Wisconsin issued 300,000 concealed carry permits in 5 years + Homicide Rate

[Tinykong]

If you remove millions of poor people prone to committing violent gun crime out of the country, rates go down!

This is more accurate.

[Deleted]

This is more accurate.

Are they less american than say... yourself?

[Ghostpanther]

Are they less american than say... yourself?

If they are committing crimes they may have less rights to exercise. One would be the right to keep and carry arms. So to that extent, they are not equal to the non criminals which have the right to freely move from one state to another.

[Deleted]

If they are committing crimes they may have less rights to exercise. One would be the right to keep and carry arms. So to that extent, they are not equal to the non criminals which have the right to freely move from one state to another.

The point being made is that they are still american and a valid part of statistics.

[Ghostpanther]

The point being made is that they are still american and a valid part of statistics.

I agree. But is still a statistic to keep in mind. Remove Chicago, New Orleans, Detroit and Baltimore and the statistics for violent crime would go down drastically. Which if you do, it should point out the real reasons for the high crime rate.

[Macaquerie]

I would not want to go camping in bear country without a firearm to protect myself. And the truth is, there are too many scumbags out there who do not give 2 shits for your life same as the bears do not. I do agree there are many ways to deter criminals from breaking into your home. Sure there are risks when you have a firearm and one must keep those risks in mind and take precautions as with anything dangerous.

See, I just can't understand that attitude. The pro-gun folks always accuse the rest of us of being irrationally afraid of weapons, but it seems like you are living in constant fear of just about everything wherever you go.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

See, I just can't understand that attitude. The pro-gun folks always accuse the rest of us of being irrationally afraid of weapons, but it seems like you are living in constant fear of just about everything wherever you go.

Nope, not even close.

[Pantomime]

Apparently the homicide rate is lower than Japan's?



This would go towards solidifying that a huge chunk of our homicide rate is coming from specific "trouble areas" in our country.

I would hope that the numbers are impressive regardless of which side of the fence you sit, but you know how that goes.

While guns remain a stupid idea, I don't think you'll find giving guns to middle-class people causes tons of violence. It's always been the case that guns in the hands of the poor or mentally ill are where the main troubles arise. You can go back on forth on the causes of this, but we don't have any real concrete data, because companies won't fund it and the CDC is legally bound from doing research.

[Ghostpanther]

See, I just can't understand that attitude. The pro-gun folks always accuse the rest of us of being irrationally afraid of weapons, but it seems like you are living in constant fear of just about everything wherever you go.

I have 3 fire alarms in my house and have never had a fire in house for over 30 years. Does that mean I walk around in fear of having one or rather being smart and prepared? Same logic can be applied to using seat belts in a car.

[TZucchini]

I agree. But is still a statistic to keep in mind. Remove Chicago, New Orleans, Detroit and Baltimore and the statistics for violent crime would go down drastically. Which if you do, it should point out the real reasons for the high crime rate.

White collar crime is more damaging to society than street crime. But if you remove white wealthy individuals from the mix, white collar crime rates go down drastically. Which if you do, it should point out the real reasons for the high white collar crime rate.

[Ghostpanther]

White collar crime is more damaging to society than street crime. But if you remove white wealthy individuals from the mix, white collar crime rates go down drastically. Which if you do, it should point out the real reasons for the high white collar crime rate.

It would. Which is why the best way to deal with crime is to look at the root causes of said crime and not the tools being used.

[Pantomime]

Scott Walker is probably the best governor in America right now.

Good news for Wisconsin.

Eh, he's the poster child for influence pedaling and dark money. He's scum really; and while I found his methods repugnant, I wish more governments from top to bottom would abolish public unions. Right-to-work in the private domain is, however, one of the worst ideas in human history.

[Deleted]

I agree. But is still a statistic to keep in mind. Remove Chicago, New Orleans, Detroit and Baltimore and the statistics for violent crime would go down drastically. Which if you do, it should point out the real reasons for the high crime rate.

That's why I made the comparison with a soccer match where you're losing 3-1 and you're trying to convince me that "if you take away those 3 goal we'd be winning".
Those 3 goals are there. Chicago, New orleans, Detroit and Baltimore are there.

[TITAN308]

That's why I made the comparison with a soccer match where you're losing 3-1 and you're trying to convince me that "if you take away those 3 goal we'd be winning".
Those 3 goals are there. Chicago, New orleans, Detroit and Baltimore are there.

Bad analogy IMO, way to simplified based on the subject context. It comes off as disingenuous.

I'd rather not run an entire country based on the problems of a few shitholes.

[BattleSaint]

And that is so insignificant it's not worth mentioning? So why all this war on terrorism and reductions of freedom because of it? It's even less than that already insignificant number.

statistically yes it is "insignificant". There is no way to stop all crime and/or violence in an open,free society. The best we can do is to enforce existing laws/standards and to plug the gaps where we find them in common sense,reasonable ways without further eroding personal liberty.
In the U.S. ownership of firearms is one of the fundamental rights of a citizen and can only be denied by serious criminal history and/or mental illness.

- - - Updated - - -

Problem aren't guns, problem is the culture of the people using them. There is a lot of trash in the world, and the easier access trash has to guns, the worse it is. If you make it so that its heavily restricted but possible, there is little to no issue. The US just happens to have exceptionally high amounts of trash and social issues that lead to constant gun violence, but in the end-all, the amount of gun deaths isnt that significant compared to say, obesity, or car crashes. And if you rule out gang-related gun crime, it becomes almost non-existent.

As a shocking fact, in most of Europe, even the UK, there are a lot of guns, and its not thaaat hard to get a permit to have one. Not sure why people think there are no guns in EU. (im pro gun control btw, but recognise guns arent the issue in by itself).
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...scheme.svg.png

there is some truth to what your saying here. the VAST majority of legal gun owners,possess their weapons,in a lawful and safe manner as intended. I guess it would be common sense however,that the criminal/gang element in possession of guns,would use them in an irresponsible manner.

[Hiricine]

The point to allowing people the right to carry firearms for protection is not to lower crime rates, but to have the capability to successfully defend themselves against ether a armed assailant/home intruder or a stronger one. Sure one can feel they can with a baseball bat. But the choice should be up to the citizen, whatever they feel the need to use, as long as they are legal. This is the base reasoning for the 2nd amendment and so far it is one which SCOTUS agrees with.

I'm simply talking a hypothetical, it would be relatively immoral to force citizens to carry firearms, though it would be an interesting exercise to see in play, to say the least. Obviously it likely would and should be terribly illegal and unconstitutional, though I guess you could just draft the entire country and force the entire population to arm.

[BattleSaint]

I'm simply talking a hypothetical, it would be relatively immoral to force citizens to carry firearms, though it would be an interesting exercise to see in play, to say the least. Obviously it likely would and should be terribly illegal and unconstitutional, though I guess you could just draft the entire country and force the entire population to arm.

no way it would be even remotely legal to REQUIRE compulsory gun possession by citizens. Its inherently unconstitutional and contrary to our tradition of personal liberty and self determination.

[Hiricine]

no way it would be even remotely legal to REQUIRE compulsory gun possession by citizens. Its inherently unconstitutional and contrary to our tradition of personal liberty and self determination.

Well its simple-- the United States has allowed a draft in the past, and all youd have to do is draft 100% of the population and force every soldier in the country to carry a firearm. Switzerland actually DOES that too to some extent which is really the weird part about that place

Of course, its a terrible idea to begin with and you're correct that there is no way in frozen hell the public would ever let it happen.

[Tinykong]

Are they less american than say... yourself?

What does that have to do with anything?

America has a poverty problem. If you remove the cities that are chock full of poverty and gun crime, suddenly, America's gun crime statistics don't look so bad.

That's the problem with statistics. It's a generalization, and in this case, a bad one. Most places in the US have gun violence levels similar to (or lower than) the rest of the first world.

[Deleted]

What does that have to do with anything?

America has a poverty problem. If you remove the cities that are chock full of poverty and gun crime, suddenly, America's gun crime statistics don't look so bad.

That's the problem with statistics. It's a generalization, and in this case, a bad one. Most places in the US have gun violence levels similar to (or lower than) the rest of the first world.

Why... would you remove the cities that are chock full of poverty and gun crime from statistics?