5 Facts Gun Controllers Hate

TTAG reader George W. writes:

There’s a silent battle that has been raging in USA for decades now. There are people and organizations who wish to take away our right to armed self defense by weakening or abolishing the Second Amendment. And the recent election result hasn’t changed their minds.

We can push back against this by spreading awareness about five prevalent myths about guns the USA. Here is an infographic with five facts you’re not likely to see in the mainstream media. The infographic was kindly provided by gunsforsalereviews.com.

comments

  1. avatar GS650G says:

    Another big problem is numbers. As in 350 million guns and 100 million owners. Deal with that.

    1. avatar Sian says:

      And the 350 million number is just a ‘lowest possible’ conservative estimate. The real number is probably closer to 500 million.

    2. avatar bLoving says:

      The problem is three and a half guns per owner?
      Yeah, I guess that half-gun needs to be finished.
      Get to work y’all.

      1. avatar No one of consequence says:

        “Building your own AR is easy,” you guys said.

        “It goes together like that!” you said.

        And now look! Half a gun. Dag nab it…!

    3. avatar Danny Griffin says:

      There has to be way more than 100 million gun owners now. According to a study published by S&W several years ago, new gun owners accounted for 20% of new gun sales since 2008. Do you know how many millions of guns have been sold between 2008 and 2016? Over 100 million! That could mean 20 million new gun owners.

  2. avatar Cliff H says:

    “…weakening or abolishing the Second Amendment.”

    Something additional to think about – since its ratification, not allowing for watering down by judicial activism and unconstitutional legislation, not one single word of any of the Bill of Rights has been altered, corrected, revised or repealed. To actually repeal one of these amendments would be an EXTREMELY dangerous precedent.

    1. avatar GS650G says:

      We could lose the third without too much trouble.

      1. avatar CarlosT says:

        So we can sign you up for housing and feeding a squad of Marines, then? Just because the government hasn’t made an issue of it since it was passed doesn’t mean it isn’t a protection worth having.

        1. avatar Geoff PR: says:

          Wait a minute – A squad of Marines?

          Good God, they’ll eat all my good food, drink every drop of alcohol (that I had when I was a drinker), impregnate all the single (and a number of the married ones as well!) women in the ‘hood, and pump the cat!

          On the upside, they’ll build me a nice pistol range in the back yard… 🙂

        2. avatar GS650G says:

          There’s always some one who like to make an extreme argument out of everything.

        3. avatar HiCarry says:

          Depends on the definition of “troops.” Apparently one circuit does not believe police are covered under the Third Amendment despite being government actors.

          http://m.reviewjournal.com/news/las-vegas/judge-police-takeover-henderson-homes-not-covered-third-amendment

  3. avatar Swilson says:

    The gun show and internet loop holes have to be the worst myths out there.

    1. avatar Hi Power Toter says:

      One might even call it “fake news”

      1. avatar Accur81 says:

        That’s exactly what I’d call it.

    2. avatar Ebby123 says:

      “Myth” implies the story’s originator actually believed it to be true.

      The word you are searching is “Complete F**king Lie”, or maybe “Manufactured political fairy-tale”.

      1. avatar Jim says:

        Good points

  4. avatar Roymond says:

    Number four is probably the most challenged. Different sources give numbers ranging from 60k at the low end to 3 million at the high. I took all the existing claims I could find once and averaged them, with a resulting figure of 1.6 million, which still gets challenged mostly because it’s really inconvenient for antis to admit that people actually defend themselves with guns on not just a daily or even hourly but every minute basis (1.6mn/yr works out to one every 19.7 seconds; the 2.5mn/yr above gives one every 12.6 seconds).

    This is one reason I regularly nag the NRA to put source links in its on-line articles; no anti will even look at a number higher than the 60k unless a source can be given (not that they necessarily look if a source is given, but observers often do, and it’s generally the observers/lurkers who actually benefit from arguments on blogs and forums).

    1. avatar Yawnz says:

      Even at the low end of 60K, that’s still twice the number of people killed as the result of usage of a firearm. Take out the suicides and accidents and that rises even more.

