so, your point is,? mine is i am gonna protect myself with a gun...!!!
2007-01-13 13:46:57
·
answer #1
·
answered by SmoothCharacter 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I doubt your perspective. Whats the source of your statistics, Hand Gun Control? Guns are used over 2 millions time each year in the US to protect homeowners and people without firing a shot. If your source was accurate, the western states would be devoid of people - except for the last guy shooting.
New York City and Washington, DC have some of the toughest gun laws in the country, its almost impossible to own a gun there, so there shouldn't be any gun crimes there, right? So why is the Mayor of New York always complaining about gun crimes.
In fact, handgun ownership by private citizens has been illegal in NYC since the Sullivan Act was passed - before World War One.
42 states have granted their citizens the right to carry concealed weapons! Based on your analysis, there should be nothing but homicides in those states. Isn't happening, is it?
Beware of surveys that won't disclose their questions or data base.
2007-01-13 13:55:16
·
answer #2
·
answered by jack w 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
This is meaningless.
Do you think that the crime rates are higher in places where people have bars on their windows? Do you think that the bars create the crime or do you think it is a reaction to the high crime rates? Then, consider that there are more police in high crime areas. Does this mean that the police are the cause of crimes??? Or could it be that there are more police there because the crime rate is higher? In higher risk areas, most people will do more for protection.
Also, I suspect they looked at the total number of firearms rather than the percentage of people who owned firearms. If you look in places like Wyoming and Montana, I suspect that more people have firearms there and the crime rate is lower, but the total number of firearms is less because there are fewer people.
Next, check out the crime rates in the states where the laws were changed to make it easier for the law abiding to have a firearm and then check in places where it was made harder. A hint is Florida, New York City and Washington, D.C. It is quite clear that crime rates go down when citizens are allowed to defend themselves, as happen in Florida, although then the criminal went after the tourists until the law was change to allow tourists to get a CCW and rental cars could not be marked.
I could provide more details, but the fact is that you need to do the research in order for you to believe it.
As has been said, 84.3% of all statistics are made up :-).
2007-01-14 07:52:30
·
answer #3
·
answered by Ghost 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Australia- simply by fact the Port Arthur bloodbath which exchange into the form that brought about stricter gun administration in Australia not a single learn has been waiting to teach crime rates there have long gone down or up. In different words stricter gun administration has had no result one way or yet another on crime. Britain- you're maximum appropriate to an quantity. the two learn I even have study on England's crime rates have shown a decline in gun crime. That reported the prevalent crime photograph in England has skyrocketed. have you ever observed while anti gun companies talk relating to the "fulfillment in struggling with crime" in Britain while they banned weapons they continually talk approximately gun crime. It can not in all danger be simply by fact common the rates for attack, rape, or perhaps homicide have skyrocketed. Japan- i'm going to provide you that one for loss of training united states of america- Crenshaw GA calls for each abode to have a gun and there crime rates are between the backside interior the country. in comparison Chicago, and Washington DC that have the quite a few strictest gun rules interior the country have the utmost homicide rates. in certainty while DC placed its gun ban in result it exchange into the only city for 20+ years to be ranked interior the precise 3 for homicide until it exchange into overturned by Heller V. DC.
2016-10-19 22:58:57
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Probably has to do with the victims being able to shoot back, instead of just being robbed and murdered.
2007-01-13 13:46:19
·
answer #5
·
answered by Baby'sMom 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
I would only figure, give people weapons and they will kill each other. I wonder what would happen if you didn't feed them, would they eat each other.
2007-01-13 13:46:03
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
legally or illegally owned guns?
2007-01-13 13:48:11
·
answer #7
·
answered by Robert B 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Well fu-kers shouldn't come in my yard
2007-01-13 13:47:22
·
answer #8
·
answered by Charisma 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
that sounds about right.
2007-01-13 13:47:11
·
answer #9
·
answered by glasgow girl 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
seems possible lol
2007-01-13 13:49:58
·
answer #10
·
answered by ♫ singin_gurl1200 ♫ 3
·
1⤊
0⤋