Published: Saturday, Jan. 5 2013 7:20 p.m. MST
If you are going to talk about suicide then you better talk about the route
cause and lever the gun out of it. Both Canada and Australia, which have very
tight gun control, have higher suicide rates than the US. Canada, Australia and
England also have a higher victim assault rate, more than double the US. These
same gun control countries also lead the US by a factor of 2 to 1 for rape.
There is more to the "gun violence" than the gun. I you look at the FBI
crime statistics violent crime is down by half in the US. We are actually
improving despite intermittent sensational stories. If you take the world crime
statistics demographic and look at violent crime you will find that it exists in
pocket of population, in particular those greater than 250,000. If you compare
this demographic with England the violent crime rate is equal. The US looks
worse because we have 186 of these vs 32 in England. Fact: Only 3.5% of violent
crime was committed with rifles, of which the AR-15 is a subset. Shows how much
you can trust the media in portraying truth.
Not sure what the answer is. As long as there are people walking the Earth,
there are going to be people that want to do bad things. And they will find a
way to do so.At the same time, the idea of every person walking around
with a gun seems a little unnerving too. Unless a citizen is one of
those highly skilled gun owners that have trained to shoot with precision...I
don't think I'd feel comfortable around them.
These are fearful people. I wish they'd participate in society and
governance, instead of preparing to take up arms against it.
Re: ". . . if you own a gun it is 22 times more likely to be used to kill
you (suicide) or someone you love (accident, homicide in a heated argument) than
a stranger in self-defense."That's a classic false
analogy.While the quoted numbers may approach validity, the
reasoning doesn't. It's comparing apples to kumquats.The
only valid comparison would be to compare accident/injury rates in homes with
and without guns, or assault/suicide rates in homes with or without guns. And,
to be valid, the studies would need to be normalized for other possible
confounding factors, such as income, drinking, drug use, etc.Since
such studies have not been proposed or funded, and since most investigators and
grantors are liberals, one may assume the results of such a study would not be
helpful to the gun-control cause.
"Shall not be infringed."To liberals that somehow gets
translated into: Taken away.But the original founding fathers meant
"Shall not be infringed."The original founding fathers meant
for the populace to have the same guns as the police and the military.It had nothing to do with hunting.It had nothing to do with target
practice.It had everything to do with citizens having the ability to
resist. It had everything to do with self defense.Liberals can mock
gun owners. Liberals can site guns in "suicide" deaths in an effort to
make it appear that guns are the "bad" thing.But the truth:
Liberals want a government that is armed to the teeth, but averace citizens
unarmed in comparison.At the gut-deep level, we need to ask
ourselves: "What ultimate goal do liberals have in mind when they want an
armed government, but an unarmed populace."Because we can look
at history to see what an armed government can do to an unarmed populace.In the not-too-distant past we can see cattle cars of unarmed citizens.
The intent of the founding fathers was the freedom of
self-defense.Liberals want to reduce freedom.
No girly men at the South towne Expo Center.
Insane. Just insane.
People are buying guns, and Hutterite assumes that they are preparing to take up
arms against the government.Not for self-defense.Not for
home protection.Not for target shooting or practice.But
to take up arms against the government.I bet there were very, very
few folks going into the gun show thinking, "I hope I can get a good gun so
that I can take up arms against the government."Yes... That was
the intention of the founding fathers. The intention of the founding fathers was
that an armed and prepared populace could not be bullied by the government.There are bad guys who are resisting the government. The Obama
administration funneled guns into cartels in Mexico. The Obama
administration intended those guns to be used *against* the government, against
officers, and against citizens.But I bet the number of ladies and
gentlement purchasing guns, thinking, "I can't wait till I can shoot
police officers" is zero.I bet there was not a single gun
purchaser thinking about putting rounds down range against police officers.
None.I bet they are worried about a volatile Obama administration
fighting the rights of average citizens.
Juni4ling -- I can't even begin to count the times I've read right
here in these comments that pro-gun folks have included the need to be prepared
to resist when our government needs to be overthrown.
Truthseeker,People announcing themselves as the seeker of truth usually
means just the opposite. You seem to have an obsession with the LDS church. Look
at the totality of it's emphasis (Actually seek the truth and start by
reading the Family Proclamation of 15 years ago.) on following Christian
doctrine and applying it in one's life. That will answer your questions.
The idea that a gun is going to keep safe you from criminals is not realistic.
Homes with guns in them have twelve (12) times as many gun deaths than homes
that do not have guns in them. Your teenage son, whose girlfriend tells him to
take a hike, and he becomes despondent and in this foolish moment can't see
all the other opportunities that are available ahead, and he commits suicide -
that is what you need to fear with the gun in your home. Ask the Layton
Grandparents, whose grandchild was accidentally killed, with the loaded gun in
their home. Before this child's parents reached the airport for a short
vacation, the home with a gun in it was the home where a child was accidentally
killed - that is what you need to fear. These events do not occur in homes that
do not have a gun. The instant death is 12 times more likely in homes with
guns. Stop and think about this. Utah is not a crime ridden ghetto - Utah is a
gun crazy killing zone filled with suicides and accidental gun deaths.
Fear is often based on nonsense. What gun owners need to fear is the accidental
gun death or gun death suicides by their family members. The accidental gun
death of a grandchild recently dropped off in a Layton, Utah home to be watched
by grandparents while the parents went on a short vacation; the love struck
teenager whose loss of a boyfriend or girlfriend causes them to feel life is not
worth living and commits suicide with the readily available gun in the Utah home
- that is what should be feared. Buying a gun for protection from criminals is a
good example of unfounded fear. Homes with guns in them have twelve times (12X)
as many gun deaths than homes that do not have a gun in them. The instant death
from a gun in Utah homes kills more young people than you can imagine, certainly
kills more innocent people than are hurt or killed by criminals.
The behavior and obsession being demonstrated by gun enthusiasts right now is
sickening. We live in a very sad world where the things that really matter are
ignored while people obsess over things that ultimately only bring pain and
suffering. Guns are just one of these items. Wake up people and start looking
for the things that matter.I was at South Town yesterday also, for
the home show. What a sorry sight these people were!
Re: ". . . the need to be prepared to resist when our government needs to be
overthrown."The best way to make sure we never have to fight our
own government is to stay strong enough, that the threat of insurrection
operates as a meaningful deterrent to liberals looking to take away our
As the Tories used to say: These are fearful people. I wish they'd
participate in society and governance, instead of preparing to take up arms
@ one old man- There is a difference between preparedness and desire.Our Founders wisely foresaw the need for multiple checks and balances when
they established our government. And they hoped that the rights guaranteed by
the Second Amendment would never be needed. I have a fire
extinguisher in my kitchen, a spare tire in my car, and insurance on my house
and car. That does not mean I WANT or LOOK FORWARD TO a kitchen fire, a flat
tire, a car accident or loss of my house or car. It is called smart people
being prepared for unexpected and undesired possible events.If the
Founders were alive today, they would have fire extinguishers, spare tires,
insurance, and some guns. And, their guns would not be flintlock muskets!
It's amazing how ill informed people are and how they let the media
influence them. If guns are so bad let the police turn theirs in first. How
about all you intellectuals put a sign on your door that says "gun free
zone" or better yet let the DN post a map of all the homes with no guns. I
fear the government. If you don't you are a fool.
By reading these posts, there sure are a lot of paranoid people out there. Just
as there were 45 years ago, when these same arguments were being made. And
I'm sure before that; I just don't have a memory that far back. A
hundred bucks says in 10, 20, 30 years, you will still be able to buy a gun, and
this same sky-is-falling, the government is going to take all our guns away
mentality will continue!
When someone is deranged/stupid/attention-seeking and wants to "do
something" you will not stop them by "hiding/confiscating" the guns.
There have been several people killed in Yew York City as
"someone" pushed them into the rail tracks. Should we ban the subway
and close up all access to the subway stations? Should we "confiscate"
the railcars? Should we make the rail cars go more slowly (and defeat the
purpose of the subway . . . to get folks to places fast)? Should we only let
people that can pass an IQ test above a certain level get on the subway? Would any of the proposed regulations (or previously proposed regulations)
have stopped any of the tragedies?Probably not. Have there been any folks
who know guns, have learned to shoot, enjoy shooting who is proposing any bans?
The fearful, because of lack of knowledge and a feel a need to do something,
seem to be beating this drum.
Too bad there isn't a "Learn to be tolerant, understanding, and get
along with others without using guns" show. Or....a "Why are
people so scared of everything that they need multiple assault rifles?"
show?Any chance "They" could pack em' in?
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments