Fact: Hammers and clubs more deadly than rifles.

[carpro]

FBI: More People Killed with Hammers, Clubs Each Year Than Rifles
Read more:

http://nation.foxnews.com/gun-right...-hammers-clubs-each-year-rifles#ixzz2Gx1FnwhE

According to the FBI annual crime statistics, the number of murders committed annually with hammers and clubs far outnumbers the number of murders committed with a rifle.

This is an interesting fact, particularly amid the Democrats' feverish push to ban many different rifles, ostensibly to keep us safe of course.

 

[Baptist Believer]

As I think most people know here, I am a conceal carry advocate and I generally oppose new regulations on firearms, especially something as wrongheaded as a so-called "assault weapons" ban.

I get very frustrated when truth is sacrificed on the altar of political rhetoric, and we've had an enormous amount of lies told about firearms over the past month. By the same token, those of us who embrace the Second Amendment as both and individual and corporate right need to hold a high standard of truth-telling and not mislead others.

While it is true that more people have been murdered by blunt objects than rifles, more people have been murdered using firearms (shotguns, pistols, rifles, etc.) than blunt objects.

That doesn't make the case for gun control any stronger though, simply because the guns don't do anything without a human being using them. If it was not a gun, it would be something else.

 

[preachinjesus]

How in the world can an intellectually honest person buy the link in the OP?

Thanks to BB for setting the record straight. The "other guns" category could likely include other rifles but the records do not indicate this.

 

[carpro]

How in the world can an intellectually honest person buy the link in the OP?

The truth is where you find it. Denial is not your friend. It just makes you look...well...willfully uninformed.

So...


Are you saying the FBI statistics are wrong?

 

[Revmitchell]

The truth is where you find it.

Are you saying the FBI statistics are wrong?

He could be saying not to confuse his truth with facts.

 

[pinoybaptist]

<snip>
That doesn't make the case for gun control any stronger though, simply because the guns don't do anything without a human being using them. <snip>

Yep, like my favorite radical atheist, Jesse Ventura, said to the idiot Pierced Moron: I got a roomful of rifles and pistols in my house, and when I come home every night, I don't hear them poppin' off by themselves. (not verbatim).

 

[preachinjesus]

The truth is where you find it. Denial is not your friend. It just makes you look...well...willfully uninformed.

Are you saying the FBI statistics are wrong?

No, I'm saying FoxNews' is lazy and sensationalistic. The author of the post is willfully exploiting a red herring fallacy to try to counter a claim that isn't being made.

The argument for restricting civilian firearms isn't just about rifles, it is about all kinds of military grade weapons. Weapons than can, and do, inflict grievous amounts of harm due to their high capacity clips and high rate of fire. It isn't about rifles only.

Also, and I guess you haven't looked at the actual FBI statistics, the total number of firearm deaths (which includes handguns and uncategorized firearms) outpace all other forms of death by ratio of over 2:1. The author of the FoxNews report is using specious reasoning to bolster a fallacious claim. It is a shining example of poor journalism.

 

[carpro]

No, I'm saying FoxNews' is lazy and sensationalistic.

So you agree that the facts are correct. You just don't like the source.

Try MSNBC. I'm sure you'll get reporting more to your taste. Biased and incomplete.

You'd somehow like everyone to overlook the fact that an "assault weapons ban" is primarily directed against RIFLES!!!!!!!

Imagine that.

 

[poncho]

No, I'm saying FoxNews' is lazy and sensationalistic. The author of the post is willfully exploiting a red herring fallacy to try to counter a claim that isn't being made.

The argument for restricting civilian firearms isn't just about rifles, it is about all kinds of military grade weapons. Weapons than can, and do, inflict grievous amounts of harm due to their high capacity clips and high rate of fire. It isn't about rifles only.

Also, and I guess you haven't looked at the actual FBI statistics, the total number of firearm deaths (which includes handguns and uncategorized firearms) outpace all other forms of death by ratio of over 2:1. The author of the FoxNews report is using specious reasoning to bolster a fallacious claim. It is a shining example of poor journalism.

Then Fox News is no different than the "liberal media" who are using the same tactics to disarm us.

Let's say for the sake of argument that a semi auto that looks like a military grade weapon is an "assault rifle". What happens when we replace a 30 round mag with a 10 round mag?

Is it then somehow transformed from an "assault rifle" to something else? Is it safer? Is it any less destructive? I don't know about you but I can empty a ten round mag and replace it with a fresh one in a matter of seconds. Take away the 30 round mags, big deal. Nothing gained there.

You are right. It isn't about rifles. It's about guns. All guns.

Tyrannical governments prefer their populations to be unarmed and docile servants of the state and since 9/11 we have lived under a tyrannical government that cannot seem to take our rights away from us fast enough to suit it.

Why? Is it worried about our safety? Hardly. It's worried about it's own security and holding onto it's illegitimate power. It couldn't care less if we all killed one another off just so long as it can continue to rule over us, steal our wealth, our health and our freedom.

 

[preachinjesus]

Seems to make a good point.

 

[preachinjesus]

So you agree that the facts are correct. You just don't like the source.

Please carefully re-read my post. I am saying the FoxNews post is only telling part of the story.

It is like retelling the story of the Cowboys and Redskins game and pointing out that the Cowboys were able to successfully pass for more yards than the Redskins and thus had a great game. That is a true statement. However it is an incomplete statement. While the Cowboys were able to pass for more yards than the Redskins they ultimately lost the game. The form of fallacy that the author of the FoxNews post is using is pointing to one aspect of a statistic and forgetting to tell the rest of the story. Yes, gun deaths as classified by rifle are lower than deaths by blunt objects. But that isn't the whole story.

I wonder how the data changes when we look at accidental gun deaths by rifle versus accidental hammer deaths.

It is an incomplete and specious use of data. Both sides in this discussion use this fallacy all the time. I'm just pointing out that it is poor argumentation and is setting up a false dichotomy.

Try MSNBC. I'm sure you'll get reporting more to your taste. Biased and incomplete.

Good see you elevating the conversation here.

You'd somehow like everyone to overlook the fact that an "assault weapons ban" is primarily directed against RIFLES!!!!!!!

It isn't primarily directed against rifles, it is directed against military grade munitions and weapons. An Uzi isn't classified as a rifle but it should be banned. (I can't honestly think of a single good reason a citizen should own an Uzi) There is no conceivable reason that citizens should be able to own high capacity, high rate of fire military grade weapons. We have a well regulated militia. We don't need citizens owning military grade weapons.

BTW, I'm all for citizens being able to own rifles and handguns. Hunting and protection are legitimate issues. However, if anyone thinks that if the worst happens and you're more protected by having a fully automatic weapon with 30+ rounds in the clip you're living in a dream world. The vast majority of gun incidents between individuals begin and end with less than five rounds being exchanged.

 

[Revmitchell]

Please carefully re-read my post. I am saying the FoxNews post is only telling part of the story.

Oh you mean just like you did with someone's post on this board. Be careful your hypocrisy is showing.

 

[carpro]

Seems to make a good point.

If you like lies.

A tyrant was overthrown to creat this nation. With guns owned by citizens.

 

[preachinjesus]

If you like lies.

A tyrant was overthrown to creat this nation. With guns owned by citizens.

Remind me, was that before or after the Second Amendment was ratified?

 

[carpro]

It isn't primarily directed against rifles, it is directed against military grade munitions and weapons. An Uzi isn't classified as a rifle but it should be banned. (I can't honestly think of a single good reason a citizen should own an Uzi) There is no conceivable reason that citizens should be able to own high capacity, high rate of fire military grade weapons. We have a well regulated militia. We don't need citizens owning military grade weapons.

What is evident is that you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[carpro]

Remind me, was that before or after the Second Amendment was ratified?

There would be no 2nd amendment, nor constitution, without guns.
Owned by citizens. To overthrow a tyrant.

 

[SolaSaint]

I was watching CBS this morning and they were reporting the increase in weapons bought over the last two years in some part of the country, I think CA. And how gun violence had lowered a lot over that time period. They couldn't understand how it was so. No one ever posited that it was good people owning guns that may have lowered the reported gun violence. I cannot believe these libs will not admit the truth when it smacks them in the face. The same show then stated Chicago has some of the toughest guns laws in the country but gun violence has increased greatly during this period. God help us all.:wavey:

 

[poncho]

Seems to make a good point.

Yup it does if the point you are trying to make is gun free zones only work to up the body count to justify disarming law abiding citizens.

It's strange that the government is stockpiling a massive amount of "assault rifles" and billions of rounds of ammo while it feverishly works to disarm Americans.

It almost looks as though the Obama administration is trying to engineer a civil war. If it happens and by chance you and I end up in the same foxhole somewhere the answer is no.

You can't borrow any of my 30 round mags. Go borrow one of the heavily armed bodyguards the hypocrite gun grabbers have protecting them and their children.