Gun control

Post Reply
User avatar
spot
Posts: 41336
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Gun control

Post by spot »

I wonder whether I could post a very specific question, in the hope that this thread might manage to stay on topic for the duration of the discussion.

It relates solely to the USA.

It relates solely to people who murder with a gun they are legally entitled to possess. The thread might, in passing, like to list a few recent prominent instances.

Question 1: Why would you prefer the law to be changed, or not, in such a way that they had no such legal entitlement before committing the murder?

Question 2: If you would, what would the change consist of?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Bruv
Posts: 12181
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:05 pm

Gun control

Post by Bruv »

Exhibit One..................

Dashcam video of fatal shooting
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
User avatar
spot
Posts: 41336
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Gun control

Post by spot »

I really don't know why anyone does that.

There is no flashplayer on my machine.

I was really hoping someone might focus on those two questions.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
User avatar
Saint_
Posts: 3342
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:05 pm
Location: The Four Corners
Contact:

Gun control

Post by Saint_ »

spot;1490142 wrote: I wonder whether I could post a very specific question, in the hope that this thread might manage to stay on topic for the duration of the discussion.

It relates solely to the USA.

It relates solely to people who murder with a gun they are legally entitled to possess. The thread might, in passing, like to list a few recent prominent instances.

Question 1: Why would you prefer the law to be changed, or not, in such a way that they had no such legal entitlement before committing the murder?


Ok, I'll bite the question being clear to me: You can either change a law so that someone is prevented from owning a gun so that they cannot commit murder with it or you can allow them to own a gun until they commit murder with it. Of course the obvious problem is, "How do you know when someone is going to commit murder?"

There we get into either psychology or metaphysics. Can you ("you" being the government of course) reliably use psychology to predict murder before it happens, or at least to a level that would greatly reduce the number of murders to a point where your society is willing to allow itself to lose a "right" it believes it has and is certainly addicted to? Or can you through other means such as clairvoyance or extrasensory perception tell who is a murderer in the future and who is not?

Let's stick to known science for now, (although there is a fascinating book by Arthur C. Clark called "The Light of Other Days" where wormhole technology allows the present to se the future and thereby avoid it.) and avoid ESP since it has never been proven reliably to work.

The answer seems clear, but not very satisfying. Psychology is the obvious choice. Modern psychology is very advanced and can often, not always, predict abnormal tendencies in people. I saw some pretty remarkable demonstrations of this in the Air Force when I visited the "Social Actions" Branch.

2. Therefore, I'd change the law to require that all gun purchasers take a very lengthy psychological exam. Unfortunately, as we all know, your state of mind at one time in your life has nothing to do with your state of mind at another, so I's suggest that you take the same exam over the course of your life or for as long as you owned guns. Every seven years would probably be doable since it could be added to the renewal of a Driver's License.

And so we just legislated sanity. Not really possible is it? Not only is it almost impossible to get people just to renew their driver's licenses, most would balk at a regular "government psych exam." It smacks of Orwellianism and thought control. Who's to say what is sane and what is not? Then there's the whole problem with sociopaths and true psychopaths who can seem perfectly normal and often pass psych exams. And weren't those the very people we wanted to stop from having guns in the first place?

I have plenty of other suggestions and even a solution which has worked for both Australia and Japan, but that would be off-topic.
User avatar
spot
Posts: 41336
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Gun control

Post by spot »

We could take a specific instance if it helps. Or any others people bring in. A couple of days ago there were three people killed by an anti-abortion advocate.

Planned Parenthood: Three die in shooting at Colorado clinic - BBC News

A legally held weapon, a dead policeman, a couple of dead visitors to the center, lots of bleeding survivors.

Can we say, in retrospect, the chap should not have been allowed a firearm permit? Or do we think he should have had one? Or do we have an alternative shooter to consider?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
User avatar
FourPart
Posts: 6491
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 3:12 am
Location: Southampton
Contact:

Gun control

Post by FourPart »

First of all, as in the UK I would ban the ownership of firearms to all but those who can demonstrate that they have a need for them in their livelihood (such as farmers, etc), and even then the type of firearm would be restricted to the purpose. I would also extend the usage to licensed sports clubs, to remain locked in the premises when not in use & only used on the sports club premises or at organised & licenced events.

Although there will always be those who will go outside the law for their firearms, I am of the belief that by not making them legitimately available, then their very ownership otherwise indicates illegal intent & may well prevent an incident from happening in the first place.

If firearms are freely available in the first place, then it seems quite obvious that the probability of them being used for illegal purposes increases accordingly. If they are more difficult to come by, then the likelihood of them being used reduces.

Yes, the topic is specifically about the US, but that doesn't mean that other countries, such as the UK can't be used as an example of how things could be managed in the US.
User avatar
spot
Posts: 41336
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Gun control

Post by spot »

FourPart;1490147 wrote: First of all, as in the UK I would ban the ownership of firearms to all but those who can demonstrate that they have a need for them in their livelihood (such as farmers, etc), and even then the type of firearm would be restricted to the purpose. I would also extend the usage to licensed sports clubs, to remain locked in the premises when not in use & only used on the sports club premises or at organised & licenced events.

Although there will always be those who will go outside the law for their firearms, I am of the belief that by not making them legitimately available, then their very ownership otherwise indicates illegal intent & may well prevent an incident from happening in the first place.

If firearms are freely available in the first place, then it seems quite obvious that the probability of them being used for illegal purposes increases accordingly. If they are more difficult to come by, then the likelihood of them being used reduces.

Yes, the topic is specifically about the US, but that doesn't mean that other countries, such as the UK can't be used as an example of how things could be managed in the US.
The thing is, I don't think you will find any part of the US legislature, either State or Federal, which has the will or the ability to "ban the ownership of firearms to all but those who can demonstrate that they have a need for them in their livelihood". At some level, practical reality surely has a place in these discussions.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
User avatar
spot
Posts: 41336
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Gun control

Post by spot »

Saint_;1490145 wrote: I'd change the law to require that all gun purchasers take a very lengthy psychological exam.


The link I put up - Accused Colorado Planned Parenthood shooter has list of complain - WCIV-TV | ABC News 4 - Charleston News, Sports, Weather - is local and detailed as far as Mr Dear is concerned. I note, among other things, that "Hood said that Dear rarely talked to them, and when he did, he offered unsolicited advice, including recommending that Hood put a metal roof on his home so the U.S. government couldn't spy on him". Your suggestion may well be a way forward.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 13701
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: on the open road
Contact:

Gun control

Post by LarsMac »

This fellow appears to have been screaming yellow bonkers. Unfortunately, there are no laws that could be enacted that could keep him from having guns until he had exhibited behavior that suggested that he is a danger to others, and then it would take legal proceeedings to remove his guns from his possession.

Probably not going to happen in the foreseeable future.

I would be all for some sort of testing to prevent nutcases from owning guns. Unfortunately, we cannot usually spot crazies until they do something crazy. So taking a somewhat fatalistic stance, I believe that we just have to accept that there are nutcases out there, and every now and again, one is going to do something bizarre. the media will make the most of it, and it will be followed by a lot of hand-wringing and recriminations.

Passing laws that ban guns will probably not happen in the foreseeable future. And when that does happen, it will create a lot of havoc. So, arguing about that is a waste of time and energy.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
User avatar
Saint_
Posts: 3342
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:05 pm
Location: The Four Corners
Contact:

Gun control

Post by Saint_ »

LarsMac;1490151 wrote:

Passing laws that ban guns will probably not happen in the foreseeable future. And when that does happen, it will create a lot of havoc. So, arguing about that is a waste of time and energy.


I disagree. Japan managed to do it, and so did Australia. It takes a ton of time (50 years in the case of Japan) and is a very gradual process, but it can be done.
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 13701
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: on the open road
Contact:

Gun control

Post by LarsMac »

Saint_;1490155 wrote: I disagree. Japan managed to do it, and so did Australia. It takes a ton of time (50 years in the case of Japan) and is a very gradual process, but it can be done.


Well, yes, it is a gradual process. And neither of those countries had 100 million raving armed lunatics to deal with.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
User avatar
tude dog
Posts: 5121
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:48 am

Gun control

Post by tude dog »

spot;1490142 wrote: I wonder whether I could post a very specific question, in the hope that this thread might manage to stay on topic for the duration of the discussion.

