Tecumsehsbones;2585065I checked VERY shortly after you made your post said:
You'd be a prime example of one who should take his own advice!
Gun Control is Completely Useless.
- Thread starter Colpy
- Start date
You'd be a prime example of one who should take his own advice!
What makes you think you're so f**king privileged, regardless there's no doubt about how two faced you are! Hypocrite!
7 Terrible Liberal Gun Control Arguments … And How To Beat Them
Kurt Schlichter
|
Posted: Feb 22, 2018 12:01 AM
I argue for a living. I often deal with hacks, liars, and agenda-driven fanatics. But never in a quarter century of being in court rooms have I faced such a blizzard of constitutional illiteracy, technical ignorance, flabby reasoning, and outright lies as I have dealing with people who think our Second Amendment rights are up for debate.
Our rights are not up for debate. But, as a courtesy, because talking is the way a free people should endeavor to solve problems, we should debate them anyway. Rational discussion beats the alternative – many of us are vets who saw the alternative overseas – even if the other side prefers emotional blackmail using articulate infants to bum rush their anti-civil rights policies. So, here are seven (it could have been 50) of the most annoying – and dishonest – arguments you will hear, and how you can fight them.
1. You Don’t Actually Have The Right To Own Guns Because You Aren’t In A Militia!
Nope. That’s wrong right off the line because Heller v. District of Columbia (2008) 554 U.S. 570, holds as a matter of settled law that individuals have the right to keep and bear arms regardless of their militia status.
The Second Amendment provides: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Justice Scalia, writing for the majority in Heller, dismissed the argument that this right somehow, despite the clear text, belongs to “militias” and not individuals. Your opponent may not like that, but that’s what Heller says. That’s what the Constitution says.
CARTOONS | Bob Gorrell
View Cartoon
And, as usual, Justice Scalia’s reasoning was incisive and compelling. He dismissed the militia reference as merely announcing just one purpose of the Second Amendment, not its only purpose. The prefatory clause does not limit the scope of the right, but even if it did that interpretation would not change the nature of the right. The “militia” is, by statute (10 U.S. Code § 246), “all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and … under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States….” This demonstrates the Founders’ intention that “able-bodied” citizens must protect their communities and Constitution. History teaches, and Justice Scalia observed, that these citizens maintained their personal weapons at home, and were ready to act when needed – whether it was to stop Redcoat gun control activists at Lexington and Concord or to mobilize to defend Korean stores during the Los Angeles riots in 1992.
I was there with the Army in LA, by the way. Don’t tell me chaos can’t happen here.
2. But Wait – It Says “Well-Regulated Militia.” Doesn’t That Mean The National Guard?
No. Guard soldiers and airmen are part of the militia, but the Guard is a component of the United States Army or Air Force. During my time in the Guard, my uniform’s service tape read “U.S. Army” and I held a U.S. Army Reserve commission. Guard members are part of the standing military; the interpretation liberals assert would render the Second Amendment meaningless, which is what liberals want, but that’s not how one interprets a legal text.
Well, aren’t citizens with guns not “well regulated?” No. Congress regulates the militia – Article I, Section 8, Clause 16 of the Constitution provides that “The Congress shall have Power To ...provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia….” And Congress has decided what “well regulated” means. It means the current level of regulation, since that is what Congress has imposed. It could enact further regulation, if it wished. If the Congress feels like decreeing that every member of the militia (which Congress can expand as it wishes to better reflect society) must be armed with an AR15, it can. (Hint hint).
And no, the rest of the Amendment limits the ability of Congress to disarm “the people,” so it can’t “well regulate” the right out of existence.
3. Well, Scalia Still Says Guns Can Be Regulated, So We Can Ban Modern Weapons!
No. What the anti-civil rights crowd likes to do is cite language from Heller that recognizes a few traditional exceptions to when and what arms may be kept and borne – in other words, gun banners try to have narrow exceptions swallow up the rule. Always pivot back to and demand that these people recite the basic holding: The Second Amendment recognizes the right of citizens to individually keep weapons in common use for lawful purposes, including self-defense.
Liberals hate when you do that, especially when you confront them with the fact that Heller protects weapons “in common use.” In that case, it was handguns. However, the fake assault weapons that liberals hate (which are involved in a tiny fraction of crimes) numbers in the millions. AR15-style weapons are in common use. Deal with it.
4. We Just Want Common Sense Gun Regulations Since There Aren’t Any Now!
Oh, I guess they never filled out a Form 4473. You know, all the lies about it being “easier to buy a gun than a Pepsi” do not exactly inspire us to believe that the gun banners’ pleas for “common sense reforms” are anything but the first steps toward confiscation and disarming our citizenry. Lying demonstrates a lack of good faith.
Nor does the fact that none of these “commonsense gun regulations” addresses the problems they cite. Ask your gun banner pals which reforms they want that would have stopped any of the recent killing sprees by people who are not conservative observant Christian or Jewish NRA members. Background checks are their usual go-to. Those are already a thing, and the scumbags all passed, except for the one scumbag whose check the FBI screwed-up.
You know, instead of hassling citizens who have committed no crime, maybe we ought to demand our law enforcement agencies start doing their damn jobs.
5. You Have Blood On Your Hands!
Actually, don’t stop them when they go this way. Scummy drama queen invective like this is proof that our stubborn defense of our rights is working, and that they have nothing else but to lie about us. Their hysterical shrieking helps motivate other people who may not have been paying attention to protect their rights. After all, “You support murdering children!” is a super-effective way to alienate normal folks and highlight the essential dishonesty of the gun banners.
6. No One Wants To Take Your Guns!
This is another classic lie. In fact, that’s exactly what liberals want to do. How do we know? They tell us when they think we are not looking – and, with more frequency, when we are. It’s fun when they say they don’t want to take your guns, then say you have to give up your ARs. If your opponent is getting wistful about Australia’s gun confiscation, he wants to take your guns.
Let’s get serious. They all want to take your guns. Why? Two reasons. First, it takes power from the citizenry. Liberals love that. Second, gun rights are important to normal Americans because the fact we maintain arms means we are not mere subjects. We are citizens, with the power to defend our freedom. Liberals hate that we have that dignity; taking our guns would humiliate us, and show us who is boss. They want to disarms us not because of the gun crime – name a liberal who wants to really do something about Chicago as opposed to hassling law-abiding normals – but because they hate us and want to see us submit.
Even the Fredocons are getting into the act, which is no surprise since Never Trumpism is always the first step downward to active liberalism. Pseudocon Bret Stephens demanded that America repeal the Second Amendment in the New York Times in October 2017. Fellow puffcon Ross Douthat simpered something similar, and the Captain Stubing of Conservatism, Bill Kristol, tweeted his concurrence.
7. The Second Amendment Is Obsolete And This Stuff About Defending Against Tyranny Is Crazy!
Obsolete? Isn’t our Constitution a living document that should change with the time? Well, in the last couple decades gun rights have expanded massively across the country via legislation – faster and more thoroughly than gay marriage did – so the Constitution is evolving toward recognizing more gun rights. Anti-civil rights holdouts like New York and California are failing to recognize that the Constitution changes with the times and stuff, and those states must conform to the new consensus about the freedom to keep and bear arms. That’s how this works, right? Right?
Did you liberals say that our government is always going to be benevolent? Sorry, I can’t hear you over the sound of the revelations of government misconduct and oppression of individual citizens for their views. Also, since Trump is totally Hitler for real, isn’t giving him a monopoly on force a bad idea?
Finally, there is the claim that “a bunch of violent country guys with rifles couldn’t take on the government anyway.” First, at the threshold this is a disgusting slander. Violence is a last resort justifiable only in cases of outright, active violent tyranny where no political or judicial processes are available. The idea that American citizens, many veterans, are somehow chomping at the bit for a civil war is right up there in the Liberal Slander Top 10.
American citizens do retain the right to use force to stop such tyranny. If some government decided to say, round up Jewish citizens, violence would be appropriate to protect our fellow citizens as a last resort. Luckily, our street level law enforcement personnel and military would never do such a thing, but that does not mean a situation could never arise where people acting under the color of authority might seek to violently violate the Constitution and deprive citizens of their rights and lives. The Founders were wise to recognize our citizens’ right to have the ability to resist violent tyranny.
But could citizens effectively resist violent tyranny? That’s a long story – someone ought to write a novel on the subject – but the short answer is, “Yes.” As Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan all teach, a decentralized insurgency with small arms can effectively confront a modern police/military force. Of course, in America’s case, the police and military rank and file are much more likely to sympathize with their fellow citizens and freedom than with some hypothetical tyrant, making such a horrifying scenario highly unlikely – though not utterly impossible.
But the bottom line is that two untrained idiots with handguns shut down Boston. What do you think 100 million Americans – many trained and some battle-tested – could do with their rifles? (To get a feel for the level of utter dishonesty among our opponents, just scroll down to the comments and count the lies about me somehow supporting civil war in this column).
The liberals want to have a conversation about guns. So should those of us who love freedom. We have the facts. We have the law. We have the right. And we have a choice.
Citizens bear arms and hold a veto over tyranny. Serfs obey their masters because they have no choice. Pick one.
https://townhall.com/columnists/kur...trol-arguments--and-how-to-beat-them-n2451718
Kurt Schlichter
|
Posted: Feb 22, 2018 12:01 AM
I argue for a living. I often deal with hacks, liars, and agenda-driven fanatics. But never in a quarter century of being in court rooms have I faced such a blizzard of constitutional illiteracy, technical ignorance, flabby reasoning, and outright lies as I have dealing with people who think our Second Amendment rights are up for debate.
Our rights are not up for debate. But, as a courtesy, because talking is the way a free people should endeavor to solve problems, we should debate them anyway. Rational discussion beats the alternative – many of us are vets who saw the alternative overseas – even if the other side prefers emotional blackmail using articulate infants to bum rush their anti-civil rights policies. So, here are seven (it could have been 50) of the most annoying – and dishonest – arguments you will hear, and how you can fight them.
1. You Don’t Actually Have The Right To Own Guns Because You Aren’t In A Militia!
Nope. That’s wrong right off the line because Heller v. District of Columbia (2008) 554 U.S. 570, holds as a matter of settled law that individuals have the right to keep and bear arms regardless of their militia status.
The Second Amendment provides: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Justice Scalia, writing for the majority in Heller, dismissed the argument that this right somehow, despite the clear text, belongs to “militias” and not individuals. Your opponent may not like that, but that’s what Heller says. That’s what the Constitution says.
CARTOONS | Bob Gorrell
View Cartoon
And, as usual, Justice Scalia’s reasoning was incisive and compelling. He dismissed the militia reference as merely announcing just one purpose of the Second Amendment, not its only purpose. The prefatory clause does not limit the scope of the right, but even if it did that interpretation would not change the nature of the right. The “militia” is, by statute (10 U.S. Code § 246), “all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and … under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States….” This demonstrates the Founders’ intention that “able-bodied” citizens must protect their communities and Constitution. History teaches, and Justice Scalia observed, that these citizens maintained their personal weapons at home, and were ready to act when needed – whether it was to stop Redcoat gun control activists at Lexington and Concord or to mobilize to defend Korean stores during the Los Angeles riots in 1992.
I was there with the Army in LA, by the way. Don’t tell me chaos can’t happen here.
2. But Wait – It Says “Well-Regulated Militia.” Doesn’t That Mean The National Guard?
No. Guard soldiers and airmen are part of the militia, but the Guard is a component of the United States Army or Air Force. During my time in the Guard, my uniform’s service tape read “U.S. Army” and I held a U.S. Army Reserve commission. Guard members are part of the standing military; the interpretation liberals assert would render the Second Amendment meaningless, which is what liberals want, but that’s not how one interprets a legal text.
Well, aren’t citizens with guns not “well regulated?” No. Congress regulates the militia – Article I, Section 8, Clause 16 of the Constitution provides that “The Congress shall have Power To ...provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia….” And Congress has decided what “well regulated” means. It means the current level of regulation, since that is what Congress has imposed. It could enact further regulation, if it wished. If the Congress feels like decreeing that every member of the militia (which Congress can expand as it wishes to better reflect society) must be armed with an AR15, it can. (Hint hint).
And no, the rest of the Amendment limits the ability of Congress to disarm “the people,” so it can’t “well regulate” the right out of existence.
3. Well, Scalia Still Says Guns Can Be Regulated, So We Can Ban Modern Weapons!
No. What the anti-civil rights crowd likes to do is cite language from Heller that recognizes a few traditional exceptions to when and what arms may be kept and borne – in other words, gun banners try to have narrow exceptions swallow up the rule. Always pivot back to and demand that these people recite the basic holding: The Second Amendment recognizes the right of citizens to individually keep weapons in common use for lawful purposes, including self-defense.
Liberals hate when you do that, especially when you confront them with the fact that Heller protects weapons “in common use.” In that case, it was handguns. However, the fake assault weapons that liberals hate (which are involved in a tiny fraction of crimes) numbers in the millions. AR15-style weapons are in common use. Deal with it.
4. We Just Want Common Sense Gun Regulations Since There Aren’t Any Now!
Oh, I guess they never filled out a Form 4473. You know, all the lies about it being “easier to buy a gun than a Pepsi” do not exactly inspire us to believe that the gun banners’ pleas for “common sense reforms” are anything but the first steps toward confiscation and disarming our citizenry. Lying demonstrates a lack of good faith.
Nor does the fact that none of these “commonsense gun regulations” addresses the problems they cite. Ask your gun banner pals which reforms they want that would have stopped any of the recent killing sprees by people who are not conservative observant Christian or Jewish NRA members. Background checks are their usual go-to. Those are already a thing, and the scumbags all passed, except for the one scumbag whose check the FBI screwed-up.
You know, instead of hassling citizens who have committed no crime, maybe we ought to demand our law enforcement agencies start doing their damn jobs.
5. You Have Blood On Your Hands!
Actually, don’t stop them when they go this way. Scummy drama queen invective like this is proof that our stubborn defense of our rights is working, and that they have nothing else but to lie about us. Their hysterical shrieking helps motivate other people who may not have been paying attention to protect their rights. After all, “You support murdering children!” is a super-effective way to alienate normal folks and highlight the essential dishonesty of the gun banners.
6. No One Wants To Take Your Guns!
This is another classic lie. In fact, that’s exactly what liberals want to do. How do we know? They tell us when they think we are not looking – and, with more frequency, when we are. It’s fun when they say they don’t want to take your guns, then say you have to give up your ARs. If your opponent is getting wistful about Australia’s gun confiscation, he wants to take your guns.
Let’s get serious. They all want to take your guns. Why? Two reasons. First, it takes power from the citizenry. Liberals love that. Second, gun rights are important to normal Americans because the fact we maintain arms means we are not mere subjects. We are citizens, with the power to defend our freedom. Liberals hate that we have that dignity; taking our guns would humiliate us, and show us who is boss. They want to disarms us not because of the gun crime – name a liberal who wants to really do something about Chicago as opposed to hassling law-abiding normals – but because they hate us and want to see us submit.
Even the Fredocons are getting into the act, which is no surprise since Never Trumpism is always the first step downward to active liberalism. Pseudocon Bret Stephens demanded that America repeal the Second Amendment in the New York Times in October 2017. Fellow puffcon Ross Douthat simpered something similar, and the Captain Stubing of Conservatism, Bill Kristol, tweeted his concurrence.
7. The Second Amendment Is Obsolete And This Stuff About Defending Against Tyranny Is Crazy!
Obsolete? Isn’t our Constitution a living document that should change with the time? Well, in the last couple decades gun rights have expanded massively across the country via legislation – faster and more thoroughly than gay marriage did – so the Constitution is evolving toward recognizing more gun rights. Anti-civil rights holdouts like New York and California are failing to recognize that the Constitution changes with the times and stuff, and those states must conform to the new consensus about the freedom to keep and bear arms. That’s how this works, right? Right?
Did you liberals say that our government is always going to be benevolent? Sorry, I can’t hear you over the sound of the revelations of government misconduct and oppression of individual citizens for their views. Also, since Trump is totally Hitler for real, isn’t giving him a monopoly on force a bad idea?
Finally, there is the claim that “a bunch of violent country guys with rifles couldn’t take on the government anyway.” First, at the threshold this is a disgusting slander. Violence is a last resort justifiable only in cases of outright, active violent tyranny where no political or judicial processes are available. The idea that American citizens, many veterans, are somehow chomping at the bit for a civil war is right up there in the Liberal Slander Top 10.
American citizens do retain the right to use force to stop such tyranny. If some government decided to say, round up Jewish citizens, violence would be appropriate to protect our fellow citizens as a last resort. Luckily, our street level law enforcement personnel and military would never do such a thing, but that does not mean a situation could never arise where people acting under the color of authority might seek to violently violate the Constitution and deprive citizens of their rights and lives. The Founders were wise to recognize our citizens’ right to have the ability to resist violent tyranny.
But could citizens effectively resist violent tyranny? That’s a long story – someone ought to write a novel on the subject – but the short answer is, “Yes.” As Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan all teach, a decentralized insurgency with small arms can effectively confront a modern police/military force. Of course, in America’s case, the police and military rank and file are much more likely to sympathize with their fellow citizens and freedom than with some hypothetical tyrant, making such a horrifying scenario highly unlikely – though not utterly impossible.
But the bottom line is that two untrained idiots with handguns shut down Boston. What do you think 100 million Americans – many trained and some battle-tested – could do with their rifles? (To get a feel for the level of utter dishonesty among our opponents, just scroll down to the comments and count the lies about me somehow supporting civil war in this column).
The liberals want to have a conversation about guns. So should those of us who love freedom. We have the facts. We have the law. We have the right. And we have a choice.
Citizens bear arms and hold a veto over tyranny. Serfs obey their masters because they have no choice. Pick one.
https://townhall.com/columnists/kur...trol-arguments--and-how-to-beat-them-n2451718
But anchors go straight to the bottom
Lol the TRUMP HATING "you are what I am" attack...see "anchors" above.
Wow.
A documentary made by a gun kook to convince you that it's okay to be a gun kook.
Well, I'm sold.
Dream on................just because you believe it doesn't mean anyone else does!
it certainly seems like you are desparate to win arguements rather than just share your opinion which you rarely share just once.
------------------
anyway, a thought for the day...
the USA has something like 90 guns per 100 people and one of the higher intentional firearm death rates of all countries. At least that is what the critics will tell you.
The truth is they rank 111th out of 218 countries for the highest death rate.
whenever, a critic represents the US at the top of the list, they are either 1)lying their arse off, or 2) adding some sort of qualifier to their list. for example, they will say something like 'high income countries'
in contrast, whenever someone points out that the US is 111th, you will hear the gun control proponents imediately say things like 'but your are distorting the stats by comparing the US to countries with corrupt governments, poverty, organized crime, etc'
clearly, they do NOT understand that looking at a complete data set of countries can not and will never be 'distorting' the facts.
And, clearly, they do NOT understand that everytime they filter the list of countries based on poverty - or anything else - they are acknowledging that poverty drives the murder rates more than the '90 guns per 100 people' stat. It is quite common to filter the list 5 or 6 ways before the US rises to the top of their 'undistorted' list.
So in Canada, what sort of gun control arguement are we left with? well, it ussually goes something like this ' look at the US, then look at Canada, we are identical so therefore gun control laws work '. They don't want to consider differences in poverty, culture, social programs because ' the US is at the top of the list '
Do you guys see the logical flaw in their conclusions? Let me explain: They don't have a raw data set that they like, so they create a data set by placing assumptions on the dataset...things like 'poverty distorts the data' then they compile a set of comclusions about Canada. When someone says 'what about the differences in poverty between the US and Canada?' they will say things like ' that doesn't matter, look at our irrefutable conclusions.'
The moral of the story? Be careful whenever someone adds assumptions to their data set then makes a set of conclusions that is pretty much the same as their assumptions.
Last edited:
the USA has something like 90 guns per 100 people and one of the higher intentional firearm death rates of all countries. At least that is what the critics will tell you.
The truth is they rank 111th out of 218 countries for the highest death rate.
Prove that statement. I don't believe it for a second. Try using a non-NRA source that is believable.
Parkland Student Details Exchange With CNN Producer He Claims Fed Him Scripted Questions
Haab, 17, alleged that he had submitted questions to CNN asking about increasing school security, but the network instead offered scripted ones they had written. He declined to attend the town hall. CNN pushed back on the claims, saying in a statement it does not give scripts for such events.
https://www.mediaite.com/tv/parklan...roducer-he-claims-fed-him-scripted-questions/
WOW the way you fakenews[sic] america haters really like dishonestly abusing child victims.
Another way of looking at that: Americans make up less than 5 percent of the world’s population yet own roughly 42 percent of all the world’s privately held firearms.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/2/21/17028930/gun-violence-us-statistics-charts
Funny, no mention of the over 100 million slaughters of people who were killed in just TWO OTHER COUNTRIES after the commies took their guns away
just the unarmed get slaughterd like sheeple by YOU dirty rotten commienazi globalist bastids.
https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM
Haab, 17, alleged that he had submitted questions to CNN asking about increasing school security, but the network instead offered scripted ones they had written. He declined to attend the town hall. CNN pushed back on the claims, saying in a statement it does not give scripts for such events.
https://www.mediaite.com/tv/parklan...roducer-he-claims-fed-him-scripted-questions/
WOW the way you fakenews[sic] america haters really like dishonestly abusing child victims.
Another way of looking at that: Americans make up less than 5 percent of the world’s population yet own roughly 42 percent of all the world’s privately held firearms.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/2/21/17028930/gun-violence-us-statistics-charts
Funny, no mention of the over 100 million slaughters of people who were killed in just TWO OTHER COUNTRIES after the commies took their guns away
just the unarmed get slaughterd like sheeple by YOU dirty rotten commienazi globalist bastids.
https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM
Last edited:
just the unarmed get slaughterd like sheeple by YOU dirty rotten commienazi globalist bastids.
You are completely fecking nuts.
Just sayin'
You don't do facts because YOU are a complete and TOTAL COWARD
Putin LUVS you for that too pal.
Sad to be you, sad to be a kid under the influence of that sort of behavior too.
I feel sorry for the life they will never have if you commienaziglobalists ever get what you are on record for wanting to get.
Putin LUVS you for that too pal.
Sad to be you, sad to be a kid under the influence of that sort of behavior too.
I feel sorry for the life they will never have if you commienaziglobalists ever get what you are on record for wanting to get.
Here you go. Here's a laundry list of current conspiracy theories for crazy feckers like you. Make the world a better place.
The people who think mass shootings are staged - BBC News
You are absolutely correct. I count 94th, not 111th.
1 *El Salvador 108.64 6,656 Americas Central America 2015
2 *Honduras 63.75 5,148 Americas Central America 2015
3 *Venezuela 57.15 17,778 Americas South America 2015
4 *United States Virgin Islands*(US) 52.64 56 Americas Caribbean 2010
5 *Jamaica 43.21 1,207 Americas Caribbean 2012
6 *Lesotho 38 764 Africa Southern Africa 2010
7 *Belize 34.4 121 Americas Central America 2014
8 *South Africa 34.27 18,673 Africa Southern Africa 2015
9 *Saint Kitts and Nevis 33.55 18 Americas Caribbean 2012
10 *Guatemala 31.21 4,998 Americas Central America 2014
11 *Trinidad and Tobago 30.88 420 Americas Caribbean 2015
12 *Bahamas 29.81 111 Americas Caribbean 2012
13 *Anguilla*(UK) 27.66 4 Americas Caribbean 2014
14 *Brazil 26.74 55,574 Americas South America 2015
15 *Colombia 26.5 12,782 Americas South America 2015
16 *Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 25.61 28 Americas Caribbean 2012
17 *Saint Lucia 21.56 39 Americas Caribbean 2012
18 *Montserrat*(UK) 20.39 1 Americas Caribbean 2008
19 *Tuvalu 20.28 2 Oceania Polynesia 2012
20 *Guyana 19.42 149 Americas South America 2015
21 *Dominican Republic 17.39 1,810 Americas Caribbean 2014
22 *Namibia 16.93 388 Africa Southern Africa 2012
23 *Mexico 16.35 20,762 Americas Central America 2015
24 *Saint Pierre and Miquelon*(France) 15.94 1 Americas Northern America 2009
25 *Puerto Rico*(US) 15.86 584 Americas Caribbean 2015
26 *Cayman Islands*(UK) 14.74 8 Americas Caribbean 2009
27 *South Sudan 13.7 1,504 Africa Eastern Africa 2012
28 *Democratic Republic of the Congo 13.36 10,322 Africa Middle Africa 2015
29 *French Guiana*(France) 13.17 30 Americas South America 2009
30 *Central African Republic 13.09 642 Africa Middle Africa 2015
31 *Greenland*(Denmark) 12.46 7 Americas Northern America 2015
32 *Bolivia 12.4 1,270 Americas South America 2012
33 *Uganda 11.84 4,473 Africa Eastern Africa 2014
34 *Ivory Coast 11.84 2,688 Africa Western Africa 2015
35 *Costa Rica 11.77 566 Americas Central America 2015
36 *Nicaragua 11.49 675 Americas Central America 2012
37 *Panama 11.38 447 Americas Central America 2015
38 *Russia 11.31 16,232 Europe Eastern Europe 2015
39 *Antigua and Barbuda 11.23 10 Americas Caribbean 2012
40 *Barbados 10.91 31 Americas Caribbean 2015
41 *Republic of the Congo 10.88 466 Africa Middle Africa 2015
42 *Mali 10.82 1,905 Africa Western Africa 2015
43 *Suriname 10.68 58 Americas South America 2015
44 *Botswana 10.53 220 Africa Southern Africa 2011
45 *Papua New Guinea 10.42 713 Oceania Melanesia 2010
46 *Mauritania 10.22 416 Africa Western Africa 2015
47 *Haiti 10.04 1,033 Americas Caribbean 2012
48 *Philippines 9.84 9,756 Asia South-Eastern Asia 2014
49 *Nigeria 9.79 17,843 Africa Western Africa 2015
50 *Angola 9.65 2,414 Africa Middle Africa 2015
51 *Paraguay 9.29 617 Americas South America 2015
52 *Guinea-Bissau 9.17 169 Africa Western Africa 2015
53 *Togo 9.14 668 Africa Western Africa 2015
54 *Gambia 9.07 181 Africa Western Africa 2015
55 *Chad 9.02 1,266 Africa Middle Africa 2015
56 *Gabon 9 155 Africa Middle Africa 2015
57 *Cape Verde 8.84 46 Africa Western Africa 2015
58 *Guinea 8.46 1,067 Africa Western Africa 2015
59 *Uruguay 8.42 289 Americas South America 2015
60 *Dominica 8.4 6 Americas Caribbean 2011
61 *British Virgin Islands*(UK) 8.37 2 Americas Caribbean 2006
62 *Ecuador 8.23 1,309 Americas South America 2014
63 *Swaziland 8.16 102 Africa Southern Africa 2013
64 *Qatar 8.1 181 Asia Western Asia 2015
65 *Iraq 8 2,628 Asia Western Asia 2012
66 *Guadeloupe*(France) 7.9 36 Americas Caribbean 2009
67 *Pakistan 7.81 13,846 Asia Southern Asia 2012
68 *Comoros 7.6 60 Africa Eastern Africa 2015
69 *Ethiopia 7.6 7,552 Africa Eastern Africa 2015
70 *Grenada 7.52 8 Americas Caribbean 2014
71 *Kiribati 7.5 8 Oceania Micronesia 2012
72 *Eritrea 7.46 390 Africa Eastern Africa 2015
73 *Senegal 7.3 1,105 Africa Western Africa 2015
74 *Mongolia 7.23 214 Asia Eastern Asia 2015
75 *Peru 7.16 2,247 Americas South America 2015
76 *Tanzania 7.01 3,746 Africa Eastern Africa 2015
77 *Laos 6.87 467 Asia South-Eastern Asia 2015
78 *Djibouti 6.77 60 Africa Eastern Africa 2015
79 *Zimbabwe 6.74 981 Africa Eastern Africa 2012
80 *Yemen 6.67 1,703 Asia Western Asia 2013
81 *Turks and Caicos Islands*(UK) 6.61 2 Americas Caribbean 2009
82 *Afghanistan 6.55 1,948 Asia Southern Asia 2012
83 *Argentina 6.53 2,837 Americas South America 2015
84 *Sudan 6.45 2,596 Africa Northern Africa 2015
85 *Bermuda*(UK) 6.45 4 Americas Northern America 2015
86 *Benin 6.01 654 Africa Western Africa 2015
87 *Lithuania 5.98 172 Europe Northern Europe 2015
88 *Mayotte*(France) 5.93 12 Africa Eastern Africa 2009
89 *Cameroon 5.93 1,385 Africa Middle Africa 2015
90 *Zambia 5.85 814 Africa Eastern Africa 2010
91 *Kenya 5.75 2,648 Africa Eastern Africa 2015
92 *Somalia 5.56 599 Africa Eastern Africa 2015
93 *Kyrgyzstan 5.12 304 Asia Central Asia 2015
94 *United States 4.88 15,696 Americas Northern America 2015
95 *Kazakhstan 4.84 853 Asia Central Asia 2015
96 *Marshall Islands 4.68 2 Oceania Micronesia 2013
97 *Micronesia, Fed. Sts. 4.67 5 Oceania Micronesia 2015
98 *Rwanda 4.51 500 Africa Eastern Africa 2013
99 *Niger 4.47 788 Africa Western Africa 2012
100 *North Korea 4.41 1,110 Asia Eastern Asia 2015
101 *Ukraine 4.36 1,988 Europe Eastern Europe 2010
102 *Turkey 4.3 3,216 Asia Western Asia 2012
103 *Turkmenistan 4.2 225 Asia Central Asia 2015
104 *Cuba 4.19 477 Americas Caribbean 2012
105 *Iran 4.12 3,259 Asia Southern Asia 2015
106 *Latvia 4.11 81 Europe Northern Europe 2015
107 *Burundi 4.03 436 Africa Eastern Africa 2014
108 *Lebanon 3.95 231 Asia Western Asia 2015
109 *Aruba*(Netherlands) 3.94 4 Americas Caribbean 2010
110 *Solomon Islands 3.77 19 Oceania Melanesia 2008
111 *East Timor 3.69 39 Asia South-Eastern Asia 2010
112 *Chile 3.59 638 Americas South America 2014
113 *Belarus 3.58 340 Europe Eastern Europe 2014
114 *Thailand 3.51 2,387 Asia South-Eastern Asia 2015
115 *Sao Tome and Principe 3.44 6 Africa Middle Africa 2011
116 *Mozambique 3.39 849 Africa Eastern Africa 2011
117 *New Caledonia*(France) 3.29 8 Oceania Melanesia 2009
118 *Egypt 3.23 2,703 Africa Northern Africa 2011
119 *Liberia 3.22 135 Africa Western Africa 2012
120 *Equatorial Guinea 3.21 27 Africa Middle Africa 2015
121 *India 3.21 41,623 Asia Southern Asia 2014
122 *Estonia 3.2 42 Europe Northern Europe 2015
123 *Moldova 3.19 130 Europe Eastern Europe 2014
124 *Samoa 3.15 6 Oceania Polynesia 2013
125 *Palau 3.11 1 Oceania Micronesia 2012
126 *Niue 3.07 x Oceania Polynesia 2012
127 *Cook Islands 3.06 1 Oceania Polynesia 2012
128 *Tunisia 3.05 332 Africa Northern Africa 2012
129 *Uzbekistan 2.99 893 Asia Central Asia 2015
130 *Fiji 2.97 26 Oceania Melanesia 2012
131 *Sri Lanka 2.91 598 Asia Southern Asia 2013
132 *Martinique*(France) 2.78 11 Americas Caribbean 2009
133 *Bhutan 2.75 21 Asia Southern Asia 2014
134 *Montenegro 2.72 17 Europe Southern Europe 2015
135 *Mauritius 2.71 34 Africa Eastern Africa 2011
136 *Georgia 2.68 108 Asia Western Asia 2014
137 *Bangladesh 2.51 4,035 Asia Southern Asia 2015
138 *Libya 2.49 156 Africa Northern Africa 2015
139 *Guam*(US) 2.49 4 Oceania Micronesia 2011
140 *Armenia 2.45 74 Asia Western Asia 2015
141 *Azerbaijan 2.45 236 Asia Western Asia 2014
142 *Myanmar 2.42 1,304 Asia South-Eastern Asia 2015
143 *Albania 2.28 117 Europe Southern Europe 2015
144 ***Nepal 2.27 639 Asia Southern Asia 2014
145 *Syria 2.23 463 Asia Western Asia 2010
146 *Seychelles 2.15 2 Africa Eastern Africa 2010
147 *Vanuatu 2.13 6 Oceania Melanesia 2015
148 *Jordan 2 144 Asia Western Asia 2013
149 *Belgium 1.95 220 Europe Western Europe 2015
150 *Sierra Leone 1.92 124 Africa Western Africa 2015
151 *Malaysia 1.92 540 Asia South-Eastern Asia 2010
152 *Cambodia 1.84 268 Asia South-Eastern Asia 2011
153 *Réunion*(France) 1.82 15 Africa Eastern Africa 2009
154 *Bulgaria 1.8 129 Europe Eastern Europe 2015
155 *Malawi 1.78 279 Africa Eastern Africa 2012
156 *Kuwait 1.78 61 Asia Western Asia 2012
157 *Ghana 1.7 423 Africa Western Africa 2011
158 *Canada 1.68 604 Americas Northern America 2015
159 *Finland 1.6 88 Europe Northern Europe 2015
160 *Kosovo 1.6 30 Europe Southern Europe 2015
161 *Macedonia 1.59 33 Europe Southern Europe 2014
162 *France 1.58 1,017 Europe Western Europe 2015
163 *Vietnam 1.52 1,358 Asia South-Eastern Asia 2011
164 *Saudi Arabia 1.5 472 Asia Western Asia 2015
165 *Bosnia and Herzegovina 1.5 57 Europe Southern Europe 2015
166 *Romania 1.49 291 Europe Eastern Europe 2015
167 *Hungary 1.48 146 Europe Eastern Europe 2014
168 *Tajikistan 1.44 117 Asia Central Asia 2013
169 *Algeria 1.37 542 Africa Northern Africa 2015
170 *Israel 1.36 110 Asia Western Asia 2015
171 *Nauru 1.31 x Oceania Micronesia 2012
172 *Cyprus 1.29 15 Asia Western Asia 2015
173 *Slovenia 1.21 25 Europe Southern Europe 2015
174 *Sweden 1.15 112 Europe Northern Europe 2015
175 *Serbia 1.13 100 Europe Southern Europe 2015
176 *Oman 1.06 34 Asia Western Asia 2011
177 *Morocco 1.05 355 Africa Northern Africa 2014
178 *Denmark 0.99 56 Europe Northern Europe 2015
179 *Australia 0.98 236 Oceania Australasia 2015
180 *Portugal 0.97 100 Europe Southern Europe 2015
181 *Malta 0.96 4 Europe Southern Europe 2015
182 *Tonga 0.95 1 Oceania Polynesia 2012
183 *United Kingdom 0.92 594 Europe Northern Europe 2014
184 *Iceland 0.91 3 Europe Northern Europe 2015
185 *New Zealand 0.91 41 Oceania Australasia 2014
186 *Slovakia 0.88 48 Europe Eastern Europe 2015
187 *Croatia 0.87 37 Europe Southern Europe 2015
188 *Maldives 0.85 3 Asia Southern Asia 2013
189 *Greece 0.85 93 Europe Southern Europe 2015
190 *Germany 0.85 682 Europe Western Europe 2015
191 *Taiwan 0.82 192 Asia Eastern Asia 2015
192 *Italy 0.78 469 Europe Southern Europe 2015
193 *Czech Republic 0.75 79 Europe Eastern Europe 2015
194 *China 0.74 10,083 Asia Eastern Asia 2014
195 *South Korea 0.74 372 Asia Eastern Asia 2014
196 *Poland 0.74 286 Europe Eastern Europe 2015
197 *Luxembourg 0.72 4 Europe Western Europe 2014
198 *Burkina Faso 0.71 117 Africa Western Africa 2012
199 **Switzerland 0.69 57 Europe Western Europe 2015
200 *United Arab Emirates 0.66 60 Asia Western Asia 2015
201 *Spain 0.66 303 Europe Southern Europe 2015
202 *Ireland 0.64 30 Europe Northern Europe 2015
203 *Madagascar 0.62 130 Africa Eastern Africa 2010
204 *Netherlands 0.61 104 Europe Western Europe 2015
205 *Palestine 0.6 26 Asia Western Asia 2012
206 *Norway 0.56 29 Europe Northern Europe 2014
207 *Bahrain 0.54 7 Asia Western Asia 2011
208 *Austria 0.51 44 Europe Western Europe 2015
209 *Indonesia 0.5 1,277 Asia South-Eastern Asia 2014
210 *Brunei 0.49 2 Asia South-Eastern Asia 2013
211 *French Polynesia*(France) 0.38 1 Oceania Polynesia 2009
212 *Japan 0.31 395 Asia Eastern Asia 2014
213 *Hong Kong 0.3 22 Asia Eastern Asia 2015
214 *Singapore 0.25 14 Asia South-Eastern Asia 2015
215 *Macao 0.17 1 Asia Eastern Asia 2015
216 *Andorra 0 0 Europe Southern Europe 2015
217 *San Marino 0 0 Europe Southern Europe 2011
218 *Liechtenstein 0 0 Europe Western Europe 2015
219 *Monaco 0 0 Europe Western Europe 2008