Gun Safe Zones

GATraveller

Just so all the information on Australia is available.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/knife-killings-on-the-rise-in-australia-as-gun-murders-fall-says-new-criminology-report/story-e6frg6nf-1226581896001

stlcharcoal

JohnInCarolina said:

There are lies, damn lies, and then there are statistics.

And then there are statistics pulled from Wikipedia that include suicides.  Take suicide out of that and you'll see the US number drop dramatically.  Then take accidental  negligent shootings out of there and you'll see it drop even more.  This is about murder, and not self inflicted or negligence. 

If there's one thing I learned in college and graduate level statistics classes, is that data on a chart can be made to look however you want it to look.  Whether it's through stretching, 3D, colors, etc......or you just carefully select the raw data to show the results you want your audience to see.

Not looking for a fight here, just saying that chart is from data that doesn't belong in this argument.

JohnInCarolina

stlcharcoal said:

And then there are statistics pulled from Wikipedia that include suicides.  Take suicide out of that and you'll see the US number drop dramatically.  Then take accidental  negligent shootings out of there and you'll see it drop even more.  This is about murder, and not self inflicted or negligence. 

If there's one thing I learned in college and graduate level statistics classes, is that data on a chart can be made to look however you want it to look.  Whether it's through stretching, 3D, colors, etc......or you just carefully select the raw data to show the results you want your audience to see.

Not looking for a fight here, just saying that chart is from data that doesn't belong in this argument.

Why aren't suicides and accidental shootings part of the picture?  To me, there is risk associated with having firearms in your house, of carrying them.  If you want to ignore that information when deciding to purchase one, that's fine, but I think you should understand what you're doing and why.  

For what it's worth, if you do have the chart without suicides or accidental deaths, then please post it.  

Davec433

It's important to have your facts in order, and to be clear about what you're representing. I believe that when politicians include suicides and accidental deaths in their 'violent crime' numbers they are misrepresenting the actual problem and conflating gun violence with mental health problems.

if your trying to sell me something don't fudge the numbers or out right lie. That's how we got stuck with Obamacare.

fishlessman

DC is practically a gun safe zone according to this chart, pay special attention to gun ownership and gun murder rates in dc. theres where we need a wall
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state

stlcharcoal

JohnInCarolina said:

stlcharcoal said:

And then there are statistics pulled from Wikipedia that include suicides.  Take suicide out of that and you'll see the US number drop dramatically.  Then take accidental  negligent shootings out of there and you'll see it drop even more.  This is about murder, and not self inflicted or negligence. 

If there's one thing I learned in college and graduate level statistics classes, is that data on a chart can be made to look however you want it to look.  Whether it's through stretching, 3D, colors, etc......or you just carefully select the raw data to show the results you want your audience to see.

Not looking for a fight here, just saying that chart is from data that doesn't belong in this argument.

Why aren't suicides and accidental shootings part of the picture?  To me, there is risk associated with having firearms in your house, of carrying them.  If you want to ignore that information when deciding to purchase one, that's fine, but I think you should understand what you're doing and why.  

For what it's worth, if you do have the chart without suicides or accidental deaths, then please post it.  

I'm not going to spend the morning searching the internet for a non-partisan chart......because they're hard to find.  That's my whole point, both sides are going to make the chart look how they want it to look.  And that was the capstone of graduate level statistics (how to do that and get away with it!!)

But suicides and negligent (or what you call "accidental") gun deaths don't belong in this.  With suicide, mentally ill people that want to kill themselves are going to do it by the whatever means they have access to.  In Japan, suicide via a firearm are low because they don't have a lot of them, but suicide with swords and jumping off buildings is a lot higher than the US.  Are they banning swords and high rises over there?  No.  I worked EMS for 10 yrs and I can tell you that most of the gun related stuff we were on scene for was suicide, then accidental/negligent, and occasionally violence or self defense.

