Mexico Gun Control

You can have all the gun control laws in the world, but if you don't teach people self control and if people don't choose to have self control, those gun control laws are absolute hogwash.

Derpybunneh, I would say you are right and people that disagree with you are wrong...

I'm not saying self control and some damn perspective on yourself, others and the world are irrelevant, but surely you can't deny this. If there was a superpower to telepathically make someone's head explode, self control could prevent the one who possesses it from killing anyone in most day-to-day situations. But you still wouldn't let just about anyone have it, would you?

True. I'm not saying we should just hand everyone guns, especially those who could use them for evil designs. But my point was, if people had more self control, gun control laws would not be so much of an issue. We still need a limit and some control.

Also lack of respect for human life in general. (Upvoted you)

But the guns are banned in England, you Dumbf**k

Yes they are. What part of isnt allowed didn't you understand? I'm sorry I didn't use banned so you understand my post but I thought I did fairly good job of getting my point out. I'm sorry you're not as intelligent as most on Imgflip hence the verbal insult but that's expected from class. I made a meme for you and its words are small so even you Jake can understand it. With all due respect Discolu. ; )

Firearm-related death rate per 100,000 population per year:
United States 10.54
Mexico 7.64

Nope. Oh, wait, you're including suicides.
Mexico's murder rate is about 5 times that of the USA.
Source: https://mises.org/blog/mistake-only-comparing-us-murder-rates-developed-countries

Meme states gun violence, which includes suicide.

Gun violence has decreased dramatically in the US.

1st graph shows steady rate since 2000. 2nd graph is only police and accidental shootings, etc (not suicides or even homicides).

Only you would interpret it that way.

With the information given from the graph...

Only if you assume that No More Guns = No More Suicides. South Korea and Japan have virtually ZERO guns but their suicide rates are more than twice the USA's.

When someone wants to kill themselves, not having a gun isn't going to stop them. Remember hydrogen sulfide being used in suicides in Japan?

Another common way is to swallow watch batteries. Let's ban watch batteries ...

If you get rid of Los Angeles, Chicago and Detroit, the United States would be near the top of the list in fewest murders per 100,000 population in the world.

And maybe you can guess what these three cities have in common.

I doubt those 3 places will magically disappear from existence, but a conservative can certainly dream

Not the point. Some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country...yet homicides some of the highest in the country. Go figure.

Could it possibly be that those restrictions are a result of gun violence.. Go figure.. Most guns used in Chicago crimes were bought outside of the city or state. They have also relaxed their gun restrictions since 2010 and gun violence has spiked again.

That's one of those foolish arguments. "They get most of their guns from outside the state where gun laws are lenient." That trumped up liberal propaganda. Most of these black market guns come from Mexico. And most of these crimes committed (gang shootings and such) are not committed from stolen guns.

You are dreaming again if you are trying to quote me. Half of the guns seized are originally purchased in other parts of Illinois and the other half are from out of state, like Indiana or Mississippi.

Lol! Not so much.

[image deleted]

Yes. Especially when the police and government are as bad as the criminals. Mexico is ridiculously corupt. Who really knows the figures.

Mexico has a Human Development Index of 0.75 which takes it out of "third world" status. The real issue is whether we can trust their reported gun violence numbers.

All the former Soviet satellite states are second world. Ukraine, Belarus, The Baltic States, Bulgaria, Hungary. The First World is Western Industrialized Capitalist countries; Second World is Soviet socialist states; the Third World consisted of the Non-Aligned Movement - neither allied with the USA or USSR. The non-aligned states descended into poverty as a result. Now third world means poverty. Source: "The End of Poverty" By Jeffrey Sachs

And Canada would be fourth world.

How do you guys not get this concept?

OP fast and furious anyone?

That is not entirely true, other countries also supply Mexico arms in an effort to destabilize the US, although I would wager a guess a larger amount are purchased here. This is hard to prove or disprove however, as foreign imports through the black market aren't usually tabulated. Also one can argue that this administration has done it's share to arm the cartels. Since you are in AZ, I'm sure you know the name Brian Terry.

