Nothing to laugh about

-
Status
Not open for further replies.
How true is this. Puts things in prospective:

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 themath: 0.000000925% 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, rape, assault all is 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–THERE IS NO 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. It must be preserved at all costs.

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." Information from Ted Nugent
 
Last edited:
Can't remember if you said this already but, have you ever fired a gun? Being what is considered a "good shot" is tough. Compound that by being in a defense situation? Forget about it.

What if there were 6 burglars? 5 rounds is not enough.

I am an avid hunter and use my firearms for sport and leisure. That being said, I do have a Remington 12 GA at my bedside, a .40 cal pistol at the top of the stairs, and a 9 mm at the bottom of the stairs, all of which are strategically placed, hidden, loaded and ready should I ever need to use them. My wife and I have no kids, and when nieces and nephews are over, my firearms are placed in spots where they 100% can not get to. I'll be honest, I hope I NEVER have to use them, but in the world we're in, you can never be too safe.
Sounds like you could start your own war. LOL. Yes I have fired a gun, it was one of my son's that he has locked up in a gun safe secured to the wall and the ammo is locked up stored in another part of the house. I hope you never have to use the guns either.
 
How true is this. Puts things in prospective:

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 themath: 0.000000925% 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, rape, assault all is 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–THERE IS NO 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. It must be preserved at all costs.

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."
You have certainly done your homework but it's sad when an innocent life is taken whether it's by accident or by some jackass running away from the police firing indiscriminately not caring where the bullets fly. If it's two drug dealers shooting at each other then who cares.
 
How true is this. Puts things in prospective:

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 themath: 0.000000925% 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, rape, assault all is 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–THERE IS NO 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. It must be preserved at all costs.

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."

I completely agree with the overall logic of this article. However, considering how badly they butchered the math in the first few lines, one should seriously question anything stated in the rest of the article.
 
I think it's time to put this to bed. Lots of opinions have been expressed whether good or bad. Hope nobody was offended by any of the comments made. The comments will never change the world as it is today.
 
I completely agree with the overall logic of this article. However, considering how badly they butchered the math in the first few lines, one should seriously question anything stated in the rest of the article.
Agreed. 30,000 is 0.01% of the population.

The logic is generally good though.
 
Another interesting statistic is that of all the causes of death combined in the US annually, total gun deaths are just 1.25% of that total.

(Approximately 2.6 million people die each year in the US)
 
You have certainly done your homework but it's sad when an innocent life is taken whether it's by accident or by some jackass running away from the police firing indiscriminately not caring where the bullets fly. If it's two drug dealers shooting at each other then who cares.
Information from Ted Nugent.
 
How true is this. Puts things in prospective:

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 themath: 0.000000925% 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, rape, assault all is 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–THERE IS NO 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. It must be preserved at all costs.

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." Information from Ted Nugent
I shared that on FB and was going to copy and post it here but I see you beat me to it :D
 
The Thread title is "Nothing to laugh about" Now this is funny. (Not).
What are the rules?
 
Nobody said it's funny. Your topic will soon escalate to harder politics period. You want to move this out of General? It's easy.
 
So who donated blood for the injured!

My wife and I did, not knowing if it would help the folks in Vegas, but the thought was there! We both carried our sidearms in and they did not have an issue with that! Concealed carry still has some limitations!
 
Last edited:
I think it's time to put this to bed. Lots of opinions have been expressed whether good or bad. Hope nobody was offended by any of the comments made. The comments will never change the world as it is today.
No offense taken, and again unfortunately, many perceptions & opinions are formed in ignorance or mis-information......or both. First, that rifle is equipped with a magazine,
not a "clip". It is just one of many mis-used words or terms such as "point blank range". Second, there a few facts You should acquaint Yourself with. A living animal will
typically live at least 7 seconds after sustaining a fatal wound, which is why some perps/victims are found almost 1/2 a block away from where they were shot, adrenaline
will get those legs moving faster than You'd believe. Killing isn't the objective of armed defense, it is incapacitating the threat, sometimes one is enough, sometimes it takes
an entire magazine esp. if the threat is higher than a kite. The FBI compiles data of all law enforcement armed engagements, and one of the metrics is the "one shot stop"
record, in other words they compare side arms/calibers for their record at neutralizing a perp with one round fired. For decades, because of it's power and still manage-able,
the .357 Magnum had the highest OSS rate. If You have to shoot someone in self defense, it does little good to shoot one round that strikes that individual if it does not
incapacitate them, because they will continue to shoot at You at that point if they are able. This moves into the value of suppressive fire, where the shot need not strike the
assailant, just prevent them from continuing the attack or being able to effectively shoot at You or your loved ones. That is why more than "a handful should be enough"
are sometimes needed. Hope that helps You Sir, This is YOUR thread, and You can close it if You wish besides the Mods, peace Brother...................
 
