Texas continues to make news.

Once again, Texas and, er, well, you know, guns combine to make the news.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/17/us/texas-gun-ownership-mass-shootings/index.html

Deaths by gunshot and Texas seem inextricably linked. I would guess that their politicians are masters at sending prayers and condolences, too.

Regards, stay safe 'n well 'n un-shot.

 

More selective outrage in an attempt to go after Texas.

We know where the vast majority of gun violence occurs and we know who's doing it. When you lefties actually begin to give a **** about that, get back to me.

 

We do. The vast majority of gun violence happens in red states, and who's doing it is people with guns.... Assault weapons mostly, when we talk about mass shootings.

Why anybody would NEED an assault weapon and high capacity magazines is a puzzle nobody has ever managed to answer. Other than, of course, trying to kill as many people as possible in a short amount of time before police shoot YOU down,

 

They will just say it's their right and dare you to suggest going after the 2nd amendment.

 

By "we" do you mean the vast majority of conservatives who are misinformed about gun violence? I think I know what you are implying with your dog whistle post. Care to fill in the blanks?

 

If they do, they just need to understand that the 2nd A has NOTHING to do with any of this.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/history-101-why-the-2nd-amendment.586263/
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...form-part-of-a-well-regulated-militia.589757/

Democrats have dropped the ball on explaining this to people. So they are also responsible.

 

Thoughts and prayers are as effective as attacking the rights of good people. I would guess the politicians on the other side still enjoy armed security.

 

Do you think any of the people who hide behind the 2nd amendment would listen to an explanation offered by democrats?

 

Where would that be? Democrat run major cities? If we look at shear numbers, maybe. But that only tells half the story. As you know, major cities have high population density. It would be surprising if almost anything didn’t happen more often there.

What we need to look at is per capita, the number of times something happens per X number of people, we get a very different and much more complete picture.

According to data collected by world population review, the top states for gun violence per capita are Red states. New York is actually the second lowest on the list next to Hawaii and you’d have to go all the way down to spot 29 to find Illinois.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/gun-deaths-per-capita-by-state

Hope this helps!

 

Illinois, New Jersey, California and New York still have higher rates of mass shootings per capita than Texas using the Gun Violence Archive definition of mass shooting.

Wouldn’t guess that would be the case based on media reports, would you?

I’m usually accused of lying when I present that stat so here is a source.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/mass-shootings-by-state

 

Not people who hide behind the 2nd A. But rational people will. And that includes most gun owners. The Democrats' lack of clarity in such a clear issue is confusing to them.

I had always known that the 2nd A had nothing to do with gun ownership. But after listening to some Democrats.... even some who advocate for gun control, I had to do all the research in the links I provided all over again just to make sure I wasn't missing something.

 

It should be obvious that places with more guns will have more gun-related incidents. This phenomenon also accounts for the relative lack of shark attacks in Indiana as compared to Florida. Similarly, if you have more hammers, you will have more squashed thumbs. If states that have more automobiles, will have more speeders... and so on. This should not be surprising to anyone.

When evaluating the impact firearms (or hammers, or automobiles, etc...) has on peaceable society, it would be disingenuous to ignore the contribution they make and only report on the crimes committed with them. There are millions of defensive uses of guns every year. It makes sense that most go unreported, because they ended without a shot fired or further incident.

Texas, a state with very permissive law with regards to gun ownership and possession, does not fall within the top 15 most violent states. There are double the guns, and half the violent crime over the last 30 years. Guns are not the problem.

 

Only because Texas doesn't have as high a gun ownership rate... YET. Abbott is doing everything to change that. He is actively campaigning to increase gun ownership in Texas. Like DeSantis is doing in Florida.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...th-most-gun-deaths-have-the-most-guns.610609/

And the number of mass shootings so far this year indicate that Abbott is succeeding.

 

Attributing anything at the state level is almost always an attempt to deflect from a more truthful and more accurate description of gun violence. When virtually no violence or crime happens in smaller towns, it's incredibly dishonest (and clearly agenda driven) to attribute gun violence to the state level. Again, we know where it occurs and who's doing it and your posts make it crystal clear that you don't care.

What's an assault weapon? Can anybody define it? To be honest, most lefties think any non handgun that's black is an assault weapon.

By 'we' I mean damn near everybody in the entire country.

Same as Golem, you can't attribute anything to the state level when it's highly concentrated to cities. When you attribute something to the state level it's almost always nothing more than a failed attempt to deflect from the truth, that it's democrats in democrat run cities committing most of the gun violence.

 

And while the "my state color is better than yours" bickering continues, no one is addressing the underlying issue. Guns do not make people violent or suicidal. Gun laws do not make people safer.

For example: Flaco wants a gun to commit a crime. His criminal background prevents him from purchasing one from a licensed dealer. Give us one law, real or imagined, that would prevent him from obtaining a firearm:

 

Assault weapons mostly? Show me.

What’s strange to me is while Biden is blaming white people for being the most dangerous threat to this country, when people are murdered by other-than-crackers, it’s now the gun’s fault.

 

Strange how murder laws aren’t stopping murders.

 

When discussing gun violence per capita, the lists that point to the areas where “we know where it occurs” have very critical flaws. They tend to require minimum population counts to even be included. When population requirements are dropped or even lowered, we see a major shift. Suddenly rural areas are much higher on the list, and the usual scapegoats much lower. Here are articles discussing studies that included lower population cities, as well as studies that look at the county level. Notice anything?
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/gun-violence-in-rural-america/

https://www.police1.com/ambush/arti...ith-the-highest-murder-rate-kerWgaEUmxJkn74J/

Edit: Strange that you keep dog whistling by the way. If you want to say racist stuff, just say it.

Beau of the fifth column has a pretty good video discussing the topic if you’re interested.

 

LOL. Texas has much higher firearm ownership rates than the other states I named. Here are the FACTS to show your unsubstantiated opinion is wrong….again.

Ownership by percentage.

Texas- 45.7%
Illinois- 27.8%
California- 28.3%
New York- 19.9%
New Jersey- 14.7%

You really ought to do a little research before posting on subjects you know little about.

 

Better than, we'll just point out that Vermont, with a 2.2% murder rate and a 50.5% gun ownership rates, while Texas has a 45.5% gun ownership rates and a 7.6% murder rate.

Are any of you the least bit offended that you're being lied to? Even a little?

 

So you disagree that there is a causative link between firearm availability/restrictions and gun crime rates? From the looks of it, the more lax the gun laws, the higher the rate.

No gun law will 100% prevent a person who is intent on obtaining one for Ill purposes from doing so, but it will make it more difficult. When considering many violent crimes are crimes of opportunity, it’s easy to see how reduced availability affects the numbers.

By the way, if it’s not the laws, what do you suppose explains it? Are people in Red states just more likely to be violent?

 

Are you under the impression that you just provided a stat that none of us have ever heard about?

 

Yeah, I'm with SteveN. You're going to have to back that up.

 

You mean, you know those states, but you still parrot the anti-gunners' lies?

There's no excuse for that...lol

 

Vermont has some of the loosest gun laws in the country and the third lowest murder rate.

Explain that.