Considering that they do… No, your badly sourced article is mistaken.
But enjoy your guns. I’m sure it’s worth it.
I am not sure why the date is showing 2017. The article is current and discusses the recent shootings.
No sure the source is transparent. The video did not give enough data to verify the claims. One has to know if they included those who were shot and lived or died.
This is for US 2009: https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/charts-and-maps
https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting - list this year alone with mass shootings.
Quite startling this website
I never assumed the US led the world in mass shootings. There are countries that suffer from civil war, tribal conflicts, constant terrorism…
But by first world standards?
Enjoy your car then! They kill 103 infants, toddlers, teens and adults every day of the year in the US.
No reporting on that. No outrage. No call for ‘car control’ or restrictions on travel by car.
Licensed to kill?
I did not know that this was a widely-made claim. Is it not enough that the US has a great many mass shootings?
Ummm…does the US have no driver licences, speed limits, road rules, car registration?
Of course! But that does not stop 103 deaths every single day.
It amazes me how the liberals react to shootings, and in the next breath (as Bill de Blasio said this week), abortion is a sacred right.
People kill people The LA Times did a survey of mass killers and did some interesting research; and mental illness is marked in each of the individuals who have decided to go out and kill classmates or strangers.
The number one problem in the matter of mass shootings is not the gun, it is the beyond abysmal status of our mental health care - or nearly complete lack of it.
You rarely hear of family shootings on a national basis, and if it even gets into the news slot, it is a minimal mention. And yet we have these repeat copycat incidences, fueled in part by the mentally unstable fascination of the shooter.
It is popular to get on the bandwagon, and sounds good to those who know nearly nothing of the issues, that we are going to “tighten down” on background checks. But unless we find a means of dealing with mental instability so that it gets into a background check, it is a worthless waste of perfectly good air to talk about.
And it does no good to scream and holler about background checks if the gun is taken from someone else who owns it legally and is not mentally unstable - check out the Kip Kinkle shootings as a prime example.
The claims in that article are simply risible.
Hotbeds of violent crime in Latin America or Africa are irrelevant. With the level of development and rule of law that the USA is able to exercise, the gun violence rate is totally unacceptable. No other developed nation on Earth is like the USA in gun violence.The claim is factually correct and will continue to be repeated because it’s true.
The analogy fails on every level. Automobile transportation is fundamental to commerce and everyday life. Guns are 98% meaningless outside of wild game and you only need certain guns for that.
A car is not designed to kill with intent. An accident is a far cry from looking at a side walk full of people and asking yourself how many you can roll over till one gets jammed in you axel.
Not saying that doesn’t happen but given the stats of trying to kill verses a mistake are two totally different stats.
We also punish and control bad drivers. We revoke license, we have a strict training period. You can’t just jump inside a car because you came of age unsupervised and that’s that. You need training, insurance and take a test.
Nice try though.
What all of you anti gun people fail to realize is most gun violence is committed by people who should not have guns to begin with.
In my city, this year, we have had many shootings that have resulted in 17 homicides so far. In every single case the gun was obtained illegally.
Criminals do not follow laws. Restricting access to guns only hurts the people who obey laws.
This argument is often made by those who are opposed to stricter and more vigilant gun regulation. The essential distinction here is that cars are not vehicles designed to kill, whereas guns, by their very nature, are designed to injure, maim, and kill. Now sometimes the intentional harm is for the purpose of self-defense, other times for the purpose of hunting, but still the intention is to injure or kill. Cars, on the other hand, are designed for the purpose of travel. Knives might have been a better example, but even here, killing is not the essential purpose of knives. Besides, the way guns are designed today, the killing is much more rapid and widespread compared to knives. Explosive devices would best fit your argument, but surely not cars.
Readers note: This is a classic example of deflection.
What are you talking about?
Controls on cars:
- Drivers license test
- Current drivers license
- Car registration
- Speed limit
- Traffic police patrol
- Parking violations
- On and on and on
Guns don’t have the restrictions that cars do… it would probably help if they did
I’m not anti-gun. I like guns. I like going out to the shooting range. I think guns are fine and I have no difficulty with gun fanciers.
What I’m against is the notion that gun ownership should be a right with no limits or restrictions.
You said in your first line that “most gun violence is committed by people who should not have guns to begin with.” You are absolutely right. The thing is, the fat that they shouldn’t have a gun doesn’t necessarily mean that they can’t legally purchase or obtain a gun.
Don’t believe me? Here’s a quick media report breaking down some of the incidences of mass shootings and showing how the shooters were able to LEGALLY obtain their weapons: https://nationalpost.com/news/world/mass-shooters-use-loopholes-lapses-in-checks-to-get-guns
At the end of the day, if you want to choose to believe that this situation can’t be helped through regulation, nothing any of us says is going to change your mind. And that’s the biggest problem with this debate. People are too entrenched in their position, no matter how divorced that position might be from reality.
The blog writer seems quite satisfied with the claim made in the title. I am not. Even if it is true, I do not find it reassuring at all. The people of the United States are rightly concerned about mass shootings.
This also applies to conservatives in reverse.