kallend 2,230 #76 December 18, 2009 QuoteQuotePer year. How long does a gun last? Well, lookie here. Mr. never-answers-a-question is suddenly wanting others to answer his. How quaint! You're the materials engineering expert. If you have some point to make, put it forth. Yes. Either your math skills suck or you are being deliberately misleading, (or both). Not unexpected, though.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #77 December 18, 2009 Quote Here's some reading for you: The NRA's "Armed Citizen" files: http://www.nraila.org/ArmedCitizen/Default.aspx The KABR's "Operation Self Defense" files: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/opsd/ Are you saying that NRA provides unbiased coverage on this issue? To me this makes as much sense as asking me to find truth in the Bible.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #78 December 18, 2009 QuoteRecent events, however, make me to reconsider this position. We had a few gun murders locally here in Bay Area, which although didn't make it up to Va Tech victim count, still were worrying. Both, by the way, happened in places which as far as I know did not restrict carrying guns (one in corporate office, and one in private apartment). In both cases I attribute the victim count to a gun used - sure, one can murder a person with a knife, Cologne massacre, 1964 - mace, flamethrower and lance. 33 killed/injured. Dnepropetrovsk murders, 2007 - 21 killed with blunt instruments Tsuyama massacre, 1938 - 30 killed with shotgun and sword Akihabara massacre, 2008 - 17 killed injured with a truck and an edged weapon Aum Shinrikyo, 1995 - 12 killed, 50 injured by sarin gas It's the CRIMINAL, not the weapon - something you still can't grasp. Quotebut it's very unlikely for an average Joe to slaughter three people, who are able to protect themselves. Very true - see the armed citizen files mentioned before. Quote So I am trying now to get the whole picture, and statements like "guns don't kill" are the least helpful here, and in fact make pro-gun people look pretty much like Brady people (who don't look smart by any means). No you're not - you're looking for perfect examples from pro-gunners, while accepting any countervailing proof at all. QuoteSo let's look closer on your examples: As far as I see, only one of those examples at least remotely supports a "a regular gun owner stopped a massacre" statement. And none of them actually used a gun as a gun - a dummy would work as well in all those scenarios. All were stopped by someone with a gun. See my mention above about only accepting perfect examples. QuoteWhat I was saying is the following: - Conclusion: until such areas exist, no matter how many gun owners you have around, they will not be able to stop every (or even most) shooting sprees. Nobody is saying that is the reason for those people to carry - except you. QuoteThen the question is, how exactly the NRA statement like "gun ownership reduces crimes even for those who do not carry guns" work? Because not all crimes are spree killings QuoteFrom the other side, there are little to none such sprees in Europe where gun ownership is severely limited. See above for the lie of that thought. IT'S THE CRIMINAL, NOT THE TOOL THEY USE.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #79 December 18, 2009 QuoteAre you sure you're comparing murders where a car was used to manslaughter a person or persons in the same way as a gun was, or it is just accidental deaths? Are the people any LESS dead because it was an accident?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #80 December 18, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotewhat percentage of guns bought is then used to murder someone. There are about 250 million guns in America, according to the BATF. There were 10,369 murders with guns in 1996, according to the FBI. Thus, only one out of every 24,000 guns is used to commit murder. That is .004% of all guns. 99.996% of all guns are never used to murder anyone! Per year. How long does a gun last? This is relevant, how? Is a 50-60 (or greater) year old gun suddenly going to develop senile dementia and wander through the neighborhood, flying into rages and shooting up the place or something? The math is obvious to anyone with a brain. Your agenda is obvious to anyone with a brain. QuoteJR quoted total number of guns, but only homicides in a single year, and divided one by the other. A gun lasts more than one year. So do cars. Your point is still stupid.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #81 December 18, 2009 Quote You wouldn't want to issue a gun license to someone who has a history of going around threatening to shoot other people. I heard this argument before. But unless you're following Republican motto "what I say should apply to everyone else but not me", then this criteria should apply to any country. Then a country which has a history of going around and actually shooting other people (comparing to just threatening) should be definitely banned from having WMDs, correct?* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #82 December 18, 2009 QuoteQuote Here's some reading for you: The NRA's "Armed Citizen" files: http://www.nraila.org/ArmedCitizen/Default.aspx The KABR's "Operation Self Defense" files: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/opsd/ Are you saying that NRA provides unbiased coverage on this issue? To me this makes as much sense as asking me to find truth in the Bible. If you bothered to research those links, you would have found that they are actually a collection of stories from the various news services for those areas.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,230 #83 December 18, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotewhat percentage of guns bought is then used to murder someone. There are about 250 million guns in America, according to the BATF. There were 10,369 murders with guns in 1996, according to the FBI. Thus, only one out of every 24,000 guns is used to commit murder. That is .004% of all guns. 99.996% of all guns are never used to murder anyone! Per year. How long does a gun last? This is relevant, how? Is a 50-60 (or greater) year old gun suddenly going to develop senile dementia and wander through the neighborhood, flying into rages and shooting up the place or something? The math is obvious to anyone with a brain. Your agenda is obvious to anyone with a brain. QuoteJR quoted total number of guns, but only homicides in a single year, and divided one by the other. A gun lasts more than one year. So do cars. Your point is still stupid. No. JR's math was simply incorrect, and your reference to cars is irrelevant, since applied to guns or cars or pink elephants, incorrect math is STILL incorrect.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #84 December 18, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotewhat percentage of guns bought is then used to murder someone. There are about 250 million guns in America, according to the BATF. There were 10,369 murders with guns in 1996, according to the FBI. Thus, only one out of every 24,000 guns is used to commit murder. That is .004% of all guns. 99.996% of all guns are never used to murder anyone! Per year. How long does a gun last? This is relevant, how? Is a 50-60 (or greater) year old gun suddenly going to develop senile dementia and wander through the neighborhood, flying into rages and shooting up the place or something? The math is obvious to anyone with a brain. Your agenda is obvious to anyone with a brain. QuoteJR quoted total number of guns, but only homicides in a single year, and divided one by the other. A gun lasts more than one year. So do cars. Your point is still stupid. No. JR's math was simply incorrect, and your reference to cars is irrelevant. You are correct about JR's math being incorrect - I'm sure that there were not 10k different single weapons being used for the murders, so the actual percentage would be less, just as the vehicular death percentage would be less. For a quick-and-dirty comparison between number of weapons and murder, it's fine, as is my comparison between the number of vehicles and vehicular deaths for a given year. But, since you claim it's wrong - show your proof.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,230 #85 December 18, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuote Here's some reading for you: The NRA's "Armed Citizen" files: http://www.nraila.org/ArmedCitizen/Default.aspx The KABR's "Operation Self Defense" files: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/opsd/ Are you saying that NRA provides unbiased coverage on this issue? To me this makes as much sense as asking me to find truth in the Bible. If you bothered to research those links, you would have found that they are actually a collection of stories from the various news services for those areas. As we've seen over the past 48 hours, cherry picking news stories is remarkably easy. You can hardly claim that the NRA is unbiased when it cherry picks stories just as much as Brady, Ron, JR, rushmc, you or I do.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #86 December 18, 2009 Quote The number of gun murders is the same, but the population has increased since then, and so has the number of guns. That trend per-capita doesn't fit well with the anti-gun folks fear-mongering. The overall number of guns is meaningless, because as you said, "guns do kill, the people do". So it's the number of gun owners which matters. And I wonder how trend per-capita would change during last two years? Quote Very few. But they sure kill a lot of people by accident - 40,000 per year - four times worse than is done intentionally with guns. Accidents do not count here, because we're comparing the items by specific purpose to answer the question what is safe - to sell a car or to sell a gun? The OP claimed that they all should be banned because virtually any item can be used to murder a person, so we need to look at statistics, how many people bought a car to murder a person, and how many people bought a gun to murder a person. Quote And I don't believe that getting killed by accident is any better than being killed intentionally. What can I say here? Even the law treats them differently, so if you consider dying in a car accident and being shooted in a massacre by a gun owner to have the same effect on society, I have nothing more to argue with you.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,230 #87 December 18, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotewhat percentage of guns bought is then used to murder someone. There are about 250 million guns in America, according to the BATF. There were 10,369 murders with guns in 1996, according to the FBI. Thus, only one out of every 24,000 guns is used to commit murder. That is .004% of all guns. 99.996% of all guns are never used to murder anyone! Per year. How long does a gun last? This is relevant, how? Is a 50-60 (or greater) year old gun suddenly going to develop senile dementia and wander through the neighborhood, flying into rages and shooting up the place or something? The math is obvious to anyone with a brain. Your agenda is obvious to anyone with a brain. QuoteJR quoted total number of guns, but only homicides in a single year, and divided one by the other. A gun lasts more than one year. So do cars. Your point is still stupid. No. JR's math was simply incorrect, and your reference to cars is irrelevant. You are correct about JR's math being incorrect Yes, I am. Quote - I'm sure that there were not 10k different single weapons being used for the murders, so the actual percentage would be less, just as the vehicular death percentage would be less. For a quick-and-dirty comparison between number of weapons and murder, it's fine, as is my comparison between the number of vehicles and vehicular deaths for a given year. Wrong - try again. Jeez- I even gave you a big hint.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #88 December 18, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Here's some reading for you: The NRA's "Armed Citizen" files: http://www.nraila.org/ArmedCitizen/Default.aspx The KABR's "Operation Self Defense" files: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/opsd/ Are you saying that NRA provides unbiased coverage on this issue? To me this makes as much sense as asking me to find truth in the Bible. If you bothered to research those links, you would have found that they are actually a collection of stories from the various news services for those areas. As we've seen over the past 48 hours, cherry picking news stories is remarkably easy. You can hardly claim that the NRA is unbiased when it cherry picks stories just as much as Brady, Ron, JR, rushmc, you or I do. It's not the NRA reporting the stories - they are a repository of stories reported by local agencies, as I said.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #89 December 18, 2009 QuoteWrong - try again. Jeez- I even gave you a big hint. SHOW. YOUR. PROOF.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,230 #90 December 18, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Here's some reading for you: The NRA's "Armed Citizen" files: http://www.nraila.org/ArmedCitizen/Default.aspx The KABR's "Operation Self Defense" files: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/opsd/ Are you saying that NRA provides unbiased coverage on this issue? To me this makes as much sense as asking me to find truth in the Bible. If you bothered to research those links, you would have found that they are actually a collection of stories from the various news services for those areas. As we've seen over the past 48 hours, cherry picking news stories is remarkably easy. You can hardly claim that the NRA is unbiased when it cherry picks stories just as much as Brady, Ron, JR, rushmc, you or I do. It's not the NRA reporting the stories - they are a repository of stories reported by local agencies, as I said. Brady doesn't report stories either. Nor does JR, or I, or you, or rushmc. They are ALL stories that that they cherry pick. When was the last time the NRA posted a story that put gun ownership in a bad light? When was the last time Brady posted a story that put it in a good light?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,230 #91 December 18, 2009 QuoteQuoteWrong - try again. Jeez- I even gave you a big hint. SHOW. YOUR[/red. PROOF. I can make you look really stupid if that is your wish, or you can work it out for yourself. I suggest you re-read his post, CAREFULLY. I'll give you a couple of hours.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #92 December 18, 2009 QuoteAre the people any LESS dead because it was an accident? Why it mattes? The law punishes murder and accident killing differently, even though in both cases the victims are dead. You really see no difference here?* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #93 December 18, 2009 Quote Dnepropetrovsk murders, 2007 - 21 killed with blunt instruments Since you didn't provide any links, I only comment this one as I'm familiar with it (my family lives nearby). You're seem to be talking about 21 persons killed by different murderers - not exactly a massacre or what. And Dnepropetrovsk is quite a large city, with over 1M people living there.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
georgerussia 0 #94 December 18, 2009 Quote If you bothered to research those links, you would have found that they are actually a collection of stories from the various news services for those areas. So what? This collection is not a representative sample, because am organization which made it was biased. In fact that's their mission.* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. * Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #95 December 18, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteWrong - try again. Jeez- I even gave you a big hint. SHOW. YOUR. PROOF. I can make you look really stupid if that is your wish, or you can work it out for yourself. I suggest you re-read his post, CAREFULLY. I'll give you a couple of hours. How about just saying "the calculations are wrong, and here's why" and SHOW it, instead of all the agenda-driven bullshit? I know that George asked 'what percentage of guns bought are then used to murder someone', and JR used the total number of guns in circulation. I think the numbers John provided are useful in the sense of showing that it is NOT the legal gun owners or THEIR guns that are the problem - something that you seemingly cannot accept. I'm also very sure that there's PLENTY of statistical tricks that you are already working out to twist the data to show something entirely different, just like you always try to do. If you HAVE proof of the number of guns bought to immediately murder someone as George asked, then trot it out and show how you came to the conclusion (for once in the history of dz.com) instead of playing your "look how much smarter I am" games.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #96 December 18, 2009 QuoteQuote Dnepropetrovsk murders, 2007 - 21 killed with blunt instruments Since you didn't provide any links, I only comment this one as I'm familiar with it (my family lives nearby). You're seem to be talking about 21 persons killed by different murderers - not exactly a massacre or what. 21, by 3 different people. I don't seem to think that's making any difference as to the status of the victims. QuoteAnd Dnepropetrovsk is quite a large city, with over 1M people living there. So? Are they any LESS dead because it's a large city? How about if you just admit that you have an agenda, rather than (unsuccessfully) trying to make people think that you're on the fence about gun ownership.