Jim M

What Does Gun Violence Really Cost?

Recommended Posts

Straw man alert! Tom and the woman getting out of the shower!

 

I repeat:

"even Booze has said that the ratio is twice as likely to shoot a family member than an intruder. So pick a number between 2 and 42. All the same to me, that's a gamble I do not want to take."

In order to convince someone to choose alternative means of self defense you should provide an alternative. I'm 100% open to effective alternatives. Please tell me what they are so I can have as safe of a home as possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When someone decides to inflict violence upon someone else, is the victim compelled to accept some modicum of that violent attack in an attempt to gauge the ferocity and likely outcome of the attack before deciding how best to respond to said attack?

 

Or, is it acceptable to presume that at the moment someone initiates an attack against someone else, that the attacker's intentions can be interpreted as worst-case, and whatever means available to protect the victim from the attack are appropriate?

 

<bump>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

When someone decides to inflict violence upon someone else, is the victim compelled to accept some modicum of that violent attack in an attempt to gauge the ferocity and likely outcome of the attack before deciding how best to respond to said attack?

 

Or, is it acceptable to presume that at the moment someone initiates an attack against someone else, that the attacker's intentions can be interpreted as worst-case, and whatever means available to protect the victim from the attack are appropriate?

 

<bump>

 

 

I'm curious as well, but jo jo won't answer. We all know its the former for him..... which is exactly why he won't answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They know the later is the logically correct answer. It just doesn't help regarding the fight to confiscate guns. The answer to that is what kills their quest. The answer will never change. It's hard wired into every living organism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I recall quoting 42 times Tom, but then numbers have not been your strong point.

 

But even Booze has said that the ratio is twice as likely to shoot a family member than an intruder. So pick a number between 2 and 42. All the same to me, that's a gamble I do not want to take.

Those dealth are statistically insignificant though, so why bring them up?

 

Are you saying guns are fine if there are no children in the home?

 

 

No, the numbers say that having a gun in the home significantly increases your chances of being shot by it. Not just children.

 

Mother Mistakes Daughter for Intruder, Tragic Gun Death ...

 

Mom shot, killed daughter mistaken for intruder

 

Dad mistakes 14-year-old son for intruder, shoots and kills him; won’t be charged

 

About that last one, interesting. If it's ok to charge someone for leavinf a gun around, why not fro shooting someone ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I recall quoting 42 times Tom, but then numbers have not been your strong point.

 

But even Booze has said that the ratio is twice as likely to shoot a family member than an intruder. So pick a number between 2 and 42. All the same to me, that's a gamble I do not want to take.

Those dealth are statistically insignificant though, so why bring them up?

 

Are you saying guns are fine if there are no children in the home?

No, the numbers say that having a gun in the home significantly increases your chances of being shot by it. Not just children.

 

Mother Mistakes Daughter for Intruder, Tragic Gun Death ...

 

Mom shot, killed daughter mistaken for intruder

 

Dad mistakes 14-year-old son for intruder, shoots and kills him; wont be charged

 

About that last one, interesting. If it's ok to charge someone for leavinf a gun around, why not fro shooting someone ....

Wow. Brilliant.

 

"A gun in the home significantly increase you chances of being shot by it."

 

Did you even read that before hitting 'reply'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as there is no better alternative I guess we'll have to stick with guns. It's the ONLY way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or you could just park an 80's El Dorado in your living room and practice jumping over it.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So how are the numbers for A and B going Boozy?

 

Oh and did you bump into any evidence that woman are saved from rape by carrying a gun?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both my wife and my daughter are armed. And are both excellent shots. There will be NO JokeAwf's wife's rapism going on in La Casa Mariachi. Take from that what you will. But I can garantee you, there will be no Mrs. JokeAwf-style assaults occurring on their watch......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I recall quoting 42 times Tom, but then numbers have not been your strong point.

 

But even Booze has said that the ratio is twice as likely to shoot a family member than an intruder. So pick a number between 2 and 42. All the same to me, that's a gamble I do not want to take.

 

The study you're referencing carefully ignores most defensive gun uses. The ones that occur outside the home (the vast majority) are ignored completely Cite away, or use my source: the Gun Violence Archives finds about 1200/yr. and ones that occur inside the home are only counted if they resulted in death. But plenty of defensive gun uses occur without resulting in death. It's just convenient to ignore them. If you are not imagining, trot them out, Tom. The NRA's DGU tally is so poor, they don't add them up in ANY year.

Your evidence is vapor and imagination and Gary Kleck, I see.

 

The question remains: what should she have done instead of defending herself with her gun?

 

Lie back and think of England? A sociopathic sack of shit just said that.

 

 

You are a disgrace. You are contorting the known facts of femicide here.

 

Gun Safety, League of Women Voters

America faces an epidemic of gun-related violence that puts us in great need of stronger gun safety measures. Every day, 32 Americans are murdered with guns, and 140 are treated for a gun assault in an emergency room. Death due to gunshot wounds is the second-leading cause of death for young people in the U.S., with a death rate that is nearly 12 times higher than that in other developed countries.

The League of Women Voters believes that it is past time for Congress and state legislatures to establish common sense solutions to prevent gun violence. Since 1990, local and state Leagues have held community meetings, testified before state legislatures and organized rallies in efforts to find common ground when it comes to gun safety.

In efforts to protect public health and safety, the League supports strong federal measures to limit the accessibility and regulate the ownership of guns, including banning assault weapons and limiting high capacity ammunition magazines, as well as funding much-needed research on gun violence in America. The League has also shown support for mandating waiting period for background checks, closing the gun show loophole and increasing penalties for straw purchases of guns.

Millions of Americans are at risk every day from senseless gun violence. The League is committed to working at the local, state and national levels to implement gun safety measures that will protect all Americans.

Pasted from <http://lwv.org/content/gun-

 

In absence of any supporting evidence from the Badgeless Shithead, the compelling evidence remains that guns are not a plus for women...

 

Women and Self Defense, TOM DIAZ

In 2009…1,818 females were murdered by males in single victim/single offender incidents that were submitted to the FBI for its Supplementary Homicide Report. Examination of that data dispels many of the myths regarding the nature of lethal violence against females.

  • For homicides in which victim-to-offender relationship could be identified, 93% of female victim (1,579 out of 1,693) were murdered by a male they knew.
  • Nearly fourteen times as may females were murdered by a male they knew (1,579 victims) as were killed by male strangers (114 victims).
  • For victims who knew their offenders, 63% (989) of female homicide victims were wives or intimate acquaintances of their killers.
  • There were 296 women shot and killed by either their husbands or acquaintances during the course of an argument.
  • Nationwide, for homicides in which the weapon could be determined (1,654), more female homicides were committed with firearms (53%) than any other weapon. Source: Tom Diaz, The Last Gun p68

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Crockdog, on 24 Feb 2016 - 2:28 PM, said:

As long as there is no better alternative I guess we'll have to stick with guns. It's the ONLY way.

 

It's the "only way" for those with guns on the brain. It's the only way down at the trailer park, too.

But many civilized individuals extend themselves and manage in other ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Straw man alert! Tom and the woman getting out of the shower!

 

I repeat:

"even Booze has said that the ratio is twice as likely to shoot a family member than an intruder. So pick a number between 2 and 42. All the same to me, that's a gamble I do not want to take."

In order to convince someone to choose alternative means of self defense you should provide an alternative. I'm 100% open to effective alternatives. Please tell me what they are so I can have as safe of a home as possible.

 

 

If you are into safety, the stats say to avoid guns in the home altogether.

That would be the number one reducer of suicide, teen gun incidents, and femicide. Win win win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Crockdog, on 24 Feb 2016 - 2:28 PM, said:[/size]

 

As long as there is no better alternative I guess we'll have to stick with guns. It's the ONLY way.

 

It's the "only way" for those with guns on the brain. It's the only way down at the trailer park, too.

But many civilized individuals extend themselves and manage in other ways.

 

 

Crockdog, on 24 Feb 2016 - 2:28 PM, said:[/size]

 

As long as there is no better alternative I guess we'll have to stick with guns. It's the ONLY way.

 

It's the "only way" for those with guns on the brain. It's the only way down at the trailer park, too.

But many civilized individuals extend themselves and manage in other ways,.

 

Do your boyfriends Bloomberg, Jerry Brown, Giffords, Obama and Tarantino live in trailer parks too? 'Cuz they all own guns and/or have armed security details protecting them around the clock you know.

 

Or are their vaginas more precious than ours?....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Miss Cunt 'n Paste? You for once have an original thought on that one? Or are ya gonna spend the rest of the evening searching for urine scented 'studies'?

 

Fag....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both my wife and my daughter are armed. And are both excellent shots. There will be NO JokeAwf's wife's rapism going on in La Casa Mariachi. Take from that what you will. But I can garantee you, there will be no Mrs. JokeAwf-style assaults occurring on their watch......

 

Ah, there's Boothy of an evening, kicking back and gettin' chill...dwelling on rape situations, guns and heroism.

 

 

 

 

On his family values.NGS%20Trailer%20Park_zpsezxvnpzx.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

When someone decides to inflict violence upon someone else, is the victim compelled to accept some modicum of that violent attack in an attempt to gauge the ferocity and likely outcome of the attack before deciding how best to respond to said attack?

Oh goodness no. Shoot the fellow with lethal intent to "destroy." The Choirboys prefer hollow points in this interaction.

 

Or, is it acceptable to presume that at the moment someone initiates an attack against someone else, that the attacker's intentions can be interpreted as worst-case, and whatever means available to protect the victim from the attack are appropriate? When you say "appropriate," you mean deadly.

 

 

<bump>

 

 

I'm curious as well, but jo jo won't answer. We all know its the former for him..... which is exactly why he won't answer.

 

 

Kill the fistfighters. Kill kill kill. Let the blacks kill the blacks. Kill kill kill. Let 93% of the women be killed by associates. We'll have her kill those associates first, kill kill kill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Crockdog, on 24 Feb 2016 - 2:28 PM, said:

As long as there is no better alternative I guess we'll have to stick with guns. It's the ONLY way.

It's the "only way" for those with guns on the brain. It's the only way down at the trailer park, too.

But many civilized individuals extend themselves and manage in other ways.

Civilized people don't go around invading houses or trying kill people. Uncivilized people do that. Please offer how any civilized person defends themselves from an uncivilized attacker without using a gun. You say they do so you must know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Straw man alert! Tom and the woman getting out of the shower!

 

I repeat:

"even Booze has said that the ratio is twice as likely to shoot a family member than an intruder. So pick a number between 2 and 42. All the same to me, that's a gamble I do not want to take."

In order to convince someone to choose alternative means of self defense you should provide an alternative. I'm 100% open to effective alternatives. Please tell me what they are so I can have as safe of a home as possible.

If you are into safety, the stats say to avoid guns in the home altogether.

That would be the number one reducer of suicide, teen gun incidents, and femicide. Win win win.

So what's the best alternative for a household with no mental health issues, no teenagers, and only one adult?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

When someone decides to inflict violence upon someone else, is the victim compelled to accept some modicum of that violent attack in an attempt to gauge the ferocity and likely outcome of the attack before deciding how best to respond to said attack?

Oh goodness no. Shoot the fellow with lethal intent to "destroy." The Choirboys prefer hollow points in this interaction.

 

Or, is it acceptable to presume that at the moment someone initiates an attack against someone else, that the attacker's intentions can be interpreted as worst-case, and whatever means available to protect the victim from the attack are appropriate? When you say "appropriate," you mean deadly.

 

<bump>

I'm curious as well, but jo jo won't answer. We all know its the former for him..... which is exactly why he won't answer.

Kill the fistfighters. Kill kill kill. Let the blacks kill the blacks. Kill kill kill. Let 93% of the women be killed by associates. We'll have her kill those associates first, kill kill kill.

Are you saying it would be wrong for a woman to stop her black boyfriend from beating her to death with his fists?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both my wife and my daughter are armed. And are both excellent shots. There will be NO JokeAwf's wife's rapism going on in La Casa Mariachi. Take from that what you will. But I can garantee you, there will be no Mrs. JokeAwf-style assaults occurring on their watch......

 

Awesome you have it all under control. I hope you don't try to sneak in late one night, because you are 42 times more likely to die by one of those guns, than an intruder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Fuk. Ing. Xlnt!..... Boothy, he in the choir, he say "amen."

 

 

Took care of that Jocal in a hurry! :o

 

 

NGS, be careful about your perceptions here.

1. What do I have in common with a purse snatcher in an alley?

2. Should purse snatchers be shot?

You are super-imposing your action fantasies, and trailer trash values, onto another person, to justify typical SAF citizenship, and gunplay on the streets.

 

How many years did your hero chick have nightmares after shooting another human?

Did she take up drinking? Did her nervous system have the typical reaction?

Have any studies been done on heroic DGU females in the aftermath of lethal gun interplay?

For the sixth Saturday morning we find you presenting images of perps being shot on behalf of, or by, females.

Interesting.

 

You are a doctor? Really? WTF?

 

NGS Posted 02 September 2014 - 04:40 PM

So am I a physician, and in my field, we are fond of something called "evidence-based medicine". Perhaps you have heard of it?

http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=159858&p=4660276

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Including the blood on the wall behind the scum ball?....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

Fuk. Ing. Xlnt!..... Boothy, he in the choir, he say "amen."

Took care of that Jocal in a hurry! :o

NGS, be careful about your perceptions here.

1. What do I have in common with a purse snatcher in an alley?

2. Should purse snatchers be shot?

You are super-imposing your action fantasies, and trailer trash values, onto another person, to justify typical SAF citizenship, and gunplay on the streets.

How many years did your hero chick have nightmares after shooting another human?

Did she take up drinking? Did her nervous system have the typical reaction?

Have any studies been done on heroic DGU females in the aftermath of lethal gun interplay?

For the sixth Saturday morning we find you presenting images of perps being shot on behalf of, or by, females.

Interesting.

 

You are a doctor? Really? WTF?

 

NGSPosted 02 September 2014 - 04:40 PM

So am I a physician, and in my field, we are fond of something called "evidence-based medicine". Perhaps you have heard of it?

http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=159858&p=4660276

Yes, purse snatchers should be shot.

 

No, that woman did suffer after defending herself. She went on with her life as she always did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Including the blood on the wall behind the scum ball?....

 

Saw that. But a couple of things look odd, sus ...

 

1. The lame way the guy tries to pull the bag away

2. The sub-three seconds between being accosted and firing. She did not have the gun in her hand while walking.

3. The nonchalant way she behaved after firing, as if it happens all the time

4. The comfortable way the robber lies down after being shot

 

Or maybe it's because the timer on the video does not match real time. It's missing 2 seconds, signs of editing.

 

Just looks sus, but gun nuts tend be be gullible people.

 

Edit: or maybe it's just because anything Nanny posts is bullshit. Maybe he could supply a link and background to support it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

but gun nuts tend be be gullible people.

 

That's rich coming from someone who believes every conspiracy theory he finds on the Internet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mass Shootings for 2015:

 

gallery_6160_1047_134721.jpg

 

And how many people were murdered in Chicago, Baltimore, St Louis, DC and LA over the weekend? Probably as many as that entire chart up there.

 

Meh.

 

 

but gun nuts tend be be gullible people.

 

That's rich coming from someone who believes every conspiracy theory he finds on the Internet.

 

 

Irony is so..... ironic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Yes, purse snatchers should be shot.

 

No, that woman did suffer after defending herself. She went on with her life as she always did.

 

 

It's bullshit, you got sucked in.

 

I'm waiting for the links to verify it. Still looks sus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's assume the Nikita-esque video is real for a moment.

The casual way the woman walks away is disturbing.

No angst? No stress? No aid? Wrong direction?...Just another day in the life?

 

 

She went on with her life as she always did.

 

 

There is often a certain degradation of human values, I find, attached to many gun supporters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Mass Shootings for 2015:

 

gallery_6160_1047_134721.jpg

Statistically insignificant.

 

 

Anecdotally insignificant, too.

Five gun mass murders happened last weekend, PLUS the roaming on-duty Uber Driver.

Two happened today. Two happened immediately after restraining orders were served.

One on Puget Sound yesterday.

They are a blur. They cannot be fathomed.

But they are insignificant compared to average people who know each each other, then kill associates.

 

Not repeat not criminal incidents. Crockdog, most mass murders are domestic. c

http://www.vox.com/2014/10/21/7027395/gun-violence-mass-shootings-james-alan-fox-mother-jones-cohen-azrael-suicide>

Most gun homicides are fallings out. Stranger Danger debunked 85% on SAILING ANARCHY.

 

 

The Rampage in Kalamazoo Was One of Six Multiple-Victim Shootings This Weekend

California, Florida, Alabama, and Missouri each experienced incidents of gun violence with four or more victims.

http://www.thetrace.org/2016/02/kalamazoo-weekend-shooting-dalton/>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Did you read it, Gouv? Any comments?

Your author here is Joyce Lee Malcom, who did a cort brief with Alan Gura (the libertarian Heller attorney who also represents the NRA and SAF). NTTAWWT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Yes, purse snatchers should be shot.

 

No, that woman did suffer after defending herself. She went on with her life as she always did.

It's bullshit, you got sucked in.

 

I'm waiting for the links to verify it. Still looks sus.

Sucked into what?

 

Who cares if that video is real or not? I could care less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's assume the Nikita-esque video is real for a moment.

The casual way the woman walks away is disturbing.

No angst? No stress? No aid? Wrong direction?...Just another day in the life?

 

She went on with her life as she always did.

 

There is often a certain degradation of human values, I find, attached to many gun supporters.

Why should she give two shits about a scumbag that tried to steal her last few dollars till payday - which was meant for baby formula?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Mass Shootings for 2015:

 

gallery_6160_1047_134721.jpg

Statistically insignificant.

Anecdotally insignificant, too.

Five gun mass murders happened last weekend, PLUS the roaming on-duty Uber Driver.

Two happened today. Two happened immediately after restraining orders were served.

One on Puget Sound yesterday.

They are a blur. They cannot be fathomed.

But they are insignificant compared to average people who know each each other, then kill associates.

 

Not repeat not criminal incidents. Crockdog, most mass murders are domestic. c

http://www.vox.com/2014/10/21/7027395/gun-violence-mass-shootings-james-alan-fox-mother-jones-cohen-azrael-suicide>

Most gun homicides are fallings out. Stranger Danger debunked 85% on SAILING ANARCHY.

 

The Rampage in Kalamazoo Was One of Six Multiple-Victim Shootings This Weekend

California, Florida, Alabama, and Missouri each experienced incidents of gun violence with four or more victims.

http://www.thetrace.org/2016/02/kalamazoo-weekend-shooting-dalton/>

2/3 of crime committed with the use of a gun are by repeat offenders. Let's cut down crime with the use of a gun. Let's start tomorrow. I'm 100% all-in!

 

Are you all-in Jocal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Yes, purse snatchers should be shot.

 

No, that woman did suffer after defending herself. She went on with her life as she always did.

It's bullshit, you got sucked in.

 

I'm waiting for the links to verify it. Still looks sus.

Sucked into what?

 

Who cares if that video is real or not? I could care less.

 

 

Random to Nanny, Random calling Nanny ... you still have a chance to redeem yourself. Where did you get that video above? The one that looks like the same bullshit quality that you usually post?

 

Any assistance in verifying the post will be greatly appreciated. Till then I will file it in the same bin as the rest of your un-linked posts on the gun subject.

 

1442866250064605843.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's wrong with shooting someone trying to steal all you have to feed your children for a few days?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's wrong with shooting someone trying to steal all you have to feed your children for a few days?

 

Crockdog, civilized nations generally oppose such behavior. They rely on an impartial judiciary (in a setting and timeframe apart from the crime scene) to impose justice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that's why those other countries are the laughing stock of the planet. Sorry but I for one don't wanna live in a country that you can't legally blow the fuking brains out of some criminal assicle parasite.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Boozy, shit year for musicians, Elvis just died.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

What's wrong with shooting someone trying to steal all you have to feed your children for a few days?

Crockdog, civilized nations generally oppose such behavior. They rely on an impartial judiciary (in a setting and timeframe apart from the crime scene) to impose justice.

What good does that do you when you are dead or your kids are starving...especially when the majority of them are never caught?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Boozy, shit year for musicians, Elvis just died.

Jfc, you mean he outlived Joe Cocker?....:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2/3 of crime committed with the use of a gun are by repeat offenders.

 

Source and link, pls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fuk awf, cunt....prove him wrong. C'mon now, we know you've read 55,000 urine-scented 'studies' already.....so it shouldn't be too difficult for you....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2/3 of crime committed with the use of a gun are by repeat offenders.

Source and link, pls.

FBI. I've looked it over more than once. If I found it on my phone I'm sure you have it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

giphy.gif

 

and the cheque is in the mail ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Law enforcement deaths by firearms is low. 48 in 2014. There's about 750,000 police with power of arrest in the US. That's 6.4 deaths per 100,000.

 

http://www.nleomf.org/facts/officer-fatalities-data/causes.html

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_enforcement_in_the_United_States

 

There were about 33,606 firearms deaths in 2015. US population is 318.9M. This is about 10.5 deaths per 100,000.

 

You are counting the suicides of non-cops, but with cops. It is that kind of use of statistics which has always polluted gun control discussions as well. To be remotely valuable to look at, one would need to look at how many cops were victims of homicide both at work and at home and compare that to the homicide rate of civilians, or look at the comparison of civilians who are victims of workplace violence with cops who are killed in the line of duty.

 

...

 

 

Or, if we're going to talk about self-murders, at least take it to the self-murder thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh fuck it's Tom

 

maxresdefault.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hannah Ferguson's thoughts from http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/03/robert-farago/quote-of-the-day-hannah-fergusons-feelings-about-guns-edition/

 

I feel like it’s good to have gun knowledge. I feel like a lot of people are scared of guns. They think they’re bad and they really don’t know anything about it . . . I feel like people should get more knowledge and understanding.

 

 

Brains and beauty

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I feel like it’s good to have gun knowledge. I feel like a lot of people are scared of guns. They think they’re bad and they really don’t know anything about it . . . I feel like people should get more knowledge and understanding.

 

 

 

"I feel like" a good spew after reading that. Nothing like a few facts to get the interest up. Congratulation Fish for passing on yet another NRA funded piece of shit, you are doing a great job for them.

