Subject:
|
Re: demographics - Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 11 Jan 2001 09:28:02 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
925 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
Assume you do not dispute the points I made which you snipped?
> > The above is taken from:
> > http://www.findarticles.com/m1061/2_110/65014590/p1/article.jhtml
>
> Good cite.
>
> Did you just use that for a demographic factoid, or do you agree with the
> conclusions the author draws?
What do you think? Read the message header. Read the text I quoted. Read my
argument. Draw your own conculsions.
Key phrase of note:
"they (guns) are most likely to belong to middle-class, middle-aged men who
live in rural areas or small towns."
Your point was the crime was low where gun ownership is high, it is my
contention that the two things may not be related.
I say again - Normally, in any country, these are not high crime areas.
Do you conceed that? Or do you think otherwise? BTW, I am open to you
showing me that these are high crime areas in the USA - I have never been to
the USA.
In the UK, where gun ownership is very very low. Burglars are not normally
armed in any real way. Further, muggers rely mostly on numbers/brute force -
although some do have knives. Do you think if guns were to become feely
available in the UK - that these criminals will cease to exist? Or do you
think they would find themselves a gun? It is my view that all increased gun
ownership provides is misplaced security, extra dangers in the home and more
dangerous/professional criminals.
Scott A
Scott A
>
> By the way, do you think this author's factoids are sufficiently vetted?
A good deal of it matches what has been covered elsewhere
> Do
> you accept all of them, or just the ones that agree with your preferences?
This one suprised me:
=+=
"In 1997, 32,436 Americans were killed with firearms," the group notes. "In
comparison, 33,651 Americans were killed in the Korean war, and 58,148
Americans were killed in the Vietnam war."
=+=
we have already covered this:
=+=
What is perhaps surprising about these gun fatalities is how few of them,
relatively speaking, are the result of homicide. As HCI and its sister
organizations emphasize, firearms pose a threat to "public health" that
extends well beyond their role in the commission of violent crimes. Of the
deaths in HCI's alarming tally, almost 13,000 were murders--but some 17,500
were suicides and nearly 1,000 were accidents. "The nexus is inescapable,"
according to an analyst for the Violence Policy Center. "The more
accessibility to guns you have, the higher the rates of gun-related death
and injury."
=+=
This one is important for your argument:
=+=
"It is important to remember that the belief that handguns are useful for
self-defense is misguided," warns the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence,
reporting an oft-cited study's conclusion that "a firearm in the home is 43
times more likely to be used for suicide or murder than self-defense."
=+=
>
> The reason I ask these questions (1) will be obvious to any critical thinker
> who reads the cite all the way through.
As I did yesterday Larry. I thing you have to learn Larry, is not to take
any written text as gospel. It is possible to read a text, such as this, and
learn a great deal - but yet agree with very little. So, no; I do not agree
with all it says. The problem is that I live in a relatively gun free
culture - and I am trying, in a very small way, to impose that on you.
However, it is unrealistic, as your fears are justifiable in a way - your
bad guys do have guns. But, as I see it, the bad guys only have guns as the
good guys have guns. The only way to rid your society devastation your gun
use is causing is with slow ratchet gun control laws – not making them
illegal overnight. As I said yesterday, I was ecourged to see that gun
ownership is on the decline in you country:
http://www.usatoday.com/snapshot/news/nsnap165.htm
Honest question – would you prefer to live in a society where you did not
need a gun to defend your home from bad guys?
Scott A
> 1 - and the implications with respect to your arguments.
>
> ++Lar
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: demographics - Re: My Gun Control Rant
|
| (...) Did you just use that for a demographic factoid, or do you agree with the conclusions the author draws? By the way, do you think this author's factoids are sufficiently vetted? Do you accept all of them, or just the ones that agree with your (...) (23 years ago, 11-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
188 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
