Skip to main content

View Diary: So Guns Don't Kill People, eh? (328 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Part of the problem with maps like this (13+ / 0-)

    is that they do not reflect specific areas of violence, nor their relationship to poverty, and other factors. These are incomplete datasets.

     All the maps that deal with more specific data indicate the majority of gun violence to be in the cities of over 250,000 population. And that data indicates it is directly related to poverty, and education.
     It is true that the redder states have more gun violent related crimes. However there seems to be a more directly related correlation to poverty, and education, and not the firearm laws.
     This would indicate that the root causes need to be addressed in order to be truly effective, and not stopgap legislative measures. Living wages, and better education would do more than any control laws, and much more rapidly, I believe.

    Here is one data article, if you are interested. Notice the Northern and Washington area cities that rate high on the map. All of the cities are highly concentrated with African American communities, indicating the damage that has been done to our inner cities with racism. But this has been going on for a very long time. Funny how, after Connecticut, now everyone feels something needs to be done.

    http://www.theatlanticcities.com/...

    Cities have substantially higher rates of murder by gun, as Moroz points out. New Orleans has the highest rate, 62.1 per 100,000, more than twice its metro rate. Detroit has the second highest rate with 35.9, nearly four times its metro rate, followed by Baltimore (29.7), Oakland (26.6), and Newark (25.4). St. Louis, Miami, Richmond, Philadelphia, and Washington, D.C., round out the top 10.

    ...

    My colleagues and I did, however, find gun deaths to be higher in states with higher levels of poverty and  lower incomes, as well as in red states and those with more blue-collar working class economies. Conversely, we found gun deaths to be less likely in states with more college graduates and stronger knowledge-based economies.

    "The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced." -Zappa My Site

    by meagert on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 08:17:54 AM PST

    •  I'm all for education and living wages (13+ / 0-)

      But those are separate issues, frankly. And Republicans are as likely to oppose spending on education and anything close to a federal living wage. In the meantime, we can use this moment to get the military-style guns out of circulation (or at least cut down in number).

      The civil rights, gay rights and women's movements, designed to allow others to reach for power previously grasped only by white men, have made a real difference, and the outlines of 21st century America have emerged. -- Paul West of LA Times

      by LiberalLady on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 08:31:06 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Your efforts are misdirected (11+ / 0-)

        Less than 3% of the violence is created by black scary rifles. But I wont argue with your emotions.

        "The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced." -Zappa My Site

        by meagert on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 08:34:57 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Oh look, it's the rightwing Marion Hammer (15+ / 0-)

          argument that the poor guns are suffering from racism!!!!

          “Well, you know, banning people and things because of the way they look went out a long time ago,” said Hammer. “But here they are again. The color of a gun. The way it looks. It’s just bad politics.”
          Gun control is all about racism, dontcha know, and the color of the gunz is what scares them crazy libruls!!!!!!

          Wow. Nice work.

          ;)

          •  Why, yes it is. (9+ / 0-)

            Nobody has cared in all these years about fixing anything to do with inner city violence. They know the root causes of poverty and drug violence, but the prison industrial complex needs it. Republicans could care less, so there is no funding for effective measures. The history of Gun and Drug laws are absolutely racist, nevermind the military industrial complex creating the environment for suicide, and tactical wargames.

            "The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced." -Zappa My Site

            by meagert on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 09:10:39 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I agree with what you say above, but I also (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              vcmvo2, sethtriggs

              believe it's time we remove military style assault weapons from the marketplace and high capacity clips. Mass shootings will be less severe with slower, less efficient weapons. It's just a matter of physics really.

              •  There is no difference (6+ / 0-)

                in civilian rifles that look like military ones, and ordinary civilian rifles. The military looking rifles are actually less effective than any normal hunting rifle. My go to weapon when the zombies come would be my 30/30, a more stable platform, and more effective round. And it costs a third of the black scary ones.

                "The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced." -Zappa My Site

                by meagert on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 09:25:58 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  That's a great comfort to the dead. (5+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  vcmvo2, poco, Debby, myboo, sethtriggs

                  See, we didn't ban the weapon because we didn't want to be LOOKIST!  So we banned no weapons at all.

                  And now you're dead.

                  I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

                  by detroitmechworks on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 09:32:41 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I really don't give 2 shits about civvy ARs or AKs (9+ / 0-)

                    They were used in several horrible mass shootings, but in the overall gun violence they barely make a blip.
                    Talk to me when you really want to reduce deaths by firearms. You'll find laws that fix the social network will be magnitudes more effective than whether you have a heat shroud or not.

                    "The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced." -Zappa My Site

                    by meagert on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 09:42:33 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  The Type of Gun isn't as important (5+ / 0-)

                      as how responsibly it's handled and protected from unauthorized use.  Regardless of the weapon characteristics, Universal Background Checks, Banning Straw Purchasers, Gun Safes, Trigger Locks, Proficiency Exams can do a lot to curb many of the problems - but not all.

                      •  I sort of agree (5+ / 0-)

                        Not necessarily with your list, but with your willingness to discuss.
                         The background check system should be improved. As it stands it is underfunded, and incomplete.
                         Straw Purchases are already illegal.
                         Gun safes are very expensive. Maybe the govt. could subsidize them instead of the giant Oil business. Plus, if someone breaks into my home and steals a weapon, isn't that already against the law?
                         Trigger locks are effective when children are around, but very dangerous in a self defense situation. People really do defend themselves, often.
                         I have no qualms with proficiency education. We used to even have that in elementary, and high school programs. The young learned safety and responsible care.
                         

                        "The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced." -Zappa My Site

                        by meagert on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 10:11:03 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Straw Purcheses are not Illegal (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Agathena, mamamedusa

                          that was the main problem in the "Fast and Furious" Case.  ATF tried to tag guns bought by a possible straw purchasers, but they U.S. Attorneys argued that had no law to arrest or prosecute them - so the guns disappeared over the border and were used by the cartels.  Their opinion was that there were literally nothing they could legally do about it, so the weapons got away.

                          The Background Check System is completely non-existence for resales and at Gun Shows, which involves about 80% of gun sales.

                          Stealing a weapon is a crime, but failing to report that your gun has been lost or stolen isn't (depending on the jurisdiction).

                          The incidents of people using their guns in "self-defense" - as I noted in the diary are dwarfed 22 to 1 by the number of suicides, and 7 to 1 by homicides and criminal assaults committed using guns.  1/22nd isn't good enough. Kids particular those 18-20 are exactly the group highly likely to use someone else gun to commit suicide.

                          •  Wrong. "Straw purchases" are illegal n/t (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            ban nock

                            "The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced." -Zappa My Site

                            by meagert on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 11:17:11 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Only if you (0+ / 0-)

                            present false information. http://smartgunlaws.org/...

                            Federal law prohibits straw purchases by criminalizing the making of false statements to an FFL about a material fact on ATF Form 4473, or presenting false identification in connection with the firearm purchase. Two federal statutes – 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(6) and 18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(1)(A) – are the primary laws under which straw purchases are prosecuted.
                            Form 4473 simply documents who you are, what you're buying and whether you've passed the background check.

                            Filing out that form accurately when your own record is clean, buying a series of weapons and then reselling them on your own without checking the background of the secondary purchaser is not illegal.

                            18 USC 924 says.

                            (a)(1) Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, subsection (b), (c), (f), or (p) of this section, or in section 929, whoever -
                            (A) knowingly makes any false statement or representation with respect to the information required by this chapter to be kept in the records of a person licensed under this chapter or in applying for any license or exemption or relief from disability under the provisions of this chapter;
                            (B) knowingly violates subsection (a)(4), (f), (k), or (q) of section 922;
                            (C) knowingly imports or brings into the United States or any possession thereof any firearm or ammunition in violation of section 922(l);
                            Nothing in that stops you from reselling the guns to someone else as long as you fill out the form correctly.The only limitation on resale via 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(6) is that the you can't have knowledge that the person you are selling to is in another state, or from another country unless you are a licensed dealer/manufacturer (and hence a background check kicks in. It is unlawful...
                            (3) for any person, other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector to transport into or receive in the State where he resides (or if the person is a corporation or other business entity, the State where it maintains a place of business) any firearm purchased or otherwise obtained by such person outside that State, except that this paragraph (A) shall not preclude any person who lawfully acquires a firearm by bequest or intestate succession in a State other than his State of residence from transporting the firearm into or receiving it in that State, if it is lawful for such person to purchase or possess such firearm in that State, (B) shall not apply to the transportation or receipt of a firearm obtained in conformity with subsection (b)(3) of this section, and (C) shall not apply to the transportation of any firearm acquired in any State prior to the effective date of this chapter;

                            (4) for any person, other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector, to transport in interstate or foreign commerce any destructive device, machinegun (as defined in section 5845 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986), short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle, except as specifically authorized by the Attorney General consistent with public safety and necessity;

                            (5) for any person (other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector) to transfer, sell, trade, give, transport, or deliver any firearm to any person (other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector) who the transferor knows or has reasonable cause to believe does not reside in</> (or if the person is a corporation or other business entity, does not maintain a place of business in) the State in which the transferor resides; except that this paragraph shall not apply to

                            (6) for any person in connection with the acquisition or attempted acquisition of any firearm or ammunition from a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector, knowingly to make any false or fictitious oral or written statement or to furnish or exhibit any false, fictitious, or misrepresented identification, intended or likely to deceive such importer, manufacturer, dealer, or collector with respect to any fact material to the lawfulness of the sale or other disposition of such firearm or ammunition under the provisions of this chapter;

                            From what I can tell the way this functions in reality is that even though you can't lie on the form, verbally or in writing to a licensed dealer,  if an unlicensed reseller doesn't ask someone which state their reside in, or which state they intend to take the guns into -  they don't have to tell you, and if they lie there's nothing you can do about it.  So people can say we have laws against "straw purchasers", but in reality - we can't really enforce them very well.

                            Vyan

                      •  Here is you problem. How do we guarentee that (0+ / 0-)

                        gun owners are responsiblie. I mean guarentee. Post a bond? Mandatory insurance? Criminal and civil penalities for misuse? I mean we require this of every other dangerous tool. If I injure you with my chainsaw you can sue my ass off and collect from my homeowners insurance. Or if you borrow my chainsaw and injure yourself through my negligance. But how are gun owners who are not responsible held accountable? Not to mention gun dealers and manufactorers.

                        •  When you guarantee that the non gun owners are (0+ / 0-)

                          responsible citizens, I'll match that.
                          As for your lawsuit argument, what goes for the chainsaw already goes for misuse of firearms too. See, everyone wants new laws. Most of what everyone is proposing, already exists, and yet you still see violence.

                          "The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced." -Zappa My Site

                          by meagert on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 11:58:15 AM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                    •  Right because the slaughter of 30,000 (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      deviant24x

                      a year will immediately commence switching to butter knives and nail hammers.

                      I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

                      by detroitmechworks on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 09:53:31 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                •  You then ban wepaons based on the type (0+ / 0-)

                  of ammuntion they fire. You can get an AR-15 in Hello Kitty colors. Still just as lethal. And useless in a civilized society.

              •  Then amend the constitution. The only way you're (4+ / 0-)

                going to achieve your goal since US V Miller is still the law of the land is to deny those items to everyone everywhere.

                You can't ban them from the market place and not ban them from police and military as well.  Your efforts will be wasted and more lives will be lost due to poverty, unfunded wars and drug laws.

                Hey, I thought we were here to elect more and better democrats, how will your plan do that again?

                -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                by gerrilea on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 10:18:40 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

          •  Look at these two firearms. (7+ / 0-)

            http://www.turnbullmfg.com/...

            http://dpmsinc.com/...

            Tell me it's not about the gut-reaction to appearance.

            They are functionally the same firearm.

            •  I don't care what it looks like. (6+ / 0-)

              If it's semi-automatic with a high capacity clip then I say remove it from the marketplace.

              Period.

              •  That is effectively a ban on most firearms (7+ / 0-)

                good luck with that. Semiautos have been around for a hundred years, and make up the majority of home and hunting ownership. Large magazines are a joke rarely used except at the range. They have been used in recent mass shootings, but that still is a tiny percentage compared to the overall numbers. 2014 is going to be a sad election year.

                "The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced." -Zappa My Site

                by meagert on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 10:02:24 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Why would 2014 be a sad election year when the (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  myboo, mrblifil

                  majority of Americans support gun control?

                  Oh. Do you mean because republicans are on the WRONG side of the issue again?

                  Okay.

                  •  This move will allow Republicans their numbers (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Tom Seaview, 43north

                    to at least hold, if not grow.
                    Should we move towards social fixes rather than deterrent legislation, we would grow our numbers far more. Simple, that's what I believe. I want a more Democratic influence on policies.
                    I'm not real positive that much of these suggestions concerning gun control will pass the Congress, but I am sure that any iffy districts can be swayed towards or remain republican because of the attempts.

                    "The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced." -Zappa My Site

                    by meagert on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 10:57:07 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  If you think the "social" fixes stand a better (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      tobendaro

                      chance of passing Congress, well then I guess we should all wonder why they haven't already? We had an assault weapons ban before, we can do it again, but make it stricter and tighter. Look at what Australia did, and look at the result.

