Guns and statistics

[Peter1469]

Guns and statistics (http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/01/06/guns-and-states/).

I believe someone posted a link that used a chart from Mother Jones that claimed to prove that more guns = more death. The Mother Jones chart is at the link.

But, when you separate suicides from homicides you get a better picture.


The relationship between gun ownership and homicide is weak (and appears negative), the relationship between gun ownership and suicide is strong and positive. The entire effect Vox highlights in their graph is due to gun suicides, but they are using it to imply conclusions about gun homicides. This is why you shouldn’t make a category combining two unlike things.

Charts and more at the link.

[Crepitus]

Why does everyone wanna separate suicides out? Are they not gun deaths?

[Mister D]

Why does everyone wanna separate suicides out? Are they not gun deaths?

Because violent crime is the reason guns are an issue. As a matter of fact, I'd go so far as to suggest it's the sole reason gun control is a national topic.

[Peter1469]

Why does everyone wanna separate suicides out? Are they not gun deaths?

Because combining homicides with suicides for the purposes of creating policy is disingenuous.

[Standing Wolf]

Because combining homicides with suicides for the purposes of creating policy is disingenuous.

As is combining anomalous incidents like Newtown or Charleston or San Bernardino with inner city gang-related shootings in which a few people are hurt, calling them all "mass shootings" and then screaming about how there's "a mass shooting every day".

As is waving around the numbers of "gun-related homicides" - all but a small fraction of which involved small caliber handguns, mostly revolvers - and using those numbers to try to justify restricting ownership of the types of firearms that are hardly ever used in a crime.

[Dr. Who]

Studies have proven that when people have to go to great lengths to find and acceptable form of suicide, they get often over it. When a gun is handy or easily purchased, it's too easy not to have time for second thoughts.

[Peter1469]

Studies have proven that when people have to go to great lengths to find and acceptable form of suicide, they get often over it. When a gun is handy or easily purchased, it's too easy not to have time for second thoughts.

That still is not relevant to gun homicides.

[Mister D]

Studies have proven that when people have to go to great lengths to find and acceptable form of suicide, they get often over it. When a gun is handy or easily purchased, it's too easy not to have time for second thoughts.

I don't doubt that but this is simply not an issue driven by suicides. If the hysteria over "mass shootings", both here on the forum and in general, is any indication suicide is not the primary concern. Indeed, given the emphasis on suicide lately I'm inclined to believe this is really just a recent effort to bolster a bad argument for further restrictions on firearms.

[Dr. Who]

That still is not relevant to gun homicides.
No, but the repercussions of death are remarkably similar.

[Dr. Who]

I don't doubt that but this is simply not an issue driven by suicides. If the hysteria over "mass shootings", both here on the forum and in general, is any indication suicide is not the primary concern. Indeed, given the emphasis on suicide lately I'm inclined to believe it's really an effort to bolster a bad argument for further restrictions on firearms.
The studies that I have read indicate that if the wait time to legally purchase a gun was just a little longer, many suicides wouldn't happen. Whether people die by their own hand or that of another, the net effect is often borne by society, often leaving children without mothers or primarily without fathers.

[Standing Wolf]

There are far more clean and easy ways to commit suicide than firing a bullet into your own head. Frankly, I don't get the appeal.

[Crepitus]

Because violent crime is the reason guns are an issue. As a matter of fact, I'd go so far as to suggest it's the sole reason gun control is a national topic.

Suicide is a violent crime

[Cletus]

Why does everyone wanna separate suicides out? Are they not gun deaths?

Because they are SUICIDES. They are a matter of personal choice.The deceased is not a "victim" of gun related violence.

[Cletus]

Suicide is a violent crime

Nonsense.

[Crepitus]

Because they are SUICIDES. They are a matter of personal choice.The deceased is not a "victim" of gun related violence.


Nonsense.
Is suicide a crime? Yes

Is a gunshot wound a violent death? Yes

Did you know that more than half the suicides in the US are done with guns?

[Cletus]

Is suicide a crime? Yes

Only in 5 states... North and South Dakota, Washington, New Jersey, and Nevada.


Is a gunshot wound a violent death? Yes

Irrelevant.


Did you know that more than half the suicides in the US are done with guns?

So? If someone wants to kill himself, what business is it of yours as long as he doesn't harm anyone else in the process?

[Peter1469]

No, but the repercussions of death are remarkably similar.

That is not the problem that is being put up for answers. Mass shootings is. Adding suicides into the mix could be seen as a dishonest attempt to shift public policy.

[Crepitus]

There are far more clean and easy ways to commit suicide than firing a bullet into your own head. Frankly, I don't get the appeal.
easy availability, almost no prep required, when done properly it's over quickly. Over half of suicides are by firearm.

[Crepitus]

Only in 5 states... North and South Dakota, Washington, New Jersey, and Nevada.



Irrelevant.



So? If someone wants to kill himself, what business is it of yours as long as he doesn't harm anyone else in the process?
Suicides always harm someone else.

[Common Sense]

A gun death is a gun death.

[Standing Wolf]

A gun death is a gun death.

Anyone - and I mean ANYONE - could, in theory, take their gun and commit suicide with it at any moment of the day or night. The only way that situation does not exist is if NO ONE is allowed to own a gun. Thousands commit suicide with prescription opiates; is the rational response to that situation not to let ANYONE have prescription opiates? You cannot childproof the world, and you most certainly cannot formulate laws or public policy regarding what people are allowed to own based on how a relative few will abuse something. For every gun in America that someone uses to commit suicide, there are something like 17,000 guns that are not; what does that tell you?

[texan]

Guns and statistics (http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/01/06/guns-and-states/).

I believe someone posted a link that used a chart from Mother Jones that claimed to prove that more guns = more death. The Mother Jones chart is at the link.

But, when you separate suicides from homicides you get a better picture.



Charts and more at the link.


Facts have nothing to do with their argument. They have been doing this combined stat because the argument starts falling apart when they don't.

This is a left trade mark. Just look at the BS on cop killing stats, those don't support an epidemic either that's why those stats are not used by the smarter people.

[Common Sense]

30,000+ Americans die every year from guns. Clearly there is no problem.

[Cletus]

Suicides always harm someone else.

So does dying of old age. That is just part of life.

Suicide done in a manner that places no one else at risk is the business of no one but the person intending to end his or her own life and possible his family. It is most definitely not the business of the State and it is not a crime of violence.

[Common]

So does dying of old age. That is just part of life.

Suicide done in a manner that places no one else at risk is the business of no one but the person intending to end his or her own life and possible his family. It is most definitely not the business of the State and it is not a crime of violence.

What about kids that commit suicide because they are bullied and are mortified by it and become so sullen and depressed they take their lives. There are many things that bring people to suicide that can be addressed. Anyone that decides knowingly and willfully to end their lives like the terminally ill I agree with you. But there are people that are driven to suicide that would not have done it with some help.

[Cletus]

What about kids that commit suicide because they are bullied and are mortified by it and become so sullen and depressed they take their lives.

What about them? If they are that weak, they will never contribute anything to society, anyway. Best to clean out the gene pool early.


There are many things that bring people to suicide that can be addressed. Anyone that decides knowingly and willfully to end their lives like the terminally ill I agree with you. But there are people that are driven to suicide that would not have done it with some help.

I am not endorsing suicide. I am saying that including suicides in "gun violence" statistics is dishonest.

[Doublejack]

Why does everyone wanna separate suicides out? Are they not gun deaths?

If someone uses their car to kill themselves with carbon monoxide poisoning would you call it a car accident?

[Common]

What about them? If they are that weak, they will never contribute anything to society, anyway. Best to clean out the gene pool early.


I am not endorsing suicide. I am saying that including suicides in "gun violence" statistics is dishonest.


Not just a question of weak, you think everyone that commits suicide does it knowling of right mind ?

Whats wrong with identifying the factors that contribute and lead to suicide and trying to minimize it.

When working have you ever talked someone down or witnessed someone talked down that would killed themselves hadnt the officer been there ? If they were of sound mind and intent no one could have talked them down

[Private Pickle]

30,000+ Americans die every year from guns. Clearly there is no problem.

Every death is worth maintaining our Freedoms. A concept only Americans can understand.

[Cletus]

Not just a question of weak, you think everyone that commits suicide does it knowling of right mind ?

Whats wrong with identifying the factors that contribute and lead to suicide and trying to minimize it.

If someone wants to commit suicide, I mean REALLY wants to commit suicide, he'll find a way to do it.

I think using a gun to do it is inconsiderate and just rude, because someone is going to have to clean up after you, but it is efficient. Down the road a piece is a bridge over a 650 foot deep gorge and a few times a year, someone, usually someone from out of the area drives to it, parks his or her car, walks out to the middle and jumps. That isn't really much of a problem unless they land on a kayaker or a boatload of rafters. Of course, someone does end up having to recover the body and that is always a nuisance.

I have always thought that what what we should do is put a rope 675 feet long, attached to a climbing harness in the middle of the bridge and put up a sign telling people that if they are going to commit suicide, they should be considerate and think about the SAR guys who put themselves at risk recovering bodies. Before they jump, they should put the harness on and then all we would have to do is hook the rope up to a winch and haul their carcasses back up instead of going down to get them.

[Crepitus]

If someone uses their car to kill themselves with carbon monoxide poisoning would you call it a car accident?
No, I'm not calling gun related suicides a gun accident either.

[Peter1469]

30,000+ Americans die every year from guns. Clearly there is no problem.

440,000 die in hospitals from mistakes. Ban those too?

[Dr. Who]

If someone wants to commit suicide, I mean REALLY wants to commit suicide, he'll find a way to do it.

I think using a gun to do it is inconsiderate and just rude, because someone is going to have to clean up after you, but it is efficient. Down the road a piece is a bridge over a 650 foot deep gorge and a few times a year, someone, usually someone from out of the area drives to it, parks his or her car, walks out to the middle and jumps. That isn't really much of a problem unless they land on a kayaker or a boatload of rafters. Of course, someone does end up having to recover the body and that is always a nuisance.

I have always thought that what what we should do is put a rope 675 feet long, attached to a climbing harness in the middle of the bridge and put up a sign telling people that if they are going to commit suicide, they should be considerate and think about the SAR guys who put themselves at risk recovering bodies. Before they jump, they should put the harness on and then all we would have to do is hook the rope up to a winch and haul their carcasses back up instead of going down to get them.
I have a friend who works for the railroad. There are a fair number of people who throw themselves in front of commuter trains. It's pretty gross for the railroad people who have to attend the scene. I'm sure the same is true for subway system workers.

[domer76]

440,000 die in hospitals from mistakes. Ban those too?

You're not going to reach to that low level of absurdity, are you?

Throwing out part of the numbers of violent gun deaths to try to rescue your argument is bad enough, but c'mon!

[Truth Detector]

If someone uses their car to kill themselves with carbon monoxide poisoning would you call it a car accident?

Spot on.

[domer76]

Spot on.

Trying to make that chronic car/gun analogy is almost as ridiculous as the call for banning hospitals.

[Common Sense]

440,000 die in hospitals from mistakes. Ban those too?

Don't be idiotic.

[texan]

30,000+ Americans die every year from guns. Clearly there is no problem.

No there clearly is a problem.............

[birddog]

440,000 die in hospitals from mistakes. Ban those too?

Yes, Iatrogenesis is a big cause of death and maiming both physically and mentally. We do not have great health care, but we do have extensive, sometimes effective sickness care.

[Peter1469]

You're not going to reach to that low level of absurdity, are you?

Throwing out part of the numbers of violent gun deaths to try to rescue your argument is bad enough, but c'mon!

I am demonstrating your stupidity.... Keep up.

[domer76]

I am demonstrating your stupidity.... Keep up.

pitiful

[Peter1469]

pitiful

Another clueless wonder.

[Common]

What all of the Gun Control people refuse to acknowledge and I say acknowledge because I believe they are smart enough to know. We gotta fix the culture and the mentality of the people behind the gun.

You can say this a thousand times and it will never be acknowledged.

Put a gun on the ground and leave it there till it turns to rusty dust and it will never harm a soul. Its the people with the mentality to harm when they pick it up that commit the mayhem.

Something needs to be fixed and gun control isnt the answer. If gun control kept guns from the percentage of those that use it to harm others I would be wholeheartedly for it

[donttread]

Why does everyone wanna separate suicides out? Are they not gun deaths?

I think I can explain that. . Suicide attempts via pills for example are often real, but often not so real. Many people swallow a handful of pills in front of someone or then call them knowing they will get help although they sometimes die anyway. For example many don't realize the effects of a Tylenol over dose.. In these situations we are looking at a person who needs help, but not necessarily a person who intended to die. Many people who take pills and intend to die , don't call anyone and do die. But no one is trying to ban pain killers.
Whereas those who use a gun and pull the trigger are committed to the act, which I believe likely means they would find another way if a gun wasn't available. People occasionally live through gun attempted suicide but they rarely meant to.
IMO, the vast majority of gun suicides would find another way if they lacked access to a gun. WE are pretty fragile creatures after all.

[Common]

I think I can explain that. . Suicide attempts via pills for example are often real, but often not so real. Many people swallow a handful of pills in front of someone or then call them knowing they will get help although they sometimes die anyway. For example many don't realize the effects of a Tylenol over dose.. In these situations we are looking at a person who needs help, but not necessarily a person who intended to die. Many people who take pills and intend to die , don't call anyone and do die. But no one is trying to ban pain killers.
Whereas those who use a gun and pull the trigger are committed to the act, which I believe likely means they would find another way if a gun wasn't available. People occasionally live through gun attempted suicide but they rarely meant to.
IMO, the vast majority of gun suicides would find another way if they lacked access to a gun. WE are pretty fragile creatures after all.

Common sense says you are right. If someone really wants to die and they dont have a gun they jump in front of the subway train or slash their wrists, or jump off the GW bridge or death by cop. The gun is just one of many vehicles.

[domer76]

Another clueless wonder.

The cluelessness and denial is on your part, pal. In your pathetic attempt to sugar coat gun violence in this country, you conveniently remove numbers that don't fit your agenda, whatever the hell that is. You must have failed statistics, if you ever took that class in the first place. One just doesn't drop out numbers from a population because they make you uncomfortable.

A suicide by gun is a violent death, whether you wish to admit it or not. To ignore that as part of the total number of incidents of gun violence is burying your head in the sand. Or, I suspect, worse.

[Cthulhu]

30,000+ Americans die every year from guns. Clearly there is no problem.
Alcohol and tobacco kills more, even with the age restrictions.

Ban sugar too.

Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.

[Common]

The cluelessness and denial is on your part, pal. In your pathetic attempt to sugar coat gun violence in this country, you conveniently remove numbers that don't fit your agenda, whatever the hell that is. You must have failed statistics, if you ever took that class in the first place. One just doesn't drop out numbers from a population because they make you uncomfortable.

A suicide by gun is a violent death, whether you wish to admit it or not. To ignore that as part of the total number of incidents of gun violence is burying your head in the sand. Or, I suspect, worse.

The pot calling the kettle black

[Peter1469]

The cluelessness and denial is on your part, pal. In your pathetic attempt to sugar coat gun violence in this country, you conveniently remove numbers that don't fit your agenda, whatever the hell that is. You must have failed statistics, if you ever took that class in the first place. One just doesn't drop out numbers from a population because they make you uncomfortable.

A suicide by gun is a violent death, whether you wish to admit it or not. To ignore that as part of the total number of incidents of gun violence is burying your head in the sand. Or, I suspect, worse.

Stop crying. Accept the fact that gun grabbers are simply not relevant in American politics.

[Standing Wolf]

Let's get this out in the open, then. You are never going to convince certain people that any other object or substance is in any way comparable to firearms, for purposes of drawing an analogy, simply because they see guns as having no intrinsic value or purpose aside from the killing of human beings.

Putting aside for the moment that some individuals, in certain circumstances, just need to be killed...if you compare the way the law treats cars or alcohol or samurai swords, or whatever guns are being compared to, their response is that those things are different - that they have this value or that purpose aside from causing death or serious injury.

The fact that hundreds of millions of privately owned firearms in the U.S. are never put to any evil purpose does not faze them. That millions of those guns are routinely put to sporting purposes, or collected for their historical or aesthetic value, is ignored by them.

Large segments of American society have simply lost touch with what is, these days, contemptuously referred to as "gun culture"...by which I do not mean a culture centered around guns, but simply that part of the culture which includes them as a useful tool...as a thing not to be feared or hated, but simply kept, used, cared for and safeguarded according to the lawful needs and wishes of the owner. A generation or two back, a high school student could belong to a school-sponsored gun club; today, he may be suspended from school and questioned by the police if he makes a gun gesture with his hand or wears a t-shirt bearing an illustration of an armed soldier.

[donttread]

What all of the Gun Control people refuse to acknowledge and I say acknowledge because I believe they are smart enough to know. We gotta fix the culture and the mentality of the people behind the gun.

You can say this a thousand times and it will never be acknowledged.

Put a gun on the ground and leave it there till it turns to rusty dust and it will never harm a soul. Its the people with the mentality to harm when they pick it up that commit the mayhem.

Something needs to be fixed and gun control isnt the answer. If gun control kept guns from the percentage of those that use it to harm others I would be wholeheartedly for it

Also, current gun laws don't work for their stated purpose why would we expect further gun laws would. To quote Mr. Spock , "it's illogical"

[donttread]

Let's get this out in the open, then. You are never going to convince certain people that any other object or substance is in any way comparable to firearms, for purposes of drawing an analogy, simply because they see guns as having no intrinsic value or purpose aside from the killing of human beings.

Putting aside for the moment that some individuals, in certain circumstances, just need to be killed...if you compare the way the law treats cars or alcohol or samurai swords, or whatever guns are being compared to, their response is that those things are different - that they have this value or that purpose aside from causing death or serious injury.

The fact that hundreds of millions of privately owned firearms in the U.S. are never put to any evil purpose does not faze them. That millions of those guns are routinely put to sporting purposes, or collected for their historical or aesthetic value, is ignored by them.

Large segments of American society have simply lost touch with what is, these days, contemptuously referred to as "gun culture"...by which I do not mean a culture centered around guns, but simply that part of the culture which includes them as a useful tool...as a thing not to be feared or hated, but simply kept, used, cared for and safeguarded according to the lawful needs and wishes of the owner. A generation or two back, a high school student could belong to a school-sponsored gun club; today, he may be suspended from school and questioned by the police if he makes a gun gesture with his hand or wears a t-shirt bearing an illustration of an armed soldier.

It was never about the guns, at least not at the leadership level. It's about control

[domer76]

Also, current gun laws don't work for their stated purpose why would we expect further gun laws would. To quote Mr. Spock , "it's illogical"

Dump the hodgepodge of individual local and state laws and enact some comprehensive national laws. With teeth. And enforce them aggressively.

[Peter1469]

Dump the hodgepodge of individual local and state laws and enact some comprehensive national laws. With teeth. And enforce them aggressively.

What would the constitutional amendment look like? Add it to the enumerated powers of Art 1, sec. 8?

[donttread]

Alcohol and tobacco kills more, even with the age restrictions.

Ban sugar too.

Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.

If this was about saving lives we'd see the same people who advocate for gun control advocating to reduce speed limits

[donttread]

Dump the hodgepodge of individual local and state laws and enact some comprehensive national laws. With teeth. And enforce them aggressively.

Read the Constitution !

[domer76]

It was never about the guns, at least not at the leadership level. It's about control

Right. 30,000+ plus gun deaths a year, year in and year out, have nothing to do with guns.

[domer76]

Read the Constitution !

lol

[donttread]

Right. 30,000+ plus gun deaths a year, year in and year out, have nothing to do with guns.

Again 2/3 rds of those are suicides by people determined to die, if they didn't have access to a gun most of them would find another way .
So clearly automobiles are a greater dander to the population at large that guns are. The same is true for alcohol and tobacco
But, I don't hear you and the ultra lib clan advocating for lower speed limits or the ban alcohol and tobacco. Now why is that?

[donttread]

lol

You consider the Constitution to be funny?

[domer76]

What would the constitutional amendment look like? Add it to the enumerated powers of Art 1, sec. 8?

What makes you think an Amendment is necessary? SCOTUS has already ruled the Second is not an unlimited right.

[domer76]

Again 2/3 rds of those are suicides by people determined to die, if they didn't have access to a gun most of them would find another way .
So clearly automobiles are a greater dander to the population at large that guns are. The same is true for alcohol and tobacco
But, I don't hear you and the ultra lib clan advocating for lower speed limits or the ban alcohol and tobacco. Now why is that?

This thread is about guns. Take your failed analogy to alcohol, tobacco and cars elsewhere. It doesn't wash with me. While you're at it, take the equally fecal "would" bullshit, too. You really don't know "would" from shinola.

[domer76]

You consider the Constitution to be funny?

I find your post to be funny.

[Peter1469]

What makes you think an Amendment is necessary? SCOTUS has already ruled the Second is not an unlimited right.

Your suggestion was dumping all state and local laws and given the authority over gun regulations to the federal government. That can only be done by amendment. That is essentially what the Constitutionally Congress did with each of the enumerated powers in Art. 1, sec. 8.

[donttread]

I find your post to be funny.

My post suggested that you read the Constitution . Why is that funny to you?

[domer76]

Alcohol and tobacco kills more, even with the age restrictions.

Ban sugar too.

Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.

Almost as humorous at pete's 'ban hospitals'.

[domer76]

The pot calling the kettle black

What part of that reality do you fail to understand? Point it out and I'll try to simplify it for you.

[domer76]

Stop crying. Accept the fact that gun grabbers are simply not relevant in American politics.

It appears those who wish to take action against gun violence do have an uphill battle against the blind ignorance of the barrel strokers.

[domer76]

Your suggestion was dumping all state and local laws and given the authority over gun regulations to the federal government. That can only be done by amendment. That is essentially what the Constitutionally Congress did with each of the enumerated powers in Art. 1, sec. 8.

The Commerce Clause works fine for me.

[domer76]

My post suggested that you read the Constitution . Why is that funny to you?

You're a funny boy!

[Standing Wolf]

It appears those who wish to take action against gun violence do have an uphill battle against the blind ignorance of the barrel strokers.

If you object to being stereotyped - as for example, if someone were to call you a terrified little rabbit of a person because of your gun control advocacy - you should really avoid doing it to others, with childish terms like "barrel strokers". It does nothing to advance the conversation, and makes you appear desperate.

As for taking "action against gun violence", that term means exactly nothing. Specific actions and policies need to be judged on an individual basis, and bad, unpromising and illogical ones need to be criticized. What I've noticed that people on your particular side of the issue tend to do is to offer up some proposal that has little or nothing to do with the problem it is alleged to be fixing - and when that proposal is trashed for cause, you shoot back (so to speak) with ad hominem shots and accusations that gun advocates "want to do nothing". You're really going to have to work harder than that if you want to be taken seriously.

[Peter1469]

It appears those who wish to take action against gun violence do have an uphill battle against the blind ignorance of the barrel strokers.

Uphill battle? Try no chance. :wink:

[Peter1469]

The Commerce Clause works fine for me.

The Commerce Clause would not be available for regulating guns. SCOTUS ruled as such in US v. Lopez (1995) where the 1990s Gun-Free Zone Act was found to be unconstitutional because Congress based it on its powers under the Commerce Clause. SCOTUS reaffirmed that the Commerce Clause is not a catch-all for anything Congress wants to impose on America in the first Obamacare case- signed by all of the liberal justices.

[Mister D]

Uphill battle? Try no chance. :wink:

But feel free to try anyway. :smiley:

[Cthulhu]

The cluelessness and denial is on your part, pal. In your pathetic attempt to sugar coat gun violence in this country, you conveniently remove numbers that don't fit your agenda, whatever the hell that is. You must have failed statistics, if you ever took that class in the first place. One just doesn't drop out numbers from a population because they make you uncomfortable.

A suicide by gun is a violent death, whether you wish to admit it or not. To ignore that as part of the total number of incidents of gun violence is burying your head in the sand. Or, I suspect, worse.

Actually one of the most important parts of statistics is sorting out your population sample and getting rid of those who do not meet the criteria.

Taking a survey of what people think of posters by the name of say...Domer with the criteria of 10 to retarded on a forum where no posters have the handle "Domer" makes no sense.

But doing it here would make lots of sense.

...you passed statistics?


Almost as humorous at pete's 'ban hospitals'.

Every time you post, a gun death happens. And there is nothing you can do about it.

:D

Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.

[donttread]

Uphill battle? Try no chance. :wink:

That may be however, we should not settle for no further infringement. We need to repeal some gun laws and take back our rights

[domer76]

If you object to being stereotyped - as for example, if someone were to call you a terrified little rabbit of a person because of your gun control advocacy - you should really avoid doing it to others, with childish terms like "barrel strokers". It does nothing to advance the conversation, and makes you appear desperate.

As for taking "action against gun violence", that term means exactly nothing. Specific actions and policies need to be judged on an individual basis, and bad, unpromising and illogical ones need to be criticized. What I've noticed that people on your particular side of the issue tend to do is to offer up some proposal that has little or nothing to do with the problem it is alleged to be fixing - and when that proposal is trashed for cause, you shoot back (so to speak) with ad hominem shots and accusations that gun advocates "want to do nothing". You're really going to have to work harder than that if you want to be taken seriously.

Wow, I must have hit a nerve there. Did I hit a little close to home?

First, let's get something straight. Since I have no need to carry a popgun 24/7 to feel secure, you'd best reserve the scared rabbit reference for the barrel strokers that I refer to. You know, the fools that believe the 2nd is the be-all and end-all in the BofR. Those that have their "cold dead fingers" bullshit on their bumper stickers. Those that run like lemmings to the nearest gun store whenever there's another mass slaughter or mention of expanded background checks by the POTUS. Or even his very election. Those that prefer to do nothing and divert when it comes to talking about 30,000+ deaths a year for years on end.

If you are one of those, welcome to the club of chicken shits.

[Mister D]

Does domer even realize he just proved Standing Wolf's point? It went something like this...

SW: 'If you want to be taken seriously you'll have to do better than ad hominem and making demonstrably false accusations.

domer: 'well fuck you you, asshole. You're just another gun nut'.

[domer76]

Actually one of the most important parts of statistics is sorting out your population sample and getting rid of those who do not meet the criteria.

Taking a survey of what people think of posters by the name of say...Domer with the criteria of 10 to retarded on a forum where no posters have the handle "Domer" makes no sense.

But doing it here would make lots of sense.

...you passed statistics?



Every time you post, a gun death happens. And there is nothing you can do about it.

:D

Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.

Another ignoramus on the subject, I see.

[domer76]

Does domer even realize he just proved Standing Wolf's point? It went something like this...

SW: 'If you want to be taken seriously you'll have to do better than ad hominem and making demonstrably false accusations.

domer: 'well fuck you you, asshole. You're just another gun nut'.

As usual, D(bag), you misread the entire post. Why does that seem to be a chronic problem with you?

[Cthulhu]

Another ignoramus on the subject, I see.
Did you look in a mirror or something?

You should just stay away from reflective surfaces I guess.

Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.

[Common]

Uphill battle? Try no chance. :wink:

lol BINGO!!!!!!!!!!!

[domer76]

Did you look in a mirror or something?

You should just stay away from reflective surfaces I guess.

Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.

Clarify something for me. Are you the dumbfuck that got crossways with the law because of his failure to understand simple requests? Or do I have you confused with someone else?

Re: statistics, a little more complex subject than two syllable requests, you're lost.

[Standing Wolf]

Anyone who speaks ill of virtually ANY gun control proposal is vilified and insulted by people like you, domer. The first thing you DO in these sorts of discussions is to express your contempt for anyone taking the adverse position or questioning your facts or "logic", and to accuse them - as you've done here - of all manner of emotional problems, deficiencies and obsessions. You claim to be on the side of sweet reason, but you retreat at the very sight of it, and fall back on emotionalism and personal attacks. You are no asset to the "cause" you claim to support because you are too easily frustrated when the facts and logic of the situation - which are NOT on your side - are pointed out. You like to stereotype and insult those who disagree with you on the subject because it's easier to do THAT than to engage in the honest, give-and-take of a serious adult conversation, and you are fundamentally lazy.

[Peter1469]

Anyone who speaks ill of virtually ANY gun control proposal is vilified and insulted by people like you, domer. The first thing you DO in these sorts of discussions is to express your contempt for anyone taking the adverse position or questioning your facts or "logic", and to accuse them - as you've done here - of all manner of emotional problems, deficiencies and obsessions. You claim to be on the side of sweet reason, but you retreat at the very sight of it, and fall back on emotionalism and personal attacks. You are no asset to the "cause" you claim to support because you are too easily frustrated when the facts and logic of the situation - which are NOT on your side - are pointed out. You like to stereotype and insult those who disagree with you on the subject because it's easier to do THAT than to engage in the honest, give-and-take of a serious adult conversation, and you are fundamentally lazy.

There isn't any reason to discuss the issue with the gun grabbers. They don't have the political clout to matter.

[Cthulhu]

Clarify something for me. Are you the dumb$#@! that got crossways with the law because of his failure to understand simple requests? Or do I have you confused with someone else?

Re: statistics, a little more complex subject than two syllable requests, you're lost.

You seem to be a glutton for punishment...

You brought up stats. But if you can't understand the value of a valid testing population... Why bother bringing up statistics?

Having a legit SRS or any other method of random sampling is valid only with a valid population to choose from.

That why suicides *must* be talked about with respect to gun crimes. Facts are that aggressive gun crimes are still quite rare. They just get all the press time giving the illusion that they happen all the time.

You might swallow that hook line and sinker. But those with even a rudimentary knowledge of statistics know better.

:p

Arrive to the next battle of wits armed please.

Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.

[Peter1469]

Clarify something for me. Are you the dumbfuck that got crossways with the law because of his failure to understand simple requests? Or do I have you confused with someone else?

Re: statistics, a little more complex subject than two syllable requests, you're lost.


Notice: Thread banned for repeatedly calling members names.

[donttread]

Is suicide a crime? Yes

Is a gunshot wound a violent death? Yes

Did you know that more than half the suicides in the US are done with guns?

Did you know that if someone is determined to die they'll find a way with or without a gun.? Should we also have bridge control, sky scrapper control, automobile control , pill control and even knife control?

[Crepitus]

Did you know that if someone is determined to die they'll find a way with or without a gun.? Should we also have bridge control, sky scrapper control, automobile control , pill control and even knife control?
Why are suicide rates lower in households without guns then?

[Standing Wolf]

Why are suicide rates lower in households without guns then?

For the same reason that there is a lower rate of child drownings in homes without swimming pools?

[Crepitus]

For the same reason that there is a lower rate of child drownings in homes without swimming pools?
But what about "they will find a way"?

[Cletus]

But what about "they will find a way"?

Whether someone decides to use a handgun to end his own life is irrelevant to the issue of gun "violence".

[Don]

Australia

In 2012, 56.9% of male suicide deaths were by hanging, followed by 10.3% due to poisoning by drugs and then 9% due to poisoning by other agents.
In 2012, hanging was the most common method of suicide used by females, constituting 47% of all female suicide deaths. The second most common cause of suicide death was poisoning by drugs (27.1% of suicide deaths).
- See more at: http://www.mindframe-media.info/for-media/reporting-suicide/facts-and-stats#sthash.tDlNv4Oe.dpuf

Car exhaust is very popular there too.

[Crepitus]

Whether someone decides to use a handgun to end his own life is irrelevant to the issue of gun "violence".
That doesn't answer my question.

[Cletus]

That doesn't answer my question.

That is because your question was of no importance to the greater issue.

[Cthulhu]

Why are suicide rates lower in households without guns then?
Lower threshold of pain.

Sissies.

Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.

[Crepitus]

That is because your question was of no importance to the greater issue.

Translation: "I can't answer this so I will deny it exists."

[Crepitus]

Lower threshold of pain.

Sissies.

Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.

So less guns = less suicides because other methods hurt more?

[Cthulhu]

So less guns = less suicides because other methods hurt more?
Possibly.

More likely is that other methods are used when guns are not available.

Pills, jumping in front of cars, sky diving with no parachute... You get the idea.

To bad they don't leave notes saying they picked X method for reason Y.

It would help us all in our arguments.
Seriously. I wish they did.

Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.

[Cthulhu]

So less guns = less suicides because other methods hurt more?
You know, I thought about it more.

I think it has more to do with pain tolerance than anything now.

Example. Sex with a blender will render a man sterile. But so does a trip to the doctor to get a vasectomy.

I don't know many men who are willing to get giddy with a blender though.

Me thinks it boils down to pain tolerance. And given that they are ending their lives avoid pain of whatever sort - or end it, it makes no sense to pick a painful method.

Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.

[Cletus]

Translation: "I can't answer this so I will deny it exists."

I acknowledge it exists. I also acknowledge it is just smoke and has no bearing on the real issue. If someone commits suicide, it doesn't matter how he does it. It is not a crime of violence.