It’s a weak argument overall littered with bad assumptions, I’m not even surprised this came from you. More guns in the hands of criminals = more effective weapons = fewer murders 
Bwahahaha. Yeah, not shocking. The repeating pattern here is a bias, which leads to desperating “reasoning”, to support the belief.
Clearly you’ve never heard of Marty McSorely.
^oh wow that was vicious
i’m not saying anything definitive, i understand the limits of the argument, nor was i referring to murders in particular. it is a greater tragedy that 100 people are assaulted versus 1 person killed, all things equal, both in terms of the scope of violence (i.e. # of people touched by it) and its effect on economic productivity and growth (e.g. lost time due to injury, effect on individuals’ psyche, etc). i seriously don’t think anyone can tell me that people would more more inclined to confront a guy with a gun versus a guy with a less lethal weapon. the odds of death and injury rise exponentially once you start fighting, whether its with a gun or without. if there are fewer fights, fewer people get seriously injured or killed. if you take a viewpoint of the good of society, including the perps, which is the fairest and most neutral position, banning guns is worse for society, at least as it pertains to morbidity and/or mortality.
the only thing that matters is the aggregate demeanor of the society as a whole. Americans kill more people because they tend to have an “Us vs. Them” mentality in all that they do. as a Canadian who deals with both Americans and Canadians on a daily basis, i can attest that the only difference between Canadians and Americans is this and the only thing a Texan and a New Yorker have in common is this.
if you have no reason to use any weapon, the availability of weapons is a meaningless debate.
Yes, lets ignore the underlying assumption you make that without a gun someone is no less likely to engage in the activity to begin with given a less effective deterrent. Also, the rest of your assumptions such as the completely arbitrary statistic of 100 people assaulted vs 1 killed lack any quantitative or qualitative basis and the conclusion is entirely your arbitrary opinion. You also use the subjective point that including the perps is the most “fair” position, which is also an opinion stated as a fact as well. There is also not one clear link or peice of evidence to support any of your underlying assumptions about behavior or outcomes, but at the end you state your conclusion as if even a single shred of it is based on factual logic or research. Nice “analysis”.
Your “us versus them” point is also arbitrarily based at best and ignores the fact that 6% of our population comprises 50% of firearm deaths while painting with a broad brush. It also ignores stark differences in population densities and the fact that Canada is a backwater puppet state with a failing economy. It’s no less silly and factually ignorant than your earlier myopic emphasis on assault rifles which contribute a whopping 2% to gun deaths.
in Canada and in the U.S., even perps, are considered Canadians/Americans. the system is in place to protect them too and their rights and freedoms are protected by the law. i make no assumptions. and clearly the 1 vs. 100 is for argument’s sake and i do think it would be 1 vs. many, no matter how you look at it.
i get it. you’re a libertarian who believes people should take care of themselves and the state has no responsibility and you require that everyone else provides extensive evidence meanwhile you use rhetoric just the same and small sample studies to justify your positions.
yes and the 6% is the them. we don’t have a them. that’s the difference.
I’ve actually put forward a butt load of stats in this thread. Try again.
I’m also not a libertarian, but you don’t equally weight perpetrators and while the system is built to protect perpetrators, laws are not designed to protect them equally. The simple existance of criminal law demonstrates this by establishing one set of legal and allowed behavior. For example, self defense laws exist in both societies.
By the same extension singling out Americans vs Canadians reflects an us versus them mentality. No, it’s simply addressing the realities of the situation.
“There was one guy,but he don’t shoot no more. A brutal son of a bitch. Most boys shoot to kill. He’d shoot to wound, wait till his friends come to help, kill them too. Turned one target into four.” - The Shooter 2:40 [video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqZuL8iZchU]
i never said equal weight wrt perps but their rights/freedoms and productive value must be considered.
it’s natural to play the game of us vs. them when comparing societies. the problem lies when the us vs. them occurs within one’s society. this has to be like grade 3 history for you guys. it’s always been us vs. them to some degree. that’s why all Canadian political parties are the same and the two U.S. parties are polar opposites. it’s still the union vs. the confederacy.
Well, as a foreigner, you must be the expert.
My first major problem is your ignorance of clearly relevant statistics.
My second is the implied racism of your country. With a 3% black population, it’s very easy to see why there’s no “us versus them” in Canada. You’ve done a good job of keeping all the them’s out, demonizinig the nations that don’t and congratulating yourselves across the great white north for your homogenous society. Meanwhile your nation of hypocricy has the gaul and complete lack of self awareness to lecture the US on inclusion and equality. ROFL.
Going back to the start of the thread, you’re basically shocked at Trump for trying to emulate Canada’s immigration profile.
That’s why both societies put them in jail for 20 years for murder?
Toronto is the most multicultural city in the world. It is not even half white. Vancouver is also not even half white. So you’re idea that Canada is a homogenous pot of loving white folk is completely incorrect. Big city Canada is more diverse than big city U.S.A. So I’m guessing you have no idea what you’re talking about. Americans love using the multi-cultural excuse but its not a good one.
Oh, well then by all means, lets define Canada by Toronto and Vancouver and ignore the aggregate statistics while cherry picking what we want! Quebec province is 87% white, so what’s your point? You guys must all love bad analysis. In fact, this points even more towards just how white the majority of your geography and population pools are.
It’s curous that your most diverse city, Vancouver, leads in every major crime statistic, with violent gun offences roughly twice the Canadian average rate. It rivaled by Toronto and Montreal. But yet diversity and population density are non-factors in any gun analysis between the much more diverse US and Canada? Are you guys really this far out to lunch?
Is skin color now considered a “culture”?
Even comparing Canada’s black population to America’s doesn’t make much sense. A better Canadian group to choose would be the Aboriginal Peoples of Canada. They have a more similar socio-economic situation to America’s black population. Unsurprisingly, they’re killing each other off or in prison.
Lots of good stats here:
Compare Toronto to Chicago. Similar sizes. Climate. Geography. Violence rates?
Poll shows 2/3 of potential GOP primary voters back trumps muslim ban
Chicago 33% African American, Toronto 8%. Chicago= significantly higher population density. Thank you for proving my point.