Not very Pro-Life - Weaker gun laws mean more kids die!

  • 136 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Avatar image for joebones5000
#1 Edited by joebones5000 (2639 posts) -

Reaffirming what reasonable people have always known - Gun laws work to protect society.

States with stricter gun laws see fewer gun-related deaths of children. Nothing could be more pro-life!

States with stricter gun control laws had 4% fewer pediatric deaths, and those with universal background checks for firearm purchases in place for at least five years had a 35% lower risk, the study found.

In all, there were 21,241 deaths among children and young adults under the age of 21 during the five-year period. The majority of the deaths, 62%, were assaults, followed by suicides.

States with stricter gun control laws had 4% fewer pediatric deaths, and those with universal background checks for firearm purchases in place for at least five years had a 35% lower risk, the study found.

35% wow. Those are huge numbers. A universal background check (communism, we know), would save the lives of so many children.

There is no valid argument against universal background checks, unless of course you like seeing more children die by gunshot, which I suppose would be a valid argument for you.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/tougher-gun-laws-mean-fewer-080001301.html

Avatar image for heirren
#2 Posted by Heirren (2236 posts) -

Sht parenting thats the real issue.

Avatar image for joebones5000
#3 Posted by joebones5000 (2639 posts) -

@heirren said:

Sht parenting thats the real issue.

Yup, shit parenting means people with guns shoot more kids. If only we would have known...

Avatar image for heirren
#4 Posted by Heirren (2236 posts) -

@joebones5000:

Well its the people doing the killing, not the guns. This is not a technological issue, its a social one.

Avatar image for jeezers
#5 Posted by jeezers (3176 posts) -

@heirren said:

@joebones5000:

Well its the people doing the killing, not the guns. This is not a technological issue, its a social one.

agreed, we seem to have more people today that do not value life at all or just dgaf

Avatar image for joebones5000
#6 Posted by joebones5000 (2639 posts) -

@jeezers said:
@heirren said:

@joebones5000:

Well its the people doing the killing, not the guns. This is not a technological issue, its a social one.

agreed, we seem to have more people today that do not value life at all or just dgaf

Then we all agree. People with guns are the problem. Great. That wasn't difficult.

Avatar image for comp_atkins
#7 Posted by comp_atkins (35805 posts) -
@joebones5000 said:

Reaffirming what reasonable people have always known - Gun laws work to protect society.

States with stricter gun laws see fewer gun-related deaths of children. Nothing could be more pro-life!

States with stricter gun control laws had 4% fewer pediatric deaths, and those with universal background checks for firearm purchases in place for at least five years had a 35% lower risk, the study found.

In all, there were 21,241 deaths among children and young adults under the age of 21 during the five-year period. The majority of the deaths, 62%, were assaults, followed by suicides.

States with stricter gun control laws had 4% fewer pediatric deaths, and those with universal background checks for firearm purchases in place for at least five years had a 35% lower risk, the study found.

35% wow. Those are huge numbers. A universal background check (communism, we know), would save the lives of so many children.

There is no valid argument against universal background checks, unless of course you like seeing more children die by gunshot, which I suppose would be a valid argument for you.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/tougher-gun-laws-mean-fewer-080001301.html

i'm going to take the same argument used in the immigration debate.

if kids didn't want to get shot, their parents shouldn't have been so stupid

Avatar image for joebones5000
#8 Posted by joebones5000 (2639 posts) -

@comp_atkins said:
@joebones5000 said:

Reaffirming what reasonable people have always known - Gun laws work to protect society.

States with stricter gun laws see fewer gun-related deaths of children. Nothing could be more pro-life!

States with stricter gun control laws had 4% fewer pediatric deaths, and those with universal background checks for firearm purchases in place for at least five years had a 35% lower risk, the study found.

In all, there were 21,241 deaths among children and young adults under the age of 21 during the five-year period. The majority of the deaths, 62%, were assaults, followed by suicides.

States with stricter gun control laws had 4% fewer pediatric deaths, and those with universal background checks for firearm purchases in place for at least five years had a 35% lower risk, the study found.

35% wow. Those are huge numbers. A universal background check (communism, we know), would save the lives of so many children.

There is no valid argument against universal background checks, unless of course you like seeing more children die by gunshot, which I suppose would be a valid argument for you.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/tougher-gun-laws-mean-fewer-080001301.html

i'm going to take the same argument used in the immigration debate.

if kids didn't want to get shot, their parents shouldn't have been so stupid

Smart parents means someone doesn't walk into a school and shoo their kids? Maybe they send them to school with body armor. Sheesh, why didn't we think of that before!?

Avatar image for heirren
#9 Posted by Heirren (2236 posts) -

@joebones5000:

No, because fact of the matter is there are responsible gun owners.

This line of thought is like saying nobody should be able to own cars because there are irresponsible drivers out there.

In a perfect world thered be no need for guns, but this is not the world we live in. Do you not believe people have the right to defend themselves?

Avatar image for jeezers
#10 Posted by jeezers (3176 posts) -

@joebones5000 said:
@jeezers said:
@heirren said:

@joebones5000:

Well its the people doing the killing, not the guns. This is not a technological issue, its a social one.

agreed, we seem to have more people today that do not value life at all or just dgaf

Then we all agree. People with guns are the problem. Great. That wasn't difficult.

No I dont because the large majority of legal gun owners do not commit crimes with them.

Avatar image for Serraph105
#11 Edited by Serraph105 (33976 posts) -

Being pro-life was never about protecting kids though so this doesn't mean anything. It's always been about controlling others.

Avatar image for Chutebox
#12 Posted by Chutebox (44703 posts) -
@Serraph105 said:

Being pro-life was never about protecting kids though so this doesn't mean anything. It's always been about controlling others.

Dude, just dumb. All I have to say to this garbage.

Avatar image for Serraph105
#13 Posted by Serraph105 (33976 posts) -

@Chutebox said:
@Serraph105 said:

Being pro-life was never about protecting kids though so this doesn't mean anything. It's always been about controlling others.

Dude, just dumb. All I have to say to this garbage.

There's so many programs about protecting kids that pro-life people traditionally do not support. Protecting kids may be an argument that pro-life people use, but there's way too much evidence that it's not really their goal for me to believe as much.

Avatar image for blaznwiipspman1
#14 Posted by blaznwiipspman1 (7234 posts) -

The cons are a party of contradictions. It's enough to make their own heads explode at some times

Avatar image for joebones5000
#15 Edited by joebones5000 (2639 posts) -

@jeezers said:
@joebones5000 said:
@jeezers said:
@heirren said:

@joebones5000:

Well its the people doing the killing, not the guns. This is not a technological issue, its a social one.

agreed, we seem to have more people today that do not value life at all or just dgaf

Then we all agree. People with guns are the problem. Great. That wasn't difficult.

No I dont because the large majority of legal gun owners do not commit crimes with them.

Oh, so it's not people with guns shooting kids?

Avatar image for joebones5000
#16 Edited by joebones5000 (2639 posts) -

@heirren said:

@joebones5000:

No, because fact of the matter is there are responsible gun owners.

This line of thought is like saying nobody should be able to own cars because there are irresponsible drivers out there.

In a perfect world thered be no need for guns, but this is not the world we live in. Do you not believe people have the right to defend themselves?

No one is saying no one can own guns or cars, only that everyone is safer when guns are more strictly regulated, just as they are safer with stricter car regulation.

Your question about self defense does not follow. You make the incorrect assumption that people cannot defend themselves without a gun, a nonsensical assertion as people have been defending themselves successfully without guns for about 100,000 years. Guns have only been around for a few hundred.

Let me me ask a serious question - Why is it that when someone demonstrates the fact of gun regulation making society safer, gun fanatics attempt to reduce the argument to absurdity by suggesting that better laws somehow means no one can own a gun? It's completely idiotic.

Avatar image for watercrack445
#17 Posted by watercrack445 (1736 posts) -

Why do kids like guns? I think this a good question.

Before, there was war on drugs and anti-smoking programs for kids. Now, it's all about war on guns. It will probably will last for decades like war on drugs.

The war on drugs policy has failed and now there is an opioid epidemic. The thing was the war on drugs didn't target the pharmaceutical industry and I guess it was one of factors it failed.

Avatar image for burntbyhellfire
#18 Posted by burntbyhellfire (451 posts) -

aah, again the OP here trying to start an argument when he has none, trying to blame the actions of people on objects, why? because its a simple enough for them to understand, most people here know how strict gun laws have historically been in places like DC, st louis, baltimore, LA, and of course, chicago and in fact after the DC vs heller and mcdonald vs chicago court rulings, which forced cities into abiding by the second amendment, violent crime and homicides in those cities dropped dramatically

we can also look across the pond at the UK and australia where there has been no noticeable change in homicide rates after enacting major gun control legislation, the homicide levels never changed course, in fact, it spiked in the UK, and homicide rates in the united states have been steadily falling since the 90s

Avatar image for heirren
#19 Posted by Heirren (2236 posts) -

@joebones5000:

People that want guns are going to get guns, by whatever means they must. Because the public knows theyre on the street, i believe people have every right to defend themselves.

Your claim of self defense does not add up. You are saying people can defend themselves without a gun and then go on to say they have only been around for X amount of time. Are you suggesting that this self sefense was before guns?

So two nations go to war, one with guns one without. How in your right mind do you suggest one nation defend themselves? An extreme example, yes, but how is that different than say, a families home being approached by 4 people with guns, with 4 people inside. Whats the defense mechanism? In a gun ownership defense its that the family can own a rifle or two, point it out the window and say, "one more step and ill shoot."

I will be honest im unsure of current gun regulations and i believe it varies depending on where you live.

Im all for training. You buy a gun, you must be required by law to understand how it works, just like a car.

The black market will always exist. Like i said we do not live in a perfect world.

How are these strict gun laws going to prevent gang violence. Do you think these arms were acquired legally? Do you think making stricter gun laws would eliminate these scum from acquiring arms?

Avatar image for joebones5000
#20 Posted by joebones5000 (2639 posts) -

@burntbyhellfire said:

aah, again the OP here trying to start an argument when he has none, trying to blame the actions of people on objects, why? because its a simple enough for them to understand, most people here know how strict gun laws have historically been in places like DC, st louis, baltimore, LA, and of course, chicago and in fact after the DC vs heller and mcdonald vs chicago court rulings, which forced cities into abiding by the second amendment, violent crime and homicides in those cities dropped dramatically

we can also look across the pond at the UK and australia where there has been no noticeable change in homicide rates after enacting major gun control legislation, the homicide levels never changed course, in fact, it spiked in the UK, and homicide rates in the united states have been steadily falling since the 90s

Another nonsensical deflection post. Comparing overall homicide rates in other countries to gun deaths of children in the U.S.

Just stop. Your weak replies completely fall apart on their own.

Here's a thought. Why don't you compare per-capita overall homicide rates in first world countries with per-capita homicide rates in the U.S.? When you do, you will see a trend - you will see that first world countries with few guns and stricter gun laws have lower rates of homicide.

Of course you don't actually have to because the work has already been done for you, but you can.

Let us know. Thanks!

Avatar image for joebones5000
#21 Posted by joebones5000 (2639 posts) -

@watercrack445 said:

Why do kids like guns? I think this a good question.

Before, there was war on drugs and anti-smoking programs for kids. Now, it's all about war on guns. It will probably will last for decades like war on drugs.

The war on drugs policy has failed and now there is an opioid epidemic. The thing was the war on drugs didn't target the pharmaceutical industry and I guess it was one of factors it failed.

But drug use rates have declined or leveled out the past 25 years. How is that a failure? Rates were higher prior to that. You're writing things that are not evidently true.

https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/nationwide-trends

Avatar image for burntbyhellfire
#22 Posted by burntbyhellfire (451 posts) -

self defense laws in most states state that you can shoot if theres a fear for your life or safety and you have no means to retreat, in most states if someones in your own home, they can be shot, and some states go further to say that if you're in public and somebody attacks or reasonably threatens your safety (like coming at you with a knife or crow bar) you are not obligated to turn your back and try to escape, but can defend yourself, lethally

honestly, i cant understand why people on the left are so hellbent on creating more victims, and support criminals in these cases.. they'll try to liken self defense to vigilantes

Avatar image for joebones5000
#23 Posted by joebones5000 (2639 posts) -

@heirren said:

@joebones5000:

People that want guns are going to get guns, by whatever means they must. Because the public knows theyre on the street, i believe people have every right to defend themselves.

Your claim of self defense does not add up. You are saying people can defend themselves without a gun and then go on to say they have only been around for X amount of time. Are you suggesting that this self sefense was before guns?

So two nations go to war, one with guns one without. How in your right mind do you suggest one nation defend themselves? An extreme example, yes, but how is that different than say, a families home being approached by 4 people with guns, with 4 people inside. Whats the defense mechanism? In a gun ownership defense its that the family can own a rifle or two, point it out the window and say, "one more step and ill shoot."

I will be honest im unsure of current gun regulations and i believe it varies depending on where you live.

Im all for training. You buy a gun, you must be required by law to understand how it works, just like a car.

The black market will always exist. Like i said we do not live in a perfect world.

How are these strict gun laws going to prevent gang violence. Do you think these arms were acquired legally? Do you think making stricter gun laws would eliminate these scum from acquiring arms?

That's great, but nothing you have written changes the fact that stricter gun laws mean fewer child gun deaths. What was the point of frantically tying all of that irrelevant information?

