Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
United States Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: FYI- did u know 28 Americans die daily due to gun violence
Necromancer    3/31/2009 2:41:30 AM
Gun control overdue!!!
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26   NEXT
Wicked Chinchilla       4/2/2009 7:54:28 AM
I agree with Buzzard, mandatory yearly evaluations are a good idea in theory but bad in practice.  I mean, no one would argue with you that if you own a gun, you damn well better know how to use it and use it well.
 
The problem is, what standard do you set for a successful evaluation?  Sure, you can say "they have to know the basics of using a weapon" but its so vague that unless it is utterly and sickly specific then you will have a problem with even classifying who should pass and fail. 
 
Once you set those standards, you are still no closer to actually get someone to follow said standards.  I am sure we all tried to drive as perfect as possible whenever we got our licenses at first, and if we ever have to retake the exam we would follow every traffic law to the letter.  Of course,  you bet your ass the second the evaluator gets out of my car I will go right back to all of my standard bad habits. 
 
Then you have the final problem enforcement.  This person passed all of their tests in the last 4 years.  What if they failed their 5th test or, better yet, didnt bother showing up?  If they failed there, do you confiscate their weapons on the spot?  If they didnt come, do you send an officer to their house to collect the weapon?  What if they refuse to give it up since it is after all personal property? 
 
A policy like that would be so difficult to define, follow, and enforce that it would be ineffective anyway.  Besides guns aren't particularly cheap and they ARE dangerous.  If someone wants to invest in a fire-arm I would hope they would want to know how to use it for their own (and their possible family's) safety as well as to make the most out of an investment. 
 
Quote    Reply

willbill       4/2/2009 2:43:54 PM

Here are the Links

Harvard: http://www.law.harvard.edu/stu...

Murder Rates by Country: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...

Suicide Rate by Country: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...

 

A Harvard study concluded that there is no correlation between strong gun control and reduced levels of murder or suicide. The study cited that Russia has strong gun prohibitions, but they have a higher per capita murder rate than the United States. Likewise, Japan has extremely strong gun prohibitions, but they have a higher per capita suicide rate, and Russia also has a higher suicide rate than the U.S.


link...

link...

link...

 


It is also important to note that U.S. citizens use firearms to defend themselves from criminals over 400,000 times according to the Department of Justice?s Bureau of Justice Statistics.   Other studies place that number as high as three million.


 


Gun Control does not equal murder control. Gun control does not equal suicide control.


 
 
Quote    Reply

Panther    This is ridiculous!   4/2/2009 7:51:53 PM
The New York Post reports:
 
 
By WILLIAM J. GORTA
 
Last updated: 3:05 am April 1, 2009 Posted: 2:36 am April 1, 2009
 
A Queens judge ruled yesterday that subway employees do not have to do anything but pick up their phones if they see a crime -- as he threw out a suit against the MTA and two workers who did nothing more to stop a rape.
 
A conductor saw the rape from the window on his train, and a station agent in the booth witnessed a screaming woman being dragged down a staircase inside the desolate 21st Street station of the G line. But neither one left the safety of their assigned posts to help her. Instead, conductor Harmodio Cruz and agent John Koort called the command center to summon cops.
 
Justice Kevin Kerrigan ruled the two workers had taken "prompt and decisive action in obtaining police help," according to the decision handed down in Queens Supreme Court. The help came far too late for the victim, who was raped on the platform.    <-------  WHAT THE  #$%&#@  HELL?
 
Her lawyer, Marc Albert, called Kerrigan's decision "offensive," saying it gives "blanket immunity" for transit workers to ignore straphangers in peril. "Simply pressing the button is enough," lamented Albert. "God forbid citizens are put in a position where municipal workers are not required to act and it leads to harm -- they are left out in the cold."
 
The victim, an artist, was inside a Queens-bound G train at 2:15 a.m. on June 7, 2005, when the only other person in the car began to touch her feet. She jumped away from him, but the commotion caused her to miss her stop at Greenpoint Avenue.
 
She got off at the next stop, 21st Street in Long Island City, but as she waited for a Brooklyn-bound train, the same sicko -- who had followed her off the train -- began licking her feet.
 
She ran up a staircase toward the platform, but the psycho grabbed her in a bear hug and hauled her down the steps.
 
A station agent saw the commotion, hit a panic button in the booth and called the command center for cops. The conductor of a Brooklyn-bound train saw the scuffle, heard the woman screaming and notified the train operator, who in turn also called the command center.
 
Albert argued that the workers could have done more without physically confronting the attacker -- the conductor could have stopped the train, he said, and the station agent could have called police directly. But Kerrigan wrote that it was "pure speculation" that added efforts would have helped the victim.
 
Cops arrived in about 10 minutes, but the attacker escaped up a different staircase. He has never been caught, police said. New York City Transit officials declined to comment.
 
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 
 
Yeah, let's ban guns for the honest joe, brilliant idea there! Trust the government (Local or National) too arrive in the nick of time!  I like to think that in states that allow "concealed carry", this sort of thing would have been nipped in the bud with a Glock to this MOTHER-#$%@ER'S face before the poor woman was ever sexually violated! 
 
Quote    Reply

EvilFishy       4/2/2009 8:15:11 PM

Panther; it is a shame the silly woman was not a politician who then could have had her own armed body guards. Had this woman the intellect to know she was going to be raped, she should have run for public office and won so she could have had the protection she should have known she would need!

/s

Having lived and worked in places where CC is prohibited, I can say I would rather deal with the hardship of being caught carrying illegally (although this is not an admission that I have ever done so) than deal with the repercussions of thugs whose understanding of the law is as follows:

-Rape, rob, and or kill person; get arrested a few days later (if unlucky), go to jail for a few years, get out; rinse and repeat.

Rights for illegal and criminals; letters of condolence and apology for the law abiding; is not our country great?!

 
Quote    Reply

swhitebull    Physicians are Deadlier than Guns   4/3/2009 6:59:25 PM

Statistics Don't lie

A. The number of physicians in the US is 700,000.

B. Accidental deaths caused by physicians is per year is 120,000.

C. Accidental deaths per physician is 0.171 (US Dept. of Health & Human Services) = 1 DEATH PER YEAR FOR EVERY 5.8 PHYSICIANS.

Then think about this:

A. The number of gun owners in the US is 80,000,000.

B. The number of accidental gun deaths per year (all age groups) is 1,500.

C. The number of accidental deaths per gun owner is .00001875 = 1 DEATH PER YEAR PER EVERY 53,333 GUN OWNERS

Statistically, doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners.

FACT: NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN, BUT ALMOST EVERYONE HAS AT LEAST ONE DOCTOR.

Please alert your friends to this alarming threat. We must ban doctors before this gets out of hand.

As a public health measure, I have withheld the statistics on lawyers for the fear that the shock could cause people to seek medical attention.

Protect your Right!!
 
 
swhitebull
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunneragain       4/3/2009 8:10:02 PM

Statistics Don't lie


A. The number of physicians in the US is 700,000.


B. Accidental deaths caused by physicians is per year is 120,000.


C. Accidental deaths per physician is 0.171 (US Dept. of Health & Human Services) = 1 DEATH PER YEAR FOR EVERY 5.8 PHYSICIANS.


Then think about this:


A. The number of gun owners in the US is 80,000,000.


B. The number of accidental gun deaths per year (all age groups) is 1,500.


C. The number of accidental deaths per gun owner is .00001875 = 1 DEATH PER YEAR PER EVERY 53,333 GUN OWNERS


Statistically, doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners.


FACT: NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN, BUT ALMOST EVERYONE HAS AT LEAST ONE DOCTOR.


Please alert your friends to this alarming threat. We must ban doctors before this gets out of hand.


As a public health measure, I have withheld the statistics on lawyers for the fear that the shock could cause people to seek medical attention.


Protect your Right!!

 

 

swhitebull



The thing is, people need doctor's (and cars and knives .... etc, etc). Medical practice (and drivers licences and public carrying of knives etc, etc) is regulated because of the inherant risks that those things pose to others (note that I'm talking about risks posed to OTHERS, before I start to get rubbish about moterbikes and handgliders etc). Apart from the fact that you can't sensibly argue that people need to privately own an assault rifle, apart from making up for some phallic inadequacies or outright pen1s envy in the case of the fairer sex, the pro-gunners don't even want guns for which there is a legitimate reason of ownership to be regulated in the way that is legitimately required for a car or a doctor. It's all a bit loopy.
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunneragain    Buzzard   4/3/2009 8:24:14 PM

Ideas like this are all well and nice, but it should be more than apparent how easily they WILL be abused to remove the ability to exercise the right of gun ownership. 
How is the requirement to undertake training going to remove the right to own guns? If the regulation is properly defined to protect that right for those who comply then taking the gun off them for any reason would be illegal. Making sure that the regulation is properly defined can be part of the role of the gun owner's lobbyists. It just requires that they choose to contructively contribute to address concerns about public safety, rather than just being pig headed about any proposed public safety measure. If they continue to do the latter then they will just deal themselves out of the ability to influence in the long term, just like the anti-gun lobby will if they choose to be equally pig headed.
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunneragain    Gunman kills 13, then himself, in upstate New York shooting   4/3/2009 8:39:56 PM

 

http://www.theaustralian.news....
 

April 04, 2009

Article from:  Agence France-Presse

A LONE killer armed with at least two handguns has massacred 13 people at a citizenship center in New York state before apparently shooting himself, police said.

Mass shooting in Binghamton, NY
A lone gunman opened fire at an immigration services center in Binghamton, New York, killing at...
Views today: 159
Sorry, this video is no longer available.
The slayings took place on the main floor of the American Civic Association in Binghamton, 217km northwest of New York city.

The gunman, reported by media outlets to be of Vietnamese origin, had barricaded a car against the back door of the centre to prevent escape. He then entered the front of the building and opened fire, apparently committing suicide soon after.

Dozens more people spent four hours cowering in the centre's basement, waiting to be told by police that they were safe to leave.

Local police chief Joseph Zikuski said that there were ?14 confirmed dead in the building? and that he had ?very good reason to believe that the shooter is among the dead at the scene.?

?We removed safely 37 people. Four people we removed are wounded. All four are listed in critical condition,? Zikuski told a press conference.

However, he cautioned ?by no means are we 100 per cent sure? about the killer's body being among those at the building.

Zikuski said that the emergency call was made by the first woman shot by the gunman, a receptionist shot in the stomach but who pretended she was dead until she could make her escape.

?A lone gunman entered the building and immediately shot her and another receptionist. Unfortunately that (second) receptionist is now deceased. Then he went into another room and shot several more people.?

Two handguns were recovered at the scene, he said.

President Barack Obama, on a visit to France, said he was ?shocked and deeply saddened to learn about the act of senseless violence?.

Many of those in the centre, which helps people prepare for citizenship tests, were apparently of Vietnamese origin and did not speak good English.

New York state Governor David Paterson said victims were there to pursue ?the American dream?.

?There still is an American dream and all of us who are Americans will try to heal this very, very deep wound in the city of Binghamton,? he said.

The outburst of violence apparently was over quickly, but hours of tension followed.

Zikuski said an emergency call was made at 10:31am (1.31am AEDT) by the receptionist as she lay on the floor wounded, listening to the gunman fire at others.

The police chief said he had ?no idea what the motive is? and that the killer ?just came in and shot her. I don't think there was any conversation.?

Police swarmed into the area after the emergency call, with first units arriving in less than two minutes, he said.

?The gunfire had ceased by that time. There's no more shots fired.?

However, it was unclear to police what the gunman was doing, or even how many there might have been, and elite SWAT police units took hours to comb methodically through the building.

Meanwhile, there were dozens
 
Quote    Reply

EvilFishy       4/3/2009 8:59:18 PM
---Aussiegunneragain ---apart from making up for some phallic inadequacies or outright pen1s envy in the case of the fairer sex, the pro-gunners don't even want guns for which there is a legitimate reason of ownership to be regulated in the way that is legitimately required for a car or a doctor. It's all a bit loopy.---

I would love for firearms in the United States to be regulated the SAME WAY as automobiles.

Why? Because automobiles are LESS REGULATED than FIREARMS!

I do not NEED a background check to buy a car.

I do not NEED a license from my state government to buy a car.

I do not NEED a license to drive my car on MY OWN PROPERTY.

I can buy as MANY CARS as I please whenever I please and from whomever I please.

I can buy the biggest ****** ****ing car I desire for WHATEVER REASON I DESIRE with out having to ask permission from my state government.

I can drive around almost indefinitely on PUBLIC roads with OUT A LICENSE with out having the produce proof of being licensed (so long as I obey the traffic laws and stay under the radar so to speak).

However, if I walk outside with a weapon on my hip, around here, Johnny Law is going to make a point to check my CC.

To get a drivers license, I have to walk into the DMV, sit in line, and pass a test so simple a 15 year old could pass (and they do); they take my check, take my picture, hand me the plastic and I am on my way.

To get a CC I have to get fingerprinted, a back ground check, on top of a whole lot of expense and aggravation.

Ironically enough (well it is not really ironic, your irrational fear of firearms is just silly), there are MORE GUNS THAN AUTOMOBILES and yet more people are killed every year in the USA from automobile related accidents than FIREARMS!

As for my so-called phallic extender: I have a Beretta 92 Sf sitting on my table in front of me. It is loaded. The magazine is loaded with 15 rounds and there is a round in the chamber.

My **** is not larger; at least not at the moment. It neither feels nor appears larger. I own it for a number of reasons which are none of your concern but I will say that adding a few inches to Capt. Winkey was and is not on the list.

 
 
Quote    Reply

EvilFishy       4/3/2009 9:08:00 PM

Oh and by the way Aussia; firearm ownership is not just a privileged or a need; IT IS A RIGHT.

I no more have to explain my NEED for acquiring a firearm to you or anybody else than I need explain my NEED to exercise my right to speak freely, worship how I see fit or peaceably assemble.

Mine is a Bill of Rights not a Bill of Needs.

 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26   NEXT



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2012StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy