50 Dead In Worst Mass Shooting in US History — Gunman Opened Fire In Crowded Gay Nightclub In Orlando


Just you know a little fact check.

What is the magical quality of the Swiss that they obey their laws on ammunition, but still have a nice little crime rate -- higher than Greece, Hungary, Portugal?

WRONG. Homicide rate is what counts.
2014 Homicide rate (per 100k population) by country

Switzerland 0.5
Greece 1.1
Hungary 1.5
Portugal 0.9

CITE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co…

...aside from those NATIONAL bans woefully failing in Russia...

Homicide rate in Russia since 1996 (Soviet era crime stats are impossible to come by):

1996 - 39,083
1997 - 34,995
1998 - 33,553
1999 - 38,225
2000 - 41,090 (start of spike)
2001 - 42,921
2002 - 44,252
2003 - 41,764
2004 - 39,256
2005 - 35,636
2006 - 28,844 (precipitous drop after tighter regulations and penalties)
2007 - 25,377
2008 - 23,738
2009 - 21,371
2010 - 18,951
2011 - 16,798
End of stats.

CITE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_R…

Just yelling numbers you want to be true doesn't make them true. That's just one sample of the entirely invented narrative from NRA stooges. The rest are likewise fabrications, distortions or hopelessly cherry picked.


Check yourself tool. I said "Crime" – not murder. But if you insist on referencing materials, let's look at murder on a PER CAPITA basis, showing Russia (no guns), had a murder rate (9.5) which is 2.5x that or the US (3.8) despite all our guns.


Further, thank you for making my point: That despite the widespread proliferation of semi-automatic weapons in Switzerland, the murder rate is lower among the Swiss than European nations that are far more restrictive on guns. Inconvenient truth for Lefties who think inanimate objects (and not people with shitty character) make choices.

In fact, you're the one that's the stooge – as you've fantastically supported my point with your own research. Keep it up!
Facts speak for themselves.
Maybe the Swiss don't open their mouths and shit falls out. Free speech without consequences seems to be the order of the day in the US.
People allowed to verbally incite violence. Allowed to denigrate others, put down gays, Blacks, Latinos, women.

So simultaneously these NRA shills claim stronger gun restrictions convert potential murders to pick pockets at petty thieves (SOLD! I'll take that) and then claim lower homicide rates are due to the presence of tightly regulated assault rifles in homes of actual well regulated militias with exceptional penalties for violations and bans in place for anybody with criminal records or on watch lists (Again SOLD! Let's embrace the swiss system).

Full disclosure: I lived in Switzerland for seven years. They have Obamacare!
In Australia there are racial and sexual discrimination laws. Free speech is curtailed, horror horror, if that speech discriminates against others.
A political leader like Trump would be charged in our country for his divisive speech.

IT IS NOT THE WORST MASS SHOOTING SLAUGHTER IN AMERICAN HISTORY. The worst mass shooting slaughter in American history occurred November 29 1864.

"ORLANDO – The tragic mass shooting at the popular Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida early Sunday morning resulted in at least 50 dead, including the shooter, and 53 others injured.

The national media were quick to label it the “deadliest mass shooting” in American history.

American Indians were responded on social media that the media failed to consider Wounded Knee where some 300 men, women and children were killed a few days after Christmas in 1890. Also, not mentioned was the Sand Creek massecre in 1864 where between 70 – 180 Cheyenne and Arapaho were massacred. It is estimated that two-thirds of the slain were women and children.

Many were clear they were not attempting to take away from Sunday’s tragedy and the loss to the families of the victims, but thought the media should respect American Indian history — even though not pleasant for the media."
@105: "cracking-down on guns actually INCREASES murder rates, as criminals find leverage over everyday citizens."
Also, you are once more making broad claims without any supporting evidence whatsoever. Just because you say it doesn't make it true.

"what law are you proposing that would lower gun deaths, and where else has that been proven to work?"
I'm in favor of requiring background checks on all gun purchases and making firearms licenses may-issue rather than shall-issue. Where have those been proven to work? In Florida, Mississippi, Oregon, and Missouri. Those four states saw statistically significant (and in some cases, quite dramatic) increases in gun-related homicide without significant decrease in non-gun-related deaths upon the REPEAL of strict gun control laws.(Sources: 1, 2)
It's a clever little scam that the gun nuts have going on here, to be certain. They block any attempt to tighten gun laws, and then they claim that we don't have evidence that tighter gun laws work, and of course we don't have that evidence because they refuse to allow gun control to be implemented or studied. But they've outsmarted themselves, you see! Where they've been successful in actually LOOSENING gun laws, the resulting increases in homicide have proven just how damaging this sort of lawlessness is. Your move, Zoner.
@116: But comparing aggregate crime rates across nations is sketchy at best and imbecilic at worst due to the differences in legal systems. What is considered a criminal offense in one nation might be considered a mild infraction in another, and so reporting is handled entirely different. The UK has less violent crime per capita than the US does, but its reported rate is higher in some sources because they have a broader definition of violent crime. You're picking a deliberately unreliable metric to try and confuse the issue.

Russia has, as discussed above, an entirely different legal system than we do, one plagued with corruption and incompetence. If gun restrictions were the sole cause of Russia's murder problem, why would murder have so sharply DECLINED following the implementation of tighter restrictions? Explain THAT. Go ahead, I'm waiting.

And please, keep attributing Switzerland's low crime rates to the presence of guns rather than the tight regulation of guns. It just goes to show how zealously you believe that a gun is some sort of anti-crime talisman, how willing you are to engage in magical thinking to justify this belief, and how far you'll go to deny all conflicting evidence.

@115: Just in the interest of accuracy, that's the raw totals of homicides per year, not the homicide rate (usually expressed as homicides per 100,000 population per year). Your point still stands, as a similar trend is present in the population-adjusted rate.

I have found the root of your stupidity.

I don't attribute Switzerland's low crime rate to the presence of guns. What I said (clearly) was that variances in CULTURE are the determinant of violent crime, not the presence of guns.

In your fairy tale, all people are essentially good – and its' the guns that cause murder. So of course you think its preposterous that having more guns would make for less crime. When in fact it is neither the presence of absence of guns that forms the intent to mayhem.

Your cognitive inability, or political unwillingness, to acknowledge that societal rot in some areas does not diminish Constitutional Rights in others is apparent.

Here's the thing to remember: The widespread presence of guns in some sectors of society (or nation cultures) as little to no impact on violent crime. In fact, the peace-keeping qualities of an armed citizenry may keep it low. (Switzerland, Issaquah, etc.)

And the broad limitation on guns in some sectors of society (or nation cultures) has little to no impact on the safety of those people. In fact, a disarmed citizenry may encourage those inclined to do harm. (Note: Sandyhook, Pulse, Blacksburg, Aurora, San Bernadino were all carried-out in Gun Free Zones.) (See Chicago, Brazil, DC).

