In article , says...

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 14:53:54 -0700 (PDT), John H
wrote:

On Wednesday, September 18, 2013 4:52:50 PM UTC-4, jps wrote:
On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 12:53:02 -0400, John H wrote: On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 07:41:51 -0700, jps wrote: A study that examined the risk factors for violent death for women in the home found that when there were one or more guns in the home, the risk of suicide among women increased nearly five times and the risk of homicide increased more than three times. The increased risk of homicide associated with firearms was
attributable to homicides at the hands of a spouse, intimate acquaintance, or close relative. http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/domviofs.htm Tell all your liberal buddies to get rid of their guns, and not to buy any more. That'll solve a lot of the problem. My liberal buddies comprise a much smaller percentage of gun ownership than your conservative buddies. It just furthers the argument (being made very well by so many in the conservative quarter) that conservatives
hold women in low regard, including their wives.
The numbers don't lie. More women die from both self-inflicted gunshots and are murdered at a higher rate in households that have guns.

Well, jps, you've gotta start somewhere. If your liberal buddies won't give up their guns, then maybe you're fighting a losing battle.

Your anti-women bull**** is just more anti-conservative liberal trash. Besides, Harry said it first. It does make sense, doesn't it, that women shot in a household are probably in one with a gun? Of course, I suppose the shooter could come in from outside the household.

How many of those households to which you refer are in Chicago?

Also, you might want to reflect on what's just happened in Texas and
elsewhere with Republican lawmakers shoving through legislation that's
decidedly anti-choice.

Men not trusting women to make a choice with what happens inside their
own bodies isn't going to serve the Republican party well.

The party of Todd Akin and Rick Perry is anti-woman.

I like that Liberals/Democrats/Progressives complaining about anti-choice.

In article , says...

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 12:53:02 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 07:41:51 -0700, jps wrote:


A study that examined the risk factors for violent death for women in
the home found that when there were one or more guns in the home, the
risk of suicide among women increased nearly five times and the risk
of homicide increased more than three times. The increased risk of
homicide associated with firearms was attributable to homicides at the
hands of a spouse, intimate acquaintance, or close relative.

http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/domviofs.htm

Tell all your liberal buddies to get rid of their guns, and not to buy any more. That'll solve a lot
of the problem.

My liberal buddies comprise a much smaller percentage of gun ownership
than your conservative buddies. It just furthers the argument (being
made very well by so many in the conservative quarter) that
conservatives hold women in low regard, including their wives.

The numbers don't lie. More women die from both self-inflicted
gunshots and are murdered at a higher rate in households that have
guns.

More women died riding in Teddy Kennedy's car than have been injured, wonded or killed by any
firearms I may or may not posses.

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 23:41:39 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 13:52:50 -0700, jps wrote:

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 12:53:02 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 07:41:51 -0700, jps wrote:


A study that examined the risk factors for violent death for women in
the home found that when there were one or more guns in the home, the
risk of suicide among women increased nearly five times and the risk
of homicide increased more than three times. The increased risk of
homicide associated with firearms was attributable to homicides at the
hands of a spouse, intimate acquaintance, or close relative.

http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/domviofs.htm

Tell all your liberal buddies to get rid of their guns, and not to buy any more. That'll solve a lot
of the problem.

My liberal buddies comprise a much smaller percentage of gun ownership
than your conservative buddies. It just furthers the argument (being
made very well by so many in the conservative quarter) that
conservatives hold women in low regard, including their wives.

The numbers don't lie. More women die from both self-inflicted
gunshots and are murdered at a higher rate in households that have
guns.

This still brings me back to Australia. They virtually banned guns and
their homicide rate, that was already declining, continued to decline
at the same rate. It is virtually a straight line when averaged out.

http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/...iciderate2.png

There like here, most are acquaintance murders. Will found a way after
the guns were gone.

With the exception that they haven't had a mass murder since they
banned assault style weapons.

There's just as many guns, and there's still plenty of murder, just
not so many mass murders.

"jps" wrote in message
...

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 23:41:39 -0400, wrote:


This still brings me back to Australia. They virtually banned guns
and
their homicide rate, that was already declining, continued to decline
at the same rate. It is virtually a straight line when averaged out.

http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/...iciderate2.png

There like here, most are acquaintance murders. Will found a way
after
the guns were gone.



With the exception that they haven't had a mass murder since they
banned assault style weapons.

There's just as many guns, and there's still plenty of murder, just
not so many mass murders.

-----------------------

jps, what exactly is your position on gun ownership?

Do you favor banning private ownership of all guns or are you simply
advocating a ban on "assault type" firearms and high capacity
magazines? I assume that if there is private ownership, you support
background checks including mental health info.

If you favor the latter (ban on assault type firearms and high
capacity magazines) you may be preaching to the choir. Most gun
owners agree with you.

In article , "Mr. Luddite" says...

"jps" wrote in message
...

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 23:41:39 -0400, wrote:


This still brings me back to Australia. They virtually banned guns
and
their homicide rate, that was already declining, continued to decline
at the same rate. It is virtually a straight line when averaged out.

http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/...iciderate2.png

There like here, most are acquaintance murders. Will found a way
after
the guns were gone.



With the exception that they haven't had a mass murder since they
banned assault style weapons.

There's just as many guns, and there's still plenty of murder, just
not so many mass murders.

-----------------------

jps, what exactly is your position on gun ownership?

Do you favor banning private ownership of all guns or are you simply
advocating a ban on "assault type" firearms and high capacity
magazines? I assume that if there is private ownership, you support
background checks including mental health info.

If you favor the latter (ban on assault type firearms and high
capacity magazines) you may be preaching to the choir. Most gun
owners agree with you.

Please identify an "assault type firearms?"

I have a pistol that is used during military assaults. Should it be banned? It only has a
capacity of 7 rounds in the magazine.

On 9/19/13 3:23 AM, jps wrote:
On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 23:41:39 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 13:52:50 -0700, jps wrote:

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 12:53:02 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 07:41:51 -0700, jps wrote:


A study that examined the risk factors for violent death for women in
the home found that when there were one or more guns in the home, the
risk of suicide among women increased nearly five times and the risk
of homicide increased more than three times. The increased risk of
homicide associated with firearms was attributable to homicides at the
hands of a spouse, intimate acquaintance, or close relative.

http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/domviofs.htm

Tell all your liberal buddies to get rid of their guns, and not to buy any more. That'll solve a lot
of the problem.

My liberal buddies comprise a much smaller percentage of gun ownership
than your conservative buddies. It just furthers the argument (being
made very well by so many in the conservative quarter) that
conservatives hold women in low regard, including their wives.

The numbers don't lie. More women die from both self-inflicted
gunshots and are murdered at a higher rate in households that have
guns.

This still brings me back to Australia. They virtually banned guns and
their homicide rate, that was already declining, continued to decline
at the same rate. It is virtually a straight line when averaged out.

http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/...iciderate2.png

There like here, most are acquaintance murders. Will found a way after
the guns were gone.

With the exception that they haven't had a mass murder since they
banned assault style weapons.

There's just as many guns, and there's still plenty of murder, just
not so many mass murders.



Obviously our 'Merican mass shooters are going after the wrong targets.
Instead of shooting kids, ordinary people at a shopping center,
teachers, and workers at a government facility, they ought to be
targeting only right-wing tea baggers, politicized members of the NRA,
and the other dregs of society. That won't lessen gun violence or allow
the passage of more reasonable background checks, of course, but it
would improve the quality of the gene pool.

In article , says...

On 9/19/13 3:23 AM, jps wrote:
On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 23:41:39 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 13:52:50 -0700, jps wrote:

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 12:53:02 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 07:41:51 -0700, jps wrote:


A study that examined the risk factors for violent death for women in
the home found that when there were one or more guns in the home, the
risk of suicide among women increased nearly five times and the risk
of homicide increased more than three times. The increased risk of
homicide associated with firearms was attributable to homicides at the
hands of a spouse, intimate acquaintance, or close relative.

http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/domviofs.htm

Tell all your liberal buddies to get rid of their guns, and not to buy any more. That'll solve a lot
of the problem.

My liberal buddies comprise a much smaller percentage of gun ownership
than your conservative buddies. It just furthers the argument (being
made very well by so many in the conservative quarter) that
conservatives hold women in low regard, including their wives.

The numbers don't lie. More women die from both self-inflicted
gunshots and are murdered at a higher rate in households that have
guns.

This still brings me back to Australia. They virtually banned guns and
their homicide rate, that was already declining, continued to decline
at the same rate. It is virtually a straight line when averaged out.

http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/...iciderate2.png

There like here, most are acquaintance murders. Will found a way after
the guns were gone.

With the exception that they haven't had a mass murder since they
banned assault style weapons.

There's just as many guns, and there's still plenty of murder, just
not so many mass murders.



Obviously our 'Merican mass shooters are going after the wrong targets.
Instead of shooting kids, ordinary people at a shopping center,
teachers, and workers at a government facility, they ought to be
targeting only right-wing tea baggers, politicized members of the NRA,
and the other dregs of society. That won't lessen gun violence or allow
the passage of more reasonable background checks, of course, but it
would improve the quality of the gene pool.

Aren't all of the recent mass shooting perpetrators registered Democrats?

On 9/19/2013 7:44 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 9/19/13 3:23 AM, jps wrote:
On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 23:41:39 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 13:52:50 -0700, jps wrote:

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 12:53:02 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 07:41:51 -0700, jps wrote:


A study that examined the risk factors for violent death for women in
the home found that when there were one or more guns in the home, the
risk of suicide among women increased nearly five times and the risk
of homicide increased more than three times. The increased risk of
homicide associated with firearms was attributable to homicides at
the
hands of a spouse, intimate acquaintance, or close relative.

http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/domviofs.htm

Tell all your liberal buddies to get rid of their guns, and not to
buy any more. That'll solve a lot
of the problem.

My liberal buddies comprise a much smaller percentage of gun ownership
than your conservative buddies. It just furthers the argument (being
made very well by so many in the conservative quarter) that
conservatives hold women in low regard, including their wives.

The numbers don't lie. More women die from both self-inflicted
gunshots and are murdered at a higher rate in households that have
guns.

This still brings me back to Australia. They virtually banned guns and
their homicide rate, that was already declining, continued to decline
at the same rate. It is virtually a straight line when averaged out.

http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/...iciderate2.png


There like here, most are acquaintance murders. Will found a way after
the guns were gone.

With the exception that they haven't had a mass murder since they
banned assault style weapons.

There's just as many guns, and there's still plenty of murder, just
not so many mass murders.



Obviously our 'Merican mass shooters are going after the wrong targets.
Instead of shooting kids, ordinary people at a shopping center,
teachers, and workers at a government facility, they ought to be
targeting only right-wing tea baggers, politicized members of the NRA,
and the other dregs of society. That won't lessen gun violence or allow
the passage of more reasonable background checks, of course, but it
would improve the quality of the gene pool.

You are advocating shooting those that don't share your narrow and
biased point of view. I thought that was your position, but I wasn't
quite positive until you admitted it.

On Thu, 19 Sep 2013 00:23:38 -0700, jps wrote:

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 23:41:39 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 13:52:50 -0700, jps wrote:

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 12:53:02 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 07:41:51 -0700, jps wrote:


A study that examined the risk factors for violent death for women in
the home found that when there were one or more guns in the home, the
risk of suicide among women increased nearly five times and the risk
of homicide increased more than three times. The increased risk of
homicide associated with firearms was attributable to homicides at the
hands of a spouse, intimate acquaintance, or close relative.

http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/domviofs.htm

Tell all your liberal buddies to get rid of their guns, and not to buy any more. That'll solve a lot
of the problem.

My liberal buddies comprise a much smaller percentage of gun ownership
than your conservative buddies. It just furthers the argument (being
made very well by so many in the conservative quarter) that
conservatives hold women in low regard, including their wives.

The numbers don't lie. More women die from both self-inflicted
gunshots and are murdered at a higher rate in households that have
guns.

This still brings me back to Australia. They virtually banned guns and
their homicide rate, that was already declining, continued to decline
at the same rate. It is virtually a straight line when averaged out.

http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/...iciderate2.png

There like here, most are acquaintance murders. Will found a way after
the guns were gone.

With the exception that they haven't had a mass murder since they
banned assault style weapons.

There's just as many guns, and there's still plenty of murder, just
not so many mass murders.

What would you call the incident at the Washington Navy Yard if not a mass murder?
--

John H.

Hope you're having a great day!

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 19 Sep 2013 00:23:38 -0700, jps wrote:

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 23:41:39 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 13:52:50 -0700, jps wrote:

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 12:53:02 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 07:41:51 -0700, jps wrote:


A study that examined the risk factors for violent death for women in
the home found that when there were one or more guns in the home, the
risk of suicide among women increased nearly five times and the risk
of homicide increased more than three times. The increased risk of
homicide associated with firearms was attributable to homicides at the
hands of a spouse, intimate acquaintance, or close relative.

http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/domviofs.htm

Tell all your liberal buddies to get rid of their guns, and not to buy any more. That'll solve a lot
of the problem.

My liberal buddies comprise a much smaller percentage of gun ownership
than your conservative buddies. It just furthers the argument (being
made very well by so many in the conservative quarter) that
conservatives hold women in low regard, including their wives.

The numbers don't lie. More women die from both self-inflicted
gunshots and are murdered at a higher rate in households that have
guns.

This still brings me back to Australia. They virtually banned guns and
their homicide rate, that was already declining, continued to decline
at the same rate. It is virtually a straight line when averaged out.

http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/...iciderate2.png

There like here, most are acquaintance murders. Will found a way after
the guns were gone.

With the exception that they haven't had a mass murder since they
banned assault style weapons.

There's just as many guns, and there's still plenty of murder, just
not so many mass murders.

What would you call the incident at the Washington Navy Yard if not a mass murder?

So it's a mass murder, what does that have to do with JPS's assertion
that there's not so many?