Support NeoGAF

[Amir0x]

Finally someone with a brain. People love to blame the weapon as if it wakes up in the morning thinking, "I'm going to kill some people today". No it's the people with the problem not the guns. Switzerland has many guns and a lot of the their population owns them but you don't see them killing each other all the time right?

Switzerland owns the second most guns outside of the US in terms of developed countries, and coincidentally has the second most gun deaths of any developed nation. After us.

Increased gun ownership and economic disparity are the two key qualities of gun violence. Also 'coincidentally', the economic disparity in the US is far worse than Switzerland, as is the institutional racism.

 

[The Beard]

There are LOTS of posts arguing for an absolute ban in this thread.




Anyone who has been adjudicated mentally incompetent, convicted of a felony, or under 18 cannot legally purchase a firearm in the US. For handguns, the age is 21. So we already have all that.

Everyone wants "gun law reform" but no one actually has any real solutions. I hear people on talk radio shows saying, "we should ban automatic weapons!". They have no clue what they're talking about, you can't even buy automatic weapons. They just like hearing themselves say "we need gun law reform in this country!"

Come up with something useful and relevant then. Stop parroting that meaningless phrase and come up with a real solution.

 

[TAJ]

Yeah, im through with block parties around here. Some kid danced with someone elses girlfriend and then the boyfriend shows up, shoots the guy and his uncle. Dumb shit.

I saw my old boss assault a 13yo kid for dancing with his gf at a block party.

 

[Air Zombie Meat]

Finally someone with a brain. People love to blame the weapon as if it wakes up in the morning thinking, "I'm going to kill some people today". No it's the people with the problem not the guns. Switzerland has many guns and a lot of the their population owns them but you don't see them killing each other all the time right?

Well...

Proponents of unfettered gun ownership often point to the example of Switzerland, which has a tradition of more widespread firearms ownership than most other European countries but is not known for its gun-ravaged inner cities.

One problem is the trend is not that different: more guns still lead to more shooting, just less so than in America. Switzerland is actually second among wealthy countries in terms of annual gun deaths (0.77 per 100,000 of population in one recent survey, versus 2.97 in the US and just 0.07 in England and Wales) but has barely half as many guns per 100 people (45.7 versus 88.8 in the US).

But even this comparison gets weaker if you look at the way the Swiss keep their guns, which stems from a tradition of military service that has been considerably tightened over the years. One US study by the National Institutes of Health points out that both Switzerland and Israel (another alleged exception to the rule touted as proof that guns don’t kill) actually limit firearm ownership considerably and require permit renewal one to four times annually.

Those are just the kind of gun control measures, in fact, that second-amendment fans in the US claim wouldn’t make any difference to gun violence.

Taken from this article I just read: 11 myths about the future of gun control, debunked after the Charleston shooting

Really frustrating how the same old bogus arguments pop up every time. Every single one thats come up in this thread is mentioned in that article.

 

[TheTurboFD]

Switzerland owns the second most guns outside of the US in terms of developed countries, and coincidentally has the second most gun deaths of any developed nation. After us.

Increased gun ownership and economic disparity are the two key qualities of gun violence. Also 'coincidentally', the economic disparity in the US is far worse than Switzerland, as is the institutional racism.

This chart shown here

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compareyears/178/rate_of_all_gun_deaths_per_100_000_people

Shows 3 per 100,000 as of 2011 and the rate has severely decreased over the years. That's not pretty high at all.

Well...
Taken from this article I just read: 11 myths about the future of gun control, debunked after the Charleston shooting

Really frustrating how the same old bogus arguments pop up every time. Every single one thats come up in this thread is mentioned in that article.

Funny that you say that, especially since the article you posted actually helped the switzerland argument by linking to an updated chart stating that it only has a a firearm death rate of 0.77 per 100,000 which is even lower than the rate I provided above. Thanks!

 

[Ke0]

That's the road to tyranny. Besides, this is America. It's built on the foundations of giving the people what they want.

Eh not really.

 

[paperboywriter]

http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/20...favourite-american-shooting-so-far-this-year/

 

[Air Zombie Meat]

Funny that you say that, especially since the article you posted actually helped the switzerland argument by linking to an updated chart stating that it only has a a firearm death rate of 0.77 per 100,000 which is even lower than the rate I provided above. Thanks!

So you're just going to ignore the rest of it. Typical.

 

[TheTurboFD]

So you're just going to ignore the rest of it. Typical.

I supported my argument with what you posted. My reply was with switzerland and you posted an article from a known biased site.-_-

 

[makingmusic476]

This chart shown here

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compareyears/178/rate_of_all_gun_deaths_per_100_000_people

Shows 3 per 100,000 as of 2011 and the rate has severely decreased over the years. That's not pretty high at all.



Funny that you say that, especially since the article you posted actually helped the switzerland argument by linking to an updated chart stating that it only has a a firearm death rate of 0.77 per 100,000 which is even lower than the rate I provided above. Thanks!

So you don't give a fuck that an increased presence of guns leads to more people dying via murders/suicides/accidents because you can phrase it in such a way to make it seem like a negligible amount of deaths?

It still amounts to tens of thousands of unnecessary deaths each year in the US.

And what trade off comes from such high levels of gun ownership? People being able to take pride in their collection or go to the range on the weekend? These desires can be easily be satiated by a large number of other entertainment devices that involve a whole lot less people dying every year.

 

[Air Zombie Meat]

I supported my argument with what you posted. My reply was with switzerland and you posted an article from a known biased site stating it's a myth while providing evidence that it's not -_-

It explains the differences in gun control between switzerland and the us which make the argument bogus. Would you like to address those? Just providing a number and ignoring any context doesn't support anything. Funny how to 2nd amendment people every other country is just too different to compare unless it supports their views. Then they'll happily ignore the differences and cherry pick.

And if we're talking bias then theres no one more biased than gun enthusiasts. I'd have a lot more respect if they just said they like guns and want to keep them rather than hiding behind bullshit arguments all the time.

 

[makingmusic476]

I supported my argument with what you posted. My reply was with switzerland and you posted an article from a known biased site.-_-

Except you're blatantly ignoring that the article pointed out that Switzerland's rate of gun related deaths is still far higher than other European nations, and while it's lower than the US, per capita gun ownership rates in Switzerland are also notably lower, and it has quite a few more gun ownership regulations in place than the US.

 

[Deku Tree]

Truly awful.

 

[Amir0x]

This chart shown here

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compareyears/178/rate_of_all_gun_deaths_per_100_000_people

Shows 3 per 100,000 as of 2011 and the rate has severely decreased over the years. That's not pretty high at all.

This is the argument of gun nutters. This is a serious argument. Jesus.

"Well who cares that the most people of any developed nation die by guns in your country. It's still not THAT much, i mean, 3 per 100,000 is really small, right!?"

Yeah you tell that to the family who realizes the death of their loved one could have been prevented if selfish Americans weren't so obsessed with their second amendment liberty that they fought against every form of control imaginable.

 

[shadowsdarknes]

Switzerland also does 1 year conscription. People learn respect for weapons and learn how to use them.
That's infinitely better for society than unfettered gun access like some believe.

I've heard pro military libertarians suggest its not a bad idea.. And then I remind them that this would be more of an invasion from big government than any regulations you spew against.

 

[Messypandas]

This is the argument of gun nutters. This is a serious argument. Jesus.

"Well who cares that the most people of any developed nation die by guns in your country. It's still not THAT much, i mean, 3 per 100,000 is really small, right!?"

Yeah you tell that to the family who realizes the death of their loved one could have been prevented if selfish Americans weren't so obsessed with their second amendment liberty that they fought against every form of control imaginable.

Reminds me of the good ole

Spoiler

horrible

Manos days.

 

[Tiamant]

And this is why I never ever could be able to live in America, way, waaaay too violent.

 

[GameGuru59]

It always amuses me how.... er the majority constituency the US started running around in circles after 9/11 (most not even near a city of any major significance to any terrorist- or anybody else for that matter). Then that constituency spent trillions of dollars, started a war that actually killed more Americans than the impetus of the war itself, and now wants to restart those wars... but can't get its fat ass off the couch to do something about the gun violence in their own nation that kills more people per year than both of those things combined.

Those people are weird.

 

[ChouGoku]

The first gun I ever called "mine" was a 12 gauge bolt-action shotgun given to me by my grandfather. He mail-ordered it out of the Sears-Roebuck catalog when he was 14 years old and it was delivered to his front door. That gun has never harmed anything but quail, squirrel, and rabbits. Every other gun I've ever owned has never done anything but punch holes in paper targets, soda cans, etc. You probably don't want to hear it and you might throw some statistics around to refute it, but the truth is that owning guns doesn't make a person a killer. The type of person with the dead heart it takes to commit crimes such as in the OP will always be able to obtain a gun if they want one. Even if you were able to pass a blanket ban on all types of firearms in the USA, there'll be hundreds of millions of them still on the street after those who follow the law surrender theirs (there won't be many who do). Any attempt at forceful confiscation will turn into a bloody clusterfuck, and you'll be giving rise to a black market with accompanying violence to make prohibition look like a day at the beach. The guns aren't going anywhere, so probably better to start looking at changing the people. Outside of organized crime stuff, this shit wasn't happening in civilian life 80-100 years ago, and they sure as hell all had guns too.

I think we should start with abolishing all prohibitions on recreational drugs, i.e. "the war on drugs." All it does is keep a huge criminal industry funded and competitive.

I never get this argument with gun control. We shouldn't do anything because people determined to have a gun will get a gun? With that logic I guess you leave all the doors to your residence wide open. I mean locking your doors/windows is not going to stop someone who is determined to break in your house so why even have a lock? Or laws, like locks, you shouldnt think they are failures because un-impenetrable shield, but rather some sort of deterrent. Yes I understand that killers will still be able to get a get a gun if they tried but at least make it somewhat harder for them, instead of basically handing it to them like we do today

 

[TheTurboFD]

This is the argument of gun nutters. This is a serious argument. Jesus.

"Well who cares that the most people of any developed nation die by guns in your country. It's still not THAT much, i mean, 3 per 100,000 is really small, right!?"

Yeah you tell that to the family who realizes the death of their loved one could have been prevented if selfish Americans weren't so obsessed with their second amendment liberty that they fought against every form of control imaginable.

Lol trying to spin my argument like a typical anti gunner. "Hey guys look he said it's not as much! He must condone it!"

Except you're blatantly ignoring that the article pointed out that Switzerland's rate of gun related deaths is still far higher than other European nations, and while it's lower than the US, per capita gun ownership rates in Switzerland are also notably lower, and it has quite a few more gun ownership regulations in place than the US.

But the argument has nothing to do with the other European nations. My argument was they have a lot of guns and their fatalities are really low compared to the U.S.

Hell if we want to talk about gun deaths in European nations then here's a comparison of switzerland and UK of gun deaths per year. One has very strict gun laws and the other doesn't.
http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compare/192/total_number_of_gun_deaths/178

Hell let's even throw in an article about violence after gun control

http://www.breitbart.com/national-s...e-england-the-most-violent-country-in-europe/

 

[Air Zombie Meat]

Brietbart and gunpolicy.org. Hilarious that you were one whining about biased sources.

 

[Amir0x]

Lol trying to spin my argument like a typical anti gunner. "Hey guys look he said it's not as much! He must condone it!"

That's factually what your comment implies. You tried to suggest that despite having the most guns and as a result the most gun deaths of every developed nation, that's not so bad because it's "only" 3 in 100,000? Do you know how transparently absurd and fucking stupid that argument is? Write some other shit if you don't want to be viewed through such a prism.

These aren't serious arguments, they're flaccid bits of nonsense bandied about by desperate people without a statistical leg to stand on. You want to hold your guns because you LIKE guns, and are too afraid to admit that the selfish culture of gun obsession directly contributes to thousands upon thousands of American deaths. It would mean being self-reflective and understanding your role in this horrific problem. We can't have that of course.

 

[TheTurboFD]

That's factually what your comment implies. You tried to suggest that despite having the most guns and as a result the most gun deaths of every developed nation, that's not so bad because it's "only" 3 in 100,000? Do you know how transparently absurd and fucking stupid that argument is? Write some other shit if you don't want to be viewed through such a prism.

These aren't serious arguments, they're flaccid bits of nonsense bandied about by desperate people without a statistical leg to stand on. You want to hold your guns because you LIKE guns, and are too afraid to admit that the selfish culture of gun obsession directly contributes to thousands upon thousands of American deaths. It would mean being self-reflective and understanding your role in this horrific problem. We can't have that of course.

I have posted statistics and you're still ranting without contributing anything. The fact that you take more time to reply to that instead of posting anything to help your view shows a lot.

 

[GameGuru59]

That's factually what your comment implies. You tried to suggest that despite having the most guns and as a result the most gun deaths of every developed nation, that's not so bad because it's "only" 3 in 100,000? Do you know how transparently absurd and fucking stupid that argument is? Write some other shit if you don't want to be viewed through such a prism.

These aren't serious arguments, they're flaccid bits of nonsense bandied about by desperate people without a statistical leg to stand on. You want to hold your guns because you LIKE guns, and are too afraid to admit that the selfish culture of gun obsession directly contributes to thousands upon thousands of American deaths. It would mean being self-reflective and understanding your role in this horrific problem. We can't have that of course.

.

 

[Amir0x]

I have posted statistics and you're still ranting without contributing anything. The fact that you take more time to reply to that instead of posting anything to help your view shows a lot.

And your statistics demonstrated more guns in a developed nation leads to more deaths, which is the argument.

So, you failed, and you tried to save your pathetic argument by literally saying well it's not THAT many deaths. If I were being even more blunt, I'd say that is actually disgusting the way you phrased it. Do you want me to pretend to be nice about someone legitimately suggesting there's an acceptable level of WORST DEATHS OF ANY DEVELOPED NATION DUE TO GUNS statistic (well over double the number of gun deaths of the next developed nation)?

 

[GameGuru59]

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compare/192/total_number_of_gun_deaths/178

Hell let's even throw in an article about violence after gun control

http://www.breitbart.com/national-s...e-england-the-most-violent-country-in-europe/

Correlation doesn't equate to causation. There may be other reasons that there are more gun deaths in Switzerland. Just about every nation in Europe has stricter gun laws than the US, and by and large the US has far fewer gun death per capita than the US. And I doubt the UK is "the most violent European nation."

 

[TheTurboFD]

And your statistics demonstrated more guns in a developed nation leads to more deaths, which is the argument.

So, you failed, and you tried to save your pathetic argument by literally saying well it's not THAT many deaths. If I were being even more blunt, I'd say that is actually disgusting the way you phrased it. Do you want me to pretend to be nice about someone literally suggesting there's an acceptable level of WORST DEATHS OF ANY DEVELOPED NATION DUE TO GUNS statistic (well over double the number of gun deaths of the next developed nation)?

Yet you fail to acknowledge that the UK has little to no guns and is close to deaths per year as switzerland. Also no one is asking you to be nice.You're still mad about how I phrased it, oh well get over it. Your personal feeling about the subject mean nothing to me.

 

[Amir0x]

Yet you fail to acknowledge that the UK has little to no guns and is close to deaths per year as switzerland. Also no one is asking you to be nice.You're still mad about how I phrased it, oh well get over it. Your personal feeling about the subject mean nothing to me.

Just like the senseless death of thousands means nothing to you just so long as you can have your jollies rubbing the shafts of your gun collection. We know gun nutters frequently lack empathy and compassion, else we wouldn't be here.

The United Kingdom has 0.4 deaths per 100,000 due to firearms. Its overall homicide rate is 1.0 per 100,000. UK's entire homicide rate is lower than the rate Americans die by gun per 100,000. 1.0 per 100,000 vs. 3.0 per 100,000. The reason gun nutters like the far-right ignorant assholes at Breitbart want to cleverly use "violent crime" rate is because it allows them to count literally anything that involves violence, even though the actual goal here is to prevent deaths. I'll take a cut to the fucking gut if it means I'll be goddamned alive.

Switzerland, second most firearm country of developed nations, is 0.77 deaths from firearms per 100,000, compared to 0.4 per 100,000 of UK.

HM I SEE A TREND.

 

[TheTurboFD]

Just like the senseless death of thousands means nothing to you just so long as you can have your jollies rubbing the shafts of your gun collection. We know gun nutters frequently lack empathy and compassion, else we wouldn't be here.

The United Kingdom has 0.4 deaths per 100,000 due to firearms. Its overall homicide rate is 1.0 per 100,000. UK's entire homicide rate is lower than the rate Americans die by gun per 100,000. 1.0 per 100,000 vs. 3.0 per 100,000. The reason gun nutters like the far-right ignorant assholes at Breitbart want to cleverly use "violent crime" rate is because it allows them to count literally anything that involves violence, even though the actual goal here is to prevent deaths. I'll take a cut to the fucking gut if it means I'll be goddamned alive.

Switzerland, second most firearm country of developed nations, is 0.77 deaths from firearms per 100,000, compared to 0.4 per 100,000 of UK.

HM I SEE A TREND.

