• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Sandy Hook gun sales surge raise accidental gun death rate.

vegas giants said:
I thought dead was dead. There are studies that sghow gun control reduces suicides.. Even if you took them out which would be ridiculous the number of man hours spent in a car far far far outweigh the number of hours spent using a gun.
Click to expand...

Do you mean this study, in which I replied to you as follows, and you, for some reason, never responded back to me??

Did you even read through these articles? ... From the first article you linked:
"Formica says that though the study does a good job of describing the relationship between waiting periods and gun deaths, it does have one major limitation: Because the researchers looked at population-level data and not at outcomes for individual gun purchasers, it’s a bit of a stretch to say with certainty that these waiting periods actively prevented deaths. “You can’t tell if gun purchasers were the ones directly affected, so you can’t know for sure that it’s a causal relationship,” she says."

Plus, are the majority of suicide committers purchasing a gun (guns and ammo aren't exactly cheap btw) for the sole purpose of suicide? Or are they maybe using guns which are already sitting around the house or guns which could be made readily available to them?

The study admittedly didn't look at the individual gun purchasers, so how can it conclude that waiting periods are what is definitely lowering homicide and suicide rates?

And the "man hours" thing makes no sense because you are comparing a car (which criminals primarily use with the intent to transport themselves to another location) to a gun (which criminals primarily use with the intent to kill people)
 
gfm7175 said:
Do you mean this study, in which I replied to you as follows, and you, for some reason, never responded back to me??

Did you even read through these articles? ... From the first article you linked:
"Formica says that though the study does a good job of describing the relationship between waiting periods and gun deaths, it does have one major limitation: Because the researchers looked at population-level data and not at outcomes for individual gun purchasers, it’s a bit of a stretch to say with certainty that these waiting periods actively prevented deaths. “You can’t tell if gun purchasers were the ones directly affected, so you can’t know for sure that it’s a causal relationship,” she says."

Plus, are the majority of suicide committers purchasing a gun (guns and ammo aren't exactly cheap btw) for the sole purpose of suicide? Or are they maybe using guns which are already sitting around the house or guns which could be made readily available to them?

The study admittedly didn't look at the individual gun purchasers, so how can it conclude that waiting periods are what is definitely lowering homicide and suicide rates?

And the "man hours" thing makes no sense because you are comparing a car (which criminals primarily use with the intent to transport themselves to another location) to a gun (which criminals primarily use with the intent to kill people)
Click to expand...

I can not tell which study you are referring to since you did not include a link. There are several studies so I would be happy to give you another one if you don't like that one. LOL
 
Manc Skipper said:
Some argue gun deaths are not caused by the guns, but the people with the guns. Suicides don't have time to reflect or change their mind when they have a gun. Bang and they're gone. The gun is a factor. Suicides count too.
Click to expand...

But that's not only true with guns... that's true with any method of suicide...
 
gfm7175 said:
But that's not only true with guns... that's true with any method of suicide...
Click to expand...

Guns make the impulsive decision much more likely to be fatal. A person who overdoses or cuts his wrists has time to change his mind
 
gfm7175 said:
But that's not only true with guns... that's true with any method of suicide...
Click to expand...

true, friends of mine at Cornell (Famous gorges) watched a woman jump once she jumped no turning back. same with hanging,

some poisons you can change your mind about. Jumping off a bridge, cliff, roof, or with a rope around your neck is pretty much terminal
 
gfm7175 said:
But that's not only true with guns... that's true with any method of suicide...
Click to expand...

People have been interviewed after they have jumped off bridges (those that survived). They almost always report that the first thought they had as their feet left the bridge is this is a mistake I want to live.
 
gfm7175 said:
Gun waiting periods could save hundreds of lives a year, study says | Science | AAAS

That would be the specific study you quoted which I debunked (well, the study debunked itself, which you didn't catch since you didn't actually read the article the full way through)
Click to expand...
Here is another quote from that same person

Absolutely, this study demonstrates a robust association between waiting periods and gun deaths,” says Margaret Formica, a public health researcher at the State University of New York Upstate Medical University in Syracuse who studies firearms deaths but wasn’t involved in the new work. “It’s an innovative way of looking at this issue.”
 
vegas giants said:
Here is another quote from that same person

Absolutely, this study demonstrates a robust association between waiting periods and gun deaths,” says Margaret Formica, a public health researcher at the State University of New York Upstate Medical University in Syracuse who studies firearms deaths but wasn’t involved in the new work. “It’s an innovative way of looking at this issue.”
Click to expand...

Association isn't the same as cause, which is why she made her concession (which was what I quoted) at the end of the article...
 
vegas giants said:
Guns make the impulsive decision much more likely to be fatal. A person who overdoses or cuts his wrists has time to change his mind
Click to expand...

Maybe... maybe not...

But the problem is, and I've brought this up in other threads, I'm not sure how you are going to stop suicidal people from acquiring guns (or any other tool for that matter) for the purposes of committing suicide...
 
gfm7175 said:
Association isn't the same as cause, which is why she made her concession (which was what I quoted) at the end of the article...
Click to expand...

She cites a ROBUST ASSOCIATION. Works for me
 
gfm7175 said:
Maybe... maybe not...

But the problem is, and I've brought this up in other threads, I'm not sure how you are going to stop suicidal people from acquiring guns (or any other tool for that matter) for the purposes of committing suicide...
Click to expand...

You can never stop anyone from acquiring anything. But you can make it a little harder for them and buy them time for the impulse to pass
 
gfm7175 said:
But that's not only true with guns... that's true with any method of suicide...
Click to expand...

The topic is guns, not diversions. Gun sales rise and so do accidental shootings. More guns, more shooting deaths. Q.E.D.
 
Manc Skipper said:
The topic is guns, not diversions. Gun sales rise and so do accidental shootings. More guns, more shooting deaths. Q.E.D.
Click to expand...

Accidental deaths went down, not up.
 
Casper said:
Define "control", then we can talk specifics.
Click to expand...

I am happy to discuss my gun control plan with someone who also puts out their plan to reduce gun violence
 
Lursa said:
Sure they do, in terms of perspective.

What we find 'acceptable' harm, and 'unacceptable.'

But dead is dead, so why do we accept the carnage from our vehicles so casually and without the same outrage as with guns? Because when you remove suicides and gang-related gun deaths, vehicle deaths BY FAR outnumber those from guns.

We are more at risk every single day on the roads (or walking near a road) from vehicles than we ever are from gunfire. And people just choose to find THAT risk acceptable. I dont get it, because I dont.
Click to expand...

Listen. I've repeated this three times in this thread, at least. I support your right to own whatever guns you want, up to and including full-auto rifles, water-cooled belt-fed machine guns, RPG's, whatever. I don't care. My point is, it's ridiculous to compare guns and cars. Why guns and cars? Why not boats and pressure cookers? Why not skil-saws and x-ray machines? Cell phones and electric guitars? They're all stupid, pointless comparisons.
I don't think I should be at risk of prosecution for distracted driving while using my cell phone when far more people are hurt each year from riding bicycles on city streets. Sounds pretty dumb, don't it?
 
vegas giants said:
I am happy to discuss my gun control plan with someone who also puts out their plan to reduce gun violence
Click to expand...

I doubt that since you could not answer a simple question asked of you. You can run along and play now............
 
Grand Mal said:
Listen. I've repeated this three times in this thread, at least. I support your right to own whatever guns you want, up to and including full-auto rifles, water-cooled belt-fed machine guns, RPG's, whatever. I don't care. My point is, it's ridiculous to compare guns and cars. Why guns and cars? Why not boats and pressure cookers? Why not skil-saws and x-ray machines? Cell phones and electric guitars? They're all stupid, pointless comparisons.
I don't think I should be at risk of prosecution for distracted driving while using my cell phone when far more people are hurt each year from riding bicycles on city streets. Sounds pretty dumb, don't it?
Click to expand...

Cars and guns? Well guns because they are the topic. Cars, because their ownership and use is endemic in our society and it provides and excellent comparison in terms of numbers and exact opposites in perspective. As for the other things you suggested, that's fine too but not as many Americans relate to those things.

And the bold does not sound dumb to me....we have such a law here in WA St.

IMO, you are avoiding the fact that the comparison is very illuminating...that Americans cant even conceive of further limitations on driving their cars, but wish to impose more limitations on gun owners.

This seems perfectly acceptable to me if Americans were truly concerned about deaths/injuries caused by personal vehicles: no speed limits above 35 mph.

And yet...if proposed, can you imagine the outrage? But but but! "It would save so many lives! Dont you care?"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom