gun nutters . . . . scary stuff!

[irishScott]

Davmat personifies the attitude that although people in America get shot all the time, no one is really all that interested in changing that.

Uh, they do? I've been alive in this country for 24 years, went to public school, and no one I know has ever been shot at. People get shot all the time in the ghetto, but the vast majority of people do not live in the fucking ghetto.

Regardless, sure we're interested in changing it. We'd just like to change it without infringing on freedom and human rights, without criminalizing those that have done and will do no harm.

That's the thing about these debates, virtually everyone can agree on the desired outcome:
1. Crazies should not have guns.
2. Stupid people should not have guns.
3. Criminals should not have guns.

And we already have multiple laws on the books to that effect, as it's what we all agree on. The only disagreement is how to make things even better, with some saying that we have to give up some freedom and rights to have any hope of making things better, and others who think there are other ways.

 

[davmat787]

If I were to repost pictures that show up on my facebook during hunting season in OT, it would cause a mental breakdown among most of the posters

As usual, you give yourself way to much credit and importance to the community. What is it about these hunting pics that would cause a mental breakdown?

 

[davmat787]

Uh, they do? I've been alive in this country for 24 years, went to public school, and no one I know has ever been shot at. People get shot all the time in the ghetto, but the vast majority of people do not live in the fucking ghetto.

Regardless, sure we're interested in changing it. We'd just like to change it without infringing on freedom and human rights, without criminalizing those that have done and will do no harm.

That's the thing about these debates, virtually everyone can agree on the desired outcome:
1. Crazies should not have guns.
2. Stupid people should not have guns.
3. Criminals should not have guns.

And we already have multiple laws on the books to that effect, as it's what we all agree on. The only disagreement is how to make things even better, with some saying that we have to give up some freedom and rights to have any hope of making things better, and others who think there are other ways.

No kidding. Would be nice to separate gun related deaths from those that occur in the hood, aka gang violence, from the rest. I imagine it would be quite telling, but of course that wouldn't be politically correct. So lets go after the law abiding firearm owners rather than taking a look at where the low hanging fruit is first.

As for Moose, please read my reply to you. It is in post #150 of this thread and I think it would give you pause to retract your statement regarding the "personifying the attitude..." you made to me. Or not.

 

[irishScott]

No kidding. Would be nice to separate gun related deaths from those that occur in the hood, aka gang violence, from the rest. I imagine it would be quite telling, but of course that wouldn't be politically correct. So lets go after the law abiding firearm owners rather than taking a look at where the low hanging fruit is first.

Screw that, leave them in. Let's look at the numbers (taken from FBI Uniform Crime Reports).

Gun deaths in the US in 2010: 8,775
US Population in 2010: 308,745,538

Population killed by gunshot, all causes (suicide, murder, etc): 0.00284%

ZOMG THOSE GUNSLINGING YANKS ARE DROPPING LIKE FLIES!!

 

[davmat787]

Screw that, leave them in. Let's look at the numbers (taken from FBI Uniform Crime Reports).

Gun deaths in the US in 2010: 8,775
US Population in 2010: 308,745,538

Population killed by gunshot, all causes (suicide, murder, etc): 0.00284%

ZOMG THOSE GUNSLINGING YANKS ARE DROPPING LIKE FLIES!!

For some reason this falls on deaf ears with the gun grabbers. The whole reason we bring up the fact that more die from cars or swimming pools is that those are not designed to kill, whereas a gun is, according to many at least. Yet fewer die from the death machines known as guns than the innocuous automobile and swimming pool The vast majority of rounds fired in the US each year kill nothing.

But hey, guns are considered the domain of conservatives, which is false if you look at statistics, so why not use this tragedy to stick it to conservatives, eh liberals?

Also people often don't realize what a valuable conservation service hunters provide every year to the USA. Since the top level predators were removed for the most part several hundred years ago, a controlled level of hunting is extremely important for the health of the target animal populations. And all the money generated from fees and licenses has purchase hundreds of thousands if not millions of acres of land for conservation.

 

[Hammerman]

Of course that's important.

But my concerns regarding America allowing gun ownership won't dissipate until I stop hearing about regular shootings in America.

Murders per 100,000

US: 4.8
UK: 1.23

So.... Why are you killing each other 3.9x more than we are?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

At least we did not have to outlaw kitchen knives... Maybe it was the tooth decay over there that drives the people crazy?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1411652/posts

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

hahahaha there are rules against murdering people, too

once again. irrelevant comparison.

murdering people with guns is compared to murdering people with cars. however since cars aren't designed to kill it's not really a fair comparison.

my point was that there's legislation in place to prevent deaths such as seat belt laws, not overloading vehicles with too many ppl, speeding laws, active law enforcement patrolling.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Screw that, leave them in. Let's look at the numbers (taken from FBI Uniform Crime Reports).

Gun deaths in the US in 2010: 8,775
US Population in 2010: 308,745,538

Population killed by gunshot, all causes (suicide, murder, etc): 0.00284%

ZOMG THOSE GUNSLINGING YANKS ARE DROPPING LIKE FLIES!!

Okay, so you're using % because to many people % seem like a small number. What is acceptable to you? This number?

Sounds ok to me, but in the world of science, for something bad that's pretty high. For example lead. When we talk about lead detection, we look at trace detection. Parts per BILLION. Just saying that using a % figure and saying "wow that's low" doesn't mean much. It makes more sense to compare murder rates to other countries for that reason.

You're right, the number of gun deaths per year is very small relative to the population at a quick glance, but at the same time, this is a weapon designed to kill. If anything this number should be zero. Now that's not possible, but I think we should work to reduce this number (once again not saying we need to ban firearms).

No, the point is that almost ANYTHING can be turned into a weapon and used for the express purpose of hurting people.

I don't deny that. But to link cars and guns together is still a ridiculous comparison. Until people are actively using cars to mow down thousands of people a year with the intent of killing, cars really aren't an issue. Car deaths are due to idiots on the road, negligence, carelessness. I can assure you if people start using cars as a regular weapon that we're going to see controls clamped down on cars. The point remains that whichever tool people choose to use as a weapon will receive the most attention.

So right now that may be guns, but until people turn to other tools, I'm sorry, but guns will be the target of violence control.

I guess a similar analogy is preventing terrorism. Israel actively profiles people and has done an excellent in job in stopping people. People argue that racial profiling is bad, and I agree that it is, but in cases of limited resources, if I were to pick who to pat down, it wouldn't be the 3 year old toddler, but the 20-something male. And profiling isn't a stagnant tool either. If the stereotypical terrorist turns from being a typical 20-something Arab male into a 60-something Asian grandma, you bet your ass we will chance our profiling standards. It's all about adjusting to the current threat.

 

[gingermeggs]

Refer to the American Revolution. A bunch of malcontents kicked the British empire out of the 13 colonies and sent them packing back to England. Firearms where essentially in this revolution. So the US founding fathers enshrined this right in the US constitution in-case this needed to be repeated.

Yes while retaining Australia and Canada.....
Guess what the worlds natural and mineral resources rankings are?
Seems those pommies are freekin smart 300years ago!


1 -CANADA
2-AUSTRALIA
3 -RUSSIA

 

[Orignal Earl]

As usual, you give yourself way to much credit and importance to the community. What is it about these hunting pics that would cause a mental breakdown?

I am nothing but another anonymous poster on this forum with an opinion, just like you

The pictures I'm talking about would be like a white tail getting field dressed, with a couple of teenagers smiling above it.

Have you ever read any of the * OMG KILL IT WITH FIRE * threads in OT.
In them, there is usually a picture of a spider or such.
You will see a lot of the same posters freaking out about a spider who say they have no problem shooting a human being.

 

[ky54]

Let's see - Bloomberg said all police should go on strike until every citizen is disarmed. How in the fuck does that make us safer?

 

[davmat787]

I am nothing but another anonymous poster on this forum with an opinion, just like you

The pictures I'm talking about would be like a white tail getting field dressed, with a couple of teenagers smiling above it.

Have you ever read any of the * OMG KILL IT WITH FIRE * threads in OT.
In them, there is usually a picture of a spider or such.
You will see a lot of the same posters freaking out about a spider who say they have no problem shooting a human being.

Dude, like 90% of the posts in OT are trolling, joking, parody, ripping on another member, .etc. People go there to bullshit and have fun, not make serious political statements. And you want me to make sense of ATOT?

Isn't *OMG KILL IT WITH FIRE* some sort of Meme? I have seen that remark in a Sarah Palin or Pelosi thread for instance.

