#MandatoryCarry or #RepealTheSecondAmendment

Let's start with link #1. All you offered was a map. No context. Are these mass murders, family fights (domestic violence), drug deals, break in... Justifiable? Without anything at least vaguely resembling context, it"s less than worthless. For all I know, all "19.3 deaths per 100,000" in Louisiana (the "worst" state) were justifiable, or worse excusable (although I think only Utah still has a firing squad). Next; The headline reads: :Gun control report: 15 percent of mass shootings happened in "gun-free zones." Mass shootings number have been pumped with many cases that are NOT actually mass shootings; The definition of mass shooting is "shooting to shoot." Drug related or other profit-motivated crimes are NOT part of the true definition of mass shootings. Not that it "really" matters, though; 15% means the largest percentage happens- In gun free zones. That only include "de jure" gun free zones (schools, for example). De facto gun free zones, in other words, areas where state laws and local ordinances make the ability to carry too difficult for the average person to achieve (and I admit, San Francisco is my whipping boy here) add to this percentage; Though the banner carried the Aurora theater (or, at least, a photo meant to invoke the Aurora theater), the "15%" calculus doesn"t actually include that location- Since guns are banned by property ownership, not by law. In fact, that"s why Batman Shooter targeted that location- Bypassing two other theaters, showing the same film, since this one had the "no guns allowed" sign. Gun "Free" Zones also get, consistently, the highest body counts. Just saying. I would have dismissed #3 out of hand (it"s GVA), but for the side bar- It"s basically re-hashing the utterly discredited "355 this year" line. It does give raw numbers- But again, no context. The last link was to a Bureau of Justice Statistics study. Ok, I can get with this. Highlights: "Although most crime is not committed with guns," Why, thank you... "most gun crime is committed with handguns." And again... "Although most available guns are not used in crime," And again... "information about the 223 million guns available to the general public provides a context for evaluating criminal preferences for guns." Finally, "a" point. If most people drive blue cars, more blue cars will be in traffic accidents than red cars. (Here"s a hint, that"s WHY school buses are painted that God-awful yellow.) Let's break it down. "Although most crime is not committed with guns, most gun crime is committed with handguns." Ya. So are most DGU's. It"s part of the reason cops only jump out of their cruisers with the shotgun if they're going to a "shots fired/active shooter" call. If they aren't they usually don't. "Although most available guns are not used in crime, information about the 223 million guns available to the general public provides a context for evaluating criminal preferences for guns." The context is pretty clear; Everyone prefers handguns, and with a pretty good reason. As a "general" rule, only soldiers in war zones and hunter prefer long arms of any sort. Long arms are bulky, they can't be laid a comfortable way, and they weigh more. And, not to beat the horse any deader than it already is, if you "need" a long arm for self-defense outside you home, you're in a neighborhood that's too violent to survive. For anyone. "By definition, stolen guns are available to criminals." Ya... They were stolen. By a criminal. (See, for all the beatings the FBI takes, they're really not stupid- I know a few, one even said "what the regulations call a localized explosive incident and the rest of us call a pipe bomb," then went on to say "pipe bomb" the rest of the presentation because he wasn't an idiot or robot or whatever.) "The FBI's National Crime Information Center (NCIC) stolen gun file contains over 2 million reports; 60% are reports of stolen handguns." So guns get stolen more than most other items. I find this number to be dubious, "unless it addresses stolen weapons only." Then it makes perfect sense. (Well, not "perfect," if you don"t add stolen knives, etc., THEN it makes perfect sense.) "In 1994, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) received over 85,132 requests from law enforcement agencies for traces of guns used in crime. Over three quarters of the guns traced by the ATF in 1994 were handguns (mostly pistols), and almost a third were less than 3 years old." Ok. so 85K+ guns were recovered. Of 320m+- guns in the US. So, 1 in 3,765 of the accounted for guns were used in crimes. AND? "Surveys of inmates show that they prefer concealable, large caliber guns. Juvenile offenders appear to be more likely to possess guns than adults." Little surprise here. That would also reflect legal gun preferences, except in young vs. old considerations. "Studies of the guns used in homicides show that large caliber revolvers are the most frequent type of gun used in homicides, but the number of large caliber semiautomatic guns used in murders is increasing." Other than a mild surprise that revolvers are preferred to semi-autos there"s not much here of interest. "Little information exists about the use of assault weapons in crime. The information that does exist uses varying definitions of assault weapons that were developed before the Federal assault weapons ban was enacted." Ah. Well, let"s use that definition then, even though it"s at best difficult to say if "assault weapons" were used. "A New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services study of homicides in 1993 in New York City found that assault weapons were involved in 16% of the homicides studied. The definition of assault weapons used was from proposed but not enacted State legislation that was more expansive than the Federal legislation. By matching ballistics records and homicide files, the study found information on 366 firearms recovered in the homicides of 271 victims. Assault weapons were linked to the deaths of 43 victims (16% of those studied)." That depends of the definition of assault weapons. Let"s use the fake definition conjured up during the CLINTON Administration as a pretext to ban hunting rifles, "shall we? So there were 366 semi-automatic rifles recovered from 271 victims- "Out of how many total? A google search later, and I have this: "Preliminary figures released by the Police Department show that 1,995 homicides were recorded last year, 12 fewer than the police department's final figures for 1992." Since the gist of the story was that overall murder was down for the state but more concentrated in NYC, and the line specifically says "by the Police Department" with nothing before to indicate that they are referencing another city (they did, however, mention some of the boroughs), I am forced to conclude that his number reflect JUST New York City" So" There were 7 times as many murders, just in the city, as victims were firearms were recovered" And by the way, there were more guns than victims" So" At least some of them HAD to be the victim"s own gun" So" "WERE you going somewhere with this? http://www.nytimes.com... But mostly" You utterly failed to address the question; Sure, People kill people with guns. And bombs. And knives. And in at least one particularly interesting incident, with an open window. (I"ve yet to get THAT story.) And yet, strangely, you DIDN"T even try to address the concept of mandatory carry. You failed to make a case for disarmament, and pretended the alternative wasn"t there. Please, do get to "A" case. Closing: I dispute the assault weapons numbers. "Assault weapons" have but ONE definition; Automatic and/or burst fire compatible detachable box magazine fed firearms. If it"s semi-automatic, it"s NOT an "assault" anything. This definition is based on the first assault rifle, the STg-44 (with accommodation for changes in technology on calibers that didn"t exist back then). The use of this term as a terror tactic is truly reprehensible. (I am checking myself here, it should NOT be allowed. Period.)