Reply to: Only in the free world

[ASB]

42836 car deaths in 2004, as you've already stated.

Surely the % figures are two orders of magnitudes too smal.

What they head as % of population is surely the actual fraction of the population.

[DodgyAgent]

In USA they've got 200 mln firearms or maybe even more - a few people will always be nutters and do wrong thing, that's a very small percentage of overall responsible ownership that actually saves lifes. Car accidents kill far more people in the USA, UK and elsewhere than guns - does it mean cars should be banned?

The ability to travel is a benign facet of life, it gives people social mobility and the opportunity to interract with one another. This breaks down fear and suspicion and creates confidence and enables people to do business (which is better than war). The ability to carry a gun is of no use to society whatsoever.

[stackpole]

It's inevitable that trick or treating is going to upset some people, and some of those are going to be nutters. The only answer is to stop it which, as we all know, is impossible. So we have to accept that the odd atrocity will happen.

[Pondlife]

Honestly, do you just come here to be argumentative no matter how much of a retard it makes you look?

Are you new here?

[Mich the Tester]

I nominate Councillor Charles Edens for an international award for 'Understatement of the Year' for this particular gem;


County Councilman Charles Edens said he lives just a few blocks away ...
"It's going to put a dampening on Halloween," Eden said.

[AtW]

29659 gun deaths in the same year.

I don't care if criminals shoot each other from guns, also I don't care if legit gun owners gun down criminals or suicides - we are here discussing crazy cases like here legit gun owner shots innocent boy for no good reason. Such cases are very rare.

[DiscoStu]

I think the "fuss" about 911 was justified in a way that 911 it was airplanes but if nothing it done about it then it will be nukes next. Also you can't carpet bomb your own cities to get retribution so in case of AK it won't work, but you can do that in afganistan. It's internal vs external thingy.



So if their kid got killed by drunk youth without driving license and insurance, would they feel a lot better when he was shot? I'd expect them to feel terrible in both cases - you can put a lot of effort and money to reduce very rare shootings like this OR you can safe a lot more kids from car crashes.

Honestly, do you just come here to be argumentative no matter how much of a retard it makes you look?

42836 car deaths in 2004, as you've already stated.


29659 gun deaths in the same year.

Hardly an insignificant proportion is it...

[AtW]

It's not either/or. Maybe they could do both.

It's very difficult to get zero incident rate - there will always be a few people who go nuts when you deal with 200 mln firearms issues, with say 100 mln gun owners (conservative figure) just 1 going crazy every year and shooting everyone then you are talking about 0.000001% "failure rate", compare this with cars where in USA 18 deaths on 10,000 car owners, that's 0.180000% failure rate, see the difference in numbers?

Stats: http://www.driveandstayalive.com/inf.../stats-usa.htm

So it's obvious that the best reduction can be achieved (if at all) is in cars, with guns sure you can try to be more careful look at reasons why that guy went nuts, however when you deal with very small numbers you can't guarantee success - removing guns from 99.999999% law abiding citizens is not acceptable solution just like getting rid of cars ain't.

[Diver]

it's probably got something to do with Hedge funds

[PAH]

It's not either/or. Maybe they could do both.

Have they prized the rifle from Charlton Heston's cold dead hand yet?

[AtW]

It's not the numbers, it's the way. Otherwise why all the fuss over 911. People want to feel safe.

I think the "fuss" about 911 was justified in a way that 911 it was airplanes but if nothing it done about it then it will be nukes next. Also you can't carpet bomb your own cities to get retribution so in case of AK it won't work, but you can do that in afganistan. It's internal vs external thingy.

A kid being gunned down is going to be more traumatic to relatives than if they are killed in a car crash

So if their kid got killed by drunk youth without driving license and insurance, would they feel a lot better when he was shot? I'd expect them to feel terrible in both cases - you can put a lot of effort and money to reduce very rare shootings like this OR you can safe a lot more kids from car crashes.

[PAH]

It's not the numbers, it's the way. Otherwise why all the fuss over 911. People want to feel safe.

A kid being gunned down is going to be more traumatic to relatives than if they are killed in a car crash, as one could be seen to be accidental where the other is with intent. All about 'closure'.

[AtW]

AKs can kill a lot more in one 'go' than a car.

Let's say one crazy AK owner will kill 100 people once a year, is that reasonable estimate?

Ok, in USA in 2004 traffic accidents killed 42,636 in one year. If you want to save people you should focus on top causes of death - car accidents, cancer, AIDS - the AK wielding crazies will be at the very bottom of the list.

Note here - kids get killed in accidents too, far more so than from AK shots.

If you look at %-tage of legal gun owners in the USA (including AK) and legal car owners, you will find that a lot greater %-tage of car owners cause death by their driving then legal gun owners. That's really the end of the arguement until car deaths are cut to much lower point than they are now.

[PAH]

AKs can kill a lot more in one 'go' than a car. You don't hear much of kids driving their car around the school corridors moving students down.

There's no place for deadly weapons in a 'civilised' society. We can sleep easy knowing the govermin have the terrorists at bay.

[AtW]

Following that logic, lets give everyone nukes. Only a handful will use them.

Nukes can kill a lot of people (tens of thousands), AK can't kill more than a few donzes. Therefore worst scale impact of firearms is fairly limited where as desire for them is high. Same applies to cars - widely used, they do kill indeed, however benefits greatly outweight downsides. This does not mean guns or cars should be given to anybody - there should be strict training, etc.