More guns, more gun deaths

This is a discussion on More guns, more gun deaths within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Let me also just state, part of my goal with this thread is to find and vett enough data that holds up even from an ...

Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 4567891011 LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 151
Like Tree99Likes

Thread: More guns, more gun deaths

  1. #106
    Distinguished Member Array brocktice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    New Mexico, USA
    Posts
    1,264

    Re: More guns, more gun deaths

    Let me also just state, part of my goal with this thread is to find and vett enough data that holds up even from an anti-gun bias that no anti-gun person that wishes to maintain the appearance of rationality can deny it. That would be extremely useful. I'm very thankful for the one person at least who understood what I am trying to do several days ago and sent me a nice PM, and for the supportive comments on this thread. We may have different approaches but I am on your side.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #107
    VIP Member Array Brad426's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    3,673
    Quote Originally Posted by brocktice View Post
    I am in fact playing devil's advocate, because it's all too easy to just confirm my own biases, which is not helpful to my cause. As for guns being designed for death and destruction, that was pointed out to me by my wife when I tried to make the 'cars kill people' argument. I'm sorry, if firearms are not designed to kill, then perhaps I need to find something else to carry. I guess you might say they are to stop the threat, and that's true in a defensive situation. I know they are designed to punch holes in paper too, and that is what I do with them. But seriously? Are you going to lay out a line of BS telling me that guns are NOT designed to kill people and animals?

    I get the feeling some people here would rather stick their heads in the sand and hope the second amendment protects them while the public is in a rage and repeals it. Do you think I would spend so much time and energy trying to understand this issue if I were anti-gun? I've seriously alienated a bunch of friends and business acquaintances on Facebook because of the stuff I've posted and arguments I've started there since Sandy Hook.

    If you think I'm somehow anti-gun, I have to conclude that you either (a) can't understand that not all of our opinions are demonstrably correct or (b) aren't paying attention.
    Frankly our "cause" needs more people doing some critical thinking. The snappy one-liners ("Because I can't carry a cop", "When seconds count the police are just minutes away", et al) just don't have the same effectiveness when little kids are laying on a slab. The nation is heartbroken and enraged and the guns are the easy whipping boy. Brocktice is right... we can stand on our high moral ground knowing we are right about the Second Amendment while it gets pulled out from under us or we can find other ways to "convert" the people that aren't too far gone.
    bombthrower77 likes this.
    I have a very strict gun control policy: if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it.
    Clint Eastwood

  4. #108
    Distinguished Member Array GlassWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Columbia, SC
    Posts
    1,747
    Quote Originally Posted by Armydad View Post
    I understand statistics and how they can be manipulated in any direction. The point is that the Second Amendment to the Constitution was to establish that we as free men have the right to bear arms that shall not be infringed as a way to protect all other rights. Back then a military rifle was a flint lock, then cap lock and every house had the same as "We the People" were the militia. Fast forward to today. We have a standing army and a national guard which the founders were not in favor of. However, "We the People" are still the standing militia. Technology has changed and thus weaponry has changed but a military style rifle does have a purpose for the militia. Keep in mind that it is only a military style weapon as they have already legislated out the ease of having fully automatic weapons. The fact that we have a love affair with the gun follows right in line with our revolutionary spirit when we fought for freedom from Britain. Our problem is not with guns, it is with a loss of morals and in most cases sanity. The recent shootings were done by people who obviously had no moral compass as well as mental issues. We do not need to ban or restrict guns, we need to reestablish the moral compass if it is possible.
    The people were also armed to protect themselves from tyranny of government. that hasn't changed, and the gov't is far worse now than at the time those papers were written. The constitution was written to restrict the government, not the people. our forefathers wanted to create a government unlike any other in existence at the time, which was one that protected the rights of the people, not defined them and granted them. In other words, every other gov't of the day told you what your rights were, and those rights only extended as far as the gov't deemed. That changed when America came into being. Sadly people have lost sight of that and have gone so far as to wanting to go back to letting a government dictate every facet of our lives. Willing slavery.
    bombthrower77 likes this.

  5. #109
    Member Array 19ElevenJoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    44
    Quote Originally Posted by brocktice View Post
    Let me also just state, part of my goal with this thread is to find and vett enough data that holds up even from an anti-gun bias that no anti-gun person that wishes to maintain the appearance of rationality can deny it. That would be extremely useful. I'm very thankful for the one person at least who understood what I am trying to do several days ago and sent me a nice PM, and for the supportive comments on this thread. We may have different approaches but I am on your side.
    Hmmm, I get the feeling that you are trying hard to find enough "data" so that you feel better about your choice. Is the wife hitting you hard about your guns, intelligent lefties at work, brother in law, perhaps?

