Sean Taylor: Another victim of stupid gun laws

Here is a chart of accidental deaths: firearm discharge is extremly low.
http://www.the-eggman.com/writings/death_stats.html

http://img139.imageshack.us/img139/9892/deathstatsek6.png

0 Replies

interesting that the 5-14 age group is the highest. I would guess, although I claim no expertise that this is from kids getting hold of their parents guns because the parents are too f*cking stupid and careless to secure them properly.

0 Replies

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

interesting that the 5-14 age group is the highest. I would guess, although I claim no expertise that this is from kids getting hold of their parents guns because the parents are too f*cking stupid and careless to secure them properly.

I would agree, that and parent probably don't teach their kids about them early enough.

0 Replies

Drowning is really the biggie, isn't it? Imagine how ape **** the limo-libs and hollywooders are gonna go when Fred Thompson's first presidential directive bans swimming pools??

0 Replies

gungasnake wrote:

Drowning is really the biggie, isn't it? Imagine how ape **** the limo-libs and hollywooders are gonna go when Fred Thompson's first presidential directive bans swimming pools??

Drano and Windex too.......

0 Replies

gungasnake wrote:

Drowning is really the biggie, isn't it? Imagine how ape **** the limo-libs and hollywooders are gonna go when Fred Thompson's first presidential directive bans swimming pools??

Fred thompson... you really are funny....hey|!!! that's the kind of snake you are gunga, a plumbers snake.

0 Replies

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

gungasnake wrote:
Drowning is really the biggie, isn't it? Imagine how ape **** the limo-libs and hollywooders are gonna go when Fred Thompson's first presidential directive bans swimming pools??

Fred thompson... you really are funny....hey|!!! that's the kind of snake you are gunga, a plumbers snake.

No matter who wins in 08, shouldnt pools be banned to "protect the children"?
After all,isnt that our main job?

0 Replies

Nice trick to only use accidental deaths..

2004
Suicide by firearms - 16,750
homicide by firearms - 11,624
death by discharge of firearm- undetermined intent - 235
accidental death by firearm - 649
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr55/nvsr55_19.pdf
table 10

So that means the TOTAL deaths by firearms was just under 30,000
compared to the 45,000 for traffic deaths (all motor vehicles including pedestrians)

There are 231 million cars in the US.
There are 80 million guns in the US.

0 Replies

mysteryman wrote:

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
gungasnake wrote:
Drowning is really the biggie, isn't it? Imagine how ape **** the limo-libs and hollywooders are gonna go when Fred Thompson's first presidential directive bans swimming pools??

Fred thompson... you really are funny....hey|!!! that's the kind of snake you are gunga, a plumbers snake.

No matter who wins in 08, shouldnt pools be banned to "protect the children"?
After all,isnt that our main job?

No our main job is to use some common sense about thing... and THAT will NEVER happen....

I don't think guns should be banned and if you were paying attention I've made that clear many times and consistently over the years.

0 Replies

If only Taylor had a 50 cal machine gun, he would be alive today..

0 Replies

well now that's a possibility... if he was first to pull the trigger Laughing

0 Replies

I would think a shotgun sawed off to the legal limit fired at an intruder within 20 feet would pretty much do the trick.... even for a bad aim.....I don't want to shoot anyone but if I'm forced to I certainly want to kill them.....and I don't think I need an AK to accomplish that...

0 Replies

parados wrote:

There are 231 million cars in the US.
There are 80 million guns in the US.

It appears we need more guns to make this analysis work.

0 Replies

gungasnake wrote:

Roxxxanne wrote:
mysteryman wrote:
Roxxxanne wrote:
This wasn't a home invasion.

Then what was it?

A burglary, of course. Are you really that dense?

In other words, they stood in the yard and demanded money and, when Taylor refused, they shot him through the walls of the house??

No.

Someone wanting to parse the legal distinctions between the crimes of "home-invasion" and "burglary," will quibble over the use of the former term only if they are sure the intent of the criminals was NOT to commit a robbery of the occupants. Not sure that's known in this case, but in any event, I wasn't speaking of the legal definition of crimes, precisely because not all facts are known.

Might have been a burglary ... might not.
Might have been a "home-invasion robbery" ... might not.

But one thing's for certain: There was a home ... and it was invaded.

0 Replies

parados wrote:

Nice trick to only use accidental deaths..

Suicide by firearms - 16,750
homicide by firearms - 11,624
death by discharge of firearm- undetermined intent - 235
accidental death by firearm - 649
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr55/nvsr55_19.pdf
table 10

It's not an valid comparison to use suicide and homicide in the firearms totals. You're not going to eliminate the total overall number of suicides or homicides by banning guns.

The only thing you can hope to limit is accidental deaths which is why those are the numbers I gathered.

0 Replies

With the info we have at this point, this was clearly a burglary gone bad. A home invasion requires the expectation that the occupants will be home. Of course, the perp who claimed that might be lying.

Are the gun wack jobs now claiming that EVEN those convicted of gun crimes be legally permitted to own and even carry firearms.

These loons remind me of the All in the Family episode in which Archie went on TV to promote the idea of arming the passengers to help prevent hijackings.

And I still find it offensive that Sean's death is being used as political fodder by the gun lunatics.

0 Replies

parados wrote:

If only Taylor had a 50 cal machine gun, he would be alive today..

That of course is not guarenteed....but his odds of survival would have been enhanced.

0 Replies

maporsche wrote:

parados wrote:
If only Taylor had a 50 cal machine gun, he would be alive today..

That of course is not guarenteed....but his odds of survival would have been enhanced.

If Sean had his burglar alarm on, he might be alive. There are an infinite number of "what ifs" This argument is idiotic.

0 Replies

Roxxxanne wrote:

maporsche wrote:
parados wrote:
If only Taylor had a 50 cal machine gun, he would be alive today..

That of course is not guarenteed....but his odds of survival would have been enhanced.

If Sean had his burglar alarm on, he might be alive.

That's a good point too......at least we was ALLOWED to OWN a burglar alarm.

0 Replies

Roxxxanne wrote:

With the info we have at this point, this was clearly a burglary gone bad. A home invasion requires the expectation that the occupants will be home. Of course, the perp who claimed that might be lying.

Weren't you claiming earlier that this wasn't a simple burglary...and there was some intent to kill this man?

Quote:

Are the gun wack jobs now claiming that EVEN those convicted of gun crimes be legally permitted to own and even carry firearms.

Not criminals of felonies....but misdemeanors, sure.

Quote:

And I still find it offensive that Sean's death is being used as political fodder by the gun lunatics.

I am not a gun lunatic, nor am I a right-winger. I'm about as left of center as they come.

Isn't this the same idiotic argument that the right wing use when we mention soldiers deaths?

I've probably heard gunga say several times something along the lines of "our soldiers deaths shouldn't be used as political fodder"......he's probably said that to you.

Now YOU are saying that we cannot use Taylor's death as political fodder......

Do you find that interesting at all? A little hippocratic maybe?

0 Replies

Sean Taylor: Another victim of stupid gun laws

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know