The second follows automatically from the first. Draw a diagram if you’re puzzled.
They’re not arming themselves and claiming to be militias, are they? Or making menacing comments about taking Walker out, or using Second Amendment Remedies, are they?
Thanks. It’s that gun culture, and the mass psychosis that feeds it, that’s the source of the problem, and the preventer of solutions.
Seconded.
He won’t answer. He never does because he would then have to acknowledge either that he is wrong or that he is deliberately lying/trolling.
Until he mans up and answers a simple question, I stand by my assessment of him as being one parking ticket from burning down a daycare center and pleasuring himself over the tiny corpses.
You think about that a lot, do you?
Nope. Just taking him at his word that everybody is “one bad day” from atrocity. He gives me the impression of being even more awful than he routinely accuses gun owners of being. Speaking of which…you haven’t been around even once to question his statements when he has slandered gun owners over and over. You’ll forgive me, I’m sure, for not considering your input now of any great value. Unless, of course, you want to throw in with Jack Batty and rim ElvisL1ves because, intellectually dishonest or not, he is on your side.
I thought that statistically that was correct?
“Bringing a gun into the home substantially increases the risk for suicide for all family members and the risk for women being murdered in the home”
“CONCLUSIONS: Guns kept in homes are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal accidental shooting, criminal assault, or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.”
I can’t find any papers suggesting that gun owners pose either the same or lower risk of murder.
As Bill Burr points out, this is of course true, the same way that putting a pool in your backyard substantially increases you risk of drowning.
Ownership, and more to the point possession, of a gun makes it likelier that there will be fatal consequences to a split-second spate of anger. As Pat Paulsen once said: “Say you come home and find a guy in bed with your wife. What are you going to do, poison him?”
Maybe take him swimming?
That’s why I’ve got a water bed.
And, as Homer Simpson observed, “Five days? But I’m angry NOW!”
Remarkably, there are gun owners who fancy themselves immune to anger attacks. “The guys in the news every day are just different, they’re stupid or something, it wouldn’t happen with me, no sirree.”
What about you? How often do you have these “anger attacks?” Could you describe, perhaps, just the most recent occasion where you were so angry that, if you’d had a gun, you’d have killed somebody?
Again, I don’t fancy myself as immune to anger, but I believe I have enough self-awareness to know whether I’m capable of murder. I am not a violent person, and I don’t resort to violence to solve problems. Owning a gun does nothing to change that aspect of my nature.
I don’t think those who murder are “stupid or something” but I do think they are far more likely to be people who use violence as a first response to anger.
Of course most gun owners never murder - but there’s a problem with people who use violence as a first response to anger being more likely to get, and have, the most effective means to act on that impulse than those who don’t - our tantrum-prone little friend **Scumpup **for instance. That means suspecting gun owners of having a propensity to use them is entirely rational and reasonable.
Because honestly, the personal anecdotes of one person are a completely valid way of showing a trend for all people.
Do you accept the above links that households with guns are more prone to gun violence? If not, why not?
See, you keep trying to do that “lofty disdain” thing and it isn’t working for you. It only accents that you refuse to answer a simple question. Are you really that afraid of “losing” on an internet board? I promise you, nobody here will respect you less if you just admit that your whole “fits of anger”-“one bad day” schtick is nothing but bullshit.
So, how many people have you wanted to kill this month? Is not owning a gun a decision you made because you realize that you would kill somebody if you had one?
Only in the sense, as noted upthread, that houses with pools are more likely to have drownings. ElvisL1ves, though, has never addressed the issue in those terms. ElvisL1ves has happily slandered gun owners for years now as crazy and violent people who, if they haven’t already killed somebody, are about to do so. He strikes me as the kind of person who attributes the worst possible motives to everybody else because, since they are his motives, they are all he really understands.
The fallacy there is, just because it has never happened in the past, you cannot conclude it won’t happen in the future. It only takes one time; how many times have we heard, “I am shocked, he was such a nice guy.”
Even at a glance the narrative of your article misses the mark. A defensive gun use doesn’t always have to end in a justifiable homicide.