Not again...

[rangerx]

Is that a tolerable consequence ?

 

9000 deaths is horrible, but statistically rare nonetheless.

 

Iraqi War Death Toll:

 

Source

Estimated violent deaths Time period Iraq Family Health Survey 151,000 violent deaths March 2003 to June 2006 Lancet survey 601,027 violent deaths out of 654,965 excess deaths March 2003 to June 2006 Opinion Research Business survey 1,033,000 deaths as a result of the conflict March 2003 to August 2007 PLOS Medicine Survey^[2] Approximately 500,000 deaths in Iraq as direct or indirect result of the war. March 2003 to June, 2011

Body counts:

Source Documented deaths from violence Time period Associated Press 110,600 violent deaths March 2003 to April 2009 Iraq Body Count project 112,667–123,284 civilian deaths from violence. 174,000 civilian and combatant deaths^[4][5][6][7] March 2003 to March 2013 Classified Iraq War Logs^{[4][8][9][10]}109,032 deaths including 66,081 civilian deaths.^[11][12] January 2004 to December 2009

 

 

Is that a tolerable consequence?

[MigL]

Ahh, but I'm not the one who claimed they were statistically rare, I'm not the one trying to excuse ISIS' actions because "someone else started it, and I'm not the one trying to 'scapegoat' a group of people ( conservatives ) for the actions of a mentally disturbed person, and the inactions of every American.

 

That last point is what we are discussing, not American foreign policy ( there are plenty of threads for that )

[Elite Engineer]

 

9000 deaths is horrible, but statistically rare nonetheless.

 

Iraqi War Death Toll:

 

Source

Estimated violent deaths Time period Iraq Family Health Survey 151,000 violent deaths March 2003 to June 2006 Lancet survey 601,027 violent deaths out of 654,965 excess deaths March 2003 to June 2006 Opinion Research Business survey 1,033,000 deaths as a result of the conflict March 2003 to August 2007 PLOS Medicine Survey^[2] Approximately 500,000 deaths in Iraq as direct or indirect result of the war. March 2003 to June, 2011

Body counts:

Source Documented deaths from violence Time period Associated Press 110,600 violent deaths March 2003 to April 2009 Iraq Body Count project 112,667–123,284 civilian deaths from violence. 174,000 civilian and combatant deaths^[4][5][6][7] March 2003 to March 2013 Classified Iraq War Logs^{[4][8][9][10]}109,032 deaths including 66,081 civilian deaths.^[11][12] January 2004 to December 2009

 

 

Is that a tolerable consequence?

What does this have to do with anything. O wait, let me post some statistics on the Vietnam War.

[Raider5678]

I live in NY. One has to go through an extensive background check, classes and a permit to own a pistol. With rifles and shotguns it's not as difficult, but still consistent. However, 2 years ago, in West Chester, NY, some ex-criminal paid off his neighbor to buy him a shotgun, and then kill two firefighters after they ran into a house he had lit on fire.

Per year, how many firearms deaths are:

 

Murder w/ illegal means of obtaining the gun

 

Murder w/ legal means of obtaining the gun

 

Accidental death

 

Is this counting suicide too?

Here's a few links. Mostly self explanatory.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/oct/05/joe-scarborough/msnbcs-joe-scarborough-tiny-fraction-crimes-commit/

http://gun.laws.com/illegal-guns/illegal-guns-statistics

http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-control-myths/crime-and-guns/

 

 

 

Whats up with this link? Are they all lies or something?

http://www.rense.com/general32/nine.htm

 

 

BTW, these are just a bunch of links. I'm not trying to actively defend anyone or debate anyone.

[iNow]

A thousand times, this:

 

Edited June 15, 2016 by iNow

[Willie71]

Here's a few links. Mostly self explanatory.http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/oct/05/joe-scarborough/msnbcs-joe-scarborough-tiny-fraction-crimes-commit/http://gun.laws.com/illegal-guns/illegal-guns-statisticshttp://www.gunfacts.info/gun-control-myths/crime-and-guns/

Whats up with this link? Are they all lies or something?http://www.rense.com/general32/nine.htm

BTW, these are just a bunch of links. I'm not trying to actively defend anyone or debate anyone.

The Rense article is simply not supported by the literature. It's a propaganda piece, and all that it claims has been proven wrong by multiple credible sources.

[CharonY]

A thousand times, this:

While we are at it:

[rangerx]

A UN report states that ISIS 'attacks deliberately and systematically target civilians', and in the first 8 months of 2014, more than 9000 people ( including women and children ) were killed, and more than 17000 were wounded.

 

 

 

Ahh, but I'm not the one who claimed they were statistically rare, I'm not the one trying to excuse ISIS' actions because "someone else started it, and I'm not the one trying to 'scapegoat' a group of people ( conservatives ) for the actions of a mentally disturbed person, and the inactions of every American.

 

That last point is what we are discussing, not American foreign policy ( there are plenty of threads for that )

 

You brought up the UN and incidents outside of America, not me, then threw out numbers and asked a question. I answered the question, threw out some numbers then asked you the same question. You didn't answer, instead stated some outright lies.

 

Yes, I claimed being attacked by a terrorist is statistically rare. Apparently one's chances of being killed by a cow are greater. I was generally saying I don't feel the need for a well regulated militia or an AR-15 to protect me from cows, a terrorist or even tyranny for that matter. I own a shotgun and a carbine. Nobody threatened to take them away, ever. Yet that's what the gun advocates would have everyone believe. Besides that, terrorism was invoked in the incident. Such as is in this case, it's germane to the discussion nonetheless.

 

What I didn't do though, was excuse ISIS or scapegoat conservatives. Do not put words in my mouth. I deride relentless extremism and obstructionism especially where public health and safety are concerned.

 

Inaction is only an excuse and it's used by obstructionists to demonize otherwise reasonable people from advancing the discussion.

Edited June 15, 2016 by rangerx

[swansont]

"statistically, terrorists rarely kill anyone' ???

 

Well here's some statistics which come up as a first hit on Google...

A UN report states that ISIS 'attacks deliberately and systematically target civilians', and in the first 8 months of 2014, more than 9000 people ( including women and children ) were killed, and more than 17000 were wounded.

 

Is that a tolerable consequence ?

 

 

The average number of people killed by natural disasters 2003-2014 is almost 100,000 per year. Out of the 55 million or so that die each year.

 

http://reliefweb.int/report/world/annual-disaster-statistical-review-2014-numbers-and-trends

http://www.ecology.com/birth-death-rates/

 

9,000 is a drop in the bucket.

[Raider5678]

I own a shotgun and a carbine. Nobody threatened to take them away, ever. Yet that's what the gun advocates would have everyone believe. .

 

And gun control advocates would have everyone believe that the NRA wants to let everyone have unfettered access to guns. Spoiler alert, they never said that.

[DrP]

Yet the application for a licence is very easy - it needs to be stricter (and run out across all states) and with proper penalties for vendors selling to people without a licence AND some form of ID. (so you can't just borrow your neighbours licence... which should also carry a heavy penalty for the guy who loans it to you.... photo id on the licence maybe?... as I said before - it's not rocket science)

Edited June 15, 2016 by DrP

[MigL]

Depends on your perspective Swansont...

If you 're part of the 'bucket', 9000 is atrivial amount.

If you're part of the 'drop' ( and their extended families ), its not trivial at all.

 

And I agree on at least one of your points Rangerx, the only solution will come from Americans working together.

Not 'finger pointing' and trying to place blame.

 

That is what I would like to see discussed; Common ground between gun and anti gun advocates that provides a way forward and prevents mentally disturbed people ( or careless, or incompetent, etc. ) from getting a gun, and infringing on the right of their fellow citizens to live.

[Delta1212]

No death is trivial, but 9,000 deaths out of the 50+ million people who die every year makes for a statistically rare cause of death, which was the original contention.

[Willie71]

And gun control advocates would have everyone believe that the NRA wants to let everyone have unfettered access to guns. Spoiler alert, they never said that.

The NRA wants people like the Orlando shooter to have access to guns, why? Profits. Gun sales go up after every mass shooting.

 

Edited June 15, 2016 by Willie71

[Arete]

And gun control advocates would have everyone believe that the NRA wants to let everyone have unfettered access to guns. Spoiler alert, they never said that.

 

Genuinely curious - 90% of Americans support background checks for gun purchases, yet the NRA does not. If the NRA does support some form of gun control, I'd be interested to know what it is.

[waitforufo]

 

http://www.dailywire.com/news/6612/west-hollywood-inundated-poster-rainbow-gadsen-hank-berrien

 

About time.

I particularly like the #ShootBack tag.

[thatsneakyguy]

Yes, if only there was armed security at that club who could have shot that gunman.

