Guns Kill More People Than Motor Vehicles in 12 States & DC

[drew89]

Even though the framers couldn't have foreseen what firearms would become in the subsequent centuries, I doubt they would have supported the meaning you divine from their words. It's the SC's job to figure out the meaning of those words. It's only ever "judicial activism" when they determine that the meaning doesn't align with the gun lobby's interests.

How else can you interpret "shall not be infringed"? Infringe is a very broad term. Why didn't they use a more specific term? The Founders believed citizens should have access to the same weapons the military has access to. At the time many private citizens had better weapons than the military. The government SHOULD be afraid of its citizens.

 

[Rion]

Is that why ricin was sent to Bloomberg?

Way to go you defenders of liberté, égalité, fraternité!

You should be ashamed of that accusation, and don't deny it, it was an accusation. He never said a single thing in this thread to suggest he was for murder or violent revolution.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

How else can you interpret "shall not be infringed"? Infringe is a very broad term. Why didn't they use a more specific term? The Founders believed citizens should have access to the same weapons the military has access to. At the time many private citizens had better weapons than the military. The government SHOULD be afraid of its citizens.

They believed that citizens should have access to grenades, bazookas, and tanks? Nuclear warheads too? Can't make the government afraid of its citizens without giving them access to nukes.

 

[MagicSabbath]

Why do pro-gun people always jump to the "disarm" conclusion whenever there is the mere mention of gun legalisation? The discussion is about setting legislative standards that encourage safe and responsible gun ownership, not disarmament.

There are already a great many laws that do just that.
Articles like this, even the title, are intended to invoke a negative connotation toward guns, comparing them of all things to cars, in terms of effects and death in the hands of the irresponsible.

A lot of the statistics concerning gun homicides are arrived at from gang activity. But those issues aren't as readily addressed for some reason. Instead it's a focus on lawful gun owners and something going awry with their possession of a firearm.

 

[kermit]

A few points:

Guns themselves are extremely safe in that they respond exactly as the user tells. Tales of accident discharges are practically non-existant. This means that any accident regarding a gun is due to the person holding it.

Judging cars by the same safety standard as guns shows that they are far less safe. The rates of cars not correctly responding to the driver's input is far more common. That said cars are getting far more safe in regards to keeping passengers safe in an accident.

This means that any variations in gun deaths is due to users while any variations in car deaths is due to the cars.

On a side note, many conservatives claimed that increasing MPG requirements would make cars less safe in an accident. Once again reality proves conservatives wrong.

 

[TheChristianSurvivalGuide]

Guns Kill More People Than Motor Vehicles in 12 States & DC

• Alaska: 144 gun deaths, 71 motor vehicle deaths
• Arizona: 931 gun deaths, 795 motor vehicle deaths
• Colorado: 555 gun deaths, 487 motor vehicle deaths
• District of Columbia: 99 gun deaths, 38 motor vehicle deaths
• Illinois: 1,064 gun deaths, 1,042 motor vehicle deaths
• Louisiana: 864 gun deaths, 722 motor vehicle deaths
• Maryland: 538 gun deaths, 514 motor vehicle deaths
• Michigan: 1,076 gun deaths, 1,063 motor vehicle deaths
• Nevada: 395 gun deaths, 289 motor vehicle deaths
• Oregon: 458 gun deaths, 324 motor vehicle deaths
• Utah: 314 gun deaths, 274 motor vehicle deaths
• Virginia: 875 gun deaths, 728 motor vehicle deaths
• Washington: 609 gun deaths, 554 motor vehicle deaths

So much for the meme that cars are bigger killers. Cars are getting safer. It seems guns, and many of those who use them, are not.

These numbers don't tell us the number of firearms related deaths that are suicides.

 

[drew89]

They believed that citizens should have access to grenades, bazookas, and tanks? Nuclear warheads too? Can't make the government afraid of its citizens without giving them access to nukes.

Sure, if they can afford them. If citizens cannot be trusted with a weapon, then neither should the government. Grenades and bazookas are already legal if you have a Class 3 license.

 

[drew89]

These numbers don't tell us the number of firearms related deaths that are suicides.

Nor do they account for firearms used in self defense.

 

[stamperben]

You should be ashamed of that accusation, and don't deny it, it was an accusation. He never said a single thing in this thread to suggest he was for murder or violent revolution.

I should be ashamed? Here's the quote:

Sorry. We don't need new laws, we need new lawmakers.

​

What better way to get new lawmakers than to get rid of the old ones.

There was an anti-gun control message with the poison. I never accused KWCrazy (no comment on the handle) of personally sending it. I have NOTHING to be ashamed of! Those who SHOULD be ashamed are those who do not speak up about their fellow gun lovers who are committing attempted murder!

As for "violent revolution" I suggest you take a look at what some of our fellow posters here have said in the Self Defense thread. Let me ask you Rion, do you think that owning guns is enough to keep the three branches of government in check?

 

[John Lee Pettimore III]

How does a gun kill someone without some form of human intervention.

I know, I know. It's perfectly logical to blame and anthropomorphize an inanimate object.

 

[stamperben]

How does a gun kill someone without some form of human intervention.

I know, I know. It's perfectly logical to blame and anthropomorphize an inanimate object.

Only because I'd like to think the best of my fellow man. However I'm losing even that any more...

 

[John Lee Pettimore III]

Only because I'd like to think the best of my fellow man. However I'm losing even that any more...

So it's some form of denial?

 

[Rion]

I should be ashamed? Here's the quote:

Sorry. We don't need new laws, we need new lawmakers.

​

What better way to get new lawmakers than to get rid of the old ones.

And what better way to get rid of the new ones than elections. You assume he meant something else.

There was an anti-gun control message with the poison. I never accused KWCrazy (no comment on the handle) of personally sending it.

You suggested he supported in some fashion by your post.

I have NOTHING to be ashamed of! Those who SHOULD be ashamed are those who do not speak up about their fellow gun lovers who are committing attempted murder!

The same way you speak up whenever a pro-abortionist guy goes nuts and shoots up a place, or that one Doctor in Philly, right? Because none of those things ever escape your notice.

As for "violent revolution" I suggest you take a look at what some of our fellow posters here have said in the Self Defense thread. Let me ask you Rion, do you think that owning guns is enough to keep the three branches of government in check?

I looked through the first thirty pages. All I saw was one guy who didn't understand why he can't carry a gun everywhere and you mocking an assault victim.

 

[stamperben]

And what better way to get rid of the new ones than elections. You assume he meant something else.



You suggested he supported in some fashion by your post.



The same way you speak up whenever a pro-abortionist guy goes nuts and shoots up a place, or that one Doctor in Philly, right? Because none of those things ever escape your notice.



I looked through the first thirty pages. All I saw was one guy who didn't understand why he can't carry a gun everywhere and you mocking an assault victim.

I see you have both projective and selective reading habits. That's too bad...

 

[Rion]

I see you have both projective and selective reading habits. That's too bad...

No, If anything, I think you're projecting the idea of violence onto KW there.

As for selective, after the first thirty, yes, there's the argument that the 2nd Amendment is intended to protect citizens from an oppressive government. That's true. One can argue the results of a modern civil war all one wishes, but that's neither here nor there.

 

[keith99]

So tell me, since it seems that cars are getting safer, what is being done to make guns safer?

The other site I frequent is a cycling site. That helps keep me aware of some things. cars have pretty much only gotten safer for people in cars. For pedestrians and cyclists they may have actually gotten more dangerous.

 

[keith99]

Even though the framers couldn't have foreseen what firearms would become in the subsequent centuries, I doubt they would have supported the meaning you divine from their words. It's the SC's job to figure out the meaning of those words. It's only ever "judicial activism" when they determine that the meaning doesn't align with the gun lobby's interests.

Others more versed in the language of war, or more properly weapons have pointed out that arms meant the weapons carried by an individual and ordinance was used to refer to things like cannon or mortars.

I can buy that.

I have serious issues with arms that clearly existed at the time of the ratification of the 2nd amendment being excluded from the protections provided there. (Try walking down the street with an undrawn sword).

Unlike many others I maintain that the 2nd amendment applies to the people as a class, not to each and every individual. So that right may be lost (or not yet gained) by an individual. E.g. violent felons or children.

I'd also point out that the 2nd amendment does not give the right to use or brandish the weapon. I'm also perfectly OK with the right to bear being lost or suspended for brandishing or otherwise threatening with a weapon.

 

[DuneSoldier]

Gee... That's what I'm asking YOU!

Well many guns have a number of automatic safeties built in to them to prevent them from discharging unless the user pulls the trigger. Many other's have manual safeties in addition to the automatic ones.

 

[KWCrazy]

Is that why ricin was sent to Bloomberg?

Way to go you defenders of liberté, égalité, fraternité!

I consider it flaming to accuse a member of an act of terrorism. Please apologize or be reported.

And no, I'm NOT kidding.

 

[stamperben]

Well many guns have a number of automatic safeties built in to them to prevent them from discharging unless the user pulls the trigger. Many other's have manual safeties in addition to the automatic ones.

To bad those safeties hadn't protected the three two year olds we've heard about who were killed or injured by guns in the past month, eh?