37231
Post by: d-usa
From the "in how many ways can you screw up" department:
http://news.yahoo.com/cops-man-killed-home-intruder-brother-housemate-181729903.html?nf=1
PITTSBURGH (AP) — A former juvenile delinquent fatally shot an armed robber who broke into his apartment through a bathroom window and accidentally shot and killed his visiting teenage brother and his housemate while exchanging shots with the intruder, a district attorney said Wednesday.
Meiko Devaughn has been charged with illegally possessing a firearm, drug possession and receiving stolen property.
Devaughn, who police said was in the "drug business," shot at 25-year-old Kadeem Williams after Williams climbed into the apartment Devaughn shared with Akeilah Solomon at about 3:20 a.m. Monday, said Stephen Zappala Jr., the Allegheny County district attorney.
As the two fired shots at each other, Devaughn, 22, also struck the 20-year-old Solomon and his 16-year-old brother, Jaimill Kenney, with bullets, killing them. Williams was mortally wounded in the exchange but managed to run outside before dying, Zappala said.
It's not clear whether Devaughn will face charges for the shootings, Zappala said, because the investigation is continuing.
"We have to know all the evidence first," the prosecutor said at the scene Tuesday. "You're entitled to protect yourself."
The county medical examiner determined Solomon was shot once in the head, while Kenney and Williams were shot once each in the chest. Kenney was visiting his brother.
Devaughn was adjudicated delinquent, the juvenile court equivalent of a conviction, in 2009 on charges including robbery and aggravated assault. That's why it was illegal for Devaughn to possess the .40-caliber Glock pistol he used, according to a criminal complaint. The gun had been stolen from neighboring Butler County.
Police believe Williams was trying to rob Devaughn because $1,000 worth of marijuana and $14,000 cash were found in the apartment, police said.
Zappala said investigators believe at least one other intruder may have been involved. They didn't find a gun near Williams' body outside the apartment complex but did find shells from a different caliber weapon at the scene, he said.
Online court records don't list an attorney for Devaughn, who was in custody awaiting arraignment Wednesday.
121
Post by: Relapse
Illiegal gun owned by a drug dealer with a record? No surprises how this turned out.
1464
Post by: Breotan
So, what are we supposed to discuss here?
43578
Post by: A Town Called Malus
Whether or not "defending yourself from a burglar" is a valid defence for killing innocent bystanders?
121
Post by: Relapse
Not really much to talk about. Just life in seamier side of the big city.
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
83501
Post by: Nostromodamus
1464
Post by: Breotan
What part of "$1,000 worth of marijuana and $14,000 cash were found in the apartment" and " illegal for Devaughn to possess the .40-caliber Glock pistol he used <snip> stolen from neighboring Butler County." allows this to be a test of the castle doctrine?
How about renaming the thread to something more accurate to the story like, "Drug dealer kills friend and relative in shootout with burgler."
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
 d-usa wrote:From the "in how many ways can you screw up" department:
Was the man successful in a "we had to destroy the village to save it" way?
43578
Post by: A Town Called Malus
Was just looking through the pennsylvania stand your ground laws and it says you lose the cover of the law if you're involved in another crime at the time. So illegal possession of a firearm and drugs render any defence under SYG void? Seems fair enough, two charges of manslaughter on the way.
121
Post by: Relapse
 A Town Called Malus wrote:
Was just looking through the pennsylvania stand your ground laws and it says you lose the cover of the law if you're involved in another crime at the time.
So illegal possession of a firearm and drugs render any defence under SYG void? Seems fair enough, two charges of manslaughter on the way.
Agreed. Just a scumbag getting ready to be absent for a while thanks to multiple infractions of the law, capped by killing two people with an illegally possessed weapon.
1464
Post by: Breotan
So, are we done here?
7361
Post by: Howard A Treesong
Citing 'self defence' doesn't let you abdicate all responsibility for your actions.
37231
Post by: d-usa
Welll, we can continue the "just two criminals killing each other and taking out other people with them, nothing going on, keep on going" trend and pretend there is nothing to talk about here.
Or we can also talk about the fact that, at least in this case, it appears that:
- Having a gun doesn't automatically make it safer
- Shooting at a bad guy doesn't automatically make you safer
- Shooting at a bad guy can result in innocent people getting shot
If you ignore the whole "bad guy had a gun he shouldn't have had" thing you could, actually, have a productive discussion about the use of a firearm in the defense of your home.
43621
Post by: sirlynchmob
Relapse wrote:Illiegal gun owned by a drug dealer with a record? No surprises how this turned out.
how does the legality of the gun influence the outcome? We both know there are hundreds of cases where legally owned firearms are used to defend the castle while shooting the family that lives there.
I heard a noise, I shot them, oh gak it was my wife/kid/dog.
47598
Post by: motyak
Enough with the 1 line "this thread has no purpose" posts. That's spammy, which is against the rules of the forum, and adds a grand total of nothing to the discussion.
If you don't think there is a valid discussion to be had...then go to another thread.
80673
Post by: Iron_Captain
Well... He did kill the intruder!
55107
Post by: ScootyPuffJunior
No need to dig back at things I asked to be stopped, motyak
d-usa wrote:Welll, we can continue the "just two criminals killing each other and taking out other people with them, nothing going on, keep on going" trend and pretend there is nothing to talk about here.
Or we can also talk about the fact that, at least in this case, it appears that:
- Having a gun doesn't automatically make it safer
- Shooting at a bad guy doesn't automatically make you safer
- Shooting at a bad guy can result in innocent people getting shot
If you ignore the whole "bad guy had a gun he shouldn't have had" thing you could, actually, have a productive discussion about the use of a firearm in the defense of your home.
Those are all interesting points, D.
Even though this guy was pretty much a criminal, does that mean he doesn't have the right to defend himself?
37231
Post by: d-usa
 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:
Even though this guy was pretty much a criminal, does that mean he doesn't have the right to defend himself?
He probably would have been clear to defend himself if he bashed the bad guys head in with a baseball bat or something, also would have had less of a risk of accidentally bashing in his housemate and his brother in the fight. Probably also could have stabbed him or killed him with some sort of Home Alone style home defense system. He would have had to clear out his drugs and cash before the cops responded to his call though  .
My take on this is pretty much just the "keep a gun around to protect yourself and your family in case somebody breaks into your house" aspect of the story as an example of how those kind of scenarios can potentially turn out.
121
Post by: Relapse
sirlynchmob wrote:Relapse wrote:Illiegal gun owned by a drug dealer with a record? No surprises how this turned out.
how does the legality of the gun influence the outcome? We both know there are hundreds of cases where legally owned firearms are used to defend the castle while shooting the family that lives there.
I heard a noise, I shot them, oh gak it was my wife/kid/dog.
We also know there are literally tens of thousands of cases yearly where alcohol contributes to someone getting killed when they're out for a drive, yet the media loses no chance to broadcast gun related deaths while pretty much ignoring those caused by alcohol. The media goes on to glorify alcohol use, in fact, even though far more people die because of it and 2 out of 3 domestic abuse cases are alcohol related. This is why I get jaded about "guns iz evil" threads.
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
d-usa wrote:- Having a gun doesn't automatically make it safer
It's a gun, not a magic talisman
d-usa wrote:- Shooting at a bad guy doesn't automatically make you safer
See above
d-usa wrote:- Shooting at a bad guy can result in innocent people getting shot
If you do not pay attention to the Four Rules;
- All guns are always loaded. (Treat them so!)
- Never point the gun at anything you are not willing to destroy.
- Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on target (and you have made the decision to shoot).
- Be sure of your target and what is beyond it.
ScootyPuffJunior wrote:Even though this guy was pretty much a criminal, does that mean he doesn't have the right to defend himself?
He absolutely has a right to defend himself. He just does not have the right to own a gun
51881
Post by: BlaxicanX
Relapse wrote:sirlynchmob wrote:Relapse wrote:Illiegal gun owned by a drug dealer with a record? No surprises how this turned out.
how does the legality of the gun influence the outcome? We both know there are hundreds of cases where legally owned firearms are used to defend the castle while shooting the family that lives there. I heard a noise, I shot them, oh gak it was my wife/kid/dog.
We also know there are literally tens of thousands of cases yearly where alcohol contributes to someone getting killed when they're out for a drive, yet the media loses no chance to broadcast gun related deaths while pretty much ignoring those caused by alcohol. The media goes on to glorify alcohol use, in fact, even though far more people die because of it and 2 out of 3 domestic abuse cases are alcohol related. This is why I get jaded about "guns iz evil" threads.
Are you as jaded about "terrorism iz evil" threads, considering that death-by-terrorist only accounts for like half of 1% of all American deaths? It's interesting how the "b-but more people are killed by X!" argument only ever rears its head when the object under scrutiny is guns.
49806
Post by: yellowfever
This shows that when you get a gun you should also get training. It sounds like both shooters were thugs, probably holding there guns sideways or whatever the fad is now a days. Of course that doesn't change the fact that he wasn't even allowed to have the gun in the first place.
121
Post by: Relapse
 BlaxicanX wrote:Relapse wrote:sirlynchmob wrote:Relapse wrote:Illiegal gun owned by a drug dealer with a record? No surprises how this turned out.
how does the legality of the gun influence the outcome? We both know there are hundreds of cases where legally owned firearms are used to defend the castle while shooting the family that lives there.
I heard a noise, I shot them, oh gak it was my wife/kid/dog.
We also know there are literally tens of thousands of cases yearly where alcohol contributes to someone getting killed when they're out for a drive, yet the media loses no chance to broadcast gun related deaths while pretty much ignoring those caused by alcohol. The media goes on to glorify alcohol use, in fact, even though far more people die because of it and 2 out of 3 domestic abuse cases are alcohol related. This is why I get jaded about "guns iz evil" threads.
Are you as jaded about "terrorism iz evil" threads, considering that death-by-terrorist only accounts for like half of 1% of all American deaths?
It's interesting how the "b-but more people are killed by X!" argument only ever rears its head when the object under scrutiny is guns.
The fact that far more harm comes to society from alcohol than guns is a matter of statistical record. The fact that the media goes out of its' way to vilify guns and gun owners to the point of publishing the addresses of gun owners, while advertising alcohol is laughable
55107
Post by: ScootyPuffJunior
 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
- All guns are always loaded. (Treat them so!)
- Never point the gun at anything you are not willing to destroy.
- Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on target (and you have made the decision to shoot).
- Be sure of your target and what is beyond it.
In a perfect, controlled world these rules would prevent needless deaths. Unfortunately, we don't live in a perfect world and as you've stated, a gun isn't a magic talisman.
ScootyPuffJunior wrote:Even though this guy was pretty much a criminal, does that mean he doesn't have the right to defend himself?
He absolutely has a right to defend himself. He just does not have the right to own a gun
But the other, badder guys have guns. Shouldn't he need a gun to defend himself against them?
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:But the other, badder guys have guns. Shouldn't he need a gun to defend himself against them?
He is legally disqualified from owning a firearm and actively engaged in criminal activity.
51881
Post by: BlaxicanX
Relapse wrote: BlaxicanX wrote:Relapse wrote:sirlynchmob wrote:Relapse wrote:Illiegal gun owned by a drug dealer with a record? No surprises how this turned out.
how does the legality of the gun influence the outcome? We both know there are hundreds of cases where legally owned firearms are used to defend the castle while shooting the family that lives there. I heard a noise, I shot them, oh gak it was my wife/kid/dog.
We also know there are literally tens of thousands of cases yearly where alcohol contributes to someone getting killed when they're out for a drive, yet the media loses no chance to broadcast gun related deaths while pretty much ignoring those caused by alcohol. The media goes on to glorify alcohol use, in fact, even though far more people die because of it and 2 out of 3 domestic abuse cases are alcohol related. This is why I get jaded about "guns iz evil" threads.
Are you as jaded about "terrorism iz evil" threads, considering that death-by-terrorist only accounts for like half of 1% of all American deaths? It's interesting how the "b-but more people are killed by X!" argument only ever rears its head when the object under scrutiny is guns.
The fact that far more harm comes to society from alcohol than guns is a matter of statistical record. The fact that the media goes out of its' way to vilify guns and gun owners to the point of publishing the addresses of gun owners, while advertising alcohol is laughable
The fact that far more harm comes to society from guns then terrorism is also a matter of statistical record. I can see that you're trying to squirrel out of addressing why you don't have the same attitude toward terrorism as you do gun crime, but I'm just not going to let you.
121
Post by: Relapse
BlaxicanX wrote:Relapse wrote: BlaxicanX wrote:Relapse wrote:sirlynchmob wrote:Relapse wrote:Illiegal gun owned by a drug dealer with a record? No surprises how this turned out.
how does the legality of the gun influence the outcome? We both know there are hundreds of cases where legally owned firearms are used to defend the castle while shooting the family that lives there.
I heard a noise, I shot them, oh gak it was my wife/kid/dog.
We also know there are literally tens of thousands of cases yearly where alcohol contributes to someone getting killed when they're out for a drive, yet the media loses no chance to broadcast gun related deaths while pretty much ignoring those caused by alcohol. The media goes on to glorify alcohol use, in fact, even though far more people die because of it and 2 out of 3 domestic abuse cases are alcohol related. This is why I get jaded about "guns iz evil" threads.
Are you as jaded about "terrorism iz evil" threads, considering that death-by-terrorist only accounts for like half of 1% of all American deaths?
It's interesting how the "b-but more people are killed by X!" argument only ever rears its head when the object under scrutiny is guns.
The fact that far more harm comes to society from alcohol than guns is a matter of statistical record. The fact that the media goes out of its' way to vilify guns and gun owners to the point of publishing the addresses of gun owners, while advertising alcohol is laughable
The fact that far more harm comes to society from guns then terrorism is also a matter of statistical record.
I can see that you're trying to squirrel out of addressing why you don't have the same attitude toward terrorism as you do gun crime, but I'm just not going to let you.
I'm not trying to squirrel out of anything, and it seems like you're trying to tell people I support terrorism. If that's the case, you and I will have some serious difficulties with each other.
55107
Post by: ScootyPuffJunior
Dreadclaw69 wrote: ScootyPuffJunior wrote:But the other, badder guys have guns. Shouldn't he need a gun to defend himself against them?
He is legally disqualified from owning a firearm and actively engaged in criminal activity.
Allegedly engaged in criminal activity.
And really, he sounds like an entrepreneur that was defending his home and the benefits of his hard work from someone that was seeking to rob him.
43621
Post by: sirlynchmob
Relapse wrote:sirlynchmob wrote:Relapse wrote:Illiegal gun owned by a drug dealer with a record? No surprises how this turned out.
how does the legality of the gun influence the outcome? We both know there are hundreds of cases where legally owned firearms are used to defend the castle while shooting the family that lives there.
I heard a noise, I shot them, oh gak it was my wife/kid/dog.
We also know there are literally tens of thousands of cases yearly where alcohol contributes to someone getting killed when they're out for a drive, yet the media loses no chance to broadcast gun related deaths while pretty much ignoring those caused by alcohol. The media goes on to glorify alcohol use, in fact, even though far more people die because of it and 2 out of 3 domestic abuse cases are alcohol related. This is why I get jaded about "guns iz evil" threads.
but the alcohol problem is well addressed, we have many organizations that platform against drunk driving. MADD, DADD, SADD, ETC. they also show commercials about DUI checkpoints and how they can ruin your life. And we actually passed laws and regulations holding bar owners accountable, setting lower BAC levels, and having DUI checkpoints. laws and regulations are saving lives.
Some fun facts for you:
the reason 2 out of 3 people die in domestic abuse cases is because there are guns in the house.
this year in america more people will die from gun violence than from all car fatalities.
the war against alcohol is winning, while the blind eye is turned towards gun violence.
121
Post by: Relapse
sirlynchmob wrote:Relapse wrote:sirlynchmob wrote:Relapse wrote:Illiegal gun owned by a drug dealer with a record? No surprises how this turned out.
how does the legality of the gun influence the outcome? We both know there are hundreds of cases where legally owned firearms are used to defend the castle while shooting the family that lives there.
I heard a noise, I shot them, oh gak it was my wife/kid/dog.
We also know there are literally tens of thousands of cases yearly where alcohol contributes to someone getting killed when they're out for a drive, yet the media loses no chance to broadcast gun related deaths while pretty much ignoring those caused by alcohol. The media goes on to glorify alcohol use, in fact, even though far more people die because of it and 2 out of 3 domestic abuse cases are alcohol related. This is why I get jaded about "guns iz evil" threads.
but the alcohol problem is well addressed, we have many organizations that platform against drunk driving. MADD, DADD, SADD, ETC. they also show commercials about DUI checkpoints and how they can ruin your life. And we actually passed laws and regulations holding bar owners accountable, setting lower BAC levels, and having DUI checkpoints. laws and regulations are saving lives.
Some fun facts for you:
the reason 2 out of 3 people die in domestic abuse cases is because there are guns in the house.
this year in america more people will die from gun violence than from all car fatalities.
the war against alcohol is winning, while the blind eye is turned towards gun violence.
Sources?
43621
Post by: sirlynchmob
Relapse wrote:sirlynchmob wrote:Relapse wrote:sirlynchmob wrote:Relapse wrote:Illiegal gun owned by a drug dealer with a record? No surprises how this turned out.
how does the legality of the gun influence the outcome? We both know there are hundreds of cases where legally owned firearms are used to defend the castle while shooting the family that lives there.
I heard a noise, I shot them, oh gak it was my wife/kid/dog.
We also know there are literally tens of thousands of cases yearly where alcohol contributes to someone getting killed when they're out for a drive, yet the media loses no chance to broadcast gun related deaths while pretty much ignoring those caused by alcohol. The media goes on to glorify alcohol use, in fact, even though far more people die because of it and 2 out of 3 domestic abuse cases are alcohol related. This is why I get jaded about "guns iz evil" threads.
but the alcohol problem is well addressed, we have many organizations that platform against drunk driving. MADD, DADD, SADD, ETC. they also show commercials about DUI checkpoints and how they can ruin your life. And we actually passed laws and regulations holding bar owners accountable, setting lower BAC levels, and having DUI checkpoints. laws and regulations are saving lives.
Some fun facts for you:
the reason 2 out of 3 people die in domestic abuse cases is because there are guns in the house.
this year in america more people will die from gun violence than from all car fatalities.
the war against alcohol is winning, while the blind eye is turned towards gun violence.
Sources?
http://wonder.cdc.gov/wonder/prevguid/m0023655/m0023655.asp
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-12-19/american-gun-deaths-to-exceed-traffic-fatalities-by-2015
and
http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/domviofs.htm
42013
Post by: Sinful Hero
Pretty wild. Seems odd Meiko wasn't hurt while killing the intruder who was firing at him, his brother, and his friend. Plus whatever happened to the possible second intruder.
ScootyPuffJunior wrote:Even though this guy was pretty much a criminal, does that mean he doesn't have the right to defend himself?
He absolutely has a right to defend himself. He just does not have the right to own a gun
But the other, badder guys have guns. Shouldn't he need a gun to defend himself against them?
Personally I concealed carry not because of "bad guys" with guns, but with knives. I occasionally find myself working in rough parts of the country, and it's far more likely the poor folks trying to rob me will pull out a knife than an expensive item like a handgun.
83501
Post by: Nostromodamus
Ah, Bloomberg and Wikipedia, those bastions of truth.
53516
Post by: Chute82
It's on the internet so it must be true
43621
Post by: sirlynchmob
is any source in america not biased? but anyways, glad to see you guys won't even look at the cdc numbers.
121
Post by: Relapse
About 60% or more of gun deaths are suicides, though. If you are talking strictly homicides, then it's pretty much the same numbers the same as drunk drivers killing people.
The fact remains, as I say, that the media promotes the use of alcohol. Pretty ironic, considering 88,000 people a year die from alcohol related causes. Automatically Appended Next Post: sirlynchmob wrote:is any source in america not biased? but anyways, glad to see you guys won't even look at the cdc numbers.
You mean like this one that cites 21,000 firearm deaths as suicide?
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/suicide.htm
43621
Post by: sirlynchmob
Relapse wrote:About 60% or more of gun deaths are suicides, though. If you are talking strictly homicides, then it's pretty much the same numbers the same as drunk drivers killing people.
The fact remains, as I say, that the media promotes the use of alcohol. Pretty ironic, considering 88,000 people a year die from alcohol related causes.
and the media promotes guns as well. did you have a point there?
the fact remains, there are many organizations working to reduce alcohol related deaths, whereas the NRA is actively advocating more guns and the great lie that more guns makes you safer. Automatically Appended Next Post:
yes, like I said before, you should give up your guns. easy access to guns makes killing people easier, yourself included.
121
Post by: Relapse
If someone is going to kill themselves, for the most part, they are going to do it by whatever means.
How about this statistic of emergency room visits by minors?
Close to 190, 000 yearly:
http://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/underage-drinking.htm
Deaths and other nastiness from alcohol:
http://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/alcohol-use.htm
43621
Post by: sirlynchmob
so 21,000 deaths by gun
4,300 deaths from alcohol poisoning.
It's like your proving my point 
121
Post by: Relapse
sirlynchmob wrote:
so 21,000 deaths by gun
4,300 deaths from alcohol poisoning.
It's like your proving my point
Not really, since you skipped the 88,000 alcohol related deaths part and are ignoring the fact that those deaths were all suicides.
Homicides, a little over 11,000:
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm
43621
Post by: sirlynchmob
Relapse wrote:sirlynchmob wrote:
so 21,000 deaths by gun
4,300 deaths from alcohol poisoning.
It's like your proving my point
Not really, since you skipped the 88,000 alcohol related deaths part and are ignoring the fact that those deaths were all suicides.
edit faster , but the fact still remains were taking action against the alcohol related deaths part, yet doing nothing against gun violence. how about a guns anonymous group? or a add campaign, this is a gun, this is your brains after using a gun? or a hotline, do you feel like shooting people, call this hotline.
121
Post by: Relapse
Watching any sports event is a great example of the hypocracy of the media. includes seeing multiple advertisements telling us how great, fun, or glamorous it is to be drinking one brand or another of alcohol. I don't believe I have seen any advertisements for guns on network television sports.
43621
Post by: sirlynchmob
Relapse wrote: Watching any sports event is a great example of the hypocracy of the media. includes seeing multiple advertisements telling us how great, fun, or glamorous it is to be drinking one brand or another of alcohol. I don't believe I have seen any advertisements for guns on network television sports.
why pay to advertise guns, when the news does that for you daily for free. bring on the experts "more guns" bring on the politicians "more guns" check out black friday, yeah we sold more guns
49806
Post by: yellowfever
And you never will. Because to people that no nothing about guns they are evil.
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
So the gun wasn't really in his possession? I understand that a person is innocent until proven guilty, but you are giving the impression of being contrary for the its own sake
ScootyPuffJunior wrote:And really, he sounds like an entrepreneur that was defending his home and the benefits of his hard work from someone that was seeking to rob him.
You are stretching the word "entrepreneur" beyond any reasonable definition.
sirlynchmob wrote:
Some fun facts for you:
the reason 2 out of 3 people die in domestic abuse cases is because there are guns in the house.
this year in america more people will die from gun violence than from all car fatalities.
Your first CDC source is over a decade old.
Firearms barely beats motor vehicle deaths because suicide with firearm is included, which distorts the statistics
And the VPC is an activist organization, whose article you linked to is hopelessly out of date. Their most recent source is from 2001.
21196
Post by: agnosto
Relapse wrote:About 60% or more of gun deaths are suicides, though. If you are talking strictly homicides, then it's pretty much the same numbers the same as drunk drivers killing people.
The fact remains, as I say, that the media promotes the use of alcohol. Pretty ironic, considering 88,000 people a year die from alcohol related causes.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
sirlynchmob wrote:is any source in america not biased? but anyways, glad to see you guys won't even look at the cdc numbers.
You mean like this one that cites 21,000 firearm deaths as suicide?
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/suicide.htm
And 35% are homicides.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/06/04/a-minority-of-americans-own-guns-but-just-how-many-is-unclear/
A little over 1/3 of Americans own guns.
There are about 300 million guns in circulation; that means an average of about 3 guns for every gun owner.
100 million gun owners.
About 69% of all murders are committed with a firearm (FBI)
8,855 murders committed with a firearm. (FBI)
Chance to be murdered by a gun: 2.95%
Alcohol:
About 87% of Americans 18 and over drink, have drunk. http://www.niaaa.nih.gov/
I'll estimate that about 60% of the population is 18 and over (66% is 14 and over so I'll fudge). So, about 209,880,000 people drink
88,000 people die each year from alcohol related deaths.
Chance to die from alcohol: 4.19%
Yep, alcohol is more dangerous than firearms.
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
sirlynchmob wrote:the fact remains, there are many organizations working to reduce alcohol related deaths, whereas the NRA is actively advocating more guns and the great lie that more guns makes you safer.
There are groups looking to infringe on the right to bear arms;
- Mayors Against Illegal Guns
- Moms Demand Action
- Coalition to Stop Gun Violence
- Brady Campaign
But I'm sure that you can show that more guns make us less safe; and that increasing levels of gun ownership with decreasing accidental deaths, suicides, etc. is not the reality
55107
Post by: ScootyPuffJunior
Sure, allegedly.
I understand that a person is innocent until proven guilty, but you are giving the impression of being contrary for the its own sake.
No, it's called actually abiding by rule of law. Something you claim to understand but clearly don't give a gak about because reasons.
You are stretching the word "entrepreneur" beyond any reasonable definition.
Do you know any drug dealers? I do (or did, he doesn't deal drugs any more), and it's pretty hard work.
121
Post by: Relapse
ScootyPuffJunior wrote:Sure, allegedly.
I understand that a person is innocent until proven guilty, but you are giving the impression of being contrary for the its own sake.
No, it's called actually abiding by rule of law. Something you claim to understand but clearly don't give a gak about because reasons.
You are stretching the word "entrepreneur" beyond any reasonable definition.
Do you know any drug dealers? I do (or did, he doesn't deal drugs any more), and it's pretty hard work.
You know drug dealers? What have you done about it?
43621
Post by: sirlynchmob
Dreadclaw69 wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
Some fun facts for you:
the reason 2 out of 3 people die in domestic abuse cases is because there are guns in the house.
this year in america more people will die from gun violence than from all car fatalities.
Your first CDC source is over a decade old.
Firearms barely beats motor vehicle deaths because suicide with firearm is included, which distorts the statistics
And the VPC is an activist organization, whose article you linked to is hopelessly out of date. Their most recent source is from 2001.
I'm comparing vehicles to guns here, and this year there is more gun deaths than vehicle deaths. Due to traffic laws and regulations vehicle related deaths have been dropping steadily, like my first link showed. the projected gun deaths didn't scale up but plateaued hence it took another 10 years til guns passed cars. Why have vehicle deaths been on the decline since the 1950's yet have a drastic rise in ownership? good laws & regulations.
here's 2014:
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm
Motor vehicle traffic deaths
Number of deaths: 33,804
All firearm deaths
Number of deaths: 33,636 Automatically Appended Next Post: Dreadclaw69 wrote:sirlynchmob wrote:the fact remains, there are many organizations working to reduce alcohol related deaths, whereas the NRA is actively advocating more guns and the great lie that more guns makes you safer.
There are groups looking to infringe on the right to bear arms;
- Mayors Against Illegal Guns
- Moms Demand Action
- Coalition to Stop Gun Violence
- Brady Campaign
But I'm sure that you can show that more guns make us less safe; and that increasing levels of gun ownership with decreasing accidental deaths, suicides, etc. is not the reality
http://time.com/3997881/cops-deaths-states-gun-ownership/
"Cops are more likely to be murdered on the job in states with higher rates of gun ownership, according to a new study."
55107
Post by: ScootyPuffJunior
Yes.
What have you done about it?
Done about what?
43578
Post by: A Town Called Malus
That's not entirely true. Some suicides are spur of the moment decisions which can be prevented by quite simple obstacles in the way (Fences on bridges, for example, or those barriers with doors on underground trainlines which means you can't get to the tracks). For example someone who wants to swallow a load of pills may not go ahead with it if it involves going to the shop to buy more pills than they currently have, or they'll try but end up with a non-fatal dose. Then if they don't succeed and end up in hospital instead they are now on the radar and will get counselling and therapy to help them overcome the problems which drove them to attempt suicide in the first place.
Guns remove many of those obstacles and are also almost a 100% guarantee of success. So if you removed guns, the total amount of suicide attempts may stay the same but the number of successful suicides will decrease.
121
Post by: Relapse
The drug dealers.
Never mind, though. I see that it would be better for me to start a different thread since this conversation has taken this thread right off the rails.
43578
Post by: A Town Called Malus
 agnosto wrote: And 35% are homicides. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/06/04/a-minority-of-americans-own-guns-but-just-how-many-is-unclear/ A little over 1/3 of Americans own guns. There are about 300 million guns in circulation; that means an average of about 3 guns for every gun owner. 100 million gun owners. About 69% of all murders are committed with a firearm (FBI) 8,855 murders committed with a firearm. (FBI) Chance to be murdered by a gun: 2.95% Alcohol: About 87% of Americans 18 and over drink, have drunk. http://www.niaaa.nih.gov/ I'll estimate that about 60% of the population is 18 and over (66% is 14 and over so I'll fudge). So, about 209,880,000 people drink 88,000 people die each year from alcohol related deaths. Chance to die from alcohol: 4.19% Yep, alcohol is more dangerous than firearms.
Why do you include all alcohol related deaths but only gun homicides? Somebody getting drunk and crashing their car into a tree or dying of liver failure caused by alcohol counts but somebody shooting themselves in the head doesn't? Not a very good comparison at all. Automatically Appended Next Post: Dreadclaw69 wrote: Your first CDC source is over a decade old. Firearms barely beats motor vehicle deaths because suicide with firearm is included, which distorts the statistics And the VPC is an activist organization, whose article you linked to is hopelessly out of date. Their most recent source is from 2001.
The motor vehicle statistics will also include deaths where the driver was the only casualty. So suicide does not distort the statistics as both sets of data include it.
37231
Post by: d-usa
Dreadclaw69 wrote: But I'm sure that you can show that more guns make us less safe; and that increasing levels of gun ownership...
Gun ownership has decreased, by a significant margin, over the past decades. 47% of households reported owning a gun in 1973 40% of households reported owning a gun in 1996 31% of households reported owning a gun in 2014 48.7% of adults lived in a household with a gun in 1973 43.3% of adults lived in a household with a gun in 1996 32.4% of adults lived in a household with a gun in 2014 28.1% of adults personally owned a gun in 1980 27.1% of adults personally owned a gun in 1996 22.4% of adults personally owned a gun in 2014 (Edit: Based on rates and the US population 5 million fewer people own a firearm in 2014 than in 1996) Source: http://www.norc.org/PDFs/GSS%20Reports/GSS_Trends%20in%20Gun%20Ownership_US_1972-2014.pdf with decreasing accidental deaths, suicides,
18,166 suicides by firearm in 1996 (rate of 6.8/100,000) 21,175 suicides by firearm in 2013 (rate of 6.7/100,000) Source: CDC Final Death Reports for 1996 and 2013 http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr47/nvs47_09.pdf http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_02.pdf etc. is not the reality
As you see, it is not. Edit: physically, fewer people are owning firearms, while physically more people commit suicide with them.
12313
Post by: Ouze
Relapse wrote:If someone is going to kill themselves, for the most part, they are going to do it by whatever means.
This is definitely not true.
I mean, it's true in the sense that you could theoretically kill yourself by drowning yourself in a bowl of water, or so in; but practically, suicide is an act of impulse and easy access to firearms means more suicides. I'm not saying that we should ban guns because it would reduce suicides but I think it's quite clear that magically removing all guns would definitely reduce suicides fairly dramatically.
ScootyPuffJunior wrote: and it's pretty hard work.
I couldn't agree more. My upstairs neighbor used to sell drugs when I still lived in NYC, and I think it's high time that the government stopped tying these industrious small businessmen up in endless red tape and regulations.
The ban on felons owning firearms doesn't seem any different than the ban on felons voting, or so on: they have served their time unless that's a agreed upon precondition of release.
37231
Post by: d-usa
 Ouze wrote:Relapse wrote:If someone is going to kill themselves, for the most part, they are going to do it by whatever means.
This is definitely not true.
I mean, it's true in the sense that you could theoretically kill yourself by drowning yourself in a bowl of water, or so in; but practically, suicide is an act of impulse and easy access to firearms means more suicides. I'm not saying that we should ban guns because it would reduce suicides but I think it's quite clear that magically removing all guns would definitely reduce suicides fairly dramatically.
ScootyPuffJunior wrote: and it's pretty hard work.
I couldn't agree more. My upstairs neighbor used to sell drugs when I still lived in NYC, and I think it's high time that the government stopped tying these industrious small businessmen up in endless red tape and regulations.
Did you know that there are only half as many deaths per year from illegal drugs than there are from alcohol?
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
I'm choosing to abide by the advice given earlier by the Moderators. Have a good night all.
12313
Post by: Ouze
I'm fairly confident there was a case really recently - like within the last 2 months or so? where a man who couldn't legally own a firearm skated on a charge when the court found that it was a valid application of self defense. The exact details elude me, I'll see if I can find them.
121
Post by: Relapse
Ouze wrote:I'm fairly confident there was a case really recently - like within the last 2 months or so? where a man who couldn't legally own a firearm skated on a charge when the court found that it was a valid application of self defense. The exact details elude me, I'll see if I can find them.
It would be interesting to see what the circumstances were.
37231
Post by: d-usa
Relapse wrote: Ouze wrote:I'm fairly confident there was a case really recently - like within the last 2 months or so? where a man who couldn't legally own a firearm skated on a charge when the court found that it was a valid application of self defense. The exact details elude me, I'll see if I can find them.
It would be interesting to see what the circumstances were.
I wonder what the technical aspects of "owning" vs "using" are.
If a felon lives with a family and the wife is legally able to own a gun, is the felon allowed to use that gun for self defense if somebody breaks into the house that he is living in with his wife? What about if the gun is owned by a house mate?
12313
Post by: Ouze
Ok, I found it (I think, my memory is a little hazy).
In part:
A felon who shot and killed a teenager robbing an East Knoxville convenience store will face no charges, according to prosecutors.
Even though state and federal law forbid Issac Jamal Scruggs, 42, from owning a gun, state law also forbids prosecuting him for using that gun to save a life, said Sean McDermott, a Knox County assistant district attorney general.
“Under Tennessee law, if a person justifiably acts in self-defense or in the defense of another, that person cannot be charged with or convicted of any firearm possession crime, including being a felon in possession of a firearm,” McDermott wrote in an email Friday.
Scruggs shot and killed 18-year-old Tamon J. Stapleton as Stapleton held a female clerk at gunpoint behind the counter of the Breadbox, 6210 Asheville Highway, just after 2:30 a.m. Monday, according to the Knoxville Police Department.
However, this is not consistent, as other jurisdictions have charged felons have attempted SYG defenses - although this particular case isn't a great one.
37231
Post by: d-usa
Seems like this may have been a case where legislators wanted to preempt any kind of firearm charge to be "tough on anti-2nd amendment opponents".
12313
Post by: Ouze
The only thing that stops a bad legislator with a pen is a good legislator with a pen.
37231
Post by: d-usa
Pens don't sign bills, governors do?
121
Post by: Relapse
Ouze wrote:Ok, I found it (I think, my memory is a little hazy).
In part:
A felon who shot and killed a teenager robbing an East Knoxville convenience store will face no charges, according to prosecutors.
Even though state and federal law forbid Issac Jamal Scruggs, 42, from owning a gun, state law also forbids prosecuting him for using that gun to save a life, said Sean McDermott, a Knox County assistant district attorney general.
“Under Tennessee law, if a person justifiably acts in self-defense or in the defense of another, that person cannot be charged with or convicted of any firearm possession crime, including being a felon in possession of a firearm,” McDermott wrote in an email Friday.
Scruggs shot and killed 18-year-old Tamon J. Stapleton as Stapleton held a female clerk at gunpoint behind the counter of the Breadbox, 6210 Asheville Highway, just after 2:30 a.m. Monday, according to the Knoxville Police Department.
However, this is not consistent, as other jurisdictions have charged felons have attempted SYG defenses - although this particular case isn't a great one.
Interesting. I wonder how much scrutiny he'll come under after this incident.
55107
Post by: ScootyPuffJunior
I still don't understand your question.
What did I do about the drug dealers I know? Nothing. I did nothing about them because I'm not fething Batman.
12313
Post by: Ouze
You're the hero this city deserves, but not the one it needs right now.
47598
Post by: motyak
This thread has a topic it deserves, but not the one it has right now.
17349
Post by: SilverMK2
If you are in the process of pirating a film from the interwebs and you shoot someone who breaks into your house do you get to be cellmates as you are not legally entitled to "defend yourself" as you are in the act of committing a crime?
25208
Post by: AlmightyWalrus
Relapse wrote:If someone is going to kill themselves, for the most part, they are going to do it by whatever means.
I'm going to just leave this here and point out that even compared to suffocation, gun suicides are successful more often.
EDIT: And this while we're at it.
Besides, it's not like people actually need guns to defend themselves, if they're not allowed to have guns they'll find another way if they're determined enough.
Yes, that last part was sarcasm.
121
Post by: Relapse
 AlmightyWalrus wrote:Relapse wrote:If someone is going to kill themselves, for the most part, they are going to do it by whatever means.
I'm going to just leave this here and point out that even compared to suffocation, gun suicides are successful more often.
EDIT: And this while we're at it.
Besides, it's not like people actually need guns to defend themselves, if they're not allowed to have guns they'll find another way if they're determined enough.
Yes, that last part was sarcasm.
I will agree that guns are indeed lethal, but if we look at Norway, we see a higher per capita suicide rate than the U.S.:
http://www.fhi.no/eway/default.aspx?pid=240&trg=MainContent_6894&Main_6664=6894:0:25,7583:1:0:0:::0:0&MainContent_6894=6706:0:25,7588:1:0:0:::0:0&List_6673=6674:0:25,7599:1:0:0:::0:0
If we were to combine a number of Europeons countries together to equal the population of the U.S., we would see an even higher per capita of suicides. That being said, I will agree that some suicides happen because a gun is acceptable.
Let's discuss this in a new thread, though.
4042
Post by: Da Boss
I feel like I should point out that Norway is dark for a huge amount of the year which brings with it problems such as a higher suicide rate etc etc.
*shrug*
But arguing in these threads is like pissing into the wind.
I mean, surely anyone can admit that having a gun brings a risk, and you have to balance the risk with the benefits.
The abuses of statistics in this thread make me weep, though.
5182
Post by: SlaveToDorkness
Never has a thread had more Exalts from me and justification for Ignoring members (wish quotes were also Ignored).
Carry on, wounderful Dakka OT, carry ON!
47598
Post by: motyak
 SlaveToDorkness wrote:Never has a thread had more Exalts from me and justification for Ignoring members (wish quotes were also Ignored).
Carry on, wounderful Dakka OT, carry ON!
Posts like this serve a total of 0 purpose, aren't at all relevant to the topic of the thread and don't further the discussion at all.
In short, don't post like this when a mod has already asked people to post on topic in a thread
50512
Post by: Jihadin
PITTSBURGH (AP) — A former juvenile delinquent fatally shot an armed robber who broke into his apartment through a bathroom window and accidentally shot and killed his visiting teenage brother and his housemate while exchanging shots with the intruder, a district attorney said Wednesday.
Meiko Devaughn has been charged with illegally possessing a firearm, drug possession and receiving stolen property.
Devaughn, who police said was in the "drug business," shot at 25-year-old Kadeem Williams after Williams climbed into the apartment Devaughn shared with Akeilah Solomon at about 3:20 a.m. Monday, said Stephen Zappala Jr., the Allegheny County district attorney.
As the two fired shots at each other, Devaughn, 22, also struck the 20-year-old Solomon and his 16-year-old brother, Jaimill Kenney, with bullets, killing them. Williams was mortally wounded in the exchange but managed to run outside before dying, Zappala said.
It's not clear whether Devaughn will face charges for the shootings, Zappala said, because the investigation is continuing.
"We have to know all the evidence first," the prosecutor said at the scene Tuesday. "You're entitled to protect yourself."
The county medical examiner determined Solomon was shot once in the head, while Kenney and Williams were shot once each in the chest. Kenney was visiting his brother.
Devaughn was adjudicated delinquent, the juvenile court equivalent of a conviction, in 2009 on charges including robbery and aggravated assault. That's why it was illegal for Devaughn to possess the .40-caliber Glock pistol he used, according to a criminal complaint. The gun had been stolen from neighboring Butler County.
Police believe Williams was trying to rob Devaughn because $1,000 worth of marijuana and $14,000 cash were found in the apartment, police said.
Zappala said investigators believe at least one other intruder may have been involved. They didn't find a gun near Williams' body outside the apartment complex but did find shells from a different caliber weapon at the scene, he said.
Online court records don't list an attorney for Devaughn, who was in custody awaiting arraignment Wednesday.
Had to read this...six times to get an idea of the shooting event.
Devaughn possess a stolen .40 cal Glock
Devaughn engages in a shooting match with intruder
Devaughn situatuinal awareness does not notice brother and roomate is in the line of fire.
So he got lucky on the kill shot on Solomon but empty the clip to add another two to the body count.
There's a Bill in PA legislature allowing recreational use of weed.
This is one GOAT ROPE
20677
Post by: NuggzTheNinja
A Town Called Malus wrote:
Was just looking through the pennsylvania stand your ground laws and it says you lose the cover of the law if you're involved in another crime at the time.
So illegal possession of a firearm and drugs render any defence under SYG void? Seems fair enough, two charges of manslaughter on the way.
Excellent example of current gun laws being sufficient to prosecute criminals.
12617
Post by: The Airman
A Town Called Malus wrote:
Was just looking through the pennsylvania stand your ground laws and it says you lose the cover of the law if you're involved in another crime at the time.
So illegal possession of a firearm and drugs render any defence under SYG void? Seems fair enough, two charges of manslaughter on the way.
Bingo. OP's agenda just got trashed.
It is your right to defend your home and self, and this one off does not change the overwhelming self defense usage of firearms.
17349
Post by: SilverMK2
So again, how much crime does one have to undertake in order to lose the right to defend themselves? Unpaid fine? Illegally parked? Pirating films?
Or is a gun, self defence, and other unrelated crime just that; unrelated? Something that should not impinge on your separate right to defend yourself?
37231
Post by: d-usa
I have an agenda? I need to check it to see what time I serve cocktails.
So I guess there is no point talking about bystanders getting killed in a home defense scenario because the guy shooting shouldn't have had a gun and if he was able to legally carry nobody would have been killed because reasons?
121
Post by: Relapse
d-usa wrote:I have an agenda? I need to check it to see what time I serve cocktails.
So I guess there is no point talking about bystanders getting killed in a home defense scenario because the guy shooting shouldn't have had a gun and if he was able to legally carry nobody would have been killed because reasons?
It's my belief that anyone who obtains a gun of any type should be required to take a safety course.
50512
Post by: Jihadin
Relapse wrote: d-usa wrote:I have an agenda? I need to check it to see what time I serve cocktails.
So I guess there is no point talking about bystanders getting killed in a home defense scenario because the guy shooting shouldn't have had a gun and if he was able to legally carry nobody would have been killed because reasons?
It's my belief that anyone who obtains a gun of any type should be required to take a safety course.
Legally.
the Glock was obtain illegally
D what type of munchies you serving at this Agenda event?
121
Post by: Relapse
 Jihadin wrote:Relapse wrote: d-usa wrote:I have an agenda? I need to check it to see what time I serve cocktails.
So I guess there is no point talking about bystanders getting killed in a home defense scenario because the guy shooting shouldn't have had a gun and if he was able to legally carry nobody would have been killed because reasons?
It's my belief that anyone who obtains a gun of any type should be required to take a safety course.
Legally.
the Glock was obtain illegally
D what type of munchies you serving at this Agenda event?
Very true. I should have been more clear on that part. I wonder how a course for illegally obtained weapons would run?
17923
Post by: Asherian Command
 The Airman wrote: A Town Called Malus wrote:
Was just looking through the pennsylvania stand your ground laws and it says you lose the cover of the law if you're involved in another crime at the time.
So illegal possession of a firearm and drugs render any defence under SYG void? Seems fair enough, two charges of manslaughter on the way.
Bingo. OP's agenda just got trashed.
It is your right to defend your home and self, and this one off does not change the overwhelming self defense usage of firearms.
There is no way a lawyer would even attempt to defend a case like this and have any chance of winning.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
 Da Boss wrote:I feel like I should point out that Norway is dark for a huge amount of the year which brings with it problems such as a higher suicide rate etc etc.
*shrug*
...
A better argument would be to point out that what Relapse said is not factually correct. The USA's suicide rate is over 30% higher than Norway's.
39550
Post by: Psienesis
Relapse wrote: ScootyPuffJunior wrote:Sure, allegedly.
I understand that a person is innocent until proven guilty, but you are giving the impression of being contrary for the its own sake.
No, it's called actually abiding by rule of law. Something you claim to understand but clearly don't give a gak about because reasons.
You are stretching the word "entrepreneur" beyond any reasonable definition.
Do you know any drug dealers? I do (or did, he doesn't deal drugs any more), and it's pretty hard work.
You know drug dealers? What have you done about it?
Got high as feth and had a good time.
20677
Post by: NuggzTheNinja
d-usa wrote:I have an agenda? I need to check it to see what time I serve cocktails.
So I guess there is no point talking about bystanders getting killed in a home defense scenario because the guy shooting shouldn't have had a gun and if he was able to legally carry nobody would have been killed because reasons?
If the resident didn't own a gun, clearly everyone involved would still be alive since the criminal who entered his home, with a gun, had no intention of hurting anyone. Is that the assumption we're working with? Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'm going to venture a guess here, but most people who would be willing to injure or kill someone over drugs would probably be willing to do so over a smudged Puma or parking space.
121
Post by: Relapse
 Kilkrazy wrote: Da Boss wrote:I feel like I should point out that Norway is dark for a huge amount of the year which brings with it problems such as a higher suicide rate etc etc.
*shrug*
...
A better argument would be to point out that what Relapse said is not factually correct. The USA's suicide rate is over 30% higher than Norway's.
The government statistics for both countries back my claim:
In the U.S., a little over 12 suicides per 100,000
http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/suicide-datasheet-a.pdf
From the CDC report:
"There were 41,149 suicides in 2013 in the United States—a rate of 12.6 per 100,000 is equal to 113 suicides each day or one every 13 minutes."
In Norway, which has more restrictive gun laws, 21 per 100,000
http://www.fhi.no/eway/default.aspx?pid=240&trg=MainContent_6894&Main_6664=6894:0:25,7583:1:0:0:::0:0&MainContent_6894=6706:0:25,7588:1:0:0:::0:0&List_6673=6674:0:25,7599:1:0:0:::0:0
From the Norwegian report:
In 2014 there were 401 suicides among men and 147 among women, which equates to 15 suicides per 100,000 men and 6 per 100,000 women (non-standardized figures).
Per capita, as I said, there is a higher incidence of suicide, in which the most popular methods are hanging and poison. If France were added into the per capita mix with Norway, the difference would be higher. If enough Europeons countries were added in to equal the population of the U.S., we would find the suicide rate exceeds the U.S. IN raw numbers.
That being said, I won't deny some suicides would not happen if a gun were absent, but as someone said earlier, the benifits of people (legally that's me saying this)owning a gun should be weighed against the risk.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
Just wanting to point out that the CDC numbers are from 2013 while Norway's are from 2014.
This chart which is for 2013 has the US at 12.1/100,000(not the 12.6/100,000 that the CDC posts) and Norway at 9.1/100,000 for the same reporting period.
As of this point in time, the CDC still has not published numbers for 2014 as far as I'm aware.
And for an interesting note, the AFSP shows that 51% of suicides within the US used a firearm
121
Post by: Relapse
 Kanluwen wrote:
Just wanting to point out that the CDC numbers are from 2013 while Norway's are from 2014.
This chart which is for 2013 has the US at 12.1/100,000(not the 12.6/100,000 that the CDC posts) and Norway at 9.1/100,000 for the same reporting period.
As of this point in time, the CDC still has not published numbers for 2014 as far as I'm aware.
And for an interesting note, the AFSP shows that 51% of suicides within the US used a firearm
Could you show the government statistics from Norway. I was using the latest figures I could find. As far as firearms go, as I said before, and it looks like I'll have to bring up the statistics I saw to prove it, as I should have from the first, an equivealent population from adding the different Europeons countries together to equal that of the U.S. shows a higher suicide per capita. My point with using Europeons suicide statistics shows if most people want to kill themselves, they will, gun or no gun.
By the way, I notice my government department charts from both countries are newer than your Wikipedia chart, which is actually from 2012.
37231
Post by: d-usa
Why are we taking about the one compatible country with close numbers and ignoring the rest of Europe with much lower numbers?
121
Post by: Relapse
d-usa wrote:Why are we taking about the one compatible country with close numbers and ignoring the rest of Europe with much lower numbers?
I was looking at countries with stricter gun laws than the U.S. France also beats the U.S. In per capita suicide, while in Asia, Japan, with extremely strict gun laws has one of the highest suicide rates in the world:
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2014/09/04/national/japans-suicide-rate-exceeds-world-average-who-report/#.VnzOC3pHarV
50541
Post by: Ashiraya
Japan's suicide rate may be more related to their extreme focus on performance in studies and the like.
20677
Post by: NuggzTheNinja
 Ashiraya wrote:Japan's suicide rate may be more related to their extreme focus on performance in studies and the like.
Right - comparing across countries is silly because there are at least thousands of variables that influence the trends you see beyond the one currently being vilified by some posters in this thread.
37231
Post by: d-usa
 NuggzTheNinja wrote: Ashiraya wrote:Japan's suicide rate may be more related to their extreme focus on performance in studies and the like.
Right - comparing across countries is silly because there are at least thousands of variables that influence the trends you see beyond the one currently being vilified by some posters in this thread.
Just to be clear, who is vilifying stuff and what exactly is being villified?
20677
Post by: NuggzTheNinja
d-usa wrote: NuggzTheNinja wrote: Ashiraya wrote:Japan's suicide rate may be more related to their extreme focus on performance in studies and the like.
Right - comparing across countries is silly because there are at least thousands of variables that influence the trends you see beyond the one currently being vilified by some posters in this thread.
Just to be clear, who is vilifying stuff and what exactly is being villified?
I'll wait for you to answer my previous question before I answer yours.
121
Post by: Relapse
Ashiraya wrote:Japan's suicide rate may be more related to their extreme focus on performance in studies and the like.
The point is, though, that these people have largely turned to other means than guns to kill themselves.
37231
Post by: d-usa
Your assumption makes no sense, there is your answer.
Feel free to stop arguing against imaginary points or try to point out what exactly is being villified. Maybe even make an actual constructive post while you are it. If it's going to stay tiny " op has an agenda" or "guns are villified" posts them maybe it's better to follow the moderators suggestion. Automatically Appended Next Post: Relapse wrote: Ashiraya wrote:Japan's suicide rate may be more related to their extreme focus on performance in studies and the like.
The point is, though, that these people have largely turned to other means than guns to kill themselves.
Comparing other countries it is pretty clear that there are many different reasons for suicide, and the majority of our peer countries had lower rates of suicide.
Comparing just our own rates it is pretty significant that suicide by firearm has increased even as firearm ownership has decreased. Now, unless we have fewer people owning guns while being more irresponsible with storing them it makes it appear that there are additional factors besides "gun in house" that are influencing those numbers.
20677
Post by: NuggzTheNinja
You're obviously playing cute here, and I'm not going to entertain it. When you stop dancing around the issue, we can have that conversation.
Do I think a sample size of 1 warrants a discussion regarding peoples' rights to defend their homes with firearms? Absolutely not. The fact that you do is very telling.
37231
Post by: d-usa
You clicked the reply button quite a few times for someone not interested in a discussion. And I'm not dancing around the issue, my discussion has nothing to do with the issue you think it does.
If you think I'm trying to say that people shouldn't have the right to defend their homes with firearms please feel free to show me where I said that. Actually feel free to go through my entire post history and try to find that.
Get that chip off your shoulder, it's gonna make your arm sore and affect your aim.
tl;dr
Back up your claims or stop playing the victim
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Edit: for fun I included all the themes from my posts in this thread to try to figure out where I danced around my attempt to have a "you shouldn't be allowed to own firearms to defend your home" discussion.
- the original posts, where I pointed out that the bad guy screwed up in multiple ways
- the second post where I actually made it pretty clear what my point of the thread was (hint: it wasn't 'take guns away')
- the third post which covers the fact that everybody is allowed to use lethal force to defend their home, but that felons can't use guns, with throwback to post #2
- post #4 countered the false statistic that gun ownership rates are up and that suicide rates are down, with cited sources, but didn't use that to argue against guns
- post 6 asked if felons should be able to use a gun to defend their home if the fun is legally owned by someone in that home (I think they should be able to)
- post 7 asked if a felon unintentionally benefitted from a law that may have been written to stop anti-gun activists
Then there were a couple other posts making fun of a couple tropes that get thrown around in gun threads and a couple posts asking people to back up their claims of an agenda.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
We can argue all night about the relative rates of suicides in different countries, but if people are interested in the details, the WHO mortality database can be searched here.
http://apps.who.int/healthinfo/statistics/mortality/whodpms/
Broadly there isn't any correlation between the suicide rate and gun laws. The USA and Norway are roughly level pegging, the UK, with more restrictive laws has about half the rate, while Japan, with even more restrictive laws, has over double the rate of the USA and Norway.
The reason for is that the epidemiology of suicide is complex.
50541
Post by: Ashiraya
There may still be causation, of course, even if there is no correlation.
121
Post by: Relapse
Ashiraya wrote:There may still be causation, of course, even if there is no correlation.
I'll agree that some suicides happen because a gun is available, but I think Japan's per capita suicide rate proves my point that if someone wants to kill themselves, they'll most times find a way to do it if no gun is available.
7361
Post by: Howard A Treesong
Despite the difficulties that led to the mindset needed for it, the final act of suicide is often a spur of the moment decision. If you prevent someone jumping off a bridge they won't immediately try again as soon as you let them go. The more barriers put in the path of carrying out that snap decision the more likely they will come to their senses and seek treatment or have intervention from another source. Obviously some are determined but many don't have a long term desire meaning that not having a gun close to hand, or other easy instant means of carrying out the suicide attempt, likely does make a difference.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/suicide.htm
It does seem that gun suicide is one of the more popular forms, but that doesn't mean they wouldn't have turned to one of those alternative forms of guns were not available. But on the other hand, there is an argument based on the ease of using a gun that could facilitate it. I think a deeper issue is whether mental healthcare provision in the US is adequate to treat people at risk.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
Putting it rather bluntly, it's not simply a mental healthcare issue.
Suicide is an issue that has many factors that could mitigate it. The spike in suicides among younger people has a lot to tie in with things that improved mental healthcare alone cannot resolve.
50541
Post by: Ashiraya
Unemployment?
37231
Post by: d-usa
- the financial crisis
- increase in the number of veterans
- increased insurance coverage and prescription of antidepressants without the needed warning of increased risk of suicide in the first few weeks despite the black box warning
- the thoughts of a Trump/Hillary presidency
Guns don't cause suicide, but access to a gun can be a factor in a successful suicide.
12313
Post by: Ouze
The thought of going into a voting booth in November 2016, and seeing that the mainstream (actually electable) choices are either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton would make even the most laid back person consider putting a gun in their mouth and ending it all.
121
Post by: Relapse
Ouze wrote:The thought of going into a voting booth in November 2016, and seeing that the mainstream (actually electable) choices are either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton would make even the most laid back person consider putting a gun in their mouth and ending it all.
You, sir, earn an exalt.
|
|
