Main > Everything Else

The Clinton gun ban has expired!

<< < (21/52) > >>

DrewKaree:

--- Quote from: danny_galaga on September 18, 2004, 10:34:33 am ---drew, watch out! when i next visit the UK hunky artist and i are grabbing our stun guns, and then make our way to the states. then we'll observe your  routine for a couple of days and decide on a couple of isolated places that you go to with some regularity. we will  then decide on the night we will do the "deed" and lay in wait for you.

All we have to do is get close to you. It doesn't really matter how, but for our purposes, say we approach slowly and non-threateningly. I tell you I wanto to talk about our problems and the stun gun I have with me is nowhere in sight. After putting you at ease (or not, really, at this point your ego has already convinced you that I want no "trouble"), hunky artist brings the stun gun out and, before you can say 'move to cuba', you're  incapacitated and we have 10 minutes to do to you what we will. It wouldn't take much effort at all to slit your  throat and I can dispose of the knife and stun gun anywhere, with little chance of them being traced back to us.

aah, sod it. we'll just get some armalites from some shady character in that same alley and we'll gun you down in a drive-by  ;D

lock your women up too, i'm bringing my cupholders  :D

--- End quote ---
Dude, you're so dang funny sometimes, I WISHED you lived in the States so we could hang out, but then I wouldn't be able to tell you to move to Austra....Cuba  ;)  For what it's worth, I'd enjoy you coming over for a visit, but I don't think it'll be with Hunky Artist anytime soon.  He won't even answer the point I bring up about his country's foolish gun laws, so I doubt he'll be wanting to see me anytime soon, even if he DID have a stun gun.  8)



--- Quote from: shmokes link=board=6;threadid=24641;start=80#msg203687 ---Don't bring me into this Dartful.  I'm omnipotent.  What in my name makes you think I need or want your protection?

--- Quote ---
--- End quote ---
now, I may be a nut by all the standards you have for me, but I'd have to be TRULY insane to worship YOU on Sunday...unless you stood on a pedestal so that as I kneel at your feet I could look up your kilt. ;)  If your girlfriend caught me, would she beat me about the head and shoulders?



--- Quote from: fredster on September 18, 2004, 09:43:13 pm ---The Canadians might take up arms and invade.  
--- End quote ---
Your generalizations are SOOO frustrating, fredster.  You honestly think the FRENCH Canadians would do such a thing?  Jeez, man, tone it down  ;) ;)
--- End quote ---

Buddabing:

--- Quote from: TA Pilot on September 16, 2004, 10:08:08 am ---I respectfully disagree. Guns do kill people

Of course - thats what they're designed for.
If they could not be used to kill people, they'd be useless, and there;d be no amendment protecting our right to own and use them.

For every story about someone defending him/herself with a gun, there are probably twenty stories about four-year-old girls accidentally killing themselves with guns,

Indeed not.  There are fewer than 1000 accidental gun deaths per year; there are somewhere in the neighborhood og 1.5 million defensive gun uses per year.


--- End quote ---

According to the CDC statistics, 29523 people died by firearms in 2001. You are correct that less than 1000 died accidentally, there were 802 that year. However there were only 323 defensive gun uses resulting in death. Although this can't be quantified, many of the 11348 homicides by gun and the 16869 suicides by gun would not have happened if guns were more tightly regulated.

Guns kill people. And yes, cars kill people too. There were 43,987 traffic accident deaths in 2001. That's not too many more than guns. Don't you think that guns, killing roughly the same number of people as cars, should be regulated roughly equally? How about mandatory gun education just like driver's ed, strict licensing requirements just like a DMV, mandatory gun liability insurance just like car liability insurance? How about mandatory ballistics "fingerprinting"?

I am not advocating the banning of guns. I am advocating the regulation of a dangerous item that doesn't belong in the hands of children or the ignorant.

And please don't mix quotes from me with quotes from someone else. :)

EDIT: Tobacco and alcohol kill people too, in far larger numbers than guns and cars. Minors aren't allowed to use tobacco products for a very good reason. Perhaps by the time they turn 18 they will have enough sense not to get hooked on cigarettes. The drinking age is 21 (at least here in Texas) because kids that age are stupid and don't know how to drive, drunk or sober. But, cigarettes and alcohol should not be outlawed, just regulated.

My quote about a 20 to 1 ratio of accidental deaths versus lawful defensive gun use was about news stories rather than actual statistics. The ratio of actual deaths is less than three to one accidents to defenses. I'll try to find statistics about news stories.

Guns kill people. Cars kill people. Tobacco kills people. Alcohol kills people. And so do a lot of other things.

shmokes:
What is the CDC doing with statistics about gun deaths?  Shouldn't that be ATF or something?  I suppose you could think of someone who wanted to buy an assault weapon as having some sort of mental disease   ;)

Buddabing:

--- Quote from: shmokes on September 19, 2004, 11:54:49 am ---What is the CDC doing with statistics about gun deaths?  Shouldn't that be ATF or something?  I suppose you could think of someone who wanted to buy an assault weapon as having some sort of mental disease   ;)

--- End quote ---

Heh I guess they classify death as "the ultimate disease". :)

TA Pilot:
However there were only 323 defensive gun uses resulting in death.

And how many that didn't?  Its been estimate dby the USDOJ that in 97% of defensive gun uses, the weapon isnt fired.  If 1 in 20 firings results in a death (and thats AWFULLY high), thats over 200,000 DGUs/year.



Although this can't be quantified, many of the 11348 homicides by gun and the 16869 suicides by gun would not have happened if guns were more tightly regulated.

Tell me:
What 'tight regulation' would have stopped them?
And you admit your claim can't be quantified - of what use is it?



Don't you think that guns, killing roughly the same number of people as cars, should be regulated roughly equally?

I agree.   Treat guns just like cars:

-You dont need a license to buy a car.
-You dont need a license to own a car.
-You dont need a license to operate a car on private property.
-You dont need a license to transport a car on public property
-You dont need to register a car to own it.
-You dont need to register a car that is operated on private property.
-You dont need to register a can to transport it on public property.
-If you ARE licensed to drive on public property, that license is good in all 50 states on all (applicable) public property
-If your car IS registered for use on public property, the registration is good in all 50 states on all (applicable) public property.
-You only need to insure a car that you use (not transport) on public property.


How about mandatory ballistics "fingerprinting"?

Useless.   You fingerprint my gun, I'm changing the barrel.






Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version