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #97 December 18, 2009 QuoteQuote If you bothered to research those links, you would have found that they are actually a collection of stories from the various news services for those areas. So what? This collection is not a representative sample, because am organization which made it was biased. In fact that's their mission. The reports were made by local news orgs. Are you saying that all those various news stations and newspapers are biased, since they reported on people defending themselves?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #98 December 19, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Here's some reading for you: The NRA's "Armed Citizen" files: http://www.nraila.org/ArmedCitizen/Default.aspx The KABR's "Operation Self Defense" files: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/opsd/ Are you saying that NRA provides unbiased coverage on this issue? To me this makes as much sense as asking me to find truth in the Bible. If you bothered to research those links, you would have found that they are actually a collection of stories from the various news services for those areas. As we've seen over the past 48 hours, cherry picking news stories is remarkably easy. You can hardly claim that the NRA is unbiased when it cherry picks stories just as much as Brady, Ron, JR, rushmc, you or I do. It's not the NRA reporting the stories - they are a repository of stories reported by local agencies, as I said. Brady doesn't report stories either. Nor does JR, or I, or you, or rushmc. They are ALL stories that that they cherry pick. When was the last time the NRA posted a story that put gun ownership in a bad light? When was the last time Brady posted a story that put it in a good light?Have you ever heard of or maybe hired a clipping service?"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
mnealtx 0 #99 December 19, 2009 QuoteSo it's the number of gun owners which matters. No. It's the number of CRIMINALS. Your agenda is showing. QuoteAccidents do not count here, because we're comparing the items by specific purpose to answer the question what is safe - to sell a car or to sell a gun? And again, your agenda is showing. Murder is not the only reason to buy a gun. Quoteso we need to look at statistics, how many people bought a car to murder a person, and how many people bought a gun to murder a person. Good luck proving that. I guess my guns must be broken, all they've killed is paper. Again, your agenda is showing. QuoteWhat can I say here? Even the law treats them differently, so if you consider dying in a car accident and being shooted in a massacre by a gun owner to have the same effect on society, I have nothing more to argue with you. Dead is still dead, regardless of the method. And your agenda is still showing.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,230 #100 December 19, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteWrong - try again. Jeez- I even gave you a big hint. SHOW. YOUR. PROOF. I can make you look really stupid if that is your wish, or you can work it out for yourself. I suggest you re-read his post, CAREFULLY. I'll give you a couple of hours. How about just saying "the calculations are wrong, and here's why" and SHOW it, instead of all the agenda-driven bullshit? . Well, as a matter of fact, that IS exactly what I did. And my agenda is to point out the truth (like how many states there are). To find how many guns have NEVER (JR's word) been used in a murder you have to eliniate the possibility that a gun hasn't been used in any year of its existence. He only calculated for one year (1996). Since guns last well over a year, a gun that wasn't used for a murder in 1996 may have been used in 1997 or 1992 or 2003 or ... Hence his final number is way off. My comment and corrections in red. *** There are about 250 million guns in America, according to the BATF. OK There were 10,369 murders with guns in 1996, according to the FBI. 1996 - one year only Thus, only one out of every 24,000 guns is was used to commit murder. in 1996, one year only That is .004% of all guns. OK, for 1996, one year only 99.996% of all guns are never were not used to murder anyone in 1996!... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next Page 4 of 6 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
kallend 2,230 #100 December 19, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteWrong - try again. Jeez- I even gave you a big hint. SHOW. YOUR. PROOF. I can make you look really stupid if that is your wish, or you can work it out for yourself. I suggest you re-read his post, CAREFULLY. I'll give you a couple of hours. How about just saying "the calculations are wrong, and here's why" and SHOW it, instead of all the agenda-driven bullshit? . Well, as a matter of fact, that IS exactly what I did. And my agenda is to point out the truth (like how many states there are). To find how many guns have NEVER (JR's word) been used in a murder you have to eliniate the possibility that a gun hasn't been used in any year of its existence. He only calculated for one year (1996). Since guns last well over a year, a gun that wasn't used for a murder in 1996 may have been used in 1997 or 1992 or 2003 or ... Hence his final number is way off. My comment and corrections in red. *** There are about 250 million guns in America, according to the BATF. OK There were 10,369 murders with guns in 1996, according to the FBI. 1996 - one year only Thus, only one out of every 24,000 guns is was used to commit murder. in 1996, one year only That is .004% of all guns. OK, for 1996, one year only 99.996% of all guns are never were not used to murder anyone in 1996!... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
