Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #6001  
Old 10-06-2015, 06:48 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
It's official. Guns now kill more Americans (34,000 annually) than car, bus and truck crashes combined (33,000). Special thanks to Law Enforcement whose 1000+ kills took gun deaths over!

Gun deaths are on track to overtake deaths due to septicemia later this decade, and breast cancer deaths early next decade.

Well done, America! Bravo!!
There are about 5000 handgun murders per year. Most of those "gun deaths' are suicides.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...st-gun-deaths/


However, 50,000 Non-smokers die every year due to second hand smoke.
Well done, Big Tobacco! Bravo!!
  #6002  
Old 10-06-2015, 08:22 PM
Hentor the Barbarian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 14,427
[QUOTE=DrDeth;18748983]There are about 5000 handgun murders per year. Most of those "gun deaths' are suicides.[/quote ]There are about 11,000 to 12,000 firearms homicides per year. Are you claiming that about 6,000 to 7,000 of those are committed with long guns? Usually gun advocates like to minimize the number of long gun homcides. Interesting.

It's true that there are more suicides than homicides by firearms, but only by 60/40 or so.
  #6003  
Old 10-07-2015, 02:01 AM
Esox Lucius is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by canned mayhem View Post
Amazingly as it sounds, you would never even know I had a gun on me.
The smug, superior attitude is a dead giveaway.
  #6004  
Old 10-07-2015, 03:59 AM
Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 24,089
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
There are about 5000 handgun murders per year. Most of those "gun deaths' are suicides.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...st-gun-deaths/


However, 50,000 Non-smokers die every year due to second hand smoke.
Well done, Big Tobacco! Bravo!!
And guess what that number would be if smoking hadn't been increasingly regulated and restricted over the years (recent UK example). Unlike guns in the US, where any regulation to attempt to reduce gun deaths is met with passionate resistance. Is this really the comparison you wanted to use?
  #6005  
Old 10-07-2015, 04:52 AM
Dave Hartwick is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,902
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a cigarette is a good guy with a cigarette! Just like the only solution to drunk driving fatalities is more drunk drivers!
  #6006  
Old 10-07-2015, 11:20 AM
Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 24,089
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Hartwick View Post
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a cigarette is a good guy with a cigarette! Just like the only solution to drunk driving fatalities is more drunk drivers!
Actually you're more likely to stop a bad guy with a gun by tackling him than by shooting him, statistically speaking.

Combat Vets Destroy the NRA's Heroic Gunslinger Fantasy

(Yes, it's a lefty source but there's a lot of studies cited in the article. Also, I'd like to register my usual objection to headlines that use the word "destroy" to mean "offer an opposing argument to", no matter how strong the evidence; it's WAY overused.)
Quote:
Not pulling a weapon is often the wisest course of action in active-shooter situations. While a number of conservatives declared that Oregon’s Umpqua Community College, the scene of a mass shooting last week, was a gun-free zone, the truth is that several concealed carry holders were present, and they wisely decided to leave their guns holstered. Veteran John Parker later explained to MSNBC, “We could have opened ourselves up to be potential targets ourselves, and not knowing where SWAT was… if we had our guns ready to shoot, they could think that we were bad guys.”
Sadly, he wasn't asked about the effectiveness of shouting "Hey everybody, let's get him!"

Quote:
Blair co-authored a study for the FBI that looked at 185 mass shooting events over a 13-year period. It found that while around one-in-five were stopped by civilians before police arrived, in only one case was it done by a typical “good guy with a gun” (professionals—an off-duty cop and an armed security guard—used their guns to stop two others). In most cases Blair and his colleague studied, civilians ended a rampage by tackling the assailant.
Bolding mine.

Quote:
“Despite what we see on TV, the presence of a firearm is a greater risk, especially in the hands of an untrained person,” says David Chipman, the former ATF agent. “Someone can always say, ‘If your mother is being raped by 5 people, wouldn’t you want her to have a gun?’ Well, OK, if you put it that way, I’d say yes, but that’s not a likely scenario. The question is: If you see someone running out of a gas station with a gun in their hand, do you want an untrained person jumping out and opening fire. For me, the answer is clearly ‘no.’”
  #6007  
Old 10-07-2015, 11:39 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 20,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
There are about 5000 handgun murders per year.
This is a very different number than my source shows. Your link seems to provide no such statistic.

Are most gun murders by shotgun? Murders without arrest/conviction or pled down to manslaughter don't count? Don't keep us in suspense -- what's your Gotcha?

(Or are you omitting gun murders where the victim was to blame, per leading GOP scientist Ben Carson?)
  #6008  
Old 10-07-2015, 11:57 AM
Esox Lucius is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Hartwick View Post
Seems he's confused his manhood with an inanimate object as well.
Excellent point.

He has also confused "carrying a gun in the United States" with "deciding his own fate" when there's almost zero likelihood that he'll ever have to use it. What a paper cowboy.

Thank you for your pretend service, canned mayhem. As a reward, here's a little joke you can relate to...

A cowboy rides into town one day, goes into the saloon and orders a drink. Looking around, he sees that he and the bartender are the only ones there.

"Where is everyone?" he asks.

"At the hangin'", the bartender says.

"Yeah?" The cowboy downs his drink. "Who are they hangin'?"

"Brown Paper Pete", says the bartender.

"Brown Paper Pete? What kind o' name is that for a cowboy?"

"Well," says the bartender, "he wore a brown paper hat, brown paper shirt, brown paper pants and brown paper boots."

"Really? So what are they hangin' him for?"

"Rustling."


Take care, CM.
  #6009  
Old 10-07-2015, 12:43 PM
Esox Lucius is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gyrate View Post
My nephew entered the local police force earlier this year. In training, it was drilled into him that his most effective weapon is his mouth. If the NRA really wanted to promote responsible gun use, it would take its cue from modern law enforcement agencies rather than its corporate masters.
  #6010  
Old 10-07-2015, 01:10 PM
Projammer's Avatar
Projammer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: SW Arkansas
Posts: 6,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gyrate View Post
Actually you're more likely to stop a bad guy with a gun by tackling him than by shooting him, statistically speaking.

Combat Vets Destroy the NRA's Heroic Gunslinger Fantasy

(Yes, it's a lefty source but there's a lot of studies cited in the article. Also, I'd like to register my usual objection to headlines that use the word "destroy" to mean "offer an opposing argument to", no matter how strong the evidence; it's WAY overused.)
Sadly, he wasn't asked about the effectiveness of shouting "Hey everybody, let's get him!"

Quote:
Blair co-authored a study for the FBI that looked at 185 mass shooting events over a 13-year period. It found that while around one-in-five were stopped by civilians before police arrived, in only one case was it done by a typical “good guy with a gun” (professionals—an off-duty cop and an armed security guard—used their guns to stop two others). In most cases Blair and his colleague studied, civilians ended a rampage by tackling the assailant.
Bolding mine.
Did Blair's study happen to include data about instances where there were options other than tackling the assailant? Like how many times there were armed civilians who decided not to intervene?

A less bloviating article which includes more of the veteran's commentary.
Quote:
Luckily we made the choice not to get involved,” he explained. “We were quite a distance away from the building where this was happening. And we could have opened ourselves up to be potential targets ourselves, and not knowing where SWAT was, their response time, they wouldn’t know who we were. And if we had our guns ready to shoot, they could think that we were bad guys.
Bolding mine.
Do you believe that Mintz would have been shot seven times tackling the shooter if he had been armed himself? Or if Parker had been in the same or even the next room?

Completely agree with you on your objections to "destroy". If Hillary/Obama had been destroyed as often as the conservative pundits have claimed, they would have been reduced to their component subatomic particles by now.
  #6011  
Old 10-07-2015, 01:31 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gyrate View Post
And guess what that number would be if smoking hadn't been increasingly regulated and restricted over the years (recent UK example). Unlike guns in the US, where any regulation to attempt to reduce gun deaths is met with passionate resistance. Is this really the comparison you wanted to use?
Guns are protected by the Bill of Rights, and smoking isn't. In any case, those "restrictions" are very minor.

It's simple- ban smoking. 100%.
  #6012  
Old 10-07-2015, 01:35 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
This is a very different number than my source shows. Your link seems to provide no such statistic.
wiki:

According to the FBI, in 2012, there were 8,855 total firearm-related homicides in the US, with 6,371 of those attributed to handguns

I guess my figure of 5000 was from a different year or more rounding. But it's damn close.
  #6013  
Old 10-07-2015, 03:36 PM
Happy Fun Ball is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The down hill slope
Posts: 3,184
Yeeeeeeehaww! Looks like its open season on criminals of all stripes now. This woman is a hero: Bystander opens fire on shoplifter at Home Depot.
  #6014  
Old 10-07-2015, 04:33 PM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,508
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Fun Ball View Post
Yeeeeeeehaww! Looks like its open season on criminals of all stripes now. This woman is a hero: Bystander opens fire on shoplifter at Home Depot.
This will simply be counted as another good example of "defensive gun use".
  #6015  
Old 10-07-2015, 04:36 PM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,508
11 year old shoots 8 year old neighbor with his dad's shotgun.

Unlocked loaded gun in a closet.

The more guns there are, the more there will be incidents like this. It is the price you pay for your "freedom." Good luck with that.
  #6016  
Old 10-07-2015, 06:32 PM
Fubaya is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,898
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
11 year old shoots 8 year old neighbor with his dad's shotgun.

Unlocked loaded gun in a closet.

The more guns there are, the more there will be incidents like this. It is the price you pay for your "freedom." Good luck with that.
This one happened in my area and it's really fucked up. I'm hoping the boy didn't flat out murder her. I'm hoping he thought the gun was empty and was just trying to scare her. Not that it matters, she's dead either way.
  #6017  
Old 10-07-2015, 07:08 PM
silenus's Avatar
silenus is offline
Isaiah 1:15/Screw the NRA
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 51,802
The kid was a known bully with a history of abusing that girl, so I'm going to go with "intentional" and I hope he gets jailed for life or longer. He's a waste of space.
  #6018  
Old 10-07-2015, 07:17 PM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,508
Quote:
Originally Posted by silenus View Post
The kid was a known bully with a history of abusing that girl, so I'm going to go with "intentional" and I hope he gets jailed for life or longer. He's a waste of space.
And without that easy access to a gun, I don't think it is likely he would have killed her. But by all means - get more guns. Don't put any horrible red tape in place that reduces your access. The government should not tell me how to store my guns. More guns will make us all safer.

Because Freedom!
  #6019  
Old 10-07-2015, 07:21 PM
Fubaya is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,898
Quote:
Originally Posted by silenus View Post
The kid was a known bully with a history of abusing that girl, so I'm going to go with "intentional" and I hope he gets jailed for life or longer. He's a waste of space.
He still might have been just trying to scare her. Not that it makes a difference, I'd just rather live in a world where kids are sometimes stupid than one where they are cold blooded murderers.

Unfortunately they are saying it's likely he'll only be held until 19. It's nearly impossible to get someone his age tried as an adult in Tennessee, and 19 is the longest they can keep a minor.
  #6020  
Old 10-07-2015, 07:49 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 20,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
wiki:

According to the FBI, in 2012, there were 8,855 total firearm-related homicides in the US, with 6,371 of those attributed to handguns

I guess my figure of 5000 was from a different year or more rounding. But it's damn close.
I'm looking at an FBI report with figures similar (but not identical) to yours, but it also has
Firearms, type not stated 1,611
With rifles, shotguns, and "other guns" all broken out separately, it seems fair to conclude that most of the "type not stated" were handguns, no?
... And the numbers are similar enough, year-to-year, that your "a different year" hypothesis is rejected.

So your "5000" should actually have been "about 8000"; correct? And here's another government document (for 2013 instead of 2012) that states
Firearm homicides: Number of deaths: 11,208
The FBI reports 13,000 homicides with about 9000 by firearm. CDC reports 16,000 homicides with 11,000 by firearms. It might be interesting to understand the difference. But none of these numbers are anywhere near 5000.

But whether 5000, 8000, or 11000, what's the difference, right? One side will characterize any of these numbers as "very rare"; the other side as "much too common."

But I get very annoyed when incorrect statistics are prattled about on message boards, hoping that no one will check. If I remember a number as "6500", am too lazy to Google, and the smaller the number the better it suits my case, I'll write "less than 7000" or "about 6500." I won't pull a Sam Stone, write "6000" and accuse the one who corrects me of being a "nit-picker." Writing "5000" is right out.

Since we're in the Pit, I'll just come out and say it: If you don't know a number, just stifle your impudence and shut up!

Last edited by septimus; 10-07-2015 at 07:54 PM.
  #6021  
Old 10-07-2015, 08:05 PM
Lumpy's Avatar
Lumpy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota US
Posts: 16,721
Quote:
Blair co-authored a study for the FBI that looked at 185 mass shooting events over a 13-year period. It found that while around one-in-five were stopped by civilians before police arrived, in only one case was it done by a typical “good guy with a gun” (professionals—an off-duty cop and an armed security guard—used their guns to stop two others). In most cases Blair and his colleague studied, civilians ended a rampage by tackling the assailant.
That speaks less to tackling an armed assailant as a preferred strategy, and more to the comparative rarity of armed bystanders. If I happened to be carrying and a mass shooting occurred, I sure as hell wouldn't forgo using my gun to try to tackle him instead.
  #6022  
Old 10-07-2015, 08:09 PM
silenus's Avatar
silenus is offline
Isaiah 1:15/Screw the NRA
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 51,802
So you think. Professionals beg to differ.

Last edited by silenus; 10-07-2015 at 08:10 PM.
  #6023  
Old 10-07-2015, 09:25 PM
Happy Fun Ball is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The down hill slope
Posts: 3,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
The more guns there are, the more there will be incidents like this. It is the price you pay for your "freedom." Good luck with that.
This is a lie! If there had been a good 11 year old with a gun, they would have stopped him!
  #6024  
Old 10-07-2015, 10:44 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
I'm looking at an FBI report with figures similar (but not identical) to yours, but it also has
Firearms, type not stated 1,611
With rifles, shotguns, and "other guns" all broken out separately, it seems fair to conclude that most of the "type not stated" were handguns, no?
... And the numbers are similar enough, year-to-year, that your "a different year" hypothesis is rejected.

So your "5000" should actually have been "about 8000"; correct? And here's another government document (for 2013 instead of 2012) that states
Firearm homicides: Number of deaths: 11,208
The FBI reports 13,000 homicides with about 9000 by firearm. CDC reports 16,000 homicides with 11,000 by firearms. It might be interesting to understand the difference. But none of these numbers are anywhere near 5000.

But whether 5000, 8000, or 11000, what's the difference, right? One side will characterize any of these numbers as "very rare"; the other side as "much too common."

But I get very annoyed when incorrect statistics are prattled about on message boards, hoping that no one will check. If I remember a number as "6500", am too lazy to Google, and the smaller the number the better it suits my case, I'll write "less than 7000" or "about 6500." I won't pull a Sam Stone, write "6000" and accuse the one who corrects me of being a "nit-picker." Writing "5000" is right out.

Since we're in the Pit, I'll just come out and say it: If you don't know a number, just stifle your impudence and shut up!
Nope, there are zip guns, sawed off rifles, etc, all which could come into that category. Since the FBI specifically said 6,371 of those attributed to handguns then there's 6371. So no, not 8000 or whatever number you were thinking of when you said "This is a very different number than my source shows." since 6371 is hardly "very different" than "about 5000".

We're talking how many handgun murders. Not "Firearm homicides" which includes all form of firearms. Or "11,000 by firearms", which again includes all form of firearms. So, no none of those numbers are anywhere near 5000 since all of those numbers include other guns deaths and other types of gun murders other than by handgun.

I stated "about 5000 handgun murders per year." Indeed, there's 6,371 which to me is not far from my "about".

And, far off from whatever " very different number than my source shows." you had since you couldn't be arsed to even come up with a estimate or a counter cite. If you don't know a number, just stifle your impudence and shut up!
  #6025  
Old 10-07-2015, 11:54 PM
Hentor the Barbarian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 14,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Nope, there are zip guns, sawed off rifles, etc, all which could come into that category. Since the FBI specifically said 6,371 of those attributed to handguns then there's 6371. So no, not 8000 or whatever number you were thinking of when you said "This is a very different number than my source shows." since 6371 is hardly "very different" than "about 5000".

We're talking how many handgun murders. Not "Firearm homicides" which includes all form of firearms. Or "11,000 by firearms", which again includes all form of firearms. So, no none of those numbers are anywhere near 5000 since all of those numbers include other guns deaths and other types of gun murders other than by handgun.

I stated "about 5000 handgun murders per year." Indeed, there's 6,371 which to me is not far from my "about".

And, far off from whatever " very different number than my source shows." you had since you couldn't be arsed to even come up with a estimate or a counter cite. If you don't know a number, just stifle your impudence and shut up!
hey fuckface, he did cite his stats. Every estimate from every source shows that your number is bullshit.

However, if you want to propose that long guns are the bulk of the problem, be my guest! The gun strokers won't like you very much, but then again, you must be use to that sort of thing.
  #6026  
Old 10-08-2015, 02:40 AM
Fear Itself is offline
Cecil's Inner Circle
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Flavortown
Posts: 36,060
Woman pulls her gun to shoot at an escaping shoplifter:
Quote:
A bystander outside a Home Depot in Auburn Hills, Michigan, opened fire on a man suspected of shoplifting from the store on Tuesday as he attempted to flee the scene in an SUV driven by another man.

Police told The Detroit News that the bystander, a woman with a license to carry a concealed pistol, shot at the getaway car's tires after witnessing a loss prevention officer attempt to stop the suspect and fail.
__________________
“If you ever drop your keys into a river of molten lava, let 'em go, because man, they're gone.” ~~Jack Handey
  #6027  
Old 10-08-2015, 06:30 AM
Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 24,089
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Guns are protected by the Bill of Rights, and smoking isn't. In any case, those "restrictions" are very minor.

It's simple- ban smoking. 100%.
Which is a goalpost move. If you're comparing smoking deaths with gun deaths in a discussion about the effectiveness of gun control, it's perfectly reasonably to note the effect that restrictions on smoking have had.

I am aware that many of the gun rights arguments boil down to:

1) I want a gun;
2) The Constitution says I can have a gun; and
3) Neener neener neener;

and much of the rest is fantasy and rationalization, but that doesn't address the fact that making access to guns more restricted would reduce gun deaths, regardless of what the Constitution says.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumpy View Post
That speaks less to tackling an armed assailant as a preferred strategy, and more to the comparative rarity of armed bystanders. If I happened to be carrying and a mass shooting occurred, I sure as hell wouldn't forgo using my gun to try to tackle him instead.
Speaking of fantasy: I note you're ignoring the point in the article about why the Heroic Gunslinger scenario is at odds with the reality of a real gunfight and why having amateurs fire away would likely cause more havoc, not less.
  #6028  
Old 10-08-2015, 07:00 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 20,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Nope, there are zip guns, sawed off rifles, etc, all which could come into that category. Since the FBI specifically said 6,371 of those attributed to handguns then there's 6371. So no, not 8000 or whatever number you were thinking of when you said "This is a very different number than my source shows." since 6371 is hardly "very different" than "about 5000".
Wrong again, fool. Obviously you couldn't be bothered to click my link. It would have taken you 15 seconds to see what I excerpt below (note the "other guns" category), and which renders your response imbecilic, yet instead of investing those 15 seconds to educate yourself, you spent a minute composing insults. What an arrogant, idiot, asshole.

Code:
Murder Victims by Weapon, 2009-2013
Weapons                  2009          2010          2011          2012          2013
Total                   13,752        13,164        12,795        12,888        12,253
Total firearms:          9,199         8,874         8,653         8,897         8,454
Handguns                 6,501         6,115         6,251         6,404         5,782
Rifles                     351           367           332           298           285
Shotguns                   423           366           362           310           308
Other guns                  96            93            97           116           123
Firearms, type not stated  1,828       1,933         1,611         1,769         1,956
Stated simply, for simple-minded people, your "sawed-off rifles" or whatever, would show up as "other guns" (or more likely "rifles") and not as "type not stated." I'd guess even an imbecile could have figured that out in two seconds by glancing at the table. But not our dear Dr Deth, who makes up numbers, and doesn't even know how to place the mouse cursor over a link and push a button. Thanks for helping to confirm my observation that gun nuts tend to be arrogant pretentious dolts.

I suppose it's conceivable that you did click the link, but were too stupid to even understand the above table. In that case, accept my apology ... and pity.
  #6029  
Old 10-08-2015, 08:34 AM
Hentor the Barbarian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 14,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fear Itself View Post
Woman pulls her gun to shoot at an escaping shoplifter:
Thank god there was a good guy with a gun.
  #6030  
Old 10-08-2015, 08:42 AM
Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 24,089
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian View Post
Thank god there was a good guy with a gun.
A good guy with a cellphone camera to take a picture of the perp and his license plate might have been more helpful.
  #6031  
Old 10-08-2015, 08:55 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,046
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic View Post
11 year old shoots 8 year old neighbor with his dad's shotgun.

Unlocked loaded gun in a closet.

The more guns there are, the more there will be incidents like this.
All too true.
Quote:
It is the price you pay for your "freedom." Good luck with that.
Unfortunately, no. It's the price someone else pays for the gun nuts' freedoms.

They get the freedom, someone else gets stuck with the (lethal) bill.

And this is moral, how?
  #6032  
Old 10-08-2015, 08:57 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,046
Quote:
Originally Posted by silenus View Post
The kid was a known bully with a history of abusing that girl, so I'm going to go with "intentional" and I hope he gets jailed for life or longer. He's a waste of space.
And she's just as dead, either way.
  #6033  
Old 10-08-2015, 09:01 AM
Hentor the Barbarian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 14,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gyrate View Post
A good guy with a cellphone camera to take a picture of the perp and his license plate might have been more helpful.
That would do nothing to resolve the sense of moral outrage arising from a thief getting away. It also wouldn't stoke our collective sense of manly efficacy.
  #6034  
Old 10-08-2015, 09:03 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 40,046
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian View Post
Thank god there was a good guy with a gun.
It would have been a real riot if some other 'good guy with a gun,' seeing a woman shooting at a car that wasn't visibly endangering anyone, started shooting at the woman. And then another 'good guy with a gun' coulda started shooting at him.

OK, not funny IRL, and I hope it never happens. But the way our gun laws are going, it's hard to believe it's not just a matter of time.
  #6035  
Old 10-08-2015, 09:31 AM
davidm's Avatar
davidm is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Near Philadelphia PA, USA
Posts: 12,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
It would have been a real riot if some other 'good guy with a gun,' seeing a woman shooting at a car that wasn't visibly endangering anyone, started shooting at the woman. And then another 'good guy with a gun' coulda started shooting at him.

OK, not funny IRL, and I hope it never happens. But the way our gun laws are going, it's hard to believe it's not just a matter of time.
Some people would like to see as many citizens armed as possible. It seems inevitable that that could easily lead to the exact type of situation you're describing. And of course she could have hit some innocent while attempting to fire at the fleeing vehicle, or caused the drive to lost control and hit somebody.

I posted a news story earlier in this thread where a "good guy with a gun" came upon a carjacking in progress, fired at the carjackers, and accidentally shot the owner of the car - the victim - in the head.
  #6036  
Old 10-08-2015, 10:09 AM
Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 24,089
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gyrate View Post
A good guy with a cellphone camera to take a picture of the perp and his license plate might have been more helpful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian View Post
That would do nothing to resolve the sense of moral outrage arising from a thief getting away. It also wouldn't stoke our collective sense of manly efficacy.
As a fun story: a few years back my wife was riding to work on a bus. En route the bus stopped and a couple of questionable young men got on who refused to pay the fare. At the driver's attempts to eject them, the young men dragged the driver out and punched him several times and then ran away. The police were called but the CCTV onboard was not clear enough to identify the men (which raises a separate question about why they even bother having CCTV that only registers "vague moving blobs", but let's not digress from this digression).

However, my wife happens to have in her bag a digital camera that also took video, and she recorded the whole scene. When the police turned up she presented herself to them with camera in hand and showed them the video complete with close-ups of the perps' faces. They transferred the video to a device of their own, said that they recognized the men in question and went off to arrest them. Justice served.

Would that situation have been improved by having a gun instead of a camera? Would that be true even if the men had also had guns?
  #6037  
Old 10-08-2015, 10:28 AM
Typo Negative's Avatar
Typo Negative is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: 7th Level of Hell, Ca
Posts: 18,108
Quote:
Originally Posted by silenus View Post
The kid was a known bully with a history of abusing that girl, so I'm going to go with "intentional" and I hope he gets jailed for life or longer. He's a waste of space.
He's 11, fer chrissakes. A lot of kids that age still wet their pants when they're scared. I find it difficult to believe that 11 yr old can appreciate the consequences of his actions. The kid should do time but I am not ready to write off his entire life yet.

The adult who gave the kid access to the gun should do time.
  #6038  
Old 10-08-2015, 10:32 AM
Fear Itself is offline
Cecil's Inner Circle
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Flavortown
Posts: 36,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by Typo Negative View Post
The adult who gave the kid access to the gun should do time.
I agree. Why do we never hear who owned the gun, or what happens to them? My suspicion is it is because nothing ever happens to them. "It was a tragic event, they are being punished enough" is the usual justification.

Last edited by Fear Itself; 10-08-2015 at 10:32 AM.
  #6039  
Old 10-08-2015, 11:25 AM
ElvisL1ves is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,549
Another "law-abiding citizen" who was sure it could never happen to him. And another, and another ...
  #6040  
Old 10-08-2015, 11:29 AM
Hentor the Barbarian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 14,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gyrate View Post
As a fun story: a few years back my wife was riding to work on a bus. En route the bus stopped and a couple of questionable young men got on who refused to pay the fare. At the driver's attempts to eject them, the young men dragged the driver out and punched him several times and then ran away. The police were called but the CCTV onboard was not clear enough to identify the men (which raises a separate question about why they even bother having CCTV that only registers "vague moving blobs", but let's not digress from this digression).

However, my wife happens to have in her bag a digital camera that also took video, and she recorded the whole scene. When the police turned up she presented herself to them with camera in hand and showed them the video complete with close-ups of the perps' faces. They transferred the video to a device of their own, said that they recognized the men in question and went off to arrest them. Justice served.

Would that situation have been improved by having a gun instead of a camera? Would that be true even if the men had also had guns?
You appear to keep putting these questions to me as if I disagree with you.
  #6041  
Old 10-08-2015, 11:52 AM
Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 24,089
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian View Post
You appear to keep putting these questions to me as if I disagree with you.
Sorry - it was meant as a question for readers in general using your comment as a launching point.

Bad writing! No biscuit!
  #6042  
Old 10-08-2015, 01:39 PM
Lumpy's Avatar
Lumpy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota US
Posts: 16,721
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gyrate View Post
Would that situation have been improved by having a gun instead of a camera? Would that be true even if the men had also had guns?
The standard in my state at least is that you may use "reasonable force" "when used by any person in resisting or aiding another to resist an offense against the person"; and deadly force "necessary in resisting or preventing an offense which the actor reasonably believes exposes the actor or another to great bodily harm or death"

So it would be a judgment call: do you believe they're about to beat the bus driver to death if someone doesn't stop them?
  #6043  
Old 10-08-2015, 01:49 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
It would have taken you 15 seconds to see what I excerpt below (note the "other guns" category),
Code:
Murder Victims by Weapon, 2009-2013
Weapons                  2009          2010          2011          2012          2013
Total                   13,752        13,164        12,795        12,888        12,253
Total firearms:          9,199         8,874         8,653         8,897         8,454
Handguns                 6,501         6,115         6,251         6,404         5,782
Rifles                     351           367           332           298           285
Shotguns                   423           366           362           310           308
Other guns                  96            93            97           116           123
Firearms, type not stated  1,828       1,933         1,611         1,769         1,956
Thanks for helping to confirm my observation that gun nuts tend to be arrogant pretentious dolts.

I suppose it's conceivable that you did click the link, but were too stupid to even understand the above table. In that case, accept my apology ... and pity.
Well, then how are you saying handguns are 'type not stated' since there is a column for handguns? And do note the last figure of 5,782 with is indeed "about 5000", my original figure. It's odd that you did paste the table, but were too stupid to even understand the above table.

Oddly, I am not a "gun nut" owning nothing but my Service pistol and a old .22.
  #6044  
Old 10-08-2015, 01:52 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian View Post
hey fuckface, he did cite his stats. Every estimate from every source shows that your number is bullshit.

However, if you want to propose that long guns are the bulk of the problem, be my guest! The gun strokers won't like you very much, but then again, you must be use to that sort of thing.

"This is a very different number than my source shows." is not a stat. That was his original figure.

And his latest cite shows 5,782, which is equivalent to my "about 5000" figure.
  #6045  
Old 10-08-2015, 04:42 PM
Defensive Indifference is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 7,320
I'm not sure if this is the best thread for this, but I don't feel like starting a new thread over it. Protesters, under the umbrella "Global Rally For Humanity", are preparing to protest outside mosques in 20 cities this Friday and Saturday. The guy apparently organizing the protests has encouraged participants to be armed, because of course they will fucking be armed.

From Talking Points Memo:
Quote:
A Facebook page called "Global Rally for Humanity" appeared in August urging "patriots" to organize protests at their local mosques on Friday and Saturday. "Global Rally for Humanity" appears to have ties to John Ritzheimer, who rose to prominence among anti-Muslim activists when he organized a protest and "Draw Mohammad" contest in May in Phoenix. Known for his bizarre antics, he recently attracted the attention of U.S. Capitol Police when he vowed in an open letter to arrest Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) over her support for the Iranian nuclear deal.

It's unclear whether Ritzheimer himself organized the event. He said in a Facebook video posted Aug. 9 that he and others were "planning a global rally to protest against radical Islam," citing contacts in Canada, Australia and Europe. He also encouraged interested protesters to bring their weapons.
A coordinated effort, across a number of cities, to bring armed citizens to the places of worship of a religious minority. That should end well. Wear good shoes! You might have to make your way through some broken glass!
  #6046  
Old 10-08-2015, 07:02 PM
Lumpy's Avatar
Lumpy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota US
Posts: 16,721
A massed march or protest is a terrible place to have to use guns. If you're facing armed opponents you're bunched together like fish in a barrel.

That said, this plan seems to violate the principle of staying out of trouble while armed.
  #6047  
Old 10-08-2015, 07:47 PM
silenus's Avatar
silenus is offline
Isaiah 1:15/Screw the NRA
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 51,802
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bayard View Post
I'm not sure if this is the best thread for this, but I don't feel like starting a new thread over it. Protesters, under the umbrella "Global Rally For Humanity", are preparing to protest outside mosques in 20 cities this Friday and Saturday. The guy apparently organizing the protests has encouraged participants to be armed, because of course they will fucking be armed.

From Talking Points Memo:

A coordinated effort, across a number of cities, to bring armed citizens to the places of worship of a religious minority. That should end well. Wear good shoes! You might have to make your way through some broken glass!
My bet is less than a dozen people show up. Nationwide.
  #6048  
Old 10-08-2015, 08:23 PM
Fubaya is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,898
Quote:
Originally Posted by Typo Negative View Post
He's 11, fer chrissakes. A lot of kids that age still wet their pants when they're scared. I find it difficult to believe that 11 yr old can appreciate the consequences of his actions. The kid should do time but I am not ready to write off his entire life yet.
He is not being tried as an adult, he is charged with murder in juvenile court. In Tennessee, juveniles can only be held until they are 19, so he's going to do about 8 years in jail.
  #6049  
Old 10-09-2015, 09:16 AM
Fear Itself is offline
Cecil's Inner Circle
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Flavortown
Posts: 36,060
Lawful, responsible gun owner kills four students at Northern Arizona University to and an argument.
  #6050  
Old 10-09-2015, 09:40 AM
JRDelirious is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Displaced
Posts: 16,045
Oh come on, I'm pro-control and there is no information on the circumstances of the shooting in that news link to tell us it was "to end an argument". It might as well have been a robbery gone wrong (and thus by definition NOT a lawful responsible gun owner) -- unless there's more info somewhere thatI don't know about.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:29 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017