[J-Man]

This one in Las Vegas, Nevada where gun laws are super lax.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-lasvegas-shooting/at-least-50-dead-more-than-200-hurt-in-las-vegas-shooting-idUSKCN1C70FU?utm_source=34553&utm_medium=partner

It's sad but I'm so used to hearing about this stuff I just can't find myself caring anymore.

Still got shot by police and not a normal citizen though. :/

Getting back on track here I find it weird there is no motive of this slaughter. Guy was normal for the most part except he obviously had a gambling addiction.

Even now with so much time passing we get nothing from the FBI or local LE. Whole thing seems odd to say the least. Largest mass shooting ever in America and nothing but silence.

I too know someone who was at the venue during the shooting. I haven't had a chance to talk to her yet about it. I do know she was quite sore the next day from falling and possibly being trampled. Supposedly it was a blur, maybe fight or flight syndrome? I'll be interested to hear if she heard or felt it was multiple shooters.

I will say I'm somewhat a conspiracy guy. I do not believe the official narrative on Sandy Hook. An AR15 doesn't have a 100% kill ratio, it's just not that kind of weapon. For all intense and purposes its a fast center fire .22 with muzzle velocity of 3300 FPS. Bullets go thru you and the bullet weights only 55 grains in most instances. Fast and effective but not nearly as lethal as a .308 or 30-06. Thus 10% or slightly more kill ratio in Vegas. You have to have shots to vitals or head wounds.

The purpose of these Nato weapons is to wound and take several individuals out of the fight taking the dude or dudess back to a hospital. Hoping to overwhelm the enemy into crying uncle.

[Jura-Glenlivet]

Sorry guys but I'm with the athiests on this one,

Less guns = Less death

Unless of course if you live in Switzerland where it doesn't seem to make any difference.

I thought you were raised Lutheran like myself and a follower of Christ?

Death can only be spiritual. Guns have no effect on that.

Apart from that, "Thou shalt not kill" bit.
It would seem the religious (Dither aside) are the bloodthirsty ones here.

I don't feel any less free now than when I was toting a gun, and what are you free from exactly, certainly not paranoia.

[Lord Dave]

...
Did you account for children who have smaller bodies and weaker constitution?  Or do you just assume you're right?

[J-Man]

...
Did you account for children who have smaller bodies and weaker constitution?  Or do you just assume you're right?

Oh now you want to hang your hat on my constitution? Which has nothing to do with trauma wounds. I'm always right, right?

[J-Man]

Sorry guys but I'm with the athiests on this one,

Less guns = Less death

Unless of course if you live in Switzerland where it doesn't seem to make any difference.

I thought you were raised Lutheran like myself and a follower of Christ?

Death can only be spiritual. Guns have no effect on that.

Apart from that, "Thou shalt not kill" bit.
It would seem the religious (Dither aside) are the bloodthirsty ones here.

I don't feel any less free now than when I was toting a gun, and what are you free from exactly, certainly not paranoia.

It's thou shall not murder.

I've never had TSA grab my crotch so I guess I am free.

[Rama Set]

Sorry guys but I'm with the athiests on this one,

Less guns = Less death

Unless of course if you live in Switzerland where it doesn't seem to make any difference.

I thought you were raised Lutheran like myself and a follower of Christ?

Death can only be spiritual. Guns have no effect on that.

Apart from that, "Thou shalt not kill" bit.
It would seem the religious (Dither aside) are the bloodthirsty ones here.

I don't feel any less free now than when I was toting a gun, and what are you free from exactly, certainly not paranoia.

It's thou shall not murder.

Incorrect, the hebrew verb used in the commandment mean a bunch of things including both "kill" and "murder".  Also, the interpretation of "murder" as "killing criminally" is a relatively modern one, probably within the last 1,000 years, that the people writing the bible surely didn't intend.  It is more appropriate that murder means, "to kill intentionally".

[Lord Dave]

...
Did you account for children who have smaller bodies and weaker constitution?  Or do you just assume you're right?

Oh now you want to hang your hat on my constitution? Which has nothing to do with trauma wounds. I'm always right, right?

I'm simply pointing out that any estimates on damage to a human body from a bullet is likely based on tests on an adult body and not a child.  A child will die a lot easier as their bodies aren't as durable as an adult's.  They have less blood, their organs are in a smaller area (and are smaller), and they lack alot of the knowledge and emotional control adults have.
Like if you get shot and don't die instantly, you might know to keep pressure on the wound.   A child would not and would simply cry in pain until they passed out from blood loss then death.

There is no reason why an AR-15 could not kill every child in a classroom without a problem. 

[J-Man]

Sorry guys but I'm with the athiests on this one,

Less guns = Less death

Unless of course if you live in Switzerland where it doesn't seem to make any difference.

I thought you were raised Lutheran like myself and a follower of Christ?

Death can only be spiritual. Guns have no effect on that.

Apart from that, "Thou shalt not kill" bit.
It would seem the religious (Dither aside) are the bloodthirsty ones here.

I don't feel any less free now than when I was toting a gun, and what are you free from exactly, certainly not paranoia.

It's thou shall not murder.

Incorrect, the hebrew verb used in the commandment mean a bunch of things including both "kill" and "murder".  Also, the interpretation of "murder" as "killing criminally" is a relatively modern one, probably within the last 1,000 years, that the people writing the bible surely didn't intend.  It is more appropriate that murder means, "to kill intentionally".

You are wrong and the word/scripture is very clear.

"The difference between the legal or illegal use of deadly force is really a matter of motive, intent and justification, and these distinctions come straight from the pages of Scripture."

You can familiarize yourself with the word of God and hopefully begin to understand the meaning.

http://coldcasechristianity.com/2013/the-difference-between-killing-and-murdering/

Junker yes I'm adding to this post because some peeps maybe hungry for the word? "to kill intentionally" is not the deal. It's to kill with "Malice" ie the intention or desire to do evil; ill will.

Evil, yes the shitty little demons I slay with pleasure.

Now those who don't care or never learned Bible study stuff. Moses didn't carry around tons of stones writing down the books of the bible. There wasn't pen and paper, only chisel and rock. There really wasn't a solid language, picture stories were used at this time too. What is assumed is Moses told stories for 15 GENERATIONS. Oral Tradition, lets sit around and talk shop, no smokie the weed guys, listen ! Then as paper and pen evolved as did languages, Moses' stories were put into writings.

Ok that's my story and I'm sticking with it. So, don't be a shitty little demon. Moses said we could axe dem bastards.....

[J-Man]

...
Did you account for children who have smaller bodies and weaker constitution?  Or do you just assume you're right?

Oh now you want to hang your hat on my constitution? Which has nothing to do with trauma wounds. I'm always right, right?

I'm simply pointing out that any estimates on damage to a human body from a bullet is likely based on tests on an adult body and not a child.  A child will die a lot easier as their bodies aren't as durable as an adult's.  They have less blood, their organs are in a smaller area (and are smaller), and they lack alot of the knowledge and emotional control adults have.
Like if you get shot and don't die instantly, you might know to keep pressure on the wound.   A child would not and would simply cry in pain until they passed out from blood loss then death.

There is no reason why an AR-15 could not kill every child in a classroom without a problem.

Au contraire, the Texas church assassin methodically went down the pew rows in the church to make head shots. It's caught on the video surveillance of the church. And thank God he was far from 100% kill even trying to accomplish such.

[Dither]

The Texas church assassin methodically went down the pew rows in the church to make head shots.

And if he didn't have access to that firearm, I wonder how many people he could have killed with his slingshot.

And you're a Lutheran, thats awesome, I love Lutherans, great sense of humor   (Patrick and Patrick)

I'm not one myself, more like Reformed Presbyterian, and I'm used to fighting about this subject with my American Brethern on the Reformed Forums that I was a part of before. Of course once I became a Flat Earther I was unceremoniously booted from my church first and then from the forums.

[Lord Dave]

...
Did you account for children who have smaller bodies and weaker constitution?  Or do you just assume you're right?

Oh now you want to hang your hat on my constitution? Which has nothing to do with trauma wounds. I'm always right, right?

I'm simply pointing out that any estimates on damage to a human body from a bullet is likely based on tests on an adult body and not a child.  A child will die a lot easier as their bodies aren't as durable as an adult's.  They have less blood, their organs are in a smaller area (and are smaller), and they lack alot of the knowledge and emotional control adults have.
Like if you get shot and don't die instantly, you might know to keep pressure on the wound.   A child would not and would simply cry in pain until they passed out from blood loss then death.

There is no reason why an AR-15 could not kill every child in a classroom without a problem.

Au contraire, the Texas church assassin methodically went down the pew rows in the church to make head shots. It's caught on the video surveillance of the church. And thank God he was far from 100% kill even trying to accomplish such.

How does that relate to Sandy Hook? 

[J-Man]

The Texas church assassin methodically went down the pew rows in the church to make head shots.

And if he didn't have access to that firearm, I wonder how many people he could have killed with his slingshot.

And you're a Lutheran, thats awesome, I love Lutherans, great sense of humor   (Patrick and Patrick)

I'm not one myself, more like Reformed Presbyterian, and I'm used to fighting about this subject with my American Brethern on the Reformed Forums that I was a part of before. Of course once I became a Flat Earther I was unceremoniously booted from my church first and then from the forums.

And how do you propose to have stopped him from acquiring a weapon? Do all these 100's of millions of weapons just disappear? This was a failure on the armed services by not reporting his domestic violence to the comp in the sky. I'm not a lawyer so consult one for info. This is not legal advise but my understanding that federal law allows a felon to own an antique rifle. Some states don't but both Calif. and Texas do from what I've read. Before 1968 guns weren't even required to have serial numbers and only automatic weapons were registered. So where are all these guns that have been sold? The Winchester "Gun that won the West" is in every barn, shop or home in over half this country, millions upon millions were produced, ie the lever action .30-.30 deer rifle.

Do all these historic guns just go poof? Are they any less capable of killing than an AR-15 with a 30 round mag? I own a 1897 mosin nagant that holds 5 rounds that is an antique. I can walk up to a private party in my state and ask if they can own this, and sell it right there without any paperwork. This rifle will shoot MOA at 200 yards with practice. I've done it. For those that don't know just how accurate that is, it's placing 3 rounds within 2" of each other at a distance of 200 yards, btw iron sights only this shooter is Cut a coke can in 1/2 and hit it 3 consecutive times at a length of 2 football fields? wow for a 100 year old rifle.

I don't own an AR or an AK......Don't need one

Go Jerry !

[Luke 22:35-38]

To read Luke’s arguments that things aren’t so bad, that guns are designed for entertainment and the countless deaths are an unfortunate by-product of all the fun America has, and anyway what about papercut fatalities in Finland, is to see the growing disconnect between what US citizens think the world is bound to be like, and how it actually is for the rest of the civilised world.

Two points.

1
After a couple of gun massacres in the 1980’s/90’s the UK banned assault rifles, handguns and tightened controls massively on gun ownership, it is estimated that 200,000 guns were removed from circulation. The reaction of the public? Bloody good show!
I was considering getting a handgun at the time as a gun club had just opened near me and shit who doesn’t want a gun? However, the Dunblane killing’s where a nut with handguns killed a bunch of children and teachers at a primary school, and the subsequent debate changed that. I couldn’t square me just wanting to have a gun with the increased possibility that that freedom would likely lead to more children cowering in cupboards while someone hunted them down and executed them. Apparently, Americans can.

2
I have in my time, for various reasons, been stopped by the police 12-20 times whilst driving. It’s an inconvenience, and the police are usually knobheads, yet not once have I been worried that I may die in the following encounter, the police themselves were not worried that they might die either, I wonder if these two points could be linked in anyway?

Oh they very muchly are linked.
The difference is that the UK does not have a right to bear arms.  The US does.  And to be patriotic, you MUST be ok with the 2nd amendment.  So it's illegal for the government to take all the guns.  Thus, gun makers have a nearly unblocked field to which they can sell their wares.  And Americans, being Americans, know that you can't be American unless guns are allowed.

BUT when some black people carried loaded guns in California one time, suddenly loaded guns were banned.

So maybe that's what they need to do: A bunch of muslims need to march as pro-gun with assault rifles and stuff in Texas and Oklahoma and Kansas.

Who called for the ban in California? Republicans or Democrats? If anything it shows that gun control is rooted in racism than anything else. As for the Muslim thing, as long as they're law abiding and not calling for the death of infidels, they have every right to keep and bear arms.

Repubs.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulford_Act

While the bill was supported by a few Republicans and even signed into law by Ronald Reagan, it was mostly supported by democrats as your own link states.

Yeah but I bet you'd be worried if they marched down your street, guns held high, saying "Freedom to fight.  Freedom to kill.  Freedom to use our guns as we will!  Allah Akbar!"

I would not because Muslims are bearing arms but the intent which they clearing proclaimed. Not only that but I'm not aware of any state that allows you to hold your weapon in public nor allow peopleto threaten to kill anyone they please.

[Luke 22:35-38]

To read Luke’s arguments that things aren’t so bad, that guns are designed for entertainment and the countless deaths are an unfortunate by-product of all the fun America has, and anyway what about paper-cut fatalities in Finland, is to see the growing disconnect between what US citizens think the world is bound to be like, and how it actually is for the rest of the civilised world.

Wow! Way to misrepresent my argument. Where have I stated such?

Here we go!

I've stated that guns aren't necessarily designed for killing.

Of all the rammel I have heard in defence of guns, this takes the biscuit.

Also I like to point out that statistically Finland has more mass shootings than we do.

More rubbish. You may have missed the point I made sometime back, so here it is again;
American guns on your soil have killed more of you, since 1968, than US fatalities in all the wars since your inception, think about that.

First place cars are on the same level, secondly that number includes suicides which are personal choices, and thirdly even more people have used firearms for protection in the same time frame.

I was considering getting a handgun at the time as a gun club had just opened near me and shit who doesn’t want a gun? However, the Dunblane killing’s where a nut with handguns killed a bunch of children and teachers at a primary school, and the subsequent debate changed that. I couldn’t square me just wanting to have a gun with the increased possibility that that freedom would likely lead to more children cowering in cupboards while someone hunted them down and executed them. Apparently, Americans can

Had someone at that school was armed they could've stopped the threat. .

Well that has worked out well for you hasn’t it? You have more guns than people in your country but still it happens.

That's faulty logic. That be like saying that your country have the most deer population in the entire world so how come you're not seeing 50 of them everyday on your way to work? There are things called demographics. Most mass shootings (whether on purpose or by happenstance) are committed in gun free zones where people aren't allowed to carry. Also the recent shooting in Texas was stopped by a person armed with an AR15 of all things.

I'm not worried about dying at a traffic stop because I know how to act. In fact, because of my job, I'm in contact with law enforcement almost every week.

You kind of underline my point there, we don’t have to worry, we don’t have to know how to act.
 
A particularly volatile work colleague got caught taking a short cut, wrong way down a one-way street by a police car coming the other way, he jumped out of the car and started to pelt the two officers with a bag of revels he was eating, whilst suggesting loudly that their parents had unnatural liaisons with farm animals (another co-worker was thankfully with him), he got a fine and points on his license, not gunned down.
 
I don’t know what the solution is to your woes, you have too many firearms in circulation, you have a retarded love for the things that defies explanation, you are paranoid about each other and your government, and the gun makers have convinced you that without them you would become slaves, so you buy more, and collectively bury your heads in the mounting pile of bodies and pretend nothing is wrong. L. Dave was right to get out.

Evidence for any of that?

[J-Man]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_carry_in_the_United_States

25 or so states allow open carry, believe that would be loaded too. Allah Akbar optional

[Rama Set]

Sorry guys but I'm with the athiests on this one,

Less guns = Less death

Unless of course if you live in Switzerland where it doesn't seem to make any difference.

I thought you were raised Lutheran like myself and a follower of Christ?

Death can only be spiritual. Guns have no effect on that.

Apart from that, "Thou shalt not kill" bit.
It would seem the religious (Dither aside) are the bloodthirsty ones here.

I don't feel any less free now than when I was toting a gun, and what are you free from exactly, certainly not paranoia.

It's thou shall not murder.

Incorrect, the hebrew verb used in the commandment mean a bunch of things including both "kill" and "murder".  Also, the interpretation of "murder" as "killing criminally" is a relatively modern one, probably within the last 1,000 years, that the people writing the bible surely didn't intend.  It is more appropriate that murder means, "to kill intentionally".

You are wrong and the word/scripture is very clear.

"The difference between the legal or illegal use of deadly force is really a matter of motive, intent and justification, and these distinctions come straight from the pages of Scripture."

You can familiarize yourself with the word of God and hopefully begin to understand the meaning.

http://coldcasechristianity.com/2013/the-difference-between-killing-and-murdering/

Junker yes I'm adding to this post because some peeps maybe hungry for the word? "to kill intentionally" is not the deal. It's to kill with "Malice" ie the intention or desire to do evil; ill will.

Evil, yes the shitty little demons I slay with pleasure.

Now those who don't care or never learned Bible study stuff. Moses didn't carry around tons of stones writing down the books of the bible. There wasn't pen and paper, only chisel and rock. There really wasn't a solid language, picture stories were used at this time too. What is assumed is Moses told stories for 15 GENERATIONS. Oral Tradition, lets sit around and talk shop, no smokie the weed guys, listen ! Then as paper and pen evolved as did languages, Moses' stories were put into writings.

Ok that's my story and I'm sticking with it. So, don't be a shitty little demon. Moses said we could axe dem bastards.....

That page only references English translations of the Pentateuch which is irrelevant to what the commandments say. The commandments are written in Hebrew and any credible interpretation of them should reference the Hebrew definitions of words.

I also delight in pointing out that on your view an abortion is not murder and therefore is ok under the Ten Commandments.

Anyway, you are obviously a biblical cherry picker so I doubt you will concede any of the points made here. Unless of course you kill your children for disobeying or kill those that wear clothes made from more than one kind of cloth? Do you do that?

[Jura-Glenlivet]

American guns on your soil have killed more of you, since 1968, than US fatalities in all the wars since your inception, think about that.

First place cars are on the same level, secondly that number includes suicides which are personal choices, and thirdly even more people have used firearms for protection in the same time frame.

WTF are you talking about cars for? All countries have cars and resultant deaths, start a new thread if it bothers you and stop trying to deflect the fact that your addiction is killing your own people in vast numbers in addition to car/drug/donkey deaths.

So, you are stating that more US citizens have defended themselves against assailants in that period, with guns, than died in all the wars? If that’s the case (and I’m calling bullshit), then I think that our point that guns are bad for society is proven. As millions of Muricans having to whip out their six-shooters to fend off their own neighbours is something that doesn’t happen at all in Europe.

I couldn’t square, me just wanting to have a gun with the increased possibility that that freedom would likely lead to more children cowering in cupboards while someone hunted them down and executed them. Apparently, Americans can

Had someone at that school was armed they could've stopped the threat. .

Well that has worked out well for you hasn’t it? You have more guns than people in your country but still it happens.

That's faulty logic. That be like saying that your country have the most deer population in the entire world so how come you're not seeing 50 of them everyday on your way to work? There are things called demographics. Most mass shootings (whether on purpose or by happenstance) are committed in gun free zones where people aren't allowed to carry. Also the recent shooting in Texas was stopped by a person armed with an AR15 of all things. .

Your analogy sucks, but let’s run through this; The Dunblane massacre was the fault of the teachers/kids in a small infant school in Scotland, as they weren’t “packing” and not that a loon was allowed a gun. The perpetrators of mass shootings gravitate to areas of low or no guns (No shit!) so having more guns than people (US style) still isn’t enough and areas where guns are prohibited are asking for it, what we need is more guns. And a man putting a few bullets in a guy who had finished blowing away a church full of people is proof of this? And my logic is faulty?

 

I'm not worried about dying at a traffic stop because I know how to act. In fact, because of my job, I'm in contact with law enforcement almost every week.


You kind of underline my point there, we don’t have to worry, we don’t have to know how to act.

I don’t know what the solution is to your woes, you have too many firearms in circulation (More guns than people), you have a retarded love for the things that defies explanation (see all of the above posts), you are paranoid about each other and your government, and the gun makers have convinced you that without them you would become slaves,(see internet) so you buy more, and collectively bury your heads in the mounting pile of bodies and pretend nothing is wrong (your head smells of corpse). L. Dave was right to get out.(ask him)


Evidence for any of that?

See red bits.

[Lord Dave]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_carry_in_the_United_States

25 or so states allow open carry, believe that would be loaded too. Allah Akbar optional

Yes but when Americans see a group packing that they don't like, they'll ban guns pretty damn quick.

Why do you think when a terrorist shoots up a place there's  immediate talk of some kind of law change for immigration but when a red blooded, white American does it, only the anti-gun group gives a shit.  The Vegas shooting is a perfect example.

