Americans should not be allowed to own guns.

[Hot Mega]

My source ;http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=726110

Regarding suicide, from the New England Journal of Medicine;

But the Supreme Court's finding of a Second Amendment right to have a handgun in the home does not mean that it is a wise decision to own a gun or to keep it easily accessible. Deciding whether to own a gun entails balancing potential benefits and risks. One of the risks for which the empirical evidence is strongest,1 and the risk whose death toll is greatest, is that of completed suicide.

In 2005, the most recent year for which mortality data are available, suicide was the second-leading cause of death among Americans 40 years of age or younger. Among Americans of all ages, more than half of all suicides are gun suicides. In 2005, an average of 46 Americans per day committed suicide with a firearm, accounting for 53% of all completed suicides. Gun suicide during this period accounted for 40% more deaths than gun homicide.

Why might the availability of firearms increase the risk of suicide in the United States? First, many suicidal acts — one third to four fifths of all suicide attempts, according to studies — are impulsive. Among people who made near-lethal suicide attempts, for example, 24% took less than 5 minutes between the decision to kill themselves and the actual attempt, and 70% took less than 1 hour.2

Second, many suicidal crises are self-limiting. Such crises are often caused by an immediate stressor, such as the breakup of a romantic relationship, the loss of a job, or a run-in with police. As the acute phase of the crisis passes, so does the urge to attempt suicide. The temporary nature and fleeting sway of many suicidal crises is evident in the fact that more than 90% of people who survive a suicide attempt, including attempts that were expected to be lethal (such as shooting oneself in the head or jumping in front of a train), do not go on to die by suicide. Indeed, recognizing the self-limiting nature of suicidal crises, penal and psychiatric institutions restrict access to lethal means for persons identified as potentially suicidal.

Third, guns are common in the United States (more than one third of U.S. households contain a firearm) and are lethal. A suicide attempt with a firearm rarely affords a second chance. Attempts involving drugs or cutting, which account for more than 90% of all suicidal acts, prove fatal far less often.

The empirical evidence linking suicide risk in the United States to the presence of firearms in the home is compelling.3 There are at least a dozen U.S. case–control studies in the peer-reviewed literature, all of which have found that a gun in the home is associated with an increased risk of suicide. The increase in risk is large, typically 2 to 10 times that in homes without guns, depending on the sample population (e.g., adolescents vs. older adults) and on the way in which the firearms were stored. The association between guns in the home and the risk of suicide is due entirely to a large increase in the risk of suicide by firearm that is not counterbalanced by a reduced risk of nonfirearm suicide. Moreover, the increased risk of suicide is not explained by increased psychopathologic characteristics, suicidal ideation, or suicide attempts among members of gun-owning households.

What would you be willing to be that because the US has more vehicles than the UK that we correspondingly so have more vehicular accidents and more vehicular related deaths.

 

[marquis2]

What would you be willing to be that because the US has more vehicles than the UK that we correspondingly so have more vehicular accidents and more vehicular related deaths.

The extract provides evidence that a lot of gunshot suicides succeed before the victim has had time to think it through or for the circumstances to change.Most other methods offer a reprieve.Read it through carefully.

Regarding vehicular related deaths we have a significantly lower death rate per mile travelled , our roads are vastly busier (over 30 million vehicles share 250 000 miles of road, and the vast majority of traffic is on just 50 000 miles of motorway , class A and class B roads) , our cars are smaller but seat belt wearing is compulsory.
Annual road deaths were 2538 in the latest figures.This is apparently the least since 1928 and can be attributed to a number of factors.
The latest figures from the US are 41 000 and like in the UK are falling.
Some of the difference can be put down to the fact that Americans drive more miles per capita but this difference is far less than most people imagine.

 

[Hot Mega]

The extract provides evidence that a lot of gunshot suicides succeed before the victim has had time to think it through or for the circumstances to change.Most other methods offer a reprieve.

Therefore what?:dunno: Because some people may kill themselves with firearms(and succeed) others shouldn't have the right to defend themselves with them?

Regarding vehicular related deaths we have a significantly lower death rate per mile travelled , our roads are vastly busier (over 30 million vehicles share 250 000 miles of road, and the vast majority of traffic is on just 50 000 miles of motorway , class A and class B roads) , our cars are smaller but seat belt wearing is compulsory.
Annual road deaths were 2538 in the latest figures.This is apparently the least since 1928 and can be attributed to a number of factors.
The latest figures from the US are 41 000 and like in the UK are falling.
Some of the difference can be put down to the fact that Americans drive more miles per capita but this difference is far less than most people imagine.

Soooo it could also be attributed to more vehicles per capita too right? In either/or events....neither is a case to be made for banning automobiles...or do you think some of these tragic accidents are void of the criticisms you level at firearms?

 

[lovejoy]

My source ;http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=726110

Regarding suicide, from the New England Journal of Medicine;
In 2005, the most recent year for which mortality data are available, suicide was the second-leading cause of death among Americans 40 years of age or younger. Among Americans of all ages, more than half of all suicides are gun suicides. In 2005, an average of 46 Americans per day committed suicide with a firearm, accounting for 53% of all completed suicides. Gun suicide during this period accounted for 40% more deaths than gun homicide.

New England Journal of Medicine covered up the truth of guns and suicide.

For most Asian countries, the suicidal rate is much higher, people jumped of tall building, burned charcoal by inhaling carbon monoxide or overdose on medication, or use knife to kill themselves. Or jump off the cliff like the former President of S. Korea.

GUNS DON'T KILL, PEOPLE KILL.

 

[lovejoy]

May be we should never keep and own a vehicle, so there will never be any accident or death ! Be it a murder related to a vehicle or suicide related to a vehicle. WTF !

 

[Marlo Manson]

You all realize that the content in this thread has been rhetorical, for sometime now, round and round juggling numbers, the USA will never be without guns, the USA will never have the mentality too eradicate guns and even if the powers to be tried to enforce a gun ban, and collect all the law abiding citizens guns it would start a civil war, the pro-gun movement (law abiding citizens who don't commit crimes) vs. the Machine (the government / the powers that be) and it would never work NO matter what they tried to do.

The supreme court would rule, that while all legal registered firearms have been purchased legally, the government has NO civil or logical way to collect and reimburse every citizen for every penny that they spent to obtain those weapons, and buy those weapons, not too mention the court would rule, that while all the law abiding citizens, say they did turn over there weapons, would be, @ the mercy of criminals who's guns can't be traced because there NOT legal, NOT registered, and NOT gonna willing hand them over to the government, so therefore, all the law abiding citizens would be like helpless sheep, to all the criminals, the criminals would have a field day.

With all that said, its silly, tiresome, and going round and round in circles about the PRO's and CON's of a countries citizens legally having guns, its NOT gonna change, there's NOTHING any anti-gun ideologist, or peace pacifist can say or do too change the MINDSET of the USA about there guns, and it certainly won't change the gun situation in the USA. so bottom line is. theres NOTHING more to say about it. I honestly :dunno: whats left to say or what anybody could say too change anything.

its all been covered, its all been said, its all gonna continue regardless of how much ANYBODY writes about it, discusses it, complains about it.etc... and so on.. move on live with it... its never gonna change... NOBODY is right and NOBODY is wrong... it is what it is.... so for FFS its a moot subject that will stay the same way as long as the sky is blue and the water is wet. :thumbsup::2 cents::hatsoff:

 

[marquis2]

New England Journal of Medicine covered up the truth of guns and suicide.

For most Asian countries, the suicidal rate is much higher, people jumped of tall building, burned charcoal by inhaling carbon monoxide or overdose on medication, or use knife to kill themselves. Or jump off the cliff like the former President of S. Korea.

GUNS DON'T KILL, PEOPLE KILL.

It was a well constructed well thought out article written by people who were neither pro or anti guns.They calmly looked at all the evidence and drew their conclusions from it. If it doesn't agree with your own viewpoint then find another way of explaining things.

Certainly in some countries suicide rates are higher than in others.There are many factors from social attitudes to climate.People determined to end it all will find a way but as the medical journal says,most suicide attempts are spur of the moment things, and if means are not at hand the impulse dies away.The fact is that suicide rates are higher in homes where there are guns than in similar homes without them.

The statement "guns don't kill , people do" though perhaps true in a way but is really an almighty cop out as a few seconds' reflection will make obvious.Guns are designed to make killing easier, more certain and safer for the user.They simply make killing less of a problem, less traumatic and more likely.

