Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The risk to your kids from such incidents is minuscule. They face a much greater risk of injury or death from just driving on the beltway.

Further, the increasing prevalence of texting while driving presents a greater risk to your kids - and it's preventable (not to mention illegal and not constitutionally protected). Then there is drunk driving - which is common among undocumented males. What about that threat? Done anything about that?

Why aren't you raising the alarm about those risks?

First of all, no. The number of non-driver fatalities in the US is about 9,000 per year, which is much lower than homicides. So my kids are at greater risk of homicide than automobile fatality.

. . .

Only 9,000 huh? That sounds like a low number, comparatively. Nice try at a deflection.

In reality, in 2012 there were 34,080 motor vehicle fatalities in the US. But you dodged the question of what you propose to do about that - other than "caring."

First of all I said "non driver fatalities", because we were talking about kids, and there are 9,000 of them. Only a fraction of those are children, and 1/3 of child vehicle deaths are due to not buckling in, which I do.

Second, it's convenient that you deleted the part of my post that said what I do besides caring. We pass laws outlawing dangerous behavior. If passing laws is just "caring", then fine. Let's care a whole damn bunch about guns. Problem solved.

[Anonymous]

Yeah, let’s pass more laws that won’t be enforced - kind of like immigration. That should solve the problem.
By the way - criminals don’t care about laws.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The risk to your kids from such incidents is minuscule. They face a much greater risk of injury or death from just driving on the beltway.

True. We also have laws setting speed limits, requiring seat belt usage, banning texting and using phones, banning drunken driving, requiring inspections of vehicles, and a whole host of other regulations that have sharply reduced automobile fatalities.

Let's just apply some of those same sorts of restrictions to guns. I know now you will be supportive of that, seeing as how you brought up the highway example.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, let’s pass more laws that won’t be enforced - kind of like immigration. That should solve the problem.
By the way - criminals don’t care about laws.

Hey, according to the earlier poster, it's not laws, it's "caring".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The risk to your kids from such incidents is minuscule. They face a much greater risk of injury or death from just driving on the beltway.

Further, the increasing prevalence of texting while driving presents a greater risk to your kids - and it's preventable (not to mention illegal and not constitutionally protected). Then there is drunk driving - which is common among undocumented males. What about that threat? Done anything about that?

Why aren't you raising the alarm about those risks?

First of all, no. The number of non-driver fatalities in the US is about 9,000 per year, which is much lower than homicides. So my kids are at greater risk of homicide than automobile fatality.

Second, of course I care about vehicle safety, about texting and driving, and about drunk driving. That's why we make laws against them. Consider the alarm raised.

And lastly, every year cars are used 392 billion times for legitimate purposes, with 30,000 fatalities. When guns can match that safety record, maybe I will consider them equivalent risks.

Did you simply make up the figure "392 billion times" every year? Looks that way.

Luckily, rational people stick to evidence and facts. Fact is, studies confirm that every year in the US, there are 2 million or more, defensive gun uses (DGUs). Here is a peer - reviewed academic study (as opposed to your apparent use of made-up members):


(Source: Gary, Kleck and Marc Gertz, "Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun," Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 1995, Vol. 86 No. 1.)

But I guess your blind hatred towards guns is immune to facts?

1995? WTF????

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The risk to your kids from such incidents is minuscule. They face a much greater risk of injury or death from just driving on the beltway.

Not by much. But my family gets a ton of value out of the use of a car. There is a benefit that goes with the cost. 392 billion car trips per year let us get places and get things done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The risk to your kids from such incidents is minuscule. They face a much greater risk of injury or death from just driving on the beltway.

Not by much. But my family gets a ton of value out of the use of a car. There is a benefit that goes with the cost. 392 billion car trips per year let us get places and get things done.

So do 2.4 million defensive gun uses ever year. Think about it.

[Anonymous]

http://m.wikihow.com/Make-a-Real-Gun

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The risk to your kids from such incidents is minuscule. They face a much greater risk of injury or death from just driving on the beltway.

Not by much. But my family gets a ton of value out of the use of a car. There is a benefit that goes with the cost. 392 billion car trips per year let us get places and get things done.

So do 2.4 million defensive gun uses ever year. Think about it.

I did but even assuming that number was real it makes guns several hundred thousand times more dangerous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The risk to your kids from such incidents is minuscule. They face a much greater risk of injury or death from just driving on the beltway.

Not by much. But my family gets a ton of value out of the use of a car. There is a benefit that goes with the cost. 392 billion car trips per year let us get places and get things done.

So do 2.4 million defensive gun uses ever year. Think about it.

That's Kleck's estimate, which is a gross exaggeration. There are nowhere near that many defensive gun uses per year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The risk to your kids from such incidents is minuscule. They face a much greater risk of injury or death from just driving on the beltway.

Not by much. But my family gets a ton of value out of the use of a car. There is a benefit that goes with the cost. 392 billion car trips per year let us get places and get things done.

So do 2.4 million defensive gun uses ever year. Think about it.

That's Kleck's estimate, which is a gross exaggeration. There are nowhere near that many defensive gun uses per year.

And whose estimation is that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The risk to your kids from such incidents is minuscule. They face a much greater risk of injury or death from just driving on the beltway.

Not by much. But my family gets a ton of value out of the use of a car. There is a benefit that goes with the cost. 392 billion car trips per year let us get places and get things done.

So do 2.4 million defensive gun uses ever year. Think about it.

That's Kleck's estimate, which is a gross exaggeration. There are nowhere near that many defensive gun uses per year.

And whose estimation is that?

First of all, Kleck's own study said 800,000-2.4 million. Obviously even if you believe the guy, just taking his top number as gospel is intellectually dishonest.

Also the NCVS.

And if you want a book that discusses the reasons behind the wild differences, read Firearms and Violence, from the National Research Council.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The risk to your kids from such incidents is minuscule. They face a much greater risk of injury or death from just driving on the beltway.

Not by much. But my family gets a ton of value out of the use of a car. There is a benefit that goes with the cost. 392 billion car trips per year let us get places and get things done.

So do 2.4 million defensive gun uses ever year. Think about it.

That's Kleck's estimate, which is a gross exaggeration. There are nowhere near that many defensive gun uses per year.

And whose estimation is that?

First of all, Kleck's own study said 800,000-2.4 million. Obviously even if you believe the guy, just taking his top number as gospel is intellectually dishonest.

Also the NCVS.

And if you want a book that discusses the reasons behind the wild differences, read Firearms and Violence, from the National Research Council.

The estimates regarding DGUs ( defensive gun uses) are estimates - and that, by necessity, implies an imprecise science. But even the most conservative estimates are that DGUs happened about 100,000 to 800,000 times per year.

Advocates for gun control, however, fail to aknowledge any of the 100,000 to 2 million annual DGUs by repeating falsehoods like "guns have no purpose but to kill innocent people." Like it or not, guns also save lives.

Since those estimates were compiled -based on contemporaneous data - there have been important changes: now every state in the US issues concealed handgun permits whereas in 1995 it was 1/2 that number. And with booming gun sales since the administration took power, the number of gun-owning households is back to about 50%.

Given these facts, it follows that defensive gun uses are much higher than when the 100,000 to 2 million estimates were compiled. Again, guns also save lives.

[Anonymous]

That's because the real goal is to disarm law abiding white people.

It's about ideology and central control and has nothing to do with school shootings or gang crime.
The left is evil and guns stand in their way of implementing control without their bloodshed. They are extremely frustrated and feel disoriented when unable to control other people.

They don't care that open carry states see reduced violent crime since safety is not their goal.

The real response to any liberal legislative victory or executive order is to distribute 100000 free guns to new owners and training at the firing range. That would be a constructive way to penalize intrusive , anti freedom advances.

[Anonymous]

Universal background checks only serve to disarm the people that shouldn't have guns - felons and the mentally ill. The rest is just slippery slope hysteria being promoted by the gun lobby.