Own a Assault Weapon? soon the Sheriff will be at your home

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by volkov2006

72 days since Newtown there have been 2262 gun deaths up 44 since yesterday.

If anyone wants me to stop posting the inconvenient truth of the approximate number of murders please let me know.

---

Interesting... Using the same CDC data set as slate is using* 7,315.06 individuals have been killed in auto accidents since Newtown (day 75). Its really interesting that the data estimates that 18,223 people will kill themselves this year by using a gun. ** That's a rate of about 50 a day (meaning that according to that data in 75 days 3,647 individuals will have killed themselves using a gun). Whoa.



*Click Here

**Click Here

Not to bring up the obvious but a knife has a lot of purposes, from helping you open the latest Amazon box UPS delivered, to skinning your fish, to cutting your steak.

An assault weapon with a high capacity won't help you open your cyber-shopping box, it won't help you cut your dinner into digestible pieces but it sure as hell can kill a a lot folks in a mere half a minute.

Even if every American has the right to bear arms, arms are unkind, they take life more often that they save life and maybe it is time that Americans stop telling teenagers with raging homones to just say no to having an orgasm and start to tell them and the general population to just say no to devices that only have one purpose which is to maim or kill whatever they are successfully aimed at.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by robertlouis

Maybe, but you can't kill 20 people in 30 seconds with a knife.

---

And you can't defeat a Great White Shark once it begins an attack. What is the point other than to paint a scary picture.

Scare tactics do not make a coherent argument to those who are not scared by them. Assault weapon deaths are incredibly rare - just like shark attack deaths. Incredibly scary and incredibly rare. We should not take a large general problem and base a solution to it on a fractionally rare and minute, but incredibly scary, version of that problem.

This response also applies to fivekatz who wrote, in part:

"An assault weapon with a high capacity won't help you open your cyber-shopping box, it won't help you cut your dinner into digestible pieces but it sure as hell can kill a a lot folks in a mere half a minute."

If assault weapons were to magically disappear - the death rate for guns would not move a single percentage point! But yet people like to focus their attention singularly on them. Just like people who fear entering the ocean ... because of sharks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buttslinger

I know I'm coming off as a gun lover here, one problem is tobacco and guns have a lobby with lots of cash behind them, and in the USA, we have a President, not a King, and Obama needs a serious outcry from the public to get anything done. I still don't know why it's the ATF, Bureau of alcohol, tobacco, and firearms. does that make sense?

So while Guns have people with a monetary concern backing them up, Sane people have to convince people that there are a lot of things out there that can kill ya. Like Big Macs may kill more people than .38s

Here's the top 15 killers that topped murder in the US in 2010, according to Reuters:

1. Heart disease (595,444 deaths)

2. Malignant neoplasms (573,855)

3. Chronic lower respiratory diseases (137,789)

4. Cerebrovascular diseases (129,180)

5. Accidents (118.043)

6. Alzheimer's disease (83,308)

7. Diabetes (68,905)

8. Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome and nephrosis (50,472)

9. Influenza and pneumonia (50,003)

10 Suicide (37,793)

11. Septicemia (34,843)

12. Chronic liver disease and cirrhosis (31,802)

13. Essential hypertension and hypertensive renal disease (26,577)

14. Parkinson's disease (21,963)

15. Pneumonitis due to solids of liquids (17,001)

---

Aside from demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that life itself is a terminal disease, I'm not really sure where this set of stats takes the debate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brickcitybrother

And you can't defeat a Great White Shark once it begins an attack. What is the point other than to paint a scary picture.

Scare tactics do not make a coherent argument to those who are not scared by them. Assault weapon deaths are incredibly rare - just like shark attack deaths. Incredibly scary and incredibly rare. We should not take a large general problem and base a solution to it on a fractionally rare and minute, but incredibly scary, version of that problem.

---

So from this should we presume that you're quite happy for "scary and rare" multiple killings with assault rifles to continue without any intervention?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by robertlouis

So from this should we presume that you're quite happy for "scary and rare" multiple killings with assault rifles to continue without any intervention?

---

Read my original post ... so that you know such a comment misses the point.

From my point you should infer that I would like to address the larger issue of gun ownership and gun deaths and not focus on a tiny scary fraction of them that the media throws in our faces as "Good Television". Too many individuals have fancination with the anecdotal incidents. The focus is just wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brickcitybrother

And you can't defeat a Great White Shark once it begins an attack. What is the point other than to paint a scary picture.

Scare tactics do not make a coherent argument to those who are not scared by them. Assault weapon deaths are incredibly rare - just like shark attack deaths. Incredibly scary and incredibly rare. We should not take a large general problem and base a solution to it on a fractionally rare and minute, but incredibly scary, version of that problem.

This response also applies to fivekatz who wrote, in part:

An assault weapon with a high capacity won't help you open your cyber-shopping box, it won't help you cut your dinner into digestible pieces but it sure as hell can kill a a lot folks in a mere half a minute.

If assault weapons were to magically disappear - the death rate for guns would not move a single percentage point! But yet people like to focus their attention to them. Just like people who fear entering the ocean ... because of sharks.

---

IMHO the rare nature of fatalities from Assault Weapons can only be dwarfed by the fact that there is even less evidence where an assault weapon in the hands of a civilian actually saved lives versus no firearm or a firearm of lesser capacity per every 10 seconds.

Even with this in mind why not just throw the bleeding hearts a bone and take the weapons of mass destruction off of the streets. Not only do you make the chardonnay drinking democrat wimps from the northeast happy, you make tens of thousands of law enforcement officers who hate being out gunned happy. Throw the them bone heh?

Since they aren't a problem why not ban them from the hands of ordinary citizens?

Just wonderin'?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buttslinger

Here's the top 15 killers that topped murder in the US in 2010, according to Reuters

---

this may come as a shock to you but the vast majority of people who die that arent murder victims (so about 20 per year in the us judging by your homicide rates) die from some form of age related illness

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fivekatz

IMHO the rare nature of fatalities from Assault Weapons can only be dwarfed by the fact that there is even less evidence where an assault weapon in the hands of a civilian actually saved lives versus no firearm or a firearm of lesser capacity per every 10 seconds.

Even with this in mind why not just throw the bleeding hearts a bone and take the weapons of mass destruction of the streets. Not only do you make the chardonnay drinking democrat wimps from the northeast happy, you make tens of thousands of law enforcement officers who hate being out gunned happy.

Since they aren't a problem why not ban them from the hands of ordinary citizens?

Just wonderin'?

---

.
.

Using your logic... I presume you are fine with the Virginia Tech shooter who killed 32 and wounded 17 because he DID NOT use any assault weapons (even though he committed a massacre that is clearly the deadliest shooting incident by a single gunman in U.S. history).

Just wonderin'?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brickcitybrother

.
.

Using your logic... I presume you are fine with the Virginia Tech shooter who killed 32 and wounded 17 because he DID NOT use any assault weapons (even though he committed a massacre that is clearly the deadliest shooting incident by a single gunman in U.S. history).

Just wonderin'?

---

Depends on your definition of assault weapons I suppose. But just the same if the weapons used at VT weren't covered under an inyial ban of assault weapons by citizens who can not show good cause for owning them I would call it a good start.