Tell me what we can do about the guns

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another night and another shooting in NW.
Will there be an end?

Send us the background on the shooter and victim please. Let’s start a catalog and focus on the shooters and not the tool.

There is no mention of any information you asked. Three were dead and some are in hospital.
According to NBC4, a honda car stopped on the road, gunman started shooting to a crowd.
That was it.
No video, no photo.
Targeted? Random?
Better stay home after dark in NW.

Sounds like the victim’s families should be able to bring a massive lawsuit against Honda to force them out of business. One of their cars was used in this crime, so they’re clearly responsible.

Cars= necessary tool for living

Guns= only necessary to kill people or animals

Why do we have to trudge through these same stupid arguments over and over again. They are so trite and third grade level.

Cars a necessary tool for living? No, they are not. Plenty live without one. Weapons were created long before the wheel and motorized vehicles and have been helping people to live (hunt) and stay alive (protect self, family, tribe) for thousands of years. Try again third grader.

No.

That is not an effective argument for guns. Female genital mutilation also existed before cars. Nor does anyone want to ban hunting rifles.

You are not some vigilante protecting your home. Your gun is statistically most likely to kill you or someone you love, not an enemy or intruder. You are not some brave warrior protecting your castle. Please, grow up!

There are thousands of defensive firearm uses in the United States each year, the vast majority not requiring the firing of a single shot, and most unreported for that reason. The trite truism you parrot about risky to gun owners ignores that. Firearms are the single effective means for a weak victim to defend against a powerful aggressor. Whether to own a fires got self defense is a private decision. Criminal misuse of firearms is the subject of numerous laws, and if criminals who misused firearms went away for a good long time, it would be a certainty that they would not be misusing any more firearms during that interval.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another night and another shooting in NW.
Will there be an end?

Send us the background on the shooter and victim please. Let’s start a catalog and focus on the shooters and not the tool.

There is no mention of any information you asked. Three were dead and some are in hospital.
According to NBC4, a honda car stopped on the road, gunman started shooting to a crowd.
That was it.
No video, no photo.
Targeted? Random?
Better stay home after dark in NW.

Sounds like the victim’s families should be able to bring a massive lawsuit against Honda to force them out of business. One of their cars was used in this crime, so they’re clearly responsible.

Cars= necessary tool for living

Guns= only necessary to kill people or animals

Why do we have to trudge through these same stupid arguments over and over again. They are so trite and third grade level.

Cars a necessary tool for living? No, they are not. Plenty live without one. Weapons were created long before the wheel and motorized vehicles and have been helping people to live (hunt) and stay alive (protect self, family, tribe) for thousands of years. Try again third grader.

No.

That is not an effective argument for guns. Female genital mutilation also existed before cars. Nor does anyone want to ban hunting rifles.

You are not some vigilante protecting your home. Your gun is statistically most likely to kill you or someone you love, not an enemy or intruder. You are not some brave warrior protecting your castle. Please, grow up!

There are thousands of defensive firearm uses in the United States each year, the vast majority not requiring the firing of a single shot, and most unreported for that reason. The trite truism you parrot about risky to gun owners ignores that. Firearms are the single effective means for a weak victim to defend against a powerful aggressor. Whether to own a fires got self defense is a private decision. Criminal misuse of firearms is the subject of numerous laws, and if criminals who misused firearms went away for a good long time, it would be a certainty that they would not be misusing any more firearms during that interval.

Really? Can you give us the source for that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another night and another shooting in NW.
Will there be an end?

Send us the background on the shooter and victim please. Let’s start a catalog and focus on the shooters and not the tool.

There is no mention of any information you asked. Three were dead and some are in hospital.
According to NBC4, a honda car stopped on the road, gunman started shooting to a crowd.
That was it.
No video, no photo.
Targeted? Random?
Better stay home after dark in NW.

Sounds like the victim’s families should be able to bring a massive lawsuit against Honda to force them out of business. One of their cars was used in this crime, so they’re clearly responsible.

Cars= necessary tool for living

Guns= only necessary to kill people or animals

Why do we have to trudge through these same stupid arguments over and over again. They are so trite and third grade level.

Cars a necessary tool for living? No, they are not. Plenty live without one. Weapons were created long before the wheel and motorized vehicles and have been helping people to live (hunt) and stay alive (protect self, family, tribe) for thousands of years. Try again third grader.

