Guns And The Laws That Govern Them

@RexRed,

Are the magazines loaded?
How do you know they have a round chambered?

0 Replies

@Suttle Tea,

Quote:

F*ck your Freedom oraloy!
People are getting massacred in this country so you can continue having your Freedom.
Happy now?

Quote:

In 2013, Motor vehicle traffic deaths
•Number of deaths: 33,804
•Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.7

All firearm deaths
•Number of deaths: 33,636
•Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.6

Those numbers are from the CDC
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm

So, more people died by cars than firearms, so
People are getting massacred in this country so you can continue having your freedom to drive.
Happy now?

Are you going to give up your priveledge to drive?

3 Replies

@mysteryman,

Don't forget that of those 33,000 deaths by guns, 60% of them are suicides.

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

Well that's fine then.

0 Replies

@mysteryman,

This is nice logic. Especially when you consider that there are more guns than cars in the USA - so guns are actually safer. Except...

A car's primary purpose is not to kill, it does actually have a bunch of ticks in the 'contributes to economy/society' column. Guns don't.

You have to have a licence to drive one. And very few five year olds have killed someone with their dad's car. Or been killed cleaning it. Guns don't deliver food all over the country, or let paramedics travel to accidents on them, or..., well you get the picture.

2 Replies

@hingehead,

Trying to compare guns and cars can be a bit trying when using age as a criteria. Wink

0 Replies

@mysteryman,

It's interesting isn't it that about 33% of households own a gun and 95% of households own a car and yet the deaths per population are equal. That would mean someone with a gun is almost 3 times more likely to kill you than someone with a car.

1 Reply

@parados,

It's barely 2016, and look at the stats on gun violence.
http://www.gunviolencearchive.org

0 Replies

@hingehead,

hingehead wrote:

Except...
A car's primary purpose is not to kill,

The primary purpose of many guns also isn't to kill, therefore the blanket implication that this is their primary purpose is untrue.

And in any case, whether the primary purpose of a device is to kill or not is completely irrelevant.

hingehead wrote:

it does actually have a bunch of ticks in the 'contributes to economy/society' column. Guns don't.

Another falsehood. Guns provide plenty of contributions to society.

hingehead wrote:

You have to have a licence to drive one.

Yet another falsehood.

hingehead wrote:

And very few five year olds have killed someone with their dad's car. Or been killed cleaning it.

Plenty of five year olds are killed in car accidents. I'd guess far more than are killed in gun accidents.

hingehead wrote:

or let paramedics travel to accidents on them,

If you are going to allow police to still carry guns while denying that right to ordinary people, then any ban on cars can allow medical personnel to still travel on roadways even when such travel is denied to ordinary people.

(Not that there would be many accidents after cars are banned.)

hingehead wrote:

Guns don't deliver food all over the country,

Guns provide cheap and affordable food to many people.

hingehead wrote:

or..., well you get the picture.

Yes. Freedom haters will spout an incredible degree of nonsense in order to attempt justification for opposing freedom.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

The primary purpose of many guns also isn't to kill, therefore the blanket implication that this is their primary purpose is untrue.

Which gun do you think doesn't have a primary purpose of killing? I doubt hunters go out to just wound their prey.

Quote:

Guns provide cheap and affordable food to many people.

That must be all those guns whose primary purpose isn't to kill. Do their owners use them to garden?

2 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

Which gun do you think doesn't have a primary purpose of killing? I doubt hunters go out to just wound their prey.

Haven't we already done this?

The primary purpose of a self defense gun is rapid incapacitation.

For example, if shooting in self defense fatally wounded the attacker, but the attacker was able to fatally wound the defender before succumbing, that would be a self defense failure despite the attacker being killed.

But if shooting in self defense immediately halted the attack, even if the attacker survived to stand trial for his assault, that would be a self defense success despite the attacker surviving.

The primary purpose of a target shooting gun is to strike a non-living target. Note all those Olympic gold medalists who never kill anything at the Olympics. Or those people who shoot flying clay discs with shotguns.

parados wrote:

That must be all those guns whose primary purpose isn't to kill. Do their owners use them to garden?

No. Hunting weapons are designed to kill.

1 Reply

@parados,

Most people with guns live in the city. What kind of food is he talking about?

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Does the 2nd Amendment mention hunting as the reason for the Amendment?

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

My question was directed to parados.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

The primary purpose of a self defense gun is rapid incapacitation.

So your argument is that killing is not the most effective rapid incapacitation? Are you proposing shooting someone in the leg or arm?

Quote:

The primary purpose of a target shooting gun is to strike a non-living target.

Yet you would have a very real problem with restricting gun ownership to just target shooting guns, wouldn't you?

2 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

So your argument is that killing is not the most effective rapid incapacitation?

Killing and incapacitation are independent from each other.

parados wrote:

Are you proposing shooting someone in the leg or arm?

No. Always try to make each bullet pass through both the heart and the spine.

parados wrote:

Yet you would have a very real problem with restricting gun ownership to just target shooting guns, wouldn't you?

Correct.

1 Reply

@parados,

Target practice is used in the military.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

The military practices so they can use guns to kill people.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

So, you prefer to have a bullet pass through the heart that doesn't kill someone?
Your logic is unassailable because it is not logic.

1 Reply

@parados,

When shooting in self defense, people should try to aim so that every bullet passes through both the heart and spine.

Strictly speaking I was making statements of fact, not statements of logic.

1 Reply

Guns And The Laws That Govern Them

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know