Monday, September 9, 2013
Homicide Detectives Probe Accidental Shooting Death
Local news reports
This one got me to thinkin'. Although I reject outright the pro-gun argument that says statistically there are very few accidental gun deaths, it occurred to me that there are even fewer than we think. Some of them are actually murders disguised as accidents.
This would lessen the impact of the accidental-death argument but increase that of the irresponsible-lawful-gun-owner argument.
What do you think? Please leave a comment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
So, are you rejecting the argument based on the statistical rarity, or are you rejecting the idea of considering accidental deaths statistically rare?
ReplyDeleteI'm saying anybody who uses the statistically-rare argument about people dying unnecessarily in order to justify doing nothing about it is a cold-hearted mother-fucker, as Jim Carrey said.
DeleteThen why don't we ban private automobiles? If we only had public transit we could make sure we only have highly trained, specially licensed drivers and fewer vehicles on the road, leading to far fewer accidental deaths.
DeleteBan back yard pools AND swimming in freshwater lakes and rivers--people are negligent when it comes to properly chlorinating their pools and you can't chlorinate the lakes to kill Naegleria fowleri--the amoeba that just killed a kid in Louisiana.
We probably need to ban meat too, because while wasting diseases are rare, some people do get them.
Ban alcohol to stop all of the alcohol poisoning deaths.
Et cetera
Of course, your gun control laws still don't go far enough--you claim that they would minimize accidents, but they wouldn't STOP them, so you're a cold-hearted motherfucker for not wanting to do more than that. You must ban ALL the guns and confiscate them all, door to door, to be truly sure you get all of them. After you destroy all of the proles' guns, you'll have to do the same with police and military arms. Then we can be free of any accidental deaths rather than merely minimizing them statistically.
Don’t forget about the suicides that also get classified as accidents. Whatever the count is, it’s negligible compared to the total suicides, but I have to think some suicidal people may have had reason to make it look like an accident.
ReplyDeleteIf the 600 a year number is actually lower due to some suicides and murders being wrongly lumped in there, it's still too high. It doesn't matter what the percentage accidental deaths to total gun owners is because by raising the bar on who can own guns we could lower it still.
DeleteI agree Mike, that the goal should be no one being killed accidentally. However, the most effective way to reduce the number of accidental shootings is education.
DeleteHowever people get the vapors about teaching gun safety in the schools, to the point where the classes were forbidden in some community colleges in California. I recall there were a lot of people acting the same way about teaching safe sex when it was first suggested.
And getting rid of All the guns--not just private ones--could eliminate the accidental gun deaths--why aren't you advocating that? Are you so cold-hearted that you still want to see an "acceptable" percentage die just because it's "low enough"?
Deletess, education is not the answer to this problem and I'll tell you why. The people who do the negligent things we read about every day have been educated and have been trained. Do you think these are guys who's father's and uncle's NEVEFR taught them about "the one in the chamber" or about the basic safety rules? Of course they did.
DeleteMainly the people doing this shit were raised in gun households, everyone they know owns and uses guns. But, in spit of that they prove themselves unfit.
The answer is a strict "one strike you're out" policy which would disarm many of these guys before they kill someone, and it would send a strong message to the others.
Education has reduced the problem to a tenth of what it used to be. Well, and some safety advancements like transfer bars, but a good chunk of the credit goes to the culture of the gun community.
Delete"Mainly the people doing this shit were raised in gun households, everyone they know owns and uses guns. But, in spit of that they prove themselves unfit."
DeleteReally Mike? And how exactly do you come to that conclusion?
Because that comment seems to be aimed at me and it couldn't be further from the truth. Care to elaborate?
Texas, what kind of background do you think these guys come from, ex-hippie parents where they preached peace and love?
DeleteSome might. It's foolish to make claims to know one way or the other.
DeleteSix hundred accidental deaths out of 100,000,000 does not justify the proposals that you offer. It's not that we're "cold-hearted mother fuckers." You simply don't have an answer worth attemptng.
ReplyDeleteI've told you before why you cannot use the 100 million like that.
DeleteBut, regardless of your less-than-honest attempts to portray the 600 as write-offs, the number could be cut in half or by 75% with a few minor changes. But you won't hear of being inconvenienced, selfish bastard that you are.
Mikeb, you're lying about me again. And you're making up numbers with no evidence again. And you're insisting that one estimate is better than another estimate, again without explaining why you think so. That's the point. You have no evidence to show that your proposals would do any good. You have no evidence generally for your claims.
DeleteYou must think that I don't really care that much about my rights, since you're not making anything close to a good case for taking them away.
Not that we needed to hear you say a life is not worth your right to own a gun, just pointing out that you constantly say, deaths are acceptable, so you can have your right to own a gun. And you will try nothing to decrease deaths because it will infringe on your right to own a gun. Yes, when talking about human life, I reject statistical rarity as an acceptable level of death, to justify your right to own a gun, or reject any reasonable attempt to reduce those deaths.
ReplyDeleteThis from a professor who claims "push" means "sell." Check the dictionary; it gives many different definitions of "push", not one includes the word "sell." While you are in the dictionary, check the word "right" as applied to "legal" rights for humans. It mentions nothing about "natural", or as you put it "rights one is born with" it defines "rights" as a legal concept that are written into law, so as to protect a person from having that "right" abused, or infringed. No matter what the 2nd amendment says, it is only legal if the Supreme Court says it is. Lucky for you the Supreme Court says you have a right to own a gun, otherwise you would not have that "right."
1. Civil rights are derived from natural rights. Beyond that, the American system of government requires said government to show sufficient cause any time it wishes to do something. We shouldn't have to ask the government permission.
Delete2. Apparently, you don't understand the concept of context. When you claimed that the NRA pushes guns, did you expect me to read that as in Wayne LaPierre shoving a gun down the road?
3. It's not that the lives lost don't matter. The problem is that no gun control proposal shows much promise of saving lives. You neglect that reality. Then there are the at least 800,000 lives that would be at risk in Mikeb's demands became law. And beyond that, there's the quality of life lost in a society that becomes a police state.
Gun control tactics do work and that is proven in American history. Again, you state you are unwilling to use those tactics, to save even one life. It is your false reality that they do not work.
DeleteI guess you refused to look at the dictionary definition of "push" if you had you would find the definition of "push" I used in my comment. But I understand as a professor(?) you have a hard time with word definitions.
What proof do we have from American history that gun control works? We went through violent decades of gun control in the middle of the twentieth century, and now, while gun control is going away in most states, violence is down.
DeleteRegarding your use of language, it would be best if you'd just admit that you were wrong.
I will admit nothing, except you (as a professor?) do not know word definitions.
DeleteWe outlawed the "tommy" gun, that saved lives and help the FBI arrest Mafia figures.Just one example. I suggest you study to lean the many other successful gun control laws that saved lives. As a professor? I'm sure you do not need me to do your research for you.
The end of prohibition and a series of gunfights/ambushes like with Bonnie and Clyde were what brought an end to the violence of the 30's, not the NFA.
DeleteAlso, the Thompson wasn't the cause of the violence, just a tool of it. It had been around over a decade before prohibition caused a massive crime wave.
Gun control Jim, if you're going to attempt to criticize my knowledge, perhaps you should get your facts straight first. The Thompson submachine gun was never outlawed. The National Firearms Act of 1934 added a bunch of red tape, but people can still own them legally to this day. The end of Prohibition and the combination of jobs programs and the Second World War had a lot more to do with ending the wave of bank robberies, mob violence, and so forth.
DeleteDid I say the "tommy" was the CAUSE of the violence? NO. Keep the lies coming. It's obviously the only debate tactic you have.
DeleteAnd again you show that you're a troll and that I was foolish to even bother entering this discussion.
DeleteIt proves you are a liar and should not be listened to.
Deletehttp://www.timescall.com/longmont-local-news/ci_24039183/18-year-old-woman-killed-friday-night-shooting
ReplyDeleteI've made a couple posts about that one. Thanks.
Delete