Gun Control is ridiculous

CFLarsen said:
Can you hunt with all that is legal? Not just guns, but whatever is at hand?

"...who truthfully fill out form 4473..." :rolleyes:

You have no way of knowing if they are telling the truth, yet you find them trustworthy so they can have guns?

Aren't you just a wee bit naive?

You don't subscribe to the "cars kill people too" comparison, then?

Why not? You are already naive enough to trust people with a gun, if you think they are telling the truth on a form.
Click to expand...
Yes, I will hunt with anything that is legal, not just guns. When I was in Hawaii, I was able to hunt with a knife and spear, but not successfully

You are reading too much into my answer. I said those who are truthful can be trusted. Anyone who lies to buy a gun is not trustworthy. I did not say anything about determining who is lying or telling the truth.

I am not naive enough to believe that everyone tells the truth when filling out the 4473.

Sure, cars do kill people. They kill more people than guns in the USA. Of the people I know, I trust fewer of the car drivers than the gun owners not to hurt anyone. I have made comparisons in the past, but because they are such completely different objects, car/gun analogies are not all that great.

So why are you so mean spirited that you have to read things that are not posted? Try using your eyes instead of your imagination when you read these posts.

Ranb
 
Lonewulf said:
I dunno, call me crazy, but I just don't feel so paranoid about the gun situation...
Click to expand...

Not even when you see stats like these?

Firearm deaths are the second leading cause of injury deaths in Oklahoma behind motor vehicle crashes. Firearms account for 1 out of every 4 Oklahomans who die from an injury.
Click to expand...
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]The second quote is worth bolding
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
Research indicates that for each firearm incident of self protection in the home, 1.3 unintentional deaths, 4.6 homicides, and 37 suicides occurred.
Click to expand...

And apparently Oklahoma gun death rate is only 8% greater than the US average.

http://www.health.state.ok.us/PROGRAM/INJURY/factsheets/firearm_injury.htm
 
Lonewulf said:
*Treated and released -- 8,807 out of 15,000. This indicates a minor injury.
*Hospitalized -- 5,236 (Note: Warned as an unstable figure, given the sample size, according to the report)
*Observed/Left/Unknown -- 63

The rest of the figure seems to involve transfers...
Click to expand...
Wow 35% hospitalised. When you boys shoot yourselves and your friends you don't mess about.
 
1 out of every four Oklahomans? And that's "just" 8% greater than the U.S. average?

I may not be a math major, but that seems to contradict the very low figures of overall chances of U.S. citizens being injured with firearms.

I'd also add that I don't live in Oklahoma.
 
Lothian said:
I can help here. When you friend invites you round to see his new gun, the chances are that he is more likely to shoot you than an intruder with it.
Click to expand...

EDIT: I interpreted them wrongly.

How many die from assaults?

Either way, I'm still not that scared, really. There's lies, there's damned lies, and then there's statistics. I'm just playing with the numbers you guys are providing.

I'm more likely to be injured or hospitalized by non-guns. As it is, I don't lie in constant worry of being hit by a car. Why should I be paranoid about firearms like you guys are?
 
Last edited:
baron said:
http://www.health.state.ok.us/PROGRAM/INJURY/factsheets/firearm_injury.htm
Click to expand...
From the above link;

¨ Research indicates that for each firearm incident of self protection in the home, 1.3 unintentional deaths, 4.6 homicides, and 37 suicides occurred.
¨ Firearms in the home have been found to be 12 times more likely to kill a family member or acquaintance than a stranger.

It would be interesting to know what their research says about how the unintentional deaths/homicides/suicides occurred. I wonder how many of the 42.9 deaths were from firearms.

Is the “firearm in the house” owned by the occupant; or does this label apply to any gun brought into the house, including those brought in by burglars or other criminals. I wonder how many persons were defending himself or herself from an attack by someone known to them?

If you have another link, please show. I will look some more myself.

Ranb
 
Lonewulf said:
I don't think you understand. I'm questioning his statistics as they don't seem to fall in with mine. One of them is wrong. I am questioning which one. Either that, or I am interpreting them wrongly.
Click to expand...

I can't say for certain they're true, but if anyone knew the facts for Oklahoma you'd expect it to be the Oklahoma State Department of Health.

In any event, I don't see how these stats contradict any others. The 1 in 4 says that for every four deaths that occurs as a result of an injury, one is by gunshot. I don't recall any comparative stats being posted. That goes for the rest of them too.
 
Lothian said:
I can help here. When you friend invites you round to see his new gun, the chances are that he is more likely to shoot you than an intruder with it.
Click to expand...

I think that when one of my firends invites me over to see his/her gun, I am more likely to die of a heart attack or get into a car accident on the way over.

Ranb
 
Ranb said:
Is the “firearm in the house” owned by the occupant; or does this label apply to any gun brought into the house, including those brought in by burglars or other criminals. I wonder how many persons were defending himself or herself from an attack by someone known to them?
Click to expand...

I would say it has to mean a firearm already in the house.
 
¨ Research indicates that for each firearm incident of self protection in the home, 1.3 unintentional deaths, 4.6 homicides, and 37 suicides occurred.
¨ Firearms in the home have been found to be 12 times more likely to kill a family member or acquaintance than a stranger.
Click to expand...

And it's worth remembering that when it says "incident of self protection" it doesn't necessarily mean that one or more lives were saved. Someone might have felt threatened by a non-violent intruder on their porch.

That is one seriously damning statistic, which I will believe in until it's proven false.
 
Ranb said:
I think that when one of my firends invites me over to see his/her gun, I am more likely to die of a heart attack or get into a car accident on the way over.

Ranb
Click to expand...

But that's completely irrelevant...

If these statistics are to be believed, a gun in the house makes you and your friends and family more at risk of injury or death, not less.


Which, it seems, undermines your entire argument.
 
volatile said:
But that's completely irrelevant...

If these statistics are to be believed, a gun in the house makes you and your friends and family more at risk of injury or death, not less.


Which, it seems, undermines your entire argument.
Click to expand...

Here is what I would rather do. Cut the risk down dramatically by educating my family about firearms and be responsible. That way, if the time does come where I need to defend myself and my family, I will still be able to do so.
 
baron said:
I can't say for certain they're true, but if anyone knew the facts for Oklahoma you'd expect it to be the Oklahoma State Department of Health.
Click to expand...

Point.

In any event, I don't see how these stats contradict any others. The 1 in 4 says that for every four deaths that occurs as a result of an injury, one is by gunshot. I don't recall any comparative stats being posted. That goes for the rest of them too.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I mistook that.

However, I did compare general injuries and gun accidents. Gun accidents were 0.005% (or 5 in 100,000), general deaths were 9.1% (or 9,100 in 100,000), though those were for non-fatal injuries. I haven't downloaded and read the PDF file on there for fatal injuries.

When we say "result of an injury", do we mean by assault, accident, or both?

Also, keep in mind that this is one state. I'm sure that you'll find that things vary in other states. And, as mentioned earlier, Washington D.C. has a very very high rate of crime, yet guns are practically banned altogether there. (Or was that claim refuted earlier?)
 
Quad4_72 said:
Here is what I would rather do. Cut the risk down dramatically by educating my family about firearms and be responsible. That way, if the time does come where I need to defend myself and my family, I will still be able to do so.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's what I'd propose as well. Don't get rid of the weapon, but increase knowledge about how to handle it. You would cut down on the accidents that way.
 
Quad4_72 said:
Here is what I would rather do. Cut the risk down dramatically by educating my family about firearms and be responsible. That way, if the time does come where I need to defend myself and my family, I will still be able to do so.
Click to expand...

That's a lottery, isn't it? A numbers game where the odds seem rather stacked against you?

As a critical thinker, would odds that bad in other fields not cause at least a pause for thought?
 
Quad4_72 said:
Here is what I would rather do. Cut the risk down dramatically by educating my family about firearms and be responsible. That way, if the time does come where I need to defend myself and my family, I will still be able to do so.
Click to expand...
I guess thats where I see the main problem. For a weapon to be usefull for defence it has to be available chambered and ready to go. I fail to see a locked unloaded and responsibly stored weapon as usefull for defence and I don't see a cocked handy firearm as safe to have in a household.

Thats what I can never figure out.
 
Having presented the comparison of gun injuries to self defense incidents with statistics as requested, and having none of those numbers or interpretations challenged, do I assume the "Self-defense is more likely than injuring others" claim is dropped?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom