Statistics Don’t Lie, But Gun Grabbers Do

0 Shares

Gun grabbers love to cite a statistic they claim bolsters their argument that America’s murder rate is higher than other developed countries, particularly European countries. The figure they cite is 4.7 cases of murder and nonnegligent manslaughter per 100,000 inhabitants.

Compared to the U.K.’s rate of 1.2 per 100,000 and France’s 1.1 per 100,000, that figure does seem high. But here’s a little nugget they won’t tell you. It comes thanks to some work by the American Thinker’s Randall Hoven, who has dug into the FBI’s crime statistics: Remove the murders committed by blacks and illegal aliens and the U.S. murder rate is 1.0 per 100,000, in line with Sweden’s, another country the gun grabbers will hold up in comparison.

Here’s how Hoven’s math works. According to the FBI’s Expanded Homicide Data Table 3, the offender’s race is known in 10,471 of the 14,612 2011 U.S. murder cases. Blacks accounted for 5,486 of them, or 52 percent. Extrapolating that rate into all murders in the United States, blacks accounted for 7,656 of the 14,612 murders in 2011. According to Representative Steve King (R-Iowa), illegals murder 12 Americans every day (4,380 annually). His numbers match up with a report issued by the Government Accountability Office, which estimated that 25,064 criminal aliens had been arrested for murder, though it’s unclear over what timeframe that covered. It also didn’t take into account how many murders were committed by those illegals nor how many were committed by illegals in which no arrest was made.

So adding it all up, of the 14,612 murders in the United States in 2011, 7,656 were committed by blacks and 4,380 were committed by illegal aliens. That leaves 2,576 committed by non-black legal residents. If there are about 250 million non-blacks in the United States, the murder rate among non-blacks is about 1 per 100,000; the same as in Sweden.

According to UCLA history professor Peter Baldwin in his book The Narcissism of Minor Differences, “Take out the black underclass from the statistics, and even American murder rates fall to European levels.”

Despite the seemingly high rate among blacks, one number is most important of all to remember: 99.98 percent of U.S. blacks did not commit murder in 2011. And of the entire U.S. population, 99.99 percent did not murder anyone.

Gun grabbers want to take guns away from everyone because .004 percent of the population use them to kill someone.

Editor’s note: There’s a slight flaw in Hoven’s analysis, but the percentages are not affected. According to FBI Expanded Data Table 8, there were only 8,583 murders committed with a gun in 2011. He used numbers that included all homicides and nonnegligent manslaughter incidents. The number of gun murders has been dropping for several years. – BL

Personal Liberty

Bob Livingston

founder of Personal Liberty Digest™, is an ultra-conservative American author and editor of The Bob Livingston Letter™, in circulation since 1969. Bob has devoted much of his life to research and the quest for truth on a variety of subjects. Bob specializes in health issues such as nutritional supplements and alternatives to drugs, as well as issues of privacy (both personal and financial), asset protection and the preservation of freedom.

Join the Discussion

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

  • independent thinker

    Something else the gun grabbers fail to mention is the violent crime rate. In much of western Europe it is higher than the US with the UK’s violent crime rate being the highest at over 2000 per 100,000 thousand while the US is around 450 per 100,000.

    • Jurgy

      no doubt due to football (soccer) hooligans …

    • Jake Thomas

      What they should be talking about is the rate in these countries even though they have STRICT gun control laws. The clowns here seem to believe if we have our guns taken away, crimes that take place using a gun will be 0.00 per 100,000 people.

      • Don 2

        To your point Jake, Switzerland has the third-highest rate of firearms per capita in the world, and had a gun homicide rate of 0.5 per 100,000 people in 2010, with an overall homicide rate of 0.7.
        More Guns = Less Crime

  • Robbie

    I haven’t seen a report here about the guy who walked in to a town hall meeting just two days ago and started shooting people. He was one of these patriotic gun lovers. Just the latest public shooting since the elementary mass killing spree at Sandy Hook Elementary.

    • Dodged5

      Robbie, if you read the report on the guy you will find that you have misreported the case. One, he did not enter the town hall meeting. He fired into the building where it was being held through the walls. Two, He is an ardent Obama supporter by his own words. Three, He is a mental case living in an illegal junkyard with no sanitary facilities or runnng water, etc. The town has been trying to get him to clean up the place and he went off the dep end. So, we have another mental deficient liberal Obama supporter that has grabbed a gun and shot and killed people would be more accurate. My sympathy goes out to all those that suffered and are suffering by his actions.

      • Robbie

        Who cares if he is a supporter of Obama or not or of Mitt Romney or not? I don’t. The issue here is the availability of guns to nut cases.

        • Dodged5

          My point exactly. So why do you portray him as a “patriotic gun lover” in your comment with no basis for that conclusion. Could it be that you yourself want to smear gun owners at large with absolutely no facts or foundation to be found in the article to back you up?. I agree with you that nut cases should not have guns or have access to them. So, what is your plan? How do we control the nuts without infringing on the rights of the millions of law abiding citizens to own firearms?. Please answer that. I haven’t figured it out yet and from what I read, neither has anyone else. You could be famous if you have the answer.

          • Robbie

            Well I do have the answer – or, at least, part of the answer. It would be a good step forward to simply have universal background checks on anyone wishing to purchase a gun. I’m surprised you have not heard this suggestion before! Law abiding citizens who want to buy a gun have no issue with this. Most NRA members support this idea. It is common sense to try to screen out mentally ill people or people with criminal gun records. Will this idea prevent ALL nuts etc from getting a gun? Well, no. But it will prevent many. We have speed limit laws even though there will always be folks breaking those limits. Most people obey the speed limits. Same idea.

          • http://personalliberty.com/ Bob Livingston

            Dear Robbie,

            Are you familiar with the 2nd Amendment? What part of “shall not be infringed” is unclear to you? What part of .004 percent of the population use guns to kill someone is unclear to you?

            Are you aware that more than 10 times as many people die each year from ingesting doctor-prescribed drugs than die from shootings? http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/DevelopmentResources/DrugInteractionsLabeling/ucm114848.htm Will you join me in my efforts to ban doctor-prescribed drugs? Or how about universal background checks for doctors and pharmacists?

            Best wishes,
            Bob

          • http://www.OlGreyGhost.Blogspot.com/ Ol’ Grey Ghost

            “Or how about universal background checks for doctors and pharmacists?”

            Especially Army psychiatrists…

          • Robbie

            Dear Bob: What part of “part of a well regulated militia” do YOU not get. Selling guns with not even a hoddie-do to mentally ill people and violent criminals is hardly part of what the Founders proscribed. But, hey, maybe that’s just me – and a majority of Americans including rank and file NRA members.

            Prescription drugs can be a problem for some but pharmacuticals give new life to zillions and save lives and cure diseases. Guns are made to kill. Period. And, in case you didn’t know it, pharmacists work under stringent regulations and oversight not to mention years of study as do doctors whereas at certain gun shows any Tom, Dick, or Harry can buy a weapon and be shooting up an elementary school later the same day. Your comparison with prescription drugs, doctors and pharmacists is just plain silly.

          • http://personalliberty.com/ Bob Livingston

            Dear Robbie,

            You have fallen prey to a classic blunder. You have engaged in a discussion and have to try and make a point you have a question that you did not know the answer to.

            You write: “What part of “part of a well regulated militia” do YOU not get.” There is no part I do not get. And so you will “get” it, read this: http://personalliberty.com/2013/01/24/what-does-the-2nd-amendment-mean/

            You write: “Prescription drugs can be a problem for some but pharmacuticals give new life to zillions and save lives and cure diseases.” Hardly.
            http://personalliberty.com/2008/09/22/trillions-for-disease-not-a-penny-for-health/
            http://personalliberty.com/2008/09/22/pharmaceuticals-are-not-people-friendly-only-patent-profit-friendly/
            http://personalliberty.com/2008/10/29/the-health-care-system/

            You write: ” Guns are made to kill. Period.” Nonsense. They have many recreational uses.

            Best wishes,
            Bob

          • vicki

            Ribbie writes:

            Dear Bob: What part of “part of a well regulated militia” do YOU not get.

            As you can see from Bob’s response, he gets it quite well.

            http://constitution.org/2ll/schol/2amd_grammar.htm

            Notice that the right to keep and bear arms is NOT dependent on a militia of any kind.

          • Jake Thomas

            By the time politicians finish writing the laws for background checks, you will be denied owning a weapon if you ever wet your pants

          • chocopot

            Check the fine print in Obamacare. That’s probably in there already, just waiting to be implemented.

          • Nadzieja Batki

            Keep talking, Robbie, so we know what Stupidity sounds like.

          • Robbie

            Thank you for your comment, however, it really does not address anything I noted in my posting. Please comment directly on my points if you can think of anything relevent to say.

          • me

            we already have background checks. the last 2 guns i bought were the only ones i bought in my life were delayed until the check went thru. Next it will be down to peashooters. People control is all they want.

          • chocopot

            The key word in the term “gun control” is not “gun,” it is “control.”

          • Charles

            Robbie, you DON’T have the answer. Read my response to you above. It is too long to post again here.

          • 1NedSprockethead1

            And here Robbie shows his firearms knowledge: “using a high speed rifle.”
            Egad.

          • Robbie

            You are very knowledgeable. Perhaps you can give us the correct terminology to describe the weapon used by the shooter at Sandy Hook elementary school who blew away some 20 little children as well as several staff members. Exactly what kind of a gun was that? You’re a very smart person so you should be able to do that. I guess it was not a “high speed rifle” right? But, putting that aside for a moment (as important as the wording is) do you think it matters to the little dead kids or the members of their families who lost loved ones? A little sensitivity training might be in order bud.

          • 1NedSprockethead1

            The point was, if your knowledge of firearms extends to “high speed rifle” maybe you should shut the hell up and do some research before you make a fool of yourself in public (again). Doesn’t matter what kind of ‘gun’ the Sandy Hook shooter had, what matters is that he was the only person who had one. What SHOULD matter to the ‘little dead kids’ or their families is that they were entrusted to the care of people who were not prepared to defend them. Yeah, maybe I could do with a little sensitivity training, but you could do with a little common sense training.

          • Robbie

            Common sense tells me that giving weapons to kindergarden teachers is a dumb, dumb, dumb idea. And if you’re fall back position is to place a trained armed guard at every school door in America my common sense would, again, inform me that that would merely end the unemployment problem and that the nuts who get hold of guns would simply move on down the street to the day care centre or to the mall or to the theatre or to the bus terminal etc., etc., etc.

