The Gun debate sandbox

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 3681 - 3700 of total 5785 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
hillrat

Trad climber
reno, nv
Mar 7, 2013 - 02:57pm PT
"Only a matter of time, obviously, before this lunatic flips out and murders the wife and kid."

Two and a half years and nothing yet... Doesn,t that sorta run contrary to your obvious theory that the more guns you own the sooner you,re going homicidal?

Obviously, just a matter of time until you get so worked up over a gun thread that you pop a vein in your head and die just for thinking about guns.
jghedge

climber
Mar 7, 2013 - 03:10pm PT
"Two and a half years and nothing yet..."


Because they took his guns away, obviously, and if caught with another, it's off to the State pen for him.

He gets them back this year, apparently. Let Freedom (AKA Carnage) Ring!


TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Mar 7, 2013 - 03:25pm PT


Trust Hollywood to keep glamorizing murder during the gun debate to make $$.



worthless without pictures

Toker Villain

Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
Mar 7, 2013 - 03:57pm PT
Those need to be belt fed.

This will require some hands on experimentation.
jghedge

climber
Mar 7, 2013 - 04:07pm PT
"Trust Hollywood to keep glamorizing murder during the gun debate to make $$."

And trust the NRA to do everything in its power to make sure we keep having 12,000 gun homicides a year

Along with "law-abiding" gun owners who give tacit approval to those deaths, by sanctioning the same system that arms the murderers.


Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Mar 7, 2013 - 04:14pm PT
How many of those "12,000 gun homicides" were committed by card-carrying NRA members?
hillrat

Trad climber
reno, nv
Mar 7, 2013 - 04:20pm PT
"Because they took his guns away, obviously, and if caught with another, it's off to the State pen for him.

He gets them back this year, apparently. Let Freedom (AKA Carnage) Ring!"


"Along with "law-abiding" gun owners who give tacit approval to those deaths, by sanctioning the same system that arms the murderers."


So then why didn't this guy just go buy a gun illegally and do what you're accusing him of all your precognizant glory?

Oh... because your theory is full of holes... like your brain.
Legal gun owners giving tacit approval to murder? That's like saying rock climbers give tacit approval to chipping!
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Mar 7, 2013 - 04:21pm PT
LOL, Chaz, the NRA advocates for an industry that provides guns to everyone, not just NRA members. They are also against universal background checks.
jghedge

climber
Mar 7, 2013 - 04:22pm PT
"How many of those "12,000 gun homicides" were committed by card-carrying NRA members?"

Translation: "How many of those 12,000 gun homicides wouldn't have occurred if not for the NRA?"
jghedge

climber
Mar 7, 2013 - 04:26pm PT
"So then why didn't this guy just go buy a gun illegally and do what you're accusing him of all your precognizant glory?"

Hahaha, you want a logical reason for being a gun nut in the first place - good luck with that.

Why do gun nuts do any of the crazy sh#t they do (besides mental/male inadequacy issues, of course).



Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Mar 7, 2013 - 04:27pm PT
What are you trying to say? That if not for the NRA, people would all be nice to each other? That's just totally asinine, and even you can see that!
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Mar 7, 2013 - 04:29pm PT
Fascinating the way your mind works, Chaz.
jghedge

climber
Mar 7, 2013 - 04:36pm PT
"What are you trying to say? That if not for the NRA, people would all be nice to each other?"


Hahahahaha

Sorry - too idiotic to respond to, even by the standards set by your ideological counterparts.
jghedge

climber
Mar 7, 2013 - 04:40pm PT
Do gun laws reduce gun deaths? New study says 'yes,' but data are thin.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2013/0307/Do-gun-laws-reduce-gun-deaths-New-study-says-yes-but-data-are-thin


The simple answer is “yes,” according to study released Wednesday in the Journal of the American Medical Association. But critics say the study falls short of proving a direct cause between the number of gun laws and reduced gun violence.

As members of Congress prepare to vote on gun-control measures, the study also highlights the need for better evidence-based research to inform policymakers about which laws are most effective at curbing gun violence and why.


“Our motivation was really to understand what are the interventions that can be done to reduce firearm mortality," Eric Fleegler, the study's lead author and a pediatrician and researcher at Boston Children's Hospital, told the Associated Press.

The new study suggests – but doesn’t prove – that increasing the number of gun-control laws in states will result in fewer gun-related deaths.

The study ranked all 50 states based on the number of gun laws on the books, which fell under five broad categories: curb firearm trafficking, strengthen background checks, improve child safety, ban military-style assault weapons, and restrict guns in public places. The states were divided into four groups based on their legislative score, 0 to 28. Then the study applied gun-related death data from 2007 to 2010 provided by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Overall, the states with the most laws had a 42 percent lower gun-death rate than states with the least number of laws.

The lowest gun-death rate was in Hawaii, with 3 deaths per 100,000 residents. Hawaii scored 16 on the legislative score. Louisiana ranked highest in the rate of gun deaths at 18 per 100,000 residents. It’s legislative score was 1.

“The study provides evidence that the laws may work,” says David Hemenway, a co-author and director of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center at the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston.

“The study provides evidence that in states with stronger laws and fewer gun deaths – that has a positive effect,” he adds.

But the research has limitations, which the study and critics identify: Just because the two factors are present, doesn’t mean that one caused the other.

“The real question is not about the number of firearm laws but whether the laws ultimately safeguard the citizens they are intended to protect,” the report said.

For research that was intended to inform policymakers, the study offers no guidance, said Garen Wintemute, director the Violence Prevention Research Program at the University of California at Davis, in a video response to the study.

“Do the laws work, or not? If so, which ones?” Dr. Wintemute wrote in a commentary on the study. “Should policymakers enact the entire package? Some part? Which part?”

The study’s limited scope does not include a complete list of gun laws, and it fails to account for differences between states in specific laws. It doesn’t include measures for how hard states work to enforce their laws, nor does it evaluate the effect on the flow of firearms between states with different laws.

One of the main points that limits the study’s conclusions is the how the rate of gun ownership in states impacts the correlation of laws and gun deaths, said Wintemute.

States generally fall on to either end of the spectrum, either strong laws with fewer deaths or weak laws with more deaths.

This is a problem because the rate of gun ownership is associated with the rate of violent deaths, he said. And, “it’s easier to enact these laws in states that have a low rate of gun ownership to begin with.”

Because gun ownership is not as important in those states, there’s less opposition, he said. “We cannot say that these laws, individually or in aggregate, drive firearm death rates up or down.”

Both Wintemute and Dr. Hemenway agree that more funding is needed to do studies that further explore the links between legislation and reduced rates of gun violence.

“The larger problem is that we effectively stopped doing research on this problem 15 years ago,” Wintemute said. “And now, at a time when we really want to have the evidence on what works and why, we don’t have that evidence.”

Since 1996, the CDC has been explicitly barred by Congress from researching the causes and prevention of gun violence as a public-health issue. Some conservative lawmakers believed that antigun researchers would politicize the data. In an executive order on Jan. 16, President Obama directed the CDC to study the best ways to reduce gun violence.

But researchers will have to wait to see if Congress goes on to appropriate funds for gun violence research.

“Until we revitalize firearm-violence research, studies using available data will often be the best we have,” Wintemute wrote. “They are not good enough.”
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Mar 7, 2013 - 05:29pm PT
Brings "concealed carry" to a whole new level.

http://www.wcsh6.com/video/default.aspx?bctid=2207296827001&odyssey=mod|newswell|text|FRONTPAGE|featured
Heyzeus

climber
Hollywood,Ca
Mar 7, 2013 - 06:50pm PT
http://www.freep.com/article/20130305/FEATURES01/130305010/Gun-violence-annual-cost-12-billion

Gun violence annual cost: $12 billion

USA TODAY


WASHINGTON — Gunshot wounds and deaths cost Americans at least $12 billion a year in court proceedings, insurance costs and hospitalizations paid for by government health programs, according to a recent study.

"I think people probably don't understand that as well as they ought to," said Ted Miller, author of a study that found that gunfire deaths and injuries incur a direct societal cost of $32 per gun.

About 20 years ago, Miller calculated the costs to society of shooting injuries and deaths with funding from the National Institute of Justice. He decided to run the numbers again this year after the shooting at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn.

"I was surprised," Miller said. "Back in 1994, the costs of drunk driving were substantially higher, but it has reversed."

Miller found that total costs per injury had at least doubled or come close for medical care, psychiatric care, court cases, insurance and emergency transport. For example, in 1992, medical care for a fatal shooting averaged $14,500. In 2010, that number reached $28,700.

He found that medical care in 2010 cost $3.2 billion for 105,177 deaths and injuries. In 1992, medical care cost $3 billion for 171,800 deaths and injuries, including 31,674 BB gun shootings, which were not included in the 2010 numbers.

According to government statistics analyzed by Miller for the Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, costs to the government in 2010 broke down this way:

• $5.4 billion in tax revenue lost because of lost work

• $4.7 billion in court costs

• $1.4 billion in Medicare and Medicaid costs for firearm injuries and deaths

• $180 million in mental health care costs for gunshot victims

• $224 million in insurance claims processing

• $133 million for responding to shooting injuries

Miller also found that Medicaid covers 28% of hospital admissions for firearm injuries, 37% of hospital days and 42% of medical costs. But in another study, he found that even if people weren't on Medicaid when they were injured, about 8% ultimately enroll in Medicaid after their injuries. "So about half of the medical costs borne by Medicaid may be the best estimate," he said.

A 2012 study by the Vanderbilt Medical Center in Nashville found that 79% of gunshot victims in greater Nashville were enrolled in Medicaid. That compared with 45% of Medicaid enrollment for all other emergency room patients. African-American patients were three times more likely to be gunshot victims than were white patients, the study showed.

Manish Sethi, a trauma surgeon at Vanderbilt University and a researcher for the study, said his team decided to look at the numbers after seeing "a bunch of African-American kids with gunshot wounds" coming through the emergency room. "We have to do something."
tooth

Trad climber
B.C.
Mar 7, 2013 - 08:52pm PT
You defend your president..................with guns
You defend your congressmen................with guns
You defend your governors..................with guns
You defend your celebreties................with guns
You defend your sporting events............with guns
You defend your jewlery stores.............with guns
You defend your banks......................with guns
You defend your courts.....................with guns



You defend your children...............with a sign that says



this is a gun-free zone.




And then call someone with a gun after the fact.










Everyone who is anti-gun has drunk the cool-aid that because it is a societal norm to have a 'security' guard armed in a 'normal' or acceptable location makes that guy more interested in the security of your children than a teacher who knows that child by name.

They think that since someone has a badge (TSA) that the person is suddenly above everyone else, and won't do anything wrong.


The facts are, those people abuse those powers because they are human, just like everyone else without a badge.


This is probably why your founding government wanted the general public to be equal with special powers, so that the special powers weren't accepted as superior humans with rights that no-one else had. The government was supposed to have the organization to protect the liberty of the people, not the power to kill Americans on US soil via video-game from some office.


But that ship has sailed. You just chomping at the bit to set a few more stupid idea ships out of port too?





bluering

Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
Mar 7, 2013 - 08:55pm PT
You defend your president..................with guns
You defend your congressmen................with guns
You defend your governors..................with guns
You defend your celebreties................with guns
You defend your sporting events............with guns
You defend your jewlery stores.............with guns
You defend your banks......................with guns
You defend your courts.....................with guns



You defend your children...............with a sign that says



this is a gun-free zone.




And then call someone with a gun after the fact.

I think that says it all. Really...that is IT!
Gary

Social climber
Right outside of Delacroix
Mar 7, 2013 - 09:16pm PT
No, this says it all.

Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
Mar 7, 2013 - 09:27pm PT
The ENDLESS serpentine lines waiting to get in to the Crossroads Gun S...
The ENDLESS serpentine lines waiting to get in to the Crossroads Gun Show, Rno NV,2/13 the wait in line just to get in was over 1.5 hours.
Credit: Ron Anderson


actually it looked more like this Gary..

And it wasnt because Obama is going to take guns but rather make many illegal - so they are buying them now and , with current massive govt orders, ammo companies cant keep stores supplied with even minimum stock. People that like to sport shoot every weekend tend to go through LOTS of ammo, that currently is scarce.
Messages 3681 - 3700 of total 5785 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews