Wednesday, September 29, 2010

Gun Cry Babies

I should start this off with a fact most readers of this blog may be shocked to know. Brace yourself. No seriously, hold onto something and get ready:

I don’t think anyone should take away your guns. Shocking, I know.

Why would I think guns should be confiscated? It’s basically a losing battle, the metallic equivalent to the war on drugs. Perhaps if people knew that I believe meth, crack and heroin should be legal (and they should), it would come as no surprise.

What I find particularly amusing and telling of the whole gun culture is the aggressive reaction one receives if one even suggests that you would be better off not buying guns.

“Guns save lives you pusillanimous piece of statist trash! More people die because of police beatings than from murder by gun!”

Doctors save lives, guns take lives. Thousands die from murder every year in the US, and the most commonly used weapon is a gun. Compare this to just under 400 deaths caused by police abuse. As a comparison, almost 700 people die from accidents related to guns every year.

Now, resist the urge to ignore what I have to say, because I still have no interest in outlawing guns. I’m just trying to put the ridiculous claims of gun advocates in a realistic perspective. Guns don’t make you safer, it’s a statistical fact. I’m sorry. They may make you feel better, in the same way a blanket makes a child feel secure, though a blanket won’t go off accidentally if you sleep with it under your pillow.

But let’s go back to heroin, crack and meth. If those three drugs were legalized tomorrow, would you run out and buy some heroin just to exercise your right as an American to purchase some? If your pal just opened a new shop, would you purchase some meth for him? If you had a tiny dick, would you smoke crack to forget about it?

Yes, it would be legal, but you have to ask yourself: are these decisions in your best interest?

“I have a right to protect my family.”

Who said anything about rights or protection? I don’t care if you buy a gun and have a family, but you should know that a gun you buy is eight times more likely to shoot you, a family member, or a friend than it is to be used in defense of your home and loved ones against an intruder you don’t know.

And I’m not even talking accidents, here. In fact, nine times out of ten, a murder victim was a family member or close friend… wait a minute. Are you all buying guns to protect yourselves from your loved ones? And here I was thinking it was to protect your loved ones from crack addicts, meth heads, and heroin junkies…

“Listen you progressive liberal left-wing socialist commie pinko statist government goon, you don’t know me or my situation, and I’ve owned guns my whole life. I’m 158 years old. I’ve never committed a crime, nor have I accidentally shot someone. I took the time to learn how to properly use my gun, so fuck off!”

Why would anyone oppose the right to bear arms for someone harboring so much anger, right?

But in all seriousness, I’m curious: how does a gun protect you when you’re asleep? How can a gun protect your home when you’re away? Would carrying a gun on your person prevent someone from coming up behind you on the street and hitting you in the back of the neck, where the skull meets the spinal cord, knocking you unconscious?

After they rabbit punch you, they’re just going to take your gun, which I honestly doubt they’ll use to commit more crime, probably just to sell… for meth, heroin or crack, which would be cheaper if only it was legal… but I digress.

I couldn’t agree more that gun owners are more likely to kill someone with their car (I hope accidentally) than with their gun (which is usually not accidental). I know with relative certainty that most guns will not be used to commit a crime, let alone wound or kill someone. In fact, most guns just collect dust, though hopefully not literally. They should be cleaned on a regular basis, and frankly I hope you use your gun from time to time.

Go hunting. I don’t even care if you kill a condor. Who needs a bird that big. I bet its turds would dent your car on impact. Hell, follow it back to its nest, then kill it, take its eggs, and make an omelet from the mother and babies. I really don’t give a shit.

If hunting isn’t your thing, go to the range. Take out some of that aggression while picturing your boss, your spouse, your kids, your parents, the guy at work who gets your name wrong, the asshole in front of you who just sat there through the green turn arrow and made you have to wait through a whole new cycle, the liberal bloggers who want to take your manhood away by making you use a real weapon like a bat, or a sword, or an axe…

Just know that you’re a pawn on the billion dollar gun industry’s board. There’s more guns than there are people in America, but over half of homes don’t have a gun. In fact, the overwhelming majority of guns are owned by just 10-15% of the population. Almost half of gun owners own both a handgun and a long-barrel firearm.

I don’t point this out to suggest, “Oh no, people are stockpiling an arsenal!” I say it to point out that the gun industry relies on a loyal base of consumers to purchase their several-hundred dollar products. It would be dumb to buy a TV and never turn it on, but it’s my impression that many gun owners do just that with their firearms.

If you plan to use a gun or two or three or a baker’s dozen, then by all means buy them. If you want to feel secure, have the doors and windows to your house reinforced. And if you do own guns, take proper care of them.

Most store their guns unloaded, which is technically responsible ownership, but it sort of defeats the whole idea of “being prepared at a moment’s notice.” Maybe a minute’s notice is enough in some cases, but a decent psychopath can have a clip full of bullets in you before you have any idea what’s going on, even if your gun is sitting loaded just a few feet away.

Also strange is that everyone thinks that in an emergency, they’ll be a hero. No one thinks they will freeze up, or stumble, or fumble around, or piss themselves, and certainly all of you would be able to react quicker when being surprised than the person who probably had their weapon pointed at you from the moment you saw them.

The fact is, owning a gun doesn’t make you any less likely to be the victim of a crime, nor will anything short of sitting in your home, day and night, holding a loaded gun with the safety off. It is also interesting to point out that one commonly stolen item in America happens to be firearms.

Which leads me to one final note. I’m sure you’ve all seen this:


Just in case my neighbor ever puts up such a sign, I came up with my own:

33 comments:

  1. You need to read More guns, less crime: understanding crime and gun-control laws By John R. Lott

    ReplyDelete
  2. "Guns don’t make you safer, it’s a statistical fact. I’m sorry. They may make you feel better, in the same way a blanket makes a child feel secure, though a blanket won’t go off accidentally if you sleep with it under your pillow."

    Bullshit - you are misreading the statistics, go to the CDC website, turn off your liberal/progressive "reality distortion field" and LOOK at the statistics - age, race, location etc. - of course you will not because like every other RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALIST your cannot process FACTS.

    "In fact, the overwhelming majority of guns are owned by just 10-15% of the population. Almost half of gun owners own both a handgun and a long-barrel firearm....I say it to point out that the gun industry relies on a loyal base of consumers to purchase their several-hundred dollar products."

    Statistically the SAFEST most RESPONSIBLE people in the entire US!

    Do you ever give your brain a break from the propaganda?

    And I don't want you to "F" off, it would be nice to see you recover from your statist programming...

    400 deaths by police abuse, (about) 800,000 LEOs in the US or 1 in 4000, US population 307,006,550 (U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division, nice and official for you) so 306206550 non-LEO - Firearm homicides 12632 plus 700 = 13332 - so - 1 in 22,967 not bad...

    But let's go deeper, 305886550 when we take out the disabled Americans. 223886550 take out all under 20 years old. 186886550 adults of retirement removed... 1 in 14017 that gives us a number 3.5 times the amount of police buggery over citizens heavily biased as we are counting ALL accidents and ALL firearm homicide. And we should demand a HIGHER standard for a sworn and trained individual.

    You don't know how to play this do you?

    Bret, again you are on the wrong side.

    I don't know Bret... Aggressive?

    "You are a dumb-ass, backwater cousin humping hick, racist/fascist, corporate toad... la, la, la, la, LA... What you don't like what I said? Oooh, Oooh, you are being AGGRESSIVE (and your are mentally ill and dangerous)..."

    Sound familiar?

    You sir are delusional! If you want to see how rational thought works I suggest any Youtube video about religion by user Aronra, or even a few clips from Dawkins on religion - it can be used to recover from the religion of "statist/liberal/progressive/neocon/conservative" propaganda also...

    Possibly you should call this "Delusional propaganda addled statist cry-babies"

    ReplyDelete
  3. It's not enough you can have guns, everyone else has to believe guns are great. It's like... a religion. Fair enough, owning a gun can be a quick way to the afterlife.

    ReplyDelete
  4. No, religion is based on faith in things you cannot see, test, measure, or verify.

    The pro-gun position is based on facts, care to step up to bat?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Plenty of religions are based on real things. Nature worship, ancestor veneration, the worship of heroes...

    And you don't need a gun, you need a hug, kiddo.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Radio Blogger - how does it feel to live a life of such fear and persecution? You must have an extremely strong bladder to not wet yourself everytime you hear a loud noise. Or do you just wear depends? Useless paranoid/delusional people like you don't make the country (or even your neighborhoods) safer. You do not make the nation stronger or better. In fact, the human race and the planet earth would be far better off without such a hateful person as yourself polluting it. Why don't you take your substitute penis out from under your pillow and put it where you really want it - in your mouth. Don't forget to pull the trigger, after all a gun that isn't used to kill is useless.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Crhymethinc...

    Did you think of all that outdated prissy wet crap yourself or did you dig it up from 20 to 40 year old unwashed washout hippie manuals?

    Of course none of you driveling bullshit is worth the time you bothered to use to key it into the public library terminal you use.

    As everything you posted was useless insult, unbacked assertions, and wet political platitudes, tell your significant other (in your case likely an air filled polymer love-doll) you are sorry for asking for sex twice in one month and find some internet 12 year old harass (could be this time you will not get arrested for it).

    Wow - I joined the useless internet insult club, does this get me a copies of photos of Ginx in ass-less chaps? He is young and pretty, Crhymethinc is likely just a 32 year old bald pervert living in his moms basement, photos of him in ass-less chaps are likely on people of walmart...

    ReplyDelete
  8. Hey Radio, your gay is showing again...

    ReplyDelete
  9. Ginx, have you given any consideration to the idea of changing your blogging name to "Pretty Boy Bret"?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Bret is just afraid of his dark side...

    We have cookies....

    ReplyDelete
  11. I think I posted pics in my blog when I spilled bacon grease on myself. I look like Nero and the tall robber from "Home Alone" had a kid.

    And I'm not afraid of my dark side. I've kissed guys, it just did nothing for me. If only I were gay... fags can get book deals so easily.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Interesting you would continue to use the word fag and faggot, not that often that egalitarians use the "N" word, or would the unending homophobia of the Atlantic Coast (in particular Filthadelphia) just train you to be offensive first and reasonable later?

    And if you haven't caught it yet I simply don't give a shit about attacks using epithets this epithet the most begin to me because I know and that is all that is important. Facts and ideas on the other hand are important.

    The problem here is obvious - offensive epithets with out the slightest thread of real content, trying to stop the conversation without having to shed the smugness of self deluded propaganda...

    You are at least catching on - Crhymethinc is obviously just a cowardly momma's boy with a sexual problem exposing itself in his statist politics... Why else go for the "my dick is bigger than yours, because you have to have a substitute" outdated erroneous BS propaganda? It is what I have come to expect from the east and west coast momma's boys so afraid of responsibility that they attack others that have no problems with the burden.

    ReplyDelete
  13. You're not upsetting me by making fun of Phil-your-ass-with-AIDS-adelphia. Maybe you are just confused and unable to figure out a way to deal with a liberal who isn't politically correct, but is correct politically. This is probably why you go back to month old posts to refute insults, but not address any ideas.

    Yes, it's easier to insult people and not address ideas. You demonstrate this amazingly.

    Here's a thought: pretend this comment doesn't exist. Pretend no comments have been posted. Read this post and address it, I dare you.

    ReplyDelete
  14. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  15. You can be such a baby Bret, and as dense as a feature participant of Jersey shore...

    And to think I thought you were catching on...

    The post this is centered on has nothing to "refute" for the most part it is a meandering post of delusional propagandistic bullshit from a wet liberal who wants others to be the bully he cannot be in real life.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Again with the insults. It doesn't bode well for you that the only response you ever has is "You suck" in so many words.

    I suck, you blow, but what's that got to do with the price of tea in China? If you disagree with something I wrote, what is it? If you don't disagree, why the hostility? If you're confused or need more information because I am not clear, why not ask questions?

    I think you can't let anyone say anything about guns unless they're heaping unending love upon them. I insulted your god, and you have come to smite me for my blashpemy. It's not very becoming of a skeptic or atheist to hold an idol in such high esteem.

    I said many times and I will re-iterate: I don't care if you own guns. You are free to practice your faith however you wish, even though there is the potential that you may hurt others. That is the price we pay for a free society. Why is that not good enough for you? Because you believe you're right, and therefore everyone must be like you? That is the opposite of freedom, so I hope I am wrong in my assessment.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I found already when you are given facts you just ignore them or continue to follow your formula...

    You are typically upset because I have upset a god you worship - narcissism.

    The biggest problem here is that currently the right to arms is one of the few specifically enumerated rights under the flawed constitution, sadly the anti-federalists did not add more to this and make it clear to the average dummy...

    What I find objectionable Bret is your constant bullshit like this above "why all the hostility" Gee Bret call people retarded, faggot, and stupid all the time this tends to happen, but for whatever reason your dense thought patterns will not let you see it...

    For goodness sake Bret, every time someone takes you to task for posting offensive things and you go into "oh, my god you are acting so hostile" act - "I know you are, but what am I" baloney, it gets old and I continue to think it is an act...

    But possibly you are actually are that dense, narcissistic, and blunderingly moronic, but I continue to think that you are actually smart enough to just be a typically snarky Atlantic coast college authoritarian follower... Who knows.

    I have given you multiple opportunities to bring down the rhetoric and become reasonable and rational, you have only chosen to ramp it up from time to time, you miss the fact that when you ramp it up it only becomes more entertaining for me.

    I hold facts and logic in highest esteem, not an object, so far none of the wet liberal or statist anti-gun propaganda v. the facts of weapon ownership has had any substance to be convincing, it is that simple.

    You are the one proposing that requirements by decree are superior to volunteerism where I think the price of freedom is the exercise of greed an the possible poverty of some.

    Likely we have at least a few things in common too bad you don't want to build on that, you seem determined to just spew out insults. That is just too bad...

    ReplyDelete
  18. Facts like...

    Hawaii having the lowest gun ownership and one of the lowest violent crime rates?

    Tennessee having high gun ownership and the highest rate of violent crime?

    A state-by-state analysis of gun ownership compared to violent crime doesn't show anything remotely resembling evidence for your views. I'm sorry, you're wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Police are at least 2.5 times as likely to kill another human mistakenly or as a result of ill intent than the general population of civilians.

    Homicide and violent crime is higher in urban areas of the United States, and highest in areas of gang activity.

    People with a criminal record are much more likely to be involved in a homicide.

    California is in the top ten per population for gun crime and also has the most restrictive gun laws (top 5) in the country.

    Wyoming has the highest gun ownership per person in the US and is in the lowest four crime states in the US. New Hampshire has the highest gun ownership of the eastern coastal-side states and the lowest gun homicide in the US.

    The ten lowest gun crime states in the us include top twenty gun ownership states - except- Hawaii (good for Hawaii this makes me interested in the state). Hawaii’s Index Crime* rate increased slightly in 2009, up 3.3% from the rate reported for 2008. (latest Hawaii figures available). If you drop off specific gun homicide and change it to just homicide Hawaii drops off the lowest ten and is replaced by Delaware and the lowest five change to high gun ownership states.

    Of course a gun is a dangerous tool as the lethal potential of a firearm increases the possibility that a death can be the result for a victim or an attacker.

    That by the way Bret is just more evidence on the side of gun ownership and I'm sorry you are again unconvincing...

    ReplyDelete
  20. You see no selection bias in the fact that police are put into situations (on a daily basis) that you and I will likely never be in?

    The fact is, I have actually studied scatter charts of gun ownership compared to violent crime and homicides. There is no correlation between gun ownership and violent crime either way; rather, the most certain way of measuring whether a state will have high violent crime is by poverty rates. Homicide, however, is higher in households that own guns and in states with higher gun ownership.

    I'm sorry you spend so much time Googling for your data. I wish more people had access to scholarly journals and raw statistics, not just NRA filtered propaganda.

    Again, I want to reiterate: I don't think guns should be illegal.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Sorry, I forgot to link the homicide statistics, here.

    http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2007/01/6601.ars

    ReplyDelete
  22. "You see no selection bias in the fact that police are put into situations (on a daily basis) that you and I will likely never be in?"

    That explains why murder by police officers is higher than the general population? Or is it more likely the type of people attracted to the job?

    It is even more shocking when we take the search feature and filter by ethnic/racial background and search the numbers get higher.

    "I'm sorry you spend so much time Googling for your data. I wish more people had access to scholarly journals and raw statistics, not just NRA filtered propaganda."

    I deliberately excluded NRA or pro gun sources Bret... and you are going to site that above?

    It looks like we agree on three things...

    1. Guns are dangerous.

    2. Criminals are more likely to murder than a random selection of the population.

    3. There is no correlation between gun ownership and violent crime and a high violent crime indicator is poverty (and this can better be broken down to lower IQ and causes of poverty).

    "Homicide, however, is higher in households that own guns and in states with higher gun ownership."

    According to Bureau of Justice Statistics that is actually not true.

    Homicide rate per 100,000 population by state - lowest.

    Iowa - 1.36
    Maine - 1.37
    New Hampshire - 1.39
    North Dakota - 1.41
    Utah - 1.90
    Delaware -2.05
    Idaho - 2.15
    Wyoming - 2.17
    Minnesota - 2.22
    South Dakota - 2.34

    Most of the listed states are in the top 20 in gun ownership, and Wyoming is in the top five, and Idaho in the top ten.

    And I don't think drugs should be illegal, but the crime that surrounds illegal drugs is an indicator of gun violence (and this could be more an indicator of the types of people involved in that crime).

    ReplyDelete
  23. That explains why murder by police officers is higher than the general population? Or is it more likely the type of people attracted to the job?

    This makes no sense. I'm saying that you and I are not called when someone across town is robbing someone or holding a hostage or beating his wife, etc. They are. Police officers are placed in the position of having to use force more often than we are.

    Also, your math is way off. To calculate it properly, you would have to look at wrongful gun deaths as a function of gun-owning households, not the entire population (if for no other reason that you're counting infants and people in vegetative states who are technically "alive). It's hilarious at how naively you tried to calculate it, though. Freshman mistake.

    Don't even get me started on drugs... if we legalized all drugs, we would prevent an unbelievable amoung of violence, police abuse, and save thousands of families from being ruined.

    I did eventually cite the homicide statistics. I thought I did the first time, but I guess I messed up the html on the link. Just in case, here it is again.

    ReplyDelete
  24. "Don't even get me started on drugs... if we legalized all drugs, we would prevent an unbelievable amoung of violence, police abuse, and save thousands of families from being ruined."

    We agree, I don't have to like or do drugs to understand what is happening.

    "To calculate it properly, you would have to look at wrongful gun deaths as a function of gun-owning households, not the entire population (if for no other reason that you're counting infants and people in vegetative states who are technically "alive"

    No I eliminated all but working age adults I eliminated the retired also.

    And is continues to stand, I am making a connection with the type of people attracted to police jobs and the general population, the general population is less violent, and less crime prone, and less likely to murder per 1000 than this one authoritarian profession. I don't think it is the stress or the availability of weapons but the personality types attracted to that profession. What is worse is that they are supposed to "better" - color of law and all of that.

    "It's hilarious at how naively you tried to calculate it, though. Freshman mistake." Don't be so smug, point out the mistakes, I was a freshman when you were conceived, don't be so snotty, if you want to keep this even handed (I get the idea you don't it's that snarky stuff again).

    "I did eventually cite the homicide statistics. I thought I did the first time" - you did I pointed out that the statistics from the Bureau of Justice do not back up the assertion this SS&M study is trying to make.

    What I am saying is that while I am not finished reading and studying this, several things are catching my attention and at least one item seems to be skewed to gain an answer they had intended in advance.

    I am also trying to find a copy from the original source, the website is not very helpful for SS&M.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I was a freshman when you were conceived,

    I think you were a Freshman when my parents were conceived. But that's part of the problem: you're working from some old instruction, and I bet it's a wee bit foggy in the twilight years.

    Original research and raw statistics are, shamefully, tough to come by. My wife works at a university and I may use their facilities one of these days to gather and post whatever raw data I can find (this university in particular has a great crimonology department). If I get really motivated, I might chat up a professor or two while schmoozing at the next excuse they come up with to gather the faculty and drink.

    ReplyDelete
  26. At least I developed some skills for my old age, I can work as much as I want, I turn down work when I want a break, I thought it would get better with the economy... far from getting less work it started to pile up, it sucks.

    ReplyDelete
  27. What many who write such diatribes do not realize, a large majority of gun owners are veterans who fought for this country. Many were wounded, so they know what it feels like and are very unlikely to use a gun.

    If we take away everything which can be used to harm others, FIRST we need to outlaw automobiles. More people are killed per day by reckless driving and speeding than by guns in a year. Then there are also the cases where family memembers run over children they do not see in driveways or other accidents which also EXCEED the number of people killed by buns. AT LEAST we should force everyone to wear helments in autos, for there are more killed by head injuries each year, than are killed by guns...

    PUT THINGS INTO PROPORTION....

    ReplyDelete
  28. "You see no selection bias in the fact that police are put into situations (on a daily basis) that you and I will likely never be in?"

    NOW, you make up excuses or Police? THERE is NO excuse for killing anyone by mistake. In three tours in combat, it the 5th R.C.T. in Korea never killed a single person by mistake. 94%+ in combat, more active combat than any other unit. Never killed a prisoner or civilian and never saw another who did. Even in a HOT firefight, you know where and who you aim at and only pull the trigger deliberately.

    ReplyDelete
  29. For crime statistics, go to the FBI site. Its better than Universities as they cover the entire USA. State by state, etc... You can also get them emailed to you, like I do.

    ReplyDelete
  30. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Bill of Rights

    You guys can argue opinions forever, and still get nowhere. The fact is, we live in the United States, and our constitution, which we all must abide by, and which many have died to protect, says what it says. Sure, we have problems, differences of opinions, and worries about what is best for the nation, but until the writing changes, you must either accept it, or exercise your right to pursue happiness by finding another country with a constitution that suits you better.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Which well regulated militia are you in again?

      Delete
  31. Wait.. so the anti-gun guy's retort sign just is how he's stalking his neighbor's daily regime? That's so appropriate. lmao, makes him look like a real dipshit.. and creepy. This makes me want to get a gun just to spite this guy...

    ReplyDelete

If the post you are commenting on is more than 30 days old, your comment will have to await approval before being published. Rest assured, however, that as long as it is not spam, it will be published in due time.

Related Posts with Thumbnails