|
Death statistics
|
Death statistics
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 15:46:03 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Urin Asshole" wrote in message .. . On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:48:20 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... On 2/19/13 9:00 AM, Eisboch wrote: For kicks I looked up the leading causes of death in the USA. Data is the final numbers from 2010 as published by the Center for Disease Control. Surprisingly, firearms related deaths didn't make the top ten and firearms related homicides weren't even close to the top ten. It's interesting that deaths caused by traffic accidents numbered about 3 times those of homicides involving firearms, but all the focus is on more gun control laws. Personal note: This is not a excuse of deaths caused by firearms, but rather an attempt to put it all in perspective. Heart disease: 597,689 Cancer: 574,743 Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 138,080 Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 129,476 Accidents (unintentional injuries): 120,859 Alzheimer's disease: 83,494 Diabetes: 69,071 Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 50,476 Influenza and Pneumonia: 50,097 Intentional self-harm (suicide): 38,364 Traffic accidents: 33,808 Firearms: 30,470 (19,392 suicides, 11,078 homicides) There are solid statistically based predictions that state that firearms deaths will exceed traffic accident deaths in a couple of years. Oh, you forgot to list the number of Americans who die of old age. :) On a more serious note, I only took one college-level statistics course and have forgotten most of what I ever learned about that sort of math, so I asked a family member who has taken four graduate-level stats courses about these sorts of comparisons (gun deaths vs. car deaths vs. cancer deaths, et cetera) and got a chuckle in response. "Such comparisions are based on silliness and are statistically absurd. Yes, more people die of cancer than of gunshot wounds but...so what?" ========================== The number that surprised me was deaths by homicide involving firearms. I read the same thing you did regarding firearm deaths exceeding traffic deaths by 2015 however that includes suicides. Unfortunately, although a gun is the method of choice for most suicides, further gun restrictions won't eliminate them. As stated in my post, the data is presented simply to put things in perspective. 11,078 firearms related homicides is too many of course but it's a reflection of violence in our society ... which also cannot be totally eliminated. There are bad people in the world. But the number is not the huge number that some of the media and proponents of even more gun control measure would like you to believe. My state has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation. Permits require background checks and every purchase of a firearm at a dealer involves a telephone check and taking of an electronic fingerprint to verify that you are who you say you are and your permit is valid. You must present a valid permit even for ammunition purchases. But, our me-too governor has proposed and is pushing for even more restrictive laws including jail time for purchasing more than one firearm per month for existing permit holders, making getting a permit more difficult, and putting a heavy state tax (up to 50%) on all ammunition sales (even range target practice rounds). I don't see how that is going to affect the homicide rate by firearms in the country. All it is is political posturing in reaction to a horrible but isolated event caused by a kid who was severely disturbed .... as are all cases of mass murders. By that twisted ****ing logic, we might as well do away with the NTSB and all the other safety protocols, since they result in fewer deaths. How about faulty cribs. What a load of horse****. You have a product that's killing 1000s of people, but since it doesn't kill as many as cancer, it's ok. ------------------------------------------------------- The numbers were presented to put things in perspective. Of course any deaths due to firearms is not ok .... but the number, especially in homicides, is not what is being hyped by the media and others and some politicians are over-reacting IMO, like the governor of my state. Except that they don't put anything in perspective, because they're unrelated. It's like saying you live close to a lake and then say there's a big lake in Russia. The politicians that are over-reacting are those who're hyping the 2nd Amend. bull****. Not sure what state you're in. Fewer guns means fewer deaths by guns. Doesn't matter why someone uses a gun. If you have zero guns (not advocating this) then there would be zero gun deaths. |
Death statistics
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 16:57:32 -0500, Salmonbait
wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 12:13:19 -0800, Urin Asshole wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:48:20 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... On 2/19/13 9:00 AM, Eisboch wrote: For kicks I looked up the leading causes of death in the USA. Data is the final numbers from 2010 as published by the Center for Disease Control. Surprisingly, firearms related deaths didn't make the top ten and firearms related homicides weren't even close to the top ten. It's interesting that deaths caused by traffic accidents numbered about 3 times those of homicides involving firearms, but all the focus is on more gun control laws. Personal note: This is not a excuse of deaths caused by firearms, but rather an attempt to put it all in perspective. Heart disease: 597,689 Cancer: 574,743 Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 138,080 Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 129,476 Accidents (unintentional injuries): 120,859 Alzheimer's disease: 83,494 Diabetes: 69,071 Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 50,476 Influenza and Pneumonia: 50,097 Intentional self-harm (suicide): 38,364 Traffic accidents: 33,808 Firearms: 30,470 (19,392 suicides, 11,078 homicides) There are solid statistically based predictions that state that firearms deaths will exceed traffic accident deaths in a couple of years. Oh, you forgot to list the number of Americans who die of old age. :) On a more serious note, I only took one college-level statistics course and have forgotten most of what I ever learned about that sort of math, so I asked a family member who has taken four graduate-level stats courses about these sorts of comparisons (gun deaths vs. car deaths vs. cancer deaths, et cetera) and got a chuckle in response. "Such comparisions are based on silliness and are statistically absurd. Yes, more people die of cancer than of gunshot wounds but...so what?" ========================== The number that surprised me was deaths by homicide involving firearms. I read the same thing you did regarding firearm deaths exceeding traffic deaths by 2015 however that includes suicides. Unfortunately, although a gun is the method of choice for most suicides, further gun restrictions won't eliminate them. As stated in my post, the data is presented simply to put things in perspective. 11,078 firearms related homicides is too many of course but it's a reflection of violence in our society ... which also cannot be totally eliminated. There are bad people in the world. But the number is not the huge number that some of the media and proponents of even more gun control measure would like you to believe. My state has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation. Permits require background checks and every purchase of a firearm at a dealer involves a telephone check and taking of an electronic fingerprint to verify that you are who you say you are and your permit is valid. You must present a valid permit even for ammunition purchases. But, our me-too governor has proposed and is pushing for even more restrictive laws including jail time for purchasing more than one firearm per month for existing permit holders, making getting a permit more difficult, and putting a heavy state tax (up to 50%) on all ammunition sales (even range target practice rounds). I don't see how that is going to affect the homicide rate by firearms in the country. All it is is political posturing in reaction to a horrible but isolated event caused by a kid who was severely disturbed .... as are all cases of mass murders. By that twisted ****ing logic, we might as well do away with the NTSB and all the other safety protocols, since they result in fewer deaths. How about faulty cribs. What a load of horse****. You have a product that's killing 1000s of people, but since it doesn't kill as many as cancer, it's ok. Where, Mr. U. Asshole, did he say 'it's OK'? Salmonbait Never said he did. I said by that twisted ****ing logic ****bait. |
Death statistics
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:00:48 -0800, Urin Asshole wrote:
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 16:57:32 -0500, Salmonbait wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 12:13:19 -0800, Urin Asshole wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:48:20 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... On 2/19/13 9:00 AM, Eisboch wrote: For kicks I looked up the leading causes of death in the USA. Data is the final numbers from 2010 as published by the Center for Disease Control. Surprisingly, firearms related deaths didn't make the top ten and firearms related homicides weren't even close to the top ten. It's interesting that deaths caused by traffic accidents numbered about 3 times those of homicides involving firearms, but all the focus is on more gun control laws. Personal note: This is not a excuse of deaths caused by firearms, but rather an attempt to put it all in perspective. Heart disease: 597,689 Cancer: 574,743 Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 138,080 Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 129,476 Accidents (unintentional injuries): 120,859 Alzheimer's disease: 83,494 Diabetes: 69,071 Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 50,476 Influenza and Pneumonia: 50,097 Intentional self-harm (suicide): 38,364 Traffic accidents: 33,808 Firearms: 30,470 (19,392 suicides, 11,078 homicides) There are solid statistically based predictions that state that firearms deaths will exceed traffic accident deaths in a couple of years. Oh, you forgot to list the number of Americans who die of old age. :) On a more serious note, I only took one college-level statistics course and have forgotten most of what I ever learned about that sort of math, so I asked a family member who has taken four graduate-level stats courses about these sorts of comparisons (gun deaths vs. car deaths vs. cancer deaths, et cetera) and got a chuckle in response. "Such comparisions are based on silliness and are statistically absurd. Yes, more people die of cancer than of gunshot wounds but...so what?" ========================== The number that surprised me was deaths by homicide involving firearms. I read the same thing you did regarding firearm deaths exceeding traffic deaths by 2015 however that includes suicides. Unfortunately, although a gun is the method of choice for most suicides, further gun restrictions won't eliminate them. As stated in my post, the data is presented simply to put things in perspective. 