Slashdot Mirror
Mugger Arrested After Victim Spots Him On Facebook's 'People You May Know' (bgr.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from BGR: In a somewhat bizarre story which proves that truth is often stranger than fiction, a serial mugger in England was arrested after one of his victims spotted him under Facebook's 'People you may know' section.Originally reported by the BBC, 21-year old Omar Famuyide had a long history of theft, muggings and armed robberies to his name. Not too long ago, Famuyide brandished a knife and stole a car.
Flash forward a bit, and the victim of said car robbery was recently shocked to see Famuyide's face pop up as a suggested friend he might want to add on Facebook. The victim promptly called the police who quickly managed to tie him to a large number of other violent crimes. By the time the dust settled and the full extent of Famuyide's criminal rampage was revealed, Famuyide was sentenced to 17 years in prison.
His Facebook profile ultimately led to charges of robbery, attempted robbery, and possessing a firearm.
Flash forward a bit, and the victim of said car robbery was recently shocked to see Famuyide's face pop up as a suggested friend he might want to add on Facebook. The victim promptly called the police who quickly managed to tie him to a large number of other violent crimes. By the time the dust settled and the full extent of Famuyide's criminal rampage was revealed, Famuyide was sentenced to 17 years in prison.
His Facebook profile ultimately led to charges of robbery, attempted robbery, and possessing a firearm.
...the victim of said car robbery was recently shocked to see Famuyide's face pop up as a suggested friend he might want to add on Facebook
Why would the victim be shocked? They shared the same car so they must be friends, right?
The mugger likely searched the victim on FB after the mugging.
FB saw one person searching out another and suggested the pairing to the victim.
With only 50 FB friends and a hidden profile, FB gives me suggestions all of the time.
Often, the suggestions only make sense if the suggested friend had tried searching for me on FB.
Criminals MAY acquire and use guns, but it makes prosecution MUCH easier because by possession they have committed an irrefutable crime already.
Because no thread on any topic is complete without a rant about the Second Amendment.
The UK has strict gun control, which is just as effective as posting "Gun-Free Zone" signs.
The number of gun murders per capita in the US in 2012 was around thirty times that of the UK. Genuinely interested in what you think this difference is down to if not a strong legislative and cultural approach to gun control.
So true!
I was expecting to hear some opinions about how the net has made the world a smaller place which ultimately helped nap the perp.
That or the expected Facebook bashing.
Knives are already banned in the UK. It is illegal to possess or carry a knife without good reason.
Obviously, there are plenty of good reasons why you might be carrying a penknife.
However, there far fewer reasons to be in possession of something like http://www.weapons-universe.co... Such that, you are highly likely to be going to jail, if you are found to be in possession of such a knife.
good that obviously guilty criminal is in prison.
but this sort of thing shouldn't be used to justify tracking, and invasions of privacy, of people who have not explicitly authorized facebook and other techs to track them.
but i am afraid they will be so used. be prepared hear more stories like this.
wonder if criminal and his lawyers(in this case probably cheap or free ones) fully used his legal defenses to invalidate evidence.
The UK has strict gun control, which is just as effective as posting "Gun-Free Zone" signs.
The number of gun murders per capita in the US in 2012 was around thirty times that of the UK. Genuinely interested in what you think this difference is down to if not a strong legislative and cultural approach to gun control.
Because the British are a bunch of sheeple, obviously. Free Men murder each other with properly virile gusto.
The mugger likely searched the victim on FB after the mugging.
And this is the reality. You can't do anything on Facebook (even searches) without being caught in one of their algorithms to increase their profit (in this case, by increasing interconnectedness).
What's even more scary is that Facebook is now tracking and advertising to you when they see you outside of Facebook [1]. This combined with the fact that Facebook trackers are everywhere infested on most sites, means without some means of being ignored [2], you could be tracked even if you didn't visit FB.
Paranoia: it's healthy now.
[1] http://www.theverge.com/2016/5...
[2/CH] https://chrome.google.com/webs...
[2/FF] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-...
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
Worthless English letting these mutts into their country. Diversity at work!
His Facebook profile ultimately led to charges of robbery, attempted robbery, and possessing a firearm.
Guess your reading comprehension could use a bit of polishing as well...
Certainly not "must" — but "might", which the write-up actually attributes to Facebook, is valid.
Now, why would you attack a strawman?
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
I think what GP may be referring to is the actual underlying story here, which the BGR article linked seems to have wrong. Omar Famuyide was in fact brandishing a gun and pointed it at the victim's head, and said gun was found abandoned in the car (a white BMW) two days later.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/u...
He also fired a shot inside of a massage parlor:
http://www.birminghammail.co.u...
And in case you consider those two sources to be somehow less reliable than BGR, here's a third source:
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-eng...
So yeah, he did in fact commit these crimes while brandishing a gun, and there are even a few photos of said gun.
What do you do if you're not physically strong, but someone bigger and stronger than you attacks you?
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016...
Famuyide's record includes armed robbery.
And yes, the UK is trying knife control: https://www.gov.uk/buying-carr...
Note that self-defense is not one of the listed valid reasons for carrying a knife.
...idiot mugger uses real photo of himself on Facebook, gets recognized by one of his many victims, and arrested.
Dude, really? Did you go to the Wet Bandit school of bad-assery?
"I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
A suggestion for you to research: lookup the crimes committed by people with "non-traditional British name" and those with "traditional" "British name". Then look to see if non-traditional naming is linked to increased criminal activity. I'd be genuinely surprised if that would be the case.
Criminals MAY acquire and use guns, but it makes prosecution MUCH easier because by possession they have committed an irrefutable crime already.
Most US jurisdictions also have penalty intensifiers for crimes committed with a gun, so that point is a wash.
Dear Sir,
You have done a superb job painstakingly pointing out the flaws of that gun-hating liberal
If you think you can change their mind, you might as well take a well deserved rest
Fire can use to burn down a house, but the same fire can also be used for cooking
The liberals can't understand that guns, like fire, have more than one use. For them 'gun' == 'kill', and that's it. They refuse to accept anything else
Forget it, Sir. Them liberals' mind is set, in concrete
US homicide rates are about 3 times higher. Lets be clear here, the rest of the world doesnt envy the US; when it comes to gun law we genuinely believe that you are totally and irredeemably batshit insane, and can only watch in horror.
Seriously though. Do you think the guy that is willing to stick that knife into you gives a shit about the law saying you can't carry a knife? That's the silliness of such laws. You make it impossible for law abiding people to have any means of defense and render them helpless while doing nothing to impede the lawless. If I'm willing to murder and or rob you then why do I care about a weapons charge?
Suffer... The Liberals and Leftist want You to stand there and take it. After all, the bigger and stronger person is just a misunderstood person who never had love as a child. You, at this point in your life, are an insensitive Clod! /sarc
What use is your do when the criminal is pointing a gun at your head? What happens if you miss? What happens if you drop your gun because you're terrified. If guns are magic wands that keep you safe, why doesn't the US have the lowest crime rate in the developed world? I'm not against gun ownership but I'm tired of the bullshit.
Knives don't run out of ammo. Also, they don't like it up 'em, you know.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Quote: "With a conspicuously non-traditional British name. Yeah, open our borders... It's all good, they only want what's ours."
Sincerely, that seems as if it was written by the late Sir Terry Prattchet (my words):
>> And the Headmaster of the Guild of Thieves said to the newly appointed Head of Tourism: "Yeah, open our borders. It's all good. They only want what's ours."
Because it allows police to have good reason to arrest someone when they stop and search them and find the knife. Why is this so difficult for you to grasp? Stop trying to peddle your idiotic American gun culture on the rest of the planet. It is clearly the reason why you have so many shootings. I enjoy my city and I don't want it to become a dangerous shithole like the US is.
Murder rates are indeed higher in the US, by a ratio of 3.4. On the other hand, you are massively more likely to be a victim of non-lethal violent crime in the UK, by a ratio of 4.8. (Exact counts vary by year, and are very rough estimates as official sources are useless because of different definitions of "violent crime").
It's also bad to compare whole countries, so let's a look at New York vs London -- very similar population, both include a minority known for violent crime. Here, in an apples-to-apples comparison the ratio is around 7 (again, wildly differing by source because of different definitions).
So what's worse, being murdered or just assaulted/mugged? Intuitively one is going to claim the first. However, if you look at absolute numbers, the chance of being murdered are negligible in either country. Also, I'd say most murders are bad-guy-on-bad-guy (no stats here, as it's so hard to define "bad guy"). On the other hand, violent crime is a part of everyday's life. I've personally been assaulted several times, murdered 0 times so far. Nor has anyone I even vaguely know. Murders tend to be an one-per-town-per-decades affair: in the 50k town I live, last murders happened in 2013 then 1981. Obviously, if your city/town happen to include organized crime or violence-prone communities, you'll jack up the stats, but those rarely spill out to ordinary citizens.
The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
Lots of people don't actually consider UK a part of Europe, seeing as it's culturally closer to the US, as this incident also demonstrates.
Ezekiel 23:20
Now that kids not exposed to so much lead as children are reaching adulthood, our crime rates are falling.
The more important figure is murder by any means. Dead is dead.
That butter isn't going to spread itself!
#DeleteChrome
This is basically how I found out that the pedophile who took advantage of me when I was a kid was still active. I signed into FB to make sure my account wasn't hijacked, and the "people you may know" was filled with profiles of families with small children, from the last city I know he lived in. I contacted police shortly thereafter, and he's being investigated.
I was expecting one about the fifth, among the lines of "He incriminated himself, so that's inadmissible".
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
At arms length, knives are the only effective weapon. I think Mythbusters did that once, it's much faster to charge into an opponent with a knife than accurately pull and aim a gun (it's like 3 or 5m or slightly more but most 'close combat' situations will be better with a non-gun weapon)
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Only if that is the only variable. Meanwhile in the U.K. muggings are more common than the U.S.
It wouldn't surprise me if the social safety net figures in to the higher homicide rate in the U.S. as well. The lack makes it harder to leave a violent home situation and in general makes people feel more desperate.
Since handgun bans are recent enough to have good figures, I can say it's a fairly consistent response. Immediately after, homicide goes up and then settles down to about where it was before the ban.
So evidence suggests we need to forget about the whole gun thing and figure out what other variable is actually making the difference.
Fuck off, you racist twat.
From a Brit with a traditional British name.
I guess we just define freedom differently. To you, freedom is walking down the street feeling safe because you're allowed to carry a firearm. For me, freedom is walking down the street feeling safe without needing to carry a firearm.
Well, it might be dangerous, and it might be a shithole, but... uh...
U! S! A!
U! S! A!
Making prosecution easier should not ever be a goal. If you don't have evidence, prosecutors need to go find some or drop the case.
What use is your do when the criminal is pointing a gun at your head? What happens if you miss? What happens if you drop your gun because you're terrified.
What if nothing... you didn't bother to read the news story I linked to...
If guns are magic wands that keep you safe, why doesn't the US have the lowest crime rate in the developed world? I'm not against gun ownership but I'm tired of the bullshit.
Then be tired of being ignorant to the facts...
The US does have one of the lowest crime rates in the developed world, outside of a few select areas. Stay out of Compton, the South Side, and a few other places and the US is amazingly crime free...
We have a gang problem and a black problem, but no one wants to talk about it because that is "racist". No it isn't, it is the truth...
And we have much lower crime rates again if we pretend all the high crime areas in our countries don't exist. Fuck me I'm sick of that stupid argument.
Lots of people don't actually consider UK a part of Europe, seeing as it's culturally closer to the US, as this incident also demonstrates.
Next month, the UK will have an opportunity to vote on that.
Now that kids not exposed to so much lead as children are reaching adulthood, our crime rates are falling.
Except in Chicago, where on some nights the air is about 40% lead.
Again, you miss the point...
Having guns or not having guns has nothing to do with the crime rates...
Removing all the guns wouldn't change them. It is an economic problem and a cultural problem.
But those are harder to fix than just saying "evil guns".
"The number of gun murders per capita in the US in 2012 was around thirty times that of the UK [bbc.co.uk]. Genuinely interested in what you think this difference is"
The real difference is 3.8 times, and it's historically because the problem of angry minorities and no-go areas that the US has had for years is brand new in Europe. But now that there have already been two beheadings in the streets of London, the problem is coming to you.
For once Facebook actually led to something good.
(Statistically speaking, though, it had to happen sooner or later.)
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
You missed me saying that I'm not in favour of gun control but this idea that guns are magic wands that keep crime at bay is bollocks otherwise your country would have the lowest crime rate in the developed world.
The UK has strict gun control, which is just as effective as posting "Gun-Free Zone" signs.
Just curious...what kind of brain injury do you have?
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
You keep changing your claims, now you've made one that is disproved by the very data you claim supports it. Here
Page changed, try this .
By that logic the gang areas should be super safe because they're full of guns. Home invasions are virtually unknown in the area I live in but there are few guns, legal or otherwise. The causes of crime tend to be poverty, family breakdown, poor education and sociopaths. There is no shortage of criminals in Eastern Europe where there are virtually no black people.
Other countries with legal ownership of firearms don't have the same murder rate as the US. I think this is more of a cultural phenomenon than anything else. Namely, I'm talking about these kind of people:
http://www.theventureonline.co...
Think about it: If your close friends think that being a petty thug is an awesome career choice, you're probably more likely to do it.
No. The US murder rate is 3.8 times that of the UK but the murder rate with guns is 30 times.
Why are police stopping and searching people? Have they done something wrong? Given that police don't have x-ray vision or mind-reading powers, how many people do you think police would have to stop and search before finding someone in possession of something illegal? How many daily searches would you tolerate?
Same is true of any item that is contraband. They catch you with pot, they can hold you until they can get more dirt on you. Hell, the feds could justify holding you for 10 illegally acquired songs found on your cell phone.
But yeah, guns are Teh Evilz so totally justified and in the public interest. Not threat of that logic being applied to other things...
So you're all for checkpoints set up across the city, frisking people who pass, on a constant basis?
Yeah, sounds like a great place to live... You make the gun solution sound like a breath of fresh air.
So, on the extremely small chance that someone physically stronger than you, threatens you (without a gun of course) and you happen to have a gun and can operate it effectively while freaked out (and not accidentally shoot someone else or yourself which is more likely), you're willing to sacrifice all the other lives lost to guns? Like children under 5 who die or kill others every week in America because they kill themselves with a misplaced gun?
You're pretty sick.
I'll counter your fox "news" entertainment site link with this:
https://everytownresearch.org/...
"the rest of the world doesnt envy the US; when it comes to gun law we genuinely believe that you are totally and irredeemably batshit insane, and can only watch in horror."
That's an understatement.
Other countries after massacres think "hmm, perhaps we should do something to fix this".
And fix it.
American's seem to think that massacres means more guns should be introduced and start buying more while screaming "Obama about to tell the army to attack Texas and take all my guns!!!". That's right, ask all the soldiers that come from Texas to attack their own families. Yet a large proportions of American's genuinely believe that will happen, just like they believe the world's only a few thousand years old.
And now they've got Trump one step away from punching the big red nuke button.
"Batshit insane" just scratches the surface of how messed up America is.
This is an assumption made by an algorithm, and perhaps based on some pictures of the driver(s) and car associating them both to the same vehicle, or who knows what happened. The parent was simply illustrating what could go wrong with tons of personal data online and tons of assumptions. Whether you end up on a terrorist watch list, get fired from your job for some association, or you suddenly have to pay ridiculous insurance rates, who knows what will happen with this russian roulette wheel of data mining.
Aw fuck, are the retards still including suicides in their "firearms violence" statistics?
I don't understand why the tons of accidental shooting deaths and injuries, in addition to all of the intended shootings that happen just because one or both parties are armed and the situation escalates, are totally acceptable to those that cite 'defense'.
I'd think the freedom not to die from some irrational fucktard's anger, or from some stray bullet going though your apartment wall due to some dude next door playing with his gun, might be a little more important than this almost-entirely-hypothetical 'freedom' to 'defend' yourself.
Yep, but there's just no reasoning with the gun-addled. My dad thinks he needs one to protect himself and my mom. In the last 42 years nobody in his family has been the victim of a violent crime. However, in 18 months of gun ownership, he has only accidentally discharged the gun twice. Both he and my mom are alive, essentially because both of them were lucky enough not to be in the path of the bullet.
He's never been convicted of any crime, but he's a drunk and an idiot- so because of the freaking gun nuts (any regulation limiting me to infinity-minus-one guns is an infringement of my rights!) somebody is going to die someday from that gun. But they don't care, and are only willing to accept preventing my dad from owning the gun that accidentally kills the _second_ person. If that.
Plenty of US cities have laws like you suggest. They are the cities with the worst gun crime.
Strangely, you made the guy's point for him. Your country's laws are such that the only people with weapons are criminals, so much so that the sight of a weapon identifies someone as a criminal. This is common knowledge for the non-criminals in your country. It's probably also common knowledge for the criminals. You all do have a point though; if the criminals know that nobody has any means to defend themselves beyond their fists, then there is less need to carry a firearm. Criminals can overpower victims with far less.
I don't quite understand the suggestion that anyone was trying to tell your country how it should run. I think you should have whatever laws you'd like in your country. Uniform laws breed ignorance, much like the content of your comment. With diverse laws, we have actual data from different jurisdictions. It's never pure, because there are always confounding variables, but it's enough to make a pretty strong argument for leaving 2nd amendment rights in tact for the people that want to exercise them.
Only a couple million people in the US have concealed carry licenses and carry regularly. It's actually quite taboo here in most places. So we do not get the benefit that you would get with criminals knowing a significant % of their potential victims are armed.
Yes they include suicides in gun death stats. They are also including justifiable homicides.
Recently, as knowledge of this statistical BS has become commonplace, the anti-gun folks have begun to justify why it's legitimate to include suicides, based on how often someone is successful in killing themselves when using a firearm vs other methods. It's quite silly to watch and I do recommend it.
Or maybe you can provide such a source? Asking others to do your legwork is incredibly lazy and reeks of you betting they won't.
In the UK all sorts of things are included in "violent crime", including some forms of verbal assault. Comparing that across borders is not going to serve any useful purpose.
The UK had a similar ratio lower murder rate before they enacted gun laws. I'm an Aussie and our murder rate has declined at about the same rate it was declining before our gun laws.
When I left school in QLD you could buy military style semiautomatics over the counter, no license, no waiting period. We didn't carry them about like Americans seem to. A few mass shootings and they got banned. But even with the mass shootings our overall murder rate was declining and was far less than the US.
I suspect that bringing in gun laws like the UK and Australia have to the US is a recipe for disaster. It would be more likely to spark a civil war than decrease deaths.
There's a reason for that risk of civil war and that is the second amendment. In Australia our gun laws were brought in legally. John Howard demanded the states implement uniform gun laws or he would have a referendum to change the constitution to give the federal government the power to do it. If our laws had violated our constitution I might have stocked up on guns like many Americans do.
If I was American I would be totally against federal gun laws without constitutional change.
A bit like trying to exclude certain areas from your crime statistics because they're inconvenient.
It isn't "entertainment", it is fact...
Thousands of people every week defend themselves with a gun, many of those people would not be here without it...
The media doesn't report on it that often, doesn't fit with their "message".
https://www.gunowners.org/sk08...
Read and learn...
https://www.gunowners.org/sk08...
Read and learn...
* Guns used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense. Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year -- or about 6,850 times a day. [1] This means that each year, firearms are used more than 80 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives. [2]
Guns are good, criminals are bad... banning guns does not remove criminals, it simply makes victims out of good people.
That's a fact, no matter how much CNN doesn't want you to know it...
Wow, OK, so with all those guns defending you, America must have one of the lowest murder rates in the world then, ay! Otherwise you'd just sound like a fool saying that!
And you're a moron, what's new? Seriously, it amazes me how stupid some people really are...
You of course don't know that you're stupid, nor would you be willing to admit it, so pointing out your errors is a waste of time, since you'll just ignore anything that doesn't match your false beliefs...
you're willing to sacrifice all the other lives lost to guns?
Guns save more lives than they take, at least the good ones...
Why do you want to kill good people? You're pretty sick...
Note: Read and learn the facts, instead of the bullshit you THINK you know...
https://www.gunowners.org/sk08...
By that logic the gang areas should be super safe because they're full of guns.
No, not at all... guns are hard to LEGALLY get in those gang areas...
Seriously, stop having opinions about shit you know nothing about...
https://www.gunowners.org/sk08...
Just what I expected, you didn't bother to learn anything...
Instead you just repeat your ignorance over and over...
For heavens sake, how the hell is the world supposed to get better if people won't learn anything?
Yes, I'm annoyed, because you're part of the problem, you're an ignorant fuck who doesn't want to learn anything and you keep repeating the same stupid things.
The human race is so screwed because of people like you, and the sad part is that you don't even know it.
Ahh, a straw man response, I'd expect nothing less.
Golf clap.
It's not just gun law. There are a HUGE number of issues on which standard US position is completely batshit.
It all starts with religion. The US is an _incredibly_ religious country for a developed nation. So that poisons a whole bunch of things, it means you've got Catholics running women's healthcare. You've actually got "doctors" who believe a bunch of crazy stuff in an old book trumps all their ethical obligations and their years of training. And the courts are right behind them, religion must trump everything. Too bad, the women died in agony, but at least she didn't commit a sin...
In schools you've got YECs teaching Creationism and then you've got a bunch of _really creepy_ people fetishizing virginity over in Sex Education.
And you've got a bunch of people who think "Eye for an eye" is state of the art ethics running the Criminal Justice System.
You even have the "Name it and claim it" Prosperity Gospel scammers out running a Lottery to tax the very poorest for their last few pennies.
But most of all, running through all of this you have the religious thinking, the idea that Truth is something you Believe in, and has no relationship to mere facts, which should be scorned as unimportant. So this isn't just a system that's doing a lot of things the Wrong Way, it's a system that intentionally can't learn to do better. A system that's going to keep failing _forever_ and patting itself on the back for how successful it is.
And brandishing.
If you guys think anyone other than white people can freely brandish guns, you are sadly mistaken.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
is not an actual right son. No matter how special your strapon makes you feel.
is that you are a racist POS that is using your own bigotry as an excuses to justify your need for compensation. then again, racists have been shown to be strangely attracted to guns. Something about needing a replacement for their spine I guess.
not nearly as silly as watching a sad little man trying to justify his need for a strapon even after it has been shown to him that the main thing it accomplishes is the death of people around him, or more importantly for these self- important morons, the death of the most important creature on the planet, the gun nut themselves.
does not allow you to simply make up facts and pretend that they have any legitimacy. You are not that powerful without your strapon, what makes you think that you would be with it.
the media doesn't report it because it they don't report made up crap from letters to penthouse. Look, I know that it made you feel all manly when you fondled your manhood replacement while those minorities walked across the street yesterday, but they are allowed to do that, and their existence is not a threat to whatever manhood you may have left.
you do know that mental illness is yet another reason why mentally challenged people like you should not be allowed near firearms , don't you?
Suicide inclusion is not significant in ranking states because it effects each score equally. In this case for 2013 it was 6.7 per 100K, so take the QZ article chart and subtract 6.7 from every score. Notice something? That uniform subtraction doesn't change the order. See here . Basically your poor argument is based on you using the word "statistical" while having extremely low numerical literacy.
The flaw in your logic is that only the good guys can access the "defensive" weapons. Allowing big knives or find just makes it more likely they will be mis-used... and your end up with the gun insanity currently prevailing in America, Syria and Libya.
Only boring people are ever bored.
"find" should be "guns"
Only boring people are ever bored.
My point is simple and not controversial. If you are a criminal about to commit a crime, you want to know there is little or no risk you will be stopped. Criminals will case a house for days before robbing it to minimize the chance they are interfered with. Not saying having a gun helps that scenario; just using it as evidence of the criminal mindset. Therefore, knowing that everyone is completely unarmed is much more comforting than not knowing. Whether a criminal still goes through with the criminal act is a different question, but if you accept the premise then surely it's not a stretch to believe that on the margin the knowledge that your victim and bystanders are completely defenseless leads to more crime.
My claim was that the anti-gun side includes suicides and justifiable homicides to inflate their numbers and summon outrage. Your blabbering is not responsive to my point at all.
Your claim is ambiguous and lacks any data to support it because you are ascribing a motivation to a group without defining that group in any clear terms, as well as continuing argument by hand-waving. I am the original poster of this thread, and I am the only one who has posted relevant, specific, and timely data to this thread. You claim data was biased which I refuted and explained by citing another objective source. Try again.
Dude, I grew up in Detroit.
We had plenty of criminals. Nobody cased a house for anything like days. The biggest problems were a) one gang of idiots whose entire "casing" strategy seemed to involve verifying the people inside the house were not black (on the apparent theory that non-blacks would be unable to tell black people apart, it failed miserably because yes we can do that, and hilariously one of their victims turned out to be a light-skinned black dude), and the super-genuis who robbed every house on the block except his mom's in a six month period.
In theory the rest of your argument makes perfect sense. In practice there's no evidence that increasing the number of firearms in the general population reduces crime, largely because the people who say that it does have banned all research into the practice; which strongly implies that gun rights advocates themselves think that actual research into the problem would result in their entire premise being disproven.
What there is quite good evidence for is that gun bans reduce supply, thus increasing the price of guns.
Moreover you're badly mistaken on self-defence in the UK. You can't walk around with a 1796, but keeping one at home where you can use it is fine, and more hard-core then any weapon a criminal is likely to transport on the streets; assuming you can convince the police that it's not a Samurai sword you'll even get the damn thing back.
Why are they hard to legally get? Are people from the bad areas banned from owning guns by default? However this conversation is a bit pointless given that in your world black criminals from bad areas don't count towards crime statistics and this man is a black criminal from a bad area so doesn't in fact exist.
Why are they hard to legally get?
Like I said, you have opinions on things you don't know anything about...
http://smartgunlaws.org/new-yo...
New York does not impose a waiting period prior to the purchase of a firearm (although it may take up to six months to obtain a license to purchase a handgun).
I don't know about you, but "up to six months obtain a license" strikes me as a hell of a waiting period.
The above are STATE laws, try it in New York City itself and it is much worse...
http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/3...
This right here is another example of all that is wrong with the gun conversation.
"stopping gun deaths" translates to "well, if we take away all the guns, we'll be fine!"
Stupid idiots...
The problem with murders and deaths has nothing to do with guns, everything to do with poverty, crime, and other issues...
2/3 of all gun deaths are suicide, but the US doesn't have a higher suicide rate than the rest of the modern world, we just use guns to do it.
That 33,000 gun death number that Clinton keeps tossing out is crap, almost 20K of it are people who shot themselves.
People who want to die, will find a way to do it...
When you consider that the majority of gun murders are gang related, that means that fewer than 5,000 gun deaths in the US are non-gang related.
Considering the 300+ million guns in the US (1 in 3 homes has a gun in it) and the 320 million people, that is a rounding error.
Guns are not the problem, poverty and culture are the problem, but people refuse to become educated on the subject.
71 fucking years ago.
A LOT has happened since then, dickwad.
Eat the rich.
You can't compare the US and Europe like for like. The US is pretty culturally homogeneous (because you killed off most of the native population and replaced it with your own), whereas Europe has enormous cultural differences, even from one country to the next.
Eastern Europe is especially under tension, because of the constant and arbitrary moving of borders that has happened over the last century or two.
The US has had nothing like that, at least not anywhere near that scale of fuckery.
Eat the rich.
Sounds like people can get guns if they want them them and therefore the ghetto should be crime free.
As expected, you don't bother to read and learn, you just repeat lies and false beliefs without regard to the truth.
You're a fool, and worse, you don't even know it.
You can get guns legally in the bad areas and therefore they should be low crime areas because guns are magic.
They are for the numerous women who carry them in their purses as a rape defence.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
Come on, go big or go home
http://store.hbo.com/game-of-t...
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
If the liberal politicians want so much to get rid of the guns, there is a quite easy process to go through. All it takes is a constitutional amendment, it has happened before, and if it is so important and popular, it should be trivial to pass. Until that process is followed, it is the right of every American according to the Bill of Rights to own and bear a firearm.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
The battle of app developers disproves his statement?
http://imgur.com/en3HZ5T
Here are some figures for you to chew on.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
That's not just wrong it's a bad joke. Even supposing such limited sample was significant, statistical analysis requires a judgement call on the meaning of differences. I doubt every bit of data there compared to each other was collected in the same manner over the same time, and that the claimed differences are either traceable to other causes than those listed or will disappear into error.
I have always wondered how the argument gets turned around and somehow people who think 2A shouldn't be thrown away have to prove that guns reduce crime. I don't have to prove that. You have to prove that there is such a compelling reason why I should be denied my right to own and carry a firearm.
I am not interested in finding data to support my claim that gun deaths include justifiable homicides and suicides for propaganda reasons. To me it is quite self-evident. The only other explanation is that anti-gun activists are too dumb to know they are using the wrong stat. You're free to disagree with me or ignore me or whatever. I'm not here to convince you or anyone else of anything. Sharing my viewpoint on something does not require you to knee jerk with "omg prove it" so you can tell yourself you're insightful.
What you mean turned around?
You specifically made an argument that guns reduce crime. I refuted that line of argument. I said nothing about my position on the Second Amendment, my belief in what the Founders meant when they wrote about the Right to Bear Arms, or any-damn-thing-else you choose to bring in because you're wrong on the effects of firearms on crime.
You're moving the goal-posts.
I made no such claim. I said there is data that suggests that and there is logic that suggests that, but I explicitly said that is only enough (in my mind) to be used as evidence that you should do whatever you want with gun laws in your country and the anti-2A folks should stop acting like the case is settled and America needs to drop 2A.