rushmc 23 #101 December 29, 2008 Quote Quote You might also try ratcheting down your ego, and when you've said something once, let it go at that. . When I try, I get asked over and over to post it again (my suggestions on gun laws being the obvious example from this very thread). Once, on one thread you were very specific on what laws you would propose. After that thread, you have not done it again."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #102 December 30, 2008 QuoteQuoteYou're still missing the point: I haven't made derogatory comments about an entire nation based upon the actions of single individuals. Maybe you should try the derisive laughter response technique. Our friends from England on this forum might disagree with you on that John... Provide an example. Support your assertion with something. Or just stick to mindless derisive laughter. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #103 December 30, 2008 Quotehuh? 3 million dead? I'm guessing you mean accidental deaths, though even then I doubt it's 100:1. The percentage of deaths by swimming pool to deaths to firearms is 100 to 1. Quotehttp://www.azstarnet.com/sn/specialreports/79388.php A child is 100 times more likely to die in a swimming accident than in gunplay, writes Steven D. Levitt, University of Chicago economics professor and best-selling author. Levitt analyzed child deaths from residential swimming pools and guns and found one child under 10 drowns annually for every 11,000 pools. By comparison, one child under 10 each year is killed by a gun for every 1 million guns, according to his research, outlined in a new book "Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side to Everything," which he co-wrote with journalist Stephen J. Dubner. In part because they are so familiar, swimming pools are less frightening than guns, Levitt writes. But the danger is clear - drowning is the leading cause of accidental death for children younger than 5 in Arizona and the second-leading cause of injury-related death nationally among children younger than 15. When a child dies by gun shot, people try to ban guns. But more children die by swimming than guns by a long shot....Where is the demand to ban swimming pools? Pool registration?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #104 December 30, 2008 Quote Jeez, what a country. Got it, you think ONE guy acts like an idiot and the whole country is jacked up. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #105 December 30, 2008 QuoteStill awaiting your recommendations on "more murder laws". And we are waiting for you to back up your comments. You know like the one where "80 criminals admitted to getting guns from a gun show" but you refuse to give the number of criminals asked. 80 out of 100 and there would be a problem, 80 out of 1 million and there is not a problem."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #106 December 30, 2008 Quote The percentage of deaths by swimming pool to deaths to firearms is 100 to 1. ***http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/specialreports/79388.php A child is 100 times more likely to die in a swimming accident than in gunplay, writes Steven D. Levitt, University of Chicago economics professor and best-selling author. Levitt analyzed child deaths from residential swimming pools and guns and found one child under 10 drowns annually for every 11,000 pools. By comparison, one child under 10 each year is killed by a gun for every 1 million guns, according to his research, outlined in a new book "Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side to Everything," which he co-wrote with journalist Stephen J. Dubner. wow - this is horseshit in the Kellerman class. The 100:1 ratio is immediately warped by making it only about those so young that many can't swim yet. Warped further by the disparity in the number of pools and guns out there. Actual numbers - accidental drownings (including the oceans and lakes) beat accidental gun deaths ~3:1. So having a pool and a gun at home, not that great a difference. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 893 #107 December 30, 2008 Once again it proves that statistics are used like a drunk uses a light pole. More support than illumination. Interesting thing about statistics, you can bend them to support desired results. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #108 December 30, 2008 Quote Quote Jeez, what a country. Got it, you think ONE guy acts like an idiot and the whole country is jacked up. One?? Shootings of every kind are in the news on a daily basis. If your country laws allow nearly everyone (including nearly every idiot!) to carry a weapon, why to wonder? dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #109 December 30, 2008 Quote (including nearly every idiot!) to carry a weapon, why to wonder? No, no bias there, Frau christel... Is 'nearly everyone' allowed to freely hunt in Germany? No - they have to go through training, just like the concealed carry holders have to. By your logic, 'nearly every' German hunter is an idiot.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #110 December 30, 2008 QuoteShootings of every kind are in the news on a daily basis. If your country laws allow nearly everyone (including nearly every idiot!) to carry a weapon, why to wonder? First of all, we're a nation of 300 million people. That's almost four times as many people as Germany has. So things will seem to happen four times more often here, even if they're occurring at the same rate per capita as in your own country. Second, the problem with your "logic" is that crime has dropped dramatically in America over the last 20 years, and that just happens to be the same period of time over which concealed carry laws started being enacted. Now, I'm not saying that concealed carry is responsible for the crime reduction. However, at the same time, you certainly can't claim that people carrying guns has caused an increase in crime. Because, in fact, crime has gone down during the time concealed carry laws have swept the states across the nation. So in other words, your perceptions and logic are completely wrong. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #111 December 30, 2008 Quote Quote (including nearly every idiot!) to carry a weapon, why to wonder? No, no bias there, Frau christel... Is 'nearly everyone' allowed to freely hunt in Germany? No - they have to go through training, just like the concealed carry holders have to. By your logic, 'nearly every' German hunter is an idiot. No contradiction here: Most of my fellow hunters are idiots We have not more than 350.000 hunters here, which are the only persons beeing allowed to keep, carry, buy weapons (no AK-whatsoever, of course), except very few "endangered" people. That's all in our population of more than 82 million. As already explained few times, it's a very long way to become a hunter, costs thousands of Euros, duration of training is about 10 months, 6-7 days/week learning for hours. Before all of that, police and hunting authorities closely check your personal "history". If they find dark spots, you can forget about all. Hunters are under strict control. I agree to that. No easy access to weapons - for nobody. Is that same procedure your CCW holders are going through, Mr. Mike? Drive drunken: your drivers license is gone, along with hunting license, SD license, private pilot license. (Proof of disaffection). Same over there? I don't think so. No doubt. You need more (rigid) gun laws. dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #112 December 31, 2008 Quote No doubt. You need more (rigid) gun laws. And those "more rigid" gun laws will have the same effect on OUR criminals as your laws had on the Erfurt killer. So, did you actually have a point?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #113 December 31, 2008 Got it. You think only have the right to do anything or have an opinion. Our history is free game, but Germanys violent history does not matter."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #114 December 31, 2008 When I was 10 I could swim. So if you wanted to remove the children that are not old enough to use a gun you argument might hold water. As it stands now, yours does not. Fact, a child is much more likely to get killed by a pool than a gun. The fact that a pool is seen as "normal" and a gun as "scarry" is the only reason guns are vilified. Further you wishing to ignore the data since the size difference in the data sets is just dishonest since we are using the ratio of events to the number of the item."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #115 December 31, 2008 Quote Further you wishing to ignore the data since the size difference in the data sets is just dishonest since we are using the ratio of events to the number of the item. I'm ignoring the 'data' because it gives a highly misleading result. The risk is not remote close to 100x. This is caused by undercounting the pools as the denominator, resulting in a much larger ratio. If the kid's neighbor has a pool, that's really the same as if he had one. A child is somewhat more likely to die drowning. (I've been unable to see the breakdown between pools and other water: oceans, rivers, lakes, bathtubs, and buckets). The conclusion is not that pools are wildly more dangerous than guns, therefore guns aren't a concern. The conclusion is teach your kids to swim. When they're 2 or 3. I was playing in the surf in San Diego by the age of 7. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sfc 1 #116 January 1, 2009 QuoteQuote Further you wishing to ignore the data since the size difference in the data sets is just dishonest since we are using the ratio of events to the number of the item. I'm ignoring the 'data' because it gives a highly misleading result. The risk is not remote close to 100x. This is caused by undercounting the pools as the denominator, resulting in a much larger ratio. If the kid's neighbor has a pool, that's really the same as if he had one. A child is somewhat more likely to die drowning. (I've been unable to see the breakdown between pools and other water: oceans, rivers, lakes, bathtubs, and buckets). The conclusion is not that pools are wildly more dangerous than guns, therefore guns aren't a concern. The conclusion is teach your kids to swim. When they're 2 or 3. I was playing in the surf in San Diego by the age of 7. And when was the last time a crook stole a swimming pool and used it to drown a police officer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skybill 22 #117 January 1, 2009 Hi cs, We need "More" "Rigid" gun laws ??? Enough Already!!!!!! Take a RED!!! To say we are doing just fine with the gun laws we now have is a joke!! We can scrape off about half of em', can as many criminals with the ones left for less of our tax $$$$, and there'll still be plenty for people like you!! Thank God we don't have hunting laws like yours in Germany!! Here in NC there's a move to extend the deer season.. more season ..more deer... more hunting...more guns... more bang, bang... I love it!! One of the major pushers for this move it seems is the Auto Insurance industry!! There are more deer, they jump in front of cars and get hit, the cars get wrecked and the insurance companies have to ante up $$ for the busted up cars!! SO, extend the deer season, more hunters can take more deer and the insurance companies will pay out fewer claims!! So, just stay in your beloved Germany with all "your" gun laws and we'll fend for oursevels over here, GOT THAT!!!! BTW, more fresh venison.."God, Guns and Guts keep America FREE!!!!" "Don't tread on me!!" SCR-2034, SCS-680 III%, Deli-out Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #118 January 2, 2009 QuoteI'm ignoring the 'data' because it gives a highly misleading result. You are trying to ignore it since you don't like the result. Nothing more. Quote If the kid's neighbor has a pool, that's really the same as if he had one. Yet children are often killed by OTHERS guns. Once again your attempt to cherry pick the data to twist it the way you want fails. QuoteThe conclusion is not that pools are wildly more dangerous than guns, therefore guns aren't a concern. The conclusion is that people ignore the greater risk of pools since they are seen as a good thing and focus on a lesser danger since they fear guns. QuoteThe conclusion is teach your kids to swim. AND to teach them about firearm safety."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #119 January 2, 2009 QuoteAnd when was the last time a crook stole a swimming pool and used it to drown a police officer. Appeal to emotion. Drowning has IN FACT been used to murder people. http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/national_world&id=6108153 You are doing EXACTLY what I claimed others are doing....You are vilifying a device since you fear it. You are vilifying a device for the ACTIONS of a person."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #120 January 2, 2009 QuoteQuoteI'm ignoring the 'data' because it gives a highly misleading result. You are trying to ignore it since you don't like the result. Nothing more. Why would I dislike the result? I have 7 guns and no child locks. (and no children) I just don't lies used to bolster my side - I believe they eventually backfire. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #121 January 3, 2009 QuoteI just don't lies used to bolster my side - I believe they eventually backfire. And *I* have provided data...*You* have provided hearsay and no data."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #122 January 3, 2009 QuoteQuoteI just don't lies used to bolster my side - I believe they eventually backfire. And *I* have provided data...*You* have provided hearsay and no data. I pointed out the obvious lie, when you switched it to only be about children. And it's not like you actually provided data, just bad conclusions. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BIGUN 1,483 #123 January 3, 2009 Very funny coming from somebody in the US, which has a far more recent history of invading a country without a valid reason and killing thousands in the process. *** Ummm. You do know the Canucks have played a role in this war also?Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #124 January 4, 2009 QuoteAnd it's not like you actually provided data, just bad conclusions. I provided sources....You provided your opinion masquerading as data. I provided a reference, you provided your personal opinion. You can try to change those facts all you want....But your tap dancing will not change the fact you brought only your personal opinion and no references or sources."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
