Another devistating crime in the US!!!

[ZokesPro]

Guns were invented for the sole purpose of killing other humans, that alone should speak for itself. Tis my argument on the subject.

[paulcs]

Firearm-related deaths: 32,436

In 1997, 32,436 deaths resulted from firearm-related injuries, making such injuries the second leading cause of injury mortality in the United States after motor-vehicle-related incidents (1). Also in 1997, an estimated 64,207 persons sustained nonfatal firearm-related injuries and were treated in U.S. hospital emergency departments

Source: Centers for Disease Control

Paul

[gt40]

I would hazard to guess that in Canada 90% of fiream deaths are due to illegal firearms.
Or maybe just in the Toronto area, just from reading the papers.

[KvHagedorn]

Originally posted by Paddy
Hey... look... I ammoving to the edge of a really shitty area... Gun crime is not an issure there... I am not trying to start any argument... Knifes over six inches long are illeagal here too.

Well, then.. this guy must be a serious outlaw, because he packs a 10 inch chef's knife!

http://www.foodnetwork.com/food/show_jo/0,1976,FOOD_9975,00.html

[ALBPM]

LOL....

Let's see what else is sharing the headlines in the World news at CNN.

Gee check this out:

http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/south/08/27/india.stampede/index.html

Festivals are bad they are deadly. Let's ban Festivals.....Let's ban European Soccer Matches too because people get trampled at those as well.

Oh wait, they will just hold illegal Festivals and Soccer Matches and trample each other.

And round and round we go....

[Marshmallowman]

Comparing several different cultures, which have very different social and cultural outloks is pretty lame, those perectages have no correlation.

If you used %changes in gun's compared to % changes in suicide/murder over time you would have some valid statistics.

I really think most of you gun lobbiest would actually benefit form stricter gun laws, you obviously take gun ownership seriously, so you would probably have no problem justifing having yours, it would just reduce the dodgy owners. Which should decrease the number of guns "in the wild", which would increase the value of your firearms, supply n demand

Tighter gun control law's are their reduce the number of guns floating around that do not have legitmate owners/uses.

Thinking about it, I would think vertually all new legislation would focus on arms dealer's

[Strahd]

Originally posted by Dr Mordrid
First some info for perspective;

Causes of death in the US;

Heart disease: 710,000
Cancer: 553,091
Stroke: 167,661
Chronic respiratory disease: 122,009
Accidents: 97,900
Diabetes: 69,301
Pneumonia/flu: 65,313
Alzheimers: 49,558
Kidney disease: 37,251
Septicemia: 31,224

I think those numbers are highly irrelevant with regards to gun control.

Unless perhaps you want to include the fact that worldwide they are doing their utmost to ban smoking anywhere and everywhere which accounts for how many of the numbers up top?

70%?

If smoking is dangerous because it kills innocent bystanders, then don't guns fit that criteria?

How many times have you heard of people being accidently killed because someone dropped a knife? Or a 5 year old boy get's his head blown off because his father was cleaning his knife.

Funny how 1 person here mentioned gun control and we have all these numbers being posted up and everyone jumps on board.

How many of these school killings, ex employees returning to their previous place of work etc DIDN'T involve guns.

Let me tell you, I've seen quite a few people passing on the street, known from school etc that I would hope don't possess a gun and couldn't get one just by going down to the local Quickie Mart.

Originally posted by Marshmallowman
really think most of you gun lobbiest would actually benefit form stricter gun laws, you obviously take gun ownership seriously, so you would probably have no problem justifing having yours, it would just reduce the dodgy owners

If you own a gun, and someone breaks into your house you can use it on them.
If people know you have a gun and don't break into your house you'll never get to use it.

Maybe that's been the argument all this time.

Alls I know is, don't own a gun, never did, can't see why I ever will in the future. Rather take my chance with a Louisville Slugger to protect my wife and daughter over possible intruders etc rather than run the rsik of having a gun in the house....

[Brian Ellis]

BULLSHIT

[Paddy]

sigh.... guns have one purpose, and only one purpose...

[Fat Tone]

Originally posted by Brian Ellis
BULLSHIT

Yes, there is a lot of bullshit here, but what do you mean?

[Brian Ellis]

Originally posted by Fat Tone
Yes, there is a lot of bullshit here, but what do you mean?

All the arguments from the NRA, the US right-wingers and so on. They don't have a single logical leg to stand on. They rely on the emotional impact of anecdotes to bolster their flawed arguments.

[Fat Tone]

We've had these arguments here before, http://forums.murc.ws/showthread.php?s=&threadid=42719 to name but one. I don't see any quick answer to the problem if those are representative attitudes.

[Paddy]

MY other half works in a forensic lab for the government. She gets all sorts of weapons handed in by the police for analysis.

The majority of guns that come into the department are a mock replica. Gun crime here is treated as 'serious crime'. In three years, she has never seen a real gun. Just to put this into perspective, the lab has a catchment area of major cities.

There was a report on the BBC news not so long ago about a farmer who shot two people who were trying to burgle him. He has jsut been released from prison. And you know what the stupid thing is??? The one burgler who survived is sueing him for undue mental anguish, or something along those lines.

Guns are designed to kill. Nothing more, nothing less.

If you are worried about being attacked then invest into securing your property, not arming yourself to the teeth.

[Joel]

Other studies show that the vast majority of our "excess" gun deaths occur in very limited geographic areas and among those predisposed to violent crime (gang menbers etc.). Wouldn't it make more sense to target them instead of the non-criminal populace?

You would think so but then again they are criminals that have no respect for the laws, any laws, including gun control laws and are harder to go after and require alittle more effort on those within the judicial system.

Joel

[Joel]

What it really boils down to is that those who have lived without guns all their lives can not understand why someone would want or need a gun while those who have live with guns all their lives can not understand why someone wouldn't want to have or need a gun.

These type of crimes do not happen as often as they seem based on the way the media plays them up but then again most of the media is owned by the liberals and gun control is one of their agenda factors. So they tend to play the hell out of things like this for their benefit.

Joel