Avatar image for heirren
#24 Posted by Heirren (2236 posts) -

@joebones5000:

People that want guns, will acquire them. Everything i said was very valid.

Explain to me how these laws aim to eliminate the black market.

Avatar image for joebones5000
#25 Edited by joebones5000 (2639 posts) -

@heirren said:

@joebones5000:

People that want guns, will acquire them. Everything i said was very valid.

Explain to me how these laws aim to eliminate the black market.

All completely irrelevant deflection. The topic is about how stricter gun laws prevent children dying from gun violence. Your fingers are babbling shit that has nothing to do with the topic, my man!

Avatar image for heirren
#26 Posted by Heirren (2236 posts) -

@joebones5000:

No. Its not deflection, sorry. Its a fact of life. It is a simple question:

How will these gun laws eliminate the black market?

Do you think all gun related crime happens with legally acquired arms?

Avatar image for jeezers
#27 Posted by jeezers (3176 posts) -

@heirren: it doesnt, joe doesnt want to hear it tho.

Criminals would still be using guns second hand, they already do. Legal abiding citizens who dont use guns for crimes would be affected the most.

Avatar image for burntbyhellfire
#28 Edited by burntbyhellfire (451 posts) -

hmm, what would have happened to this girl if guns were illegal?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/oklahoma-girl-shoots-home-intruder_n_1992381

or this boy?

https://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/s-boy-13-kills-burglar-mother-gun-police-article-1.2431838

i could post these stories of "kids" saving their lives with firearms

Avatar image for comp_atkins
#29 Posted by comp_atkins (35805 posts) -

if guns aren't an issue. the more concerning question is:

why the hell are americans so fucking violent and crazy and quick to murder each other when compared to the rest of the civilized world?

Avatar image for joebones5000
#30 Posted by joebones5000 (2639 posts) -

@heirren said:

@joebones5000:

No. Its not deflection, sorry. Its a fact of life. It is a simple question:

How will these gun laws eliminate the black market?

Do you think all gun related crime happens with legally acquired arms?

I don't know. No one is claiming that gun laws will eliminate the black market. That's why your stupid question is nonsense deflection. No one claimed it would.

I have no idea how many crimes happen with legal weapons. It's completely irrelevant.

States with gun laws have fewer child gun deaths. That is the topic at hand, my friend.

If all you're going to do is NOT talk about the topic, why not just go create another thread about the things you want to discuss?

Avatar image for joebones5000
#31 Posted by joebones5000 (2639 posts) -

@comp_atkins said:

if guns aren't an issue. the more concerning question is:

why the hell are americans so fucking violent and crazy and quick to murder each other when compared to the rest of the civilized world?

The answer seems to be: Easy access to guns.

Avatar image for comp_atkins
#32 Posted by comp_atkins (35805 posts) -
@joebones5000 said:
@comp_atkins said:

if guns aren't an issue. the more concerning question is:

why the hell are americans so fucking violent and crazy and quick to murder each other when compared to the rest of the civilized world?

The answer seems to be: Easy access to guns.

NONONONONO. it can't be easy access to deadly weapons. it just CAN'T be.

maybe it's the water.

Avatar image for heirren
#33 Posted by Heirren (2236 posts) -

@joebones5000:

Its not nonsense at all, and i think you know that, too.

Let me ask you this: what are the current gun laws(i know this varies) and what do you believe the gun laws should be?

Avatar image for Solaryellow
#34 Posted by Solaryellow (5109 posts) -

@joebones5000 said:
@comp_atkins said:

if guns aren't an issue. the more concerning question is:

why the hell are americans so fucking violent and crazy and quick to murder each other when compared to the rest of the civilized world?

The answer seems to be: Easy access to guns.

Can you elaborate on your use of the word "easy?"

Avatar image for vl4d_l3nin
#35 Posted by vl4d_l3nin (1922 posts) -

Clinton used mandatory minimums and heavier policing on criminals - it's super effective!

Obama attempts barrier on legal gun owners - it had no effect...

Avatar image for n64dd
#36 Posted by N64DD (11970 posts) -

What a dumb troll thread.

Avatar image for Celsius765
#37 Posted by Celsius765 (2411 posts) -

@joebones5000: it's not only that. School staff don't make enough of an effort to stop bullying

Avatar image for heirren
#38 Posted by Heirren (2236 posts) -

@Celsius765:

Parents, too. Though to be fair, social media and cell phones in general have sort of neutered adult intellect. I know adults that act far more immature than childen.

Avatar image for sonicare
#39 Posted by sonicare (56812 posts) -

It's simple math, more guns means more gun deaths. It comes down to an argument about personal rights vs. public safety.

Avatar image for heirren
#40 Edited by Heirren (2236 posts) -

@sonicare:

Lol no. Nice try but no. In your argument though, how are you factoring in the amount of bullets each gun holds? For example is there an electoral college for automatic and non automatic?

So a clip of 48 equates to how many handguns?

Avatar image for zaryia
#41 Edited by Zaryia (9470 posts) -
@heirren said:

Sht parenting thats the real issue.

@n64dd said:

What a dumb troll thread.

@vl4d_l3nin said:

Clinton used mandatory minimums and heavier policing on criminals - it's super effective!

Obama attempts barrier on legal gun owners - it had no effect...

The study may still require more data, but do you have any data to directly counter it with?

https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2019/07/16/532234.htm

The new results bolster the argument that gun restrictions may help avert some of the 4,250 deaths that occur each year among Americans under age 21, already the second leading cause of death in children after traffic accidents. States with stricter gun control laws had 4% fewer pediatric deaths, and those with universal background checks for firearm purchases in place for at least five years had a 35% lower risk, the study found.

Avatar image for heirren
#42 Posted by Heirren (2236 posts) -

@zaryia:

Bs propaganda. Are they trying to claim this is all from legally acquired firearms? Where are the numbers? Theres a comment stating "...kids should feel safe in their neigborhood...play outside...." to me that sounds like they are suggesting gang violence, in that kids are being caught in the crossfire. Theyre also including 18 to 21 year olds, which could very well make this gang related violence. Are these legally acquired weapons?

Avatar image for zaryia
#43 Edited by Zaryia (9470 posts) -
@heirren said:

@zaryia:

Bs propaganda. Are they trying to claim this is all from legally acquired firearms? Where are the numbers? Theres a comment stating "...kids should feel safe in their neigborhood...play outside...." to me that sounds like they are suggesting gang violence, in that kids are being caught in the crossfire. Theyre also including 18 to 21 year olds, which could very well make this gang related violence. Are these legally acquired weapons?

Are you saying a peer reviewed study in the 'Journal of Pediatrics' and 'CDC' are BS Propaganda?

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr67/nvsr67_04.pdf

https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/144/1?current-issue=y

Citation? Can you at least disprove some of the findings, directly?

Previous studies found overall deaths from firearms fell after states implemented stricter laws, including background checks for buying guns or ammunition and identification measures like microstamping weapons. Goyal and her team decided to see if the protective benefits trickled down to children, as measured by lower pediatric death rates in the strictest states.

Avatar image for vfighter
#44 Posted by VFighter (5134 posts) -

@zaryia: Stay delusional, its all you know.

Avatar image for joebones5000
#45 Posted by joebones5000 (2639 posts) -

@Solaryellow said:
@joebones5000 said:
@comp_atkins said:

if guns aren't an issue. the more concerning question is:

why the hell are americans so fucking violent and crazy and quick to murder each other when compared to the rest of the civilized world?

The answer seems to be: Easy access to guns.

Can you elaborate on your use of the word "easy?"

Sure. Easier then getting a drivers license in more than 40 states.

Avatar image for joebones5000
#46 Edited by joebones5000 (2639 posts) -

@Celsius765 said:

@joebones5000: it's not only that. School staff don't make enough of an effort to stop bullying

Not sure what this has to do with anything.

Avatar image for joebones5000
#47 Posted by joebones5000 (2639 posts) -

@vfighter said:

@zaryia: Stay delusional, its all you know.

lol. The dude provides peer reviewed evidence and you call him delusional. Why even bother replying if you're just going to write something so dumb?

Avatar image for zaryia
#48 Edited by Zaryia (9470 posts) -
@vfighter said:

@zaryia: Stay delusional, its all you know.

All I did was linked papers from a Journal (and CDC) and ask him if he could disprove them.

Are you sure you aren't a Russian bot? You aren't making sense anymore.

Do facts hurt your feelings?

Avatar image for heirren
#49 Posted by Heirren (2236 posts) -

@zaryia:

Theyre not listing the types of shootings these are and whether or not they are registered firearms or not. This tells me its propaganda. Had they had more facts to back up their claim youd can bet theyd be listed.

Avatar image for Solaryellow
#50 Posted by Solaryellow (5109 posts) -

@joebones5000 said:
@Solaryellow said:
@joebones5000 said:

The answer seems to be: Easy access to guns.

Can you elaborate on your use of the word "easy?"

Sure. Easier then getting a drivers license in more than 40 states.

Don't think I am busting your balls but please explain the process because I honestly want to know. I haven't encountered what you claim here in my state and we are very pro 2A.