Gun Control

Americans Who Favor Stricter Gun Control Believe Gun Crime Has Increased


According to a recent Rasmussen poll, 64 percent of Americans who favor stricter gun control laws in the United States also have the misperception that gun crime has gone up in the past 20 years. A plurality (43 percent) of those who oppose stricter gun control say gun crime has decreased.

Interestingly, 54 percent of Democrats think gun crime has increased in the US over the past 20 years, compared to 29 percent of Republicans and 25 percent of Independents.

Recent reports from the Bureau of Justice Statistics and the Pew Research Center shows gun crime has significantly declined since the 1990s. NPR writes:

"Firearm-related homicides dropped from 18,253 homicides in 1993 to 11,101 in 2011," according to a report by the federal Bureau of Justice Statistics, "and nonfatal firearm crimes dropped from 1.5 million victimizations in 1993 to 467,300 in 2011.

There were seven gun homicides per 100,000 people in 1993, the Pew Research Center study says, which dropped to 3.6 gun deaths in 2010. The study relied in part on data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

"Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49 percent lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation's population grew," according to the Pew study. "The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75 percent lower in 2011 than in 1993."

Although gun crime has significantly decreased since the 1990s, few Americans are aware of it. A Pew Research Poll found only 12 percent of Americans think gun crime is lower and 56 percent say crimes involving guns are higher. Women (65 percent) are significantly more likely than men (46 percent) to think gun crime has increased.

Pew has cited several statistics related to gun crime:

NEXT: With Court Permission, CA Cities Move Against Marijuana Dispensaries

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. They know what they feel, and no amount of silly facts are going to change it!

    1. Yep. Had this conversation with my neighbor a few days ago, i/r/t raising kids. She insisted it is much more dangerous than when we grew up in mid to late 80s.

      I attempted to explain that crime has actually gone down since then, and at first she didn’t believe me. When she finally relented, her argument became “It feels so much worse”.

      1. Could be because we didn’t get bombarded with stuff from Cleveland 24/7 or hear about every child who went missing in the mid-80’s.

        1. I was a young’n when the Atlanta child murders were going on. The local stations would run ads “It’s 10 P.M. Do you know where your children are?”

          Funny how we’re supposed to be so much less safe now and yet no one runs ads like that.

          1. They ran those ads in Indianapolis, too.

            But yeah. Where are those ads now?

            1. They replaced them with that ad with the guy advocating gun control while pretending to be a hunter and waving his shotgun, with closed action, in the general direction of children, I think.

              1. I see what you did there..

                Well played sir.

          2. In the words of Homer Simpson, “I told you last night, NO!”

      2. i haz a scared

  2. Well, there are a lot of shootings in TV, movies, and gaming. I’ve shot thousands in Mass Effect alone.

    1. I knew there was something better to do than get depressed about recent events.

      1. I saved the entire galaxy. Very uplifting.

        1. Dude, you never actually save the galaxy in multiplayer, so how could you?

          1. I don’t fucking play multiplayer or on-line?

    2. I blame violent video games for the drop in gun crimes.

  3. Retarded people are retarded.

    1. That’s offensive to retarded people.

      You’re suppose to say retarded people are special.

      1. They’re not the ones who complain about the terminology used. I don’t think they have the capacity to be offended by it.

        1. Because they are retards.

        2. Standard response to an offended person:

          “You are the only one who has any control over whether you are offended. Why are you blaming someone else for your own choices?”

      2. But everyone is special. Does that mean everyone is retarded?

  4. Please don’t bother the reality-based community with your dirty little facts.

    1. I think it reads more beautifully in the original Smug: “Reality has a well-known liberal bias.”

      1. It does, problem being that the people who think they’re liberals aren’t.

      2. That’s a misquote. It’s actually “Realty has a well-known liberal bias.”

        1. +1 Phil-osophy

    2. It was that stupid slogan that made me realize they thought the Delphic “Know thyself” referred to masturbation.

      1. Onanic self knowledge is a keystone of progressive autoirrumatio.

        1. I can’t argue with that.

    3. Fucking crime-rate-change deniers!

      1. Crimate change…. or is that lacist?

        1. *gloans*

        2. Fuck you darphins!

  5. Like TIME is going to write a cover story on the Pew Poll results.

    1. Maybe Pew Poll can be man of the year?

  6. Interestingly, 54 percent of Democrats think gun crime has increased in the US over the past 20 years, compared to 29 percent of Republicans and 25 percent of Independents.

    How many people answered “what difference, at this point, does it make?”

    1. Death is a part of life, bitches!

      1. Death is the absence of life, whores!

        1. *** rising intonation ***

          What about “Until death do us *part*”, skanks?

          1. So her death ends the marriage and I don’t have a beef if she’s fucking some other dude once I’m summoned to heaven?

  7. At a certain point, you have to realize that a certain percentage of the population is irredeemably stupid. Which is why they should never, ever be allowed to dictate how anyone else can live their lives. In any way. Because they’re fucking morons, and because dictating how other people live isn’t within their purview anyway.

    1. Well said.

      1. Are you joking? That was only an 8.41.

        1. Are you joking? “Well said.” got only 8.41?!

          1. Where do you get the rate a comment thingee?

            1. When will it be added to the reasonable Chrome extension is the real question.

            2. I think feel $park? made that number up.

              1. Hey this will help our scores:
                supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, supercalifragilisticexpialidocious.

                1. Repetition of defenestration will not help the situation, no equivocation.

            3. Here.

              And I make up nothing! YOU HEAR ME? NOTHING!

              1. *** cowers nakedly in the corner ***

              2. *** clears throat ***

                Then how do you explain that the program yields 120.21 for “Well said.”?

                1. Then how do you explain that the program yields 120.21 for “Well said.”?

                  You’re clearly looking at the wrong number. It only rates a 0.80 on the important factor.

                  1. Sorry, $park?. Just giving you a hard time. Thanks for the link!

                    1. Just giving you a hard time.

                      You know Rich, I like you. I like you because you put in the effort to spell my name right. I like a man that’s willing to put a little effort into a relationship.

                    2. Humph! Just because I use the formal Dollar-park-Yen is no reason to snub me!

              3. Thanks, Sparky.

    2. And another thing:

      If we *must* have background checks, implement them in order to vote or hold public office.

      1. Next you’ll suggest drug testing for the ruling class. You Fucking Peon.

    3. True. People seem to think I’m some sort of callous bastard when I suggest the merits of eugenics…

      1. Probably because you are.

      2. Three generations of nosdrahcirs is enough.

  8. Why not try the Paul Krugman approach? If gun violence is increasing, it’s a clear indicator that not enough people have guns.

    1. I like the way you think.

    2. If ObamaCare is okay, then MandatoraGun is also okay, right? As a tax.

      1. Of course. The Militia Acts were among the old timey legislation people used when arguing ObamaCare was constitutional. Just update them to modern tech.

      2. I’d go with MandaGun because it’s close to ManDagon, and the Elder Gods are really what it’s all about.

        1. Or MaGun. Like Ma Bell, and also tied to a very old, proto-Indo-European word.

          1. “We’re the gun company. We don’t care. We don’t have to.”

            1. Oh, no, it’s the gun cops!

          2. Apparently magun is pretty big in Africa.

            1. Good, it’s multicultural. Once Apple joins in with the iGun, the left should love the mandatory gun.

              1. I envision something like the turrets from Portal…

      3. You know who else loved MondatoraGun?

        1. Optimus Prime in the leaked Transformers sequel script?

      4. Yeah! And if anybody is against gun ownership I will volunteer to keep their mandatory guns for them. I promise to shoot and care for them too.

  9. The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.-H.L. Mencken

  10. Hasn’t all violent crime, not just that committed with firearms, decreased since 1993?

    I mean, how is this that different than people supporting ratchet-effect politics wrt law and order issues over the past 20 years? Every community that has elected a swaggering “tough on crime” type to brutalize the criminals who increasingly don’t exist (at least the truly violent ones; no idea what and where nonviolent crimes are, some of which do actually harm like robbery) seems to be under the same misapprehension that the gun swindlers are.

    What? I am trying to raise our truly horrendous academic scribbling score and thus raise the tone of this wretched log of internet ramblings.

    1. And then when someone is a victim of a violent crime and goes to the police, the most common response is “What do you expect me to do about it?”

      They’d rather hand out fines and steal property.

      1. “We’ll take a report, ensure procedures are followed, and do nothing until the next wrong-address-FULL-SWAT dog execution in the name of Teh War on Teh Drugz!!1

        Have a nice day.”

        1. A coworker of mine was talking about how her neighbor’s car was burglarized. Someone stole a bunch of music disks. She goes to the police who file a report, and of course they don’t do a damn thing. She then goes to a couple stores nearby that sell used disks, and sure enough there was her stolen property. The store told her who sold them, and she took that information to the police. They proceeded to mock and chastise her for doing their job, and then reluctantly did their job and arrested the kid.

    2. Robbery is a violent crime.

      I’m very tough on crime, and I support politicians who are tough on crime. I just happen to think that a crime without a victim is not a crime at all, but an excuse for government control and tyranny.

      1. Neal Boortz favors a constitutional amendment to the effect of only actions that harm life, liberty or property shall be criminalized.

        1. Dammit sarc, by not giving me stuff you’re harming my liberty! I can’t be free without a material guarantee, which you insist on denying me. The Freedom Enforcement Agency is their way to confiscate some of your stuff.

          1. Once I tell them that you have more stuff than me, I’ll get them to skip your house and deliver straight to mine.

        2. And the drugs you take (allegedly) are harming your body, therefore we need to lock you up.

      2. Maybe I’m not thinking of robbery per se. What are break in classified as? I mean, that’s a property crime, and your stuff is harmed certainly, but I’m not sure it is a “violent” crime in the same way that a mugging or a battery or what not is.

        1. Burglary, not robbery.

          1. To expound, robbery is when someone uses physical force or the threat of it to take property from you.

            The violent crimes are: homicide (excepting self-defense of course), assault, rape, robbery, and kidnapping.

          2. Ah, yes, that. See, burglars are total dicks who should be punished, but the ones who never actually harm human beings I am less worried about, and morally judge a bit less, those burglers than the people who hold up little old ladies at knife point.

            1. For fucks sake, it’s a little old lady, is the knife REALLY NECESSARY?!

              Man up, pussies.

              1. What if she has a cane? One of those dangerous assault canes with the thing that goes up?

                1. Or a HoverRound!

                2. the shoulder thing ?

            2. As you should. There’s a reason people like the gentleman thief character so much, and rightfully despise muggers.

              1. It’s also why so many bankers are still walking around free, despite causing harm beyond the reach of a mugger.

                1. I don’t think people view the bankers as “gentlemen”, NEM. I think it may have more to do with the fact that the banks have various governments by the balls if they go tits up (basically the only reason the Germans have kept the euro around. If the Greeks, Italians, etc. default, German banks are screwed), combined with the revolving door between banks and government (Goldman Sachs). I think if the vast American public had its way, the bankers would be put in the stocks and pelted with rotten fruit.

                  1. It’s not the only factor, of course, but I think the notion that non-violent theft isn’t as pernicious still plays into it. Maybe I’m stretching the metaphor too far.

        2. Burglary.

        3. And I don’t think we can count on burglars to be non-violent.

          1. I think only the Hamburglar is non-violent. Although he commits a lot of violence against….FASHION!! AM I RIGHT, GIRLS?

              1. That’s the turd burglar, not the hamburglar…

                1. THIS is why I come to H&R!

        4. I would argue that burglary is violence as well. In that it deprives me of my property, which I consider violence against me.

          1. This squares with Frank Herbert’s definition of violence, which I agree with.

          2. It’s a fair point, but I still think the law should somehow reflect that the guy who stole your shit, while someone who should go away for a few years or make restitution or we can debate the merits of various forms of punishment, is less of a danger to society, at least based on actions (I admit the possibility for violence in a burglary gone wrong, but we can’t punish for a “could happen”) than a guy who punches a bunch of people in a bar fight.

            1. …but we can’t punish for a “could happen”

              I don’t know who “we” is, but if someone breaks into my house I’m going to shoot his ass because of a “could happen.”

              1. Precisely. If you break into my home when I am in it, I’m going to assume you’re a psycho axe murderer and treat you accordingly.

                Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

              2. And I will agree with your action. I am talking about the case where the person breaks in when you aren’t home, and then is later caught (because in my crazy alternate reality, the police actually do their damn job).

                1. I see your distinction, but breaking into people’s homes is an inherently dangerous practice even if violence doesn’t manifest every time.

                  Breaking into a storage unit, or even a car, I can agree more with you. Someone who breaks into homes is dangerous and should be treated as such.

                  1. Yeah. Storage units are a good example. You are targeting that probably because you won’t/don’t really ever have to use violence on another person.

                    Another good example are con artists. Utter dicks, and I guess it does go to your bankers point above, but I would say that fraud can be a lesser crime. The people who defraud people of every last penny are committing a huge violence. But I’ve been around New York City enough to have some affection for a classically bent game of Find the Lady.

                    1. That said, in Texas, I’m 100% on solid ground shooting someone who’s breaking into my car. Whether I want to take on that headache is another question.

                  2. Breaking into a storage unit, or even a car, I can agree more with you.

                    KY makes this distinction when it comes to use of deadly force. I can shoot someone I catch breaking into my house, but not my car.

                    1. Same here is Florida, but I can legally hose the person down with a generous amount of Fox Labs 5.3 🙂

                2. The person who steals from me has taken away from my ability to feed myself, by whatever measure. It is a violent act.

            2. I agree.

          3. Depends. If you are taking things from the home of a government employee you are merely justly redistributing against a previous initiation of force.

            1. Every 100k you steal from the President, knock 5 years off your sentence.

              1. I’m justifying that utensil set I took on the White House tour. Sterling silver just calls out to me.

      3. There are no victimless crimes. All crimes have victims. If some dude smokes weed and gets caught he becomes a victim. See?

      4. I think a better distinction is victimless crime, rather than non-violent crime. Fraud, embezzlement, most burglary, etc. are non-violent, but should be punished. Drug use/production/distribution, prostitution, etc. are victimless and should be left alone.

    3. 11.71. Not bad.

    4. Nonviolent criminals comprise the majority of inmates, mostly from the fallacious war on drugs, in order to keep them cycling through the private prison industry.

  11. These articles were showing up 2 days ago on Bloomberg News and the LA Times of all places. The liberal tears were predictable. What wasn’t as predictable to me were those who used this article as a jumping off point for a fresh anti-gun attack.

    “See, you stupid NRA gun nuts, no one tried to grab all your guns after all”

    1. Saw a headline in a USA Today someone nearby me was reading suggest that given the lower levels of violent crime the NRA was wrong about guns being necessary for personal protection. Causation, what dat?

      1. That’s a lot like the “Prison populations on the rise even as crime goes down” approach.

  12. So the Texas Rangers have opened up a criminal investigation into the fertilizer plant explosion. They arrested a guy for making a pipe bomb.

    Wouldn’t it be funny to watch the NEEDZ MOAR REGULATION crowd fall silent just as the KEEP US SAFE FROM TURRURISTS crowd revvs up into full panic mode?

    1. If by funny you mean “Bang my head through this monitor stupid” then yes.

    2. Funny “peculiar” or funny “ha ha”?

      1. Or funny “uh-oh”?

        1. Yep. Funny I forgot that option.

    3. Mediocre episode of Walker. Needed more weird Christian and/or Cherokee spirituality. Too much Alex/Walker stuff, and not enough Gage and especially Sidney. The martial arts were basic, and why have they been shitting on Trivette lately? He used to be competent! CC was awesome, as always though, and I liked Walker bonding with the younger brother of the bad guy. Overall 2.7/5

      1. If we wanted two wussies, we would have named them Dr. Quinn and Medicine Woman.

    4. Did anybody roundhouse kick a pipe bomb out of a mousy-looking guy’s hand?

      1. They did, but it turned out he was the bomb tech disarming it, and the kick set it off, killing both the tech and the kicker.

    5. Why does a baseball team care about a fertilizer plant?

      1. You want players to settle for shitty turf on the field?

    6. So the Texas Rangers have opened up a criminal investigation into the fertilizer plant explosion. They arrested a guy for making a pipe bomb.

      The Houston Astros couldn’t do any worse, and probably have a lower payroll.

  13. Firearms homicides have gone down over the last 20 years (a LOT), but idiots don’t know this. Got it.

    This also demonstrates that the search for Peak Retard continues on, unabated. Always sought but never achieved – just out of reach, like the dragon in “Heroin Addict”.

