The counter argument to the "guns will save lives" movement

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Specop 007
Why shouldnt felons be allowed to own a firearm?

Well, on that issue, I will side with those who won't allow them to own a firearm. Once convicted, they have proven themselves incapable of following the law. This demonstration of irresponsible and criminal behavior is reason enough to prevent them from owning a firearm in the future.

In other words, it's part of their punishment, so tough sh*t.

Do you consider that aspect of their punishment "cruel" or "unusual"?

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Did you notice that your source is a gun right's advocate site and that their totals are "implied"?

Did you notice I mentioned that within my reply? If you really cared about truth you could follow the source notes and find the original studies by people such as the department of justice, gallup, and so on. But you don't, so I'm sure you won't. But that's ok, because in the end I'm still right.

 

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Did you notice that your source is a gun right's advocate site and that their totals are "implied"?

Did you notice I mentioned that within my reply? If you really cared about truth you could follow the source notes and find the original studies by people such as the department of justice, gallup, and so on. But you don't, so I'm sure you won't. But that's ok, because in the end I'm still right.

Okay fine. Since you would like to believe the hyperbole of some gun-nut site stating "implied" statistics and accepting that as fact while chiding me for saying "probably".....

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/guncrime.htm

Notice the chart on that site says that there were 388,897 crimes committed that involved a firearm....TOTAL. Of course, it's pretty easy to say that more than 6x that were diverted because of the intended victim having a weapon using an "implied" study instead of actually looking up the stats.

Next baseless claim that you would like to have shot full of holes (pun intended).

Edit: Response to your stats on accidental deaths w/firearms:

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/frmdth.htm

The average deaths per year caused by firearms that were unintended suicides were 1121.36 (11 year avg from 1991-2001).

The lowest total in any of the 11 years that data is available is 776 and the high is 1521. Slightly off from you 200 bouncing up to 600. You might want to go back and double check those studies that you are using. They seem way out of line with the DoJ's stats.

One last thing.....looking at the charts above from the DoJ, since stricter gun control has gone into effect, deaths via firearm have reduced by more than 25%.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
I'm not sure what the issue is here. I need to demonstrate competence before I can drive a car. It's not a Constitutional issue. It's a big friggin piece of steel which can kill people. Likewise, I think it perfectly reasonable that the same sort of requirement be in place. Once passed then one gets to carry.

As far as purchasing a handgun goes I'm for instant background checks. While it may be possible to buy a firearm illegally, that doesn't mean it we should just hand them out to John Doe either.

Responsible people ought to be able to purchase and carry firearms, and reasonable precautions to ensure they are who they say they are is also reasonable.

You see, I've been a responsible gun owner all my life. Who do you think you are to try and infringe on my right to own a gun because your afraid I'm not a responsible person? That's like saying I'm guilty until proven innocent.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Did you notice that your source is a gun right's advocate site and that their totals are "implied"?

Did you notice I mentioned that within my reply? If you really cared about truth you could follow the source notes and find the original studies by people such as the department of justice, gallup, and so on. But you don't, so I'm sure you won't. But that's ok, because in the end I'm still right.

Okay fine. Since you would like to believe the hyperbole of some gun-nut site stating "implied" statistics and accepting that as fact while chiding me for saying "probably".....

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/guncrime.htm

Notice the chart on that site says that there were 388,897 crimes committed that involved a firearm....TOTAL. Of course, it's pretty easy to say that more than 6x that were diverted because of the intended victim having a weapon using an "implied" study instead of actually looking up the stats.

Next baseless claim that you would like to have shot full of holes (pun intended).

Edit: Response to your stats on accidental deaths w/firearms:

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/frmdth.htm

The average deaths per year caused by firearms that were unintended suicides were 1121.36 (11 year avg from 1991-2001).

The lowest total in any of the 11 years that data is available is 776 and the high is 1521. Slightly off from you 200 bouncing up to 600. You might want to go back and double check those studies that you are using. They seem way out of line with the DoJ's stats.

One last thing.....looking at the charts above from the DoJ, since stricter gun control has gone into effect, deaths via firearm have reduced by more than 25%.

I don't want to go too far into more general gun/crime debates, in fact I shouldn't have even countered your claim. But let's build a fact tree:

You claimed that the number of 'children' killed accidentally was higher than the number of defensive gun uses. My numbers (200-600) ARE exactly what your charts show for 'children and teens under 19'. If you'd rather look at just children under 14 the number tops out at just over 200 annually. Now look at ANY source for defensive gun uses per year and see the number between 300k and 2.5 million...if you want to completely discount survey data then you can still find between 50,000 and 100,000 reported lawful shootings per year (based on DOJ studies). That's just shootings mind you, not all the times where merely brandishing ends a confrontation. Tell me flat out which is bigger... 1200 or 50,000. Answer that question directly and finally.

Now, as to your gun control and crime reduction: the first attempt at gun control was in 1837 when Georgia banned handguns. The first MAJOR impact was the National Firearms Act of 1934, then the Gun Control Act of 1968. Finally you get Brady in 1994 and the AWB also in 1994. The problem is crime (and specifically homicides) haven't been highly correlated with those acts. We experienced a 'golden era' of low crime between the 40s and 60s but then saw it rise until recently. We have basically the same rate of crime today as we did in 1910. The single largest study attempting to link gun control and crime was undertaken during the Clinton administration. It couldn't find any significant positives from gun control. You can read about it here and go on to research the actual study if you'd like.

 

[RightIsWrong]

Two quick questions....

1. Do you realize that I wasn't the one that made any claims about accidental deaths compared to defensive gun uses?

2. Do you realize that the 2.5M DGU was figured via a random phone survey of less than 5,000 people?

A study of 743 gunshot deaths by Dr. Arthur Kellermann and Dr. Donald Reay published in The New England Journal of Medicine found that 84% of these homicides occurred during altercations in the home. Only 2 of the 743 gunshot deaths occurring in the home involved an intruder killed during an attempted entry, and only 9 of the deaths were determined by police/courts to be justified (FE Zimring, Firearms, violence, and public policy, Scientific American, vol. 265, 1991, p. 48). The evidence revealed in the Kellermann study is consistent with data reported by the FBI. In 1993, there were 24,526 people murdered, 13,980 with handguns, yet only 251 justifiable homicides by civilians using handguns. (FBI, Crime in the United States: Uniform Crime Reports 1994, 1995).

 

[RightIsWrong]

Your "use any source" challenge is bogus because everyone that "validates" that claim are all using the same Kleck survey as a source. How about you actually back up your claim with a source that isn't Kleck or someone quoting Kleck.

 

[PingSpike]

This thread is going places.

 

[brandonb]

Until "We the people of the United States" (our government) has the same gun control/restrictions as the people, I'm not going to agree to any sort of gun control. I will even go as far as to say there should be no background checks or anything. Because those who fail background checks are probably those "anti government" types.

So, I'd be ok with a few nut cases going postal vs our government doing what its doing today (bankrupting our future, killing our children in baseless wars to protect Israel, and so on.)

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
I'm not sure what the issue is here. I need to demonstrate competence before I can drive a car. It's not a Constitutional issue. It's a big friggin piece of steel which can kill people. Likewise, I think it perfectly reasonable that the same sort of requirement be in place. Once passed then one gets to carry.

As far as purchasing a handgun goes I'm for instant background checks. While it may be possible to buy a firearm illegally, that doesn't mean it we should just hand them out to John Doe either.

Responsible people ought to be able to purchase and carry firearms, and reasonable precautions to ensure they are who they say they are is also reasonable.

You see, I've been a responsible gun owner all my life. Who do you think you are to try and infringe on my right to own a gun because your afraid I'm not a responsible person? That's like saying I'm guilty until proven innocent.

Serious, I'm not a particularly diehard republican, but please tell me why when the left cries about bush or any other politician trampling the bill of rights, the 2nd amendment is somehow overlooked?

And before I hear crying about how it's for militias, please tell me why the rest of the "bill of rights", are protections of individual rights, except for the 2nd?

If the argument is about how dangerous guns are to society, then why shouldn't we just suspend the rest of the bill of rights, right to trial by jury, right against self incrimination, against unreasonable search and seizure, against cruel or unusual punishment, right to free speech, etc. since those can ALL protect dangerous individuals?

Finally, if someday the gov declares martial law, suspends elections and all other rights, AND you have been disarmed, how much of a snowballs chance in hell will you have of opposing your own politicians?

 

[child of wonder]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
I'm not sure what the issue is here. I need to demonstrate competence before I can drive a car. It's not a Constitutional issue. It's a big friggin piece of steel which can kill people. Likewise, I think it perfectly reasonable that the same sort of requirement be in place. Once passed then one gets to carry.

As far as purchasing a handgun goes I'm for instant background checks. While it may be possible to buy a firearm illegally, that doesn't mean it we should just hand them out to John Doe either.

Responsible people ought to be able to purchase and carry firearms, and reasonable precautions to ensure they are who they say they are is also reasonable.

This is my view as well.

I think storage and home safety should also be key points in gun training. I'm thinking of eventually getting a small handgun to keep in our house just in case but what holds me back from doing so is my 5 and 3 year old kids.

Even though I would keep the gun locked up and out of sight, if they were to ever somehow hurt themselves with that gun I could never forgive myself.

I also believe there are certain people that should not be allowed to have guns. For instance, the company I do consulting for hires a lot of 18-30 year old guys to do tower work. In their break room are photographs of them posing with various guns attempting to look bad ass. In my opinion, people that treat guns as toys by presenting them in such a manner should not be allowed to have them.

However, I also believe that they have as much right to own a gun as I do so I can only hope they never hurt anyone and, if they do, only themselves are the victim so that natural selection takes its course.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Two quick questions....

1. Do you realize that I wasn't the one that made any claims about accidental deaths compared to defensive gun uses?

2. Do you realize that the 2.5M DGU was figured via a random phone survey of less than 5,000 people?

A study of 743 gunshot deaths by Dr. Arthur Kellermann and Dr. Donald Reay published in The New England Journal of Medicine found that 84% of these homicides occurred during altercations in the home. Only 2 of the 743 gunshot deaths occurring in the home involved an intruder killed during an attempted entry, and only 9 of the deaths were determined by police/courts to be justified (FE Zimring, Firearms, violence, and public policy, Scientific American, vol. 265, 1991, p. 48). The evidence revealed in the Kellermann study is consistent with data reported by the FBI. In 1993, there were 24,526 people murdered, 13,980 with handguns, yet only 251 justifiable homicides by civilians using handguns. (FBI, Crime in the United States: Uniform Crime Reports 1994, 1995).

Kellermann has been completely debunked over and over again. Just google 'kellermann debunked'. Furthermore the New England Journal of Medicine printed a retraction of his works after coming under fire for bad research and Kellermann himself admitted his errors and has since co-authored works with a pro-gun stance (albeit with careful restrictions).

The methodological flaw there is that it doesn't consider gun use not resulting in death. The DOJ admits 50k-100k defensive gun uses annually as reported through the BCS NCVS. These figures are widely availabe.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Your "use any source" challenge is bogus because everyone that "validates" that claim are all using the same Kleck survey as a source. How about you actually back up your claim with a source that isn't Kleck or someone quoting Kleck.

You are incorrect. Very few sources use the Kleck or Lott studies. The table I originally linked has a number of other options, all with closely matching statistics. You can also easily find more if you just look for them. I'm tired of throwing mountains of evidence at you since you're not going to look at any of it anyway. I'll keep debunking your claims, but I'm not wasting my time on a lost cause.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
I'm not sure what the issue is here. I need to demonstrate competence before I can drive a car. It's not a Constitutional issue. It's a big friggin piece of steel which can kill people. Likewise, I think it perfectly reasonable that the same sort of requirement be in place. Once passed then one gets to carry.

As far as purchasing a handgun goes I'm for instant background checks. While it may be possible to buy a firearm illegally, that doesn't mean it we should just hand them out to John Doe either.

Responsible people ought to be able to purchase and carry firearms, and reasonable precautions to ensure they are who they say they are is also reasonable.

You see, I've been a responsible gun owner all my life. Who do you think you are to try and infringe on my right to own a gun because your afraid I'm not a responsible person? That's like saying I'm guilty until proven innocent.

Where did I say you can't own a gun? I'm saying if you want to carry it, passing a safety course isn't unreasonable. Do you think we should test drivers only after they demonstrate they can't drive?

I also don't not think it unreasonable to deny a felon a firearm.

 

[shortylickens]

Originally posted by: PingSpike
This thread is going places.

I looked up "shithole" on google images and this is what I got:
http://idea15.files.wordpress....07/08/20070404cbgb.jpg

 

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Your "use any source" challenge is bogus because everyone that "validates" that claim are all using the same Kleck survey as a source. How about you actually back up your claim with a source that isn't Kleck or someone quoting Kleck.

You are incorrect. Very few sources use the Kleck or Lott studies. The table I originally linked has a number of other options, all with closely matching statistics. You can also easily find more if you just look for them. I'm tired of throwing mountains of evidence at you since you're not going to look at any of it anyway. I'll keep debunking your claims, but I'm not wasting my time on a lost cause.

I'm tired of this. You keep stating the same stats over and over and challenge me to prove them wrong while you have yet to do anything to prove them right.

You have repeatedly blasted my arguments on the basis that they are only "guesses" or "probabilities" with no definitive stats to back them up while posting crap evidence based on "implied" studies or phone surveys.

Time for you to put up or shut up. I have been able to show the number of actual crimes committed using firearms. I have shown you the number of accidental deaths associated with firearms. You? You have shown squat but gun advocates making unverifiable claims or predictions based on the statements of other gun advocates.

As techs has learned from all of the polls done where Hillary is leading and then ends up losing....polls don't matter. Either back up your claims with verified incidents or stop making them and asserting that they are indeed fact. They aren't.

 

[NeoV]

"Now look at ANY source for defensive gun uses per year and see the number between 300k and 2.5 million"

total BS

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
I'm not sure what the issue is here. I need to demonstrate competence before I can drive a car. It's not a Constitutional issue. It's a big friggin piece of steel which can kill people. Likewise, I think it perfectly reasonable that the same sort of requirement be in place. Once passed then one gets to carry.

As far as purchasing a handgun goes I'm for instant background checks. While it may be possible to buy a firearm illegally, that doesn't mean it we should just hand them out to John Doe either.

Responsible people ought to be able to purchase and carry firearms, and reasonable precautions to ensure they are who they say they are is also reasonable.

You see, I've been a responsible gun owner all my life. Who do you think you are to try and infringe on my right to own a gun because your afraid I'm not a responsible person? That's like saying I'm guilty until proven innocent.

Where did I say you can't own a gun? I'm saying if you want to carry it, passing a safety course isn't unreasonable. Do you think we should test drivers only after they demonstrate they can't drive?

I also don't not think it unreasonable to deny a felon a firearm.

Oh, how nice of you that you will allow me to own a gun... just as long as I don't carry it. What good is owning a gun to me if it's sitting at home in a gun safe?

The people that are going to misuse a gun will find a way. Passing laws to restrict the rest of us is just an excuse to control the number of guns out there so the pansies feel safer, even though they aren't.

I'm curious, what do you think this "safety course" should consist of? Teaching people not to point guns at things unless they what to shoot it? Please, we're talking about adults here, not 3 year olds.

 

[NeoV]

for all you 'pry my guns out of my dead hands' folks - I have a few honest questions.

Do you feel there is a problem with gun violence in the USA?

Are you opposed to felons being able to legally buy a gun?

How would you suggest we reduce the ease in which guns can be illegally bought/sold?

Are you opposed to any type of restriction on what type of gun an individual can own? Ammo?

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Originally posted by: NeoV
for all you 'pry my guns out of my dead hands' folks - I have a few honest questions.

Do you feel there is a problem with gun violence in the USA?
Yes, though no correlation with it being guns, just violence.

Are you opposed to felons being able to legally buy a gun?
Only for those with violent crimes. They have served their time, yet they lose the right to vote and bear arms because they stole are car when they were 17?

How would you suggest we reduce the ease in which guns can be illegally bought/sold?
Drop the war on drugs. Keep violent offenders in prison, not let them out after several months or a few years

Are you opposed to any type of restriction on what type of gun an individual can own? Ammo?No. I'm no more a threat to anyone with a single shot than I am a minigun

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
I'm not sure what the issue is here. I need to demonstrate competence before I can drive a car. It's not a Constitutional issue. It's a big friggin piece of steel which can kill people. Likewise, I think it perfectly reasonable that the same sort of requirement be in place. Once passed then one gets to carry.

As far as purchasing a handgun goes I'm for instant background checks. While it may be possible to buy a firearm illegally, that doesn't mean it we should just hand them out to John Doe either.

Responsible people ought to be able to purchase and carry firearms, and reasonable precautions to ensure they are who they say they are is also reasonable.

You see, I've been a responsible gun owner all my life. Who do you think you are to try and infringe on my right to own a gun because your afraid I'm not a responsible person? That's like saying I'm guilty until proven innocent.

Where did I say you can't own a gun? I'm saying if you want to carry it, passing a safety course isn't unreasonable. Do you think we should test drivers only after they demonstrate they can't drive?

I also don't not think it unreasonable to deny a felon a firearm.

Oh, how nice of you that you will allow me to own a car... just as long as I don't drive it it. What good is owning a car to me if it's sitting at home in a driveway?

The people that are going to misuse a car will find a way. Passing laws to restrict the rest of us is just an excuse to control the number of cars out there so the pansies feel safer, even though they aren't.

I'm curious, what do you think this "drivers test" should consist of? Making sure people don't run others over unless they mean too? Please, we're talking about adults here, not 3 year olds.

Fixed

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
I'm not sure what the issue is here. I need to demonstrate competence before I can drive a car. It's not a Constitutional issue. It's a big friggin piece of steel which can kill people. Likewise, I think it perfectly reasonable that the same sort of requirement be in place. Once passed then one gets to carry.

As far as purchasing a handgun goes I'm for instant background checks. While it may be possible to buy a firearm illegally, that doesn't mean it we should just hand them out to John Doe either.

Responsible people ought to be able to purchase and carry firearms, and reasonable precautions to ensure they are who they say they are is also reasonable.

You see, I've been a responsible gun owner all my life. Who do you think you are to try and infringe on my right to own a gun because your afraid I'm not a responsible person? That's like saying I'm guilty until proven innocent.

Where did I say you can't own a gun? I'm saying if you want to carry it, passing a safety course isn't unreasonable. Do you think we should test drivers only after they demonstrate they can't drive?

I also don't not think it unreasonable to deny a felon a firearm.

Oh, how nice of you that you will allow me to own a car... just as long as I don't drive it it. What good is owning a car to me if it's sitting at home in a driveway?

The people that are going to misuse a car will find a way. Passing laws to restrict the rest of us is just an excuse to control the number of cars out there so the pansies feel safer, even though they aren't.

I'm curious, what do you think this "drivers test" should consist of? Making sure people don't run others over unless they mean too? Please, we're talking about adults here, not 3 year olds.

Fixed

Now show me where the bill rights addresses car ownership.

You lose.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: NeoV
for all you 'pry my guns out of my dead hands' folks - I have a few honest questions.

Do you feel there is a problem with gun violence in the USA?
Yes, though no correlation with it being guns, just violence.

Are you opposed to felons being able to legally buy a gun?
Only for those with violent crimes. They have served their time, yet they lose the right to vote and bear arms because they stole are car when they were 17?

How would you suggest we reduce the ease in which guns can be illegally bought/sold?
Drop the war on drugs. Keep violent offenders in prison, not let them out after several months or a few years

Are you opposed to any type of restriction on what type of gun an individual can own? Ammo?No. I'm no more a threat to anyone with a single shot than I am a minigun

That sums it up for me. Punish the criminals, (especially the violent criminals) instead of making it harder for law abiding people to own firearms.

The whole issue of gun control is the left's attempt at fear mongering the same as terrorism is the rights. Are there concerns? Yes, but that doesn't mean you throw the baby out with the bathwater.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: NeoV
for all you 'pry my guns out of my dead hands' folks - I have a few honest questions.

Do you feel there is a problem with gun violence in the USA?
Yes, though no correlation with it being guns, just violence.

Are you opposed to felons being able to legally buy a gun?
Only for those with violent crimes. They have served their time, yet they lose the right to vote and bear arms because they stole are car when they were 17?

How would you suggest we reduce the ease in which guns can be illegally bought/sold?
Drop the war on drugs. Keep violent offenders in prison, not let them out after several months or a few years

Are you opposed to any type of restriction on what type of gun an individual can own? Ammo?No. I'm no more a threat to anyone with a single shot than I am a minigun

qft +1

 

[OS]

I'm curious if when the lefties and communists succeed in banning all guns, and middle eastern style suicide bombings on campus become vogue in the US, if they intend on banning hands, feet, wires and fertilizer in the interests of public safety.