14 Shot Dead at 'Dark Knight Rises' Screening

[Kakapo Dundee]

A cars intended purpose is to drive from place to another.

A guns intended purpose is normally to kill.

I believe in the United States that there are more firearms than there are cars.

However, more people are killed with cars then guns.

2 innocent people who get killed by a car becomes a statistic, a bunch of people get shot with a gun becomes front page news.

Another well-worn argument.

If someone deliberately used a car in an attempt to kill as many people as possible in as short a time as possible, it would also be front page news.

The death toll from motor vehicles is irrelevant to this argument. The automobile is a valuable tool, and is seldom used as a weapon.

 

[Joe the meek]

Another well-worn argument.

If someone deliberately used a car in an attempt to kill as many people as possible in as short a time as possible, it would also be front page news.

The death toll from motor vehicles is irrelevant to this argument. The automobile is a valuable tool, and is seldom used as a weapon.

Not intended as an argument at all.

Anyone who has taken a stat 101 class knows what they say about statistics.

Someone with your brains should realize that.

Say "if" I had 100 guns and not ONE of those guns has ever been used to kill anyone, what does that do to all the gun statistics people love to post to make the claim that to many people die by firearms in the US?

 

[cam elle toe]

You hit one of the problems right on the head.

Most people who are anti gun know ABSOLUTELY nothing about them other than they go bang and they kill.

You also apparently haven't read any other of my previous posts where I stated that I have no qualms with "raising the standards" on how people acquire certain firearms. The problem becomes who sets those "standards" and how those standards are applied, and ensuring that those who enforce those standards don't abuse their authority. This is one reason why IMO that people who own firearms in the United States are afraid to give up what they already have per "gun rights". Give the government a inch, and they will take a yard. This is a fear that I can complete agree with and understand.

Do I believe that owning any type of firearm is a "right" that should not be regulated? No. However, once you start walking down the road of "regulation" and giving power to those who enforce those regulations, you start a chain of events that usually are impossible to reverse. Those in power rarely like to give that power up.

Do you have ANY clue as to why the assault rifle ban that was enacted in the 90's in the U.S (that has since expired) was a complete joke, and that the only thing it did was make more money for people? Probably not. Do you even know what an "assault rifle" is? Probably not. Heck, I would consider myself having more knowledge than the average person on firearms and at times I'm not certain I know what an assault rifle is LOL

Ignorance is a two way street.

Would I live in fear without ANY firearms in my possession? No (honestly, one time, at 0100 into Camden NJ by mistake). A gun is nothing more than a tool designed to kill and should be treated with the utmost respect.

You would also be amazed at what kind of damage a knife can do if someone knows how to use it.

You actually had me coming round a bit...until the last statement....then I read further down and you compare car fatalities to gun deaths......then you totally lost me again.

and yes, I do realise guns go bang...and knives go "stab stab" (rolls eyes)

 

[Joe the meek]

You actually had me coming round a bit...

Honestly, I don't care.

You may know that guns go bang, but other than that, you're completely ignorant about the subject.

Go out and shoot a .22LR pistol. You may find yourself having some fun.

 

[cam elle toe]

Honestly, I don't care.

You may know that guns go bang, but other than that, you're completely ignorant about the subject.

Go out and shoot a .22LR pistol. You may find yourself having some fun.

HA..yeah you do....thats why the long posts and why you keep coming back

and no thanks...I could think of a 100 more ways I would rather have "fun"....but you go right ahead.

 

[Joe the meek]

HA..yeah you do....thats why the long posts and why you keep coming back

You just don't know me very well

 

[Maulds]

Coz your armed? Would you still live without fear if you didnt have your gun/s?

I never leave the house with a gun. I own two that never leave my room. So while it's nice to know I have a means to protect my family in the case of a home invasion, my sense of security out in the world at large is not tied to owning a gun.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

I never leave the house with a gun. I own two that never leave my room. So while it's nice to know I have a means to protect my family in the case of a home invasion, my sense of security out in the world at large is not tied to owning a gun.

I never leave home without one.

I just don't...

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

Not intended as an argument at all.

Anyone who has taken a stat 101 class knows what they say about statistics.

Someone with your brains should realize that.

Say "if" I had 100 guns and not ONE of those guns has ever been used to kill anyone, what does that do to all the gun statistics people love to post to make the claim that to many people die by firearms in the US?

Over here, they call this kind of response a 'flip-flop'.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

Over here, they call this kind of response a 'flip-flop'.

joe has a valid point. Over 330,000,000 registered guns in the US. That's registered!

So you can inflate or dilute numbers to support either side.

What you will find is rare are lawful owners the primary initiator.

Look at Switzerland, 100% gun ownership almost 0% gun violence.

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

Joe has a valid side point, but his core argument in that post had a hole big enough to drive a bus through. And when I drove the bus through it, not only did he turn tail and run away, he had the bare faced cheek [Someone with your brains should realize that.]to flip the bird at at me.

Joe's argument was that car fatalities are statistics, but gun fatalities are news.
My response was that people don't use cars to commit mass murder.


Maybe Joe would like to have a second go at salvaging his argument.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

Joe has a valid side point, but his core argument in that post had a hole big enough to drive a bus through. And when I drove the bus through it, not only did he turn tail and run away, he had the bare faced cheek [Someone with your brains should realize that.]to flip the bird at at me.

Joe's argument was that car fatalities are statistics, but gun fatalities are news.
My response was that people don't use cars to commit mass murder.


Maybe Joe would like to have a second go at salvaging his argument.

I agree :thumbup: hopefully you know I fired no shot across your bough. But wanted to validate the equitable argument that was made.

But I agree with you on your point as well.

 

[Joe the meek]

Joe's argument was that car fatalities are statistics, but gun fatalities are news.
My response was that people don't use cars to commit mass murder.

Another point you missed is that statistics can be utilized by anyone to make a point who is collecting the data.

EXACTLY how many guns are in the United States and are owned legally by civilians and what percentage of those guns are used to commit crime?

I just scratch my head because you have both anti and pro idiots on both sides of this argument and there never seems to be any room for anyone to meet in the middle.

Re read post #256 of mine Sherlock.

I also believe I made the comment that a gun is a tool that was DESIGNED to kill. No **** Sherlock Holmes that people don't usually use cars to commit mass murders.

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

I also believe I made the comment that a gun is a tool that was DESIGNED to kill. No **** Sherlock Holmes that people don't usually use cars to commit mass murders.

So why on earth would you expect parity in the way that mass murder and car accident figures were reported?

p.s.....calm down, there are trigger happy mods in here. but as long as you don't say :urstupid:, I'm sure that the asterisks that you put in your abuse will keep you onside, particularly as you appear to be on the pro-gun side.

 

[Joe the meek]

p.s.....calm down, there are trigger happy mods in here.[/COLOR] but as long as you don't say :urstupid:, I'm sure that the asterisks that you put in your abuse will keep you onside, particularly as you appear to be on the pro-gun side.

You've past the pot calling the kettle black a long time ago from some of the posts I've read of yours :24:

You didn't answer my question, but I'm use to people like you who have all the answers.

By the way, people on the internet aren't worth it getting worked over

To answer your question on parity per statistics, if you have almost as many guns as you do auto's in a country, and the autos kill more people than guns, it leads me to believe that perhaps people with guns are in general more responsible with a tool designed to kill as compared to a tool designed to transport. That said, I'd like to think I'm smart enough to realize that you also have to look at the operating time of both tools to get a better comparison.

Although I don't consider myself anti gun OR pro gun, I do believe that the nut jobs of the world shouldn't affect my own individual rights to own firearms. You have nut jobs who don't want guns to exists and you have nut jobs who believe it is a God given right to own anything you want. That said, both the state and federal government know pretty much everything about me except my penis size. EVERYTHING I do I do legally and follow the law.

As I commented, re read post #256 of mine per this thread.

Ironically enough, if I lived in Colorado and was attending that movie, it would of been illegal for me to carry a weapon there. That said, in NC, it is also illegal.

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

people like me? So you're admitting that you stereotype the people who disagree with you?

I guess that's a start.

Maybe I'll answer your questions when you see fit to answer mine. Why does America have a higher percentage of gun crime, and a higher percentage of mass murders per head of population than most civilised nations?

 

[Joe the meek]

people like me? So you're admitting that you stereotype the people who disagree with you?

I guess that's a start.

Maybe I'll answer your questions when you see fit to answer mine. Why does America have a higher percentage of gun crime, and a higher percentage of mass murders per head of population than most civilised nations?

Not people that disagree with me, but people who have all the answers, and particularly those people commenting on countries where they don't live (and yes, in general, Americans are the worst on commenting on other countries, so in some aspects, you're just like an a mercian LMAO).

Higher percentage of gun crime? Where does that gun crime occur? In locations with STIRCT gun control or locations where people are allowed to arm themselves?

For the mass murders? Well, how many guns are in the US as compared to those other countries?

I don't know, that's why I'm asking.

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

It's all been discussed and documented further up the thread..... If you choose to ignore it, I see no point in repeating it.

And if I had all the answers, why would I be asking so many questions? Questions, it seems, that you'd rather run away from.

 

[Joe the meek]

Questions, it seems, that you'd rather run away from.

Not run away from, but being able to realize that when dealing with man, little changes.

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

Perhaps it best if I trouble you no more then. The questions remain for anyone else who is more capable.