Why? (Continued)

[InTheLight]

Are guns, knives, bow and arrows, ropes, hammers even in the hands of a depressed person a good idea?

Such persons are already prohibited from owning or possessing a firearm.

Please tell us about this law, this background check that prohibits depressed people from buying firearms.



Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Let us not forget that it was also the NRA which fought those "Jim Crow" laws in the south that made it virtually impossible for the freed slaves to own firearms. The NRA seeks to uphold everyone's constitutional rights and I am a proud Lifetime member.

Ca Ching

 

[supersoldier71]

I'm sorry, but that is ridiculous. The whole point of the united States is that there was no such unity. The US was a group of independent, autonomous states. That is why, in the Declaration of Independence, the word "united" in "united States" is not capitalized. Prior to the Civil War the US was referred to in the plural, "The united States ARE." After the Civil War the US is now referred to in the singular "The United States IS."

Nonsense!

Only by slaves.

You sir are incorrect.

We are at our best when our individual abilities serve a higher purpose.

Or you can look at an America where everyone does what is right in his own eyes...like now...and say that that is preferred.

Unity and bondage are actually not the same either. For one thing you'll notice the words are different.

Unity is a voluntary series of actions and attitudes taken by free people in service of a common cause.

Slavery is clearly not that.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Benjamin]

while I agree with the point it is making... Israel is a fraction of the size of the U.S. with a fraction of the number of schools. so it's not really a fair comparison with the numbers.

Howbout this, like it better?

 

[TCassidy]

You sir are incorrect.

We are at our best when our individual abilities serve a higher purpose.

Or you can look at an America where everyone does what is right in his own eyes...like now...and say that that is preferred.

Unity and bondage are actually not the same either. For one thing you'll notice the words are different.

Unity is a voluntary series of actions and attitudes taken by free people in service of a common cause.

Slavery is clearly not that.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wow. You really, really missed the point!

 

[supersoldier71]

Wow. You really, really missed the point!

How so?

 

[TCassidy]

The US was a group of independent, autonomous states.

You sir are incorrect.

No. That is history. Read up on it.

That is why, in the Declaration of Independence, the word "united" in "united States" is not capitalized.

You sir are incorrect.

No, that is also history. Read the Declaration and see for yourself.

Prior to the Civil War the US was referred to in the plural, "The united States ARE." After the Civil War the US is now referred to in the singular "The United States IS."

You sir are incorrect.

Nope. More history. Look it up.

 

[supersoldier71]

No. That is history. Read up on it.No, that is also history. Read the Declaration and see for yourself.Nope. More history. Look it up.

I wasn't disputing your history, that was correct. And anyone who's seen National Treasure 2 knows this.

It's also irrelevant to the discussion.

And thus your conclusions are incorrect.

I'm not arguing that the right to self determination is somehow wrong.

Clearly this is an inalienable right.

My point, and I suspect that behind your barricade of irrelevance, you know that while the right to determine one's own path should not be determined by government, the fact is that humans can accomplish very little alone.

This is true from the macro scale: the United States ended slavery, defeated Nazi Germany, the Empire of Japan, the USSR and is in the process of defeating radical Islam. And, my personal favorite, landed Americans on the Moon!

Micro-scale: ever been a cop, soldier or team athlete? These all function better in plurality.

And let me be candid: if you disagree with these points, you're being argumentative.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TCassidy]

Micro-scale: ever been a cop, soldier or team athlete? These all function better in plurality.

I have been all three. Look at the Medal of Honor recipients and see how many were acting alone when they were doing what they received the Medal for.

And let me be candid: if you disagree with these points, you're being argumentative.

Yes, of course. Your arguing with my point when you weren't even in the discussion wasn't argumentative, was it!

 

[supersoldier71]

I have been all three. Look at the Medal of Honor recipients and see how many were acting alone when they were doing what they received the Medal for.
Yes, of course. Your arguing with my point when you weren't even in the discussion wasn't argumentative, was it!

MOH recipients? Right!! Exactly!!!