1) would guns have helped?  No.  The perpetrator was too far away for anything other than an assault rifle or something with a scope to do any good.  And who carries that to a party?
2) Would blocking immigrants help? No, he was an American born man.
3) Would cracking down on blacks help?  No, he was white.

Thus, when Fox News had to talk about it, they had nothing to rage against.  It was literally "This is the price we pay for open and lax gun laws.  But we can't say that so we'll say nothing and hope no one notices."

Yeah.
Sandy Hook:
"Let's make sure schools have guns in them."  Cause that's just what an elementary school needs: Teachers with loaded guns in their desks.  That was their solution.
"Oh but we'd train them to use it properly and store it and bla bla bla"
Then I say
Why not have a god damn cop at every school?  Or better yet, we can get the nation guard to just stand around with machine guns looking all intimidating.  Why don't we do that?

[Luke 22:35-38]

American guns on your soil have killed more of you, since 1968, than US fatalities in all the wars since your inception, think about that.

First place cars are on the same level, secondly that number includes suicides which are personal choices, and thirdly even more people have used firearms for protection in the same time frame.

WTF are you talking about cars for? All countries have cars and resultant deaths, start a new thread if it bothers you and stop trying to deflect the fact that your addiction is killing your own people in vast numbers in addition to car/drug/donkey deaths.

Using your logic, we should ban cars or for you get rid of your car because of how many people died from them.

So, you are stating that more US citizens have defended themselves against assailants in that period, with guns, than died in all the wars? If that’s the case (and I’m calling bullshit), then I think that our point that guns are bad for society is proven. As millions of Muricans having to whip out their six-shooters to fend off their own neighbours is something that doesn’t happen at all in Europe.

So self defense is bad? If we were talking about martial arts would you say the same thing? X amount of people used Krav Mega for bad but far more people used Krav Mega for good.

I couldn’t square, me just wanting to have a gun with the increased possibility that that freedom would likely lead to more children cowering in cupboards while someone hunted them down and executed them. Apparently, Americans can

Had someone at that school was armed they could've stopped the threat. .

Well that has worked out well for you hasn’t it? You have more guns than people in your country but still it happens.

That's faulty logic. That be like saying that your country have the most deer population in the entire world so how come you're not seeing 50 of them everyday on your way to work? There are things called demographics. Most mass shootings (whether on purpose or by happenstance) are committed in gun free zones where people aren't allowed to carry. Also the recent shooting in Texas was stopped by a person armed with an AR15 of all things. .

Your analogy sucks, but let’s run through this; The Dunblane massacre was the fault of the teachers/kids in a small infant school in Scotland, as they weren’t “packing” and not that a loon was allowed a gun.

No. It's no more their fault than it is the fault of the parent for not buckling in his child because some crazy law says you can't use a seatbelt on a certain stretch of the road. I'ts the government's and/or the establishment's fault for disarming the teachers who wanted to carry.

The perpetrators of mass shootings gravitate to areas of low or no guns (No shit!) so having more guns than people (US style) still isn’t enough and areas where guns are prohibited are asking for it, what we need is more guns. And a man putting a few bullets in a guy who had finished blowing away a church full of people is proof of this? And my logic is faulty?

Yeah. if more guns equal more crime then why haven't we heard of shootings in gun shops, shows, ranges, and police stations?

I'm not worried about dying at a traffic stop because I know how to act. In fact, because of my job, I'm in contact with law enforcement almost every week.


You kind of underline my point there, we don’t have to worry, we don’t have to know how to act.

I don’t know what the solution is to your woes, you have too many firearms in circulation (More guns than people), you have a retarded love for the things that defies explanation (see all of the above posts), you are paranoid about each other and your government, and the gun makers have convinced you that without them you would become slaves,(see internet) so you buy more, and collectively bury your heads in the mounting pile of bodies and pretend nothing is wrong (your head smells of corpse). L. Dave was right to get out.(ask him)


Evidence for any of that?

See red bits.

How is that evidence? Is it paranoid to have a fire extinguisher?

[Lord Dave]

More guns = More crime.
Why are you assuming that the density of guns in a specific area mean more crimes in that area?  More guns in a country means said country has more crime.  It's pretty simple correlation.

And why does this only apply to America, anyway?  Why is it that only America has the "more guns = Safer" rule that you seem to think works?