Don't forget 0.77 deaths from firearms per 100k with a population of 8 million compared to 0.4 per 100k with a population of 64 million people.

 

[Amir0x]

Don't forget 0.77 deaths from firearms per 100k with a population of 8 million compared to 0.4 per 100k with a population of 64 million people.

holy shit did you literally not understand how statistics work

this is like wow seventh grade shit

 

[Siegcram]

I love how people have to somehow statistically justify that the US has a problem when it comes to gun legislation. Open your fucking eyes!

Edit: "uses per 100k statistics; mentions population size anyway" brilliant

 

[Air Zombie Meat]

Don't forget 0.77 deaths from firearms per 100k with a population of 8 million compared to 0.4 per 100k with a population of 64 million people.

lmao

That edit didn't save you at all. Obvious theres no point in talking to you about this anymore. Switzerland was your example and you don't even understand what the statistic you've been so desperately clinging to means.

 

[Amir0x]

Just for the record, in case there's any helping him, a simple primer on what calculating rates per capita means and why it allows us to compare statistics between countries, cities, etc of wildly different population sizes:

Percent change in a value tells you only part of the story when you are comparing values for several communities or groups. Another important statistic is each group's per capita value. This figure helps you compare values among groups of different size.

Let's look at Springfield and Capital City again. This year, 800,000 people live in Springfield while 600,000 live in Capital City. Five years ago, however, just 450,000 people lived in Springfield while 550,000 lived in Capital City.

Why is this important? The fact that Springfield grew so much more than Capital City over the past five years could help explain why the number of murders in Springfield increased by so much over the same period. After all, if there are more people in a city, one might expect there to be more murders.

To find out if one city really is more dangerous than another, you need to determine a per capita murder rate. That is, the number of murders for each person in town. (That's what "per capita" means. It's Latin for "for each head.")

To find that rate, simply divide the number of murders by the total population of the city. To keep from using a tiny little decimal, statisticians usually multiply the result by 100,000 and give the result as the number of murders per 100,000 people.

In Springfield's case, 50 murders divided by 800,000 people equals a murder rate of 6.25 per 100,000 people. Capital City's 50 murders divided by 600,000 people equals a murder rate of 8.33 per 100,000 people.

Five years ago, Springfield's 29 murders divided by 450,000 people equaled a murder rate of 6.44 per 100,000 people. And Capital City's 42 murders divided by 550,000 equaled a murder rate of 7.64 per 100,000 people.

In the previous section, we found that the number of murders in Springfield increased 72 percent over five years, while the number of murders in Capital City grew by just 19 percent. But when we now compare per capita murders, Springfield's murder rate decreased by almost 3 percent, while Capital City's per capita murder rate increased by more than 9 percent.

Link

 

[Xe4]

And nothing will ever change. If I learned anything in the last few years is that if 20 elementary school children get shot to death and nothing comes from it, then god knows none of the recent shootings will account to anything.

 

[cutmeamango]

Ban alcohol.

 

[Eighty Deuce]

Ban alcohol.

Only good things can come from prohibition!

 

[Air Zombie Meat]

Ban alcohol.

Take that back or I'll shoot you with my beer!

 

[cutmeamango]

Only good things can come from prohibition!

Take that back or I'll shoot you with my beer!

Homicides (vehicular and otherwise) under influence of alcohol is greater than any gun alone could ever dream of. I mean, guns don't have shit on stairs and ledges.

 

[Air Zombie Meat]

You'll not see me argue that drinking culture doesn't contribute heavily to violence and accidental deaths. I actually get annoyed when people downplay that fact. Society definitely pays a price for it's intoxicant of choice. Stairs and ledges though, we kind of need those.

 

[diehard]

Homicides (vehicular and otherwise) under influence of alcohol is greater than any gun alone could ever dream of. I mean, guns don't have shit on stairs and ledges.

Don't take away my akkohol! I needs it to have fun

 

[Seventy70]

I think the people who are saying to ban guns are really lacking understanding. With the way the constitution is treated like a religious text in this country, if the government even tried to take away all guns, there would be a massive push back and people would buy even more.

I think the solution would be to have more thorough background checks to see who is actually buying the gun and also dealing with the gun culture problem.

 

[Winter John]

My parents live in a very isolated area with no local police. Guns are a necessity for them. Without them they would have no protection against wolves and other animals in the area. That said, I'm all for gun control within inner cities. I see no reason for anyone to be carrying a weapon in a city.

 

[SapientWolf]

Finally someone with a brain. People love to blame the weapon as if it wakes up in the morning thinking, "I'm going to kill some people today". No it's the people with the problem not the guns. Switzerland has many guns and a lot of the their population owns them but you don't see them killing each other all the time right?

There are also places with less guns and far more violence. There's a cultural component to it. If it wasn't a gun it might have been a knife, a molotov, or a car. I don't think Japan would turn into a bloodbath if guns were legal.

 

[scotcheggz]

No one ever talks about how traumatic guns are either. Shooting a gun should not be viewed as a simple thing, they ARE fucking traumatic. It's a horrible machine, designed to kill. The bravado and masculinity that people feel from a gun is incredibly misguided and frankly, a little bit sick. The fact that this trauma is reduced to a triviality is not healthy.

Isn't it time to step back and attempt to have a proper political debate on this issue? I would say there is a fair to good chance that a big, sweeping generalisation like "everyone from outside the US looks at gun laws in America and thinks its fucking bananas" is not such a whacky thing to say. We're not all thinking this because we hate you or are jealous of your freedoms or any other fucking ridiculous thought you might have. We're thinking it because it's just a very simple fact, that is very easy to see from an outside perspective and we're all fucking sick of reading about more innocent lives lost that could be avoided.

It feels like every fuckin day there's a new shooting reported on GAF and it's just disturbing. I thank fuck that I'm not born in the US every time I see a new thread about them, doesn't this fact alone shock you into thinking for one second? I appreciate it's very complex, but fuck off with this "too soon to talk about the issues" or "It's too hard, it will never work" because no, it's not too soon, no it's not too hard, just a fucking start wouldn't be bad. When you think it's too soon, maybe it's the best time to actually think about it with some clarity, when the consequences are staring you in the fucking face.

But what the fuck do I know. I'm not American. I know that reasoned arguments get nowhere with the pro gun chaps though. At least attitudes seem positive for the future on GAF.

 

[fizzik]

I'd call it cautious. There're almost as many guns as people here. Not including the illegal ones. Making a mistake with that many armed criminals could have consequences.

It's weird that we're an ex penal colony that was like "yeah take our guns. It isn't worth it" and you're a nation founded on freedom where everyone is terrified of their neighbors. Maybe they're right. Maybe it's not the guns. Maybe it's the people. But which of those is the more damming statement.

 

[Spinluck]

This is terrible no matter how you look at it, but for fucks sake, the kids. Fucking pieces of shit out there shooting kids, what the hell?

 

[King_Moc]

If only all kids at parties carried guns at all times. Then this would never happen.

 

[R2D4]

We need our guns. A piece of paper says so!

We need free speech. A piece of paper says so!!

 

[DrSlek]

My parents live in a very isolated area with no local police. Guns are a necessity for them. Without them they would have no protection against wolves and other animals in the area. That said, I'm all for gun control within inner cities. I see no reason for anyone to be carrying a weapon in a city.

Even with the gun ban in Australia, there are allowances for farmers and such to own shotguns for pest control, and the rest of the populace are able to purchase .22 rifles for target shooting. You have to jump through hoops to get a license, and have to report to the police with your firearm every so often to ensure it's still in your possession and hasn't been sold on.

Nevertheless, there's still small political movements who want our gun laws to return to a state closer to that of America. The vast majority of the population strongly disagree with them.

 

[Lord Thrappleper The 49th]

After dozens of threads of mass shootings and the constant debate over gun control in America, it really just seems to me that there are 2 cultures in the US. It seems that half the country want to take a more active role is saving people, being kind and intelligent, and just generally joining the 21st century.
The other half wants to stay in the 18th century, kill everybody they deem a threat, and resist any attempt to educate themselves and be rid of their ignorance. (Don't forget the racism as well, good ol' god fearing black hating white man made their country great dag'nabbit!)

Honestly, how do you coexist as a country? If I had a roomate who insisted on carrying weapons in the house, hating me because I don't like the same things as him, and blaring the america national anthem on his magic bible speaking machine (technology is for squares and queers remember? The great pioneers of old made it with 2 sticks and a buffalo, and all them damn foreigners took the buffalo away, I'll be damned if they take my boomstick!) I would not want to live with them. If anything I would forcibly eject them out of the house if they became too unbearable.