Go Back  British Expats > General > Take it Outside!
Reload this Page >

It's not just about guns, it's about the person holding the weapon

It's not just about guns, it's about the person holding the weapon

Old May 19th 2013, 7:18 am
  #286  
Bloody Yank
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Location: USA! USA!
Posts: 4,186
RoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: It's not just about guns, it's about the person holding the weapon

Originally Posted by Boiler View Post
I get that first you disagree with me, and then you re state what I said.

Weird.
I guess the answer to my question is, no, you're not getting it.

Let's have some fun with statistics, shall we?

In a given year, about 158,000 people in the US will die of lung cancer. 80-90% of those cases will be attributable to smoking, so taking the upper end of that range, let's assume that about 142,000 smokers die per year of lung cancer.

In a recent year, there were about 360 billion (with a "b") cigarettes sold in the United States.

Now, let's do the math(s): the ratio of individual cigarettes sold to the number of deaths is about 2100:1. To put it another way, the number of deaths totals only 0.047% of the number of cigarettes sold.

Using gun nut "logic", cigarettes must be quite safe. After all, more than 99.95% of those cigarettes aren't doing any harm. The number of deaths in comparison to the number of cigarettes is quite low: how could smoking possibly be dangerous?

Last edited by RoadWarriorFromLP; May 19th 2013 at 7:20 am.
RoadWarriorFromLP is offline  
Old May 19th 2013, 1:14 pm
  #287  
L/R
Thread Starter
 
Pulaski's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Location: Dixie, ex UK
Posts: 49,521
Pulaski has a reputation beyond reputePulaski has a reputation beyond reputePulaski has a reputation beyond reputePulaski has a reputation beyond reputePulaski has a reputation beyond reputePulaski has a reputation beyond reputePulaski has a reputation beyond reputePulaski has a reputation beyond reputePulaski has a reputation beyond reputePulaski has a reputation beyond reputePulaski has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: It's not just about guns, it's about the person holding the weapon

Originally Posted by RoadWarriorFromLP View Post
..... Let's have some fun with statistics, shall we? .....
It's late on a Saturday night, and you're on-line having "fun with statistics". ....
Are you an actuary?

Last edited by Pulaski; May 19th 2013 at 2:20 pm.
Pulaski is offline  
Old May 19th 2013, 1:40 pm
  #288  
L/R
Thread Starter
 
Pulaski's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Location: Dixie, ex UK
Posts: 49,521
Pulaski has a reputation beyond reputePulaski has a reputation beyond reputePulaski has a reputation beyond reputePulaski has a reputation beyond reputePulaski has a reputation beyond reputePulaski has a reputation beyond reputePulaski has a reputation beyond reputePulaski has a reputation beyond reputePulaski has a reputation beyond reputePulaski has a reputation beyond reputePulaski has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: It's not just about guns, it's about the person holding the weapon

Originally Posted by RoadWarriorFromLP View Post
We sure as hell knows what happens Americans get guns -- more of them kill each other......
I think you'd find we agree on much more than you'd ever expect on the subject of guns:

They kill a significant number of people each year in the US - murders, suicides and accidents. In an ideal world we wouldn't have them, especially the pistols that don't have a hunting purpose. (Long guns have a legitimate use in hunting and pest control, and are responsible for fewer murders, though shotguns are especially effective for suicides.)

I can see your point (though I still don't see how it is a "marginal cost" issue) about the use and abuse of firearms. Other than hunting, they serve no benefit to society, and ideally we would never have had them, or they should be removed.

Where my opinion diverges from you, LIW, and others, is that the removal of all guns from society is impossible, with the law abiding citizens most likely to be coercible into giving them up, but the criminal underclass would ignore all and any laws to disarm them, and worse, continue to trade them an acquire them freely. This would mean that the only people with free access to guns would be the criminals, which is exactly what has happened in the UK, where admitted from a much low base, shooting deaths have increased steadily and relentlessly since the ownership of pistols was outlawed.

My view on guns is based on the practical point, that even without the likely insurmountable second amendment issues, disarming America is, for all practical purposes, impossible. It isn't going to happen, so that I agree with all of your statistics and most of your opinions is moot when what you and I both would like to see just isn't going to happen.

Last edited by Pulaski; May 19th 2013 at 2:23 pm.
Pulaski is offline  
Old May 19th 2013, 3:36 pm
  #289  
BE Forum Addict
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 4,130
CelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: It's not just about guns, it's about the person holding the weapon

Originally Posted by Boiler View Post
So which one is an assault rifle?

They seem semi automatic rifles firing the .22LR.


It all depends on the politics.



http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/17/us...ewanted=2&_r=0
CelticRover is offline  
Old May 19th 2013, 4:22 pm
  #290  
Lost in BE Cyberspace
 
Boiler's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Location: Colorado
Posts: 34,052
Boiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: It's not just about guns, it's about the person holding the weapon

Originally Posted by CelticRover View Post
Exactly, politics.

Nothing to do with actuality. Would be like banning Hummer 3's because they are military vehicles.
Boiler is online now  
Old May 19th 2013, 7:00 pm
  #291  
Bloody Yank
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Location: USA! USA!
Posts: 4,186
RoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: It's not just about guns, it's about the person holding the weapon

Originally Posted by Pulaski View Post
I still don't see how it is a "marginal cost" issue
Calculate a cost: Homicide rate in gun-free USA.
Calculate a second cost: Homicide rate in USA, with guns added.

The difference between those two things is the marginal cost. If the second cost is higher than the first, than there's a cost for having guns in US society.

The numbers of guns or bullets are irrelevant in determining the social cost of guns, just as the number of cigarettes or matches are irrelevant in determining the social cost of smoking. The cost that matters is the difference in the number of deaths and injuries between the gun-free scenario and the gun-infested scenario.

Originally Posted by Pulaski View Post
the criminal underclass would ignore all and any laws to disarm them
The criminal underclass abroad has less access to guns that does the criminal underclass here. Your system favors criminals -- where do you think their guns are coming from?
RoadWarriorFromLP is offline  
Old May 19th 2013, 7:18 pm
  #292  
BE Forum Addict
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 4,130
CelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond reputeCelticRover has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: It's not just about guns, it's about the person holding the weapon

Originally Posted by Boiler View Post
Exactly, politics.

Nothing to do with actuality. Would be like banning Hummer 3's because they are military vehicles.


How about Hummer 2s?

http://www.uberreview.com/2012/07/gu...kind-awful.htm
CelticRover is offline  
Old May 19th 2013, 8:40 pm
  #293  
Lost in BE Cyberspace
 
Boiler's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Location: Colorado
Posts: 34,052
Boiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: It's not just about guns, it's about the person holding the weapon

Calculate a cost: Homicide rate in Drug-free USA.
Calculate a second cost: Homicide rate in USA, with drugs added.

The difference between those two things is the marginal cost. If the second cost is higher than the first, than there's a cost for having drugs in US society.

The numbers of drugs are irrelevant in determining the social cost of drugs, just as the number of cigarettes or matches are irrelevant in determining the social cost of smoking. The cost that matters is the difference in the number of deaths and injuries between the drug free scenario and the drug-infested scenario.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013...g-drugs-report

Western leaders study 'gamechanging' report on global drugs trade
Review by Organisation of American States on illicit drugs 'could mark beginning of the end' of prohibition
Boiler is online now  
Old May 19th 2013, 9:01 pm
  #294  
Bloody Yank
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Location: USA! USA!
Posts: 4,186
RoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond reputeRoadWarriorFromLP has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: It's not just about guns, it's about the person holding the weapon

Originally Posted by Boiler View Post
Calculate a cost: Homicide rate in Drug-free USA.
Calculate a second cost: Homicide rate in USA, with drugs added.

The difference between those two things is the marginal cost. If the second cost is higher than the first, than there's a cost for having drugs in US society.
The social cost of drug prohibition is higher than the cost of drug decriminalization.

For guns, it's exactly the opposite.
RoadWarriorFromLP is offline  
Old May 19th 2013, 9:28 pm
  #295  
Bob
BE Site Lead
 
Bob's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Location: MA, USA
Posts: 91,842
Bob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: It's not just about guns, it's about the person holding the weapon

Originally Posted by Pulaski View Post

Where my opinion diverges from you, LIW, and others, is that the removal of all guns from society is impossible, with the law abiding citizens most likely to be coercible into giving them up, but the criminal underclass would ignore all and any laws to disarm them, and worse, continue to trade them an acquire them freely. This would mean that the only people with free access to guns would be the criminals, which is exactly what has happened in the UK, where admitted from a much low base, shooting deaths have increased steadily and relentlessly since the ownership of pistols was outlawed.

My view on guns is based on the practical point, that even without the likely insurmountable second amendment issues, disarming America is, for all practical purposes, impossible. It isn't going to happen, so that I agree with all of your statistics and most of your opinions is moot when what you and I both would like to see just isn't going to happen.
Not to many people are saying ban and then remove guns from society are they though.

There's a big difference in:

-Do nothing
-Increased and more importantly, consistent gun control and gun ownership regulationi
-Ban and remove guns entirely.

The middle ground still allows people to have guns and do what they will with them.

It just means there's a little more inconvenience involved in getting a proper criminal background check and doctors check up as well as actual enforcement of the laws and then having a register of who owns what and how many bullets/re-loading equipment they might have.
Bob is offline  
Old May 19th 2013, 9:29 pm
  #296  
Lost in BE Cyberspace
 
Boiler's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Location: Colorado
Posts: 34,052
Boiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: It's not just about guns, it's about the person holding the weapon

How much would it cost?
Boiler is online now  
Old May 19th 2013, 11:54 pm
  #297  
Bob
BE Site Lead
 
Bob's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Location: MA, USA
Posts: 91,842
Bob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: It's not just about guns, it's about the person holding the weapon

Originally Posted by Boiler View Post
How much would it cost?
Who cares.

You want a gun, you pay for it.

Just like people who want to drive a car have to pay for a drivers license, just like people who want international travel have to pay for a passport.

It does not need to be cheap. Ones second amendment rights aren't infringed because they can't afford it, just like their rights aren't infringed because they can't afford to buy a Glock and have to settle for a dodgy Chinese imitation.
Bob is offline  
Old May 20th 2013, 12:19 am
  #298  
Lost in BE Cyberspace
 
Boiler's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Location: Colorado
Posts: 34,052
Boiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond reputeBoiler has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: It's not just about guns, it's about the person holding the weapon

Originally Posted by Bob View Post
Who cares.

You want a gun, you pay for it.

Just like people who want to drive a car have to pay for a drivers license, just like people who want international travel have to pay for a passport.

It does not need to be cheap. Ones second amendment rights aren't infringed because they can't afford it, just like their rights aren't infringed because they can't afford to buy a Glock and have to settle for a dodgy Chinese imitation.
The US government spends it seems $20 to $25 Billion a year on drug enforcement sic. Without enforcing the laws.

How much would be need to be spent on Gun enforcement for it be effective?
Boiler is online now  
Old May 20th 2013, 1:54 am
  #299  
Bob
BE Site Lead
 
Bob's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Location: MA, USA
Posts: 91,842
Bob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond reputeBob has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: It's not just about guns, it's about the person holding the weapon

Originally Posted by Boiler View Post
The US government spends it seems $20 to $25 Billion a year on drug enforcement sic. Without enforcing the laws.

How much would be need to be spent on Gun enforcement for it be effective?
How much blood money should be spent to keep the status quo?
Bob is offline  
Old May 20th 2013, 2:09 am
  #300  
Professional Drama Queen
 
Songbird's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 1,061
Songbird has a reputation beyond reputeSongbird has a reputation beyond reputeSongbird has a reputation beyond reputeSongbird has a reputation beyond reputeSongbird has a reputation beyond reputeSongbird has a reputation beyond reputeSongbird has a reputation beyond reputeSongbird has a reputation beyond reputeSongbird has a reputation beyond reputeSongbird has a reputation beyond reputeSongbird has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: It's not just about guns, it's about the person holding the weapon

Originally Posted by Boiler View Post
How much would be need to be spent on Gun enforcement for it be effective?
Ask that question to a victim of gun violence or the family of someone whose life was taken by a gun and I think you will find the answer is - as much as it takes to make it work!
Songbird is offline  

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.