 

ETA

Edited June 16, 2016 by thatsneakyguy

[rangerx]

Yes, if one there was armed security at that club who could have shot that gunman.

 

Nonsense.

 

There were armed law enforcement officers there. Orlando Police Chief John Mina has admitted that some of the victims inside Pulse nightclub could have been shot by law enforcement.

 

Other law enforcement stated they were "outgunned".

The so called good guy with a gun theory has been debunked time and time again.

[thatsneakyguy]

Yes, I knew that.

 

Sorry, meant to add to my post.

[rangerx]

Yes, I knew that.

 

Sorry, meant to add to my post.

 

I guess that's why they call you thatsneakyguy

 

While we're in a sarcastic mood, perhaps the nightclub could issue everyone a AR-15 and a couple HC mags when they enter.

 

No way the gunman would have had a chance. He'd shoot up the school down the road instead, because kids finger painting with AR-15s are not as skilled in marksmanship, situational awareness and incident command as drunken clubbers.

 

*sarcasm off*

Edited June 16, 2016 by rangerx

[DrP]

Very sad news!

 

Jo Cox - a British MP was shot and stabbed today at a public meeting. Tragic! She was only 31 years old and with 2 children and a husband. Terrible news!

[thatsneakyguy]

 

I guess that's why they call you thatsneakyguy

 

While we're in a sarcastic mood, perhaps the nightclub could issue everyone a AR-15 and a couple HC mags when they enter.

 

No way the gunman would have had a chance. He'd shoot up the school down the road instead, because kids finger painting with AR-15s are not as skilled in marksmanship, situational awareness and incident command as drunken clubbers.

 

*sarcasm off*

 

Yeah, handing out guns to the people entering the club is a great idea. Don’t worry about mixing young people, guns, and alcohol. You can’t deny that the odds would be in favor of more “good” guys having guns than “bad” guys with guns.

 

After all, the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun, so arm the most people possible.

 

Like if the nightclub gunman had been the only person killed after a 5-10 minute exchange of gunfire it still would have been a pretty fun night at that club. Just go ahead and have the short gun battle, then back to dancing.

 

And that’s the kind of society I think we all want to live in: one where we live our everyday lives, travel, meet our friends, dance, and the occasional gun battle breaks out from time to time.

 

#shootback

[iNow]

More perspective:

 

http://www.economist.com/news/business-and-finance/21700596-evidence-growing-gun-violence-america-product-weak-gun-laws-guns

 

In 2013, in the wake of the Sandy Hook massacre, in which 20 schoolchildren were shot dead, two senators, one Democrat and one Republican, introduced a measure that would have required background checks on most gun sales. It failed to move forward despite a majority vote in its favour, because supporters were unable to assemble the supermajority needed to overcome a procedural hurdle. Seemingly intractable disputes in American politics do sometimes give way to overdue reform.

Then, last night there was a 15-hour filibuster from the Senator from Connecticut (the state where Sandy Hook occurred) to force the issue. There were two amendments that Mitch O'Donnell wanted to strip, but Dems wouldn't let him.

 

http://www.vox.com/2016/6/16/11952166/filibuster-gun-control-shootings

Yesterday, in an effort to force legislative action on gun control, Sen. Chris Murphy staged a 15-hour filibuster on the Senate floor. It lasted from 11 am Wednesday through 2 am Thursday, eventually ending with the GOP agreeing to vote on a gun control bill.

And it worked. GOP agreed to allow a vote on background checks and prevention of gun sales to those on the terrorist watchlist (cannot effing believe it took a 15-hour filibuster to even ALLOW us JUST TO TAKE A VOTE!! one these two minuscule and overwhelmingly supported regulations, but I digress...)

 

The really sad part is this:

 

 

 

So, however glacial and painful, progress is occuring, but too slow to save too many people.

 

Just... Too... Slow.

 

http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2016/06/daily-chart-9

Edited June 16, 2016 by iNow

[MigL]

Even if background checks are ( ever ) introduced, iNow, it'll only be for new gun sales.

The large inventory of guns already in people's possession will most likely be 'grand-fathered' into the new regulations.

IOW, a lot more people will die.

[CharonY]

Very sad news!

 

Jo Cox - a British MP was shot and stabbed today at a public meeting. Tragic! She was only 31 years old and with 2 children and a husband. Terrible news!

 

Not that it matters, but 41, actually.