Warning: Function split() is deprecated in ..../includes/class_bootstrap.php(561) : eval()'d code on line 1
Gun control discussions in the wake of the Newtown, CT deaths - Page 21

This message board is only an archive. Click here to go to the current message board.

Page 21 of 86 FirstFirst ... 1119202122233171 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 210 of 857

Thread: Gun control discussions in the wake of the Newtown, CT deaths

  1. #201
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    281

    Default Re: Gun control discussions in the wake of the Newtown, CT deaths

    On the whole, I was speaking hypothetically.

  2. #202
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    3,847

    Default Re: Gun control discussions in the wake of the Newtown, CT deaths

    Quote Originally Posted by exzel View Post
    Thanks for the links. I try to read as much as I can on the subject from both sides.

    We already know the HuffPo has an agenda, akin to me posting stories from the NRA, methinks. Deaths by violent acts involving guns hovers right around 10,000 in the US, not 30,000.
    Actually, suicides + homicides = about 30,000. Suicide is indeed a violent death, probably more preventable than even homicides, if our laws were formulated well.
    And as I previously noted, one can extrapolate (since we seemingly don't wish as a nation for some unknown reason to report statistics on lives saved) that guns save more lives than cost in lives
    No. I don't think so. You might wish to believe that guns save more lives than they cost. You also seem to believe there is a conspiracy to hide their awesomeness. But think about this logically: it's simple and easy to count dead people. I suppose you might in some cases not know whether the wound was self-inflicted, but you can determine fairly easily that someone is dead, and that the dead person got that way via bullet. Counting the live leftovers is a lot trickier. Small city council meeting with 20 in attendance, someone busts in with a gun and says "you're all going to die," and the cop that was sitting their shoots him immediately? I think it's fair to say that up to 20 lives were saved by that police officer. A shooter in a mall takes out five people before getting plugged by an armed security guard or someone with a concealed carry permit, and that mall happened to have 4000 people in it that day ... Did the guard/armed citizen save 3995 people? Of course not, and there's really no good way to estimate how many were saved. It's not a conspiracy; it's just ... math is hard. Fuzzy math is really hard.

    And why not hold up Chicago as a model for strict gun control? It's one of the, if not the most, strictest areas in the country when it comes to gun laws. They should be a shining example of its effectiveness, right? Unfortunately their population amounts to less than 1% of the US population, yet comprises over 5% of deaths caused by gun violence. Darn statistics!
    Agreed, unfortunately BY THEMSELVES stricter gun laws will not reduce violence in all areas. Gun violence correlates not only with gun ownership but also with poverty and mental health issues, much of which could be alleviated by social support. It's not as simple an issue as some gun control advocates make it out to be; you are completely right about that.

    And interesting to note though that the drop in (non-suicidal & non-accident) gun deaths from the article attributes it to less violence from drug trafficking, more people incarcerated, and more police crackdowns on illegal firearms. Nothing to do with stricter gun control laws.
    Don't accidental and suicide deaths count? I think they count.

    And right now firearm deaths fall in as number 7 in the list of preventable causes of death in the nation. Just wondering, wouldn't our efforts better be served concerning ourselves with 1 through 6 at the current time?
    Those other things all get plenty of press, legal attention, and education effort. And also, I personally feel that I have a certain amount of control over every other cause (with perhaps the exception of toxins ... I do wish we would get more serious about that). But if you decide to shoot me, the general state of my health won't help me one bit.

  3. #203
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    3,847

    Default Re: Gun control discussions in the wake of the Newtown, CT deaths

    Quote Originally Posted by exzel View Post
    Let's say I agree with that. Would you then agree with me that we limit the sale of alcohol, and that I want assurances that you cannot purchase alcohol if:
    • You've ever had a DUI.
    • You've ever had a domestic dispute involving police where alcohol was involved.
    • You've never been drunk in public.
    • You've never consumed alcohol to excess.
    DUI - Yes, I'm right there with you.
    Domestic dispute - Eh ... depends on your role in the dispute, really. But I would say repeat offenses would qualify for that restriction.
    Drunk in public - No, that's just a misdemeanor/nuisance. Annoying but on its own not truly harmful.
    Consumed alcohol to excess - Nope, that's between you and your liver, and most people exceed their limit unintentionally from time to time. (But if you want to call me when you get drunk and need a ride home, I'll come pick you up, and I promise, no lecture.)

    Hey, this is not related, but I gotta ask, how are you putting apostrophes in? I'm asking because you are using an extended character one, and quoting you doesn't work very well. I have to keep replacing the ones you use with the standard you get from using the key to the right of the semicolon. I mean, I can quote you, but if I try to do a preview, everything in my message window vanishes. (You can't use extended chars very well with this MB software.) Might I ask a favor? Could you just use the ' and " keys and not whatever other characters you're using? Thanks.

  4. #204
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,083

    Default Re: Gun control discussions in the wake of the Newtown, CT deaths

    You’ve got to give Ms. Mod kudos in this matter… and the members. Though passions are evident, she and the members have managed to help keep this rather toxic topic relegated to one of thoughtful and informative debate and opinions, void of hate, anger, finger-pointing and disrespect. I for one, appreciate her and the members who chose to participate (and where the faint hearted fear to tread. )

  5. #205
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,083

    Default Re: Gun control discussions in the wake of the Newtown, CT deaths

    Quote Originally Posted by Todash View Post
    DUI - Yes, I'm right there with you.
    Domestic dispute - Eh ... depends on your role in the dispute, really. But I would say repeat offenses would qualify for that restriction.
    Drunk in public - No, that's just a misdemeanor/nuisance. Annoying but on its own not truly harmful.
    Consumed alcohol to excess - Nope, that's between you and your liver, and most people exceed their limit unintentionally from time to time. (But if you want to call me when you get drunk and need a ride home, I'll come pick you up, and I promise, no lecture.)
    But the last two prohibit you from thinking rationally, which is where one unfortunately thinks they can do things they are not capable of doing... and where they have a higher tendency to hurt other, or worse. And isn't that what it's all about in stricter gun legislation... stopping the potential problem.


    Hey, this is not related, but I gotta ask, how are you putting apostrophes in? I'm asking because you are using an extended character one, and quoting you doesn't work very well. I have to keep replacing the ones you use with the standard you get from using the key to the right of the semicolon. I mean, I can quote you, but if I try to do a preview, everything in my message window vanishes. (You can't use extended chars very well with this MB software.) Might I ask a favor? Could you just use the ' and " keys and not whatever other characters you're using? Thanks.
    Quoting me never does anyone any good. And you're not the first person to have to clean up my mess.

    I am using the ' and " keys, but often on my longer posts I do in in MSWord first (rather than directly to the MB, so I can take my time, change things around... and thank god for spellcheck at times. Then I copy it to the MB. I didn't realize it casued problems. I never had an issue with it. Going forward, if I do use word, I'll try to remember to copy it to Notepad first, then copy it to the MB from there. Hopefully it will help. See I can be reasonable at... times.

  6. #206
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
    Posts
    3,926

    Default Re: Gun control discussions in the wake of the Newtown, CT deaths

    Quote Originally Posted by exzel View Post
    Ask yourself a question. You’re shopping in a mall with your wife and daughters. Thousands of people are around you. Suddenly there’s a bomb blast and shots begin ringing out. Terrorists, or a psychotic 20 year old, have begun killing people... and you, your wife and kids are huddled behind a fountain. You’re all being quiet, but can hear the approaching steps of the gunmen as they shoot the wounded and helpless. Your wife has her arms wrapped around your crying kids… and you can reach out and pick up one of three things:
    A) A cell phone
    B) A single shot manually loaded pistol
    C) A semi-automatic handgun with a 16 round capacity magazine (one of the most common type of current legal handguns, but the type this debate and the gun control advocates are pushing to make illegal… beyond the assault weapons ban).

    If you picked A or B, then good for you for sticking to your convictions. But somehow I think if we were all being honest here, it would be C.

    I guess what makes me most upset about the issue at hand is the attitude that the second amendment is viewed as a privilege rather than a right, the lack of honesty about what is being considered. and discussion on how many times when guns have saved lives.
    This is one of those typical pro-gun fantasy scenarios. They always seem to envision these scenarios where they have lots of time to take out their weapon and dispense some frontier justice.

    Here's how violent crime really happens 99.99% of the time: You're walking down the street minding your business and suddenly someone's beating the crap out of you. They take your money, and your gun if you have one, and you're left unconscious on the sidewalk.

    This isn't some Death Wish movie where you have lots of time to figure out what's going on and time to take out your handy gun.

    Also, here's what's far more likely to happen to people who have a gun in their possession, and the statistics bear this out:
    1. They shoot themselves, either deliberately or accidentally.
    2. They shoot someone they know, either deliberately or accidentally.

    Anyway, to get back to your question, answers to your one highly charged fantasy scenario don't mean anything about what's best for all situations, do they? Heck, my life would be a lot safer if I wore kevlar clothing and safety goggles and drove a tank on my morning commute, that doesn't mean everyone should do it! Why go to the mall at all, on any day, there might be a mass shooting there!

  7. #207
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,083

    Default Re: Gun control discussions in the wake of the Newtown, CT deaths

    Quote Originally Posted by fushingfeef View Post
    Also, here's what's far more likely to happen to people who have a gun in their possession, and the statistics bear this out:
    1. They shoot themselves, either deliberately or accidentally.
    2. They shoot someone they know, either deliberately or accidentally.
    Well I don’t know about all of that, and I would think it is mostly opinion… unless you can provide those stastics you speak about. But what I do know is law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year – or about 6,850 times a day.

  8. #208
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    3,847

    Default Re: Gun control discussions in the wake of the Newtown, CT deaths

    Quote Originally Posted by exzel View Post
    But the last two prohibit you from thinking rationally, which is where one unfortunately thinks they can do things they are not capable of doing... and where they have a higher tendency to hurt other, or worse. And isn't that what it's all about in stricter gun legislation... stopping the potential problem.
    Ah, but you see, here's the thing: drunk driving and the like is declining. Gun deaths are increasing. Regardless, this is irrelevant. It's like the smoking/obesity/etc. thing you brought up earlier: classic misdirection. We aren't talking about any of those things. We are talking about gun violence.

  9. #209
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Bremerton, Washington, United States
    Posts
    2,932

    Default Re: Gun control discussions in the wake of the Newtown, CT deaths

    Oh, I love it when someone says that someone else has "an agenda" because they conflict with their beliefs. HuffPo's only agenda is getting eyes on their website so that doesn't fly.

    Now, as to the number of annual deaths due to guns - it IS 30,000. I wrote an article on it and did my research, TYVM.

    I have made my views known. I own guns - yes, plural: we just bought a pest control rifle - but I support restrictions on ownership. Nobody needs a military weapon like an AK. Nobody needs 30-round magazines. And I'm sick to death of the freaking paranoid fantasies of gun nuts who think they need an arsenal to "protect themselves from the gubmint." Those fantasies are stupid. And rewriting history to make themselves feel better about owning 50 guns is the pinnacle of self-absorbtion. And their dicks don't get any bigger, either.

    Listen, if it is a wee bit more of an effort to legally purchase a gun I. Don't. Care. It's worth that small inconvenience to me to make this country safer. Safer. IOW, less guns - as every unbiased survey proves. Why is it that the people who shout loudest about their "freedoms" and "liberty" don't give a rat's patoot about MINE? Selfish, self-centered asshats.

    Jon Stewart got this one right, about the gun nuts being so obsessed with a fantasy dystopian future that they ignore the dystopian present:

    http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tu...apegoat-hunter

  10. #210
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Cambridge, Ohio
    Posts
    17,667

    Default Re: Gun control discussions in the wake of the Newtown, CT deaths

    Quote Originally Posted by hossenpepper View Post
    We don't need gun control, we need stupidity control.

    Make it a requirement to have over a 125 IQ to purchase/own a gun of any kind.

    That would eliminate most members of the NRA and about 95% of the population.
    ...I'm glad you qualified that with "most"...I'm a Life Member of the NRA, and last tested-my IQ was well over 160.....

Page 21 of 86 FirstFirst ... 1119202122233171 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •