PBS is attacking the NRA

[sirs]

The problem is that more guns in "the good guys" hands DOES make us safer.  That's backed up by both facts & common sense.  That doesn't equate to preventing every crime & murder.   Merely lessens them

[Plane]

Then he should not have made that idiotic statement about how more guns make everyone safer.

 I wouldn't mind making such a statement myself.
   When the two policemen were assassinated.....
  Wasn't this crime easier to commit in NYNY due to its highly restrictive environment that disarms most of the decent people (not the criminals of course, because guns are so useful to crime that criminals are willing to do whatever it takes to get one)?

    I wouldn't maintain that this crime would become impossible ever , even if the city were thick with good guys that were well armed, people willing to act suicidal are hard to deter.

    But , I think it well demonstrated that this crime does not become impossible with any sort of restriction on guns either. 

     What does change with more people having guns is the margins , rational criminals do compute the odds and rob and rape less where their odds of being injured in the act are greater, this moves the margins in a positive way.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Countries that restrict guns have far fewer gun deaths. The American Gun Nut Lobby is provincial and does not think that what goes on in the rest of the world applies to the US.

I seriously doubt that civilians with guns are likely to prevent any cops, anywhere, from being shop by some crazed gun nut, which is what happened in NYC. The murderer was a crazy gun nut.

The Nightline program on PBS specializes in specific news stories. The story of how a minority of Gun Nuts, lobbyists and their organizations prevented a majority of people from having their representatives from passing legislation against ammo clips and particularly efficient firearms used to slaughter the children at New Town and in the parking lot where Rep Gifford was speaking is a bona fide news story.


The will of the people was subverted by a well financed bunch of fanatical gun nuts. That is the story here. PBS had every right to run this story. They has=d an OBLIGATION to do so.

[sirs]

Doesn't matter what other countries do, we have the 2nd amendment.  And France literally has a complete ban on firearms, and they were just hit by radicals with automatic weapons.  So, making guns illegal to the law abiding doesn't stop murderers and radicals from committing atrocities.  It only makes the law abiding more vulnerable.  The facts prove this, here in this country.....the greater gun deaths occur in regions with the strictest gun laws.  NY, DC, Chicago, etc.

You're right in that a law abiding civilian, legally able to carry a firearm, is unlikely to prevent an officer from being assassinated.  That's not their job or function.  A law abiding civilian, legally able to carry a firearm, simply makes it more likely that person can defend themselves from an attempted attack.  And more of those law abiding in an area makes attacks on police officers less likely......unless of course the thug in question, is on a suicide mission.  In that case, you could have a dozen police officers of where these 2 officers were assassinated, having bagels & coffee, and the 2 cops would still have been murdered

And one more time....NOTHING being pushed by Anti-gun nuts, as supposed "common sense gun laws" would have stopped this assassination, of these 2 officers.  The will of a small radical minority may have been thwarted, but that's about it

[Xavier_Onassis]

Doesn't matter what other countries do, we have the 2nd amendment.

That is utterly idiotic.  There are a lot of hunters in France, and they have rifles to hunt with.
So far, there were maybe 14 peopls killed in the attack on Charlie Hebdo.

Add all the nut job mass murders that we have had in the US since 1995, when the last attack in France occurred, and we have had many many times more people murdered by Gun Nuts. Columbine, New Towne, the Gaby Gifford thing, and countless others, most of whom never offended anyone anywhere.

We are far less safe because of your fucking Gun "Rights"

[Plane]

Countries that restrict guns have far fewer gun deaths.

  Do countries with fewer pools have fewer drownings?

   There is no country with a lower overall death rate , it is 100% everywhere.

     We are keeping the pools because we value swimming enough to put up with the cost, there are intangible and tangible benefits to gun ownership that a solid majority of the US public value above the risk of death by illegal shooting.

       In France they have decided otherwise , with fewer pools they drown less , but they do still drown, with fewer guns they shoot less but do still get shot.

     How do you estimate the benefit of making everyone helpless?
     Is it like the benefit of no one learning to swim?

[Xavier_Onassis]

Ypur gun is as likely to be used to shoot a member of your own family as it is to shoot you.

Swimming is at least good exercise, and swimming pools are not deliberately made to kill people or animals. That is a poor comparison.

As I have said, there are far too many guns for this country to ever put this under any rational control. There is no solution, other than to stay away from places where gun nuts tend to go. There is no way to collect all the guns that are likely to be used against innocent people. The bill proposed on the PBS program was as reasonable as it could be. It might have prevented at least some people from being massacred the next time some insane gun nut goes are, by making it necessary to change his clips more often.

[Plane]

Ypur gun is as likely to be used to shoot a member of your own family as it is to shoot you.

I don't get your point there.
Neither of these is very likely , nor desirable.

[Plane]

Swimming is at least good exercise, and swimming pools are not deliberately made to kill people or animals. That is a poor comparison.

http://www.cdc.gov/homeandrecreationalsafety/water-safety/waterinjuries-factsheet.html

Is intent the important factor?

Filling in all of our swimming pools would save many more children's lives than vaporizing every gun in the nation.

Why concentrate on the smaller problem, and the problem with the more difficult solution?

You seem to be discounting completely the number of people who have benefited from having a gun handy, my own life was preserved by my mother having a gun just one time , this is only once that I might have died as an infant so it is statistically insignificant. However she afterwards made sure that I learned to swim in a pool exposing me to that danger repeatedly.

     I must have swum thousands of times now, I have been threatened by guns very few times, but whatever finily kills me will kill me dead just once.

[sirs]

Doesn't matter what other countries do, we have the 2nd amendment.

That is utterly idiotic.  There are a lot of hunters in France, and they have rifles to hunt with.

Yea, damn Constitution, giving me rights you claim I shouldn't have.  How about I don't think you should have a right to privacy.  I think every one of your slinky movements should be known, to everyone.  And of course that's ridiculous.  Just as ridiculous as your implication I shouldn't have the right to a firearm, to protect myself.....be it from some radical thug/thief/terrorist, or a tyrannical forming Government.  The 2nd amendment has squat to do with hunting, or what French hunters put on their plate.  France has banned the guns that the Islamic terrorists used.  Sure didn't seem to stop them now, did it.  That's what's utterly idiotic....to think banning them would stop such killings

So far, there were maybe 14 peopls killed in the attack on Charlie Hebdo.

And.......?  Were you hoping for more?

Add all the nut job mass murders that we have had in the US since 1995, when the last attack in France occurred, and we have had many many times more people murdered by Gun Nuts.

Add all the lives saved in the U.S. by the use of a firearm, since 1995, would dwarf the number taken, by murderers of all creeds, using a gun.  Per the FBI (not sirs, not the NRA, not some RW publication, but per the FBI,) murders at the hands of a gun, since 2006, average around 8600 - 9600 deaths.  In that SAME time frame, the lowball figure is approx 600,000 lives saved, annually.  The highball figure for lives saved is 2.5 MILLION.  That's 2.5 MILLION times a person used a firearm to defend them self.  So, just taking the low ball figure, has guns saving lives over 60X more than those taken

60+x MORE lives saved than those taken, using one of those evil guns.  You can cite all the mass murders and school shootings you want.  It's a mere drop in the proverbial bucket of lives saved, using a gun, in the same time frame
 
What's completely devoid of any rational thought, is to believe & claim that abolishing the 2nd amendment somehow makes this country safer from the bad guys.  Like all of a sudden, they're going to start to abide by the law??  When they weren't doing so in the 1st place??  Banning guns merely disarms the law abiding.  "Bad guys" are going to still get them

We are far less safe because of your fucking Gun "Rights"

Couldn't be more wrong, and the facts demonstrate that.  Then again, one must consider the source

[Xavier_Onassis]

The gun death rate in the US is far higher than in any country where there are no "rights" to bear arms.
So you are wrong.

You fail to recognize this, so you are stupid.

On the other hand, I was wrong to say that Charleton Heston is an idiot.  This is untrue, since Charleton Heston is dead. He is no more, like the Monty Python Norwegian Blue Parrot.

I must amend my statement to read Charleton Heston WAS an idiot. Now he is an ex-idiot. One who died without needing to use his alleged arsenal even once. All the money he spent on it was wasted.

Had he spent it on a coffin way back when, THAT would have been a much wiser investment.

[sirs]

What you fail to recognize is for every 1 murder, at the hands of a gun, 60+ more lives are saved with the same evil gun.  And that's a minimum low ball figure

Facts are not your friend, I'm afraid.  Nor is the Constitution....that ironically protects your right to spew such AMBE

[Xavier_Onassis]

That is NRA bullshit. If you had a brain, you would recognize that.

They never count all the children that play with guns and shoot themselves, Mommy, Daddy or someone else. They never count the many fools who manange to shoot themselves cleaning their guns.
 Those are all "accidents" and therefore unrelated entirely to gun ownership.

By your logic, all we need are even more guns and we would have a NEGATIVE murder rate. Live people would be popping up all over the place, as if by magic, not even realizing that their existence was occasioned  by  gun ownership. They would have no idea who they were or what their names were.

[sirs]

That is concrete fact.  If you weren't so blinded in ignorant leftist propaganda, you'd recognize that

Of course there are stats that include all those who have used guns, in some manner.  The number is still 10 : 1 in the manner of lives saved, to all gun related deaths

So instead of 60+:1, that number drops to 10:1, when you include accidents & suicides

So, no, that's not my logic what-so-ever.  The logic is that more guns in law abiding hands, makes it safer for everyone.  This isn't a mathematical vacuum, simply reality, backed up by the facts

[Xavier_Onassis]

Believe any nonsense you want.