Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have always wondered how an anti-gun person would feel if they were saved by a law abiding citizen who had a concealed weapon?
Funny how gun grabbers first reaction when faced with fear is to call 911.....You know, call the people with the guns.
Yeah and how many times has that little heroic happenstance actually occurred versus how many times people HAVEN'T been saved by ANOTHER person with a gun. You can fantasize about being the hero of the day all you wish but the facts do not support your fantasy. Keep in mind we're discussing the serious issue of folks dying needlessly while you folks are imagining drawing down on someone already shooting to kill which pretty much precludes you saving that first victim doesn't it?
The very best you can do is react and how many of you will actually do that rather than run from the scene like the armed guy in the crowd at the Gabby Giffords shooting?
C'mon here get real. You can put as many spins on this as you wish but the facts are; the more guns there are, the more crimes committed using guns will occur. The more guns there are the more deaths due to their usage there will be. The more guns there are the more owners rushing forward to put lipstick on a pig there will be.
The damn things are dangerous in the hands of weak-minded and dangerous individuals and with 350 million of you, the odds are favorable that there are more weak-minded and dangerous individuals holding a firearm.
Now; if the best you people can propose is arming as many of yourselves as possible in the futile attempt to protect yourselves from EACH OTHER; you've already lost any semblance of common sense or grasp on reality.
Keep on keeping on and pretty soon your country will resemble the armed camps of all those apocalyptic films with entry into and out of certain zones being done at your peril. What a fudged up way to live in the land of the free and home of the brave.
No point in trying to argue with it. Ellemint is a sockpuppet who is arguing purely to convince himself.
I have no problem with linking studies, but studies vary in their reliability and honesty. I do know some of the organizations that conducted the research do have an anti-gun bias. Does that mean that the research itself is bad? Not necessarily. You can be biased and still carry out quality research. It does mean that if the results are inconclusive (as most studies usually are) that the author might just as well assume that it probably leans a bit in his point of view anyways or if a study comes up with the opposite conclusion "Well, the study is wrong" and it goes down the memory hole.
Heh. This is actually better than any satire than I could come up with.
You freely admit that you haven't looked into the issue and use an appeal to authority as well.
Bravo. This is the first time I have ever seen someone clearly lose a thread.
What are you talking about it? I've looked into the issue as much as you probably have. I don't see most people on here citing original scientific articles --- which are often not accessible on the internet anyway--- nor do I see the need.
And then you think of what will happen when the government pisses off of everyone that owns a firearm...
Gosh, what a ringing endorsement of the mental stability of gun fondlers in the USA.
Do you know what I think? I think the gun fondlers are justifiably terrified that there might actually be a growing will to start doing something about laissez-faire gun ownership as a result of this carnage. You should be worried. Maybe not at a national level just yet, but at the state level, particularly on the coasts. People are tired of this and they're tired of hearing the response from brain-dead fondlers that the proper response to this is to get even more guns in the hands of the general public.
And compared to the number of people in the country, that number is insignificant. I already showed you the math of this earlier in the thread. If you are going to get upset about this number and disregard everything else out there that is significantly higher, well... it is hypocritical and shows attention to a given bias to fulfill an agenda.
And here you have it: instead of being outraged at that number, we have instead, "that number is insignificant". This coming from someone who belittles the position taken by another.
You sound like anyone letting that famous phrase "collateral damage" roll off their tongue.
And here you have it: instead of being outraged at that number, we have instead, "that number is insignificant". This coming from someone who belittles the position taken by another.
You sound like anyone letting that famous phrase "collateral damage" roll off their tongue.
We're not supposed to say these things, because it's politically incorrect to label these specimens for what they are: Sick.
Now, the crime rate is starting to go up in this town....I'll give you that....however the crime rate in this town is 85% lower than that Georgia....
I wonder why that is?
Quote:
Ga - Several Kennesaw officials attribute a drop in crime in the city over the past two decades to a law that requires residents to have a gun in the house.
But throughout today several of those firearms will be used to kill, either suicide or homicide:
"The nation averages 87 gun deaths each day as a function of gun violence, with an average of 183 injured, according to the University of Chicago Crime Lab and the Centers for Disease Control."
87 a day? Really.....because the daily beast said so? That's laughable....
Even the CDC disagrees with you.....and you said you listen to experts....
Quote:
Originally Posted by ellemint
At this exact second I wouldn't be equipped to argue all of that because it would take time to research. That's why I'm relying on the expert researchers conclusions---they've done the literature review for us.
The numbers above are so alarming... Private citizens own a LOT more guns than the government put together.
It makes sense to me. What is the per capita number of people in the government that have guns and the number of the citizens?
In other words to simply lump numbers may give a skewed picture. I venture to guess that there are a lot more citizens than government people, agree?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADA_NC
Number of gun homicides in 2010 :8775~ (in the last 10 years around 100,000 people have been murdered using guns)
I can't help seeing this part using the emotional angle to prove a point. 8775? 100,000? They are numbers that on their own sound like some huge amount. However, it is important to see the whole picture.
How many homicides in 2010? Of those, what percentage the 8,775 are in the total number o homicides as compared with knives, rocks, potpans, poison, etc?
Also, of the total number of gun owners in American, what is the rate of them commiting homicides?
Another one, how many of those gun were owned illegaly?
With this in mind, how many of the legal owners of guns committed crimes and were convicted?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADA_NC
Number Of self inflicted gun suicide deaths:18,375 (in the last 10 years around 210,000 people have killed themselves with guns)
Again, what is the population percentage that have committed suicide with guns as compared with poison, hanging, jumping from a bridge, etc?
If someone is determinded to killed him/herself, I assure you that if a gun is not available will find another means. So to me using numbers just like that seems you are using a sensationalist angle to prove your point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADA_NC
Number of gun deaths where cause cannot be determined : roughly 800 every year
Number of gun deaths where cause cannot determinde? This one is interesting. I won't even get into this one. To me you just used a number to sensationalize the issue get people emotional instead of trying to use reason, just how I see it.
Lastly, every death is one to many. However, there is more to it than just to focus on guns. If we focus on guns as you seem to do, we may simply forget there are other factors that may need to be discussed than just having guns such as mental issues, societal attitudes, etc. How much do movies affect our kids? Do they make life look cheap? How about how we seem to be raising narcissistic children that cannot handle stress, adversity in life, a simple "No", etc? How about divorce? After all it seems many of cases like Newtown have broken homes. This is something the news does mention in many of these cases, something to look into?
I can go on and on. The point is that getting this perception that the issue is to focus on guns is getting a tunnel vision and not see other factors and issues in society that may contribute to horrible events like what happened yesterday. Take care.
What are you talking about it? I've looked into the issue as much as you probably have. I don't see most people on here citing original scientific articles --- which are often not accessible on the internet anyway--- nor do I see the need.
considering the arguments you are making and having been here long enough on these forums to know Frank's posting style and attention to detail of the subject, I seriously doubt that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
