Ten Gun Myths and Memes-- Shot Down

[GHook93]

I appreciate your euthanism and used bullet points with backup to prove your points.

Ten Gun Myths Shot Down in a Hail of • • • bullets ​

• Myth #1: They're coming for your guns.
Fact-check: No one knows the exact number of guns in America, but it's clear there's no practical way to round them all up (never mind that no one in Washington is proposing this). Yet if you fantasize about rifle-toting citizens facing down the government, you'll rest easy knowing that America's roughly 80 million gun owners already have the feds and cops outgunned by a factor of around 79 to 1. (chart)

Not true! There can and could easily be attempts. There can be a slow transition to large mass one. They could make guns illegal and confiscate them on the go! With the type of registering they want it won't be hard to locate those guns. At the moment I think it far far off and not even close to the agenda, but it could happen. See England!

• Myth #2: Guns don't kill people—people kill people.
Fact-check: People with more guns tend to kill more people—with guns. The states with the highest gun ownership rates have a gun murder rate 114% higher than those with the lowest gun ownership rates...

I guarantee this BS chart is leaving out people who own guns illegally, that is how NY could be at the bottom! Gangster use illegal guns!

Myth #3: An armed society is a polite society.
Fact-check: Drivers who carry guns are 44% more likely than unarmed drivers to make obscene gestures at other motorists, and 77% more likely to follow them aggressively.

• Among Texans convicted of serious crimes, those with concealed-handgun licenses were sentenced for threatening someone with a firearm 4.8 times more than those without...​

How is god's green Earth can that be obtain without Bullshit inferences. No way this is legit and is a bunch of BS!

• Myth #4: More good guys with guns can stop rampaging bad guys.
Fact-check: Mass shootings stopped by armed civilians in the past 30 years: 0

• Chances that a shooting at an ER involves guns taken from guards: 1 in 5.​

So why does the President amd NY Mayor keep body-guards? Why are there armed guards at all the presitigous schools around the country? Also right after Newtown, a mass shooting was prevented at a school by an armed off-duty officer, who happened to be at the school that day!

Also see Rabbi's list beliw this is BULLSHIT!

• Myth #5: Keeping a gun at home makes you safer.
Fact-check: Owning a gun has been linked to higher risks of homicide, suicide, and accidental death by gun.

• For every time a gun is used in self-defense in the home, there are 7 assaults or murders, 11 suicide attempts, and 4 accidents involving guns in or around a home...​

First the suicide argument is BULLSHIT! If someone wants to kill themselves, they will do it with or without a gun. A gun makes it easier and increases the chance of success, but so do sleeping pills! Second, homicide argument is more legit, but I think the numbers are fudged here without a doubt.
Lastly, the accidential death one is the one study done by liberals a longtime ago and it was pelted at the truth for decades. It turned out to falsify data and make illogical conclusions to press an agenda. Now-a-days there are amazing safes and gun locks. My lock in attached to the drawer in my dresser and have a finger-print sensor to open it! My kids are safe.

• Myth #6: Carrying a gun for self-defense makes you safer.
Fact-check: In 2011, nearly 10 times more people were shot and killed in arguments than by civilians trying to stop a crime.

• In one survey, nearly 1% of Americans reported using guns to defend themselves or their property. However, a closer look at their claims found that more than 50% involved using guns in an aggressive manner, such as escalating an argument.
• A Philadelphia study found that the odds of an assault victim being shot were 4.5 times greater if he carried a gun. His odds of being killed were 4.2 times greater.​

I go back and forth on concealed carry. I am not sure I support it. Protecting oneself in ones home, armed guards at schools, universities, shopping malls etc is another. I'm not so sure it's the best solution.

• Myth #7: Guns make women safer.
Fact-check: In 2010, nearly 6 times more women were shot by husbands, boyfriends, and ex-partners than murdered by male strangers...

Let's put it this way. The vast majority of women are defenseless physically against they boyfriend or husband. Most men wouldn't need a gun to kill their GF or spouse, but most women would need a gun to stop their BF, husband or intruder from killing or raping them!

