Guns or not Guns

[Marxist ßastard]

Then take your figure (for the sake of argument as valid) and break that down as a fraction of the total population we are left with 1/30,000,000

Yeah, and if you divide it by Avogadro's number you get 1.4×10^-22. So really, there is no gun violence problem!

 

Stop. These are 85 real, whole, indivisible people with names and families who have died from gun violence within the past 24 hours. You can't make their deaths go away using math.

[WizardOfAtlantis]

Then take your figure (for the sake of argument as valid) and break that down as a fraction of the total population we are left with 1/30,000,000

These are 85 real, whole, indivisible people with names and families who have died from gun violence within the past 24 hours. You can't make their deaths go away using math.

You can't make their deaths go away by taking away law-abiding citizens' guns, either. http://forums.nexusmods.com/public/style_emoticons/dark/rolleyes.gif

[dazzerfong]

WizardOfAtlantis:

 

That's a bit tactless, don't you think? We all know that 'law-abiding' citizens can at any moment be the contradict of that..........

Edited February 10, 2012 by dazzerfong

[Syco21]

Then take your figure (for the sake of argument as valid) and break that down as a fraction of the total population we are left with 1/30,000,000

Yeah, and if you divide it by Avogadro's number you get 1.4×10^-22. So really, there is no gun violence problem!

 

Stop. These are 85 real, whole, indivisible people with names and families who have died from gun violence within the past 24 hours. You can't make their deaths go away using math.

I can. There was 13,000 murders in the U.S. during '09. Of those murders, 9,000 used guns.

 

85*365=31025

9000/365=23

 

There, I just made 62 daily gun murders disappear and did so using the magical powers of math. Huzzah! That's a 75% reduction right there.

 

But you're absolutely right, 85 people daily is a lot. This is why we need to outlaw cars. Afterall, they kill 107 people every single day. They must be banned! I'm 400% more likely to be killed by an idiot with a car than by a murderer with a gun. I'm 1400% more likely to be killed in an accident of some sort.

 

Every single day, some 7,000 people croak for some reason or another. If you're going to demand guns be outlawed or heavily restricted because the imaginary number of 85dpd(deaths per day) is too high despite the countless times they are used for legitimate purposes including self defense. Then you also need to call for heavily restricting motor vehicles, since they account for 107dpd.

 

An interesting thought; it is estimated that there are as many guns as, if not moreso than, cars in the US. This means that my car is about 4.5x more likely to kill someone than my gun. But since I'm not a murderer, let's look at it from the perspective of accidental gun deaths. There were 550 in '09. Making it around 1.5dpd, which means that my car is 71x more likely to kill someone than my gun. :psyduck:

 

 

Source: CDC

[dazzerfong]

@ Syco:

 

And what's the alternative to cars then? Public transport? Unlike firearms, cars are almost essential: you can't just take cars out of the country, but you can (in theory) for firearms with no significant problems other than an angry crowd.

[myrmaad]

You could not even fathom the joy that banning cars would instill in me. I would not even mind if it was only fossil fuel based carbon engine cars, or all of them. Excluding mass transit, 2 wheeled, and self propelled vehicles. (bicycles, motorcycles, flintstone cars...) But that's another whole discussion.

[Syco21]

@ Syco:

 

And what's the alternative to cars then? Public transport? Unlike firearms, cars are almost essential: you can't just take cars out of the country, but you can (in theory) for firearms with no significant problems other than an angry crowd.

Cars aren't essential and it's harder to remove all guns than it is all cars.

 

Guns are used everyday to protect people from threats by both humans and animals.

[Syco21]

<SNIP>

but there are realities outside america, such as canada, such as belgium, japan, etc, where this situation is not automatically circular.

<SNIP>

in norway police do not have guns, and we do not have lifetimes in prison.

<snip>

i do realize that for a place like america, lets throw in brazil, russia, africa... this is now "too late", the situation has allready become circular.

but for the sake of _debate_, gun-regulation DOES have an effect - in the places where the situation has not become completely hopeless.

Not to be unnecessarily cruel but Norway just had a mass shooting spree with over 80 dead, the onlookers from the shoreline could do nothing but wait it out. Hardly a recommending feature to your vision of a disarmed citizenry, being unarmed didn't stop a damn thing except help. One armed hunter could have intervened and saved at least some of the young victims from being added to the tally.

Seems rather unlikely considering the shooting was at a kids camp. Pretty sure you are not going to have many guns around a kids camp either way. If this happened in the US, for example at a school/college (one famous example you can probably remember) or at another camp, the exact same thing would have happened.

Actually more and more colleges are allowing carry. There have been mass shootings stopped by armed citizens, even at schools. I've alway cited and sourced several examples, including an example of the result of anti carry laws.

[Marxist ßastard]

Is it so necessary to have guns that as a country we should ignore the deaths of 30,000 people every year? That we should continue the current campaign of gun deregulation that has required activist judges to take power away from states and rewrite the Constitution?

 

Are you willing to call up the father or mother of a gun violence victim and explain to them that their child had to die and our Constitution had to be ripped to shreds – why? So you can hunt squirrels? Because you like to collect?

[Syco21]

Is it so necessary to have guns that as a country we should ignore the deaths of 30,000 people every year? That we should continue the current campaign of gun deregulation that has required activist judges to take power away from states and rewrite the Constitution?

 

Are you willing to call up the father or mother of a gun violence victim and explain to them that their child had to die and our Constitution had to be ripped to shreds – why? So you can hunt squirrels? Because you like to collect?

Is it so important to ban guns that we are going to ignore the two and a half million lives that are saved every year because they were able to use a gun to protect themselves?

 

There isn't 30,000 murders every year, let alone 30,000 gun murders. Hell, if you combined all gun murders for the last thee years, it still wouldn't be 30,000.