What Lefties can't seem to admit is that we have a people problem, not a gun problem. Gun violence is off -40+% since the early 90's, at the same time gun sales exploded.

By your logic – that doesn't make any sense! Because access to guns is the dangerous thing. How can gun sales go way-way-up – and yet crime has gone way-way-down?

But look at the huge incarceration rate. Because that's where the violent criminals were swept up. And here Bernie and Obama (say) they want to release this convicted class back into their communities, where they won't have legal access to guns –- and so really won't be a problem.

@125: ...aaand another swing and a miss.
"I don't attribute Switzerland's low crime rate to the presence of guns. What I said (clearly) was that variances in CULTURE are the determinant of violent crime, not the presence of guns."
Let's see what you said way back in your first post here:
"And cultures riddled with possession of high-capacity, high-power semi-automatic rifles live quite peaceably."
So, you say that cultures with guns are peaceful and that cities that have attempted to restrict guns have seen violence as a result, and you expect anyone to believe that you're not trying to draw a connection between more guns and less crime? No really, it's about CULTURE, totally!

Again, how would requiring universal background checks diminish anyone's "Constitutional Rights"? You gun nuts parrot that back every time it's proposed, but you never seem to explain HOW that is. It's nothing more than an article of faith for your lot.

"And the broad limitation on guns in some sectors of society (or nation cultures) has little to no impact on the safety of those people."
Did you READ the studies I linked above? Or are you just going to stick your fingers in your ears, as usual? Those states loosened their gun laws and promptly saw statewide gun violence climb EVEN WHILE it was declining nationwide. How long are you going to repeat these thoroughly false claims?

"What Lefties can't seem to admit is that we have a people problem, not a gun problem. Gun violence is off -40+% since the early 90's, at the same time gun sales exploded."
Guns per capita has risen, certainly, but gun OWNERSHIP (a much more meaningful statistic) has actually fallen! From 1990 to 2012, the homicide rate was cut in half, dropping from 9.4 to 4.7 homicides per 100k per year. Meanwhile, the proportion of households with at least one gun in them fell from 42.2% to 31.1%. How can gun ownership go way-way-down – and yet crime has also gone way-way-down?

Who's proposing the release of violent career criminals, anyway? Can you show me where President Obama actually suggested that? Or is it just another thing you're PRETTY SURE he said?

I'm eager also to see how you explain away just how ass-backward your claims about Russia and Australia are. And again, can you explain the aforementioned climbs in violence resulting from the relaxation of gun laws? Or are you going to continue ignoring all facts you dislike?
Oh oh. Venomlash is upside down. Don't let him rattle you V.
I feel such a deep sadness for all those beautiful young people, targeted because of who they love.
116/Zoner: Inconvenient truth for Lefties who think inanimate objects (and not people with shitty character) make choices.

A mischaracterization of why people support some type of regulation on guns.

A human being makes the choice to slaughter other people but it's the weapon (or weapons) he/she (typically a he, of course) is able to obtain that determines the degree of the carnage.

It's leverage. Without any weapon at all, a human being is pretty limited as to how many people he's going to be able to kill at one time. With some kind of a weapon -- say a baseball bat or a knife -- the odds are that he'll be able to kill more people than with his bare hands. Increase the lethality of the weapon -- from a knife or baseball bat to a handgun, and from a handgun to an AR-15 -- and you increase the degree of carnage.

It was a person, President Truman, who made the decision to drop an atomic bomb on Hiroshima. But it was the particular weapon which determined the degree of the carnage. Had a single conventional bomb been dropped on Hiroshima, the casualties wouldn't have been anywhere close to what they were.


Over all of last year, Washington's Initiative 594, requiring background checks, rounded-up 50 people that weren't eligible to purchase guns.

Importantly, none – NOT ONE - of those cases was prosecuted.


1) Criminals intent on purchasing won't use "official" channels.
2) The government is fucking useless even when you spoon feed them criminality.

As for Obama's softness on criminals (even violent ones): Just LAST WEEK Dear Leader commuted the sentence of Sherman Ray Meirovitz of Minneapolis, MN. The guy was armed, selling four pounds of cocaine and previously found guilty of shooting his mother in law to death.

Or look at aspiring Milwaukee rapper Dontray Mills, arrested in April 2014 for using false identification to purchase 27 guns at sporting goods stores in suburban Milwaukee. He was selling them on the street. He was charged with 55 counts of buying firearms with fake identification and dealing weapons without a license. He struck a sweet plea bargain with Obama's Justice Dept. and pled guilty to one count. In August 2015, U.S. District Judge Rudolph Randa sentence Mills to one year of probation and NO jail time. (He was given dispensation to travel out-of-state to record his rap album.) That's how willing Obama is to let trash run the streets. (And there are many other examples. But your too busy fawning..)

Australia and Russia were simple examples if you pay attention.

Australia banned guns, murder didn't fall appreciably and mass murders were simply conducted with other means.

Russia has strict gun prohibitions, but huge violent crime. Gun restriction isn't highly correlated with violent crime reduction.

People murder. Guns don't cause them to.

Try to keep up.
People murder, wow. That's a profound insight @129. Yes, we know people murder and people hit and people scream.
Guns are just so much more effective than knives. How many people could that sad closeted gay ( he was on gay web sites, he'd been to that club) man, have been able to Kill, if he had used a knife.
No one is ignoring his anger, his hatred, his denial of his own homoerotic urges. Making a gun available to such an unhinged man is to me total cultural lunacy. So. tighten the fucking gun laws.
Throw out all the snivelling republicans in office who accept money from the gun mob, and really take your country back.
129/Zoner: People murder. Guns don't cause them to.

People murder. The more firepower they have, the more people they are likely to murder (and injure.) .

@129: My, what a lot of words with so little substance.
1) Criminals intent on purchasing guns don't HAVE to go to the black market in most states right now. And more importantly, universal background check requirements will eliminate the grey area that unlicensed dealers currently occupy, selling to criminals without being themselves guilty of any crime. You take away their facade of legitimacy, either they stop selling to criminals or you get to prosecute them.
2) It's not a crime to fail a background check; it's a crime to LIE on a background check application. Making a failed but honest background check a criminal offense would be idiotic.

Meirovitz was convicted of manslaughter in 1983, and was given life in prison for cocaine possession with intent to distribute in 1990. His age (73) makes recidivism unlikely, and he already served over a quarter century for a drug-dealing conviction before his sentence was commuted. THAT is the best example you can give?

Oh, and Mills? Snopes has already debunked that one. President Obama had nothing to do with that case, but you know what the judge said upon handing down a lenient sentence?
"People kill people. Guns don't kill people." Let's see, where could he have gotten THAT idea...?

"Australia banned guns, murder didn't fall appreciably and mass murders were simply conducted with other means."
Murder declined slightly, but suicide PLUNGED. And excuse me, but the goal here is not so much to minimize mass murders as to minimize TOTAL loss of life. Nice try to distract from the facts.

"Russia has strict gun prohibitions, but huge violent crime."
Keep telling us that! Keep on ignoring how corrupt, lawless, and dysfunctional the Russian justice system is, since that's obviously got nothing to do with violent crime! You STILL can't explain why murder rates fell sharply when they tightened their gun laws.
130/LavaGirl: and really take your country back.

In my post above @ 98 about the post-Port Arthur change in Australia's gun laws, I did point out the caveat from former Prime Minister Howard, who acknowledges that "major cultural and historical differences" make it difficult to draw comparisons between the gun cultures in the U.S. and Australia.

Guns are (and killing people is), I believe, more deeply ingrained in the "cultural DNA" of the U.S. compared to Australia. We had a violent revolution. Australia achieved independence from Great Britain peacefully, did it not? There was a lot of violence between new Americans and Native Americans. I imagine there was also violence between new Australians and aboriginal people, but I'm guessing it was nothing like we had in the U.S. We went to war against Mexico, basically stealing half of their country (Ulysses S. Grant called it "one of the most unjust [wars] ever waged by a stronger against a weaker nation.") As far as I know, Australia never went to war to order to grab half of another's country's land. We had a horrendous civil war, where we slaughtered each other. Australia didn't. Compared to Australia, we are a very violent and bloody country.

We also have the Second Amendment, which is like sacred scripture to the NRA and gun enthusiasts. I don't believe Australia has anything similar, does it?

Given those differences, it's extremely difficult-to-impossible to do what Australia has done.
A partial list of questions Zoner STILL doesn't have answers to:
-If gun control doesn't work, why did several states (particularly Missouri) suffer increases in gun crime and violent crime rates after loosening their gun laws, even while neighboring states and the country as a whole experienced a drop in crime?
-If Russia proves that stricter gun control means more violence, why did murder rates drop precipitously following the implementation of stricter gun control?
-If more guns mean less crime, how come violent crime and murder rates are positively correlated with gun ownership rates?
-If gun control doesn't work, how come Switzerland has such low violent crime rates despite guns being both widely available and tightly controlled?

I keep asking these relevant questions, and he keeps running away from them. This, dear reader, is because he doesn't have the facts on his side.
Roma. You don't have to do what Australia has done. If you'd notice, we are in Asia. To the Nth of us is the biggest Muslim country in the world. We have learnt to whistle a happy tune and smile nicely.
You can do what America can do. No we have no God given Constitution. Is this written in stone, like the Ten Commandments? Do what you can. Get those fuckers out of power. Rip the guts out of the endemic corruption in your Governments.
I mean, it's just us and New Zealand down here.
This young man was so conflicted about his sexuality, he did that horrible slaughter of other young people. Young people whose parents accepted them. I keep flashing on the Mothers I saw on tv, and my heart starts to ache.
His father, his mad delusional father, could never have accepted his homosexuality.
Muslims are not alone finding homosexuality unpalatable.Christians @ Red Necks all over the world, fearful of their own erotic impulses, have done and will do horrific acts against others, until full acceptance of whatever is other people's business, as well as their own blurred lines.
@134 -- Jesus, you're all over the place.

I said Obama was soft on criminals. The Snope you posted (check) debunks a rumor that he was pardoned. Which I never said. He wasn't jailed. Not even. Obama's Justice Department (Executive Branch) gave a year of probation to a guy that sold guns on the streets of Milwaukee – America's 7th deadliest city. So yes, Obama has softened on crime.

How do you square your loathing of guns, with support for Obama, when the guy won't even have his appointee fucking prosecute a guy repeatedly violates gun laws and background checks in America's more dangerous cities? Really? Look at you -- so caught in your political convictions you've lost sight of reason.

As for Missouri, you don't get to have it both ways. If Chicago crime is due to an influx of guns acquired elsewhere, so would Missouri have plenty of access under tighter restrictions. The point being, if restrictions don't work in Chicago, they weren't making a difference in Missouri either. So nice try.

And in fact, Missouri is an anomalistically deadly place. Before the repeal, from 1999 to 2006, Missouri’s gun homicide rate was 13.8 percent higher than the national rate. After the change, its murder rate climbed even higher.

You – quite apparently – can't read, as I previously said I do not correlate

Russia drop in murders is due in part to the dramatic collapse of their population in age and number, (booze, violence, malnutrition, low birth rate), The country contracts .5%-1% every year now. The UN projects Russia to fall another 1/3rd by 2050.) In the period cited, Russia fell behind INDIA in media household wealth. Further, that was a period of significant economic stability and relative growth. Finally, the Russians are widely known to cook the books. http://tcr.sagepub.com/content/19/2/257.…

As for Missouri: Even the "experts" don't agree that Missouri presents meaningful long-term data:


Quote: "Gary Kleck, a professor of criminology at Florida State University, said he doubted that Missouri’s permit law had ever blocked many criminals from getting guns. Gun homicides in California rose after the state banned one category of guns, so-called junk guns, he said, suggesting tighter laws were not safer. Professor Webster (the expert on Missouri) admitted that the (apparent) rise in California crime (due to loosening of gun laws) disappeared with more years of data...."

As for the Swiss, you repetitive dolt – the neutral Swiss nation is disinclined to violence (culturally) INDEPENDENT of whatever gun laws there are. It doesn't matter how loose of how tight guns are regulated, if people aren't inclined to shoot. That's why Issaquah and the CD have different rates of gun violence, under the same gun restrictions/liberties.

So desperate to have the world in one neat, tidy, regulatory bundle...


No we have no God given Constitution. Is this written in stone, like the Ten Commandments?

Pretty much, yes. Especially the Second Amendment. If there was ever a movement to abolish (or even change) the Second Amendment, the NRA and gunbangers would likely go batshit crazy. If John Howard had been here in the U.S., trying to do what he did in Australia, he probably would've been shot and killed by some enraged gunbanger.
136/LavaGirl: Muslims are not alone finding homosexuality unpalatable.

You're right, they're not. But I don't think anyone claims that they're "alone" in this.

However, per Wikipedia...

Extreme prejudice remains, both socially and legally, in much of the Islamic world against people who engage in homosexual acts. In Afghanistan, Brunei, Iran, Mauritania, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, United Arab Emirates and Yemen, homosexual activity carries the death penalty. In others, such as Algeria, Maldives, Malaysia, Qatar, Somalia and Syria, it is illegal.


Most Muslim-majority countries and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) have opposed moves to advance LGBT rights at the United Nations, in the General Assembly and/or the UNHRC. In May 2016, a group of 51 Muslim states blocked 11 gay and transgender organizations from attending 2016 High Level Meeting on Ending AIDS.
Oh, and Obamas pardons/commutations include any number of previously convicted felons – who had illegally-acquired firearms on them when arrested.

And he lets them go back out again... and again...

Charrell Franklin Burrage, age 40 – drug trafficking and carrying a concealed firearm.

Almos L. Starks – Conspiracy to distribute cocaine and cocaine base; possess with intent to distribute and distribute cocaine; possess with intent to distribute in excess of 50 grams of cocaine base; possession of firearms by a convicted felon.

Shane William Tuttle – Cocaine possession with intent to distribute (three counts); use of a firearm during drug trafficking offense (two counts).

Cleon Jermaine Hawkins - Distributing cocaine; possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug-trafficking crime.

Bernard Beard – Compton, CA
Offense: Conspiracy to distribute cocaine, cocaine base, heroin, and phencyclidine (PCP); felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition; Central District of California
Sentence: 240 months’ imprisonment; five years’ supervised release (May 22, 2009)

Reginald Wendell Boyd, Jr. – Greensboro, NC
Offense: Conspiracy to distribute cocaine hydrochloride; carry a firearm during and in relation to a drug trafficking crime; Middle District of North Carolina
Sentence: 180 months’ imprisonment; eight years’ supervised release (October 31, 2005)

Nabar Moneek Criam – Brooklyn, NY
Offense: Possessed with intent to distribute crack; possessed firearms during trafficking crime; Middle District of North Carolina
Sentence: 180 months’ imprisonment; five years’ supervised release (March 30, 2007)

Ian Kavanaugh Gavin – Eight Mile, AL
Offense: Possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine; using/carrying a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking offense; Southern District of Alabama
Sentence: 180 months’ imprisonment; eight years’ supervised release (March 8, 2007)

George Michael Gray – Springfield, OR
Offense: Conspiracy to manufacture, possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine; manufacture of methamphetamine; possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine; possession of firearm in connection with drug trafficking offense; District of Oregon
Sentence: Life imprisonment; five years’ supervised release (July 3, 1995)

Jerome Harris, Jr. – Mobile, AL
Offense: Possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine; possession with intent to distribute cocaine; use/carry/possess a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime; Southern District of Alabama
Sentence: 300 months’ imprisonment; 10 years’ supervised release (November 7, 2006)

Vernon Harris – Philadelphia, PA
Offense: Possession with intent to distribute; possession of firearm by convicted felon; Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Sentence: Life imprisonment; 10 years’ supervised release (October 25, 1996)

Tommy Howard – Cincinnati, OH
Offense: Use of a firearm during the commission of a drug trafficking offense; Southern District of Ohio
Sentence: 292 months’ imprisonment; five years’ supervised release; $1,000 fine (January 8, 2004)

Anthony Lee Lewis – Tampa, FL
Offense: Conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine and crack cocaine; distribution of crack cocaine; possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine; convicted felon in possession of a firearm; possession with intent to distribute cocaine; Middle District of Florida
Sentence: Life imprisonment (September 16, 1994)

Ernest Spiller – East St. Louis, IL
Offense: Distribution of crack cocaine (two counts); maintaining a crack house; possession of a firearm in further of a drug trafficking crime; felon in possession of a firearm; Southern District of Illinois
Sentence: 352 months’ imprisonment; three years’ supervised release; $1,000 fine (August 3, 2000)

Michael A. Yandal – Murray, KY
Offense: Possession with the intent to distribute approximately 50 grams or more of a mixture or substance containing cocaine base; possession with the intent to distribute marijuana; possession of a firearm in the furtherance of a drug trafficking crime; Western District of Kentucky
Sentence: 195 months’ imprisonment; five years’ supervised release (April 24, 2007); amended to 180 months’ imprisonment (December 11, 2007)

Lamont Durville Glass – Knoxville, TN
Offense: Possession with intent to distribute cocaine base; felon in possession of a firearm; Eastern District of Tennessee
Sentence: 262 months’ imprisonment; eight years’ supervised release (January 9, 1998)
@137: If you actually READ the Snopes article, you'll see they concluded that Obama didn't actually have anything to do with the particular sentence handed down. Just another case of "blame it all on the guy we don't like".

"If Chicago crime is due to an influx of guns acquired elsewhere, so would Missouri have plenty of access under tighter restrictions."
Now you're just making shit up! There is a well-documented pattern of guns from out of state, particularly Indiana, turning up at Chicago crime scenes; no such pattern exists of crime guns flowing into Missouri. Additionally, even IF guns from out of state were available on the black market before Missouri relaxed its laws, HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN THE INCREASE IN VIOLENCE after the laws were loosened?

"And in fact, Missouri is an anomalistically deadly place. Before the repeal, from 1999 to 2006, Missouri’s gun homicide rate was 13.8 percent higher than the national rate. After the change, its murder rate climbed even higher."
And this is relevant...why? You're making meaningless statements in an effort to poke holes in research that contradicts your opinions.

"Russia drop in murders is due in part to the dramatic collapse of their population in age and number, (booze, violence, malnutrition, low birth rate), The country contracts .5%-1% every year now."
Someone didn't run the numbers! Between 2001 and 2006, Russia's population fell by about 2.5%, while over the same interval, the number of murders fell by fucking 33%. But yeah, it's just population!
"Further, that was a period of significant economic stability and relative growth."
Except that the economy was growing during that increase in crime too. If the economy was the driving force, why did the murder rate suddenly drop when it did? You're grasping at straws here.
"Finally, the Russians are widely known to cook the books."
By which you mean that a couple researchers think they aren't reporting homicide properly. Sure, let's throw out all information that contradicts your opinions, if we can find one or two voices that question its legitimacy!

"Even the 'experts' don't agree that Missouri presents meaningful long-term data"
Gary Kleck isn't exactly an objective source; his record as an anti-gun control activist goes back quite a while. He's basically John Lott with better methodology, and you might as well quote Anthony Watts on climatology if you're going to claim that his skepticism of the study is evidence that it's flawed.

"the neutral Swiss nation is disinclined to violence (culturally) INDEPENDENT of whatever gun laws there are"
Except that political neutrality doesn't imply domestic tranquility, and the Swiss certainly DO have crime (you yourself claimed that they have more crime than Greece, Hungary, and Portugal). What they DON'T have is a lot of murder or gun crime.

"That's why Issaquah and the CD have different rates of gun violence, under the same gun restrictions/liberties."
That's right, it's TOTALLY about culture and NOT AT ALL about poverty and population density. Your dogmatism that gun violence is how you think it is is so complete that you willingly ignore the obvious in order to advance your claims.
@140: What do all those have in common? Possession of a firearm during a drug offense or by a convicted felon. What don't you see there? The offender actually shooting anyone.

So much for Obama putting "violent career criminals" back on the street. Ah well, you tried.
Roma @139. I'm sure Australia has some laws written down by old guys way back, that we must be sticking too. They sure divided up the country funny. and we've had some seriously fascist policies over the years. things evolve.

There are many ways to interpret the SEcond A.
It would still be in place with some controls over access to them. Limiting gun licenses; making high powered guns of war illegal.
Do solid back ground checks. Venomlash has already covered it.
This mad situation where this gun lobby has so much power, has to be confronted. Do it politically. Change the make up of those in power. Then change the laws. Means people have to use their vote at all the elections.

