PDA

View Full Version : More Americans Killed by Guns Since 1968 Than in All U.S. Wars — Combined



Dr. Who
10-04-2017, 07:25 PM
More Americans have died from gunshots in the last 50 years than in all of the wars in American history.
Since 1968, more than 1.5 million Americans have died in gun-related incidents, according to data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00023655.htm). By comparison, approximately 1.2 million service members have been killed in every war in U.S. history, according to estimates from the Department of Veterans Affairs (https://www.va.gov/opa/publications/factsheets/fs_americas_wars.pdf) and iCasualties.org (http://icasualties.org/), (http://icasualties.org/)a website that maintains an ongoing database of casualties from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Sunday's massacre in Las Vegas — which left 59 dead and 530 others injured — is the deadliest mass shooting in modern American history. And such attacks are becoming more common.

20291
https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/las-vegas-shooting/more-americans-killed-guns-1968-all-u-s-wars-combined-n807156

Pretty sobering statistics. Now I'm sure that suicides by gun are part of those statistics, however, that shouldn't make you feel better. Many of those suicides would not have happened if a gun were not readily available since suicidal thoughts, absent a gun, make it more difficult to kill oneself in the moment and suicidal ideation often passes after a time. Gun suicides are often impulsive actions. Taking pills often doesn't work or is discovered before death occurs.

There is a proven correlation between the availability of guns and deaths by gunshot. The current lack of consistency between jurisdictions make it very easy for criminals to acquire weapons.

While the right to own weapons is Constitutionally recognized it is not unlimited. No right is absolute. Freedom of speech is vigorously protected by the Constitution, but still restricted when it comes to falsely damaging someone's reputation, shouting fire in a crowded theater, counselling people to commit a crime, threatening violence, harassing etc. You have a right to practice your religion, you don't have a right to make others practice your religion or damage others through your practice of said religion. Your protected rights end where they infringe on someone else's rights. If that requires sensible federal regulations, then so be it. You have a right to self-defense and to hunt. That doesn't necessarily imply that you have an unlimited right to own an arsenal, for example. It doesn't mean that you have a right to leave your gun laying around where children may find it and fire it. With all rights come responsibilities and not all people are responsible. To that end, it is prudent to create restrictions such as banning private weapon sales, gun shows etc or requiring all buyers of weapons to undergo a background check, restricting the number of weapons, types of weapons and quantity of ammunition that you can possess or purchase without a special license.

We have a lot of technology today. It would not be impossible to create a registry of retinal patterns and a special ID with said retinal pattern that would be required for purchasing weapons. Without private sales, this would make straw man purchases, much more difficult, particularly if you couldn't own multiple weapons without a special license.

Millions of people should not have to die to protect a right.

Captain Obvious
10-04-2017, 07:31 PM
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/Ushomicidesbyweapon.svg/800px-Ushomicidesbyweapon.svg.png

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States

Captain Obvious
10-04-2017, 07:33 PM
So further break those down.

How many were caused by illegal gun ownership, that mountains of regs, background checks, waiting periods, whatever wouldn't stop?

How many were by angry white guys shooting up movie theaters?

Bullshit called.

Mister D
10-04-2017, 07:34 PM
The fact that an easy majority of those deaths are suicides destroys your intended argument. Besides, what happened to my body my choice? Sorry, Who, this is the sort of emotionalism that, if it makes a good argument for anything, it's for getting rid of female suffrage.

Perianne
10-04-2017, 07:34 PM
... Without private sales, this would make straw man purchases, much more difficult, particularly if you couldn't own multiple weapons without a special license....

If I have a right to own a gun, why does anyone care how many guns I have?

I have a couple of shotguns for home defense. I have several handguns for home defense, placed at different areas around my home. I have several guns my husband owned, but are too big for me to handle easily. I have a couple of .22 rifles that I like to shoot.

Why does it matter how many times I exercise my right guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution?

Mister D
10-04-2017, 07:36 PM
BTW, yes, "suicide ideation" also fades among those with serious illnesses once treated for depression but we don't care about that do we...

Captain Obvious
10-04-2017, 07:41 PM
The fact that an easy majority of those deaths are suicides destroys your intended argument. Besides, what happened to my body my choice? Sorry, Who, this is the sort of emotionalism that, if it makes a good argument for anything, it's for getting rid of female suffrage.

I didn't know what the proportion of those deaths were suicide, I didn't feel like doing everyone's homework, I just knew that those stats were... on the surface as presented not really honest.

But that's how the left's approach is - purely on raw emotion, not on honest statistics or data.

Making decisions or taking positions on raw emotion solely is grossly irresponsible.

Dr. Who
10-04-2017, 07:57 PM
If I have a right to own a gun, why does anyone care how many guns I have?

I have a couple of shotguns for home defense. I have several handguns for home defense, placed at different areas around my home. I have several guns my husband owned, but are too big for me to handle easily. I have a couple of .22 rifles that I like to shoot.

Why does it matter how many times I exercise my right guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution?
For one thing, it sounds as though your weapons are unsecured (unless they are all in gun safes), so anytime you leave your house those weapons are at risk of being stolen by an intruder and ending up in the hands of criminals. Additionally, if you ever have other people in your home, including children, you have multiple loaded weapons that any one of them could pick up and discharge. Clearly, you are worried about intruders. For the cost of all of those weapons, a good security system would let you know the minute anyone steps on your property, nevermind in your house, so then you only need one handgun that you are very adept at using, as opposed to having many loaded weapons that could be found by an intruder and used against you. If you are a hunter, then you should have those rifles appropriate to what you hunt. They should be secured as well as the ammunition.

