Bowling For Columbine

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

What they/you try to imply is that the reason they were murdered, is because they have a gun in their home. Wrong!

Having a gun in the home makes killing a living creature much easier than some other tool which can be used to kill. Why do you think the suicide rates may be higher with homes equiped with guns? If I cut my wrist with a razor blade, will I die? Likely not. But if I put a pistol to my head, I'm a goner.

Quote

That's the kind of voodoo science that the VPC would like everyone to believe...

Geez, I never considered the CDC (Center for Decease Control) voodoo science.

Dude you and I will never agree. To you guns save people's lives. To me, they take them.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[Michele 1]

Steve, I am truly sorry you lost a friend in the Montreal Massacre.

But - and this in no way negates your loss - didn't Marc Lepine have a knife, and used it on one of the victims? I seem to recall that. Yes, there was a gun - a semi-auto, iirc - and I can really understand your position. I don't agree, but that's all right...I do understand it.

However, when someone goes on a spree killing, there are generally many other things to consider rather than just the weapon used. If someone had that kind of hatred - as in Marc Lepine's life - they will go off with whatever weapon they have handy - a truck, a knife, a gun, their hands...it's the person, not the weapon, which needs to get help and be identified - and possibly cured, if they are not sociopathic.

Look at Andrea Yeates. 5 children dead, a history of severe mental illness, and she killed her five children by drowning. Or the children who've been strangled. Or those who've died in arson fires (like those 20 or so here recently). It's the person, not the weapon.

My ex used his hands, even though we had many weapons around the house (several rifles, a shotgun, his sport gun [for skeet], and our handguns). He used a table, too, once, but never a gun.

I suppose my point is simply that should a person desire it, there are many weapons available, including hands. It is not the gun, it is the person who wields the gun, wields the table, wields the vase. It is the murderous intent which is important here, and no matter if there was a gun available or not, the murder will happen.

And now I'm backing out of this thread. Please, Steve, understand there is NO disrespect intended for your loss.

Ciels-
Michele

~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

Steve, I am truly sorry you lost a friend in the Montreal Massacre. Please, Steve, understand there is NO disrespect intended for your loss.

Michele

For the record, I wasn't a close friend of Anne-Marie (at best I was an acquantence). But the girl I was dating at the time knew her and the circumstances surrounding the event did not in anyway help the state of my relationship (which failed soon after).

I know Marc Lepine was a psycho with little respect for life and women. And as far as I remember all of his victims (dead or alive) were assaulted with a firearm, not a knife.

One other thing, I do realize that it is the person not the object initiating the killing. But guns are just a much more efficient killing tool than someone's hands, a knife, or most other objects lying around. When a gun is used on someone, traggic results often occur.

I'm not saying the answer is strick gun control (personally I hope the solution is for people to decide that they don't need that weapon under their pillow). But I do question why private citizens need military assault weapons.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

...using a handgun to kill in self-defense is a rare event. Looking at both men and women, over the past 20 years, on average only two percent of the homicides committed with handguns in the United States were deemed justifiable or self-defense homicides...

Let's see, according to the FBI there were 7,176 handgun homicides, so 2% of that means that there were 143 justifiable homicides with handguns.

Quote

To put it in perspective, more people are struck by lightning each year than use handguns to kill in self-defense.

According to numerous internet sites, an average of 73 people die each year from lightening.

So, what this means is that you are wrong again. Actually, there are twice as many justifiable homicides with handguns, then there are deaths from lightening.

Furthermore, the number of justifiable homicides reported by the FBI is low, for several reasons:

- The FBI report bases the status of the homicide (justifiable or not justifiable) soley on judgement of the police officer at the scene, who are likely to be very conservative in ruling out criminal activity. Many of these incidents are later ruled justifiable in a court of law and are missed in these statistics.

- Once a death is later determined to be justifiable, many police departments don't bother with the extra paperwork necessary to modify the original report to the FBI.

- The biggest factor skewing this number are those jurisdictions that follow legal distinctions between "justifiable" and "excusable" homicides. In these areas the *majority* of civilian legal defensive homicides are ruled excusable and are then not eligible to be counted in the FBI statistics. Gary Kleck did a study of such homicides in Detroit (a jurisdiction which uses this method of classification) and found that between 1969 and 1980 344 civilian legal defensive homicides were ruled "Justifiable" and 741 were ruled "Excusable" suggesting that in these jurisdictions the number of civilian legal defensive homicides missed is very substantial.

