Seems to be the case in Iraq. How come the mighty US military hasn't yet crushed the insurgents? Exactly!Zaelath wrote:Handgun, rifle, assault rifle, all stand up equally well against depleted uranium shells and air support!
McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
Have You Hugged An Iksar Today?
--
--
- miir
- Super Poster!
- Posts: 11501
- Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:06 pm
- XBL Gamertag: miir1
- Location: Toronto
- Contact:
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
The fact remains that violent and gun related (especially homocide) crime is much lower in countries with strict gun control.Kilmoll the Sexy wrote: And I could link tens of thousands of incidents where unarmed people have been shot by people that ARE NOT LEGALLY ALLOWED TO OWN A GUN. Can you dreamers understand this for one fucking time ever in your pathetic lives? People that are convicted felons are not allowed to own a gun. They still manage to obtain them and keep them and then use them. Tell me what good a LAW will be that makes it illegal for them to possess a firearm when the CURRENT fucking laws that preven them from owning one have proven to not do one goddamn bit of good.
Come on assholes....enlighten me. The people that go through the time and background checks to prove they are NOT criminals to get a concealed carry shoudl all be stripped of firearms that they carry to protect themselves from the criminals that are running this country now just because you morons and your utopian ideas say so.....yea. Fuck off.
Shootings happen in every country and city on this planet....even the countries where firearms are strictly regulated. Controlling crime is not controlling firearms....it is going to take eliminating criminals with real punishments. You murder...you fry. End of story. Then watch the crime rates drop....Until you liberal tree hugging fags come to terms with that, then suck my dick and get the fuck away from my firearms.
I've got 99 problems and I'm not dealing with any of them - Lay-Z
- Kilmoll the Sexy
- Super Poster!
- Posts: 5295
- Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:31 pm
- Gender: Male
- XBL Gamertag: bunkeru2k
- Location: Ohio
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
Why do you choose to ignore the fact that it still occurs? Why not stop it at its source and stop blaming everyone and everything except the people that commit the crimes?
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
I think it would be much more relevant if you were to link tens of thousands of incidents where completely innocent people who do not own guns were shot or otherwise killed during a home break-in.Kilmoll wrote:And I could link tens of thousands of incidents where unarmed people have been shot by people that ARE NOT LEGALLY ALLOWED TO OWN A GUN.
Setting aside the 'overthrowing the government' concept, that's the defense for guns that's being put forward: They allow you to protect your home and your person from intruders. The counterargument that's being put forward is that it is very, very rarely necessary to protect yourself from an intruder, who will typically run as soon as he realizes that someone is home, and that confronting the intruder with a gun raises the chance of escalation.
What's more likely:
1. An intruder comes in planning to murder/rape or otherwise violate you and your family (as opposed to stealing your property or whatever), but is unable to do so BECAUSE he is threatened with a gun or shot with a gun
or
2. An intruder comes in with no intention of murdering/raping/otherwise violating anybody, but is confronted by a homeowner with a gun, and someone ends up getting murdered/raped/otherwise violated due to the escalation represented by the gun.
I think the point that the gun control folks are pushing right now is that scenario 2 happens an awful lot more than scenario 1. I don't know if this is true, but I suspect it is.
Even if it is true, though, maybe there's something to be said for agency-- even if I'm more likely to be killed by an intruder if I have a gun than I am if I don't, at least having the gun gives me some control over the situation and lets me fight back. Maybe I'd rather have the opportunity to fight than not, even if fighting is less likely to be successful than giving in.
- Kilmoll the Sexy
- Super Poster!
- Posts: 5295
- Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:31 pm
- Gender: Male
- XBL Gamertag: bunkeru2k
- Location: Ohio
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
Oh....you mean like Sean Taylor. Last I saw he had no gun. They cowered in the bderoom while teenage thugs who could not lawfully own a gun kicked in the door and shot him. This is not isolated and is becoming much more frequent. I am sure there are stats out there on it, but my guess is that the amount of incidents where someone breaks in a house, takes the gun from a homeowner and uses it on them is incredibly small....especially whne compared to a homeowner being the one doing the shooting. NRA website probably has info on it if I feel like looking it up later.
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
Yeah, Sean Taylor is a good example... although I don't think it's fair to say that he "cowered in the bedroom"... I seem to recall him grabbing a machete and trying to defend himself when the door was kicked in and shots were immediately fired through it. Possible although far from certain that he could have survived with a gun instead of a machete.
That's the kind of situation that the gun control folks are talking about.
You can argue that you shoot first and ask questions later if there's an intruder in your home, which increases your chances of being the one who survives. I don't dispute the right of any homeowner to do this. There are a few possible negative outcomes though:
1. You just shot some drunk who was so confused he didn't know where he was, or who was engaged in petty vandalism, or something like that. Not really your fault, but fairly tragic-- this guy probably doesn't deserve to die.
2. You just shot some unarmed or nondangerous robber who was merely looking for some quick cash. Also not your fault, but also still tragic-- it would be preferable if he were arrested and punished by the legal system (your opinion may vary)
3. You just shot a cop. There have been several cases where gunowners, defending their homes, have mistaken police SWAT teams serving search or arrest warrants for intruders and have shot at them. SWAT teams, in some jurisdictions, are used for infractions as minor as possession of marijuana or gambling in a NCAA tournament pool. Also, wrong-door raids are relatively common, in which the SWAT team is at the wrong house entirely. This isn't a huge risk (it happens a couple of times a year) but it certainly is a possibility.
