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.
guns never killed anybody. they are just a chunk of metal. i love the logic, i didnt shoot him that evil white man that made the bullet that came out of my gun, killed him.
And what numbers far outweigh those? Why that would be the 100 million killed since the beginning of the 20th century in genocide after genocide. Time after time those people were systematically disarmed or faced opposition who were far better armed then the victims.
Since the beginning of the 20th century there's been no time including the present where genocide was not occurring on planet Earth.
In fact America is about the only nation that hasn't had its own genocidal history. The closest we got was slavery and once former slaves were armed and allowed by law to have those arms that problem ceased to exist.
People are inherently evil/bad/selfish and the only thing that keeps humans in check is a micro and macro MAD policy.
You want to come in my home and kill me and my family for whatever reason you deem viable. Fine, but you're going to face an equal and opposite reaction and quite frankly you might not achieve any of your goals and you'll also end up 6 ft under.
guns never killed anybody. they are just a chunk of metal. i love the logic, i didnt shoot him that evil white man that made the bullet that came out of my gun, killed him.
I was just cleaning my knife & he ran around the corner, right into it. 17 times. Same logic........
worthless stats. Half of these are suicides, many, if not most of whom would just choose another method if guns were not available
We lost 447,000 in WWII alone. Frankly it seems a bit disrerespectful to lump in together someone who commits suicde, or for that matter a gang-banger fighting over drug turf, with someone who sacrificed his/her life so that you could have the freedom to post tripe on the internet.
Research has shown that "Guns kept in homes are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal accidental shooting, criminal assault, or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense."
<snip>
True, but think about it. It means that for all these gun owners who think they need their guns for self-defense, it's more likely that the guns in their home will be involved in an accidental shooting, criminal assault, or suicide attempt.
Firstly to have an accidental shooting one must first own a gun... If no one had a gun the number of accidental shootings would be zero. Secondly it's well established that legal gun ownership follows certain demographic patterns which may be less represented in crime statistics. Offender surveys have consistently proven that the vast majority of criminals who are committing crimes will avoid entering a home where they suspect a gun and it's owner to be present (i.e. the home owners fit the demographic pattern, crime is not random) thus there can be no use of that gun for self defense since the only time they may be victims of crime is when nobody is present.
So by those that do not own a gun cannot be involved with an accidental shooting. The don't have a gun to accidentally shoot. If they do not fit the demographic profile of a gun owner, they are not flagged as a risk to have a gun by a criminal. Therefore those people have no risk of being involved in an accidental shooting, but more likely to be present when a crime is committed, and obviously cannot use their gun for self defense since they do not own one.
The interesting area for more study would be those who legally own a gun who are demographically dissimilar. In those cases are there more crimes committed to these people when present and if so what are the defensive handgun use statistics? Also is their risk of accidental shooting higher than their risk of being the victim of a crime.
A similar area for study may be those who are demographically similar to gun owners who do not own guns, is their risk of crime higher that a gun owner who also fits the demographic group.
Let's not do NOTHING by stymying any meaningful change by harping on arguments around apples and oranges. There are murders of all kind all over the world every day. If you want to work against abortion or unjust wars or child hunger/death due to big powerful ag with your legislators, that would be commendable. Gun control is a separate issue.
Let's not compare apples and oranges, says the person who opened the thread by comparing gun deaths to war.
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.
