Guns don't kill people, just throw the bullets by hand and watch them die
Check out the number of gun related gun show accidents yesterday.
There is no gun ban. I think we should be talking about our reading
comprehension problem. The right is clinically "hysterical"
that Obama is going to come house to house and take their guns. Need
I point out that it's impossible? Or that he has never even mention it?
Thinkin Man, you obviously ain't thinking. At least not truthfully.Here are some numbers:Murders using rifles and "assault
weapons": 323Murders using handguns: 1694Murders using all other
forms of weapons: 1222(Numbers from 2010 FBI statistics)
Another perspective..this life is brief, random, indifferent, and cruel, with or
without a second amendment, always has been and always will be. Evil exsists,
and humans are violent. 300 million guns divided among 300 million citizens
just makes it insane. That it's legal and constitutional just makes it
Drinking also lowers the life expectancy of people maybe we should get rid of
alcohol. Wait we tried that and it didn't work out so well.
More people are killed by bare hands, baseball bats, and knives each than by
guns. Are those things factors in the homicide rate? Should we ban them?What a letter.
Nice try, cjb. When you said: "Nice try, but in 2010 the Supreme Court
affirmed that ALL Americans have a 2nd Ammendment right to have a gun, this
includes Chicago and New York." You forgot (conveniently?) that the Court
also left open the possibility of a future need for some kind of regulation.They did NOT leave the gate open entirely as the NRA and others want us
to be fooled into believing.It takes some effort, but you might try
reading the actual court decision.
re:cjb"Nice try, but in 2010 the Supreme Court affirmed that ALL
Americans have a 2nd Ammendment right to have a gun,"Please
point out where I said otherwise. But, more accurately, the Supreme Court did
not affirm in 2010 that ALL Americans (for example, not mentally ill or felons)
have a 2nd Amendment right to have a gun. "possibly due to
demographic reasons,"...and possibly due to gun control
measures. Gun control was enacted in 1996 and then again in 2002. According to the Australian Institute of Criminology, a government agency, the
number of homicides in Australia did increase slightly in 1997 and peaked in
1999, but has since declined to the lowest number on record in 2007. Murders
using firearms have declined even more sharply than murders in general since the
1996 gun law. In the seven years prior to 1997, firearms were used in 24 percent
of all Australian homicides. But most recently, firearms were used in only 11
percent of Australian homicides, according to figures for the 12 months ending
July 1, 2007. That’s a decline of more than half since enactment of the
gun law to which this message refers.(factcheck)
Re Truth SeekerNice try, but in 2010 the Supreme Court affirmed that
ALL Americans have a 2nd Ammendment right to have a gun, this includes Chicago
and New York.Also after Austrialias more restrictive gun laws, their
murder rate did go up for 5, then went down, possibly due to demographic
reasons, just as our murder rate is going down for demographic reasons.
pragmatistferlifeExcellent post and observation.
Another Perspective, you've twisted what I said. I said cars and
fertilizer are regulated. I did not say that people with mental issues are
regulated.But maybe they should be . . . . .
I would suggest that the overiding factor of these numbers is the absence of
quality healthcare for an affordable price. Factors are indeed numerous but when
we are paying a third of our healthcare dollar to an administrator before we see
a nurse, let along a doctor, then we cannot prevent most of the examples you
We will never know if common sense regulations can help curb mass murder unless
we make an effort to keep weapons from the unfit. Thus far the effort has been
minimal due to under the table payments from corporations to washed up
musicians, actors and fanatical secret organizations ie, NRA, an organization
whose focus was to control gun violence at the genesis of it's existance.
Then, we have allowed the distortion of revered documents such as the
constitution and the scriptures not to mention history because we distance
ourselves from civil history.
One Old ManThe mentally ill are not restricted from driving, or from
buying fertilizer, or baseball bats, they can buy all the knives they want and
gasoline too. They are even able to get guns even though they are restricted.
Unless we give them the treatment they need, them they will always be a
threat.Your logic isn't sound.
