Gun free zone

Flooring Forum - DIY & Professional

Help Support Flooring Forum - DIY & Professional:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. U.S. population 324,059,091 as of Wednesday, June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.00925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant! What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death:

• 65% of those deaths are by suicide which would never be prevented by gun laws
• 15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified
• 17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons – gun violence
• 3% are accidental discharge deaths

So technically, "gun violence" is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Well, first, how are those deaths spanned across the nation?
• 480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago
• 344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore
• 333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit
• 119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)

So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.

This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation, or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 1.

Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, so it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So if all cities and states are not created equally, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.

Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of crime. Robbery, death, and sexual assault are all done by criminals and thinking that criminals will obey laws is ludicrous. That's why they are criminals.

But what about other deaths each year?
• 40,000+ die from a drug overdose–Where's the excuse for that?
• 36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths
• 34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide)

Now it gets good:
• 200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer in Chicago than when you are in a hospital!

• 710,000 people die per year from heart disease. It’s time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So what is the point? If Obama and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.). A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides......Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions!

So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns? It's pretty simple.:
Taking away guns gives control to governments.

The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies. It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.

Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution.

So the next time someone tries to tell you that gun control is about saving lives, look at these facts and remember these words from Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, because the whole body of the people are armed and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force at the command of Congress can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power."

Remember, when it comes to "gun control," the important word is “control," not “gun."
 
Interesting to see the outcome of this. I never knew there were different age limits for hand guns and long guns. I bought my revolver when I was 17. Actually, my dad bought it, tho I paid the money. Maybe the age was 18 back in '73.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/02/21/trump-on-preventing-mass-shootings-were-going-to-get-it-done.html
If the age for "long guns'' is raised, I wonder if it will cover all "long guns". In rural areas, shotguns and 22's are given as rights of passage long before age 18........ there's pigeons and doves to hunt and groundhogs to exterminate cans to plink. That might just fall into a vague adult supervision issue. Kids need to learn early so gun safety sinks in. Enter the Eddy Eagle program.

I don't have any issue with an age limit on the AR's, but shotguns or a 22?
I know "city folk" have a totally different viewpoint on this....... but again as Rusty and I have mentioned............. the states with the most strict gun laws have murder rates many, many time that of the rest of the country.
............one needs to ask why. It's the culture in those cities, not the guns that cause the problem. Criminals will always get the guns if the law abiding citizens de-arm themselves. I mean really, if you're a criminal or a gang member......... are you really gonna turn in your gun?
I shouldn't even have to ask that one.
Anyway, interesting to see what comes from this.

Gotta teach early while kids are impressionable. Our high school had a shooting range in the weight room. i took a hunters safety course at age 14 or so. Everone in the neighborhood did that. ......and it was taught in the high school auditorium. We learned about guns and gun safety early on. That has to be done if those little skulls full of mush are going to 'get it'. That's not all. You need parents who care and parents that participate.
http://ksnt.com/2018/02/15/gun-safety-courses-could-be-a-requirement-in-your-childs-classroom/
 
Last edited:
I agree that the culture has more to do with the shootings than with the guns, but I do think common sense laws could help in some cases. There are people who are currently allowed to buy guns legally that have no business owning any weapons.

I know someone who now will not be able to get a gun once he gets out of jail.
Tales from small town madness from last night:
A friend of mine, let's call him A was letting his brother, let's call him B, stay with him. B was unemployed and was smoking pot & eating all the food. He has a violent history with his girlfriend, S. They beat each other up and threaten each other etc all the time. She cheats on him constantly and uses drugs.
She called a male friend, D, over to take her somewhere-- claiming they were going to see her cousin so she could introduce them so they could hook up. They left around 6:30pm and never returned. She had B's phone and turned it off after a couple of calls from friends to figure out her whearabouts-- she'd gone to a city that was far away. It seems to me that she was trying to get out of the relationship and escape without it turning violent. Somehow S's uncle got involved and came to pick her up and was trying to take her back to B. She didn't want to go back to him so she started beating up her uncle in the car and jumped out of it while it was moving.
Meanwhile, A was at work and his girlfriend, G, was trying to keep B calm. But the longer S was gone the more B started freaking out and by the time A got home (around 11pm), B was going berserk. He begged A to drive him to the other city to try to go drag S back home (or so he could "kick her ass" for leaving him). A refused and told him to wait it out and see what happens (did I mention that B had just gotten full custody of his son with a previous girlfriend and that child was there?). B tried to wake up the children to upset A and G to try to badger A in to driving him. A continued to refuse. B violently attacked him and started beating the crap out of him. A finally got the upper hand and got B to stop attacking. B went outside, they thought to calm down, but came back with a hunting knife and threatened to stab A to death if he didn't drive him. He then tried to stab him, but A wrestled with him and took the knife away. B went outside again and came back with a shotgun, walked in and in front of the children, threatened to shoot and kill him if he didn't drive him. They wrestled some more and A got B pushed outside of the house. B then fired the gun from the outside but didn't hit anyone. A went outside and wrestled with him again to take the gun away while G called the cops. So, now B is in jail for probably 5 years.
 
You can't make this stuff up !! I just learned my Letters all over again .. :D

LOL! I just used first letters of their names. It's a good thing the other brother who's name started with D wasn't involved. It's a good thing that A is strong as an ox. Only reason B got the upper hand the first time was because he took him by surprise. If A hadn't been strong and tough, B probably could have killed him with the knife. People in this area are just plain nuts.

Here's a question for you guys: If someone is prohibited from buying a gun for some reason, should it be permanent, or should there be a time limit? And if there is a time limit, what time limits for what infractions? Like, if someone used drugs but then got clean, how long after they tested as consistently clean would they be able to get a gun again (if ever)?
 
Interesting to see the outcome of this. I never knew there were different age limits for hand guns and long guns. I bought my revolver when I was 17. Actually, my dad bought it, tho I paid the money. Maybe the age was 18 back in '73.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/02/21/trump-on-preventing-mass-shootings-were-going-to-get-it-done.html
If the age for "long guns'' is raised, I wonder if it will cover all "long guns". In rural areas, shotguns and 22's are given as rights of passage long before age 18........ there's pigeons and doves to hunt and groundhogs to exterminate cans to plink. That might just fall into a vague adult supervision issue. Kids need to learn early so gun safety sinks in. Enter the Eddy Eagle program.

I don't have any issue with an age limit on the AR's, but shotguns or a 22?
I know "city folk" have a totally different viewpoint on this....... but again as Rusty and I have mentioned............. the states with the most strict gun laws have murder rates many, many time that of the rest of the country.
............one needs to ask why. It's the culture in those cities, not the guns that cause the problem. Criminals will always get the guns if the law abiding citizens de-arm themselves. I mean really, if you're a criminal or a gang member......... are you really gonna turn in your gun?
I shouldn't even have to ask that one.
Anyway, interesting to see what comes from this.

Gotta teach early while kids are impressionable. Our high school had a shooting range in the weight room. i took a hunters safety course at age 14 or so. Everone in the neighborhood did that. ......and it was taught in the high school auditorium. We learned about guns and gun safety early on. That has to be done if those little skulls full of mush are going to 'get it'. That's not all. You need parents who care and parents that participate.
http://ksnt.com/2018/02/15/gun-safety-courses-could-be-a-requirement-in-your-childs-classroom/

Got my first 22 when I was 8. Hunted and cleaned rabbits alone by age 10.
 
I wonder how gun people would feel if one of their children were shot at a school?
Do not forget we do not have guns as Americans have and I do not understand the gun lobbyists That is why I ask
How long has NZ been gun free?
People can only shoot guns at a range?
 
I wonder how gun people would feel if one of their children were shot at a school?
Do not forget we do not have guns as Americans have and I do not understand the gun lobbyists That is why I ask
They would be mad at the shooter....... Gun owners know that guns are unable to plan and carry out attacks.
So unbelievable to me that with all the talk, the kids and the media ....that know one is mad at the shooter. :confused:
 
I think because the media was quick to blame other reasons and given that he's a white Christian male, they aren't going to call him a "thug" or blame ISIS (although some places did try that). They are playing up his sad life story-- possibly having fetal alcohol syndrome, father died when he was young, mother died recently from the flu, greedy caregiver for him had his brother institutionalized and is now trying to file a claim on his inheritance. They are painting him as a poor misguided youth that can garner sympathy from the masses.

And while all the stuff they are claiming is tragic, he still chose to buy a gun, go in to a school, and start shooting innocent people. But today's society is not about accountability. They teach people to blame other people and things for their choices/shortfalls. I've seen people blaming everything from lack of religion in schools to abortion policies for the school shooting. It's ridiculous. Bottom line is for whatever reason this young man decided to kill people and was able to legally obtain a weapon and do so. Who knows if he may have gotten one illegally had he not been able to obtain one legally though.
 
I read tonight that the school had a sheriff deputy assigned to that school and he was there and stayed outside the school the entire time........ I guess he was waiting until the noise stopped so it would be safe to go in. :rolleyes:
I'm betting even tho his job included this very dangerous possibility, he knew that when he signed up for it............ that's what police do, right? He resigned and retired, but I bet he's not sleeping well. If he had entered the school, he might not have come back out alive, but then??????? ...well, maybe he might have caught the kid off guard and save a lot of lives.
Good reason for locking doors and visually screening students before or as they enter.
 
Last edited:
I read tonight that the school had a sheriff deputy assigned to that school and he was there and stayed outside the school the entire time........ I guess he was waiting until the noise stopped so it would be safe to go in. :rolleyes:
I'm betting even tho his job included this very dangerous possibility, he knew that when he signed up for it............ that's what police do, right? He resigned and retired, but I bet he's not sleeping well. If he had entered the school, he might not have come back out alive, but then??????? ...well, maybe he might have caught the kid off guard and save a lot of lives.
Good reason for locking doors and visually screening students before or as they enter.

You're not sending me in with a 6 shooter to face a gun that fires 100 rounds a minute.. That is taking a knife to a gun fight ..

Now they want to arm teachers ? Have to protect the NRA first ..:mad:
 
church

church.jpg
 
Jon, guns have been very regulated in NZ for a long long time, so it's understandable that you don't understand why some countries allow more lax gun ownership and gun use laws.
We grew up with guns around. Almost every house has em......... except Democrats as one of the charts below shows. :D

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2017/06/22/the-demographics-of-gun-ownership/

I don't know the 'lay of the land' in NZ as far as property size, distance from home to home, how many percent of the people live in the city and how many percent live in rural areas, spread out like say ranches or farms or people who simply live away from populated areas.
Where I live, it's small cities, 17 to 27 miles apart up and down the entire coast with forested areas in between. A lot of people live outside the city boundaries so they don't necessarily have a neighbor's house 25 or 50 feet away. So we aren't tightly packed together. This describes a huge part of the US population. We grew up being able to go out in the back yard and 'plink' with a .22 as target practice like shooting the flowers off of distant weeds, or knock a small cone off out of a tree. It's a lot of fun testing your skill level. From there it was pigeon hunting, or duck hunting, deer hunting. It was as common as apple pie......... just normal to us.
City folk..... people who have lived in the cities most of their lives certainly have different experiences and viewpoints, but for smaller communities and rural communities, gun ownership is often a right of passage. A single shot bolt action rifle has been passed from relative to relative as members of our family had children that became of "teaching age"......7 or 8 years of age. I'm talking an age to instill gun safety and under adult supervision. You don't give a 6 year old a gun to play with at age 7 unless you're Rusty. :D
We don't have a gun problem, we have a social problem with too many people having no value for human life, respect for other peoples property. Drugs are a problem, single parent households are a problem and a lot of others.
As a kid, TV programs drummed into our minds, respecting parents, looking up to TV idols like super-heros, TV westerns and such. In TV sitcoms of old, kids always addressed or replied to their father or a policeman saying things such as "yes, sir"
...little kids today grow up watching TV with total disrespect of their elders and of police. I think that's a big deal and hard or impossible to correct once a kid gets past a certain age. I'll blame 90% of our problems on the media...... they don't teach kids "the good stuff" anymore.
 
Last edited:
You're not sending me in with a 6 shooter to face a gun that fires 100 rounds a minute.. That is taking a knife to a gun fight ..

Now they want to arm teachers ? Have to protect the NRA first ..:mad:
The deputy had a pistol that could fire that fast if he had enough clips. (no, I don't hink he had 10 clips in his pocket) ;) He also was much better trained than the kid..... or he shouldn't have been in law enforcement in the first place.
Had he entered the school and distracted or caught the kid off guard from a distance, the results would certainly come out different. Cops know how to shoot from a defensive position or location. (IE: don't stand out in the open) If he fired at the kid with the protection from the corner of the hall, the kid would have had to change and stop his attack, ....or being surprised, run from the bullets. It would have come out different for sure with less loss of life.
 
Last edited:
I think the biggest problem with a gun ban or a clip ban is the fact there are so many guns and clips out there now........... banning will do nothing about the deranged scumbags bent on mayhem obtaining a weapon..or explosive devices or running over people with cars or trucks. Bans in my opinion are a feel good thing, not so much reality
"If" that's the case, then the kids need some protection and that's what needs to be the focus.
What would be faster and do more good? Protecting the kids now via trained teachers (and I mean trained, not just any teacher) or school cops, or debating gun laws for another 10 years?
 
You're not sending me in with a 6 shooter to face a gun that fires 100 rounds a minute.. That is taking a knife to a gun fight ..

Now they want to arm teachers ? Have to protect the NRA first ..:mad:

AR 15 won't fire 100 rounds a minute. One shot per trigger pull.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top