Guns - a list

[Crackerjack]

Levity. Try some. I'm sure you're not the heartless bastard you portray in this thread, cracker.

I'm supposed to be laughing at this tragedy??

And weren't you leaving?

Good night.

I hope you're not laughing.

Pull down a dictionary and look up the term "levity."

 

[saveliberty]

The real danger here is people shooting their mouths off.

 

[westwall]

Probably a wise move, but I'll indulge my friends, if you don't mind.

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.") (Kleck, Gary. "Can Owning a Gun Really Triple the Owner's Chances of Being Murdered?" Homicide Studies 5 <2001>.)

Debunking the '3 times more likely to be the victim' myth -- reprise - Democratic Underground

Secondly, no correlation was made between "independent" factors that actually may have been factors related to each other- they treated illicit drug use, having an arrest record, living alone or not, renting, having a gun, and a history of domestic abuse as independent variables without any relationship to each other. No collateral multivariate analysis was performed. The correlation to each control was not predicated on other factors, just gun ownership. They gave the same weight to a gun death in a household with someone with a previous arrest as to a gun death in a household where an intruder brought their own gun to a home invasion and shot the occupant (each weighting was independent, not cumulative). No correlation was explored for similar situations with the only difference being gun ownership.

Thirdly, there were significant differences between the study participants and the control. There was a 30% difference between home ownership vs renting between subjects and control, and a 15% difference in living alone or not. Only 48% of the control subjects were interviewed in person. Never mind that there were more users of illicit drugs, alcoholics, and persons with a history of violence in the households of the case subjects than in the households of the controls.

Finally, correlation doesn't equate to causation. They state in one place, "keeping a gun in the home was strongly and independently associated with an increased risk of homicide". "Associated with", not "causally related to". The possibility of why a gun was kept in the home was not explored nor accounted for- so a person who lives in a high crime neighborhood who may already be at higher risk of homicide death was treated the same as a person shot in a "nice" neighborhood.

Further reading (some are related to Kellermann's previous work on the subject, just to show how tortured his conclusions are):

Dave Kopel on NRO

Kellermann-Gun Ownership as a Risk Factor for Homicide in the Home

Its almost like he had a idea and created data to support his predetermined conclusion...

Not "almost like". He did and he did.

 

[saveliberty]

Probably a wise move, but I'll indulge my friends, if you don't mind.

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.") (Kleck, Gary. "Can Owning a Gun Really Triple the Owner's Chances of Being Murdered?" Homicide Studies 5 <2001>.)

Debunking the '3 times more likely to be the victim' myth -- reprise - Democratic Underground

Secondly, no correlation was made between "independent" factors that actually may have been factors related to each other- they treated illicit drug use, having an arrest record, living alone or not, renting, having a gun, and a history of domestic abuse as independent variables without any relationship to each other. No collateral multivariate analysis was performed. The correlation to each control was not predicated on other factors, just gun ownership. They gave the same weight to a gun death in a household with someone with a previous arrest as to a gun death in a household where an intruder brought their own gun to a home invasion and shot the occupant (each weighting was independent, not cumulative). No correlation was explored for similar situations with the only difference being gun ownership.

Thirdly, there were significant differences between the study participants and the control. There was a 30% difference between home ownership vs renting between subjects and control, and a 15% difference in living alone or not. Only 48% of the control subjects were interviewed in person. Never mind that there were more users of illicit drugs, alcoholics, and persons with a history of violence in the households of the case subjects than in the households of the controls.

Finally, correlation doesn't equate to causation. They state in one place, "keeping a gun in the home was strongly and independently associated with an increased risk of homicide". "Associated with", not "causally related to". The possibility of why a gun was kept in the home was not explored nor accounted for- so a person who lives in a high crime neighborhood who may already be at higher risk of homicide death was treated the same as a person shot in a "nice" neighborhood.

Further reading (some are related to Kellermann's previous work on the subject, just to show how tortured his conclusions are):

Dave Kopel on NRO

Kellermann-Gun Ownership as a Risk Factor for Homicide in the Home

Its almost like he had a idea and created data to support his predetermined conclusion...

Not "almost like". He did and he did.

Yes, but I have it in writing...

 

[jtpr312]

Let's use some facts to put a stop to this liberal nonsense.

Guns are used for self-defense between 2.1 Million and 2.5 Million times every year. The following facts from the Kleck/Gertz study, relate directly to this fact.

&#8226;In the vast majority of those self-defense cases, the citizen will only brandish the gun or fire a warning shot.
&#8226;In less than 8% of those self-defense cases will the citizen will even wound his attacker.
&#8226;Over 1.9 million of those self-defense cases involve handguns.
&#8226;As many as 500,000 of those self-defense cases occur away from home.
&#8226;Almost 10% of those self-defense cases are women defending themselves against sexual assault or abuse.
&#8226;This means that guns are used 60 times more often to protect the lives of law-abiding citizens than to take a life.
&#8226;At an estimated 263 million US population, in 1995, when the study was released, it also means that an average of 1 out of every 105 to 125 people that you know will use a gun for self-defense every year.


A 1979 Carter Justice Department study found that of more than 32,000 attempted rapes, 32% were actually committed. That number dropped to only 3% when the woman was armed. That means that an unarmed woman is more than 10 times more likely to be raped than an armed woman



Since England passed its strict gun control laws, their previously low murder rate has almost caught up to that of the USA and according to a Reuters article on October 11, 1998 most other violent crime in England has passed the US crime rates. This is also supported by an October 1998 report of the Bureau of Justice Statistics.



there were 168,881 crimes of violence where police took more than 1 hour to respond. But, there's a reason for this.

Of the just under 800,000 combined full time, sworn law enforcement officers in the U.S., in 2000, only about 150,000 were on duty on the streets at any given moment to protect a population of roughly 281 million, at that time. That means that there was one policeman to protect almost 1900 civilians in 2000. That ratio has not changed significantly in many years.

http://http://actionamerica.org/guns/guns1.shtml

 

[Wry Catcher]

Algiers man fatally shot during home invasion Monday night | NOLA.com

Liberal nonsense? This thread is not nonsense, it is simply a chronicle of life and death in America. That so many seem obsessed with attacking facts seems a bit odd, hence my use of the term gun nuts. But, in using such a pejorative I'm not including all gun owners, only the wackadoodles who think they need firepower to take on the US Military.

No where have I suggested a sane, sober and responsible adult should be deprived of their Second Amendment right to own a firearm for self defense or sport. Yet, I do believe the state and local communities have a duty to protect citizens from harm.

One method of doing so is some form of gun control. Unfortunately, the gun nuts and those who profit from the sale of firearms - and it is big business - argue guns are not the problem. Per se, they are correct; so the problem becomes how do we keep guns out of the hands of those who are not sane, sober and responsible?

That's what this thread is about. Not a liberal agenda, not nonsense, but a real problem which exists in our country and one in which the 'gun nuts' refuse to take part.

 

[saveliberty]

Instead of fighting guns, try fighting greed.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Instead of fighting guns, try fighting greed.

Guns can be regulated; greed cannot.

 

[Crackerjack]

Instead of fighting guns, try fighting greed.

Guns can be regulated; greed cannot.

Just like drugs are regulated, right?

 

[saveliberty]

Instead of fighting guns, try fighting greed.

Guns can be regulated; greed cannot.

Which is one of the big reasons guns are handy.

 

[Arthur]

Second amendment rights are one thing, frontier gun culture is another. With all the stand your ground and make my day laws America is turning into a place where citizens take the law into their own hands.

 

[Crackerjack]

Second amendment rights are one thing, frontier gun culture is another. With all the stand your ground and make my day laws America is turning into a place where citizens take the law into their own hands.

So don't bother people. Problem solved.

 

[Arthur]

On April 6, 1998, the nation's two leading news magazines featured cover photographs of a young boy with a gun. The photograph on the cover of Time magazine was of a toddler named Andrew Golden, dressed in camouflage and clutching a high-powered rifle. Newsweek featured a slightly older Andrew Golden, still in camouflage, now clutching a pistol. The two magazines chronicled the brief lives of Golden and Mitchell Johnson, boys growing up in a culture in which parents thought it a good idea to pose their three-year-olds with deadly weapons and said, "Santa gave Drew Golden a shotgun when he was six." These two children were raised with guns, and with God. Mitchell Johnson had just "made a profession of faith and decided to accept Jesus Christ as his savior." He was active in his church and impressed the adults with his piety. But the temptation of a gun can trump a claim of faith in God and all dreams of childhood innocence.

On March 24, 1998, these two boys, aged eleven and thirteen, set off the fire alarm at their school in Jonesboro, Arkansas, and then shot at the other children as they filed out of the building. Between them the boys had three rifles and seven pistols. In less than four minutes, they fired twenty-two shots, killing eleven-year-old Brittheny Varner, twelve-year-olds Natalie Brooks, Stephanie Johnson, and Paige Ann Herring, and their young teacher Shannon Wright, who was shielding one of her students. Golden and Johnson wounded ten other people, mostly children.

In the United States of America in the 1990s, two million violent crimes and twenty-four thousand murders occurred on average every year. The weapon of choice in 70 percent of these murders was a gun, and thousands more are killed by firearms every year in accidents and suicides. In a typical week, more Americans are killed with guns than in all of Western Europe in a year.

Arming America

 

[Arthur]

Second amendment rights are one thing, frontier gun culture is another. With all the stand your ground and make my day laws America is turning into a place where citizens take the law into their own hands.

So don't bother people. Problem solved.

I see. You think it's ok to kill someone if they "bother" you?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Instead of fighting guns, try fighting greed.

Guns can be regulated; greed cannot.

Just like drugs are regulated, right?

No, that's not what I posted. Apparently you're not very bright.

A gun is a product, an artifact; greed has always been an aspect of human nature. Of course in the abstact human nature can be regulated, if one wanted to live in a dystopian society and 'treat' the greedy as Alex was in A Clockwork Orange.

 

[Crackerjack]

Second amendment rights are one thing, frontier gun culture is another. With all the stand your ground and make my day laws America is turning into a place where citizens take the law into their own hands.

So don't bother people. Problem solved.

I see. You think it's ok to kill someone if they "bother" you?

I didn't say that. I'm suggesting that if you are afraid of being shot by someone in a state with laws like that, then don't mess with people there.

 

[Crackerjack]

Guns can be regulated; greed cannot.

Just like drugs are regulated, right?

No, that's not what I posted. Apparently you're not very bright.

A gun is a product, an artifact; greed has always been an aspect of human nature. Of course in the abstact human nature can be regulated, if one wanted to live in a dystopian society and 'treat' the greedy as Alex was in A Clockwork Orange.

So are drugs. See the analogy?

 

[Arthur]

It's ok. We're just expressing our political postions, which differ from each other.

 

[Spoonman]

Second amendment rights are one thing, frontier gun culture is another. With all the stand your ground and make my day laws America is turning into a place where citizens take the law into their own hands.

the law is handcuffed by restrictions protecting the criminals. you have no choice but to protect yourself

 

[Wry Catcher]

Just like drugs are regulated, right?

No, that's not what I posted. Apparently you're not very bright.

A gun is a product, an artifact; greed has always been an aspect of human nature. Of course in the abstact human nature can be regulated, if one wanted to live in a dystopian society and 'treat' the greedy as Alex was in A Clockwork Orange.

So are drugs. See the analogy?

I see the comparison, but: There is no Second Amendment right to drugs; of course there is no Constitutional authority granted to Congress to regulate drugs either. Drugs are regulated by the Executive Branch, the DOJ promolgates regulations and in the case of drugs a schedule has been developed to regulate their use.