Another Day, Another Shooting
#21
The placebo effect, I suppose. Smiling
Reply
#22
(01-06-2013, 04:01 PM)GoCometsGo Wrote:
(01-06-2013, 03:37 PM)csrowan Wrote: When guns work, someone dies. Occasionally it is in self defense, and saves a life.

Not true. The mere presence of a gun can be a very effective deterrent to bad things happening. You don't have to actually fire a gun for it to "work."

Even Clone posted a thread proving that fact.

Guns also "work" to feed people and as a sport that contributes 10's of millions towards benefiting wildlife and their habitat.

I have zero doubt that even the simple presence of an NRA sticker on peoples gates has "worked to deter thieves.
Reply
#23
(01-06-2013, 04:41 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(01-06-2013, 04:01 PM)GoCometsGo Wrote:
(01-06-2013, 03:37 PM)csrowan Wrote: When guns work, someone dies. Occasionally it is in self defense, and saves a life.

Not true. The mere presence of a gun can be a very effective deterrent to bad things happening. You don't have to actually fire a gun for it to "work."

Even Clone posted a thread proving that fact.

Guns also "work" to feed people and as a sport that contributes 10's of millions towards benefiting wildlife and their habitat.

I have zero doubt that even the simple presence of an NRA sticker on peoples gates has "worked to deter thieves.

I edited my post just as you posted this... saying the same basic thing.
Reply
#24
Quote:A Georgia mother hid her two 9-year-old twins and shot an intruder, Paul Ali Slater, several times during a home invasion on Friday, according to multiple media reports.

The Loganville mother said she didn’t initially answer when someone knocked on her door around 1 p.m. Friday. When the visitor began repeatedly ringing the doorbell, she called her husband at work, according to the Atlanta Journal Constitution.

He then dialed 911 and his 37-year-old wife gathered their 9-year-old twins and hid them in a crawlspace inside the home.

According to the report, the intruder then forced his way into the home and started “rummaging” through the family’s belongings.

When the suspect went into the closet where the family was hiding ,the woman fired six bullets at the suspect, five of which hit alleged suspect Paul Ali Slater in the face and neck area.

http://myfox8.com/2013/01/06/ga-mom-shoo...-children/
Reply
#25
(01-05-2013, 08:27 PM)Larry Wrote: http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/wom...der/nTm7s/

Another day, another family saved.

I posted this one Chuck, but thanks for bringing it back up. I'm not sure anyone cares.
Reply
#26
(01-06-2013, 02:00 PM)Larry Wrote: [Image: deaths_zps8f3bf9db.jpg]

I we confusing intentional with unintentional?
Could have included drownings I guess.
Reply
#27
(01-06-2013, 12:43 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(01-06-2013, 09:37 AM)Willie Krash Wrote:
(01-05-2013, 08:27 PM)Larry Wrote: http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/wom...der/nTm7s/

Another day, another family saved.

Not quite a shooting spree and it appears a proper use. It isn't about guns to me, it's about type of gun and do people that own them have proper screening and training.

If that's what IT is about then I wonder what percentage of gun deaths are attributed to the TYPE of gun you speak of?

I have to assume you are referring to assault rifles with high capacity magazines.


Because IMO the total amount of gun deaths is really the problem and these type of spree killings always bring the public attention to that number.

So even with this proper screening and training for people with assault rifles with high capacity magazines, will the number of gun deaths actually have a significant drop?
I don't think it will because I think what keeps our gun death totals so high are criminals in our inner cities. And instead of going with sensationalized news and media hype we should look at the REAL problem
Again it is where the bar is..flintlocks to suitcase nukes. Rocket launchers to bazookas. It is a call to look at the real problem.

You asked,
"So even with this proper screening and training for people with assault rifles with high capacity magazines, will the number of gun deaths actually have a significant drop?"

Well CC folks tend not to be much of a problem nor will I defend the thought that folks trained in the use of weapons to be an exercise in futility. My words.

If you die from a gun and are part of the "significant drop" I guess that's OK if I understand your point. If it is me It's not OK. Any drop is a step in the right directions. Not a personal comment by the way. It is just easier if the dead persons that make up part of the signification drop is somebody else. I can not quantify how man lives must be saved (significant) to make the effort worthwhile. Innocent lives in particular.

If it is to be criminals in the city would the question be valid to the need of assault style weapons and ammunition? Where is the Tommy gun when you need one and yes they were removed from the cities, ask Al or those that were part of the Valentine day massacre. Back to where the bar is??
Reply
#28
Reply
#29
Open carry. Concealed carry. Street sweeper. In a world gone crazy, we are the worst. I quit.
Reply
#30
An executive order to overturn the Constitution? Nothing to see here, go about your business... If we approve of what you do, that is. We will be watching, and making those decisions for you... sheeple..

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/bide...94984.html
Reply
#31
(01-09-2013, 11:25 AM)Larry Wrote: An executive order to overturn the Constitution? Nothing to see here, go about your business... If we approve of what you do, that is. We will be watching, and making those decisions for you... sheeple..

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/bide...94984.html

Wow. Overturn the Constitution?

That's amazing. I've got to read/watch this and find out exactly how bad it is...








Oh. How strange. Nothing mentioned even comes close to suggesting that. It's more along the lines of saying "We're working on something, and we're working with the cabinet and the Attorney general to determine what can be done. We're also working on legislation that would have to be passed by the Senate and Congress."

Maybe I didn't read the same story as you?
Reply
#32
Per the CDC every week in the US 50 kids are killed simply in back-over accident and another 48 are injured and 5000 are killed by being hit by cars. Heck, simply adjusting carseat/seatbelt laws could save thousands of kids weekly-- it is the number 1 killer of kids. While I understand that guns make a safe target- if you want to keep kids safer the reality is there are a lot of other things that would be more effective at doing that, a lot cheaper and without violating the 2nd ammendment for legal and responsible Americans.
Reply
#33
(01-09-2013, 11:42 AM)reelo Wrote: Per the CDC every week in the US 50 kids are killed simply in back-over accident and another 48 are injured and 5000 are killed by being hit by cars. Heck, simply adjusting carseat/seatbelt laws could save thousands of kids weekly-- it is the number 1 killer of kids. While I understand that guns make a safe target- if you want to keep kids safer the reality is there are a lot of other things that would be more effective at doing that, a lot cheaper and without violating the 2nd ammendment for legal and responsible Americans.

Wonder how many kids are killed by illegal immigrants in California?
Reply
#34
Why do you always try to sidetrack discussions? Obviously you like the tactic but it accomplishes nothing.
Reply
#35
http://www.immigrationshumancost.org/tex...ctims.html
Reply
#36
(01-09-2013, 11:48 AM)PonderThis Wrote: Why do you always try to sidetrack discussions? Obviously you like the tactic but it accomplishes nothing.

According to leftists saving lives is a moral issue. Unless it means getting rid of potential votes.
Reply
#37
(01-09-2013, 11:50 AM)orygunluvr Wrote: According to leftists saving lives is a moral issue. Unless it means getting rid of potential votes.

This is a nonsense statement.
Reply
#38
(01-09-2013, 11:42 AM)reelo Wrote: Per the CDC every week in the US 50 kids are killed simply in back-over accident and another 48 are injured and 5000 are killed by being hit by cars. Heck, simply adjusting carseat/seatbelt laws could save thousands of kids weekly-- it is the number 1 killer of kids. While I understand that guns make a safe target- if you want to keep kids safer the reality is there are a lot of other things that would be more effective at doing that, a lot cheaper and without violating the 2nd ammendment for legal and responsible Americans.

I'm all for that, too.

But guns are weapons. It makes perfect sense to me to legislate weapons to prevent improper use, especially when there massive evidence of improper use. And guns aren't nearly as legislated as vehicles. Imagine if vehicles were only controlled as much as guns are...
Reply
#39
Honestly, who knows, but in a way it really ticks me off that they are all about the gun control around here while kids are getting killed walking in the street to school (no sidewalks/ partial sidewalks all over Sacramento) and with California having some of the weakest car seat laws in the country. The state could save more kids lives quickly and easily by simply raising the rear facing limit and keeping kids in car seats/ boosters a bit longer-- but they won't because that would infringe on people's rights Blink

But then they would like to take away guns from legal, responsible owners (I think we all know criminals are not going to follow any gun restrictions, simply look at Chicago) just in case.

It just makes you go "huh".
Reply
#40
(01-09-2013, 11:55 AM)reelo Wrote: Honestly, who knows, but in a way it really ticks me off that they are all about the gun control around here while kids are getting killed walking in the street to school (no sidewalks/ partial sidewalks all over Sacramento) and with California having some of the weakest car seat laws in the country. The state could save more kids lives quickly and easily by simply raising the rear facing limit and keeping kids in car seats/ boosters a bit longer-- but they won't because that would infringe on people's rights Blink

But then they would like to take away guns from legal, responsible owners (I think we all know criminals are not going to follow any gun restrictions, simply look at Chicago) just in case.

It just makes you go "huh".

Well, after the last ban was implemented mass killings went UP.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)