Do guns kill people, or people kill with guns?

[Bluecheese]

I am forever thankful that I live in the UK where owning a gun for protection is not permitted, and even our police are not routinely armed! When will the USofA realise that their crazy gun laws don't make them any safer?

 

[ximmix]

blind post...
Isn't it obvious to a rational mind, that with more guns comes more deaths by guns..?

 

[Samuel_Rigby]

blind post...
Isn't it obvious to a rational mind, that with more guns comes more deaths by guns..?

Obviously! Kind of like more forks means more fork-related deaths from obesity! Hey, maybe if we banned all forks then we could stop obesity once and for all! Think about it, healthcare costs would plummet and the overall health of the human race would improve. Of course, the food industry would take a serious hit. But that is just the natural consequences of doing what is in everyone's best interests and overall safety of mankind.

Seriously, let's ban all forks by executive order!

Next item on the agenda. . .cars! Car-related deaths are OUT-OF-CON-TROL!!

 

[expos4ever]

Guns make it so easy to kill people any idiot with a gun could do it if they get angry.

So while people kill people, people kill people with guns significantly more easily than without them.

Of course. But just you watch - a significant fraction of gun rights supporter try to foist the patently absurd notion that guns cannot be part of the problem since they are inanimate objects with no capability to "decide" to fire themselves.

People cannot be dumb enough to really believe such manifestly incorrect reasoning. So either they are in denial or they willingly promote a line of argument they know to be flawed. I suspect with most people it is the former.

 

[expos4ever]

Obviously! Kind of like more forks means more fork-related deaths from obesity! Hey, maybe if we banned all forks then we could stop obesity once and for all! Think about it, healthcare costs would plummet and the overall health of the human race would improve. Of course, the food industry would take a serious hit. But that is just the natural consequences of doing what is in everyone's best interests and overall safety of mankind.

Seriously, let's ban all forks by executive order!

Next item on the agenda. . .cars! Car-related deaths are OUT-OF-CON-TROL!!

This is another of the absurd arguments that people use to defend gun rights. They will draw analogies to other products that are dangerous - cars, knives, baseball bats, and seemingly now forks - to try to counter the common sense argument that guns are a big problem.

Do we really need to tell you what the problem is with such analogies?

I suspect you know full well why such comparisons are profoundly misleading.

 

[expos4ever]

Well as some US Christian informed me, when the guns are taken away, the murders are done without guns.

Yes, and they almost always are speculating when they make this argument. There is at least one study I know of (I believe I can provide the citation) that this "substitution" argument does not pan out - people do not always "find another tool" with which to do harm.

Admittedly, there is a shred of common-sense appeal to the "substitution" argument. But common sense is not always a reliable guide.

 

[expos4ever]

What's the number one murder weapon in the UK?

The food.

 

[Deidre32]

For years I was in a state of excellent mental health. Then I went through severe emotional trauma (not going to be specific but the majority of peoples reaction when I do actually say what happened in stunned silence) then my mental health took a massive nosedive and if I had a gun well I doubt I would be here today and I doubt some others would still be alive. Having sound mental health when purchasing the gun is no guarantee. There was one shooting where a person with mental health issues used guns owned by relatives (may have been direct family) so even then it is not successful.

Illegal guns come from many different sources but certainly stolen guns would be one source.

This is an outstanding post and quite brave of you to share this, thank you! You are right, there are no guarantees. I hope you are doing better now.

 

[MorkandMindy]

I am forever thankful that I live in the UK where owning a gun for protection is not permitted, and even our police are not routinely armed! When will the USofA realise that their crazy gun laws don't make them any safer?

With more guns the gun homicides (murders and similar unlawful killings of those other than the gunman/gunwoman/gunchild) increase and so do non gun killings.

 

[Aquila 04]

One must understand that taking firearms away from the law abiding would never actually make anything better. We have massive cartels and gangs both in our borders and across the border. The members of those organizations already have more firepower than most lawful firearm owning citizens. So what in the right mind would ever make one think that disarming our people would solve any problems. Gangs and cartels would thrive on the lack of any threat in this country. Same for terrorist organizations, they would all have free reign to do what they want.

There is nothing wrong with legal firearm ownership. The grand majority of gun owners use them for things like hunting and recreation or self-defense. Where is the problem with that?

I would also like to point out that the banning of things only caused increases in violence and crime. Think about the Civil War. Even though slavery wasn't abolished until after there was such a divide in the country over that and other issues that massive amounts of lives were lost in the fighting. Same for alcohol prohibition, when alcohol was outlawed people were upset and started producing their own. If you didn't die from possibly poisonous booze you ran the risk of getting shot by either rum runners or police for having alcohol with you.

If they ever tried to fully ban firearms there is no doubt in my mind that this country would see another civil war. Too many people hold on to our Constitutional rights to just willingly give up like the political left thinks they will. I've said it before, many law enforcement and military members themselves would laugh at the politicians before they ever went out to enforce gun laws and most gun owning citizens would shoot any government official who came to their door to take them. There would be far more blood shed from trying to take firearms than we will ever see while firearms are legal.

 

[MorkandMindy]

Every time a gun injures or kills in self-defense, one is used:

• 7 times in a criminal assault or homicide
• 4 times in an unintentional shooting death or injury

I'm not sure how valid the 'obtained legally' point is, guns obtained legally and then taken by someone else would also not be used if the guns were not available in the first place.

The easiest data to collect is from the mass shootings because the perpetrator is found.

Mass shootings, gun obtained:
Unknown 1
illegally 11
legally 48
.

 

[Darkhorse]

Every time a gun injures or kills in self-defense, one is used:

• 7 times in a criminal assault or homicide
• 4 times in an unintentional shooting death or injury

.

Of course, you're not counting the cases where the bad guy sees the gun in the good guy's hand, turns, and runs away; these are the majority of self-defense encounters.

My mom was the "good guy" a few times in between husbands...

 

[Aquila 04]

Of course, you're not counting the cases where the bad guy sees the gun in the good guy's hand, turns, and runs away; these are the majority of self-defense encounters.

My mom was the "good guy" a few times in between husbands...

This is very true, I know if I broke into someone's house even if I myself was armed all it would take was the sound of a round being chambered. Doesn't matter if it's a pistol, rifle or shotgun, the moment I hear that infamous noise of someone charging a weapon I am done with that house for ever.

 

[ViaCrucis]

People with guns kill people.

In the same way that cars don't kill people, people driving cars kill people.

Which is also why we have restrictions about cars, you know like having a driver's license, having said license revoked through negligence, or if one is simply incapable of safely being behind the wheel due to poor eyesight, age, etc they shouldn't drive and we can not give those people driver's licenses. We also require that people have insurance, and we require safety belts and put the vehicles themselves through transmission testing.

So, I mean, it's true that cars don't kill people, it's people who drive cars that kill people. But we also have a lot of prevention and restrictions in place to try and make our roads safer, and quite frankly we could do a whole lot more to improve that.

I'm going to suggest something kind of crazy: Perhaps we could treat weapons whose chief purpose historically was to injure and kill (as opposed as a means of transportation) with at least the same regard as we do automobiles.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[TheDag]

Obviously! Kind of like more forks means more fork-related deaths from obesity! Hey, maybe if we banned all forks then we could stop obesity once and for all! Think about it, healthcare costs would plummet and the overall health of the human race would improve. Of course, the food industry would take a serious hit. But that is just the natural consequences of doing what is in everyone's best interests and overall safety of mankind.

Seriously, let's ban all forks by executive order!

Next item on the agenda. . .cars! Car-related deaths are OUT-OF-CON-TROL!!

to even think forks and guns are suitable comparisons defies all logic. It is just a argument some clown came up with that is repeated on a regular basis. Obesity is not caused by forks. We all know that. You can just as easily eat with your hands or other implements and have the same problem. A gun however is designed to kill with its use.

 

[TheDag]

This is an outstanding post and quite brave of you to share this, thank you! You are right, there are no guarantees. I hope you are doing better now.

Yes I am much better now. In consultation with my doctor I am no longer on medication. While medication helped the far bigger part was people at the church I started attending. I moved interstate so had to find a new church.

 

[TheDag]

One must understand that taking firearms away from the law abiding would never actually make anything better. We have massive cartels and gangs both in our borders and across the border. The members of those organizations already have more firepower than most lawful firearm owning citizens. So what in the right mind would ever make one think that disarming our people would solve any problems. Gangs and cartels would thrive on the lack of any threat in this country. Same for terrorist organizations, they would all have free reign to do what they want.

You should be far less worried about terrorists than your own citizens. Do a comparison between the number of terrorist related deaths and gun deaths since the 9/11 attacks and it is not the terrorists you need to worry about. The reason for using that date is because thats when measures were put into place to prevent it. It is interesting just how few deaths the country needs before they take action against cars or medication yet they are less than a drop in the ocean compared to gun deaths and it is all no nothing should be done. Its called double standards and just shows how powerful the gun lobby is.

There is nothing wrong with legal firearm ownership. The grand majority of gun owners use them for things like hunting and recreation or self-defense. Where is the problem with that?

When people get hold of those guns and use them in shootings. Several of the shootings the guns were obtained from relatives who had guns for those reasons. The self defence is a bit of a flawed argument. Some keep the gun locked away and/or unloaded. If someone was to break into your house you simply wouldn't have time to get it ready. Makes it a bit pointless. Yet keep it loaded and people get accidently shot and killed either themselves or a friend or family member. In the street if a person is already threatening you with a weapon then you don't have time to draw, aim and fire before they shoot you. This is not the movies where it is scripted and the good guys always manage to get that shot in the shoulder without being hit themselves. Guns also get stolen and are then used. While people say oh but they aren't legally owned guns they often once were legally purchased guns.

I would also like to point out that the banning of things only caused increases in violence and crime. Think about the Civil War. Even though slavery wasn't abolished until after there was such a divide in the country over that and other issues that massive amounts of lives were lost in the fighting. Same for alcohol prohibition, when alcohol was outlawed people were upset and started producing their own. If you didn't die from possibly poisonous booze you ran the risk of getting shot by either rum runners or police for having alcohol with you.

This does not stand because it has not always been the case. In other countries where guns were restricted this did not happen. Increases in the use of other weapons did not happen. Of course the problem with that is that you need to have a big push to every ten years to eliminate these weapons. You don't have to ban guns altogether however restrictions are to any reasonable person clearly needed.

ViaCrucis made an excellent point about all the restrictions on cars and safety mechanisms in place. However pro-gun people don't even want to consider that.

... most gun owning citizens would shoot any government official who came to their door to take them. There would be far more blood shed from trying to take firearms than we will ever see while firearms are legal.

Sadly there are many who claim to be christian who say things like this. It is disgraceful behaviour by people who claim to be christian and if their friends actually cared about them they would rebuke them for this attitude.

 

[ximmix]

Obviously! Kind of like more forks means more fork-related deaths from obesity! Hey, maybe if we banned all forks then we could stop obesity once and for all! Think about it, healthcare costs would plummet and the overall health of the human race would improve. Of course, the food industry would take a serious hit. But that is just the natural consequences of doing what is in everyone's best interests and overall safety of mankind.

Seriously, let's ban all forks by executive order!

Next item on the agenda. . .cars! Car-related deaths are OUT-OF-CON-TROL!!

Note that I said "to a rational mind"...

 

[Samuel_Rigby]

Note that I said "to a rational mind"...

My post was purposely exaggerated to point out the inconsistency in your argument.

Your argument goes as follows:

Death by car--blame the person, not the car
Death by obesity--blame the person, not the fork
Death by gun--blame the gun, not the person

You are inconsistent with your argument. You say "guns are designed to kill" and you are correct. But you wrongly conclude that all killing is bad. Killing isn't wrong when you are defending your own life or the life of your family.

 

[expos4ever]

One must understand that taking firearms away from the law abiding would never actually make anything better.

No one is saying to only take guns away only from the "law-abiding citizens". But if we basically do not allow anyone to have a gun (with exceedingly rare exceptions) I suspect that there will be less gun violence overall. I draw your attention to the fact that almost all western nations that restrict guns have fewer gun-related deaths than the US. If the argument that "the bad guys will always get guns" were true, we would not expect that to be the case. Granted, there are other factors than the mere availability of guns that contribute to gun violence (e.g. socio-economic conditions).