It relates solely to the USA.

It relates solely to people who murder with a gun they are legally entitled to possess. The thread might, in passing, like to list a few recent prominent instances.

Question 1: Why would you prefer the law to be changed, or not, in such a way that they had no such legal entitlement before committing the murder?

Question 2: If you would, what would the change consist of?


Every once and a while the news media goes bonkers over a single incident and the usual suspects pick up on it again to rise up in self-righteous indignation.





82 SHOT- 15 FATALLY- IN CHICAGO OVER HOLIDAY WEEKEND

That is Obama's hometown where he was a Community Organizer, State Senator.

Daily his people are killed and he is silent. Some horrible thing happens in Colorado he jumps on it to promote his agenda

Los Angeles Times-The Homicide Report

Look at the map, any clues?

I live most my life in Los Angeles where for al least 30 years the Los Angeles Times have beat the drum for more gun control. The city and state have followed suit with laws to harass the legal gun owner.

What I am trying to say this is a lot of handwringing over a single incident.

Much of the country does not suffer that type of violence involving guns.

Go figure.
What happened to Kamala Harris' campaign?
She had the black vote all locked up.
User avatar
tude dog
Posts: 5121
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:48 am

Gun control

Post by tude dog »

LarsMac;1490156 wrote: Well, yes, it is a gradual process. And neither of those countries had 100 million raving armed lunatics to deal with.


100 million lunatics who pose no danger, only a different point of view.
What happened to Kamala Harris' campaign?
She had the black vote all locked up.
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 13701
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: on the open road
Contact:

Gun control

Post by LarsMac »

tude dog;1490162 wrote: 100 million lunatics who pose no danger, only a different point of view.


According to the other side, we are all armed lunatics. I don't really think we are all raving, though.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
Bruv
Posts: 12181
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:05 pm

Gun control

Post by Bruv »

spot;1490142 wrote:

Question 1: Why would you prefer the law to be changed, or not, in such a way that they had no such legal entitlement before committing the murder?

Question 2: If you would, what would the change consist of?


spot;1490144 wrote: I really don't know why anyone does that.

There is no flashplayer on my machine.

I was really hoping someone might focus on those two questions.


I am reluctant to enter this conversation, my contribution with a recent prominent incident which happened to include a video was rated down, then immediately followed by yet another BBC report including............a video.

It is obviously not as easy as banning or restricting the ownership of firearms, it is now so deeply embedded into the national psyche.

When anti abortionists protest by shooting people you know there is a problem.

When people like the Tude think that it's all about media outrage over 'A' single incident, or that it's not a general problem because it happens in Chicago......"go figure"....That is the problem.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
User avatar
tude dog
Posts: 5121
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:48 am

Gun control

Post by tude dog »

LarsMac;1490170 wrote: According to the other side, we are all armed lunatics. I don't really think we are all raving, though.


I'll leave it at that.
What happened to Kamala Harris' campaign?
She had the black vote all locked up.
User avatar
spot
Posts: 41336
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Gun control

Post by spot »

Bruv;1490171 wrote: I am reluctant to enter this conversation, my contribution with a recent prominent incident which happened to include a video was rated down, then immediately followed by yet another BBC report including............a video.


What made my eyes roll was the title of the link - "Dashcam video of fatal shooting" - and the lack of any comment on its content or relevance. I didn't click the link because the link says "video" - the "BBC News" bit was edited out.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 13701
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: on the open road
Contact:

Gun control

Post by LarsMac »

The problem that I have is that people link all of these incidents together to present the opinion that all our problems here in America are because we have guns.

Yes, there are police out there who through lack of proper training don't seem to know when they should use their gun and when not to.

Yes, there are lunatics out there that have guns, and think that somehow, they can accomplish something by using their guns.

Yes, there are people out there who think that having a gun will keep them safe.

Yes, there are people out there who should have their guns taken away.

Yes, perhaps, if suddenly there were no guns in America, there are people who would be safer.

No, getting rid of all our guns will not magically fix all of the problems in America.

I would like to see something done about children having access to guns, and killing other children.

That is where I would like to start, but everyone else seems to insist that the entire discussion must be an all or nothing issue, and so, nothing ever gets done, and children continue to die.

