Why were there more than twice as many shooting victims as stabbing victims here?

[sharesunited]

Why did the only fatality result from gunshot wounds?

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/09/25/california.shooting/index.html?hpt=T2

[Duchess]

1. Well...

There might have been 2Xs as many people with guns. Or there were the same number of people with gun but each of them had two and were dual wielding.

There were people gathered after 2 am (assuming alcohol and or drugs involved) in LA (high crime rate).

We should ban guns, alcohol, drugs, and gatherings in LA after 2AM...for the children.

[sharesunited]

3. If you just take guns out of the equation, the damage drops dramatically.

[Duchess]

5. Agreed...

If you take stupid out of the equation then the damage drops even more dramatically. Stupid drunken violence is never the answer. We will never be able to get rid of stupid. We won't be able to get rid of drunks (I think we tried that one already). We won't be able to get rid of guns. We won't be able to get rid of knives. We won't be able to get rid of glass bottles.

But guns, knives, and broken bottles let smart and sober people protect themselves (to some extent) from stupid drunk people.

So, weapons aren't the biggest problem I see in this article. I think the biggest problem is stupid drunk people.

[cleanhippie]

15. Just like when you take logic out of the equation, the ignorance increases dramatically.

Oh, BTW, you're act is still stale.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

29. lol... n/t

[Hoyt]

87. He's got a point. The praise/worship of gun toting here is what's often stale (and disturbing).

[Hangingon]

32. I wonder. It might make the stabbings and beatings go up

for the unarmed people. I would like to see how many of the guns that were used were legal.

[wtmusic]

2. Because guns are an acceptable way to resolve our differences

and everyone should always have one, loaded and at the ready? :shrug:

[spin]

7. Another common foolish argument ...

I can't remember any posters here who oppose new gun control who have ever suggested that everybody should own firearms. Therefore your comment contributes little to the discussion. But if it makes you feel better about yourself, it does indeed have some value and it might give you enough confidence to join in a productive discussion.

Please do. Who knows, you might just come up with a solution that might make our country a better place.

[wtmusic]

8. So you do support gun control. Finally, a voice of reason in this forum. nt

[cleanhippie]

17. I think you already know that most do support it.

But you seem to want to ignore that fact and just post your hyperbole instead.

[spin]

24. Of course I support reasonable gun control...

For example, the NICS background check has proven effective. The Brady Campaign was largely responsible for this program with some modifications proposed by the NRA. I would like to see a way developed to use this system for private sales. (Many gun owners will disagree with me). Currently I only sell firearms to people who I personally know and who have a concealed weapons permit.)

Of course, "reasonable" is up the the individual. I like Florida gun laws which fit my definition of "reasonable". You can view a quick summary at http://crime.about.com/od/gunlawsbystate/p/gunlaws_fl.htm

People running around using firearms irresponsibly threatens my hobby. Every time some person with a severe mental problem decides to try a mass murder, or when a member of a drug gang decides that he has been disrespected and seeks revenge, or when a junkie robs a store or breaks into a home and shoots someone it makes all gun owners look bad.

So I favor tweaking the laws we have to make them more effective and also to enforce these laws to put those who chose to misuse or carry weapons illegally in jail for a lengthy period. I think future, gun control measure should focus most of their effort on the bad guys not the honest citizens.

[safeinOhio]

31. I agree that no

no honest citizen has anything to fear from NICS background checks on private handgun sales. Only when I propose it I get nothing but personal attacks.

[benEzra]

57. Unless the gun-control lobby has its way with record retention and expanding the Bush blacklists...

in which case there *would* be cause for concern.

And since the same people pushing for background checks on private sales are the ones pushing for abuse of the NICS point-of-sale checks, I think that concern is legitimate.

[cleanhippie]

73. You do? From who?

Or are you proposing MORE than just a background check?

[friendly_iconoclast]

38. I support gun control, too. Just not *your* version of it.

I'd say most Americans do as well. Unfortunately for prohibitionists, it's usually not the kind they would like.

Too often, they are wont to claim that not wanting the kind they want means not wanting any at all.

[SteveM]

78. Still waiting for you "voice of reason." And waiting.

[cleanhippie]

16. Is that what you think? Wow, you be be a very scared person.

[safeinOhio]

35. and how do you feel about

NICS checks on personal sales of handguns?

[cleanhippie]

44. Fine with it.

Any other question?

[safeinOhio]

51. You wouldn't find it

a hassle to get a check on your background every time you buy a handgun from a private source and wouldn't mind spending $5 or $10 so that it would make it more difficult for criminals and straw purchasers to obtain handguns? This would be knowing it wouldn't stop all criminal and other restricted people from obtaining handguns, but making it more difficult for them, thus putting a dent in violent gun crime?

[oneshooter]

53. And in a little while the fee could be raised to $50-100, To help fight violence.

And when that fails to "stop the violence" then it will go to $200 or even $300, all in the name of "crime control".

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[safeinOhio]

66. And the fee could go to zero

by making it a service required as part of a FFL as they already have the infrastructure to do it now. The fee I was speaking about was to cover the cost of setting up and handling the check. I was inferring that the background check would help restrict availability to those unlawfully trying to obtain handguns and that would help fight violence. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

[safeinOhio]

67. An example

of the reason for background check requirements in an article today on yahoo.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100927/ap_on_re_us/us_illegal_guns

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives traced more than 145,000 guns used in crimes in 2009 and found that more than 43,000 of those weapons were sold in other states.

Forty-nine percent of those guns were sold in Georgia, Florida, Virginia, Texas, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, California or Arizona.

Those states, the report said, have more relaxed gun laws, suggesting that "criminals and gun traffickers may favor certain states as the sources of guns."
For example, in states that do not require background checks for handgun sales at gun shows, the crime-gun export rate was two-and-a-half times as much as the rate in states that do require such checks.

[oneshooter]

68. Do you want to make it mandatory?

"in states that do not require background checks for handgun sales at gun shows" or a available option?
As for lowering fees, when has government ever lowered or removed fees? Even the telephone tax imposed in 1900 (or so) wasn't removed until 1990 (?). It to be used to pay for the Spanish-American War.
Many antis would jump at the chance to raise the fee to remove gun ownership from the less well to do. Those that live in the poorer parts of town. Sounds a little elitist to me.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[safeinOhio]

71. yes

just like buying from FFL. How much does it cost you for a check at store and how much have those fees increase since installed some 20 or 30 years ago? Do you want to make background checks from a FFL voluntary?

[friendly_iconoclast]

76. No, I want private sellers to be able to access the NICS system.

Like you and the NRA, I don't want ineligible persons buying firearms. It would be easier to prevent this if non-FFL

holders could use the NICS.


So what have you done or proposed to help make this possible?


Would you be willing to support open access to the NICS even without registration or a transfer tax?

[safeinOhio]

79. Sure I'd support having it open

I did purchase a handgun at a garage sale and then ran the numbers at the Sheriffs office to make sure it was not reported stolen or used in a crime.
However, we both know that few people would use this. It would be no more useful than making all FFL background checks voluntary.
In states that already have mandatory checks on private handgun sales, many guns used in crimes have been shown to have been purchased in states with no mandatory laws on handgun background checks on private sales.

If it was voluntary and you found a 1911 early serial number, unfired Singer made military 45 auto pistol for sale for $200 and the seller would only sell it if there was no checks. Would you turn it down?

[oneshooter]

80. It doesn't cost me a dime here, I have a Texas CHL.

You can guarantee a fee, if imposed will not be raised by a future goverment to impose gun control by proxy?

If so then how?
Remember the telephone tax. 90+ years to pay for a war that only lasted five months.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[safeinOhio]

83. Using CCW as a background check

is fine with me. Had that when I lived in Michigan.

I have no problem with taxes as they are the price of civilization. I gladly pay all of mine.

[oneshooter]

84. Please don't dance around or ignore the question asked.

"You can guarantee a fee, if imposed will not be raised by a future goverment to impose gun control by proxy?"

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[safeinOhio]

88. as easily as you can

guarantee that it would led to everyone working in the salt mines for 50 cents an hour.

I love to dance, by the way. But never to the tune you play.

:applause:

[oneshooter]

89. But YOU are pushing the fee. n/t

[safeinOhio]

90. and you ask for a guarantee

for a hypothetical. Please show the quote where I ever asked for a "fee"? If not, how about one of those apologies.

[X_Digger]

54. Why a fee? We already pay 11% excise tax..

.. why not a 1-800 number that I can call?

Oh right.. I forgot the other hobby horse you're so fond of- registration.

[cleanhippie]

56. My CCW proves I already passed the NICS check.

At least here in Washington, it does, I think. When I purchased my .45, I just showed the dealer my CCW and walked away with my new Ruger.

I guess as long as the NICS was online and free (or a buck or two for a lookup) and available to the public, I wouldn't mind it. As long as there was no requirement to log my transaction, but thats different from a NICS lookup.

SO, I had already said I was fine with it, why did you ask me again as if I had said otherwise?

[safeinOhio]

65. Just wanted to be sure you would support a

gun control measure.

[cleanhippie]

72. I'm pretty sure that most pro-2A folks agree with that.

Do you not read the threads, or what?

[oneshooter]

43. When you have a well thought out, reasoned idea please post it.

We will wait for it.
Really we will.
No matter how long it takes, or how much it hurts you.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[SteveM]

77. Are you advocating this philosophy? I don't. Perhaps you should explain.

[spin]

4. Obviously your point is that if there had been no firearms ...

no one would have shot. You also probably hope to point out that a firearm is easier to use than a knife.

O.K. I grant your points. Now how do you propose to eliminate firearms in our society?

I think we have been through this several times, but maybe you have come up with better solutions. In the past most of your solutions have resembled the war on drugs. Despite bans and tremendous amounts of money spent on enforcement, education and attempting to stop the flow of drugs into our country by closing the border and even sending people to foreign nations to help combat the production of drugs - the war on drugs is a failure.

[sharesunited]

6. Guns and ammo are manufactured and sold under color of legitimacy in our country.

Despite their inherent purpose of being used against others.

Very unlike recreational drugs.

[Duchess]

9. yeah, but

don't recreational drugs pose a threat to society at large if they are abused.

There is nothing inherently dangerous about guns or recreational drugs until they are abused by people with ill intent or extraordinary stupidity.

The common denominator is human action.

[sharesunited]

11. Ammonium nitrate is fertilizer. But access to it has been severely curtailed because of McVeigh.

Available only to properly licensed farming operations.

Its potential for doing damage to OTHERS was the rationale for choking down on the supply.

Access to guns and ammo is even less justifiable, inasmuch as they are designed and intended to be used against others with convenient lethality.

[Duchess]

14. And I can't get Sudafed in bulk any more

but people still use it to make meth.

It's harder to get large quantities of Ammonium Nitrate but it is still just as easy to get large amounts of diesel. You need the diesel to make the Ammonium Nitrate effective as a weapon. So, why can I get hundreds of gallons of diesel without a licence. In fact my car is full of that deadly stuff right now.

The restrictions on Sudafed and Ammonium Nitrate don't really do anything. A ban on guns would be just as useless.

[spin]

23. Most meth is now made in Mexico.

Mexican 'Ice' Replaces Home-Cooked Meth in U.S.
by Howard Berkes
April 4, 2007

The nation's war on drugs has at least one successful battle: State and federal laws limiting access to cold medicines containing ephedrine and pseudoephedrine have dramatically curtailed small "mom and pop" meth labs.

Thousands of these toxic and explosive labs flourished in the nation's interior, especially in rural areas in the South, Midwest and West. From 1998 to 2003, more than 38,000 small meth labs were discovered in rural areas — more than those found in cities and suburbs combined. More than 10,000 labs were seized in 2003 alone, the peak year for small labs. They were typically set up in bathrooms, kitchens, motel rooms, cars and abandoned buildings.

But in 2004, states began restricting purchases of ephedrine and pseudoephedrine, key ingredients in some meth recipes. Congress responded a year later with a federal law. The impact on meth labs was swift and dramatic, especially in the Midwest, where meth makers were especially prolific.

***snip***

There's one other key difference. Addicts and treatment counselors say Mexican meth, when smoked in its purer and more potent forms, leads to quicker and deeper addiction. They say it's an addiction that is tougher to kick.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9193186

[Hangingon]

34. I don;t agree that all meth is made in Mexico.

Meth labs are discovered or simply blow up allthe time. Labs are relatively easy to set up and there is a profit. There will be plenty of local lans. Mexico and Canada are meth sources I will agree.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

30. It's easily available to anyone with a few bucks... not just farmers.

Ammonium Nitrate is WAY WAY WAY WAY easier to buy than firearms or ammunition.

I can get technical grade Ammonium Nitrate in <5mins. So can you.
Go to the drugstore and simply buy some cold packs... now you some relatively pure NH3NO3.
The granulated chunks in a cold packets are NH3NO3. The liquid pouch is just distilled water.

[cleanhippie]

19. So the Constitution is "the color of legitimacy?" Oh yeah, thats right, your an authoritarian.

I forgot about that.

[spin]

22. Since firearms are used for many purposes ...

including hunting, target shooting and for law enforcement and for legitimate self defense, it would be very difficult to legally stop all manufacture of ammunition. The votes in Congress for such a measure do not exist.

The problems with your idea are:

1) Impossible to pass such laws through congress.

2) If such laws were passed, they would likely be overturned by the Supreme Court.

3) Many gun owners, anticipating the possibility of such measures, have stockpiled enough ammunition to last their lifetime. Quality ammunition doesn't go bad if stored properly.

4) People reload ammunition and many reloaders have stocked up on powder, primers and bullets. One pound of powder can reload a lot of ammo. For example there are 6000 grains of powder in a pound. I used a powder that enabled me to reload 740 .357 magnum rounds or 1130 38 special +P rounds from just one pound. When I was reloading I often had at least 10 pounds of different powders that I used for different calibers. I know some reloaders how have stocked up on powder and primers and many have more than 20 pounds of powder and 20 thousand primers (20 boxes). Bullets can be expensive but you can easily cast your own bullets.

5) If the manufacture of ammunition was prohibited in our country, a black market would be created. If tons and tons of drugs can be smuggled into our country, ammo would be no problem.

6) The fact that honest citizens would find it difficult to get ammo for their firearms would lead then to practice less and lack proficiency with their firearms. This could lead to more accidents or innocent people being injured.

7) Many citizens would not buy firearms for self defense as ammo would be hard to obtain legally and criminals would find a far better work environment to enjoy their profession. More home invasions and street robberies would occur and from the time the ban on manufacturing ammo would take place, statistics would show an increase in violent crime.

You tend to dismiss recreational drugs as harmless, but their use leads to many crimes from drug gangs fighting over turf to addicts breaking into homes or robbing businesses to obtain the money to buy their drugs.

I would legalize many currently illegal drugs to stop the profit motive of dealing. This in itself would stop a considerable amount of gun related violence and do far more to reduce deaths caused by firearms than any ideas I expect you to come up with. It's past time to withdraw from the War on Drugs. (Of course, like your fantasy, this will never happen. At the best we can hope to legalize marijuana, which would be a good start.)

Of course we have many other problems in our nation such as the availability of good jobs and our failure to educate our students to actually do these jobs.

[oneshooter]

45. Would you also disarm the Police and Military? n/t

[cleanhippie]

18. Me, me, me, me! I know the answer.

But I'm sure he will just regurgitate it, again.

[spin]

26. And we will present our arguments once again ...

remember this forum attracts a lot of lurkers. Many lurkers feel that all Democrats hate firearms and want to ban and confiscate them.

If they find that a very progressive forum such as DU has a percentage of posters who are pro-gun and can argue in a logical manner against those who want more draconian gun control, they may visit more often. Eventually they may decide that all Democrats are not as bad as their conservative friends think. The may visit other sub forums and decide that they do agree with many of the things Democrats believe. They may actually vote for Democrats.

Sharesunited offers us an excellent opportunity to portray our party as more welcoming than most conservatives believe.

[safeinOhio]

36. Then there may be posters here, like that one

that could be Bradybunch plants that are only here to make honest, sane gun owners look like crazy people. They are doing a very good job of it too.

[friendly_iconoclast]

39. S'alright. The Brady Bunch have their own credibility problems, as witness here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x341047#341053

Remember, this is their President and chief spokesperson here contradicting himself

Brings to mind a line that DUers of a certain age might remember: "Would you buy a used car from this man?"

[safeinOhio]

40. Like I said, they apparently have

people here posing as gun rights supporters making very stupid remarks just to make gun owners look like angry idiots. They only make reactionary remarks and personal attacks to make you look bad.

[mistertrickster]

10. Gun control is a total loser for Dems. We don't want to go there.

There are more guns in the US than people. History has dealt us this hand, and we can't change it now.

We can only destroy the Democratic Party and still lose the issue.

Put it in "the too-hard box."

On edit -- I used to be a card-carrying member of Handgun Control. Do a bone-dig of my early posts here if you don't believe it.

But it's futile in the current political climate.

[sharesunited]

13. Yes, politically futile. It takes the judiciary and a properly configured Supreme Court.

Exactly the same way racial equality was accomplished.

Legislatures are always the prisoners of fear, ignorance and bigotry of the voters.

[cleanhippie]

20. "Properly configured Supreme Court." At least your true colors are showing, Shares.

Your authoritarianism is really starting to come out. Don't stop now. let it out, man, show us what your plans are. What other authoritarian ideas do you have?

[sharesunited]

47. You like the Citizens United decision I take it? Freedom galore. For whom and to what end?

[cleanhippie]

48. As usual, you could not be more wrong.

My opinion on the Citizens United case is on record here, look it up. But nice try to deflect the light on your authoritarianism, most like you don;t wnat that kind of attention.

[sharesunited]

50. Sorry, coming up empty handed as to your record on the Citizens United case.

Are you an anti-corporate authoritarian for the good of the People?

[cleanhippie]

55. You, my friend, are the only authoritarian here.

What other Constitutional rights will I lose under your rule?

[Name removed]

59. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[X_Digger]

60. Now you're denying the right to self-defense??

"As we have seen, the first public expression of disenchantment with nonviolence arose around the question of "self-defense." In a sense this is a false issue, for the right to defend one's home and one's person when attacked has been guaranteed through the ages by common law." Martin Luther King, Jr., Where Do We Go From Here: Chaos or Community? Chapter II, Black Power, Page 55, Harper & Row Publishers Inc., First Edition, 1967.

[sharesunited]

62. You are trying to cast MLK as a gun nut and I am just not buying it.

Don't try to sell Doctor King to me as a shoot first gangsta. I am just not going to buy your shit.

[X_Digger]

69. Dr. King believed in self-defense. You, apparently, do not.

Question for you: Do you believe in the right of a person to use force, even lethal force, against an attacker to avoid grievous bodily injury or death? It's a simple yes or no question.

[cleanhippie]

61. As usual, you are fact-free and full of inflammatory rhetoric.

Actually, I think that a personal attack. Is that why you don't like guns? Can't trust yourself around them or else you might "snap"? Maybe when you say things like that (as you frequently do) you are just projecting?

[spin]

27. Since gun control is rooted in racism ...

it would be all to easy to make accusations and insinuations.

I prefer to avoid that approach, and merely consider you a person who for some (possibly valid) reason has a hatred of firearms.

I doubt that anything I can say will change your views and I know for a fact that nothing you can say will change mine.

Perhaps we could find some common ground on some points. Compromise can often lead to progress.

[Pavulon]

37. Well we have 2 cases setting the bar for personal ownership, translation

your position is done. You are now on the side of the anti abortion, anti racial equality, just anti.

You get it, you are now the fringe.

[oneshooter]

46. How is your plan to let foreign army's collect the guns?

Namely Mexico and Canada. Have you worked out the legal kinks in that one yet?

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[Froward69]

12. Violence is proportional to Population.

the method of that violence is directly related to the availability of weapons.

a society that has no firearms, uses knives.

Frankly, If I am gonna die... I would rather be shot than stabbed.

[cleanhippie]

21. Hey you! You stop that right now. The OP does NOT like facts or evidence.

All of your claims need to be emotional and authoritarian in nature.

[Froward69]

25. Phbbbit...

:loveya: :fistbump: :rofl:

yes I do have a problem with pointing out the reality of things.

I wrote a College paper on this very subject... got an A. I compared Canada, GB, the US and USSR's crime stats to population... the results were remarkably similar. The ONLY determining factor in reduction of Violence/crime was Economic Stability.

[spin]

28. Would you agree that more guns does not mean more violence?

Far more factors are involved.

[safeinOhio]

52. I would think the biggest problem

with gun violence is handguns in the hands of those not legally able to possesses them, not more guns in the hands of responsible law abiding citizens.

[benEzra]

58. Agreed. (n/t)

[Froward69]

70. Yes I would

as a single person cannot fire more than one weapon at a time.

Violence is going to happen. Be it with a Gun, knife, brass knuckles, or bare fist.

[shadowrider]

41. Frankly, if I'm gonna die

I want to go quietly in my sleep like my grandfather, not yelling and screaming like the passengers in his car.

(drum roll)..thank you, thank you, I'll be here till Thursday. Try the veal and don't forget to tip.

[lawodevolution]

33. Everytime the gun control crowd takes a major step forward...

The number of civilian owned guns increases by millions. You try to ban assault rifles, now it's our most popular gun. You try to ban guns, now there are at least 75 million extra guns out there that only exist because a person was scared into buying more guns thanks to the gun control crowd. The only thing SharesUnited has done has been to motivate people to buy more guns.

[shadowrider]

42. I told SU what he needs to do. Unfortunately, the post was deleted.

But my opinion still stands nonetheless.

[cleanhippie]

49. Did you tell him

to fuck off and die with his authoritarian desires? I really want to, but....

[sharesunited]

63. I didn't have it said all. As we drew our swords?

[pneutin]

64. Because gang members prefer guns over knives

Why is this even news?

[spin]

74. It's hard to do a drive by with a knife. (n/t)

[safeinOhio]

75. You haven't seen those

high powered sniper knifes?

[oneshooter]

81. If you have seen them, then do you support

a ban on bayonet mounts on rifles?

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[safeinOhio]

82. only on full auto handguns.

[oneshooter]

85. The question wasn't about handguns. Please answer the question.

[safeinOhio]

86. My answer was about handguns

guess you'll have to change the question.:smoke: