OMG Politics, I'm over it already.

Status
Not open for further replies.
sonik said:
Sure, a gun is better than no gun in all those situations, but with the exception of #5 (an extreme oddity) plenty of other firearms would have done the same.

Anyway I'm not knocking the AR. I'll probably get one someday myself. But for me home/self defense is shotgun and pistol territory.

*obligatory insular gun nerd debate*
Click to expand...
the best home defense firearm is a short barreled (legal) 12 Ga. shotgun with #1's/#2's/#3's in a 2-3/4" shell. period.
 
mongooz said:
the best home defense firearm is a short barreled (legal) 12 Ga. shotgun with #1's/#2's/#3's in a 2-3/4" shell. period.
Click to expand...

I pity the peasant that doesn't have a moat and the larder to survive a prolonged siege.
2749678541.png
 
Aahzz said:
people clamoring for gun control, proven time and again to do nothing
.
Click to expand...

You say that, but every other modern country in the world has very strict guns laws and none of them have anything like the number of gun related deaths that we have in the US.
 
Chad said:
You say that, but every other modern country in the world has very strict guns laws and none of them have anything like the number of gun related deaths that we have in the US.
Click to expand...

But you're only looking at gun related deaths when you say that. First, the majority of gun related deaths are suicide, so they pose no threat to the general population. Look at overall murder rates, and violent crime rates, and you'll find that our rates are not bad, and are in fact the lowest they've been in 50 years, per the FBI. Do you not care about people killed with knives, bombs, baseball bats, etc? Do those deaths not matter because no gun was used? Let's not forget that Britain now has a knife control movement.... http://countercurrentnews.com/2014/11/british-police-calling-for-knife-ban/
 
Aahzz said:
But you're only looking at gun related deaths when you say that. First, the majority of gun related deaths are suicide, so they pose no threat to the general population. Look at overall murder rates, and violent crime rates, and you'll find that our rates are not bad, and are in fact the lowest they've been in 50 years, per the FBI. Do you not care about people killed with knives, bombs, baseball bats, etc? Do those deaths not matter because no gun was used? Let's not forget that Britain now has a knife control movement.... http://countercurrentnews.com/2014/11/british-police-calling-for-knife-ban/
Click to expand...

You are correct, most gun deaths are suicide. I wonder how many of those folks would still be alive without access to the firearms?
So since violent crime rates are down, we should just not see how to make them less, just live with it as is?
Once we lower the gun murders, we can work on the others. Guns still kill way more than any other method.

gun.png
 
Well as the chart shows, the vast majority of homicides, by gun or otherwise, are done with a pistol. And they aren't going anywhere. America made that decision a long time ago.

Also gang violence always throws these type of stats for a curve. Certainly an issue that is unfortunate and needs attention, but it's more of a systemic thing with many causes than specifically gun related.
 
sonik said:
Well as the chart shows, the vast majority of homicides, by gun or otherwise, are done with a pistol. And they aren't going anywhere. America made that decision a long time ago.

Also gang violence always throws these type of stats for a curve. Certainly an issue that is unfortunate and needs attention, but it's more of a systemic thing with many causes than specifically gun related.
Click to expand...

The chart was put in because Ahazz was asking what about knives, bombs and bats. I was showing that those types of murders are nowhere near the number of gun murders. Also that is only handguns, so add in the other types of guns and the number of total gun deaths would be way more than the others.
 
That, and the fact that a stab wound is a hell of a lot less likely to kill someone from a gunshot wound.

And even among survivors, the medical costs of a gunshot would, relative to being stabbed or beaten up, are massive.

Yeah, no. This isn't a problem at all; if you're comparing the US to African or South American nations. Compared to the rest of the first world, it's an embarrassment. Plain and simple.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Tig
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9715182

OBJECTIVE: Determine the relative frequency with which guns in the home are used to injure or kill in self-defense, compared with the number of times these weapons are involved in an unintentional injury, suicide attempt, or criminal assault or homicide.

METHODS: We reviewed the police, medical examiner, emergency medical service, emergency department, and hospital records of all fatal and nonfatal shootings in three U.S. cities: Memphis, Tennessee; Seattle, Washington; and Galveston, Texas.

RESULTS: During the study interval (12 months in Memphis, 18 months in Seattle, and Galveston) 626 shootings occurred in or around a residence. This total included 54 unintentional shootings, 118 attempted or completed suicides, and 438 assaults/homicides. Thirteen shootings were legally justifiable or an act of self-defense, including three that involved law enforcement officers acting in the line of duty. For every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.

Anyone wanna make a guess on the conclusion?
 
Flamencology said:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9715182

OBJECTIVE: Determine the relative frequency with which guns in the home are used to injure or kill in self-defense, compared with the number of times these weapons are involved in an unintentional injury, suicide attempt, or criminal assault or homicide.

METHODS: We reviewed the police, medical examiner, emergency medical service, emergency department, and hospital records of all fatal and nonfatal shootings in three U.S. cities: Memphis, Tennessee; Seattle, Washington; and Galveston, Texas.

RESULTS: During the study interval (12 months in Memphis, 18 months in Seattle, and Galveston) 626 shootings occurred in or around a residence. This total included 54 unintentional shootings, 118 attempted or completed suicides, and 438 assaults/homicides. Thirteen shootings were legally justifiable or an act of self-defense, including three that involved law enforcement officers acting in the line of duty. For every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.

Anyone wanna make a guess on the conclusion?
Click to expand...

Did you factor in all the incidents where a firearm was used to prevent a crime form occurring?
 
Beyer160 said:
Did you factor in all the incidents where a firearm was used to prevent a crime form occurring?
Click to expand...

I'm not going to argue with anyone on the basis of someone having an anecdotal account here and an anecdotal account there. That's absolutely meaningless to me. Facts and studies, man. That's all we've got. And none of them indicate that guns save lives. That's a fantasy that gun-lovers believe because they want to believe it. Simple as that.
 
Flamencology said:
I'm not going to argue with anyone on the basis of someone having an anecdotal account here and an anecdotal account there. That's absolutely meaningless to me. Facts and studies, man. That's all we've got. And none of them indicate that guns save lives. That's a fantasy that gun-lovers believe because they want to believe it. Simple as that.
Click to expand...

And considering how Congress and the NRA have effectively kept the CDC from doing a study on gun violence since the mid-90s...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tig
Flamencology said:
I'm not going to argue with anyone on the basis of someone having an anecdotal account here and an anecdotal account there. That's absolutely meaningless to me. Facts and studies, man. That's all we've got. And none of them indicate that guns save lives. That's a fantasy that gun-lovers believe because they want to believe it. Simple as that.
Click to expand...
I'm sure your familiar with the research done John Lott? And if so, you're probably familiar with research that attempts to disprove him as well.

There is no official account of how many defensive gun uses there are per year in US. The numbers I've seen range from 50k to over 1 million.

My understanding is they mostly go unreported, or even if reported to police, if no crime took place, there is no national compilation of defensive actions.

So anecdotal or not, I'll take my chances that having a gun will keep me safer than not having one.
 
wagdog said:
I'm sure your familiar with the research done John Lott? And if so, you're probably familiar with research that attempts to disprove him as well.

There is no official account of how many defensive gun uses there are per year in US. The numbers I've seen range from 50k to over 1 million.

My understanding is they mostly go unreported, or even if reported to police, if no crime took place, there is no national compilation of defensive actions.

So anecdotal or not, I'll take my chances that having a gun will keep me safer than not having one.
Click to expand...

Lott has practically been discredited.

But arguing to his defenders is like (?) arguing with with a conspiracy theorist.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top