Gun Control

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/national/mass-shootings-in-america/?utm_term=.20aa6d3ed921

1153 killed in mass shootings since 1966 through 2018.  (Mass shooting defined as 4 or more people dying in one setting from gun violence) That averages out to 22 per year.  Not exactly epidemic.  Does it seem like it is happening more lately?  Has the nonstop coverage from the media accelerated this rate by 24 hour coverage whenever there is a shooting?  Maybe....maybe not.....I can't answer that but I suspect it might be a factor.

In any one year there are approximately 33,000 deaths from guns.  Factor out those that commit suicide and accidental deaths and you are left with about 11,000 deaths.  Remove the gun deaths through gang violence and you drop almost 9000 from that figure.  You are left with about 2000 deaths, many of which are neighbor disputes, jealous lovers.  2000 in a population of 320,000,000 means you have about a .0000069% chance of dying by gun violence if you aren't in a gang or commit suicide.

Lets address the suicide issue.  About 20,000 per year and a large percentage by gun. It's a sad and tragic number for sure.  Lets compare our national rate of 13.4/100,000 to Japan which is 19.5 per 100,000.  In Japan gun ownership is rare. Their most common form of suicide are poison and stepping in front of a high speed train.

 
TonyStalloni said:
Lets address the suicide issue.  About 20,000 per year and a large percentage by gun. It's a sad and tragic number for sure.  Lets compare our national rate of 13.4/100,000 to Japan which is 19.5 per 100,000.  In Japan gun ownership is rare. Their most common form of suicide are poison and stepping in front of a high speed train.
Click to expand...


This might be interesting and compelling if I had an idea what less gun ownership in America and more gun ownership in Japan would do to the respective numbers. 

For all I know Japan would jump to 45/100,000 with a prominent gun ownership culture.

 
Landlord said:
This might be interesting and compelling if I had an idea what less gun ownership in America and more gun ownership in Japan would do to the respective numbers. 

For all I know Japan would jump to 45/100,000 with a prominent gun ownership culture.
Click to expand...
There could be some variation but I think someone intent on ending their life is going to find a way. A person dealing with a mobility handicap may not be able to drive to the train tracks but might be able to get the gun out of the closet or drawer. They would probably have a way to OD.  

 
Interestimg

over the last 50 years

mass shootings have on average killed about 22 people per year

but this somehow is an epidemic of mass proportions that demands a national debate and immediate action 

with many demanding the banning of assault style weapons

some even calling for a total gun ban

to think that some of the hysteria surrounding these rare events isnt  politically motivated is very naive 

 both sides fan their own pet flames and it’s sickening 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
OTHusker said:
Interestimg

over the last 50 years

mass shootings have on average killed about 22 people per year

but this somehow is an epidemic of mass proportions that demands a national debate and immediate action 

with many demanding the banning of assault style weapons

some even calling for a total gun ban

to think that some of the hysteria surrounding these rare events isnt  politically motivated is very naive 

 both sides fan their own pet flames and it’s sickening 
Click to expand...
"Over the last 50 years" how bout you look over the last 10 years instead. Almost 400 last year alone. 77 killed in the first 2 months of 2019.

461 in 2017 for reference. Its not really fair to go back to an era where automatic weapons weren't easily accesibly by private citizens as a starting point for your data. Maybe we should compare numbers from 1994-2004 and 2005-present to see what kind of effect a gun ban has on gun violence. I'm afraid the numbers wouldn't be in your favor though.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Unfortunately this thread and others have devolved into shaming and name calling instead of a back and forth based on facts

i don’t recall calling anyone a name or insinuated someone was stupid because of their opinions

if I said anything of the like or inferred it,  please accept my apologies 

ive always found like landlord pointed out earlier when the conversation gets nasty no one is opening or changing their minds

ive spent far too much of my last week with this and my family and other interests deserve more attention 

best of luck to all the fellas that participated 

 
Nebfanatic said:
"Over the last 50 years" how bout you look over the last 10 years instead. Almost 400 last year alone. 77 killed in the first 2 months of 2019.

461 in 2017 for reference. Its not really fair to go back to an era where automatic weapons weren't easily accesibly by private citizens as a starting point for your data. Maybe we should compare numbers from 1994-2004 and 2005-present to see what kind of effect a gun ban has on gun violence. I'm afraid the numbers wouldn't be in your favor though.
Click to expand...
My statistics were for "mass" murders by a shooter who kills 4 or more people (often times random unknown to the shooter) in one setting. Many of the 77 were done by a shooter who knew the victim and was done after an argument where alcohol was involved,  may have been a revenge shooting or a gang style hit and run.  It is too early to know how many of the 77 shootings will become drug related, gang style or drunken arguments where a man at a party gets in a fight then goes to his car to retrieve his pistol. Those don't qualify as mass murder.  They would apply to the roughly 2000 people a year killed for no obvious reason.  If we apply all 77 to that category it comes out to 462/year which would be considerably under the 2000/year figure. Probably the murder rate goes up in the summer time particularly in northern locations as people have more parties and outdoor events.  We won't know for sure till the FBI puts those figures together.

 
OTHusker said:
Unfortunately this thread and others have devolved into shaming and name calling instead of a back and forth based on facts

i don’t recall calling anyone a name or insinuated someone was stupid because of their opinions

if I said anything of the like or inferred it,  please accept my apologies 

ive always found like landlord pointed out earlier when the conversation gets nasty no one is opening or changing their minds

ive spent far too much of my last week with this and my family and other interests deserve more attention 

best of luck to all the fellas that participated 
Click to expand...
I literally quoted your last post with nothing but statistics.

 
TonyStalloni said:
My statistics were for "mass" murders by a shooter who kills 4 or more people (often times random unknown to the shooter) in one setting. Many of the 77 were done by a shooter who knew the victim and was done after an argument where alcohol was involved,  may have been a revenge shooting or a gang style hit and run.  It is too early to know how many of the 77 shootings will become drug related, gang style or drunken arguments where a man at a party gets in a fight then goes to his car to retrieve his pistol. Those don't qualify as mass murder.  They would apply to the roughly 2000 people a year killed for no obvious reason.  If we apply all 77 to that category it comes out to 462/year which would be considerably under the 2000/year figure. Probably the murder rate goes up in the summer time particularly in northern locations as people have more parties and outdoor events.  We won't know for sure till the FBI puts those figures together.
Click to expand...
My numbers are for mass shooting incidents

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States_in_2019

 
Decoy73 said:
How would one’s life be adversely effected by the banning the sale of “assault “ weapons going forward?  I’m a gun owner so I’m clearly not anti-gun, but I’ve never heard a good compelling reason why civilians need to own assault weapons (AR-15, AK-47,etc).  Just curious. 
Click to expand...


Save for the pearl-clutching gun owners and the scant few that live in remote areas where they may have need of such a weapon for protection against wildlife (and aren't actively looking to hunt said wildlife for sport), there's no realistic need. 

There's nothing sporting about using them for hunting, and while they're fun to shoot, there's zero real-world day-to-day application for them, as they're originally meant as a way to spread a large amount of bullets against human targets in a short amount of time...that is, unless you're in a war.  :dunno

We had a ban on assault weapons in the past (the Brady Bill, IIRC, named after the bodyguard that took a bullet for President Reagan and was permanently handicapped as a result) and the FUD that the NRA said would happen didn't. They can (and should) be banned again, and then we should examine other means of restrictions (e.g. forcing temporary surrender of weapons and permits to city/county officials if someone is charged with domestic assault). 

 
OTHusker said:
Interestimg

over the last 50 years

mass shootings have on average killed about 22 people per year

but this somehow is an epidemic of mass proportions that demands a national debate and immediate action 

with many demanding the banning of assault style weapons

some even calling for a total gun ban

to think that some of the hysteria surrounding these rare events isnt  politically motivated is very naive 

 both sides fan their own pet flames and it’s sickening 
Click to expand...


Then again, you can directly measure the hysteria: 1 white girl killed by an undocumented worker > 17 kids killed by an American with a semi-automatic weapon.

btw....about 45,000 Americans die every year, attributed to a lack of health insurance. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
OTHusker said:
I’m not sure there are many jungles in Syria but that hasn’t seemed to stop a tiny poorly equipped force from creating quite a problem for a much larger and better equipped one 
Click to expand...
Where there is geopolitical concerns to take into consideration with multinational armies from multiple sides taking part. 

Usually when the government comes for its' own people, civilian casualties are of low priority. 

 
Back
Top