          • vicki

            Robbie writes:

            Common sense tells me that giving weapons to kindergarden teachers is a dumb, dumb, dumb idea.

            Actual common sense (is there much left anymore?) tells us that GunFree Zones are magnets for mass murderers.

          • 1NedSprockethead1

            As I said, common sense does not seem to run in your family.

          • Robbie

            Thanks for your comment but do you have anything relevant to say?

          • 1NedSprockethead1

            Well, I think that’s pretty relevant: you like to get on here and blab about things you have no knowledge of and then say you have common sense. The two don’t go together, as you would know if you had and cdf, but then you’d also understand ‘relevance’ which seems also to be a problem.

          • Robbie

            Again you’re just repeating yourself and not addressing the actual topic.

          • 1NedSprockethead1

            The actual topic is somebody with no knowledge of a subject and no common sense to draw on lecturing those who have both. Idiocy.

          • Robbie

            I don’t think you get it. I made some specific points about gun control. You still have not answered even one of those points. All you do is make personal attacks on me which, of course, means nothing. Are you unable to actually follow an argument and contribute actual information?

          • yoshi

            There are many, much more efficient ways of doing damage on a mass scale. You just want to exploit these little dead kids to chip away at the second amendment.

          • vicki

            Robbie writes

            Perhaps you can give us the correct terminology to describe the weapon used by the shooter at Sandy Hook elementary school who blew away some
            20 little children as well as several staff members.

            It’s called a hand gun. The alleged shooter apparently had 2 of them with him.

          • Robbie

            And those school children are just as dead right?

          • JeffH

            There is nothing “universal” about universal background checks!

            Robbie says about universal background checks that “Most NRA members support this idea.”

            Robbie, that is a blant LIE perpetuated by gun control advocates, Obama and NY Mayor Bloomberg’s own MAIG “poll” that found (supposedly) that 82% of NRA members support the background check and registries.

            Now here are some actual facts.

            Both the NRA and GOA did polls of their own members.

            * NRA did a scientific survey of about 1,000 members and found that 5% of its members support the universal registry legislation.

            * And GOA did a non-scientific poll of its members. After nearly 25,000 gun owners responded, GOA’s survey found that only 4% of its members supported “universal background checks.”

            These poll results are significant as they show that the “mainstream” polls are about 70-80 percentage points off when they survey members of gun organizations.
            http://gunowners.org/04052013congress.htm

          • Don 2

            As an NRA member myself, I can attest that you’re full of crap!

          • Robbie

            No you can’t.

          • Don 2

            O.K., let me re-phrase that. As an NRA member myself, I can attest that your statement, “Most NRA members support this idea,” is full of crap.
            The poll in question was done in May 2012 and was commissioned by Mayors Against Illegal Guns – a group overwhelmingly made up of anti-gun Democrats and founded by gun-hating Mayors Bloomberg of NYC and Tom Menino of Boston in 2006. The survey itself was conducted by Frank Lutz, a pollster and Republican consultant. According to the Washington Post, which reported on the survey, Luntz’s group “did not provide requested details about the poll’s question wording.” That’s a pretty big issue, considering the type of question we are talking about here. If you want us to believe that NRA members overwhelmingly support universal background checks, you’d damn well better be willing to tell us how you asked the question. To ask people if they support “background checks on the sale of guns” is not quite the same as asking if they support background checks on private transfers within a family or between neighbors or friends. Aside from the question itself, there are a couple of other red flags. For example, the Washington Post reported that the survey “used a non-random opt-in Internet panel to contact self-identified NRA members.” Self-identified? It gets worse: The Luntz poll of 945 gun owners nationwide…was divided evenly by gun owners who were current or lapsed members of the NRA and non-NRA gun owners.Okay, so now it’s “self-identified” current or lapsed NRA members – you can see why people have questions about the accuracy of the results.
            In an earlier 2009 survey conducted by Luntz for the same group, only 26 percent of non-NRA members and 16 percent of NRA members agreed that they “feel that the laws covering the sale of guns should be more strict.” And a recent poll of current members done for the NRA by AG Research found that just 5 percent support “[a] new federal law banning the sale of firearms between private citizens.” That’s relevant considering that there would be no way to enforce universal background checks if someone could lrgally sell a gun to their friend, outside of the system. (Control – Exposing The Truth About Guns)

        • fr334all

          Who cares if the guy was one of those “patriotic fun lovers?” As if that’s the defining feature of people that commit atrocities like that!

          • Robbie

            I don’t think we have much to fear from “fun lovers”.

        • Nadzieja Batki

          But that is not what you are after, your want is that all guns be confiscated from all citizens and only the persons government permits to have guns be allowed to have them.
          You won’t get your way this time around no matter how you and your ideologues agitate.

        • JeffH

          Robbie, I think we all get it that you don’t like guns…but use something other than your own emotions, like logic, to frame your arguement.

          Guns are inanimate objects, just tools like a shovel, a trowell or a pair of shears. Guns don’t kill, people kill!

          ~300 MILLION AMERICANS DID NOT ASSAULT ANYONE USING ANY FIREARM.

          ~300 MILLION Americans DIDN’T SHOOT anyone AT ALL. Not even by accident.

          Join the NRA, GOA, SAF, NAGR and the rest of us in telling them to STOP PUNISHING THE INNOCENT

          STOP IT

          STOP IT NOW

          • Robbie

            Yes people kill people. But people using guns get to kill more people faster. Faster than using a knife or a baseball bat for example or strangling them. Do you not get the difference? The Sandy Hook killer used a gun because he was able to blow away 20 kids in a minute or so. Had he tried to strangle them it would have taken a lot longer and lot more effort. Or don’t you see that?

          • chocopot

            What is your point? A maniac will always behave like a maniac. Do you take away the rights of those who have done nothing wrong because one person did? If a driver goes out drunk and kills someone, do you take away everyone’s license?

          • Robbie

            You have actually made the point for me. Of course we don’t take away a driver’s license from all because one person drives drunk. But the is that we DO have drivers’ licenses. We DO insist on certain standards before we issue one. Universal background checks would kind of be like that – certain standards or checks before you could get a gun. We don’t just hand out licenses to any one who wants to drive and – as you yourself said – we should not take away licenses based on what one person might do.

          • chocopot

            You are an uninformed fool. THERE ALREADY ARE UNIVERSAL BACKGROUND CHECKS. The only exceptions involve passing firearms along to children or other relatives, and sales between two persons (who are not dealers) within the same state. And even then, a paper record of the transfer needs to be maintained by both the old owner and the new owner. And as has been pointed out endless times: owning a firearm is a right guraranteed by the Constitution – getting a driver’s license is not.

          • JeffH

            Robbie repeats another blatant lie: “he was able to blow away 20 kids in a minute or so.”

            What is the “or so” in real time?

            First off your original arguement was based on your idea that “universal” background checks were necessary…stick to that point or does that no longer work for you?

            Robbie, your whole arguement is based on your anti-gun emotions and not on any facts. Try to think, rationalize and present your arguement based on the reality of facts and not your emotions…don’t you see that?

            Nearly 75% of the cases involving firearms are actually gang related and another fraction of it are justifiable cases in self-defense.

            In the US other object such as knives and bats in combination pose as tools that are used far more regularly in homicides than guns. In other figures as reported by various reports, Americans are more likely to be killed by a baseball bat than a rifle.

            Use of knives, bats, personal body weapons and blunt objects are the tools, which the criminals use to take far more lives than guns. Criminals will always get their their weapons, no matter what. That is a FACT!

          • vicki

            People using guns get to stop more killers faster. Faster than for example charging at them telling them to stop.

            Do YOU get the difference?

    • JimH

      What if the “patriotic gun lover” had his gun taken away? Problem solve?
      He throws a molitov cocktail into the room instead.
      The problem is mentally unstable people. not guns.

      • Robbie

        Making molotov cocktails is illegal. And as far as mentally unstable people go you are correct. That’s why background checks meant to weed them out would be useful. But you’re probably against background checks right?

        • http://personalliberty.com/ Bob Livingston

          Dear Robbie,

          You write: “Making molotov cocktails is illegal.” Shooting people is illegal. That didn’t seem to be much of a deterrent. Your argument is illogical.

          Best wishes,
          Bob

          • Robbie

            O.K. all you folks here are right. Forget about background checks that would try to screen out mentally ill folks and folks with a violent criminal record. After all there will be those who try to get around the law so why bother trying at all. Also why try to cut down on gun mass killings when people intent on murder could always use a baseball bat or a bomb. Makes perfect sense to just allow any nut to get his hands on any type of gun he wants and when the mass murder spree happens so what. It’s no big deal.

          • vicki

            Robbie gets a clue and writes:

            O.K. all you folks here are right.

            Yes we are. Good of you to notice.

            Forget about background checks that would try to screen out mentally ill folks and folks with a violent criminal record.

            Mentally ill belong in a mental hospital. Crimials belong in jail. No need to do background checks on the rest of us.

            After all there will be those who try to get around the law so why bother trying at all.

            Could you please look in a mirror and notice that you are the one trying to get around the law? The Constitution IS the law and it clearly says you shall NOT infringe on our right to keep and bear arms.

            Also why try to cut down on gun mass killings when people intent on murder could always use a baseball bat or a bomb.

            The best way to end gun mass killings is to end GunFree Zones.

            Makes perfect sense to just allow any nut to get his hands on any type of gun he wants and when the mass murder spree happens so what. It’s no big deal.

            That is the beauty of the 2nd Amendment. Mass murder sprees don’t happen to an armed and dangerous people. A perfect negative example is the fort hood shooting. All those soldiers should have had their firearms with them. The out come would have been one Muslim on his way to visit with Allah.

          • Don 2

            Lest we forget…..72 camels awaiting his arrival.

        • REK

          if you look at statistics 80% of violent crimes are committed by democrat obuma supporters. fix that problem then we wont have a gun problem

          • Don 2

            The Fix:
            1) Back off and let those men who want to marry men, marry men.
            2) Allow those women who want to marry women, marry women.
            3) Allow those folks who want to abort their babies, abort their babies.
            4) In three generations, there will be no more Democrats. Isn’t it great when a plan comes together.

        • JimH

          “Making molotov cocktails is illegal.” So is shooting people. So what’s your point?
          Yes, I oppose background checks, but not for the reason you think.
          Who gets to decide who is or isn’t stable. Who gets to decide what stable is or isn’t?

          Who gets to set up the guide lines?
          I see a whole new route for someone to abuse their power.
          I God we trust, the government, not so much.

          • Robbie

            Unfortunately you don’t deal with god on a daily basis whereas dealing with other people – fellow citizens – kind of has to happen all the time.

          • JimH

            God(capitol G) is in our daily lives. Some people just don’t acknowledge it,
            Just because I have to deal with bureaucrats doesn’t mean the deserve my trust. Past history makes that trust even harder to come by.

          • Robbie

            God is in our daily lives just as is Zeus, Annubis, and Thor. Bugga, buuga.

          • JimH

            What a scathing refute. Hard to argue against those facts and figures.
            How does one reason against”bugga, bugga.
            Does that just make God irrelevant, or does it also boost the credibility of corrupt bureaucrats?
            Your refute is just pure bugga, bugga.

          • Robbie

            As I was saying I suggest you let Zeus, Annubis, and Thor into your heart. Let them walk with you in your daily life (and beyond) and let their ways be your ways and may the light of the heavens shine upon thee.

          • JimH

            I let the real God into my heart. Not so the false ones.
            You may like them because reality doesn’t seem to be a big part of your beliefs.
            Bugga, bugga.
            Nice non-answer to my question by the way.
            Bugga, bugga.

          • Robbie

            Zeus not real? Thor and Annubis not real? You’re kidding me right? You only assume they are false because you have not yet seen the light.

          • JimH

            Still no answer.

            Bugga,bugga.

          • Robbie

            Jim: Are you O.K.? You seem somewhat disoriented and fixated on one god. Time for a reality check.

          • JimH

            I’m still not sure. Do you put your trust in false gods(small g) or corrupt bureaucrats? From your posts, your non-straight answers can be disorientating.
            I find one real God to be sufficient. More than that would really cut into my goof-off time.
            Bugga,bugga.(how can you refute that?)

          • vicki

            Robbie writes:

            Jim: Are you O.K.? You seem somewhat disoriented and fixated on one god. Time for a reality check.

            Way past time in your case Robbie.

          • Robbie

            Your elected representatives with input from citizens. That’s how your system works. Zeus, Thor, and Annubis are with you. Oh and Allah, Tu Fu, and Jesus also.

          • JimH

            I know how the system is supposed to work. I just don’t trust the corrupt bureaucrats that are bastardizing our system, like you do.
            Thor wrecked to many picnics and ballgames, if I need to choose a Nordic god or goddess Freya is way more fun.
            God the Father Son and Holy Spirit are sufficient, to keep track of the others, cuts drastically into my goof-off time.
            Have fun with your wrong gods, they compliment your wrong ideas.

          • Robbie

            If you dislike the American system as set up by the Founders perhaps you should consider moving to some far off island in the Pacific. Then you could set up the better system which I’m sure you have already formulated in your mind. [ P.S.: There is no God. He’s a made up fantasy just like Thor, Annubis and Zeus. Sorry about that.]

          • JimH

            I like the system the founders set up. I just don’t like what corrupt politicians turned it into. I see your OK with it.
            What part of I know how the system is “supposed” to work was lost on you.
            I know the 2nd amendment(how the founders set it up) is lost on you.(use the late 18th century definition of Militia, instead of the 20th&21rst century definition and it will become clearer to you,)

            The founders set up a non-intrusive form of government,that I agree with. Not the police state background check type you want.
            Your Godless pacific Island awaits you.
            Bugga,bugga.

          • Robbie

            Love it or leave it.

          • JimH

            Another scathing rebuttal.
            You managed to refute all my points. Not really.

          • vicki

            I don’t think robbie, being Canadian, has a full understanding of the American system.

          • vicki

            Robbie writes with little understanding of history and says:

            If you dislike the American system as set up by the Founders…

            We LIKE the American system as set up by our founders.
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4r0VUybeXY

            We want that system back.

          • vicki

            Robbie writes

            Your elected representatives with input from citizens.

            Incomplete. Our elected representatives with input from citizens are oath bound to follow the Constitution. That means even if all the citizens want infringements on the right to keep and bear arms the representatives have a DUTY to just say, sorry but no.

          • vicki

            Robbie writes:

            God is in our daily lives just as is Zeus, Annubis, and Thor.

            Haven’t seen hide nor hair of them but I see God and His works around me all the time. I do occasionally hear from Thor though. I rather enjoy thunder and lightning. Also he’s got a new movie coming out in November (http://marvel.com/thor).

          • Robbie

            That’s the spirit!

            By the way those “works” you are seeing are actually the works of Hathor.

          • vicki

            Since you failed to verify what “works” I might have been referring it is no surprise that you would fail to correctly identify the Creator.

          • Robbie

            It was YOU who claimed to see the works of God all around you. I merely asked what those works were/are. Can you not name any?

          • vicki

            You actually failed to ask what those works were/are but since you have now asked I will tell you just some of his works.

            The sun, moon, stars, planets
            The earth and the seas, the birds and the bees.
            The grass and the trees, Every living thing that He hath made. Every non living thing that He hath made.

            Even the light by which we see His mighty works.

          • Robbie

            The things you have listed were actually created by Hathor, Ra, Annubis, and several others.

          • vicki

            And your supporting evidence is?

          • Robbie

            Whereas you use the Torah as YOUR supporting evidence I prefer the ancient Egyptian text known as the Book of the Divine Cow (Hathor). That text clearly describes the creation of the world and the universe including how Ra creates himself.

          • vicki

            You may not deal with God on a daily basis. Therein lies the problem. Let God back into your life and you will find less fear. You might also discover the easy to verify truth that

            ~300 Million Americans didn’t shoot anyone. Not even by accident. We will NOT give up our rights. We will NOT give up our guns.

            Stop trying to punish the innocent for the acts of a VERY VERY Few.

            Stop it.
            Stop it NOW.

          • Robbie

            You should deal with Zeus, Annubis, and Thor just to break things up a bit.

          • vicki

            Should they drop in for a visit I shall :)

          • Robbie

            They are all around you all the time. Like god they can not be seen but like god they are there none the less. Let them in to your heart.

          • vicki

            Robbie writes:

            “They are all around you all the time. Like god they can not be seen but
            like god they are there none the less. Let them in to your heart.”

            “Thou shalt have no other gods before Me.”

          • Robbie

            The quote from Torah was written by the Hebrews who, like you, rejected the divinities from other cultures so you would expect them to promote just THEIR god. That, of course, does not negate the ever present omnipotence of Zeus, Annubis, and Thor (not to mention the Tooth Fairy).

        • JimH

          The point is without the gun there are still other ways. I don’t believe mad men worry about legality.

          • Robbie

            But guns are just so efficient at killing lots of people in a short amount of time. I know a baseball bat could kill someone but killing, say, 20 elementary school kids and several teachers with a bat would just take so much longer than using a high speed rifle. I guess you get that don’t you?

          • JimH

            I guess that you don’t get the point that guns aren’t the only weapons. People killed each other long before the invention of gun powder.
            If plan A doesn’t work, go to plan B.
            Guns are also used by good people to protect themselves from bad people.
            The problem is there are people that are willing to kill other people, not the means they use to do it.

          • Don 2

            The worst school massacre in U.S. history, in which 38 people were killed, occurred in 1927 and was carried out with a bomb.

          • Robbie

            Oh, then let’s make it legal to carry bombs around. That’s easily part of bearing arms.

          • yoshi

            Bill Ayers and his weather underground tried that but they were arrested. Guns are for self defense and protection. The other is not.

          • Don 2

            What’s a matter Robbie, did I blow up your argument?

          • Robbie

            My argument got blowed up. It got blowed up real good. Gosh dernit, you becha’.

          • yoshi

            Are you a vet? Every been on medication? Maybe a Christian? Who’s to determine the qualifications for gun ownership with a background check? Hitler demanded registration and used that list for confiscation. Oddly, registered Democrats have been the latest mass shooters. Would that mean Democrats should be disqualified from owning guns? Background checks are political. Why not call out Big Pharma?

          • Robbie

            What on earth does “big pharm” have to do with mass murder by gunfire?

          • yoshi

            The perps were all on some kind of inappropriate psychiatric drug.

            But mass murder is not restricted to guns. Where guns are unavailable knives come in handy.

            On March 23, 2010, Zheng Minsheng 41, murdered eight children with a knife in an elementary school in Nanping.

            An attacker named Wu Huanming 48, killed seven children and two adults and injured 11 other persons with a cleaver at a kindergarten inHanzhong, Shaanxi on May 12, 2010

            On 4 August 2010, 26-year-old Fang Jiantang slashed more than 20 children and staff with a 60 cm knife, killing 3 children and 1 teacher, at a kindergarten in Zibo, Shandong province.

            On September 2011, a young girl and three adults taking their children to nursery school were killed in Gongyi, Henan by 30-year-old Wang Hongbin with an axe. Another child and an adult were seriously wounded but survived. The suspect is a local farmer who is suspected of being mentally ill.

            And in Japan: 37-year-old former janitor Mamoru Takuma entered the school armed with a kitchen knife and began stabbing numerous school children and teachers. He killed eight children, mostly between the ages of seven and eight, and seriously wounded thirteen other children and two teachers.

            And where unable to defend themselves:

            MAIDUGURI, Nigeria 7/8/13 — The governor of Nigeria’s northeast Yobe state is ordering all schools closed to avoid attacks by Islamic militants who have killed dozens of students and teachers.
            48 students and seven teachers have been slain since June in northeast Nigeria.

          • vicki

            Guns are the best tool for self and community defense yet invented. They are especially good at stopping someone trying to use one to kill lots of people.

          • Robbie

            All true, Vicki, but why not prevent mental patients and people with a violent past from getting their hands on weaponry? Why freakin’ not?

          • chocopot

            They already do. Try checking the laws that have long been in place.

          • vicki

            Mental patients belong in a mental hospital. This restricts their access to weaponry

            People with a violent past might well no longer be violent. If they do violence then put them in jail which restricts their access to weaponry.

            Neither case requires a background check on the

            ~300 MILLION Americans who DIDN’T SHOOT ANYONE.

            Stop punishing the innocent for the acts of a very very few.

            Stop it
            Stop it NOW.

