Tucson tea party founder says Giffords to blame for getting shot

My first thought on reading the headline was "WTF?" Reading the story just left me dumbfounded. I had to read it again. Could anyone really be that jaw dropping mean? Apparently yes. Yes they can.

Then the thought occurred to me that there are lots of folks out there that eat this crap up like it was candy. Scary, eh.

By Monday everyone will know that this whole thing was Rep. Giffords' fault. And those innocent by-standers? Well they just had no business being there now did they? [/s]

These people are cold.
Wow, just wow.
*shakes head*

What makes you think they are not already rejoicing? And how much you want to bet a Republican now wins the seat? The tea bag partisans took no time at all to blame the Congresswoman for being in the way of the bullet.

With the far right it is always about blame the "other" rather than work towards the common good. Banks make loans that are unsustainable, blame the borrower. Jobs are outsourced over seas, blame the Unions (even if it is a non union job) instead of the Greed of the Corporations and their owners. People are on unemployment blame them for not getting a job, even when there are no jobs to get. People get sick and have to go to the E.R. for primary care, blame them for not having insurance, not the Insurance companies who won't sell them a policy and drop them the moment they get sick.

And the trully sad part is they don't even have the empathy to see themselves doing this, it is all about THEM and THEIRS not ALL of US together. It is selfish, arrogant, greedy and heartless: and it does not speak well for them.

doesnt the Rep gov get to appoint someone to her seat if she cant continue in office? Another TP member?

Senators yes, Representatives require a special election.

CynicL1

What makes you think they are not already rejoicing? And how much you want to bet a Republican now wins the seat?

Gabrielle Giffords is merely 2 months into her 3rd elected term as an AZ Congressional Rep. She is currently "on sick leave". She has NOT lost her seat.

It is a serious injury ... but nothing has determined yet whether she can or cant continue to preform her duties as elected. She may have some permanent, residual "disabilities" resulting from her "work-related" injuries at the hands of the assassin, BUT there are laws preventing discrimination based upon physical handicaps.

Hawkings is a prime example of the impact anyone can have on society as a whole, regardless of the physical limitations handicaps may impose on an individual.

Whether Gabby Giffords come through stronger and unscathed or permanently disabled, her ability to preform her elected duties have not at this time been determined. Currently, as anyone else would be entitled to in the advent of a medical emergency, Gabby Giffords is on "medical leave" due to a "work related injury".

a child who was a wonderful American.

And she was a billion times more valuable to our society than an entire nation of idiots like Mr. Trent Humphries.

Amen madvargr. I agree henry....1000 times up........

The horrible irony of this is they wrap themselves in the flag and 9/11 saying how patriotic they are, then they attack the memory someone who was born on that very date trying to follow her American dream. They disgust me beyond words, I don't see how they can live with themselves. Wait I forgot they are all about themselves no one else matters! Just like their leader Sarah Palin.

Conscience.

the inner sense of what is right or wrong in one's conduct or motives, impelling one toward right action

We already know they were unconscious for the entire Bush Administration.

Hey, God,

Any way we can trade Trent for Christine?

Thank you!
TJG

I am an athiest, but I don't think either of you really want to pray for the death of another person... Isn't that the firs step down the road to becoming what it is you currently abhor?

As we have always beentold:

Only the Good Die Young.

Palin and her ilk have long, long, and very loney, lives ahead of them.

Perhaps they have greater time on earth because God wants to give them every chance possible TO DEVELOP A SOUL.

At least your tears are not the crocodile kind like another in public office.....who BTW, couldn't be bothered going to the service for the REAL victims but instead stayed and partied with the GreedyObstructionistParty of NO compassion! (not even for their own!)

Hey, did you hear about the Baggy so stupid the other Baggies noticed ??

Blue: From one Ohioan to another, John Boehner embarrassed every Ohioan last night because, he opted to attend a cocktail party, instead of the memorial. If we have a true emergency, in the Buckeye state, I hope we will not need, to depend on John-boy. His priorities are right on the mark, for Republicans. He has no grace, no class, no ethics. He cries at the drop of a hat, for any injustice, he perceives as anti-Republican, but ignored the victims, families and friends of those in Tucson. Hopefully Ohioans will remember Boehner's lack of empathy, when he comes up for re-election.

If he looses the "majority seat" in 2012, I will invite you to a "Cocktail party."

As for Trent Humphries, I can only image the man has no brain, to make such a statement. Maybe, he lives in the Land Of Oz!

Boehner= no heart, Humphries= no brain and no courage!

Is that Sarah behind that curtain? Palin= None of the above!

Yes! Henry, I SOOO agree! I hope he is on one of the lists of Homeland Security! Can he be committed for being a danger to himself or others? If so...................DO IT, Arizona!

I would suggest 1,500

Take that back.,

From one Ohioan to another, John Boehner embarrassed every Ohioan last night because, he opted to attend a cocktail party, instead of the memorial.

Boehner has been and will continue to be an embarrassment to Buckeyes as he drags the legislative process through the mire he lives in. Let's hope we can celebrate his "demotion" in 2012!

FrReq sent your way...

What good is a dictionary if you can't spell?

I disagree - there is no need for a dictionary if you say exactly what you mean, and he meant what he said, of that I have no doubt.

I know henry, me too;-)

i find with a Tea Bag, the longers its held under the water the better

Mr Parker, may I suggest that boiling water is best.

it was 'the difference between genius and stupidity'... and it was Einstein. and it appears to be accurate.

Those four who resigned are Republicans and at least one, Mille, resigned because he was afraid of the tea party. This in itself is suspicious. Why are they afraid of members of their own party? It was a democrat that got shot. Or was she the intended victim? Was the real victim Judge Rolls who was at the center of the immigration debate. This sure would explain why four AZ Republicans resigned. If had nothing to do with Gifford then the Cross Hairs over the district were meant for Roll.

Was the real victim Judge Rolls who was at the center of the immigration debate. This sure would explain why four AZ Republicans resigned. If had nothing to do with Gifford then the Cross Hairs over the district were meant for Roll. Or maybe it was too good to be true - two birds with one stone! Judge Rolls was accused by many conservatives as being too moderate. The Baggers HATE moderates!

DerryGirl the judge just happend by, he was simply a handy target of opportunity for the maniac, but I am sure he rejoiced in geting a Twofer: The Congresswoman and the Judge.

Henry I am not sure they have any understanding of what America IS or the ability to do so. They hate simply because Government and Democrats have been demonized for Decades now and it has sunk into their psyche in such a way they cannot help themselves. In my opinion it is almost pathological now, and does not bode well for the future of America.

I think they are ALL Treasonous! They truly are fomenting for a Revolution! It's BEYOND frightening, into totally insane!

DerryGirl the judge just happend by, he was simply a handy target of opportunity for the maniac, but I am sure he rejoiced in geting a Twofer: The Congresswoman and the Judge

So we are to believe. However, after I did all the research on the judge and on Loughner, I began to wonder if Judge Roll was the intended victim. Or maybe Loughner was there to see Giffords and the judge showed up and Loughner took the chance to assassinate him and those around him.

I just found something interesting. I was looking up Gifford and found an article that headlined: Was Judge John Roll an intentional target of the Giffords shooting? I hit the link and I ask you to and look what happens.

http://www.naturalnews.com/030999_Judge_John_Roll_shooting.html

I am getting really concerned now.

He just happened to stop in.....dont read too much into this............

I am not reading anything into it. It is there for all to see. Judge Roll was at the center of the AZ immigration debate. There were threats on his life.

http://firedoglake.com/2011/01/08/chief-judge-john-roll-dead-in-az-shooting-received-death-threats-over-2009-immigration-case/

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47277.html

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2011/01/08/arizona-chief-u-s-district-judge-john-m-roll-assassinated-in-t/

Dave, did you open the link I posted in 9.8?

Huskergal - the article you linked at 9.8 has been removed! What did it say,roughly?

That is what I was pointing out. It has been removed. WHY? It wasn't published to the public for very long as it was new when I went to read it. That is why I said "I am really getting concerned now."

G. H.

I think they are ALL Treasonous! They truly are fomenting for a Revolution! It's BEYOND frightening, into totally insane!

If only we could be so lucky as for them to attempt to do such ... then they would get a taste of the other sword's edge of the 14th Amendment:

AMENDMENT XIV

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_amendments_11-27.html

Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868.

Note: Article I, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of the 14th amendment.

Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 2.
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age,* and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Section 3.
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4.
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5.
The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

*Changed by section 1 of the 26th amendment.

We wouldnt have to worry about them ever being able to hold office or vote again thanks to Amendment 14, Section 3 ratified on July 9, 1968 and still quite enforce ... unless 2/3 vote of those remaining in Congress vote to "remove this" political "disability" - which would be political suicide for those who left in office who did. And none of them could dare attempt to run for President or VP since they would automatically, upon revolution, lose their "natural born citizenship" and to regain American citizenship, would have to be naturalized like any other immigrant (and would have to "wait in line" like legal immigrants have to do). Anyone in revolution against the USA has publically renounced their citizenship ... and when an American publically and legally renounces their American citizenship, it is damn near impossible to get it back ... ask Elizabeth Taylor.

Yes silence is consent. Are we all sitting at out computers and dissenting because if this is all we are doing, we are giving tea pertyers our consent.

Trent Humphries' can say what he wants, the tea parters can make all the demands they want, etc. because no one is standing up to them. 4 AZ Republicans resigned from their positions because they are afraid that they are not conservative enough for the Tea Party Members and are afraid for their lives and the lives of their families. That tells me plenty. Trent's statement also tells me plenty. Unless we get up and stand together and shout down this demanding demented group we will lose this country. We, you and I, will lose this country to the Tea Party and their demands.

Silence instead of criticism of such statements. The Tea Party will not disown their right wing extremists, even the ones busy writing death threat letters or likely to be the next Jared Loughner. They accept white supremacists, racists, gun fanatics, Timothy McVeigh type anti government people, etc... because they need all the votes they can get. Yet they get offended with criticisms of their extremists and say don't stereotype all of us by our extremists.

Then similarly the Republican Party will not disown the Tea Party, as they need all the votes they can get.

Then similarly the Republican Party will not disown the Tea Party, as they need all the votes they can get.

What? An AZ Republican appointed Judge was assassinated in AZ. Four Republican resigned from their positions in Az because they are afraid that they will meet the same fate because they do not believe they are "conservative" enough for the Tea Party Members. Do you not see that the Republicans are running off into hiding because of these extremists that theu hooked in with for their votes. The Repoubliucan Party will soon extinct an it will be known as the TeaParty.

husker, yep I seeded an article on this last night and interestingly enough the Tea Party members here are ignoring it and trying to pretend it didn´t happen.

Pretty much, yup.

Are the teapartiers a registered political party as Republicans and Democrats are? If they are not, which would explain why they run as Republicans, they have just qualified for being listed as a Known Terrorist Group by the very definition the Republican party set down.

I surely HOPE so, daMamma! If HE is the example of their leadership, then they are a KTG!

daMomma is absolutely right and a known terrorist group has got to be stopped.

Is it just me or are we really in the Bizzaro world since 2009!

What the Heck happened?

The tea-party was founded.

that's really not the worst of it... the most of the tea-party were\are decent folk,,, but big money and the "dick" armey's professional polotical activists got ahold of it and it was infiltrated by a bunch of hatefull morons and the reasonable folk either left or got drowned out....

yes it's bizzarro and we have been beaten down by 24\7\365 cable news and instant access online turbulance.... ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Agreed! The Tea Party was a viable and welcome message when initiated. It was when the big corporate funders, the Armey's and the Rove's and the Palin's got involved that not only did the message get lost, it went crazy by design.

The tea-party was founded.

And that was brought on by ?????

Agreed! The Tea Party was a viable and welcome message when initiated.

Any populist movement can be hijacked by extremists...sigh.

They made it REALLY EASY to hijack...

A whole lot of ignorance, a whole lot of anger, and a whole lot of money do NOT make good bedfellows...

The tea-party was founded.

And that was brought on by ?????

In answer to your question, it was created through a grassroots effort by those who supported Ron Paul during his 2008 Presidential bid. It was then hijacked by neo cons, who claim to understand the concept of individual liberty.

Post #13.2 is spot on.

I wonder about the no courage part. I know they have no heart and no soul. They are defintely brazen and ignorant with a lot of courage, They get up and make demands and fully expect their demands to be met. Look, they demanded that the Consitution be read on opening day and it was. Need more be said?

No ... there is no courage. As soon as they are expected to take responsibility for their words or actions, they immediately cry "It wasnt me" and point anywhere but to themselves. The louder they cry it, the more join their ranks to "hide" the rodent.

Courage is standing up for what you believe is right and taking the responsibilities and consequences for such actions. No sign of that in any tea baggin exercises

Again, I respectively disagree! He did think and he expressed his thoughts exactly as he intended them to be heard. It is what he, and I think many others like him, believes!

I believe that Giffords is a red herring. I do not believe she was the intended victim and I believe that Humphries is continuing to distract us so that we do not see what reall happened. The Tea Party is taking control of AZ while distracting us with the shooting of a Democratic Congresswoman. The real victim has been assassinated and is being treated as collateral damage.

husker, she was the intended victim...that much has already been determined by the sheriff. Evidently the shooter already told them that much. I think they should sit him in a room with the parents of this nine year old until he gives them an explanation for the tragedy and why he killed their daughter and then when he is done we should let the family decide what happens to him.

No, we used to investigate losses like this, but we are taking the word of the media and the tea party that the intended victim was Giffords. We are looking the other way and letting the Tea party take over. One word explains it all: Immigration.

I guess even Fox will be too ashamed to broadcast this.

I wouldn't take that bet, there is NOTHING to low for the Fox (not the) News to air.

Maybe Fox is afraid of the TPs also.

It's not that FOX News is "scared", it just that without the teabaggers they wouldn't have near as large an audience. So when your entire "news" strategy is telling people only what they want to hear, it isn't always in your interest to tell the truth.

i believe the old nespaper adage was ' never let the truth get in the way of a good story'

Friends Of Xenophobics

is Humphries well hung, no, well he should be

If not well hung at least short leashed!

get him in a muzzle too

Nah. Just give him the name tag "Hello! My Name Is 'Village Idiot'"

Not so much ignorant but FAR, FAR, beyond the horizon, Right!

i think this tea bagger will be getting himself into a lot of hot water over this

I think the Tea Party will throw him a fundraiser and give him a plaque.

Oh, most of us that truly believe in the explicit message of the actual "Tea Party Movement" (i.e., tax less, spend less, do less) never would have said this person spoke for us in the first place.

If someone goes and buys a Gadsden flag and founds their own political party in Tuscon, the chances of them actually speaking for the entire movement are roughly zero.

The same chances of this individual being taken seriously, I might add.

Rob, I think we've seen that all it takes is one madman.

Rob, the public face and apparent leaders of the Tea Party or whatever groups claim that title simply do not reflect what many of the rank and file members claim. Sarah Palin, Sharon Angle, Christine O'Donnell, the idiot bigoted governor candidate in New York (forgot his name,sorry), Joe Miller in Alaska, Rod Paul and his head stompers, Glenn Beck (cheering from the sidelines), David and Charles Koch, Dick Armey, and on and on. These are the public face of the Tea Party and it's simply not a pretty one.

I'm sure you've seen the pages and pages of stupid, racist or inflammatory signs carried at Tea Party functions. Yet you still claim that this doesn't reflect the true meaning of the movement. I ask you what does?

PaPa, I will tell you what it is...deny, deny, deny...

Those are the faces of "Tea Party Nation" and "Tea Party Express" and some other groups, certainly.

The true "Tea Party Movement" is just about fiscal conservatism. All that racist crap our country can ill afford (and the birther crap and the socialist crap and the second ammendment solutions crap and the witch crap) has as much to do with the roots of the movement - "taxed enough already" as it does with sunspots.

Hey Federal Government - why don't ya tax less, spend less, and do less. Anything other than that is some other party's extremist position that has been 'grafted' on. Fiscal conservatives that want the Government to tax less and spend less.

Those people make me ill also. The Ron Paul thing...IDK. I can't imagine sitting down to have a beer with any of the folks you mention (at least one of them is actually a friend of someone close in my family...lol).

After last night, I'd have a beer with my President.

Rob-LVNevada

Those are the faces of "Tea Party Nation" and "Tea Party Express" and some other groups, certainly.

The true "Tea Party Movement" is just about fiscal conservatism. All that racist crap our country can ill afford (and the birther crap and the socialist crap and the second ammendment solutions crap and the witch crap) has as much to do with the roots of the movement - "taxed enough already" as it does with sunspots.

Then the "true Tea Party Movement" better get it's ass in gear and denounce these idiots. Because *all* I see is bigots, racists, secessionists, birthers, birchers, people who want to "Take America Back" to the days of segregation, less rights for minorities and woman and ignorance. I see people being conned by large-moneyed interests who *only* care about how they can get taxes lowered for *themselves*, not the average America.

If it's all about "taxes and spending" then why is practically *every* Tea Party group involved in "social conservationism", why does practically every large Tea Party group seem to attract the most fringe elements of the far-right? Why are Tea Party groups getting involved in what is taught in schools? Why are definitely anti-American groups like White Supremacists and neo-Nazis drawn to the Tea Party? What the frack interest does the Tea Party have in Gay Rights or the Abortion debate? Why is the entire Tea Party made up of primarily far-right Republicans?

I know a lot of Tea Party folk really *want* to think the whole "movement" is about "Taxed Enough Already" and that it's not a front for the revived "Moral Majority" and segregationists of yesteryear. But when the majority of your members (and "leaders") are Teabaggers who support only far-right causes, even against their own stated principles, then maybe you should take another look at yourselves.

The True Tea Partiers which were mostly just pro tax reform have left the building because they want nothing to do with what the Tea Party became during the birther crap.

why does practically every large Tea Party group seem to attract the most fringe elements of the far-right?

Just have time to address this one point - but...seriously, where the hell else are they going to go? You think those folks are going to fit in at a meeting of the local anti defamation league? You think they just have one or two differences with the Democratic Party so they will be welcomed under the big tent? Maybe they are welcome down at the American Communist Party down the block?

No, they too agree with "taxed enough already"...so they fit in, and then they subvert the movement and hijack the message. Because if one day the message is "taxed enough already" and the next day it's "we need to each have an automatic weapon, this is a Christian Nation, President Obama isn't eligible"...well, it's not like the message was 'tweaked'. It was discarded in a wholesale manner.

There are many people that fundamentally disagree with even the basic message - so naturally want the group to fail. It certainly looks like to me that they prefer to associate the violent "crazy" rhetoric with the "Tea Party Movement". I mean, wow, that makes it easy if we're all just a bunch of whackos, right?

nowadays tea comes in teabags and one bag does not make a decent cup of tea. Always wonder what's in it besides the few tea leaves.

We don't need gun control... we need politicians who won't change their stance or views on which they were voted into office on. If someone is voted into office and does what she and others have done (which includes flipping sides), they should step down from their office and try to be re-elected again for the next term under the party they've switched to.

We don't need gun control... we need politicians who won't change their stance or views on which they were voted into office on. If someone is voted into office and does what she and others have done (which includes flipping sides), they should step down from their office and try to be re-elected again for the next term under the party they've switched to.

Or get shot, right? Seriously?

They can do whatever they want. And you can vote however you want. But if you think they cannot switch parties or vote their conscience without fear of getting shot, we DO need gun control and in a bad way.

Wow! Second amendment remedies? I can't believe someone actually posted that comment. If there's people out there that actually believe that crap, we definitely need more gun control.

douglasq... where exactly do you see me saying what the ramification would be??? You don't!

Do you understand what happens in countries like England where there is gun control? People still end up getting killed, but with different weapons. A lot of good gun control would do.

And just what is the murder rate, per capita in "countries like England" in comparison to the US?

douglasq... where exactly do you see me saying what the ramification would be??? You don't!

You said we don't need gun control. We need pols who don't switch parties. You linked the two. Not me.

If you want to throw it in reverse and say you didn't mean it that way, I'll buy that. But the need for gun control has NOTHING to do with whether or not certain politicians are loyal to their party or whether they uphold their campaign promises.

Do you understand what happens in countries like England where there is gun control? People still end up getting killed, but with different weapons. A lot of good gun control would do.

As I've said before, I've never heard of a drive-by knifing. And I don't think the DC sniper would have gotten as much press had he been throwing knives from a couple hundred yards.

dont you people have jobs.... here is your answer!

The latest poll for the UK found there were 11,000,000 crimes committed in the UK. The same year, the US Census found there were also 11,000,000 crimes committed in the US.

The World Bank reports the UK had a population of 61,838,154 as of 2009.

The estimated population of the US for 2009 was 304,200,000.

The UK crime rate, at eleven million crimes for 61,838,154 population is 17,776 crimes per 100,000 population.

The US crime rate, at eleven million crimes for 304,000,000 is 3,618 crimes per 100,000 population.

So in round numbers, the overall US crime rate is one fifth that of the “gun free and crime free” UK.

Bah hah hah! Careful of what you ask for!

The latest poll for the UK found there were 11,000,000 crimes committed in the UK. The same year, the US Census found there were also 11,000,000 crimes committed in the US.

You are completely wrong. The numbers you are using are apples-to-oranges comparisons. The BCS survey interviewed 11,000,000 people and the total crimes reported in the UK was 4,448,273 (of which only 8,063 included firearms and ~410,000 violent crimes with or without physical injury) - http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/apr/22/uk-crime-rates-police-force

Compare that to the US with ~11,150,000 crimes reported in 2008 - http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/law_enforcement_courts_prisons/crimes_and_crime_rates.html

US Violent crimes were ~1,382,000.

Bah hah hah! Careful of what you ask for!

Bah hah hah! Careful how you use "data"...

Now, care to try again?

i am pretty sure that they do not have 15,000 deaths by firearm a year in england, but we do in the united states. no one seems to complain much about it, though.

bang, you're dead! oh, and you are a statistic. of course, this changes some if you know the person.

And I asked what the "murder rate per capita" is (reading in FUN-DUH-MEN-TUHL)

The US is more than 3 TIMES that of the UK.

And Lookie! I have an actual SOURCE. (See, having a source gives credibility to your argument.)

Thanks for playing.

Bye.

guns kill people, what can i say? of course, i would never let a gun get in the way of a good knife fight. you don't see those as much anymore.

Dont you people have jobs....

I have sources as well. (See, having a source gives credibility to your argument.) JA!

&

I posted my source.

(and if your source was the same one that Grae used, then you had sorely misinterpreted that information).

i am a bit surprised that our per capita murder rate was only three times higher than england.

what I know is that Madonna moved to England supposedly because she thought she was safer there...but she was subjected to a home invasion in England when that had never happened to her in the US.

Ix chel

Are you saying the exceptions are the Rule?

i guess the question is, why do we have three times the number of murders, per capita, than they have in canada, or england?

one major difference between the united states and the other two countries is that we have the right to bear arms. is this the reason why our murder rate is higher? that would require a lot of study. it could, however, be a contributing factor.

800, my question is, what other hypotheses do we have to explain the difference, other than access to guns? It is one thing for folks to say it's not the guns, but then what are the alternatives?

there are other issues, which may have different impacts such as drugs, level of education, level of poverty, and/or level of unemployment, racial tensions, gap between the wealthy and poor, etc.

that being said, it has always been my contention that guns are definitely high up on the list of why we have more murder than other civilized societies. guns kill people, and people with guns kill people, and sometimes people without guns kill people. isn't life grand? why yes it is, despite the tragic and the tragedy.

800 one thing about our figures that may not be in their figures is suicide, accidental deaths, and also self defense...even if it is self defense it is still a homocide.