Gun Control is Completely Useless.

[Tecumsehsbones]

Just though maybe a bunch of stats that give actual facts on gun violence. No comparisons. Just the facts.


Kevork Djansezian / Getty Images file
People wait to be reunited with loved ones after a school shooting at Gardena High School on January 18, 2011 in Gardena, Calif. According to reports, a student had brought a gun into school in a backpack and the weapon accidentally fired, injuring two students.

By NBC News staff
As lawmakers at the state and federal level weigh various measures to stem gun violence, here are some facts and figures on guns and crime, compiled by the NBC News research department.
The big picture:

• Every year in the U.S., an average of more than 100,000 people are shot, according to The Brady Campaign To Prevent Gun Violence.
• Every day in the U.S., an average of 289 people are shot. Eighty-six of them die: 30 are murdered, 53 kill themselves, two die accidentally, and one is shot in a police intervention, the Brady Campaign reports.
• Between 2000 and 2010, a total of 335,609 people died from guns -- more than the population of St. Louis, Mo. (318,069), Pittsburgh (307,484), Cincinnati, Ohio (296,223), Newark, N.J. (277,540), and Orlando, Fla. (243,195) (sources: CDF, U.S. Census; CDC)
• One person is killed by a firearm every 17 minutes, 87 people are killed during an average day, and 609 are killed every week. (source: CDC)

Homicides by weapon:

• Handguns comprised 72.5 percent of the firearms used in murder and non-negligent manslaughter incidents in 2011; 4.1 percent were with shotguns; 3.8 percent were with rifles; 18.5 percent were with unspecified firearms.
• 13.3 percent of homicides were done with knives or other cutting instruments.
• 5.8 percent of homicides were from the use of hands, fists, feet, etc. (source: FBI)

Guns and kids:

• 82 children under five years old died from firearms in 2010 compared with 58 law enforcement officers killed by firearms in the line of duty (sources: CDF, CDC, FBI)
• More kids ages 0-19 died from firearms every three days in 2010 than died in the 2012 Newtown, Conn., massacre (source:CDF, CDC)
• Nearly three times more kids (15,576) were injured by firearms in 2010 than the number of U.S. soldiers (5,247) wounded in action that year in the war in Afghanistan (source: CDF, CDC, Department of Defense)
• Half of all juveniles murdered in 2010 were killed with a firearm (source: Office of Juvenile Justice & Delinquency Prevention)

A bit different looking at it from another point of view.....right?? Imagine your child, grandchild, husband, wife, or parents as any of those victims. Now keep justifying freedom to strap a gun to the waist, laying one on the seat of a car, or keeping one close to the door loaded and ready for action "in case a bad guy comes to the door"

Yeah, so what? Putting governors on cars to make them incapable of exceeding 50 mph (80 kph) would save more lives than banning guns, even assuming you could get rid of the quarter of a billion guns currently in the U.S.

I couldn't help but notice you didn't address that little point. I'd love to hear your ideas for how to round up a quarter of a billion guns.

 

[bluebyrd35]

Yeah, so what? Putting governors on cars to make them incapable of exceeding 50 mph (80 kph) would save more lives than banning guns, even assuming you could get rid of the quarter of a billion guns currently in the U.S.

I couldn't help but notice you didn't address that little point. I'd love to hear your ideas for how to round up a quarter of a billion guns.

There are many ways of cutting down the guns already in circulation. An ongoing campaign on the dangers of leaving arms not locked up, along with deglamorizing guns. I am not sure how many of those who base their self-worth on their protective prowess with weaponry, realize that on the whole the majority of people prefer intelligence and thoughtfulness.


For those who want to have a collection of guns.......removing the firing pins is another solution. I am not against hunting or rifles however, I do feel repeating rifles are not sporting. Even paying a minimum amount per gun turned in to be destroyed would help. Perhaps before issuing a license for any gun, not a hunting rifle, the one applying spend time helping on a children's or adult's ward for survivors of gunshot wounds. Of course, this would only work in fair sized cities. Still, it would help the health care system as well as pointing out that guns are not toys.


These are just ideas from the top of my head. I am sure there are people with much better ideas than mine, who given the chance could come up with many good ways of reducing the huge supply of guns floating about in the US. Anyway, I am really tired of dealing with this topic. I remember when several farm families around here lost children and family members to guns and saw the devastation it caused.

Yeah, so what? Putting governors on cars to make them incapable of exceeding 50 mph (80 kph) would save more lives than banning guns, even assuming you could get rid of the quarter of a billion guns currently in the U.S.

I couldn't help but notice you didn't address that little point. I'd love to hear your ideas for how to round up a quarter of a billion guns.

Oh by the way, most transport truck, semi's etc. are supposed to have governors on them. Caught without them or modifying them costs big bucks. I am not sure but I think the limit is 100 km on highways. 50 km is 30 miles per hour (about) which would cause more accidents than it prevented.

 

[JLM]

There are many ways of cutting down the guns already in circulation. An ongoing campaign on the dangers of leaving arms not locked up, along with deglamorizing guns. I am not sure how many of those who base their self-worth on their protective prowess with weaponry, realize that on the whole the majority of people prefer intelligence and thoughtfulness.


For those who want to have a collection of guns.......removing the firing pins is another solution. I am not against hunting or rifles however, I do feel repeating rifles are not sporting. Even paying a minimum amount per gun turned in to be destroyed would help. Perhaps before issuing a license for any gun, not a hunting rifle, the one applying spend time helping on a children's or adult's ward for survivors of gunshot wounds. Of course, this would only work in fair sized cities. Still, it would help the health care system as well as pointing out that guns are not toys.


These are just ideas from the top of my head. I am sure there are people with much better ideas than mine, who given the chance could come up with many good ways of reducing the huge supply of guns floating about in the US. Anyway, I am really tired of dealing with this topic. I remember when several farm families around here lost children and family members to guns and saw the devastation it caused.


Oh by the way, most transport truck, semi's etc. are supposed to have governors on them. Caught without them or modifying them costs big bucks. I am not sure but I think the limit is 100 km on highways. 50 km is 30 miles per hour (about) which would cause more accidents than it prevented.

Guns aren't the problem, Bluebyrd, it's the idiots that get a hold of them!

 

[EagleSmack]

Damn good thing, too. Musket violence t is at an all-time high (except for when muskets actually were the "assault weapon" of the day). And everybody knows former Marines are just looking for a tower to climb.

Yes we've always had a thing for rappelling and towers are good in lieu of copters.

You dang musketeers. Holding up convenience stores and the like.

What kind ya git ?;-)

I got an Enfield .50 cal.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

There are many ways of cutting down the guns already in circulation.

Yes, that's what I'm asking. What exactly are those ways?

An ongoing campaign on the dangers of leaving arms not locked up, along with deglamorizing guns. I am not sure how many of those who base their self-worth on their protective prowess with weaponry, realize that on the whole the majority of people prefer intelligence and thoughtfulness.

Still waiting. . .

For those who want to have a collection of guns.......removing the firing pins is another solution. I am not against hunting or rifles however, I do feel repeating rifles are not sporting. Even paying a minimum amount per gun turned in to be destroyed would help. Perhaps before issuing a license for any gun, not a hunting rifle, the one applying spend time helping on a children's or adult's ward for survivors of gunshot wounds. Of course, this would only work in fair sized cities. Still, it would help the health care system as well as pointing out that guns are not toys.

Still waiting. . .

These are just ideas from the top of my head. I am sure there are people with much better ideas than mine, who given the chance could come up with many good ways of reducing the huge supply of guns floating about in the US. Anyway, I am really tired of dealing with this topic. I remember when several farm families around here lost children and family members to guns and saw the devastation it caused.

I'll ask again. Even if you ban guns entirely, what do you do about the quarter of a billion guns in private hands in the U.S.? You've given me a bunch of feel-good, kum ba ya crap, none of which even begins to answer the question.

Oh by the way, most transport truck, semi's etc. are supposed to have governors on them. Caught without them or modifying them costs big bucks. I am not sure but I think the limit is 100 km on highways. 50 km is 30 miles per hour (about) which would cause more accidents than it prevented.

Of course it would. You know that because it's Da Troof.

By the way, nobody, repeat nobody, suggested a 50 kph limit. I hope you understand that when you make up something in your head, ascribe it to me, then argue against it, you are really just talking to yourself. And you don't need a computer to do that. You can save Mother Gaia by sitting in the corner mumbling arguments to yourself and pretend you're addressing somebody else.

 

[Nuggler]

Yes we've always had a thing for rappelling and towers are good in lieu of copters.




I got an Enfield .50 cal.

Makes a BIG hole8O

Cap or flintlock?. I know about zero about old guns - or new ones for that matter. Well.............maybe shotguns.

 

[bluebyrd35]

Guns aren't the problem, Bluebyrd, it's the idiots that get a hold of them!

By accepting that premise, it means that there are so many more American idiots than are living in the rest of the civilized world. After all, mustn't blame the ridiculous amount of guns available, blame a population of idiots?? Something wrong there surely!!

Yes, that's what I'm asking. What exactly are those ways?


Still waiting. . .


Still waiting. . .



I'll ask again. Even if you ban guns entirely, what do you do about the quarter of a billion guns in private hands in the U.S.? You've given me a bunch of feel-good, kum ba ya crap, none of which even begins to answer the question.


Of course it would. You know that because it's Da Troof.

By the way, nobody, repeat nobody, suggested a 50 kph limit. I hope you understand that when you make up something in your head, ascribe it to me, then argue against it, you are really just talking to yourself. And you don't need a computer to do that. You can save Mother Gaia by sitting in the corner mumbling arguments to yourself and pretend you're addressing somebody else.

Ah so.....it's back to attack the messenger. I gave you several ways of diminishing the many guns floating about the US but hey, not my fault you don't think anything would work. A lot of the world thinks differently. What happened to all that American know-how?? Has it got up and gone. By the way how close are you to melt down?? Much better to debate gun-control on line in my view.





As far as that governor red herring goes, why bother to drag it in?? PS I suspect you changed it to mph after posting, but so what, it was still a red herring

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

By accepting that premise, it means that there are so many more American idiots than are living in the rest of the civilized world. After all, mustn't blame the ridiculous amount of guns available, blame a population of idiots?? Something wrong there surely!!





Ah so.....it's back to attack the messenger. I gave you several ways of diminishing the many guns floating about the US but hey, not my fault you don't think anything would work. A lot of the world thinks differently. What happened to all that American know-how?? Has it got up and gone. By the way how close are you to melt down?? Much better to debate gun-control on line in my view.

You gave me no ways of diminishing the guns floating around. You gave me some ways that, even if they work, would reduce the increase in gun ownership. None of your ways would actually get guns currently in private hands out of them.

As far as that governor red herring goes, why bother to drag it in?? PS I suspect you changed it to mph after posting, but so what, it was still a red herring

Of course you suspect that, because you are the sole possessor of Da Troof!

Here's a hint. You can't change a post without an edit statement at the bottom.

 

[EagleSmack]

Makes a BIG hole8O

Cap or flintlock?. I know about zero about old guns - or new ones for that matter. Well.............maybe shotguns.

Cap. The Enfield is real nice. It had a sleeker look than the Springfield which was more typical of that era.

 

[JamesBondo]

Geez then what was all the fuss about the long gun registration laws or those laws governing the licensing of hand guns or the laws on restricting machine guns or uzis. Since guns were restricted to those with titles and royalty, the average joe never had those rights to begin with. So we are back to privilege. In any case our version of " Bush the younger" will be gone next election, it makes no never mind. [/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]

[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]


Incorrect. You aren't back to privilege, you never left it. I had truly hoped you would take a good hard look at what I provided. oh well, it is my fault to expect an objective opponent on an internet forum.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

oh well, it is my fault to expect an objective opponent on an internet forum.

Ay-yup. No shortage of True Believers, though.

 

[JamesBondo]

By accepting that premise,...

Actually, you are free to reject that premise because Canada was already an awesome place way back in the 70s - BEFOREthe last 40 years worth of gun control.


Alas, you still haven't established that our laws are any good, especially if the US laws are causing their multi-decade trend of reduced crime to drop at a rate faster than Canada's.

 

[bluebyrd35]

Actually, you are free to reject that premise because Canada was already an awesome place way back in the 70s - BEFOREthe last 40 years worth of gun control.


Alas, you still haven't established that our laws are any good, especially if the US laws are causing their multi-decade trend of reduced crime to drop at a rate faster than Canada's.

LOL Good grief, that's it. If one in debt by a million guns and another by 5, which one do you think could reduce the most over a short time?? Bye folks,

 

[petros]

Would you live in rural Canada without a rifle or pistol in the house?

 

[bluebyrd35]

Would you live in rural Canada without a rifle or pistol in the house?

Where have you been? I do and have lived in in rural Canada since 1955......on a farm the last twenty by myself always without a gun. For 4 to 4-1/2 months I live in the US in Florida for the past 25 years.....these days by myself, mostly, except when people visit. I do not have a gun there either and have never had a time when I needed a gun. And yes I AM old but more logical and sensible than the average wanna be gun-toting cowboys that are posting here.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

And yes I AM old but more logical and sensible than the average wanna be gun-toting cowboys that are posting here.

Yep, anybody who believes gun rights are important is just a wannabe cowboy, and no doubt compensating for a small *****.

We've heard it all before. You've got no facts, no logic, and ain't long before you get to snarky ad hominems.

You and your ilk are the anti-gunners' worst enemy.

 

[petros]

Where have you been? I do and have lived in in rural Canada since 1955......on a farm the last twenty by myself always without a gun. For 4 to 4-1/2 months I live in the US in Florida for the past 25 years.....these days by myself, mostly, except when people visit. I do not have a gun there either and have never had a time when I needed a gun. And yes I AM old but more logical and sensible than the average wanna be gun-toting cowboys that are posting here.

Small town with a cop or out on a few acres with no neighbours for a mile or two?

 

[bluebyrd35]

Yep, anybody who believes gun rights are important is just a wannabe cowboy, and no doubt compensating for a small *****.

We've heard it all before. You've got no facts, no logic, and ain't long before you get to snarky ad hominems.

You and your ilk are the anti-gunners' worst enemy.

LOL. have it your way. If it makes you feel better to feel a bit better by ascribing ridiculous motives to my posts other than too loose gun laws kills more people in the US than the country loses in wars fine. Not my country.


To Pedro....



Nope - provincial police and 30 miles from Montreal. While neighbours are not close, there is a main highway running through the farm. Good try though.

 

[petros]

That's not rural that's the burbs.

 

[bluebyrd35]

That's not rural that's the burbs.

Your opinion. I have had deer in the pastures along with the dairy cows, Foxes walk under my windows and every now and then, a weasel or skunk has to be fished out of the pool. Oh and in hard times, have even found the odd person down on their luck sleeping in the hay mow or at the door wanting to trade work for food. The burbs have neighbours closer than 1/2 mile surely.