11,078 firearms related homicides is too many of course but it's a reflection of violence in our society ... which also cannot be totally eliminated. There are bad people in the world. But the number is not the huge number that some of the media and proponents of even more gun control measure would like you to believe. My state has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation. Permits require background checks and every purchase of a firearm at a dealer involves a telephone check and taking of an electronic fingerprint to verify that you are who you say you are and your permit is valid. You must present a valid permit even for ammunition purchases. But, our me-too governor has proposed and is pushing for even more restrictive laws including jail time for purchasing more than one firearm per month for existing permit holders, making getting a permit more difficult, and putting a heavy state tax (up to 50%) on all ammunition sales (even range target practice rounds). I don't see how that is going to affect the homicide rate by firearms in the country. All it is is political posturing in reaction to a horrible but isolated event caused by a kid who was severely disturbed .... as are all cases of mass murders. By that twisted ****ing logic, we might as well do away with the NTSB and all the other safety protocols, since they result in fewer deaths. How about faulty cribs. What a load of horse****. You have a product that's killing 1000s of people, but since it doesn't kill as many as cancer, it's ok. Where, Mr. U. Asshole, did he say 'it's OK'? Salmonbait Never said he did. I said by that twisted ****ing logic ****bait. Not your words? "You have a product that's killing 1000s of people, but since it doesn't kill as many as cancer, it's ok. " You, Mr. U. Asshole, make a good Harry. Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' answer to a lost argument! You know you live in a Country run by idiots if... ....the death penalty is a 'no-no', but death by Hellfire *without* a trial is AOK! |
Death statistics
On 2/19/2013 4:57 PM, Salmonbait wrote:
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 12:13:19 -0800, Urin Asshole wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:48:20 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... On 2/19/13 9:00 AM, Eisboch wrote: For kicks I looked up the leading causes of death in the USA. Data is the final numbers from 2010 as published by the Center for Disease Control. Surprisingly, firearms related deaths didn't make the top ten and firearms related homicides weren't even close to the top ten. It's interesting that deaths caused by traffic accidents numbered about 3 times those of homicides involving firearms, but all the focus is on more gun control laws. Personal note: This is not a excuse of deaths caused by firearms, but rather an attempt to put it all in perspective. Heart disease: 597,689 Cancer: 574,743 Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 138,080 Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 129,476 Accidents (unintentional injuries): 120,859 Alzheimer's disease: 83,494 Diabetes: 69,071 Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 50,476 Influenza and Pneumonia: 50,097 Intentional self-harm (suicide): 38,364 Traffic accidents: 33,808 Firearms: 30,470 (19,392 suicides, 11,078 homicides) There are solid statistically based predictions that state that firearms deaths will exceed traffic accident deaths in a couple of years. Oh, you forgot to list the number of Americans who die of old age. :) On a more serious note, I only took one college-level statistics course and have forgotten most of what I ever learned about that sort of math, so I asked a family member who has taken four graduate-level stats courses about these sorts of comparisons (gun deaths vs. car deaths vs. cancer deaths, et cetera) and got a chuckle in response. "Such comparisions are based on silliness and are statistically absurd. Yes, more people die of cancer than of gunshot wounds but...so what?" ========================== The number that surprised me was deaths by homicide involving firearms. I read the same thing you did regarding firearm deaths exceeding traffic deaths by 2015 however that includes suicides. Unfortunately, although a gun is the method of choice for most suicides, further gun restrictions won't eliminate them. As stated in my post, the data is presented simply to put things in perspective. 11,078 firearms related homicides is too many of course but it's a reflection of violence in our society ... which also cannot be totally eliminated. There are bad people in the world. But the number is not the huge number that some of the media and proponents of even more gun control measure would like you to believe. My state has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation. Permits require background checks and every purchase of a firearm at a dealer involves a telephone check and taking of an electronic fingerprint to verify that you are who you say you are and your permit is valid. You must present a valid permit even for ammunition purchases. But, our me-too governor has proposed and is pushing for even more restrictive laws including jail time for purchasing more than one firearm per month for existing permit holders, making getting a permit more difficult, and putting a heavy state tax (up to 50%) on all ammunition sales (even range target practice rounds). I don't see how that is going to affect the homicide rate by firearms in the country. All it is is political posturing in reaction to a horrible but isolated event caused by a kid who was severely disturbed .... as are all cases of mass murders. By that twisted ****ing logic, we might as well do away with the NTSB and all the other safety protocols, since they result in fewer deaths. How about faulty cribs. What a load of horse****. You have a product that's killing 1000s of people, but since it doesn't kill as many as cancer, it's ok. Where, Mr. U. Asshole, did he say 'it's OK'? He never did, that's how loogie starts more dumb tangents... he's a liar, not a man at all, just a disturbed little twit like harry, looking for success on the net. Makes them feel better for their failures to come here and pretend they are useful to somebody... We all know loog almost drank himself to death, then pushed his wife down the stairs, then his kid, then left the bbq burning on his porch almost burned his kid out of her bed..... Folks like that need to do what they can to feel better, this is all they have... Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' answer to a lost argument! You know you live in a Country run by idiots if... ...the death penalty is a 'no-no', but death by Hellfire *without* a trial is AOK! |
Death statistics
On Tuesday, February 19, 2013 6:07:53 PM UTC-4, JustWaitAFrekinMinute! wrote:
On 2/19/2013 2:00 PM, Meyer wrote: On 2/19/2013 11:49 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 2/19/13 11:33 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 2/19/2013 11:06 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 2/19/2013 9:56 AM, Meyer wrote: On 2/19/2013 9:55 AM, Salmonbait wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:48:20 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... On 2/19/13 9:00 AM, Eisboch wrote: For kicks I looked up the leading causes of death in the USA. Data is the final numbers from 2010 as published by the Center for Disease Control. Surprisingly, firearms related deaths didn't make the top ten and firearms related homicides weren't even close to the top ten. It's interesting that deaths caused by traffic accidents numbered about 3 times those of homicides involving firearms, but all the focus is on more gun control laws. Personal note: This is not a excuse of deaths caused by firearms, but rather an attempt to put it all in perspective. Heart disease: 597,689 Cancer: 574,743 Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 138,080 Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 129,476 Accidents (unintentional injuries): 120,859 Alzheimer's disease: 83,494 Diabetes: 69,071 Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 50,476 Influenza and Pneumonia: 50,097 Intentional self-harm (suicide): 38,364 Traffic accidents: 33,808 Firearms: 30,470 (19,392 suicides, 11,078 homicides) There are solid statistically based predictions that state that firearms deaths will exceed traffic accident deaths in a couple of years. Oh, you forgot to list the number of Americans who die of old age. :) On a more serious note, I only took one college-level statistics course and have forgotten most of what I ever learned about that sort of math, so I asked a family member who has taken four graduate-level stats courses about these sorts of comparisons (gun deaths vs. car deaths vs. cancer deaths, et cetera) and got a chuckle in response. "Such comparisions are based on silliness and are statistically absurd. Yes, more people die of cancer than of gunshot wounds but...so what?" ========================== The number that surprised me was deaths by homicide involving firearms. I read the same thing you did regarding firearm deaths exceeding traffic deaths by 2015 however that includes suicides. Unfortunately, although a gun is the method of choice for most suicides, further gun restrictions won't eliminate them. As stated in my post, the data is presented simply to put things in perspective. 11,078 firearms related homicides is too many of course but it's a reflection of violence in our society ... which also cannot be totally eliminated. There are bad people in the world. But the number is not the huge number that some of the media and proponents of even more gun control measure would like you to believe. My state has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation. Funny how it's the bigger nanny states, they really don't want their citizens to have a "say" in their government... Mass is a perfect example. You stupid little fool!!! You fat old drunk... do you really think I am gonna' read anything you write? Yup. Because...you do. He tripped himself up just as you have done on many occasions. Nope... I just look at the screen. Usually by the first sentence I see if it's kevin, don, asshole, the other asshole.. etc.. and I skip to the next post. I never see the meat as none of them can write a decent post... I do admit it is extremely hard to "write a decent post" about you, your Peter Pan lifestyle or your criminally insane rants. So...who's fault is that? |
Death statistics
On 2/19/2013 12:52 PM, True North wrote:
On Tuesday, February 19, 2013 1:37:36 PM UTC-4, wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 08:08:57 -0800, jps wrote: Why is it considered punishment to limit the number of guns and ammo that are owned by the public? What would be the point? Is it punishment that I want to own a tank with the capacity to shell an area of the desert that wouldn't be affected by my hobby? Why can't I own surface to air missles so that I can shoot down my own drones? Why can't I own a mortar setup so I can play with it when I want to? Why am I being punished? That is a red herring, those things have been illegal for 50 years I wonder what would happen with the suicide stats if guns were incapable of shooting the person holding them. Would they find another way? What percentage? Should we make other, less violent methods available to suicidal persons? The lack of guns has not affected the suicide rate in Japan, one of the left's favorite example of gun control. Lastly, what do you suppose the percentages of young people (let's say under 20) that die in gun related homicides or suicides vs all those other maladies? I'm sure a lot die in car accidents but all those stats above? Not so many. The ratio of young people who die in cars is pretty close to guns. Maybe we should ban any car that goes over 70 MPH, put mandatory breatholizers on the ignition and keep them from running if the seat belts are not fastened. (they actually tried that in 1974) That might save more people than banning guns. Might not be a bad idea...doesn't seem sensible to put autos on the road capable of double the legal speed...or more. Some kind of limiter could keep speed down to 75 or so while not limiting towing capacity. Make cell phones and computer screens blank out at 10 mph.. but they will never do that... |
Death statistics
On 2/19/13 5:17 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
Make cell phones and computer screens blank out at 10 mph.. but they will never do that... Yeah...what happens if you are a passenger in a car or on a train or in a bus? You really don't know anything about anything. -- I'm a *Liberal* because I knew the militant christian fundamentalist racist militaristic xenophobic corporate oligarchy wasn't going to work for me. |
Death statistics
On 2/19/2013 5:24 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/19/13 5:17 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: Make cell phones and computer screens blank out at 10 mph.. but they will never do that... Yeah...what happens if you are a passenger in a car or on a train or in a bus? You really don't know anything about anything. Maybe you could go a few minutes without posting lame insults to usenet? But of course typical liberal, that would save millions of lives, but it would inconvenience you so of course you are against it. Not like you are working all that hard to pay back the folks you stole from with your several bankruptcies... |
Death statistics
On 2/19/13 5:39 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 2/19/2013 5:24 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 2/19/13 5:17 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: Make cell phones and computer screens blank out at 10 mph.. but they will never do that... Yeah...what happens if you are a passenger in a car or on a train or in a bus? You really don't know anything about anything. Maybe you could go a few minutes without posting lame insults to usenet? But of course typical liberal, that would save millions of lives, but it would inconvenience you so of course you are against it. Not like you are working all that hard to pay back the folks you stole from with your several bankruptcies... And once again you demonstrate you don't know anything about anything. I know you are not part of the workaday world, but millions of Americans are, and they find it necessary to make and receive phone calls or emails while they commute to work. They commute all sorts of ways, including in vehicles of various types they aren't driving. Many commute long distances. So, your proposal is that they folks should not be able to use their smart phones/tablets/whatever because once the vehicle is going more than 10 mph, it should blank out? You don't know anything about anything. -- I'm a *Liberal* because I knew the militant christian fundamentalist racist militaristic xenophobic corporate oligarchy wasn't going to work for me. |
Death statistics
On 2/19/2013 6:07 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/19/13 5:39 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 2/19/2013 5:24 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 2/19/13 5:17 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: Make cell phones and computer screens blank out at 10 mph.. but they will never do that... Yeah...what happens if you are a passenger in a car or on a train or in a bus? You really don't know anything about anything. Maybe you could go a few minutes without posting lame insults to usenet? But of course typical liberal, that would save millions of lives, but it would inconvenience you so of course you are against it. Not like you are working all that hard to pay back the folks you stole from with your several bankruptcies... And once again you demonstrate you don't know anything about anything. Do you really think I am gonna' read any of this? LOL! |
Death statistics
On 2/19/13 6:17 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 2/19/2013 6:07 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 2/19/13 5:39 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 2/19/2013 5:24 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 2/19/13 5:17 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: Make cell phones and computer screens blank out at 10 mph.. but they will never do that... Yeah...what happens if you are a passenger in a car or on a train or in a bus? You really don't know anything about anything. Maybe you could go a few minutes without posting lame insults to usenet? But of course typical liberal, that would save millions of lives, but it would inconvenience you so of course you are against it. Not like you are working all that hard to pay back the folks you stole from with your several bankruptcies... And once again you demonstrate you don't know anything about anything. Do you really think I am gonna' read any of this? LOL! Hey, most of your posts make absolutely no sense. Why should your latest idea of having everyone's cells shut off at 10 mph be any different. Oh...my wife just messaged me from her iPhone. Her commuter bus, the one on which is she a passenger and the one that travels at more than 10 mph except when it is stuck in traffic arrived at her stop downtown 10 minutes late so she probably will be home a littler later than usual. Under your plan, she wouldn't be able to send such a message. You're a moron. -- I'm a *Liberal* because I knew the militant christian fundamentalist racist militaristic xenophobic corporate oligarchy wasn't going to work for me. |
Death statistics
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 17:12:01 -0500, Salmonbait
wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:00:48 -0800, Urin Asshole wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 16:57:32 -0500, Salmonbait wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 12:13:19 -0800, Urin Asshole wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:48:20 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... On 2/19/13 9:00 AM, Eisboch wrote: For kicks I looked up the leading causes of death in the USA. Data is the final numbers from 2010 as published by the Center for Disease Control. Surprisingly, firearms related deaths didn't make the top ten and firearms related homicides weren't even close to the top ten. It's interesting that deaths caused by traffic accidents numbered about 3 times those of homicides involving firearms, but all the focus is on more gun control laws. Personal note: This is not a excuse of deaths caused by firearms, but rather an attempt to put it all in perspective. Heart disease: 597,689 Cancer: 574,743 Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 138,080 Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 129,476 Accidents (unintentional injuries): 120,859 Alzheimer's disease: 83,494 Diabetes: 69,071 Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 50,476 Influenza and Pneumonia: 50,097 Intentional self-harm (suicide): 38,364 Traffic accidents: 33,808 Firearms: 30,470 (19,392 suicides, 11,078 homicides) There are solid statistically based predictions that state that firearms deaths will exceed traffic accident deaths in a couple of years. Oh, you forgot to list the number of Americans who die of old age. :) On a more serious note, I only took one college-level statistics course and have forgotten most of what I ever learned about that sort of math, so I asked a family member who has taken four graduate-level stats courses about these sorts of comparisons (gun deaths vs. car deaths vs. cancer deaths, et cetera) and got a chuckle in response. "Such comparisions are based on silliness and are statistically absurd. Yes, more people die of cancer than of gunshot wounds but...so what?" ========================== The number that surprised me was deaths by homicide involving firearms. I read the same thing you did regarding firearm deaths exceeding traffic deaths by 2015 however that includes suicides. Unfortunately, although a gun is the method of choice for most suicides, further gun restrictions won't eliminate them. As stated in my post, the data is presented simply to put things in perspective. 11,078 firearms related homicides is too many of course but it's a reflection of violence in our society ... which also cannot be totally eliminated. There are bad people in the world. But the number is not the huge number that some of the media and proponents of even more gun control measure would like you to believe. My state has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation. Permits require background checks and every purchase of a firearm at a dealer involves a telephone check and taking of an electronic fingerprint to verify that you are who you say you are and your permit is valid. You must present a valid permit even for ammunition purchases. But, our me-too governor has proposed and is pushing for even more restrictive laws including jail time for purchasing more than one firearm per month for existing permit holders, making getting a permit more difficult, and putting a heavy state tax (up to 50%) on all ammunition sales (even range target practice rounds). I don't see how that is going to affect the homicide rate by firearms in the country. All it is is political posturing in reaction to a horrible but isolated event caused by a kid who was severely disturbed .... as are all cases of mass murders. By that twisted ****ing logic, we might as well do away with the NTSB and all the other safety protocols, since they result in fewer deaths. How about faulty cribs. What a load of horse****. You have a product that's killing 1000s of people, but since it doesn't kill as many as cancer, it's ok. Where, Mr. U. Asshole, did he say 'it's OK'? Salmonbait Never said he did. I said by that twisted ****ing logic ****bait. Not your words? "You have a product that's killing 1000s of people, but since it doesn't kill as many as cancer, it's ok. " You, Mr. U. Asshole, make a good Harry. Salmonbait Sorry Salmonbreath.. I giving an example of twisted logic. Feel free to foam at the mouth but you're still an idiot. |
Death statistics
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 11:06:23 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: Funny how it's the bigger nanny states, they really don't want their citizens to have a "say" in their government... Mass is a perfect example. You stupid little fool!!! What does ANY of the above have to do with ANY state's citizens having a "say" in their government? Do you know (probably not) that the people that run states are hired BY those "citizens"? It's called voting. If I buy a product that just doesn't work out well when I get it home, I can return it and get a refund. With an elected official, whey you vote you are making a two year commitment for any mistakes you have made in your judgment in selecting the elected official. You can try and return it but often times it isn't worth the effort. |
Death statistics
In article ,
says... On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:58:33 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote: The number of suicides by gun might drop if it were a bit more difficult and time consuming to buy pistols. In my state, there's a waiting period that ends up running about 10 days from purchase to approval by the state police. If you are suicidal and want a gun to end it and you don't have one, you might change your mind in 10 days. Not likely. Most people who seriously contemplate suicide, eventually decide to do it. Japan has a much higher suicide rate than the US and they have virtually zero firearms. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aokigahara |
Death statistics
In article ,
says... On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 11:26:55 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 2/19/13 11:08 AM, wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:58:33 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote: The number of suicides by gun might drop if it were a bit more difficult and time consuming to buy pistols. In my state, there's a waiting period that ends up running about 10 days from purchase to approval by the state police. If you are suicidal and want a gun to end it and you don't have one, you might change your mind in 10 days. Not likely. Most people who seriously contemplate suicide, eventually decide to do it. - - - You have valid statistics on that? What exactly, That people who commit suicide have a history of "gestures"? That is easy, or are you going for something else? This is all over the news right now because of Mindy McCredy Doctor Drew's fees took a nose dive today. |
Death statistics
On 2/19/2013 4:55 PM, Salmonbait wrote:
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:19:17 -0500, Meyer wrote: On 2/19/2013 12:52 PM, True North wrote: On Tuesday, February 19, 2013 1:37:36 PM UTC-4, wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 08:08:57 -0800, jps wrote: Why is it considered punishment to limit the number of guns and ammo that are owned by the public? What would be the point? Is it punishment that I want to own a tank with the capacity to shell an area of the desert that wouldn't be affected by my hobby? Why can't I own surface to air missles so that I can shoot down my own drones? Why can't I own a mortar setup so I can play with it when I want to? Why am I being punished? That is a red herring, those things have been illegal for 50 years I wonder what would happen with the suicide stats if guns were incapable of shooting the person holding them. Would they find another way? What percentage? Should we make other, less violent methods available to suicidal persons? The lack of guns has not affected the suicide rate in Japan, one of the left's favorite example of gun control. Lastly, what do you suppose the percentages of young people (let's say under 20) that die in gun related homicides or suicides vs all those other maladies? I'm sure a lot die in car accidents but all those stats above? Not so many. The ratio of young people who die in cars is pretty close to guns. Maybe we should ban any car that goes over 70 MPH, put mandatory breatholizers on the ignition and keep them from running if the seat belts are not fastened. (they actually tried that in 1974) That might save more people than banning guns. Might not be a bad idea...doesn't seem sensible to put autos on the road capable of double the legal speed...or more. Some kind of limiter could keep speed down to 75 or so while not limiting towing capacity. What's the towing capacity of your Rav 4? If it's a 2009 with a v6, and he's really full of bravado, he can tow 2000lbs. That doesn't mean he can *stop* it though. Salmonbait I don't think he has the gutsy V6 His new boat is 3 times the princecraft. It's hard to believe he can tow that hefty boat with that pyrite gray devil of a rave 4. |
Death statistics
On 2/19/2013 4:57 PM, Salmonbait wrote:
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 12:13:19 -0800, Urin Asshole wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:48:20 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... On 2/19/13 9:00 AM, Eisboch wrote: For kicks I looked up the leading causes of death in the USA. Data is the final numbers from 2010 as published by the Center for Disease Control. Surprisingly, firearms related deaths didn't make the top ten and firearms related homicides weren't even close to the top ten. It's interesting that deaths caused by traffic accidents numbered about 3 times those of homicides involving firearms, but all the focus is on more gun control laws. Personal note: This is not a excuse of deaths caused by firearms, but rather an attempt to put it all in perspective. Heart disease: 597,689 Cancer: 574,743 Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 138,080 Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 129,476 Accidents (unintentional injuries): 120,859 Alzheimer's disease: 83,494 Diabetes: 69,071 Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 50,476 Influenza and Pneumonia: 50,097 Intentional self-harm (suicide): 38,364 Traffic accidents: 33,808 Firearms: 30,470 (19,392 suicides, 11,078 homicides) There are solid statistically based predictions that state that firearms deaths will exceed traffic accident deaths in a couple of years. Oh, you forgot to list the number of Americans who die of old age. :) On a more serious note, I only took one college-level statistics course and have forgotten most of what I ever learned about that sort of math, so I asked a family member who has taken four graduate-level stats courses about these sorts of comparisons (gun deaths vs. car deaths vs. cancer deaths, et cetera) and got a chuckle in response. "Such comparisions are based on silliness and are statistically absurd. Yes, more people die of cancer than of gunshot wounds but...so what?" ========================== The number that surprised me was deaths by homicide involving firearms. I read the same thing you did regarding firearm deaths exceeding traffic deaths by 2015 however that includes suicides. Unfortunately, although a gun is the method of choice for most suicides, further gun restrictions won't eliminate them. As stated in my post, the data is presented simply to put things in perspective. 11,078 firearms related homicides is too many of course but it's a reflection of violence in our society ... which also cannot be totally eliminated. There are bad people in the world. But the number is not the huge number that some of the media and proponents of even more gun control measure would like you to believe. My state has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation. Permits require background checks and every purchase of a firearm at a dealer involves a telephone check and taking of an electronic fingerprint to verify that you are who you say you are and your permit is valid. You must present a valid permit even for ammunition purchases. But, our me-too governor has proposed and is pushing for even more restrictive laws including jail time for purchasing more than one firearm per month for existing permit holders, making getting a permit more difficult, and putting a heavy state tax (up to 50%) on all ammunition sales (even range target practice rounds). I don't see how that is going to affect the homicide rate by firearms in the country. All it is is political posturing in reaction to a horrible but isolated event caused by a kid who was severely disturbed .... as are all cases of mass murders. By that twisted ****ing logic, we might as well do away with the NTSB and all the other safety protocols, since they result in fewer deaths. How about faulty cribs. What a load of horse****. You have a product that's killing 1000s of people, but since it doesn't kill as many as cancer, it's ok. Where, Mr. U. Asshole, did he say 'it's OK'? Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' answer to a lost argument! You know you live in a Country run by idiots if... ....the death penalty is a 'no-no', but death by Hellfire *without* a trial is AOK! That was foad's comment. Are you confused or is foad really urine A. |
Death statistics
On 2/19/2013 5:07 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 2/19/2013 2:00 PM, Meyer wrote: On 2/19/2013 11:49 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 2/19/13 11:33 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 2/19/2013 11:06 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 2/19/2013 9:56 AM, Meyer wrote: On 2/19/2013 9:55 AM, Salmonbait wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:48:20 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... On 2/19/13 9:00 AM, Eisboch wrote: For kicks I looked up the leading causes of death in the USA. Data is the final numbers from 2010 as published by the Center for Disease Control. Surprisingly, firearms related deaths didn't make the top ten and firearms related homicides weren't even close to the top ten. It's interesting that deaths caused by traffic accidents numbered about 3 times those of homicides involving firearms, but all the focus is on more gun control laws. Personal note: This is not a excuse of deaths caused by firearms, but rather an attempt to put it all in perspective. Heart disease: 597,689 Cancer: 574,743 Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 138,080 Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 129,476 Accidents (unintentional injuries): 120,859 Alzheimer's disease: 83,494 Diabetes: 69,071 Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 50,476 Influenza and Pneumonia: 50,097 Intentional self-harm (suicide): 38,364 Traffic accidents: 33,808 Firearms: 30,470 (19,392 suicides, 11,078 homicides) There are solid statistically based predictions that state that firearms deaths will exceed traffic accident deaths in a couple of years. Oh, you forgot to list the number of Americans who die of old age. :) On a more serious note, I only took one college-level statistics course and have forgotten most of what I ever learned about that sort of math, so I asked a family member who has taken four graduate-level stats courses about these sorts of comparisons (gun deaths vs. car deaths vs. cancer deaths, et cetera) and got a chuckle in response. "Such comparisions are based on silliness and are statistically absurd. Yes, more people die of cancer than of gunshot wounds but...so what?" ========================== The number that surprised me was deaths by homicide involving firearms. I read the same thing you did regarding firearm deaths exceeding traffic deaths by 2015 however that includes suicides. Unfortunately, although a gun is the method of choice for most suicides, further gun restrictions won't eliminate them. As stated in my post, the data is presented simply to put things in perspective. 