| Author |
Message |
|
Seahawk Sailor
|
Post subject: Re: Gun control and violence  Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 11:31 am |
|
| * Navy Badass * |
 |
 |
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:23 am
Posts: 16265
Location: Bothell
|
|
  |
|
 |
|
BlueTalon
|
Post subject: Re: Gun control and violence Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 11:34 am |
|
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:06 am
Posts: 6798
Location: Eastern Washington
|
SmokinHawk wrote: When you say "cirtain types of guns simply don't belong in the hands of the civilian population", are you aware that the very reason we have the right to bear arms is to fight our own government, in the event we the people deem it to be necessary? Simple logic would dictate that we need to be armed with paramilitary weapons, not "safe and sane" popguns with limited capacity and single-shot firing. I find it highly ironic that would-be gun controllers simultaneously use the militia clause of the 2nd Amendment to argue that the right of the people to keep and bear arms should be more tightly restricted, and argue that those tighter restrictions should include bans on militia-style weapons.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SonicHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Gun control and violence Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 11:38 am |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 12:56 pm
Posts: 2365
|
|
| |
|
|
|
pehawk
|
Post subject: Re: Gun control and violence Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 11:53 am |
|
| * Report Button * |
 |
|
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 12:08 pm
Posts: 6637
|
BlueTalon wrote: pehawk wrote: I try to live my life by the code and knowledge of 1775 or so.
"What the fuck you mean an x-ray? Jefferson used leeches, motherfucker! What am I, a communist?" Ya know what? I don't mind the idea of people working to restrict or even ban the ownership of guns by the people of this country. My problem with them is that they want to cheat. If they want to ban guns, let them do it in the only constitutionally approved method -- amend the US Constitution to change or repeal the 2nd Amendment. But they don't want to do that (because it is extremely difficult by design, and they know they'd never get it done). Instead, they want to do an end run around the Constitution by arbitrarily redefining words and using courts to bypass the constitutional process. Fair enough.
_________________
@ryanadamdavis
|
|
| |
|
|
|
12evanf
|
Post subject: Re: Gun control and violence Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 12:05 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
|
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 10:40 am
Posts: 1704
|
pehawk wrote: BlueTalon wrote: pehawk wrote: I try to live my life by the code and knowledge of 1775 or so.
"What the fuck you mean an x-ray? Jefferson used leeches, motherfucker! What am I, a communist?" Ya know what? I don't mind the idea of people working to restrict or even ban the ownership of guns by the people of this country. My problem with them is that they want to cheat. If they want to ban guns, let them do it in the only constitutionally approved method -- amend the US Constitution to change or repeal the 2nd Amendment. But they don't want to do that (because it is extremely difficult by design, and they know they'd never get it done). Instead, they want to do an end run around the Constitution by arbitrarily redefining words and using courts to bypass the constitutional process. Fair enough. I was also for a Universal Healthcare Amendment. It's hard to get any shit done in this Congress without cheating.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Seahawk Sailor
|
Post subject: Re: Gun control and violence Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 2:25 pm |
|
| * Navy Badass * |
|
|
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:23 am
Posts: 16265
Location: Bothell
|
Another shooting, eerily similar to Newtown's happened in Pearl River, MS, in 1997: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_High_School_shootingFrom the Wikipedia page (which is all I could find with a cursory search): Quote: Woodham went on to wound seven others before leaving, intending to drive off campus and conduct another shooting at the nearby Pearl Junior High School. However, assistant principal Joel Myrick had retrieved a .45 pistol from the glove compartment of his truck and subdued Woodham inside his mother's car. Of course, it doesn't fit the script or the agenda. _________________ I blog, I tweet. When I'm not writing or goofing around on Seahawks.NET.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SonicHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Gun control and violence Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 2:33 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 12:56 pm
Posts: 2365
|
Seahawk Sailor wrote: Another shooting, eerily similar to Newtown's happened in Pearl River, MS, in 1997: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_High_School_shootingFrom the Wikipedia page (which is all I could find with a cursory search): Quote: Woodham went on to wound seven others before leaving, intending to drive off campus and conduct another shooting at the nearby Pearl Junior High School. However, assistant principal Joel Myrick had retrieved a .45 pistol from the glove compartment of his truck and subdued Woodham inside his mother's car. Of course, it doesn't fit the script or the agenda. It's a nice story and certainly thankful for his actions... but there's plenty of accidental shootings that could have been prevented if there was never a gun to begin with. There are 680 accidental shootings that result in death and 15,000 injuries in the United States each year. Many of these incidents involve children.
_________________
RIP ROAD WOES 12/2/2012
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DTexHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Gun control and violence Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 2:50 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 5:55 am
Posts: 3265
|
Here's some more stats: http://www.madd.org/statistics/"In 2010, 211 children were killed in drunk driving crashes. Out of those 211 deaths, 131 (62 percent) were riding with the drunk driver." "Every day in America, another 27 people die as a result of drunk driving crashes." "In fatal crashes in 2010, the highest percentage of drunk drivers was for drivers ages 21 to 24 (34 percent), followed by ages 25 to 34 (30 percent) and 35 to 44 (25 percent)." So using your reasoning, we should; Prohibit alcohol? Prohibit automobiles? Raise the drinking age to 50?
_________________
That's weak sauce!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SonicHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Gun control and violence Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 2:53 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 12:56 pm
Posts: 2365
|
DTexHawk wrote: Here's some more stats: http://www.madd.org/statistics/"In 2010, 211 children were killed in drunk driving crashes. Out of those 211 deaths, 131 (62 percent) were riding with the drunk driver." "Every day in America, another 27 people die as a result of drunk driving crashes." "In fatal crashes in 2010, the highest percentage of drunk drivers was for drivers ages 21 to 24 (34 percent), followed by ages 25 to 34 (30 percent) and 35 to 44 (25 percent)." So using your reasoning, we should; Prohibit alcohol? Prohibit automobiles? Raise the drinking age to 50? Using my reasoning you wouldn't do either of those because neither of those items primary function is to kill something. However I am completely open to putting significant resources to automating our travel by vehicle.
_________________
RIP ROAD WOES 12/2/2012
|
|
| |
|
|
|
BlueTalon
|
Post subject: Re: Gun control and violence Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 2:54 pm |
|
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:06 am
Posts: 6798
Location: Eastern Washington
|
SonicHawk wrote: It's a nice story and certainly thankful for his actions... but there's plenty of accidental shootings that could have been prevented if there was never a gun to begin with. The topic we have been discussing is mass murder in schools, and how best to prevent or reduce it. On topic, that "nice story" could have been replicated many times if teachers were allowed to have guns on school premises. SonicHawk wrote: There are 680 accidental shootings that result in death and 15,000 injuries in the United States each year. Many of these incidents involve children. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DTexHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Gun control and violence Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 2:59 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 5:55 am
Posts: 3265
|
SonicHawk wrote: DTexHawk wrote: Here's some more stats: http://www.madd.org/statistics/"In 2010, 211 children were killed in drunk driving crashes. Out of those 211 deaths, 131 (62 percent) were riding with the drunk driver." "Every day in America, another 27 people die as a result of drunk driving crashes." "In fatal crashes in 2010, the highest percentage of drunk drivers was for drivers ages 21 to 24 (34 percent), followed by ages 25 to 34 (30 percent) and 35 to 44 (25 percent)." So using your reasoning, we should; Prohibit alcohol? Prohibit automobiles? Raise the drinking age to 50? Using my reasoning you wouldn't do either of those because neither of those items primary function is to kill something. However I am completely open to putting significant resources to automating our travel by vehicle. So you are only concerned about deaths caused by a certain function, and not by behavior?
_________________
That's weak sauce!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SonicHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Gun control and violence Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 3:00 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 12:56 pm
Posts: 2365
|
|
_________________
RIP ROAD WOES 12/2/2012
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SonicHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Gun control and violence Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 3:05 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 12:56 pm
Posts: 2365
|
DTexHawk wrote: SonicHawk wrote: DTexHawk wrote: Here's some more stats: http://www.madd.org/statistics/"In 2010, 211 children were killed in drunk driving crashes. Out of those 211 deaths, 131 (62 percent) were riding with the drunk driver." "Every day in America, another 27 people die as a result of drunk driving crashes." "In fatal crashes in 2010, the highest percentage of drunk drivers was for drivers ages 21 to 24 (34 percent), followed by ages 25 to 34 (30 percent) and 35 to 44 (25 percent)." So using your reasoning, we should; Prohibit alcohol? Prohibit automobiles? Raise the drinking age to 50? Using my reasoning you wouldn't do either of those because neither of those items primary function is to kill something. However I am completely open to putting significant resources to automating our travel by vehicle. So you are only concerned about deaths caused by a certain function, and not by behavior? No. And you really should stop getting your arguments from those right-wing message boards. Drunk driving is illegal, not just killing/injuring someone while drunk driving. Guns aren't illegal, it's just illegal (sometimes) to kill/injure someone using it.
_________________
RIP ROAD WOES 12/2/2012
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DTexHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Gun control and violence Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 3:11 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 5:55 am
Posts: 3265
|
SonicHawk wrote: No. And you really should stop getting your arguments from those right-wing message boards.
Drunk driving is illegal, not just killing/injuring someone while drunk driving.
Guns aren't illegal, it's just illegal (sometimes) to kill/injure someone using it. Shooting someone else is illegal, don't do it. Punish those who do. Very simple.
_________________
That's weak sauce!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Seahawk Sailor
|
Post subject: Re: Gun control and violence Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 3:14 pm |
|
| * Navy Badass * |
|
|
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:23 am
Posts: 16265
Location: Bothell
|
SonicHawk wrote: It's a nice story and certainly thankful for his actions... but there's plenty of accidental shootings that could have been prevented if there was never a gun to begin with.
There are 680 accidental shootings that result in death and 15,000 injuries in the United States each year. Many of these incidents involve children. This was a carbon copy of the shooting that just occurred in Newtown, but without as much death - directly because the teacher had a gun handy to stop him. This had nothing to do with accidental shootings, nor is it any indication that an accidental shooting could have been caused by any actions in the incident. There are a lot of things we could be doing to cut back on deaths of all sorts. They don't pertain to preventing loonies from walking into public places and killing people, no matter how they do it. One of the common points to all these recent mass killings is that they all happened in gun-free zones, that is, they occurred in places where guns were already banned. A gun ban in those areas did nothing to prevent any of it. Do you think strict gun bans in the U.S. would ensure there was "never a gun to begin with" for future incidents? After all, we don't have a stellar track record with prohibiting anything. _________________ I blog, I tweet. When I'm not writing or goofing around on Seahawks.NET.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SonicHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Gun control and violence Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 3:22 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 12:56 pm
Posts: 2365
|
|
| |
|
|
|
BlueTalon
|
Post subject: Re: Gun control and violence Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 3:31 pm |
|
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:06 am
Posts: 6798
Location: Eastern Washington
|
SonicHawk wrote: No, of course it wouldn't prevent every horrific tragedy from happening. But look at this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... death_rateLook at where the UK is. Look at where we are. That is an ubersimplistic way of looking at it. We aren't them, and they aren't us. There is a whole myriad of things to take into account when looking at numbers like that and trying to make sense of them. You can't just pick out arbitrary bits and establish a correlation to support your viewpoint. (Well, you can, but that doesn't make it legitimate.)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SmokinHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Gun control and violence Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 3:34 pm |
|
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:29 am
Posts: 4742
Location: Not Umatilla, Oregon
|
SonicHawk wrote: It's a nice story and certainly thankful for his actions... but there's plenty of accidental shootings that could have been prevented if there was never a gun to begin with.
There are 680 accidental shootings that result in death and 15,000 injuries in the United States each year. Many of these incidents involve children. You should learn to celebrate accidental shootings as they are an example of evolution in action. Given how simple guns are to operate, do you really want someone to breed if they're stupid enough to accidentally off themselves? I know I don't. We are all stronger people without these buffoons pissing in the gene pool. How do 680 accidental shootings result in 15,000 injuries? Or, how about this, what percentage of the entire US population (including about 75 million undocumented, giving us roughly 400,000,000) is 15,000? The answer is 0.0000375%. Are you suggesting that because the 0.0000375% minority can't handle their shit, nobody else should be allowed to either? Your statistics hardly paint a picture of this being a widespread problem. Lastly, predicating your argument on a statement of "if there was never a gun to begin with" is beyond fallacious. There are guns everywhere, something to the tune of 600 million of them (roughly half in the hands of private individuals) in the USA alone, so your gun-free reality is a complete fantasy.
_________________
Feel free to contact me if you need legal assistance. I have a great lawyer that helped me with an ex who violated my privacy and kept harassing me on MySpace and Facebook. He's very good. And there is legal precedent. - linuxpro
He is hold back the legion of boom - skater18000
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SonicHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Gun control and violence Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 3:36 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 12:56 pm
Posts: 2365
|
BlueTalon wrote: SonicHawk wrote: No, of course it wouldn't prevent every horrific tragedy from happening. But look at this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... death_rateLook at where the UK is. Look at where we are. That is an ubersimplistic way of looking at it. We aren't them, and they aren't us. There is a whole myriad of things to take into account when looking at numbers like that and trying to make sense of them. You can't just pick out arbitrary bits and establish a correlation to support your viewpoint. (Well, you can, but that doesn't make it legitimate.) Seriously, I can't even use real stats to make an argument for removing guns? A country very similar to us (in the scheme of things) banned weapons. They now have a ridiculously low rate of death by firearms. How can you guys continue to disregard this?
_________________
RIP ROAD WOES 12/2/2012
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SonicHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Gun control and violence Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 3:40 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 12:56 pm
Posts: 2365
|
SmokinHawk wrote: SonicHawk wrote: It's a nice story and certainly thankful for his actions... but there's plenty of accidental shootings that could have been prevented if there was never a gun to begin with.
There are 680 accidental shootings that result in death and 15,000 injuries in the United States each year. Many of these incidents involve children. You should learn to celebrate accidental shootings as they are an example of evolution in action. Given how simple guns are to operate, do you really want someone to breed if they're stupid enough to accidentally off themselves? I know I don't. We are all stronger people without these buffoons pissing in the gene pool. How do 680 accidental shootings result in 15,000 injuries? Or, how about this, what percentage of the entire US population (including about 75 million undocumented, giving us roughly 400,000,000) is 15,000? The answer is 0.0000375%. Are you suggesting that because the 0.0000375% minority can't handle their shit, nobody else should be allowed to either? Your statistics hardly paint a picture of this being a widespread problem. Lastly, predicating your argument on a statement of "if there was never a gun to begin with" is beyond fallacious. There are guns everywhere, something to the tune of 600 million of them (roughly half in the hands of private individuals) in the USA alone, so your gun-free reality is a complete fantasy. It's 680 fatalities and 15,000 non-fatal injuries. ------> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... death_rateContinue to disregard obvious statistics. We ban toys all the time for killing a single child. 10,000 people died in drunk driving accidents each year. 11,000+ die from firearms Do you think that statistic is too small of a size? Do you want more people to die from firearms for it to be ok? How many more school shootings until it's ok to use them as examples of why we need significant change?
_________________
RIP ROAD WOES 12/2/2012
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|
