|
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 21:03:54 -0500, "Rich Schultz"
wrote: What about 12 ga flare pistols fitted with a metal insert for .410 ga shotgun shells? Why bother with .410? 12ga. minishells are much better. they are available in buckshot and slugs Weebles Wobble (but they don't fall down) |
"Jeff Morris" wrote in message ... Leanne wrote: I don't carry a gun on me or my boat, but guns on boats discussions should be made with a bit of discretion. We just went through this discussion a bit ago on alt.rv. Should we or should we not carry firearms in our RV. I wonder how many gun owners have killed with their weapon. It takes a lot of nerve to actually do it. Talking is easy. Leanne Of the 30,000 gun deaths in the in 2002, only 300 were "legal interventions." I would guess most of these were professionals (police, etc.). Over 750 were accidental. About 12000 were homicides and more than half were suicide. Over 600 were 14 years of age or under. Its pretty clear that if a gun is fired and kills someone, its far more likely that the victim will be a family member, friend, or child, than than a criminal. Of course, these stats don't tell us how many crimes were prevented by the threat of a gun. In some neighborhoods, and for some businesses, this is clearly a factor, but for the average family, I think a gun is a liability. http://webapp.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_sy.html Your conclusion above doesn't follow the facts you just presented. About 750 accidental shootings took place. Over 27,000 were murders or homicides, i.e., someone "intentionally" killing themselves or others. The suicides are sad but if someone wants to do it, not much that can be done as many means are available. Given the 12,000 homicides, it would seem that a homeowner having a gun is an asset, not liability. (12000 compared to 750 accidents.) In other words, 12000 people were killed by criminals, that is, someone's family member, friend, or child, not the criminal. So if more citizens were trained and armed, maybe the statistic could be changed to 12000 dead criminals. The funny thing about guns is that if they aren't in your hand when needed, they can't magically strike down the bad guy - unlike SUVs that are able to kill people and the environment without human intervention! :) So if a person feels the need of a firearm for protection, either the weapon should be within reach at all times or, some type of delaying/alarm/alerting system should be in place to give one time to access and present the firearm. Such as steel doors and frames, windows high off the ground, and a good alarm system for the home defense scenario. Unintentionally, the house I built had the first 2 and added the last after an attempted daylight pre-Christmas burglery. Also had an incident in Savannah, Georgia, with a violent beggar hitting up folks at a Burger King. Instead of presenting my .45, I held up my folding tac knife (still folded) as he approached and he executed an immediate 90 degree turn away from us and left the area. No police, no blood, just peace and security for my wife and I and the rest of the good folks wanting a late night burger. But the firearm was there if needed, a comforting feeling. |
"Brian Whatcott" wrote ...
"Doug Dotson" wrote: When faced with questions like this, it is best to follow the advice of confucious: It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubts. I believe that this quote came from Samuel Johnson. But as Confucious actually said: " To know is to know that you know nothing. That is the meaning of true knowledge." K'ung-fu-tzu or Kongfuzi is usually rendered in English as Confucius And in modern standard Chinese he's known as Kongzi. The appellation 'Kongfuzi' seems to have only been recorded once in Chinese. Some have suggested it may have been a creation of Jesuit scholars. Cheers Bil |
Greg wrote:
"Jeff Morris" wrote in message ... Leanne wrote: I don't carry a gun on me or my boat, but guns on boats discussions should be made with a bit of discretion. We just went through this discussion a bit ago on alt.rv. Should we or should we not carry firearms in our RV. I wonder how many gun owners have killed with their weapon. It takes a lot of nerve to actually do it. Talking is easy. Leanne Of the 30,000 gun deaths in the in 2002, only 300 were "legal interventions." I would guess most of these were professionals (police, etc.). Over 750 were accidental. About 12000 were homicides and more than half were suicide. Over 600 were 14 years of age or under. Its pretty clear that if a gun is fired and kills someone, its far more likely that the victim will be a family member, friend, or child, than than a criminal. Of course, these stats don't tell us how many crimes were prevented by the threat of a gun. In some neighborhoods, and for some businesses, this is clearly a factor, but for the average family, I think a gun is a liability. http://webapp.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_sy.html Your conclusion above doesn't follow the facts you just presented. About 750 accidental shootings took place. Over 27,000 were murders or homicides, i.e., someone "intentionally" killing themselves or others. The important stat was "legal intervention" which includes self-defense. The fact that is very low would seem to imply that actually shooting a gun in self defense is very rare, or not very successful. The fact that more than half of the gun deaths are suicides is proof alone that gun ownership is dangerous. The suicides are sad but if someone wants to do it, not much that can be done as many means are available. Wrong. There are roughly 10 attempts for every successful suicide. Which method do you think has a higher success rate: a handgun or aspirin? Hopefully, if you or a loved one gets depressed, there will not be a gun handy. Also, much of the difference in suicide rates between states can be explained by easy access to guns. In fact, membership in the NRA seems to be an suicide risk. Given the 12,000 homicides, it would seem that a homeowner having a gun is an asset, not liability. (12000 compared to 750 accidents.) In other words, 12000 people were killed by criminals, that is, someone's family member, friend, or child, not the criminal. So if more citizens were trained and armed, maybe the statistic could be changed to 12000 dead criminals. More than half of the victims knew their murderer. You're assuming the murderer is a criminal that could be deterred if only the victim had a gun. Its more likely that the murderer is the next door neighbor who's ****ed you ran over his trash can again. In southern states, where the murder rate is triple that of the northeast, murder is much more likely to stem from a altercation between acquaintances. In the Northeast, murder is more often associated with an actual crime. The obvious conclusion is that while having a gun may protect against of small risk of burglary, it greatly increases the odds of killing a friend in a barroom fight. The funny thing about guns is that if they aren't in your hand when needed, they can't magically strike down the bad guy - unlike SUVs that are able to kill people and the environment without human intervention! :) So if a person feels the need of a firearm for protection, either the weapon should be within reach at all times or, some type of delaying/alarm/alerting system should be in place to give one time to access and present the firearm. Such as steel doors and frames, windows high off the ground, and a good alarm system for the home defense scenario. Unintentionally, the house I built had the first 2 and added the last after an attempted daylight pre-Christmas burglery. Also had an incident in Savannah, Georgia, with a violent beggar hitting up folks at a Burger King. Instead of presenting my .45, I held up my folding tac knife (still folded) as he approached and he executed an immediate 90 degree turn away from us and left the area. No police, no blood, just peace and security for my wife and I and the rest of the good folks wanting a late night burger. But the firearm was there if needed, a comforting feeling. Savannah has one of the highest murder rates in the country - almost triple that of New York or Boston. I don't think this proves that arming everyone makes you safer. The more I look into this topic, the clearer the answer seems: those parts of the country where people insist on the right, even the responsibility, to carry a gun, do it simply because they enjoy killing themselves and each other. |
On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 09:33:21 -0500, Jeff Morris
wrote: In southern states, where the murder rate is triple that of the northeast, murder is much more likely to stem from a altercation between acquaintances. In the Northeast, murder is more often associated with an actual crime. The obvious conclusion is that while having a gun may protect against of small risk of burglary, it greatly increases the odds of killing a friend in a barroom fight. Only if you are a criminal. It is illegal to carry a gun into a bar in Georgia, even with a weapons carry permit Weebles Wobble (but they don't fall down) |
In 2002 the Leading cities for murders were; Washington DC, Detroit,
Baltimore, Memphis, Chicago and Philadelphia all southern cities? Jeff Morris wrote: Greg wrote: "Jeff Morris" wrote in message ... Leanne wrote: I don't carry a gun on me or my boat, but guns on boats discussions should be made with a bit of discretion. We just went through this discussion a bit ago on alt.rv. Should we or should we not carry firearms in our RV. I wonder how many gun owners have killed with their weapon. It takes a lot of nerve to actually do it. Talking is easy. Leanne Of the 30,000 gun deaths in the in 2002, only 300 were "legal interventions." I would guess most of these were professionals (police, etc.). Over 750 were accidental. About 12000 were homicides and more than half were suicide. Over 600 were 14 years of age or under. Its pretty clear that if a gun is fired and kills someone, its far more likely that the victim will be a family member, friend, or child, than than a criminal. Of course, these stats don't tell us how many crimes were prevented by the threat of a gun. In some neighborhoods, and for some businesses, this is clearly a factor, but for the average family, I think a gun is a liability. http://webapp.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_sy.html Your conclusion above doesn't follow the facts you just presented. About 750 accidental shootings took place. Over 27,000 were murders or homicides, i.e., someone "intentionally" killing themselves or others. The important stat was "legal intervention" which includes self-defense. The fact that is very low would seem to imply that actually shooting a gun in self defense is very rare, or not very successful. The fact that more than half of the gun deaths are suicides is proof alone that gun ownership is dangerous. The suicides are sad but if someone wants to do it, not much that can be done as many means are available. Wrong. There are roughly 10 attempts for every successful suicide. Which method do you think has a higher success rate: a handgun or aspirin? Hopefully, if you or a loved one gets depressed, there will not be a gun handy. Also, much of the difference in suicide rates between states can be explained by easy access to guns. In fact, membership in the NRA seems to be an suicide risk. Given the 12,000 homicides, it would seem that a homeowner having a gun is an asset, not liability. (12000 compared to 750 accidents.) In other words, 12000 people were killed by criminals, that is, someone's family member, friend, or child, not the criminal. So if more citizens were trained and armed, maybe the statistic could be changed to 12000 dead criminals. More than half of the victims knew their murderer. You're assuming the murderer is a criminal that could be deterred if only the victim had a gun. Its more likely that the murderer is the next door neighbor who's ****ed you ran over his trash can again. In southern states, where the murder rate is triple that of the northeast, murder is much more likely to stem from a altercation between acquaintances. In the Northeast, murder is more often associated with an actual crime. The obvious conclusion is that while having a gun may protect against of small risk of burglary, it greatly increases the odds of killing a friend in a barroom fight. The funny thing about guns is that if they aren't in your hand when needed, they can't magically strike down the bad guy - unlike SUVs that are able to kill people and the environment without human intervention! :) So if a person feels the need of a firearm for protection, either the weapon should be within reach at all times or, some type of delaying/alarm/alerting system should be in place to give one time to access and present the firearm. Such as steel doors and frames, windows high off the ground, and a good alarm system for the home defense scenario. Unintentionally, the house I built had the first 2 and added the last after an attempted daylight pre-Christmas burglery. Also had an incident in Savannah, Georgia, with a violent beggar hitting up folks at a Burger King. Instead of presenting my .45, I held up my folding tac knife (still folded) as he approached and he executed an immediate 90 degree turn away from us and left the area. No police, no blood, just peace and security for my wife and I and the rest of the good folks wanting a late night burger. But the firearm was there if needed, a comforting feeling. Savannah has one of the highest murder rates in the country - almost triple that of New York or Boston. I don't think this proves that arming everyone makes you safer. The more I look into this topic, the clearer the answer seems: those parts of the country where people insist on the right, even the responsibility, to carry a gun, do it simply because they enjoy killing themselves and each other. |
Its not clear what your point is here. Are you saying these are or are
not southern states? From my Boston perspective, most of these cities are southern. However, if you're claiming they are not, you should consider that this is from a list of cities over 500,000, which excludes all cities in Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, South Carolina, Mississippi, and Louisiana. Birmingham, Little Rock, Atlanta, Jackson, and Miami have higher murder rates than Philadelphia. New Orleans would lead the list, having a murder rate 20% worse than Washington. JR Gilbreath wrote: In 2002 the Leading cities for murders were; Washington DC, Detroit, Baltimore, Memphis, Chicago and Philadelphia all southern cities? |
Well duh! Of course I thought Detroit, Chicago and Philadelphia were
southen cities. Get a life. Also, if you get murdered you are just as dead in a city of 500,000+ as you are in one with 1,000 people. Your knowledge of the population of cities is truly unbelievable are you looking at 1810 census? Jeff Morris wrote: Its not clear what your point is here. Are you saying these are or are not southern states? From my Boston perspective, most of these cities are southern. However, if you're claiming they are not, you should consider that this is from a list of cities over 500,000, which excludes all cities in Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, South Carolina, Mississippi, and Louisiana. Birmingham, Little Rock, Atlanta, Jackson, and Miami have higher murder rates than Philadelphia. New Orleans would lead the list, having a murder rate 20% worse than Washington. JR Gilbreath wrote: In 2002 the Leading cities for murders were; Washington DC, Detroit, Baltimore, Memphis, Chicago and Philadelphia all southern cities? |
Suggest you get a copy of "More Guns Less Crime" by John Lott. It puts alot
of the stats into perspective in a way that is understandable. "Jeff Morris" wrote in message ... Greg wrote: "Jeff Morris" wrote in message ... Leanne wrote: I don't carry a gun on me or my boat, but guns on boats discussions should be made with a bit of discretion. We just went through this discussion a bit ago on alt.rv. Should we or should we not carry firearms in our RV. I wonder how many gun owners have killed with their weapon. It takes a lot of nerve to actually do it. Talking is easy. Leanne Of the 30,000 gun deaths in the in 2002, only 300 were "legal interventions." I would guess most of these were professionals (police, etc.). Over 750 were accidental. About 12000 were homicides and more than half were suicide. Over 600 were 14 years of age or under. Its pretty clear that if a gun is fired and kills someone, its far more likely that the victim will be a family member, friend, or child, than than a criminal. Of course, these stats don't tell us how many crimes were prevented by the threat of a gun. In some neighborhoods, and for some businesses, this is clearly a factor, but for the average family, I think a gun is a liability. http://webapp.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_sy.html Your conclusion above doesn't follow the facts you just presented. About 750 accidental shootings took place. Over 27,000 were murders or homicides, i.e., someone "intentionally" killing themselves or others. The important stat was "legal intervention" which includes self-defense. The fact that is very low would seem to imply that actually shooting a gun in self defense is very rare, or not very successful. The fact that more than half of the gun deaths are suicides is proof alone that gun ownership is dangerous. The suicides are sad but if someone wants to do it, not much that can be done as many means are available. Wrong. There are roughly 10 attempts for every successful suicide. Which method do you think has a higher success rate: a handgun or aspirin? Hopefully, if you or a loved one gets depressed, there will not be a gun handy. Also, much of the difference in suicide rates between states can be explained by easy access to guns. In fact, membership in the NRA seems to be an suicide risk. Given the 12,000 homicides, it would seem that a homeowner having a gun is an asset, not liability. (12000 compared to 750 accidents.) In other words, 12000 people were killed by criminals, that is, someone's family member, friend, or child, not the criminal. So if more citizens were trained and armed, maybe the statistic could be changed to 12000 dead criminals. More than half of the victims knew their murderer. You're assuming the murderer is a criminal that could be deterred if only the victim had a gun. Its more likely that the murderer is the next door neighbor who's ****ed you ran over his trash can again. In southern states, where the murder rate is triple that of the northeast, murder is much more likely to stem from a altercation between acquaintances. In the Northeast, murder is more often associated with an actual crime. The obvious conclusion is that while having a gun may protect against of small risk of burglary, it greatly increases the odds of killing a friend in a barroom fight. The funny thing about guns is that if they aren't in your hand when needed, they can't magically strike down the bad guy - unlike SUVs that are able to kill people and the environment without human intervention! :) So if a person feels the need of a firearm for protection, either the weapon should be within reach at all times or, some type of delaying/alarm/alerting system should be in place to give one time to access and present the firearm. Such as steel doors and frames, windows high off the ground, and a good alarm system for the home defense scenario. Unintentionally, the house I built had the first 2 and added the last after an attempted daylight pre-Christmas burglery. Also had an incident in Savannah, Georgia, with a violent beggar hitting up folks at a Burger King. Instead of presenting my .45, I held up my folding tac knife (still folded) as he approached and he executed an immediate 90 degree turn away from us and left the area. No police, no blood, just peace and security for my wife and I and the rest of the good folks wanting a late night burger. But the firearm was there if needed, a comforting feeling. Savannah has one of the highest murder rates in the country - almost triple that of New York or Boston. I don't think this proves that arming everyone makes you safer. The more I look into this topic, the clearer the answer seems: those parts of the country where people insist on the right, even the responsibility, to carry a gun, do it simply because they enjoy killing themselves and each other. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:38 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com