 

Something shiny like a nude female to attract the drooling converted. Keep passing them on to everyone you know, well done sheeple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Random thinks people shouldn't have knowledge about guns now? Why the change of heart?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

2/3 of crime committed with the use of a gun are by repeat offenders.

Source and link, pls.

FBI. I've looked it over more than once. If I found it on my phone I'm sure you have it.

 

 

 

Unsubstantiated info alert, this time it's Crockdog.

I repeat, present the link and source that 2/3 of gun crime is repeat offenders.

Or STFU. If true, this detail incriminates the supply of guns to prohibited individuals.

 

Have you read Braga's stuff? This link proudly presents some of Braga's extensive work with incarcerated criminals. His peer-reviewed numbers indicated that 60% of Cook COunty's first degree murderers had committed no felonies in the previous decade:

 

***60% of homicide offenders were not recent felons

(From the excellent series of Armed With Reason articles, DePhillipis and Hughes)

Furthermore, a 2005 study done by Cook, Ludwig and Braga found that nearly three in five homicide offenders in Illinois in 2001 did not have a felony conviction within the 10 years prior to the homicide. Looking at just violent felons excludes a huge subset of potential criminals that become violent in the presence of a firearm.

Gun advocates' blind focus on gangs, drugs and violent felons overlooks the larger gun problem facing America. It is irresponsible and disingenuous for some of us to brush off our staggering death toll from firearms merely as the product of gangs or even violent criminals. Recognizing America's high homicide rate for what it is -- a gun problem -- is the first step in solving it.

Pasted from <http://www.huffingto..._b_5071639.html>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

What's wrong with shooting someone trying to steal all you have to feed your children for a few days?

Crockdog, civilized nations generally oppose such behavior. They rely on an impartial judiciary (in a setting and timeframe apart from the crime scene) to impose justice.

What good does that do you when you are dead or your kids are starving...especially when the majority of them are never caught?

 

 

Crockdogs%20stories%20for%20the%20girl%2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Random thinks people shouldn't have knowledge about guns now? Why the change of heart?

 

I'm guessing he didn't like what the woman had to say. Or perhaps he doesn't like knowledgeable women.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

2/3 of crime committed with the use of a gun are by repeat offenders.

Source and link, pls.

FBI. I've looked it over more than once. If I found it on my phone I'm sure you have it.

 

Unsubstantiated info alert, this time it's Crockdog.

I repeat, present the link and source that 2/3 of gun crime is repeat offenders.

Or STFU. If true, this detail incriminates the supply of guns to prohibited individuals.

 

Have you read Braga's stuff? This link proudly presents some of Braga's extensive work with incarcerated criminals. His peer-reviewed numbers indicated that 60% of Cook COunty's first degree murderers had committed no felonies in the previous decade:

 

***60% of homicide offenders were not recent felons

(From the excellent series of Armed With Reason articles, DePhillipis and Hughes)

Furthermore, a 2005 study done by Cook, Ludwig and Braga found that nearly three in five homicide offenders in Illinois in 2001 did not have a felony conviction within the 10 years prior to the homicide. Looking at just violent felons excludes a huge subset of potential criminals that become violent in the presence of a firearm.

Gun advocates' blind focus on gangs, drugs and violent felons overlooks the larger gun problem facing America. It is irresponsible and disingenuous for some of us to brush off our staggering death toll from firearms merely as the product of gangs or even violent criminals. Recognizing America's high homicide rate for what it is -- a gun problem -- is the first step in solving it.

Pasted from <http://www.huffingto..._b_5071639.html>

Fuck you JerkOff. It's easy to find. It's FBI published.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JokeAwf refuses to believe stats from law enforcement. Instead his eggs are all in the scrotums of urine spraying 'scholars'.... who are quite aware of who butters their bread....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

2/3 of crime committed with the use of a gun are by repeat offenders.

Source and link, pls.

Fuck you JerkOff. It's easy to find. It's FBI published.

 

 

That's not how we do it here. We want sources, to obtain credible information whose background is identified.

If it's easy to find, then present it.

NGS is also guilty of laying down bullshit whose sources are identified.

Boothy, same.

 

Grow up. Establish your credibility by identifying the source of information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JokeAwf refuses to believe stats from law enforcement. Instead his eggs are all in the scrotums of urine spraying 'scholars'.... who are quite aware of who butters their bread....

 

Trailer park discourse. Hogwash, too.

I use FBI figures regularly. But they don't do analysis, or study gun violence, Rick.

New FBI Report Casts Doubt on NRA's 'Good Guy Stops Bad Guy' Nonsense

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-weisser/fbi-report-active-shooters_b_5900748.html>

 

 

 

FBI figures were used in this report:

 

Does strengthening self-defense law deter crime or escalate violence? Evidence from "castle doctrine"

Researchers from Texas A&M University used FBI state-level crime data from 2000-2009 to test the effects of castle doctrine laws and compare outcomes across states.

The study’s findings include:

  • States that adopted castle doctrine laws saw a 7% to 9% increase in murder and manslaughter incidents

The authors note that their findings effectively negate the “possibility that castle doctrine laws cause economically meaningful deterrence effects” on general crime. Furthermore, the authors conclude that “by lowering the expected costs associated with using lethal force, castle doctrine laws induce more of it … due either to the increased use of lethal force in self-defense situations, or to the escalation of violence in otherwise nonlethal conflicts.”

See more at: http://journalistsre...tes-crime-deterrence#sthash.s1JtZUMW.dpuf

Here, the FBI notes the increase increase in active shooter incidents:

 

FBI releases report examining mass shootings Sept. 14 AP,

 

"These incidents, the large majority of them, are over in minutes.

