Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
The_Squid

More guns = more homicides

Recommended Posts

Guest Derek L

More consequences from easy access to guns:

More consequences from easy access to guns water:

http://annistonstar.com/view/full_story/20500991/article-Local-defense-attorney-drowns-while-diving-in-Glencoe?instance=top_center_featured

Long-time Anniston attorney Randy Brooks died Sunday at Dive Land Park in Glencoe, while practicing diving for an upcoming trip to Mexico. As officials investigate what they believe to be an accidental drowning, friends and colleagues remember the 60-year-old Brooks as, among other things, a brilliant attorney, avid outdoorsman and sharp pool player.

http://www.wric.com/story/19817038/teens-drowning-death-at-plaza-hotel-ruled-accidental

Henrico County police say the apparent drowning of a teenager in a hotel pool appears to be an accident.

Police tell media outlets that a group of youths told investigators the 16-year-old boy dived into the pool and hit his head on the side. He was pronounced dead at a local hospital

http://www.chicoer.com/fromthenewspaper/ci_21686706/brett-olsons-death-ruled-accidental-from-labor-day

Officials Tuesday classified the drowning death of Brett Olson as accidental and closed the case.

Olson, 20, went missing from beer can beach during the Labor Day weekend float Sept. 2 on the Sacramento River. A fisherman found his body a week later about a mile or two downstream.

The Glenn County Sheriff's Office received autopsy results Monday, Undersheriff Rich Warren said Tuesday. The doctor who performed the autopsy determined that he drowned, had alcohol in his system and had recently used cocaine.

rolleyes.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again you are introducing red herrings to the gun debate. At least you aren't comparing guns to cars any more. But I think your comparison has gone from silly to absurd.

If you can't debate the merits of easy access to guns, you may want to avoid the topic. guns/water are not the same thing, nor are they comparable. Anything to add about the actual subject, or are you content to go on with your silliness?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want to start a new thread about the dangers of access to water, you should do so. But it isn't relevant to this topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Derek L

Once again you are introducing red herrings to the gun debate. At least you aren't comparing guns to cars any more. But I think your comparison has gone from silly to absurd.

If you can't debate the merits of easy access to guns, you may want to avoid the topic. guns/water are not the same thing, nor are they comparable. Anything to add about the actual subject, or are you content to go on with your silliness?

Red Herrings? Merits of a Gun Debate?

Seriously, you politicize several accidental gun deaths as evidence that “easy access” to firearms is a determent to society…..How many guns are there within the United States and Canada? How many annual deaths?

I’ll continue to counter your “evidence” of gun deaths with accidental drowning deaths, since, as I demonstrated earlier in this thread, more Canadians die a year from drowning associated with recreational swimming/water sports than firearms.

I will though entertain your suggestion that guns/water related deaths are not comparable though………..By rights, if we waved your magic anti-gun wand, and banned/restricted all actives associated with immersing oneself in water, surely we’d put an end to tragic drowning deaths. Correct?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More guns = less victims

The bad guys will always get and have guns no mater what the law is. It's time to let the public protect themselves with CCW law in Canada for law abiding citizens so we can protect ourselves from the thugs and gangstas who would make us their bitches or ho's or whatever the lingo is now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
By rights, if we waved your magic anti-gun wand...

I'm not anti gun. I own guns. You haven't been listening.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Red Herrings? Merits of a Gun Debate?

Seriously, you politicize several accidental gun deaths as evidence that “easy access” to firearms is a determent to society…..How many guns are there within the United States and Canada? How many annual deaths?

I’ll continue to counter your “evidence” of gun deaths with accidental drowning deaths, since, as I demonstrated earlier in this thread, more Canadians die a year from drowning associated with recreational swimming/water sports than firearms.

I will though entertain your suggestion that guns/water related deaths are not comparable though………..By rights, if we waved your magic anti-gun wand, and banned/restricted all actives associated with immersing oneself in water, surely we’d put an end to tragic drowning deaths. Correct?

No to be fair if we're take your analogy seriously you'd have to weigh the cost of prohibiting guns vs the cost of prohibiting water. I'm betting the cost of the latter would make the former look like mice nuts.

But perhaps the difference could also be measured in terms of what society has to spend in the wake of occasional mass shootings vs what it needs to spends in the case of a stream (no pun intended) of individual drownings. I'm betting the cost to society of processing a mass shooting of say 10 people all at once dwarfs the cost of attending to the paper work involved in the cases of 10 drowning victims.

In other words we'd get a bigger bang for the buck trying to prevent more gun deaths than the splash we'd get trying to prevent more drownings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Derek L

I'm not anti gun. I own guns. You haven't been listening.....

And I’m not anti recreational water sports……I enjoy swimming, boating etc, but since more Canadians are succumbing to water than firearms, perhaps we should look at restricting or banning it’s usage…..That is the point of this thread right? Saving Canadians………

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Derek L

No to be fair if we're take your analogy seriously you'd have to weigh the cost of prohibiting guns vs the cost of prohibiting water. I'm betting the cost of the latter would make the former look like mice nuts.

But perhaps the difference could also be measured in terms of what society has to spend in the wake of occasional mass shootings vs what it needs to spends in the case of a stream (no pun intended) of individual drownings. I'm betting the cost to society of processing a mass shooting of say 10 people all at once dwarfs the cost of attending to the paper work involved in the cases of 10 drowning victims.

In other words we'd get a bigger bang for the buck trying to prevent more gun deaths than the splash we'd get trying to prevent more drownings.

So it’s a money issue? Simply restrict private pools & tubs in the home………If people want to partake in the water sports, it has to be in the presence of lifeguards…….If you are concerned about costs, force swimmers to obtain a licence and pay for the facilities if they wish to use them……..Public pools, lakes, rivers, beaches etc…………As for enforcement, since all swimmers are licensed (And pools registered of course) we’ll allow the police, under the auspices of the Provincial Chief Swimming Officer, to conduct periodic, random checks of peoples homes (Without warrants of course) to ensure that those with private pools and bathtubs are keeping them safe for the public’s benefit………….Sounds like a good idea to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Derek L

So it’s a money issue? Simply restrict private pools & tubs in the home………If people want to partake in the water sports, it has to be in the presence of lifeguards…….If you are concerned about costs, force swimmers to obtain a licence and pay for the facilities if they wish to use them……..Public pools, lakes, rivers, beaches etc…………As for enforcement, since all swimmers are licensed (And pools registered of course) we’ll allow the police, under the auspices of the Provincial Chief Swimming Officer, to conduct periodic, random checks of peoples homes (Without warrants of course) to ensure that those with private pools and bathtubs are keeping them safe for the public’s benefit………….Sounds like a good idea to me.

To add, I'm sure if these users of water had of been licensed, these innocent people never would have been murdered:

http://www.torontosun.com/2012/05/02/toronto-man-charged-with-murder-in-wifes-drowning

He said the victim was “under six months” pregnant with her first child when she died. The investigator was otherwise tight-lipped about the case.

However, several of the couple’s neighbours said they were told by officers at the scene that Karissa fell in the bathtub, hit her head and drowned

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jan/30/honour-killings-jury-afghan-family

A jury in Canada has found three members of an Afghan family guilty of drowning three teenage sisters and another woman in what the judge described as "cold-blooded, shameful murders" resulting from a "twisted concept of honour". The verdicts concludes a case that shocked Canadians.

Surely the deterrence factor of having registered bodies of water would have prevented these tragic crimes….

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now you're just spamming the board acting the idiot. If you don't care for the topic, don't post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Derek L

Now you're just spamming the board acting the idiot. If you don't care for the topic, don't post.

Hey now, no need for name calling………..Clearly the idea of restricting the public’s ability to access water is as viable as restrictions placed upon firearms in ensuring “the public‘s well being” …..As such, we should recognize that, like cars, fast food and alcohol/drug usage, there will be people injured and killed well partaking in such activities, be it from malfeasance, negligence, inexperience or just a plain old accident and/or “act of God”………

You claim to be a gun owner…..Ok………Are your guns safe? Is the public at risk because you have firearms? Since the registry, have your guns become more deadly? Without the registry, do you now feel the urge to commit a gun related crime?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are your guns safe? Is the public at risk because you have firearms?

Of course they are safe. My issue is with people like yourself that think they should be allowed to have a loaded pistol under their child's car seat in case they are car-jacked.

Since the registry, have your guns become more deadly? Without the registry, do you now feel the urge to commit a gun related crime?

Try and stick to the topic... the gun registry is irrelevant. Maybe read the OP again. The OP is about how it has been shown that more guns in an area equate to more homicides. This is the type of data that should be informing policy. Not gun nuts, like yourself, who think that having a gun in your pocket is "freedom".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Derek L

Of course they are safe. My issue is with people like yourself that think they should be allowed to have a loaded pistol under their child's car seat in case they are car-jacked.

Why are your guns safe and mine not then?………..And, as I’ve suggested in both this thread and the many others, if a Concealed Carry like permit became obtainable (Authorizations to Carry are already within the framework of the Firearms Act) in Canada, why then would said guns become “unsafe”?

And for the record, I’ve never advocated keeping a “loaded gun under a car child’s car seat”………Concealed carry would allude to said firearm being carried on ones person…..

Try and stick to the topic... the gun registry is irrelevant. Maybe read the OP again. The OP is about how it has been shown that more guns in an area equate to more homicides. This is the type of data that should be informing policy. Not gun nuts, like yourself, who think that having a gun in your pocket is "freedom".

More guns equals more homicides? So if a farmer or rancher has a deer rifle, shotgun and .22 he’s ok, but if his neighbour has a dozen rifles and shotguns in his home, there’s a greater chance of his guns being involved in a homicide?

Or better put, let’s say you have a couple of guns in your home, and let’s say I have about 50 in my home, my household is automatically more dangerous then yours? Please explain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More consequences from easy access to guns:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/story/2012/11/04/toronto-oshawa-funeral-plans-nick-king.html

A teenage boy who was accidentally shot dead in Indianapolis will be brought back to Ontario to be laid to rest next weekend.

This is what a gun under every pillow will get you:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57529715/retired-chicago-cop-fatally-shoots-son-after-mistaking-him-for-burglar/

A retired Chicago police officer accidentally shot and killed his son early Tuesday, after mistaking him for a burglar, the officer's family said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Derek L

More consequences from easy access to guns:

http://www.cbc.ca/ne...-nick-king.html

This is what a gun under every pillow will get you:

http://www.cbsnews.c...im-for-burglar/

More consequences from easy access to water:

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Parents+welcome+news+inquest+into+toddler+drowning/7448371/story.html

On Thursday, Dr. Roger Skinner, the regional supervising coroner for the east region office in Kingston, announced an inquest into the 2010 death of two-year-old Jérémie Audette. The child drowned in a backyard swimming pool at an unlicensed private daycare operator in Orléans in late July of that year.

And even in the land of Oz:

http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/alarm-at-increase-in-drowning-deaths-20121022-281ib.html

The National Drowning Report, released by the Royal Life Saving Society last month, found 45 drowning deaths in 2011-12 among 15- to 24-year-olds, a 25 per cent increase on the five-year average. More than 600,000 young adults in that age group are at ''extreme risk'' of drowning, the society says.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More consequences from easy access to water:

http://www.ottawacit...8371/story.html

And even in the land of Oz:

http://www.smh.com.a...1022-281ib.html

Stick to the topic at hand Spammer.

Instead of flaming the topic, argue the topic at hand.

Edited by The_Squid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're violating forum rules when you spam my topic with your drivel.

Do not post inflammatory remarks just to annoy people. If you are not bringing anything new to the argument, then do not say anything at all.

Some messages are not so much offensive as simply nuisance value.

--------------

It is also important that you stay on topic and keep the discussion focused. If the thread begins to wonder off into a new topic area, start a new thread and continue the discussion under the new thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Derek L

Stick to the topic at hand Spammer.

Instead of flaming the topic, argue the topic at hand.

Name calling? Isn't that:

violating forum rules
?

Now why don't you answer my previous questions of you, or in your words, argue the topic at hand:

Why are your guns safe and mine not then?………..And, as I’ve suggested in both this thread and the many others, if a Concealed Carry like permit became obtainable (Authorizations to Carry are already within the framework of the Firearms Act) in Canada, why then would said guns become “unsafe”?
Or better put, let’s say you have a couple of guns in your home, and let’s say I have about 50 in my home, my household is automatically more dangerous then yours? Please explain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More consequences from easy access to guns:

http://www.cbc.ca/ne...-nick-king.html

This is what a gun under every pillow will get you:

http://www.cbsnews.c...im-for-burglar/

Both of those incident elude to complete stupidity rather than easy access to guns.

1st story

You treat EVERY gun like it is loaded, weather it is loaded or not. Idiocy resulted in death, not ease of access to guns.

2nd story

The father was reactionary in his acts, instead of assessing the situation. Not to mention the guy was a former police officer and should already know a few things about when to shoot and how to safely handle firearms. Idiocy resulted in death, not the ease of access to guns.

Edited by GostHacked

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...