HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » The CDC study on guns...s...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sat Oct 6, 2012, 10:36 PM

The CDC study on guns...shut down.

Sat Oct 06, 2012 at 03:40 PM PDT
The CDC study on guns...shut down.
by lutznancy

...In the late 1980s and early 1990s, he and other researchers at the CDC started looking at gun violence in America.......their conclusions caused the NRA to to lobby Congress and put enough fear into our esteemed politicians to cause them to withdraw the funding.....it shut the whole study down. But look what they found!...

SNIP

..."We started looking at gun violence as a public health problem at the CDC in the late 80s and early 90s." Rosenberg says. "The standard line from the NRA is that you should have a gun in your house to protect you."

The results of their study speak for themselves: not only does owning a gun not protect you, but it increases the risk of homicide for people in the home three times, and increases the risk of suicide five times.

The same science that researchers use to study traffic deaths and other safety issues can be applied to the study of guns and their impact on the health of society.
"We're being held hostage to firearm violence," Rosenberg says, citing the NRA as the cause. "All of the science that could possibly give us answers is being stopped."

While a tremendous amount of research has been done to stop other leading causes of death, like cancer, or traffic deaths, Rosenberg says that the NRA has successfully put a stop to any work that might have been done to decrease firearm injuries and deaths.
Gun control has not been an issue in this country in years. Democrats have dropped the entire issue. They are so afraid of the NRA that even after all the horrific gun violence in our country in the last year, not a peep about any new gun control laws.

When will this insanity stop?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/06/1141136/-The-CDC-study-on-guns-shut-down

227 replies, 25344 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 227 replies Author Time Post
Reply The CDC study on guns...shut down. (Original post)
FourScore Oct 2012 OP
Hoyt Oct 2012 #1
Trunk Monkey Oct 2012 #3
Hoyt Oct 2012 #9
fightthegoodfightnow Oct 2012 #13
PavePusher Oct 2012 #65
Electric Monk Oct 2012 #25
Trunk Monkey Oct 2012 #37
Warren Stupidity Oct 2012 #132
Trunk Monkey Oct 2012 #174
G_j Oct 2012 #200
Eleanors38 Oct 2012 #89
Kingofalldems Oct 2012 #33
DainBramaged Oct 2012 #55
Eleanors38 Oct 2012 #90
Missycim Oct 2012 #206
Kingofalldems Oct 2012 #214
Missycim Oct 2012 #216
SecularMotion Oct 2012 #222
DainBramaged Oct 2012 #42
PavePusher Oct 2012 #66
Hoyt Oct 2012 #77
PavePusher Oct 2012 #96
Scootaloo Oct 2012 #112
Trunk Monkey Oct 2012 #121
Hoyt Oct 2012 #177
Trunk Monkey Oct 2012 #185
Scootaloo Oct 2012 #101
Lightbulb_on Oct 2012 #147
Scootaloo Oct 2012 #164
Lightbulb_on Oct 2012 #167
Scootaloo Oct 2012 #169
burrowowl Oct 2012 #2
former-republican Oct 2012 #4
Taverner Oct 2012 #224
hack89 Oct 2012 #5
former-republican Oct 2012 #6
fightthegoodfightnow Oct 2012 #14
hack89 Oct 2012 #30
Warren Stupidity Oct 2012 #83
hack89 Oct 2012 #105
Warren Stupidity Oct 2012 #130
hack89 Oct 2012 #139
hack89 Oct 2012 #142
AtheistCrusader Oct 2012 #184
bongbong Oct 2012 #201
hack89 Oct 2012 #202
bongbong Oct 2012 #203
hack89 Oct 2012 #204
bongbong Oct 2012 #208
hack89 Oct 2012 #211
hack89 Oct 2012 #205
bongbong Oct 2012 #207
hack89 Oct 2012 #210
bongbong Oct 2012 #215
Coexist Oct 2012 #175
hack89 Oct 2012 #188
Trunk Monkey Oct 2012 #36
intaglio Oct 2012 #17
eqfan592 Oct 2012 #19
fightthegoodfightnow Oct 2012 #26
hack89 Oct 2012 #34
hack89 Oct 2012 #31
Crunchy Frog Oct 2012 #49
hack89 Oct 2012 #53
iamthebandfanman Oct 2012 #23
hack89 Oct 2012 #32
4th law of robotics Oct 2012 #106
baldguy Oct 2012 #60
hack89 Oct 2012 #61
Warren Stupidity Oct 2012 #84
hack89 Oct 2012 #111
baldguy Oct 2012 #117
hack89 Oct 2012 #191
Hoyt Oct 2012 #186
hack89 Oct 2012 #189
Hoyt Oct 2012 #192
hack89 Oct 2012 #193
baldguy Oct 2012 #217
hack89 Oct 2012 #218
Warren Stupidity Oct 2012 #80
hack89 Oct 2012 #109
Warren Stupidity Oct 2012 #128
hack89 Oct 2012 #135
hack89 Oct 2012 #144
Zalatix Oct 2012 #82
Eleanors38 Oct 2012 #104
Zalatix Oct 2012 #127
Eleanors38 Oct 2012 #136
Zalatix Oct 2012 #143
4th law of robotics Oct 2012 #110
booley Oct 2012 #151
hack89 Oct 2012 #190
booley Oct 2012 #220
countryjake Oct 2012 #153
hack89 Oct 2012 #166
countryjake Oct 2012 #212
hack89 Oct 2012 #213
spanone Oct 2012 #7
Heather MC Oct 2012 #8
Hoyt Oct 2012 #10
iamthebandfanman Oct 2012 #16
eqfan592 Oct 2012 #20
iamthebandfanman Oct 2012 #22
Heather MC Oct 2012 #51
Eleanors38 Oct 2012 #100
fightthegoodfightnow Oct 2012 #27
Jkid Oct 2012 #11
Hoyt Oct 2012 #40
krispos42 Oct 2012 #48
AtheistCrusader Oct 2012 #12
former-republican Oct 2012 #18
fightthegoodfightnow Oct 2012 #28
AtheistCrusader Oct 2012 #29
hack89 Oct 2012 #198
Warren Stupidity Oct 2012 #133
AtheistCrusader Oct 2012 #181
Tumbulu Oct 2012 #15
FourScore Oct 2012 #21
Tumbulu Oct 2012 #24
PavePusher Oct 2012 #67
Paladin Oct 2012 #71
PavePusher Oct 2012 #94
Tumbulu Oct 2012 #141
Eleanors38 Oct 2012 #102
xchrom Oct 2012 #35
k2qb3 Oct 2012 #38
Eleanors38 Oct 2012 #97
etherealtruth Oct 2012 #39
DainBramaged Oct 2012 #46
Eleanors38 Oct 2012 #114
Eleanors38 Oct 2012 #113
Ya Basta Oct 2012 #41
Crunchy Frog Oct 2012 #50
Ya Basta Oct 2012 #57
Eleanors38 Oct 2012 #115
Zoeisright Oct 2012 #54
Ya Basta Oct 2012 #56
DainBramaged Oct 2012 #148
glacierbay Oct 2012 #58
rawtribe Oct 2012 #81
glacierbay Oct 2012 #85
rawtribe Oct 2012 #92
PavePusher Oct 2012 #98
rawtribe Oct 2012 #107
PavePusher Oct 2012 #146
AtheistCrusader Oct 2012 #183
AtheistCrusader Oct 2012 #182
Paladin Oct 2012 #187
AtheistCrusader Oct 2012 #197
hack89 Oct 2012 #194
Missycim Oct 2012 #209
Eleanors38 Oct 2012 #118
porphyrian Oct 2012 #43
slackmaster Oct 2012 #44
DainBramaged Oct 2012 #45
Crunchy Frog Oct 2012 #52
PavePusher Oct 2012 #68
Eleanors38 Oct 2012 #119
krispos42 Oct 2012 #47
GoneOffShore Oct 2012 #59
glacierbay Oct 2012 #62
GoneOffShore Oct 2012 #63
glacierbay Oct 2012 #64
DainBramaged Oct 2012 #72
glacierbay Oct 2012 #76
DainBramaged Oct 2012 #78
glacierbay Oct 2012 #86
DainBramaged Oct 2012 #87
glacierbay Oct 2012 #93
Eleanors38 Oct 2012 #123
PavePusher Oct 2012 #69
Eleanors38 Oct 2012 #120
krispos42 Oct 2012 #163
Whovian Oct 2012 #138
DainBramaged Oct 2012 #152
Whovian Oct 2012 #154
DainBramaged Oct 2012 #155
Whovian Oct 2012 #156
DainBramaged Oct 2012 #157
oneshooter Oct 2012 #170
Whovian Oct 2012 #179
DainBramaged Oct 2012 #199
sl8 Oct 2012 #158
Whovian Oct 2012 #160
DainBramaged Oct 2012 #161
krispos42 Oct 2012 #159
Whovian Oct 2012 #162
krispos42 Oct 2012 #178
Ya Basta Oct 2012 #70
slackmaster Oct 2012 #73
DainBramaged Oct 2012 #74
Eleanors38 Oct 2012 #124
glacierbay Oct 2012 #75
DainBramaged Oct 2012 #79
glacierbay Oct 2012 #88
DainBramaged Oct 2012 #91
glacierbay Oct 2012 #95
Eleanors38 Oct 2012 #126
PavePusher Oct 2012 #99
Eleanors38 Oct 2012 #125
DainBramaged Oct 2012 #134
Eleanors38 Oct 2012 #149
Ya Basta Oct 2012 #165
treestar Oct 2012 #122
Ya Basta Oct 2012 #168
DainBramaged Oct 2012 #103
glacierbay Oct 2012 #108
Eleanors38 Oct 2012 #129
PavePusher Oct 2012 #150
Ya Basta Oct 2012 #171
former-republican Oct 2012 #172
hack89 Oct 2012 #195
fascisthunter Oct 2012 #116
Eleanors38 Oct 2012 #131
DainBramaged Oct 2012 #137
aikoaiko Oct 2012 #140
aikoaiko Oct 2012 #145
Ilsa Oct 2012 #173
former-republican Oct 2012 #176
Ilsa Oct 2012 #219
PavePusher Oct 2012 #223
Ilsa Oct 2012 #225
hack89 Oct 2012 #196
X_Digger Oct 2012 #180
fightthegoodfightnow Oct 2012 #221
orpupilofnature57 Oct 2012 #226
Swede Atlanta Oct 2012 #227

Response to FourScore (Original post)

Sat Oct 6, 2012, 10:38 PM

1. +1.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #1)

Sat Oct 6, 2012, 11:49 PM

3. It must be rough only getting to troll the occasional GD gun related thread NT

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trunk Monkey (Reply #3)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 12:58 AM

9. No, truthfully it's refreshing not posting to people who need a gun strapped

to their body to walk out door, think guns are good for society, cheer when a gun toter shoots unarmed teenager, and worse.

Enjoy your guns.

Still, love you guys when you aren't toting or spouting NRA/riggtwing BS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trunk Monkey (Reply #3)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 01:06 AM

13. Actually

It's the BEST place to talk about guns since the RKBA board seems to have forgotten another Amendment- the First.

Notice how there is NOTHING in you post about guns. Talk about trolling.

But heh, why attack the CDC study when you sarcastically and arrogantly ridicule Hoyt for what we both know to be true:

The results of their study speak for themselves: not only does owning a gun not protect you, but it increases the risk of homicide for people in the home three times, and increases the risk of suicide five times.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #13)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 12:56 PM

65. How odd. I don't see the government trying to interfere with D.U. anywhere.

 

Citation, please?

And you seem to think that inanimate objects cause actions. Also very odd.

Good luck with all that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trunk Monkey (Reply #3)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:18 AM

25. You got lucky. A jury voted 3-3 on what is clearly and only a personal attack

without even an attempt to discuss the issue presented by the OP.

It's because of people like you that the gungeon exists here, and threads like this get locked in GD.

/ibtl

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Electric Monk (Reply #25)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 08:59 AM

37. Had the post been hidden it would have made a grand total of 2

 

that I've had hidden since I've been here (Both regarding Hoyt BTW).

Fairly strong evidence that my posting isn't all that problematic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trunk Monkey (Reply #37)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 04:34 PM

132. whatever. Your post above makes DU suck.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #132)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 08:41 PM

174. That is of course your opinion and you are entitled to it. Good day NT

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #132)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 10:48 AM

200. +1000!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Electric Monk (Reply #25)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:40 PM

89. And there you have it. Just Romney-around enough, you'll get your way...

and that close vote you referenced? That's rather common here, and allows a lot of verbal upchuck to pass by the juries as: "The usual stuff. For the Gungeon."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trunk Monkey (Reply #3)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 08:06 AM

33. So you accuse a long time member of trolling

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kingofalldems (Reply #33)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 11:42 AM

55. No, when the 'king of all trolls' accuses other of trolling it must be a slow day in the gun forum

after a while, thay must get tired of agreeing with each other.........







Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kingofalldems (Reply #33)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:42 PM

90. Check out the history of this Forum/group.nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kingofalldems (Reply #33)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 02:48 PM

206. Oh so a high post count protects you?

 

I hate to break it to you, he did troll in the RKBA forum.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Missycim (Reply #206)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 04:08 PM

214. Trolling has one meaning in DU

And that is pretending to be a Democrat when you are actually a republican.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kingofalldems (Reply #214)



Response to Trunk Monkey (Reply #3)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 10:29 AM

42. So you think it's ok to try and intimidate others in GD?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #42)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 12:58 PM

66. Wow. If you think that is "intimidation", you've led a very sheltered life.

 

I suggest you attain some more maturity, self-confidence and increase the depth of your outer integument.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PavePusher (Reply #66)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:10 PM

77. I would suggest same for those who have to strap a gun or two on to venture into public.

Like they aren't prepared to use it for intimidation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #77)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:47 PM

96. Wharfgarble. What fun!! n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #77)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 03:22 PM

112. Do you think there's a market for adult diapers equipped with holsters?

We're talking about people who have to pinch tight when checking the mail, after all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #77)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 04:07 PM

121. I am required to "strap a gun on" to go to work every day

 

but I am very careful not to anythinjg that would cause a person to think I was trying to intimidate them because I was carrying a gun

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trunk Monkey (Reply #121)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 09:40 PM

177. When you are not working, whatayoudo with your guns?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #177)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 06:59 AM

185. First I have to clarify that when I'm done working I'm usually home for the day

 

Since I'm not going out again (if I can help it) I have no need to "strap on a gun or two".

A duty belt is a PITA to carry around all day, when I get home it is usually the first thing that comes off and my gun (23 YO S&W 6906 nothing to drool over) goes into a holster on my night stand and the bat belt gets hung up in the closed next to tomorrow's uniform.

Having said that, if I do have to go back out I just puit the holster on my belt and go wherever I'm going.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trunk Monkey (Reply #3)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:58 PM

101. How's that working out for you, Trunk Monkey?

As you say, it sounds like it's pretty tough. You holding up okay? Need a bridge to nap under? Maybe a goat to munch?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #101)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 05:01 PM

147. I've seen that dog all over with your posts...

 

Why does a chihuahua have a purple mohawk?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lightbulb_on (Reply #147)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 06:38 PM

164. It's not a dog!

Gah!
It's a pony!



You are like, the third person who thinks it's a dog. Philistines, ALL OF YOU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #164)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 06:49 PM

167. I dunno...

 

Take away the mohawk and bam... Chihuahua



Also, thanks to this conversation I just discovered the existence of "Bronies" *shudder* It's a sign of the end of days.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lightbulb_on (Reply #167)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 07:24 PM

169. My jimmies are unrustled n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FourScore (Original post)

Sat Oct 6, 2012, 10:46 PM

2. Sane account! K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FourScore (Original post)

Sat Oct 6, 2012, 11:55 PM

4. There's needs to be laws passed that make assault , suicide and violence against other people illegal

 



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former-republican (Reply #4)

Fri Oct 12, 2012, 12:04 PM

224. Why should Suicide be illegal?

 

And aren't there already laws stating this?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FourScore (Original post)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 12:10 AM

5. So if guns are such a public health threat

why have gun deaths plummeted in the past 30 years as gun ownership has skyrocketed? Their premise that owning a gun " increases the risk of homicide for people in the home three times" would seem to imply that more guns = more deaths. Yet exactly the opposite has happened.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #5)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 12:31 AM

6. You have no business posting in this thread

 

This is a thread about emotion not logic.

Please go away.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #5)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 01:10 AM

14. Hogwash

Plummeted?

Gun-involved homicides have increased since falling to a low in 1999.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #14)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 08:00 AM

30. Wrong

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10tbl01.xls

- Our murder rate has been cut in half since 1992

Here we see a drop from 2005 to 2009:

Weapons 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Total 14,965 15,087 14,916 14,224 13,636
Total firearms: 10,158 10,225 10,129 9,528 9,146


http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2009

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #30)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:29 PM

83. And there is your confusion: murder rates are not total firearm related deaths.

The CDC studies were getting at the fact that firearms are a public health hazard. You translated that into "murder rate". Why would you do that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #83)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 03:07 PM

105. Gun deaths are down in absolute numbers too

look at my links again. Numbers and rates are down. Fewer people are dying by guns - you cannot show otherwise can you? Perhaps you could provide some actual facts for once?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #105)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 04:31 PM

130. you are talking about crime stats. The CDC numbers are not the same at all.

And you have been told that repeatedly. The CDC data on firearm related deaths remains around 30,000/year. It is a public health issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #130)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 04:47 PM

139. It is really two separate problems.

one is criminal violence. The other is a mental health issue.

The solutions are separate too - adequate mental health care for Americans and a justice system that is focused on removing violent felons from society.

You want to make it about guns. Let's fix the real problems instead.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #130)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 04:52 PM

142. The post specifically says that the odds of being murdered

increases threefold with a gun in the house. Why are there fewer murders if there are many more households with guns?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #142)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 03:05 AM

184. Math is hard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #142)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 11:45 AM

201. Always a logic fail with you

 

It's really

> hy are there fewer murders if there are many more households with guns?

So "more guns" = "more households with guns"? Not "more guns = nearly same households with more guns per household"?



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #201)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 12:05 PM

202. Feel free to provide some evidence. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #202)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 01:46 PM

203. LOL

 

> eel free to provide some evidence. nt

Your claim in your original post:

> Why are there fewer murders if there are many more households with guns?

You made the claim, you back it up! That's how this chatboard thing works.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #203)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 02:45 PM

204. So if gun ownership has steadily dropped for 30 years

Then all those concerns over gun proliferation were what? Lies to justify gun grabbing?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #204)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 03:02 PM

208. Strawman alert!

 

> So if gun ownership has steadily dropped for 30 years

Who said that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #208)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 03:14 PM

211. Either gun ownership went up or it went down. What is it? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #203)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 02:47 PM

205. Self-Reported Gun Ownership in U.S. Is Highest Since 1993

Forty-seven percent of American adults currently report that they have a gun in their home or elsewhere on their property. This is up from 41% a year ago and is the highest Gallup has recorded since 1993, albeit marginally above the 44% and 45% highs seen during that period.

Democrats' self-reported gun ownership spiked to 40% this year.


http://www.gallup.com/poll/150353/self-reported-gun-ownership-highest-1993.aspx

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #205)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 03:00 PM

207. Thanks!

 

For proving your own post wrong! 50% had guns in 1991, vs. 47% today.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #207)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 03:13 PM

210. It dropped to 40% in 1995 and continued to increase for 17 years.

There has not been a drop in 17 years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #210)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 04:30 PM

215. LOL

 

It's always fun to watch the links provided by Delicate Flowers prove that they themselves are wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #30)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 09:10 PM

175. "Gun-involved homicides have increased since falling to a low in 1999"

yet you posted stats only through 1999 - which was the LOW point, and a very long time ago.. what are the stats after that year? You kinda proved the other poster's point unless you ante up those numbers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coexist (Reply #175)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 08:35 AM

188. I posted stats from 1992 through 2010

was your post intended for me?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #14)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 08:40 AM

36. Gun-involved homicides or homicides over all? NT

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #5)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 01:21 AM

17. It means more deaths of amongst households that own guns

than amongst those who do not.

It means more suicides in gun possessing households than in those that do not hold such weapons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to intaglio (Reply #17)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 01:32 AM

19. got evidence?

Evidence that takes into account the criminal behavior of the occupants of the household? Cuz that's where the studies usually fail.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eqfan592 (Reply #19)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:54 AM

26. An Explanation for Everything

You got it all figured out.

Who cares what the 'criminal element' that according to you brought the guns in......NO ONE deserves to die at the hands of a gun from another simply for living in the same house.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #26)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 08:11 AM

34. So what is your solution? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to intaglio (Reply #17)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 08:01 AM

31. But with more household having guns

why would there be fewer deaths?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #31)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 11:04 AM

49. Maybe it has to do with more trauma centers and better trauma surgeons.

Maybe someone who would have died 20 years ago can be saved today. I wonder what the statistics are on gun woundings.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Crunchy Frog (Reply #49)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 11:15 AM

53. But non-fatal shootings and accidents are tracked too - and they are down.

aggravated assault is the charge when you criminally shoot someone and they survive - aggravated assaults have not gone up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #5)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:06 AM

23. suicides

are still the leading cause of gun deaths by the owner of the gun..

granted there are plenty of other ways to kill yourself..
but since a gun is typically quick and easy to accomplish the goal with..
its preferred over slower or more painful deaths.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to iamthebandfanman (Reply #23)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 08:03 AM

32. But access to guns does not mean higher sucide rates

There are countries with much higher suicide rates that have draconian gun laws - Japan is the best example.

There has not been an increase in the suicide rate in America.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to iamthebandfanman (Reply #23)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 03:11 PM

106. Is it wrong that people have a quick and easy way to kill themselves?

 

Their body, their choice. Right?

Why should those who no longer wish to live be forced to kill themselves slowly/painfully?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #5)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 12:14 PM

60. Still spouting the same old RW propaganda bullshit, I see.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #60)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 12:25 PM

61. Do you disagree that gun violence and deaths have significantly declined in the past 30 years?

I didn't know the FBI was a RW source.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #61)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:30 PM

84. Crime stats are not the issue here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #84)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 03:15 PM

111. So we have a public health issue with a declining mortality rate

and this is a big crisis?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #111)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 03:39 PM

117. Right: "30,000 gun deaths each year isn't a crisis." That's the GOP talking, of course.

There's no problem, just as long as the "right" people are the ones getting killed - the poor, minorities, members of the designated criminal class, and other "undesirables". It's one more way to cull the surplus population.

The trouble is that most sane people realize THERE ARE NO UNDESIRABLE PEOPLE WHO NATURALLY DESERVE TO DIE.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #117)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 08:47 AM

191. Suicides are a mental health problem

it is no mystery what the solution is - single payer health care with mental health coverage.

The solution to criminal violence is to focus the legal system like a laser on violent crime of every kind. The real problem to solve is violent felons - removing them from society is the solution.

There are two distinct problems with two different solutions. Your attempt to lump all gun death together may support your particular anti-gun agenda but does not engender nuanced and effective solutions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #111)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 07:15 AM

186. Might be even less had we said "No" decades ago to those who believe more guns, in more places,


is good for society.

But, we'll putz around for another decade promoting/glamorizing guns and laxer laws so that we'll have another 100 million guns to deal with and more people walking around in public with their gun(s) on their hip. Of course, then the obstructionists will say it's too late to do anything about guns -- so more guns for everyone. What a crock of crud.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #186)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 08:37 AM

189. And in another decade the rates of gun violence will be even lower.

when will you move on to social ills that kill many more people than guns?

Isn't it time to start another temperance movement? It will save more lives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #189)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 09:11 AM

192. Maybe, maybe not. Certainly the rate will be higher than it needs to be.


And, there will be more gun carriers shooting unarmed people because the gun lobby tells us that is OK if you feel "threatened" to blast away under "stand your ground" laws, or some kid is running away with something easily replaceable out of one's car.

What is definitely true is that those who need guns close by 24/7, will come up with more and more bull to rationalize their needs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #192)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 09:28 AM

193. There are good reasons the gun control movement is dead in America

I wouldn't put my money on your predictions.

There are good reasons the gun control movement is dead in America - being consistently wrong in predicting the impact of gun laws is just one of them.

Time will tell. Perhaps we can discuss it in 2022.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #193)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 06:45 PM

217. Support for gun control is soft because it's been endlessly propagandized by the RW for 40 yrs.

Just like every other issue.

The surprising thing is that The NRA's deadly bullshit lies find a voice on a place like DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #217)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 06:59 PM

218. 40 percent of Dems own guns

the reason that gun control fails politically is that it is not a LW vs RW issue - as much as many here want it to be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #5)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:23 PM

80. Gun deaths have not plummeted. They remain at around 30000 annually.

If you have data to back up your assertion that gun deaths have plummeted, please provide a link.

And just to be fair: the facts, http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm

All firearm deaths
Number of deaths: 31,347
Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.2


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #80)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 03:13 PM

109. Gun deaths due to murder and manslaughter have been halved

since 1992. Criminal gun violence has plummeted by any objective measure. Suicides have held constant. Suicides are a true health issue - the answer is decent mental health care for all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #109)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 04:28 PM

128. yes you keep repeating that the murder rate is down.

Meanwhile that other statistic, firearm deaths, remains unchanged at about 30,000/deaths per year. That is the subject of the OP. I understand your desire to change the subject, it makes you uncomfortable, but there it is. If you would like to discuss the crime rate, and its relationship to guns, please feel free to do so, in some other thread. Instead your efforts to conflate crime rates with the CDC stat for firearm deaths, now that the difference has been repeatedly pointed out to you, is simply dishonest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #128)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 04:42 PM

135. Suicides are a mental health problem

it is no mystery what the solution is - single payer health care with mental health coverage.

The solution to criminal violence is to focus the legal system like a laser on violent crime of every kind. The real problem to solve is violent felons - removing them from society is the solution.

There are two distinct problems with two different solutions. Your attempt to lump all gun death together may support your particular anti-gun agenda but does not engender nuanced and effective solutions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #80)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 04:55 PM

144. But if the odds of.murder or suicide increase with guns

why haven't actual murders and suicides increased. Seems like the logic in the OP is flawed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #5)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:25 PM

82. That, sir or madam, is Crimethink.

 

Seriously, though, the problem is that we can't keep crazy people from owning firearms and going on shooting rampages. This is understandably driving a lot of the "ban guns" mentality. Not all of it, but a lot. We as a nation are at a complete loss as to how to fix that.

And while I'm stirring up trouble here, why can't we have a conversation about taking assault rifles from the hands of the second biggest gun nut culture* in the whole WORLD: our law enforcement network?


* Second only to the US Military

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #82)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 03:07 PM

104. The issue of "assault rifles" has been discussed numerous times in this forum.

First, just so we understand the terms, "assault rifles" are capable of full-auto fire (in accordance with BATF definitions). Do you have any data to indicate that civilian LEOs have "assault rifles," or just look-alike semi-auto carbines? I really don't know this figure, or if it is available. Most of the carbines I've seen in LEO hands are semi-auto.

I agree that it is very difficult if not impossible to keep guns out of the hands of mass-murderers. I posted a few days ago articles from Psychology Today which profiled the mass murderer as one who WILL NOT be deterred from obtaining arms, and WILL NOT be deterred from killing. Further, gun laws would have little bearing on the "thought process" of these celebro-punks.

Mass murder incidents serve only to re-new the completely-failed attempt to prohibit guns. I'm convinced that prohibition is America's most addictive drug.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eleanors38 (Reply #104)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 04:28 PM

127. Excellent points.

 

I have no data on whether cops use FULL auto assault rifles. Even if all they use are carbines, the number of carbines in their hands is way too high. Our police could probably fight wars with the armament they have. No militia even comes close. This doesn't bode well, considering the police are little more than minions of the Plutocracy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #127)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 04:43 PM

136. There is an urban myth, with considerable truth to it, that cops are chronically...

under-armed. Complaints were heard at the close of the 19th century about the weak .44 and .38; hence the .38 special and the .44 special. The .357 was developed in part to satisfy LEO's concerns that even the .38 special was too weak. Auto loading pistols only came into dominance after I had left college, to keep up with criminals who were using them. Now, LEOs feel it necessary to use auto-loading carbines (AR 15s usually) because of alleged increased fire-power from the crims. But ALL categories of rifles account for only less than 3% of ALL firearms deaths. Police do point to an increased number of officers shot with carbines, but the number is low double-digits for a year, I believe.

Perhaps the push is in connection with more and more police coming from war veteran recruits who are familiar and comfortable with this class of weaponry; perhaps it is part of a general philosophy that you hit the armed suspect hard and fast with overwhelming firepower. This latter notion seems to stem from military thinking.

Too many wars and their residuals, or as Faulkner said "The past is never dead. It's not even past."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eleanors38 (Reply #136)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 04:54 PM

143. What are they doing to research better flash-bangs and non(er, less than?)-lethal weapons?

 

BTW I greatly appreciate that historical account you gave me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #5)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 03:14 PM

110. When crime goes up the answer is clear: too many guns. More guns = more crime!

 

when it goes down the answer is less clear: there are a thousand factors at play, we can't consider guns to be that important, besides correlation doesn't prove causation.

Also suicides and self defense are the same as a murder and should all be counted together as unlawful murders committed by guns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #5)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 05:13 PM

151. are there no other factors?

the study itself was done in the 90s and since then the CDC has not done any follow ups.

So there could very easily be a factor that was not the same 10 years ago: changes in culture, law enforcement, suicide and crime prevention. One study found a correlation between gun violence and honor culture.

Though even with this drop, the fact remains that we still have way more gun deaths then countries with more gun control. We've only gotten better when compared to ourselves earlier.

To me it's suspicious that studying gun violence is resisted so much.

Yes there could be some magical number of gun owners that leads to less crime. But right now the CDC can't look at that because of the pro gun advocates.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to booley (Reply #151)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 08:44 AM

190. But there are two seperate and distinct issues here.

Suicides and criminal violence.

Suicides are a mental health problem. It is no mystery what the solution is - single payer health care with mental health coverage.

The solution to criminal violence is to focus the legal system like a laser on violent crime of every kind. The real problem to solve is violent felons - removing them from society is the solution.

Any attempt to lump all gun deaths together may support a particular anti-gun agenda but does not engender nuanced and effective solutions. You want to make the issue guns when it is not - it is people. Lets fix the real problems.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #190)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 02:06 PM

220. yes and no

suicide is a mental health issue.

BUT it's also an issue with lethality.

In short, people who attempt suicide are more successful at their attempt if there's a gun available. That's probably why the military is telling families of soldiers with PTSD to remove guns from their homes.

Not surprising as guns are very lethal, quick and easy to use.

However in both cases what the CDC was studying was the health effects of having guns around. In both cases there is a commonality.

OF course there are other possible factors that could also be affecting gun deaths.

However the OPs contention that having a gun in the house increases the odds of a gun related injury/death and your contention that crime has gone down are not exclusive. Both can be true.

MY POINT was that it's not the anti gun "agenda that's the problem. It's the anti gun control agenda.

Fact is we can both say what we think is causing this or that and what can be done about it but without research, we are both just guessing. YOU don't know for sure and neither do I or anyone else on this forum.

We trust the CDC for every other issue involving health. "Until the word "guns" gets involved and suddenly the CDC and indeed any other researcher should not be believed if they say anything negative about fire arms.

Even if the CDC here had done a bad study, the remedy for that is to do MORE studies to make up the weaknesses of the first. Except in this case. Here, the anti gun control crowd just made researching this political suicide in general and for the CDC specifically.

Which is a weird thing to do if the facts were in their favor.

We can't come up with any "nuanced and effective" solutions if we ignore anything that contradicts what we want to believe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #5)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 05:29 PM

153. Um, evidently you haven't checked the stats in Seattle lately.

Just try googling "gun violence Seattle" and then try telling us that "exactly the opposite has happened".

And also notice (if you even bother reading all of those alarming, tragic articles) that in fact, the Seattle Police have stated that most of the deaths due to guns this year had nothing to do with any gangs or known criminal elements.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to countryjake (Reply #153)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 06:46 PM

166. I rather look at the annual FBI crime reports

it gives you both the entire national picture as well as making it easier to track trends from year to year. The facts nationally are simple - we have cut gun murder and man slaughter deaths in half over the past 30 years. You have to go back 50 years to find a lower murder rate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #166)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 03:30 PM

212. National "facts" aside, your statement simply isn't true up here in the PNW...

where we have an over-abundance of militia maniacs, loony libertarian lunks, strident "sovereign" citizens, and other odious white supremacist's clubs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to countryjake (Reply #212)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 03:39 PM

213. Your first problem then is your state constitution.

it grants more liberal gun rights then the US Constitution. Washington state is on the forefront of civil liberties - which is a good thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FourScore (Original post)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 12:33 AM

7. knr...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FourScore (Original post)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 12:46 AM

8. I don't agree with this study

It's only looking at the number of times the trigger has been pulled, how can you blame the poor defenseless weapon, when it's clearly the people's fault for using it!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Heather MC (Reply #8)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 01:01 AM

10. Agree - but lethal weapons embolden some folks. Georgie Zimmernan is good example.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Heather MC (Reply #8)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 01:21 AM

16. i know right?

i mean, its not like a gun is designed specifically for something like killing or anything.. i mean gosh!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to iamthebandfanman (Reply #16)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 01:33 AM

20. It's not. sarcasm fail on your part. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eqfan592 (Reply #20)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 01:58 AM

22. My garden would look terrible

if i didnt get to use my ole trusty metal baby to dig out the weeds!

OH and you havent lived until youve used an AR15 to get that hard to reach itch spot on ur back!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to iamthebandfanman (Reply #16)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 11:11 AM

51. guns are people my friend!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to iamthebandfanman (Reply #16)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:54 PM

100. Jeez, my gun is defective. Hasn't killed anyone in 50+ years.nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Heather MC (Reply #8)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:56 AM

27. And Yet


The results of their study speak for themselves: not only does owning a gun not protect you, but it increases the risk of homicide for people in the home three times, and increases the risk of suicide five times.






.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FourScore (Original post)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 01:04 AM

11. No wonder we have no real action on gun control.

For the NRA they only care about the money, not the real lives lost to gun violence. For them the money must flow, the blood must flow, and the bodies must fall.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jkid (Reply #11)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 09:53 AM

40. That's a big part of it. The other part is that NRA's leadership - including Grover Norquist, John

Bolton, and worse -- is interested in right wing causes beyond just guns including beating Obama and other good Democrats in November.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jkid (Reply #11)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 11:03 AM

48. People who have guns will fight to keep them

People who don't have guns have to do absolutely nothing to continue to not have guns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FourScore (Original post)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 01:04 AM

12. If I have more than 30 firearms in my home how likely am I

Last edited Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:52 AM - Edit history (1)

to die in the next 15 minutes?


(Edit: I've been waiting about 25 years, ain't one of them jumped up by itself and shot anyone yet)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #12)


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #12)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:59 AM

28. Fact Remains

Again......

The results of their study speak for themselves: not only does owning a gun not protect you, but it increases the risk of homicide for people in the home three times, and increases the risk of suicide five times.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #28)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 03:04 AM

29. increases the risk of SUCCESSFUL suicide perhaps.

I would like to see this study controlled for socio-economic and regional factors. I'm guessing there are some regional 'hot spots' where the 'risks' as you put them, might be much higher, and areas where it is nil.

Owning a gun has already protected me once, so you can just stop saying that whenever you feel like it. (You might say 'statistically, owning a gun isn't inherently protective')

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fightthegoodfightnow (Reply #28)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 10:45 AM

198. Shall we look at that math again

if there are more households with guns then there are more people with increased odds of being murdered or committing suicide.

Yet there has been no increase in murders or suicides. Why is that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #12)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 04:37 PM

133. There are people who smoke a pack a day their entire lives and never get lung cancer.

So what?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #133)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 03:01 AM

181. One pack huh?

How many guns do I have to own to hit the equivalent 4 packs a day?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FourScore (Original post)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 01:15 AM

15. So interesting, I was actually considering buying a rifle

as coyotes have been slaughtering my sheep right in front of me.

But I was talked out of it by a number of people (hunters even), for these sorts of reasons, how actually dangerous it would be - I have a child in the house- and how keeping it locked up and safe would make it not that useful for shooting the coyotes.

I rescued a Livestock Guardian Dog who chases the coyotes off and this goes way better with my nature.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tumbulu (Reply #15)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 01:58 AM

21. I love this story. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FourScore (Reply #21)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:14 AM

24. thanks (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tumbulu (Reply #15)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 01:04 PM

67. Well yeah... you'd have to actually take it out of your storage location....

 

to shoot the coyotes. They don't take any action by themselves.

Just a little logic fail there, maybe?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PavePusher (Reply #67)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 01:46 PM

71. No, Just You Being Pissed At The Lack Of Gun Play.


Completely and sadly predictable......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Paladin (Reply #71)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:46 PM

94. Ummm... whatever, buddy.

 

Invent stuff, much?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PavePusher (Reply #67)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 04:52 PM

141. The point being that it takes time to go get the rifle, unlock it

load it and by that time the coyote is long gone. Or already killed the sheep.

The trouble of it all is not worth it. I have chased them off by yelling and running at them throwing rocks, but the dog does a much better job.

I have considered getting a paintball rifle as this would not need to be all locked up, I think. This would scare them off. But I've gone the dog route.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tumbulu (Reply #15)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:58 PM

102. Probably a good solution for you. I have several firearms, locked up to prevent

criminals and thugs from getting them.

My Dad taught me as a child how to use and fire a gun. We had some 40 firearms with four kids. No one worried.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FourScore (Original post)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 08:39 AM

35. du rec. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FourScore (Original post)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 09:15 AM

38. People with bongs in the house are ten times as likely to get high...

If we just ban bongs the pot-smoking population will decline 90%... except of course it won't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to k2qb3 (Reply #38)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:50 PM

97. LOL! I think you caught the massive flaw in these "studies." nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FourScore (Original post)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 09:20 AM

39. Looking at the responses in this thread ....

... there is no doubt that the "gun lobby" would pressure the legislature to halt any studies that did not result in a finding of: "Guns good. More guns good"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to etherealtruth (Reply #39)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 10:43 AM

46. The door to hell opened when 'guns are bad' was written......

and there is NO compromise with them, none, it's all or all....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #46)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 03:30 PM

114. Anytime one proposes a law -- especially a ban -- they must show how such action will resolve...

a societal problem before any action is taken. To propose "gun control," and then expect compromise one way or another, is to turn sound public policy thinking on its head. You don't compromise with purported solutions simply because those "solutions" were placed on the board. Solutions are designed to address PROBLEMS. Problems are defined, then solutions are proffered. You don't proffer gun control and then expect "compromise."

I have noticed that 'guns are bad' is typical of most approaches to prohibition; it is a short, nay simultaneous, step to 'people are bad.'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to etherealtruth (Reply #39)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 03:24 PM

113. You might be interested in what the CDC said themselves about gun-control strategies:

http://www.news-sentinel.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20121001/EDITORIAL/121009979/1015

The CDC Task Force studying gun-control strategies (including John Lott's work that claimed more guns = less crime) issued this executive summary:

“The Task Force found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws or combinations of laws reviewed on violent outcomes.”

Of course, the writer of this article can be keel-hauled because he is an NRA instructor. But you can find the CDC material on your own. So much for the "public health" model of gun-control.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FourScore (Original post)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 10:24 AM

41. Booze, tobacco, meth, heroin, etc kills hundreds of thousands

 

But you know what? I am not familiar with any of them saving someone's life. But even if there were examples it doesn't matter. The reason is the same as with folks who own firearms. Its none of my fucking business. As long as someone is not harming someone else its none of my fucking business. If someone harms or threatens someone else, we already have plenty of laws to deal with that.

THAT is what America is. BUD your fucking nose out of other people's fucking business unless they harm someone.

If there's anyone who can't handle the concept of freedom or others living responsibly but in a manner they themselves don't like. Then perhaps they would be happier living in a different country where telling other people how to live is the national principle.

"security" the age old cry of the oppressor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ya Basta (Reply #41)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 11:10 AM

50. If I or my family members can get hit by a stray bullet

or get caught in a mass shooting, then it is my fucking business. Just like if I have to breathe your secondhand smoke, that's my fucking business as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Crunchy Frog (Reply #50)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 12:00 PM

57. If you have not been harmed you have not been harmed

 

If you have second hand smoke coming into your house, THEN you have a valid complaint, but not beforehand. Same goes for guns. Besides we already have laws against discharging a firearm with gross negligence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ya Basta (Reply #57)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 03:33 PM

115. Well played. Not that it will do any good where prohibition is concerned. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ya Basta (Reply #41)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 11:25 AM

54. Completely, absolutely wrong.

If you keep your fucking guns in your own home, then fine. I could care less if you get killed by it. But YOUR guns threaten MY life. That crosses the line and allows ME to request laws that restrict guns. If there's anyone who can't handle the concept of public welfare then perhaps they would be happier living in a different country where anarchy is the national principle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zoeisright (Reply #54)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 11:48 AM

56. With that logic then your car threatens my life

 

Sound silly? Yes. But then again its no more or less. But I suspect you will have some excuse. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ya Basta (Reply #56)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 05:03 PM

148. And it's silly you need a gun everywhere

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zoeisright (Reply #54)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 12:11 PM

58. The only guns that threaten your life

 

are the guns that criminals use, not the law abiding citizen who holds a CC permit. In my experience, the vast majority of CC permit holders are polite, level headed, lawful citizens who realize that the cops (me) can't be there to protect, and it's not my job to protect the individual citizen unless they're in my custody, so they take the necessary steps to provide for their own safety.

I have had nothing but good interaction with CC permit holders and I have no problem with citizens CC'ing, and I'm fairly confident that I have a heck of a lot more experience dealing with CC permit holders than you do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to glacierbay (Reply #58)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:23 PM

81. Most of the mass killers where

law abiding citizen one day and then the weren't. Just a matter of time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rawtribe (Reply #81)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:30 PM

85. No shit

 

everyone is law abiding until they aren't. What do you suggest, a Pre-Crime Division?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to glacierbay (Reply #85)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:43 PM

92. NO

But I would like access to gun ownership to be similar to owning a car. Training = license, Owning = registering.
We should tag all ammo and have it linked to a licensed gun owner. If someone is harmed of killed with your gun or ammo you would be 100% responsible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rawtribe (Reply #92)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:51 PM

98. Bwaaaahahahahha!

 

When it comes to cars, no "training" is required for licencing, you just have to pass the test. A weak, pathetic test, in most cases in the U.S.

You don't have to register any vehicle... as long as you don't take it on public roads. And you don't need a licence to buy or own a car.

If someone steals my car and kills someone with it, I am not at all responsible for that death.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PavePusher (Reply #98)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 03:12 PM

107. I had to take drivers ed

and pass both a written and driving test.

Every car I've purchased was registered with the state before I purchased it (VIN) the title was transferred to me. When I've sold cars I make damn sure the title is transferred to the new owner.

If the main purpose for the car was to kill then yes you should be 100% responsible. It's not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rawtribe (Reply #107)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 04:58 PM

146. "I had to take drivers ed"... Was this a legal requirement of your state?

 

If the "main purpose" of guns was "to kill", with the 250-300 million privately owned firearms in the U.S., I think we'd have far more firearm-related deaths. The fact that we don't (and they are, in fact, decreasing), and that the great majority of the criminal deaths are commited by persons with previous criminal records, tells me that:

A. The "main purpose" of guns is not "to kill".

B. We do not have a particular problem with ownership of firearms by non-criminal Citizens.

Any firearm recovered at a crime scene can already be traced to it's last legal owner quite easily. No additional laws will make this process any easier, merely more expensive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rawtribe (Reply #107)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 03:04 AM

183. Are you saying all my guns are broken?

What do you mean, 'main purpose is to kill'?

I better take them to a gunsmith right away then. Every last one is broken.
Weird, since I use them all the time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rawtribe (Reply #92)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 03:02 AM

182. I only need to license a car if I operate it on public roads.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #182)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 07:33 AM

187. Believe It Or Not, That's Not Very Persuasive. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Paladin (Reply #187)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 09:49 AM

197. Why not? I have a license to carry a firearm in public.

seems to have a correlation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rawtribe (Reply #92)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 09:37 AM

194. So I would get a license that is good in every state?

After passing an easy test that 99% of the population from 16 to 90 can pass?


Sounds good to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #194)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 03:08 PM

209. No they anti-choice crowd won't take that flawed

 

analogy that far. I always anti-choicers if they want to talk about gun control what are they going to give up to get a registration law passed? with them its always take take take and never give.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zoeisright (Reply #54)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 03:46 PM

118. Sorry, but corrections to your post are in order:

(1) Leaving aside your lack of concern about the other poster's death, you have not proposed ANY prohibition/control which lessens any threat to your life; in fact, you haven't even noted what that threat is. You seem to have issue with carrying of firearms ("If you keep your fucking funs in your own home, then fine."), but the Constitution protects my right to BEAR arms. IMO, the individual states have powers to regulate method of carry. Chiefly, these are 'open' carry or 'concealed carry.' You CANNOT ban both or be in violation of the Second and Fourteenth Amendments (the latter's incorporation clause).

(2) Since you have not really given a credible reason why you are "threatened," then it is hard to give much credibility to your "request" to "restrict guns." The Constitution's Bill of Rights charges the federal government with protecting one's individual rights. The Articles empower the government with "promoting the general welfare," but it CANNOT do this in violation of the enumerated rights. Incidentally, feeling threatened is no grounds to infringe or abridge any of those rights.

(3) Please explain "anarchy is the national principle."

As I stated above, when you propose a prohibition/control, you have to explain WHAT THAT IS and how it will address a societal problem within the purview of the government. Merely throwing out another prohibition won't do. As for now, I will continue enjoying my life in this country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FourScore (Original post)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 10:30 AM

43. Thank the Supreme Court for strengthening the influence of special interests on our government. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FourScore (Original post)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 10:32 AM

44. We don't need to spend money on frivolous studies to prove that dangerous weapons are dangerous

 

Teaching basic gun safety in public schools would produce an actual positive result.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FourScore (Original post)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 10:42 AM

45. Those who speak out against this OP do not believe in the 1st amendment but otherwise

Otherwise





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #45)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 11:14 AM

52. Because guns are a natural part of the human anatomy that you are born with

and shooting is a normal human physiological function. Makes perfect sense to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #45)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 01:07 PM

68. "Those who speak out against this OP do not believe in the 1st amendment"?!?!

 



Whew!

Not sure how you make that intellectual leap, but it was amusing. Feel free to explain that logic-chain. Should be entertaining.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PavePusher (Reply #68)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 03:52 PM

119. Yeah, I felt that thought slip like an old Hydramatic.nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FourScore (Original post)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 11:01 AM

47. Guns are not a leading cause of death

They are a tool used in violent death, typically suicide or homicide. But they are not the cause of death. The cause of death is almost always either a) a person deciding to kill another person, or b) a person deciding to kill himself. There are very few accidents with guns.

So (t)he same science that researchers use to study traffic deaths and other safety issues can be applied to the study of guns and their impact on the health of society might be a little bit off. I'd rather have people figuring out how to get less people murdered or suicidal than figuring out how to get less people using a gun to murder or suicide.


Of course, the single biggest aid to reducing homicides would be to legalize drugs, but that's not even an option. Can you imagine the CDC issuing a paper saying the best way to reduce gun-related murders was to legalize drugs??? If you think the NRA has some power with the voter, wait until you see the power Big Pharma has with lobbyists and Congresscritters in DC.



The best way to reduce guns to criminals, if that's your goal, is to have mandatory background checks for for all firearm transfers, both commercial and private. And this would only work if the states kept the database of criminals and mentally deficient up-to-date. BUT, it has to be done on a state-by-state level; it cannot be federally regulated because DC doesn't have the jurisdiction.

And the cities and states need to stop pleading down accused criminals that use guns to commit crimes, or convicted criminals that are caught with guns. Strict guns laws don't work if enforcement is lax. Get the potheads out of prison and put in armed felons instead!

A 12-gun-a-year limit would also be possible and reasonable. Not 1-gun-a-month, but 12 guns a year. This would reduce trafficking. If you want to buy 13 or more guns a year, get some kind of state or federal permit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #47)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 12:14 PM

59. Take a look at this Mother Jones article about mass killings.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/09/mass-shootings-investigation


In the wake of the slaughters this summer at a Colorado movie theater and a Sikh temple in Wisconsin, we set out to track mass shootings in the United States over the last 30 years. We identified and analyzed 61 of them, and one striking pattern in the data is this: In not a single case was the killing stopped by a civilian using a gun. Moreover, we found that the rate of mass shootings has increased in recent years—at a time when America has been flooded with millions of additional firearms and a barrage of new laws has made it easier than ever to carry them in public. And in recent rampages in which armed civilians attempted to intervene, they not only failed to stop the shooter but also were gravely wounded or killed.


Interesting reading.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoneOffShore (Reply #59)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 12:36 PM

62. And most of those shootings happened in gun free zones

 

where the law abiding citizen will obey the law but the criminals won't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to glacierbay (Reply #62)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 12:41 PM

63. Missing the point aren't you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoneOffShore (Reply #63)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 12:50 PM

64. Not at all

 

do you deny that the majority of mass shootings have taken place in gun free zones? Do you deny that violent crime, including firearms crimes have declined in the past 20 years while there are more firearms now? Do you think that CC permit holders are responsible for the mass shootings?
Guns are used quite often to stop shootings before they become mass shootings, just use your google fu and look up defensive gun uses, they're all over youtube.
I've dealt with hundreds of CC permit holders and I can't remember the last time I had a problem with one, they are by far law abiding, level headed citizens, the ones I worry about are the criminals with guns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to glacierbay (Reply #62)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 01:58 PM

72. Yup yup uhuh yeppers who haw yee haw get the guns boyz we're going out to the movies

when you stop being afraid of the 'boogeyman' and start to live life instead of hoping you have the chance to take it, you'll join the human race. Until then, you can scream and stamp your feet all you like about guns protecting people against the criminals, but I'll ask one more question;


Why is it in high white population areas every one carries a gun, are you afraid of each other, QUICKDRAW?


Where I live, there are morans who would run out TOMORROW and buy a gun for protection if the gun laws were relaxed even though the only people they'd be protecting themselves against were their Lilly white neighborhoods where there ISN'T any crime.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #72)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:08 PM

76. Ummmmmm

 

you do know that I'm a cop, right? I've said many times that I personally don't carry while off the job, but I have no issue with those that legally do,
So take your snark elsewhere please.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to glacierbay (Reply #76)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:15 PM

78. I don't care who you are.

And I can snark till the gunpowder runs out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #78)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:35 PM

86. That seems to be your M.O.

 

get nasty with people you don't agree with, well, have at it, I won't play that game.
Have a good day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to glacierbay (Reply #86)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:38 PM

87. I don't care that you think that way



you must have been here for a long time.....or is the stalking something you learn at the Polize Academy?





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #87)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:43 PM

93. You must really think you're insulting me.

 

Not by a long shot. I've got a very thick skin learned from 30 years of dealing with criminals. But you just keep on trying, meanwhile, you have a great day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #72)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 04:11 PM

123. More fanciful construction, eh? --

"Why is it in high white population areas every one carries a gun, are you afraid of each other, QUICKDRAW?"

Good god, your mendacity is slightly above average for a controller/prohibitionist. The number of folks carrying a gun is about 2.5 - 3% of all gun-owners. Where do you get this stuff....oh, wait, nevermind.

Please note also: Whether or not you live in a "high white population" or not, you do move about; like outside of your neighborhood, you know? (And, Pssst! Keep this quiet: Criminals move about as well. Got it? Good boyz.)

BTW, I'm enjoying the human race. Why not join?


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoneOffShore (Reply #59)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 01:12 PM

69. Interesting how they rest their case on only two data points.

 

Hardly a good statistical sample by any stretch of imagination.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoneOffShore (Reply #59)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 04:03 PM

120. Big problem with this outlook, respectfully...

The rationale for carrying firearms is NOT social policy; presumably the straw man constructed by MoJo. The rationale is SELF-DEFENSE, not necessarily stopping the celebro-punk from further killing. It is so unfortunate that this Gerry-built narrative continues and is nourished by MoJo, it does not reflect well on the magazine.

There ARE studies which indicate that successful self-defense using firearms has occurred anywhere from a few hundred thousand times a year to over 2 million. I will also point out that mass murders are holding relatively stable over the last 30 or so years.

BTW, in a threat the other day in the Gungeon, one poster took to task a concealed-carry Democrat because he was only "selfishly" protecting himself, and didn't care about anyone else. Guess what other gun-controller/prohibitionists would have said if this concealed-carry fellow had said he was doing so to protect the folks around him? "Macho man."

Gun-control is throwing ANY PROHIBITION or argument against the wall and seeing what sticks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoneOffShore (Reply #59)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 06:35 PM

163. Well, think of it this way...

...if a guy with criminal intent pulls out a gun and starts threatening people (say, in a fast-food restaurant) and is gunned down by a legally-armed citizen, neither you or I can say the guy prevented a mass murder.

If a criminal kills 5 or more people before he's gunned down, by definition he's committed mass murder and was not stopped by a legally-armed citizen. But if a criminal is gunned down before he's able to shoot, or before he's able to shoot more than a couple of people, then the armed citizen MAY have stopped a mass murder. But we'll never know, because it was stopped.

Every time a CCW permitee guns down a teenager waving a handgun in the face of a 7-Eleven store clerk or a Burger King cashier, he may have prevented a mass murder. I can't say he did, and you can't say he didn't.

I'll also note that several of the mass shootings have taken place by people who figured out the best place to do a mass killing... where people are disarmed. An awful lot of those shootings take place in schools and houses of worship (gun-free zones by law, usually) and workplaces (gun-free zones by employer decree, usually).



Finally, despite the media attention, the fact is that for the same amount of money that Sideshow Bob spend on arming up for the Colorado shooting with his AR-15 and 90-round magazine (which, incidentally, jammed), he could have bought a half-dozen pump-action, sawn-off shotguns loaded with buckshot and simply stood there, emptying gun after gun into the crowd until he had six empty shotguns and 48 empty shells on the floor. 48 buckshot shells fired into a packed crowd, at 12 pellets per shell that's nearly 600 lead balls nearly the size and weight of a 9mm bullet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #47)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 04:45 PM

138. Roughly 2/3 of all murders are by guns in the US.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state

Good link for statistics. We seem to be #1 in firearm murders in the civilized world. Ain't that grand! We also rank highest in assaults and robberies w/firearms.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Reply #138)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 05:20 PM

152. You are talking to the deaf through a sunscreen

they are here to mock us, here to attack us, here to inform us that guns rule, JUST LIKE bullies, they intidimate the public so THEY can feel safe.


They care not one whit for anyone else, the guns rule.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #152)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 05:36 PM

154. I know and sigh that the gun industry has absorbed so many into their thinking.

 

It didn't used to be this way. People used to have a gun or two but not an arsenal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Reply #154)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 05:50 PM

155. Back in the day, when I was a kid, people had rifles and shotguns for hunting

no one had handguns let alone carried them for 'protection'.


The more guns there are the nmore crime there is period.


It's the Guns – But We All Know, It's Not Really the Guns


Since Cain went nuts and whacked Abel, there have always been those humans who, for one reason or another, go temporarily or permanently insane and commit unspeakable acts of violence. There was the Roman Emperor Tiberius, who during the first century A.D. enjoyed throwing victims off a cliff on the Mediterranean island of Capri. Gilles de Rais, a French knight and ally of Joan of Arc during the middle ages, went cuckoo-for-Cocoa Puffs one day and ended up murdering hundreds of children. Just a few decades later Vlad the Impaler, the inspiration for Dracula, was killing people in Transylvania in numberless horrifying ways.

In modern times, nearly every nation has had a psychopath or two commit a mass murder, regardless of how strict their gun laws are – the crazed white supremacist in Norway one year ago Sunday, the schoolyard butcher in Dunblane, Scotland, the École Polytechnique killer in Montreal, the mass murderer in Erfurt, Germany … the list seems endless.

And now the Aurora shooter last Friday. There have always been insane people, and there always will be.

But here's the difference between the rest of the world and us: We have TWO Auroras that take place every single day of every single year! At least 24 Americans every day (8-9,000 a year) are killed by people with guns – and that doesn't count the ones accidentally killed by guns or who commit suicide with a gun. Count them and you can triple that number to over 25,000.

That means the United States is responsible for over 80% of all the gun deaths in the 23 richest countries combined. Considering that the people of those countries, as human beings, are no better or worse than any of us, well, then, why us?

http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/mike-friends-blog/its-guns-we-all-know-its-not-really-guns

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #155)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 05:56 PM

156. Salient points.

 

It's a damned shame. Fear coupled with ignorance and an industry that pays politicians and spends millions on propaganda via NRA and other outlets have influenced a large proportion of our populace. It's an undeniable fact that the more guns held in a populace the more they will be used. For good or naught.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Reply #156)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 06:04 PM

157. Offender use of firearms (telling statistic)

Of incidents involving offenders with firearms, victims -


were shot (3%)
were shot at but not hit (8%)
were struck with a firearm (4%)
were threatened with a firearm (72%)
did not describe offender's use of firearms (13%)



http://www.americanfirearms.org/statistics.php#16


So we need 300 million + firearms for what reason?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #155)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 07:28 PM

170. So what new laws would you propose to elimanate this problem?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oneshooter (Reply #170)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 10:22 PM

179. I doubt you would care for my suggestion.

 

It would be modeled on the English rules of gun ownership.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oneshooter (Reply #170)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 10:45 AM

199. Why do I have to propose shit?




gunz gunz gunz


oneshooter


iron penises abound here


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Reply #138)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 06:05 PM

158. Interesting stats. Compared to Canada, the firearm homicide rate per 100,000 is less than 1/5 ...

that of the US.

From your link, the overall firearm homicide rate per 100,000 for the US is 2.84 in 2010, while Canada's rate was .50 per 100,000 in 2010 ( http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2011001/article/11561/c-g/desc/desc06-eng.htm ).

Two states, Vermont (.32) and New Hampshire (.38), had a lower rate than Canada.

12 states had a rate of 1 per 100,000 or lower. The District of Columbia had the highest rate at 16 per 100,000.

Thanks for the link.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sl8 (Reply #158)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 06:17 PM

160. Marketing. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sl8 (Reply #158)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 06:21 PM

161. The United States had over 25000 firearms deaths last year

Canada had 200.


England usually had less than 40.


In 2006 Japan had 2.


Which country is barbaric?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Reply #138)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 06:16 PM

159. No, 2/3rds of all murders are WITH guns in the US

100% of all murders are BY people.


People don't murder because they have a gun. They murder for other reasons and USE a gun... or a knife, or a club, or whatever.

16,000 people a year are killed. Nearly all of them die in single-incident homicide crime scenes (about 95%) so that means we have about 15,000 people a year who murder somebody else... in other words, we generate 15,000 murderers annually.

Take away the guns, the 11,000 or so murderers who would normally use a gun will most likely use "something else".


Also, our current non-gun homicide rate is the same or higher than the total homicide rate in most "civilized" countries.


If you want to lower gun homicide rates AND the total homicide rates, legalize drugs. Banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazine will have no discernible impact on crime but will have an enormous and negative impact on politics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #159)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 06:27 PM

162. Guns as an instrument of murder or assault. In this case 2/3's of murderers decided on a gun.

 

If you look at the chart at the above link the other third is divided between several other objects including knives, blunt objects and other means.

Guns though just make it so damned easy and convenient with little chance of harm to yourself.

I'll disagree with you on the idea that if there were no guns people would use something else. That's just silly. Mass shootings, flaring anger, cowards all seem to use guns. Gabby gifford would have been less hurt if the guy came in with anything but a gun. Don't even get into Columbine or other school shootings.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Reply #162)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 10:11 PM

178. A certain percentage of the people that would use a gun would use something else.

What is that percentage? I have no clue. 1%? 10%? 99%? But it's there, because you can't reasonably expect me to believe that of the 11,000 people in 2013 that are going to kill somebody with a firearm, in all 12,000 or so circumstances where murder was going to be committed that if they didn't have a gun they would just go home and eat Cheetos and pout.

And then there's the "helpless victim" effect. Criminals become emboldened by disarmed citizens and start do do more attacks on people rather than property. And you go through this multi-decade period where the people are disarmed but the criminals aren't.

And you can't really expect there to be no more guns.

Like I said before, 95% of murder scenes only have 1 victim, and 3% only have two. The mass shootings you're worried about are a tiny fraction of the overall homicide rate. They get the media attention (the M$M media, remember) but don't have any real effect. 16,000 people a year versus 15,960? That's a legislative success? That's effective government?


Yeah, if Loughner didn't have a gun, he probably couldn't have nearly killed her, especially with a crowd of people around. Or at least not wounded or killed so many other people. But how hard would that be to achieve? Virtually impossible.

Even if handguns were hard to get, Loughner could have also used a bolt-action, scope-sighted hunting rifle. Park in the lot, stand up on his roof, and *pow*. The only real difference between a hunting rifle and a sniper rifle is what's in the crosshairs. Or a buckshot-loaded pump shotgun under a coat. 5 rounds in 5 seconds, sending some 60 pellets nearly the same weight and size of a 9mm bullet at Giffords.

Gabby's head may have been hard enough to survive a 9mm bullet from a pistol. It would NOT survive a .30-caliber bullet from a rifle, and her body would not survive shredding from 00-buck at close range.


You want fewer gun-related deaths? Legalize drugs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FourScore (Original post)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 01:14 PM

70. If owning a gun doesn't protect you then why do police own them?

 

According to the OP the police should be informed that not only do their guns not protect them, but their guns actually increase the danger to themselves.

I'm just saying. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ya Basta (Reply #70)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 01:59 PM

73. That brings to mind a line from one of the Firesign Theatre albums...

 

"Don't mind the bars between you and the driver. They're for his protection, not yours."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ya Basta (Reply #70)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:02 PM

74. If having a brain doesn't help people why do they have one?

all these fresh faces, NRA recruits I'd say, because the mean old DU is such a threat...........

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #74)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 04:18 PM

124. HA! DU's "Gungeon" is the best thing to happen to the Democratic Left...

It finally shows to more and more people that -- you ready for this? --

There ain't nothin' liberal about gun-control.

Keep settin' up those "targets." We'll keep knocking 'em down!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ya Basta (Reply #70)


Response to glacierbay (Reply #75)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:18 PM

79. Mr Polize man, this is DEMOCRATIC Underground, not Free Republic or the NRA blog

if you don't LIKE what we say here, find someone else you can pat on the back who believes like you...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #79)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:39 PM

88. Oh I get it

 

anything you don't like, you wish to shut up, how democratic of you.
Meanwhile, you have a great day, I am, I'm on vacation for another 3 weeks.

On edit: if you don't like what I say, don't read it. seems simple enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to glacierbay (Reply #88)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:42 PM

91. Oh Mr. Polize man don't gives me a tickets




Click the red X like I'm doing to you in 3, 2, 1

Buh Bye Mr. Polize mans


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #91)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:46 PM

95. Now that's funny

 

I've known some cops like that.
Meanwhile, you have a great day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to glacierbay (Reply #95)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 04:26 PM

126. Oh, he would be assured if Officer Blart answered 9-1-1 and answered: "Hold on...

The Nicks are in overtime"

Have a good vacation!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #79)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 02:54 PM

99. And thus the irony of posts 13 and 42 eludes you...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #79)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 04:22 PM

125. Sorry, but "we say" PRO-2A. And most of DU agrees. Got it? Hold onto it. Firmly. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eleanors38 (Reply #125)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 04:38 PM

134. Who's "we"?

Long after you're gone from here I won't be, and I'll STILL believe that guns have done more to harm this country than you'll ever be able to comprehend.


Another ignored NRA proponent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #134)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 05:06 PM

149. We? DU, bud. Most here support 2A. BTW I've been told this a few times...

"Long after you're gone from here I won't be..."

Been here since 2006, and was told that stuff then. See my profile.

You need to re-examine your position. "Gun-control" wasn't even mentioned in the Democratic Party Platform until the Zombies had charted all their biggest hits (1968). If you would drop some of the passion, it would be worth a discussion as to why "gun-control" suddenly cropped up at this time (not that there weren't attempts here and there before, esp. in the antebellum and Jim Crow South). The most curious thing I find about the gun-control outlook (it is hardly a movement given its lack of popular base/activism) is that it wouldn't have any legs at all if it weren't for MSM's almost uniform advocacy of its ideology. But that doesn't explain the motivations for the outlook.

Some say it was the assassinations of the 60s; others, including some early gun-control proponents said otherwise (to their credit), that in reality the 1968 GCA was a thinly-veiled attempt to keep guns out of the hands of blacks, but not to encroach upon the "well to do's" ability to arm themselves (there were, of course scores of major "inner city" riots in the latter 60s). The Jim Crow foundations of gun-control have been well-documented. But even this cannot explain all the motivations.

Some believe that after the Civil Rights era, there was a burning resentment toward Southern Culture (On the Skids!), and a wider resentment toward white males in general, and the best way to get at them was through disarmament (this outlook is seen in a significant number of "feminist" writings in the 70s and 80s, esp. regarding hunting).

Perhaps also, this was a period of MSM's highest power and its concomitant ability to shape national issues (something collapsing with the new social media), and gun-control was seen as a "quickie" social issue and would somehow move this country toward a "new man" of more benign beliefs and actions, all of which would reflect well on the Fifth Estate's power in a democracy. Of course, the "quickie" turned out to be a political nightmare.

Then there is always this country's fascination with prohibition. Gin, Guns, Gays, Ganja, Abortion and the new kid on the block, tobacco. We don't seem to learn much from using prohibition as social policy.

What do you think?

I am not, nor have I ever been, a member of the NRA. ("You may be seated.")

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to glacierbay (Reply #75)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 06:43 PM

165. Wow that guy actually believes that?

 

Thanks glacierbay. Just goes to show the lengths some people will go to restrict the rights of others.

And also I agree this person doesn't seem to understand what the term liberal means.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ya Basta (Reply #70)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 04:10 PM

122. Police are in more danger than other people

And they are at least trained to use the gun - though not as well as we would have supposed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #122)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 07:11 PM

168. So you agree guns DO protect. Thanks

 

And also you do realize "other people" go to ranges and shooting areas all the time getting experience, often times as much and more than the police.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FourScore (Original post)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 03:07 PM

103. Guns guns guns guns guns guns




I just wanted to give our gun defenders from the NRA in this thread a woody...............



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #103)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 03:12 PM

108. You do realize that the orange tip on those firearms

 

means they're not real don't you?
BTW, did I tell you to have a great day?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to glacierbay (Reply #108)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 04:30 PM

129. He stumbled drunkenly, like a robot, from the porta-John, trailing toilet paper before all.nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #103)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 05:08 PM

150. You're doing nothing but living up to the promise of your screen name. Good luck with that. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #103)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 07:40 PM

171. Ahhh right out of the right-wing strategy playbook

 

Dehumanize your enemy/opponent or conflate them to something unpopular and never mind if there's no truth to it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #103)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 07:46 PM

172. airsoft , If you're going to do that get it right.

 







Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #103)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 09:40 AM

195. Toy guns? LOL. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FourScore (Original post)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 03:34 PM

116. The NRA has to bury the Truth and then Lie

Is anyone surprised...

sociopaths

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fascisthunter (Reply #116)


Response to fascisthunter (Reply #116)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 04:45 PM

137. So many low post defenders of the Second cause of death to the innocents

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FourScore (Original post)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 04:47 PM

140. HuffPo Blog piece on guns not locked in GD? Mon dieu.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FourScore (Original post)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 04:55 PM

145. As I understand the law, funding requirements prohibit advocacy or promotion of gun control.



Not for merely conducting studies.


AR-13: Prohibition on Use of CDC Funds for Certain Gun Control Activities

The Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act specifies that: "None of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention may be used to advocate or promote gun control."

Anti-Lobbying Act requirements prohibit lobbying Congress with appropriated Federal monies. Specifically, this Act prohibits the use of Federal funds for direct or indirect communications intended or designed to influence a member of Congress with regard to specific Federal legislation. This prohibition includes the funding and assistance of public grassroots campaigns intended or designed to influence members of Congress with regard to specific legislation or appropriation by Congress.
In addition to the restrictions in the Anti-Lobbying Act, CDC interprets the language in the CDC's Appropriations Act to mean that CDC's funds may not be spent on political action or other activities designed to affect the passage of specific Federal, State, or local legislation intended to restrict or control the purchase or use of firearms.

http://www.cdc.gov/od/pgo/funding/grants/additional_req.shtm#ar13


And there are plenty of rich anti-gun foundations out there who will support gun control advocacy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FourScore (Original post)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 08:41 PM

173. It'll stop when the NRA members

turn their guns on each other and make gun extremists extinct.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ilsa (Reply #173)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 09:33 PM

176. That is a deranged statement to post.

 



Hoping men , women , children turn their guns on each other.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former-republican (Reply #176)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 08:21 PM

219. And where did I say I was hoping for that?

I said it wasn't going to stop until they were all dead by each other's hand. Or just dead. They simply won't stop until you can pry the guns from their cold, dead hands, as they've sworn.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ilsa (Reply #219)

Fri Oct 12, 2012, 11:50 AM

223. The insinuation/implication was quite clear.

 

And quite foul.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PavePusher (Reply #223)

Fri Oct 12, 2012, 06:12 PM

225. You inferred it. I didn't imply my preferences.

That just shows where your head is at.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ilsa (Reply #173)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 09:41 AM

196. What about the remaining 50 million gun owners who are not NRA members?

the NRA only has bout 4 or 5 million members.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FourScore (Original post)

Sun Oct 7, 2012, 10:47 PM

180. Ahh the 'gunnium (Gi) attracts gunnium (Gi)' theory..

As if the gun kept in your closet attracts the gun in the home invader's hand before you're shot.

That's typically the problem with studies such as these. They rarely account for the source of the gun in a homicide. The classic example is Kellerman's work, where in 85-something percent* of the cases, the gun that shot the person was brought into the home from outside.

You'd think from reading that particular study that guns in your home attract other people's guns.

Rather, people who are at risk of being shot are more likely to have a gun for protection themselves. (Because they're in a high crime area, because they (or a member of the household) are drug dealers, because they're being stalked by an abusive (ex-)partner.)

Which goes first, the horse or the cart?


eta: http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/cgi/archive.prl?study=6898 -- Kellerman's data..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FourScore (Original post)

Tue Oct 9, 2012, 09:57 PM

221. GREAT DISCUSSION ABOUT CDC STORY AND GUNS

Thanks!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FourScore (Original post)

Fri Oct 12, 2012, 06:21 PM

226. That hidden agenda I always smell.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FourScore (Original post)

Fri Oct 12, 2012, 06:34 PM

227. I would go beyond what the poster asserts here (right or wrong)....

 

The use of firearms is not only an issue in homicides, suicides and accidental deaths, it is a significant factor in other violent crimes.

According to a U.S. Department of Justice report from 2009 (there may be more updated statistics), over 40% of non-fatal violent crimes involved the use of a firearm (http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=430=).

I have never owned a firearm, never fired a firearm and, unless something drastic happens, I doubt that will change for the rest of my life. I have nothing against people possessing a firearm for lawful hunting and personal protection. I could never imagine myself killing a helpless animal. Hunters with firearms really are not sportsmen or "skilled". They simply use technology that renders the defenseless animal vulnerable. Neither do I believe that firearms increase your safety and security.

But if others want to possess them, so be it. But those that possess them need to be licensed. The purchase of a weapon should be subject to a thorough background check to ensure the individual doesn't have a history of mental illness or a criminal history. The Supreme Court has never held that even the most fundamental rights from the Bill of Rights cannot be subject to reasonable regulation. For example you cannot yell "fire" in a crowded theater for no reason and defend yourself with the 1st Amendment if someone is harmed or trampled.

But if you look at the rate of total violent crime in this country, factoring in the number of firearms in circulation, we dwarf the rest of the world combined. Yes violent crimes happen even in countries like Norway (right-wing religious "Taliban" nutcase), Finland, etc. but not in the number of such events or their frequency.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread