In response to:

Local TV Anchor Delivers Blistering Fact-Check of Piers Morgan’s Anti-Gun Claims

StanatTX Wrote: Jan 09, 2013 3:27 PM
All due respect to the anchor, the argument is not that less guns means less crime. It's that less guns means less homicides. He has to give the murder rate of various countries, not the violent crime rate. Even if you oppose gun control, the argument is that a crime is less likely to result in death if there are less guns. The violent crime rate is irrelevant.
Earl29 Wrote: Jan 09, 2013 6:33 PM
I don't want to be robbed or beaten, either. Guns are used about 2.5 million times a year to prevent crime. Frankly, I prefer not to be a helpless victim. The violent crime rate is not irrelevant to the victim.
Jay Wye Wrote: Jan 09, 2013 6:07 PM
Britain's gun crime rate was lower than the US -BEFORE- they enacted "strict gun control",and after enactment,their gun crime INCREASED.
Regardless of what new laws they added,the Brits were already less homicidal. They've been CONDITIONED by centuries of being disarmed by their Kings.
Jay Wye Wrote: Jan 09, 2013 6:09 PM
And how many homicides would have been PREVENTED if the ODC had had a gun?

Here in the US,guns are used over 2 MILLION times every year for self-defense. take that away,and crime will SOAR,and more people will be harmed.
Primus54 from Ohio Wrote: Jan 09, 2013 3:40 PM
Now THAT'S as much a load of manure as the "facts" Morgan tries to peddle.

If your point is less homicides... then ALL homicides that occur by any means needs to be discussed.

I doubt the victims of a violent crime find it "irrelevant", however they suffered "violence".
StanatTX Wrote: Jan 09, 2013 3:51 PM
I doubt you're being serious, but I'll play a little.

My comment is quite narrow. The anchor did not back up his point with the violent crime rate.

My comment says nothing more.

Obviously violent crime is not irrelevant. The category is irrelevant or at the least quite incomplete regarding the anchor's point.

Second, I wrote homicides -- which obviously means ALL homicides. That's the way it is with a word like homicides.
Earl29 Wrote: Jan 09, 2013 6:35 PM
Yes, it is quite narrow. It is, in fact, nit-picking.
AmyDB Wrote: Jan 09, 2013 3:38 PM
So it's better to be a victim of crime than to have the ability to defend one's self?
MAVERICK ONE Wrote: Jan 21, 2013 2:33 AM
Nobody has mentioned yet....."Better to tried by 12 than carried by 6" Next is I saw a salesman trying to show a woman how to insert a clip, charge it and engage the safety...Without breaking one of her nails..//Real smart elic used car salesman type. Any novice ***what is needed is a 2 inch bbl. 5 or 6 shot revolver---double action .38 special with 158 grain hollow point bullets. at the same settong the salesman was trying & showing a guy a 12 gauge "black" shotgun (w/a 3inch chamber) without a stock. Moron must have been a golfer, stockbroker, or a ballplayer(?) Dangerous for a novice

Via The Blaze: Ben Swann, a local Fox anchor for WXIX-TV in Cincinnati, offered up a fascinating fact-check of some of the stats that the British CNN host has been using.

 

“In the UK, there are 2,034 violent crimes per 100,000 people...the U.S. has a violent crime rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents."