Do guns kill people, or people kill with guns?

[Darkhorse]

Also, Van Gogh cut off his own ear and gave it to a prostitute.

 

[Xalith]

This is a complicated issue. There are no easy answers.
I believe in the 2nd amendment.
Are you asking what is the most likely weapon with which people are killed?
Its silly to ask whether the gun kills or the person who uses it kills. Now if you're asking what is the most common motive for using a gun to kill another, (because no one knows really) then we would be in this thread from now on.

Roughly, the number of guns in America is about as many as ONE per person! (if they were spread out equally) As a defense against robberies, think of this: "only the tiniest fraction of victims of violent crime are able to use a gun in their defense. Over the period from 2007-2011, when roughly six million nonfatal violent crimes occurred each year, data from the National Crime Victimization Survey show that the victim did not defend with a gun in 99.2% of these incidents" http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/27/opinions/us-guns-evidence/ So guns are not used primarily for protection, it seems.

I'm not myself a gun owner. I've lived to this age, thankfully, having never had a use for one.

I wonder how many of those guns are used for hunting?

My family of 3 owns two shotguns, three rifles, a muzzle-loader and a compound bow, and all of these weapons are used for hunting. That's 6 guns and 1 bow for 3 people. Several other people who live nearby have similar arsenals.

Myself, nor any family member has never threatened a human being with a gun, ever.

So in that figure of "there are as many guns as there are people", how many of those guns are for hunting, rather than defense? Now don't get me wrong, the shotguns particularly could be used for defense quite effectively, but that's not what they are there for.

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

Pretty much anything you see around you as you read this can be used to kill someone. But only if YOU use it that way. A gun is no different. Some say its made to kill! Not true. It "can" kill but its also used for other things. SKeet shooting, target practice, hunting. Granted with hunting you are killing but you are (usually) hunting and plan to eat the meat. Which is no different then we did WAY before we had guns. If we ever ban guns then I vote we also ban cars, rocks, tree branches, razers, plastic bags, heavy objects, string, statues, windshield washed fluid, ovens, electricity lines... even our own bodies should be banned.

 

[Larniavc]

Pretty much anything you see around you as you read this can be used to kill someone. But only if YOU use it that way. A gun is no different. Some say its made to kill! Not true. It "can" kill but its also used for other things. SKeet shooting, target practice, hunting. Granted with hunting you are killing but you are (usually) hunting and plan to eat the meat. Which is no different then we did WAY before we had guns. If we ever ban guns then I vote we also ban cars, rocks, tree branches, razers, plastic bags, heavy objects, string, statues, windshield washed fluid, ovens, electricity lines... even our own bodies should be banned.

You can kill someone with a loaf of bread. But it is dramatically easier to kill somebody with a gun.

It is therefor dramatically easier to kill people with guns.

Where is the confusion?

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

People act like guns are the only thing that kills people. But anything can instantly kill someone. But no one seems to complain about those things.

 

[Xalith]

People act like guns are the only thing that kills people. But anything can instantly kill someone. But no one seems to complain about those things.

Well, to be honest, few things are as readily accessible that are anywhere near as effective at killing people from the distances a gun can. A scoped rifle in the hands of an amateur can kill someone from 100+ yards away with a single shot with the target being unaware that their life is in mortal danger.

I can't think of any other readily accessible weapon that can do this, can you? Maybe a bomb or something, but bombs are not easy to make, and not everybody knows how to make them, and even then a lot of the times, amateur home-brew bomb makers will oftentimes blow themselves up (or at the very least, suffer injuries) in home-brew accidents and/or their bombs won't function as intended, not to mention how difficult materials for an effective and reliable bomb are to obtain.

Sure, a knife will kill somebody, but unless you're an awesome knife thrower, you're going to be needing to stand within 5 feet of your victim. I suppose a ballbat is capable of killing somebody too, but again, you need range. Also, knife&ballbat wounds are easily survivable depending on where exactly you got hit.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

The logic is that a gun offers protection that other weapons don't.

Only if you have the gun readily available. If your attacker is coming at you in your kitchen, and your gun is locked up in your safe in your bedroom, then that gun is about as useful as a pack of gum in protecting you, your family or your property.

This is the irony. The few people I know who own guns keep them locked in a safe to protect their children. They don't want to leave guns lying around where kids might be able to reach them. So, the gun which you are supposed to use to protect your children is actually locked away...to protect your children.

There are certain, very particular and perhaps contrived examples where a gun might be useful. And if you want to have such a gun for such an unlikely situation, go for it. I personally think that personal self-defence (i.e. martial arts) is more useful. You always have your arms, legs and fists with you.

I have guns for hunting, but if needed I will use them for protection. You don't always have time to 'lock and load' but if your life depends on it you must try.

Yea I'm fine with that sentiment. I have hammers and screwdrivers that I use for home repairs but if needed I will use them or protection. But my hammer is out in the garage in a toolbox, so the chances of me having a hammer readily available when an assailant is advancing upon me is pretty slim.

As I said, I think self defence (martial arts) is more useful overall.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Only if you have the gun readily available.

Many do.

I have hammers and screwdrivers that I use for home repairs but if needed I will use them or protection.

The thought that you have hand tools in your home probably wouldn't deter anyone. But, if that person thought that you might have loaded gun in the house it might well be a deterrent. I can make a list of friends and family that I know have, or don't have, a gun in the house. The general knowledge that one probably has a gun in the house has, undoubtedly, deterred many crimes.

Bill and Darlene were classmates of mine in HS. They married and moved to a less-than-savory neighborhood (reason not given). Bill taught Darlene (a beautiful woman often alone at home) how to use a shotgun, which he insisted she keep loaded and close at hand. He also made that fact known to many. Sixty years later I still cannot think of Bill and Darlene without thinking about that loaded shotgun (as is evidenced by this recollection).

 

[Darkhorse]

If you have a gun for protection, it must be readily available. The best way to do this (while keeping it away from children and other unqualified people) is to carry it with you concealed at all times. You know where it is and you can access it immediately.

I did this when my kids were young and never had a problem.

 

[PsychoSarah]

From my perspective, people kill people. Apart from the rare instance of gun malfunction, guns won't kill people without being pointed in the direction and shot. People committed murder long before guns existed, and still would were they to be banned. There is more than one way to skin a cat, as the old people say.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

Many do.

Fair enough.

I guess, being from Canada, conceal carry is illegal so most people I know don't have guns readily available.

Some stats: Rates of gun violence in Canada: 2.22 deaths per 100,000; USA: 10.6 deaths per 100,000. The homicide rate in Canada: 1.4 per 100,000; USA: 3.8 per 100,000.

Even if you have a concealed weapon on you at all times, what are the chances you can react quick enough to draw your gun before your assailant has peppered you with bullets?

The thought that you have hand tools in your home probably wouldn't deter anyone. But, if that person thought that you might have loaded gun in the house it might well be a deterrent. I can make a list of friends and family that I know have, or don't have, a gun in the house.

If I want to rob someone's house and I know them well enough to know that they have loaded guns in their house, then I also can likely find out when they will and will not be home. If I were a robber, I would simply wait until they were out (at work, on vacation, at the store, etc) and then happily gut their house. I'm not advocating burglary, but I'm pointing out how your argument is ridiculous.

The general knowledge that one probably has a gun in the house has, undoubtedly, deterred many crimes.

It is very difficult to ascribe likelihood to events that never happened. They may have not been robbed whether or not they had a gun in the house. To say that this has "undoubtedly, deterred many crimes" is ludicrous. What's the crime rate in the area you live? Probability alone would likely indicate that the chances of robbery are incredibly low so, the chances of them being burgled, regardless of gun ownership, would remain incredibly low.

My parents house was robbed once. They were on vacation for three weeks. Guns did not and would not have helped them.

The majority of burglaries occur when the owners are not home. A home alarm system is far, far, far more effective than a gun will ever be.

Bill and Darlene were classmates of mine in HS. They married and moved to a less-than-savory neighborhood (reason not given). Bill taught Darlene (a beautiful woman often alone at home) how to use a shotgun, which he insisted she keep loaded and close at hand. He also made that fact known to many. Sixty years later I still cannot think of Bill and Darlene without thinking about that loaded shotgun (as is evidenced by this recollection).

Sounds a little paranoid.

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

Well despite what people say about guns violence is down here in America. And if you were to get rid of guns it would just leave the door open for criminals to use guns sine alot of times they get them through illegal methods. Such as the dark/deepweb. Having looked you can buy not only guns but you can also buy, rocket launchers, grenades, flame throwers, bombs, poison gases...etc. And as most know the dark/deepweb pretty much allow you to be anonymous. So theres no real way to shut down the site NOR track the people that are on it. So most criminals would just go there for weapons if guns weren't allowed in america. I know violence would spike when that happens.

 

[Darkhorse]

Even if you have a concealed weapon on you at all times, what are the chances you can react quick enough to draw your gun before your assailant has peppered you with bullets?

Actually, Americans defend themselves and others every day by carrying and using guns.

Here are over 6000 documented cases of this:

https://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/armed-citizen/

 

[Loudmouth]

I can't understand why newscasters constantly say a person was killed by a gun. No it's a person who used a gun to kill someone. Every time someone calls for gun control they never explain what they mean by that statement.

We mean the same thing when we talk about stopping Iran's nuclear bomb program. We mean the same thing when we say that an atomic bomb killed tens of thousands of people in Hiroshima.

Background checks are a must especially for gun and knife shows. Having laws that allow buyers of guns and rifles at gun shows without background checks should be illegal in all states. Permitting people to buy guns and rifles without background checks is stupid and thoughtless. Those demanding gun control, that I have heard seldom, if ever, mention those gun shows.
My opinion is that gun and knife shows are a huge loop hole for gun stores and people to by pass the law of mandatory background checks when gun stores sell guns and rifles. I have never heard of requiring people selling their personal gun or rifle to someone else to file a report to some authority. That might be an acceptable idea for some.
If the Liberal thinkers of our government continue to push for more restrictive gun control laws, and require everyone to register their gun or rifle, what would you do?

As a practical matter, only new sales would require registration. This would include transfer of ownership of used guns. Due to attrition alone you will increase the percentage of guns that are registered. If a gun is used in a crime, then the registered user of that gun should be held accountable. If your registered gun is stolen, then you need to report it immediately.

The whole "they want to us to register our guns so they can take them away" conspiracy theory is a bunch of hogwash.

 

[Loudmouth]

Well despite what people say about guns violence is down here in America. And if you were to get rid of guns it would just leave the door open for criminals to use guns sine alot of times they get them through illegal methods. Such as the dark/deepweb. Having looked you can buy not only guns but you can also buy, rocket launchers, grenades, flame throwers, bombs, poison gases...etc. And as most know the dark/deepweb pretty much allow you to be anonymous. So theres no real way to shut down the site NOR track the people that are on it. So most criminals would just go there for weapons if guns weren't allowed in america. I know violence would spike when that happens.

Then why have any laws if all of them can be broken?

 

[lupusFati]

I don't want to take away all guns. But I do know we need to control them to an extent. I don't get this "we either have guns or we don't" mentality of gun control. It's gun control, not gun prohibition.

 

[Xalith]

Then why have any laws if all of them can be broken?

Because the laws deter a lot of people and only a small percentage actually break the law?

With no laws, then everybody would do what they want and we'd have total anarchy, but with the law, 99% of the people are going to be law-abiding (at least for the most part). The 1% is what you hear about all the time, but yet they don't bother talking about the 99% that do follow the law.

Removing guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens is only going to make them defenseless against criminals who have guns illegally. Very seldom are crimes committed by people who lawfully own guns. The guns aren't the problem, society is.

We have a nation where 1% are wealthy beyond belief while 99% are not, and a large portion of that 99% are not living comfortably and are discontent, and a decent chunk of that are in poverty and resort to a life of crime. There's a lot of dissent against the government, dissent against the police force, and just a general low attitude and morale towards authority in general here.

I'd say that, more than anything, is a big cause behind the crime in America. More advanced techniques used by police and those who solve crimes are slowly pushing violence down, but yet they aren't solving the general bad attitudes that lead to crime in the first place, so I wouldn't be surprised if this lull in gun violence is temporary and fleeting.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

Actually, Americans defend themselves and others every day by carrying and using guns.

Here are over 6000 documented cases of this:

https://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/armed-citizen/

First of all, I'm not at all denying that a gun can be used as protection. But just because that is the case does not mean we should let it proliferate because of other negative outcomes in society. Furthermore, you can still have all the gun protection you want, while also registering your gun and undergoing background checks before purchasing your gun. Neither of those things (registration or background checks) impede your ability to protect you, your family or your property.

I also want to point out that, according to the link that you posted, there are 60 documented articles on that website in the last year. This website would try to find any and every possible case because they want to bolster their cause. And they found 60 in the last year. Do you know how many gun related injuries, deaths and homicides there are every year in the US? Over a hundred thousand. There were over 11,000 gun homicides in 2013 alone. 60 anecdotal cases of gun protection are a drop in the bucket. These cases where gun protection actually worked are rare, anomalous events. The exception rather than the rule. If you can find better stats, I'm all ears.

Buy guns as tools and as hunting weapons. Buying guns for protection only results in a false sense of security.

 

[Darkhorse]

These instances are ones which came to the attention of police and news media. There are many others which never go beyond the bad guy seeing a gun in the good guy's hand, and running in the other direction.

My mom was the "good guy" in a few situations like that; no shots fired, but no crime occurred either.

I'll take facing a crook with a gun in my hand any day over being unarmed.


And gun registration DOES infringe on my rights; it's the main link in the chain towards confiscation. History proves that very clearly.

 

[Darkhorse]

The whole "they want to us to register our guns so they can take them away" conspiracy theory is a bunch of hogwash.

No, it's not hogwash; check out what U.S. politicians say:

http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-752083.html