I don't know any Aus Muslims personally. I have no idea where they stand on homosexuality after living here.
Sharia Law etc scares the bejesus out of me. I have a lot of issue with how Muslim countries treat people. As I have with many other countries around the world, including my own.
Islam like Christianity needs to update.
The Christians in your country have persecuted gays forever. Same in mine. Yes, slow movement forward. This tortured young man was fed his religious crap, the carry on in the U.S. about gays and marriage equality. Bullshit around people using toilets. Bigotry is all around.

Lord have mercy, bless your heart, Zoner, you are still joyously dancing on the dead. Your endurance is admirable if nothing else.
Ms Lava - #127 is the exception to my rule that, whenever we agree, one of us must be wrong. I knew there would be such an exception; it's just a shame that this horrifying event had to be it.
Why did it take the Orlando police 3 hours to decide to deal with that man in a decisive and definitive manner? At 2:02 am, the first 3 officers were at the scene when it started and acted as they knew to do: they immediately engaged the shooter and fought him. One hundred more officers arrived at the club in the ensuing minutes and then affirmative/aggressive police action stopped around 2:10-2:15 am, a mere 8-12 minutes later. Police say they had to wait three hours to “access the situation, get armored vehicles on the scene and make sure they had enough personnel”. Armoured vehicles? They needed a few good men and women to enter that building by all possible means and deal with that ass NOW.

Why did the Orlando PD dither? I suggest that the police followed old-school dogma about securing the area, getting negotiators there, planning the intervention to get it right… This was a mistake. Don’t talk; act. Easy to say in retrospect? Current practice in recent years is to get to the shooter and stop him, period. The Dawson College shootings in Montreal in 2006 was one of the first situations where the first police officers on the scene entered the building and ran to the sound of gunfire and quickly dealt with the shooter, as they were trained to do, clearly minimizing the terrible damage.

Over 3 hours, many of those who were not killed outright would have bled to death from their wounds, many of those could well have been saved had they received medical care ASAP. He did not kill all 50 people within only 10 minutes. He was actively hunting people room to room, when it should have been the police hunting for him.
theLine @146
He did not kill all 50 people within only 10 minutes. He was actively hunting people room to room, when it should have been the police hunting for him.

I understand something like that went down with the Batacan massacre in Paris as well. At first police assumed a hostage situation, but it was a slaughterhouse. Law enforcement needs to update its default response.
@LavaGirl & @Roma,
Good Discussion.

However, I am going to strongly disagree with LG's statement "Bigotry is all around." No, it isn't. America, Australia (I've visited there) and the Occident in general treat women & gays far better than the developing world in largely the Orient but especially the Islamic Orient. It's pretty irrefutable.

Having travelled extensively, I can easily see a wide difference between "here" & "there". I served in the Peace Corps in a Muslim area of a central African country and noticed the contrast instantly. There is rampant bigotry among tribe, against certain sexual orientation and women are especially maltreated. The difference is stark.

I do believe it would help as some commentators have said, if Islam had a Reformation. My understanding is in conventional, note not radical Islam homosexuality is apostasy and punishable by death. Women are subservient to men (it's only the husband that can divorce) and must in some societies wear burquas. I recall a Mexican woman I knew who mentioned that she dated a Saudi Arabian man once. She said that she had to walk behind him in public even in France where she was living at the time. Consider this, I do believe it was only recently in the past 5 years(?) that women were allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia! I am not sure that that is true but in any event, it was mad to ban women from driving anyway.

While I have no prejudice against that or any other religion I do believe Islam needs a cultural reckoning. It needs one to help itself and all of humanity.


I don't own a gun. I'm not a Republican. I think Trump is a dangerous fucking asshole.

But you haven't yet exhausted yourself repeating tired, lefty party-line theories.

The migration of guns to Chicago is a function of basic, prohibition-accelerated supply & demand economics. They are the same pressures that bring cocaine over the border. That you feel the need for someone to cite a specific peer-reviewed scientific study to accept that where prohibitions meet illicit demand, there is a market, says much about your intellectual poverty. You don't want to think differently. It may leave your in dangerous disagreement with your cafe culture pseudo-intellectual friends. So just keep repeating the same ol' same ol'.

Fuck, even Obama looks resigned when he gives the same old tired, droning finger-wag speech....

FYI – Kleck is a Florida State professor whose published work is peer-reviewed. The Left just looooooooves his work showing that capital punishment isn't a crime deterrent. (But apparently he's a mindless shill of the right when it comes to guns?) He won the Michael J. Hindelang Award from the American Society of Criminology in 1993. Just because you don't like him doesn't discredit him. (Ironic that you would bring climate science into the light, because that tactic of attacking people, not ideas, is another area where the left's Orwellian tendencies emerge.)

Yes, there are income and population density differences between Issaquah and the CD. But as I said, gun violence is function of culture. And often times a culture (unparented boys, gang tribalism, glorification of violence) that leads to gun violence, is also high correlated with poverty. There a plenty of people the world over who live in greater poverty, and higher density, with less opportunity – and abundant access to guns – who manage to not kill each other at astounding rates. The 14 million people in Istanbul come to mind. But you believe in solving problems at only a societal level – not the individual level. So good luck with that.

Move along now, desperate soul.
@148. lark2. Yes. Muslim countries treat their people, esp their women and gays
in archaic ways. I too read of many Muslims and others calling for change.
Still I believe bigotry is everywhere. The Victorian Premier( head MP in the state govt) has just offered an apology to gays who were imprisioned in the past. Who were treated as criminals. I've watched the attitudes in my country go from It Doesn't Exist to For Gods Sake Let Them Marry Already, in my conscious lifetime. Attitudes changing is what is needed.
Attitudes don't change by force. We can't force Muslim countries to change their attitudes.
We can screen immigrants who have extremist attitudes from entering our countries. Keep educating our children about democracy and freedom.
Trump and his vile finger pointing is obscene. Yes Muslims have joined what seems to have turned into some national sport for your country, but the majority of mass murderers were not Muslims.

Zoner. You keep stating the bleeding obvious. Of course things have to change on an individual level. As well.
Changed govt policies change individuals all the time and while we live in such obviously economically unfair
capitalist countries, individuals are gonna get angry and wanna hurt somebody. It just doesn't have to be with war machines, assault guns.
Americans don't want this on repeat carnage.
Hillary is talking sense re gun laws. So rise all you guys and support her and others to change these rules. All the double speak from the gun lobby, ignore it. Stop repeating it. Make some guns illegal and screen for licences. Believe it can be done, from the top down. Change the makeup of Congress.
And talk to each other. Not let every discussion turn into some nasty name calling exercise.

I still disagree with some of what you say but thank you for keeping it civil. Good on you & yours.
Lava - By the FBI's statistics, just 2% of murders happen with "assault weapons." Ever ask yourself why Hillary is so obsessed with something that has so little do with actual crime? It's not about the government protecting us from ourselves. It's about the government protecting itself.

The FBI spent days and assigned investigators to look into the Orlando shooter. In fact, twice. What additional level of background check are you proposing that would catch people?

Guns and ammunition are generally small, portable and fungible. The entire world is full of markets where regulated products meet illicit demand to create a black market. And in fact the problems don't diminish. They bloom. Prohibition. The War on Drugs. What magical regulatory laws are you proposing that simultaneously defy both economics and the base instincts of evil man? Will they be as effective at wiping out booze in the 20s, and weed in America's dorms?

Those inclined to mayhem don't want it to be over early. (In fact, the Orlando shooter tried to buy body armor.) So they attack where they can't be readily counter-attacked. Gun-free zones like Virginia Tech, SandyHook, the Aurora theater and Pulse nightclub. Beyond whether gun free zones are sensible, what assurance can you give that a less-capably armed citizenry won't be at greater risk to opportunistic criminals –– that frankly don't give a shit about your background check, registration plan and training course? (See Brazil as an example.)

The discussion about guns in America is one giant fucking lefty feel-good session that defies sense and reason.

To be brutally frank: If the government didn't do anything after a whole group of kindergartners were shot – they certainly aren't going to go out on a limb for a gay nightclub. So ask yourself – just why is it that the vast majority of killing happens with pistols, and ol' Hillary doesn't say anything about her Democratically controlled citizenry?

But just 2% of the murders happen with auto rifles and she thinks she's found the root of evil.

@149: "That you feel the need for someone to cite a specific peer-reviewed scientific study to accept that where prohibitions meet illicit demand, there is a market, says much about your intellectual poverty."
Excuse me, but "it makes sense to me" isn't evidence. We men and women of science don't blindly follow appeals to authority, much less argument from incredulity. If you want someone to believe your claim, you might try supporting it with some actual evidence instead of demanding that they take your word for it. You're attacking me for my empiricism? You're saying that it's pseudo-intellectual to demand evidence rather than taking someone's word for it? Unfuckingbelievable.
(I'd also like to see some evidence to support your implicit claim that there is significant illicit demand for ammunition in Switzerland.)

"Just because you don't like him doesn't discredit him."
I never claimed that his work isn't reliable. I merely made the point that his skepticism of the Missouri study (Webster et al. 2014) is not in and of itself evidence that the study was flawed. His political biases on the matter are well-documented; he'd be skeptical of ANY study showing a link between looser gun laws and more crime, regardless of its merits or flaws. His quote in the NYT piece is his opinion on the matter, nothing more. If he wants to do his own analysis of crime trends in Missouri and in similar situations, I'm happy to look over that with you. But until then, he's just another guy with an opinion, albeit an educated one.

"Ironic that you would bring climate science into the light, because that tactic of attacking people, not ideas, is another area where the left's Orwellian tendencies emerge."
Yeah, it's extremely Orwellian for a powerful legislator to use his office to harass researchers who have produced politically inconvenient results. Or for a massive smear campaign against such researchers launched by shadowy special interest groups to be written into the platform of a major political party. Of course, those are things that the RIGHT has done.
Meanwhile, you're whining that climate change "skeptics" (read: deniers) are being attacked for failing to disclose the sometimes MILLIONS OF DOLLARS they received from the energy industry, or that their reputation has been damaged by their publishing of methodologically flawed and ideologically slanted papers.

"There a plenty of people the world over who live in greater poverty, and higher density, with less opportunity – and abundant access to guns – who manage to not kill each other at astounding rates. The 14 million people in Istanbul come to mind."
This may come as a shock to you, but the number of guns per capita in Turkey is about 1/8th that of America, and their household gun ownership is about 1/3rd of ours. I'd have shown you figures regarding Istanbul specifically, but I couldn't seem to track any down, at least not in English. (Sources: 1, 2, 3)
Your argument here seems to be to cherry-pick a handful of cities or countries that are similar in one or two respects, gloss over all the other differences, and attribute the entire disparity in violence to the effects of culture. In the above example you note that Istanbul has similar poverty rates to some American cities but much less gun violence, and you claim that is proof of your hypothesis, completely ignoring their much lower gun ownership.

One of many things that separates science from pseudoscience is proper experimental design. I encourage you to learn a little about it.
@153: "Those inclined to mayhem don't want it to be over early. (In fact, the Orlando shooter tried to buy body armor.) So they attack where they can't be readily counter-attacked. Gun-free zones like Virginia Tech, SandyHook, the Aurora theater and Pulse nightclub."
Such mass shooters typically choose their targets based on personal criteria and the concentration of potential victims, not based on any gun-free characteristics. Note also that Pulse DID have an armed security guard who exchanged fire with the shooter without being able to stop him.

"what assurance can you give that a less-capably armed citizenry won't be at greater risk to opportunistic criminals"
How would requiring universal background checks and banning assault weapons result in citizens being less-capably armed? That's another question you've steadfastly refused to answer.
excuse me, @152
148/lark, thanks. I've always liked your posts. They're thoughtful and you can disagree with the opinions of others without bashing or belittling them.

However, I am going to strongly disagree with LG's statement "Bigotry is all around." No, it isn't.

If I may, I believe what you mean is that bigotry is all around but it's not evenly distributed all around. There's plenty of people in Western countries who dislike gays & lesbians but I think that antipathy is far more intense in Muslim countries, particularly Arab-Muslim countries.

In the present day, I believe that Islam has a rabidly intolerant and violent streak that does not exist (or is very small) in Christianity and other religions. For example, in a column about two years ago in the NYTimes entitled "The Diversity of Islam", Nicholas Kristof wrote: "Yes, almost four out of five Afghans favor the death penalty for apostasy, but most Muslims say that that is nuts. In Indonesia, the most populous Muslim country in the world, only 16 percent of Muslims favor such a penalty."

So in Indonesia, typically cited as a "moderate" Muslim country, 16 percent of Muslims think a Muslim should be killed for rejecting Islam. Yes, 84 percent of Indonesian Muslims don't feel that way but, to me, if even 5 percent thought a Muslim should be killed for leaving Islam, that's indicative of a sickness, a profound one. And it's even worse in Jordan and Egypt (and Afghanistan, as noted above). Kristof writes: "In Afghanistan,Jordan and Egypt, more than three-quarters of Muslims favor the death penalty for Muslims who renounce their faith, according to a Pew survey."

Kristof himself, although he's defending Islam in the column, notes "Second, today the Islamic world includes a strain that truly is disproportionately intolerant and oppressive. . . . Moreover, of the 10 bottom-ranking countries in the World Economic Forum’s report on women’s rights, nine are majority Muslim." Kristof calls it a "strain"; I call it a "streak"...same thing. Kristof even calls it a "significant" strain (and I wouldn't disagree): "Sure, denounce the brutality, sexism and intolerance that animate the Islamic State and constitute a significant strain within Islam.
148/lark: I do believe it would help as some commentators have said, if Islam had a Reformation.

Here's an interesting piece in The Guardian: Why Islam doesn’t need a reformation

With his "doesn't need", the author -- Mehdi Hasan, a presenter on Al-Jazeera English -- is talking more about a "Reformation" as in the type sparked by Martin Luther.

Buried in the middle of the piece is a parargraph on how a "reformation" is (or, if you wish, reforms are) necessary: "Don’t get me wrong. Reforms are of course needed across the crisis-ridden Muslim-majority world: political, socio-economic and, yes, religious too. Muslims need to rediscover their own heritage of pluralism, tolerance and mutual respect – embodied in, say, the Prophet’s letter to the monks of St Catherine’s monastery, or the “convivencia” (or co-existence) of medieval Muslim Spain.

I don't believe I'll see any of the reforms he mentions happen in my lifetime. And one of the reasons for my cynicism is in Kristof's column: "A lawyer friend of mine in Pakistan, Rashid Rehman, was a great champion of human rights and religious tolerance — and was assassinated this year by fundamentalists who stormed his office."
Much obliged.

Yes, I've read much of Kristof. I read "Half the Sky" written by him & his wife Sheryl. Even gave the book as a gift to my sister. His columns are by & large, level headed. He travels extenstively and that helps. And, while sometimes I strongly disagree with him, I do believe I could have a cup of coffee with himand discuss anything.

I genuinely never had a problem with Islam while living in an area that was essentially Muslim. I'll never forget the muezzin waking me up daily. Man, was it loud. I recalled the Five Pillars of Islam, belief in one God, Allah, almsgiving, praying 5 times a day towards Mecca, fasting for the Ramadam (11th month) and finally, if possible rendering a visit to Mecca (Haj). My Mom even mailed me a copy of the Koran.

So, yeah I was famliar with it. But after the Rushdie Affair, the bombings in Nairobi, Dar Es Salam, 9/11, Beslan, Madrid, London & Bali among others I began to see a pattern. Islam needs a rework.

I don't favor a "30 Years War". NO! But Islam needs refining. And it can only come from within.
@153, @154, @155

Check in again when the Occupy Democrats newsfeed isn't your cognitive crutch.

@159: In other words, you don't have any counterarguments to make, so you're going to accuse me of reading a website you don't like. (Protip: I don't actually read Occupy Democrats. As in, ever.)
Yeah, that's about the level of debate I'd expect from a guy who thinks that demanding supporting evidence (as opposed to "because I said so") makes one a pseudo-intellectual.
@160 He swings wildly between hurling insults and making up or cherry picking statistics. So Safe to say set Phasers to Total Ignore from here on out. I'll add him to my filtering script and that will be that.
@160 In fact, there is no level of debate you'll 'accept' (not expect) that isn't a cheery reaffirmation of every dullard's "world-would-be-better-if-only" post on Mother Jones.

To insulate yourself from disruptive ideas, you simply reject non-monotonic logic, slowing the world right down. (Which is irony for a "progressive.")

Heuristics, inference, deduction? Nope, none of those work. Fuck that!

If it's not empiricism, you don't wanna know. (Covers ears. Closes eyes. Shakes head. "Bill loves Hillary. Bill loves Hillary")

"You have to give me the verified address of a black market recreational ammo dealer in Zurich before I'll accept there's mischief in the mountains." Like a liberal flat earth society.

Maybe your Midwest friends are impressed with your smarty-smarts.

Not here.
@162: You are literally demanding that I take your word for it that there is a black market for ammunition. Your argument, paraphrased, is as follows:
1. There is strict restriction of ammunition in Switzerland.
2. There is high demand for ammunition in Switzerland.
3. If there is restriction and high demand, the laws of economics dictate that there MUST be a thriving black market.
The problem with your argument is that you've detached it entirely from reality, from any evidence-based standard. Rather than search the literature for studies of ammunition black markets and trafficking, you've decided that it MUST BE SO based on your opinions alone.
Line 1 is uncontroversial; we agree that this is the case, and the laws of Switzerland back it up. Line 2 is entirely unsupported; you have offered no evidence that this is the case, but insist that it must be true. Line 3 is simplistic, to put it kindly. The particular economic model it espouses reduces a highly complex system to an Econ 101 blackboard example. It MAY hold true, but there is a great deal it ignores, such as restrictions on supply due to regulatory oversight of manufacturers and the difficulty of home manufacture, and the deterrent effect of strict gun laws on possession of illegal ammunition.

You're dropping buzzwords now in an attempt to distract from how unsupported your claims are. Heuristics are nothing more than methods of practical problem-solving, and are entirely unrelated to your arguments here. Inference is the interpolative "filling in" of missing information based on what is present, while deduction is the logical derivation of specific facts based on universal principles; both are powerful tools, but they can only build on information already known.

"If it's not empiricism, you don't wanna know."
Well, yeah. That's the basis of science right there: truth comes from observation and experimentation, not from people going "well, it makes sense in my head so it must be true". That's not to say there's no room for reasoning and conjecture, but they are DEPENDENT on the support of the evidence!

I'm not asking for some specific 10-year study of a certain illicit ammunition dealer. I'm just asking for SOME evidence, ANY evidence, to support your claim. After all, if Switzerland (a modernized and prosperous nation with a strong national and political interest in enforcing its gun laws) really had such a problem as you claim it does, wouldn't there be some documentation of it? Wouldn't there be some study, or at least a study proposal, to assess the problem? Wouldn't there be some news reporting related to ammunition trafficking?

I actually attempted to do your homework for you, and it turns out that Switzerland has some of the best practices at preventing the illicit sale of ammunition. They require that individual rounds and their packaging be marked with manufacturer and production lot information, which not only enables the tracing of bullets recovered from criminals but also the recall of ammunition in the event of a defective lot. (Source) Despite spending a good half hour poring through Google Scholar and various documents produced, I was unable to find ANY evidence to support your claim. Think you can do better? Prove me wrong.

What makes you think the illegal guns and ammunition bought/sold in Switzerland would stay in Switzerland? Or that the Swiss wouldn't import illegal guns & ammo, away from the reaches of bureaucracy. That comment about marking the ammunition to track it in a crime is spectacularly naive. Do you still read Hardy Boys books to appreciate the criminal mind?

FYI – below, a very short summary of the illicit trade and loose regulation in Switzerland. This took 2 minutes. (It's only hard to find if you really prefer not to know.)

Basel cop convicted for selling machine guns…
A former Basel police detective received a ten-month suspended jail sentence on Monday for using his position to acquire and re-sell illegal machine guns, firearms, hand grenades and other accessories.

About 116,000 Guns Registered, 20,000 Untraceable in Geneva
Following a recent shooting in Switzerland, Bernard Bersier, Chief of the Firearms Service, analyses the situation in Geneva. Last year, 115,684 firearms were registered in Geneva, one firearm per four inhabitants. Behind this official number hides a GREY MARKET that constitutes the real danger.

“The mobsters have the weapons, and they’re making a killing selling them off to Islamic radicals.”
…The Neapolitan cops were also aware of an international arrest warrant for him in SWITZERLAND, where he was wanted in connection with a variety of offenses, including forgery, assault, AND POSSESSION OF ILLEGAL WEAPONS.”

Swiss couple hoard cache of illegal weapons
Couple busted for a major pot plant growing operation in Biberist, a town in the canton of Solothurn, also harboured a large cache of weapons. Subsequent investigations have showed that many of the weapons were not registered.

In Switzerland, 240,000 guns are lost.
The problem is that a number is not reported. From 1999 to 2008, a legislative change allowed the sale of weapons to individuals to individuals.
The Ministry of Defence estimated "240,000" the number of weapons that were lost.

Swiss confiscate more weapons
…said David Marquis, spokesman for the Federal Customs Administration (FCA), firearms accounted for 76 seizures in 2015.

@164: Are you illiterate? We're talking about your (still unsupported!) claim from back in post #45 that there is a thriving black market in Switzerland FOR AMMUNITION. You're saying that in Switzerland, where they enforce their gun regulations, people occasionally get busted for possession of illegal/unregistered weapons? NO SHIT.
You still have no evidence to support your earlier claim. Nice try at changing the subject.

And this is a side note really, but the plural of "anecdote" is not "data". A few cherry-picked events aren't typically enough to prove a trend.
I could, for example, pull up a few stories about gun murders in the UK. But the UK has incredibly low rates of gun murder, and accounts of a few rare events don't change that, however gruesome and scary they may be! Of course, the issue of potential cherry-picking can wait until you've got SOME sort of evidence in support of the whole ammunition thing.
@165... Again your abject denial of probablistic reasoning....

Are you so desperate to hold-on to the weakest possible thread of arguments: That the so-many- cited people (above) would be totally cool with stealing, smuggling, re-selling and trafficking in an illegal black market for firearms (with tens of thousands of weapons trading hands), but when it comes to cheap, buy-as-much-as-you'd-like ammo... well then.... THEN... they'd really prefer to do things by the book, thank you very much.

Well, one word to you then:


What a fucking tool.

I suggest that all indicators of a black market for weapons exist. And nobody would seriously doubt it. You say you need empirical evidence. (I thought Missouri was the "Show-Me" state, not you backwards metropolitan wannabes from Chiraq.) You say you look for some evidence tapping the brain on Google. I find 10 stories in 2 minutes.

You say "But those are about guns. What about bullets?"

Are you fucking kidding?

Waddle back to your deep dish moron.
@166: So...what you're saying here is that you DON'T have any evidence that "blackmarket ammunition is readily available to criminals"? Because that's what you're saying here.

The problem with your argument from probability is that you're not actually quantifying any of it. You're not measuring any probabilities, you're not going to the literature and deriving any models from similar situations. You're literally just saying that it seems likely to you!

That is not "probablistic [sic] reasoning". That is an opinion.

To the point, though, you didn't actually provide evidence that guns are readily available either. All your links show is that SOME people have managed to get their hands on illegal weapons, and that a lot of (perfectly legal) guns aren't in the registry because the law allowed unregistered sales for a few years. (You also posted a link talking about how Swiss customs have been confiscating a lot of contraband at the border lately. Not quite sure what you thought that was going to prove.)

So, your argument is that because a few dangerous criminals and the occasional corrupt cop have dealt in illegal firearms, that illicit contraband ammunition is "readily available" in Switzerland. That's like claiming that illegal caimans are readily available on the black market in America, just because this fine gentleman got caught with a crocodile he wasn't allowed to have.
Never mind the evidence (see Pézard and Anders above) that the Swiss actually keep pretty good tabs on ammunition, of course; because YOU figure shady ammunition is probably easy to get, that's how it must be!

A few further notes:
You suggest that unmarked ammunition is being brought in from other countries and that the Swiss are powerless to stop this from happening, and then you link to a story about how they're confiscating a lot of contraband at the borders. You ARE aware, of course, that even though manufacturers in other countries are "away from the reaches of bureaucracy", borders give countries some control over what passes in and out, right? Do you understand the contradiction inherent in pointing out how strict Swiss customs are about guns while simultaneously claiming that they can't stop the flow of guns and ammo across their borders?
What exactly is the basis for your claim that marking ammunition doesn't make it traceable? No, I don't expect you to come up with any evidence.
There's a difference between going through scientific publications using Google Scholar and just finding whatever story any yahoo wants to write using Google. Google Scholar allows people to find DATA rather than ANECDOTES.
a ha ha ha ha....

ma' boy "second shitty' up above here, still tryna hold on...

@168: In other words, you've STILL got nothing.
I'm invoking Danth's Law here.
@169 may I suggest you install Greasemonkey on your browser and you'll never have to read another one of his comments again. It's delightful. Let him scream alone into the wilderness. Which I assume he's still doing but I can't see. Thank goodness.


Magical Switzerland.

Scores arrested for illegal arms possession and trading; 240,000 unregistered weapons 'missing' according to government; illegal cocaine, ex, heroin traded in city streets and clubs; former official arrested for selling hand-grenades – and Second Shitty believe you can't easily score a box ammunition on the black market.

Bullets are the only thing that escape illicit commerce because of magical bullet regulations.

Second Shitty, you slay...

Waddle back to that vertical midwest suburb you call a city. They've probably got time for you.

Not here.
Venomlash good job tying Zoner up in this thread for the week.
@171: You WOULD have a point if you'd actually demonstrated that Switzerland has a gun-trafficking problem. Unfortunately for you, you haven't. You've provided examples of FOUR people getting arrested for successful gun trafficking or similar, over the course of five years; in a nation of 8 million, the chance of getting struck by lightning is literally ten times greater.
I am not claiming that they are the ONLY ones who have trafficked in weapons. I am simply pointing out that you have not demonstrated, not even HINTED in fact, at any sort of large-scale gun trafficking in contravention of Swiss law.

And hey, if firearm and ammunition smuggling were really such a problem in Switzerland, wouldn't there be SOME kind of report on it somewhere? Every report on such smuggling that I've looked at makes Switzerland a footnote; they make a lot of ammunition, sure, but smuggling is such a small problem there it's hardly worth investigating.
You are literally telling me to take your word for it that crime is rampant in Switzerland despite all evidence to the contrary. I'm not sure whether it's more amusing or pathetic how you continue to insist your opinions are right even in the face of all the facts.

@170: He posted a few news articles about a few people getting v& for illegal guns in Switzerland, told me that proved that illicit ammunition sales are rife there, and proceeded to talk shit about Chicago and call me fat. He's throwing quite the tantrum, and it's a shame you can't see it. Quite the spectacle.
Zero mention of how gun violence is at an all-time low, statistically, and how suicide is at a historical high in the US. People are taking and mixing and abusing more anti-depressants and anti-anxiety prescriptions than ever before in history. And then the media blames it on gun laws. Sounds like someone is protecting Big Pharma's best interests.