                      You can try to convince republicans to help poor people all you want. They're not interested in case you haven't seen. That strategy to reduce gun violence is as likely to succeed as convincing republicans that we should expand Social Security, or Medicare, or universal healthcare.

                      Please. Let's be realistic here.

                      •  My way increases Democratic election results (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        43north

                        Your way insures Republicans have sway in policy. I believe gun control legislation will have little effect on violence in America. What will be more effective? Right now, I think social fixes will be the quickest and most effective. Gun control policies equal Republican strength.

                        "The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced." -Zappa My Site

                        by meagert on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 11:27:56 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Bullshit (0+ / 0-)

                          That's your opinion. It's not fact. Dem losses in 2010 had nothing to do with gun control advocacy. What kind of fucking "social fix" is supposed to happen in order to prevent spree shooting? What the fuck IS a "social fix." Many spree shooters are not on anybody's radar in terms of mental wellness, though some are. Your claims and ideas simply don't make any sense.

                          •  Never said it was anything other than my opinion (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            43north

                            That's how this thread started. Until the anklebiters showed up, and devolved. No more response to you. Have at it.

                            "The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced." -Zappa My Site

                            by meagert on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 02:02:17 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                        •  You know what? If so-called democrats are (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          splintersawry

                          actually one-issue voting republicans (i.e. guns), well then no loss there. They were never democrats to begin with. And if you're willing to say that you're going to vote for republicans because democrats wanted to establish sane gun laws, well then I have nothing further to say to you.

                          Other than good luck trying to convince republicans to fight poverty and fund education (chuckleburp) in order to reduce the carnage of mass shooting sprees.

                •  Then most firearms should be banned. (6+ / 0-)

                  If large magazines are a joke, why not ban them?  Or confine them to shooting ranges?  

                  I don't think most people care that mass shootings are a "tiny percentage" of gun deaths compared to the overall numbers.  I think most people think the mass shootings with these high-capacity, semi-automatic weapons should stop altogether, or at least be a lot rarer with a lot lower likelihood of success and of mass death.  I think most people would accept the trade-off of getting rid of semi-autos if that meant that there would never be another Sandy Hook with 20 dead first graders.  

                  The argument that hunters want to use their semi-autos to hunt seems shallow to me.  You don't need a semi-auto to hunt.  The desire to use a semi-auto to hunt because it's fun or whatever, when it's entirely unnecessary, does not justify the rest of us having to fear for our children at school or at the mall or at a movie theater.

                  We already know that getting rid of these weapons lowers the likelihood of this type of crime.  Just look at American stats compared to everybody else that can't by a semi-automatic weapon at the WalMart around the corner.

        •  Tell that to the parents (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Matt Z

          of the babies killed in Sandy Hook.  I am sick of you people.  I am going to refer to gun nuts as baby killers from now on.  It worked for the forced birthers.

          Everyone! Arms akimbo!

          by tobendaro on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 11:12:52 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  It is not the black scary rifles. It is the ammo (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          lyvwyr101

          they shoot. Like full metal jacket bullets and hollow point bullets. I could care less what they look like. I care about what they shoot. And who.

      •  Separate issues that will never be addressed (8+ / 0-)

        when we are removed from office by going after the guns.

        Separate issues that if legitimately addressed would keep us in power for generations.  Making guns unnecessary.

        What a concept, right?

        A win-win.  Why do you not want us to win?  

        Is your own bigotry blinding you to the reality of what we can accomplish?

        -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

        by gerrilea on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 10:14:33 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Bottom line (24+ / 0-)

      the problem is always something else - never guns.

      The lengths people will go to to defend their hobby.

    •  These charts do not rise to the level of "proof" (5+ / 0-)

      But I value this presentation more than your evidence-by-anecdote presentation. If stronger correlations exist, then  show them to us. It should not be that hard to do as the correlations shown in this diary are not particularly strong. And of course there is a major problem in using linear regression on a combination of hard data (deaths/100k) and subjective ratings (WI gets a "C-" on gun laws.)

      As with any complex situation, trying to find a single root-cause is a fool's errand. There might be a strong correlation between gun death rate and community population, but observing this correlation does not mean other correlations are not also valid.

      This would indicate that the root causes need to be addressed in order to be truly effective, and not stopgap legislative measures.
      This comments betrays your bias. Of course "stopgap" legal measures are likely to fail!  The counter argument to this is, the gun lobby has successfully weakened existing gun laws to the point of "stopgap" status.

      That does nothing to dispute the claim that strong gun laws would significantly lower the rate of gun deaths in America. And in fact this very diary offers some data, at least, to prove you wrong. This diary does show evidence that as laws become less "stopgap" they become more effective in keeping people from dying.

      •  Fine, continue the class warfare (9+ / 0-)

        North against South, Urban against Rural, White against AA, Wealthy against Poor.
         Gun laws, Drug laws are all aimed directly at the economically lower classes. Rich people can get their personal protection, or hire bodyguards, and install gates.
         All the data indicates violent crime has been halved in the last decade. But everyone is convinced it's more rampant than ever. No one is claiming their policies are responsible for that drop. Why? Because every one is ignoring that positive in favor of enacting their pet policies, regardless of effectiveness.

        "The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced." -Zappa My Site

        by meagert on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 09:04:22 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  If you bothered to check (9+ / 0-)

          You would find that, while the homicide rate has indeed been dropping in the U.S., it has dropped at a substantially slower rate than in other developed countries such as the UK, Germany, and France.

          Something is causing that. I suspect the ready availability and comparatively loose regulation of firearms in the U.S. is a likely possibility.

          •  Actually their violence has increased. (5+ / 0-)

            I don't have the article I recently read, but I'm sure if you were honest, you could search for it and find it.

            If you like the way things are done elsewhere, as an American, you are free to move there. Or even work to have their views enacted here.
            I've been to those places, guess where I want to live.
             We are the only industrialized nation in the world without Universal Health Care access. I'll fight for that, it will have more influence on the reduction in violence than anything so far presented. But I want our version, not copying someone else's that is not designed for our particular interests, and way of life.

            "The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced." -Zappa My Site

            by meagert on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 09:54:49 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  try decriminalization of drugs to be one reason (6+ / 0-)

            If I don't have a street-level criminal drug enterprise to defend, the reason for the gunfire is...?

            Of course, that applies to the violence afflicting 500 plus young men of color killed in Chicago last year, not 20 upper middle class kids in Connecticut.

            The reason drugs and gangs are viable options to school and jobs is what exactly?

        •  Do you know any 'rich people'? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          tobendaro, a2nite
          Rich people can get their personal protection, or hire bodyguards, and install gates.
          I take it by this you're talking about the top 0.1% of the US?

          The vast majority of people even in the top 1% do not have the resources to hire bodyguards and so forth. And let's be honest here: if I am concerned about class warfare between the 0.1% and the rest of us, the last thing I am going to be concerned about is the fact that they're allowed to have guns and we aren't. If things are bad enough that the obscenely wealthy can have their minions take out guns and plug passers-by on the street freely, then we're not living in the US any more anyway.

          I live in San Francisco, which often feels like it is the second home of half of the top 1% in the country, and the first home of nearly as many more. If there's class warfare here, it's not over who gets to have guns, it's over who gets the two-bedroom $1.5m Russian Hill apartment and who has to commute in from two hours away because both partners together only make $30k a year and can't afford to live closer in. The idea that gun laws would pit the rich against the poor is something I have a hard time classifying as anything other than 'hilarious'.

          •  I know tons of them (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            FrankRose, Tom Seaview

            and tons of Veterans who can't find good jobs, who have started their own businesses. Those businesses involve defensive training, personal and corporate protection. Most of their business comes from the rich.
             Every rich ( I call rich anyone making a combined income of over 200,00 a year) person I know owns a weapon and theyhave the most expensive weaponry, of course.
            Methinks you protest too much.

            "The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced." -Zappa My Site

            by meagert on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 10:38:24 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  violent crime falling but gun deaths remain high (7+ / 0-)

          another cliché used to defend guns:
          "in spite of the number of guns, violent crime is down"

          Violent crime rates have been falling in recent years, but the number of people killed by firearms in the United States remains high.  According to the FBI Uniform Crime Report, between 2006 and 2010 47,856 people were murdered in the U.S. by firearms, more than twice as many as were killed by all other means combined.

          ❧To thine ownself be true

          by Agathena on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 11:29:11 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  So let me guess, you want legal drugs and (4+ / 0-)

          free access to guns? Sounds like a real winner of a combination. Do we have any data on who actually owns guns legal and illegal? Of course not because the NRA said we can not do research on that because freedom.

          Until we can do more research and the reasearch is free from ideological lead weights like the NRA we will never have answers. But the NRA is not interested in finding the truth. They refuse to allow questions to be asked and peer reviewed.

        •  OMG! Tell me you didn't play that card (0+ / 0-)

          Now it is class warfare to examine data and looks for evidence?

          Begone, time thief.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site