It is overwhelmingly true. The vast majority of "Mexican guns" come from, specifically, Arizona and Texas where there are some of the loosest gun laws in the country.

No, this is not entirely true. It's a smoke screen...this "logic" of yours. I'll forgive you, though, since you're obviously taking this "logic" from the liberal, anti-2nd amendment handbook. The overwhelming majority of these guns are not legal guns.

Nobody said they were legally purchased. They are usually obtained illegally. Still overwhelmingly American guns.

By your logic, if strict border controls were put in place, Americans could feel secure, keep our rights, and Mexico would have less crime.

Yes, from progressive idiots like Hillary Clinton. Aaaand she's anti-2nd amendment. Fast and Furious anyone?

I would love for once to hear a gun right advocate to simply state their right to own a gun is more important than a little girl's right to not get shot. Pick one. Here and now, 2nd ammendment or little girl.

What kind of sense does that even make? Our 2nd amendment right is very important, but has nothing to do with little girls being shot. Come back when you have a legitimate argument.

Perfectly straightforward but I will rephrase.. either you can have choice A: keep the 2nd ammendment or choice B: one little girl's life. Which do you pick? A or B.

Yeah, that isn't going to happen. You aren't really asking anything logical. Your question is a distraction scenario meant to distract from legitimate issues.

You won't say it and that was my whole point. I hope someday we all come to realize that the 2nd ammendment COSTS LIVES. Good luck, go Spurs.

The 2nd amendment was put in place so we could protect ourselves from intruders both foreign and domestic. It was put in place so we could protect ourselves should our government turn against its people. It was not created so rednecks could have the freedom to hunt hogs. The 2nd amendment protects us and our rights and allows us to enjoy the freedoms we have as Americans that no other country has.

I'm sorry you can't see that. It's a shame you believe it kills little girls. I mean, that doesn't even make any sense.

It's original intent 200 years ago was A WELL REGULATED MILITIA - which we dont have anymore. It has since devolved into rednecks with hogs and terrorist.

I know what its original intent was.

[image deleted]so its either you agree that cars should be banned or you are in favor of running over little girls

You need insurance on a car, and you should also need insurance for a gun. Also, cars don't come fully automatic and aren't built for the sole purpose of destroying things. So I pick cars.. see how easy that was?! At least I have the conviction to stand up and say what I think is right and what isnt. More than I can say for for these Rambo wannabes.

No legal gun is fully automatic. Strawman.

[image deleted]I'm pretty sure you are not. if you are we should be talking about car control.

please understand i'm not unsympathetic but your passion has overcome your argument. a mean person would take you to task for picking a car over life and it can be done very easy. i'm not that person. you seem like a nice person but on this issue (guns not cars) we will not agree. that is fine. my point was about how your argument was presented.

i have had friends murdered and some committed suicide. i would be in a fool's paradise to think it wouldn't have happened if guns were outlawed.

on a side note.. you still drive a stick shift car? i thought most people drove automatics now lol

LMAO!!! The meme is super funny, thanks! :-)
I take no offense, everybody. I am (obviously) in favor of stricter gun control laws, I honestly mean no offense to anyone...I truely only intend to persuade. That isn't going to happen here. And I actually do enjoy driving stick shift!

FULLY AUTOMATIC weapons are already illegal!!!!
Guns are used for self defense. For instance, let's pretend I have an abusive ex boyfriend who is stalking me and who has already violated restraining orders. I know if he attacks me (with or without a gun) that he can overpower me. I might choose to carry a gun for protection.
The problem with assault weapon bans, is that there is no objective definition of what constitutes an assault weapon.
I, personally, am in favor of mandatory safety classes for gun owners. I personally do not own a gun or have one in my house. I feel that is the best choice for my family (I.e. my personal circumstances are such that I feel the risks outweigh the benefits of gun ownership), but I have no right, NONE, to decide what is right for others

You can keep your right to take a bath or you can keep infants from drowning in tubs. Pick one. Bathtubs cost lives.
Seriously, that is exactly the same argument as you are making.

Second amendment. More little girls die where there is no Second amendment, like in Mexico.