 

According to the report, an average of six shooting incidents occurred in the first seven years that were studied. That average rose to more than 16 per year in the last seven years of the study. That period included the 2012 shootings at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado and at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, as well as last year's massacre at the Washington Navy Yard in which a gunman killed 12 people before dying in a police shootout.

 

(...) The shooters were female in at least six of the incidents.

 

(...) "The copycat phenomenon is real," said Andre Simons of the FBI's Behavioral Analysis Unit.

 

http://www.twitter.com/etuckerAP

 

Pasted from <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20140925/us--mass-shootings-fbi/>

 

U.S. Police Chiefs Call For Background Checks For All Gun Purchases

"This is a no-brainer, this is the simplest thing in the world."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/police-chiefs-background-checks_562f7bc5e4b00aa54a4b19bc>

Posted: 10/27/2015 09:31 AM EDT | Edited: 10/27/2015 11:57 AM EDT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NO ONE CARES WHAT YOU THINK, JOKEAWF. NO ONE.

 

 

 

Senior Right-to-Carry permit holder shoots two attackers, WPVI, Philadelphia, Pa. 03/03/2016

A 65-year-old resident and his wife were walking home from their business in Philadelphia, Pa. when a pair of men attacked them. The resident, a Right-to-Carry permit holder, responded to the attack by drawing a ...


A locksmith called the property manager for a home in Las Vegas, Nev. to alert them that there was a person in the house. The property manager went to the home and checked the front ...

 

 

A Right-to-Carry permit holder was at the end of a driveway in a neighborhood in Brooklyn Park, Minn. when he was approached by an armed robber who demanded money. The permit holder responded by drawing ...

 

 

Disabled 71-year-old Tony Pitts was watching TV in bed at home in Hickory, N.C. when he heard his sliding glass door shatter. Pitts retrieved a .22-caliber pistol, went to investigate and saw a man coming ...

 

 

A man wielding a 12-inch knife attempted to break into several home in Las Vegas, Nev. After unsuccessfully attempting to kick in the doors of several homes, the would-be intruder tried to get into another ...

 

 

An officer was attempting to break up two teens involved in an altercation near Upper Darby High School in Upper Darby Township, Pa. when one of the teens attacked the officer. Soon after, the other ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

2/3 of crime committed with the use of a gun are by repeat offenders.

Source and link, pls.

Fuck you JerkOff. It's easy to find. It's FBI published.

 

That's not how we do it here. We want sources, to obtain credible information whose background is identified.

If it's easy to find, then present it.

NGS is also guilty of laying down bullshit whose sources are identified.

Boothy, same.

 

Grow up. Establish your credibility by identifying the source of information.

 

With you that's how I do it. I'm not wasting the time. It's easy to find.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Western States Trying To Lower Self-Murder Rate


One of Montana's hardest-hit areas is the city of Butte and surrounding Silver Bow County, where, according to local health director Karen Sullivan, the rate of gun ownership is far above the national average. Jolted by the recent firearm suicides of six young people, including a good friend of her daughter, Sullivan and others formed a suicide prevention committee and began distributing gun locks.

...

In Colorado and Nevada, the states' suicide prevention offices have been reaching out to gun stores and shooting ranges, offering suicide-prevention materials and training. One of the outreach workers in Nevada, Richard Egan, regularly visits gun shows, sometimes giving away high-quality gun locks to people interested in his message.

Egan, who developed expertise in weaponry during a long Air Force career, said he was heartened by recent news that prosecutors would pursue a felony child-abuse charge in the case of an 8-year-old Las Vegas boy who committed suicide last year. The boy had been left at home without adult supervision, and used a gun left unsecured by the boyfriend of the child's mother.

"That's huge," said Egan of the charge filed against the boyfriend. "We're now going to hold the gun owner accountable."
...

Leaving a gun where an 8 year old can get it is completely irresponsible.

 

As for the gun locks, they're a partial solution and they present their own problems. They're pretty good at stopping 8 year olds, much less so at stopping teenagers, who will find the key or a way to cut the lock. The trigger locking kind can lead to another form of gun violence: accidents. People disregard instructions and common sense and try to apply them to loaded guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

We'd better advise the Hungarians, Japanese, Koreans, Poles, Belgians, and Fins to disarm at once! I say, it must be all of the guns they have in those localities that make this possible.

 

 

Suicide rates per country (per 100,000)

Country Total Female Male

Republic of Korea 28.9 18 41.7

Hungary 19.1 7.4 32.4

Japan 18.5 10.1 26.9

Poland 16.6 3.8 30.5

Belgium 14.2 7.7 21.0

Finland 14.8 7.5 22.2

France 12.3 6.0 19.3

Austria 11.5 5.4 18.2

Czech Republic 12.5 3.9 21.5

United States 12.1 5.2 19.4

United Kingdom 6.2 2.6 9.8

 

 

Those are 2015 figures. The following are from 2005, and it looks fairly steady in terms of who's offing themselves the most with whatever means they have readily available, just beckoning them to kill themselves.

 

Country Suicide rates per 100,000 people

South Korea 24.7

Hungary 21.0

Japan 19.4

Belgium 18.4

Finland 16.5

France 14.6

Austria 13.8

Poland 13.8

Czech Republic 12.7

New Zealand 11.9

Denmark 11.3

Sweden 11.1

Norway 10.9

Slovak Republic 10.9

Iceland 10.4

Germany 10.3

Canada 10.2

United States 10.1

Luxembourg 9.5

Portugal 8.7

Netherlands 7.9

Spain 6.3

Britain 6

Italy 5.5

Mexico 4.4

Greece 2.9

 

 

 

What's truly pathetic (not to mention disingenuous in the extreme) is to NEED to inflate "gun misuse" figures with numbers of persons killing themselves in the U.S., and choose to use something the peoples of most of the other countries shown above have little or no access to in the first place or the access to which are heavily restricted and controlled (or "measured", according to some).

