Some facts about guns in the US

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by James R, Dec 17, 2012.

  1. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    I know that I do not miss the target more than 3% of the time.
    I know that those who would abrogate my rights have no sense of morality.

    I think that there are far too many immoral people out there.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. billvon Valued Senior Member

    That's fine. I do not demand that everyone bike to work. If someone wants to drive to work, that's fine too. Both can coexist.
    It does not.
    Again, are you willing to apply that across the board? Or do you just want to apply that to guns?

    Now let's post a news story and ask you the same question:
    A young Oklahoma mother shot and killed an intruder to protect her 3-month-old baby on New Year's Eve, less than a week after the baby's father died of cancer.

    Sarah McKinley says that a week earlier a man named Justin Martin dropped by on the day of her husband's funeral, claiming that he was a neighbor who wanted to say hello. The 18-year-old Oklahoma City area woman did not let him into her home that day.

    On New Year's Eve Martin returned with another man, Dustin Stewart, and this time was armed with a 12-inch hunting knife. The two soon began trying to break into McKinley's home.

    As one of the men was going from door to door outside her home trying to gain entry, McKinley called 911 and grabbed her 12-gauge shotgun.

    McKinley told ABC News Oklahoma City affiliate KOCO that she quickly got her 12 gauge, went into her bedroom and got a pistol, put the bottle in the baby's mouth and called 911.

    "I've got two guns in my hand -- is it okay to shoot him if he comes in this door?" the young mother asked the 911 dispatcher. "I'm here by myself with my infant baby, can I please get a dispatcher out here immediately?"

    The 911 dispatcher confirmed with McKinley that the doors to her home were locked as she asked again if it was okay to shoot the intruder if he were to come through her door. . . .

    When Martin kicked in the door and came after her with the knife, the teen mom shot and killed the 24-year-old. Police are calling the shooting justified.

    How many 3 month old babies (and their mothers) have to die because Tiassa is afraid of guns?
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    The only thing I should like to ask is if weapons other than for hunting, are by definition designed for killing people? If so, possessing a non-hunting gun indicates an expectation of having to defend your life with deadly force. Against whom?
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    you do know its against forums rules to threaten another member?

    what right of yours am i trying abrogate? the magical right to a gun that the NRA made up and got right wing activist judges to to push?
  8. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Waitresses Carry Guns At Aptly Named Restaurant In Aptly Named Town

    AP Posted: 07/04/2014 9:37 am EDT Updated: 3 hours ago Print Article
    Huff Post

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Waitresses with their sidearms in front of the Shooters Grill in Rifle, Colo., June 23, 2014.

    RIFLE, Colo. (AP) — Many stores and restaurants are telling people not to bring their guns inside, but one western Colorado restaurant not only embraces the practice of packing heat, it encourages its customers to carry openly — and its waitresses do, too.

    As she takes your order at Shooters Grill in the town of Rifle — yes, Rifle — waitress Ashlee Saenz carries a pad, pen and a loaded Ruger .357 Blackhawk revolver holstered on her leg, Old West style.

    It's loaded, and she knows how to use it.

    Colorado is among the states where openly carrying a gun in public is legal. The issue has made headlines after gun rights activists carrying loaded rifles gathered in Target stores in Texas, Alabama and North Carolina to demonstrate their support of "open carry" laws. On Wednesday, Target Corp. asked its customers "respectfully" to not bring firearms into stores, even where allowed by law.

    But in Rifle, Saenz, her co-workers and her customers at Shooters Grill are encouraged to bring their holstered guns in the restaurant, The Glenwood Springs Post Independent reports ( ).


    I always feel safer eating lunch when it is served by pistol packin' mammas. Don't y'all?
  9. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    A slight majority of Americans (like a slight majority of the entire world population) now live in metropolitan regions. Distances within a metropolitan region are probably inconceivable to people who don't live there, but people who live within bicycling distance of their job are a small percentage of the population. My last job in the Washington-Baltimore metropolitan area, for instance, was thirty miles from my home!

    There was a time when a man could buy a house within a short distance of his job and plan on staying there forever because he had a pretty good chance of keeping that job until he retired. (Women didn't figure into this because few of them had jobs.) But it's just not that way anymore. Today the average American changes jobs every 4-5 years. He's lucky if he can still drive to it from his house instead of having to move to another state, but its fer shure that he won't be able to commute by bicycle.

    Then, by Be'elzebub, we finally agree on something! Starting with 9/11, terrorists have killed an average of roughly 300 American civilians per year. During that same time period, about 450 American military personnel have been killed per year in the War on Terror.

    Is that supposed to be a bargain??? Especially when you add in the 12,000 Iraqis and Afghanis who were killed every year--virtually all of whom had nothing to do with 9/11 since, as we now know, it was planned, financed, managed and executed primarily by Saudis! The energy-industry bosom-buddies of the traitorous Bush family, who had to deflect the blame to somebody.

    Then factor in the turnover of our airports to the Homeland Gestapo so it's no longer feasible for a consultant to fly home every weekend. And shall we talk about the financial cost, the $3 trillion that Backward Baby Bush borrowed from China and added to the national debt, which for inexplicable reasons everyone now blames on Obama?

    Yes, like all wars since Korea (and many of us insist that Korea also belongs on this list), the War on Terror is simply a way for a lot of corporations to make a lot of money. It has nothing to do with our safety. In fact, the destabilization of Iraq and Afghanistan has domino'ed throughout the entire Middle East, from Syria to Palestine to Iran to Pakistan, turning it into a powder keg. Who thinks that this won't make us less safe?
  10. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Protesters with picket signs do not stop people from meeting their friends at the mall to go shopping. They might slow down the first twenty people who enter the mall through that particular entrance by fifteen seconds, right when they start their protest but before the security staff shows up to corral them.

    Again, I don't see how you can compare this to the risk of being shot dead. Business at the Mall in Columbia was down measurably for three weeks. And the store in which the gun-totin' asshole did the deed was shuttered for four months, reopening with an entirely new façade that doesn't bring back memories of the old one.

    The little putz didn't even have enough assets to confiscate to cover any of the damage, much less the loss of life. (Based on life insurance sales and jury awards, the average American values his life at just under $10M.) I hope they're going after his parents. If you raise a kid like that, you should be thrown into a pit of vipers.

    What's irrational about my fear of being one of the 30,000 Americans who will die this year because the National Rifle Assholes have control of Congress? I worry just as much as I do about being one of the 30,000 Americans who will die in road accidents. I wear my seat belt, I drive the safest car I can afford (a Mercedes-Benz SUV), and I never drive when I'm exhausted, intoxicated or distracted.

    Not much I can do about the risk of guns. Those pendejos are everywhere.

    Not malls specifically. This is the only mall shooting in the Washington-Baltimore metro area since I moved here in 2002. In fact it might be the first one ever, since none of the news stories included the words, "the first mall shooting since..."

    But a few months after I arrived, the Beltway Snipers (John Allan Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo) began terrorizing the entire region, killing ten people in widely separated outdoor locations in three weeks, crouched in a parked nondescript old Chevy and shooting a high-powered rifle through a hole in the trunk.

    Where? It's become fashionable for gun nuts to shoot anywhere there are crowds of people, including movie theaters, parking lots, university campuses, high schools, and for God's sake, even elementary schools!

    That's not a very long list. Most hunters call what they do "sport," even though the animal is given no chance to fight back, unlike other ridiculous, violent sports like boxing or hockey. I'll call hunting a "sport" as soon as I start seeing a few thousand hunters killed by elk or wild boars every year. Make the shit-heads fight with spears and knives!

    Yet they kill five times as many innocent people as criminals.

    My reward for allowing other people to have guns is my one-percent probability that some day one of the Paleolithic-throwbacks will SHOOT ME.

