Notices
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 201 to 248 of 248
Like Tree89Likes

Thread: Guns in the USA

  1. #201  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,107
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    You know I just realized something. Admin is from in India. I wonder if we can get his input on this. The wording of that seemed vague to me. I am used to reading excruciatingly detailed legal definitions so this was a bit confusing to me.
    Well, here's a copy of the actual legal documents:
    http://www.poa-iss.org/CASACountryPr...Act%201959.pdf
    I tried looking it over but it seems they only listed the table of contents for the laws and not the laws themselves. I went to the home domain of that site and could not find a path to the actual documents. Frustrating.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
     

  2. #202  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    I tried looking it over but it seems they only listed the table of contents for the laws and not the laws themselves. I went to the home domain of that site and could not find a path to the actual documents. Frustrating.
    My bad.
    I didn't scroll down far enough.

    Try these:
    Abhijeet Singh - Indian Arms Act 1959
    Abhijeet Singh - Indian Arms Rules 1962
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
     

  3. #203  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    double post
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
     

  4. #204  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,107
    4. Licence for acquisition and possession of arms of specified description in certain cases

    If the Central Government is of opinion that having regard to the circumstances prevailing in any area it is necessary or expedient in the public interest that the acquisition, possession or carrying of arms other than firearms should also be regulated, it may, by notification in the Official Gazette, direct that this section shall apply to the area specified in the notification, and thereupon no person shall acquire, have in his possession or carry in that area arms of such class or description as may be specified in that notification unless he holds in this behalf a licence issued in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the rules made there under.
    11. Power to prohibit import or export of arms, etc.

    The Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, prohibit the bringing into, or the taking out of, India, arms or ammunition of such classes and descriptions as may be specified in the notification.
    12. Power to restrict or prohibit transport of arms

    (1) The Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette,---

    (a) direct that no person shall transport over India or any part thereof arms or ammunition of such classes and descriptions as may be specified in the notification unless he holds in this behalf a licence issued in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder; or

    (b) prohibit such transport altogether.

    (2) Arms or ammunition trans-shipped at a seaport or an airport in India are transported within the meaning of this section.
    - from Abhijeet Singh - Indian Arms Act 1959 - Chapters 1-2

    It would seem that the people involved in establishing the law for India trusted themselves and their descendants far more than our forefathers did.

    One difference between our independence from England and the independence of India from England is that England was an outside occupier of India. The Indian people did not have families long descended from the Brits and so their history with England was shorter than that of the US founders.

    The US founders were British themselves. They were descended from countless generations of British rule. They had a firm understanding of how the British monarchy tended to change with the whims of whomever sat on the throne. Being descendants from them ourselves and having our own inclinations to behave the same way the British rulers did if given the opportunity, our founders anticipated the possibility that minds would change and become complacent allowing a dictator to step into office and have his/her way.

    I am thinking that many who are against stricter gun laws are afraid they will ultimately lead to bans. There is an old phrase, "those who forget history are doomed to repeat it". I don't know if their fears are justified but the only way to find out is to test it. And that is one test no one wants to show true.
    RedPanda likes this.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
     

  5. #205  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,306
    They had pretty good reasons to be timid....they'd just had a heck of a time keeping a Revolutionary Army in the field and didn't want high taxes to maintain one full time--what many realized the British taxes were about anyhow (getting us to pay for colony defense). Also, of course, no one had really tried our form of government above the city state level in Ancient Greece, Novagrad Russia which they probably didn't know about etc.

    Always though it a bit ironic that by 1820 or so, hardly two generations after the American revolution, the Brit probably had more representative government and a less powerful King than our President. Overall an interesting turn of history
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
     

  6. #206  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,225
    The difference between India and USA on carrying arms? I thought it was commonly known what a "militia" was, and why the amendment refers to a "State" and not the country, the nation or the federation, and that it was now irrelevant to the modern era. Or are people simply not taught about the details of how the various amendments were drafted several times with revisions to take account of particular interests.

    ... first draft for what became the Second Amendment had said: "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed, and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country [emphasis mine]: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms, shall be compelled to render military service in person."
    But Henry, Mason and others wanted southern states to preserve their slave-patrol militias independent of the federal government. So Madison changed the word "country" to the word "state," and redrafted the Second Amendment into today's form:
    http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/...eserve-slavery
    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
     

  7. #207  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,107
    Quote Originally Posted by adelady View Post
    The difference between India and USA on carrying arms? I thought it was commonly known what a "militia" was, and why the amendment refers to a "State" and not the country, the nation or the federation, and that it was now irrelevant to the modern era. Or are people simply not taught about the details of how the various amendments were drafted several times with revisions to take account of particular interests.

    ... first draft for what became the Second Amendment had said: "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed, and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country [emphasis mine]: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms, shall be compelled to render military service in person."
    But Henry, Mason and others wanted southern states to preserve their slave-patrol militias independent of the federal government. So Madison changed the word "country" to the word "state," and redrafted the Second Amendment into today's form:
    http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/...eserve-slavery
    It's common for Americans to know how US government runs but you'd be hard pressed to find many average American citizens that know the details of how India runs their government. We are pretty egocentric in our learnings of how governments run. Few Americans notice how other countries run unless we get attacked by them, and then we only "know" what Faux News tells us. We are a society where the majority is educated about other countries by the spin media and rumor rather than formal study of foreign governments.

    So sure we generally know about America, but we would have to know about India as well to know what the differences are.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
     

  8. #208  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,773
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post

    So sure we generally know about America, but we would have to know about India as well to know what the differences are.
    India, having been heavily influenced by the UK throughout the latter part of the 19th. Century, surely must have "inherited" much British influence..

    What-all did it encompass? joc
     

  9. #209  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    The US founders were British themselves. They were descended from countless generations of British rule. They had a firm understanding of how the British monarchy tended to change with the whims of whomever sat on the throne. Being descendants from them ourselves and having our own inclinations to behave the same way the British rulers did if given the opportunity, our founders anticipated the possibility that minds would change and become complacent allowing a dictator to step into office and have his/her way.

    I am thinking that many who are against stricter gun laws are afraid they will ultimately lead to bans. There is an old phrase, "those who forget history are doomed to repeat it". I don't know if their fears are justified but the only way to find out is to test it. And that is one test no one wants to show true.
    Couldn't we consider every democratic country with strict gun laws to be a test?
    Surely Britain itself is a test of what would happen to a country under British rule?
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
     

  10. #210  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    for jack

    seagypsy, Neverfly and babe like this.
     

  11. #211  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by sculptor View Post
    Princess Diana?
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
     

  12. #212  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    we swapped 1 tyrant 3000 miles away for 3000 tyrants 1 mile away a couple centuries ago
    ............
    their numbers have grown some since then
     

  13. #213  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    1,969


    So here in the US - minorities and veterans rule the country?
     

  14. #214  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    The NRA seems to have achieved a startling amount of political power. It seems likely that it is their influence that dried up the state research money into the harm done by guns (though Obama seems to be opening that finance again). How is it that the NRA could get that powerful?
     

  15. #215  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    1,969
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic View Post
    The NRA seems to have achieved a startling amount of political power. . . .How is it that the NRA could get that powerful?
    Several reasons.

    1) Fear. They are better than almost any other organizations in creating fear amongst the populace. "They are coming to grab your guns" has been a meme they're been promulgating for decades. "Hitler outlawed guns, too, you know" is another.

    2) Close alignment with a political party. They have very closely identified with the GOP, and the two, while not interchangeable, share a great many political positions and objectives - thus what benefits one benefits the other.

    3) Money. They get a lot of money from gun manufacturers. For a while, several gun manufacturers were contributing $1 for every gun they sold to the NRA. Thus, in the wake of mass shootings, their advice is generally "buy more guns." They outwardly give three reasons for this:
    -an armed populace would have stopped this
    -there was a lack of armed guards, thus arming guards is the solution
    -the democrats will come to 'grab your guns' after this incident, so stock up.

    This works remarkably well; there have been waves of gun purchases shortly after the two most visible recent shootings, Columbine and Sandy Hook.
     

  16. #216  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,107
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    The US founders were British themselves. They were descended from countless generations of British rule. They had a firm understanding of how the British monarchy tended to change with the whims of whomever sat on the throne. Being descendants from them ourselves and having our own inclinations to behave the same way the British rulers did if given the opportunity, our founders anticipated the possibility that minds would change and become complacent allowing a dictator to step into office and have his/her way.

    I am thinking that many who are against stricter gun laws are afraid they will ultimately lead to bans. There is an old phrase, "those who forget history are doomed to repeat it". I don't know if their fears are justified but the only way to find out is to test it. And that is one test no one wants to show true.
    Couldn't we consider every democratic country with strict gun laws to be a test?
    Surely Britain itself is a test of what would happen to a country under British rule?
    Well yes but then you would have to take into consideration of how many people including some of their own blood descendants fought to get away from them. Has Britain ever been under oppressive long term rule of an outside nation? Who did they get their independence from? Are they truly democratic? If so, how long have they been so?
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
     

  17. #217  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,773
    Quote Originally Posted by adelady View Post
    jocular

    This statement is as phony as fruitjuice. jocular
    So, for your own information, "fruitjuice" is the stuff applied to the body cosmetically and fragrantly by Fags to enhance their "availability".
    So just exactly when was the moment you thought it would be acceptable to express yourself in this distasteful, offensive and totally unacceptable manner?

    I don't much care if you make the people you deal with away from the keyboard cope with this kind of stupid adolescent vileness. But you're well beyond the age when adults will look away and hope that this disgusting stuff spewing into their ears in merely a phase which will be left behind when you eventually mature. Clearly that hasn't happened. So we have to work by rules alone.

    One more stupid remark like that and you're in for a longish holiday.
    We do not mind users messaging us about our decisions as Moderators, however we will not tolerate questioning on the forums.
    In view of the above, I am automatically errant. However, by the time my reaction is addressed by Mod, dozens, perhaps hundreds, will have first seen it, before Mods could "erase".

    I am not about to attempt to defend my post. What I am doing, is questioning the reaction to it which implies that my moral being is in doubt: therefore, what one writes is what one IS? Surely not.

    The "unacceptable" utterance (the "word") was used previously in this forum without undue concern, several times, that being the reason I expected acceptance. If need be, ask me who and when. Therefore, I now perceive that a double standard exists: preferential acceptance of "unacceptable material" while my use of precisely the same material is "unacceptable".

    Double standards are typically the work of either the overworked, or the overly-excitable. The work an individual writes, is surely not the "work" of which the writer is made. In view of this, I am happy to accept the unsolicited psychological evaluation meted out by MOD, so revealing of my inner-workings, so perceptively realized and understood by her. An amazing tribute given my remoteness.

    .The "double standard" is one under which I shall not commit/ jocular
     

  18. #218  
    Forum Ph.D. Raziell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    928
    "The blade itself incites to deeds of violence."- Homer

    Its pretty much a given that if the average citizen wasnt allowed to own a gun, the murder statistics in the US would be much lower.

    Example:

    USA In a paralell universe with no guns: You have a really bad fight with your neighbour and you are both drunk. With no guns available, you end up fighting but noone gets severly hurt OR You actually both manage to cool down OR the lack of guns makes none of you make any move, the next day you square things up and grab a beer together instead - becomming friends again.
    Todays USA: Rage, alcohol and the easy use and availability of guns ends this night in tragedy with two lives ruined, one dead and one in jail. Wives losing their husbands, children losing their fathers.

    In an emotional rage induced state, the easy use and availabilty of guns can easily cause you to use it. If they werent available, you would have time to think it over, clear your heads or cool off.

    A lie is a lie even if everyone believes it. The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it. - David Stevens
     

  19. #219  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Because I am not a self-centred prick who is only concerned about immediate friends and family, but has a deep interest in the well being of all of humanity and of life in general.
    Ok, so your enormously huge Dunbar Number encompasses all of humanity because only a self centered prick cares about his immediate friends and family...
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Because I am currently in Houston for the sixth time this year and would like to survive to make a seventh.
    Wait... What? Which is it, now? make up your mind.

    Here I am, getting banned for having the audacity to point out that Lynx Fox's graph was highly misleading and showed cherry picked information- supported even by the link posted by Adelady who opposes my viewpoint... And you go and claim that pretty much every human being on Earth is a self centered prick in complete and total Hypocrisy.
    Lynx- You complained with the Claim... That the NRA silences those who oppose or criticize their views- Yet, that is exactly what you just did when you banned me claiming it's because I'm irrational on this topic for pointing out your fallacy in your posted graph and argument.

    You two should be ashamed. You two should get some Time Off to think about your behavior. But you never will because you're Above Accountability. It's ok for others to question my sanity for standing up for Liberty and Freedom but it is NOT Ok to question the particulars or accuracy of the information you present.

    And if you dislike it being said here openly in the threads- Don't Act In Such Ways.
    Hiding it out of open view does not stop everyone from thinking it. It only stops you from having to tolerate seeing their thoughts on it.
    But you two lost face with this one and did a disservice for what you claim to represent.
     

  20. #220  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,107
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic View Post
    The NRA seems to have achieved a startling amount of political power. It seems likely that it is their influence that dried up the state research money into the harm done by guns (though Obama seems to be opening that finance again). How is it that the NRA could get that powerful?
    They have a lot of support from people, specifically, wealthy people?
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
     

  21. #221  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    skeptic
    You seem to be suffering from a delusion that our government is not keeping statistics on firearm related deaths and injuries because the CDC has no mandate to collect this data.

    The numbers are available from DOJ branches.

    The NRA ain't all that powerful, but as the gun control nuts have attacked the constitution, they have stepped in to defend certain of our rights. And the supreme court has found the arguments convincing.

    If we are to remain a nation, we must remain a nation of laws, not the whims of the few, and that means a people with rights.
    You may not like our rights and freedoms, and that is your choice. You may have seen one sensationalized tv "news" opinion too many, and think our country unsafe, and that is a highly biased and narrow view.
    Our main dangers are unaffordable health care and a millionaires congress who seem to forget that they swore an oath to uphold the constitution and represent the needs of all of the people of this country, and a government who spends too much time trying to circumvent our constitution.
    Anything else is a foil to detract fools from our real problems.
    Last edited by sculptor; October 14th, 2013 at 07:24 PM.
    Neverfly likes this.
     

  22. #222  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    That's the other bit. Augmented by the commentary I just questioned above where he says he'd like to stay alive. There's this impression everyone over here is Yosemite Sam shooting off like a madman.
    Your odds of getting shot are so slim, it's ridiculous. You have a better chance of being struck by lightning.
     

  23. #223  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,773
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post


    You two should be ashamed. You two should get some Time Off to think about your behavior. But you never will because you're Above Accountability. It's ok for others to question my sanity for standing up for Liberty and Freedom but it is NOT Ok to question the particulars or accuracy of the information you present.

    And if you dislike it being said here openly in the threads- Don't Act In Such Ways.
    Hiding it out of open view does not stop everyone from thinking it. It only stops you from having to tolerate seeing their thoughts on it.
    But you two lost face with this one and did a disservice for what you claim to represent.
    Geez, Fly, yer startin' to talk almost like me......joc
    Neverfly likes this.
     

  24. #224  
    Your Mama! GiantEvil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Vancouver, Wa
    Posts
    1,908
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly
    Your odds of getting shot are so slim, it's ridiculous. You have a better chance of being struck by lightning.
    Total number of fatal and non-fatal gunshot injuries minus suicides in 2010; 86,000. Source; PolitiFact | Do 100,000 people get shot every year in U.S.? Facebook post says yes
    Total number of fatal and non-fatal lightning injuries in 2010; 269. Source; StruckByLightning.org - Safety first! When Thunder Roars, Go Indoors!
    I was some of the mud that got to sit up and look around.
    Lucky me. Lucky mud.
    -Kurt Vonnegut Jr.-
    Cat's Cradle.
     

  25. #225  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    moose turd pie time?
     

  26. #226  
    Forum Masters Degree mat5592's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    West Virginia
    Posts
    601
    Quote Originally Posted by GiantEvil View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly
    Your odds of getting shot are so slim, it's ridiculous. You have a better chance of being struck by lightning.
    Total number of fatal and non-fatal gunshot injuries minus suicides in 2010; 86,000. Source; PolitiFact | Do 100,000 people get shot every year in U.S.? Facebook post says yes
    Total number of fatal and non-fatal lightning injuries in 2010; 269. Source; StruckByLightning.org - Safety first! When Thunder Roars, Go Indoors!
    Yes, I think NeverFly may have confused being shot with being involved in a mass shooting. You are just as likely to be struck by lightning as you are to be involved in a mass shooting, yet it would be hard to believe that if you are fed information from the mainstream media.
    Neverfly likes this.
     

  27. #227  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
     

  28. #228  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    Odds of getting shot.

    Over a lifetime, at an average longevity of 80 years, 1 in 50 Americans will receive a bullet through some part of their anatomy. 1 in 200 will die of that bullet. That is not an infinitesimal probability. It is, in fact, a disgustingly high probability. It is close to the odds of dying by car accident, and those odds are definitely too high.

    Nor is carrying a gun a "right". It is allowed under the second amendment, but that does not make it a "right". It is a bizarre and ridiculous allowance that is found only in the USA. Every other western nation has strong gun controls, and the result of those strong gun controls is a murder rate of 25% or less compared to the USA.

    The American lax gun rules lead to 10,000 gun murders each year. That is 85% of all gun murders in all 24 richest nations put together. Anyone who thinks that is OK needs his arse thoroughly and soundly kicked.
    Jeaunse23 likes this.
     

  29. #229  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,773
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic View Post
    Odds of getting shot.

    Over a lifetime, at an average longevity of 80 years, 1 in 50 Americans will receive a bullet through some part of their anatomy. 1 in 200 will die of that bullet. That is not an infinitesimal probability. It is, in fact, a disgustingly high probability. It is close to the odds of dying by car accident, and those odds are definitely too high.

    Nor is carrying a gun a "right". It is allowed under the second amendment, but that does not make it a "right". It is a bizarre and ridiculous allowance that is found only in the USA. Every other western nation has strong gun controls, and the result of those strong gun controls is a murder rate of 25% or less compared to the USA.

    The American lax gun rules lead to 10,000 gun murders each year. That is 85% of all gun murders in all 24 richest nations put together. Anyone who thinks that is OK needs his arse thoroughly and soundly kicked.
    Kick my ass then, sir, as you obviously condone world overpopulation! jocc
     

  30. #230  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by mat5592 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by GiantEvil View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly
    Your odds of getting shot are so slim, it's ridiculous. You have a better chance of being struck by lightning.
    Total number of fatal and non-fatal gunshot injuries minus suicides in 2010; 86,000. Source; PolitiFact | Do 100,000 people get shot every year in U.S.? Facebook post says yes
    Total number of fatal and non-fatal lightning injuries in 2010; 269. Source; StruckByLightning.org - Safety first! When Thunder Roars, Go Indoors!
    Yes, I think NeverFly may have confused being shot with being involved in a mass shooting. You are just as likely to be struck by lightning as you are to be involved in a mass shooting, yet it would be hard to believe that if you are fed information from the mainstream media.
    Or at random.

    Suicide: 18,735 deaths
    Homicide: 11,493 deaths
    Unintentional: 554 deaths
    Legal interventions: 333 deaths
    Undetermined: 232 deaths

    So to go with the stereotype I was referring to- one made by John Glat- He would need to be walking down the street minding his own business and get shot out of the blue...
    Let's look again:
    Suicide: 18,735 deaths
    Homicide: 11,493 deaths
    Unintentional: 554 deaths
    Legal interventions: 333 deaths
    Undetermined: 232 deaths
    We can rule out suicide attempt safely... What's left is Homicide- in which the victims are either targeted or a result of a mass shooting. Of those homicides, the majority are from internecine fighting- gang violence et. in which a person would have to be hit by a stray bullet if they are not a member of the gangs or involved:
    http://www.cdc.gov/minorityhealth/re...s/Homicide.pdf
    CDC Online Newsroom | Press Release | CDC releases report on 30-year low in youth homicide rates
    This also requires a person to randomly be in the right place at the right time to put themselves at risk of a Stray Bullet from either Law enforcement dealing with criminal activity or internecine gang fighting.
    Firearm Homicides and Suicides in Major Metropolitan Areas — United States, 2006–2007 and 2009–2010
    This leaves us with:
    Suicide: 18,735 deaths
    Homicide: 11,493 deaths 576 A large portion of this number does, in fact, include burglars being shot.
    Unintentional: 554 deaths-- This take place during hunting or shooting range activities and the average tourist won't be too likely to be involved- Odds Negligible.
    Legal interventions: 333 deaths64
    Undetermined: 232 deaths-- These are probably suicides or homicides in which they cannot figure out which it is- Not enough data is provided to really examine it.

    Hey, wait- what were those odds on getting hit by lightning, again?

    Skeptic: Would you prefer people be blown up, stabbed, bludgeoned to death? Do I sound like Archie Bunker? "Would you feel any better, little girl, if they was pushed outta winders?"
    You're not going to stop people from killing eachother... we're just animals. Look at war- Why is that OK? Hmmm?
    As long as people will kill eachother- Disarming the populace is a great way to prevent their ability to prevent their own demise.

    Because here's the thing: Your statistic Admits that it is high for GUN deaths------ DUH. What about other forms of murder?

    The vast majority of people are ending their own lives and I support the Freedom To Choose For Yourself.
    The vast majority of others are due to Criminals Committing crimes- if they are killing eachother off Or getting shot invading someones home or raping or assaulting - Kick my ass, then (Or try.) Cuz I', totally ok with it. No srsly- Kick My Ass.
    The odds left over for the Law Abiding citizen are that they are in Greater Danger if left vulnerable than they are randomly being plucked off by a stray bullet.

    Such citation of statistics fail miserably when objectively examined.
    jocular likes this.
     

  31. #231  
    Northern Horse Whisperer Moderator scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Yukon, Canada
    Posts
    4,054
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    That's the other bit. Augmented by the commentary I just questioned above where he says he'd like to stay alive. There's this impression everyone over here is Yosemite Sam shooting off like a madman.
    Your odds of getting shot are so slim, it's ridiculous. You have a better chance of being struck by lightning.
    This article has the origins of your remark as well as the data on the lightning part.

    PolitiFact | How likely are you to be struck by lightning?
    jocular likes this.
     

  32. #232  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by scheherazade View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    That's the other bit. Augmented by the commentary I just questioned above where he says he'd like to stay alive. There's this impression everyone over here is Yosemite Sam shooting off like a madman.
    Your odds of getting shot are so slim, it's ridiculous. You have a better chance of being struck by lightning.
    This article has the origins of your remark as well as the data on the lightning part.

    PolitiFact | How likely are you to be struck by lightning?
    It basically says: "Unknown- too difficult to verify."
    Well, it's just not good enough, really.

    Let's play it safe and ban lightning.

    And Cars.
    Ban whooping cough, the flu and cancer, too. Ban Mountain lions, bacteria and ... This could be a long list...

    I think playing it safe in that manner will never be very effective. Let's try a different tactic:
    Let's let personal responsibility allow people to Choose for Themselves to take personal measures for their own protection.

    Now- that's doable.
    jocular likes this.
     

  33. #233  
    Your Mama! GiantEvil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Vancouver, Wa
    Posts
    1,908
    We can rule out suicide attempt safely...
    I did in the figures I provided.
    What's left is Homicide- in which the victims are either targeted or a result of a mass shooting. Of those homicides, the majority are from internecine fighting- gang violence et. in which a person would have to be hit by a stray bullet if they are not a member of the gangs or involved:
    This also requires a person to randomly be in the right place at the right time to put themselves at risk of a Stray Bullet from either Law enforcement dealing with criminal activity or internecine gang fighting.
    Man shot in leg while walking down street | Education - Home
    Girl killed in random drive-by shooting while celebrating 15th birthday | Q13 FOX News
    2 shot while walking down Fulton County street | 11alive.com
    http://ews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/08...-shooting?lite
    Oakdale: Boy killed, 2 injured in random shooting; suspect ID'd - TwinCities.com
    Crime Trackers: Man shot while walking home, seemingly at random | KVOA.com | Tucson, Arizona
    Suicide: 18,735 deaths
    Homicide: 11,493 deaths 576 A large portion of this number does, in fact, include burglars being shot.
    Unintentional: 554 deaths-- This take place during hunting or shooting range activities and the average tourist won't be too likely to be involved- Odds Negligible.
    Legal interventions: 333 deaths64
    Undetermined: 232 deaths-- These are probably suicides or homicides in which they cannot figure out which it is- Not enough data is provided to really examine it.
    It isn't clear to me how you arrived at the numbers you did. But let's total them, and I'm going to assume that you meant to cross out "Undetermined".
    That would be a total of 640 by your numbers, with my allowance of removing "Undetermined".
    Hey, wait- what were those odds on getting hit by lightning, again?
    Well, considering that you've only admitted fatalities, and omitted injuries, I'm going to only present fatality numbers for lightning strikes.
    2013; 23 killed. (2013 is not complete yet, so we'll disregard this number.)
    2012; 28 killed.
    2011; 26 killed.
    2010; 28 killed.
    2009; 34 killed.
    2008; 27 killed.
    Let's just use the biggest number, that's 34 killed in 2009. And let's further assume that it's an under reported number, so we'll double it, to 68. And round up to 70.
    Your number for random accidental fatal shootings (with the "undetermined" gimme); 640.
    My number for lightning strike fatalities (generously padded); 70.
    RedPanda likes this.
    I was some of the mud that got to sit up and look around.
    Lucky me. Lucky mud.
    -Kurt Vonnegut Jr.-
    Cat's Cradle.
     

  34. #234  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    Neverfly

    There are about 100,000 shootings every year in the USA. About 85,000 of those are not suicide attempts.
    Of the 100,000 shootings, about 1 in 4 lead to deaths.

    However, other forms of physical attack have a much lower rate of killings. The second highest set of murders in the USA is stabbings. But only 1 in 400 stabbings results in death. If all those who currently murder by means of a gun are forced to rely on a knife, the rate of killings will drop by 100 fold. Because 1 in 4 shootings results in death and only 1 in 400 stabbings results in death. (The high survival, for both shootings and stabbings, is due to excellent emergency medical care.)

    So the argument that a lack of guns simply means those murders will be carried out with knives or clubs is so much bulldust.
     

  35. #235  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and in Bayside, Ca. since 1981, Humboldt since 1977
    Posts
    12,436
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic View Post
    Neverfly

    There are about 100,000 shootings every year in the USA. About 85,000 of those are not suicide attempts.
    Of the 100,000 shootings, about 1 in 4 lead to deaths.

    However, other forms of physical attack have a much lower rate of killings. The second highest set of murders in the USA is stabbings. But only 1 in 400 stabbings results in death. If all those who currently murder by means of a gun are forced to rely on a knife, the rate of killings will drop by 100 fold. Because 1 in 4 shootings results in death and only 1 in 400 stabbings results in death. (The high survival, for both shootings and stabbings, is due to excellent emergency medical care.)

    So the argument that a lack of guns simply means those murders will be carried out with knives or clubs is so much bulldust.
    I guess my niece was one of the unlucky 1 in 400.
     

  36. #236  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,107
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    The US founders were British themselves. They were descended from countless generations of British rule. They had a firm understanding of how the British monarchy tended to change with the whims of whomever sat on the throne. Being descendants from them ourselves and having our own inclinations to behave the same way the British rulers did if given the opportunity, our founders anticipated the possibility that minds would change and become complacent allowing a dictator to step into office and have his/her way.

    I am thinking that many who are against stricter gun laws are afraid they will ultimately lead to bans. There is an old phrase, "those who forget history are doomed to repeat it". I don't know if their fears are justified but the only way to find out is to test it. And that is one test no one wants to show true.
    Couldn't we consider every democratic country with strict gun laws to be a test?
    Surely Britain itself is a test of what would happen to a country under British rule?
    Well we tried, Red but it seems everyone else in the thread is hell bent on pushing their political opinions on the issue down each other's throat. This thread should be moved to politics since discussing the psychology behind gun culture seems to be of absolutely no interest to the majority of those participating in the thread.
    RedPanda likes this.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
     

  37. #237  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,232
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    The US founders were British themselves. They were descended from countless generations of British rule. They had a firm understanding of how the British monarchy tended to change with the whims of whomever sat on the throne. Being descendants from them ourselves and having our own inclinations to behave the same way the British rulers did if given the opportunity, our founders anticipated the possibility that minds would change and become complacent allowing a dictator to step into office and have his/her way.

    I am thinking that many who are against stricter gun laws are afraid they will ultimately lead to bans. There is an old phrase, "those who forget history are doomed to repeat it". I don't know if their fears are justified but the only way to find out is to test it. And that is one test no one wants to show true.
    Couldn't we consider every democratic country with strict gun laws to be a test?
    Surely Britain itself is a test of what would happen to a country under British rule?
    Well we tried, Red but it seems everyone else in the thread is hell bent on pushing their political opinions on the issue down each other's throat. This thread should be moved to politics since discussing the psychology behind gun culture seems to be of absolutely no interest to the majority of those participating in the thread.
    Done.
    seagypsy likes this.
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
     

  38. #238  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,306
    Yep it's been mostly politics, to some degree because while the government keeps stats about gun homicides, they aren't allowed to do further study that would shed light into the psychology of gun ownership--things that would probably help reduce the number of homicides. Nor is the government allowed to directly target gun suicide in its mental health campaigns--horrible irresponsible given it's one of the leading methods. The parts in the thread that do discuss psychology are relevant though.... such as how degree of access effects the suicide rates--if they gun is locked up rather than in plain view and loaded drops the suicide rate by nearly half.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
     

  39. #239  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    A person is over 20 times more likely to die from a medical mistake in a hospital in the USA than from a "gun" related homicide.

    And here's the psychological kicker.

    Medical mistakes that cause death just ain't SEXY.
    Gun violence seems to be sexy.

    Just like maintenance of infrastructure ain't sexy, but building new infrastructure is sexy

    So, fools focus on the sexy, and ignore the real dangers in our "great society".
    Knaves run the media to make trap for fools.
    And other knaves make silly outlandish claims to draw the focus away from their peers.
    When you quote "doctors" about "gun" deaths, you are quoting knaves.

    I ain't all that bright, but I do try to avoid being too foolish.
     

  40. #240  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,306
    Quote Originally Posted by sculptor View Post
    A person is over 20 times more likely to die from a medical mistake in a hospital in the USA than from a "gun" related homicide.
    I guess I'd asked for a citation if medical mistakes in hospitals were relevant to the thread. I did look is up and the one summary I could find suggested about 100,000 with some studies suggesting higher for medical mistakes compared to nearly 30,000 for guns..a 3 x difference.

    And of course there's great efforts to reduce deaths by other means....vehicle deaths per mile have dropped dramatically due in large part research and implementation of safety standards, medical mistakes is being reduced by standardized proscription and other standards. (the days of misreading docs bad handwriting are nearly gone).

    US agencies can't even do research to reduce gun deaths, nor implement safety measures to reduce them, make it quite different than other known health hazards.

    I don't see anything "sexy" about gun deaths, I don't think many other people do either.
    KALSTER likes this.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
     

  41. #241  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    citations, I don't mind------note that I keyboarded in:
    A person is over 20 times more likely to die from a medical mistake in a hospital in the USA than from a "gun" related homicide.
    (the homicide # is about 10-11k/yr)

    (NaturalNews) According to "Dead By Mistake," a report detailing the findings of an investigation by the Hearst Corporation, approximately 200,000 people die in the United States every year from hospital infections and preventable medical errors. To make matters worse, the situation has not changed from 10 years ago, when the recommendations of a similar report by the federal government went ignored.
    Car accidents, often classified as the leading preventable cause of death in the United States, kill fewer than 50,000 people per year.
    Learn more: 200,000 Americans Killed Each Year in Hospitals by Medical Error

    An investigation by the Hearst Corporation says an estimated 200 thousand Americans will die this year from preventable medical errors and hospital infections.
    Heart dubbed its report, "Dead by Mistake."
    The report also says 20 states have no medical error reporting system in place, five have voluntary ones, and five more are developing reporting systems.
    Med Mistakes Blamed in 200K Deaths a Year - CBS News

    a reasonable estimate is that medical mistakes now kill around 200,000 Americans every year.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/01/op...akes.html?_r=0

    An average of 195,000 people in the USA died due to potentially preventable, in-hospital medical errors in each of the years 2000, 2001 and 2002, according to a new study of 37 million patient records that was released today by HealthGrades, the healthcare quality company.
    In Hospital Deaths from Medical Errors at 195,000 per Year USA

    Preventable medical mistakes and infections are responsible for about 200,000 deaths in the U.S. each year,
    News Blog: Deaths from avoidable medical error more than double in past decade, investigation shows

    One year later, in 1995, a report in JAMA said that:
    "Over a million patients are injured in U.S. hospitals each year, and approximately 280,000 die annually as a result of these injuries.
    The leading cause of death and injury in the United States

    ..................
    Many more claim higher numbers.
    The problem seems exacerbated by willful blindness to the problem as evidenced by not mandating the collection and publication of the information.
    Preventable medical errors are the 3rd biggest killer in the usa, behind heart disease, and cancer and above stroke, chronic lower respiratory disease, and accidents, diabetes, alzheimers, influenza/pneumonia, ... ... and way abobe homicides by "guns"!
    ........
    We do have real problems in this country!
    But if we are foolish enough to only concentrate on the words/stories presented by knaves to make trap for fools, then we will never address the real problems.

    We need a free and open medical care system in this country that welcomes everyone suffering from a physical or mental condition.
    Blaming the mailman because your neighbor's dog ate your cat ain't gonna fix any problems.
     

  42. #242  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,306
    Ok...good 6 to 9 times gun homicides according to your sources.

    It still has little to nothing to do with the thread, unless you are suggesting we should study and reduce gun homicides like we are medical errors--you don't seem to be making that argument.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
     

  43. #243  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    6 x 10,000 = 60,000
    9 x 10,000 = 90,000
    20 x 10,000 = 200,000


    How many of the "gun" homicides were by the mentally ill?

    I would submit that almost 100% of homicides are by the mentally ill.

    Killing people just ain't normal!
     

  44. #244  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    1,969
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    Let's play it safe and ban lightning.
    We do. We put lighting rods on buildings to keep it out of the building itself. We design aircraft so that the lighting does not pass through the interior of the aircraft. We avoid storms in aircraft to avoid lightning to begin with. In other words we do what we can to "ban" lightning because it's dangerous.

    You really want to apply the same logic to guns? Be careful what you wish for - you just might get it.
    Let's let personal responsibility allow people to Choose for Themselves to take personal measures for their own protection.
    That works up until the point that someone in your family is killed by the drunk guys having an argument next door.

    Everyone in the US starts off with the expectation for the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Taking away someone else's life due to carelessness or transient anger is never acceptable, and guns make it very easy to do that. Thus they are not like knives, or spoons, or video games. They deserve a higher level of care, respect and regulation than those objects do.
    RedPanda likes this.
     

  45. #245  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,306
    Quote Originally Posted by sculptor View Post
    6 x 10,000 = 60,000
    9 x 10,000 = 90,000
    20 x 10,000 = 200,000
    Ok, fair enough....so what? (for the third time). And you still haven't explained why you think medical mistake to firearm deaths is relevant to the this thread.

    How many of the "gun" homicides were by the mentally ill?
    Good question....would be nice if the US agencies researched that...but of course they can't.
    I would submit that almost 100% of homicides are by the mentally ill.
    Doubtful.
    Killing people just ain't normal!
    It should be be, but the reality is it both from an historical/evolutionary perspective as well as in US culture.

    And of course Homicide is just one of the two quite high components of firearm deaths, the other being Suicide. The sum of the two is
    about 32,000 death as of 2011 (CDC National Vital Statistics report).

    As already posted in this thread numerous times, both of Suicide and Homicide are directly linked to gun use because it's the most effective common method to kill people. It is also the only types of deaths, one of the more common, that cannot be researched by the government, nor education or other measures applied to reduce them, thus making it very different from other health threats.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
     

  46. #246  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    Since the lifetime risk of death by bullet is 1 in 200, it makes a 20 fold increase by hospital deaths a little unlikely. If true, 10% of the American population would die as a result of mistakes in hospital.

    However, it is true that there are causes of death much worse than guns. Car accidents are a little worse, and death by tobacco is much worse. So what? That does not alter the fact that guns are a nasty fact of life and death in the USA. And only in the USA among OECD countries.
     

  47. #247  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic View Post
    Since the lifetime risk of death by bullet is 1 in 200, it makes a 20 fold increase by hospital deaths a little unlikely. If true, 10% of the American population would die as a result of mistakes in hospital.

    However, it is true that there are causes of death much worse than guns. Car accidents are a little worse, and death by tobacco is much worse. So what? That does not alter the fact that guns are a nasty fact of life and death in the USA. And only in the USA among OECD countries.
    You started out wrong with the 1 in 200, thinking that that would extrapolate out to a fixed population.
    2.3 to 2.4 million people die annually in the usa,
    (2,448,288 in 2003, and 2,398,343 in 2004 for example)
    births, deaths, immigration and outmigration keeps the population fluid-----------not fixed.
    ...............
    if, out of that 2.4 million 225k die from iatrogenesis( Iatrogenesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ), and 30k from "guns"
    we still got another 2,000,000+ from other causes(cancer and heart disease account for over 1,000,000 of that)
    out of 319,000,000

    plenty of room for iatrogenesis and automobiles and airplanes, and ...........

    with immigration(legal= 1,042,625 in 2010), our population is still growing
    (habla espanol?)
     

  48. #248 This is intended as humor- everyone needs to lighten up 
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,107
    The leading cause of death, observable by the one constant among all people who die is that they were conceived. Therefore, it MUST be that banning conception will prevent any further untoward human deaths.

    We should act immediately. Be considerate, spay and neuter all those you care about so that you may save the lives of your unborn descendents. Do it for yourself, do it for all humanity.
    sculptor and TheUnknowable like this.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
     

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Similar Threads

  1. Artillery guns on satellites?
    By TPhaoimnaes in forum Military Technology
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: October 9th, 2014, 11:11 PM
  2. Do Russians like Gunz?(I know it is Guns)
    By Mateja78 in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: September 18th, 2012, 04:49 AM
  3. If you can't sell guns, how can you make money?
    By theQuestIsNotOver in forum Politics
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: January 12th, 2012, 11:18 AM
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: May 17th, 2010, 04:07 PM
  5. Space and Guns
    By Martian_Monkey in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: April 29th, 2010, 08:33 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •