The UCLA shooting shows how silly opponents of campus carry are....

[Divine Wind]

How many are murders and how many are suicides?

Are the suicides somehow less dead than the murders?

No less dead than the MILLIONS of other preventable deaths you don't give a shit about.

Try to be honest for a change, Joe. You don't give a flying fuck about people dying, but you've wrapped yourself up in banning guns. Why?

Notice, murder and guns aren't even mentioned on the list below. How fucking stupid and politically biased does a person have to be to think banning or limiting Constitutional rights is the most effective way to prevent the deaths listed below?

FastStats
Number of deaths for leading causes of death:

• Heart disease: 614,348
• Cancer: 591,699
• Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 147,101
• Accidents (unintentional injuries): 136,053
• Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 133,103
• Alzheimer's disease: 93,541
• Diabetes: 76,488
• Influenza and Pneumonia: 55,227
• Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome and nephrosis: 48,146
• Intentional self-harm (suicide): 42,773

 

[Rustic]

How many are murders and how many are suicides?

Are the suicides somehow less dead than the murders?

No less dead than the MILLIONS of other preventable deaths you don't give a shit about.

Try to be honest for a change, Joe. You don't give a flying fuck about people dying, but you've wrapped yourself up in banning guns. Why?

Notice, murder and guns aren't even mentioned on the list below. How fucking stupid and politically biased does a person have to be to think banning or limiting Constitutional rights is the most effective way to prevent the deaths listed below?

FastStats
Number of deaths for leading causes of death:

• Heart disease: 614,348
• Cancer: 591,699
• Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 147,101
• Accidents (unintentional injuries): 136,053
• Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 133,103
• Alzheimer's disease: 93,541
• Diabetes: 76,488
• Influenza and Pneumonia: 55,227
• Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome and nephrosis: 48,146
• Intentional self-harm (suicide): 42,773

2016 Real Time Death Statistics in America

 

[JoeB131]

Moron.....they banned guns in China, South Korea, and Japan....and they have higher suicide rates than we do.......how stupid are you....you keep seeing this fact and yet you pretend it doesn't exist....and those aren't the only countries with extreme gun control and higher suicide rates than us.....

China is a communist dictatorship where you can't breathe the air. Of course they are going to have a higher suicide rate.

I love how you gun nuts just live in terror that someone might take away your toys.

 

[JoeB131]

No less dead than the MILLIONS of other preventable deaths you don't give a shit about.

Try to be honest for a change, Joe. You don't give a flying fuck about people dying, but you've wrapped yourself up in banning guns. Why?

Notice, murder and guns aren't even mentioned on the list below. How fucking stupid and politically biased does a person have to be to think banning or limiting Constitutional rights is the most effective way to prevent the deaths listed below?

Dumbass, we do make a concerted effort to prevent accidents and cancers.

If a product is found to cause cancer, it is taken off the market or we limit who can buy it.

Frankly, I would LOVE to put the Gun Industry under the same scrutiny we put the Tobacco industry.

(Oh, this would be the part where you start welping about the Founding Slave Rapists)

Let's take the top item on your list, heart attacks. well guess what, every time you go to the doctor's office, your doctor will tell you to lose weight, excercise more, change your diet and so on.

But if he asks if you have a gun in the house with small children, OH MY GOD, THESE LIBERAL DOCTORS HATE THE FOUNDING FATHERS!!!!

 

[2aguy]

Moron.....they banned guns in China, South Korea, and Japan....and they have higher suicide rates than we do.......how stupid are you....you keep seeing this fact and yet you pretend it doesn't exist....and those aren't the only countries with extreme gun control and higher suicide rates than us.....

China is a communist dictatorship where you can't breathe the air. Of course they are going to have a higher suicide rate.

I love how you gun nuts just live in terror that someone might take away your toys.

And these countries dumb ass......


here you go stupid......ignore these countries too....

World suicide rates by country

World suicide rates by country

Per 100,000


Hungary ... 21.0
Belgium .... 18.4
Finland... 16.5
Poland... 13.8
Austria... 13.8
Czech Republic... 12.7
New Zealand.... 11.9
Denmark... 11.3
Sweden..............11.1
Norway...............10.9
Iceland................10.4
Germany.............10.3
Canada...............10.2

United States.......10.1

And another list....
Here Are The Countries With The Worst Suicide Rates

 

[Rustic]

No less dead than the MILLIONS of other preventable deaths you don't give a shit about.

Try to be honest for a change, Joe. You don't give a flying fuck about people dying, but you've wrapped yourself up in banning guns. Why?

Notice, murder and guns aren't even mentioned on the list below. How fucking stupid and politically biased does a person have to be to think banning or limiting Constitutional rights is the most effective way to prevent the deaths listed below?

Dumbass, we do make a concerted effort to prevent accidents and cancers.

If a product is found to cause cancer, it is taken off the market or we limit who can buy it.

Frankly, I would LOVE to put the Gun Industry under the same scrutiny we put the Tobacco industry.

(Oh, this would be the part where you start welping about the Founding Slave Rapists)

Let's take the top item on your list, heart attacks. well guess what, every time you go to the doctor's office, your doctor will tell you to lose weight, excercise more, change your diet and so on.

But if he asks if you have a gun in the house with small children, OH MY GOD, THESE LIBERAL DOCTORS HATE THE FOUNDING FATHERS!!!!

You're not making any sense, get out of your moms basement more...
2016 Real Time Death Statistics in America

 

[Divine Wind]

Dumbass

This neatly sums up your entire intellectual acumen.

Frankly, I would LOVE to put the Gun Industry under the same scrutiny we put the Tobacco industry.

Of course you would. Anti-gunners want to ban guns like tobacco. That's well known.

Oh, this would be the part where you start welping about the Founding Slave Rapists

Thank you for, once again, confirming your hate for our Constitution, Founders and, in general, the United States of America.

Come on, Joe, be honest. You never really did take the Oath of Enlistment, did you?

I love how you gun nuts American citizens just live in terror are so strongly concerned that someone might take away your toys Constitutional rights.

I corrected your emotional statement to become factually correct.

 

[JoeB131]

Thank you for, once again, confirming your hate for our Constitution, Founders and, in general, the United States of America.

Come on, Joe, be honest. You never really did take the Oath of Enlistment, did you?

Yes, I did. And if they said that there were pink unicorns, I'd have agreed to that, too, if they paid for my college.

On a more serious note, no, I don't think maniacs should have machine guns because a bunch of clowns who shit in chamber pots couldn't word a militia amendment clearly.

America isn't great because of the Founding Slave Rapists. It would be a pretty shitty place to live if we hadn't progressed beyond them. So I'm not eternally grateful because they saved us from being Canadians.

Of course you would. Anti-gunners want to ban guns like tobacco. That's well known.

Yes, we would - AND FOR THE SAME REASON.

You see, the Tobacco Industry got as far as it did because it lied to people about how dangerous their products were and deliberately marketed them to children.

The gun industry lies to people about what the Second Amendment was about, lies to them about guns making them safer (Gun in the home 43 times more likely to kill a family member than a bad guy.) and even intentionally make guns available to people who plain old shouldn't have them to drive up fear and sales.

I would LOVE to do to the gun industry what we did to the tobacco industry.

 

[2aguy]

Thank you for, once again, confirming your hate for our Constitution, Founders and, in general, the United States of America.

Come on, Joe, be honest. You never really did take the Oath of Enlistment, did you?

Yes, I did. And if they said that there were pink unicorns, I'd have agreed to that, too, if they paid for my college.

On a more serious note, no, I don't think maniacs should have machine guns because a bunch of clowns who shit in chamber pots couldn't word a militia amendment clearly.

America isn't great because of the Founding Slave Rapists. It would be a pretty shitty place to live if we hadn't progressed beyond them. So I'm not eternally grateful because they saved us from being Canadians.

Of course you would. Anti-gunners want to ban guns like tobacco. That's well known.

Yes, we would - AND FOR THE SAME REASON.

You see, the Tobacco Industry got as far as it did because it lied to people about how dangerous their products were and deliberately marketed them to children.

The gun industry lies to people about what the Second Amendment was about, lies to them about guns making them safer (Gun in the home 43 times more likely to kill a family member than a bad guy.) and even intentionally make guns available to people who plain old shouldn't have them to drive up fear and sales.

I would LOVE to do to the gun industry what we did to the tobacco industry.

There you go again...lying....your hero...kellerman....changed that number....because he lied....I showed you where he lied, how he redid his study...still lying but changed the number from 43 to 2.7......and even that wasn't accurate....

And you still use the 43 number.....are you stupid or just a vile asshole?

 

[2aguy]

Thank you for, once again, confirming your hate for our Constitution, Founders and, in general, the United States of America.

Come on, Joe, be honest. You never really did take the Oath of Enlistment, did you?

Yes, I did. And if they said that there were pink unicorns, I'd have agreed to that, too, if they paid for my college.

On a more serious note, no, I don't think maniacs should have machine guns because a bunch of clowns who shit in chamber pots couldn't word a militia amendment clearly.

America isn't great because of the Founding Slave Rapists. It would be a pretty shitty place to live if we hadn't progressed beyond them. So I'm not eternally grateful because they saved us from being Canadians.

Of course you would. Anti-gunners want to ban guns like tobacco. That's well known.

Yes, we would - AND FOR THE SAME REASON.

You see, the Tobacco Industry got as far as it did because it lied to people about how dangerous their products were and deliberately marketed them to children.

The gun industry lies to people about what the Second Amendment was about, lies to them about guns making them safer (Gun in the home 43 times more likely to kill a family member than a bad guy.) and even intentionally make guns available to people who plain old shouldn't have them to drive up fear and sales.

I would LOVE to do to the gun industry what we did to the tobacco industry.

here you go...so you can't lie again........



------------


Nine Myths Of Gun Control

Myth #6 "A homeowner is 43 times as likely to be killed or kill a family member as an intruder"

To suggest that science has proven that defending oneself or one's family with a gun is dangerous, gun prohibitionists repeat Dr. Kellermann's long discredited claim: "a gun owner is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than an intruder." [17]

This fallacy , fabricated using tax dollars, is one of the most misused slogans of the anti-self-defense lobby.

The honest measure of the protective benefits of guns are the lives saved, the injuries prevented, the medical costs saved, and the property protected not Kellermann's burglar or rapist body count.

Only 0.1% (1 in a thousand) of the defensive uses of guns results in the death of the predator. [3]

Any study, such as Kellermann' "43 times" fallacy, that only counts bodies will expectedly underestimate the benefits of gun a thousand fold.

Think for a minute. Would anyone suggest that the only measure of the benefit of law enforcement is the number of people killed by police? Of course not. The honest measure of the benefits of guns are the lives saved, the injuries prevented, the medical costs saved by deaths and injuries averted, and the property protected. 65 lives protected by guns for every life lost to a gun. [2]

Kellermann recently downgraded his estimate to "2.7 times," [18] but he persisted in discredited methodology. He used a method that cannot distinguish between "cause" and "effect." His method would be like finding more diet drinks in the refrigerators of fat people and then concluding that diet drinks "cause" obesity.


Also, he studied groups with high rates of violent criminality, alcoholism, drug addiction, abject poverty, and domestic abuse .


From such a poor and violent study group he attempted to generalize his findings to normal homes

Interestingly, when Dr. Kellermann was interviewed he stated that, if his wife were attacked, he would want her to have a gun for protection.[19] Apparently, Dr. Kellermann doesn't even believe his own studies.


And just for you joe......the follow up study where kellerman changed his number to 2.7...

MMS: Error

After controlling for these characteristics, we found that keeping a gun in the home was strongly and independently associated with an increased risk of homicide (adjusted odds ratio, 2.7;

 

[JoeB131]

There you go again...lying....your hero...kellerman....changed that number....because he lied....I showed you where he lied, how he redid his study...still lying but changed the number from 43 to 2.7......and even that wasn't accurate....

And you still use the 43 number.....are you stupid or just a vile asshole?

Kellerman did nothing of the sort.. and you need to stop reading gun nut propaganda.

here's what Kellerman actually found when he repeated his study.

Injuries and deaths due to firearms in the home. - PubMed - NCBI

OBJECTIVE:
Determine the relative frequency with which guns in the home are used to injure or kill in self-defense, compared with the number of times these weapons are involved in an unintentional injury, suicide attempt, or criminal assault or homicide.

METHODS:
We reviewed the police, medical examiner, emergency medical service, emergency department, and hospital records of all fatal and nonfatal shootings in three U.S. cities: Memphis, Tennessee; Seattle, Washington; and Galveston, Texas.

RESULTS:
During the study interval (12 months in Memphis, 18 months in Seattle, and Galveston) 626 shootings occurred in or around a residence. This total included 54 unintentional shootings, 118 attempted or completed suicides, and 438 assaults/homicides. Thirteen shootings were legally justifiable or an act of self-defense, including three that involved law enforcement officers acting in the line of duty. For every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.

CONCLUSIONS:
Guns kept in homes are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal accidental shooting, criminal assault, or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.

 

[2aguy]

There you go again...lying....your hero...kellerman....changed that number....because he lied....I showed you where he lied, how he redid his study...still lying but changed the number from 43 to 2.7......and even that wasn't accurate....

And you still use the 43 number.....are you stupid or just a vile asshole?

Kellerman did nothing of the sort.. and you need to stop reading gun nut propaganda.

here's what Kellerman actually found when he repeated his study.

Injuries and deaths due to firearms in the home. - PubMed - NCBI

OBJECTIVE:
Determine the relative frequency with which guns in the home are used to injure or kill in self-defense, compared with the number of times these weapons are involved in an unintentional injury, suicide attempt, or criminal assault or homicide.

METHODS:
We reviewed the police, medical examiner, emergency medical service, emergency department, and hospital records of all fatal and nonfatal shootings in three U.S. cities: Memphis, Tennessee; Seattle, Washington; and Galveston, Texas.

RESULTS:
During the study interval (12 months in Memphis, 18 months in Seattle, and Galveston) 626 shootings occurred in or around a residence. This total included 54 unintentional shootings, 118 attempted or completed suicides, and 438 assaults/homicides. Thirteen shootings were legally justifiable or an act of self-defense, including three that involved law enforcement officers acting in the line of duty. For every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.

CONCLUSIONS:
Guns kept in homes are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal accidental shooting, criminal assault, or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.

Moron..I gave you his actual study...twit.

 

[JoeB131]

Moron..I gave you his actual study...twit.

No, you gave a link to a website called "Rense.com", a website that also talks about Chemtrails.

I posted one to the government website that funded the study.

 

[2aguy]

There you go again...lying....your hero...kellerman....changed that number....because he lied....I showed you where he lied, how he redid his study...still lying but changed the number from 43 to 2.7......and even that wasn't accurate....

And you still use the 43 number.....are you stupid or just a vile asshole?

Kellerman did nothing of the sort.. and you need to stop reading gun nut propaganda.

here's what Kellerman actually found when he repeated his study.

Injuries and deaths due to firearms in the home. - PubMed - NCBI

OBJECTIVE:
Determine the relative frequency with which guns in the home are used to injure or kill in self-defense, compared with the number of times these weapons are involved in an unintentional injury, suicide attempt, or criminal assault or homicide.

METHODS:
We reviewed the police, medical examiner, emergency medical service, emergency department, and hospital records of all fatal and nonfatal shootings in three U.S. cities: Memphis, Tennessee; Seattle, Washington; and Galveston, Texas.

RESULTS:
During the study interval (12 months in Memphis, 18 months in Seattle, and Galveston) 626 shootings occurred in or around a residence. This total included 54 unintentional shootings, 118 attempted or completed suicides, and 438 assaults/homicides. Thirteen shootings were legally justifiable or an act of self-defense, including three that involved law enforcement officers acting in the line of duty. For every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.

CONCLUSIONS:
Guns kept in homes are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal accidental shooting, criminal assault, or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.

Wow...you actually lied right there...a blatant, in your face lie...I called you out on your 43 number and told you kellerman changed it...You used his first study........and say I am wrong...by leaving out the last part where they confirm what I said..in his updated study........2.7....and he even got that wrong because he looked at sociopaths and pathological homes...and claimed that represented normal gun owners...

Here...the part you left off...you vile, liar...

After controlling for these characteristics, we found that keeping a gun in the home was strongly and independently associated with an increased risk of homicide (adjusted odds ratio, 2.7; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.6 to 4.4). Virtually all of this risk involved homicide by a family member or intimate acquaintance.

 

[2aguy]

Moron..I gave you his actual study...twit.

No, you gave a link to a website called "Rense.com", a website that also talks about Chemtrails.

I posted one to the government website that funded the study.

I posted the New England Journal of Medicine study asswipe..........Rense just went into detail about how he lied in order to get his number and then changed his number while still lying about the subjects he studied and how their drug and alcohol use, criminal records and histories of violence actually was the cause...and not simply having a gun in the home.............asshole.....

 

[2aguy]

There you go again...lying....your hero...kellerman....changed that number....because he lied....I showed you where he lied, how he redid his study...still lying but changed the number from 43 to 2.7......and even that wasn't accurate....

And you still use the 43 number.....are you stupid or just a vile asshole?

Kellerman did nothing of the sort.. and you need to stop reading gun nut propaganda.

here's what Kellerman actually found when he repeated his study.

Injuries and deaths due to firearms in the home. - PubMed - NCBI

OBJECTIVE:
Determine the relative frequency with which guns in the home are used to injure or kill in self-defense, compared with the number of times these weapons are involved in an unintentional injury, suicide attempt, or criminal assault or homicide.

METHODS:
We reviewed the police, medical examiner, emergency medical service, emergency department, and hospital records of all fatal and nonfatal shootings in three U.S. cities: Memphis, Tennessee; Seattle, Washington; and Galveston, Texas.

RESULTS:
During the study interval (12 months in Memphis, 18 months in Seattle, and Galveston) 626 shootings occurred in or around a residence. This total included 54 unintentional shootings, 118 attempted or completed suicides, and 438 assaults/homicides. Thirteen shootings were legally justifiable or an act of self-defense, including three that involved law enforcement officers acting in the line of duty. For every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.

CONCLUSIONS:
Guns kept in homes are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal accidental shooting, criminal assault, or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.

Here...my New England Journal of Medicine study link...which you saw and have to pretend didn't exist.... where he lied...and this is the updated study...yours is the original lie.......the one he had to reduce because it was so obvious he had to cherry pick the worst subjects in those 3 cherry picked counties to get his result......

He cherry picked 3 counties, and focused on the worst neighborhoods he could find because that was the only way he could get that number.....

MMS: Error

RESULTS
During the study period, 1860 homicides occurred in the three counties, 444 of them (23.9 percent) in the home of the victim. After excluding 24 cases for various reasons, we interviewed proxy respondents for 93 percent of the victims. Controls were identified for 99 percent of these, yielding 388 matched pairs.

As compared with the controls, the victims more often lived alone or rented their residence. Also, case households more commonly contained an illicit-drug user, a person with prior arrests, or someone who had been hit or hurt in a fight in the home.


After controlling for these characteristics, we found that keeping a gun in the home was strongly and independently associated with an increased risk of homicide (adjusted odds ratio, 2.7; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.6 to 4.4). Virtually all of this risk involved homicide by a family member or intimate acquaintance.

Full Text of Results...


So...not normal gun owners...and yet he put out the idea...taken up by anti gunners all over the country that normal gun owners were the subject of his study...and they weren't..........he lied.....because he had to lie to get the numbers he did....

 

[JoeB131]

Wow...you actually lied right there...a blatant, in your face lie...I called you out on your 43 number and told you kellerman changed it...You used his first study........and say I am wrong...by leaving out the last part where they confirm what I said..in his updated study..

Except he said nothing of the sort. He just expended it to include the wounded... But his point remains- a gun in the home is STILL far more likely to kill or wound someone in the house.

The Gun Industry lies, and you accept their lies.

But go ahead and keep citing the website with the Chem-Trails, that gives you crediblity.

Rense just went into detail about how he lied in order to get his number and then changed his number while still lying about the subjects he studied and how their drug and alcohol use, criminal records and histories of violence actually was the cause...and not simply having a gun in the home.

Rense is a nutter website.

Sorry, man, guns are dangerous to the people who own them and your dick is still very tiny.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Sorry, man…your dick is still very tiny.

Why are you so obsessed with other people's dicks, and with making unwarranted assumptions about their size?

This sure looks to me like a clear case of psychological projection, mixed in with some much more creepy crap going on in your head.

 

[2aguy]

Wow...you actually lied right there...a blatant, in your face lie...I called you out on your 43 number and told you kellerman changed it...You used his first study........and say I am wrong...by leaving out the last part where they confirm what I said..in his updated study..

Except he said nothing of the sort. He just expended it to include the wounded... But his point remains- a gun in the home is STILL far more likely to kill or wound someone in the house.

The Gun Industry lies, and you accept their lies.

But go ahead and keep citing the website with the Chem-Trails, that gives you crediblity.

Rense just went into detail about how he lied in order to get his number and then changed his number while still lying about the subjects he studied and how their drug and alcohol use, criminal records and histories of violence actually was the cause...and not simply having a gun in the home.

Rense is a nutter website.

Sorry, man, guns are dangerous to the people who own them and your dick is still very tiny.

Yeah...tell me how the New England Journal of Medicine...which is the link I gave you for his actual study where he says 2.7 instead of 43....tell me how that is an NRA site....moron.

 

[2aguy]

Wow...you actually lied right there...a blatant, in your face lie...I called you out on your 43 number and told you kellerman changed it...You used his first study........and say I am wrong...by leaving out the last part where they confirm what I said..in his updated study..

Except he said nothing of the sort. He just expended it to include the wounded... But his point remains- a gun in the home is STILL far more likely to kill or wound someone in the house.

The Gun Industry lies, and you accept their lies.

But go ahead and keep citing the website with the Chem-Trails, that gives you crediblity.

Rense just went into detail about how he lied in order to get his number and then changed his number while still lying about the subjects he studied and how their drug and alcohol use, criminal records and histories of violence actually was the cause...and not simply having a gun in the home.

Rense is a nutter website.

Sorry, man, guns are dangerous to the people who own them and your dick is still very tiny.

Wrong...if you are a criminal with a long criminal record, have a history of violent behavior and or drug and alcohol abuse, then you are just dangerous and a gun doesn't make you more dangerous...ask the wife who was hacked to death with a 10 dollar Wal Mart hatchet......

Normal people do not shoot each other in arguments at home.....

Accidental gun deaths....586 in 2014....out of a sample of 357,000,000 guns in private hands....

total gun murders in 2014...8,124

of the 8,124 gun murders, 90% of the shooters had long histories of crime going back to their teens, with multiple felonies, and long histories of violence......

and of the other 10%...you have many of them who are unconvicted criminals, mass shooters, and people like the abortion clinic mass shooter who was accused of rape but the woman was too afraid to testify..on top of his history of violence.....

So no....normal people who own guns are not using them to murder family members....and gun accidents deaths are rare for the number of guns in private hands.......

8,124 gun murders by mostly criminals...

586 accidental gun deaths...

35,000 accidental car deaths...

Keep the gun, ban cars....