That, in my not-so-humble opinion, is truly criminal.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 13701
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: on the open road
Contact:

Gun control

Post by LarsMac »

spot;1490173 wrote: What made my eyes roll was the title of the link - "Dashcam video of fatal shooting" - and the lack of any comment on its content or relevance. I didn't click the link because the link says "video" - the "BBC News" bit was edited out.


I am not sure of the relevance, either. The video shows someone walking away, and suddenly being shot down.

It is claimed that a police officer arrived on the scene of a young man holing a knife, and immediately shooting the young man 16 times.

Apparently, the young man was on drugs, and failed to respond to demands to drop the knife. Why the chicken**** cops could not simply take the boy down and remove his knife from his possession, I don't know.

This happened a year ago.

Why it has any current relevance, I have no idea.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
User avatar
tude dog
Posts: 5121
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:48 am

Gun control

Post by tude dog »

Bruv;1490171 wrote: I am reluctant to enter this conversation, my contribution with a recent prominent incident which happened to include a video was rated down, then immediately followed by yet another BBC report including............a video.

It is obviously not as easy as banning or restricting the ownership of firearms, it is now so deeply embedded into the national psyche.

When anti abortionists protest by shooting people you know there is a problem.

When people like the Tude think that it's all about media outrage over 'A' single incident, or that it's not a general problem because it happens in Chicago......"go figure"....That is the problem.


Such a shooting or even bombing of abortion clinics is nothing new. My point is it is rare.
What happened to Kamala Harris' campaign?
She had the black vote all locked up.
User avatar
spot
Posts: 41336
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Gun control

Post by spot »

tude dog;1490177 wrote: Such a shooting or even bombing of abortion clinics is nothing new. My point is it is rare.


You have, I think persuaded me. On average there are only three people illegally killed - murdered, if you like - by the use of firearms in the USA each day. That is so trivially small a number that reacting hysterically to it by changing the lifestyle of all Americans by curtailing their peculiar and idiosyncratic "right to bear arms" would be a major admission of defeat at the hands of a fringe element of people who turned out to be bad. Refusing to be beaten is more important than saving, at best, a thousand lives a year, while possibly endangering many more.

It is, as you say, rare, and backing down as a result of badness is the wrong approach.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
User avatar
FourPart
Posts: 6491
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 3:12 am
Location: Southampton
Contact:

Gun control

Post by FourPart »

3 per day in the USA?

Breaking it down further, three people are killed by a gun per hour and almost seven people are shot every 60 minutes.
Murders, Shootings And Gun Sales Per Day: An Average Day In United States

Yes, stats a couple of years old, but I can't imagine them changing as much as that.
User avatar
spot
Posts: 41336
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Gun control

Post by spot »

FourPart;1490213 wrote: Yes, stats a couple of years old, but I can't imagine them changing as much as that.It's all a matter of vocabulary. There are 30,000ish deaths by firearm in the USA each year. Of those, around 1,000 are illegal. The vast majority are suicides. My "three people illegally killed - murdered, if you like - by the use of firearms in the USA each day" is bang on.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
User avatar
G#Gill
Posts: 14763
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 1:09 pm

Gun control

Post by G#Gill »

Today there has been another gun attack in America. 14 dead, not sure how many injured. It was an attack inside a disabled persons' institute. Apparently the attack started at 11.00 am USA time and is still not sorted 6 hours later ! There seem to be dozens of police and soldiers and it seems to be a siege situation. Reports say that one of the attackers has been shot. They had body armour on and carried at least rifles.

Why is this sort of thing getting more and more common in America ?
I'm a Saga-lout, growing old disgracefully
User avatar
spot
Posts: 41336
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Gun control

Post by spot »

G#Gill;1490241 wrote: Why is this sort of thing getting more and more common in America ?
Endemic explicit violence in the entertainment and games industry, and the increasingly polarized capitalist inequality throughout American society. That it was "inside a disabled persons' institute" doesn't seem relevant, there seems to be a significant category of co-worker attacks and this sounds like another of them (though bringing one's wife to join in would be a bit bizarre).
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Bruv
Posts: 12181
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:05 pm

Gun control

Post by Bruv »

I wonder who has more fatalities, armed American citizens or terrorists ?

Quick Edit.

It has no bloody comparison..... HERE
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
User avatar
FourPart
Posts: 6491
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2014 3:12 am
Location: Southampton
Contact:

Gun control

Post by FourPart »

I notice that 9/11 falls conveniently just outside of the timescale.
Bruv
Posts: 12181
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:05 pm

Gun control

Post by Bruv »

FourPart;1490257 wrote: I notice that 9/11 falls conveniently just outside of the timescale.


280,024 domestic gun deaths................whether intended or accidental.....its a death.

3000 plus due to 9/11, add that to the 24 terrorist related deaths, thats 3024 ?

Hardly matters statistically...............somebody is making a lot of money off both statistics cynical me thinks.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
User avatar
spot
Posts: 41336
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Gun control

Post by spot »

Bruv;1490260 wrote: 280,024 domestic gun deaths................whether intended or accidental.....its a death.


That's close to the same number as died driving. They're deaths too. Most are accidental or suicide.

Of those "280,024 domestic gun deaths" - I wonder what "domestic" means in this context? - around 10,000 are illegal killings. Of the remaining 96%, most are accidental or suicide.

By about 20 years from now a lot of cars are going to drive themselves and the accidental total of driving deaths will drop to - let me guess - less than a tenth. Most of the remainder will be people refusing to give up driving despite the extra risk.

I wonder whether we could do that with guns too. Allow them to decide when to fire, instead of leaving it up to their owner. They'd need a similar amount of computing power as the car, which might add a few grams inside the handle. They'd need sensors to recognize body heat and detect other weapons, they'd need communications to discover whether the other guns in range had a hostile intention or capability. And they'd fire without command to protect their owner and his recognized compadres. People would soon stop carrying concealed manual weaponry if all the intelligent guns could detect them and consider them potentially hostile.

We may have a glimmer of an answer here.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
User avatar
Bryn Mawr
Posts: 16113
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 4:54 pm

Gun control

Post by Bryn Mawr »

spot;1490216 wrote: It's all a matter of vocabulary. There are 30,000ish deaths by firearm in the USA each year. Of those, around 1,000 are illegal. The vast majority are suicides. My "three people illegally killed - murdered, if you like - by the use of firearms in the USA each day" is bang on.


What is illegal, the shooting of the gun used to do it?

If only one in thirty deaths by firearms are illegal then either Americans are committing suicide in unbelievable numbers or the definition of illegal shooting has to be looked at.

If only one in thirty firearms used to kill is illegal then that is a strong argument to get rid of legal guns.

If your "The vast majority are suicides" is suggesting that twenty five thousand plus Americans shoot themselves each year then that is an appalling statistic - one person in each ten thousand of the population each year ...
User avatar
spot
Posts: 41336
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Gun control

Post by spot »

I'm sure it's one of the areas actually available for inspection. CDC for the reasons for death. The use of "illegal" is a combination of either convicted of murder or died in a shootout with the officers of the law, and it's around 3 a day.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
User avatar
spot
Posts: 41336
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Gun control

Post by spot »

All suicides

Number of deaths: 41,149

Deaths per 100,000 population: 13.0

Cause of death rank: 10

Firearm suicides

Number of deaths: 21,175

Deaths per 100,000 population: 6.7

Suffocation suicides

Number of deaths: 10,062

Deaths per 100,000 population: 3.2

Poisoning suicides

Number of deaths: 6,637

Deaths per 100,000 population: 2.1

FastStats - Suicide and Self-Inflicted Injury

from googling cdc statistics death rate suicide firearm
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
User avatar
spot
Posts: 41336
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Gun control

Post by spot »

As for the murder by firearm US figure, no, I've misremembered something I saw. The actual annual figure is currently nearer 7,000 than 1,000, which is 20 a day, not 3. I can't find the news story that had 1,000 in it, but it has to have been about a different matter.

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/c ... rtbl08.xls

I would still maintain that, while every death is a tragedy for a group of people and I have no desire to minimize that, the problem for society at large is trivial by comparison with major issues. Changing a country's ethos to try to mitigate it, while leaving bigger problems untouched, is not the way forward. Tackle the big problems first. Gun control is a big distraction with minor benefits even if it happened.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Bruv
Posts: 12181
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:05 pm

Gun control

Post by Bruv »

spot;1490262 wrote: That's close to the same number as died driving. They're deaths too. Most are accidental or suicide.

Of those "280,024 domestic gun deaths" - I wonder what "domestic" means in this context? - around 10,000 are illegal killings. Of the remaining 96%, most are accidental or suicide.

By about 20 years from now a lot of cars are going to drive themselves and the accidental total of driving deaths will drop to - let me guess - less than a tenth. Most of the remainder will be people refusing to give up driving despite the extra risk.

I wonder whether we could do that with guns too. Allow them to decide when to fire, instead of leaving it up to their owner. They'd need a similar amount of computing power as the car, which might add a few grams inside the handle. They'd need sensors to recognize body heat and detect other weapons, they'd need communications to discover whether the other guns in range had a hostile intention or capability. And they'd fire without command to protect their owner and his recognized compadres. People would soon stop carrying concealed manual weaponry if all the intelligent guns could detect them and consider them potentially hostile.

We may have a glimmer of an answer here.


Spot has lost it.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
User avatar
Bryn Mawr
Posts: 16113
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 4:54 pm

Gun control

Post by Bryn Mawr »

spot;1490267 wrote: All suicides

Number of deaths: 41,149

Deaths per 100,000 population: 13.0

Cause of death rank: 10

Firearm suicides

Number of deaths: 21,175

Deaths per 100,000 population: 6.7

Suffocation suicides

Number of deaths: 10,062

Deaths per 100,000 population: 3.2

Poisoning suicides

Number of deaths: 6,637

Deaths per 100,000 population: 2.1

FastStats - Suicide and Self-Inflicted Injury

from googling cdc statistics death rate suicide firearm


Odd, that totals to twenty five per hundred thousand whilst the WHO and others reports a figure of half that :-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c ... icide_rate
User avatar
spot
Posts: 41336
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Gun control

Post by spot »

Bryn Mawr;1490270 wrote: Odd, that totals to twenty five per hundred thousand
No no - the first 13 is the figure, the other three add to 12, they're the primary subtotals and there's 1 left over for others - like jumping off bridges or under trains.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
User avatar
Bryn Mawr
Posts: 16113
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 4:54 pm

Gun control

Post by Bryn Mawr »

spot;1490271 wrote: No no - the first 13 is the figure, the other three add to 12, they're the primary subtotals and there's 1 left over for others - like jumping off bridges or under trains.


Doh!
User avatar
spot
Posts: 41336
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Gun control

Post by spot »

Bruv;1490269 wrote: Spot has lost it.


I have a suspicion you're unaware the US military is trying out area interdiction weapons which can take themselves to a place, with instructions to watch who approaches within a particular distance and to kill those who don't match the pattern of "friend". These autonomous weapons are pretty close to what I described, and they're already developed.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Bruv
Posts: 12181
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:05 pm

Gun control

Post by Bruv »

spot;1490274 wrote: I have a suspicion you're unaware the US military is trying out area interdiction weapons which can take themselves to a place, with instructions to watch who approaches within a particular distance and to kill those who don't match the pattern of "friend". These autonomous weapons are pretty close to what I described, and they're already developed.


Nothing about mankind's advances toward killing their fellow man would surprise me, we are talking of a country that gave us napalm, cluster bombs,agent orange,drones,and the only country to use the atomic bomb.....so far.

Cut it any way you like.......but............the percentage of people that die by the gun in the USA is almost entirely down to the availability of guns and the culture that sustains that situation.

Whether the deaths are accidental, self inflicted,legal by officers of the law, or not is by the by.............death is death and very final........irreversible.

If the police/householder/suicidal teen/inquisitive toddler/disillusioned individual/angry ex-employee-husband-wife, in fact anybody with issues that might be solved by pulling a trigger can lay hands on a gun so easily it will continue.

"Guns don't kill...........people do" and other smart ass slogans are part of that culture, if everybody believes everybody else 'might' have a gun and 'might' use it, shooting them dead before they shoot you is not only acceptable, it is a way of life.

That unfortunately is the present culture in a nutshell without the excuses or justification, many might want that to change.......but rock and a hard place come to mind.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
Post Reply

Return to “Gun Control”