More gun laws? Why? Anti's need to look at the facts and then STFU

[rushmc 23]

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/doj-children-unmarried-38x-more-likely-be-victims-violent-crime

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/vcay9410.pdf

Quote

The study shows a heavy drop—a full 95%—in gun-related violence toward youth from 1994 to 2010.

Moreover, the study shows that "serious crimes against youth perpetrated at schools dropped 62%" over this same period of time.

The study also showed that youth who came from a single parent home were 3.8 times more likely to be a victim of violent crime, and "homicides among American youth declined by 65 percent from 1993 to 2010."

Quote

The study—“Violent Crime Against Youth, 1994-2010”--also discovered that American youth who were victims of a serious violent crime in 2010 were six times more likely to have been attacked by a perpetrator wielding a knife than one wielding a gun.

Serious violent crimes against youth perpetrated at schools dropped 62 percent from 1994 to 2010, said the study, and students were less likely to become victims of a serious violent crime at school than they were away from school. In 2010, 6.6 out of every 1,000 youth became victims of a serious violent crime at school while 7.4 of every 1,000 became victims of a serious violent crime away from school.

The bolded part just for Quade

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Sure destroys the more guns more crime argument given the number of new guns on the streets in the same time period

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,034]

It would be easier to look at facts about gun violence if the GOP controlled Congress hadn't, at the request of the NRA, suppressed scientific research on gun violence.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

It would be easier to look at facts about gun violence if the GOP controlled Congress hadn't, at the request of the NRA, suppressed scientific research on gun violence.

DoJ is not good enough for you

Thanks for helping with my point

Now please read the title of the OP again

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[DrewEckhardt 0]

Quote

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/doj-children-unmarried-38x-more-likely-be-victims-violent-crime

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/vcay9410.pdf

You are confused. This is _NOT_ about facts. It's about

1. Political power. Politicians remain in power by "doing something" about problems without offending too many campaign contributors which the NRA is not for anti-gun politicians.

2. Elitism. Our ruling class is better than us which is why Dianne Feinstein can have a concealed carry permit but I can't.

3. Emotions. Otherwise reasonable people have visceral reactions to guns especially black ones.

4. Estrogen. Gun ownership is more a male thing - in 2010 33 percent of men owned guns versus 9.9% of women.

We'll loose faster until we accept those realities and act accordingly.

1. The NRA-ILA used to endorse anti-gun Republicans over Democrats with more favorable treatment of gun rights. Fortunately they quit helping our opponents' slow trudge towards victory.

2. The ruling class will remain privileged regardless of what we do.

3. Many urban peoples' experience with guns is limited to seeing them in police patrol cars or on an officer's belt plus what they've seen in the movies and on TV. A trip to the firing range can do wonders to dispel their fantasies.

You can also find something they fear more than guns. I suggested to one woman that Bush/Cheney/Rove could send her children to die in the Middle East and pondered a bit about Bush 43 "If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator," satisfying his career goals. She came around on the Second Amendment.

4. The National Crime and Victimization surveys show that in confrontational crimes (notably rape) criminals' chances of success and the victim injury rate is lowest when people resist with a gun compared to everything else (except running away in some cases). Guns protect women.

As a man abortion rights aren't a personal issue for me. If necessary I can afford to fly women in my family to free states/countries. OTOH, as a firearms enthusiast gun laws have practical implications. Given a choice between package deals with a Democrat candidate who's pro-choice and anti-gun and Republican candidate who's anti-abortion but pro-gun I'll take the Republican. Obviously demographics and Gerrymandering may preclude me getting the Republican for my district, although it's pretty easy to fund such candidates elsewhere in winnable races. Women may do better if their candidates stay away from guns.

[quade 4]

What was the number of single incident mass killings (single events at schools, business, shopping malls, etc.) perpetrated by knife wielders last year?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[DrewEckhardt 0]

Quote

What was the number of single incident mass killings (single events at schools, business, shopping malls, etc.) perpetrated by knife wielders last year?

Approximately zero just like the number done with guns.

[billvon 3,009]

"and then STFU"

The party of "fuck you" strikes again.

In general I find that a policy of telling everyone to go fuck themselves ends up losing people elections, policy debates and, in general, a place in rational discussion.

[quade 4]

Quote

Quote

What was the number of single incident mass killings (single events at schools, business, shopping malls, etc.) perpetrated by knife wielders last year?

Approximately zero just like the number done with guns.

http://www.thenation.com/blog/171774/fifteen-us-mass-shootings-happened-2012-84-dead

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[DrewEckhardt 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

What was the number of single incident mass killings (single events at schools, business, shopping malls, etc.) perpetrated by knife wielders last year?

Approximately zero just like the number done with guns.

http://www.thenation.com/blog/171774/fifteen-us-mass-shootings-happened-2012-84-dead

That confirms my statement. In 2012

.0000051% of Americans (1 in 19.5 million) committed mass shootings.

and

.0000282% of Americans (1 in 3.5 million) were killed in one.

The numbers of annual mass murders and their victims are approximately zero in the context of our country with 311,000,000 residents.

[lawrocket 3]

This doesn't make any lists.
http://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/story?section=news/local&id=8944026

I don't know about last year, but since 2013, there have been more mass stabbings than mass shootings.

Another one about a month ago. http://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/story?section=news/local&id=8913828

About a week ago, a cop shot a dude. Dude had a knife. Excessive force, maybe?
http://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/story?section=news/local&id=8944692

Found a triple shooting: http://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/story?section=news/local&id=8942961

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

"and then STFU"

The party of "fuck you" strikes again.

In general I find that a policy of telling everyone to go fuck themselves ends up losing people elections, policy debates and, in general, a place in rational discussion.

agreed, and that includes - "it's a FACT" - "nuff said" - belittling the other poster instead of debating - talking about how they "feel" about an issue - etc etc etc

but "nuff said" and "STFU" pretty much guarantees I won't even bother with the poster at all

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[OHCHUTE 0]

Here's how I feel. According to current law I have the right to keep and bare an arm. Should people come on my property demanding to see, touch, feel, take my firearem I'll tell them to leave the property and if they don't leave the property the sherriff gets called to have the tresspassers removed and then my lawyer gets a call. No need to tell anyone to shut up. No sense discussing or debating guns with idiot liberals who don't know the rules.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

"and then STFU"

The party of "fuck you" strikes again.

In general I find that a policy of telling everyone to go fuck themselves ends up losing people elections, policy debates and, in general, a place in rational discussion.

ok point taken

Just some thoughts to ponder. First my stfu was aimed at a specific group who ignore facts and argue emotionaly. Second our president represents the part of fuck you proven by the blatant lies in his presser today

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Stumpy 284]

Quote

a specific group who ignore facts and argue emotionaly.

Plenty of that on both sides.

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[rushmc 23]

Really.? Where are the banners FACTS.?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 3,009]

> First my stfu was aimed at a specific group who ignore facts and argue emotionaly.

There are groups like that on both sides of the argument. You can identify them by their use of statements like "just shut the fuck up" "you're all sheep" "I'll just start killing" etc. Thus there is danger in telling people any those things because you get lumped in with the extremists, whether or not you are one.

>Second our president represents the part of fuck you proven by the blatant lies in his
>presser today

As opposed to a politician who blatantly lies AND says "fuck you?"

[Stumpy 284]

Quote

Really.? Where are the banners FACTS.?

See Billvons post - he has it spot on as usual.
Your blindness and aggressive response to any opinion other than yours is truly telling.

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[rushmc 23]

Boom

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[champu 1]

Quote

Quote

a specific group who ignore facts and argue emotionaly.

Plenty of that on both sides.

Absolutely true, both sides of the issue are arguing out of frustration. A problem in any wide-spread political debate like this is that people's attentions are naturally drawn to the biggest train-wreck of an argument on the other side, and soon everyone is talking in hyperbole.

There are quite a few gun rights advocates that have gotten a lot of attention with their, "cold, dead hands," attitude, but there's a couple things from the gun control camp that I'd like to point out too.

1) "If not now, then when?" This, as many have noted is a pretty dangerous attitude. It's an acknowledgement that political will is driven by emotional responses and it's more important than doing the right thing and I'm at a loss as to why that is being touted in this case. You don't go grocery shopping when you haven't eaten all day, you don't drive after you've been drinking, and you don't pass legislation when you're crying. Callous? Sure. But what happened to cooler heads prevailing?

2) "We need to have a serious talk as a country [...about reinstating an assault weapons ban.]" Whether the person says the second part or not, It seems like it's always there. It's like the whack-a-mole of this debate. It's not the only thing that stricter gun control advocates bring to the discussion, but they'd do themselves a favor if they stop making it their starting point over and over again.

/edited: A had a "that" that was supposed to be a "than" and it mangled the meaning of one of my sentences.

[kallend 2,034]

Since you're interested in facts, it seems that the widely circulated "quote" from Hitler about gun control:
This year will go down in history! For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!

is, in FACT, bogus. It seems that the Nazis actually adopted more relaxed gun laws than the Weimar regime that preceded them.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[toolbox 0]

so you are saying the nazis made it easier for everyone to have guns?
Did that include the jews,gypsies,and socialist,ect,ect,or just the people Hitler and his supporters felt would be good nazis?

[pchapman 279]

Quote

so you are saying the nazis made it easier for everyone to have guns?
Did that include the jews,gypsies,and socialist,ect,ect,or just the people Hitler and his supporters felt would be good nazis?

Um, yeah. Even "rights" do have their limitations. I think we understand that Hitler was not just all about good, fast highways, and sharp looking uniforms.

I think there were also some issues in the USA about how to apply the 2nd Amendment to slaves & former slaves, whether they should have the right to bear arms...

[toolbox 0]

As fucked up as the nazis moral compass was,the SS did have some stylish uniforms.

[OHCHUTE 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

a specific group who ignore facts and argue emotionaly.

Plenty of that on both sides.

Absolutely true, both sides of the issue are arguing out of frustration. A problem in any wide-spread political debate like this is that people's attentions are naturally drawn to the biggest train-wreck of an argument on the other side, and soon everyone is talking in hyperbole.

There are quite a few gun rights advocates that have gotten a lot of attention with their, "cold, dead hands," attitude, but there's a couple things from the gun control camp that I'd like to point out too.

1) "If not now, then when?" This, as many have noted is a pretty dangerous attitude. It's an acknowledgement that political will is driven by emotional responses and it's more important than doing the right thing and I'm at a loss as to why that is being touted in this case. You don't go grocery shopping when you haven't eaten all day, you don't drive after you've been drinking, and you don't pass legislation when you're crying. Callous? Sure. But what happened to cooler heads prevailing?

2) "We need to have a serious talk as a country [...about reinstating an assault weapons ban.]" Whether the person says the second part or not, It seems like it's always there. It's like the whack-a-mole of this debate. It's not the only thing that stricter gun control advocates bring to the discussion, but they'd do themselves a favor if they stop making it their starting point over and over again.

/edited: A had a "that" that was supposed to be a "than" and it mangled the meaning of one of my sentences.

Debate? What debate. NY just enacted laws today. Laws are coming quick and swift. No debate.