[Coco with marshmallows]

Technically, a mass shooting is 4 or more victims, therefore, 2.5 victims isn't a mass shooting, more a shoot out.

Secondly, he doesn't provide proof for that particular statement either, unless you give me quantifiable evidence, its essentially hearsay, no better than "he said, she said" - what are the statistics based on?

Let me give an example

In the article, the author makes the following statement:

"Gun Free Zones are hunting preserves for innocent people. Period."

I live in a country that's a Gun Free Zone (UK - its not actually entirely gun free, farmers & vets have shotguns/rifles and target/sport shooters have pistols/rifles, etc).

We suffer a per 100,000 capita death rate of 0.25 attributable to guns (source Here European Mortality database)

By contrast, the US has a per 100,000 capita death rate of 10.2 (sources here - CDC on mortality rates) and here - another CDC source)

Going on that basis, the per capita death rate attributable to guns is FORTY TIMES HIGHER in the US. That's not rhetoric, or rumour, or guess, its simple fact.

However, its a slanted fact, as that figure includes ALL gun deaths - INCLUDING suicides/accidental. So how about the murder rates?

US is 3.7 per 100,000, UK is 0.04 = you are NINETY TWO AND A HALF times more likely to be murdered with a gun in a country where guns are legal (US) as opposed to not (UK)

Therefore, let me rebut his sentence. He states:

"Gun Free Zones are hunting preserves for innocent people. Period."

With the following adjustment:

"Gun Free Zones are hunting preserves for innocent people - IF GUNS ARE EASILY AND LEGALLY OBTAINABLE THE NEXT TOWN OVER INSTEAD."

[pathos]

Surely this is a bit in bad taste?


http://www.news24.co...-in-US-20130107

[Phere]

Wow, I just can't believe some of the posts on the subject. Thankfully, the majority here seem to possess the ability to look at the big picture. I don't care if Nico was a troll or a genuine forum member, but he absolutely turned my stomach. You know, aside from the prevalent Good 'Ol Boys, there have been a few thoughtful, intelligent responses to the Sandy Hook tragedy by actual gun owners. People who would be willing to draw a line - a line that should have been drawn a long time ago. I will be attending a town meeting hosted by our congressman, Mike Thompson, on the subject of gun control tomorrow evening. While I dread the prevalent 'Good 'Ol Boy' mentality in my town (of which there are PLENTY), I am looking forward to seeing how this will play out. As I previously stated, this is real for me. This tragedy has not diminished as the days have passed - it is time for action and while the ideologists squawk, I am taking a step beyond ideology and attempting to form a rational, PEACEFUL society for my child's future. To the NRA and its stupidity-spewing poster boys; bring it on. Bring it ON. All La Pierre has done is render himself and his organization moot on all further serious discussions on the subject of rational, realistic gun control. I refuse to sit idly. SO, best wishes to all those who have moved on - who have forgotten those bright little faces and the caring teachers. I haven't - millions others haven't.

[worry]

pathos, on 08 January 2013 - 06:14 AM, said:

Surely this is a bit in bad taste?


http://www.news24.co...-in-US-20130107

It's a pretty good snapshot of the NRA-style mentality (including it's ever-ever-ever-bubbling just below the surface racism):
"The Obama administration has shown that it is more than willing to trample the Constitution to impose its dictates upon the American people," said Gun Appreciation Day chairperson Larry Ward.

Challenge this man to name a single bit of legislation the Obama admin put forward about gun control -- even what reasonable people would consider mild -- and he'd come up with next to nothing. He didn't even pursue the ban on assault rifles.

[Obdigore]

worrywort, on 08 January 2013 - 06:39 AM, said:

pathos, on 08 January 2013 - 06:14 AM, said:

Surely this is a bit in bad taste?


http://www.news24.co...-in-US-20130107

It's a pretty good snapshot of the NRA-style mentality (including it's ever-ever-ever-bubbling just below the surface racism):
"The Obama administration has shown that it is more than willing to trample the Constitution to impose its dictates upon the American people," said Gun Appreciation Day chairperson Larry Ward.

Challenge this man to name a single bit of legislation the Obama admin put forward about gun control -- even what reasonable people would consider mild -- and he'd come up with next to nothing. He didn't even pursue the ban on assault rifles.

Oh come on Worry. You know rhetoric is more important than facts in the minds of the right wing.

[Tapper]

Nicodimas, on 07 January 2013 - 09:50 PM, said:

Good little article for a read:
http://1389blog.com/...ce-and-for-all/

Quote

The average number of people shot in a mass shooting event when the shooter is stopped by law enforcement: 14. The average number of people shot in a mass shooting event when the shooter is stopped by civilians: 2.5. The reason is simple. The armed civilians are there when it started.

Quote

Oregon. NOT a gun free zone. Shooter confronted by permit holder. Shooter commits suicide. Only a few casualties.
Texas. NOT a gun free zone. Shooter killed immediately by off duty cop. Only a few casualties.
Connecticut. GUN FREE ZONE. Shooters kills until the police arrive. Suicide. 26 dead.
China. GUN FREE COUNTRY. A guy with a KNIFE stabs 22 children.

Quote

That mass killer used a gun and homemade explosives. Make guns harder to get, and explosives become the weapon of choice. Please do keep in mind that the largest and most advanced military coalition in human history was basically stymied for a decade by a small group using high school level chemistry and the Afghani equivalent to Radio Shack.

At the least this article is written by someone with a spell-checker. But, to quote:

Quote

The teachers are there already. The school staff is there already. Their reaction time is measured in seconds, not minutes. They can serve as your immediate violent response. Best case scenario, they engage and stop the attacker, or it bursts his fantasy bubble and he commits suicide. Worst case scenario, the armed staff provides a distraction, and while he’s concentrating on killing them, he’s not killing more children.

But teachers aren’t as trained as police officers! True, yet totally irrelevant. The teacher doesn’t need to be a SWAT cop or Navy SEAL. They need to be speed bumps.

It sounds so reasonable. This good man is proposing that a teacher should be willing and able to give his/her life for their pupils - it practically becomes a job requirement. He is expecting them to go in cool and collected, willing to die to buy time. He is saying they 'are speed bumps'. In a military term, that's cannonfodder. It is the ill-fed french regiments that bore the brunt of the gun- and cannon fire before the Old Guard marched in.

And if an armed teacher freezes, or a child dies by friendly fire, what will happen? Will they be sued?
And it will happen. Your guru says so himself:

Quote

Also, you’re going to miss. It is going to happen. If you can shoot pretty little groups at the range, those groups are going to expand dramatically under the stress and adrenalin. The more you train, the better you will do, but you can still may miss, or the bad guy may end up hiding behind something which your bullets don’t penetrate. Nobody has ever survived a gunfight and then said afterwards, “Darn, I wish I hadn’t brought all that extra ammo.”

The bad guy may also be hiding behind a child.

[Tattersail_]

Personally I think they should be made illegal. They never will. Never.

I think a lot of people with common sense would say "make them illegal". Yet there is a lot of politics behind this and "votes" are needed which can always be swayed. Someone can make false promises about getting rid of them but they'll never act upon this.


Do we know where these people got their guns from? That would be interesting to know.

If drugs were legal, people would pay tax on them and therefore help out the economy (maybe) could this be seen as the same argument as the guns illegal/legal one? They both kill people.

[Tattersail_]

By the way I'm responding to

Quote

Connecticut shooting, guns, and wtf to do

in the above post.




Now i am going to have a read through.

[Tattersail_]

HoosierDaddy, on 15 December 2012 - 01:16 AM, said:

Just like there will always be someone willing to do anything to get a gun, there will always be someone finally shrugging out of their sanity. If guns are not so easily attainable these instances go down because they are much harder to actually do.

I agree mental health needs to be considered, but as long as there is nearly one gun for every person in the country, nothing can stop this. Nothing. You HAVE to get the guns. It is the ONLY actual solution with a chance to work most of the time.

I agree with this.

[Tattersail_]

Primateus, on 15 December 2012 - 09:20 AM, said:

How about something a bit more simple to start out with at least. You drive a car you MUST have your license and registration with you. You want to own a gun you MUST have a license and registration, you want to carry your gun with you, then you must have said license and registration on your person. If you don't have that, your weapon is illegal and will be confiscated. If you DO have it, but forgot it at home, your weapon will confiscated and returned to you until such a time as you have paid a sizable fine.

And talking about registration. Do you guys have to registrate your firearms with the authorities? If not, how about making that mandatory?

Oh, and I don't really care what argument people want to whip out, private citizens do NOT need assault rifles, of ANY kind! Heck, they don't even need high-powered sniper rifles.

"But Primateus, I need my high-powered sniper rifle so I can hunt deer!" Then get a fucking hunting rifle! Or be a real man (apologies ladies) and hunt with a bow/crossbow/spear.

I agree with Sombra, the majority of gunowners don't need firearms, they just want them. And that's fine with me, by all means. Heck, I wouldn't mind owning a couple of handguns and go to the shooting range once in a while to have some fun, but I don't need it.

Oh, and sure, you can kill people, lots of people with a knife if you're determined enough, but guns makes it easier. In fact, it makes it too easy.

Oh, and finally, just for the record. If you're one of those "I need guns to protect myself from the big bad government" then you're a paranoid fuckwit who should be banned from owning guns. And don't give me that "keep telling yourself that the government isn't coming for you" bullshit. It's ridiculous, I'll bet your good money that the very same people who claim the government will become oppressive and dictatorial are the very same people who will make a government that is those things.

OH OH OH OH OH, I KNOW! How about when you want to sell your snubnosed revolver, or whatever, to your buddy you have to fill out a bill of sale. Forms for that could available at your nearest convenient (and certified) gun store, or at the police station. After the sale you then submit that form, or bill of sale if you will, to the proper authorities.

Oh, and how about some serious bullet control? Yes, gun-control probably includes that. But how about when you buy bullets, at your nearest convenient and certified gun store, you show your license and registration and the sale gets registered with the proper authorities. And just to make it really annoying, how about a requirement that you keep a record of how many bullets you use and when and where? And how about requiring people to pick of the bullet casing for rycycling after a fun day at the range? (I hope people already do that, because it would just be silly not to do it)

The good part about all this is that should the big bad government really try and oppress you, none of these measures prevents you from blowing their heads off.

Primateus for Presidency!!

Solutions people. This is good work. I vote him

[Silencer]

Please, please, do not go through this 350-post thread and quote every post that you think is good/worthy of a one-line response and post them individually. At the very least group them under one post by using multiquote/right-click quote and open in a new tab then copy+paste into one reply. Please. XD

[Tattersail_]

D, on 15 December 2012 - 10:51 PM, said:

nacht, on 15 December 2012 - 09:55 PM, said:

Mexico has gun control and the only people who suffer are the people who don't have them to defend themselves. The death count in the drug wars there is horrific. Pull out a gun in USA to threaten somebody and you are liable to get yourself killed. That is why they are often hidden by the people.

Not a very reasonable example. What gun control there is on paper in Mexico is not necessarily very well enforced, especially in the areas that are practically run by the drug cartels.

Better examples would be, say, Japan where gun control is extremely strict and there are around 0 to 20 gun-related deaths per year, rather than the hundreds of the U.S.

Or even compare to Canada - arguably the most similar culture to the U.S. - where there is some gun control but it is still pretty easy to get a gun if you want to (basically you just need to go through the process of getting a license, but almost anyone can). With just the basic control of needing to get a license for your guns, the homicide rate per 100 000 capita in Canada is 0.76, rather than 2.98 in the US.

Is there an age restriction? That may help but I don't know.

[Tattersail_]

Silencer, on 08 January 2013 - 12:12 PM, said:

Please, please, do not go through this 350-post thread and quote every post that you think is good/worthy of a one-line response and post them individually. At the very least group them under one post by using multiquote/right-click quote and open in a new tab then copy+paste into one reply. Please. XD

My ears are burning red right now, i'll er, stop.

[Illuyankas]

Haha, I was having flashbacks to OT doing just that for 14 posts in a row, glad you got caught.

[Primateus]

Tattersail, on 08 January 2013 - 12:15 PM, said:

Silencer, on 08 January 2013 - 12:12 PM, said:

Please, please, do not go through this 350-post thread and quote every post that you think is good/worthy of a one-line response and post them individually. At the very least group them under one post by using multiquote/right-click quote and open in a new tab then copy+paste into one reply. Please. XD

My ears are burning red right now, i'll er, stop.

C'mon, do it! DO IT! DO ITTTT!

You know you want to!

[Tsundoku]

Ahhh, foaming-at-the-mouth yeehaws.

http://www.news.com....v-1226550059067

This post has been edited by Sombra: 09 January 2013 - 01:25 AM

[King Lear]

I'd probably pay money to see a redneck punch Piers Morgan in the face.

[worry]

Yah that would be pretty awesome. Alex Jones isn't a redneck though, he's a New World Order conspiracy guy with a pretty strong following. He's also the dude behind Infowars and Prison Planet. He might be small potatoes next to Rush Limbaugh, but he's still got genuine, genuinely frightening influence.

[Silencer]

Daily Show on the matter.

Pretty funny. Also fairly excellent at pointing out how absurd some of the pro-Gun stuff that is coming out of this is.

ETA: The follow-up videos are pretty good too, imo.

[worry]

A counterargument:
http://livewire.talk...ver-gun-control