+DieChecker Posted November 9, 2015 #126 Share Posted November 9, 2015 (edited) Really? We have lots of accidental shootings, they are less than the people who have supposedly been saved? Very much less. It depends on who you want to believe. The pro-gun crowd with their 3 to 5 million crimes prevented, with possibly tens of thousands of lives saved. Or the anti-gun people who believe in less then ten thousand crimes prevented and only hundreds of lives saved. Obviously the truth is somewhere in the middle. For 2010 the number killed accidentally was 600 nationwide. That is way lower then the thousands that were saved, such as the lady in the article previously mentioned. I didn't see anything in the article that said she and her baby would likely be dead if she didn't have a gun, and I'd guess most home invasions are for the purposes of burglary, not murder. And when comparing to accidental shootings as I mentioned above, keep in mind that there isn't much interpretation or guesswork involved in tallying those up, unlike, "this person had a gun and fended off an armed crime, so I'll assume they would have been killed if they didn't have a gun". It said she ran upstairs and hid, and ended up exchanging fire with the robbers. Why would robbers fire on someone hiding in an upstairs bedroom other then to kill them and get whatever was in that room? Logically, they wanted to kill her, or they would never have fired a shot. And... killing her, they likely would have either shot, or killed indirectly, the baby. If the robbers were unarmed, they would have fled if the lady fired a shot. And if they didn't mean to kill anyone, even if they were armed, they would have fled again, when she fired a shot. That the robbers shot back is the telling fact. THOUGH you may be right in that if she didn't have a gun, they might have merely raped her and beaten her unconscious, which I suppose would be preferable to owning a gun? Edited November 9, 2015 by DieChecker 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+OverSword Posted November 9, 2015 #127 Share Posted November 9, 2015 I didn't see anything in the article that said she and her baby would likely be dead if she didn't have a gun, and I'd guess most home invasions are for the purposes of burglary, not murder. And when comparing to accidental shootings as I mentioned above, keep in mind that there isn't much interpretation or guesswork involved in tallying those up, unlike, "this person had a gun and fended off an armed crime, so I'll assume they would have been killed if they didn't have a gun". A burglary is when nobody is home. Burglars are generally not armed because if caught the sentence is much larger if you have a weapon with you. If they have a weapon assume it will be used, like in this instance. It's a very, very good thing this family had the good judgement to have a fire arm in their home. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Liquid Gardens Posted November 9, 2015 #128 Share Posted November 9, 2015 Very much less. It depends on who you want to believe. The pro-gun crowd with their 3 to 5 million crimes prevented, with possibly tens of thousands of lives saved. Or the anti-gun people who believe in less then ten thousand crimes prevented and only hundreds of lives saved. Obviously the truth is somewhere in the middle. For 2010 the number killed accidentally was 600 nationwide. That is way lower then the thousands that were saved, such as the lady in the article previously mentioned. Okay, but there seem to be some pretty obvious inconsistencies in the way the statistics are being compared. How many accidental shootings, not just deaths, were there? I assume it's more than 600 since I believe toddlers are shooting people at roughly the pace of one a week. How many of the supposed 'Gun Saves Lives' incidents may have resulted in a non-fatality, and thus shouldn't be counted like we're not counting non-fatal accidental shootings? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+DieChecker Posted November 9, 2015 #129 Share Posted November 9, 2015 (edited) Okay, but there seem to be some pretty obvious inconsistencies in the way the statistics are being compared. How many accidental shootings, not just deaths, were there? I assume it's more than 600 since I believe toddlers are shooting people at roughly the pace of one a week. Well toddlers with guns is bad.... M'kay. The CDC says that in 2013 there were 69 child (under age 14) deaths by firearm. Shootings I am sure were much higher, probably in the 500 range, if I was to guess. We can talk accidental shootings if you like, but the international comparisons always use deaths. How many of the supposed 'Gun Saves Lives' incidents may have resulted in a non-fatality, and thus shouldn't be counted like we're not counting non-fatal accidental shootings? The argument, I suppose, is that you are trying to prevent injury and death to the homeowner. So the assumption is that the criminal is trying to kill the homeowner in all instances. What use is it to try to guess the percentage of criminals who are only trying to injure the homeowner? If someone comes into your house and starts shooting, are you going to assume they want to kill you, or that they only intend to put a bullet into your leg to get you out of the way? Edited November 9, 2015 by DieChecker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellapenella Posted November 10, 2015 #130 