I have already explained that no right is absolute.

Chris
10-04-2017, 08:01 PM
The fact that an easy majority of those deaths are suicides destroys your intended argument. Besides, what happened to my body my choice? Sorry, Who, this is the sort of emotionalism that, if it makes a good argument for anything, it's for getting rid of female suffrage.

I was about to get the violin out.

Dr. Who
10-04-2017, 08:03 PM
So further break those down.

How many were caused by illegal gun ownership, that mountains of regs, background checks, waiting periods, whatever wouldn't stop?

How many were by angry white guys shooting up movie theaters?

Bullshit called.
Deaths are deaths. Is inconvenience a good reason to make guns as easy to purchase as a can of soup? There is a reason why criminals have such easy access to weapons.

Captain Obvious
10-04-2017, 08:05 PM
Deaths are deaths. Is inconvenience a good reason to make guns as easy to purchase as a can of soup? There is a reason why criminals have such easy access to weapons.

So take away guns from law abiding citizens and allow criminals to continue to obtain them illegally?

Sorry no, I will always oppose that approach.

Train another pony and bring it to the show and maybe I'll watch.

Mister D
10-04-2017, 08:12 PM
Deaths are deaths. Is inconvenience a good reason to make guns as easy to purchase as a can of soup? There is a reason why criminals have such easy access to weapons.
Yes, deaths are deaths but suicides are not murders. It's a transparent attempt to flesh out statistics that just aren't that alarming. It reminds me of the way rags like Time inflate the number of interracial marriages by over 100% by including Hispanic and non-Hispanic couplings. You have to either willing or stupid to fall for this stuff.

Mister D
10-04-2017, 08:15 PM
Is inconvenience a good reason to make guns as easy to purchase as a can of soup?

This is the sort of comment that makes it all too clear that gun control advocates generally have no idea what they're talking about.

Dr. Who
10-04-2017, 08:26 PM
BTW, yes, "suicide ideation" also fades among those with serious illnesses once treated for depression but we don't care about that do we...
So why not deregulate all controlled substances, including all pharmaceuticals? Why even require prescriptions? Put them all on the shelf with a pamphlet of warnings contained within each package. People have the right to the pursuit of happiness. That includes, by definition access to painkillers, soporifics and any medicines necessary for treatment of illnesses. You can't be happy if you are in pain or suffering from the symptoms of disease. It should therefore be irrelevant that people are irresponsible, illiterate or drug addicted. If they are intent on suicide, let them buy as many pills as they need to do the job. If they are illiterate and take the wrong meds, who cares? They should have learned to read. If they are drug addicted and OD, again, who cares? One less addict. Who cares if they sell them to kids? Their parents should have been more vigilant. Let the drug stores make the profits that the drug dealers now make. It's all good.

While we are at it, let's just remove all of those pesky regs surrounding freedom of speech. If you are libelled or slandered, too bad for you. If you share military secrets, tough. If you threaten people verbally or in writing, pfft, suck it up. Let's just make all rights absolute.

Dr. Who
10-04-2017, 08:44 PM
So take away guns from law abiding citizens and allow criminals to continue to obtain them illegally?

Sorry no, I will always oppose that approach.

Train another pony and bring it to the show and maybe I'll watch.
I didn't say take away, I said restrict to something sensible i.e. anyone can own a handgun and a rifle, beyond one of each, they should have to show cause and obtain an appropriate license. It makes absolutely no sense that there are more guns in America than people and that includes minor children or that half of the population owns the majority of the guns and that doesn't include the millions of guns that are unknown and in the hands of criminals or in people's attics. The regulatory laxity and sheer volume of weapons owned and being legally sold on a daily basis are responsible for the ridiculous gun death stats, including death at the hands of criminals. They are also responsible for the ridiculous costs of policing, investigation, criminal incarceration, weapons trafficking, medical costs associated with gunshot wounds, legal defense costs, trial costs ... I could go on. I wonder how much of your tax bills, federal, state and municipal, are charges directly related to the consequences of guns?

Perianne
10-04-2017, 08:48 PM
I think I am going to go buy that Ruger 556 tomorrow. This thread has gotten me in the mood.

Dr. Who
10-04-2017, 08:49 PM
This is the sort of comment that makes it all too clear that gun control advocates generally have no idea what they're talking about.
When you buy a gun at a private sale, it's as easy to buy as a can of soup.

Peter1469
10-04-2017, 09:36 PM
Take the suicides out and let's look at the numbers.

Captain Obvious
10-04-2017, 09:37 PM
When you buy a gun at a private sale, it's as easy to buy as a can of soup.

Easier.

I bought a .22 at a gun show. Handed the guy a hundred bucks, he handed me the rifle. No words spoken.

It misfires but that's another story.

:biglaugh:

Captain Obvious
10-04-2017, 09:38 PM
I think I am going to go buy that Ruger 556 tomorrow. This thread has gotten me in the mood.

I'm looking at a glock 9mm also, might accelerate that purchase.

Captain Obvious
10-04-2017, 09:40 PM
I didn't say take away, I said restrict to something sensible i.e. anyone can own a handgun and a rifle, beyond one of each, they should have to show cause and obtain an appropriate license. It makes absolutely no sense that there are more guns in America than people and that includes minor children or that half of the population owns the majority of the guns and that doesn't include the millions of guns that are unknown and in the hands of criminals or in people's attics. The regulatory laxity and sheer volume of weapons owned and being legally sold on a daily basis are responsible for the ridiculous gun death stats, including death at the hands of criminals. They are also responsible for the ridiculous costs of policing, investigation, criminal incarceration, weapons trafficking, medical costs associated with gunshot wounds, legal defense costs, trial costs ... I could go on. I wonder how much of your tax bills, federal, state and municipal, are charges directly related to the consequences of guns?

The amount of mass shootings are a negligible proportion of deaths. I don't think restricting high power rifles will solve our overall gun violence issue.

No concerns about that at all.

Cletus
10-04-2017, 09:52 PM
More Americans have died from gunshots in the last 50 years than in all of the wars in American history.
Since 1968, more than 1.5 million Americans have died in gun-related incidents, according to data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00023655.htm). By comparison, approximately 1.2 million service members have been killed in every war in U.S. history, according to estimates from the Department of Veterans Affairs (https://www.va.gov/opa/publications/factsheets/fs_americas_wars.pdf) and iCasualties.org (http://icasualties.org/), (http://icasualties.org/)a website that maintains an ongoing database of casualties from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Sunday's massacre in Las Vegas — which left 59 dead and 530 others injured — is the deadliest mass shooting in modern American history. And such attacks are becoming more common.

20291
https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/las-vegas-shooting/more-americans-killed-guns-1968-all-u-s-wars-combined-n807156

Pretty sobering statistics. Now I'm sure that suicides by gun are part of those statistics, however, that shouldn't make you feel better. Many of those suicides would not have happened if a gun were not readily available since suicidal thoughts, absent a gun, make it more difficult to kill oneself in the moment and suicidal ideation often passes after a time. Gun suicides are often impulsive actions. Taking pills often doesn't work or is discovered before death occurs.

There is a proven correlation between the availability of guns and deaths by gunshot. The current lack of consistency between jurisdictions make it very easy for criminals to acquire weapons.

While the right to own weapons is Constitutionally recognized it is not unlimited. No right is absolute. Freedom of speech is vigorously protected by the Constitution, but still restricted when it comes to falsely damaging someone's reputation, shouting fire in a crowded theater, counselling people to commit a crime, threatening violence, harassing etc. You have a right to practice your religion, you don't have a right to make others practice your religion or damage others through your practice of said religion. Your protected rights end where they infringe on someone else's rights. If that requires sensible federal regulations, then so be it. You have a right to self-defense and to hunt. That doesn't necessarily imply that you have an unlimited right to own an arsenal, for example. It doesn't mean that you have a right to leave your gun laying around where children may find it and fire it. With all rights come responsibilities and not all people are responsible. To that end, it is prudent to create restrictions such as banning private weapon sales, gun shows etc or requiring all buyers of weapons to undergo a background check, restricting the number of weapons, types of weapons and quantity of ammunition that you can possess or purchase without a special license.

We have a lot of technology today. It would not be impossible to create a registry of retinal patterns and a special ID with said retinal pattern that would be required for purchasing weapons. Without private sales, this would make straw man purchases, much more difficult, particularly if you couldn't own multiple weapons without a special license.

Millions of people should not have to die to protect a right.

You need to stop watching so much television.

Cletus
10-04-2017, 09:58 PM
Deaths are deaths. Is inconvenience a good reason to make guns as easy to purchase as a can of soup? There is a reason why criminals have such easy access to weapons.

Have you ever gone into a gun shop and bought a gun?

If it was as easy as buying a can of soup, I would like to know where you buy your soup that requires proof of identity and residence, an FBI criminal records check and the filling out of federal forms the dealer is required to keep under lock and key for 20 years.

Why do you even try to bullshit your way through discussions like this?

Dr. Who
10-04-2017, 10:24 PM
The amount of mass shootings are a negligible proportion of deaths. I don't think restricting high power rifles will solve our overall gun violence issue.

No concerns about that at all.
I'm not talking about high powered rifles, but guns in general. The incredible volume of weapons owned and being sold, traded and stolen are actually costing every citizen financially both in the direct costs of policing, including the additional officers required because of the proliferation of weapons, investigations, trials, incarcerations, civil suits for wrongful deaths as well hospital costs which are not reimbursed, the increased number of people who end up on welfare because of the incarceration or death of the breadwinner, government costs incurred for cremation of those whose families cannot afford to pay for funerals, federal and state investigations into straw man sales, and weapons trafficking... That's got to cost a lot of money.

Dr. Who
10-04-2017, 10:29 PM
You need to stop watching so much television.
That is pretty nonresponsive. Challenge what I have said, specifically, with data that refutes it. Additionally, prove to me that rights are absolute.

Common
10-04-2017, 10:35 PM
I dont believe that list is accurate, especially the number for WW2, 60 million people died in ww2 of various causes.

Either way, no separate your total number from legal guns, illegal guns and suicides and the result changes the picture

Most gun deaths are from suicide

Cletus
10-04-2017, 10:41 PM
That is pretty nonresponsive. Challenge what I have said, specifically, with data that refutes it. Additionally, prove to me that rights are absolute.
Refute what? The yammerings of someone almost totally ignorant regarding the issues under discussion? Tell me, do you know what "shall" means when it appears in the Constitution? Do you?

Dr. Who
10-04-2017, 11:14 PM
I dont believe that list is accurate, especially the number for WW2, 60 million people died in ww2 of various causes.

Either way, no separate your total number from legal guns, illegal guns and suicides and the result changes the picture

Most gun deaths are from suicide

The statistic is about Americans who died, not the total death toll. If that is true, why all the rhetoric about gun crime?

Dr. Who
10-04-2017, 11:15 PM
Refute what? The yammerings of someone almost totally ignorant regarding the issues under discussion? Tell me, do you know what "shall" means when it appears in the Constitution? Do you?
Unsuprisingly you are not rebutting anything. The right to bear arms is not an absolute right. Back to you.

Cletus
10-04-2017, 11:16 PM
Unsuprisingly you are not rebutting anything. The right to bear arms is not an absolute right. Back to you.

Did you not answer the question because you had no answer or were afraid of being honest?

Dr. Who
10-05-2017, 12:30 AM
Did you not answer the question because you had no answer or were afraid of being honest?
Answer what? Your bad faith response? BTW any response that is predominantly an insult, is a bad faith response. Furthermore, I posted all manner of statements that you failed to respond to substantively but instead insulted me personally. Why should I respond to your question about 'shall' like it makes all the difference in the world? The Framers used 'shall' in virtually every reference to rights. That has not inhibited the body of law that evolved reasonably limiting those rights so as not to vitiate the rights of others.

The Xl
10-05-2017, 12:33 AM
1.5 million is a drop in the bucket compared to the number of people that have lived in the country over the last 50 years. It's simply not an epidemic.

resister
10-05-2017, 12:39 AM
Get yo mitts off my smoke poles! My 1858 new model army is not a threat. In fact, it sits right near me, unloaded.

Cletus
10-05-2017, 02:51 AM
Answer what? Your bad faith response? BTW any response that is predominantly an insult, is a bad faith response. Furthermore, I posted all manner of statements that you failed to respond to substantively but instead insulted me personally. Why should I respond to your question about 'shall' like it makes all the difference in the world? The Framers used 'shall' in virtually every reference to rights. That has not inhibited the body of law that evolved reasonably limiting those rights so as not to vitiate the rights of others.

You continue to display your ignorance. I called what you have been saying uninformed nonsense because it is uninformed nonsense. Should I sit here and humor you and pretend you know what you are talking about?

You have no idea what the significance of the word "shall" is as used in the Constitution. I really don't need you to lecture me about "bad faith". You are talking about stripping Americans of some of their most basic rights and protections. There is nothing more "bad faith than that.

Chris
10-05-2017, 07:24 AM
Answer what? Your bad faith response? BTW any response that is predominantly an insult, is a bad faith response. Furthermore, I posted all manner of statements that you failed to respond to substantively but instead insulted me personally. Why should I respond to your question about 'shall' like it makes all the difference in the world? The Framers used 'shall' in virtually every reference to rights. That has not inhibited the body of law that evolved reasonably limiting those rights so as not to vitiate the rights of others.

One, no one insulted you personally. Disagreement is not disagreeable.

Two, stop trying to moderate, especially trying to redefine rules.

Chris
10-05-2017, 07:32 AM
Even as politicfact says:


We’ll offer some added thoughts for context.

These figures refer to all gunfire-related deaths, not just homicides. In fact, homicides represent a minority of gun deaths, with suicides comprising the biggest share. In 2013, according to CDC data, 63 percent of gun-related deaths were from suicides, 33 percent were from homicides, and roughly 1 percent each were from accidents, legal interventions and undetermined causes.

There’s a risk in using a statistic like this to decry mass homicides carried out with guns. Using total firearm-related deaths makes the case against guns more dramatic than just using homicides alone.

@ http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/aug/27/nicholas-kristof/more-americans-killed-guns-1968-all-wars-says-colu/

In short, intellectually dishonest emotional appeal.

Chris
10-05-2017, 07:36 AM
To put things into perspective,

https://i.snag.gy/JfpU2i.jpg

Less than 1% of all deaths have to do with homicide.

We're left with more Americans have died since 1968.... Death is a terrible thing.

Adelaide
10-05-2017, 10:05 AM
It is an interesting number to consider, but not sure how much stock I would put into it.

Captdon
10-05-2017, 10:15 AM
The Civil war killed a minimum of 600,000 men. Can't trust your facts when they're wrong.

Hoosier8
10-05-2017, 10:15 AM
More people killed by auto accidents too. Time to ban em.

MisterVeritis
10-05-2017, 10:44 AM
Deaths are deaths. Is inconvenience a good reason to make guns as easy to purchase as a can of soup? There is a reason why criminals have such easy access to weapons.
I have purchased cans of soup. I have purchased weapons. I did not have to fill out a form allowing a background check when I bought cans of soup.

Perhaps it is different where you live.

If you wonder why people are beginning to laugh at you...well.

MisterVeritis
10-05-2017, 10:46 AM
When you buy a gun at a private sale, it's as easy to buy as a can of soup.
How many weapons have you bought through private sale?

Chris
10-05-2017, 10:55 AM
I'm all for death control!

Mister D
10-05-2017, 11:08 AM
So why not deregulate all controlled substances, including all pharmaceuticals? Why even require prescriptions? Put them all on the shelf with a pamphlet of warnings contained within each package. People have the right to the pursuit of happiness. That includes, by definition access to painkillers, soporifics and any medicines necessary for treatment of illnesses. You can't be happy if you are in pain or suffering from the symptoms of disease. It should therefore be irrelevant that people are irresponsible, illiterate or drug addicted. If they are intent on suicide, let them buy as many pills as they need to do the job. If they are illiterate and take the wrong meds, who cares? They should have learned to read. If they are drug addicted and OD, again, who cares? One less addict. Who cares if they sell them to kids? Their parents should have been more vigilant. Let the drug stores make the profits that the drug dealers now make. It's all good.