  14. But if it saves just one more life. Your bitter clinger “facts” and “data” just means that you hate the childrens.

  15. Alt-text may be increasing over the past 20 years, but it hasn’t increased enough.

    1. I urge President Obama and Congress to work together to pass an Alt-Text stimulus package, that will upgrade our Alt-Text infrastructure and allow the United States to lead the world in the Alt-Text of Tomorrow!

  16. Gun crime is through the roof. I can’t remember the last time I was able to drive to the gas station without getting into a firefight.

    Polls indicate that 111% of the public supports closing the gun loophole thing, and growing the background checker.

    Nobody needs a high capacity hair clip, or a scary weapon of war that belongs on the battlefield or on tv.

    If you reactionaries would just watch more ABC/CBS/NBC you would agree with me. You are entitled to disagree, if you want to align yourself with crazy homicidal maniacs who execute kittens.

    1. Awww, you lucky dick. You ended up in the alternate Mad Max timeline?

      And it’s still Mad Max 1?

      Dude, you should get to the ruins of Sydney. Or Thunderdome. But still… lucky dick.


        1. NIGHT RIDER was a crying pussy.

          Bubba Zanetti was the only competent bad guy.

    2. That’s the best piece of satirical writing I have seen today, and the day is getting shorter by the minute.

  17. Crime is down, but crime reporting is up.

    Thanks to the 24hr news cycle, things that used to remain local news become national news, giving the illusion of more crime.

    1. Unless it’s philadelphia.

      1. AHEM – Detroit would like to have a word?

        1. Can it afford the purchase price?

  18. These are undoubtedly the some people who believe there has been a wave of school shootings around the country recently.

    1. NEWTOWN AND…….***….COLUMBINE AND…. ****


      NEWTOWN AND COLUMBINE! If it saves even ONE life…

      1. VT.

        What gets lost on Columbine is that if their propane bombs had worked, 500+ would have been killed or injured.

        1. I support charcoal, but why do you need an assault grill?

          1. Cows are pretty big.

            1. You must be a fan of Chef John Bullington at the Alamo Drafthouse.

  19. In other news, water is wet, film at eleven…

  20. I sometimes think that this is related to decreasing household size.

    Households with one child are overinvested in that one child, and perceive risk differently than households with five children.

    I’m not saying that households with a lot of children don’t love their kids. I’m saying that they’re less vulnerable to a quasi-biological hysteria about them.

    That, and people are retarded. Put those two together and a lot of trends in public perception of crime and risk make sense.

    1. I don’t think so. My mother goes batshit when I let my daughters do 10% of what I did at their age. “Things are so much more dangerous now. There are so many more predators out there now.”

      I think it’s a misperception fed by the constant bombardment of info that people generally aren’t equipped to put into perspective.

      1. The perception of danger is certainly heightened.

        Round here a 21 year old can get on the sex offenders register for getting caught taking a leak on the street after falling out of a bar.

        You can also get on that register by exposing yourself if you are ironing naked and the blinds aren’t properly closed.

        The public just looks at the website and thinks, holy cow! My neighborhood is 15% pedofiles! Um, no. Sexual predators who favor children are very rare, you do not live in an ongoing episode of Criminal Minds where everyone is a sexual sadist, and the media is stealing your brains.

        1. after falling out of a bar.

          Proper adherence to building codes would prevent this malfunction.

        2. “where everyone is a sexual sadist”

          Do you really know where Warty lives?

          1. You just follow the screams.

      2. I definitely think the fear of pedophiles may play a big part. It really seems to have been a totally unthinkable crime in the 30s. I mean, yeah, there were totally pedophiles in the Victorian era, but I think that may have been also because it was unthinkable (“He just loves children for their innocence!”). But, ever since the 60s/70s, and exploding with the “recovered memories” crap in the 80s, it seems our society is hyper aware and hyper alert to the idea that men who are around children want to molest those children (note that it is never women, despite a number of examples of female pedophiles preying on children. Like RA Dickey’s babysitter). I would also guess that homophobia and gay men coming out of the closet probably played a role in this (“They’re corrupting our sons!”).

        It really, really sucks. I don’t think it does our society any favors to be innately suspicious of everyone, and warn our kids away from developing relationships with adult men, the overwhelming majority of whom aren’t pedophiles, that could help them out mentorship wise.

        But think of how shocking the Lindberg baby kidnapping was, and that was in the 1930s. Now, a baby kidnapping can be gone in a news cycle. So maybe I am wrong, and maybe we have become just more used to shit going weird with kids.

        1. Kids are a protected class. As a parent, I get it. Those crimes on the news hit hard.

          But I also don’t want to raise moron shut ins who are afraid of everything.

          I give them the same advice my Dad gave me. Know your surroundings, trust your gut, and if someone grabs you, scratch, claw, poke all while screaming your lungs out.

          1. This. Also, go for his eyes with everything you have.

          2. Also, it just is not a smart playing of the odds. The truth about pedophilia is one that is both horrifying and terrifying to most parents: The person most likely to molest your child is you, your spouse, or a close friend or relative. It isn’t the creepy guy down the street or in the van (I mean, you should watch out for those guys, but they probably just murder adult female prostitutes, so you’re good), it’s your best friend who looks after the kids on nights you and your wife go out.

            It’s far easier to deal with a monster that is a bogeyman, all claws and teeth, than a monster who lives right next door and who you celebrate the Fourth of July with. It’s why Roald Dahl’s short stories are unsettling as fuck, too.

            1. Yeah, but if you protect against yourself being the molester by sending your kids away, they’ll just join the mongolians and try to tear down the city wok guy’s wall.

        2. Yeah, but that was Lindberg’s baby. I doubt the kidnapping of some D-List celebrity’s baby goes away in one cycle, let alone someone with the notoriety Lindberg had. Hell, it’s still a pretty well-known crime.

          1. What about Mary Phagan?

        3. Actually, Lindberg was famous, a celebrity baby-napping would never leave the news cycle these days. The mass abduction of poor infants? Not a blip will show.

        4. Notions of acceptable sexual behavior have changed over the past century. If a widowed, wealthier neighbor took a shine to your fifteen year old daughter you considered it her good fortune to be social climbing and you did what you could to arrange that marriage. Now that respectable neighbor is the creep living in his parent’s basement.

          1. I do think we have a bit too much judgement on those who are attracted to post-pubescent people. They are not accurately labelled pedophiles. Hell, look at Hill Street Blues from the 80s. The sergeant is dating a high school senior at the beginning of the show, and he had to be at least 20 years her senior. It’s played for laughs!

            1. Absolutely right. Recall George on Seinfeld getting caught glancing at the NBC producer’s teen age daughter’s boobs (played by Denise Richards btw) A moment any guy attracted to women can relate because the proper word to describe that sort of attraction is heterosexual, not pedophile.

          2. Technically speaking attraction to teenagers is not pedophilia.

            1. No, but it’s treated as such, in the media and legally.

        5. I mean, yeah, there were totally pedophiles in the Victorian era,

          Child prostitution was legal in the Victorian era.

          1. Child prostitution was legal in the Victorian era.

            Ah, those were the days of libertarian paradise: no child labor or prostitution laws, and it only cost you a shilling to get your monocle polished, too!

            1. get your monocle polished


    2. It’s the Suburban Soccer Mom syndrome. I have, literally, never run across a group of people that live in a constant fear and are held in a svengali-like grip of anxiety, as to what foul deed will befall their family next, more than these women do.

      This behavior ends up becoming a parody of itself, but for some reason, no one ever laughs.

      1. I can second this. As I mentioned up thread, I was out at a bar with some of them recently.

        The husbands were mocking them, as they won’t even let their kids walk a half mile to the bus stop.

        EVERYTHING is a major risk to them.

        1. My own wife-unit is a major contributor to it, as well other neighborhood moms. It doesn’t stop there; it expands its sticky tentacles onto neighborhood listserves and the like. It’s a swift-moving river of mom-angst.

          You should have seen it when the online sexual crime convict database came online. “Oh…my…GOD! There’s one only a mile from our street!!!1!11!!1”

          1. Yep.

          2. How do you stand it, without having to spend most of the week on the couch?

            I think that the biggest thing I will have to develop should I ever want to be married is patience. At 24, should I ever have to deal with my wife becoming a Soccer Mom, I will go all Strangers on a Train on her.

            1. How do you stand it, without having to spend most of the week on the couch?

              This is why civilized men invented gin.

              My only advice to you, young apprentice, on choosing a mate is to choose very wisely. If you suspect something is amiss, or you don’t quite gel, don’t shrug it off. RUN.

              This message is brought to you by men who don’t follow their own fucking advice.

            2. should I ever have to deal with my wife becoming a Soccer Mom

              Considering the emotional nature of the fairer sex, it’s pretty much unavoidable.

              I find sanity in the serenity prayer. Yes, I’m an atheist, but the message is sound.

            3. When Dateline and Law & Order were huge in the ratings, you had a pretty good filter that told you which of the women folk you should avoid. Now, its a bit more difficult. Go foreign. Latin American women tend to superstitious in more traditional ways than American women so less susceptible to the unpredictable fear fads that you’ll inevitably be subjected to in a long term relationship.

              1. Go foreign.

                I have long said the same. I’m still kicking myself for dumping my Indian gf all those years ago. I wasn’t ready to be married then, but she probably would have been perfect for me.

                Don’t misunderstand me, she wasn’t subservient at all. She was very Westernized, college educated and didn’t take any shit, but she tended to place a greater emphasis on my happiness than I’ve seen in American women. It was nice.

                1. but she tended to place a greater emphasis on my happiness

                  Isn’t that the point of Romantic Marriage? To bring happiness to your partner? You can be concerned with your own happiness quite well on your own.

                  1. Isn’t that the point of Romantic Marriage? To bring happiness to your partner?

                    Love is an affliction where one’s happiness is dependent upon the happiness of someone else.

                2. My wife isn’t really foreign. Puerto Rican on her dad’s side, but I didn’t even know this until we had dated for months as I knew her by her first husband’s last name.

                  1. And yeah, still kicking myself over choosing my first wife over a beautiful, intelligent, funny and completely westernized Arab girl sixteen years ago.

            4. Don’t get married at 24. Wait till at least 30. I waited till 33, and I got an awesome wife.

              1. I waited till 33, and I got an awesome wife.

                Same here.

          3. My own wife-unit is a major contributor to it


        2. It mandated last week in the geekster fortress that all parties should close the toilet lid before flushing. Because of some study about ass germs.

          Now, while I appreciate that swirling water that you just took a shit in probably throws some shit particles in the air, if you think about it hard enough, their are probably shit particle in every lungful anyway, and on you food, and in your hair. The question isn’t do you eat or breathe or drink shit (because you do) the question really is how much does incidental shit consumption increase the odds of dying in the near term. We’ve working with immune systems that have been dealing with shit consumption for millions of years, so unless you’re ramping into ‘2 Girls, 1 Cup’ territory, I think it’s under control. So the risk of horrible and immediate death doesn’t really increase even slightly? Okay then, we’re not shutting the lid.

          Oh, wait, you have a vagina that I want access to, and have an exclusive contract with.

          Shutting the lid.

          1. This is why you should never, under any circumstances, enter an exclusive contract with a vagina.

  21. Starting the timer till the meme turns into “Gun control is responsible for the drop in gun-crime which is why we need more of it.”

    1. “Can you prove it didn’t happen?”

    2. That would be a hard case to make considering there were really only two major gun control laws passed in the 90s and the decline began before either law was implemented.

      AWB which did diddly squat
      The Brady Bill which was passed in late 93, except that NICS wasn’t really operational until late in 98

      1. There you go relying on facts again.

  22. If only there was some comedian who specialized in making fun of “truthiness”, he could really make some hay out this.

    1. RIP Bill Hicks.

    2. That would imply the existence of an entertainment media that is not lockstep leftist.

  23. “According to a recent Rasmussen poll, 64 percent of Americans who favor stricter gun control laws in the United States also have the misperception that gun crime has gone up in the past 20 years”

    In other words, stupider people are the ones in favor of gun control.

    1. ignorant people.

      1. remaining ignorant is pretty fucking stupid.

  24. Wasn’t Tennessee voted the freest state in the union, just a while back? How can they have the highest beer tax. They should have been disqualified for that alone.

  25. It may be worth noting in this context that one big contributor to the declining gun violence is the increasing prevalence of concealed carry laws.

  26. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job Ive had. Last Monday I got a new Alfa Romeo from bringing in $7778. I started this 9 months ago and practically straight away started making more than $83 per hour. I work through this link,

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.