Another US Gun Nut Opens Fire

myp · Feb 15, 2010

chuck schmidt said:
There is another gun thread in which I posted a page or two from Wicki which somebody dismissed because it was 'just Wicki' and without discussing the facts. I thought you debated there, but I guess I was wrong. Careful though when you discredit everything from Wicki – honest, the world really is not flat just because Wicki says it is not.

I was not discrediting it simply because it was from Wiki. You just posted a link to a wiki page about gun shootings in America, without explaining what you were trying to show from it. We all know gun shootings happen in public in America- we also know they happen in Europe, Australia, and Canada. I'm not sure what your point with it was.

chuck schmidt · Feb 15, 2010

DodgeFB said:
I don't see much "courtesy" coming from you about anything to anyone. You just seem to devote all your efforts to harping and complaining about all of America's so called problems.

I think that?s a bit unrealistic. I don?t come to a political debating forum to discuss local floral shows. Maybe some do? How are the magnolias in Dixie this time of year?

Why does everything you disagree with need another law? There are plenty of laws on the books to cover most things.

I can go along with that. How about we repeal the 2nd Amendment?

Enough said for Chuck and Dodge. Time to move on. Have a nice day.

I hope he doesn?t mean it forever?

chuck schmidt · Feb 15, 2010

myp said:
I was not discrediting it simply because it was from Wiki. You just posted a link to a wiki page about gun shootings in America, without explaining what you were trying to show from it. We all know gun shootings happen in public in America- we also know they happen in Europe, Australia, and Canada. I'm not sure what your point with it was.

The shear number of times they happen in America.

Children and Gun Violence
In a single year, 3,012 children and teens were killed by gunfire in the United States, according to the latest national data released in 2002. That is one child every three hours; eight children every day; and more than 50 children every week. (Children's Defense Fund and National Center for Health Statistics)

America and Gun Violence
American children are more at risk from firearms than the children of any other industrialized nation. In one year, firearms killed no children in Japan, 19 in Great Britain, 57 in Germany, 109 in France, 153 in Canada, and 5,285 in the United States. (Centers for Disease Control)

Over a two and a half-year period, at least 9,976 convicted felons and other illegal buyers in 46 states obtained guns because of inadequate records. (Broken Records, Americans for Gun Safety Foundation )

School Safety

Between 1994 and 1999, there were 220 school associated violent events resulting in 253 deaths - - 74.5% of these involved firearms. Handguns caused almost 60% of these deaths. (Journal of American Medical Association, December 2001)
In 1998-99 academic year, 3,523 students were expelled for bringing a firearm to school. This is a decrease from the 5,724 students expelled in 1996-97 for bringing a firearm to school. (U.S. Department of Education, October 2000)
Nearly 8% of adolescents in urban junior and senior high schools miss at least one day of school each month because they are afraid to attend. (National Mental Health & Education Center for Children & Families, National Association of School Psychologists 1998)
The National School Boards Association estimates that more than 135,000 guns are brought into U.S. schools each day. (NSBA, 1993)

Children and Gun Violence

Between 1979 and 2001, gunfire killed 90,000 children and teens in America. (Children's Defense Fund and National Center for Health Statistics)
In one year, more children and teens died from gunfire than from cancer, pneumonia, influenza, asthma, and HIV/AIDS combined. (Children's Defense Fund)
The rate of firearm deaths among kids under age 15 is almost 12 times higher in the United States than in 25 other industrialized countries combined. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)

I'll have to post the rest of the list on the next post.

chuck schmidt · Feb 15, 2010

America and Gun Violence

Every day more than 80 Americans die from gun violence. (Coalition to Stop Gun Violence)
The rate of firearm deaths among kids under age 15 is almost 12 times higher in the United States than in 25 other industrialized countries combined. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)
American kids are 16 times more likely to be murdered with a gun, 11 times more likely to commit suicide with a gun, and nine times more likely to die from a firearm accident than children in 25 other industrialized countries combined. (Centers for Disease Control)

Guns in the Wrong Hands

Americans for Gun Safety produced a 2003 report that reveals that 20 of the nation’s 22 national gun laws are not enforced. According to U.S. Department of Justice data (FY 2000-2002), only 2% of federal gun crimes were actually prosecuted. Eighty-five percent of cases prosecuted relate to street criminals in possession of firearms. Ignored are laws intended to punish illegal gun trafficking, firearm theft, corrupt gun dealers, lying on a criminal background check form, obliterating firearm serial numbers, selling guns to minors and possessing a gun in a school zone. To access The Enforcement Gap: Federal Gun Laws Ignored, visit http://w3.agsfoundation.com/ . For a state-by-state chart of gun crimes (FY 2000-2002), click here .

Note that the report was from Americans for Gun Safety, not Gun Abolition.

Studies show that 1 percent of gun stores sell the weapons traced to 57 percent of gun crimes. According to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF), the dealer that armed the DC area sniper is among this small group of problem gun dealers that "supply the suppliers" who funnel guns to the nation's criminals. (Between 1997 and 2001, guns sold by this dealer were involved in 52 crimes, including homicides, kidnappings and assaults. Still open today, it also can't account for 238 guns or say whether they were stolen, lost or sold, or if their buyers underwent felony-background checks.) As a result, these few gun dealers have a vastly disproportionate impact on public safety. ... Yet ATF enforcement is weak due to a lack of Congressional support and resources. For more details, click here .
[*] Terrorists have purchased firearms at gun shows, where unlicensed sellers are not currently required to conduct background checks or to ask for identification. According to the Middle East Intelligence Report, for example, a Hezbollah member was arrested in November 2000, after a nine-month investigation by the FBI's counter-terrorism unit. Ali Boumelhem was later convicted on seven counts of weapons charges and conspiracy to ship weapons and ammunition to Lebanon. Federal agents had observed Boumelhem, a resident of Detroit and Beirut, travel to Michigan gun shows and buy gun parts and ammunition for shipment overseas. Boumelhem was prohibited from legally purchasing guns as gun stores because he was a convicted felon. Additional cases involve a Pakistani national with an expired (1988) student visa; a Lebanese native and Hamas member with numerous felony convictions; and a supporter of the Irish Republican Army. (USA Today, Wednesday, November 28, 2001 Americans for Gun Safety )

According to Americans for Gun Safety (December 2002), gun theft is most likely in states without laws requiring safe storage of firearms in the home and where there are large numbers of gun owners and relatively high crime rates. Based on FBI data, nearly 1.7 million guns have been reported stolen in the past ten years, and only 40% of those were recovered. The missing guns, over 80% of which are taken from homes or cars, most likely fuel the black market for criminals. NEA, AGS and the National Rifle Association advocate for safe storage. To access "Stolen Guns: Arming the Enemy" visit www.agsfoundation.com .

The American Medical Association reports that between 36% and 50% of male eleventh graders believe that they could easily get a gun if they wanted one.

In 1998-99 academic year, 3,523 students were expelled for bringing a firearm to school. This is a decrease from the 5,724 students expelled in 1996-97 for bringing a firearm to school. (U.S. Department of Education, October 2000)

According to a report by the Joshephson Institute of Ethics (2000 Report Card: Report #1), 60% of high school and 31% of middle school boys said they could get a gun if they wanted to (April, 2001).

Updated: April 14, 2005

So how do these incidents "protect" Americans?

myp · Feb 15, 2010

One problem with the majority of those facts: America has a population of ~300 million, most European countries have exponentially lower populations. For this reason, straight number comparisons do not work- percentage-wise stats are a lot more accurate and if you look at those you will see even in nations of high gun control, the numbers are very similar.

That brings me to the second post in which one of the points is that most gun crimes are not punished. The reason for this is often related to the fact that our jail system is simply overcrowded. Perhaps even more important though is the fact that most of those gun "crimes" that are listed such as trafficking, etc. are the result of criminalizing gun ownership, which have led to black markets. It is often the best interest of police officers to not take down parts of black markets because that usually results in violence among competitors who fight for that market share. The prostitution situation in Chicago shows this very same thing, where according to statistics in a recent (few years old) study, a police officer is more likely to sleep with a prostitute than to arrest her or a pimp.

Now we are at the point where 1% of gun stores sell to 57% of gun crime criminals. The problem with dealing with this is the black market will always support that demand. If you don't buy into that argument because you still dream of utopia, then consider pushing legislation that would further regulate those stores- don't talk about overall bans because of a few stores. Same goes for gun shows.

As for stolen guns, what do you say we do about that? You yourself said that you are for gun ownership, just not public carrying. Most people who steal guns don't do so when a person is carrying them (that'd just be dangerous and stupid

)- they do it from private locations.

And as for youth getting guns, that is currently illegal by law first of all, but in any nation that allows gun ownership, it would obviously be easy to an extent as people would have them in the homes their children also live in.

Those statistics are very misleading and they seem to advocate for complete gun bans anyway. I thought you are ok with private ownership, just not public carrying?

Edit: Also, if you could give a link to where you got those stats from that'd be nice- always give credit to those who did the work, no matter how misleading it may be

chuck schmidt · Feb 15, 2010

deanhills said:
I'm quite intrigued by the label of "gun-nuts". How does one differentiate between life-time gun owners who know how to use guns responsibly like you do, and gun-nuts?

I am not talking about just guns. I am discussing handguns. By and large, people who pack hidden handguns for the purpose of shooting other human beings in public can be classed as gun nuts. They might not be, but the onus is on them unless they're on-duty cops. Some non-cops should be armed such as armored car security, but even then only when they are on the job.

I don't think guns shoot and kill people, but people use guns to shoot people.

THAT old saw? Tell ya what. To satisfy me that you truly believe there are no problems with handguns here is what I want you to do. Load your favorite sidearm to the nuts. Cock it. Release the safety if it is a pistol. Stick it in your mouth. Then go 4X4ing all afternoon with your buddies while you sit in the back. Just to help you, please keep your finger off the trigger. But keep the gun in your mouth.

As long as there is a need to kill or to defend against being killed, guns will be around, legally or illegally.

There is no need to kill or to defend against being killed in a free and democratic country with professional policing, if you use common sense in where you go. If you mean that you want so badly to go to a bar that is so dangerous you might have to shoot somebody, I think that makes you a gun nut. If going to that bar is so important that you would risk your life, the lives of those around you and the future of your family, your judgment is faulted.

It isn?t about your rights as an individual, in my opinion. Individual rights always have to be balanced against the needs of society as a whole. Freedom of speech does not entitle you to yell ?fire? in a crowded theatre. Packing a handgun in public for the purpose of shooting other people is a risk society should not have to bear.

Legislation won't make a difference.

If you are saying you would refuse to obey firearms laws yet you want us to believe you should be trusted armed in public with a hidden handgun, I disagree.

Do I think you and me should be permitted to use a loaded shotgun in our homes to protect our families? Yes, I do. If instead you choose to use a rifle and you accidentally hit a neighbor do I think you should be liable? Yes, unless you prove the contrary. If you live in town and shoot an intruder with a centerfire rifle and it also hits a neighbor, you?d better have a good reason for having to use a rifle instead of something safer.

David · Feb 15, 2010

chuck schmidt said:
THAT old saw? Tell ya what. To satisfy me that you truly believe there are no problems with handguns here is what I want you to do. Load your favorite sidearm to the nuts. Cock it. Release the safety if it is a pistol. Stick it in your mouth. Then go 4X4ing all afternoon with your buddies while you sit in the back. Just to help you, please keep your finger off the trigger. But keep the gun in your mouth.

Russian Roulette is a form of suicide. Just because the person being shot is also the person doing the shooting doesn't change the facts of GDKP PKP argument, it just shows how stupid someone might be.

That is 1 of your better arguments, however.

Dirk · Feb 15, 2010

I don't think firearms better the situation, or necessarily worsen it. Ultimately, i would support the liberty (not the right) to own a firearm. In terms of crime, however, i believe the last analysis i was told about was that countries with firearms available for the general population had a higher gun crime rate, but a similar or equal murder rate.

In other words, the people that murdered with guns would probably have murdered anyway.

chuck schmidt · Feb 15, 2010

myp said:
One problem with the majority of those facts: America has a population of ~300 million, most European countries have exponentially lower populations. For this reason, straight number comparisons do not work- percentage-wise stats are a lot more accurate and if you look at those you will see even in nations of high gun control, the numbers are very similar.

I disagree. The population of the old western Europe was approximately 75-85% of that of the US. Now it might even be more. There is certainly not an exponential difference. The new western European nations might even outnumber the US.

That brings me to the second post in which one of the points is that most gun crimes are not punished. The reason for this is often related to the fact that our jail system is simply overcrowded. Perhaps even more important though is the fact that most of those gun "crimes" that are listed such as trafficking, etc. are the result of criminalizing gun ownership, which have led to black markets. It is often the best interest of police officers to not take down parts of black markets because that usually results in violence among competitors who fight for that market share. The prostitution situation in Chicago shows this very same thing, where according to statistics in a recent (few years old) study, a police officer is more likely to sleep with a prostitute than to arrest her or a pimp.

Maybe police need more supervision? Police negligence and police crime are no argument. Essentially you seem to be arguing that America is incapable of controlling gun crime. I beg to differ.

Now we are at the point where 1% of gun stores sell to 57% of gun crime criminals. The problem with dealing with this is the black market will always support that demand. If you don't buy into that argument because you still dream of utopia, then consider pushing legislation that would further regulate those stores- don't talk about overall bans because of a few stores. Same goes for gun shows.

You also seem to be arguing that over supply cannot be regulated. I suggest that America might lack the political will, but it does not lack either ability or resources. Amongst other things there are very obvious choke points at factories and borders. Guns cannot be grown, shipped and trafficked as easily as drugs. America has more people in prison than any other nation in the world. Catching wrongdoers does not seem to be a problem.

FWIW I agree about gun stores and shows. Like I said, my objection is not guns. My objection is ordinary citizens armed in public with hidden guns for the purpose of shooting other people.

As for stolen guns, what do you say we do about that? You yourself said that you are for gun ownership, just not public carrying. Most people who steal guns don't do so when a person is carrying them (that'd just be dangerous and stupid )- they do it from private locations.

The continued existence in a society of B&E artists does not justify legions of Billy-the-Kids who are too scared to leave their guns at home. Lock em
up. At least once the supply is throttled and enforcement starts there will be a lesser incidence of armed burgurglars.

And as for youth getting guns, that is currently illegal by law first of all, but in any nation that allows gun ownership, it would obviously be easy to an extent as people would have them in the homes their children also live in.

Yup. Still doesn`t logically mean the society should have armed vigilantes. Are you arguing for tough lock-em-up laws?

I thought you are ok with private ownership, just not public carrying?

Yup. Ever hear the expression, "Moderation in all things?"

Edit: Also, if you could give a link to where you got those stats from that'd be nice- always give credit to those who did the work, no matter how misleading it may be

I did. Check about three or so posts above the post you replied to. I posted it. Then I did a small bit of editing on the text I posted to try keeping within bounds.

myp · Feb 15, 2010

Dirk said:
In other words, the people that murdered with guns would probably have murdered anyway.

Exactly. Throw in the fact that government officials would still be allowed to have guns and I would much rather prefer the people did too.

On top of that, legalizing guns severely cuts down or destroys a black market which often leads to more crime. Gun sales could also serve as tax revenue depending on the tax system and it would certainly create more (non-black market) jobs.

chuck schmidt · Feb 15, 2010

David said:
That is 1 of your better arguments, however.

Well thankee. I wore a sh!t-eating grin as I typed it.

chuck schmidt · Feb 15, 2010

myp said:
Exactly. Throw in the fact that government officials would still be allowed to have guns and I would much rather prefer the people did too.

Me too.

On top of that, legalizing guns severely cuts down or destroys a black market which often leads to more crime.

You want to support a black market?

Gun sales could also serve as tax revenue depending on the tax system and it would certainly create more (non-black market) jobs.

Be my guest. Not my argument. Check post 40 for my link.

David · Feb 15, 2010

chuck schmidt said:
Well thankee. I wore a sh!t-eating grin as I typed it.

I admit, while I had a come back (obviously), I did have to stop and think about it. Honestly, for a few seconds I thought you had a point. Right debating style, just think a bit more. Like I said, suicide doesn't change the argument.

myp · Feb 15, 2010

chuck schmidt said:
I disagree. The population of the old western Europe was approximately 75-85% of that of the US. Now it might even be more. There is certainly not an exponential difference. The new western European nations might even outnumber the US.

I was talking about each individual country, not all of Western Europe as the statistics you posted had numbers by country. Either way- whether you look at it via Western Europe or by each individual country- the most relevant numbers would be those of deaths/crimes as a percentage or ratio of the population you are looking at. Do that and suddenly the numbers are a lot closer.

chuck schmidt said:
Maybe police need more supervision? Police negligence and police crime are no argument. Essentially you seem to be arguing that America is incapable of controlling gun crime. I beg to differ.

What often happens in cases such as these is that the police chiefs hold policies of being hard of these crimes, but the officers carrying out the duty often overlook these crimes because they know that arresting these black market suppliers could lead to fights for market share which would lead to MORE deaths and eventually the same market situation as new suppliers move in to take the market share. The chiefs probably realize this to an extent to and hence, don't pressure their lower officers on it. What sort of surveillance do you suggest? What they are doing is completely rational considering the conditions tend to return to the status quo, but with interruptions in the market, only more deaths are pilled up. It is an uphill battle and one that can not be won. Demand is a strong force and it doesn't have legislative boundaries as gun crimes in countries such as England clearly show.

chuck schmidt said:
You also seem to be arguing that over supply cannot be regulated. I suggest that America might lack the political will, but it does not lack either ability or resources. Amongst other things there are very obvious choke points at factories and borders. Guns cannot be grown, shipped and trafficked as easily as drugs. America has more people in prison than any other nation in the world. Catching wrongdoers does not seem to be a problem.

Do you know why we have so many people in the jails? A lot of it is because of a very similar battle with drugs (as well as prostitution.) And the demand of these things can never be completely stopped. If it could, then why does England still have gun problems? It is not about political will, it is about rationality.The world will never be what a utopian politician sees it as.

chuck schmidt said:
FWIW I agree about gun stores and shows. Like I said, my objection is not guns. My objection is ordinary citizens armed in public with hidden guns for the purpose of shooting other people.

The thing is that a lot of what you are posting seems to argue for complete gun bans

- the sources you cite are mostly for gun bans, not bans just in public. And either way, if you allow guns in private, what stops someone from hiding it and bringing it in public any way? Public gun crimes still happen in nations who have banned guns completely as well as those who have banned them in public. Why? Because criminals will do it is they want. How are you going to stop them? Have a metal detector on every street?

chuck schmidt said:
The continued existence in a society of B&E artists does not justify legions of Billy-the-Kids who are too scared to leave their guns at home. Lock em
up. At least once the supply is throttled and enforcement starts there will be a lesser incidence of armed burgurglars.

I guarantee you it will still happen. History is on my side- the prohibition, war on drugs, prostitution, gun numbers in Europe and Canada, etc.

chuck schmidt said:
Yup. Still doesn`t logically mean the society should have armed vigilantes. Are you arguing for tough lock-em-up laws?

Depends on the circumstance- if someone got hurt then certainly some of the responsibility falls in the hands of the gun owner, especially if the person hurt was a child of the person.

chuck schmidt said:
Yup. Ever hear the expression, "Moderation in all things?"

I addressed this point earlier.

chuck schmidt said:
Me too. You want to support a black market?

Of course not, I am just saying it will form if you ban guns (I know you are not arguing for it, I am just saying.)

chuck schmidt · Feb 16, 2010

David said:
I admit, while I had a come back (obviously), I did have to stop and think about it. Honestly, for a few seconds I thought you had a point. Right debating style, just think a bit more. Like I said, suicide doesn't change the argument.

Suicide isn't the argument. People are. To perhaps make the argument more realistic let me say that people don't cause pollution, cars do. Only when we're driving them, of course. All social problems are people problems, but the things people use need to be regulated. Since guns are already regulated, all we are doing is debating how much. As well, in law the concept of regulation expressly excludes the ability to prohibit so we are not talking gun ban.

dave · Feb 16, 2010

chuck schmidt said:
There is no need to kill or to defend against being killed in a free and democratic country with professional policing, if you use common sense in where you go. If you mean that you want so badly to go to a bar that is so dangerous you might have to shoot somebody, I think that makes you a gun nut. If going to that bar is so important that you would risk your life, the lives of those around you and the future of your family, your judgment is faulted. .

Are you going to put a policeman on every corner, in every store, at every home, along every roadway? The police cannot prevent all crime.

Its naive to think that you can avoid crime by staying in the "safe" places. Are you arguing that its the victims fault for being in the wrong place?

I do agree that if a person wants to go to a bar that is so dangerous they might have to shoot somebody, that person has a problem. But thats not why people carry a weapon. Why do you want a weapon in your home? Apply that same reason to people that carry in public.

I assume you are not an NRA member. Every month, the NRA publishes accounts of armed citizens using firearms to defend themselves. To be published, it has to be an incident verified by the police. You should read some of them, people have to use firearms to protect themselves and other people in more places than you think.

dave · Feb 16, 2010

chuck schmidt said:
The shear number of times they happen in America.

Children and Gun Violence
In a single year, 3,012 children and teens were killed by gunfire in the United States, according to the latest national data released in 2002. That is one child every three hours; eight children every day; and more than 50 children every week. (Children's Defense Fund and National Center for Health Statistics)

America and Gun Violence
American children are more at risk from firearms than the children of any other industrialized nation. In one year, firearms killed no children in Japan, 19 in Great Britain, 57 in Germany, 109 in France, 153 in Canada, and 5,285 in the United States. (Centers for Disease Control)

...................

I'll have to post the rest of the list on the next post.

Why don't you look up how many people have been protected and crimes prevented by guns?

I would put up the data, but you seem to have your mind made up, I think you won't believe it unless you do the research yourself.

chuck schmidt · Feb 16, 2010

dave said:
Its naive to think that you can avoid crime by staying in the "safe" places.

Most US middle class neighborhoods are not unsafe for the unarmed.

Are you arguing that its the victims fault for being in the wrong place?

Too simplistic. But there is that aspect. The way some guys on gun sites talk it is obvious that if they don't exactly troll for a shooting, they arm up and go to the worst neighborhoods only because they are armed.

Why do you want a weapon in your home? Apply that same reason to people that carry in public.

A man's home is his castle and his final refuge against the world. However I didn't say I "want to be armed in my home." Being armed at home and having guns at home are two different concepts. I said that I don't agree with private citizens armed in public for the purpose of shooting other people, but neither do I want a gun ban. It sounds to me like you are desperately twisting like a fish on a line seeking some mere semantic victory.

I assume you are not an NRA member. Every month, the NRA publishes accounts of armed citizens using firearms to defend themselves. To be published, it has to be an incident verified by the police. You should read some of them, people have to use firearms to protect themselves and other people in more places than you think.

And that isn't enough to tell you there are too many guns on US streets?

chuck schmidt · Feb 16, 2010

dave said:
Are you going to put a policeman on every corner, in every store, at every home, along every roadway? The police cannot prevent all crime.

America is a law abiding nation. Law abiding nations enact laws and people obey them. The fact that there will always be crime does not mean there should not be laws.

dave said:
Why don't you look up how many people have been protected and crimes prevented by guns?

From gun crime? Get rid of the handguns on the streets and you'll get rid of the problem. If there is a slight bump in numbers in a few isolated places that is less important than getting the huge volume of unnecessary guns off US streets. Like I said, I'd melt them all to save the 3,000 children killed by them in 2005.

The more you guys argue that the prevalence of handguns on US streets is now so profound that the law can't do anything about it, the more you admit that America has a gun problem. Except it is not uncontrollable. America has the strength to do it.

GOP · Feb 16, 2010

chuck schmidt said:
From gun crime? Get rid of the handguns on the streets and you'll get rid of the problem. If there is a slight bump in numbers in a few isolated places that is less important than getting the huge volume of unnecessary guns off US streets. Like I said, I'd melt them all to save the 3,000 children killed by them in 2005.

So you want to limit peoples freedom because some decide to commit crimes?

Another US Gun Nut Opens Fire

Similar threads