My argument is--and has always been--that placing the well-being of a greater cause above one's one self-interest is better for the country. Acting alone doesn't negate the fact that they had something on their minds besides what was best for them in that moment.

Thank you for making my point!

P.S. If you have been a law enforcement officer, service member or team athlete, I suspect that you probably understand intuitively what you are arguing against intellectually.

Or you wouldn't have been very good at any of them.

 

[thatbrian]

MOH recipients? Right!! Exactly!!!

My argument is--and has always been--that placing the well-being of a greater cause above one's one self-interest is better for the country. Acting alone doesn't negate the fact that they had something on their minds besides what was best for them in that moment.

Thank you for making my point!

P.S. If you have been a law enforcement officer, service member or team athlete, I suspect that you probably understand intuitively what you are arguing against intellectually.

Or you wouldn't have been very good at any of them.

There is no such thing as raw altruism. Even a mother serving her baby revives as she gives.

 

[Gold Dragon]

If you are interested in comparing guns ownership and gun violence across countries, the University of Sydney School of Public Health has a great resource.

GunPolicy.org: Firearms and armed violence, country by country

Here are some customized charts I created using their database comparing some of the countries mentioned here (US, Canada, Australia, UK, Israel, Switzerland, Japan).
Rate of Civilian Firearm possession per 100 people
Gun Deaths per 100,000 people
Homicides by any method per 100,000 people
Gun Homicides per 100,000 people
Proportion of Homicides committed with a gun
Gun Suicides per 100,000 people
Unintended Gun deaths per 100,000 people

You can make your own charts too without the bias of gun lobbies or media outlets. These charts are based on their most current numbers which is around 2014-2015. But a lot of their data goes back to the 1970s.

 

[Gold Dragon]

This link didn't come out properly.

Unintended Gun deaths per 100,000 people

 

[Gold Dragon]

To put it into perspective, the odds of a British student being stabbed to death in Britain is about 1:200,000.
While the odds of an American student being killed by gunfire in the worst year ever is about 1:1,000,000.
These numbers are only for primary and secondary school children. Colleges excluded.

When will Britain ban knives?

It isn't about students, but the number of American homicides by gunfire is around 3.5 per 100,000 people.

The number of UK homicides by any means is between 1 and 2 per 100,000 people since 1999.

 

[Gold Dragon]

The following is taken from American Gun Facts: A Factual Look At Guns In America

The top two countries having gun ownership is America and Switzerland.

The top two counties with gun fatalities are Honduras and El Salvador --where there is restrictive control.

Honduras has a population of 8.2 million. It has the highest homicide rate in the world. Citizens are banned from owning guns.

Switzerland has 8.2 million citizens. It has the lowest homicide rate in the world. Guns are not banned in that country -- citizens are encouraged to but them.

The most violent country in the EU is the UK.
There are 2,034 violent crmes per 100,000 people each year. The UK has violent assaults every two minutes.

The crime rate in the UK is higher than 16 other industralized nations --including America.

America, in contrast has 466 violent crimes per 100,000 people each year.

In the U.S.A. 606 violent criminals were killed by police.

But 1,527 violent criminals are killed by citizens.

Just an FYI that American Gun Facts bases a lot of its statements on a polemic paper (essentially an opinion piece) published in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy (a student run conservative and libertarian journal that is not peer reviewed) written by 2 known gun activists. Of course it is frequently cited as a Harvard "study" by the gun lobby.

FALSE: Harvard University Study Reveals Astonishing Link Between Firearms, Crime and Gun Control

In a document dated June 2009 ( PDF), Director of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center Dr. David Hemenway addressed the 2007 article’s flaws in correlating higher rates of gun ownership with lower crime rates thusly:

The article appears in a publication, described as a “student law review for conservative and libertarian legal scholarship.” It does not appear to be a peer-reviewed journal, or one that is searching for truth as opposed to presenting a certain world view. The paper itself is not a scientific article, but a polemic, making the claim that gun availability does not affect homicide or suicide. It does this by ignoring most of the scientific literature, and by making too many incorrect and illogical claims.

And that is what they try to pawn off as "facts" to unsuspecting folks. I guess I should give them credit for citing their sources but they probably don't expect people to actually check them.

 

[Gold Dragon]

The following is taken from American Gun Facts: A Factual Look At Guns In America

...
The most violent country in the EU is the UK.
There are 2,034 violent crmes per 100,000 people each year. The UK has violent assaults every two minutes.

The crime rate in the UK is higher than 16 other industralized nations --including America.

America, in contrast has 466 violent crimes per 100,000 people each year.

There is a very simple explanation for these numbers. The UK and US have very different definitions of violent crime.

United Kingdom:

“Violent crime contains a wide range of offences, from minor assaults such as pushing and shoving that result in no physical harm through to serious incidents of wounding and murder. Around a half of violent incidents identified by both BCS and police statistics involve no injury to the victim.” (THOSB – CEW, page 17, paragraph 1.)

United States:

“In the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program, violent crime is composed of four offenses: murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. Violent crimes are defined in the UCR Program as those offenses which involve force or threat of force.” (FBI – CUS – Violent Crime)

But that doesn't stop gun activitists and media from misrepresenting the numbers.

Here is a more detailed look at how the two countries define the specific crimes under the banner of "violent crime" and an attempt to make an accurate comparison.

 

[Gold Dragon]

Such persons are already prohibited from owning or possessing a firearm.
...
This is the problem we face. HIPAA laws make our medical records confidential. When a person is a danger to himself and others his records can not, must not, be kept secret. That derangement must be part of the meta-data set the NICS system accesses. If not this sort of thing will continue to happen.

This article just came out and deals with the challenges of this issue.

The challenge of preventing mass shootings through mental health records

There is no law that prevents depressed people from owning or buying a gun in the US. If depression were a criteria for making it onto NICS, then you would significantly decrease the number of guns sold in the united states. According to JAMA psychiatry, an estimated 46.4% of Americans will have a DSM IV diagnosable mental disorder some time in their lifetime, 16.6% with major depression.

The legal description is
“ Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(d), it is unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person “has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution”

In practical terms that usually means someone who has been involuntarily admitted for a mental health condition because of risk of harm to themselves or others. Depression could be the condition that creates this risk but an overwhelming majority of people with depression do not fall under this category of risk until it is too late.

People who are at risk because of a mental health condition could have that status change very quickly. I have worked in psychiatry and emergency rotations where I have voluntarily and involuntarily admitted people for mental health on a daily basis. Many of them are back to "normal" within the week and are stable once they get their treatment back on track. And while some are repeat offenders, most of them never get admitted again for the rest of their life, especially when it is drug induced and they stop using. A psychotic episode can be a good deterrent for using drugs.

 

[thatbrian]

It isn't about students, but the number of American homicides by gunfire is around 3.5 per 100,000 people.

Subtract the gang members who are shot by other gang members from that number for a more accurate picture.

Secondly, is there a "normal" homicide rate? Is there a good murder rate? Murder begins in he heart, and the very first siblings could not escape the consequences of the Fall.

 

[Benjamin]

There is a very simple explanation for these numbers. The UK and US have very different definitions of violent crime.
...

But that doesn't stop gun activitists and media from misrepresenting the numbers.

Something to take into account is the number of murders world wide in the name of Islam or of the Jews who were disarmed before being slaughtered and then consider the value of being a nation that honors gun ownership (activistivism). If one were to weigh in ALL the numbers the BIG picture begins to become more clear...

 

[Gold Dragon]

Subtract the gang members who are shot by other gang members from that number for a more accurate picture.

Something to take into account is the number of murders world wide in the name of Islam or of the Jews who were disarmed before being slaughtered and then consider the value of being a nation that honors gun ownership (activistivism). If one were to weigh in ALL the numbers the BIG picture begins to become more clear...

I would say that selectively removing or adding data to make the data fit your narrative better is the opposite of being accurate.

I know a lot of folks don't really care about accurate statistics and only want to see numbers that support their narrative and selectively cherry pick data and sources. Just don't be surprised when those numbers are easily shown to be false or misleading.