Post a chart with death from automobile accidents in the same countries and you'll see similar results.  We have a lot of cars, a lot of roads, drive at higher speeds, drive heavier vehicles, multi-task more, and a lot of accidents......it's not comparing apples to apples when they pick a highly populated countries that can fit inside the state of Texas.  How can negligent gun deaths from a widely practiced sport like hunting in the US, be compared to data in the UK where hunting is only a sport for the elite?  Yes, we have more negligent gun deaths and more guns, but comparison to the UK, France, etc is only for the purpose of making a heavily skewed chart like you posted.  It shows the visual message that the maker wanted it to.

GuitarEC

@JohnInCarolina I was looking at that chart you posted and something didn't quite strike right with me, so I checked it.  Sure enough that red line thru it gives no point of reference or any indication as to what it's supposed to represent.  I've edited that chart to include grey index marks along the X and Y axis and added a red line representing a linear connection along those references.  The added reference points changes the perceived dynamic of what that chart represents.


Eric "GuitarEC"
Metro Atl., Ga.

northGAcock

No one has ever been shot unless there was a gun around. (no political or opinions on the thread)....just stating the obvious. 

HendersonTRKing

Click, read and scroll.  Wash, rinse, repeat.  

This is madness.

http://www.theonion.com/article/no-way-prevent-says-only-nation-where-regularly-ha-51938

theyolksonyou

Ummm, the onion?

JohnInCarolina

GuitarEC said:

@JohnInCarolina I was looking at that chart you posted and something didn't quite strike right with me, so I checked it.  Sure enough that red line thru it gives no point of reference or any indication as to what it's supposed to represent.  I've edited that chart to include grey index marks along the X and Y axis and added a red line representing a linear connection along those references.  The added reference points changes the perceived dynamic of what that chart represents.


Eric "GuitarEC"
Metro Atl., Ga.

Thank you and I agree.

rossv1

northGAcock said:

No one has ever been shot unless there was a gun around. (no political or opinions on the thread)....just stating the obvious. 

Depends on what you consider "around". Craig Harrison killed a couple guys from 1.5 miles away. Lol

gdenby

bgebrent said:

My life is devoted to helping strangers, saving lives and helping others.  Every hospital I discharge those duties in are declared "weapon free".  That also declares them to be the softest of targets.  As most of you know I conceal carry, except in the hospitals I work in as a law abiding citizen.  Given the events of the day, what do you think is a reasonable way forward?

What if the couple in CA had just tossed fire bombs into the party? What if they were not bent on some sort of vengance but destruction, and waited till people left and picked them off at a distance? I don't know that there are any hard targets if someone has multiple weapons, explosives, possibly body armor, and no particular desire to escape alive.

But to the point. Public places such as hospitals or schools should have perimeter defense. But shooting within the space is a bad idea. There will be people in panic, running around perhaps into the line of fire. Bullets may miss, go thru walls or ricochet. Police may not know who is the "good guy" when they arrive. Etc.

Every hospital I've been in or near for the past few years has lots of police in the vicinity. Most of the schools seem to have them. The local grocery stores have a few on hand, some in uniform, some not.

The response in San Bernadino was remarkable. From what I've read so far, the attempted escape may have been foiled by the almost immediate and massive police response.

gdenby

Davec433 said:

http://www.mintpressnews.com/the-facts-that-neither-side-wants-to-admit-about-gun-control/207152/

False quote. Actual quote:

""A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies." 1st state of the Union address.

Oh, I get it, while there was a picture of what appears to be Pres. Geo Washington behind the quote, the Geo. who actually made the statement was the crazy guy down the block who beats his wife, particularly when he drinks too much.

hoofaloos

northGAcock said:

No one has ever been shot unless there was a gun around. (no political or opinions on the thread)....just stating the obvious. 

this


also, to keep this relevant to the forum...smoking guns- do we go plate setter legs up or down?

DoubleEgger

GATraveller said:

Just so all the information on Australia is available.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/knife-killings-on-the-rise-in-australia-as-gun-murders-fall-says-new-criminology-report/story-e6frg6nf-1226581896001

scottc454

gdenby said:

Davec433 said:

http://www.mintpressnews.com/the-facts-that-neither-side-wants-to-admit-about-gun-control/207152/

False quote. Actual quote:

""A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies." 1st state of the Union address.

Oh, I get it, while there was a picture of what appears to be Pres. Geo Washington behind the quote, the Geo. who actually made the statement was the crazy guy down the block who beats his wife, particularly when he drinks too much.

It's not a false quote. It was merely translated to contemporary English.  The meaning is the same. Don't be daft. 

Canugghead

JohnInCarolina said:

There are lies, damn lies, and then there are statistics.

Darn, canuckland ranks 3rd, I wonder if it has anything to do with proximity to US, eh 
If that's the case, I'm all for building that wall 

JohnInCarolina

Here's what it looks like when you take out suicides:

Toxarch

You know why Russia doesn't have mass shootings like we do? Well, first they don't report all of them and we don't hear about them. But mostly because the government doesn't put up with hostages and all the people know it. If you are taken hostage, you better get yourself out. If not, then the government is sending in guys and taking out everybody. They kill the bad guys and the hostages. Men, women, children, elderly, the sick, the bed ridden, everyone. So if you want to live, you better save your own butt before the government sends their guys in.

scottc454

Yeah, but you need to factor out the hunting accidents and the people who died who are better off dead, and so on. 

Then you need to add in the people in other places who would have been killed by guns if they were available, but were killed by other means such as drive by swordings. 

nolaegghead

scottc454 said:

gdenby said:

Davec433 said:

http://www.mintpressnews.com/the-facts-that-neither-side-wants-to-admit-about-gun-control/207152/

False quote. Actual quote:

""A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies." 1st state of the Union address.

Oh, I get it, while there was a picture of what appears to be Pres. Geo Washington behind the quote, the Geo. who actually made the statement was the crazy guy down the block who beats his wife, particularly when he drinks too much.

It's not a false quote. It was merely translated to contemporary English.  The meaning is the same. Don't be daft. 

Um....that is contemporary English to start with.

JohnInCarolina

Toxarch said:

You know why Russia doesn't have mass shootings like we do? Well, first they don't report all of them and we don't hear about them. But mostly because the government doesn't put up with hostages and all the people know it. If you are taken hostage, you better get yourself out. If not, then the government is sending in guys and taking out everybody. They kill the bad guys and the hostages. Men, women, children, elderly, the sick, the bed ridden, everyone. So if you want to live, you better save your own butt before the government sends their guys in.

scottc454

nolaegghead said:

scottc454 said:

It's not a false quote. It was merely translated to contemporary English.  The meaning is the same. Don't be daft. 

Um....that is contemporary English to start with.

Sorry. I retract my post. The quote was indeed modified and 'murica'd.
I blame my error on multitasking. 

HendersonTRKing

theyolksonyou said:

Ummm, the onion?

Ummm, yes.  "No Way to Prevent This" Says The Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens.  

They use the same headline and story each time a mass shooting occurs . . . which is to say, often.

Again and again, with the same refrain -- "there's no way to prevent this".  It's sickening.   

People are entitled to their own opinions, but not to their own facts.

Fact:  The USA is an outlier in gun violence and mass shootings as compared to all other industrialized nations.

Opinion:  Is this a good thing?

Fact:  The USA has the least restrictive gun laws of all industrialized nations.

Opinion: No laws should be changed to try to prevent gun violence and mass shootings.

Fact:  Those constitutional rights set forth in the amendments to the US Constitution, such as free speech and freedom of association, are guaranteed to me by the US Constitution.

Fact:  My constitutionally guaranteed rights to free speech and freedom of association are subject to restrictions to protect public health and safety notwithstanding the Constitution's guarantee of same.

Opinion:  My Constitutional right to keep and bear arms is not subject to ANY restriction of ANY kind in the interest of public health and safety.

tamu2009

What does "shall not be infringed" mean then? 

Sardonicus

What does "well-regulated militia" mean?

MelSharples

I heard Wayne LaPierre has started lobbying to get the definition of a mass shooting changed from 4 or more to 20 or more...problem solved.

YukonRon

4 or 20, What difference will it make?

HeavyG

Sardonicus said:

What does "well-regulated militia" mean?

It's funny how people that always quote the last four words always forget the first four words.