No.

That is not an effective argument for guns. Female genital mutilation also existed before cars. Nor does anyone want to ban hunting rifles.

You are not some vigilante protecting your home. Your gun is statistically most likely to kill you or someone you love, not an enemy or intruder. You are not some brave warrior protecting your castle. Please, grow up!

There are thousands of defensive firearm uses in the United States each year, the vast majority not requiring the firing of a single shot, and most unreported for that reason. The trite truism you parrot about risky to gun owners ignores that. Firearms are the single effective means for a weak victim to defend against a powerful aggressor. Whether to own a fires got self defense is a private decision. Criminal misuse of firearms is the subject of numerous laws, and if criminals who misused firearms went away for a good long time, it would be a certainty that they would not be misusing any more firearms during that interval.

Really? Can you give us the source for that?

Do your own research if you think I’m wrong.

[Anonymous]

CDC reported as part of a 2013 study that:

“Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million, in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008.“

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:CDC reported as part of a 2013 study that:

“Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million, in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008.“

I remember reading that in the NY Times or Washington Post.

NOT!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another night and another shooting in NW.
Will there be an end?

Send us the background on the shooter and victim please. Let’s start a catalog and focus on the shooters and not the tool.

There is no mention of any information you asked. Three were dead and some are in hospital.
According to NBC4, a honda car stopped on the road, gunman started shooting to a crowd.
That was it.
No video, no photo.
Targeted? Random?
Better stay home after dark in NW.

Sounds like the victim’s families should be able to bring a massive lawsuit against Honda to force them out of business. One of their cars was used in this crime, so they’re clearly responsible.

Cars= necessary tool for living

Guns= only necessary to kill people or animals

Why do we have to trudge through these same stupid arguments over and over again. They are so trite and third grade level.

Cars a necessary tool for living? No, they are not. Plenty live without one. Weapons were created long before the wheel and motorized vehicles and have been helping people to live (hunt) and stay alive (protect self, family, tribe) for thousands of years. Try again third grader.

No.

That is not an effective argument for guns. Female genital mutilation also existed before cars. Nor does anyone want to ban hunting rifles.

You are not some vigilante protecting your home. Your gun is statistically most likely to kill you or someone you love, not an enemy or intruder. You are not some brave warrior protecting your castle. Please, grow up!

There are thousands of defensive firearm uses in the United States each year, the vast majority not requiring the firing of a single shot, and most unreported for that reason. The trite truism you parrot about risky to gun owners ignores that. Firearms are the single effective means for a weak victim to defend against a powerful aggressor. Whether to own a fires got self defense is a private decision. Criminal misuse of firearms is the subject of numerous laws, and if criminals who misused firearms went away for a good long time, it would be a certainty that they would not be misusing any more firearms during that interval.

Really? Can you give us the source for that?

Do your own research if you think I’m wrong.

Ok so I’ll take that as confirmation you are talking out of your you-know-what.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:CDC reported as part of a 2013 study that:

“Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million, in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008.“

Link?

[Anonymous]

There was an Atlantic article the other day that mentioned “defensive gun use.”

Gun advocates counter this tally of unnecessary bloodshed by generating piles of studies on successful “defensive gun use.” Estimates of defensive gun use vary wildly, from as few as 60,000 incidents a year to as many as 2.5 million. The higher estimates are distorted by a crucial error: They rely heavily on self-reporting by gun owners themselves, with a huge risk of self-flattering bias. If an argument spirals until one person produces a gun and menaces the other into shutting up, the gun owner might regard that use as “defensive.” A third party, however, might perceive a situation that only spiraled in the first place because the gun owner felt empowered to escalate it. Whose perception should prevail?

But there’s a larger absurdity to the project of counting “defensive gun uses.” For decades, the world has witnessed a colossal natural experiment in gun laws. With one exception, virtually all developed countries strictly regulate firearms, especially handguns. If there were any merit to the “defensive gun use” argument, you’d expect that one permissive nation to boast much greater safety. Instead, the one outlier nation—the United States—suffers the deadliest levels of criminal violence. Guns everywhere engender violence everywhere.

[Anonymous]

Another mass shooting in Wichita Kansas, 1 dead, 7 injured: https://www.kwch.com/2021/09/07/1-killed-7-hurt-downtown-wichita-shooting/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Another mass shooting in Wichita Kansas, 1 dead, 7 injured: https://www.kwch.com/2021/09/07/1-killed-7-hurt-downtown-wichita-shooting/

Not sure what that has to do with the 99.999-something-percent of gun owners who aren’t criminals? Why do you think it’s relevant?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There was an Atlantic article the other day that mentioned “defensive gun use.”

Gun advocates counter this tally of unnecessary bloodshed by generating piles of studies on successful “defensive gun use.” Estimates of defensive gun use vary wildly, from as few as 60,000 incidents a year to as many as 2.5 million. The higher estimates are distorted by a crucial error: They rely heavily on self-reporting by gun owners themselves, with a huge risk of self-flattering bias. If an argument spirals until one person produces a gun and menaces the other into shutting up, the gun owner might regard that use as “defensive.” A third party, however, might perceive a situation that only spiraled in the first place because the gun owner felt empowered to escalate it. Whose perception should prevail?

But there’s a larger absurdity to the project of counting “defensive gun uses.” For decades, the world has witnessed a colossal natural experiment in gun laws. With one exception, virtually all developed countries strictly regulate firearms, especially handguns. If there were any merit to the “defensive gun use” argument, you’d expect that one permissive nation to boast much greater safety. Instead, the one outlier nation—the United States—suffers the deadliest levels of criminal violence. Guns everywhere engender violence everywhere.

Let’s concede that the 60,000 figure is the one to pin this argument on, then. Seems laughably low to me, but let’s go with it.


That means 60,000 people prevented their becoming a victim of violent crime or murder, because they had a gun, and that gun stopped the threat - in most cases without it even being fired.



That’s good enough for me right there. That’s why guns exist. And that’s why people with guns, are NEVER going to give them up. Period.


Find a new cause celeb. This one is over.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CDC reported as part of a 2013 study that:

“Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million, in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008.“

Link?

Here’s a thought: search a few words and see what pops up.

[Anonymous]

I still say that we should just make murder/assault illegal.

[Anonymous]

Conservatives are wrong about the biggest issues of our time .

they are wrong about guns - the US death toll is evidence.

They are wrong about climate change - fires, hurricanes, rain, heat all setting records.

They were wrong about weapons of mass destruction and invasion of both Iraq and Afghanistan. (Cheney and Rumsfeld is still looking for them.)

They are wrong about Russian interference in US elections (Read the actual report.)

They were wrong about Vietnam.

they were wrong about desegregation.

they are wrong about equal rights of all kinds.

Feel free to add to the list

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another night and another shooting in NW.
Will there be an end?

Send us the background on the shooter and victim please. Let’s start a catalog and focus on the shooters and not the tool.

There is no mention of any information you asked. Three were dead and some are in hospital.
According to NBC4, a honda car stopped on the road, gunman started shooting to a crowd.
That was it.
No video, no photo.
Targeted? Random?
Better stay home after dark in NW.

Sounds like the victim’s families should be able to bring a massive lawsuit against Honda to force them out of business. One of their cars was used in this crime, so they’re clearly responsible.

Cars= necessary tool for living

Guns= only necessary to kill people or animals

Why do we have to trudge through these same stupid arguments over and over again. They are so trite and third grade level.

Cars a necessary tool for living? No, they are not. Plenty live without one. Weapons were created long before the wheel and motorized vehicles and have been helping people to live (hunt) and stay alive (protect self, family, tribe) for thousands of years. Try again third grader.

No.

That is not an effective argument for guns. Female genital mutilation also existed before cars. Nor does anyone want to ban hunting rifles.

You are not some vigilante protecting your home. Your gun is statistically most likely to kill you or someone you love, not an enemy or intruder. You are not some brave warrior protecting your castle. Please, grow up!

There are thousands of defensive firearm uses in the United States each year, the vast majority not requiring the firing of a single shot, and most unreported for that reason. The trite truism you parrot about risky to gun owners ignores that. Firearms are the single effective means for a weak victim to defend against a powerful aggressor. Whether to own a fires got self defense is a private decision. Criminal misuse of firearms is the subject of numerous laws, and if criminals who misused firearms went away for a good long time, it would be a certainty that they would not be misusing any more firearms during that interval.

Yes, suicides are very high relative to homicides. I think more guns likely leads to more suicides, though a substantial fraction would be just people choosing suicide by gun versus another means.
At least the poster didn't bring up the similar claim that having a gun makes you more likely to get shot.