Harvard Study on Guns & Violence: Suck it, Donks!

[AZGrizFan]

It's only Harvard. WTF do THEY know?

Harvard Study titled "Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?" looks at figures for "intentional deaths" throughout continental Europe and juxtaposes them with the U.S. to show that more gun control does not necessarily lead to lower death rates or violent crime.

Because the findings so clearly demonstrate that more gun laws may in fact increase death rates, the study says that "the mantra that more guns mean more deaths and that fewer guns, therefore, mean fewer deaths" is wrong.

For example, when the study shows numbers for Eastern European gun ownership and corresponding murder rates, it is readily apparent that less guns to do not mean less death. In Russia, where the rate of gun ownership is 4,000 per 100,000 inhabitants, the murder rate was 20.52 per 100,000 in 2002. That same year in Finland, where the rater of gun ownership is exceedingly higher--39,000 per 100,000--the murder rate was almost nill, at 1.98 per 100,000.

Looking at Western Europe, the study shows that Norway "has far and away Western Europe's highest household gun ownership rate (32%), but also its lowest murder rate."

And when the study focuses on intentional deaths by looking at the U.S. vs Continental Europe, the findings are no less revealing. The U.S., which is so often labeled as the most violent nation in the world by gun control proponents, comes in 7th--behind Russia, Estonia, Lativa, Lithuania, Belarus, and the Ukraine--in murders. America also only ranks 22nd in suicides.

The murder rate in Russia, where handguns are banned, is 30.6; the rate in the U.S. is 7.8.

The authors of the study conclude that the burden of proof rests on those who claim more guns equal more death and violent crime; such proponents should "at the very least [be able] to show a large number of nations with more guns have more death and that nations that impose stringent gun controls have achieved substantial reductions in criminal violence (or suicide)." But after intense study the authors conclude "those correlations are not observed when a large number of nations are compared around the world."

In fact, the numbers presented in the Harvard study support the contention that among the nations studied, those with more gun control tend toward higher death rates.

[D1B]

It's only Harvard. WTF do THEY know?

Harvard Study titled "Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?" looks at figures for "intentional deaths" throughout continental Europe and juxtaposes them with the U.S. to show that more gun control does not necessarily lead to lower death rates or violent crime.

Because the findings so clearly demonstrate that more gun laws may in fact increase death rates, the study says that "the mantra that more guns mean more deaths and that fewer guns, therefore, mean fewer deaths" is wrong.

For example, when the study shows numbers for Eastern European gun ownership and corresponding murder rates, it is readily apparent that less guns to do not mean less death. In Russia, where the rate of gun ownership is 4,000 per 100,000 inhabitants, the murder rate was 20.52 per 100,000 in 2002. That same year in Finland, where the rater of gun ownership is exceedingly higher--39,000 per 100,000--the murder rate was almost nill, at 1.98 per 100,000.

Looking at Western Europe, the study shows that Norway "has far and away Western Europe's highest household gun ownership rate (32%), but also its lowest murder rate."

And when the study focuses on intentional deaths by looking at the U.S. vs Continental Europe, the findings are no less revealing. The U.S., which is so often labeled as the most violent nation in the world by gun control proponents, comes in 7th--behind Russia, Estonia, Lativa, Lithuania, Belarus, and the Ukraine--in murders. America also only ranks 22nd in suicides.

The murder rate in Russia, where handguns are banned, is 30.6; the rate in the U.S. is 7.8.

The authors of the study conclude that the burden of proof rests on those who claim more guns equal more death and violent crime; such proponents should "at the very least [be able] to show a large number of nations with more guns have more death and that nations that impose stringent gun controls have achieved substantial reductions in criminal violence (or suicide)." But after intense study the authors conclude "those correlations are not observed when a large number of nations are compared around the world."

In fact, the numbers presented in the Harvard study support the contention that among the nations studied, those with more gun control tend toward higher death rates.

Where's the link, Azzhole?

Lot of cherrypicking above.

[AZGrizFan]

It's only Harvard. WTF do THEY know?

Where's the link, Azzhole?

Lot of cherrypicking above.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government ... gn=foxnews" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Google is your friend.

[D1B]

Where's the link, Azzhole?

Lot of cherrypicking above.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government ... gn=foxnews" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Google is your friend.

Brietbart, huh?

[AZGrizFan]

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government ... gn=foxnews" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Google is your friend.

Brietbart, huh?

Yes, Brietbart. As posted by FoxNews. You wouldn't expect the MSM to pick up a story that goes against their agenda, would you?

And it's a HARVARD study, Einstein. Brietbart didn't DO the study.

[Ivytalk]

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government ... gn=foxnews" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Google is your friend.

Brietbart, huh?

No, Faber College.

[Skjellyfetti]

Eh. So, I guess all the Donks that suggest banning all handguns are wrong.

Big surprise. Because there are barely a handful of them.

[AZGrizFan]

Eh. So, I guess all the Donks that suggest banning all handguns are wrong.

Big surprise. Because there are barely a handful of them.

But if you were to believe the MSM, they're lined up in droves....and the only reason there aren't MORE donks in that line is they value being in office more than they value their faux moral values of being against guns.

[Baldy]

Eh. So, I guess all the Donks that suggest banning all handguns are wrong.

Big surprise. Because there are barely a handful of them.

Obama is one, or has he "evolved"?

[D1B]

Brietbart, huh?

Yes, Brietbart. As posted by FoxNews. You wouldn't expect the MSM to pick up a story that goes against their agenda, would you?

And it's a HARVARD study, Einstein. Brietbart didn't DO the study.

Oh, I'm aware that Harvard did the piss poor study, what I was getting at, Retardo, was you checking out Brietbart.

BDFKSGOATS?- yes, but not you. I stand corrected.

[Cap'n Cat]

Z, really? Breitbart? You might as well quote Glenn Beck, you dumbass.

You need a couple months off to regroup, Sluggo.

[expandspanos]

http://gunsnfreedom.com/17-years-after- ... f-control/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

17 Years After Gun Bans in Australia …Police Say Gun Crime is Out of Control



In 1996 Australia unloaded some of the most severe gun bans and gun confiscation programs on record. And for the guns that were not confiscated gun owners were forced to enter into license agreements and have their guns registered so the government knew what guns everyone had.

Well, they really only knew what guns the law abiding had, since none of the criminals actually followed the program. Fancy that.

Breitbart just reported some interesting developments in Australia that prove all the anti-gun lawmakers wrong. Gun control does NOT take guns out of the hands of criminals, it only disarms the law abiding, while making everyone less safe.

Because of the out of control crime, Australia law enforcement officials have been forced to carry out recent operations

The New South Wales police commissioner Andrew Scipione had this to say about the spike in gun crime,

“There is no single source of gun violence… guns have fallen into the hands of organized crime, outlaw motorcycle gangs, mid-level crime groups and petty thieves and the lines are often blurred.”

So it looks like the only ones left with all the guns are the criminals. And the gun policies that Australia has enforced are the exact ones that gun control pushers like Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Senator Dianne Feinstein want to see here in the U.S.

Of course they will ignore the real facts behind the issue and overlook the fact that when guns are banned only the police and the criminals will have guns, leaving citizens to fend for themselves when lawlessness like we have seen in Australia starts to rise up.

In the last 12 months alone, over 3,300 people were charged with gun crimes, and over 9,000 guns have been confiscated.

The lesson? Gun control only affects the law abiding gun owners. Criminals are empowered by it.

http://gunsnfreedom.com/17-years-after- ... f-control/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[AZGrizFan]

Z, really? Breitbart? You might as well quote Glenn Beck, you dumbass.

You need a couple months off to regroup, Sluggo.

Again, it was linked on FoxNews. THAT shouldn't surprise you...

[Ibanez]

Z, really? Breitbart? You might as well quote Glenn Beck, you dumbass.

You need a couple months off to regroup, Sluggo.

Again, it was linked on FoxNews. THAT shouldn't surprise you...

Should I reiterate that it was conducted by a liberal, elitist Ivy Leave school or do you want to? Just let me know.

[LeadBolt]

Here's another source for the Harvard Study:

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/org ... online.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Perhaps the findings are valid now, since the source has not been compromised...

[Cap'n Cat]

Cap'n Cat is neither here nor there on gun control. He just doesn't care, as many Conks on here could care less about the religion shit.

Only time and experience will dictate what happens with guns. Liberal, Conk - makes no diff to The Cap'n. Arm yourselves up, people. Just don't kill any innocents.....or wolves. Meanwhile, I reserve the right to portray over-the-top gun fucks as, well, over-the-top gun fucks, bless their hearts.

Cap'n Cat hath spoken.
Long live Cap'n Cat.

[AZGrizFan]

Cap'n Cat is neither here nor there on gun control. He just doesn't care, as many Conks on here could care less about the religion shit.

Only time and experience will dictate what happens with guns. Liberal, Conk - makes no diff to The Cap'n. Arm yourselves up, people. Just don't kill any innocents.....or wolves. Meanwhile, I reserve the right to portray over-the-top gun fucks as, well, over-the-top gun fucks, bless their hearts.

Cap'n Cat hath spoken.
Long live Cap'n Cat.

You sure about that whole "wolves" thingy?


This one just happened last weekend up in your nape of the neck:

It's being called the first confirmed attack of a person by a gray wolf in Minnesota history, according to the Department of Natural Resources. Now, a 16-year-old Solway boy is home recovering from a vicious bite wound to the head.


It happened early Saturday morning at the West Winnie Campground on Lake Winnibigoshish in north central Minnesota. The campground is operated by the U.S. Forest Service and was temporarily closed following the wolf attack, reports CBS affiliate WCCO in Minneapolis.


The gray wolf, also known as a timber wolf, was captured by trappers with the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The wolf was shot and killed to permit testing for rabies at the University of Minnesota veterinary diagnostic lab.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-576 ... k-in-minn/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And this one happened Saturday in Montana....the wolves have gone CRAY-CRAY!!!

State wildlife officials say a private citizen shot and killed a wolf in the Jardine area after the animal killed several chickens and a cat.

The female collared wolf was shot Saturday in the process while eating one of the chickens it had killed. Formerly a member of Yellowstone National Park's Lamar Canyon pack, the wolf left the park several months ago and had since displayed unusually bold behavior around humans.

Fish, Wildlife and Parks spokeswoman Andrea Jones says the shooting was justified in part because the animal had failed to respond to efforts to drive it away from populated areas.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/08/28/wo ... z2dIEXnHs4" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Skjellyfetti]

Obama is one, or has he "evolved"?

Obama supports a nationwide ban on handguns... and this is a position he has been pushing?



Maybe you are right, but this would be news to me.

[Cap'n Cat]

Cap'n Cat is neither here nor there on gun control. He just doesn't care, as many Conks on here could care less about the religion shit.

Only time and experience will dictate what happens with guns. Liberal, Conk - makes no diff to The Cap'n. Arm yourselves up, people. Just don't kill any innocents.....or wolves. Meanwhile, I reserve the right to portray over-the-top gun fucks as, well, over-the-top gun fucks, bless their hearts.

Cap'n Cat hath spoken.
Long live Cap'n Cat.

You sure about that whole "wolves" thingy?

Yeah, I'm sure. Pull your bootstraps up, dumbass, and take some extra care when cavorting in known wolf habitat. Build bigger fences for your livestock. How's that for libertarian thinking, Jody?

[AZGrizFan]

Yeah, I'm sure. Pull your bootstraps up, dumbass, and take some extra care when cavorting in known wolf habitat. Build bigger fences for your livestock. How's that for libertarian thinking, Jody?

Bigger fences.

[D1B]

Still laughing at the "Harvard" Study comparing only gun owernership rates and not other factors or accelerants like rampant alcholism (Russia) and legal or decriminalized drugs (Scandanavian Countries.)

Z = conk dupe.

[AZGrizFan]

Still laughing at the "Harvard" Study comparing only gun owernership rates and not other factors or accelerants like rampant alcholism (Russia) and legal or decriminalized drugs (Scandanavian Countries.)

Z = conk dupe.

Harvard....the Truckee Community College of the Charles River.

[Gil Dobie]

Yeah, I'm sure. Pull your bootstraps up, dumbass, and take some extra care when cavorting in known wolf habitat. Build bigger fences for your livestock. How's that for libertarian thinking, Jody?

Did you fill you wolf tag in Minny this year. The total take was around 400 wolves. Minnesota has done a great job managing it's wolf population. One of my favorites, the Canadian Lynx isn't doing so well.

MPR Link

DNR: Wolves, bald eagles no longer endangered; lynx & pocket gopher on watchlist

ST. PAUL, Minn. — The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has added 180 species to the state's list of endangered or threatened plants and animals, many of which have struggled to survive as native habitat disappeared. Another 29 species, including bald eagles and wolves, have been taken off the list.

[Ivytalk]

Still laughing at the "Harvard" Study comparing only gun owernership rates and not other factors or accelerants like rampant alcholism (Russia) and legal or decriminalized drugs (Scandanavian Countries.)

Z = conk dupe.

Harvard....the Truckee Community College of the Charles River.

Hah! At the rate we're plummeting down the academic rankings, we'll be staring up Truckee's kilt before long!

See my siggy below.

[travelinman67]

Eh. So, I guess all the Donks that suggest banning all handguns are wrong.

Big surprise. Because there are barely a handful of them.

HORSESHIT! Dems are born to ban.

Anything to add limits to American's constitutional rights.

January 17, 2013

On Wednesday, President Barack Obama signed 23 executive actions as part of the administration's gun control initiative, a move that is meeting stiff resistance due to its apparent infringement upon the Second Amendment of the U.S. constitution.

What has been Obama's stance on crime and gun control since being elected to the Illinois State Senate in 1996? After digging through limited files, the answer may be shocking.

In a 1996 questionnaire, then-state senator Barack Obama answered "Yes" to a question asking whether he would support legislation to "ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns." Thus, Obama supported the complete banishment of firearms in Illinois.

During the 2008 presidential campaign, his staff claimed that Obama never filled out the mentioned survey and that the form had been filled out by an aide who "mischaracterized" Obama's position on gun control. Skeptics believe Obama's campaign lied by making such an assertion. An examination by Politico found that Obama's own handwriting was found on the document.

In terms of crime legislation, a Jan. 16 report by The Daily Caller shows that in 1999 Obama did not support adult prosecution for young criminals who shot a gun in school premises. According to Obama's view, criminals under the age of 18 who perpetrate gun-related crimes at school should be tried as juveniles.

In his Jan. 16 White House press conference, Obama was surrounded by children and informed the nation of the need to protect schools from gun violence. However, Illinois State Senate records show that in 1999 a 37-year-old Obama withheld support for tougher penalties for violent crimes committed near schools.

In 1999, tougher crime legislation was passed in Illinois in response to the Columbine High School shooting. The measure passed overwhelmingly in the Illinois State Senate in a 52-1 vote. But without Barack Obama's support. Five members, including state senator Obama, voted "present" and did not support the anti-crime bill aimed at protecting school children.

According to The Dailer Caller's Jan. 16 report, "SB 759 provided that anyone 15 years of age or older charged with aggravated battery with a weapon in school or within 1,000 feet of a school would be charged as an adult."

Here's the recent television ad by the National Rifle Association (NRA) calling Mr. Obama an "elitist hypocrite".

In a 1999 op-ed, the Chicago Tribune lambasted the young lawmaker for being a "gutless sheep" on crime. Columnist Steve Rauschenberger wrote: "Sen. Barack Obama (D-Chicago), who has--had?--aspirations to be a member of Congress, chose a trip to Hawaii over public safety in Illinois."

Mr. Rauschenberger added: "If everyone had shown up Wednesday in the Illinois Senate, if everyone had lived up to their word, Illinois citizens would be protected by a tough, necessary anti-crime law. But not everybody showed. Some who showed didn't vote. Some found more important things to do than vote against crime. What gutless sheep."

Barack Obama has maintained that he no longer has his records or schedule from his days as an Illinois state senator. At a campaign stop in Iowa during the 2008 presidential campaign, Obama said, "I don’t have – I don’t maintain – a file of eight years of work in the state Senate because I didn’t have the resources available to maintain those kinds of records. It could have been thrown out. I haven’t been in the State Senate now for quite some time."

There's more, despite the alleged "lost" records.

In 2004, then-Illinois state senator Obama opposed legislation that would have made it legally acceptable for a gun owner to protect his own life at home or to defend his household domain. At the time, it was a violation of a municipal gun ban law to use a firearm to save your own life in your own home.

The bill was passed overwhelmingly without Barack Obama's support. This vote would shock the gun lobby. Obama supported the view that gun owners in Illinois should be charged of a crime even in the act of self-defense while at home.

Suck it, Skelly. Obama's an oppressive socialist.