By using numbers from various sample jurisdictions and eliminating the errors caused by the FBI sampling, Kleck came up with two methods of determining how many legal defensive homicides occured in 1980. Combing the results of the two methods Kleck came up with upper and lower boundaries for estimating civilian legal defensive homicides: 1,700 - 3,100 civilian legal defensive homicides occured in the US in 1980 (with more confidence toward the upper boundary than the lower).
This is more than 10 - 20 times greater than the FBI totals for 1980 of 145. It is from 5 to 10 times more than the number of legal defensive homicides attributed to police officers in that time period.

Source: Point Blank, Guns and Violence in America, Gary Kleck, pages 111-116.

[ryoder 1,590]

Quote

- (My favorite) For all of the promises made on behalf of the self-defense handgun, using a handgun to kill in self-defense is a rare event. Looking at both men and women, over the past 20 years, on average only two percent of the homicides committed with handguns in the United States were deemed justifiable or self-defense homicides by civilians. To put it in perspective, more people are struck by lightning each year than use handguns to kill in self-defense.

OK, now I'm curious; Why do you specify "kill in self-defense" instead of "used a handgun in self-defense"??? You are excluding all instances where:

1. The attack was prevented by the display of the gun.
2. The attack was stopped by the display of the gun.
3. The attack was stopped by wounding the attacker.

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Why do you think the suicide rates may be higher with homes equiped with guns?

Having a gun in your home does not make you suicidal. However, suicidal people might decide to go out and get a gun to complete their plans. The gun is not responsible for that.

Quote

If I cut my wrist with a razor blade, will I die? Likely not. But if I put a pistol to my head, I'm a goner.

Here's one you'll like, from your own home country:

"Making guns less available does not reduce suicide but merely causes the person seeking death to use another means. While gun-related suicides were reduced by Canada's gun control legislation of 1978, the overall suicide rate did not go down at all: the gun-related suicides were replaced 100% by an increase in other types of suicide -- mostly jumping off bridges."

Source: "Guns and suicide: possible effects of some specific legislation," Rich, Young, Fowler, Wagner, and Black, The American Journal of Psychiatry March, 1990.

I don't think that deaths from jumping off of bridges is any better than deaths from guns.

The Japanese don't own any private guns, and yet their suicide rate is higher than that of the U.S.

Suicides are not caused by guns. The suicide rate is determined by cultural and economic factors.

And for more evidence of the cultural causation, consider that the Japanese, with no private guns, have one of the lowest murder rates in the world. However, Japanese-Americans - Japanese folks who live in America with complete access to guns - still commit murder only at the same low rate as their countrymen back home.

It ain't the guns. It's the culture.

[Michele 1]

Quote

I now know Marc Lepin was a psycho with little respect for life and women. And as far as I remember all of his victims (dead or alive) were assaulted with a firearm, not a knife.

In the interest of fairness, there was not a lot of information about the crime itself (something about things getting censored and withheld from public view...), but there are some reports that indicate he was found with a bloody knife, and one of his victims (not in the original room - I think it was the room he suicided in) had several stab wounds, as well as at least one gunshot.

Lepine was indeed a psycho. The stressors in his life included his girlfriend getting pregnant and then terminating the pregnacy, as well as being rejected by the military for being "unstable"...and some others, as well. He was definitely mysoginistic, inasmuch as all the failures in his life he blamed on women. I can't research his early life, but I will venture a solid bet that there was a seriously violent household he came from, likely with the father either absent or violent towards women and towards himself.

In any event...

I suppose my point is simply that murder is murder, despite the weapon. While I agree that guns handy make it simpler to actually murder, there are (as in my case) times where the violence is done, even with guns in the house, by hands.

I am wondering if there is a breakdown of murders with a gun, and what kind. I mean, domestic violence v. gang shooting v. armed robbery v. et cetera. And then compare to stats like domestic violence/murder without a gun, via hands, or poison, or whatever.

Quote

I do realize that it is the person not the object initiating the killing. But guns are just a much more efficient killing tool than someone's hands, a knife, or most other objects lying around

As someone who has lived with "a gun laying around", I simply don't agree. I also have not yet been murdered, and hopefully won't ever be. I also hope I never have to use the gun in anger. But as someone who has suffered at the hands of someone I loved, with guns laying around (in two cases within easy reach - easier than say, the coffee table...), I just can't agree.

There are many effective killing tools...guns are just one of many, and likely the easiest to legislate. If the gun laws were actually enforced, and then a study determines more action is necessary, then perhaps I'd consider my position again. But I don't think those studies have been done, and I don't think they will be done.

Perhaps the question which needs to be answered for me is why are there people who kill, and how can we find them, and help them? I suspect that answer will not come, either, because we are dealing with as many reasons as there are murders, but still, I think finding the root of the issue, the cause, is important, rather than focussing on one single method of murder.

Ciels-
Michele

~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~

[CanuckInUSA 0]

yada ... yada ... yada ... did you say something? I didn't hear you.

Man this sucks!!! If the weather was better I'd be thinking about jumping instead of talking about this stuff.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

I now know Marc Lepin was a psycho with little respect for life and women.

There's the cause of the mass murder. The gun didn't make him do it. Even if guns had been banned, psycho's like this find ways to get them on the black market. Complaining about guns doesn't stop psychos.

Quote

I do question why private citizens need military assault weapons.

Please define what you think a "military assault weapon" is.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

Perhaps the question which needs to be answered for me is why are there people who kill, and how can we find them, and help them?

Wow ... leave it to Michele to step in at the right time and say the right thing. Who would of thunk'it. You actually beat me to the punch (the why people kill people question). But humans have been killing each other for a long time now, and we're likely not going to be stopping anytime soon.

So yeah haw!!! It's open season, where's the closest gun shop? Just kidding of course.

LOL ... I can see the headlines.

"DZ.COMer gets wasted by fellow DZ.COMer. Why? Because the DZ.COMer doing the wasting knew that the other DZ.COMer getting wasted wasn't armed. News at eleven ..."

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[Michele 1]

Quote

But humans have been killing each other for a long time now, and we're likely not going to be stopping anytime soon.

But that's the point, then, isn't it? It doesn't matter about guns/knives/poison/whatever, what matters is that there are murderous hearts...

Quote

leave it to Michele to step in at the right time and say the right thing. Who would of thunk'it

Yeah, who'd'a thunk it??? LOLOL!

Quote

DZ.COMer gets wasted by fellow DZ.COMer. Why? Because the DZ.COMer doing the wasting knew that the other DZ.COMer getting wasted wasn't armed. News at eleven

Nah, but you're welcome to come over for dinner in a gun ridden household when you're in town. I promise I won't shoot you. No news at 11 here....

Ciels-
Michele

~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

Please define what you think a "military assault weapon" is.

I consider automatic weapons to be military assault weapons. I can see handguns as self-defense weapons and hunting is well hunting (a whole different ball game). But things like Tec9s or AK47s (just to name a fraction of the stuff out there) just shouldn't be on the open market. But they are. Hey if you want to go shoot military quality weapons? Why don't you either join the military (I'm sure they'll find some war for you to shoot people) or setup some sort of system where licensed (if that's what you want to call it) gun clubs have these weapons. But in a controlled environment on gun ranges. But the weapons are already out there in circulation and calling them back just isn't going to happen. I don't know?

I would like to see less semi-automatic weapons out there in the public's hands. But the will of the pro-gun forces (and the history of the USA) are just too strong for the Feds to have the balls to controls those type of weapons.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[mnischalke 0]

And if you find three apples under an apple tree, your pears will be ripe.

The fiction you base your entire argument upon was written by Karen Brock, an "analyst" for the Violence Policy Center, and otherwise unpublished, to the best of my knowledge. The VPC is an extremist organization which calls for the ban of all firearms. Brock has also written unfounded rebuttals to Prof. John Lott's book, More Guns, Less Crime. While his work has been challenged frequently, it was researched so thoroughly, I am yet unaware of anyone who has developed unrefuted evidence against his findings.

In fact, in one of her "studies" she states that Hispanics have a lower rate of gun ownership than the rest of the population. "Hispanics are far less likely than blacks or whites to own guns," the study maintains. "Only 11 percent of Hispanics own guns, compared to 16 percent of blacks, and 27 percent of whites."

She further states that "Hispanic households had significantly higher rates of property crime, burglary, and theft than non-Hispanic households." She goes on to add "That year [1997], Hispanics had a total firearm injury (fatal and nonfatal) rate 2.8 times that of whites," also "Hispanics are more likely than those in other racial/ethnic groups to be victims of violent crimes involving strangers," the study continues. "77.4 percent of Hispanics were murdered with a firearm—the highest percentage for any racial or ethnic group...Handguns were used in 69.5 percent of all Hispanic homicides—once again the highest of any racial or ethnic group."

I am sorry, but what logic is she using to realize that more guns equals more crime? She actually proves the point of what she is arguing against! Less guns equals more crime!!!!

The numbers she states about women and violence, which you outlined, may well be factual in some contexts. But upon analyzation, her conclusions and misrepresentations are unfounded. Is it surprising that most women know their killer? Is it surprising that most killings happen during an argument? Is it surprising that when a woman used a firearm in self defense (wow, did she actually admit to that in her "study?"), she knew the person she defended herself against?

She says "The overwhelming majority of homicides among females by male offenders in
single victim/single offender incidents in 2001 were not related to any other felony
crime. Most often, females were killed by males in the course of an
argument—usually with a firearm. In 2001 there were 1,541 incidents in which the
circumstances of the homicide between the female victim and the male offender in
single victim/single offender incidents could be identified. Of these, 86 percent (1,320
out of 1,541) were not related to the commission of any other felony." In the very next paragraph, she states the truth: "Of the non-felony homicides, 65 percent (862 out of 1,320) involved arguments between the female victim and the male offender and 49 percent (425 out of 862) of those homicides involved guns." Read it any way you want, but she says "USUALLY with a firearm" but then goes on to say usually is 49% of the time. Sorry, but 49% of the time, does not constitute USUALLY to me. Unfortunately, she never states what the percentage is in the 14% of murders which were related to the commission of a felony, nor does she expound on what that constitutes. Was the female committing the felony when she was killed? That's a whole new ballgame

Also, according to the FBI, firearms are used in about 66% of all homocides (2002). To me, that tells me that women who are killed 49% of the time with firearms, are actually 17% more likely to be killed by something other than a firearm than the overall average murder victim (considering there's no felony taking place).

You were right when you said propaganda.

But, you couldn't be more wrong when you said:

Quote

Firearms are rarely used to kill criminals or stop crimes.

Here's a list of press clippings from 2000-2002 of defensive uses of firearms and justifiable homocides. Figures by various sources, from law enforcement to extensive studies place self-defensive uses of firearms between 600,000 and 2.5 million each year.

I am sorry you are so misinformed.

Her study does a few things for me though: It reinforces my theory that many men are motherfuckers and cannot treat women with the respect they deserve as the mothers of our society. It tells me that restraining orders do not work. It tells me that women need to get the fuck away when they are threatened the first time in a relationship. It tells me that more women need to be educated all forms of self defense, including and most importantly, firearms training, and that all women should be armed in order to equalize the threat posed by these men and their propensity to violence against the fairer sex.

mike

Girls only want boyfriends who have great skills--You know, like nunchuk skills, bow-hunting skills, computer-hacking skills.

[mnischalke 0]

Quote

But things like Tec9s or AK47s (just to name a fraction of the stuff out there) just shouldn't be on the open market. But they are.

So, any clue as to how many AK47s are actually used in homocides? Any clue as to the ratio between homocides committed with "assault weapons" and with the handguns you admit to seeing as okay?

The media has done a wonderful job on misinforming you.

Quote

Hey if you want to go shoot military quality weapons? Why don't you either join the military (I'm sure they'll find some war for you to shoot people)...

Where do you think I developed my fondness, proficiency and deep respect for firearms, especially those dreaded "assault weapons?" As one of Uncle Sam's Misguided Children, my dear boy.

mike

Girls only want boyfriends who have great skills--You know, like nunchuk skills, bow-hunting skills, computer-hacking skills.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

Less guns equals more crime!!!!

Maybe here, but not in other societies.

Hey I agree with you 100% about how men and women act and how we really should act. So it's not like we're always talking apples and oranges.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

The media has done a wonderful job on misinforming you.

I really don't care for the media. You should know that. After all, we're skydivers right?

Quote

Where do you think I developed my fondness, proficiency and deep respect for firearms, especially those dreaded "assault weapons?"

Hey I can respect your background and you obviously know a whole lot more about the weaponry than I ever will. Now if you can believe it, I was briefly in the military as well and thoroughly enjoyed firing the automatic weapons. But that was Canada's military back in 80s (if you want to call it a military) ... LOL

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[mnischalke 0]

Quote

Maybe here, but not in other societies.

And the root of the matter is society. Please name one other society which has the diversity in backgrounds, religions, races, creeds, colors, etc. Compound that with the pace at which we live our lives in this society. Add in the influence of the media and the entertainment dollar value of violence. Sprinkle in the competitive nature of our society and the fact our children are far-too-often neglected in the pursuit of the almighty dollar. Add a dash of societal acceptance of quitting vows and breaking homes.

Ya might say there's no other society in the world quite like ours. Someone called it a melting pot a few dozen decades ago. I call it a pressure cooker.

Quote

Hey I agree with you 100% about how men and women act and how we really should act. So it's not like we're always talking apples and oranges.

Then you might want to be a little more selective of what utter BS fuzzy math "studies" you base your arguments on.

mike

Girls only want boyfriends who have great skills--You know, like nunchuk skills, bow-hunting skills, computer-hacking skills.

[mnischalke 0]

Quote

Hey I can respect your background and you obviously know a whole lot more about the weaponry than I ever will. Now if you can believe it, I was briefly in the military as well and thoroughly enjoyed firing the automatic weapons. But that was Canada's military back in 80s (if you want to call it a military) ... LOL

Any time you make it out to Northern Virginia, please look me up. I'd love to show you some aspects of shooting and owning firearms you probably never dreamed of.

mike

Girls only want boyfriends who have great skills--You know, like nunchuk skills, bow-hunting skills, computer-hacking skills.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Actually there is another society. Canada. Of course we are a much smaller, less intense version. But we are much more alike than many people would like to admit on both sides of the border.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[happythoughts 0]

I found it interesting that when battered womens shelters are built, it decreases the murder rate for men. The women don't feel "trapped" or "cornered" and go to the shelter. For women, the weapon of choice for murder is poison. I found it surprising when I read it (FBI website).

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

Any time you make it out to Northern Virginia, please look me up. I'd love to show you some aspects of shooting and owning firearms you probably never dreamed of.

Hey that sounds like fun. And it's guys like you (with experience) that I'm not concerned about.

Of course I'm sure one day, a DZ.COMer is going to pop me at a boogie. Because after reading this thread, they'll know that I'm not armed. Or am I? Maybe I'm an hypocrite and I'm packing?

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[jaaska 0]

Quote

Quote

Maybe here, but not in other societies.

And the root of the matter is society. Please name one other society which has the diversity in backgrounds, religions, races, creeds, colors, etc.... CUT...

Well, believe it or not, there are countries in Europe with a lot more diverse background etc. with a lot less death, murder and gun debate.

On top of that, e.g. The Netherlands is considered to be one of the most liberal countries w/ something like half of the population non-Dutch origin (liberal in a sense "as long as your actions do not harm others, you are free to do so" - not in "leftie communist blah blah blah" sense that, according to many, liberal means )

America is a wonderful place. I've been there, I've even lived there, and I'm looking forward to visit you guys again. However, it is hard to find another place with such contradictions (hard conservatism vs. "freedom" etc. ).

[billvon 3,121]

>I am sorry you are so misinformed.

Cut it out.

[mnischalke 0]

Ooops. My apologies go out again.

So, just to get it straight, saying that someone is misinformed because they base an argument on an apples becoming oranges propaganda piece is a personal attack? It certainly wasn't meant to be, but I will amend my post so this thread can live a long and educational life.

Edit: I cannot edit that line out since the edit feature is no longer available. If you would like to edit that single line from my post, please do.

mike

Girls only want boyfriends who have great skills--You know, like nunchuk skills, bow-hunting skills, computer-hacking skills.

[goose491 0]

Quote

To put it in perspective, more people are struck by lightning each year than use handguns to kill in self-defense.

According to numerous internet sites, an average of 73 people die each year from lightening.

So, what this means is that you are wrong again. Actually, there are twice as many justifiable homicides with handguns, then there are deaths from lightening.