. You seem to be crippled with both.
Should I be surprised? Nope! 😉