Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > Community Center > The Lounge > Current Events, Philosophy, & Religion
Register Blogging Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-06-2013, 05:26 PM   #41 (permalink)
Registered Jimmy Rustler
 
Dr_Rez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 5,187
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Larehip View Post
Do it yourself, I got the 43 figure right off the internet. You think I made it up? Look it up and take your pick of your source so I don't have to hear how I cherry-picked the data.
Yea because it is my responsibility as the reader to find the sources for things when reading claims like you said above....You look it up since you brought it up and are claiming it as true. And as 216 said, that has got to be the most BS stat I have ever seen.
__________________
*Best chance of losing virginity is in prison crew*
*Always Checks Credentials Crew*
*nba > nfl crew*
*Shave one of my legs to pretend its a girl in my bed crew*
*Flakes on Dates to go Hoop crew*

Power: Yamaha Rx-v363
Speakers:2 Boston Acoustics A100's, 2 Pioneer HPM-60's
Headphones: Audio Technica M50, Sony MDR-XB500
Dr_Rez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2013, 06:15 PM   #42 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 895
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by butthead aka 216 View Post
what do u mean it doesnt impress you?? you dont think someone should be able to defend themselves?

and i will say that your stat you gave is really misleading.

usage of guns in self defense stats range from 65,000 per year to 2.5 million per year. (gun control lefties use the smaller number, NRA righties use the high number).

from numbes ive found, about 3800 ppl died from accidental gun death in a 5 year span.


so:

1 year: 65,000-2.5million guns used in self defense
5 years: 3800 accidental deaths


so i cant overstate how misleading your stats are

link1link2
Try out this stat:

The following is from a pro-gun website:

Regardless of which counts of homicides by police are used, the results indicate that civilians legally kill far more felons than police officers do. The figures imply that, of 24,614 civilian (not by police) homicide deaths in the United States in 1990, about 1400 to 3200, or 5.6% to 13.0% were legal civilian defensive homicides.
http://www.pulpless.com/gunclock/kleck2.html

There are no stats I can find related to numbers of intruders killed in the home but if we use the above stat from any and all justifiable homicides of 1400-3200 a year, take a mean average of 2300, and spread that over five years, it means that there about 11,000 justifiable homicides in five years. That means accidental deaths in the home over a five year period (3800) is a whopping 33% of ALL the justifiable homicides that occurred in that same period! Now remember that "justifiable" includes very questionable shootings like the Trayvon Martin case but even if Martin deserved to be killed, he wasn't an intruder breaking into a home. In fact, if the majority of justifiable homicides were the killings of intruders, I wouldn't be having such a hard time finding a statistic for it. The fact that it doesn't appear that this stat exists indicates how little it happens.

Further, the fact that legal civilian defensive homicides only account for 5.6%-13% of all the non-police homicides in a single year, shows that number of justifiable homicide gun deaths is exceedingly small--the rest is murder, suicide and accidents. Remove 3200 pennies from a pile of 24,600 and see how much of a difference it makes.

Owning a gun at home substantially increase the risk of death by firearm to everyone in the home. It turns out that suicide is the leading cause of death for Americans who have purchased a handgun within the previous year. (data published in the New England Journal of Medicine – Wintermute GJ. NEJM. 2008; 358:1421-4). Like cigarette smoke, owning a firearm has deleterious effects on everyone in the home, not just on the one who purchased the gun. Writing in the peer-reviewed journal Annals of Emergency Medicine, Dr. Wiebe reported on a case-controlled study in which household were matched on a number of demographic factors, and then incidences of gun violence were compared. They found that people who keep a gun in their home are almost twice as likely to die in a gun-related homicide, and that the risk was especially greater for women: women living in a home where there is a gun are almost three times more likely to die in a gun-related homicide than men similarly situated. The risk of killing oneself using a gun was almost 17 times greater for persons who live in a home where there is a gun, compared to those in homes without guns. (Wiebe D. Annals of Emergency Medicine. 2003; 41:771-82).

Gun enthusiasts like to claim that keeping a gun handy protects them and their family from violent intruders. The study by Wiebe shows that having a gun at home is associated with an increased risk of dying by gunfire, so gun ownership does not appear to be protective of violent firearms-related killings. But the Wiebe study was also able to compute the likelihood of dying by violence other than gunfire. They found there was no relationship between owning a gun and homicide by means other than a gun. In other words, having a gun around is not associated with a decreased risk of homicide of any sort. The study could find no empiric evidence that owning a gun confers some protection on a household from homicide. To my knowledge, there is no peer-reviewed study published anywhere that provides evidence that guns or gun ownership protects individuals from death or injury. If anyone reading this knows of such a study, I hope they will tell me so I can go read that study.


Daily Kos: Statistics, Guns, and Wishful Thinking

Unintentional Deaths and Injuries
In 2010, unintentional firearm injuries caused the deaths of 606 people.18
From 2005-2010, almost 3,800 people in the U.S. died from unintentional shootings.
Over 1,300 victims of unintentional shootings for the period 2005–2010 were under 25 years of age.
People of all age groups are significantly more likely to die from unintentional firearm injuries when they live in states with more guns, relative to states with fewer guns. On average, states with the highest gun levels had nine times the rate of unintentional firearms deaths compared to states with the lowest gun levels.
A federal government study of unintentional shootings found that 8% of such shooting deaths resulted from shots fired by children under the age of six.
The U.S. General Accounting Office has estimated that 31% of unintentional deaths caused by firearms might be prevented by the addition of two devices: a child-proof safety lock (8%) and a loading indicator (23%).

Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence

Last edited by Lord Larehip; 09-06-2013 at 06:23 PM.
Lord Larehip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2013, 06:19 PM   #43 (permalink)
Registered Jimmy Rustler
 
Dr_Rez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 5,187
Default

Ok so what is your point? No one should have a gun because some people shoot themselves? That is called Darwinism. And bringing up gun suicide...why shouldnt I have the right to kill myself with whatever I please?
__________________
*Best chance of losing virginity is in prison crew*
*Always Checks Credentials Crew*
*nba > nfl crew*
*Shave one of my legs to pretend its a girl in my bed crew*
*Flakes on Dates to go Hoop crew*

Power: Yamaha Rx-v363
Speakers:2 Boston Acoustics A100's, 2 Pioneer HPM-60's
Headphones: Audio Technica M50, Sony MDR-XB500
Dr_Rez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2013, 06:40 PM   #44 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 895
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rezdaddy Longlegs View Post
Ok so what is your point? No one should have a gun because some people shoot themselves? That is called Darwinism. And bringing up gun suicide...why shouldnt I have the right to kill myself with whatever I please?
My point is that guns in the home don't keep you safe. In fact, you are more at risk. And if you factor in school shootings, most of those students got the guns from home (Sandy Hook) or the home of a nearby relative (Jonesboro). This would tell us that guns in the home put people outside that home at risk as well if they live in the same community.

The argument that if guns were banned only criminals would have guns is a very reasonable trade-off for me. Compare having to worry about being shot in a dispute in which I am not involved, by a troubled kid who took his dad's gun to shoot people at random, getting killed by some moron cleaning or toying around with his gun while it was loaded, by a child handling a loaded gun because the idiot parents have no concept of gun safety or being killed by a criminal to just being killed by a criminal. So the argument that only criminals would have guns greatly increases my chances of never being shot.

Criminals a re less likely to shoot you when holding you up. For the record, I was robbed at gunpoint by a guy in a ski mask. We gave him what he wanted and he left. Those kids at Sandy Hook or Columbine or Jonesboro weren't shown that courtesy by a person who wasn't a criminal. So, yes, I'd rather the only people who had guns were cops and criminals.
Lord Larehip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2013, 06:53 PM   #45 (permalink)
Registered Jimmy Rustler
 
Dr_Rez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 5,187
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Larehip View Post
My point is that guns in the home don't keep you safe. In fact, you are more at risk. And if you factor in school shootings, most of those students got the guns from home (Sandy Hook) or the home of a nearby relative (Jonesboro). This would tell us that guns in the home put people outside that home at risk as well if they live in the same community.

The argument that if guns were banned only criminals would have guns is a very reasonable trade-off for me. Compare having to worry about being shot in a dispute in which I am not involved, by a troubled kid who took his dad's gun to shoot people at random, getting killed by some moron cleaning or toying around with his gun while it was loaded, by a child handling a loaded gun because the idiot parents have no concept of gun safety or being killed by a criminal to just being killed by a criminal. So the argument that only criminals would have guns greatly increases my chances of never being shot.

Criminals a re less likely to shoot you when holding you up. For the record, I was robbed at gunpoint by a guy in a ski mask. We gave him what he wanted and he left. Those kids at Sandy Hook or Columbine or Jonesboro weren't shown that courtesy by a person who wasn't a criminal. So, yes, I'd rather the only people who had guns were cops and criminals.
Honestly your stance makes me sick.

please watch this video it is exactly how I feel.
__________________
*Best chance of losing virginity is in prison crew*
*Always Checks Credentials Crew*
*nba > nfl crew*
*Shave one of my legs to pretend its a girl in my bed crew*
*Flakes on Dates to go Hoop crew*

Power: Yamaha Rx-v363
Speakers:2 Boston Acoustics A100's, 2 Pioneer HPM-60's
Headphones: Audio Technica M50, Sony MDR-XB500
Dr_Rez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2013, 09:45 PM   #46 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: freely swimmin thru the waters of glory much like a majestic bald eagle soars thru the skies
Posts: 1,385
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Larehip View Post
My point is that guns in the home don't keep you safe. In fact, you are more at risk. And if you factor in school shootings, most of those students got the guns from home (Sandy Hook) or the home of a nearby relative (Jonesboro). This would tell us that guns in the home put people outside that home at risk as well if they live in the same community.

The argument that if guns were banned only criminals would have guns is a very reasonable trade-off for me. Compare having to worry about being shot in a dispute in which I am not involved, by a troubled kid who took his dad's gun to shoot people at random, getting killed by some moron cleaning or toying around with his gun while it was loaded, by a child handling a loaded gun because the idiot parents have no concept of gun safety or being killed by a criminal to just being killed by a criminal. So the argument that only criminals would have guns greatly increases my chances of never being shot.

Criminals a re less likely to shoot you when holding you up. For the record, I was robbed at gunpoint by a guy in a ski mask. We gave him what he wanted and he left. Those kids at Sandy Hook or Columbine or Jonesboro weren't shown that courtesy by a person who wasn't a criminal. So, yes, I'd rather the only people who had guns were cops and criminals.

i will go thru your other posts when i have more energy because i do find a lot of stuff that either doesnt make sense or i disagree with but i caught this post here and just have to say that is a pretty sick way of thinking.


not only would you prefer yourself not to have a gun, you would prefer only criminals have guns and no non-criminals have guns. lol ive just never heard anyone say that before its so shocking to me.

school shootings are not very common. crimes with guns are very common. yet you want those people who commit more crime to have guns and nobody else. like you want the worst people in society to have the most weaponry. its like the opposite of everything ive ever heard anyone say. cmon man u can be real on this.
butthead aka 216 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2013, 10:03 PM   #47 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 895
Default

So Rez and 216,

Tell us how many people you've shot in self-defense.
Lord Larehip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2013, 11:03 PM   #48 (permalink)
Registered Jimmy Rustler
 
Dr_Rez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 5,187
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Larehip View Post
So Rez and 216,

Tell us how many people you've shot in self-defense.
Wow, another great comment.

Why not ask how many rounds have you practiced with in the guns you own? Are you familiar with the firearm and all of its workings and safety aspects?

Did you watch the video I posted? It answered nearly every absurd claim and comment you brought up. What is your knowledge of firearms or experience with them first hand, other than just saying someone at one point pointed one at me and robbed me.
__________________
*Best chance of losing virginity is in prison crew*
*Always Checks Credentials Crew*
*nba > nfl crew*
*Shave one of my legs to pretend its a girl in my bed crew*
*Flakes on Dates to go Hoop crew*

Power: Yamaha Rx-v363
Speakers:2 Boston Acoustics A100's, 2 Pioneer HPM-60's
Headphones: Audio Technica M50, Sony MDR-XB500
Dr_Rez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2013, 11:16 PM   #49 (permalink)
Crazyyyyyy Train
 
Celladorina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,832
Default

I keep seeing your name as lord lardship! But yeah your stance is rather silly, let's make sure all criminals are armed so we are more likely to be robbed or killed.
Celladorina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2013, 11:41 PM   #50 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,016
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rezdaddy Longlegs View Post
Honestly your stance makes me sick.

please watch this video it is exactly how I feel.
I don't necessarily disagree with him about gun free zones, but I'd be careful about extending this logic to gun control/gun bans in general. Gun free zones don't work precisely because of the abundance of guns.

In regard to his claim that eliminating guns doesn't eliminate violence, but merely changes it: I hear this a lot, but one thing people never seem to consider is that it might be a change for the better. Crime statistics for England vs America show that restricting access to guns does at least correlate with lower murder rates. I don't think the discrepancy can be explained in any other way.

For example London has an extremely high crime rate, roughly 4x that of NYC in most categories of violent crime IIRC, yet a significantly lower murder rate. In my opinion, the only reasonable explanation for this is that guns are efficient tools for killing and criminals in London have less access to guns than they do in NYC.

The idea that murder-by-knife or some other weapon will fill the gap if guns are eliminated clearly seems to be untrue by these statistics. Probably because it's a lot harder to stab someone to death than it is to shoot them to death.

Last edited by John Wilkes Booth; 09-06-2013 at 11:55 PM.
John Wilkes Booth is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads



2003-2019 Advameg, Inc.

SEO by vBSEO 3.5.2 ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.