  5. avatar former water walker says:

    Edumacation don’t mean much when yer a RETARD…yeah deal with us millions of gun owners jerkweeds.

  6. avatar Stinkeye says:

    “Silent battle”? The last couple decades haven’t seemed all that quiet to me. Especially the last four years.

  7. avatar ButtHurtz says:

    Any mother f’er that tries to take/limit my gun will be shot.

  8. avatar TommyJay says:

    I think the 92% number in #1 is low. I haven’t checked the reference, but I see Washington Post (wp) and Bloomberg in the link. Are we trusting those guys now?

    Plus, there is the question of “gun free” by criminal penalty, or “gun free” by store or institution policy. I’d call both gun free, but Bloomberg probably says just the first one is.

    1. avatar YAR0892 says:

      Not sure, but willing to bet those are using their own outlets against them, in essence declaring that their own sources acknowledge what POTG have been saying all this time…

    2. avatar fishydude says:

      You can bet the Bloomers doesn’t include malls that only have gun buster signs on the main entrances. But those signs still make evil people think the mall is a free fire zone.
      [lawful CCer’s know where the unmarked doors are and thus legal to enter. from that point concealed means concealed.]

    3. avatar TommyJay says:

      So I read/skimmed the #1 reference which was done by John Lott et. al. as a rebuttal to Bloomberg’s Everytown propaganda. They stick to the Everytown requirements of time period, 2009 thru July 2014, and body count, 4 or more. Everytown says 14% are in gun free zones. After excluding the Everytown nonsense, Lott was left with 25 cases, two of which were not in public gun free zones, hence the 92% number.

      These two were an IHOP shooting in Carson City, NV and the Rep. Giffords shooting in Tucson, AZ.

      Lott has an addendum of 3 more cases with a victim body count of 2 or more (note the shooter’s suicide is not a victim). Surprisingly, Lott missed the Clackamas mall shooting with 2 victim fatalities even though it is within the time period and it was a gun free zone.

      I would be interested to see the statistics on all public shootings with two or more victim fatalities since say 1960.

  9. avatar Geoff PR: says:

    “5 Facts Gun Controllers Hate”

    # 6 – (But should be #1) – That by running the HildaBeast for President, they lost their best opportunity to implement their flavor of ‘gun safety’ for *decades*, and quite likely forever.

    Suck on *THAT*, Progressives, and MERRY CHRISTMAS!

    (Hillary Clinton in November of 2016, proof that God answers prayers. *snicker*)

    1. avatar Ad says:

      Not quite. The battle will be fought on state ballots. See: referendums passed in Nevada, California and Washington.

      1. avatar Geoff PR: says:

        With conservative SCOTUS justices chosen by Trump, those ballot initiatives can be ruled unconstitutional.

        Hilary’s justices would rule them constitutional…

  10. avatar dave in NC says:

    Could someone tell me where on gunsforsalereviews.com that graphic is found, I’d like a high res version to print and drop off in the “gun free zones”.

  11. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    The 6th fact that should be included: average police response time to priority calls for help in the United States is something like 9 minutes … and is frequently much longer. Do you think it is wise to let a violent attacker, rapist, or murderer have their way with you for 9 minutes?

  12. avatar Kap says:

    Hillery only suck’s for the big bucks like a bunch of Democratic Party do gooders, working for the Democratic Party agenda of the super rich for one world order so they {people like Bloomberg} think they control everything and can order {buy}subversion of the Constitution of this USA for the benefit of their back pocket and their sense of power!

    1. avatar bob in IN says:

      Hillarys deplorables voted Nov 11. Thank God.

  13. avatar Rusty Chains says:

    A common tactic from the middle ages right on down till our ancestors tossed out the British was to impoverish your potential opponents by forcing them to feed and house your troops. There is no reason it wouldn’t work in modern times, instead of the troops stealing the silver it would be the iPad, and there is always prima nocta….

  14. avatar Anonymous says:

    The gun show “loophole” above doesn’t provide adequate explanation. The ability to make a private sale without the government holding your hand – was intended. Intended. Again, leftist revisionist history takes place. There was no loophole, the ability to make a private sale was intended.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email