I have no idea how common successful home defenses by gunowners are. Anybody have some statistics?
For the record, I have no particular position on gun control. I'm really unsure as to how guns affect crime and society.
I don't really believe this. I don't particularly disbelieve it, either, but the country has become safer in most respects since the early '90's, so I'm not going to believe it without a source. You are of course under no obligation to do the research and cite it, but I don't think anyone is going to believe you, either, unless you do.Kilmoll wrote:This is not isolated and is becoming much more frequent.
I agree but don't think it's relevant. The kind of situation I'm talking about is one in which an intruder breaks into a house with a gun and is confronted by a homeowner with a gun. Generally, an intruder has no plans on killing or harming anyone in the home-- they plan on nobody being home, or maybe they plan on subduing the person who is home (tying him up or whatever) so they can leave with their loot. When such an intruder is faced with a gun-wielding homeowner, somebody is going to get shot. Nobody would have gotten shot if the homeowner did not have the gun.Kilmoll wrote:but my guess is that the amount of incidents where someone breaks in a house, takes the gun from a homeowner and uses it on them is incredibly small
That's the kind of situation that the gun control folks are talking about.
You can argue that you shoot first and ask questions later if there's an intruder in your home, which increases your chances of being the one who survives. I don't dispute the right of any homeowner to do this. There are a few possible negative outcomes though:
1. You just shot some drunk who was so confused he didn't know where he was, or who was engaged in petty vandalism, or something like that. Not really your fault, but fairly tragic-- this guy probably doesn't deserve to die.
2. You just shot some unarmed or nondangerous robber who was merely looking for some quick cash. Also not your fault, but also still tragic-- it would be preferable if he were arrested and punished by the legal system (your opinion may vary)
3. You just shot a cop. There have been several cases where gunowners, defending their homes, have mistaken police SWAT teams serving search or arrest warrants for intruders and have shot at them. SWAT teams, in some jurisdictions, are used for infractions as minor as possession of marijuana or gambling in a NCAA tournament pool. Also, wrong-door raids are relatively common, in which the SWAT team is at the wrong house entirely. This isn't a huge risk (it happens a couple of times a year) but it certainly is a possibility.
I have no idea how common successful home defenses by gunowners are. Anybody have some statistics?
For the record, I have no particular position on gun control. I'm really unsure as to how guns affect crime and society.
Last edited by Sueven on January 31, 2008, 1:31 pm, edited 2 times in total.
- miir
- Super Poster!
- Posts: 11501
- Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:06 pm
- XBL Gamertag: miir1
- Location: Toronto
- Contact:
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
The same Sean Taylor who was charged with a felony count of aggravated assault with a weapon (gun) in 2005?
The same guy who had no problem pulling a gun on people who he claimed stole his ATVs...
Were you at his home when he was shot?
Do you know for a fact that he didn't get his gun and confront the guys who broke into his house?
I suspect he confronted the intruders with a weapon of some sort (gun or knife).
His wife and child (who did not confront the intruders) hid under a bed and were not phsically harmed in any way.
The same guy who had no problem pulling a gun on people who he claimed stole his ATVs...
Were you at his home when he was shot?
Do you know for a fact that he didn't get his gun and confront the guys who broke into his house?
I suspect he confronted the intruders with a weapon of some sort (gun or knife).
His wife and child (who did not confront the intruders) hid under a bed and were not phsically harmed in any way.
I've got 99 problems and I'm not dealing with any of them - Lay-Z
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
Miir is correct. While Taylor did not confront the intruders with a gun, he did confront them with a weapon. And he was a gunowner, which didn't seem to help him any.
- Sylvus
- Super Poster!
- Posts: 7033
- Joined: July 10, 2002, 11:10 am
- Gender: Male
- XBL Gamertag: mp72
- Location: A², MI
- Contact:
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
Sean Taylor is not a good example. Didn't reports say he was wielding a machete? That's not the same as being unarmed and saying "hey, please don't hurt us, take what you want". Don't read that as me saying that's what he should have done, I merely point it out because your specific example does not fall in line with Sueven's scenarios. Not to mention that Taylor was a pretty high-profile person whose home was likely targeted because of who he was. He had been previously charged with assault with a firearm, something the perps would very likely have known. So you've got some people breaking into the house of a guy that they know is exceptionally strong and fast (hence his being a pro-bowl football player), who has previously threatened people with a gun, who may have confronted them armed with a machete, and they shot him in the leg. Sounds more like scenario 2 than 1.
Any idea where the teenage thugs got their guns? This time for reals instead of fairies and leprechauns? I'm actually trying to engage the gun lovers in a discussion rather than having you foaming at the mouth and screaming like Gollum that I'm trying to take your precious. If you look back through this thread I haven't suggested that you shouldn't be allowed to own a gun or guns. I scoffed at the idea that anyone could legitimately protect themselves from the government with a handgun, and then started asking where most illegal guns came from, something which no one has been able and/or willing to discuss.Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:They cowered in the bderoom while teenage thugs who could not lawfully own a gun kicked in the door and shot him.
