Think About This, You Anti-gun Idiots

The BBQ Pit
41

The point of numbers is to determine the seriousness of the problem being described in an anecdote. You indicate the applicability of this approach when you point out:

This was my point exactly: if this is hardly an epidemic, so is the guy breaking in and killing the family. The idiocy of your making a big deal out of one but not the other is hopefully now clear.

BTW, the number I pulled out was not ‘the number of kids shot’ in 1997. The number of kids 14 and under shot and killed was much larger; it included 346 homicides, 127 suicides, and 15 ‘other’ or ‘undetermined’ gun deaths in addition. (Time to include the link to the CDC’s 1997 mortality report; if you don’t already have Adobe Acrobat, download that from adobe.com first.) (Due to the way the CDC tables are broken down, I can’t break out the number of kids in the 15-17 age group who accidentally offed themselves with Daddy’s gun.)

I’d be willing to bet that just about all the gun suicides and a good chunk of the homicides above were committed with the guns in the home. So you’re actually dismissing a problem that’s probably 2-4 times as big a problem as the one you’re hollering about.

And, yes, I definitely carry car insurance. What does that have to do with anything? The risk of a car wreck, for most of us, is continually very real. There may ‘only’ be 42,500 people a year killed in car wrecks, but the number of actual car wrecks is enormous. But since neither I nor most of the people I know own guns, the main risk of getting shot - of a disagreement escalating to the point of someone pulling the trigger - is reduced to effectively zero. I’d like to reemphasize that most of us are far more likely to be shot by someone we already know than by some stranger.

Enough of voting for the lesser of evils - vote Cthulhu 2000!

42

Dr. Watson:

True. And nuclear weapons were also developed by the government, but I still don’t want any Wayne, Tanya, or Charlton getting his/her hands on one. The NRA was fighting tooth and nail for general access to these bullets, which threatened to render bulletproof vests useless - not simply for their existence. (I assume the government had some military purpose in mind for the bullets, as it did for the nukes.)

No, those countries aren’t more noble. But restricting guns has placed limits on the consequences of their lack of nobility. Does England or France have homicide rates similar to ours? I haven’t looked, but I’d bet not. In which city would you feel safer walking around at night, Toronto or nearby Buffalo?

Nope, but societies similar to ours have demonstrated that it’s quite possible to get along without guns. Doing without either ladders or cars might be a bit more of a stretch.

43

I this “what if” argument is simply an appeal to the emotion fallacy. It is absolutely useless to address the real issue of whether one is safer if one has a gun in the house by simply focusing on one situation when a gun would be useful, rather than looking at all of the positives and negatives, and the probabilities of them happening.

This reminds me of the scenarios people sometimes use to justfy why they don’t wear seatbelts: “What if the car gets trapped underwater and I can’t get out?” Well, you’re right, if your car gets trapped underwater having a seatbelt on might delay rescue. BUT, how often does a car get trapped underwater? Just about bloody never! How often does a car get into an accident on land where a seatbelt might save your life? All the friggin time.

Anyway, try this scenario (with none of the dramatic detail of the original post, but imagine it’s there): You are aseep, and hear a noise. You go downstairs and see someone sneaking in with something shiny in their hands. BAM, you blow away the intruder, only to realize to you horror it’s your teenage daughter sneaking in late with her keys in her hand. Sorry honey :).

44

By the way, that last smiley was supposed to be a :(, rather than a :). !@#$%^& lack of preview.

45

And then the rampant paranoia starts…
Ladies, do you remember that weird guy you saw? Well, that odd looking fellow was probably me. On the other hand, that completely normal, hardly noticeable fellow is in fact a psychotic killer who is going to rape your daughter and kill your husband unless you shoot him with a gun.
Wait, you say that if the car gets trapped under water then my seatbelt might keep me from leaving the car in time, and hence drowning? Well, in that case I better not wear it then, it’s just plain safer.

You know, for once I’d like to come across a “pro-gun” argument that doesn’t revolve around anecdotal evidence and paranoia.

46

Happy to oblige:

“What country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.”

– Thomas Jefferson, 13 November 1787

Dr. Watson
“It is not the insurrections of ignorance that are dangerous, but the revolts of intelligence.” – James Russell Lowell

47

This sure seems more like a great debate with a little rudeness and profanity than a flame, but anyway …

The thing that’s always bothered me about scenarios like the OP is this: If you have that gun in your house and you have young children, you are being an extremely derelict parent if that gun isn’t locked up securely, unloaded, in a safe or cabinet, or at the very least is unloaded with a trigger lock on it.

So explain to me how that helps you when Mr. Bad Guy announces he’s coming upstairs? There’s no way in hell you will have that gun ready to shoot him if necessary in the amount of time you will have.

You could announce, “I have a gun and I’m prepared to use it,” but you could also do that without really having the gun.

All that said, I do completely support people’s rights to own firearms in a safe, legal and conscientious manner. Increased laws seem to only mess with and inconvenience the law-abiding citizens, not the criminals. All of Clinton’s rambling for this new gun law and that new gun law in the aftermath of the 6-year-old’s shooting wouldn’t have done a thing in preventing that tragedy from occurring.

Here’s one new law I would like to see, however: In Michigan where I live, using a firearm during the commission of a felony adds 4-6 years to your prison sentence, IIRC. Make that crime a life sentence, second only to murder. Why the hell not? And don’t plea bargain it down, you fucking lawyers.

That won’t affect people using their guns in a legal, responsible manner. It also probably won’t stop bad people from commiting crimes with guns, but at least after they do, they won’t again if they’re caught.

“Nothing is so firmly believed as what is least known” - Michel Gyquem de Montaigne

48

Hey, I know - since a number of pro-gun posters have testified to the deterrent value of the very sound of a gun being cocked, maybe we need a gizmo that can simulate the sound, thereby getting the deterrent value without the risk. :slight_smile:

Enough of voting for the lesser of evils - vote Cthulhu 2000!

49

I’ve just sat here for the last 20 -30 minutes reading all your comments. It is all the same stuff said in every arguement about guns. I am a gun owner I am not a NRA member. But in their defence they are for not giving up anything that is a right. IThey have never claimed to be for “Cop Killer” bullets. they only say that they do not want to give up the right to own them.
Never give up your rights.Never!

50

Don’t neeeed the radar–just the si-yun."
Ichabod and me, 1961.

51

Me, I have fired guns, have been trained in their use, do not own one, do not care to own one. Instead, I have two 100+ lb dogs.

12 Reasons a dog is better than a gun:

  1. Nobody can take a dog away and use it against you.
  2. It’s hard to steal a dog.
  3. A dog can prevent someone from entering your house before you even know there’s anyone there, just by barking.
  4. No child ever accidentally killed another with a dog.
  5. Dogs don’t go off by accident.
  6. A dog can defend you even if you cannot defend yourself.
    7)You don’t need to worry about a dog going through the wall of the apartment and accidnetally killing your neighbor.
  7. A dog can defend your home when the dog’s not there, by the signs of its presence: doggy-doo in the yard, bones, toys, dishes, etc.
  8. Dogs can detect hostile intentions, which guns cannot.
  9. You can’t accidentally hurt yourself cleaning a dog.
  10. Having a dog with you can deter a criminal from even approaching you, whereas you won’t even show your gun until the crime is already in progress, at which point it can only elevate the situation.
  11. Guns have only one purpose- to kill. Dogs are good for lots of things-carrying groceries, pulling strollers, fetching sticks, aerating the flowerbed…
52

How long you had those dogs anyway?
(just kidding)

Yeah, I’m certainly convinced there, dogs are better than guns(now if only I could find a way to get them to stay there over the mantelpiece…)

53

(shrug) Yes, well, Nu, it’s true that owning dogs is not for everyone. People who don’t like dogs, or who don’t have the ability or interest to care for them, should absolutely NOT get them just for personal defense.

Me, I happen to also like dogs, and I’m willing to support the expense and effort involved in having them. (You wouldn’t believe how fast I go through vaccuum cleaner bags. My boys shed a lot.)

But I thought it was rather interesting that in the neighborhood I used to live in, every house on my block was broken into, except mine. Even though several of my neighbors owned guns. (Yes, it was a lousy neighborhood.)

54
  1. Dogs don’t go off by accident.

That is after they are paper trained, right?

55

That’s like being for having the death penalty on the books, but being neutral on actually sentencing anyone to death.

56

I’ve owned guns for years. Been around guns all my life-yet I’ve never killed, wounded or even threatened anyone. Never used a gun to commit a crime and never will. None of my guns has been involved in a murder, suicide or accident. Multiply this by 80+million. Is there really a problem here?

The incidence of murder/suicide/accident verses responsible gun ownership is very low.

You cannot ‘disinvent’ the firearm. It is here to stay.

57

You crazy Americans and your “right to bear arms”. This isn’t Frontierland kids, it’s a supposedly civilised society. Whatever way you look at it, you fire a gun, you kill someone. They’re dead and you’re a headfuck and your country slides further down the slope. The UK has it’s headfucks but they generally don’t go around shooting people at random, and when they do the legislative wheels are put in motion and we at least try to do something about it. Flame at will…

58

Madhun, what the fuck are you talking about?

I have fire literally tens of thousands of rounds. No one has died from any of those shots; no one has even been injured. Your statement is so ludicrous it hardly bears comment, but I can’t in good conscience let is go unchallenged.

RTFirefly, you work for our federal gov’t don’t you? It’s nice to see that our federal employees are so intent upon circumscribing our constitutional rights.

I think this is the exact reason the founding fathers created the 2nd amendment, to enable the combat a despostic regime. If you take a close look at the constitution and all the amendments to it, you will note that guns are afforded a quite special significance; they are the only physical entity mentioned anywhere. All other things in these documents are intangible, it’s apparent the founding fathers thought firearms were quite necessary.

Ideas are dangerous, or at least can encourage dangerous actions; I don’t see anyone here arguing to limit first amendment rights on that basis. Ideas are responsible for far more death and suffering than any physical items.

59

[quote]
I have fire literally tens of thousands of rounds. No one has died from any of those shots; no one has even been injured.{/quote]

I didn’t think I had to qualify that with “at someone” but, for the hard of thinking, you fire a gun at someone, you kill them. If you want to go to a firing range where any weapons used are stored under lock and key and not taken outwith the environs of said club, then fair enough. If you want to sleep with it under your pillow in anticipation of a random act of violence against you, you’re a headfuck.

60

Unc, there are people around here that go for cheapshots like that. I didn’t realize you were one of them. I thought better of you than that.

Yes, I have worked for the Feds for a year and a half now. I’ve been in the workforce for nearly a quarter-century. So of course, a federal employee is all I am, and I exist to make life tough for people who don’t work for Uncle Sam; I no longer remember what life was like, working for anyone else. (They did a brainwipe when I signed up.) None of my political positions predate my becoming a government employee. And of course, I don’t believe in the Constitution. At our orientation, a guy held up a copy, ripped it to shreds before our eyes, and nodded meaningfully. We all got the message. [/sarcasm]

Seriously, if you can’t make your case using facts and logic, you’ve been around here long enough to know that ad hominem approaches don’t get you far on the SDMB.