Guns do protect women and it's illogical to argue that since a woman might be killed by a gun that a gun in her possession would not protect her from an abusive BF, husband or intruder!

• Myth #8: "Vicious, violent video games" deserve more blame than guns.
Fact-check: So said NRA executive vice president Wayne LaPierre after Newtown. So what's up with Japan?
(chart/resource in link - wont behave here)

I love that twist in the use of "more!" See people are saying violent games and movies have a role. I mean if commercials are so good at persuading people to buy stuff, why wouldn't the clamoring of violence in video games and movies have an effect of some?

• Myth #9: More and more Americans are becoming gun owners.
Fact-check: More guns are being sold, but they're owned by a shrinking portion of the population...

• Around 80% of gun owners are men. On average they own 7.9 guns each...​

And what is the issue?

• Myth #10: We don't need more gun laws—we just need to enforce the ones we have.
Fact-check: Weak laws and loopholes backed by the gun lobby make it easier to get guns illegally.

• Around 40% of all legal gun sales involve private sellers and don't require background checks. 40% of prison inmates who used guns in their crimes got them this way.
• An investigation found 62% of online gun sellers were willing to sell to buyers who said they couldn't pass a background check...​

Links for substantiation of all points, charts, further point narratives at the article link here.

I will give you this. The gun show backdoorness is a joke and should be done away with. I think universal background check system should be in place for a while. I can't understand why other states don't issue FOID cards like IL. Can't understand why schools are gun-free zones and don't have armed guards or allows SOME teachers to carry. I am not sure the concealed carry laws are the best for us. Etc.

 

[RDD_1210]

Australia Gun Laws Provided No Extra Safety | Wall Street Journal


.

From your own link....

"In 2008, the Australian Institute of Criminology reported a decrease of 9% in homicides and a one-third decrease in armed robbery since the 1990s"

Woops!

pretty much what the usa has done since letting the assualt weapons ban expire - Next

Link? Nah...why would you bother.

 

[GeoLaureate8]

Question for Liberal idiots:

If banning guns makes us safer, who confiscates our guns and who gets to keep their guns?

I'll save you the effort. Answer: The government, law enforcement, and the military. The same people who had the guns in genocidal tyrannies.

.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

It is logical to compare the US with other large, developed western economies - Germany, France, the UK, Canada, perhaps Australia and Holland.

Less so with Switzerland, Japan, Fiji or China.

You're still ignoring me, can everyone hold Saigon accountable and tell him to respond to the citations and facts presented to him in two prior posts?

 

[The Rabbi]

BigFoot -

Why not compare like-with-like?

Why not compare the US with countries like Germany, the UK, France, Canada or Australia.

We both know why you don't want to do that.

Insisting on comparing the US with Switzerland, Cuba, Luxembourg or Fiji is simply dishonest and childish. Obviously.

Since none of those countries are remotely like the US in terms of population, history, etc etc why do that? Why don't we compare the US to Mexico? Or Panama? Or Zimbabwe?
But it is idiotic, an exercise in Euro-weenie-ism.

 

[Spoonman]

From your own link....

"In 2008, the Australian Institute of Criminology reported a decrease of 9% in homicides and a one-third decrease in armed robbery since the 1990s"

Woops!

pretty much what the usa has done since letting the assualt weapons ban expire - Next

Link? Nah...why would you bother.

i've already posted it. check the FBI crime statistics. if you even know how to

 

[Spoonman]

BigFoot -

Why not compare like-with-like?

Why not compare the US with countries like Germany, the UK, France, Canada or Australia.

We both know why you don't want to do that.

Insisting on comparing the US with Switzerland, Cuba, Luxembourg or Fiji is simply dishonest and childish. Obviously.

Since none of those countries are remotely like the US in terms of population, history, etc etc why do that? Why don't we compare the US to Mexico? Or Panama? Or Zimbabwe?
But it is idiotic, an exercise in Euro-weenie-ism.

what we should do is check their policies on immigration and how they deal with illegals.

 

[RDD_1210]

pretty much what the usa has done since letting the assualt weapons ban expire - Next

Link? Nah...why would you bother.

i've already posted it. check the FBI crime statistics. if you even know how to

LOL, so you double down on the lying. Good for you.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Well here it is -- it was only a matter of time:

Today, 12:16 AM

New reputation!
Hi, you have received -583 reputation points from The Rabbi.
Reputation was given for this post.

Comment:
dunce

Regards,
The Rabbi

This is a first; I actually got negged for creating a topic. No discussion, no exchange, just a straight neg from a rhetorical pissant so drowning in his own insecurities that he just wants to shut people up. Too much of a spineless coward to debate. This is how afraid some people are of facing their hangups I guess.

Is this typical of the Right? Or of rabbis? Or just those who don't know baseball from their ass? You tell me.

Anybody else have the balls to discuss this without running to the neg machine like a little girl? (meant figuratively of course)

Actually this is illutrative; TheCrybabbi is illustrating the point that "gun nuts" go to their armamental paraphernalia to make up for the part of "gun nuts" that isn't "gun" -- and in the process demonstrate the whole fallacy of gun abuse: "shoot first, ask questions later". Literally.

Rabbi is a hack, a liar and a coward. He uses negative reps because he's dumb and becomes aggressive when someone makes points which creates for him cognitive dissonance.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Quite frankly I put little stock in statistics when it comes to guns.

I grew up shooting with people who shoot and own guns and no one not one person I have ever met has injured himself or someone else with a gun. No one has brandished a gun at his or her spouse during a argument, no one has committed suicide etc.

Those numbers just don't jive with my life experience.

And I've never been to China so obviously it doesn't exist.

As i have said it's meaningless to say that if you live in a household with guns that you are more likely to be shot than if you live in a household without guns.

If you live in a household with a wood shop you're more likely to get a finger cut off than if you live in a household without one.

If you have a pool you're more likely to drown than someone without a pool.

If you Live in a flood zone you're more likely to get flooded than if you live in the desert.

These are meaningless comparisons.

 

[The Rabbi]

So no one in Chicago has guns? Chicago has the strictest gun laws in the world?

a lot of good the laws do. ooh i know. lets make more laws and just pretend we are solving a problem

We need the right laws. Like they have in numerous other countries that have figured out which laws are needed and how to enforce them.

You fail again.

You mean like Mexico and So. Africa, which have very strict laws?

You are a fail and a half. And your avatar is absurd.

 

[Spoonman]

Question for Liberal idiots:

If banning guns makes us safer, who confiscates our guns and who gets to keep their guns?

I'll save you the effort. Answer: The government, law enforcement, and the military. The same people who had the guns in genocidal tyrannies.

.

funny how the politicians who wrote the constitution viewed guns as a way the population could protect themselves from government and tyranny.

 

[Spoonman]

Well here it is -- it was only a matter of time:

Today, 12:16 AM

New reputation!
Hi, you have received -583 reputation points from The Rabbi.
Reputation was given for this post.

Comment:
dunce

Regards,
The Rabbi

This is a first; I actually got negged for creating a topic. No discussion, no exchange, just a straight neg from a rhetorical pissant so drowning in his own insecurities that he just wants to shut people up. Too much of a spineless coward to debate. This is how afraid some people are of facing their hangups I guess.

Is this typical of the Right? Or of rabbis? Or just those who don't know baseball from their ass? You tell me.

Anybody else have the balls to discuss this without running to the neg machine like a little girl? (meant figuratively of course)

Actually this is illutrative; TheCrybabbi is illustrating the point that "gun nuts" go to their armamental paraphernalia to make up for the part of "gun nuts" that isn't "gun" -- and in the process demonstrate the whole fallacy of gun abuse: "shoot first, ask questions later". Literally.

Rabbi is a hack, a liar and a coward. He uses negative reps because he's dumb and becomes aggressive when someone makes points which creates for him cognitive dissonance.

oh geez, pot kettle.

 

[Spoonman]

Link? Nah...why would you bother.

i've already posted it. check the FBI crime statistics. if you even know how to

LOL, so you double down on the lying. Good for you.

great another, no yuo faill post by RDD. what else is new.

translation - he doesn't know how to look it up

 

[GeoLaureate8]

It would.

Australia Gun Laws Provided No Extra Safety | Wall Street Journal


.

From your own link....

"In 2008, the Australian Institute of Criminology reported a decrease of 9% in homicides and a one-third decrease in armed robbery since the 1990s"

Woops!

More selective statistics: ...but an increase of over 40% in assaults and 20% in sexual assaults.

The rest of the sentence you left out.

 

[Pogo]

Im laughing...........to make a statement "countries that do not allow gun ownership have lower murder rates." indicates somebody who envisions the United States as a country that might someday be a gunless country.


Ooooooops

I don't think that's the point here. At least not for me.
The point is simpler than it might look: to demythtify the myths so we can see how things really work in human experience and psychology. If we determine that a lesser availability of guns means less violence, does that mean we have to lessen the availability of guns? Not necessarily, and I don't think that's effective if the mentality is still there.

We've had white sugar and fried foods readily available too, but over time as we see the deleterious effects thereof, we voluntarily started backing away. Nobody had to ban sugar for that to happen.

The point here is not any kind of "gun grab" and I know before even going back through the thread that some are going to choose to interpret it that way. Don't overthink it; the point is simply to understand how things really work through an honest and fact-based approach rather than through explosive emotional hype. It's to raise consciousness above the guessing-game level.

What we then do with that understanding is another and entirely separate separate question. Before we even address that step we need a starting point based on tangible truths.

Thank you all for participating in this; I'll catch up and jump back in when I get time.

indeed.....but far left guys look at the world fromt he perspective that if we try hard enough to collectively "understand" something, the outcome will be necessarily better. In fact, those on the left look at the whole gun issue from a purely emotional standpoint, with alot riding on how they wish a society can be. Others look at the world and have long ago disgarded the BS shoveled by thinkers like PLato, Hobbes and Moore et. al.. Idea's a great, but they suck if not ever placed under the scrutiny of examining the results.

I refer to this as having "connect the dots issues". Anybody who thinks that you eradicate the Aurora's and Sandy Hooks by banning guns is somebody who's feet are not firmly on the ground........or unable to connect the dots. No "psychology" to understand there.

There are 10's of millions ( ie:not fringe politically) who absolutely will NEVER ever go for gun registration in this country, thus, politically, it is 100% infeasible.......100%. In fact, many many Dems in the house heading to 2014 will most certainly not be backing weapons ban related legislation. Why? Because if they do, they are out.( thank heavens for the massive GOP victories at the governors levels leading to redistricting)


So really......in the end, the whole discussion is akin to group navel contemplation here.!!

Yeah, in a way I guess it is. That is after all the whole point; to think about what these things really mean, and what they don't mean. I see you going off on that strawman yet again about "confiscation" but it was never part of this dialogue or this OP, even if you'd like it to be. Ain't going there. I thought about it long ago and decided it's not a solution, so don't bother.

Now you are quite correct that emotionalism colors our reactions to the Sandy Hooks and Auroras and Columbines. That needs to be held in check too, and it's why I believe that passing feelgood restriction legalization does no more than address those same emotions and lets us off the hook of cultural responsibility by telling ourselves we fixed it because we threw legislation at the problem. I don't think that's reality either.

But I absolutely disagree that it's a bad idea to discuss it. What the hell are we signed up on a message board for?

 

[RDD_1210]

Quite frankly I put little stock in statistics when it comes to guns.

I grew up shooting with people who shoot and own guns and no one not one person I have ever met has injured himself or someone else with a gun. No one has brandished a gun at his or her spouse during a argument, no one has committed suicide etc.

Those numbers just don't jive with my life experience.

And I've never been to China so obviously it doesn't exist.

As i have said it's meaningless to say that if you live in a household with guns that you are more likely to be shot than if you live in a household without guns.

If you live in a household with a wood shop you're more likely to get a finger cut off than if you live in a household without one.

If you have a pool you're more likely to drown than someone without a pool.

If you Live in a flood zone you're more likely to get flooded than if you live in the desert.

These are meaningless comparisons.

But it's not though. Not when the whole reason to own a weapon is to promote safety. If more people are getting injured/killed when they possess a gun then they are failing to do the one thing you claim they are needed for...ensure safety.

If a pools sole purpose was to prevent people from drowning then you would have a point. But a pool isn't designed to prevent drowning. It's designed for swimming.....which drowning happens to be a potential by-product of. HUGE difference.

 

[tjvh]

The OP is nothing but pathetic Liberal talking points based upon partisan derived talking points with no basis in reality.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

funny how the politicians who wrote the constitution viewed guns as a way the population could protect themselves from government and tyranny.

Here let me help you with that:

I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason
Co-author of the Second Amendment
during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788

"A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves …"
Richard Henry Lee
writing in Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republic, Letter XVIII, May, 1788.

"The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full posession of them."
Zachariah Johnson
Elliot's Debates, vol. 3 "The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution."

"… the people are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their private arms"
Philadelphia Federal Gazette
June 18, 1789, Pg. 2, Col. 2
Article on the Bill of Rights

"And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the Press, or the rights of Conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; …"
Samuel Adams
quoted in the Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer, August 20, 1789, "Propositions submitted to the Convention of this State"
The Founding Fathers on Arms

"BOGUS QUOTE REMOVED"
George Washington
First President of the United States

"The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand arms, like laws, discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside … Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them."
Thomas Paine

"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them."
Richard Henry Lee
American Statesman, 1788

"The great object is that every man be armed." and "Everyone who is able may have a gun."
Patrick Henry
American Patriot

"Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?"
Patrick Henry
American Patriot

"Those who hammer their guns into plowshares will plow for those who do not."
Thomas Jefferson
Third President of the United States

"The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that … it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; … "
Thomas Jefferson
letter to Justice John Cartwright, June 5, 1824. ME 16:45.

"The best we can help for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed."
Alexander Hamilton
The Federalist Papers at 184-8
The Founding Fathers on Maintaining Freedom

"The greatest danger to American freedom is a government that ignores the Constitution."
Thomas Jefferson
Third President of the United States

"There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters. "
Noah Webster
American Lexicographer

"The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion."
Edmund Burke
British Statesman, 1784

"What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms."
Thomas Jefferson
to James Madison

"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Ben Franklin
American Statesman
Later Quotes on Gun Control

"The ruling class doesn't care about public safety. Having made it very difficult for States and localities to police themselves, having left ordinary citizens with no choice but to protect themselves as best they can, they now try to take our guns away. In fact they blame us and our guns for crime. This is so wrong that it cannot be an honest mistake."
Malcolm Wallop
former U.S. Sen. (R-WY)

"An armed man is a citizen. A disarmed man is a subject."

Here is the Supreme Court ruling on Dred Scott. I put the important part in Bold.

"[If black people were] entitled to the privileges and immunities of citizens, it would exempt them from the operation of the special laws and from the police regulations which [Southern states] considered to be necessary for their own safety. It would give the persons of the negro race, who were recognized as citizens in any one State of the Union...the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went. And all of this would be done in the face of the subject race of the same color, both free and slaves, inevitably producing discontent and insubordination among them, and endangering the peace and safety of the State."

 

[RDD_1210]

Australia Gun Laws Provided No Extra Safety | Wall Street Journal


.

From your own link....

"In 2008, the Australian Institute of Criminology reported a decrease of 9% in homicides and a one-third decrease in armed robbery since the 1990s"

Woops!

More selective statistics: ...but an increase of over 40% in assaults and 20% in sexual assaults.

The rest of the sentence you left out.

Good thing we're talking about homicide. I'll take an assault and living over being murdered any day. Thanks for bringing that up.