    They should all be sent to another planet where they can happily shoot each other all day every day until there's only one left, and he can't reproduce by himself.
  11. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Shooters instead of Hooters.......
    that is very funny.
  12. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Uh, no, that was you - you started that ball rolling, by comparing a one in lightning bolt chance of being killed by a criminal psychopath who has smuggled a gun into a shopping mall with a global suppression of your right of peaceful assembly where you do enjoy it.

    And yes, one considers the influence of psychiatric disorder when reading that kind of stuff, but it is so typical of suburbanites to dramatize their misconceived fears of the real world that medical issues are not really indicated in any individual case.

    The common back story in these things is one of desperate parents bankrupting themselves on psychiatrists, calling police or social services, trying to get some attention, help, etc, for years prior. But don't let that curb your enthusiasm in pursuit of the acceptable witch.

    And once again with the stupid. So? We have to politely try to fix your ignorance and carelessness every time you open your yap in this matter? How many times is enough? .

    Bullshit, technically. You almost certainly do not have a one percent of being shot in your life, should you ever make the calculation, and you know it.

    And you do not "allow" other people to have guns. That isn't how it works, in the US.

    The second amendment specifically mentions militia, which were (and usually are) by definition formed of private citizens armed with their own personal militia-grade weapons.

    So? As an example of the ridiculous situations allowing people to have accidents with their cars can create, that's a good one. All the more reason to pass such sensible legislation, and get people to take their driving seriously as the matter of life and death it most manifestly is. The society of responsible car owners (a term in need of definition, obviously) will have to adjust.

    And it would be much, much simpler to make and enforce such eminently sensible laws regarding responsible car management, because driving is a privilege in the US - in my State, a privilege that can be revoked for dropping out of high school, or failing to meet one's child support obligations.

    Consider the apparent absurdity of that situation - you can kill someone with a car and be on the road driving the next day, you can attempt suicide with a car and the authorities will not even take your license, but miss a couple of child support payments and you can lose your license even with a job hanging in the balance. Obviously the priorities here are out of whack - so we should fix them, eh?

    No, we're not. And no plain reading of my posts would suggest that.

    You have a vendetta going here, and it's interfering with everything from your reading comprehension to your estimation of other people's political stances.

    I am in favor of tight, sane, enforceable restrictions on firearms in the US - a serious tightening and cleaning up of the existing slipshod mess, including explicit assignment of responsibility to the right of gun possession. This has been my plain, clear, and repeated stance from my first appearance here, and the only political stance I have ever "advocated" here or anywhere. That's my "outlook", and it's hardly "inexplicable". And most - by far the majority of - gun owners seem to agree with me, including most NRA members.

    In a thread devoted to "facts about guns", that's one of the few relevant facts on the table.

    Contrast with this:
    You can not shoot yourself on purpose - that reduces your risk by 2/3. You can not keep a gun in your home where your family can get at it or you might shoot yourself cleaning it etc - another 5-10%. You can avoid financial dealings or hanging around with young male organized criminals in urban locations - another 15-20%. The rest is perhaps not as easily avoided - as with comparable hazards (lightning, food poisoning, etc), it would require alterations in lifestyle you may not wish to make - but we're down around the extra risk of eating peanut butter in large quantities, and far below the risk of watching too much television.

    So panicky revocations of other people's Constitutional rights seem a bit disproportionate, as a response, in general, eh?

    And btw: that SUV you drive? You are endangering other people with it. Such large, topheavy, and tall vehicles not only interfere with other people's vision and safety margins, but they inflict greater damage on other vehicles in crashes, they are more likely to go out of control during emergency maneuvers, they roll easier and take longer to brake to a stop, and so forth. If you like, I can maybe run the numbers for you and estimate how many extra people die and are badly injured every year due to the extra hazards of allowing private citizens to possess and drive SUVs, and we can compare that with the number of people killed by these random mass shootings every year - what do you think the numbers would show?
    Last edited: Jul 5, 2014
  13. Defined By Labels Banned Banned

    As far as deaths from car accidents.. we are working to reduce those. Making legislation against drunk driving, speeding, talking/texting while driving. Some states I believe have laws against eating while driving, the stereotypical putting on makeup while driving (lol), etc.

    Cars (being driven) need to be registered. We need to pass written and/or behind the wheel tests. Some of these vary by states.. But I do support making driving a motor vehicle, a dangerous metal box on wheels, back to being a PRIVILEGE like it's suppose to be. I love firearms, I love shooting but I believe owning a firearm should be a PRIVILEGE, much like how Switzerland treats gun ownership. Plus, Swiss boys, the larger demographic that owns and carries firearms, are raised from youth to join the militia. They are tested and trained for proper handling, operation and storage of firearms. That is something SERIOUSLY lacking here in the US.
    Most people who support "gun control" aren't trying to take all of your guns away, just trying to make sure people like Elliot Rodger aren't able to easily/legally obtain a dangerous weapon.

    - Possible things some of us are asking for to ensure questionable people aren't just easily handed a gun -
    *Because no matter how much I love America, my fellow Americans make it really hard to love American citizenship. 240-ish million questionable American adults.
    - Criminal Background Checks
    - Registration of firearms (first or second hand purchases)
    - Knowledge test based on proper handling, operation and storage of any firearms.
    - Marksmanship. Make sure that little old granny or overzealous "cowboy" can at least hit the broad side of a barn.
    (Possible minimum hours to target practice like with driving)
    - Possibly mental background check (more so evaluation) Some fucking doctor decided to jump the gun (sorry for the gun lol) and label an incident of mine as self inflicted, which has now prevented me from enlisting in the military alongside my buddy. However I'd pass a psych evaluation with flying colors.
  14. Stoniphi obscurely fossiliferous Valued Senior Member

    Welcome to the Sciforums, pleased to meet you.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Yes sir.

    Sorry Frag, but we humans are predators. We have a legacy of killing other animals and eating them. We kill each other as well. As long as we fail to admit this to ourselves so we can come up with ways to sublimate these violent tendencies (your dreaded hockey, boxing and the like) we will continue to work these out on each other informally. Guns or no guns.
  15. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Don't misunderstand.
    People like doing what it is that they are good at, and get good at what it is that they like doing.
    It is a simple pleasure that I enjoy a few times a year when I'm shopping for venison.
    Eating wild game is healthier than eating feedlot beef, and a damned site more ecologically friendly.

    Every skillset develops best at certain points in our physical and psychological development. I was raised in a single parent household, and back in the 50's, women were grossly underpaid, so, i grew up poor. So, i started putting meat on the table by hunting and trapping when I was 10 or 11 years old. By the time I was in my mid teens, I simply did not miss with a rifle or shotgun. A few years later, the M14 was a real treat. It seemed that all of the good shots had grown up hunting. So, denying hunting firearms to young people means we most likely end up with a generation whose military acumen is hinged on "spray and pray", which would most likely result in a lot more "collateral damage".

    I'm an old man. It ain't just my rights I want to preserve, it's the rights of the next 1-2-3-etc generations.
  16. Bells Staff Member

    A gunman killed at least six people, including four children, and wounded a teenager in a Houston suburb and then engaged police in a three-hour standoff before finally surrendering late Wednesday.

    The suspect, who has not yet been identified, is believed to be the biological father of some of the children and the adoptive father to the others, reports.

    Harris County Constable Ron Hickman said the incident appeared to be a "domestic situation gone south," and that it may have involved a divorce or separation.

    Police say three children and two adults were dead at the scene. Two wounded children, ages 4 and 15, were taken to the hospital, where the 4-year-old later died, KTRK reported.

    KHOU says the survivor, a 15-year-old girl, told police the suspect was on his way to another location to kill more people.

    She remains in critical condition, but police were able to use her information to intercept the suspect's car, leading to a 25-minute chase before authorities disabled his vehicle using rumble stripes, the Houston Chronicle reports.

    Then, the standoff began.

    Anyone here thankful that he was exercising his Constitutional Rights to own firearms?
  17. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Some days, it seems that whenever there is a gun related tragedy:
    The ghoulish gun control nutjobs come out of the woodwork like a plague of cockroaches to feast upon the rotting flesh of the poor dead victims.
  18. billvon Valued Senior Member

    If it bugs you just post something like this in reply:
    Woman hiding with kids shoots intruder

    Updated: 10:08 p.m. Friday, Jan. 4, 2013 | Posted: 3:25 p.m. Friday, Jan. 4, 2013

    Deputies arrested 32-year-old Atlanta resident Paul Slater in connection with the break-in. He was most recently released from jail in August.

    A woman hiding in her attic with children shot an intruder multiple times before fleeing to safety Friday.
    The incident happened at a home on Henderson Ridge Lane in Loganville around 1 p.m. The woman was working in an upstairs office when she spotted a strange man outside a window, according to Walton County Sheriff Joe Chapman. He said she took her 9-year-old twins to a crawlspace before the man broke in using a crowbar.
    But the man eventually found the family.
    "The perpetrator opens that door. Of course, at that time he's staring at her, her two children and a .38 revolver," Chapman told Channel 2’s Kerry Kavanaugh.
    The woman then shot him five times, but he survived, Chapman said. He said the woman ran out of bullets but threatened to shoot the intruder if he moved.
    "She's standing over him, and she realizes she's fired all six rounds. And the guy's telling her to quit shooting," Chapman said.
    The woman ran to a neighbor's home with her children. The intruder attempted to flee in his car but crashed into a wooded area and collapsed in a nearby driveway, Chapman said.
    Deputies arrested 32-year-old Atlanta resident Paul Slater in connection with the crime. Chapman said they found him on the ground saying, "Help me. I'm close to dying." Slater was taken to Gwinnett Medical Center for treatment. Chapman said Slater was shot in the face and neck.
  19. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Yeh billvon, that'll do.
    There ain't too many things a full grown male grizzly bear fears in this world. One of them is a momma grizzly with cubs.
  20. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    i didn't don't worry your threat came through wide and clear
  21. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    yes the people who want gun control are goulish. as opposed to a upstanding idividual who would imply he would shoot at, and not miss, someone cause he didn't like their views
  22. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Originally Posted by sculptor View Post

    Is this part of your sense of humor?

    Think about this.
    If i ever actually wanted to bother with shooting anyone: What advantage would i gain by threatening them first?

    I shoot for meat and I ain't a cannibal.

    .............There are many millions of guns and gun owners and hunters in this country.
    Why focus on the lunatic few?
    Are these lunatic killers your secret heroes?
    Are they living your fantasies?
  23. Bells Staff Member

    One US city, one weekend, 84 people shot and 14 killed..

    "Ghoulish gun control nutjobs" simply do not have the time...

    The man charged with slaughtering six of his ex-wife's relatives had a history of domestic violence on his record, police say.

    Ron Lee Haskell, 33, surrendered after a three-hour standoff that started late Wednesday at a home in a Houston suburb. NBC News reports that he had been arrested in 2008 over domestic-related charges.

    Haskell allegedly forced his way into his ex-wife's relatives' home Wednesday, and tied up five children, ages 4, 7, 9, 13 and 15. He shot those children and two adults, execution-style, in the back of the head, police say.


    The couple's problems began in 2008, when they were living in Utah. Haskell was arrested on suspicion of domestic violence, simple assault and committing an act of violence in front of children. NBC News reports:

    Melannie Haskell told police her husband dragged her out of their bedroom by her hair and hit her in the side of the head.

    In 2009, Haskell told police that his wife had left and he believed she was going to harm herself. He followed up, and said he found his wife and was taking her to the hospital, records show.

    Then, a year ago, Melannie Haskell filed for an order of protection against him. A judge granted the order, and she filed for divorce the following month.
    In October, the Haskells agreed to a mutual restraining order and arranged for mutual custody of their children.

    Aren't you thankful he was able to exercise his Constitutional rights?

    You want ghoulish?

    In their latest display of indifference for public safety, the National Rifle Association is now challenging proposed federal legislation that would prohibit those convicted of stalking and of domestic violence against dating partners from buying guns.

    Existing federal law already (sort of) prohibits convicted domestic abusers from purchasing firearms, but the new legislation would expand those protections. The bill, S. 1290, introduced by Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), would add convicted stalkers to the group of offenders banned from buying guns. It would also expand the current definition of those convicted of domestic violence against “intimate partners” to include those who harmed dating partners.

    The NRA wrote to senators to voice their opposition to the bill, noting that the group “strongly opposes” the legislation because it “manipulates emotionally compelling issues such as ‘domestic violence’ and ‘stalking’ simply to cast as wide a net as possible for firearm prohibitions,”according to the Huffington Post, which obtained the letter. The NRA described Klobuchar’s legislation as “a bill to turn disputes between family members and social acquaintances into lifetime firearm prohibitions.”


    It’s important to remember that the proposed legislation only applies to those convicted of stalking. Not someone who is suspected of stalking or accused of stalking or charged with stalking, but a person who is convicted of stalking. If you are familiar with the statistics, domestic violence and stalking have dismally low conviction rates. It’s not easy to become a convicted stalker. Those who do get convicted of stalking have done a lot more than just driving by an ex’s house one too many times or sending a few nasty emails — they’ve shown, beyond a reasonable doubt, that they pose a threat. Essentially, by definition, convicted stalkers are dangerous.

    The NRA is also ignoring some pretty significant numbers when they push against the proposed reform. Each year, an average of at least 1,000 people with misdemeanor domestic violence convictions are able to purchase guns without being identified by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. The actual number is likely much higher. And a review of conviction records in 20 states showed that there are at least 11,986 individuals across the country who have been convicted of misdemeanor-level stalking but are still permitted to possess guns under federal law. It is likely that there are tens of thousands of additional convicted stalkers who are able to buy guns.

    Firearms in in the hands of abusers and stalkers pose a major threat to victims. Each day in the U.S., at least three women are murdered by a boyfriend or a husband — and guns kill more women in domestic violence homicides than all other weapons combined. In fact, gun acessibility is one of the strongest predictors of homicide in abusive relationships: Domestic abusers with access to guns are seven times more likely to murder their partners. Additionally, one recent study found that women are up to 83 percent more likely to experience repeat abuse by their male partners if a gun is used in the initial abuse incident. The use of firearms in the first abusive incident was the strongest predictor of ongoing abuse, even when controlling for factors like socioeconomic status and neighborhood violence. Based on these findings, the researchers stated that guns in the home are a “red flag” indicating the “danger and severity of abuse over time.”

    Furthermore, a report released by the Center for American Progress last week shows that stalkers and physically abusive dating partners are often just as deadly as a violent spouse. Almost half of all intimate-partner homicides are committed by a non-married, non-cohabitating dating partner who was not covered by federal gun restrictions.

    Most significantly in the context of the current debate, research shows that approximately 76 percent of women who are murdered by an intimate partner were stalked within the past year.

    So I'll ask again, are you happy and glad that people like Ron Lee Haskell have the NRA watching their backs and fighting for him to be allowed to purchase and keep guns?

    Haskell allegedly forced his way into his ex-wife's relatives' home Wednesday, and tied up five children, ages 4, 7, 9, 13 and 15. He shot those children and two adults, execution-style, in the back of the head, police say.

    Bet the NRA are really happy and pleased with themselves, since they are fighting tooth and nail to ensure that people like Haskell can remain armed.

Share This Page