Another gun killed a person

Originally posted by woogleuk
...
The surgeon/doctor sets out with the intention of saving a life, and things go wrong. The gunman intends to kill right from the start.

Flawed argument... You start off in the wrong path thinking that all gun deaths are intentional... There are many that are not intentional, yet people like you use EVERY excuse to TRY to ban firearms...

Not to mention the fact that many good citizens have been able to use their weapons to kill criminals trying to rob them or worse... Criminals are a virus, a cancer, one which the left LOVES to forgive and try to give another chance, then after they commit another crime you want to give them another chance, and another, and another...

Guns are also used FREQUENTLY to save innocent, and good lives... But of course people like you don't care about that...you just care about FORCING everyone to accept and swallow YOUR views...

reply to post by woogleuk


So was the bow and arrow...
So was the xbow and bolt...
So were KNIVES, swords and other pointy objects... Yes knives were and still are used as tools which includes for killing...
So were clubs...
So are many other items which can readily be found and have been used by criminals and regular people who like you wrote snap...

But of course you don't care about the other tools... You just care about banning the one tool that gets your panties in a bunch...

BTW, we know already, said it in my previous responses here... People like you just want to FORCE your will on others...

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


Never once said I wanted them banned, what you do in your own country is up to you, not forcing you to do anything.

I was just pointing out flawed arguments.

For the record, I have my reasons for hating firearms, and it is a bloody good reason, but that is a different story.

On the other hand, I have fired many different guns/rifles, from Browning 9mm pistols, to 5.56/7.62 army issue rifles (SA80, LSW, GPMG), heck I've even fire anti tank weapons, loved every minute of it.

I still think guns in civilian hands leads to nothing but tragedy, of which I have had first hand experience (that different story previously mentioned).

But, again, I never once said they should be banned in your country (assuming the USA), nor would I force my views upon you, just express my opinions.

Originally posted by woogleuk
I've never understood the logic behind "Guns don't kill people, people do", a gun does not fire itself

And cars dont drive themselves. A Bow and Arrow does not aim and fire on it's own. A baseball bat does not swing by itself. Cigarettes do not just light themselves and fill your lungs with smoke. Alcohol does not open itself and jump down your throat.

When a person gets drunk and gets behind the wheel of a car and kills another person, we do not blame the alcohol and we do not blame the car. No one made that person get drunk, no one made that person get behind the wheel. This line of thinking applies to firearms as well. It's called personal responsibility. We hold the individual responsible for their own actions. So we don't blame the gun when Billybob goes on a shooting spree in a mall. We blame Billybob. Just like we dont blame the car, or alcohol, when Billybob gets drunk and crashes into a school bus full of kids, we blame Billybob.

How would you ban guns anyway? They have been invented and it is quite hard to uninvent something, you can make your own gun if you want to, they are quite simple. So essentially we would have to erase the knowledge of how a gun works. As long as there is demand someone will make them and those who seek to use force over others will therefore always have guns until a better alternative make them obsolete.

reply to post by citizenoftheworld


look at the English gun laws only organized criminals have firearms and the petty criminals use knives on a public that is unable to protect itself, Gun laws dont protect anyone but those criminals who dont want victims to defend themselves, look at chicago where its extremely hard or impossible to get a firearms and look at the murder rate compared to a city who allows people to exercise their 2nd amendment RIGHT to bear arms to protect themselves

Originally posted by citizenoftheworld
reply to post by whatsecret

 

It may be the person itself that chose to shoot, but a gun is still a tool that provides this action to happen. Therefore all guns should be banned, at least for public use, everywhere! But that is whish full thinking! It does do more bad than good. The gun could have also hit someone else!

edit on 13-12-2012 by citizenoftheworld because: (no reason given)

That's freakin brilliant!!! Maybe also if we ban all pencils then no kids would get bad grades or make spelling errors? So I suppose murder was unheard of before gunpowder was invented correct?

Banning, or stricter laws, on guns will not stop gun deaths. Criminals by their very nature do not obey laws. It is already illegal to kill someone but words on a paper don't seem to stop people from doing it. What makes anyone think words on a paper will stop someone from getting a gun?

Isn't crack already banned? Yet, if I wanted to I can go and get some anytime I want. I can even make a phone call and have it delivered to my house. People will do what people want to do, regardless of who likes it or not. Some people want an outright ban on guns and they think that will stop murders but isn't murder already banned?

As for statistics, what do they say....there are lies, damn lies, and statistics? I remember reading some anti gun story about how many innocent children are killed by guns every year. Problem was they didn't say that they included such things as gang bangers and suicides in their statistics ... hardly innocent children just standing around getting shot, though that's how their statistics were portrayed. They also failed to mention that they included people up to the age of 25 as 'children". When gang bangers(or those shot while engaged in criminal activity), suicides and those over 18 years old were excluded their number dropped to a small fraction of their original statistic. Of course nobody wants to see ANY innocent killed, but to twist the statistics to play on emotions to further an agenda is simply dishonest

If you are going to use statistics you should verify who came up with them and their methods. I don't think it's really honest when you are trying to ban guns based on just showing "deaths" to include people who, if they weren't engaged in some other criminal activity would not have gotten shot to begin with. Were they shot by other criminals? Were they shot by someone defending themselves from said criminal? These things matter when using numbers as an argument.

If a criminal shoots another criminal, really I don't care. If you weren't a criminal you'd still be alive and blaming the gun simply because one was involved is dishonest. The criminal activity is what got that person shot and killed, not the gun.

Besides, people have been killing each other since the only weapons available were pointy sticks and rocks, what makes anyone thing taking away guns would make any difference.

Someone above made reference to how many are killed by doctors and was told you cant compare because doctors aren't trying to intentionally kill you, but it is actually something to think about. If doctors, who are actually trying to help you, are ten times more likely to kill you than getting shot .... well doesn't that tell you something about gun owners? With approximately 100 million gun owners (that we are aware of) possessing tools designed specifically to kill yet actually killing ten times less than those who possess the tools specifically made to save you, it looks like it's better to have a gun protecting you all day than a doctor treating you all day.

Originally posted by marvinthemartian
Last year over 300,000 guns where stolen in the u s a.
That is 300, 000 guns in the hands of criminals.
WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG?

Disarming the other 100 million lawful gun owners and leaving them defenseless in the face of the criminals perhaps?

Originally posted by Primordial

With approximately 100 million gun owners (that we are aware of) possessing tools designed specifically to kill yet actually killing ten times less than those who possess the tools specifically made to save you, it looks like it's better to have a gun protecting you all day than a doctor treating you all day.

edit on 14-12-2012 by Primordial because: (no reason given)

What about a doctor with a gun?

Speaking of, doctors kill more people per year by malpractice than those killed by people with guns, so I think we should ban doctors.

reply to post by NavyDoc


If they were not there in the first place there would'nt be so many in the hands of criminals
and there would'nt be as much paranoia about gun toting madmen.

reply to post by defcon5


No because as a Glock firearm owner, the description is wrong. It's fact. You clearly have never handled a Glock so you wouldn't know. But you're awful eager at spouting whatever crap you've quoted off the internet. The death of the policeman's daughter, while tragic, is the fault of the father who left his sevice pistol in the open and unsafe, not Glocks.

I'll take a second to educate you so you can make an informed conclusion instead of reading your opinion online. Glock's triggers are standard weight, between 5 to 8 lbs, not anymore lighter or harder than comparable firearms. Since Glock pistols are Striker-fired and Not true Double-Action, each trigger pull is the same and consistent, unlike other action-types with significantly lighter subsequent trigger pulls. So, in fact, Glock's system is safer than other pistols, if you're examining trigger pull safety. It is possible the officer altered his trigger pull to decrease his trigger pull. Additionally, Glock firearms have three independent safety mechanisms. There is the external trigger safety and two automatic internal safeties, including a firing pin safety and a drop safety.

So, in conclusion, if you leave your service pistol out in the open around your children, and don't educate them on proper firearm safety, AND despite having three safeties on your Glock you STILL manage to have an accidental shooting in your home, then that only leaves one thing....you're an idiot and everything bad that happens to you is YOUR FAULT.

Yes, there are a lot of negative statistics out there that indicate firearms are dangerous. All it indicates is that those owners should have never purchased those firearms because their irresponsibilty lead to an accidental fatality or injury. They are too stupid to safely own a gun. Well, cigarette smoking has been linked to serious illness and death as well, but the decision to smoke is still left up to the individual. Should we ban smoking because aren't smart enough to stop smoking, yep....the cost of treating illness and disease related to smoking is significant. Is smoking still legal...yep. We're never going to ban gun ownership in this country. It's just not going to happen so people need to get over it already. What people NEED to do is take responsibility for themselves, stop blaming everything on everyone else and grow up.

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

Originally posted by marvinthemartian
Last year over 300,000 guns where stolen in the u s a.
That is 300, 000 guns in the hands of criminals.
WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG?

Look to the UK to find out...

It has gone very well for your people to ban guns huh?...

edit on 14-12-2012 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)

Tell me when was the last time someone went on a shooting spree killing multiple people in the U K?

Originally posted by marvinthemartian
reply to post by NavyDoc

 

If they were not there in the first place there would'nt be so many in the hands of criminals
and there would'nt be as much paranoia about gun toting madmen.

If you could magic all of the guns away tomorrow, guess what would happen. Strong predatory criminals would still prey on the weak just as they had for time immemorial. A gun is a tool that can even up the odds in the favor of the innocent citizen. A pistol can give a 110 pound woman a chance against a 210 pound rapist, whereas, before this tool was invented, she had nothing.

Originally posted by marvinthemartian

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

Originally posted by marvinthemartian
Last year over 300,000 guns where stolen in the u s a.
That is 300, 000 guns in the hands of criminals.
WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG?

Look to the UK to find out...

It has gone very well for your people to ban guns huh?...

edit on 14-12-2012 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)

Tell me when was the last time someone went on a shooting spree killing multiple people in the U K?

2010. Cumbria Shootings

Boy, all that gun control kept Derrik Bird in line, didn't it? Perhaps if his fellow citizens were not disarmed, one of them could ahve defended himself.

reply to post by NavyDoc


Yes but turn your logic around

that tool can allow a 12 year old to kill a 20 stone man

see him try that with a knife/bat/ect.

reply to post by NavyDoc


One of the three since 1987 (25 years)

compare and contrast.

Originally posted by marvinthemartian
reply to post by NavyDoc

 

Yes but turn your logic around

that tool can allow a 12 year old to kill a 20 stone man

see him try that with a knife/bat/ect.

Sure, which is why we evaluate the person, not the tool. 12 year olds have used guns to protect themselves from 20 stone men as well.

Originally posted by marvinthemartian
reply to post by NavyDoc

 

One of the three since 1987 (25 years)

compare and contrast.

One of 4 since 1987.Hungerford, Monkseaton, Dunblaine, Cumbria. If gun control stopped this sort of thing, it should have been zero in the last 25 years, no?

•In or about 2006, there were about 60 million (actually closer to 58M, but we'll use the rounded-up number to be kind to hopolophobes) people in the UK as a whole, including Scotland.

•In England and Wales alone — discounting Scotland — there were over 163 thousand knife crimes.

•By the end of 2006, there were more than 300 million people in the US as a whole.

•In the US as a whole, there were fewer than 400 thousand gun crimes.

•In the UK, based on these numbers, there was one knife crime commited for every 374 people (rounded down).

•In the US, based on these numbers, there was one gun crime committed for every 750 people — less than half a gun crime per 374 people (about 0.4987 gun crimes per 374 people, actually).

•That means that, based on these statistics, you are more than twice as likely to be a victim of knife crime in the UK as you are to be a victim of gun crime in the US.

What does this tell you, that evil people will hurt other people regardless the law and disarming the law abiding does not make people safer. How are those stab-proof knives working out over their?