 

[Orignal Earl]

Dude, like 90% of the posts in OT are trolling, joking, parody, ripping on another member, .etc. People go there to bullshit and have fun, not make serious political statements. And you want me to make sense of ATOT?

Isn't *OMG KILL IT WITH FIRE* some sort of Meme? I have seen that remark in a Sarah Palin or Pelosi thread for instance.

So your saying those people aren't really scared of a little spider?
And then when the same posters come into P&N and say they would have no problem shooting another human, executing children etc... that's the real poster?
Ya, I don't know

 

[DrPizza]

I am nothing but another anonymous poster on this forum with an opinion, just like you

The pictures I'm talking about would be like a white tail getting field dressed, with a couple of teenagers smiling above it.

I share the opinion of a lot of hunters I know - some of them very accomplished & serious hunters. They would never take a "gory" picture of someone field dressing a deer. Or, if they did, it would not be shared online. For pretty much the reason you pointed out, such pictures do a disservice to hunting. (Likewise, most people accept where their beef comes from, but don't want to see pictures of the cows being slaughtered.) The people I know, and myself, have plenty of pictures of them with the animal they just downed, and they're smiling. But, every effort is made to minimize the amount of blood seen in any such pose. Not only is this to respect other people's not wanting to see gore, but it's also done out of respect for the animal that was shot.

edit: that's not to say that I don't agree with you, Earl, that the majority of posters couldn't deal with it.

 

[Orignal Earl]

I share the opinion of a lot of hunters I know - some of them very accomplished & serious hunters. They would never take a "gory" picture of someone field dressing a deer. Or, if they did, it would not be shared online. For pretty much the reason you pointed out, such pictures do a disservice to hunting. (Likewise, most people accept where their beef comes from, but don't want to see pictures of the cows being slaughtered.) The people I know, and myself, have plenty of pictures of them with the animal they just downed, and they're smiling. But, every effort is made to minimize the amount of blood seen in any such pose. Not only is this to respect other people's not wanting to see gore, but it's also done out of respect for the animal that was shot.

edit: that's not to say that I don't agree with you, Earl, that the majority of posters couldn't deal with it.

Agreed
Like I said, these are teenagers posting the pics.
I know teenagers still have a lot of growing up to do, I always hope the posters who think 13 and older should be executed are teenagers, for example
Unfortunately, there are a lot of adults here who have never grown up either

 

[xj0hnx]

once again. irrelevant comparison.

murdering people with guns is compared to murdering people with cars. however since cars aren't designed to kill it's not really a fair comparison.

my point was that there's legislation in place to prevent deaths such as seat belt laws, not overloading vehicles with too many ppl, speeding laws, active law enforcement patrolling.

You're right, it isn't valid, cars are MUCH more dangerous.

Automobile deaths in 2007: 41,059
Firearm homicide deaths in 2007: 12,632

You are 3.25 times more likely to get killed by a vehicle than a gun just as a base statistic. Of course most people are around cars all day every day, and not around guns so your chances of being killed by a firearm are dramatically lessened by exposure alone.

I guess my point would be that there's probably more legislation for vehicles, yet they cause over three times the deaths as firearms.

 

[Brovane]

Yes while retaining Australia and Canada.....
Guess what the worlds natural and mineral resources rankings are?
Seems those pommies are freekin smart 300years ago!


1 -CANADA
2-AUSTRALIA
3 -RUSSIA

Link to your reference?

 

[sixone]

I don't deny that. But to link cars and guns together is still a ridiculous comparison. Until people are actively using cars to mow down thousands of people a year with the intent of killing, cars really aren't an issue. Car deaths are due to idiots on the road, negligence, carelessness. I can assure you if people start using cars as a regular weapon that we're going to see controls clamped down on cars. The point remains that whichever tool people choose to use as a weapon will receive the most attention.

And gun deaths and injuries are caused by carelessness, negligence, and evil. Responsible, law-abiding gun owners don't cause deaths or injuries, so restricting their legal rights serves no purpose whatsoever. Doing so won't protect a single human life. The people who use guns to kill or injure other human beings don't respect the laws we already have, so expecting them to respect new laws is just silly.

So right now that may be guns, but until people turn to other tools, I'm sorry, but guns will be the target of violence control.

If you can show me a gun control law that has more effect on criminals than on law-abiding citizens, I'll be all for it. The only stuff we've seen so far only hampers people who respect their weapons and the damage they can do.

 

[HAL9000]

At least we did not have to outlaw kitchen knives... Maybe it was the tooth decay over there that drives the people crazy?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1411652/posts

So you think a delusional post by a commenter on a random website = The UK have banned kitchen knives... Wow Americans are stupid.

 

[HAL9000]

So your concern isn't actually with the loss of life but the tool that was used to end a life and what that tools main purpose was intended to be?

My concern is the loss of life, and if by banning something that only ends life that lives will be saved, then do it.

If banning something would be extremely detrimental to society while saving lives (i.e. banning cars) then don't do it, if all it will do is remove weapons from peoples homes, nothing else, then sure I'm cool with it.

 

[sixone]

My concern is the loss of life, and if by banning something that only ends life that lives will be saved, then do it.

If banning something would be extremely detrimental to society while saving lives (i.e. banning cars) then don't do it, if all it will do is remove weapons from peoples homes, nothing else, then sure I'm cool with it.

Guns don't "only end life". They aren't detrimental to society, until and unless they are used by a person with bad intent or with negligence.

Taking them away from people who use them for sport or for hunting or for defense won't have ANY effect on criminals or people who create conditions for accidents to happen.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

And gun deaths and injuries are caused by carelessness, negligence, and evil. Responsible, law-abiding gun owners don't cause deaths or injuries, so restricting their legal rights serves no purpose whatsoever. Doing so won't protect a single human life. The people who use guns to kill or injure other human beings don't respect the laws we already have, so expecting them to respect new laws is just silly.

If you can show me a gun control law that has more effect on criminals than on law-abiding citizens, I'll be all for it. The only stuff we've seen so far only hampers people who respect their weapons and the damage they can do.

You know very well the difference between gun deaths and car deaths yet you keep comparing the two. I'm not arguing that we need to take guns away from law abiding citizens at all.

Many gun deaths are the result of murders in which there was a target and there was motive. Even if you talk about 2nd degree or 3rd degree cases, how often do these same cases apply to cars?

How many people plot killing someone and then ready their cars to mow them down? How many people get in an argument and say "fuck it" and walk to the parking lot and come back and ram their car into the person they got into a fight with? How many people position their cars at a movie theater and get ready to drive over hundreds as they leave the theater?

Come on. What part of the shootings in CO was caused by carelessness and negligence on behalf of the shooter? He plotted the whole thing, and if you want to compare what he did with cars, then we need to talk about people doing GTA style driving.

Point is, illogical comparisons are unwarranted.

 

[Brovane]

My concern is the loss of life, and if by banning something that only ends life that lives will be saved, then do it.

If banning something would be extremely detrimental to society while saving lives (i.e. banning cars) then don't do it, if all it will do is remove weapons from peoples homes, nothing else, then sure I'm cool with it.

 

[irishScott]

Okay, so you're using % because to many people % seem like a small number. What is acceptable to you? This number?

Sounds ok to me, but in the world of science, for something bad that's pretty high. For example lead. When we talk about lead detection, we look at trace detection. Parts per BILLION. Just saying that using a % figure and saying "wow that's low" doesn't mean much. It makes more sense to compare murder rates to other countries for that reason.

You're right, the number of gun deaths per year is very small relative to the population at a quick glance, but at the same time, this is a weapon designed to kill. If anything this number should be zero. Now that's not possible, but I think we should work to reduce this number (once again not saying we need to ban firearms).

Well if you need more context compare that number to the fact that 40-some-odd % of American households have a gun.

40+% have ready access to a gun, 0.00284% are killed by a gun.

In the grand scheme of things I accept those numbers. I'd like them even smaller yes, but you don't punish 39.99716% to reduce 0.00284% into 0.00280%

 

[Hammerman]

So you think a delusional post by a commenter on a random website = The UK have banned kitchen knives... Wow Americans are stupid.

Hal, if you cannot see the obvious, then you are blind.... There are bad eggs in every bunch and it doesn't matter if it involves knives, guns, cars, airplane hijacking, fertilizer bombs, etc.... The article was to SHOW that there are knee jerk reactions to every incident and this one (among many others) shows that your precious gunless UK has issues along with the rest of the world.

Get a clue, dude.