Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NBC New York)   If you picked New Jersey as the location of the next mass shooting, come up and claim your prize. Several dead, including the shooter, after a "shootout" in a supermarket   (nbcnewyork.com) divider line 410
    More: News, New Jersey, armed police, NBC 4 New York, Pathmark, mass shooting, NJ Transit  
•       •       •

12675 clicks; posted to Main » on 31 Aug 2012 at 9:09 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



410 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-31 10:30:05 AM  

calm like a bomb: Dimensio: calm like a bomb: Trivia Jockey: It's going to take dozens and dozens more of these shootings before anyone has the balls to start challenging the NRA's lobbying power and influence.

This makes me sick. As does each shooting.

It isn't going to change. That war is over, we lost, and the price we will pay for the right of self-righteous honkeys to own military grade weaponry and armor piercing bullets is that sometimes one of them will get all shooty.

Military-grade weaponry is restricted by the National Firearms Act of 1934. Handgun ammunition capable of penetrating body armour (legally determined by composition of the bullet core) is prohibited to civilians by federal law..

I can buy an AR-15 from a dozen places right now. I can find AK-47s by the crateload. I can legally buy a .50 cal sniper rifle. And for the former two, provided they are not labeled as such, I can buy bullets that will pierce armor. Those laws are written on tissue paper.


Actually, it's entirely legal to purchase armor-piercing ammunition for the AR-15 and AK-47. The federal prohibition on armor-piercing ammunition is for handgun calibers. Rifle bullets are extremely energetic by nature, and even non-armor-piercing bullets are going to go right through standard body armor at the ranges that police shootouts occur. However, pistols tend to fire relatively slow moving and heavy bullets which can be stopped by thin body armor. The point of the handgun armor-piercing ammo ban is to prevent someone from carrying such "cop killers" in a concealed fashion.

Just for reference, no one labels their bullets as "armor piercing," but the ability of a bullet to penetrate armor is largely determined by the construction of the bullet. Full Metal Jacket (or FMJ) bullets are sheathed in a hard metal to prevent deformation when impacting objects. This keeps all of the bullet's kinetic energy concentrated in a small area, which lets it penetrate deeply and retain kinetic energy. FMJ penetrate most armors, but they actually cause less trauma to the human body than other types of bullets.

Hollow Point (or HP) ammunition has a hollow recess in the nose of the bullet. This design causes the bullet to expand very rapidly (almost explosively) on impact, and transfers the maximum amount of energy in the shortest amount of time. These bullets are used on small animals to avoid wounding the creature and causing an agonizing death. They're used handguns to provide a "knockdown" effect against unarmored humans. Soft body armor works on the principle of catching a hollow point bullet and having it expend all of it's energy expanding within the soft armor layers, so by the time it reaches the person it has lost most or all of it's energy.

Soft Point (or SP) ammunition has a nose made out of a soft metal such as lead. These are a middle-ground between FMJ and HP ammunition in that they do expand upon impact, but are designed to expand more slowly. Because the nose of the bullet provides some measure of resistance, a soft point bullet will penetrate to a certain depth before really expanding and loosing energy into the surrounding tissue. The idea is that the bullet penetrates to the depth of the animal's vital organs before expending much energy, and the releasing it rapidly. These bullets are commonly used for larger game to ensure a quick kill, which improves the quality of the meat and avoids prolonged animal suffering (and are usually required by law when hunting such animals).
 
2012-08-31 10:30:55 AM  

Trivia Jockey: MichiganFTL: Collection, appreciate the craftsmanship and history behind them (M14, M1 Garand, Mauser 98k), hunting (I process/eat what I kill. Venison's yummy). How many reasons do I need to pass this test?

It's not a test. I'm simply doing a mental exercise where I read the responses you guys provide, and then I weigh them in my own mind against the harm that guns cause. It's a balancing test I'm conducting in my own head.


Ok so lets say you pass an admendment outlawing all civilian gun ownership.

How do you go about collecting them?
 
2012-08-31 10:31:02 AM  

justneal: so he changed his clothes to shoot someone?


He put on his "killin clothes"
 
2012-08-31 10:31:53 AM  

Trivia Jockey: Can some of you gun advocates explain why you want to have guns so badly? Why you feel the need to have them?

A lot of advocates tell me they want to exercise their rights, and that's fine, but putting that aside, is there any other reason why you feel it's so important to own a gun or guns?


I actually used my shotgun to defend my family from two armed home invaders. My wife had my pistol in the event I failed. No one on this planet will ever be able to convince me to turn in my firearms.
 
2012-08-31 10:32:17 AM  

you have pee hands: JackieRabbit: You're only counting murders. In the 2006-2007 statistical year, only 4.14 deaths/100K were homicides. 5.71/100K were suicides and 0.23/100K were unintentional, for a total of 10.27/100K. (according to the UN). That puts the US in sixth place in the number of firearm deaths. In the same year, according to the US Census, the automobile death rate was 104/100K population. Clearly, we need car control.

Do you mean 10.4/100k? There are certainly not upwards of a quarter million automobile deaths in the US every year.


Oops, I grabbed the wrong line from the PDF doc. There were 10.4M automobile accidents in 2006. Of these there were 45,300 fatalities. Sorry about that!
 
2012-08-31 10:32:22 AM  

The_Sponge: Trivia Jockey: It's going to take dozens and dozens more of these shootings before anyone has the balls to start challenging the NRA's lobbying power and influence.

This makes me sick. As does each shooting.

Does New Jersey have strict gun laws?


Since you can't legally own a BB gun without an FID card I'll say yes.
/it's illegal to own a gun in NJ
//the FID card is an exemption to that law
///it's also a big PIA to get one, and CCW is outright unattainable
 
2012-08-31 10:32:54 AM  

AlwaysRightBoy: My wifes office


AlwaysRightBoy: My PathmRk by me closed down for good. It's good to know this one opens at 6a.m. Weekdays.


/another shooting to close to home. My wifes office is a half mile away


Oh my god. Is she okay?
 
2012-08-31 10:33:07 AM  

Tenatra: Would you have a problem if I walk around in full riot gear + riot shield? Just for self defense

/I got my riot shield training in Counter Strike :p


If were to the point where we have the necessity to wear full riot gear and a riot shield to buy a gallon of milk, it's time to move out of Flint.
 
2012-08-31 10:33:07 AM  

you have pee hands: SirDigbyChickenCaesar: Not that the situation would ever happen but for the sake of discussion let's say it did. The scenario of the majority of the population versus the military.

How on earth would our military (assuming it stays fully intake throughout this, no mass desertions) occupy the entire country and fight, lets say, a 15 million person insurgency (only 5% of the population).

Fear, mostly. If you had 15 million legitimate insurgents who were willing to die for the cause, they wouldn't be able to. If you had 15 million "insurgents" who liked the idea but weren't willing to accept the fact that taking a shot gives away their location and may mean a quick death, a small but visible and iron fisted presence is enough. I happen to think there are more people who are 'internet tough' than actually willing to risk death for a cause.


Dude, I watched Red Dawn like 50 times. I am totally ready for the C Thomas Howell role.

/except I would shoot at the attack helicopter from behind the giant rock instead of standing in front of it...
//then work at repopulating the country with Jennifer Grey and Lea Thompson
 
2012-08-31 10:34:00 AM  

Trivia Jockey: Let me change the subject a bit and put all the legalities and rights issues aside...

Can some of you gun advocates explain why you want to have guns so badly? Why you feel the need to have them?

A lot of advocates tell me they want to exercise their rights, and that's fine, but putting that aside, is there any other reason why you feel it's so important to own a gun or guns?


Well, not being a big gun enthusiast, I can't answer those questions, but I can pose a couplee of my own.

WHY do you wish to have access to alcohol? It's poisonous, and makes people violent and crazy.

WHY would you wish to have pornography? It rots the mind, and subverts healthy sexuality.

WHY would you wish to have access to tobacco, or pot? They are bad for your health, and pot makes people lazy and stupid.

But above all:
WHY, in the name of all that is holy, would you bother to justify, to me, your desire to possess a right based upon your ability to explain your "need" for it to my nosy, intrusive satisfaction?
 
2012-08-31 10:34:07 AM  

jscart: The_Sponge: Trivia Jockey: It's going to take dozens and dozens more of these shootings before anyone has the balls to start challenging the NRA's lobbying power and influence.

This makes me sick. As does each shooting.

Does New Jersey have strict gun laws?

Since you can't legally own a BB gun without an FID card I'll say yes.
/it's illegal to own a gun in NJ
//the FID card is an exemption to that law
///it's also a big PIA to get one, and CCW is outright unattainable


Really? Is that the whole state or just metro areas? Wow and I thought NY was bad :(
 
2012-08-31 10:34:21 AM  
At least this time the "mass" shooting was a number greater than one. So, grats for that, I guess
 
2012-08-31 10:34:43 AM  

Trivia Jockey: Let me change the subject a bit and put all the legalities and rights issues aside...

Can some of you gun advocates explain why you want to have guns so badly? Why you feel the need to have them?

A lot of advocates tell me they want to exercise their rights, and that's fine, but putting that aside, is there any other reason why you feel it's so important to own a gun or guns?


My "need", if any, is not relevant.
 
2012-08-31 10:36:45 AM  
Several = 2?
 
2012-08-31 10:36:46 AM  

Tenatra: Would you have a problem if I walk around in full riot gear + riot shield? Just for self defense

/I got my riot shield training in Counter Strike :p


Some places prohibit ownership of body armor by civilians under the rationale that there is no justifiable reason for a civilian to want body armor unless they expect to be in a gunfight. Federal law restricts the ownership of body armor by felons and minors. Most places have laws that increase the severity of the offense if you wear body armor during the commission of a crime.

I know you're joking, but there really are people out there who think that you shouldn't be trusted with body armor- a completely passive item designed solely for the protection of the user. I really think that some people just power-trip and cannot stand the idea that your average Joe should be allowed to protect themselves.
 
2012-08-31 10:37:08 AM  

Trivia Jockey: It's not a test. I'm simply doing a mental exercise where I read the responses you guys provide, and then I weigh them in my own mind against the harm that guns cause. It's a balancing test I'm conducting in my own head.


My concern with the harm that guns cause is the factors behind them, such as how do we stop the cause of the gun violence by decreasing gang proliferation, reduce prescription drug abuse, improve mental health treatment availability, and the aforementioned increase in punishment for straw buyers and other illegal transfers.
 
2012-08-31 10:37:58 AM  

Weirdnjfan1: Supermarket employee here. I'm pretty much going to be paranoid for the rest of the day/weekend. This is our fourth busiest weekend coming up, behind Christmas and Thanksgiving, and now this happens. Well there goes our sales for the weekend.


I was employed as a third shift cashier several years ago. Following a robbery, another third-shift cashier asked management if she was permitted to carry pepper spray. She was informed that doing so was prohibited; she later quit.

I did not ask. I then kept the pepper spray canister visibly hung outside of my pocket. No one said anything.
 
2012-08-31 10:38:25 AM  

jscart: The_Sponge: Trivia Jockey: It's going to take dozens and dozens more of these shootings before anyone has the balls to start challenging the NRA's lobbying power and influence.

This makes me sick. As does each shooting.

Does New Jersey have strict gun laws?

Since you can't legally own a BB gun without an FID card I'll say yes.
/it's illegal to own a gun in NJ
//the FID card is an exemption to that law
///it's also a big PIA to get one, and CCW is outright unattainable


Yeah. We're the dipshiat state.

We had a guy call up the state troopers and ask about how he was supposed to transport his guns into the state, as he was moving. Followed their advice to the letter, had all the proper permits, etc.

Long story short, cops searched his car, found the guns. Had to arrest him. The law says that ALL guns are illegal. Then a seperate law has the exceptions. At court, the judge wouldn't allow the exceptions to be read, so the guy got thrown in jail.
 
2012-08-31 10:38:26 AM  

Fubini: Tenatra: Would you have a problem if I walk around in full riot gear + riot shield? Just for self defense

/I got my riot shield training in Counter Strike :p

Some places prohibit ownership of body armor by civilians under the rationale that there is no justifiable reason for a civilian to want body armor unless they expect to be in a gunfight. Federal law restricts the ownership of body armor by felons and minors. Most places have laws that increase the severity of the offense if you wear body armor during the commission of a crime.

I know you're joking, but there really are people out there who think that you shouldn't be trusted with body armor- a completely passive item designed solely for the protection of the user. I really think that some people just power-trip and cannot stand the idea that your average Joe should be allowed to protect themselves.


I cannot legally wear body armor or own guns so I am getting a kick....
 
2012-08-31 10:40:08 AM  

jso2897: WHY do you wish to have access to alcohol? It's poisonous, and makes people violent and crazy.


People forget that at one point in this country we saw fit to make it illegal for everyone to have alcohol, despite the fact that the large majority of alcohol users did so safely and legally, at the behest of a small minority that were morally opposed to the idea. The country rapidly figured out that it was a horrible idea.

Even as late as the last decade we had groups like MADD that wanted to mandate the installation of a breathalyzer in every vehicle.
 
gja
2012-08-31 10:41:07 AM  

jso2897: Trivia Jockey: Let me change the subject a bit and put all the legalities and rights issues aside...

Can some of you gun advocates explain why you want to have guns so badly? Why you feel the need to have them?

A lot of advocates tell me they want to exercise their rights, and that's fine, but putting that aside, is there any other reason why you feel it's so important to own a gun or guns?

Well, not being a big gun enthusiast, I can't answer those questions, but I can pose a couplee of my own.

WHY do you wish to have access to alcohol? It's poisonous, and makes people violent and crazy.

WHY would you wish to have pornography? It rots the mind, and subverts healthy sexuality.

WHY would you wish to have access to tobacco, or pot? They are bad for your health, and pot makes people lazy and stupid.

But above all:
WHY, in the name of all that is holy, would you bother to justify, to me, your desire to possess a right based upon your ability to explain your "need" for it to my nosy, intrusive satisfaction?


THANK YOU!!! Finally a clearly thought out and lucid line of reasoning that really gives some perspective.
 
2012-08-31 10:42:03 AM  

Mazzic518: jscart: The_Sponge: Trivia Jockey: It's going to take dozens and dozens more of these shootings before anyone has the balls to start challenging the NRA's lobbying power and influence.

This makes me sick. As does each shooting.

Does New Jersey have strict gun laws?

Since you can't legally own a BB gun without an FID card I'll say yes.
/it's illegal to own a gun in NJ
//the FID card is an exemption to that law
///it's also a big PIA to get one, and CCW is outright unattainable

Really? Is that the whole state or just metro areas? Wow and I thought NY was bad :(


As a NJ gun owner.....

If you want to get a gun, its pretty easy assuming you aren't a criminal. Depending on your town it can take a while (several months) for all of your paperwork to get processed for your first gun, but after that, subsequent purchases are pretty quick. Just the normal waiting periods for the most part.

Concealed carry requires you to demonstrate an actual need for it, be it as part of your job, or a reasonable threat against you that the police will agree with. It also requires some training. Because of that, very few people outside of ex law enforcement have it.

They are also pretty strict on rules on how you transport a gun and where you can\can't transport it to\from. I used to live down the street from a gun range, and technically if you really wanted to get into it, it was against the law for me to walk directly to the range, even if it was closer to me than where my car was parked.

Yes BB Guns require a firearm id card to buy.
 
2012-08-31 10:43:46 AM  
and also as a NJ gun owner, i don't have an issue with any of our gun laws. Yea, the BB Gun one is a little silly, but I have bigger things in life to worry about than the difficulty in obtaining a bb gun.
 
2012-08-31 10:44:16 AM  

Mazzic518: jscart: The_Sponge: Trivia Jockey: It's going to take dozens and dozens more of these shootings before anyone has the balls to start challenging the NRA's lobbying power and influence.

This makes me sick. As does each shooting.

Does New Jersey have strict gun laws?

Since you can't legally own a BB gun without an FID card I'll say yes.
/it's illegal to own a gun in NJ
//the FID card is an exemption to that law
///it's also a big PIA to get one, and CCW is outright unattainable

Really? Is that the whole state or just metro areas? Wow and I thought NY was bad :(


Whole state, even the pines.
/I'd love to be able to go and shoot my Grandfathers old 22 but I can't
//couldn't even get my son a Red Rider for x-mas
 
2012-08-31 10:46:46 AM  
On the plus side, he gets twenty cents off his next fill-up at Shell.
 
2012-08-31 10:46:53 AM  

Headso: This marine was slicing the pie at the supermarket...


That "m" in marine needs to be capitalized. Marine is what it needs to be. Just sayin
 
2012-08-31 10:48:16 AM  
i141.photobucket.com
 
2012-08-31 10:48:26 AM  
img.gawkerassets.com
 
2012-08-31 10:48:59 AM  

Free Radical: "The gunman, an ex-Marine, had been working at the store for about two weeks"

America's Heroes!


No such thing as "ex" Marine
 
2012-08-31 10:49:33 AM  

Wittenberg Dropout: Dang it! I guess it's time to drum some more CCW success stories again!

Didn't we just do this?


I submitted an article about a motorist who heroically shot a douchebag cyclist, though it will likely be "redlit".
 
2012-08-31 10:51:43 AM  

jbabbler: Several = 2?


Three individuals were shot, in total. Civilian disarmament advocacy organizations always include suicides when presenting numbers of individuals killed by "gun violence".
 
2012-08-31 10:52:04 AM  
Ahhh, this happened in "gun-free" New Jersey, so of course most of you tards blame guns and/or the NRA.
 
2012-08-31 10:53:37 AM  

tallguywithglasseson: Ex-Marine Kills Two, Self in NJ Supermarket Shootout

Trolled in the boobies.


Lol...is that anything like motorboating? 

www2.dallasdancemusic.com
 
2012-08-31 10:54:17 AM  

Quigs: Fail in Human Form: Quigs: SEMPER FI! GOOD WORK SOLDIER!

/farkin A I hate military.

Then pickup a rifle and defend the country yourself, coward.

Next time I'm given the chance to protect the country from backwards military farks who kill 18 year olds stuck working graveyard shifts? I will.


So you enlisted yesterday?
 
2012-08-31 10:55:18 AM  

Quigs: jscart: The_Sponge: Trivia Jockey: It's going to take dozens and dozens more of these shootings before anyone has the balls to start challenging the NRA's lobbying power and influence.

This makes me sick. As does each shooting.

Does New Jersey have strict gun laws?

Since you can't legally own a BB gun without an FID card I'll say yes.
/it's illegal to own a gun in NJ
//the FID card is an exemption to that law
///it's also a big PIA to get one, and CCW is outright unattainable

Yeah. We're the dipshiat state.

We had a guy call up the state troopers and ask about how he was supposed to transport his guns into the state, as he was moving. Followed their advice to the letter, had all the proper permits, etc.

Long story short, cops searched his car, found the guns. Had to arrest him. The law says that ALL guns are illegal. Then a seperate law has the exceptions. At court, the judge wouldn't allow the exceptions to be read, so the guy got thrown in jail.


Even more egregious is the ignoring of the federal Firearm Owners Protection Act by the New Jersey Port Authority.
 
2012-08-31 10:55:39 AM  

SirDigbyChickenCaesar: Dude, I watched Red Dawn like 50 times. I am totally ready for the C Thomas Howell role.

/except I would shoot at the attack helicopter from behind the giant rock instead of standing in front of it...


Your plot sucks! :-|
 
2012-08-31 10:55:44 AM  

Freebyrdjason: Headso: This marine was slicing the pie at the supermarket...

That "m" in marine needs to be capitalized. Marine is what it needs to be. Just sayin


Yes because he was a proud Corps Soldier!!!
 
2012-08-31 10:55:47 AM  

Dimensio: My "need", if any, is not relevant.


It will be very relevant if and when we ever got to discussing a complete overhaul of the second amendment.
 
2012-08-31 10:56:09 AM  

Quigs:
I've got five military friends. Only one is active. When the dipshiat came back home last month, bunch of us went bowling. When we left, in the parking lot he popped his trunk and pulled out his M4 and passed it around between our circle of friends. He said it was cool though, because 'The bullets were in the center console in the car.'

While I do like that in general, military folk tend to be more motivated and able to get shiat done, the whole uniformity and sanding down of personality is aberrant, and the main reason folks claim to respect that type of behavior is a long-standing propaganda campaign..


Ah, I misunderstood. At risk of putting words in your mouth, you "hate the military" in terms of the culture within the military and not the individuals that comprise it. Fair enough, but I would wager more exposure to the positive elements (camaraderie, tradition, dedication, honor) might change your opinion. I'm not convinced that it is a long standing propaganda campaign as much as the military historically has been a necessary society function (the "Security Dilemma" is worth reading about), and large groups require some form of order or discipline to be effective (as evidenced by society at large requiring law and law enforcement to maintain cohesion).

Please tell your friend to be careful with that rifle, and if you suspect he is going to harm himself or others have one of your other former military friends contact his Command or First Sergeant.
 
2012-08-31 10:56:15 AM  

you have pee hands: Fear, mostly. If you had 15 million legitimate insurgents who were willing to die for the cause, they wouldn't be able to. If you had 15 million "insurgents" who liked the idea but weren't willing to accept the fact that taking a shot gives away their location and may mean a quick death, a small but visible and iron fisted presence is enough.


Here is the problem with the idea: You don't have to be able to win. You just have to make it expensive enough that the other side isn't going to try.

First, you have to understand the culture that the military largely draws from: The gun culture, at least for combat arms troops. Generally, if it's a white boy from the sticks who grew up hunting and shooting, he'll end up in some sort of combat-related specialty by choice. He likes guns, and the idea of getting *PAID* to play with the really good stuff is quite attractive. The black kid from the ghetto is more likely to be using the military as a gateway to a better opportunity, so he or she is more likely to pick a non-combat arms specialty that has some civilian counterpart.

Many of those people are going to be reluctant to fire upon people just like them. Some fraction, if ordered to do that sort of thing, would defect and take their equipment with them. Some would refuse orders. And don't forget that the ones they would be fighting, if they don't have actual combat or military experience themselves, likely would be shown the ropes by someone who has.

Then you have people like me: Sure, I'm a part of the gun culture, but I wouldn't actively engage in any insurgency outside of some *VERY* exceptional circumstances that I can't envision happening in my lifetime. I've got a family, ie., something very precious to lose. But I do my part to make things more difficult for the government to suppress any such insurgency by using my military and non-military experience in signals intelligence, radio, and encryption to inform about ways to communicate that are safer and offer more protection than calling up your buddies on their cell phones. Go ahead and google "dittybopper fark encryption" and you'll see what I mean.

I'm actually working on an essay that I will publish on teh innartubes about using low-tech, more secure means of communication to thwart technologically advanced monitoring. It's mostly just common sense sort of stuff, but if you don't actually think about it, it wouldn't necessarily occur to you that using a common walkie-talkie to communicate is safer than using a cellphone. I should be finished with that essay RSN ;-)
 
2012-08-31 10:57:32 AM  

Fubini: Some places prohibit ownership of body armor by civilians under the rationale that there is no justifiable reason for a civilian to want body armor unless they expect to be in a gunfight. Federal law restricts the ownership of body armor by felons and minors. Most places have laws that increase the severity of the offense if you wear body armor during the commission of a crime.

I know you're joking, but there really are people out there who think that you shouldn't be trusted with body armor- a completely passive item designed solely for the protection of the user. I really think that some people just power-trip and cannot stand the idea that your average Joe should be allowed to protect themselves.


Yea that is an over the top scenario but I have a feeling like people are more intimidated by body armor than by a handgun for this reason. I'd much rather wear a vest and protect the vitals in my chest rather than carry a gun and have no armor.
 
2012-08-31 10:57:34 AM  

GAT_00: Glorious freedom everywhere.


It's one way to solve the looming pensions shortfall, I'll give you that.
 
2012-08-31 10:57:35 AM  

Trivia Jockey: Dimensio: My "need", if any, is not relevant.

It will be very relevant if and when we ever got to discussing a complete overhaul of the second amendment.


Given established trends of popular support of civilian firearm ownership rights, I suspect that I will have died of natural causes before the Second Amendment is altered or repealed.
 
2012-08-31 10:58:08 AM  

Trivia Jockey: It will be very relevant if and when we ever got to discussing a complete overhaul of the second amendment.


Do we really NEED free speech? I can just get my thoughts on Comedy Central and then spout them off like my own opinions. Matt Damon.
 
2012-08-31 10:58:19 AM  

Trivia Jockey: It's going to take dozens and dozens more of these shootings before anyone has the balls to start challenging the NRA's lobbying power and influence.


Perhaps, but in this case I think I think the more important issue is one of health care. Specifically mental health care. Especially for guys who likely have PTSD and/or TBI
 
2012-08-31 11:00:29 AM  

you have pee hands: JackieRabbit: You're only counting murders. In the 2006-2007 statistical year, only 4.14 deaths/100K were homicides. 5.71/100K were suicides and 0.23/100K were unintentional, for a total of 10.27/100K. (according to the UN). That puts the US in sixth place in the number of firearm deaths. In the same year, according to the US Census, the automobile death rate was 104/100K population. Clearly, we need car control.

Do you mean 10.4/100k? There are certainly not upwards of a quarter million automobile deaths in the US every year.


You are correct that there aren't that many automobile deaths each year: Source: U.S. Centers for Disease Control. Click the link entitled Deaths: Preliminary Data for 2010. FYI it's a PDF. They list all causes of death and mash the data up in various ways. I'll summarize the relevant bits here but I think everyone should look for themselves.

Death by Motor vehicle accidents in 2010: 35,080
Death by accidental discharge of firearms in 2010: 600
Suicide by firearm in 2010: 19,308
Homicide by firearm in 2010: 11,015
Total deaths by firearm in 2010: 30,923

Bottom line: car accidents kill more people than firearms (at least in 2010). 4,157 more, to be exact. That's enough people to fill almost 95 school buses.

The table I'm talking about starts on page 17 of the PDF. There's 30-ish causes of death per page. Car accidents are at the bottom of page 19 and firearm deaths are at the top of page 20. The table ends at page 20.

Also of interest are the comparisons with previous years starting on page 38. Death by both car accidents and firearms are falling and (at least since 2007) have always had a relationship of more people dying by car than by gun.

So that's enough facts for the moment.

Here's an opinion: I do not understand why isn't there the same amount of emotional hysteria surrounding car accidents as there is for anything to do with firearms. Cars kill more people, in spite of there being almost an equal number of both in the U.S. Sure, cars are more generally utilitarian but so are knives and I still have a healthy fear of being stabbed. However, utilitarian or not, the argument has always been about saving lives. Or so we've always been told.

Well, there's a bigger killer out there than firearms and it doesn't get nearly the attention firearms get. Where's the Brady Campaign against bad drivers? Mothers against bad drivers?

I'm forced to admit that because such organizations don't exist (or don't at the level they do for firearms issues), the position gun control advocates have taken is not based on a rational desire to reduce death. Otherwise, they would do the logical thing and start with what kills the most people first, then the second, and so on.

I won't make any assumptions about the true agenda but the data and logic indicate that it's not about saving lives.

The news is breathlessly reporting this tragic event, like they do for every shooting that didn't happen in a low-income part of Detroit. Yet I bet that same news station reported on more car accident fatalities in the last couple of weeks and it barely made a blip beyond the usual note of how much longer everyone's commute just got.

A gun control advocate cannot logically claim any moral high ground whatsoever as long as they do not attack the provably more deadly causes of preventable death with a proportionally greater amount of fervor.
 
2012-08-31 11:00:36 AM  
 
2012-08-31 11:01:57 AM  

thecpt: We are culturally different to the core and any argument using rates and percentages (albeit very good arguments with factual data) are missing the basis of a good comparison.


That was kind of my point.
 
2012-08-31 11:01:59 AM  

Mazzic518: Freebyrdjason: Headso: This marine was slicing the pie at the supermarket...

That "m" in marine needs to be capitalized. Marine is what it needs to be. Just sayin

Yes because he was a proud Corps Soldier!!!


Hahaha what ya tryin to do, get me going first thing this morning?
 
2012-08-31 11:02:08 AM  

MichiganFTL: Trivia Jockey: It will be very relevant if and when we ever got to discussing a complete overhaul of the second amendment.

Do we really NEED free speech? I can just get my thoughts on Comedy Central and then spout them off like my own opinions. Matt Damon.


Is protection from unwarranted search and seizure really "NEEDED"? If citizens are violating no law, then they have no reason to fear unannounced inspections of their homes.
 
Displayed 50 of 410 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report