 

[marquis2]

Therefore what?:dunno: Because some people may kill themselves with firearms(and succeed) others shouldn't have the right to defend themselves with them?



Soooo it could also be attributed to more vehicles per capita too right? In either/or events....neither is a case to be made for banning automobiles...or do you think some of these tragic accidents are void of the criticisms you level at firearms?

The bit about suicides was to emphasise there is a downside to ready availability of guns. The self defence idea has been widely discredited but people persist in trotting it out so they obviously prefer to ignore the evidence,
Re cars-I don't think so-in both countries everybody who wants a vehicle has got one which means pretty well everybody of driving age.My wife and I have three cars.I never drive more than one at a time though!The per capita idea breaks down when there are spare cars standing in garages and on drives.

Although both cars and firearms are both lethal if misused they cannot be equated because the primary functions are different.

 

[Hot Mega]

The self defence idea has been widely discredited but people persist in trotting it out so they obviously prefer to ignore the evidence,

This is the problem with you guys and that statement, the facts are at odds with your beliefs.

Elderly woman held robber at gunpoint
during 911 call

Sunday night, a 70-year-old woman in South Bend, Indiana stopped an intruder in his tracks, holding him at gunpoint until police arrived. The woman called 911 about 9 p.m. sounding frantic, but prepared.

“I’ve got my gun out. Somebody’s trying to get in my house,” she told a dispatcher. “I’ll have to shoot him if he comes in.”

“What kind of weapon do you have?" asked the dispatcher. “I have a .38," the homeowner responded.

Minutes later, the intruder was inside, breaking through a window, but was stopped by the homeowner.

“I don’t want to have to kill anybody, but I will,” she said.

“She felt threatened by a man entering her home illegally by breaking the window and she was going to protect herself,” St. Joseph County Police Sgt. Bill Redman said.

After holding her intruder at gunpoint for almost five minutes, police arrived and arrested Cyrus Brown on preliminary charges of burglary, resisting arrest, and intimidation.

But Brown told police and the homeowner he was just looking for help. Police said he crashed his car near this woman's home because he said he was being chased by gang members trying to kill him. Authorities took Brown to the hospital for a broken leg before being booked into jail. Police are still looking into the story. (info from WSB TV)

http://911wackos.blogspot.com/2009/01/elderly-woman-held-robber-at-gunpoint.html

85-Year-Old Pennsylvania Woman Pulls Gun on Burglar, Forces Him to Call 911

OINT MARION, Pa. — An 85-year-old woman busted a would-be burglar by pulling a gun on him, then forcing him to call 911 while she kept him in her sights, police said.

"I just walked right on past him to the bedroom and got my gun," said Leda Smith, of Springhill Township, about 45 miles south of Pittsburgh.

Smith heard the 17-year-old boy break into her home about 3 p.m. Monday. She grabbed a .22-caliber revolver she began keeping by her bed when a neighbor's home was burglarized a few weeks ago.

"I said, 'What are you doing in my house?' He just kept saying he didn't do it," Smith said.

After the boy called 911, Smith held him at bay until the state police arrived.

The boy will be charged with attempted burglary and related offenses in Fayette County Juvenile Court, Trooper Christian Lieberum said. The boy was not identified because of his age.

"It was exciting," Smith said, who hoped the incident stops burglaries in her neighborhood. "I just hope I broke up the ring because they have been hitting a lot of places around here."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,406185,00.html

We owe it to ourselves to see things as they are not as we hope them to be.

Although both cars and firearms are both lethal if misused they cannot be equated because the primary functions are different.

What's the difference is if the effect is the same??

 

[BioDefenseGrad]

If you take the drug/gang scene out of the UK picture then gun crime drops to practically zero.It's not a part of mainstream crime.Guns are rarely used in robberies because they add 5 years to the sentence.

You must also look at suicide rates , a lot of US gun deaths are from this.You might argue that if guns weren't available then another method would be found.But where other methods are used the success rate is much lower, perhaps because many people who attempted suicide were really in a temporary state or looking for help.

Where do you think a large chunk of the gun crime comes from in the U.S. ??:tongue:

 

[BioDefenseGrad]

I so totally agree. A gun is a tool used for killing and or distruction. Both killing and distruction are negative. I'd prefer screwing.

Some folks have been fucked to death...

 

[rawlwear]

Some folks have been fucked to death...

Best reply!

Guns aren't just used for killing people, there is also a sport behind clay and target shooting. Its not guns that are the problem its the people who use the guns that are. As for guns in deaths, if you want someone dead they will be regardless if you have a gun or not there's a lot of other ways.

 

[lovejoy]

There have been robberies of restauants open late on Sundays across the street where I live.

I would say if the restaurant owners are allowed to keep guns, then those thugs (young black teenagers) would not have rob the small business owners week after week.

 

[marquis2]

This is the problem with you guys and that statement, the facts are at odds with your beliefs.



http://911wackos.blogspot.com/2009/01/elderly-woman-held-robber-at-gunpoint.html



http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,406185,00.html

We owe it to ourselves to see things as they are not as we hope them to be.



What's the difference is if the effect is the same??

I always said there would be occasions where having a gun would be helpful to you.There will always be anecdotes to support any point of view.When car seat belts were introduced opponents quoted examples when belted passengers had been trapped in a car but unbelted ones had survived by being thrown clear.What they couldn't overturn was the vast overwhelming evidence that seat belts overall save a lot of lives.Similarly the evidence is there that OVERALL the presence of a gun in a house renders the inhabitants less, not more, safe.For every intruder there are several accidents.

 

[marquis2]

Best reply!

As for guns in deaths, if you want someone dead they will be regardless if you have a gun or not there's a lot of other ways.

This just isn't true.Guns remove some of the obstacles in killing somone, they make it possible to do it at a distance, they make it possible to do it on impulse (which may later be regretted) they make it more certain and less risky than a direct physical confrontation and they make it easier to escape detection.

 

[TyrannosaurZ]

All that's good. Some people need to be killed, and it makes it easy and less dangerous for the good guys. Thank God they're more of them with guns. Thank God guns save so many lives a year, much more than they take in murder of innocents.

Guns save lives, they protect freedoms, they protect the weak from oppression.

Thank God we have the 2nd amendment so we can have the others!

 

[Hot Mega]

I always said there would be occasions where having a gun would be helpful to you.There will always be anecdotes to support any point of view.When car seat belts were introduced opponents quoted examples when belted passengers had been trapped in a car but unbelted ones had survived by being thrown clear.What they couldn't overturn was the vast overwhelming evidence that seat belts overall save a lot of lives.Similarly the evidence is there that OVERALL the presence of a gun in a house renders the inhabitants less, not more, safe.For every intruder there are several accidents.

Well now you're talking two, different things. People being victimized by accident versus people being victimized by overt acts.

Certainly the most damning case against your analogy is the fact that when seatbelts were introduced, while their installation was made mandatory...their use was voluntary.

You dismiss these cases as anecdotal as it may be since in the majority of cases unarmed people end up being the victims of home invasion rape, robbery or murder. There are countless cases like that out there.

In the one case, the elderly woman admitted to getting the handgun as a result of a previous robbery.

Why don't you draw comparisons between homes where invaders victimize occupants versus homes that have accidental deaths resulting from firearms. That would be the more relevant comparison wouldn't it???

 

[marquis2]

Why don't you draw comparisons between homes where invaders victimize occupants versus homes that have accidental deaths resulting from firearms. That would be the more relevant comparison wouldn't it???

That's been done somewhere recently-from memory it was about 22 times more likely that a family member was shot by accident than a burglar but I've no source to back this up.
Generally-and there are exceptions of course-people illegally entering a home aren't interested in confrontation , they just want the loot and a quick exit, preferably unnoticed.Where victimisation occurs the criminal will most likely be armed too which changes the rules.

 

[mrtrebus]

 

[Hot Mega]

That's been done somewhere recently-from memory it was about 22 times more likely that a family member was shot by accident than a burglar but I've no source to back this up.
Generally-and there are exceptions of course-people illegally entering a home aren't interested in confrontation , they just want the loot and a quick exit, preferably unnoticed.Where victimisation occurs the criminal will most likely be armed too which changes tie rules.

You're trying to tell me (or us) that for every home invasion rape, robbery or murder there are 22 cases in which someone is the accidental victim of a firearm in their home????

I imagine a source to back that up would be pretty tough to come by.