11,078 firearms related homicides is too many of course but it's a reflection of violence in our society ... which also cannot be totally eliminated. There are bad people in the world. But the number is not the huge number that some of the media and proponents of even more gun control measure would like you to believe. My state has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation. Funny how it's the bigger nanny states, they really don't want their citizens to have a "say" in their government... Mass is a perfect example. You stupid little fool!!! You fat old drunk... do you really think I am gonna' read anything you write? Yup. Because...you do. He tripped himself up just as you have done on many occasions. Nope... I just look at the screen. Usually by the first sentence I see if it's kevin, don, asshole, the other asshole.. etc.. and I skip to the next post. I never see the meat as none of them can write a decent post... Actually there never seems to be any meat in their posts. They are all pansys. |
Death statistics
On 2/19/2013 5:16 PM, True North wrote:
On Tuesday, February 19, 2013 6:07:53 PM UTC-4, JustWaitAFrekinMinute! wrote: On 2/19/2013 2:00 PM, Meyer wrote: On 2/19/2013 11:49 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 2/19/13 11:33 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 2/19/2013 11:06 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 2/19/2013 9:56 AM, Meyer wrote: On 2/19/2013 9:55 AM, Salmonbait wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:48:20 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... On 2/19/13 9:00 AM, Eisboch wrote: For kicks I looked up the leading causes of death in the USA. Data is the final numbers from 2010 as published by the Center for Disease Control. Surprisingly, firearms related deaths didn't make the top ten and firearms related homicides weren't even close to the top ten. It's interesting that deaths caused by traffic accidents numbered about 3 times those of homicides involving firearms, but all the focus is on more gun control laws. Personal note: This is not a excuse of deaths caused by firearms, but rather an attempt to put it all in perspective. Heart disease: 597,689 Cancer: 574,743 Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 138,080 Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 129,476 Accidents (unintentional injuries): 120,859 Alzheimer's disease: 83,494 Diabetes: 69,071 Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 50,476 Influenza and Pneumonia: 50,097 Intentional self-harm (suicide): 38,364 Traffic accidents: 33,808 Firearms: 30,470 (19,392 suicides, 11,078 homicides) There are solid statistically based predictions that state that firearms deaths will exceed traffic accident deaths in a couple of years. Oh, you forgot to list the number of Americans who die of old age. :) On a more serious note, I only took one college-level statistics course and have forgotten most of what I ever learned about that sort of math, so I asked a family member who has taken four graduate-level stats courses about these sorts of comparisons (gun deaths vs. car deaths vs. cancer deaths, et cetera) and got a chuckle in response. "Such comparisions are based on silliness and are statistically absurd. Yes, more people die of cancer than of gunshot wounds but...so what?" ========================== The number that surprised me was deaths by homicide involving firearms. I read the same thing you did regarding firearm deaths exceeding traffic deaths by 2015 however that includes suicides. Unfortunately, although a gun is the method of choice for most suicides, further gun restrictions won't eliminate them. As stated in my post, the data is presented simply to put things in perspective. 11,078 firearms related homicides is too many of course but it's a reflection of violence in our society ... which also cannot be totally eliminated. There are bad people in the world. But the number is not the huge number that some of the media and proponents of even more gun control measure would like you to believe. My state has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation. Funny how it's the bigger nanny states, they really don't want their citizens to have a "say" in their government... Mass is a perfect example. You stupid little fool!!! You fat old drunk... do you really think I am gonna' read anything you write? Yup. Because...you do. He tripped himself up just as you have done on many occasions. Nope... I just look at the screen. Usually by the first sentence I see if it's kevin, don, asshole, the other asshole.. etc.. and I skip to the next post. I never see the meat as none of them can write a decent post... I do admit it is extremely hard to "write a decent post" about you, your Peter Pan lifestyle or your criminally insane rants. So...who's fault is that? Yours, actually. You havent written a decent post about anything in several years, at least. You won't because you can't. You're just a Harry enabler. Write something interesting about that fine new boat of yours. Betcha can't. |
Death statistics
On Tuesday, 19 February 2013 20:29:00 UTC-4, Meyer wrote:
On 2/19/2013 4:55 PM, Salmonbait wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:19:17 -0500, Meyer wrote: On 2/19/2013 12:52 PM, True North wrote: On Tuesday, February 19, 2013 1:37:36 PM UTC-4, wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 08:08:57 -0800, jps wrote: Why is it considered punishment to limit the number of guns and ammo that are owned by the public? What would be the point? Is it punishment that I want to own a tank with the capacity to shell an area of the desert that wouldn't be affected by my hobby? Why can't I own surface to air missles so that I can shoot down my own drones? Why can't I own a mortar setup so I can play with it when I want to? Why am I being punished? That is a red herring, those things have been illegal for 50 years I wonder what would happen with the suicide stats if guns were incapable of shooting the person holding them. Would they find another way? What percentage? Should we make other, less violent methods available to suicidal persons? The lack of guns has not affected the suicide rate in Japan, one of the left's favorite example of gun control. Lastly, what do you suppose the percentages of young people (let's say under 20) that die in gun related homicides or suicides vs all those other maladies? I'm sure a lot die in car accidents but all those stats above? Not so many. The ratio of young people who die in cars is pretty close to guns. Maybe we should ban any car that goes over 70 MPH, put mandatory breatholizers on the ignition and keep them from running if the seat belts are not fastened. (they actually tried that in 1974) That might save more people than banning guns. Might not be a bad idea...doesn't seem sensible to put autos on the road capable of double the legal speed...or more. Some kind of limiter could keep speed down to 75 or so while not limiting towing capacity. What's the towing capacity of your Rav 4? If it's a 2009 with a v6, and he's really full of bravado, he can tow 2000lbs. That doesn't mean he can *stop* it though. Salmonbait I don't think he has the gutsy V6 His new boat is 3 times the princecraft. It's hard to believe he can tow that hefty boat with that pyrite gray devil of a rave 4. Actually, it's closer to 4X, StinkyOne. BTW it's pyrite mica... that would be a very pleasing dark bronze when the sun is shinning. |
Death statistics
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 19:31:29 -0500, Meyer wrote:
That was foad's comment. Are you confused or is foad really urine A. === We all know that foad is Harry Krause. Chances are that urinal is also given Harry's past record of creating peole who agree with him. |
Death statistics
On 2/19/13 8:11 PM, True North wrote:
On Tuesday, 19 February 2013 20:29:00 UTC-4, Meyer wrote: On 2/19/2013 4:55 PM, Salmonbait wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:19:17 -0500, Meyer wrote: On 2/19/2013 12:52 PM, True North wrote: On Tuesday, February 19, 2013 1:37:36 PM UTC-4, wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 08:08:57 -0800, jps wrote: Why is it considered punishment to limit the number of guns and ammo that are owned by the public? What would be the point? Is it punishment that I want to own a tank with the capacity to shell an area of the desert that wouldn't be affected by my hobby? Why can't I own surface to air missles so that I can shoot down my own drones? Why can't I own a mortar setup so I can play with it when I want to? Why am I being punished? That is a red herring, those things have been illegal for 50 years I wonder what would happen with the suicide stats if guns were incapable of shooting the person holding them. Would they find another way? What percentage? Should we make other, less violent methods available to suicidal persons? The lack of guns has not affected the suicide rate in Japan, one of the left's favorite example of gun control. Lastly, what do you suppose the percentages of young people (let's say under 20) that die in gun related homicides or suicides vs all those other maladies? I'm sure a lot die in car accidents but all those stats above? Not so many. The ratio of young people who die in cars is pretty close to guns. Maybe we should ban any car that goes over 70 MPH, put mandatory breatholizers on the ignition and keep them from running if the seat belts are not fastened. (they actually tried that in 1974) That might save more people than banning guns. Might not be a bad idea...doesn't seem sensible to put autos on the road capable of double the legal speed...or more. Some kind of limiter could keep speed down to 75 or so while not limiting towing capacity. What's the towing capacity of your Rav 4? If it's a 2009 with a v6, and he's really full of bravado, he can tow 2000lbs. That doesn't mean he can *stop* it though. Salmonbait I don't think he has the gutsy V6 His new boat is 3 times the princecraft. It's hard to believe he can tow that hefty boat with that pyrite gray devil of a rave 4. Actually, it's closer to 4X, StinkyOne. BTW it's pyrite mica... that would be a very pleasing dark bronze when the sun is shinning. What's Meyer boating in this days...oh, I forgot...it's a state secret. -- I'm a *Liberal* because I knew the militant christian fundamentalist racist militaristic xenophobic corporate oligarchy wasn't going to work for me. |
Death statistics
On 2/19/13 8:14 PM, Wayne B wrote:
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 19:31:29 -0500, Meyer wrote: That was foad's comment. Are you confused or is foad really urine A. === We all know that foad is Harry Krause. Chances are that urinal is also given Harry's past record of creating peole who agree with him. Sorry, whiner...Mr. Pee ain't me, and when I changed my handle to FOAD, I announced it here. It is true, isn't it, that "etc" is your altered ego? -- I'm a *Liberal* because I knew the militant christian fundamentalist racist militaristic xenophobic corporate oligarchy wasn't going to work for me. |
Death statistics
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 19:19:14 -0500, BAR wrote:
In article , says... On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:58:33 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote: The number of suicides by gun might drop if it were a bit more difficult and time consuming to buy pistols. In my state, there's a waiting period that ends up running about 10 days from purchase to approval by the state police. If you are suicidal and want a gun to end it and you don't have one, you might change your mind in 10 days. Not likely. Most people who seriously contemplate suicide, eventually decide to do it. Japan has a much higher suicide rate than the US and they have virtually zero firearms. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aokigahara They're really good at sharpening knives too. Salmonbait -- "That's not a baby kicking, dear Bride, that's just a fetus!" |
Death statistics
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 19:29:00 -0500, Meyer wrote:
On 2/19/2013 4:55 PM, Salmonbait wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:19:17 -0500, Meyer wrote: On 2/19/2013 12:52 PM, True North wrote: On Tuesday, February 19, 2013 1:37:36 PM UTC-4, wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 08:08:57 -0800, jps wrote: Why is it considered punishment to limit the number of guns and ammo that are owned by the public? What would be the point? Is it punishment that I want to own a tank with the capacity to shell an area of the desert that wouldn't be affected by my hobby? Why can't I own surface to air missles so that I can shoot down my own drones? Why can't I own a mortar setup so I can play with it when I want to? Why am I being punished? That is a red herring, those things have been illegal for 50 years I wonder what would happen with the suicide stats if guns were incapable of shooting the person holding them. Would they find another way? What percentage? Should we make other, less violent methods available to suicidal persons? The lack of guns has not affected the suicide rate in Japan, one of the left's favorite example of gun control. Lastly, what do you suppose the percentages of young people (let's say under 20) that die in gun related homicides or suicides vs all those other maladies? I'm sure a lot die in car accidents but all those stats above? Not so many. The ratio of young people who die in cars is pretty close to guns. Maybe we should ban any car that goes over 70 MPH, put mandatory breatholizers on the ignition and keep them from running if the seat belts are not fastened. (they actually tried that in 1974) That might save more people than banning guns. Might not be a bad idea...doesn't seem sensible to put autos on the road capable of double the legal speed...or more. Some kind of limiter could keep speed down to 75 or so while not limiting towing capacity. What's the towing capacity of your Rav 4? If it's a 2009 with a v6, and he's really full of bravado, he can tow 2000lbs. That doesn't mean he can *stop* it though. Salmonbait I don't think he has the gutsy V6 His new boat is 3 times the princecraft. It's hard to believe he can tow that hefty boat with that pyrite gray devil of a rave 4. He's probably got a big diesel Silverado behind that pink Rav4. Or maybe he had a plastic model Princecraft. Hell, just a trailer is close to 1000lbs. Salmonbait -- "That's not a baby kicking, dear Bride, that's just a fetus!" |
Death statistics
On 2/19/2013 7:18 PM, BAR wrote:
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 11:06:23 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: Funny how it's the bigger nanny states, they really don't want their citizens to have a "say" in their government... Mass is a perfect example. You stupid little fool!!! What does ANY of the above have to do with ANY state's citizens having a "say" in their government? Do you know (probably not) that the people that run states are hired BY those "citizens"? It's called voting. If I buy a product that just doesn't work out well when I get it home, I can return it and get a refund. With an elected official, whey you vote you are making a two year commitment for any mistakes you have made in your judgment in selecting the elected official. You can try and return it but often times it isn't worth the effort. Sorry, I guess you all missed my meaning. I meant, in the big socialist states, they don't want you to have guns... For exactly the reason the second wants us to have them.... I should have been more direct. |
Death statistics
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 19:31:29 -0500, Meyer wrote:
On 2/19/2013 4:57 PM, Salmonbait wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 12:13:19 -0800, Urin Asshole wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:48:20 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... On 2/19/13 9:00 AM, Eisboch wrote: For kicks I looked up the leading causes of death in the USA. Data is the final numbers from 2010 as published by the Center for Disease Control. Surprisingly, firearms related deaths didn't make the top ten and firearms related homicides weren't even close to the top ten. It's interesting that deaths caused by traffic accidents numbered about 3 times those of homicides involving firearms, but all the focus is on more gun control laws. Personal note: This is not a excuse of deaths caused by firearms, but rather an attempt to put it all in perspective. Heart disease: 597,689 Cancer: 574,743 Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 138,080 Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 129,476 Accidents (unintentional injuries): 120,859 Alzheimer's disease: 83,494 Diabetes: 69,071 Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 50,476 Influenza and Pneumonia: 50,097 Intentional self-harm (suicide): 38,364 Traffic accidents: 33,808 Firearms: 30,470 (19,392 suicides, 11,078 homicides) There are solid statistically based predictions that state that firearms deaths will exceed traffic accident deaths in a couple of years. Oh, you forgot to list the number of Americans who die of old age. :) On a more serious note, I only took one college-level statistics course and have forgotten most of what I ever learned about that sort of math, so I asked a family member who has taken four graduate-level stats courses about these sorts of comparisons (gun deaths vs. car deaths vs. cancer deaths, et cetera) and got a chuckle in response. "Such comparisions are based on silliness and are statistically absurd. Yes, more people die of cancer than of gunshot wounds but...so what?" ========================== The number that surprised me was deaths by homicide involving firearms. I read the same thing you did regarding firearm deaths exceeding traffic deaths by 2015 however that includes suicides. Unfortunately, although a gun is the method of choice for most suicides, further gun restrictions won't eliminate them. As stated in my post, the data is presented simply to put things in perspective. 11,078 firearms related homicides is too many of course but it's a reflection of violence in our society ... which also cannot be totally eliminated. There are bad people in the world. But the number is not the huge number that some of the media and proponents of even more gun control measure would like you to believe. My state has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation. Permits require background checks and every purchase of a firearm at a dealer involves a telephone check and taking of an electronic fingerprint to verify that you are who you say you are and your permit is valid. You must present a valid permit even for ammunition purchases. But, our me-too governor has proposed and is pushing for even more restrictive laws including jail time for purchasing more than one firearm per month for existing permit holders, making getting a permit more difficult, and putting a heavy state tax (up to 50%) on all ammunition sales (even range target practice rounds). I don't see how that is going to affect the homicide rate by firearms in the country. All it is is political posturing in reaction to a horrible but isolated event caused by a kid who was severely disturbed .... as are all cases of mass murders. By that twisted ****ing logic, we might as well do away with the NTSB and all the other safety protocols, since they result in fewer deaths. How about faulty cribs. What a load of horse****. You have a product that's killing 1000s of people, but since it doesn't kill as many as cancer, it's ok. Where, Mr. U. Asshole, did he say 'it's OK'? Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' answer to a lost argument! You know you live in a Country run by idiots if... ....the death penalty is a 'no-no', but death by Hellfire *without* a trial is AOK! That was foad's comment. Are you confused or is foad really urine A. Nope, count all those little pointy things. It was UrineAsshole for sure. He does do a good job of imitating ESAD though. I think he's somewhere between Kevin and ESAD. Salmonbait -- "That's not a baby kicking, dear Bride, that's just a fetus!" |
Death statistics
On 2/19/2013 7:31 PM, Meyer wrote:
On 2/19/2013 4:57 PM, Salmonbait wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 12:13:19 -0800, Urin Asshole wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:48:20 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... On 2/19/13 9:00 AM, Eisboch wrote: For kicks I looked up the leading causes of death in the USA. Data is the final numbers from 2010 as published by the Center for Disease Control. Surprisingly, firearms related deaths didn't make the top ten and firearms related homicides weren't even close to the top ten. It's interesting that deaths caused by traffic accidents numbered about 3 times those of homicides involving firearms, but all the focus is on more gun control laws. Personal note: This is not a excuse of deaths caused by firearms, but rather an attempt to put it all in perspective. Heart disease: 597,689 Cancer: 574,743 Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 138,080 Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 129,476 Accidents (unintentional injuries): 120,859 Alzheimer's disease: 83,494 Diabetes: 69,071 Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 50,476 Influenza and Pneumonia: 50,097 Intentional self-harm (suicide): 38,364 Traffic accidents: 33,808 Firearms: 30,470 (19,392 suicides, 11,078 homicides) There are solid statistically based predictions that state that firearms deaths will exceed traffic accident deaths in a couple of years. Oh, you forgot to list the number of Americans who die of old age. :) On a more serious note, I only took one college-level statistics course and have forgotten most of what I ever learned about that sort of math, so I asked a family member who has taken four graduate-level stats courses about these sorts of comparisons (gun deaths vs. car deaths vs. cancer deaths, et cetera) and got a chuckle in response. "Such comparisions are based on silliness and are statistically absurd. Yes, more people die of cancer than of gunshot wounds but...so what?" ========================== The number that surprised me was deaths by homicide involving firearms. I read the same thing you did regarding firearm deaths exceeding traffic deaths by 2015 however that includes suicides. Unfortunately, although a gun is the method of choice for most suicides, further gun restrictions won't eliminate them. As stated in my post, the data is presented simply to put things in perspective. 11,078 firearms related homicides is too many of course but it's a reflection of violence in our society ... which also cannot be totally eliminated. There are bad people in the world. But the number is not the huge number that some of the media and proponents of even more gun control measure would like you to believe. My state has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation. Permits require background checks and every purchase of a firearm at a dealer involves a telephone check and taking of an electronic fingerprint to verify that you are who you say you are and your permit is valid. You must present a valid permit even for ammunition purchases. But, our me-too governor has proposed and is pushing for even more restrictive laws including jail time for purchasing more than one firearm per month for existing permit holders, making getting a permit more difficult, and putting a heavy state tax (up to 50%) on all ammunition sales (even range target practice rounds). I don't see how that is going to affect the homicide rate by firearms in the country. All it is is political posturing in reaction to a horrible but isolated event caused by a kid who was severely disturbed .... as are all cases of mass murders. By that twisted ****ing logic, we might as well do away with the NTSB and all the other safety protocols, since they result in fewer deaths. How about faulty cribs. What a load of horse****. You have a product that's killing 1000s of people, but since it doesn't kill as many as cancer, it's ok. Where, Mr. U. Asshole, did he say 'it's OK'? Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' answer to a lost argument! You know you live in a Country run by idiots if... ....the death penalty is a 'no-no', but death by Hellfire *without* a trial is AOK! That was foad's comment. Are you confused or is foad really urine A. They are one in the same... |
Death statistics
On 2/19/2013 5:24 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/19/13 5:17 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: Make cell phones and computer screens blank out at 10 mph.. but they will never do that... Yeah...what happens if you are a passenger in a car or on a train or in a bus? You really don't know anything about anything. No harm in disabling ALL cell phones at 10 MPH. Might even save some lives. You like to save lives don't you. Except fetus's, obviously. Certainly you remember when these gismos didn't exist. Life went on, didn't it. |
Death statistics
JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:
On 2/19/2013 7:18 PM, BAR wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 11:06:23 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: Funny how it's the bigger nanny states, they really don't want their citizens to have a "say" in their government... Mass is a perfect example. You stupid little fool!!! What does ANY of the above have to do with ANY state's citizens having a "say" in their government? Do you know (probably not) that the people that run states are hired BY those "citizens"? It's called voting. If I buy a product that just doesn't work out well when I get it home, I can return it and get a refund. With an elected official, whey you vote you are making a two year commitment for any mistakes you have made in your judgment in selecting the elected official. You can try and return it but often times it isn't worth the effort. Sorry, I guess you all missed my meaning. I meant, in the big socialist states, they don't want you to have guns... For exactly the reason the second wants us to have them.... I should have been more direct. I live in one of those socialist states. I can buy whatever firearm I want to buy. In fact, I can buy several at the same time if I feel like it. So, once again, you are full of shot. |
Death statistics
On 2/19/2013 6:23 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/19/13 6:17 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 2/19/2013 6:07 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 2/19/13 5:39 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 2/19/2013 5:24 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 2/19/13 5:17 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: Make cell phones and computer screens blank out at 10 mph.. but they will never do that... Yeah...what happens if you are a passenger in a car or on a train or in a bus? You really don't know anything about anything. Maybe you could go a few minutes without posting lame insults to usenet? But of course typical liberal, that would save millions of lives, but it would inconvenience you so of course you are against it. Not like you are working all that hard to pay back the folks you stole from with your several bankruptcies... And once again you demonstrate you don't know anything about anything. Do you really think I am gonna' read any of this? LOL! Hey, most of your posts make absolutely no sense. Why should your latest idea of having everyone's cells shut off at 10 mph be any different. Oh...my wife just messaged me from her iPhone. Her commuter bus, the one on which is she a passenger and the one that travels at more than 10 mph except when it is stuck in traffic arrived at her stop downtown 10 minutes late so she probably will be home a littler later than usual. Under your plan, she wouldn't be able to send such a message. You're a moron. Not a critical message. |
Death statistics
On 2/19/2013 8:11 PM, True North wrote:
On Tuesday, 19 February 2013 20:29:00 UTC-4, Meyer wrote: On 2/19/2013 4:55 PM, Salmonbait wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:19:17 -0500, Meyer wrote: On 2/19/2013 12:52 PM, True North wrote: On Tuesday, February 19, 2013 1:37:36 PM UTC-4, wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 08:08:57 -0800, jps wrote: Why is it considered punishment to limit the number of guns and ammo that are owned by the public? What would be the point? Is it punishment that I want to own a tank with the capacity to shell an area of the desert that wouldn't be affected by my hobby? Why can't I own surface to air missles so that I can shoot down my own drones? Why can't I own a mortar setup so I can play with it when I want to? Why am I being punished? That is a red herring, those things have been illegal for 50 years I wonder what would happen with the suicide stats if guns were incapable of shooting the person holding them. Would they find another way? What percentage? Should we make other, less violent methods available to suicidal persons? The lack of guns has not affected the suicide rate in Japan, one of the left's favorite example of gun control. Lastly, what do you suppose the percentages of young people (let's say under 20) that die in gun related homicides or suicides vs all those other maladies? I'm sure a lot die in car accidents but all those stats above? Not so many. The ratio of young people who die in cars is pretty close to guns. Maybe we should ban any car that goes over 70 MPH, put mandatory breatholizers on the ignition and keep them from running if the seat belts are not fastened. (they actually tried that in 1974) That might save more people than banning guns. Might not be a bad idea...doesn't seem sensible to put autos on the road capable of double the legal speed...or more. Some kind of limiter could keep speed down to 75 or so while not limiting towing capacity. What's the towing capacity of your Rav 4? If it's a 2009 with a v6, and he's really full of bravado, he can tow 2000lbs. That doesn't mean he can *stop* it though. Salmonbait I don't think he has the gutsy V6 His new boat is 3 times the princecraft. It's hard to believe he can tow that hefty boat with that pyrite gray devil of a rave 4. Actually, it's closer to 4X, StinkyOne. BTW it's pyrite mica... that would be a very pleasing dark bronze when the sun is shinning. You got wheel spinners on that chameleon? |
Death statistics
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 21:14:53 -0400, Wayne B
wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 19:31:29 -0500, Meyer wrote: That was foad's comment. Are you confused or is foad really urine A. === We all know that foad is Harry Krause. Chances are that urinal is also given Harry's past record of creating peole who agree with him. There's no chance that you're a sniveling little turd who pretends to be reasonable. Stink is the same. |
Death statistics
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 20:17:34 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 2/19/13 8:14 PM, Wayne B wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 19:31:29 -0500, Meyer wrote: That was foad's comment. Are you confused or is foad really urine A. === We all know that foad is Harry Krause. Chances are that urinal is also given Harry's past record of creating peole who agree with him. Sorry, whiner...Mr. Pee ain't me, and when I changed my handle to FOAD, I announced it here. It is true, isn't it, that "etc" is your altered ego? When I change my handle to Wayne Is A Moron, I'll let everyone know. |
Death statistics
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 20:27:24 -0500, Salmonbait
wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 19:31:29 -0500, Meyer wrote: On 2/19/2013 4:57 PM, Salmonbait wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 12:13:19 -0800, Urin Asshole wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:48:20 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... On 2/19/13 9:00 AM, Eisboch wrote: For kicks I looked up the leading causes of death in the USA. Data is the final numbers from 2010 as published by the Center for Disease Control. Surprisingly, firearms related deaths didn't make the top ten and firearms related homicides weren't even close to the top ten. It's interesting that deaths caused by traffic accidents numbered about 3 times those of homicides involving firearms, but all the focus is on more gun control laws. Personal note: This is not a excuse of deaths caused by firearms, but rather an attempt to put it all in perspective. Heart disease: 597,689 Cancer: 574,743 Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 138,080 Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 129,476 Accidents (unintentional injuries): 120,859 Alzheimer's disease: 83,494 Diabetes: 69,071 Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 50,476 Influenza and Pneumonia: 50,097 Intentional self-harm (suicide): 38,364 Traffic accidents: 33,808 Firearms: 30,470 (19,392 suicides, 11,078 homicides) There are solid statistically based predictions that state that firearms deaths will exceed traffic accident deaths in a couple of years. Oh, you forgot to list the number of Americans who die of old age. :) On a more serious note, I only took one college-level statistics course and have forgotten most of what I ever learned about that sort of math, so I asked a family member who has taken four graduate-level stats courses about these sorts of comparisons (gun deaths vs. car deaths vs. cancer deaths, et cetera) and got a chuckle in response. "Such comparisions are based on silliness and are statistically absurd. Yes, more people die of cancer than of gunshot wounds but...so what?" ========================== The number that surprised me was deaths by homicide involving firearms. I read the same thing you did regarding firearm deaths exceeding traffic deaths by 2015 however that includes suicides. Unfortunately, although a gun is the method of choice for most suicides, further gun restrictions won't eliminate them. As stated in my post, the data is presented simply to put things in perspective. 11,078 firearms related homicides is too many of course but it's a reflection of violence in our society ... which also cannot be totally eliminated. There are bad people in the world. But the number is not the huge number that some of the media and proponents of even more gun control measure would like you to believe. My state has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation. Permits require background checks and every purchase of a firearm at a dealer involves a telephone check and taking of an electronic fingerprint to verify that you are who you say you are and your permit is valid. You must present a valid permit even for ammunition purchases. But, our me-too governor has proposed and is pushing for even more restrictive laws including jail time for purchasing more than one firearm per month for existing permit holders, making getting a permit more difficult, and putting a heavy state tax (up to 50%) on all ammunition sales (even range target practice rounds). I don't see how that is going to affect the homicide rate by firearms in the country. All it is is political posturing in reaction to a horrible but isolated event caused by a kid who was severely disturbed .... as are all cases of mass murders. By that twisted ****ing logic, we might as well do away with the NTSB and all the other safety protocols, since they result in fewer deaths. How about faulty cribs. What a load of horse****. You have a product that's killing 1000s of people, but since it doesn't kill as many as cancer, it's ok. Where, Mr. U. Asshole, did he say 'it's OK'? Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' answer to a lost argument! You know you live in a Country run by idiots if... ....the death penalty is a 'no-no', but death by Hellfire *without* a trial is AOK! That was foad's comment. Are you confused or is foad really urine A. Nope, count all those little pointy things. It was UrineAsshole for sure. He does do a good job of imitating ESAD though. I think he's somewhere between Kevin and ESAD. Salmonbait You're somewhere between stupid and stupid. Exactly... no difference. |
Death statistics
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 20:29:54 -0500, JustWaitAFrekinMinute
wrote: On 2/19/2013 7:31 PM, Meyer wrote: On 2/19/2013 4:57 PM, Salmonbait wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 12:13:19 -0800, Urin Asshole wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:48:20 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... On 2/19/13 9:00 AM, Eisboch wrote: For kicks I looked up the leading causes of death in the USA. Data is the final numbers from 2010 as published by the Center for Disease Control. Surprisingly, firearms related deaths didn't make the top ten and firearms related homicides weren't even close to the top ten. It's interesting that deaths caused by traffic accidents numbered about 3 times those of homicides involving firearms, but all the focus is on more gun control laws. Personal note: This is not a excuse of deaths caused by firearms, but rather an attempt to put it all in perspective. Heart disease: 597,689 Cancer: 574,743 Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 138,080 Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 129,476 Accidents (unintentional injuries): 120,859 Alzheimer's disease: 83,494 Diabetes: 69,071 Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 50,476 Influenza and Pneumonia: 50,097 Intentional self-harm (suicide): 38,364 Traffic accidents: 33,808 Firearms: 30,470 (19,392 suicides, 11,078 homicides) There are solid statistically based predictions that state that firearms deaths will exceed traffic accident deaths in a couple of years. Oh, you forgot to list the number of Americans who die of old age. :) On a more serious note, I only took one college-level statistics course and have forgotten most of what I ever learned about that sort of math, so I asked a family member who has taken four graduate-level stats courses about these sorts of comparisons (gun deaths vs. car deaths vs. cancer deaths, et cetera) and got a chuckle in response. "Such comparisions are based on silliness and are statistically absurd. Yes, more people die of cancer than of gunshot wounds but...so what?" ========================== The number that surprised me was deaths by homicide involving firearms. I read the same thing you did regarding firearm deaths exceeding traffic deaths by 2015 however that includes suicides. Unfortunately, although a gun is the method of choice for most suicides, further gun restrictions won't eliminate them. As stated in my post, the data is presented simply to put things in perspective. 11,078 firearms related homicides is too many of course but it's a reflection of violence in our society ... which also cannot be totally eliminated. There are bad people in the world. But the number is not the huge number that some of the media and proponents of even more gun control measure would like you to believe. My state has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation. Permits require background checks and every purchase of a firearm at a dealer involves a telephone check and taking of an electronic fingerprint to verify that you are who you say you are and your permit is valid. You must present a valid permit even for ammunition purchases. But, our me-too governor has proposed and is pushing for even more restrictive laws including jail time for purchasing more than one firearm per month for existing permit holders, making getting a permit more difficult, and putting a heavy state tax (up to 50%) on all ammunition sales (even range target practice rounds). I don't see how that is going to affect the homicide rate by firearms in the country. All it is is political posturing in reaction to a horrible but isolated event caused by a kid who was severely disturbed .... as are all cases of mass murders. By that twisted ****ing logic, we might as well do away with the NTSB and all the other safety protocols, since they result in fewer deaths. How about faulty cribs. What a load of horse****. You have a product that's killing 1000s of people, but since it doesn't kill as many as cancer, it's ok. Where, Mr. U. Asshole, did he say 'it's OK'? Salmonbait -- 'Name-calling'...the liberals' answer to a lost argument! You know you live in a Country run by idiots if... ....the death penalty is a 'no-no', but death by Hellfire *without* a trial is AOK! That was foad's comment. Are you confused or is foad really urine A. They are one in the same... Just like you and Salmon****. |
Death statistics
On 2/19/13 9:17 PM, Urin Asshole wrote:
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 20:17:34 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote: On 2/19/13 8:14 PM, Wayne B wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 19:31:29 -0500, Meyer wrote: That was foad's comment. Are you confused or is foad really urine A. === We all know that foad is Harry Krause. Chances are that urinal is also given Harry's past record of creating peole who agree with him. Sorry, whiner...Mr. Pee ain't me, and when I changed my handle to FOAD, I announced it here. It is true, isn't it, that "etc" is your altered ego? When I change my handle to Wayne Is A Moron, I'll let everyone know. You can use the handle I gave him... W'hine. Or, better, Lil W'hine. -- I'm a *Liberal* because I knew the militant christian fundamentalist racist militaristic xenophobic corporate oligarchy wasn't going to work for me. |
Death statistics
On 2/19/2013 8:58 PM, Meyer wrote:
On 2/19/2013 6:23 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 2/19/13 6:17 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 2/19/2013 6:07 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 2/19/13 5:39 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: On 2/19/2013 5:24 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote: On 2/19/13 5:17 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: Make cell phones and computer screens blank out at 10 mph.. but they will never do that... Yeah...what happens if you are a passenger in a car or on a train or in a bus? You really don't know anything about anything. Maybe you could go a few minutes without posting lame insults to usenet? But of course typical liberal, that would save millions of lives, but it would inconvenience you so of course you are against it. Not like you are working all that hard to pay back the folks you stole from with your several bankruptcies... And once again you demonstrate you don't know anything about anything. Do you really think I am gonna' read any of this? LOL! Hey, most of your posts make absolutely no sense. Why should your latest idea of having everyone's cells shut off at 10 mph be any different. Oh...my wife just messaged me from her iPhone. Her commuter bus, the one on which is she a passenger and the one that travels at more than 10 mph except when it is stuck in traffic arrived at her stop downtown 10 minutes late so she probably will be home a littler later than usual. Under your plan, she wouldn't be able to send such a message. You're a moron. Not a critical message. Exactly... harry is only concerned with his own convenience, period.. he's a typical democrat. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:19 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com