Guns don't kill?

Originally posted by budski
Great post, but do you have any more up to date figures?

Thanx...
Sry, that's all I could find doing a quick search, I'm sure there's more up to date stats somewhere. I thought it would pass muster to just make a point. I'll do some more indepth searching later if I have time.

Originally posted by IAF101
He is deranged, he wanted to feel the flesh tear under his force, see the blood, the death. I think one or two would have satisfied his blood lust before he took his life.

Apparently not as he took time out to send a tape to a news network before continuing his rampage.

But as you say the gun is impersonal and thus would require more death for him to feel satisfied.

A gun is a weapon designed to kill fast and efficiently.. it was probably more about him being unchallenged than 'unsatisfied'.

As for killing 30 people with a carving knife it is possible, if a person is skilled enough, he can easily kill 30 people.

More evidence that some confuse kung-fu action movies with reality.

Or he could what Jack the Ripper did, wait in the dark places and pick off people one by one.

Jack the ripper was a sadist who got off on stalking prostitutes and decorating rooms with their intestines. They were possibly alive when he did this so obviously he had much more on his mind than just killing them. He also existed over a hundred years ago so using him for comparison against a modern day school shooting is a stretch.

When one wants to kill they will always find a way.

Or they might just get passed the angry impulse and go to the gym instead. Shooting someone is easy, immediate and relatively risk free.
Thats what hand guns were designed to do and they are perfect for home protection, drive bys.. and for anyone who's a bit trigger happy and wants to indulge a murderous whim. So much better than x-box.

[I should be in advertising..]

[edit on 22-4-2007 by riley]

Are a mechanism. They don't kill people. If left alone a gun will not search someone out and kill them.

If you take away guns, people will just evolve better more refined ways to kill each other, that is our way.

If you take away Legal guns, then the only people who will be armed will be the criminals who will still have them.

If you take away guns, then they will start taking away other things. Knives, sharp instruments, razors, etc.

Then they will try and take away negative thougts, you will be locked up for what you think, how you think.

Then you and the other four hundred billion living in cities of the future can be told what to think, how to think , when to eat, what to eat, when to crap, how to, etc.

There too many Sheep in this world already, why try and turn the rest of us into you.

Are a mechanism. They don't kill people. If left alone a gun will not search someone out and kill them.

A gun is a weapon, it was designed for only one purpose - to kill.

If you take away guns, people will just evolve better more refined ways to kill each other, that is our way.

This is not our way. It is the way of some. Please give examples of "better" ways to kill, that are available to the general public.

If you take away Legal guns, then the only people who will be armed will be the criminals who will still have them.

I did not specify legal guns - I specified all guns.

If you take away guns, then they will start taking away other things. Knives, sharp instruments, razors, etc.

Where is your proof of this?

Then they will try and take away negative thougts, you will be locked up for what you think, how you think.

And how would "they" do this? And who are "they"?

Then you and the other four hundred billion living in cities of the future can be told what to think, how to think , when to eat, what to eat, when to crap, how to, etc.

Again, total supposition with a strong element of fantasy - 2000AD anyone?

There too many Sheep in this world already, why try and turn the rest of us into you.

So because someone has a different opinion they are a sheep? I could easily say the same - that because you want guns, you have been brainwashed by the pro gun lobby, and that you are as much a sheep as anyone, but worse, because you have taken a destructive path.

Didnt you have this exact conversation a couple of times already?

You know, about magically making all guns disappear and world 'social problems' and all this stuff?

You free to have this converstaion as many times as you want with as many people as you want, it doesnt matter to me, I just thought I was having deja vu or something and needed to check.

If this post right here shows up Ill check the time stamp and know Im not caught in some sci-fi time loop or something.

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
Didnt you have this exact conversation a couple of times already?

You know, about magically making all guns disappear and world 'social problems' and all this stuff?

You free to have this converstaion as many times as you want with as many people as you want, it doesnt matter to me, I just thought I was having deja vu or something and needed to check.

If this post right here shows up Ill check the time stamp and know Im not caught in some sci-fi time loop or something.

yup, already had the conversation, but it doesn't appear as though royal76 read all of the thread, so just thought I'd respond - again

Remember your question of where were the police and the whole bit about how the police are only able to react to crime not prevent it?

I seem to remember that one got you thinking about the other side.

Anyway, whats your take on this:
www.abovepolitics.com...

Here is a example of a man defending himself from armed robbery and the police actually rather he had been a victim.

We get a lot of this in the UK.

A man restrains a robber until the cops arrive, he's charged with kidnapping.
A man beats up a burglar whilst restraining him, he's charged with assault.
A man shouts abuse back at youths who have been tormenting him, he's arrested for threatening behaviour.

Loads of examples of these kind of things - you can read about them every day.

This is more of a political matter rather than a policing matter.
I wish we did like you guys, and elect police chiefs, who would then be forced to do the job at hand, rather than enforcing their liberal/social elite thinking on the rest of us.

Good example though.

You should get rid of the stop sign and replace it with a sheep being led to slaughter.

1. You will never get rid of all guns, only a supernatural being can do that.
-Look at the UK, how long have they outlawed guns. Do you know that they have had a rise in gun related deaths this year alone?

By most of you answers I can tell that you fall back on your rhetoric manifesto handed to you by your local liberal media.

My proof is the UK. You have no guns, you have only camera's to follow you every movement, bowel or other. I bet you feel real freaken safe over there.

[edit on 24-4-2007 by Royal76]

Originally posted by Royal76
You should get rid of the stop sign and replace it with a sheep being led to slaughter.

1. You will never get rid of all guns, only a supernatural being can do that.
-Look at the UK, how long have they outlawed guns. Do you know that they have had a rise in gun related deaths this year alone?

By most of you answers I can tell that you fall back on your rhetoric manifesto handed to you by your local liberal media.

My proof is the UK. You have no guns, you have only camera's to follow you every movement, bowel or other. I bet you feel real freaken safe over there.

[edit on 24-4-2007 by Royal76]

whatever,
I'm glad you think you're so superior.
Look again at the stats posted in this thread - they give the lie to your statement.
as far being a liberal? I was in the forces, and could not be termed a liberal by anyone that knows me. Your mewling about rhetoric manifesto reminds me soooo much of how communists used to talk - before they got beaten. And I feel a lot safer here than I would in the US.
In nearly 40 years, I have never been mugged, robbed, beaten or shot at.

BTW are you going to answer any of the questions I posed? or will you continue to put forth your comic book view of the world?

[edit on 24-4-2007 by budski]

I'm just better than you...

Sorry man, I just can't help it...In my defense I was raised by a clan of
smartss's if you know what I mean. We just can't let anything go without talking smack.Sorry

What I'm saying is that should a guy living in a world free of guns, yet still have people dieing from gun shots, surrounded by camera's, yet can't find most of your real criminals, really be the voice of reason here?

Yeah you talked about this with other people like Santa said, but you haven't really talked about it until you talked to me.

Remember I told you so when we are old and grey, living in our little cubicles of the future. Guns are only the first step in government overall goal to run everything about our lives.

[edit on 24-4-2007 by Royal76]

Like I said before, this has a lot to do with political constraints, and the introduction of the european human rights bill - known as "protect a paedo".
Effectively our courts and police have been taken over by a so-called "left wing liberal elite" who believe that the rights of criminals are more important than the rights of victims. But this cannot last, sooner or later the populace will demand real action, then our cops can go back to being cops, instead of social workers.

posted by budsk

posted by Royal76
You should get rid of the stop sign and replace it with a sheep being led to slaughter.

I'm glad you think you're superior. Look again at the stats posted in this thread - they give the lie to your statement. As far being a liberal? I was in the forces, and could not be termed a liberal by anyone that knows me.

BTW are you going to answer any of the questions I posed? or will you continue your comic book view of the world? [Edited by Don W]

You're on target, Mr Budsk. Talk about NRA sycophants. Look at these genuine numbers.

All (USA) Reported Accidents Outcomes in 2001 from the CDC

Treated and Released, 27,993,603, 94.1%
Hospitalized, 1,624,532, 5.6%
Death, 157,078, 0.56%

Although anti gun control proponents sometimes call cars or trucks into question because ironically, motor vehicles and firearms kill close to the same number of Americans each year, the banning of cars is not equal to the banning of guns. The CDC statistics show fewer than 1/10th of 1% of people injured in motor vehicle accidents die, whereas 28%-30% of people who are injured by gunshot, die. (Gunshot chart not available.)

Lethality. Guns are more lethal than cars. One pertinent and even more potent argument is this: motor vehicles are not designed or intended to KILL, whereas that is the purpose and design of GUNS.

Other Statistics. The lethality of firearms compared to other agencies of self-inflicted injury is demonstrated in the following statistics.

Cut or stab oneself, 1.5%
Fall, 2.1%
Gunshot, 55.1%
Poisoning, 17%
Suffocation, 20.2%
Other causes, 3.5%
Undetermined or unspecified, 0.5%
From the CDC, 2001

[edit on 4/24/2007 by donwhite]

But it will never change.

We had Generation X, Y, etc.

This is Generation PC

You know a guy actually got sued by a robber for cutting himself on the glass of the window he broke to get in, because there was no sign posted about the dangers of broken glass. He got a million dollars.

If anything we need more guns to weed out the herd.

Originally posted by budski

I wish we did like you guys, and elect police chiefs, who would then be forced to do the job at hand, rather than enforcing their liberal/social elite thinking on the rest of us.

Hmmm... I dont vote for my sheriff. Our sheriff is appointed by a group of local politicians that seem to be getting more and more corrupt as the years go on.

Maybe somewhere in Idaho they can still vote for their sheriff but not where I am. You see, Im stuck in the middle of a wonderful 'progressive' state where corruption is ignored, taxation is obscene and the government always knows whats best for everyone.

