Political Theories on Recent Shootings

this is statistical bullshit!!! lets take a look at suicide statistical rates by square mile, circular mile, demographic breakout per sq mile, you're fucking comparing apples and oranges. Trying to equate a patter of distribution based on population densities and relating that to a societal reasons if fucking sheer stupidity. There are way too many fucking professors sitting on their asses that have never produced, made, created, managed a day in their pathetic lives feeding you this shit. They've been in school their entire lives and know nothing but a book. But because they've worked their whole lives to get the 8 letters after their names , they are hailed as all knowing, when the truth of it is, they would fail miserably if they ever had to try and put their theories into practical application.

Easy for you to say, but I think I will rely upon the experts. They point to social isolation and a perceived cultural value of rugged individualism which inhibits people from seeking help as the basic contributer to this phenomenon and that it exists world wide with the more rural areas of a given country having a greater suicide rate than urbanized areas. An example is in Canada. The lowest suicide rates are in Ontario (7.8/100,000) which is also the most urbanized area. The highest suicide rates are in the newly formed territory of Nunavut (an amazing 71.00/100,000), Yukon (15.30/100,000) and Northwest Territories 18.66/100,000) which are also the least densely populated regions in Canada..

So let me guess, they were questioned before they committed suicide? And you know that rugged individualism inhibits seeking help how? These are guesses, maybe even educated guesses, but guesses none the less.
 
22 veterans a day are killing themselves. (Liberals will be blamed in 3....2.....1...)

This is not that unusual because of the demographic involved. Huge amounts of WWII veterans are entering a critical age for suicide which elevates the number of suicides for veterans..

Of more concern is the elevated levels of suicide for active duty personnel, which are significantly higher than the same demographic of civilians.. However only extreme gun control groups are advocating that our soldiers be disarmed to alleviate this problem.

Really??? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! 90 year olds commit suicide at a higher rate than other age groups???????
 
So let me guess, they were questioned before they committed suicide? And you know that rugged individualism inhibits seeking help how? These are guesses, maybe even educated guesses, but guesses none the less.

Yes, before a person is allowed to commit suicide, they must first fill out a questionnaire. Anything else?
 
Honestly ... No offense, and not trying to be ugly ... But you may be a little out of your league there.
Soldiers are damn sure not killing themselves because they can buy a firearm ... They know more than a hundred ways to get the job done.

.

The hilarious stereotype of a soldier knowing 100 ways to kill themselves (or someone else) is just that; hilarious. Although some probably know 1,000 ways.

While they are not doing it because they can buy a firearm, they're "not"-not doing it because firearms are so readily available; agree?

not at all. if you are going to kill yourself you are not going to say, aw shit no gun, I can't do this.

Good point...I don't know how many are using firearms to start with.
 
Sounds like the "avowed purpose" shouldn't be "avowed". Lets call it a "washing the blood off the streets" tax....will that work?

A hidden purpose can usually be discerned if the law has disparate impact. A similar problem is associated with de facto segregation versus de jure . Courts have been pretty good about discovering what the legislature is really up to. A washing the blood off the streets law which taxes only guns would be quickly found unconstitutional. A tax on all persons using the street would be ok.

So liability insurance on guns would be okay since it's on all guns...right?
 
Honestly ... No offense, and not trying to be ugly ... But you may be a little out of your league there.
Soldiers are damn sure not killing themselves because they can buy a firearm ... They know more than a hundred ways to get the job done.

.

The hilarious stereotype of a soldier knowing 100 ways to kill themselves (or someone else) is just that; hilarious. Although some probably know 1,000 ways.

While they are not doing it because they can buy a firearm, they're "not"-not doing it because firearms are so readily available; agree?

Like I said ... You are out of your league ... You think it is funny.

Twenty years in a library, online, college classroom or wherever ... Won't help you understand any more than 10 seconds on the business end of a firearm.
When the thoughts banging around in your head are ... "Why did I deserve to be here instead of them" ... and ... "One more won't send me to Hell any quicker" ... Then you might have clue what the fu** you are talking about.

.

No, I think the never ending litiny of excuses that gun nuts come up with to tell us that 10,000+ deaths from guns each year is natural, that our cities are having more people slaughtered by guns that other countries is just a demographic issue, and that teh words "militia" meant anyone who can point a gun is hilarious.
 
Really??? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! 90 year olds commit suicide at a higher rate than other age groups???????

The standard grouping is made for those 85 and older and it has the highest level of suicides of any other group from 2000 to 2006 and ranked 2nd amongst all other age groups after 2006 and through 2010 (last year available). They normally hold on to the top spot as they choose to commit suicide in the face of failing health. The rate in 2010 for that age group was 17.62/100,000. The overall suicide rate in 2010 was 12.1/100,000. The only group higher from 2007 through 2010 was those aged 45-64. The reason for this is explained by experts was the economic downturn in which this group is more sensitive to economic reversals perceiving their situation as hopeless. The same trend occurred during the Great Depression. In 2010, their suicide rate stood at 18.63

The next highest rate was the age group 25-44 and in 2010 it stood at 14.98
The next was 65-84 and stood at 14.45
The next was 15-24 and stood at 10.54
The lowest group rate was those under 14 and under and they stood at 0.40
 
The hilarious stereotype of a soldier knowing 100 ways to kill themselves (or someone else) is just that; hilarious. Although some probably know 1,000 ways.

While they are not doing it because they can buy a firearm, they're "not"-not doing it because firearms are so readily available; agree?

Like I said ... You are out of your league ... You think it is funny.

Twenty years in a library, online, college classroom or wherever ... Won't help you understand any more than 10 seconds on the business end of a firearm.
When the thoughts banging around in your head are ... "Why did I deserve to be here instead of them" ... and ... "One more won't send me to Hell any quicker" ... Then you might have clue what the fu** you are talking about.

.

No, I think the never ending litiny of excuses that gun nuts come up with to tell us that 10,000+ deaths from guns each year is natural, that our cities are having more people slaughtered by guns that other countries is just a demographic issue, and that teh words "militia" meant anyone who can point a gun is hilarious.

It is not the presence of defensive firearms but their absence that increases death tolls

-Geaux
 
No, I think the never ending litiny of excuses that gun nuts come up with to tell us that 10,000+ deaths from guns each year is natural, that our cities are having more people slaughtered by guns that other countries is just a demographic issue, and that teh words "militia" meant anyone who can point a gun is hilarious.

Look ... You can attempt to parse the subject any way you would like ... It is a free country.
On the other hand ... Your ideas and proposals for change have already been shot so full of holes that if they were something we were hunting ... They wouldn't be fit to eat.

I never said anything was "natural" ... Although I did suggest that you don't have a clue about the nature of the beast regarding soldiers.
How you want to interpret "militia" is up to you ... Everybody knows why they left the right to bare arms in the Constitution ... It isn't secret, and they left behind volumes on the matter.
Again ... Your reference to "militia" is just another way Progressive Liberals will attempt to interpret anything any way they can ... To get around the fact we have the right to bare arms.

We take the bad with the good ... I know it is novel idea, but we have been living with Liberals for quite some time ... Bless their little hearts.

.
 
No, I think the never ending litiny of excuses that gun nuts come up with to tell us that 10,000+ deaths from guns each year is natural, that our cities are having more people slaughtered by guns that other countries is just a demographic issue, and that teh words "militia" meant anyone who can point a gun is hilarious.

Look ... You can attempt to parse the subject any way you would like ... It is a free country.
On the other hand ... Your ideas and proposals for change have already been shot so full of holes that if they were something we were hunting ... They wouldn't be fit to eat.

I never said anything was "natural" ... Although I did suggest that you don't have a clue about the nature of the beast regarding soldiers.
How you want to interpret "militia" is up to you ... Everybody knows why they left the right to bare arms in the Constitution ... It isn't secret, and they left behind volumes on the matter.
Again ... Your reference to "militia" is just another way Progressive Liberals will attempt to interpret anything any way they can ... To get around the fact we have the right to bare arms.

We take the bad with the good ... I know it is novel idea, but we have been living with Liberals for quite some time ... Bless their little hearts.

.

That you characterize 10,000+ murders as "bad" and not tragic and ultimately preventable is the problem.

Other nations have got it figured out. We haven't. The solution is obvious...fewer guns equals fewer deaths. Personally attack me all you wish; it doesn't change the fact.
 
that teh words "militia" meant anyone who can point a gun is hilarious.

Historically, it meant all white able bodied male citizens between the ages of 18 and 45. At least that was the criteria employed by the Militia Act of 1792.

Interesting enough, the limitation of "white" did not appear in the initial proposal prepared by Secretary of War Knox in 1790. It was added by Congress with no record of any debate on the issue. At one point I tried to track that down, hoping to find a rationale similar to the one employed in Dred Scott, but alas the change was made in committee and no record of those proceedings were made.

In the run up to the Civil War, Massachusetts tried to include free black citizens in their state militia but were told they could not due to federal preemption.

However, that is academic the right to keep and bear arms arises regardless of membership in any militia.
 
Like I said ... You are out of your league ... You think it is funny.

Twenty years in a library, online, college classroom or wherever ... Won't help you understand any more than 10 seconds on the business end of a firearm.
When the thoughts banging around in your head are ... "Why did I deserve to be here instead of them" ... and ... "One more won't send me to Hell any quicker" ... Then you might have clue what the fu** you are talking about.

.

No, I think the never ending litiny of excuses that gun nuts come up with to tell us that 10,000+ deaths from guns each year is natural, that our cities are having more people slaughtered by guns that other countries is just a demographic issue, and that teh words "militia" meant anyone who can point a gun is hilarious.

It is not the presence of defensive firearms but their absence that increases death tolls

-Geaux

We probably should have armed the kids at Sandy Hook, at Columbine, at _________ whatever is next...
 
That you characterize 10,000+ murders as "bad" and not tragic and ultimately preventable is the problem.

The latest figures show about 8,500 criminal homicides. Antigun groups jack that figure up by including legitimate instances of "legal intervention" and "self defense" as "homicides" and letting the reader believe that these are all murders.

Other nations have got it figured out. We haven't. The solution is obvious...fewer guns equals fewer deaths. Personally attack me all you wish; it doesn't change the fact.

Other nations have figured it out? How so? Merely because they currently have a lower homicide rate than the US? They had a lower homicide rate BEFORE they enacted gun control and it remained about the same. There are other reasons for the high homicide rate in the US Candy. How do you explain that are non firearm homicide rate is significantly higher than the total homicide rate in many European countries?
 
Really??? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! 90 year olds commit suicide at a higher rate than other age groups???????

The standard grouping is made for those 85 and older and it has the highest level of suicides of any other group from 2000 to 2006 and ranked 2nd amongst all other age groups after 2006 and through 2010 (last year available). They normally hold on to the top spot as they choose to commit suicide in the face of failing health. The rate in 2010 for that age group was 17.62/100,000. The overall suicide rate in 2010 was 12.1/100,000. The only group higher from 2007 through 2010 was those aged 45-64. The reason for this is explained by experts was the economic downturn in which this group is more sensitive to economic reversals perceiving their situation as hopeless. The same trend occurred during the Great Depression. In 2010, their suicide rate stood at 18.63

The next highest rate was the age group 25-44 and in 2010 it stood at 14.98
The next was 65-84 and stood at 14.45
The next was 15-24 and stood at 10.54
The lowest group rate was those under 14 and under and they stood at 0.40

Among Veterans??? The statistics you are quoting are for the general population.
 
That you characterize 10,000+ murders as "bad" and not tragic and ultimately preventable is the problem.

Other nations have got it figured out. We haven't. The solution is obvious...fewer guns equals fewer deaths. Personally attack me all you wish; it doesn't change the fact.

If tragedies are not bad ... How would you describe them?
The countries you adore so much still have firearm deaths ... So I guess that gets rid of the idea they are preventable through legislation or geographical location.

I have been to quite a few countries that don't let their citizens own firearms and that are a hell of a lot more dangerous than America.
The last I checked ... The countries you are referring to also don't fall under our Constitution ... Or have the equivalent of our 2nd Amendment.


If telling you that you don't have clue what you are talking about is a personal attack ... Then I can only agree with you that it doesn't change the facts.

.
 
No, I think the never ending litiny of excuses that gun nuts come up with to tell us that 10,000+ deaths from guns each year is natural, that our cities are having more people slaughtered by guns that other countries is just a demographic issue, and that teh words "militia" meant anyone who can point a gun is hilarious.

It is not the presence of defensive firearms but their absence that increases death tolls

-Geaux

We probably should have armed the kids at Sandy Hook, at Columbine, at _________ whatever is next...


Dumbest post yet for you Candy!!!
 
Among Veterans??? The statistics you are quoting are for the general population.

Correct, please pay attention to the argument presented. A great number of WWII veterans are entering into a demographic which has a very high rate of suicide... which helps to partially explain why 22 veterans are committing suicide daily.
 
Mexico is actually sometimes held up as an example of exemplary gun laws. Despite a sort-of constitutional guarantee of the right to bear arms, Mexico has only one gun store, which is run by the army, and severe legal restrictions on gun ownership. From the New York Times:


The 1917 Constitution written after Mexico’s bloody revolution, for example, says that the right to carry arms excludes those weapons forbidden by law or reserved for use by the military, and it also states that “they may not carry arms within inhabited places without complying with police regulations.”

The government added more specific limits after the uprisings in the 1960s, when students looted gun stores in Mexico City. So under current law, typical customers like Rafael Vargas, 43, a businessman from Morelos who said he was buying a pistol “to make sure I sleep better,” must wait months for approval and keep his gun at home at all times.

His purchase options are also limited: the largest weapons in Mexico’s single gun store — including semiautomatic rifles like the one used in the Aurora attack — can be bought only by members of the police or the military. Handgun permits for home protection allow only for the purchase of calibers no greater than .38, so the most exotic option in the pistol case here consisted of a Smith & Wesson revolver selling for $803.05.

So, the country is largely disarmed, right? Not so much. Put aside the well-armed drug cartels; average Mexicans don't let the country's laws get too much in their way. From Austin, Texas's KVUE:


Mexico has some of the toughest gun control laws in the world. But while drug cartels have well-stocked arsenals, law-abiding citizens struggle to get a permit to own a gun.

Even so, in the seemingly tranquil region of northern Mexico, at the foot of the Sierra Madre Mountains, it’s an open secret that many people have guns for protection.

"Most Mexican families do have guns in their homes, and they’re illegal,” said Alex LeBaron, a Chihuahua state representative and native of the town of LeBaron.

The Geneva-based Small Arms Survey estimated (PDF) in 2007 that Mexicans owned about 15.5 million guns, of which 4.5 million were registered in compliance with the law. As NPR noted in a story on this same issue, Mexico has no real gun-rights movement largely because people don't perceive a need for one:
 

Forum List

Back
Top