Pro-gun myths busted

[Ikazamay]

We don't blame alcohol for drunk drives. Or car manufactures for car accidents.
I'd be very sad if they limited hp or speed a car can have. They do that in some parts of Europe n Asia.

[Roysneon]

We don't blame alcohol for drunk drives. Or car manufactures for car accidents.
I'd be very sad if they limited hp or speed a car can have. They do that in some parts of Europe n Asia.

Proof?

[The Dark Side of Will]

Do you have any data or sources to back this up? For all we know you just pulled that number out of thin air.

I disagree. I don't think 2.3 deaths is considered "massive". Remember, we're talking about MASS shootings, not singular homicides. Including shootings that result in 1 or 2 deaths in to the category of "mass shootings" would corrupt and skew the data, as those events do not meet the criteria. Is 1 death considered a "mass shooting"? No. Is 2? No. What about 5? Ya, I'd say you're getting there with 5. There's no written-in-stone rule for just how many deaths constitute a "mass shooting", but 5 is a very reasonable place to start. 1 or 2 is not.

http://dailyanarchist.com/2012/07/31/auditing-shooting-rampage-statistics/

If you were interested in doing real research, you could find a good many more by googling "mass shootings stopped by armed bystanders"

When a guy shows up with multiple firearms and over 100 rounds of ammunition in multiple mags on his person, he was clearly planning to shoot more than 1, 2 or 2.3 people, despite the fact that he was stopped in the process.

Your argument is that if you exclude all the intended mass shootings stopped by armed bystanders, then armed bystanders don't stop any mass shootings... which is typical of broken MJ logic.

[The Dark Side of Will]

The FBI classifies any non-gang active shooter event involving 4 or more homicides as a mass killing, so they applied a higher standard than the FBI to determine that number.

PS your uncited quotation regarding an average of 2.3 fatalities relies on a very shitty math to come up with that number

http://ccwvslaw.org/item/1332

The definition of mass killing is that people were shot. This includes the assumption that the shooter wasn't stopped.

From your link (which actually critiqued the link I posted):

What is important, and what you should take away, are the two central numbers: 14.3 versus 2.3. When bystanders act, fewer victims die.

I don't see anything about shitty math. You posted something that agreed with what I said.

[Farbin Kaiber]

We are gonna need a quicklink in a sticky in P&R to quote this post a whole damn lot I think.

[ParsedOut]

I'm just gonna leave this here...because you all seem to prefer heavily biased research over what history has shown.

"The measures adopted to restore public order are: First of all, the elimination of the so-called subversive elements .... They were elements of disorder and subversion. On the morrow of each conflict I gave the categorical order to confiscate the largest possible number of weapons of every sort and kind. This confiscation, which continues with the utmost energy, has given satisfactory results."
- Benito Mussolini

"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty."
- Adolf Hitler

"All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The communist party must command all the guns, that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party."
- Mao Tse Tung


And for those saying that NO ONE in congress is trying to ban guns entirely.

"If I could have banned them all - 'Mr. and Mrs. America turn in your guns' - I would have!"
- Diane Feinstein

“I don’t believe people should to be able to own guns.”
- Barack Obama (during conversation with economist and author John Lott Jr. at the University of Chicago Law School in the 1990s)

Yeah, we're crazy to think our rights are under attack. These were said in public, to think there are no further hidden agendas across the party is naive.

[evandael]

We don't blame alcohol for drunk drives. Or car manufactures for car accidents.
I'd be very sad if they limited hp or speed a car can have. They do that in some parts of Europe n Asia.

Would it be sad?

[Liquidity]

I did not expect to see that texas is only half way up that chart in % of gun ownership

[CorvallisBMW]

Guns don't kill people, oh wait... yes they do.

Yep. And here's more proof.

On 12/14/12, Adam Lanza shot 26 people at Sandy Hook elementary, killing all 26 and wounding 0.

On that same exact day, Min Yongjun stabbed 24 people at Chenpeng Village Primary School, wounding 24 and killing 0.

Still think guns don't kill people? There are mentally disturbed people in every city in every country in the world. The difference between the US and every other country is that we give them assault rifles.

[CorvallisBMW]

Cars kill people to.

Yes but you have to be licensed, trained and insured to drive one, because they're dangerous is used improperly. How are guns any different?

[BraveUlysses]

The definition of mass killing is that people were shot. This includes the assumption that the shooter wasn't stopped.

First, you complain that mother jones made up the determination for what constitutes a mass killing for their analysis. I pointed out the FBI uses a similar definition but with a lower number for determining this distinction. And now you proceed to redefine it as you please.

Furthermore, the author decided for this study that the definition is:

What remains in the data set are rampage shootings in which a killer went someplace public, began firing at random people, and was forcibly stopped.

Obviously not very encompassing and done for a specific reason.

Next I removed incidents that did not fit within the scope of this analysis. Even though every incident on the list was a shooting, not every incident was a rampage shooting. So, I selected for incidents that included at least some indiscriminate targeting of bystanders. I removed incidents like Dedric Darnell Owens who shot and killed his classmate Kayla Rolland and then threw his handgun in a wastebasket (*meaning I removed incidents where the shooter killed all he was going to kill and stopped, because neither police or civilians actually reduced the deaths at the scene.) And I removed incidents like Michele Kristen Anderson who killed her entire family at a Christmas Party. So what remained were specifically rampage shootings in which a killer went someplace public and began firing at random people.

He's intentionally removing incidents (70% of his initial sample base) so that he can arrive at a foregone conclusion.

From your link (which actually critiqued the link I posted):

I don't see anything about shitty math. You posted something that agreed with what I said.

You couldn't be arsed to cite your sources, so I had to go your source information.

I don't agree with the conclusion of the article and I don't think the study presents any meaningful conclusion because the data has been cherry picked to reach a particular conclusion.

Fourteen incidents were stopped by police with a total of 200 dead. That comes to 14.3 murdered victims per incident. Fifteen incidents were stopped by bystanders with a total of 35 dead. That comes to 2.3 murdered victims per incident.

Starting with a list of 100 events, it then whittled down to 29 incidents for determining that 14.3 vs 2.3 "statistic."

You wouldn't accept such poor standards if the conclusion was pro-gun control, so you shouldn't accept them here.

[mrsleeve]

While Cato is somewhat biased to the libertarian side of the argument they are far more reputable than fucking Mother Jones, again their ENTIRE and SOLE existence is to further restrict firearms and push heavy unconstitutional gun control.


Stop worrying in about 40 years the American public will soon demand a amendment to the Constitution that will null and void the 2ed. Look at what they are doing to kids in school who even think the word gun!!!!!!! Its training kindergarteners and grade schoolers that guns are forbidden and taboo topics. Great way to train a couple of generations and get rid of firearms by public demand.

Oh yeah there are many modern Politioc's that have said they wish the 2a did not exist and that the Constitution was just a piece of paper, when one of those pesky amendments get in the way of what they want to do consolidate even more power in to the hands of the rulers, The 2ed, the 4th, the 5th hell even the gutted 9th and 10th......... Phased got 2 of the more prominent ones as of late, but the president (a "constitutional law scholar" btw) saying in a public interview to a large paper shortly before his 1st foray into state (or was it before his senate run IDR ) politics in 1996 IIRC that he things people should not own firearms is really someone that should hold the highest law enforcement position in the country?????

Yes but you have to be licensed, trained and insured to drive one, because they're dangerous is used improperly. How are guns any different?

Driving is a privilege Firearms ownership is a right. Do I need to explain the difference between the 2 again for you???

Freedom of travel is a right, not method, because there are many means to get your ass from point A to point B denying your privilege to drive is not a violation of your right to free travel.

Next we take people privilege to drive away from them AFTER they have shown a tendency to break the laws habitually and or regularly endanger others with them. What your advocating is that ALL firearms owners be punished BEFORE they do anything wrong with their firearms as if the mere act of firearms ownership is the force that drives criminal use of firearms. This is how the cars and firearms are different


Your Mother Jones study is nothing more than obvious statistical manipulation to create the desired results. Lets remove all the criminal vs criminal (a small fraction of a percentile of the general population) form the numbers, lets remove the suicide numbers from that graph as well and I think you would find that gun crime by law abiding joe citizen is one of the lowest in the world. You lambast me at every chance for poor taste mostly satirical post about a parking lot. And not "judge a entire culture" by the actions of a small fractional percentile of that culture. Your right, I suggest you turn that same argument and mentality on your self within this topic.

[profbooty]

Yes but you have to be licensed, trained and insured to drive one, because they're dangerous is used improperly. How are guns any different?

For good or bad, it is an enumerated right in the constitution (though Heller says that it can be subject to some restrictions), thus is arguably could be subject to fewer restrictions than automobiles. Car licensure likely would fall under the 9th amendment as something for the states to restrict.

You actually don't need to be license, trained and insured to drive a car. People can drive a car on private property without a license, farmers do it all the time (and use farm plates to drive on public roads). You need it to drive it in public without restrictions though.

This same logic has been utilized with respect to firearms in large cities, that one can possess them within the home, but not outside the home.

[BraveUlysses]

While Cato is somewhat biased to the libertarian side of the argument they are far more reputable than fucking Mother Jones, again their ENTIRE and SOLE existence is to further restrict firearms and push heavy unconstitutional gun control.

No, it doesn't. It's just a website and magazine.

There's no reason to make shit up to try to make your (misguided) point.

Stop worrying in about 40 years the American public will soon demand a amendment to the Constitution that will null and void the 2ed. Look at what they are doing to kids in school who even think the word gun!!!!!!! Its training kindergarteners and grade schoolers that guns are forbidden and taboo topics. Great way to train a couple of generations and get rid of firearms by public demand.

Oh yeah there are many modern Politioc's that have said they wish the 2a did not exist and that the Constitution was just a piece of paper, when one of those pesky amendments get in the way of what they want to do consolidate even more power in to the hands of the rulers, The 2ed, the 4th, the 5th hell even the gutted 9th and 10th......... Phased got 2 of the more prominent ones as of late, but the president (a "constitutional law scholar" btw) saying in a public interview to a large paper shortly before his 1st foray into state (or was it before his senate run IDR ) politics in 1996 IIRC that he things people should not own firearms is really someone that should hold the highest law enforcement position in the country?????

Chicken little called, he said you're a incoherent fucking moron.

[ST1G]

We are gonna need a quicklink in a sticky in P&R to quote this post a whole damn lot I think.

I expect it to pop up on Knowyourmeme in the next few weeks after rampant use on this site.