Per capita cost of gun violence, by state

[kallend 2,175]

Coreeece

This is just another example of your liberal hypocrisy in that prohibition is only good for stuff you don't like...

Please provide a link to ANY post I've made that calls for prohibition.

Rushmc has made the same claim as you, but whenever asked to provide evidence he goes really quiet.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,175]

Hooknswoop

General aviation doesn't cover their costs 100%, the tax payers pick up the tab. Maybe this should change. A per use fee for ATC, per call to 1-800-WX-BRIEF, per flight plan filed, increase fuel taxes to cover all maintnence, improvements, etc of airports, fire stations on airports, etc.


Derek V

Evidence in support of your claim?

User fees - government proposed them but on analysis decided less revenue than the current system and withdrew the proposal.

Who here is calling for any bans anyway? Just another strawman from you.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

Evidence in support of your claim?

I'm not going to do the work for you, you can google it.

Quote

User fees - government proposed them but on analysis decided less revenue than the current system and withdrew the proposal.

That's because the fee schedule was too small. How about 56.6% tax on fuel, $1000.00 per landing fee, etc. up the fee schedule so that it covers the costs of General Aviation instead of tax payers paying for a completely unnecessary private ownership of aircraft.

Quote

Who here is calling for any bans anyway? Just another strawman from you.

I'm calling for the ban. Who NEEDS a private airplane?

Derek V

[Coreeece 2]

kallend

***

This is just another example of your liberal hypocrisy in that prohibition is only good for stuff you don't like...

Please provide a link to ANY post I've made that calls for prohibition.

Perhaps I'm wrong John...but could you please finally explain your stance, because all these anti-gun postings over the years are making you look like a coward...

Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

[kallend 2,175]

Hooknswoop

***
Evidence in support of your claim?

I'm not going to do the work for you, you can google it.



Interpretation - you have no evidence.

Quote

***Who here is calling for any bans anyway? Just another strawman from you.

I'm calling for the ban. Who NEEDS a private airplane?

Derek V

So you want to ban all civilian skydiving. I hope all your skydiver friends know this. I guess anyone that wants to skydive in your world will have to join the 82nd Airborne or the Seals.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

kallend

***Source?

In the long run, taxpayers.

Maybe ammo should be taxed like tobacco, to reimburse for the costs to society.

You will not provide a source??



SOP

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,175]

Coreeece

******

This is just another example of your liberal hypocrisy in that prohibition is only good for stuff you don't like...

Please provide a link to ANY post I've made that calls for prohibition.

Perhaps I'm wrong John...but could you please finally explain your stance, because all these anti-gun postings over the years are making you look like a coward...

I've explained my position time and time again in SC.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

So you want to ban all civilian skydiving. I hope all your skydiver friends know this. I guess anyone that wants to skydive in your world will have to join the 82nd Airborne or the Seals.

Nope, I'll make exceptions for commercial aviation.

But for non-commercial purposes, who NEEDS a private airplane? No one. Maybe should ban them. Our taxes would go to better use. The skies would be quieter. Less pollution. I wouldn't have to worry about some crazy pilot crashing into my house. We should ban non-commercial private aircraft.

Why are my taxes paying for someone's HOBBY? We could put that money towards education.

Who NEEEDS a private airplane?

Derek V

[Boomerdog 0]

Quote

On balance I'd prefer to spend taxpayer money on education.

Well...you just validated the axiom that Liberals are very good at spending other people's money.

[masterrig 1]

Boomerdog

Quote

On balance I'd prefer to spend taxpayer money on education.

Well...you just validated the axiom that Liberals are very good at spending other people's money.

...but not in their back yard!


Chuck

[kallend 2,175]

Hooknswoop

Quote

So you want to ban all civilian skydiving. I hope all your skydiver friends know this. I guess anyone that wants to skydive in your world will have to join the 82nd Airborne or the Seals.

Nope, I'll make exceptions for commercial aviation.



Derek V

Totally lame. Your argument was about the cost to society of General Aviation (which includes skydiving, pipeline inspections, ballooning, crop spraying...), post #23 this thread. Now you're trying to move the goalposts.

Sorry - moving the goalposts is an automatic "you lose" around here.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,175]

Boomerdog

Quote

On balance I'd prefer to spend taxpayer money on education.

Well...you just validated the axiom that Liberals are very good at spending other people's money.

You mean like Reagan and GWB, those liberals each of whom increased federal spending.

I suppose YOUR education was 100% private, at schools receiving no subsidies whatsoever, and that your time in the military was privately funded.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Well, you would make exceptions so that the military and police could keep their firearms, right? So I can make an exception for commercial aviation. Private ownership of aircraft should be banned. No reason for our taxes to pay for someone's HOBBY. No one NEEDS their own private airplane.

Derek V

[Boomerdog 0]

You gotta REAL bad sense of timing. I mean...I'm up to a 1,500+ body count with Zombie Gun Ship on my I-Pad - I got the 105 going, the 40mm going and the mini gun hosin' Zombies left and right then this message breaks of your response and interrupts all of the mayhem...sheesh!

Now...back to hosin' zombies.

[Hooknswoop 19]

I checked the rules, http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=142088

Nope, nothing about goal posts.

Yep, either ban or tax enough to cover the cost of non-commercial aviation. I might consider allowing private ownership of ultralights, but only after extensive back ground checks, including a physiatrist examine the potential pilot firest. Wouldn't want to have the wrong sort owning one of these things.

Derek V

[kallend 2,175]

Hooknswoop

I checked the rules, http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=142088

Nope, nothing about goal posts.

Yep, either ban or tax enough to cover the cost of non-commercial aviation. I might consider allowing private ownership of ultralights, but only after extensive back ground checks, including a physiatrist examine the potential pilot firest. Wouldn't want to have the wrong sort owning one of these things.

Derek V

Well, since you INSIST on comparing guns to planes:

It would be just fine by me if similar training and testing were required for gun ownership as is required for a pilot license. And that guns be registered like airplanes. And when you carry a gun you have a transponder so the government can track you. And that your guns be inspected for compliance every year.

Parallelism between guns and planes. Thanks for the great idea.

After all, criminals far prefer guns to planes when committing violent crime, which IS the topic of this thread..

[BartsDaddy 7]

And we are still waiting on a source. Would let any of your students off without revealing their sources?

Handguns are only used to fight your way to a good rifle

[Hooknswoop 19]

I'm still thinking just ban non commercial private airplanes. No more of my taxes going towards someone's hobby that they don't need. Why would anyone need their own private airplane?!?!??

Derek V

[rushmc 23]

Come on John
You post the source or (to use YOUR OWN WORDS) it is just kallend made up hearsay

Get with it sir!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Anvilbrother 0]

Quote

Evidence in support of your claim?

You will get it from him, when we get the same for your original post.

Postes r made from an iPad or iPhone. Spelling and gramhair mistakes guaranteed move along,

[kallend 2,175]

rushmc

Come on John
You post the source or (to use YOUR OWN WORDS) it is just kallend made up hearsay

Get with it sir!

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

kallend

***Come on John
You post the source or (to use YOUR OWN WORDS) it is just kallend made up hearsay

Get with it sir!

Oh the blatant hypocritical dishonesty

As will most good liberals
Rules only apply to others (unless they agree with you)

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kelpdiver 2]

RMK

The state numbers stack up with the above overall number of around $230 billion. That is a lot of money it's nearly what the US spends on Medicaid - in this case for something that is needless (excepting this need to have "shootin' irons" like the founding fathers).

I hope both of the above two posters were joking by saying that the numbers seem cheap; otherwise it shows a strong lack of maths skills and understanding of large numbers.

Comes back to knowing what this value actually represents. It is highly comprised of lost potential rather than true costs, and it is dominated by the suicides. We know fully well that there are other methods to kill oneself - the American suicide rate is not notably high. The key detriment with suicide by handguns is that it is more effective than most with an 80% success rate (success = dying). So forcing them to the methods used by Europeans and Japanese will likely mean slightly fewer deaths, but most of this 'cost' will remain even without guns.

Mother Jones (LOL) was the source - that's why Kallend didn't want to offer it up.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/04/true-cost-of-gun-violence-in-america

Key ammo for my friends on this subject:
"the Department of Transportation (DOT) published a 300-page study estimating the "total value of societal harm" from this problem in 2010 at $871 billion."

IOW, using the same methodology, and including suicides, guns are still 1/4th the cost to society as car crashes.

[kallend 2,175]

rushmc

******Come on John
You post the source or (to use YOUR OWN WORDS) it is just kallend made up hearsay

Get with it sir!

Oh the blatant hypocritical dishonesty

As will most good liberals
Rules only apply to others (unless they agree with you)

You need to learn how to click on a link with your mouse.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,175]

kelpdiver

IOW, using the same methodology, and including suicides, guns are still 1/4th the cost to society as car crashes.

Oh, nothing to be concerned about then. Keep on killing and carry on.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.