A liberal against gun control

[hsmith]

Children dying at the hands of guns is a pretty wildly circulated myth, and it is being perpetrated here, once again by Thorgrim. Another thing he knows nothing about.

Gun-related deaths in the USA

In 1999 there were 1776 gun deaths in the 0 through 17 age group and 3385 gun deaths in the 0 through 19 age group. By subtraction we find that there were a whopping 1609 gun deaths in just the 18 through 19 age group. Historically the 18 through 24 age group is the highest crime-committing group. At age 18 part-time drug dealers leave school and become full-time drug dealers. Despite the propaganda from the gun control lobby, criminals in general and drug dealers in particular are the group of so-called children most likely to be shot by their fellow criminals. You can verify this by reading the local gun death news stories in any city newspaper. School shootings are so rare that every one gets national television coverage, but drug dealers are shot so often that they are barely mentioned in their local newspaper.

From the stats I have heard, typically 150 children die each year by firearms (Sorry, 17 year olds aren't children). Yes, it is sad and I wish it was 0. But the number, when compared to anything else that kills children is entirely a statical anomaly.

More lies and half truths to make a problem seem worse than it actually is. Mandating "safes and locks" may help a bit, but the trouble they impose is far worse than not imposing them. (Yes, you should lock your firearms up you aren't in control of if you have kids in your abode).

[RockPusher]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

I couldn't count on my hand the number of healthy people today who tried to commit suicide with a knife and failed

Sincere suicides are almost always successful. Attention seeking dramatizations rarely prove fatal.

How many people have failed to successfully kill themselves by jumping from 'fatal' altitudes?

I would wager it is lower than or approximates the number of non fatal self inflicted gunshots.

How many failed self hangings?

How many failed to die when jumping in front of a bus?

I never even heard of anyone who tried to commit suicide with a gun and failed

And I am sure that you researched this before posting to ensure that you are being intellectually honest.

I found several google hits on a very simple search string. It happens.

When's the last time you heard of a cooking accident with a knife where the chef died? Yet even people familiar with guns die...guns are mechanical objects with a failure rate like any other and people are not flawless

When's the last time you heard of a cooking accident motor vehicle accident with a knife car where the chef driver died? Yet even people familiar with guns cars die...guns cars are mechanical objects with a failure rate like any other and people are not flawless


Yawn..... I don't find much sport in this, but I will slam it anyways.

[Ezra Smack]

When lives are on the line and seconds count, the police are only five minutes away.

[Spideynw]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

You have no proof of that whatsoever

And you have absolutely no proof that people would use them if it was made law or that it would make anyone safer.

[RockPusher]

Originally Posted by Spideynw

And child safety on guns would not affect whether or not people would actually use them. There is no way to enforce such a ludicrous law.

Absolutely no way to enforce without having Thorgrims 'Peace' squad check your weapons every night to make sure that they are not ready if you are attacked.

When people DO follow the law, children die.



Jessica Lynne Carpenter is 14 years old. She knows how to shoot; her father taught her. And there were adequate firearms to deal with the crisis that arose in the Carpenter home in Merced, Calif. — a San Joaquin Valley farming community 130 miles southeast of San Francisco — when 27-year-old Jonathon David Bruce came calling on Wednesday morning, Aug. 23.
There was just one problem. Under the new "safe storage" laws being enacted in California and elsewhere, parents can be held criminally liable unless they lock up their guns when their children are home alone ... so that's just what law-abiding parents John and Tephanie Carpenter had done.
Some of Jessica's siblings — Anna, 13; Vanessa, 11; Ashley, 9; and John William, 7 — were still in their bedrooms when Bruce broke into the farmhouse shortly after 9 a.m.
Bruce, who was armed with a pitchfork — but to whom police remain unable to attribute any motive — had apparently cut the phone lines. So when he forced his way into the house and began stabbing the younger children in their beds, Jessica's attempts to dial 9-1-1 didn't do much good. Next, the sensible girl ran for where the family guns were stored. But they were locked up tight.
"When the 14-year-old girl ran to a nearby house to escape the pitchfork-wielding man attacking her siblings," writes Kimi Yoshino of the Fresno Bee, "she didn't ask her neighbor to call 9-1-1. She begged him to grab his rifle and 'take care of this guy.' "
He didn't. Jessica ended up on the phone.
By the time Merced County sheriff's deputies arrived at the home, 7-year-old John William and 9-year-old Ashley Danielle were dead. Ashley had apparently hung onto her assailant's leg long enough for her older sisters to escape. Thirteen-year-old Anna was wounded but survived.






With that kind of bravery and weapons in the house, that little girl and boy should never have died a horrible death BY PITCHFORK.



I suppose their deaths were just the price that must be paid for the sniveling, cowardly, firearm fearing elitist scumbags to have their piece of mind and sleep at night.

[thewise1]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

I couldn't count on my hand the number of healthy people today who tried to commit suicide with a knife and failed

That's not relevant. If someone wants to commit suicide, they will do it. And honestly, as tragic as it is, and sinful as I believe it to be personally, they should have that right, IMO.

I never even heard of anyone who tried to commit suicide with a gun and failed

Actually I have, but it's not really relevant to the argument..

When's the last time you heard of a cooking accident with a knife where the chef died? Yet even people familiar with guns die...guns are mechanical objects with a failure rate like any other and people are not flawless

We can't even agree on giving kids vaccines that would save them from a very serious risk to cancer, yet you think we as a society can solve depression? Although this is offtopic, it's simply impossible, way too many families teach their kids and tell themselves that depression is a bunch of crock and they need to "man up" or "stop being a little girl"

lol, we disagree on so very much, man.

[Ezra Smack]

Lets look at some facts:

Violent crime rates are highest overall in states with laws severely limiting or prohibiting the carrying of concealed firearms for self-defense. (FBI Uniform Crime Reports, 1992) -

The total Violent Crime Rate is 26% higher in the restrictive states (798.3 per 100,000 pop.) than in the less restrictive states (631.6 per 100,000).

The Homicide Rate is 49% higher in the restrictive states (10.1 per 100,000) than in the states with less restrictive CCW laws (6.8 per 100,000).

The Robbery Rate is 58% higher in the restrictive states (289.7 per 100,000) than in the less restrictive states (183.1 per 100,000).

The Aggravated Assault Rate is 15% higher in the restrictive states (455.9 per 100,000) than in the less restrictive states (398.3 per 100,000). Using the most recent FBI data (1992), homicide trends in the 17 states with less restrictive CCW laws compare favorably against national trends, and almost all CCW permittees are law-abiding.

Since adopting CCW (1987), Florida's homicide rate has fallen 21% while the U.S. rate has risen 12%. From start-up 10/1/87 2/28/94 (over 6 yrs.) Florida issued 204,108 permits; only 17 (0.008%) were revoked because permittees later committed crimes (not necessarily violent) in which guns were present (not necessarily used).

Of 14,000 CCW licensees in Oregon, only 4 (0.03%) were convicted of the criminal (not necessarily violent) use or possession of a firearm. Americans use firearms for self-defense more than 2.1 million times annually.

By contrast, there are about 579,000 violent crimes committed annually with firearms of all types. Seventy percent of violent crimes are committed by 7% of criminals, including repeat offenders, many of whom the courts place on probation after conviction, and felons that are paroled before serving their full time behind bars.

Two-thirds of self-protective firearms uses are with handguns.

99.9% of self-defense firearms uses do not result in fatal shootings of criminals, an important factor ignored in certain "studies" that are used to claim that guns are more often misused than used for self-protection. Of incarcerated felons surveyed by the Department of Justice, 34% have been driven away, wounded, or captured by armed citizens; 40% have decided against committing crimes for fear their would-be victims were armed.

With adoption of CCW by Arizona, Tennessee and Wyoming in early 1994, 19 states have CCW laws requiring the issuance of permits to carry concealed firearms for self-defense to citizens who meet fair and reasonable state standards. Vermont, which ranks near the bottom in violent crime rates year-in and year-out, allows firearms to be carried concealed without a permit.

In recent years NRA successfully fought for the adoption of favorable CCW laws now on the books in Florida (1987), Idaho (1990, amended 1991), Mississippi (1990), Montana (1991), and Oregon (1990). In recent legislative sessions, proposals for similar CCW laws have progressed in Alaska, Colorado, Missouri, Oklahoma and Texas.

Anti-gun forces oppose CCW with a variety of arguments, ranging from deliberate misrepresentations of commonly available crime data to "studies" pretending to show that private ownership of firearms leads to death and injury rather than providing protection to the owner.

1. Firearms ownership opponents claim that "violent crime" went up in Florida since that state enacted CCW legislation in 1987, a misleading statement for multiple reasons:

Florida's homicide rate has declined 21% since adopting CCW in1987.

No comparison of aggravated assault, robbery, and rape (99.3% of Florida violent crimes) beginning before 1988 is valid,according to the Florida Dept. of Law Enforcement. In 1988,Florida changed its method of compiling crime statistics.

In Florida, as in the U.S., more than 70% of violent crimes do not involve guns. Violent crime rates, therefore, don't necessarily reflect violent gun-related crime trends. According to the most recent FBI Uniform Crime Reports (1992), nationwide firearms were used in the four violent crimes that make up the total "Violent Crime" category, as follows: Aggravated Assault (58% of violent crimes) -- firearms used in 25%; Robbery (35% of violent crimes) -- firearms used in 41%; Rapes (6% of violent crimes) -- firearms used in an estimated 5%-10% (survey data); and Homicides (1% of violent crimes) -- firearms used in 68%.

In Florida: Aggravated Assaults (64% of violent crimes) -- firearms used in 25%; Robberies (30% of violent crimes) -- firearms used in 37%; Rapes (4% of violent crimes) -- firearms used in an estimated 5%-10% (survey data); and Homicides (0.7% of violent crimes) -- firearms used in 61%.

2. Anti-gunners cite "studies" they claim show that firearms kept at home are "43 times more likely" to be used to kill family members than be used for self-defense. (Other "studies" claim different ratios.) The 43:1 claim, based upon a small-scale study of Kings County (Seattle) and Shelby County (Memphis), is a fraud, because it counts as self-defense gun uses only those cases in which criminals were killed in the defender's home. Approximately 99.9% of all defensive gun uses are not fatal shootings, however -- criminals are usually frightened off, held at bay, or non-fatally wounded. Also, many defensive firearms uses occur away from home. Further, suicides were counted as "family member killings" in the "study," elevating that number more than 500%. Unfortunately, some of these "studies" are funded with taxpayer dollars, through grants from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, a division of the U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by Spideynw

And you have absolutely no proof that people would use them if it was made law or that it would make anyone safer.

Making it a law is a much stronger force...those who don't have a trigger lock would not throw out their non-existant trigger lcoks in protest...so no decline...and yes, out of the 100 million gun owners I think more than few would take a law more seriously and it would tip the scales when they were already considering it but barely decided against it in the past

So no declines, and an extremely high likelyhood of at least some additions...and since this is all based on common sense it's pretty much what would happen...

[Ezra Smack]

And now some history:


In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953,
about
20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
exterminated.
------------------------------
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million
Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
exterminated.
------------------------------
Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total
of
13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were
rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------
China established gun control in 1935. >From 1948 to 1952, 20 million
political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
exterminated
------------------------------
Guatemala established gun control in 1964. >From 1964 to 1981, 100,000
Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
exterminated.
------------------------------
Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000
Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
exterminated.
------------------------------
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. >From 1975 to 1977, one
million educated' people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up
and exterminated
-----------------------------
Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century
because of gun control: 56 million.
------------------------------
It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by
new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their
own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500
million dollars. The first year results are now in:


List of 7 items:
Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent
Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!


In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300
percent. Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the
criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns!


While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in
armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the
past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is
unarmed


There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of
the ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public
safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was
expended in successfully ridding Australian society of guns. The
Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it.


You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians
disseminating this information.


Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes,
gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.


Take note my fellow Americans, before it's too late!


The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them
of this history lesson.


With guns, we are 'citizens'.


Without them, we are 'subjects'.


During WWII the Japanese decided not to invade America because they
knew most Americans were ARMED!

[Thorgrim]

Citing Florida as an example is something I've seen before and it just doesn't pass muster with me...Florida has crazy amounts of crime, I wouldn't live there if you paid me (unless it was inside Disneyworld)

The state continues to honor itself by making top positions in per capita crimes

[Thorgrim]

I am positive your cut and paste email is full of flaws, even the incredibly right-wing gun rights site: guncite.com
Disagrees with you:

GunCite: The Myth of Nazi Gun Control

[Thorgrim]

Also you are wrong about australia:

Urban Legends Reference Pages: Australian Guns Stats

[WickedLou9]

Originally Posted by Ezra Smack

Lets look at some facts:

Violent crime rates are highest overall in states with laws severely limiting or prohibiting the carrying of concealed firearms for self-defense. (FBI Uniform Crime Reports, 1992) -

The total Violent Crime Rate is 26% higher in the restrictive states (798.3 per 100,000 pop.) than in the less restrictive states (631.6 per 100,000).

The Homicide Rate is 49% higher in the restrictive states (10.1 per 100,000) than in the states with less restrictive CCW laws (6.8 per 100,000).

The Robbery Rate is 58% higher in the restrictive states (289.7 per 100,000) than in the less restrictive states (183.1 per 100,000).

The Aggravated Assault Rate is 15% higher in the restrictive states (455.9 per 100,000) than in the less restrictive states (398.3 per 100,000). Using the most recent FBI data (1992), homicide trends in the 17 states with less restrictive CCW laws compare favorably against national trends, and almost all CCW permittees are law-abiding.

Since adopting CCW (1987), Florida's homicide rate has fallen 21% while the U.S. rate has risen 12%. From start-up 10/1/87 2/28/94 (over 6 yrs.) Florida issued 204,108 permits; only 17 (0.008%) were revoked because permittees later committed crimes (not necessarily violent) in which guns were present (not necessarily used).

Of 14,000 CCW licensees in Oregon, only 4 (0.03%) were convicted of the criminal (not necessarily violent) use or possession of a firearm. Americans use firearms for self-defense more than 2.1 million times annually.

By contrast, there are about 579,000 violent crimes committed annually with firearms of all types. Seventy percent of violent crimes are committed by 7% of criminals, including repeat offenders, many of whom the courts place on probation after conviction, and felons that are paroled before serving their full time behind bars.

Two-thirds of self-protective firearms uses are with handguns.

99.9% of self-defense firearms uses do not result in fatal shootings of criminals, an important factor ignored in certain "studies" that are used to claim that guns are more often misused than used for self-protection. Of incarcerated felons surveyed by the Department of Justice, 34% have been driven away, wounded, or captured by armed citizens; 40% have decided against committing crimes for fear their would-be victims were armed.

With adoption of CCW by Arizona, Tennessee and Wyoming in early 1994, 19 states have CCW laws requiring the issuance of permits to carry concealed firearms for self-defense to citizens who meet fair and reasonable state standards. Vermont, which ranks near the bottom in violent crime rates year-in and year-out, allows firearms to be carried concealed without a permit.

In recent years NRA successfully fought for the adoption of favorable CCW laws now on the books in Florida (1987), Idaho (1990, amended 1991), Mississippi (1990), Montana (1991), and Oregon (1990). In recent legislative sessions, proposals for similar CCW laws have progressed in Alaska, Colorado, Missouri, Oklahoma and Texas.

Anti-gun forces oppose CCW with a variety of arguments, ranging from deliberate misrepresentations of commonly available crime data to "studies" pretending to show that private ownership of firearms leads to death and injury rather than providing protection to the owner.

1. Firearms ownership opponents claim that "violent crime" went up in Florida since that state enacted CCW legislation in 1987, a misleading statement for multiple reasons:

Florida's homicide rate has declined 21% since adopting CCW in1987.

No comparison of aggravated assault, robbery, and rape (99.3% of Florida violent crimes) beginning before 1988 is valid,according to the Florida Dept. of Law Enforcement. In 1988,Florida changed its method of compiling crime statistics.

In Florida, as in the U.S., more than 70% of violent crimes do not involve guns. Violent crime rates, therefore, don't necessarily reflect violent gun-related crime trends. According to the most recent FBI Uniform Crime Reports (1992), nationwide firearms were used in the four violent crimes that make up the total "Violent Crime" category, as follows: Aggravated Assault (58% of violent crimes) -- firearms used in 25%; Robbery (35% of violent crimes) -- firearms used in 41%; Rapes (6% of violent crimes) -- firearms used in an estimated 5%-10% (survey data); and Homicides (1% of violent crimes) -- firearms used in 68%.

In Florida: Aggravated Assaults (64% of violent crimes) -- firearms used in 25%; Robberies (30% of violent crimes) -- firearms used in 37%; Rapes (4% of violent crimes) -- firearms used in an estimated 5%-10% (survey data); and Homicides (0.7% of violent crimes) -- firearms used in 61%.

2. Anti-gunners cite "studies" they claim show that firearms kept at home are "43 times more likely" to be used to kill family members than be used for self-defense. (Other "studies" claim different ratios.) The 43:1 claim, based upon a small-scale study of Kings County (Seattle) and Shelby County (Memphis), is a fraud, because it counts as self-defense gun uses only those cases in which criminals were killed in the defender's home. Approximately 99.9% of all defensive gun uses are not fatal shootings, however -- criminals are usually frightened off, held at bay, or non-fatally wounded. Also, many defensive firearms uses occur away from home. Further, suicides were counted as "family member killings" in the "study," elevating that number more than 500%. Unfortunately, some of these "studies" are funded with taxpayer dollars, through grants from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, a division of the U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services.

Correlation and causation. Both sides of the arguement often make the mistake that guns can cause or prevent crime. They can do neither. In those areas where crime is high it is NOT because of strict gun laws. Strict gun laws were enacted BECAUSE crime is high.... obviously with little effect.

Anyway.. you know the old axiom about the 3 kinds of lies.

[Spideynw]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Making it a law is a much stronger force...those who don't have a trigger lock would not throw out their non-existant trigger lcoks in protest...so no decline...and yes, out of the 100 million gun owners I think more than few would take a law more seriously and it would tip the scales when they were already considering it but barely decided against it in the past

So no declines, and an extremely high likelyhood of at least some additions...and since this is all based on common sense it's pretty much what would happen...

Again, no proof.

Even more important is the fact that you have no proof that gun locks would result in statistically significantly fewer deaths.

[hsmith]

Originally Posted by Spideynw

Again, no proof.

Even more important is the fact that you have no proof that gun locks would result in statistically significantly fewer deaths.

He has yet to provide a piece of proof for any of his mindless conjecture.

He doesn't know gun laws nor does he know the facts, it has been proven over and over.

[Thorgrim]

trigger locks are required with many gun purchses...by state law...

Locking Devices

Would you say that was an increase or decrease in trigger lock ownership?

[7960]

Originally Posted by Ezra Smack

During WWII the Japanese decided not to invade America because they
knew most Americans were ARMED!

I've heard this before but I've never seen it backed up.

Can you prove that or is it just one of those "well they didn't attack us so it *must* have been because we're armed!" tihngs?

[Spideynw]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

trigger locks are required with many gun purchses...by state law...

Locking Devices

Would you say that was an increase or decrease in trigger lock ownership?

Who cares about increased trigger lock ownership? It still does not prove more people use them. Even if they did use them more, it would still not be proof that statistically significantly more lives had been saved because of it.