Well, look on the bright side. In the immortal words of one of the
conservatives' heroes (before his 3-ghost induced epiphany), the gun
culture helps "decrease the surplus population."
One thing I've learned in the last few weeks is that statistics are
ineffective in these discussions. They're like bible verses; everyone can
spin them to their own needs. Having said that, I'm not sure what the true
measure of how much regulation we need is. A lot of us aren't happy with
the status quo, but are by no means advocating a nanny state.
Another Perspective has provided another perspective of the need for stiffer
regulation of guns. He (or she) says, "Cars can be run into crowds, bombs
can easily be made from fertilizer." Which is true. And that is exactly
why they are both regulated in an attempt to keep them from being used to harm
others.It doesn't always succeed, but at least it makes it more
difficult for people who would misuse them.I do, however, fully
agree with the first part of his comment about ensuring help for those with
mental problems.However, that and gun regulation need to go hand in
Re:cjb"Why not point out out that in states and countries where
guns have been made harder to get, the overall murder rate has gone up."Because that just isn't true.Examples:Chicago's 28yr handgun ban was overturned in 2010. Homicides were 19%
higher in 2012.Australian crime statistics show a marked decrease in
homicides since the gun law change.
As long as we focus on particular tools instead of the root of the problem of
violence we will never solve the problem. We need to ensure that all of the
mentally ill get the help they need.If we got rid of all guns but
didn't ensure that all mentally I'll people get the help they need,
they would find some other tool to kill others.Cars can be run into
crowds, bombs can easily be made from fertilizer. Getting rid of guns will not
solve the problem and diverts us from focusing on and doing that which would
You know folks what we've done as Americans is given ourselves (I certainly
don't think this was the intent of the founding fathers) a constitutional
right to violence, mayhem, and destruction and then constructed completely
circular arguments to justify the idiocy. A country that has 300 million guns
and a gun ownership rate magnitudes higher than any other civilized country has
killed more of it citizens with guns in the last 40 years than in all of its
wars, skirmishes or military actions of any kind. It's inevitable who
cares if the guns were legal, if the person shot themselves or were murdered.
What starts off as a perfectly reasonable action to assure a
military is available for a new country without a formal military or tradition
of a military. A country that relied on the volunteerism of it's citizens
for it's freedom. Evolves into a country with the strongest military and
the most violent and armed society in the world killing itself at unheard of
rates and in unspeakable ways. Was that the founding fathers vision?
Well, statistics aside, guns were a big part of shortening the satistical life
expectancy for 28 people at Sandy Hook elementary, in Aurora Colorado, Columbine
High ,and Tucson Arizona. Not to mention all those young people killed on the
streets of a major cities. The common demoninator - Assualt Wepons. Oh, I
forgot Virgina Tech. How could that horror have slipped from my mind?
This is cherry picking of statistics. Why not point out that in states and
countries where guns have been made harder or impossible to get, that the
overall murder rate has gone up. This is because law abiding people were made
less able to defend themselves and the criminals who didn't abide by the
newly enacted gun laws knew that.The fact is, the governments
militias (the Police and National Guard) can't always be counted on to be
there when they are needed and on time. This is why our founders ensured that
the people would have and keep the right to have to form up into armed militias.
So that they could protect themselves, their families, and when necessary, help
protect their communities such as after an earth quake or hurricane from looters
or even worse.
The NRA with its powerful political clout has kept the Center from Disease
Control from being funded for the study this issue. Each year, over the past
five years, 30,000 people in the United States are killed with a gun. Most of
these deaths are suicides and accidental shootings. Young men are most often
the victims. When you add in 30,000 deaths to our national statistics, it will
have an impact and possibly identify guns as part of the problem. Approaching
the gun death issue from a disease control standpoint, might find some traction.
We quick accept and go after drugs as a serious disease issue, and as a former
DEA agent, I know we do all we can to stop the number of overdose deaths in
America. Hopefully, with good research, we can start looking at gun death
prevention through the same lens we look at drug overdose prevention.
Don't expect this to be easy. The NRA will do all it can to keep guns
Hey, the gun hobby has its consequences.