I'm totally in favor of selected Mod editing to keep the discussion on track and in the general forum.

Some of my own posts got deleted too, but it was necesssary to keep the discussion on topic.

It has been good so far and I'd like to see it stay that way.
 
The Thread title is "Nothing to laugh about" Now this is funny. (Not).
What are the rules?


i think i got the answer to where the "laughs" came from
Mark originally posted this in the jokes section of the forum and a mod moved it into the general
the title makes more sense in that light
 
Being fairly new to this site I didn't know there was another place to post it. Naturally I didn't post as a joke. It has brought to light some very serious issues and I have learned a lot but also has saddened me to what goes on in the world.
Thank you Killer 6 for educating me on the proper names of parts on a gun but will never use the info. I have fired one of my son's guns at a target to get a feeling what it is like to do that. Personally, they only kick I got out of it was when I pulled the trigger. Like I said before, I'd rather shoot an animal with my camera and that doesn't make any lesser of a man but that's my choice.
On a good note...hope everyone has a fabulous weekend, we'll be celebrating Thanksgiving and you celebrate Columbus Day.
 
Here's a snip.
I can post the entire article if appropriate, legal, and you want to read it.
It's worth a read.
And does address the OP.

The Culture of Death—and of Disdain
The Culture of Death—and of Disdain
Why do Americans own so many guns? Because they don’t trust the protected elites to protect them.

When Columbine happened in the spring of 1999, it hit me like a wave of sickness. I wrote a piece about the culture of death that produced the teenage shooters: “Think of it this way. Your child is an intelligent little fish. He swims in deep water. Waves of sound and sight, of thought and fact, come invisibly through that water, like radar. . . . The sound from the television is a wave, and the sound from the radio; the headlines on the newsstand, on the magazines, on the ad on the bus as it whizzes by—all are waves. The fish—your child—is bombarded and barely knows it. But the waves contain words like this, which I’ll limit to only one source, the news:

“. . . was found strangled and is believed to have been sexually molested . . . had her breast implants removed . . . took the stand to say the killer was smiling the day the show aired . . . said the procedure is, in fact, legal infanticide . . . is thought to be connected to earlier sexual activity among teens . . . court battle over who owns the frozen sperm . . . contains songs that call for dominating and even imprisoning women . . . died of lethal injection . . . had threatened to kill her children . . . had asked Kevorkian for help in killing himself . . . protested the game, which they said has gone beyond violence to sadism . . . showed no remorse . . . which is about a wager over whether he could sleep with another student . . .

“This is the ocean in which our children swim. This is the sound of our culture. It comes from all parts of our culture and reaches all parts of our culture, and all the people in it, which is everybody.”

We were bringing up our children in an unwell atmosphere. It would enter and distort them. Could we turn this around?

And here is the horror for me of Las Vegas: I was not shattered. That shatters me.





Cathy: You're living in a sewer, Frank.
e3bf25bd5cd4a43063393724aa0ce28b.jpg
 
Last edited:
The best quote I have seen in the Media regarding the LV shooting...

"Stephen Paddock did not have a criminal background, prior record and no evaluations of suspect mental health. Politicians would be better off offering up legislation banning high-rise hotels in attempting to make a connection to the Las Vegas shooting than they would by strengthening background checks."
 
Well, I've already heard He was recently prescribed anti-anxiety meds, really...imagine that. The Dude was loaded & pissed His time away spending obscene amounts of
cash, recycling it through the casinos, exactly what was He anxious about?
 
Here is another bit of information on the bump-stock devices the shooter used.

While a lot of rhetoric is flying around about who's to blame, these are the unspun facts...



In a June 2010 letter, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives told the manufacturer of the bump-stock device that it considered the device to be outside its regulatory jurisdiction, thereby posing no obstacle to its marketing. The bureau noted that the device was intended to help people whose hands have limited mobility and that it had no automatically functioning parts. Constant forward pressure with the non-shooting hand and constant rearward pressure with the shooting hand were required for it to work, the letter said.

But there’s more. Republicans by and large did not support Democratic legislation that would have restricted bump stocks. Such a provision was contained in a 2013 bill pushed by Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California.

There’s still more, though. The provision was in a bill that had little hope of GOP support because it sought to restore a ban on certain semi-automatic weapons, a non-starter for many in the GOP.

Legislation often contains pieces that might win bipartisan support if they were not entangled in sweeping measures unpalatable to the other side.

So, in essence, neither party in Congress had the foresight to take a clean run against bump stocks and similar devices before they were put to such lethal use.

Now you know.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
-
Back
Top