Skip to comments.By the numbers: Guns in America
Posted on 08/10/2012 5:01:40 AM PDT by marktwain
(CNN) -- Following the mass shootings in a Colorado movie theater and a Sikh temple in Wisconsin, the debate over gun control has been reignited: How should the country balance its constitutional right to bear arms with access to deadly firepower?
Here's a look by the numbers on guns in the United States and Americans' attitudes toward them.
26 -- Percentage of Americans who favor a handgun ban, a record low, according to a 2011 Gallup Poll.
60 -- Percentage who supported a ban in 1959, the first year Gallup asked this question.
56 -- Number of votes in the Senate that the assault weapons ban received in 1994.
19 -- Types of military-style weapons affected by the ban.
10 -- Years the assault weapons ban was in effect until it expired.
Do guns make us safer?
$75 or less -- Retail price of a low-caliber handgun.
At least $1,500 -- Retail price of a "higher-end" shotgun or rifle.
49 -- Percentage of Americans who said in 2011 that protecting gun-ownership rights was important.
46 -- Percentage who thought gun control was more important.
58 -- Percentage polled in 2011 after the shootings in Tucson, Arizona, that felt mass shootings were mainly isolated events carried out by "troubled individuals."
16,799 -- Homicides in the United States in 2009.
11,493 -- Homicides by firearm in 2009.
150,000 -- Brady Act background checks in 2009 that led to the rejection of a potential gun buyer's application.
39 -- Percentage of applications denied by states because of a felony conviction or indictment.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Where does she find a $75 or less handgun retail? I do not see them.
Here is the source for the 9,146 total firearms murder victims in 2009:
“Where does she find a $75 or less handgun retail?”
may I be so bold to ask,in what cities did most of these killings take place ?
Most meaningful statistics were left out:
0 - number of countries that became a dictatorship when citizens owned guns.
1 - reason for owning a firearm - becuase it is a right guaranteed by the Constitution.
2 - Second Amendment. With it, government fears us. Without it, we fear the government.
For seventy-five bucks, you won’t get much more than some industrial strength elastics and a couple of clothespins.
In other words, a slingshot.
Out of those 11,000, or 9700, annual firearms homicides, how many were in places where open and/or concealed carry was banned? And how is it possible to use any of those as a reason to further restrict arms elsewhere? Let’s see: Were guns banned in Columbine? Check. The Theater in Aurora? Check. That island off of Norway? Check.
Companies such as Raven, Jennings and Lorcin used to sell their pot-metal specials for around $80 - ten years ago. Some of those companies are no longer around, but even a Hi-Point would sell for a multiple of that today. Sounds like somebody found an old copy of Shotgun News.
3 - number of firearms homicides committed in victim disarmament zones that are being employed by the left to push for more victim disarmament laws there or elsewhere.
That price point is from the late '80s or early '90s. She probabaly got it from old Brady leterature. The companies that sold such trash are either OOB or have moved upmarket. Even Stallard Arms pistols cost upwards of $200 these days.
A few years ago you could find them for less.
From a linked article within the above CNN article.
What planet are these people living on? While the second part of the statement is darn sure correct...the first part is just idiotic.
Only in the fevered, imaginative minds that wish it would be so like Amy the Media-babe, Chuckie "Control Freak" Schumer, and the Brady Bunch. The recent buying surge makes a strong argument contrary to her assertion.
By the numbers? 100% of first phone calls from mass shootings are to bring people with guns to make it stop.
Given the level of communist infiltration into every layer of our government, I can think of no greater time to need the 2nd Amendment for its intended purpose.
Jefferson knew damned well what could happen to the Federal government and gave us the tools to handle it. Unfortunately he was unable to impart the backbone required.
Coincidental to a marked increase in boating accidents...
Stopped reading right there.
C’mon people. Some threads need a BARF alert
I have a feeling that the murder rate would correlate to something much less PC than “handgun ownership”.
In regards to crime statistics, if people scrutinized race like they do guns and gun ownership, being a young, black, urban male would be illegal. Young black urban males are far more inclined to criminal behavior than the average gun owner.
It is, of course, “racist” to point this out, not that I care any more.
where are you more likely to be murdered with a firearm? Is it a.) in afghanistan b) at an NRA sponsored ccw shooting event or c) walking the wrong streets of Chicago at night?
All you need to know about gun control proponents is that they are on the side of criminals and tyrants.
They KNOW that criminals don’t obey the laws and will obtain and use firearms.
They KNOW what governments can and will do their people when they have a complete monopoly on force.
Gun Control: It is not about Guns. It is about Control.
The best way to deal with this is to let the Sikh community know that it can defend itself freely in America, that they really *have* to do so, and that nobody is going to be too upset if they seek some revenge on these morons that attacked them.
Importantly, the Sikh religion, though generally peaceable, middle class and entrepreneurial, is also very pro-military and pro-defense, to the point where (sort of as in Kennesaw, GA with guns) adults are religiously *required* to be armed with at least a knife.
In recent years, and under the rather stuffy, post-British Hindu regime in India, and wimpy American liberalism, they have been religiously allowed to “downgrade” this idea, so that they can just carry ceremonial, non-functional or even decorative knives.
While serious knives are a great idea, and I am a big fan of them, Sikhs need to return to their religion’s more traditional principals of self defense and self reliance.
Importantly, Sikhs have *nothing* in their religion opposed to guns, either, and Sikh soldiers, in whatever army, are often quite proficient in their use.
So the bottom line is a message to American Sikhs. Arm yourselves for real, based on the laws of your state. Open carry, concealed carry, it’s time to return to that good old-fashioned religion, because they had the right idea.
At inner city police buy-backs? Cash for Clunkers?
As they say:
The problem is not that gun control nuts don't know everything about guns.
The problem is that everything they know is incorrect.
The author of this article was interviewed by Joe Pags this morning. As Joe said - this explosive revelation, if true could be 10 times worse for Obama than what Watergate was for Nixon!
High-Ranking Mexican Drug Cartel Member Makes Explosive Allegation: Fast and Furious Is Not What You Think It Is
Posted on August 9, 2012 at 8:00am by Jason Howerton
A high-ranking Mexican drug cartel operative currently in U.S. custody is making startling allegations that the failed federal gun-walking operation known as Fast and Furious isnt what you think it is.
It wasnt about tracking guns, it was about supplying them all part of an elaborate agreement between the U.S. government and Mexicos powerful Sinaloa Cartel to take down rival cartels.
The explosive allegations are being made by Jesus Vicente Zambada-Niebla, known as the Sinaloa Cartels logistics coordinator. He was extradited to the Chicago last year to face federal drug charges.
Sinaloa Cartel Operative Jesus Vincente Zambada Niebla Makes Explosive Allegation About Operation Fast and Furious
Jesus Vincente Zambada-Niebla (Source: MSNBC)
Zambada-Niebla claims that under a divide and conquer strategy, the U.S. helped finance and arm the Sinaloa Cartel through Operation Fast and Furious in exchange for information that allowed the DEA, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and other federal agencies to take down rival drug
That’s what I was implying as well. If they equated correlation with causation like they will when trying to prove a political point. Being young black and male would be illegal.