Gun Control is Completely Useless.
- Thread starter Colpy
- Start date
Well let's see.. You do realize that some people are allergic to nuts, but not all, some people have genetics tending towards certain diseases, still not all....;and then there are those who are prone to curiosity, wife or children abusers, or are mentally unstable, suffer from bouts of rage, are criminally inclined, even some put their brains on hiatus while around guns. That is my numerology........And yours.....?bumps on the skull??
Where is that carved in stone? The more you do things in moderation generally the better you fare.
Ah, phrenology! All you need is belief in astrology and you have the trifecta!
No, just donated the stats for them. I never did need the result of stats to tell me when I dropped something it went down not up. I did not need an official stats to know that my children were allergic to Pen-V, when they broke out in hives after taking it, and I did not need stats to tell me when someone I knew, developed breast ca. at a the age of 30 when all her other siblings died of one form of the disease at an early age, that there was a choice of two reasons. One hereditary or exposure to cancer causing elements at a young age.
Now I also know of some who got lung cancer while never smoking a day in their lives and I have also come across those who smoked the strongest cigarettes spent hours in a smoke ladened environment every night and still never developed it.
It is about analytic common sense, which as I get older, find something lacking these days. I have grandchildren who will not eat cheese beyond the expiry date. Hey....the best cheddar cheese is that which is 10 years old. Same thing with eggs. Our ancestors used to store them over the winter because, the young hens only began laying in the spring!! Aside from having the hens living in with the cows for the heat over the winter or keeping them in the house for the duration, they could not survive our winters.
They used to store them, in a lime solution in a crock according to my mother-in-law who lived to be 85.
Not me ......You??
Yeah, I'm allergic to nuts......................................................some of the ones on the forum!
I am not the phrenology believer, it is about brain power. I look around and see the IQ sinking at an alarming rate. It seems the in-between ages say 35 and 60 seems to have become the lost brain generation.
Are you one of those who have analytic common sense, or one who in spite of all evidence to the contrary believe what a particular government or company commissioned an agency to do statistic to suit??
Which leads one to wonder why you inserted it into the conversation.
No, it's about the shape of the skull.
For values of IQ = agreement with bluebird.
My clients seem to think I'm sharp enough that they pay me very nicely.
LOL, no I didn't!! Good try though. So, in your case bone is more valuable than a decent brain?? Figures!! Oho so an engineer using his brain gets paid well, geez I wonder how I ended worth over $2,000,000.00 without an engineers degree. Like that lady on TV......"Could it be a mistake??? after all I am only a woman"
By the way none of that was inherited!! That went to those that need it more.
By the way none of that was inherited!! That went to those that need it more.
Don't see why not. I do OK without an engineering degree.
I wonder where you got that I'm an engineer. Probably the same place you get all your "facts."
So exactly what do your clients pay you for?? (PS I know what you did) Oh heck I don't give a damn how you earn your living.
Got better ways to waste my time than on film flam artists.
Got better ways to waste my time than on film flam artists.
She's beyond help... all that rambling off the subject.....
Senility is a strange thing.....
Yeah, maybe the old gal should sit back and relax with a hot cup of tea.
I take it you are asking her for help.
The students of Dr. Mark Ferris's Mathematical Statistics 460" class ask, "In how many of the homicides was the victim killed with a gun that was kept in the house rather than a gun that was brought to the house by the perpetrator?"
The question is a relevant one since, as the letter also notes, the study's authors had stated in part based on their findings that "people should be strongly discouraged from keeping guns in their homes [p. 1090]."
In other words, the students are well aware that advising people against keeping a gun in the home doesn't make sense unless it causes an increase in homicide risk.
Kellermann's first response to the students was incorrect: "Ninety-three percent of the homicides involving firearms occurred in homes where a gun was kept, according to the proxy respondents." In a follow-up letter (four years later) Kellermann acknowledges his error, but still fails to directly answer the question.
Kellermann's own data suggests that for all gun homicides of matched cases no more than 34% were murdered by a gun from the victim's home. (GunCite's analysis of Kellermann's data.) (The data, such as it is, is available at http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/cgi/archive.prl?study=6898). 34% is probably on the charitable side since it assumes all family member or intimate homicides were commited by offenders living with the victim which is highly unlikely given that not all intimates (as defined in the Kellermann dataset: spouse, parents, in-laws, siblings, other relatives, and lovers) were likely to have lived with an adult victim.
A subsequent study, again by Kellermann, of fatal and non-fatal gunshot woundings, showed that only 14.2% of the shootings involving a gun whose origins were known, involved a gun kept in the home where the shooting occurred. (Kellermann, et. al. 1998. "Injuries and deaths due to firearms in the home." Journal of Trauma 45:263-267) ("The authors reported that among those 438 assaultive gunshot woundings, 49 involved a gun 'kept in the home where the shooting occurred,' 295 involved a gun brought to the scene from elsewhere, and another 94 involved a gun whose origins were not noted by the police [p. 252].") (Kleck, Gary. "Can Owning a Gun Really Triple the Owner's Chances of Being Murdered?" Homicide Studies 5 [2001].)
Canadians are smart enough to learn from mistakes of the Americans. Guns need to remain a right, but registrations are must to ensure the accountability of guns used in crimes. Maybe guns should be registered every 3 years to prove the current ownership at any given time? Just thinking out loud here.
Some Canadians maybe, but from what I have seen from some of the posters here, when upset, it is recommended to string up people before trial and/or simply shoot them.
rRght boomer?? To heck with a trial, investigation, just do away with all that stuff.