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Some in the entertainment industry influence idiotic thinking like this jerk. Why's he boasting about what he has in his song ? idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yamato Posted November 10, 2015 #131 Share Posted November 10, 2015 The way many Americans behave today, a lot of people are going to be very glad they own guns when the economy collapses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Liquid Gardens Posted November 10, 2015 #132 Share Posted November 10, 2015 The argument, I suppose, is that you are trying to prevent injury and death to the homeowner. So the assumption is that the criminal is trying to kill the homeowner in all instances. What use is it to try to guess the percentage of criminals who are only trying to injure the homeowner? The only use it has is in the evaluation of your statement that we are discussing, "It is complete naivety that breeds people to think that guns cause more death then they save". If we're going to count most every time someone uses a gun to thwart a crime by an armed person as an avoided fatality, not just injury, that seems unrealistic and is going to inflate those numbers, especially compared to just accidental shooting fatalities which is a more tangible and objective statistic. Obviously we'd want to compare apples to apples when evaluating both sides of that equation; if we are going to count just fatalities then we need to guess that percentage you mention, or we need to start counting injuries incurred by shootings as well as injuries that have been avoided by gun owners stopping crimes. I don't know how that all shakes out, but what you say is naive doesn't for sure seem to be so considering we are making guesses when it comes to how many deaths guns prevented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweetpumper Posted November 10, 2015 #133 Share Posted November 10, 2015 CHARLOTTE, N.C. -- Police have charged a man with attempted murder after an alleged shootout with an Army National Guard combat medic in the stairwell of her Charlotte, North Carolina home. The medic's husband says 21-year-old Semantha Bunce was feeding her baby just before 10 a.m. Tuesday when intruders knocked on the front door, rang the doorbell and kicked in the door. Paul Bunce says his wife grabbed her gun and exchanged gunfire with them before they fled. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/family-semantha-bunce-north-carolina-mom-fired-back-to-protect-infant-in-home-invasion-shootout/ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweetpumper Posted November 10, 2015 #134 Share Posted November 10, 2015 The state of Maryland, which has some of the most stringent gun laws in the US, has scrapped a scheme it has been operating for fifteen years allowing police to keep a gun tracking database, because it has failed to contribute anything to a single criminal case. http://www.infowars.com/maryland-gun-tracking-database-scrapped-after-failing-to-solve-a-single-crime/ LMAO. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aztek Posted November 10, 2015 #135 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Why Ballistic Fingerprinting Is Not An Effective Crime Tool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweetpumper Posted November 10, 2015 #136 Share Posted November 10, 2015 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a61_1447171130 Idiot. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aztek Posted November 10, 2015 #137 Share Posted November 10, 2015 lol. great video. gun did save 2 lives, at the cost of 1 lowlife. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellapenella Posted November 11, 2015 #138 Share Posted November 11, 2015 The way many Americans behave today, a lot of people are going to be very glad they own guns when the economy collapses. yeah, hopefully not though. Or like what happened in New Orleans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellapenella Posted November 11, 2015 #139 Share Posted November 11, 2015 Even though guns do save lives, they're also utilized wrongfully by nations to oppress people . I think trauma has given rise to mental illness in the M.E over the course of being exposed to ongoing battles, wars, death, brutality, violence in general everyday of their life. Forget it if you don't have a military to protect you from a take over. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweetpumper Posted November 11, 2015 #140 Share Posted November 11, 2015 A South Carolina teenager left home alone used his mother's gun to shoot and kill a burglar, authorities said Tuesday. Fox Carolina reported that deputies responded to a report of shots fired at a home in Ladson Tuesday shortly before 2 p.m. EST Tuesday. When they arrived, they found the unidentified 13-year-old boy and asked him to come out of the home. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/11/11/authorities-say-south-carolina-teen-used-mother-gun-to-kill-burglar/?intcmp=hpbt3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+DieChecker Posted November 11, 2015 #141 Share Posted November 11, 2015 The only use it has is in the evaluation of your statement that we are discussing, "It is complete naivety that breeds people to think that guns cause more death then they save". If we're going to count most every time someone uses a gun to thwart a crime by an armed person as an avoided fatality, not just injury, that seems unrealistic and is going to inflate those numbers, especially compared to just accidental shooting fatalities which is a more tangible and objective statistic. Obviously we'd want to compare apples to apples when evaluating both sides of that equation; if we are going to count just fatalities then we need to guess that percentage you mention, or we need to start counting injuries incurred by shootings as well as injuries that have been avoided by gun owners stopping crimes. I don't know how that all shakes out, but what you say is naive doesn't for sure seem to be so considering we are making guesses when it comes to how many deaths guns prevented. I think if you go back and read my post again, you'll find that I did exactly what you suggest. I took the millions of crimes (according to some experts) and constricted that down to tens of thousands. Let's say that if even one in a hundred home invasions, where a gun leads to the invaders leaving, results in saving a life. Those tens of thousands is still one and a half orders of magnitude higher then the accidental death rate, and two and a half orders of magnitude over the child death accident rate. Now I will admit that the death rate, and the accident rate, and home invasion rates could be lower... should be lower. But, I think that is due to sub-cultural trends, not based off the number of guns. Just yesterday there were two shootings in Portland. Both by black males. Both missed their target. Both fled the scene and were not found. Both happened in the "black" part of town. You just don't see that much in the suburbs which are not even predominantly white. Because there is a urban culture in some areas that glorifies violence above the US norm, and has a disregard for human life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aztek Posted November 11, 2015 #142 Share Posted November 11, 2015 (edited) Because there is a urban culture in some areas that glorifies violence above the US norm, and has a disregard for human life. yes, and i noticed it is mostly same people that deny that mental issues are, well issues, they also deny entertaiment industry impact. yet, on the radio a song with these words were playing for months, ............. Some some some I some I murder Some I some I let go Some some some I some I murder Some I some I let go [x4] All I wanna do is (BANG BANG BANG BANG!) And (KKKAAAA CHING!) And take your money. ............ Edited November 11, 2015 by aztek 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweetpumper Posted November 18, 2015 #143 Share Posted November 18, 2015 In the days since the heinous terror attacks in Paris took 130 innocent lives and wounded hundreds more, Americans have flooded into gun stores to purchase new guns and sign up for concealed carry permit classes in their respective states. http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/11/18/gun-sales-concealed-permit-applications-surge-paris-attacks/ 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweetpumper Posted November 20, 2015 #144 Share Posted November 20, 2015 Don’t Adopt Our Gun Control Laws, Australian Politician Tells US "We are a nation of victims," he said http://www.infowars.com/dont-adopt-our-gun-control-laws-australian-politician-tells-us/ No s*it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweetpumper Posted November 20, 2015 #145 Share Posted November 20, 2015 The sickening moment a would-be thief was shot dead at point blank range by an undercover police officer after he tried to rob him in a Venezuelan bank The robber had approached the officer from side and demanded valuables As he bent down to collect his loot, policeman draws out his gun He then walks towards the would-be thief and shoots at point-blank range Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3325775/The-sickening-moment-thief-shot-dead-point-blank-range-undercover-police-officer-tried-rob-Venezuelan-bank.html#ixzz3s347SRnj Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3325775/The-sickening-moment-thief-shot-dead-point-blank-range-undercover-police-officer-tried-rob-Venezuelan-bank.html 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweetpumper Posted November 20, 2015 #146 Share Posted November 20, 2015 Weird, how the lefties avoid this thread like the plague. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorvir Posted November 20, 2015 #147 Share Posted November 20, 2015 Weird, how the lefties avoid this thread like the plague. Good. And it's because they have nothing to refute this thread. They can't stand potential victims refusing to be victims, screws up their views on the world. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweetpumper Posted November 20, 2015 #148 Share Posted November 20, 2015 They want to be victims. It's weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorvir Posted November 20, 2015 #149 Share Posted November 20, 2015 They want to be victims. It's weird. Someone has to be, I guess. Sigh, I guess I'll have protect them as well given the chance. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robinrenee Posted November 21, 2015 #150 Share Posted November 21, 2015 They want to be victims. It's weird. Liberalism is a mental illness.... seriously. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.png.0332af9e78f2251ae24e5aa89207b58c.png){kind=tracking}
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now