Defend the Second Amendment!

Yep, pretty much.

 

Are you ever going to listen to what is being said?

I did not say that this was my "analysis", I said that there is any number of other ways to look at the statistics and here is one as an example.

Cut and paste over and over, are ever going to stop and think?

Let's take a look at just this; "[SIZE=11pt]But you are 35.2 times more likely to be shot dead in the US than in the UK."[/SIZE] There could be any number reasons for this, one being the "[SIZE=11pt]natural born killers" explanation that you are so dismissive of but for you there is only one conclusion, Guns, it has to be Guns![/SIZE] Easy access to Guns forces people to kill people with Guns, Guns, and Guns!

Quite simply, people have hundreds, if not thousands of reasons to kill other people but seldom if ever is it because of easy access to guns. What needs to be addressed is those reasons to kill and not access to guns.

 

Figures don't lie but liers figure.

It depends on what you mean by figures ‘lying’ I have often pointed out a favourite saying of Mark Twain’s “there are three types of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics”
And as I point out it is very difficult to compare differing crime statistics but one can be compared with some accuracy and that is homicide and the US seems to have one of the highest homicide rates per 100,000 populations of the developed countries.

[SIZE=11pt]USA 5.9[/SIZE]
[SIZE=11pt]England and Wales 1.6[/SIZE]
[SIZE=11pt]France - 1.6[/SIZE]
[SIZE=11pt]Germany 1[/SIZE]
[SIZE=11pt]Denmark – 1.1[/SIZE]
[SIZE=11pt]Ireland – 1.1[/SIZE]
[SIZE=11pt]Australia – 1.3[/SIZE]
[SIZE=11pt]Canada – 1.5[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]What is your explanation? [/SIZE]

 

Yes and merely pointed out that there may be many reasons for those statistics. Also I may have been the one to bring knives into the fray.

And you are reasoning on the subject? In any case I said that you where implying something.

Nor do I need to, I used your data and showed that what you imply is not the only conclusion that be drawn from those statistics.

 

[SIZE=11pt]Old[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Are you saying you gave this no thought subjected it to no analysis, you have just thrown it out without even thinking about it – what next, LOL will it be all down to aliens or bogymen from under the beds? [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]This doesn’t seem like a very rational way to debate [/SIZE]and so its not surprising your points don't seem that rational.

[SIZE=11pt]So why are the homicide figures higher in the US? [/SIZE]

We are just pointing out that guns make killing a lot easier

 

Your Point? Perhaps the "natural born killer" argument that balbus is so dismissive of, is true for the US.

 

Old

[SIZE=11pt]Are you saying you don’t dismiss it - that you think Americans are more murderous than other people and that it is not the easy accessibility of guns that account for the high levels of homicide in the US but that even without the ease of access to such lethal weapons American killers would still kill as many people but just with other things like knives. [/SIZE]

 

Like your cut and paste one size fits none is a "very rational way to debate" but in any case you continue to fail in reading comprehension. What I presented was not my opinion on what the statistics actually indicate as you seemed to imply but merely a pointing out of what you seem to fail to understand, that there can be any number of ways to look at what the data says.

Maybe people in the US feel they have more reasons to be murderous.

I find it interesting that you, who says that Americans don't deal with their problem because of gun ownership, that when a person points out that the reasons for Americans being murderous are more important than what weapon they use, continues to indicate that guns are the problem.

 

No I don't dismiss it. I don't know for sure why American are more murderous but I'm pretty sure people seldom look at a gun and say; "look a gun, I need to find someone to kill'.

As for knives, yesterday in Denver, a woman went to a Craigslist ad and took a knife, not a gun and cut a baby out of a pregnant woman killing both the baby and the mother.

 

Old

[SIZE=11.5pt][/SIZE]

Ok this is your unanalysed, not thought about response

[SIZE=11pt][/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Are you suggesting that the reason for so many homicides committed with guns is because people don’t know how to use them properly? Are you arguing that the gun related homicides are virtually all accidents? That if the killers had been better trained the deaths would not have taken place? [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Sorry but that doesn’t seem that very rational if anything would they be better at killing? [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11.5pt][/SIZE]

[SIZE=11.5pt]Ok if that is the case then wouldn’t it be best to keep them away from weapons that are very good at killing people with ease? [/SIZE]

 

Whatever.

Accidents? No, what I was saying is we don't have any idea why murderers use guns for their homicides and that one reason may be a lack of respect for guns and what they can do and one solution could be early training in the purpose and use of guns. It seems that I read some information that shows that people that were trained early in the proper respect, care and use of guns seldom use them for homicide but I couldn't tell where I saw it.

Yep, good idea but I have yet to hear any good ideas on how to do that and defend the second amendment at the same time, which what this thread is about.

 

Thanx, don't tell anybody but I often take the underdog side for that very reason. Not so much to be ganged up on but it does cause me think harder about both sides and what I believe when I'm getting so many ideas to think about and trying to answer them.

PS don't tell balbus but one of the reasons I've been so hard on him is I felt he had shut down and had been kind of phoning it in. Although lately it does kind of seem like he may be taking an interest again.

 

I understand but as I tried to clarify to Balbus, I seem to recall some information on youthful gun training and reduced violent gun use by those same youths and thus my mentioning that ubicquous youthful training with knives may have an effect on how knifes are viewed.

Please feel free.

Okay, nicely reasoned. The top of your head seems to reason a lot better than mine.

Now I'm trying to remember why we are talking about the lethality of guns versus knives.

I think it had to do with my mentioning more knives less homicides less guns more homicides, when Balbus said that ease of access to guns was the reason for more gun homicides, I was pointing out that ease of access to knives didn’t mean more knife homicides, which would bring into the discussion the lethality of knives.

Then I guess my reply should be; so, with all you said, do you really think guns are over a thousand times more lethal than knives?

 

1. The U.S.A. has NOT been fighting a war during EACH of the past 236 years.
2. The total number of deaths resulting from each of the mentioned wars was greatly more than 1,171,177.
3. Looking at the Civil war, lasting a period of about 4 years, which was fought by Americans, about 620,000 Americans lost their lives from a population of about 32,000,000. That's about 155,000 deaths per year of a population about 1/10 of todays.
4. WW II, lasting about 6 years, resulted in between an estimated 60-85 million casualties from a world population of about 2 billion, compared to the Mongol conquests which lasted over 100 years, resulting in an estimated 40-70 million casualties from a world population of about 400 million. So WW II, fought with modern, much more lethal weaponry resulted in about 3% loss of population, and ended much more quickly than the Mongol conquests which were fought without guns, planes, bombs, etc. yet resulted in about 10% loss of population and continued for more than 100 years.

Why are there so many homicides in the U.S.?
In my opinion, when people are taught from birth/early age that they are entitled to things which others acquire through honest work, they are much more likely to also feel entitled to use violence as a means of acquiring not only their needs but also their wants.

How many lives are saved or crimes prevented because of a gun? I doubt any reliable numbers are available relating to that, and I've never reported a single incident where I used a gun to prevent being robbed or harmed, nor have I killed or injured anyone while doing so. Perhaps later, an unarmed person became the victim?

 

Regardless of what weapon is used, WHY do people murder other people? That is the issue we should be looking to solve.
Best reasons to "Defend the Second Amendment"

“If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun” - words by Obama in 2008 while running for president of the U.S.A.

"When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny." - While often attributed to Thomas Jefferson, it appears to have originated in a 1914 debate by John Basil Barnhill, a socialist?

Jefferson did write in an 1825 letter to William Short: “Some are whigs, liberals, democrats, call them what you please. Others are tories, serviles, aristocrats, &c. The latter fear the people, and wish to transfer all power to the higher classes of society; the former consider the people as the safest depository of power in the last resort; they cherish them therefore, and wish to leave in them all the powers to the exercise of which they are competent.”
Although the labels used above no longer are defined as they were in Jeffersons time, I would simply replace them with the words 'governed' for the former, and 'government or governing' for the latter, and place my trust more so in the former rather than in the latter.

 

[SIZE=11pt]Old[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Which, I’m afraid to say, is inductive of your whole approach to debate.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]The knives I have where not brought as weapons and most would not be very good for that purpose, and I’ve never trained to kill with a knife, or use it in any way as a weapon. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]I cook most days so I use a knife most days, but it is for the preparation of food, as I say I brought them for food preparation not as weapons - a gun is and is only a weapon, it was designed to maim and kill, some might now be used for hunting and fun, but its primary purpose has always been to maim and kill other humans. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]So training in the purpose and use of guns is basically about being more lethal with that gun been a better and more accurate shot. A better killer.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]There are cookery schools that can train someone in the better use of a knife in the preparation of food, they don’t teach them how better to kill someone with one. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]Oh and very occasionally there is an accident with our knives and one of us cuts a finger, I don’t put a big hole in myself or another, it usually just requires a simple plaster not a visit to ER. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]LOL and it seems that I read somewhere that if you go to the back of a certain wardrobe you can enter a magical kingdom…[/SIZE]

[SIZE=11pt]I’m sure that with a bit of work you can find the ‘information’ you are talking about so we can all examine it. [/SIZE]

I see and that would explain why your arguments are so weak you don’t really believe in them yourself, this is just playing devil’s advocate.

Sorry mate but I haven’t noticed anything 'hard' coming my way from your direction as I’ve said many times your arguments seem weak, flaccid and ill thought through, sorry to bust your bubble.

You where the one who seemed to implying that alternative weapons to guns were just as lethal as guns and that if guns were not available Americans would kill just as many people with those alternative - knives were one example but you also put forward amongst other things spears and bows and arrows.

It has taken many pages but you do now seem to be conceding that guns are more lethal than such things as knives. So thankfully we can move on from that although you now seem to be implying that you only took that rather undefendable stance because you wanted to play at been devil’s advocate and really didn’t believe in it - but please you must realize that such silliness doesn’t help us in having a rational debate.