"It's like these guys take pride in being ignorant." - Barack Obama
Go Blue!
Go Blue!
- Funkmasterr
- Super Poster!
- Posts: 9022
- Joined: July 7, 2002, 9:12 pm
- Gender: Male
- XBL Gamertag: Dandelo19
- PSN ID: ToPsHoTTa471
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
I am not going to go balls deep into this conversation because I've said it all before, and I know that you are not saying that this is or isn't necessarily your own opinion. However, this is complete bullshit; the conversation doesn't need to go any further than this - we should not be making laws to prevent criminals from getting shot. Don't do something like rob a store/car or break into someones home and you don't have to worry about someone shooting you in the process.Sueven wrote:Yeah, Sean Taylor is a good example... although I don't think it's fair to say that he "cowered in the bedroom"... I seem to recall him grabbing a machete and trying to defend himself when the door was kicked in and shots were immediately fired through it. Possible although not certain that he could have survived with a gun.
I don't really believe this. I don't particularly disbelieve it, either, but the country has become safer in most respects since the early '90's, so I'm not going to believe it without a source. You are of course under no obligation to do the research and cite it, but I don't think anyone is going to believe you, either, unless you do.Kilmoll wrote:This is not isolated and is becoming much more frequent.
I agree but don't think it's relevant. The kind of situation I'm talking about is one in which an intruder breaks into a house with a gun and is confronted by a homeowner with a gun. Generally, an intruder has no plans on killing or harming anyone in the home-- they plan on nobody being home, or maybe they plan on subduing the person who is home (tying him up or whatever) so they can leave with their loot. When such an intruder is faced with a gun-wielding homeowner, somebody is going to get shot. Nobody would have gotten shot if the homeowner did not have the gun.Kilmoll wrote:but my guess is that the amount of incidents where someone breaks in a house, takes the gun from a homeowner and uses it on them is incredibly small
That's the kind of situation that the gun control folks are talking about.
For the record, I have no particular position on gun control. I'm really unsure as to how guns affect crime and society.
What exactly is it that is wrong with people genetically/the way they were raised that makes their fucking heart bleed for everyone, no matter how absolutely worthless they are. That is the same kind of argument that gets the robber who breaks into someones house and falls on a fucking slippery floor the ability to sue and win. I hate people.
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
it's often the HOMEOWNER who ends up shotHowever, this is complete bullshit; the conversation doesn't need to go any further than this - we should not be making laws to prevent criminals from getting shot.
- Funkmasterr
- Super Poster!
- Posts: 9022
- Joined: July 7, 2002, 9:12 pm
- Gender: Male
- XBL Gamertag: Dandelo19
- PSN ID: ToPsHoTTa471
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
Well, if the situation is: Asshole breaks into house with gun, homeowner (also with gun) confronts asshole but hesitates to shoot.. Then In my opinion, this is more a situation of the homeowner being an idiot and a coward. If someone is in your home with a weapon you fucking shoot them, hell sneak up on them and shoot them in the back of the head if possible. At any rate, I hardly see someone getting shot because they were too whatever to defend themselves first as an argument for gun control.Sueven wrote:it's often the HOMEOWNER who ends up shotHowever, this is complete bullshit; the conversation doesn't need to go any further than this - we should not be making laws to prevent criminals from getting shot.
He who hesitates is lost.
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
Not really agreeing or disagreeing.. But I'd like to see some statistics on this as well since it's thrown out there often.Sueven wrote:it's often the HOMEOWNER who ends up shot
(DId a bit of searching myself!):
Personally I don't know the answer to reducing/eliminating gun-related crime. With how common guns are in our society I'm not sure a ban would be all that effective at this point.Statistics are manipulated by both sides in the gun debate, though. A study published in 1993 in the New England Journal of Medicine found that, even controlling for contributing factors like drug use and a history of family violence, people who keep a gun in their house are three times more likely to be killed in their homes than those who don’t. The implication was that you’re more likely to shoot or be shot by a family member than to frighten off or shoot an intruder. But as gun-rights advocate John R. Lott Jr. of the University of Chicago Law School pointed out, the study never actually inquired as to whose gun was used in the killing. If a household owned a gun and if a family member or acquaintance was shot to death while in the home, the gun in the household was blamed.
"In fact, virtually all the killings in the study were committed with guns brought in by an intruder," Lott noted. "No more than 4 percent of the gun deaths in the study can be attributed to the homeowner’s gun."
Have You Hugged An Iksar Today?
--
--
- Canelek
- Super Poster!
- Posts: 9380
- Joined: July 3, 2002, 1:23 pm
- Gender: Male
- XBL Gamertag: Canelek
- Location: Portland, OR
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
It is very easy to talk about not hesitating to shoot an intruder. I am quite sure that in that situation, just about every person would be having serious issues with nerves.... it's all tough-guy talk until it becomes reality.
That said, I do have 10mm pistola in a lockbox....wonder if I could get to it in time to be aware of the situation and have the coherency to use it against an intruder....
Answer--I honestly do not know, because it has never happened.
That said, I do have 10mm pistola in a lockbox....wonder if I could get to it in time to be aware of the situation and have the coherency to use it against an intruder....
Answer--I honestly do not know, because it has never happened.
en kærlighed småkager
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
Bad guys would run out of ammo at some point.
- miir
- Super Poster!
- Posts: 11501
- Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:06 pm
- XBL Gamertag: miir1
- Location: Toronto
- Contact:
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
If you've never been in the position of shoot or be shot, it's impossible to predict how you would react.
Adrenaline and stress have unpredictable effects on poeple.
I would think stricter controls that are gradually implemented over a few years (well more than a few) would be more effective. You're not going to see an instant drop in gun related crime... a gradual, yearly decrease would be a more realistic expectation.
Adrenaline and stress have unpredictable effects on poeple.
For the US, a ban would be pretty ineffective considering how many (legal and illegal) are currently in circulation.With how common guns are in our society I'm not sure a ban would be all that effective at this point.
I would think stricter controls that are gradually implemented over a few years (well more than a few) would be more effective. You're not going to see an instant drop in gun related crime... a gradual, yearly decrease would be a more realistic expectation.
I've got 99 problems and I'm not dealing with any of them - Lay-Z
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
To the quote Aslanna brought up on statistics in the gun control debate, and really supporting neither side, I've always wondered if those sorts of statistics are skewed by those in a lifestyle (drug dealer, shady businessperson, etc) where they would EXPECT to be possibly be confronted by armed individuals and thus have armed themselves.
- Ash
- Canelek
- Super Poster!
- Posts: 9380
- Joined: July 3, 2002, 1:23 pm
- Gender: Male
- XBL Gamertag: Canelek
- Location: Portland, OR
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
Exactly. How many times have we heard someone say.... "I'd like to see someone try to break into MY place!"If you've never been in the position of shoot or be shot, it's impossible to predict how you would react.
Adrenaline and stress have unpredictable effects on poeple.
Humerous pseudo-macho posturing. That should be printed on every wife-beater shirt.....
en kærlighed småkager
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
Or the nerves to remember it and go get it out of the lockbox?Canelek wrote:It is very easy to talk about not hesitating to shoot an intruder. I am quite sure that in that situation, just about every person would be having serious issues with nerves.... it's all tough-guy talk until it becomes reality.
That said, I do have 10mm pistola in a lockbox....wonder if I could get to it in time to be aware of the situation and have the coherency to use it against an intruder....
Answer--I honestly do not know, because it has never happened.
I used to be in the military and thought I was the king of cool in a crisis, but when you're not expecting something, it's easy to be shaken. For example, I recently had a very minor fender bender (under 5MPH, no one hurt and no serious vehicular damage) , but because I was driving my wife's van and had my young daughter in the back I was so confused and shaken I forgot to do some very simple and rudimentary things I'd always assumed would be second nature. In retrospect I think I acted pretty much the way I did when I plowed my Camaro into the back of a Datsun skidding on the ice when I was 16 back in 1984.
- Ash
- Funkmasterr
- Super Poster!
- Posts: 9022
- Joined: July 7, 2002, 9:12 pm
- Gender: Male
- XBL Gamertag: Dandelo19
- PSN ID: ToPsHoTTa471
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
Eh, I don't know. My dad was in the marines recon in Vietnam. I was taught how to shoot a handgun young, we have always had them in the house, and for as long as I can remember It's been drilled into my head that if you were put into the situation to react without thinking basically, shoot first.Canelek wrote:Exactly. How many times have we heard someone say.... "I'd like to see someone try to break into MY place!"If you've never been in the position of shoot or be shot, it's impossible to predict how you would react.
Adrenaline and stress have unpredictable effects on poeple.
Humerous pseudo-macho posturing. That should be printed on every wife-beater shirt.....
Add on top of that how many times I've had guns pulled on me and how many times I've been around people who my friends have pulled guns on - I'm completely aware from first hand experience of how different people react when put in that situation. I'm also aware that at no point did it ever get me nervous to the point that I started blubbering like a little bitch or let it destroy my judgement.. If you are able to still form coherent thoughts you would understand that reacting those ways is only going to make the situation worse...
I'm also not saying this is the norm, it's obviously not. All I'm saying is if someone broke into my house, and I was able to get any semblance of control over the situation I would not stop pulling the trigger until the clip was empty, just to make sure the piece of shit that is in my home trying to fuck my life up has a closed casket.
-
- Way too much time!
- Posts: 1673
- Joined: July 16, 2004, 11:02 am
- Location: Royal Palm Beach, FL
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
this one guy pulled a gun on me but i had such a badass reaction to it that the guy saw the error in his ways and actually turned the gun around and shot himself
I TOLD YOU ID SHOOT! BUT YOU DIDNT BELIEVE ME! WHY DIDNT YOU BELIEVE ME?
- Canelek
- Super Poster!
- Posts: 9380
- Joined: July 3, 2002, 1:23 pm
- Gender: Male
- XBL Gamertag: Canelek
- Location: Portland, OR
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
Many folks here are quite adept at firearms. I know I am. That doesn't mean I am going to get all 007 in the event of a robbery. Of course, I am no expert at having people pull guns on me. Does this hurt my street cred?
en kærlighed småkager
- Funkmasterr
- Super Poster!
- Posts: 9022
- Joined: July 7, 2002, 9:12 pm
- Gender: Male
- XBL Gamertag: Dandelo19
- PSN ID: ToPsHoTTa471
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
cadalano wrote:this one guy pulled a gun on me but i had such a badass reaction to it that the guy saw the error in his ways and actually turned the gun around and shot himself

- Kilmoll the Sexy
- Super Poster!
- Posts: 5295
- Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:31 pm
- Gender: Male
- XBL Gamertag: bunkeru2k
- Location: Ohio
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/informat ... sp?ID=2331
Those who oppose the use of firearms for self-defense have for fourteen years quoted a study by Arthur Kellermann and Donald Reay published in the June 12, 1986 issue of New England Journal of Medicine (v. 314, n. 24, p. 1557-60) which concluded that a firearm in the home is "43 times more likely" to be used to kill a member of the household than to kill a criminal intruder. This "statistic" is used regularly by anti self-protection groups which surely know better, and was even published recently without question in a letter to the Ann Arbor News. Representative Liz Brater cited this "43 times" number in a House committee hearing just a year ago. Thus the original study and its conclusion deserve careful analysis. If nothing else, the repeated use of this "statistic" demonstrates how a grossly inaccurate statement can become a "truth" with sufficient repetition by the compliant and non-critical media.
The "43 times" claim was based upon a small-scale study of firearms deaths in King County, Washington (Seattle and Bellevue) covering the period 1978-83. The authors state,
"Mortality studies such as ours do not include cases in which burglars or intruders are wounded or frightened away by the use or display of a firearm. Cases in which would-be intruders may have purposely avoided a house known to be armed are also not identified…A complete determination of firearm risks versus benefits would require that these figures be known."
Having said this, these authors proceed anyway to exclude those same instances where a potential criminal was not killed but was thwarted.
How many successful self-defense events do not result in death of the criminal? An analysis by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz (Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, v. 86 n.1 [Fall 1995]) of successful defensive uses of firearms against criminal attack concluded that the criminal is killed in only one case in approximately every one thousand attacks. If this same ratio is applied to defensive uses in the home, then Kellermann's "43 times" is off by a factor of a thousand and should be at least as small as 0.043, not 43. Any evaluation of the effectiveness of firearms as defense against criminal assault should incorporate every event where a crime is either thwarted or mitigated; thus Kellermann's conclusion omits 999 non-lethal favorable outcomes from criminal attack and counts only the one event in which the criminal is killed. With woeful disregard for this vital point, recognized by these authors but then ignored, they conclude,
"The advisability of keeping firearms in the home for protection must be questioned."
In making this statement the authors have demonstrated an inexcusable non-scientific bias against the effectiveness of firearms ownership for self defense. This is junk science at its worst.
This vital flaw in Kellermann and Reay's paper was demonstrated clearly just six months later, on Dec. 4, 1986 by David Stolinsky and G. Tim Hagen in the same journal (v. 315 n. 23, p. 1483-84), yet these letters have been ignored for fourteen years in favor of the grossly exaggerated figure of the original article. The continual use of the "43 times" figure by groups opposed to the defensive use of firearms suggests the appalling weakness of their argument.
But there's more. Included in the "43 times" of Kellermann are 37 suicides, some 86 percent of the alleged total, which have nothing to do with either crime or defensive uses of firearms. Even Kellermann and Reay say clearly
"…[that] the precise nature of the relation between gun availability and suicide is unclear."
Yet they proceed anyway to include suicides, which comprise the vast majority of the deaths in this study, in their calculations. Omitting suicides further reduces the "43 times" number from 0.043 to 0.006.
"Reverse causation" is a significant factor that does not lend itself to quantitative evaluation, although it surely accounts for a substantial number of additional homicides in the home. A person, such as a drug dealer, who is in fear for his life, will be more likely to have a firearm in his home than will an ordinary person. Put another way, if a person fears death he might arm himself and at the same time be at greater risk of being murdered. Thus Kellermann's correlation is strongly skewed away from normal defensive uses of firearms. His conclusion is thus no more valid than a finding that because fat people are more likely to have diet foods in their refrigerators we can conclude that diet foods "cause" obesity, or that because so many people die in hospitals we should conclude that hospitals "cause" premature death. Reverse causation thus further lowers the 0.006 value, but by an unknown amount.
In conclusion, if we use Kellermann's data adjusted for reality, a firearm kept in a home is at least 167 times more likely to deter criminal attack than to harm a person in the home. This number is some 7000 times more positive than the "43 times" negative figure so often quoted. Should groups and individuals that knowingly perpetuate a figure that is at least 7000 times too large be given any credence at all?
With two million defensive uses of firearms each year, both inside and outside the home, the value of protection against criminal assault provided by firearms vastly exceeds any dangers that they might present.
- Funkmasterr
- Super Poster!
- Posts: 9022
- Joined: July 7, 2002, 9:12 pm
- Gender: Male
- XBL Gamertag: Dandelo19
- PSN ID: ToPsHoTTa471
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
I'm not saying I would get all 007 either, I'm just saying. Assuming you are given the opportunity to get to the weapon (won't do you much good if you wake up and have a gun pointed at you), and are able to get a shot off - do it. Of course there are going to be some situations where you are not going to be able to do this, I'm fully aware of that.Canelek wrote:Many folks here are quite adept at firearms. I know I am. That doesn't mean I am going to get all 007 in the event of a robbery. Of course, I am no expert at having people pull guns on me. Does this hurt my street cred?
I also think placement of the gun has a lot to do with how effective it is (this changes if you have kids, which I don't) - keeping it in a lock box in the opposite side of the house from where you are most likely going to need it in these situations makes it pretty much worthless.. You also don't want to sleep with it under your pillow of on/in your night stand, because I personally think that raises your chance of being accidentally shot or shooting someone on accident through the roof. Something like on a shelf in your closet is a happy medium.. Like I said if you have kids in the house you obviously aren't going to leave it out in the open like that.. in which case I don't know what would be best.
- Canelek
- Super Poster!
- Posts: 9380
- Joined: July 3, 2002, 1:23 pm
- Gender: Male
- XBL Gamertag: Canelek
- Location: Portland, OR
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
Now deterrence is something that I did not touch on, but is pointed out in the article Kilmoll quoted.
This is where a pump-action can send many running... Not sure what the success rate is on the sound alone scaring folks off. I imagine it is pretty good considering the majority of breakins are simple robbery with the hope of no contact.
This is where a pump-action can send many running... Not sure what the success rate is on the sound alone scaring folks off. I imagine it is pretty good considering the majority of breakins are simple robbery with the hope of no contact.
en kærlighed småkager
- Canelek
- Super Poster!
- Posts: 9380
- Joined: July 3, 2002, 1:23 pm
- Gender: Male
- XBL Gamertag: Canelek
- Location: Portland, OR
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
Correct. There are excellent gunsafes designed to go under the bed with easy to work keypads for access yet inaccessible to children and others.
en kærlighed småkager
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
Thanks for that quote Kilmoll, precisely what I was wondering."Reverse causation" is a significant factor that does not lend itself to quantitative evaluation, although it surely accounts for a substantial number of additional homicides in the home. A person, such as a drug dealer, who is in fear for his life, will be more likely to have a firearm in his home than will an ordinary person. Put another way, if a person fears death he might arm himself and at the same time be at greater risk of being murdered. Thus Kellermann's correlation is strongly skewed away from normal defensive uses of firearms. His conclusion is thus no more valid than a finding that because fat people are more likely to have diet foods in their refrigerators we can conclude that diet foods "cause" obesity, or that because so many people die in hospitals we should conclude that hospitals "cause" premature death. Reverse causation thus further lowers the 0.006 value, but by an unknown amount.
- Ash
- Kilmoll the Sexy
- Super Poster!
- Posts: 5295
- Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:31 pm
- Gender: Male
- XBL Gamertag: bunkeru2k
- Location: Ohio
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
I get supremely irritated by people who choose to not own guns or bother to protect themselves or their family in any way deciding that I should not be allowed to either. Most of those "redneck gun nuts" do more training and take defense more seriously than your average police officer. Cops are only required to qualify once a year and spend 20ish hours on the range a year. Most folks that have gone through concealed carry licensing and the training for it spend that many hours in a month on the range. It is not a fluke that your average gun owner will be able to far outpace police officers in accuracy on a range.
You also fail to realize that self defense, even for people who are carrying, is not about yanking it out and spraying lead like the wild west. It is a last option knowing what you are going to have to endure if you do pull and shoot someone. Investigations, lawsuits, possible jail time, etc.....no one who went through all the hassle to even carry wants to be spending time in jail.....although I would rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6.
You also fail to realize that self defense, even for people who are carrying, is not about yanking it out and spraying lead like the wild west. It is a last option knowing what you are going to have to endure if you do pull and shoot someone. Investigations, lawsuits, possible jail time, etc.....no one who went through all the hassle to even carry wants to be spending time in jail.....although I would rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6.
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
miir wrote:The fact remains that violent and gun related (especially homocide) crime is much lower in countries with strict gun control.Kilmoll the Sexy wrote: And I could link tens of thousands of incidents where unarmed people have been shot by people that ARE NOT LEGALLY ALLOWED TO OWN A GUN. Can you dreamers understand this for one fucking time ever in your pathetic lives? People that are convicted felons are not allowed to own a gun. They still manage to obtain them and keep them and then use them. Tell me what good a LAW will be that makes it illegal for them to possess a firearm when the CURRENT fucking laws that preven them from owning one have proven to not do one goddamn bit of good.
Come on assholes....enlighten me. The people that go through the time and background checks to prove they are NOT criminals to get a concealed carry shoudl all be stripped of firearms that they carry to protect themselves from the criminals that are running this country now just because you morons and your utopian ideas say so.....yea. Fuck off.
Shootings happen in every country and city on this planet....even the countries where firearms are strictly regulated. Controlling crime is not controlling firearms....it is going to take eliminating criminals with real punishments. You murder...you fry. End of story. Then watch the crime rates drop....Until you liberal tree hugging fags come to terms with that, then suck my dick and get the fuck away from my firearms.
The FACT remains that violent genocide crime is much higher in countries with strict gun control.
Fuck the crime aspect. Americans are gonna kill each other anyways, more swords more automotive homicides, more strangulations... who gives a shit. I dont want the Latin reconquistas ever to line me up against the wall cause I'm caucasian. I dont want the 'white majority' to start lining up blacks against the wall because they are black. Our right to own firearms protects us from that. PERIOD.
Nazi Germany, USSR, Rwanda, Burma, china... the list is almost endless just in the last 60 years!
Oh yeh, Bagar~... try reading before you comment. damn Ogres...
Sick Balls!
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
How come the insurgents haven't overthrown the government?Aslanna wrote:Seems to be the case in Iraq. How come the mighty US military hasn't yet crushed the insurgents? Exactly!Zaelath wrote:Handgun, rifle, assault rifle, all stand up equally well against depleted uranium shells and air support!
May 2003 - "Mission Accomplished"
June 2005 - "The mission isn't easy, and it will not be accomplished overnight"
-- G W Bush, freelance writer for The Daily Show.
June 2005 - "The mission isn't easy, and it will not be accomplished overnight"
-- G W Bush, freelance writer for The Daily Show.
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
I wasn't aware that was their main goal at the present time.Zaelath wrote:How come the insurgents haven't overthrown the government?Aslanna wrote:Seems to be the case in Iraq. How come the mighty US military hasn't yet crushed the insurgents? Exactly!Zaelath wrote:Handgun, rifle, assault rifle, all stand up equally well against depleted uranium shells and air support!
The fact (!) is that a large number of people with simple weapons is a more powerful a force than people here seem to think. Sure they are not as effective as the modern armanent of a large superpower but they still kill our soldiers just as dead every day.
And to be honest I don't know a whole lot about Vietnam but didn't the US hold the upper hand there in the weaponry department? How did that work out for them?
Have You Hugged An Iksar Today?
--
--
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
Meh, I don't deny that militia are a pain in the arse for any government, but realistically you're not going to "overthrow" a government without the support of the military, and if you have that support you don't need the militia.
May 2003 - "Mission Accomplished"
June 2005 - "The mission isn't easy, and it will not be accomplished overnight"
-- G W Bush, freelance writer for The Daily Show.
June 2005 - "The mission isn't easy, and it will not be accomplished overnight"
-- G W Bush, freelance writer for The Daily Show.
- Drolgin Steingrinder
- Way too much time!
- Posts: 3510
- Joined: July 3, 2002, 5:28 pm
- Gender: Male
- PSN ID: Drolgin
- Location: Århus, Denmark
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
Where do you get this fact from? What are your sources? I'm genuinely curious to see any data that would corroborate your statement.Noysyrump wrote:
The FACT remains that violent genocide crime is much higher in countries with strict gun control.
IT'S HARD TO PUT YOUR FINGER ON IT; SOMETHING IS WRONG
I'M LIKE THE UNCLE WHO HUGGED YOU A LITTLE TOO LONG
I'M LIKE THE UNCLE WHO HUGGED YOU A LITTLE TOO LONG
- Canelek
- Super Poster!
- Posts: 9380
- Joined: July 3, 2002, 1:23 pm
- Gender: Male
- XBL Gamertag: Canelek
- Location: Portland, OR
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
I am sure there is some right-wing rhetoric that totally supports his "fact" on the internet.
en kærlighed småkager
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
I agree with the pro-gun people on this issue. You simply can't pick and choose which amendments of the constitution you like. You got to abide by all of them if you believe in the law of the land. Besides that, I am also pro death penalty for murderers.
But this quote makes me laugh.
But this quote makes me laugh.
Hey, maybe we can apply this logic to 9-11. But fucking oops, huh?Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:Why do you choose to ignore the fact that it still occurs? Why not stop it at its source and stop blaming everyone and everything except the people that commit the crimes?
I tell it like a true mackadelic.
Founder of Ixtlan - the SCUM of Veeshan.
Founder of Ixtlan - the SCUM of Veeshan.
- Kilmoll the Sexy
- Super Poster!
- Posts: 5295
- Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:31 pm
- Gender: Male
- XBL Gamertag: bunkeru2k
- Location: Ohio
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
I am interested in which direction exactly you are going with that.
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
He's probably going with the fact that the Stalinist Russian/Nazi German/Milosovich Serbian/Baathist Iraqi pogroms of genocide were in pretty much police states. That said, I think that the tribal and religious killing in near anarchy of Africa gives them a run for their money.Drolgin Steingrinder wrote:Where do you get this fact from? What are your sources? I'm genuinely curious to see any data that would corroborate your statement.Noysyrump wrote:
The FACT remains that violent genocide crime is much higher in countries with strict gun control.
Still doesn't change the fact that if your government decides to make you a target that the populace's pea shooters will stop them as a whole (but hey I'm sure it would help a few folks to slip the net).
- Ash
- Fash
- Way too much time!
- Posts: 4147
- Joined: July 10, 2002, 2:26 am
- Gender: Male
- XBL Gamertag: sylblaydis
- Location: A Secure Location
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
Ann Coulter hates John McCain, says she will campaign for Hillary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuTqgqhxVMc
Fash
--
Naivety is dangerous.
--
Naivety is dangerous.
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
Ann Coulter is as irrelevant as Britney Spears when it comes to politics.
Like Hillary's campaign would want to be associated with that nutball.
Like Hillary's campaign would want to be associated with that nutball.
- Ash
- Midnyte_Ragebringer
- Super Poster!
- Posts: 7062
- Joined: July 4, 2002, 1:59 pm
- Gender: Male
- XBL Gamertag: Daellyn
- Location: Northeast Pennsylvania
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
She is very out spoken indeed. Irrelevant? No.Ashur wrote:Ann Coulter is as irrelevant as Britney Spears when it comes to politics.
Like Hillary's campaign would want to be associated with that nutball.
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
Holy crap, what an amazing video.
Highlights:
1. Coulter and Hannity turning on their "I will shout you down" conservative pundit debating techniques on one another. The stretches where they're trying to talk over one another are gold.
2. Colmes just sitting back and chilling and seeming entertained. Especially around the halfway mark where Coulter wins a shout-down showdown with Hannity, and Colmes yells out "don't interrupt her!"
3. Ann Coulter claiming that she will vote for and campaign for Hillary Clinton... wtf
Highlights:
1. Coulter and Hannity turning on their "I will shout you down" conservative pundit debating techniques on one another. The stretches where they're trying to talk over one another are gold.
2. Colmes just sitting back and chilling and seeming entertained. Especially around the halfway mark where Coulter wins a shout-down showdown with Hannity, and Colmes yells out "don't interrupt her!"
3. Ann Coulter claiming that she will vote for and campaign for Hillary Clinton... wtf
- Funkmasterr
- Super Poster!
- Posts: 9022
- Joined: July 7, 2002, 9:12 pm
- Gender: Male
- XBL Gamertag: Dandelo19
- PSN ID: ToPsHoTTa471
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
I wouldn't say she is irrelevant, but she is fucking borderline insane.Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:She is very out spoken indeed. Irrelevant? No.Ashur wrote:Ann Coulter is as irrelevant as Britney Spears when it comes to politics.
Like Hillary's campaign would want to be associated with that nutball.
- Canelek
- Super Poster!
- Posts: 9380
- Joined: July 3, 2002, 1:23 pm
- Gender: Male
- XBL Gamertag: Canelek
- Location: Portland, OR
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
Ann Coulter is a certified wuwuwuwwlooonneyeyywwwuwuwuw
en kærlighed småkager
-
- Way too much time!
- Posts: 3876
- Joined: July 3, 2002, 1:59 pm
- Gender: Male
- XBL Gamertag: kimj0ngil
- Location: Ahwatukee, Arizona
- Contact:
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
Sylvus wrote:Yeah, your CCW is certainly preventing that. I'd like to thank you and the NRA for keeping me safe from Bush!Noysyrump wrote:As far as us yokels and guns. A) they're damn good fun. 2) they give you security that nothing else can provide from criminals and polititians alike. III) they make my epeen larger.
I'm not saying we should go shoot a president, but should say like Bush decide he was gonna be emporer, king, dictator, etcetera, we as a people could stand up to him instead of just beeing lined up against a wall and shot (like in european countries).
Meanwhile a city like Detroit has a higher murder rate than most European countries. Thank goodness for the Second Amendment!
that's just because michigan is a waste of land that should be burned it has nothing to do with guns
-
- Way too much time!
- Posts: 3876
- Joined: July 3, 2002, 1:59 pm
- Gender: Male
- XBL Gamertag: kimj0ngil
- Location: Ahwatukee, Arizona
- Contact:
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
i was 2 in 1984Ashur wrote:Or the nerves to remember it and go get it out of the lockbox?Canelek wrote:It is very easy to talk about not hesitating to shoot an intruder. I am quite sure that in that situation, just about every person would be having serious issues with nerves.... it's all tough-guy talk until it becomes reality.
That said, I do have 10mm pistola in a lockbox....wonder if I could get to it in time to be aware of the situation and have the coherency to use it against an intruder....
Answer--I honestly do not know, because it has never happened.
I used to be in the military and thought I was the king of cool in a crisis, but when you're not expecting something, it's easy to be shaken. For example, I recently had a very minor fender bender (under 5MPH, no one hurt and no serious vehicular damage) , but because I was driving my wife's van and had my young daughter in the back I was so confused and shaken I forgot to do some very simple and rudimentary things I'd always assumed would be second nature. In retrospect I think I acted pretty much the way I did when I plowed my Camaro into the back of a Datsun skidding on the ice when I was 16 back in 1984.
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
Fash wrote:Ann Coulter hates John McCain, says she will campaign for Hillary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuTqgqhxVMc
DERAIL!~
Sick Balls!
- miir
- Super Poster!
- Posts: 11501
- Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:06 pm
- XBL Gamertag: miir1
- Location: Toronto
- Contact:
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
Taht video was fucking gold.
Ann Coulter is batshit insane.
Ann Coulter is batshit insane.
I've got 99 problems and I'm not dealing with any of them - Lay-Z
Re: McCain will be the next U.S. President (IMO)
All women are. Hence, you are correct sir! She just wears her crazy on the outside.miir wrote:Ann Coulter is batshit insane.
- Ash