While we are at it, let's just remove all of those pesky regs surrounding freedom of speech. If you are libelled or slandered, too bad for you. If you share military secrets, tough. If you threaten people verbally or in writing, pfft, suck it up. Let's just make all rights absolute.
I'm sorry but what does this have to do with my comment?

Mister D
10-05-2017, 11:10 AM
I'm going to Walmart at lunch to grab some cat food, some litter and an AR-15. lol

Captdon
10-05-2017, 02:44 PM
I didn't say take away, I said restrict to something sensible i.e. anyone can own a handgun and a rifle, beyond one of each, they should have to show cause and obtain an appropriate license. It makes absolutely no sense that there are more guns in America than people and that includes minor children or that half of the population owns the majority of the guns and that doesn't include the millions of guns that are unknown and in the hands of criminals or in people's attics. The regulatory laxity and sheer volume of weapons owned and being legally sold on a daily basis are responsible for the ridiculous gun death stats, including death at the hands of criminals. They are also responsible for the ridiculous costs of policing, investigation, criminal incarceration, weapons trafficking, medical costs associated with gunshot wounds, legal defense costs, trial costs ... I could go on. I wonder how much of your tax bills, federal, state and municipal, are charges directly related to the consequences of guns?

Show cause. The Constitution is the only cause I need. I know you people forget that but there is is.

Captain Obvious
10-05-2017, 04:06 PM
I'm going to Walmart at lunch to grab some cat food, some litter and an AR-15. lol

Some Walmarts sell guns, I've bought them there. Shotgun and an air rifle. In both cases, after paying for the guns the store manager would not give them to me, he carried them outside and handed them to me in the parking lot.

This is the kind of dumbfuckery regulation the left is going to dream up. Like that prevented me from going on a shooting rampage.

Dr. Who
10-05-2017, 05:12 PM
To put things into perspective,

https://i.snag.gy/JfpU2i.jpg

Less than 1% of all deaths have to do with homicide.

We're left with more Americans have died since 1968.... Death is a terrible thing.
Speaking of the CDC: https://www.pri.org/stories/2015-07-02/quietly-congress-extends-ban-cdc-research-gun-violence

Common
10-05-2017, 05:17 PM
Speaking of the CDC: https://www.pri.org/stories/2015-07-02/quietly-congress-extends-ban-cdc-research-gun-violence

I remember when they did that and why Doc, it was because the CDC wanted Medical Drs to ask patients if they owned guns and how many and report it to them

Common
10-05-2017, 05:18 PM
Some Walmarts sell guns, I've bought them there. Shotgun and an air rifle. In both cases, after paying for the guns the store manager would not give them to me, he carried them outside and handed them to me in the parking lot.

This is the kind of dumbfuckery regulation the left is going to dream up. Like that prevented me from going on a shooting rampage.
Thats a store policy not a regulation and it makes sense, you could buy a shotgun, have shells in your pocket load up and fire away. I dont have problem with that Capt

Chris
10-05-2017, 05:18 PM
Speaking of the CDC: https://www.pri.org/stories/2015-07-02/quietly-congress-extends-ban-cdc-research-gun-violence

I wasn't speaking of the CDC but of the data they reported.

What do you want to say about the CDC?

Chris
10-05-2017, 05:20 PM
I remember when they did that and why Doc, it was because the CDC wanted Medical Drs to ask patients if they owned guns and how many and report it to them

Actually the study by the CDC that caused a ruckus was this:


While the new study analyzed Wilmington's 127 recorded shootings in 2013, it does not address how the perpetrators acquired their weapons, or if attempts to limit access to firearms might lead to a dip in crime. Instead, the Wilmington report outlines already well-established trends and risk factors: that 95 percent of city residents arrested for violent crimes are young men; that a history of violence is a strong predictor for being involved in a firearm-related crime; and that unemployment is often a risk factor for violence. The report concludes that "integrating data systems" across Delaware would allow social service providers to better understand the issue.

@ https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/qbxnpm/the-cdc-just-released-a-gun-violence-study-that-doesnt-study-guns-122 referenced in Who's link

Dr. Who
10-05-2017, 06:22 PM
I wasn't speaking of the CDC but of the data they reported.

What do you want to say about the CDC?

As is plainly stated in the linked document, the CDC is prohibited from researching the relationship between gun ownership and gun deaths and well as any other exacerbatory factors, although one statistic was revealed - that possessing a gun triples your chances of being killed or injured by a gun.

Mister D
10-05-2017, 06:58 PM
Some Walmarts sell guns, I've bought them there. Shotgun and an air rifle. In both cases, after paying for the guns the store manager would not give them to me, he carried them outside and handed them to me in the parking lot.

This is the kind of dumbfuckery regulation the left is going to dream up. Like that prevented me from going on a shooting rampage.

I know they sell guns. I'm just poking fun at the people who think you bring guns to the register with your beans and franks.

Don
10-05-2017, 07:07 PM
Take the suicides out and let's look at the numbers.

Hasn't that 30,000 per year number been debunked? Even with suicides and justifiable killings being classified as homicides?

The old standard of 50000 motor vehicle accidents per year (which over 50 years adds up to 2,500,000) has gone down somewhat mostly because cars are built safer now. It sure hasn't been public education attempts that brought that number down. Even the much publicized education about driving under the influence seems to have not made drugged/drunk driving numbers go down.

http://b2.ifrm.com/17/153/0/p710989/10_big_killers.jpg

Newpublius
10-05-2017, 07:07 PM
More Americans have died from gunshots in the last 50 years than in all of the wars in American history.
Since 1968, more than 1.5 million Americans have died in gun-related incidents, according to data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00023655.htm). By comparison, approximately 1.2 million service members have been killed in every war in U.S. history, according to estimates from the Department of Veterans Affairs (https://www.va.gov/opa/publications/factsheets/fs_americas_wars.pdf) and iCasualties.org (http://icasualties.org/), (http://icasualties.org/)a website that maintains an ongoing database of casualties from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Sunday's massacre in Las Vegas — which left 59 dead and 530 others injured — is the deadliest mass shooting in modern American history. And such attacks are becoming more common.

20291
https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/las-vegas-shooting/more-americans-killed-guns-1968-all-u-s-wars-combined-n807156

Pretty sobering statistics. Now I'm sure that suicides by gun are part of those statistics, however, that shouldn't make you feel better. Many of those suicides would not have happened if a gun were not readily available since suicidal thoughts, absent a gun, make it more difficult to kill oneself in the moment and suicidal ideation often passes after a time. Gun suicides are often impulsive actions. Taking pills often doesn't work or is discovered before death occurs.

There is a proven correlation between the availability of guns and deaths by gunshot. The current lack of consistency between jurisdictions make it very easy for criminals to acquire weapons.

While the right to own weapons is Constitutionally recognized it is not unlimited. No right is absolute. Freedom of speech is vigorously protected by the Constitution, but still restricted when it comes to falsely damaging someone's reputation, shouting fire in a crowded theater, counselling people to commit a crime, threatening violence, harassing etc. You have a right to practice your religion, you don't have a right to make others practice your religion or damage others through your practice of said religion. Your protected rights end where they infringe on someone else's rights. If that requires sensible federal regulations, then so be it. You have a right to self-defense and to hunt. That doesn't necessarily imply that you have an unlimited right to own an arsenal, for example. It doesn't mean that you have a right to leave your gun laying around where children may find it and fire it. With all rights come responsibilities and not all people are responsible. To that end, it is prudent to create restrictions such as banning private weapon sales, gun shows etc or requiring all buyers of weapons to undergo a background check, restricting the number of weapons, types of weapons and quantity of ammunition that you can possess or purchase without a special license.

We have a lot of technology today. It would not be impossible to create a registry of retinal patterns and a special ID with said retinal pattern that would be required for purchasing weapons. Without private sales, this would make straw man purchases, much more difficult, particularly if you couldn't own multiple weapons without a special license.

Millions of people should not have to die to protect a right.

Legalize drugs and it goes away. Vast majority of gun issues is drug related. You can't go to court, you can't go to the police.

Don
10-05-2017, 07:09 PM
Thats a store policy not a regulation and it makes sense, you could buy a shotgun, have shells in your pocket load up and fire away. I dont have problem with that Capt

That policy also reduces their chance of getting sued for millions of dollars.

Common
10-05-2017, 07:11 PM
Hasn't that 30,000 per year number been debunked? Even with suicides and justifiable killings being classified as homicides?

The old standard of 50000 motor vehicle accidents per year (which over 50 years adds up to 2,500,000) has gone down somewhat mostly because cars are built safer now. It sure hasn't been public education attempts that brought that number down. Even the much publicized education about driving under the influence seems to have not made drugged/drunk driving numbers go down.

http://b2.ifrm.com/17/153/0/p710989/10_big_killers.jpg

Youre right alcohol related deaths have been surpassed by cellphone related auto deaths

Dr. Who
10-05-2017, 09:19 PM
Youre right alcohol related deaths have been surpassed by cellphone related auto deaths
Distracted and/or impaired driving will disappear with autonomous vehicles.

MisterVeritis
10-05-2017, 09:27 PM
As is plainly stated in the linked document, the CDC is prohibited from researching the relationship between gun ownership and gun deaths and well as any other exacerbatory factors, although one statistic was revealed - that possessing a gun triples your chances of being killed or injured by a gun.
Or more likely, being in a dangerous situation leads to gun ownership.

What does the relationship between living in a democrat-controlled city and harm involving guns show?

Cletus
10-05-2017, 10:42 PM
As is plainly stated in the linked document, the CDC is prohibited from researching the relationship between gun ownership and gun deaths and well as any other exacerbatory factors, although one statistic was revealed - that possessing a gun triples your chances of being killed or injured by a gun.

In the same way that swimming greatly increases your chances of drowning.

Dr. Who
10-05-2017, 10:50 PM
Or more likely, being in a dangerous situation leads to gun ownership.

What does the relationship between living in a democrat-controlled city and harm involving guns show?
There is certainly a relationship between dense populations of poor people, crime and gun use. I don't think the political affiliations of the temporal municipal governments changes that dynamic in any significant fashion.

Dr. Who
10-05-2017, 10:51 PM
In the same way that swimming greatly increases your chances of drowning.
That's true, but most people don't have a swimming pool in the house.

resister
10-05-2017, 10:59 PM
That's true, but most people don't have a swimming pool in the house.
Just in the back yard. Owning a car greatly increases your chances of being injured by one.

Cletus
10-06-2017, 12:29 AM
Flying in a plane increases your chances of dying in a plane crash.

Using electrical appliances increases your chances of electrocution.

Bathing increases your chances of drowning (forget about the pool).

Walking outside increases your chances of skin cancer.

We could go on and on and on with this.

Ethereal
10-06-2017, 12:29 PM
And roughly as many Americans have died from falling down. Such is life. But we can take comfort in the fact that the average American has roughly a 0.003% chance of becoming the victim of a gun homicide in a given year.

Ethereal
10-06-2017, 12:33 PM
I have already explained that no right is absolute.
We are becoming less and less interested in your tortuous explanations. Suffice it to say, you and the rest of the gun control crowd will not be given an inch.

MisterVeritis
10-06-2017, 12:34 PM
There is certainly a relationship between dense populations of poor people, crime and gun use. I don't think the political affiliations of the temporal municipal governments changes that dynamic in any significant fashion.
You are fond of pointing out many meaningless relationships. And yet the one with the most meaning of all, the political mindset that "rules" nearly every dangerous area is the Democratic Party, soft-totalitarian mindset. I do not wonder that you fail to see it.

Ethereal
10-06-2017, 12:42 PM
I don't think the political affiliations of the temporal municipal governments changes that dynamic in any significant fashion.
Yea, it's just a big coincidence that the places with the highest gun crime in the USA are all cities controlled by Democrats.

Dr. Who
10-06-2017, 06:09 PM
Yea, it's just a big coincidence that the places with the highest gun crime in the USA are all cities controlled by Democrats.
Perhaps if Republicans showed a little empathy, they might get elected. Instead they come across as antagonistic to the poor.

MisterVeritis
10-06-2017, 07:16 PM
Perhaps if Republicans showed a little empathy, they might get elected. Instead they come across as antagonistic to the poor.
Republicans do get elected. Just not by people living on their knees with their hands out.

Mister D
10-06-2017, 07:32 PM
Republicans do get elected. Just not by people living on their knees with their hands out.
Last I checked Hillary Clinton isn't President. Probably a lack of empathy.

Mister D
10-06-2017, 07:34 PM
Perhaps if Republicans showed a little empathy, they might get elected. Instead they come across as antagonistic to the poor.

Not holding certain demographic groups accountable for anything isn't empathy.

MisterVeritis
10-06-2017, 07:35 PM
Last I checked Hillary Clinton isn't President. Probably a lack of empathy.
LOL. She blames white people. Good job white people!

Mister D
10-06-2017, 07:38 PM
LOL. She blames white people. Good job white people!
Who knew a "white people suck" platform might cause poor turnout?

Chris
10-06-2017, 08:17 PM
Perhaps if Republicans showed a little empathy, they might get elected. Instead they come across as antagonistic to the poor.


Republicans do get elected. Just not by people living on their knees with their hands out.


Last I checked Hillary Clinton isn't President. Probably a lack of empathy.


Good lord, the statements some make are so divorced from reality. Reps now control all three branches of government. They need advice from a liberal like they need a hole in the head.

Dr. Who
10-06-2017, 08:29 PM
Good lord, the statements some make are so divorced from reality. Reps now control all three branches of government. They need advice from a liberal like they need a hole in the head.
If you read the statement that I was responding to, you would know that it was suggested that all big cities are controlled by Democrats - not Republicans. Why not Republicans? Perhaps because they don't try to connect with the issues of urban dwellers and in particular the poor.

MisterVeritis
10-06-2017, 08:32 PM
If you read the statement that I was responding to, you would know that it was suggested that all big cities are controlled by Democrats - not Republicans. Why not Republicans? Perhaps because they don't try to connect with the issues of urban dwellers.
Blacks, ever on a Democrat-controlled plantation, do as they are told. They vote almost exclusively for Democrats. Until blacks begin to vote for individual liberty instead of government handouts, they will continue to live in dangerous, Democrat-controlled places.

Dr. Who
10-06-2017, 08:50 PM
Blacks, ever on a Democrat-controlled plantation, do as they are told. They vote almost exclusively for Democrats. Until blacks begin to vote for individual liberty instead of government handouts, they will continue to live in dangerous, Democrat-controlled places.

You don't think that white people live in large cities? Take Chicago for instance. Whites are the single largest demographic:



Race
Population
% of Total


Total Population
2,695,598
100


White (https://suburbanstats.org/race/illinois/chicago/how-many-white-people-live-in-chicago-illinois)
1,212,835
44


Black or African American (https://suburbanstats.org/race/illinois/chicago/how-many-black-or-african-american-people-live-in-chicago-illinois)
887,608
32


Hispanic or Latino (https://suburbanstats.org/race/illinois/chicago/how-many-hispanic-or-latino-people-live-in-chicago-illinois)
778,862
28


Some Other Race (https://suburbanstats.org/race/illinois/chicago/how-many-some-other-race-people-live-in-chicago-illinois)
360,493
13


Asian (https://suburbanstats.org/race/illinois/chicago/how-many-asian-people-live-in-chicago-illinois)
147,164
5


Two or More Races (https://suburbanstats.org/race/illinois/chicago/how-many-two-or-more-races-people-live-in-chicago-illinois)
73,148
2


American Indian (https://suburbanstats.org/race/illinois/chicago/how-many-american-indian-people-live-in-chicago-illinois)
13,337
Below 1%


Three or more races (https://suburbanstats.org/race/illinois/chicago/how-many-three-or-more-races-people-live-in-chicago-illinois)
5,186
Below 1%


Native Hawaiian Pacific Islander (https://suburbanstats.org/race/illinois/chicago/how-many-native-hawaiian-pacific-islander-people-live-in-chicago-illinois)
1,013
Below 1%


Native Hawaiian (https://suburbanstats.org/race/illinois/chicago/how-many-native-hawaiian-people-live-in-chicago-illinois)
242
Below 1%


https://suburbanstats.org/population/illinois/how-many-people-live-in-chicago

Chris
10-07-2017, 08:25 AM
If you read the statement that I was responding to, you would know that it was suggested that all big cities are controlled by Democrats - not Republicans. Why not Republicans? Perhaps because they don't try to connect with the issues of urban dwellers and in particular the poor.

I have no idea why people elect Democrats.

Chris
10-07-2017, 08:28 AM
It can't be crowding in cities. While some cities are worse than US cities, none of the major cities in Europe or Asia come close:

https://i.snag.gy/Spr4W3.jpg

America is an outlier:

https://i.snag.gy/Hdv8y6.jpg

Mister D
10-07-2017, 10:05 AM
It can't be crowding in cities. While some cities are worse than US cities, none of the major cities in Europe or Asia come close:

https://i.snag.gy/Spr4W3.jpg

America is an outlier:

https://i.snag.gy/Hdv8y6.jpg

I've made that point many times. The population density of American cities tends to be lower than their European and Asian counterparts.

Chris
10-07-2017, 10:24 AM
I've made that point many times. The population density of American cities tends to be lower than their European and Asian counterparts.

Yes, I have hypothesized violence is related to crowding but you've said no so in Europe. So I looked for some data and found you're right.

Mister D
10-07-2017, 10:46 AM
Yes, I have hypothesized violence is related to crowding but you've said no so in Europe. So I looked for some data and found you're right.

Mind you, I think population density is probably a factor but I don't think it's crucial. The cultural and economic elements seem to be more pertinent.

Mister D
10-07-2017, 10:47 AM
Chris you've lived in Japan. From what I understand the crime rate in densely packed Tokyo is low by developed world standards.

Common
10-07-2017, 10:48 AM
No one is killed by guns, they are killed by other people.

Run over by a car, shot, stabbed, beaten to death etc is all done by other people

Chris
10-07-2017, 10:56 AM
Mind you, I think population density is probably a factor but I don't think it's crucial. The cultural and economic elements seem to be more pertinent.

Or lack of culture.

Diversity is probably another big factor. A bunch of Swedes are likely to trust each other (unless you watch Fargo!).

Chris
10-07-2017, 10:59 AM
Chris you've lived in Japan. From what I understand the crime rate in densely packed Tokyo is low by developed world standards.

Most definitely. Shop owners at the end of the day walk down the street money bags in hand to the bank. In Hemiji, the Yakuza section of the city was right next to the business district and there was no danger of theft or violence.

Mister D
10-07-2017, 01:05 PM
Most definitely. Shop owners at the end of the day walk down the street money bags in hand to the bank. In Hemiji, the Yakuza section of the city was right next to the business district and there was no danger of theft or violence.
I just watched a documentary on the Yakuza. They were saying that the Yakuza is tolerated to an extent because it monopolizes criminal activity. Kind of like the Mafia back in the day.

Mister D
10-07-2017, 01:08 PM
Or lack of culture.

Diversity is probably another big factor. A bunch of Swedes are likely to trust each other (unless you watch Fargo!).
Yes, I think there is good evidence to suggest that homogeneity or lack thereof has a significant impact.

Dr. Who
10-07-2017, 02:30 PM
It can't be crowding in cities. While some cities are worse than US cities, none of the major cities in Europe or Asia come close:

https://i.snag.gy/Spr4W3.jpg

America is an outlier:

https://i.snag.gy/Hdv8y6.jpg
It couldn't be that no other country in the world has so many guns in the stream of commerce, could it? If you mix dense populations with poverty, crime and easy access to weapons. It also seems that the states with the highest rates of per capita gun ownership also strangely have the highest rates of gun homicides.
https://qz.com/437015/mapped-the-us-states-with-the-most-gun-owners-and-most-gun-deaths/

Mister D
10-07-2017, 04:01 PM
It couldn't be that no other country in the world has so many guns in the stream of commerce, could it? If you mix dense populations with poverty, crime and easy access to weapons. It also seems that the states with the highest rates of per capita gun ownership also strangely have the highest rates of gun homicides.
https://qz.com/437015/mapped-the-us-states-with-the-most-gun-owners-and-most-gun-deaths/

The US has one of the highest rates if not the highest rate of guns per capita yet it does not have the highest rate of homicide in the world. That your contention is at odds with the facts is precisely the point. In fact, Canada is #12 and the Nordic countries are all in the top ten. Their homicide rates are minute, relatively speaking.

Dr. Who
10-07-2017, 04:12 PM
The US has one of the highest rates if not the highest rate of guns per capita yet it does not have the highest rate of homicide in the world. That your contention is at odds with the facts is precisely the point. In fact, Canada is #12 and the Nordic countries are all in the top ten. Their homicide rates are minute, relatively speaking.

Those really tall red bars in the above graph actually indicate the highest per capita (i.e. per 100,000 people) gun homicide rate in the world. However, to be fair, it also includes South and Central America as well as Canada.

Mister D
10-07-2017, 04:16 PM
You're not being "fair", Dr. Who. You're making a statement and then telling us why it's inaccurate.

Mister D
10-07-2017, 04:21 PM
Let me put this in some perspective for you, Who. The homicide rate in Honduras is over 60 per 100K. El Salvador it's over a 100! In the US it's around 5. With our rate of firearms per capita you;d expect the apocalypse...but it ain't happenin'.