I think this is what Royal was getting at with his description of a police state.

It may not be as extreme as he describes it but its headed that way fast and there really isnt anything to stop it.

Voting is great. As long as your votes count.

When the votes dont mean anything anymore what do we do?

If the guns were to magically disappear then I guess we could just all rebel with farm tools or kung-fu. Maybe we could all starve ourselves like ghandi?
If the people in control of a totalitarian state see their plebes starving themselves why would they care?

The only way to force a change from a police state to a free one is to decapitate the leaders. If you know a better way (and guns do exist there is no way of getting around that) let me know.

I could talk about the rise of the proletariat, but won't, cos any mans definition of this means it can't work.

I think that the power of mass opinion is the most powerful tool, I also think that when politicians can get away with election rigging like dubya did, it's a bad thing.

In the UK, after 10 years of blair with all the lies, corruption, distortion, broken promises and mis-management we are waking up and are threatening to kick his party out.

Power lies with the people - they just have to know how to wield it....

About 10,000 people are killed (homicides) each year in the US of A by gunshot. That's about 60 people per day, on average. The 32 people shot dead at Va Tech were just half a days "work" done in one place. That's the only difference the NRA sycophants can see. Economic, you could say if it had been pigs and not people.

[edit on 4/24/2007 by donwhite]

Originally posted by donwhite
About 10,000 people are killed (homicides) each year in the US of A by gunshot. That's about 60 people per day, on average. The 32 people shot dead at Va Tech were just half a days "work" done in one place. That's the only difference the NRA sycophants can see. Economic, you could say if it had been pigs and not people.

[edit on 4/24/2007 by donwhite]

I'd probably draw the line at calling them sycophants - after all, they are just as entitled to their opinion.
It just happens that in this case, i disagree with them. And I suppose it's no worse than being called a "bleeding-heart liberal".

VT killed more than his limit..

its around 27.3 per day.

I tired of the psycho's and idiots ruining stuff for the rest of us. Why a guy with a mental health stay got to buy a gun is beyond me. Why does that mean I don't get to have one. I'm not planning on killing anyone. What about my Rights , or don't they matter next to your feeling that it would be safer for the world.

The world would be safer if we outlawed McDonalds too, but that's not right either. The right to choose is a God given right to all individuals.

interesting that people seem to think that makeing guns illegal will keep gun crimes low. thats idiotic at best. being able to own a gun where i live is prety hard. we have major restrictions on what types of firearms/clip capacities you can have. it does NOTHING to slow down gun crimes, in fact we have had more shootings than ever, mostly involveing guns smuggled into the country, guns that can't be legaly purchased like full automatic and large clip capacities. in fact i actualy own a prohibited weapon, lol only because i have no clue as to where it is as i had legaly bought it as a teen, (small useless handheld crossbow, but it is prohibbited now).

the point is that makeing guns illegal only keeps guns out of the hands of those who don't want to use a gun for a crime. criminals can get a gun in about half an hour if you know who to talk to. in fact our criminals are much better armed than the cops with illigal guns, so how is makeing them illegal actualy helping anything? sure there are a few cases like a domestic where a legal gun might be used, but then again in the same circumstance there are plenty of other methods of killing the other party, that would probably be used, so you realy can't use that as an argument, guns are just generaly easyer to use in some cases.

i think it would be much better to alow everyone free axcess to guns, and alow them to be used to protect person and propperty, without lawsuits being alowed by criminals, (after all it was THEIR choice to commit said crimes). as well there should be rather severe punishments if you actualy use a gun or have it ready for use in crime. they should also be held finantualy responsible for any damaged caused by the effects of their crimes. now at that point crime becomes rather risky for the criminal. how many people that break into houses would stop at that point? after all you might surprise someone who will shoot an intruder on sight and that they will still be charged and even held accountable for any damage they have caused if they survive or out of their assets if they die. suddenly break and enters become dangerouse to these criminals who are mostly cowards to begin with. not to mention it could become expensive afterwords for them to have to pay damages.

how many muggings would cease after passers bye shoot the muggers as they are mugging someone? can you imagine two gangs haveing a firefight only to have honest citizens shoot at both sides so that they now have a two sided (or even more) battle fronts to contend with. criminals would now have to not only watch out for suspected cops, but now anyone arround them could be dangerous to them. or how about that bank robber drawing a gun and being shot by several people as soon as he utters a threat.

this could actualy be a decent deturant to violent crimes, after all if crime is dangerous to your health and you KNOW that you could be shot with impunity for trying to commit a crime. i know i would certainly think twice they say "crime dosen't pay" but sadly at this time crime DOES pay, and can pay very well. as well they all know that if something happens even if it is just tripping over a loose carpet dureing a robbery and breaking their leg can sue the homeowner/tennant, how does this deture guncrime? we know that this is prety true as seen by all the crimes we have commited bye children and teenagers who know dammed well that they can literaly get away with murder and only get a slap on the wrist. and they KNOW THEIR RIGHTS VERY WELL.