General News There's almost one gun per person in the USA.

That said, only a minority of Americans owns guns, though nobody actually has any reliable statistics on how big that minority is, because a lot of states don't keep track.

 

And yet we have reporters on CNN and such bumbling around trying to figure out why there are so many gun deaths in America. It's not that hard, really. It's also not a surprise that the states with the most lax gun laws also tend to have more firearm related deaths.

 

Here are some interesting statistics:

I extracted the annual number of gun deaths in the US between 1999 and 2013:

Of course, one could argue there are more gun deaths because there are more people, so the rate (in the stats referred to here) is what is important: the number of gun deaths per 100,000 people in 1999 was 10.35, in 2013 it was 10.64. An increase of 0.29 in the rate doesn't seem like much until you realize that in 2013, with 316.5 million people in the US, 0.29 represents 917.85 more people killed by guns on an annual basis.

An annual rate of 10.64 gun deaths per 100,000 translates to 33,676 people killed.

Oddly enough this is roughly equivalent to the 32,479 traffic fatalities tallied in 2011...

 

Guns aren't the problem.

I know plenty of gun owners and not a single one of them have used it on a person. A few of them hunt. One likes to shoot at cans and other makeshift targets for fun, and one used to be in the military and he keeps a gun around just because he's used to having one.

These shootings are happening because our system is completely broken, and there is almost no focus on mental health. If we took care of the people who needed us before they got to the point of shooting people we'd not be having any problems.

Also requiring a gun safety course ( which has to be passed ) before you can have a license to carry a gun wouldn't hurt either.

 

Guns are a tool.

You don't solve the issue that's leading people to violence by taking away the tool they do it with. You solve the problem by solving the problem.

 

Guns most certainly aren't the only problem but they are without a doubt part of the problem.

News stations and politicians saying that the pastor should've been armed is one hundred percent victim shaming.

The same thing was said after Sandy Hook "well if teachers were armed...or if every school had armed security"', now the arguments been brought out regarding places of worship. Pure insanity!

So Rather then actually working to tighten gun control because we wouldn't want to take the freedom of owning guns away from people we are saying that more people in places like churches and schools should carry guns in order to be safer. Yet we will then proclaim to still be a free society. Insanity.

I don't want to live in a society where kids can't go to school without the notion that teachers be armed or armed security be on sight. I don't want to live in a society where people can't go to church without the pastor being armed or armed security being on sight. Nothing about that would strike me as living in a free society.

 

I agree with that sentiment.


I wouldn't be opposed to requiring some type of gun safety ( and proper use ) course being required for someone to get a license to use a gun. I think that'd stop a lot of idiots from getting their hands on them.

 

Just stop making guns and gunpowder....

 

If they did that wars would be a lot more nuclear.

 

Personally, I can't understand the States' craze with guns. There are more people who die by accidents, such as children who kill themselves with the parent's gun, then cases in which the gun saved a life.

You can't just go and let anyone buy a gun. That's a recipe for disaster. By now, I'm sure you know that other countries in the world have laws regulating guns and that there are way less mass shootings and gun accidents (like ten times less, at least). That's not really a coincidence. But, well, second amendment, I guess :/

 

There is no good reason for wars.

 

That won't stop them from happening.

---------- Post added 20th Jun 2015 at 02:02 PM ----------

I agree that there should be more steps taken to promote proper gun use and to prevent idiots from getting weapons. Also I think anyone with children in their home should be given punishment under the law if they don't keep their gun in proper storage where a child cannot access it.

 

Yeah, no. Of the six or seven countries (out of around 206) that have nukes (USA, Russian Federation, India, Pakistan, Israel, UK and China, all but two of those countries have agreed not to do an attack with a nuclear weapon unless they are attacked with one first. Israel, who didn't agree, will only use them if the USA will back them, and honestly, blowing up the Gaza Strip or the West Bank with a nuke probably isn't the best idea. That only leaves Pakistan, whom is also a major ally of the United States currently. Wars would not become nuclear quickly.

 

Gun violence is a issue in America we can all admit that. We need solutions to end this kind of violence yes but at the same time what if someone cannot have gun and they get killed because they are defenseless. Background checks and bans on guns for people who committed violent felonies sound reasonable to me but my question is for the people who want stricter gun control is how are the defenseless supposed to defend themselves. Not everyone can fight off a perpetrator or throw punches. Again i am for reasonable gun control but how can you allow a person to defend themselves while banning guns in public places or anywhere or banning a certain kind of gun. There are a lot more issues to look at it while seeing to end gun violence like poverty, racism, mental health, and discrimination.

Oh Yes we cannot even trust the police with guns these days so do we all expect to take their guns away. Might as well no one with a gun cannot be trusted. We got to do something about this while still being rational about the people having a lack of defense. Also like drugs the real criminals are gonna find a way to get a gun whether they steal one or borrow one or buy one from a illegal gun seller or they sneak them across the border. If the illegals can sneak in they sure can sneak guns into as well as drugs. Taking away civil liberties are not the answer.

 

Oh they agreed not to use their nukes, well I guess we can just go ahead and assume they'll be honest then and never use em.

Also, without guns in existence war won't stop. They aren't likely going back to sword fights so that pretty much leaves bombs and bombs will likely lead to nuclear warfare. War escalates quickly and what you promise is not usually what you end up doing.

 

And as they say: if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail!


I agree that guns don't go out by themselves and shoot people, but the high number is definitely a sign of an unhealthy gun culture. It's a sympom that shows how, more than other countries, Americans see guns as not just A tool, but as THE tool to solve many issues.

Which is patently not true. I'm a military brat (the black sheep in my family for being the first in three generations not to join the military). So I'm used to firearms. Most of my family members own one.

But even they can tell you that, except for some very specific circumstances, a gun is not a tool of choice. Mostly, you're better off running away or putting as much distance as possible between you and anyone with ill intentions. And contacting people who actually deal with crime and violence for a living. Because there's many more ways of using guns that make a situation worse, and only a few ways of making a situation better.

In short, it's gun culture itself that needs to change. As long as people think that guns are an easy quick fix-all, stuff like this will continue to happen.


And, indeed, some checks are hardly out of order. Cars are tools too. But we accept that they're deadly tools and that you can't just have anyone use them without some education and supervision. Then how is it possible that a driver's license is seen as a symbol of freedom, and a gun license would be seen as a symbol of oppression?

 

I agree some sort of educational and required course about proper gun use and safety before someone could be a licensed gun carrier sounds pretty much fine to me.

 

That is well put.I get what your saying. I am just wondering though how does someone who cannot defend themselves and let's say the attacker has a hold on them or they cannot get away how can a defenseless person defend themselves without a gun. Some cannot run away fast enough to avoid such a tragic incident.