Thursday, September 16, 2010

2 More Dead in Newark

nj.com reports on the latest killings in Newark. I guess someone forgot to tell Newark that in spite of all the gun sales last year, shootings are supposed to be down.

The shootings come after the bloodiest summer in Newark since 1990, with 35 people killed between June 1 and Aug. 31.

The pro-gun voices cannot restrain themselves whenever the incident takes place in NJ or CA or NY. They love to point out that the gun control laws are not working. Well, of course they're not working since other states just a few hours away have lax gun laws and all the availability you can shake a stick at.

What's your opinion? Is the problem in Newark the fact that gun control laws don't work? Or is the problem that gun availability is extremely high all over?

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

10 comments:

  1. "What's your opinion? Is the problem in Newark the fact that gun control laws don't work? Or is the problem that gun availability is extremely high all over?"

    Yes, gun control does not work. Yes, gun availability is extremely high all over so gun control will never work.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yes, it's proof that gun control doesn't work. No one can carry in NJ, so obviously such shootings could never occur.

    Well, of course they're not working since other states just a few hours away have lax gun laws and all the availability you can shake a stick at.

    As usual you are dishonest. You act as if some guy from NJ can just drive over to DE, walk into any gun shop and have a gun in a few minutes. He cannot do so legally.

    ReplyDelete
  3. MikeB: “Well, of course they're not working since other states just a few hours away have lax gun laws and all the availability you can shake a stick at.”

    So why have them if they don’t work?

    ReplyDelete
  4. "Well, of course they're not working since other states just a few hours away have lax gun laws and all the availability you can shake a stick at."

    Which is just more proof that gun control is not working as it is already illegal to purchase a handgun in a state you are not resident of.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The iron pipeline up I-95 is like the mighty Mississippi which, along with a 1,000 little tributaries, supplies the "tough gun-law" states with weapons procured in the easier places.

    It's not rocket science, guys. Tough laws in NJ work only up to a point. Beyond that the blood keeps flowing due to the easy importation of guns.

    ReplyDelete
  6. So, why aren't the places that have all the guns that are making their way to 'Jersey awash in shootings and crime, too?

    I mean, really, shouldn't GA and MO and MT and pretty much every place in the US have MUCH worse crime than NJ, if guns and gun laws are problem? Shouldn't places with gun bans and stringent gun laws be the "oases in the deserts," so to speak?

    ReplyDelete
  7. No answer, or did this just get forgotten?

    ReplyDelete
  8. But, that doesn't answer it. You've provided ONE location in ONE year where guns are less restricted that ends up with a higher rate of homicides per 100K population.

    What about all the times when DC and Chicago and LA held the top honors, and pushed IL and CA to the top of that list?

    As I pointed out the last time this discussion came around,

    http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/2010/09/murder-rates.html

    Hawaii and Vermont have nearly similar rates of homicide per 100K population, yet they are on opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to firearms and firearms law.

    In the top five states for homicides, three and "anti-gun" and two are "pro-gun."

    If your theory held water, all the top five unsafe places should be "pro-gun" and all the safe places should be "anti-gun."

    Your theory is full of holes.

    Again, shouldn't GA and MO and MT and pretty much every place in the US have MUCH worse crime than NJ, if guns and gun laws are problem?

    There must be something else at work here.

    ReplyDelete
  9. You're right, there are a lot of things at work here.

    ReplyDelete