        • http://www.OlGreyGhost.Blogspot.com/ Ol’ Grey Ghost

          But what our benevolent government officials are calling a “background check” is anything but…

          http://olgreyghost.blogspot.com/2013/04/because-its-not-background-check.html

          Since any of us can become “mentally unstable” at any time for any psychological or physiological reason, what you’re suggesting will eventually apply to all, including those you expect to enforce the law or determine who is “mentally unstable,” like a certain U.S. Army psychiatrist…

        • Charles

          Robbie, here are some quotes from GunFacts, regarding the registration in Canada:

          “The gun registry as it sits right now is causing law abiding citizens to register their guns but it does nothing to take one illegal gun off the street or to increase any type of penalty for anybody that violates any part of the legislation,” according to Al Koenig, President, Calgary Police Association.

          “We have an ongoing gun crisis, including firearms-related homicides lately in Toronto, and a law registering firearms has neither deterred these crimes nor helped us solve any of them,” according to Toronto police Chief Julian Fantino .

          Their registration now costs more than 16 times the original estimate, and it has proven to be worthless. Three of the provinces have dumped enforcement of the law. Six provinces refuse to prosecute gun-owners who don’t register. A Saskatchewan MP who endorsed the long gun registry when first proposed has introduced legislation to abolish it. He says it has not saved one life, and it has become a financial sinkhole.
          —-

          Registration and background checks serve only one purpose: more control by the government.

          • RCB762

            On October 25, 2011, the government introduced Bill C-19, legislation to scrap the Canadian Firearms Registry.
            The bill would repeal the requirement to register non-restricted
            firearms (long-guns) and mandate the destruction of all records
            pertaining to the registration of long-guns currently contained in the
            Canadian Firearms Registry and under the control of the chief firearms
            officers. The bill passed second reading in the House of Commons (156 to 123).
            On February 15, 2012, Bill C-19 was passed in the House of Commons (159
            to 130) with support from the Conservatives and two NDP MPs. On April
            4, 2012, Bill C-19 passed third reading in the Senate by a vote of 50-27
            and received royal assent from the Governor General on April 5.

            The Canadian gun registry was found to be very expensive, and to not have any effect on the use of firearms in murders in Canada. It has been scrapped…

        • Lobo VNVMC

          It looks as if you haven’t purchased a gun recently, before you get to have the gun your background is checked. Exception is a private sale (gun shows and individual) which is some were around 40% I’ve read in different articles.

          • JeffH

            Background checks are required for all firearm purchases at all gun shows.

            Individuals that make deals outside of the gun shows should check their state laws for compliance on sales and transfers.

          • Lobo VNVMC

            You may be right for Commie California, but if checks were required at all gun shows then why are they not done in all states same with individual sales. Back ground checks are only required if bought from a Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL) in my state.

          • JeffH

            Background checks are required for all purchases made from all firearm vendors at all gun shows in every state…that’s the law. As for individuals selling or trading firearms outside of the gun shows…each state is responsible for making it’s own requirements, not the federal government.

            Firearms – Frequently Asked Questions
            Unlicensed Persons Questions
            http://www.atf.gov/content/firearms-frequently-asked-questions-unlicensed-persons

          • Robbie

            True. Gun show sales is a major loophole in the system.

          • chocopot

            More falsehoods from the ignorant.

          • JeffH

            NO! That is just another piece of anti-gun propaganda…see my post below.

        • chocopot

          “Making molotov cocktails is illegal”
          So are a great many things that criminals do, but they still do them. And you propose…?

          • Robbie

            Why not propose revoking all highway speeding and other safety laws because, after all, there will always be those who speed or go through stop signs or shine their brights in our eyes? Are you on board with that?

          • chocopot

            Laws that are not enforced are meaningless. I live in NJ; no one, and I mean no one, obeys the traffic laws. And there is no enforcement, so the laws become meaningless. There are already 22,000+ gun control laws on the books at the federal, state, and local levels. 99+% of them are never enforced. Do we need more laws? In addition, you need to read the Second Amendment; it makes no provision for limitations or restrictions. Thus, technically, all gun control laws are unconstitutional. Do I want crazy people to have the ability to purchase guns whenever they want so they can go out and commit mayhem? Of course not. But when the rights of law-abiding citizens are restricted over and over and more and more in what ‘the authorities’ consider ‘reasonable’ new laws, it is time to stop and take a good look at what is going on. In point of fact, repeated studies conducted over periods of decades have shown that, as John Lott has stated time and again, “more guns equals less crime.” The best deterrent to crime is not another useless law that is not enforced; rather, it is guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens. Our incredibly biased media NEVER report on all the times guns in the hands of citizens stop crimes and take out the bad guys. Yet every time a gun is used illegally or to hurt someone, it is the headline story all over the country. In point of fact, guns are used legally to stop far more crimes than they are used to commit. This is fact. Accept that or not, but it is fact. In addition, preventing crime is not the reason we have the Second Amendment; perhaps you should read The Federalist Papers to get a real understanding of why we have a Second Amendment.
            .

        • JeffH

          Robbie says “Making molotov cocktails is illegal.”
          Ah yes…the rationale of the ignorant!

          DUH! Killing people is illegal too but that doesn’t stop the killers does it?

          Robbie then says “And as far as mentally unstable people go you are correct. That’s why background checks meant to weed them out would be useful.”

          Mentally ill people who pose a risk to society or themselves are legally prohibited from owning guns under federal law. States are required under federal law to add the names of the mentally ill people who pose a risk to society or themselves to the FBI national background database.

          How’s that working out Robbie?

          Background checks are required when purchasing a firearm from a dealer…this also means purchasing a firearm from a vendor at a gun show. Many states also require any private firearm transfer or sale be done through a licensed FFL dealer.

          Robbie, are you so ignorant as to believe that criminals, i.e. murderers, or the mentally ill will never get their hands on guns even with universal background checks?

          Try to use your noggin Robbie…think before you spout!

          • equestrian_colt

            However the true mentally ill aren’t the ones committing these crimes so for people to think that is just a way for them to put blame somewhere it doesn’t belong. Every school or other mass shooting has been done by normal (government so called people) that either reached their snapping point or did it for whatever reasons. The argument in court for the defense to avoid the death penalty was mental illness so thus anyone that is depressed mad whatever is a threat to society is total B.S. cause every human in their life at some point can be classified mentally ill. The people that decide to go and seek help are not the dangerous ones but yet are put in the category of the ones that snap and go on shooting rampages. So then man thinks they have the right to take away their God Given right to protect themselves family and friends think again.

    • Don 2

      I haven’t seen a report here either about your country, gun control haven Canada, where only 1.1 firearms per 100 people, still resulted in 1.6 homicides per 100,000 people in 2010.

    • manuel

      Robbie;
      I note your claim does not mention time or place, nor the name of the perp. Surely you are not just tossing stuff like this out, or are you? Another libertard making up more statistics.

      • Alan

        That really did happen in a town in Penn. ,but this Canadian should mind his own business and butt out of ours.

      • Robbie

        It was in a small town in Penn. It was all over the news. Well, all over the real news. Fox and such like made no mention of it. Golly gosh gee, you becha’.

  • me

    If gun control would stop things like Sandy Hook I would personally melt all my guns down, But it will not so why should I stop enjoying my time in the woods hunting turkey, deer, boar, rabbits,etc. all of which I enjoy nfor dinner

    • Jake Thomas

      The gun grabbers with their “All knowing minds” probably think that turkey, deer, boar, and rabbits are all code words for blacks, illegals, homosexuals and progressives.

      • Lobo VNVMC

        It’s not? Damn and I was going out to shoot some cans.

      • equestrian_colt

        ROFLMAO SOOOOOOOOO true

  • Warrior

    Put the guns away for a week, the embassies are closed. Shooting can resume on August 12th.

    • equestrian_colt

      lol

  • Don 2

    “According to FBI Expanded Data Table 8, there were only 8,583 murders committed with a gun in 2011.” This translates into a gun murder rate of 3.2 per 100,000 people, compared to the often cited 4.7 per 100,000 murder rate, which includes all homicides, by any means.

    • vicki

      So in 2011 ~300 million Americans didn’t murder anyone where tool = gun. That would mean that the % of Americans who do not deserve to be punished for the acts of a very very very few is 99.997%

      That’s right. The gun grabbers are trying to punish 99.997% of us for the acts of ~0.003%. Tell them loud and clear

      STOP PUNISHING THE INNOCENT for the acts of a very (0.003%) few.

      STOP IT
      STOP IT NOW

  • dan

    Good breakdown Bob….but when you consider:
    1,16 deaths per 100,000 in automobiles….

  • FreedomFighter

    Concealed Carry permits (gun ownership) went up in the state of Virginia — violent crime has gone down measurably show latest stats…in gun restricted regions like Chicago and Detroit…the opposite.

    Liberal Progressives are liars, thieves and criminals and care not for you or your family, only about power, control, and moving the takeover agenda forward.

    JFK told you…here is a reminder”If you ever had any questions as to why JFK was assassinated just listen to this speech. He called out the elite’s and their methods of control. The elite’s couldn’t let JFK expose them anymore. They couldn’t let him interfere”

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bj3AECSKmhU

    Laus Deo
    Semper FI

    • chocopot

      FF –
      The anti-gun nutjobs simply cannot fathom the idea that more guns in the hands of the law-abiding will lead to a lower crime rate. Similarly, they complain that the jails are so full but crime is going down, so why are so many people still in jail? There is a complete disconnect. As Michael Savage has stated, “Liberalism is a mental illenss.” Indeed it is.

  • wandamurline

    Governments around the world have disarmed their people and these governments have killed more innocent citizens than all the wars combined….genocide by their very own government. If you think this cannot happen in America, wake up…..we will not allow them to take our guns without a fight.

  • Patriot

    In the Zimmerman happenings…..why do we keep showing Martin’s 9yr old picture instead of his 17 yr old picture and show what the school coverups are on him…..
    Obuma’s son….why don’t he claim another son…the 4yr old boy shot in the face by black….not his kind of son.

    • equestrian_colt

      No he likes the ones with potential of growing up to be true violent drugged out antichrist Nazis.

    • vicki

      “…why do we keep showing Martin’s 9yr old picture instead of his 17 yr old picture….”

      “WE” don’t. Mainstream media keeps pushing it’s agenda.

  • vicki

    There is one statistic that is easy to verify and no gun-grabber has ever been able to counter. It trumps all of their statistical arguments. They can’t avoid it. They can’t get around it. It is there haunting them each and every day.

    In the last year ~300 MILLION Americans DIDN’T shoot ANYONE. AT ALL.

    Stop trying to punish the 99.99% of us for the acts of a VERY VERY few.

    STOP IT
    STOP IT NOW