Shooting at CT Elementary School. WTF AMERICA?!

[Cain]

All automobile deaths in the USA, 2011:  34,485 (includes involvement by law enforcement)
All Firearm deaths in the USA, 2011:  31,347 (includes involvement by law enforcement)

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm

To be honest, that's a hell of a lot closer than I thought it would be.

For non-Americans, for comparison, the 2008 road death toll in the UK was 2538.

The UK has a population of 60 million, the USA, 311 million.

Cars beat guns, despite the oft-repeated assertion here that the only use of guns is to shoot 5 year olds.

And we're really shitty drivers.  Comes from each of us thinking we own the road.

No, I was surprised guns were so close to cars.  I knew the US driving death rate was pretty awfully high already, so I thought the gap would be much bigger.

[Faust]

I don't support legal sale of them because I see no necessity of use for them, and believe the few cases such as hunting and the like do not outweigh the deaths caused by them.

By that standard, we should outlaw ladders, too.

Misuse of ladders could admittedly be used to kill 30 people in a short space of time, Though outside of a Benny hill sketch would not prove efficient or easy, that's what guns are for.

So it's not the number of deaths, but the speed at which they occur?

It's the number of deaths, the easy at which they are performed, the speed at which they are performed, the likelihood of the victim surviving. I said so with my first posts in this thread, the Remote control analogy.
Impulsive violent crime and even premeditated is made more difficult without access to a gun.
Some will be put off by how it's more difficult, others because the suicide factor isn't as easy, others because when they sit down to google making a bomb they lose interest.
If it's more difficult to commit the crime, then by extension the rate goes down.

[Don Coyote]

How about swimming pools? What's your stance on those?

Each day in the United States, nine people drown.

Drowning is the second leading cause of accidental injury-related death among children ages 1 to 14.

Drowning is the leading cause of accidental injury-related death among children ages 1 to 4.

Accidental is a key word there.

Which is different than intentional.  You get less dead.

One person accidentally drowning in a pool kills less little kids than an unhinged 20 year old with a Bushmaster, yes.

So it's ok that more children per year die by accidental drowning, because it happens accidentally, and only one at a time?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

How about swimming pools? What's your stance on those?

Each day in the United States, nine people drown.

Drowning is the second leading cause of accidental injury-related death among children ages 1 to 14.

Drowning is the leading cause of accidental injury-related death among children ages 1 to 4.

Accidental is a key word there.

Which is different than intentional.  You get less dead.

One person accidentally drowning in a pool kills less little kids than an unhinged 20 year old with a Bushmaster, yes.

Good thing only one person dies a year from that.

Oh, wait.  9 a day.  So it's as bad as the school shooting every 3 days.

[Pæs]

How about swimming pools? What's your stance on those?

Each day in the United States, nine people drown.

Drowning is the second leading cause of accidental injury-related death among children ages 1 to 14.

Drowning is the leading cause of accidental injury-related death among children ages 1 to 4.

Accidental is a key word there.

Which is different than intentional.  You get less dead.

One person accidentally drowning in a pool kills less little kids than an unhinged 20 year old with a Bushmaster, yes.

...what?

[AFK]

I don't support legal sale of them because I see no necessity of use for them, and believe the few cases such as hunting and the like do not outweigh the deaths caused by them.

By that standard, we should outlaw ladders, too.

Misuse of ladders could admittedly be used to kill 30 people in a short space of time, Though outside of a Benny hill sketch would not prove efficient or easy, that's what guns are for.

So it's not the number of deaths, but the speed at which they occur?

It's the number of deaths, the easy at which they are performed, the speed at which they are performed, the likelihood of the victim surviving. I said so with my first posts in this thread, the Remote control analogy.
Impulsive violent crime and even premeditated is made more difficult without access to a gun.
Some will be put off by how it's more difficult, others because the suicide factor isn't as easy, others because when they sit down to google making a bomb they lose interest.
If it's more difficult to commit the crime, then by extension the rate goes down.

THIS

[The Good Reverend Roger]

How about swimming pools? What's your stance on those?

Each day in the United States, nine people drown.

Drowning is the second leading cause of accidental injury-related death among children ages 1 to 14.

Drowning is the leading cause of accidental injury-related death among children ages 1 to 4.

Accidental is a key word there.

Which is different than intentional.  You get less dead.

One person accidentally drowning in a pool kills less little kids than an unhinged 20 year old with a Bushmaster, yes.

So it's ok that more children per year die by accidental drowning, because it happens accidentally, and only one at a time?

That doesn't make sense.  Retail should be more expensive than wholesale.

Also, drowned kids don't count, because they don't make great TV more than once every 3 years or so.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I keep wanting to come back to the "Afghanistan" thing, because that's not, actually, what I had in mind.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:School_bombings

Didn't we used to firebomb churches & schools?

Good thing nobody got shot, though.

Yes.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I don't support legal sale of them because I see no necessity of use for them, and believe the few cases such as hunting and the like do not outweigh the deaths caused by them.

By that standard, we should outlaw ladders, too.

Misuse of ladders could admittedly be used to kill 30 people in a short space of time, Though outside of a Benny hill sketch would not prove efficient or easy, that's what guns are for.

So it's not the number of deaths, but the speed at which they occur?

It's the number of deaths, the easy at which they are performed, the speed at which they are performed, the likelihood of the victim surviving. I said so with my first posts in this thread, the Remote control analogy.
Impulsive violent crime and even premeditated is made more difficult without access to a gun.
Some will be put off by how it's more difficult, others because the suicide factor isn't as easy, others because when they sit down to google making a bomb they lose interest.
If it's more difficult to commit the crime, then by extension the rate goes down.

Interestingly enough, gun legalization or illegalization doesn't seem to have much effect on the murder rate.

[AFK]

How about swimming pools? What's your stance on those?

Each day in the United States, nine people drown.

Drowning is the second leading cause of accidental injury-related death among children ages 1 to 14.

Drowning is the leading cause of accidental injury-related death among children ages 1 to 4.

Accidental is a key word there.

Which is different than intentional.  You get less dead.

One person accidentally drowning in a pool kills less little kids than an unhinged 20 year old with a Bushmaster, yes.

So it's ok that more children per year die by accidental drowning, because it happens accidentally, and only one at a time?

At no point have I said anything about any death being okay.  It's a stupid analogy anyway and I should have just ignored it.  Guns are for killing, pools are for swimming.  To outlaw death we'd need to outlaw living.  But you can outlaw intentional death and put up barriers to make mass intentional death more difficult. 

[Don Coyote]

Accidental deaths are ok because I want to be able to swim in my pool and drive my car.

[AFK]

Accidental deaths are ok because I want to be able to swim in my pool and drive my car.

At no point have I said anything about any death being okay.  It's a stupid analogy anyway and I should have just ignored it.  Guns are for killing, pools are for swimming.  To outlaw death we'd need to outlaw living.  But you can outlaw intentional death and put up barriers to make mass intentional death more difficult.

[Faust]

I don't support legal sale of them because I see no necessity of use for them, and believe the few cases such as hunting and the like do not outweigh the deaths caused by them.

By that standard, we should outlaw ladders, too.

Misuse of ladders could admittedly be used to kill 30 people in a short space of time, Though outside of a Benny hill sketch would not prove efficient or easy, that's what guns are for.

So it's not the number of deaths, but the speed at which they occur?

It's the number of deaths, the easy at which they are performed, the speed at which they are performed, the likelihood of the victim surviving. I said so with my first posts in this thread, the Remote control analogy.
Impulsive violent crime and even premeditated is made more difficult without access to a gun.
Some will be put off by how it's more difficult, others because the suicide factor isn't as easy, others because when they sit down to google making a bomb they lose interest.
If it's more difficult to commit the crime, then by extension the rate goes down.

Interestingly enough, gun legalization or illegalization doesn't seem to have much effect on the murder rate.

Effect on the murder rates with guns or the total figure. Are you saying other murder rises to match the gun murder rate?
As you said legalisation or illegalistion(regulation?) are already too late in the game as guns have proliferated, I am willing to accept that it is a lost cause at this point if that is what you are saying.
It doesn't change my view on the legality on it but there may be no solution within the legal framework.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Also RWHN, automatic.
You keep using that word.
I do not think it means what you think it means.

To wit, an automatic firearm is one that will continuously discharge while the trigger is held down. Which is not what is commonly available to the citizens of the US, nor is it the type that that majority of "assault" rifles are. This includes military rifles.

Shoosh.  He's an expert on this.  Fully automatic, semi automatic, what's the difference?

Get rid of them both, fine by me.

No.

Don't worry, we happen to have a complete puss of a President right now so it will never happen anyway.

Also, since when does the president legislate?

[Pæs]

Accidental deaths are ok because I want to be able to swim in my pool and drive my car.

At no point have I said anything about any death being okay.  It's a stupid analogy anyway and I should have just ignored it.  Guns are for killing, pools are for swimming.  To outlaw death we'd need to outlaw living.  But you can outlaw intentional death and put up barriers to make mass intentional death more difficult.

SOMEONE SHOULD OUTLAW INTENTIONAL DEATH.