Your new graph compares the last 50 years rather than the last 20, which is a big difference. Other than that, the trend is similar, i agree. But don't you understand why governments act on arms and decide to limit them? In the UK, there was a major school shooting in 1996, comparable to the one in Connecticut last October and our government and the public didn't want an event like that again. A gun ban policy made sense and nearly worked, since there's been only one major massacre since then, which was in 2008 i think.

And i pointed out the crime rate ended up being the same after 20 years to show you that a gun ban only increases the crime rate in the short term and then drops off afterwards (it's still falling now, 10 per million in 2012). But surely if guns aren't readily available, then murder is at least given a 2nd though by the criminal, since most would have to kill with other weapons, instead, like a knife. 

And finally, the comparision between the US and UK was only possible because it was per 100,000 people. US murder rate is still 3x higher than the UK's at the end of it all, the American law must be missing something. Either that, or the economic system is the cause of the problem there. 

"Hey guys: my federal state took away people's negative liberties and I have so much of a Stockholm syndrome complex I love my state for it. You guys should let your federal state do the same! If not, you're crazy and your culture is crazy. "

^ This thread in a nutshell!

Those were you know... trained law officers... as opposed to you who are... completely making shit up... honestly your just doing your cause a diservice. 

Ok, lets see a hand taser...  Criminal has a gun.  How effective is that hand taser going to be across a room?

Pepperspray... if we're talking gas, you have to be close and risk it backdrafting on you.  If we're talking liquid... hope you have GREAT aim.

The best way for you to convince people to support gun control is to stop argueing since your general lack of information and just making things up is hurting your cause. 

You don't understand us because your uninformed and would rather make untrue and often made up arguements then be informed.

They are also two of the most corrupt countries, and quite poor as well. Police in both countries can easily be bought off. When comparing gun violence in the US we should compare them to other developed countires such as: Canada, England, Norway, Sweden, and Japan. Not Russia, and Mexico.

Say WHAAA????? WTF is going on south of the boarder?

I was actually was talking about something like this, and people in Canada would just let them rob us. One of my close friends said to me only a couple weeks ago, and I quote "I'm not getting into a f***en gun fight over property, just let them take my property, it's not worth risking my life over."

No burgler will kill or even harm a victim who isn't resisting. Heck In Canada, we'd probably open the door for them and thank them for not shooting us.


This is the difference between American and Canadian mentality. You don't need a gun, it's a f***en life you're talking about. Mace works for 1 on 1 encounters just as effectively, and in the extremely rare case of a multi person robbery (rare here), most people would just let the robber steal our stuff, and call the police later.

LOL Yea Wasp Spray and Bear Spray (Wide Shot specifically designed for attacking Bears) might work better then Pepper Spray, I don't know. However for 1 on 1 encounters Pepper Spray is just as effective as a gun. I tried to look up a link to verify this because I heard it on the news, but I can't find one, but with a spray, you din't need a line of sight to spray, and you can have the weapon right up to your chest and use it in a confined place.

As for Tasers, wouldn't most crimes be committed at arms reach? If someone was trying to rape you in a park, they would likely sneak up on you. Guns are only effective at a range, so I could argue the same point back.

I think the main thing is, crime/gangs, aren't as prevalent as they are in the USA. People don't attack each other with guns here, and in the rare event that they do, most Canadians think a bit and just let the person rob us. No point risking your life for property. In the clause of rape, I can't see a gun being an effective, short distance weapon of intimidation. I knife would probably be a better weapon for an attacker, and in that case, you are already close range, so pepper spray is probably a better solution.

Also, I'm not sure about the USA, but our colleges and universities (community college and college in USA) are filled with Emergency Stations. There is always a tall red pole with a big red button you can run to to press for help and within a minute or two, either the Police or Campus Police will come to the rescue. Police here are efficient, and readily available in places more likely to see rape/crime (I would imagine a school would be a good place to commit a rape since girls are younger).

As for bogus stats... they aren't bogus.  Actually if you look historically at homicide rates.  You'll note homicdes go UP after gun bans.  Not down. 

For a very mild example.

This mentality is so freaking dumb. "I wont get into a gun fight over property." Okay cool... what about having your wife getting raped? By the time you realize the intentions of the burglars it would be too late. They already broke in. They obviously don't care for you or your family. Whats stopping them from doing more harm? It's not like there is a formal greeting where the burglar knocks on the door and says "Good day good sir. I am here to burglarize you. After you close the door I am going to kick it in and steal your property. But fear not. I am only here to make money off your hard work. I don't expect use to have any issues."

That should give you a hint that you are wrong shouldn't it...

*Hold up a gun from 10 feet away* "Gimme your purse/backback bitch." "Gimme your car keys" or you could just get shot and your dead body can be ramsacked.... so no... obviously most crimes don't need to be close range. Your ignorance is really showing.

You're 3x more likely to be shot if you try to shoot them....so, your ignorance is showing.

Yeah, the colleges have those distress call buttons... However, "According to American Police Beat, the average response time for an emergency call is 10 minutes. Atlanta has the worst response time with 11 to 12 minutes and Nashville comes in at a lightning speed of 9 minutes." That puts my mind at ease!

That's US incompetence. U of Toronto's claimed response time is 5-10 minutes, but I've seen police respond to 911 calls in 2-3 minutes the few times someone called the cops near me.

Also, "CHICAGO—Police here stopped physically responding to some 911 calls for non-life-threatening issues this week so officers can focus on stemming the city's rising homicide rate, a strategy that other big cities have implemented with sometimes controversial results.

Under the new policy, dispatchers will route 911 calls reporting non-criminal complaints or crimes in which no one is in imminent danger, such as some car thefts and simple assaults, to desk officers who will fill out police reports by phone. The new policy prohibits callers from insisting an officer be sent to the scene, as was allowed before."

So, your getting your ass beat in chicago don't expect a cop to come along.

You listed non-emergency as "car thefts and simple assaults." From the wording it's fair to assume that's after the fact (since police are filing a report, they couldn't do that if someone was beating you down with the phone).

Why would you need immediate attention for that? All a cops going to do is come down and file a report.

Still either way, that's USA being incompetent, not at all related to guns.