    If you are looking for the "holy grail" of pro-gun arguments you are fighting a losing battle. How do I know, because no one can change my opinion about my right to bear arms and I won't waste my time trying to convice anti-gunners that they are wrong. People are WAY passionate about this issue.

    The argument you seek doesn't exist. People have to be conviced that the loss of any right, even 2A, is a precedent that has the potential to cost us even more; this is a fact that any rational anti-gunner should possess simply by default. If they don't understand fascism they aren't worth your effort.

    Over 10,000 people died in 2011 as a result of DUI and there is no big push for prohibition. In 2010, 211 children died as a result of DUI, that my friend, is 10.55 times times higher than Newtown. It may be time to pick your battle.

  6. #110
    Senior Member Array Darrow75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    St. Petersburg, FL
    Posts
    609
    Quote Originally Posted by retsupt99 View Post
    I think it's "Figures lie, and liars figure..."
    That's pretty much how my dad taught it to me.

  7. #111
    Distinguished Member Array brocktice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    New Mexico, USA
    Posts
    1,264

    Re: More guns, more gun deaths

    Quote Originally Posted by 19ElevenJoe View Post
    Hmmm, I get the feeling that you are trying hard to find enough "data" so that you feel better about your choice. Is the wife hitting you hard about your guns, intelligent lefties at work, brother in law, perhaps?
    I feel just fine about my choice and my wife, despite pointing out a flaw in my argument, feels the same way, actually. I know of nobody anti-gun in my family, which is not to say that none of them are.
    There's one friend in particular I argue with about this, an economist, who is very good at pointing out when I am wrong. My goal is to find enough evidence to convince him, because he does listen to evidence, and if he can be convinced so can any rational person.

    Quote Originally Posted by 19ElevenJoe View Post
    If you are looking for the "holy grail" of pro-gun arguments you are fighting a losing battle. How do I know, because no one can change my opinion about my right to bear arms and I won't waste my time trying to convice anti-gunners that they are wrong. People are WAY passionate about this issue.
    Sadly, you are probably right.

    Quote Originally Posted by 19ElevenJoe View Post
    The argument you seek doesn't exist. People have to be conviced that the loss of any right, even 2A, is a precedent that has the potential to cost us even more; this is a fact that any rational anti-gunner should possess simply by default. If they don't understand fascism they aren't worth your effort.
    Again, maybe you're right, but I hope not.

    Quote Originally Posted by 19ElevenJoe View Post
    Over 10,000 people died in 2011 as a result of DUI and there is no big push for prohibition. In 2010, 211 children died as a result of DUI, that my friend, is 10.55 times times higher than Newtown. It may be time to pick your battle.
    We've already seen that prohibition did more harm than good. I hope we don't have to learn that the hard way as a country with guns like England. As for picking my battles, again, maybe you're right. I'm not ready to give this one up just yet though.

  8. #112
    Senior Moderator
    Array HotGuns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,821
    I'm a scientifically-minded person, and it is an empirical fact that countries with more guns per capita have more gun deaths per capita, with the exception of Mexico. This makes sense to me. More guns around means more available to criminals (via theft), and more available to law-abiding citizens that turn criminal.

    What does it matter? Statistical evidence tell us nothing other than what happened.
    It does not predict the future.

    Anyone that gets into the stock market is familiar with the phrase,"past history performance is no indicator of future performance" or words to that effect.


    I am totally against any form of gun control. ANY. Form of GUN CONTROL.

    I own guns for two reasons.
    The one that gets used the most is because I like to shoot them.
    The one that is the most important that I hope I never use is to shoot any sumbich that messes with me or my family. That might be some crook breaking into my house at 2 in the morn, or it could be some tyrant with an official title that wants me to bend a knee to him.

    Anything else is just so much gibberish and wasted band space. All the discussions, all the contemplation,all of the hand wringing, all of the speculation, none of it matters in the big scheme of things. No amount of statistics, good or bad, is going to sway how I think about the ownership of guns. All this talk about guns that you can reload fast or guns that look dangerous or guns being the scourge of society is mostly being brought up by weak minded pansy's that couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper sack. Its likely that they never have to do a day of physical labor in their miserable little lives, never had a callous on them, only sweat when someone challenges their opinion and they don't know how to refute it, and lots of them never had a Dad to steer them straight when they got stupid. Most of them have no perception of life outside of the little cubicle in which they sit.

    Statistics? Who cares? We can argue about this one or or that one for eternity.

    Lets go back to common sence and start using it.

    If you are worried about your children being slaughtered like cattle while they attend school do something about it. Allow the teachers that would to be armed.
    If you are worried about mass shootings in malls, restaurants,movie theaters or anywhere else, do away with the gun free zones and the target rich environments and let people be able to defend themselves.

    Lets do what needs to be done and quit entertaining the thoughts of lesser men. Lets just man up and get it done and put the whining,touch feely crap that is getting people killed under a rock where it belongs and make some Changes that account for something.

    Anything else is just a waste of time.
    Rock and Glock and zacii like this.
    The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it...- George Orwell

    AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
    Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
    http://bobbailey1959.wordpress.com/

  9. #113
    Member Array dugo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    128
    Quote Originally Posted by brocktice View Post
    I am in fact playing devil's advocate, because it's all too easy to just confirm my own biases, which is not helpful to my cause. As for guns being designed for death and destruction, that was pointed out to me by my wife when I tried to make the 'cars kill people' argument. I'm sorry, if firearms are not designed to kill, then perhaps I need to find something else to carry. I guess you might say they are to stop the threat, and that's true in a defensive situation. I know they are designed to punch holes in paper too, and that is what I do with them. But seriously? Are you going to lay out a line of BS telling me that guns are NOT designed to kill people and animals?

    I get the feeling some people here would rather stick their heads in the sand and hope the second amendment protects them while the public is in a rage and repeals it. Do you think I would spend so much time and energy trying to understand this issue if I were anti-gun? I've seriously alienated a bunch of friends and business acquaintances on Facebook because of the stuff I've posted and arguments I've started there since Sandy Hook.

    If you think I'm somehow anti-gun, I have to conclude that you either (a) can't understand that not all of our opinions are demonstrably correct or (b) aren't paying attention.
    I'd suggest that on the "primary function of guns", you'll need to think a little deeper. While "death and destruction" are certainly possible if any powerful tool is used in desperation, or especially if perverted (as we recently saw), you are still essentially wrong by any unbiased analysis.

    Further, your claim, while seeming plausibly defensible on it's face, is at best such an oversimplification as to be misleading, and stated in language designed to create emotional reactions which prejudice rational analysis. Barring war, no one I personally know has ever used guns to deal out "death and destruction", except in the most slanted and prejudice-serving definition, and certainly most here know of many instances which could be reasonably categorized only as the opposite. We could continue a "lawyer-esque" argument about definitions, but I am certain you can understand my point.

    Giving you the benefit of the doubt, you do seem to redeem your purpose in your last post (6:26 p.m. yesterday). If you are indeed honestly trying to discover and analyze real arguments on both sides, I commend you for your industry and for taking the responsibility do so -- and even for putting us through our paces here. Your honest research (as you indicated you will do) will stand you in good light.

    Though I did at first take your early post(s) in that positive light, it no longer seemed that way (to me) as the thread went on -- although perhaps that was by your design.

  10. #114
    Distinguished Member Array brocktice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    New Mexico, USA
    Posts
    1,264

    Re: More guns, more gun deaths

    Quote Originally Posted by dugo View Post
    Barring war, no one I personally know has ever used guns to deal out "death and destruction",
    Well, I thank you for your reconsideration of my posts. I'm no historian, but as I understand it guns were designed for hunting and war, right? Now we have refinements for target shooting and whatnot, but that is the design goal. Hammers are designed to pound nails. You can hit other things with them, break things, hit people, or you can pound nails to build a house. You could argue that a hammer is designed to build things, more specifically to pound nails, and I would agree with that, even though hammers can cause wounds, that building or nailing is their specific purpose. The purpose of a gun, most specifically, is to launch a projectile. There are only so many things you can do with a projectile. I saw a thread on here where someone used a gun to cut something loose in an emergency while towing, which is creative, but still involves breaking something. To hunt, you must kill. In war, you must kill or at least threaten it. The same goes for self-defense, or even national defense as a deterrent to aggressors. Guns are designed to launch bullets, and bullets are designed to break, destroy, and kill things. Or in the case of wadcutters, to punch holes in paper.I was not trying to demonize guns by saying so. The whole point was just that you can't say, "let's ban cars too, since cars kill people, " because that's not why we have cars to begin with. It's a side effect. It's also like pointing out, "gee officer, those other guys were speeding too, why should I get the ticket if everyone is doing it?" Won't go over well and is fundamentally an immature response. The problem being discussed is nothing to do with cars, or alcohol.

    Since I am apparently so unable to grasp what guns are *really* designed for, would someone care to enlighten me?

  11. #115
    Distinguished Member Array brocktice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    New Mexico, USA
    Posts
    1,264

    Re: More guns, more gun deaths

    I know how you guys love Wikipedia, but whether or not you agree with me this is a fascinating read: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_firearm

  12. #116
    Senior Moderator
    Array HotGuns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,821
    Since I am apparently so unable to grasp what guns are *really* designed for, would someone care to enlighten me?
    Guns...or handgonnes as they were known...
    started out as defensive mechanisms for troops to be able to defend against attacks by Knights on horseback. These guy were armored up and very hard to counter against. Troops standing should to shoulder had a very hard time standing against a full charge mounted Knights.

    The hand gonnes were basically just pieces of pipe mounted to a stick with a black powder charge and a lead ball. They started out shooting rocks, nails, glass and such, but soon it was realized that round lead projectiles were much better suited for the purpose.

    Although they were primitive, they worked. That small invention basically made the Knights in shining armor obsolete as any one that could point a stick and hold it long enough to shoot made years of training and a small fortune in armored suits be canceled out by a mere pheasant.

    So, going all the way back to history, they were made as equalizers, defensive tools.
    They all of a sudden made anyone that had one "more equal" to each other. The rulers continued to lose the ability to lord their power over the classes because they no longer had the monopoly of force to use against anyone that refused to yield to them.

    It is still their primary purpose and it is still to this day, hated by the ruling elite, just as it was then.

    Everything else is semantics.
    The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it...- George Orwell

    AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
    Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
    http://bobbailey1959.wordpress.com/

  13. #117
    Member Array WfatebB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Fayetteville Arkansas
    Posts
    25
    I, as many others, have spent quite a lot of time looking at numbers recently. One thing I have tried to do is look at the numbers from sources that would not immediately be dismissed from someone wanting gun control because of the biased source. Although these numbers won't sway many they are enlightening. They are 2011 numbers from the FBI of total murders in US.

    Total Murders - 12626
    Firearms - 8552
    Handguns - 6193
    Rifle - 323
    Shotguns - 356
    Unknown Firearm - 1680
    Knives/cutting 1689
    Unknown non firearm - 1657
    Hands, fists, feet etc. - 728

    Yes, the numbers are way too high. Not as high as the 1.2 million abortions annually in the US, but that is a different conversation altogether. The statement I hear and read most often is we don't want to take away all guns, but there is no need for someone to have an 'assault weapon'. I find it interesting that rifles, which includes, but is not limited to AR 15 etc., accounts for less murders than Knives, hands, and shotguns. Again, the numbers won't change anyone's opinion, but they do show that the 'big black gun' is not the problem.

  14. #118
    Distinguished Member Array brocktice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    New Mexico, USA
    Posts
    1,264

    Re: More guns, more gun deaths

    Quote Originally Posted by WfatebB View Post
    Rifle - 323
    Shotguns - 356
    Knives/cutting 1689

    Again, the numbers won't change anyone's opinion, but they do show that the 'big black gun' is not the problem.
    I've seen something similar before, and it makes extremely clear that 'assault weapons' are not the problem. I don't see people demonizing shotguns or edged weapons, but both appear to have been used to cause more deaths than rifles. It shows that the assault weapons ban is almost totally emotional and not rational. Thanks for posting that.

  15. #119
    Moderator
    Array Rock and Glock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Colorado at 15,670'
    Posts
    12,138
    With a Ph.d in Engineering I would assume you have a wealth of experience in locating and using primary source data.

    I also don't know if John Lott's Data and Conclusion were disproven although there appears to be controversy regarding his alleged behavior regarding some articles written.

    If I really wanted to understand the issues, I'd skip the economists and engineers and go straight to Epidemiologists. Have you looked at CDC data, understanding their bias may taint their conclusions?

    I don't know if you've seen this, not really on point but interesting if speaking to an economist:

    FBI Top 10 Killers.jpg

    What you do with your statistics is your business.

    I have also seen comments made FBI analysis show the prior AWB ineffective, although I have never studied the source or data.

  16. #120
    Distinguished Member Array brocktice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    New Mexico, USA
    Posts
    1,264

    Re: More guns, more gun deaths

    Quote Originally Posted by Rock and Glock View Post
    With a Ph.d in Engineering I would assume you have a wealth of experience in locating and using primary source data.

    I have also seen comments made FBI analysis show the prior AWB ineffective, although I have never studied the source or data.
    I read the two studies, (primary sources!) they were done by the DoJ, and there was absolutely no benefit from the assault weapons ban. I pointed this out and included one of the studies with my letters to my representatives, it's the very best we have to oppose a new ban. My economist friend was also unaware of the studies and has told me he's going to read them in full before we discuss any more.

Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 4567891011 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

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

Search tags for this page

book more guns more gun deaths

,

deaths from guns by country and per capita

,
powered by mybb british industrial revolution
,
powered by mybb dead people
,
powered by mybb drug detection times
,
powered by mybb drug list
,
powered by mybb find drug information
,

powered by mybb legitimate home based business

,

powered by mybb michigan state

,

powered by mybb noun

,

powered by mybb side effects of illegal drugs

,
powered by mybb who invented medicine
Click on a term to search for related topics.