 

We've collectively been over this before, yet you insist upon this simplistic meme about how the presence of a gun facilitates suicide. In one sense one could argue that, except that the same is true of many other things which we do not regulate, restrict, or otherwise treat as a boogyman. Oh, and then there's that expressed civil rights protection, though that's an entirely different discussion from people murdering themselves.

 

(...)

 

Fail.

 

Hmmm. Atoyot, you are posting flimsy, half-baked, poorly supported fiction, to deny the link between guns and 21,000 annual gun suicides in the USA.

Easy access to guns is driving up the US suicide rate, according to quite a bit of research.

Here's your chance to study up on this a bit, to sound less foolish.

 

.

Suicides, Am Col of Physicians

Suicide Outcomes

We pooled data from 14 identified observational studies that assessed the odds of suicide (68, 10, 1625) and, using a random-effects model, calculated a pooled OR of 3.24 (95% CI, 2.41 to 4.40) with substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 89%; τ = 0.45) (Figure 2). All but 1 study (20) found significantly higher odds of suicide among participants who had firearm access than among those who did not, with ORs ranging from 1.38 to 10.38.

http://annals.org/article.aspx?articleid=1814426#f2-6>

 

 

Research: Less Access to Guns Does Reduce Suicide

http://www.motherjon...ckground-checks>

Firearm Access is a Risk Factor for Suicide

http://www.hsph.harv...ns-matter/risk/>

Suicide Barriers and Gun Control

http://www.armedwith...s-relationship/>

The Accessibility of Firearms and Risk for Suicide

http://annals.org/ar...id=1814426#f2-6> c

Quote

In my latest paper, Firearms and Suicides in US States, (written with the excellent Justin Briggs) we examine the easier question, what is the relationship between firearms and suicide? Using a variety of techniques and data we estimate that a 1 percentage point increase in the household gun ownership rate leads to a .5 to .9% increase in suicides. (...) The results in the paper appear to be robust but the data on gun ownership is frustratingly sparse due to political considerations.http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2013/11/firearms-and-suicides-in-us-states.html#sthash.VORfuuB1.dpuf

Quote

“You can reduce the rate of suicide in the United States substantially, without attending to underlying mental health problems, if fewer people had guns in their homes and fewer people who are at risk for suicide had access to guns in their home,” said Dr. Matthew Miller, a director of Harvard Injury Control Research Center.

http://www.nytimes.c...&seid=auto&_r=3>

Quote

Suicides in the 15 U.S. States with the Highest vs. the 6 U.S. States with the Lowest Average Household Gun Ownership (2000-2002)

High-Gun States Low-Gun States

Population 39 million 40 million

Household Gun Ownership 47% 15%

Firearm Suicide 9,749 2,606

Non-Firearm Suicide 5,060 5,446

Total Suicide 14,809 8,052

Twelve or more U.S. case control studies have compared individuals who died by suicide with those who did not and found those dying by suicide were more likely to live in homes with guns.

For example, Brent and colleagues studied three groups of adolescents: 47 suicide decedents, 47 inpatient attempters, and 47 psychiatric inpatients who had never attempted suicide. Those who died by suicide were twice as likely to have a gun at home than either of the other two groups.

(...) For example, one study (Miller 2007) used survey-based measures of state household firearm ownership (from the CDC’s Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System) while controlling for state-level measures of mental illness, drug and alcohol abuse, and other factors associated with suicide. The study found that males and females and people of all age groups were at higher risk for suicide if they lived in a state with high firearm prevalence.

Quote

RESULTS:

Results largely indicated that states with any of these laws in place exhibited lower overall suicide rates and suicide by firearms rates and that a smaller proportion of suicides in such states resulted from firearms. Furthermore, results indicated that laws requiring registration and license had significant indirect effects through the proportion of suicides resulting from firearms. The latter results imply that such laws are associated with fewer suicide attempts overall, a tendency for those who attempt to use less-lethal means, or both. Exploratory longitudinal analyses indicated a decrease in overall suicide rates immediately following implementation of laws requiring a license to own a handgun.

CONCLUSIONS:

The results are thus supportive of the potential of handgun legislation to have an impact on suicide rates.

(Am J Public Health. Published online ahead of print April 16, 2015: e1-e9. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2014.302465).

PMID:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25880944>

Pasted from <http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=165145&page=4#entry4990654>

 

 

 

Trying to get the self-murder discussion back into the appropriate thread here...

 

When all those countries with much more strict gun control laws manage to get their self-murder rate down near ours, I might start to listen to the practical side of your argument.

 

The issue of self-ownership will remain, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well. since this thread was started I am happy to report that the cost of Gun violence has dropped below $0.28 per round. Stock up mates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Much blah. The DUI and Alcohol abuse deaths FAR outnumber the gun deaths.

In 2014, 9,967 people were killed in alcohol-impaired driving crashes,

 

http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/impaired_driving/impaired-drv_factsheet.html

 

For 2013, All firearm deaths

Number of deaths: 33,636

 

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm

 

So you're completely utterly wrong on this.

 

 

But what about the alcohol-related self-murders?

 

If you're going to include self-murders by gun, seems to me that self-murders involving alcohol should also be in the mix.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jezus fucking christ Tom, don't you nearly spew now when you type one of those old ones?

 

Yawning2-300x200.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A disturbing trend:

 

http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/04/22/474888854/suicide-rates-climb-in-u-s-especially-among-adolescent-girls

 

Adolescent girls don't generally kill themselves with guns. So jocal, how do you explain their sudden rise in suicide when they are not using guns? It seems inconceivable.

 

She says it's heartbreaking to work with these data. While other causes of death are on the decline, suicide just keeps climbing — and it's doing so for every age group under 75.

 

"I've been losing sleep over this, quite honestly," says Curtin. "You can't just say it's confined to one age group or another for males and females. Truly at all ages people are at risk for this, and our youngest have some of the highest percent increases."

 

There is one age group that really stands out — girls between the ages of 10 and 14. Though they make up a very small portion of the total suicides, the rate in that group jumped the most — it experienced the largest percent increase, tripling over 15 years from 0.5 to 1.7 per 100,000 people.

 

 

IMHO, and I'm not being sarcastic here - its the First Amendment that is causing contributory to them to commit suicide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A disturbing trend:

 

http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/04/22/474888854/suicide-rates-climb-in-u-s-especially-among-adolescent-girls

 

Adolescent girls don't generally kill themselves with guns. So jocal, how do you explain their sudden rise in suicide when they are not using guns? It seems inconceivable.

 

She says it's heartbreaking to work with these data. While other causes of death are on the decline, suicide just keeps climbing — and it's doing so for every age group under 75.

 

"I've been losing sleep over this, quite honestly," says Curtin. "You can't just say it's confined to one age group or another for males and females. Truly at all ages people are at risk for this, and our youngest have some of the highest percent increases."

 

There is one age group that really stands out — girls between the ages of 10 and 14. Though they make up a very small portion of the total suicides, the rate in that group jumped the most — it experienced the largest percent increase, tripling over 15 years from 0.5 to 1.7 per 100,000 people.

 

 

IMHO, and I'm not being sarcastic here - its the First Amendment that is causing contributory to them to commit suicide.

 

Jesus Christ you're a naive asshole. It is big pharma causing suicides in this country, they don't know how to deal with depression other than to prescribe drugs with side effects to handle it. The most simplistic solution is the worst and the fact that no one has figured that out is dismally disgusting. Don't you find it odd that people haven't figured this much out? Well Google Viagra deaths, and you will see that in 1999 over 500 people died from using it and after that point numbers are very difficult to flesh out. Why? big money, If you have a better answer show it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A disturbing trend:

 

http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/04/22/474888854/suicide-rates-climb-in-u-s-especially-among-adolescent-girls

 

Adolescent girls don't generally kill themselves with guns. So jocal, how do you explain their sudden rise in suicide when they are not using guns? It seems inconceivable.

 

She says it's heartbreaking to work with these data. While other causes of death are on the decline, suicide just keeps climbing — and it's doing so for every age group under 75.

 

"I've been losing sleep over this, quite honestly," says Curtin. "You can't just say it's confined to one age group or another for males and females. Truly at all ages people are at risk for this, and our youngest have some of the highest percent increases."

 

There is one age group that really stands out — girls between the ages of 10 and 14. Though they make up a very small portion of the total suicides, the rate in that group jumped the most — it experienced the largest percent increase, tripling over 15 years from 0.5 to 1.7 per 100,000 people.

 

 

IMHO, and I'm not being sarcastic here - its the First Amendment that is causing contributory to them to commit suicide.

 

Jesus Christ you're a naive asshole. It is big pharma causing suicides in this country, they don't know how to deal with depression other than to prescribe drugs with side effects to handle it. The most simplistic solution is the worst and the fact that no one has figured that out is dismally disgusting. Don't you find it odd that people haven't figured this much out? Well Google Viagra deaths, and you will see that in 1999 over 500 people died from using it and after that point numbers are very difficult to flesh out. Why? big money, If you have a better answer show it.

 

 

Big Pharma is "causing suicides"?? Had you bothered to actually read the article, you would have seen they said that one of the primary factors in the suicide spike was that docs were backing off on writing Rx's for anti-depressants. Not more.

 

Asshole indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

A disturbing trend:

 

http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/04/22/474888854/suicide-rates-climb-in-u-s-especially-among-adolescent-girls

 

Adolescent girls don't generally kill themselves with guns. So jocal, how do you explain their sudden rise in suicide when they are not using guns? It seems inconceivable.

 

She says it's heartbreaking to work with these data. While other causes of death are on the decline, suicide just keeps climbing — and it's doing so for every age group under 75.

 

"I've been losing sleep over this, quite honestly," says Curtin. "You can't just say it's confined to one age group or another for males and females. Truly at all ages people are at risk for this, and our youngest have some of the highest percent increases."

 

There is one age group that really stands out — girls between the ages of 10 and 14. Though they make up a very small portion of the total suicides, the rate in that group jumped the most — it experienced the largest percent increase, tripling over 15 years from 0.5 to 1.7 per 100,000 people.

 

 

IMHO, and I'm not being sarcastic here - its the First Amendment that is causing contributory to them to commit suicide.

 

Jesus Christ you're a naive asshole. It is big pharma causing suicides in this country, they don't know how to deal with depression other than to prescribe drugs with side effects to handle it. The most simplistic solution is the worst and the fact that no one has figured that out is dismally disgusting. Don't you find it odd that people haven't figured this much out? Well Google Viagra deaths, and you will see that in 1999 over 500 people died from using it and after that point numbers are very difficult to flesh out. Why? big money, If you have a better answer show it.

 

 

Big Pharma is "causing suicides"?? Had you bothered to actually read the article, you would have seen they said that one of the primary factors in the suicide spike was that docs were backing off on writing Rx's for anti-depressants. Not more.

 

Asshole indeed.

 

 

Yes, asshole indeed. The only reason doctors back "off" is fear of torts. The patient is left to wallow in their own delusions from drugs already prescribed and where there is no refill. The docs are covered, the government is covered, the patient is dead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites