a great example of someone just openly gaslighting the world

No that’s just it. Those states I mentioned have lower, by a lot, gun murder rates while having higher gun ownership numbers. And none are above the national average of murder/manslaughter including Cali, though at 4.8 it’s pretty much a statistical tie.

Per capita rates are certainly one way to measure murder but in a state that has some of the toughest gun laws you would expect there to be far fewer murders. My whole point is that the numbers are all over the place.

It’s over because your argument is invalid. You’ve proven nothing. And where are these “Shooting Schools” you refer to? You make it sound like this is a major source of illegal guns, which I can tell you it’s not. I showed how your assertion that guns are stolen is a myth, so stated by an expert at the ATF.

Cite your sources. The rate of suicide in the US is somewhere between 25th and 35th in the World depending on the year. Trying to narrow it down to suicide by handgun is cherry picking the stats. The fact is, you don’t need a firearm to commit suicide and plenty of other countries can attest to that fact.

And you’re unable to offer up any sort of reasonable, much less polite, rebuttal. Look at my face, do you think I give a shit what you think?

I’ve bought several houses and never once had a background check done. I’ve had credit checks but there’s no government requirement for a background check to buy a house. And what’s with the insults? You’re only making yourself look stupid.

Uh no shit Sherlock. But you know the different between murder and suicide? One if voluntary and the other isn’t. Now why don’t you go fuck off? PS - if you think guns are the primary reason for suicides then explain why a country like Japan has a slightly higher suicide rate than the US and has virtually ZERO guns in…

Not a silly argument. Per Capita assumes that everyone, children, babies, invalids and everything in between is capable of murder. That’s a false assumption.

This article refutes those assertions (ps - I can’t read your article without subscribing). Here’s the opening paragraph which pretty much captures the point.

Nope, I didn’t say that at all. That’s what you inferred. What I was responding to is your assertion that somehow not requiring permits was analogous to giving guns to criminals (domestic violence). The point you missed is that you can require permits all day long and it will not prevent criminals from seeking out and…

It is still illegal to sell to a prohibited person, license or not.

Talk about weak ass arguments! Comparing property rights to gun rights? First, do you need to get a background check done to buy property? Are my rights, as a legal property owner, being restricted in some way, like I can’t buy certain types of property or I can’t buy property over a certain size, is there a waiting…

Depending on where you live you may have to get a background check even if it’s a private party sale. And the same holds true for gun shows. If a licensed dealer is selling at a gun show you will get a background check regardless of where you live.

Every licensed gun seller has to do a background check. The only exception is private party sales. People who are actively buying and selling guns without a license can be prosecuted, although it’s not all that common.

So if criminals won’t follow the restrictions, what purpose will they serve?

There are a lot of questions here. My uninformed assessment is that the cops acted to quickly as they have done in the past. I can understand their concern for a person running around with a firearm but they should have assessed that situation before firing. That is the main issue here.

Why? You’re happy to have them guard the airport, the bank, government buildings, sports stadiums, business campuses. Why not schools where your children are unarmed targets?

Do you think a criminal will follow the permit law and not carry a firearm if he’s prohibited? 

Stop playing the victim.