Gun homicides down dramatically, Americans unaware

Easily explained.

As the DHS has bought all the ammo, people are too poor to afford buying bullets any more, so they are having to use kitchen knives on their victims.

If you take out Detroit and Shitcago, it gets even better. The libtard stongholds account for a big chunk of the gun violence in America.

Stop smoking that crack!

According to the DOJ, less than 8% of firearm related homicides occur in rural areas, and as we know, geographically, the US is overwhelmingly rural with one of the lowest population densities of any country.

The simple fact is, the vast majority of this country does not have a 'gun violence' problem and doesn't need another one-size-fits-no-one 'solution' from the federal government.

If they want to address the problem that does exist, they can start by going after the thugs and gangbangers in the inner cities. Of course, that'll never happen, because a certain political party has too much invested in cultivating the victim status of those areas for votes.

Gun violence dramatically in recent years. Fake gun violence news stories up dramatically under Obama!

HA! In Dallas? That's like saying nobody showed up for an ANTI Obama protest in Seattle.

Duh...

This. Violent crime is down.

But, mass shootings are way up.

How about this simple theory

Modern Societies are becoming increasingly disconnected by use of technology. So much so that everyone is shooting each other more empty threats on social media, then engaging in actual face to face confrontations. Thus resulting in this gradual decline of killings.

Really? So superior trauma treatment has decreased gun crime?

Odd. I thought those doctors fixed injuries not psychological problems.

No, actually, mass shootings are way down. However, the 24 hour news' industries ability to constantly milk the mass shootings is *WAY* up.

...seems that you're a case in point.

Actually, they're not up all that much. You do hear more about it, though.

Shove it up your ass! Go argue with the FBI crime stats.

Thus the bad acting scenes portrayed on MSM by the anti-gun actorvists.

No, trauma treatment by emts and emergency rooms are a lot better at treating gun shot wounds and keeping victims alive.

Usually official stats are dismissed on GLP, unless of course it suits the narrative...

You'll be agreeing with the unemployment stats next

Funny!

missing the (gun)boat, appears to me.

the point is the official stats contradict the official "president". at least in his views about rifles and such.

Americans... also mostly clueless as to all of the fucking false flags being perpetuated against them. News @ 11.

What a moron you are.

The less restrictive the gun laws, the LESS crime. The fact that there are MORE gun owners than ever before, is the reason that gun-related crime is lower.

An unarmed idiot is an easy mark for a criminal. People like you want everybody to be unarmed idiots.

Another reason, that I have seen mentioned, is the aging of the baby boom generation. In 1993 the youngest baby boomers were 29, the oldest 47. Violent crime is overwhelmingly perpetrated by younger males.

Starting in the 1960s, America saw a huge increase in levels of violent crime that peaked in the early 1990s, then steadily declined, and continues to decline today. All kinds of theories have been promulgated to explain this peak and decline in crime, and plenty of politicians in the 1990s took credit for it. But in what I personally consider to be a tour de force of journalism, Kevin Drum of Mother Jones has summarized all of the available research. All of it points to one simple idea: violent crime rose as a result of lead poisoning because of leaded gasoline. It declined because of lead abatement policies.

"" style="box-sizing: border-box; border: 0px; width: 300px; max-width: 100%; margin: 0px auto !important; vertical-align: bottom;">

There are three basic reasons why this theory should be believed. First, as Drum points out, the numbers correlate almost perfectly. “If you add a lag time of 23 years,” he writes. “Lead emissions from automobiles explain 90 percent of the variation in violent crime in America. Toddlers who ingested high levels of lead in the ’40s and ’50s really were more likely to become violent criminals in the ’60s, ’70s, and ’80s.”

Second, this correlation holds true with no exceptions. Every country studied has shown this same strong correlation between leaded gasoline and violent crime rates. Within the United States, you can see the data at the state level. Where lead concentrations declined quickly, crime declined quickly. Where it declined slowly, crime declined slowly. The data even holds true at the neighborhood level – high lead concentrations correlate so well that you can overlay maps of crime rates over maps of lead concentrations and get an almost perfect fit.

[link to www.forbes.com]

I've heard that theory regarding leaded gasoline before and I think its an interesting one worthy of more study. The basic premise of a strong correlation between leaded fuel use and emissions versus high crime rates is certainly true. I'm not quite sold on it yet, but its intriguing.

Not for law enforcement, for the prison workforce industry.

LOL. Um.........heh.

Good luck with the good work.

I am sure you will be welcomed on every corner.

Remember to use bright colored markers for you signs.

Get the ones that glow in the dark and you can go 24/7.