About Us

moto-d · 12-29-2011, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elarson

Interesting article. Taking their facts at face value and crunching the math, you have 216 incidents in 31 states over a 4 year peiod. This boils down to 1.74 incidents per state per year.

For illustration, compare this to the number of people who have CCW permits in Ohio (246,760 as of the end of 2010). 1.74 incidents per year divided by 246,760 permit holders equals a failure rate of .0007%. This seems like an incredibly small percentage. I'm not sure I could name another human endeavor that has a failure rate so small.

FWIW,
Eric

On average, yes, but a true measure of the merit of one position vs another would be to compare the failure rates vs. the success rates ... success defined by how many positive incidents could be attributed to CCW, compared to the .0007% failure rate. What if it were smaller?

And of course there's always the non-statistical impacts as well.

Elarson · 12-29-2011, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moto-d

On average, yes, but a true measure of the merit of one position vs another would be to compare the failure rates vs. the success rates ... success defined by how many positive incidents could be attributed to CCW, compared to the .0007% failure rate. What if it were smaller?

And of course there's always the non-statistical impacts as well.

The non-statistical impact is that crime is lower in CCW states because the criminals have an element of fear (of a level playing field) that serves as a deterrent. Think of it from their side: If you decided to be a mugger, would it make sense for you to ply your trade in Dayton, OH where your intended victim might shoot you...or in Chicago where your victims are unarmed? It's a simple business decision.

Eric

moto-d · 12-29-2011, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elarson

The non-statistical impact is that crime is lower in CCW states because the criminals have an element of fear (of a level playing field) that serves as a deterrent. Think of it from their side: If you decided to be a mugger, would it make sense for you to ply your trade in Dayton, OH where your intended victim might shoot you...or in Chicago where your victims are unarmed? It's a simple business decision.

Eric

That's one argument, Eric, though I haven't seen the data comparing non-CCW states to CCW states. Could be why, if your claims are correct.

By non-statistical, I was meaning the direct impact of losing a family member to a statistically acceptable "failure rate."

In any case, the idea that "guns save lives" has a flaw in it, as these 216 examples show, acceptable statistically or not. Same goes for the other argument, as this Kroger example would indicate.

moto-d · 12-29-2011, 01:38 PM

I would ask, has a smoke detector ever caused a fire? Has an insurance policy ever caused an accident? Because guns HAVE killed innocent people, so the analogy's a poor one.

sleepy · 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moto-d

I would ask, has a smoke detector ever caused a fire? Has an insurance policy ever caused an accident? Because guns HAVE killed innocent people, so the analogy's a poor one.

No, PEOPLE have killed people, Bad behavior and stupidity have killed people. Have you ever seen a gun start shooting at people by itself? It takes a person to fire a gun at another, Guns don't do it on their own.
And SOME hard wired smoke detectors HAVE shorted out started fires. ANYTHING electric CAN start a fire if it shorts out.

What is the purpose of having insurance, fire, police department?
Answer. JUST IN CASE.

moto-d · 12-29-2011, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleepy

No, PEOPLE have killed people, Bad behavior and stupidity have killed people. Have you ever seen a gun start shooting at people by itself? It takes a person to fire a gun at another, Guns don't do it on their own.

True, but they've done it with an instrument created with the sole purpose of taking life at worst, and injuring at best. Sure, pencils can be used to kill; but they're actually designed for writing. When a person kills with a gun, they're using that gun exactly as it was intended. You hope it's for a good cause, and you hope it's not accidental, but there are no guarantees, as my link shows.

sleepy · 12-29-2011, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moto-d

True, but they've done it with an instrument created with the sole purpose of taking life at worst, and injuring at best. Sure, pencils can be used to kill; but they're actually designed for writing. When a person kills with a gun, they're using that gun exactly as it was intended. You hope it's for a good cause, and you hope it's not accidental, but there are no guarantees, as my link shows.

Your link also proves you have more of a chance of injury or death by taking prescribed medicine than being killed by a CCW holder. Just look at all the"if you've taken this drug and this happened call the law office of" commercials all day long on TV.

moto-d · 12-29-2011, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleepy

Your link also proves you have more of a chance of injury or death by taking prescribed medicine than being killed by a CCW holder. Just look at all the"if you've taken this drug and this happened call the law office of" commercials all day long on TV.

It does?

moto-d · 12-29-2011, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleepy

No, PEOPLE have killed people, Bad behavior and stupidity have killed people. Have you ever seen a gun start shooting at people by itself? It takes a person to fire a gun at another, Guns don't do it on their own.
And SOME hard wired smoke detectors HAVE shorted out started fires. ANYTHING electric CAN start a fire if it shorts out.

What is the purpose of having insurance, fire, police department?
Answer. JUST IN CASE.

Protection, of course. My argument is that insurance protects without any possibility of accidentally killing your daughter with it. Same with police and fire protection. That's not to say a gun can't protect and that guns are bad. It's just to argue that the analogy isn't without a big ol' flaw.

And yes, I suppose a fire detector can short out. But it's not MEANT to short out, it just doe sometimes. Guns, on the other hand, are meant to shoot at anything in front of them, good, bad, cat, dog, family member, bad guy. My link provides 216 examples of documents failure. Maybe there's 216 examples of success, hell I don't know.

Elarson · 12-29-2011, 01:45 PM

People have been killed by:

pencils
baseball bats
anti-freeze
clothesline
hammers
butter knives
rocks
cars
and on and on....

These are all items that are good for society in the hands of a responsible person and dangerous in the hands of a criminal. It's all about the operator.

Eric

quick67bird · 12-29-2011, 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moto-d

I would ask, has a smoke detector ever caused a fire? Has an insurance policy ever caused an accident? Because guns HAVE killed innocent people, so the analogy's a poor one.

Actually I am sure some faulty wired smoke detectors have been attributed to a fire. I know that means the it wasn't the smoke detectors fault, but the person who wired it right. Well lets see a gun has never killed anyone, but the person who used it may have. Same deal a gun is nothing more than a tool to be used to help if needed just like any other tool they can be abused.

geeteeohguy · 12-29-2011, 02:16 PM

Saw a bumper sticker at a gun show years back...it read "My guns have killed less people than Ted Kennedy's car". I thought it was perfect. My liberal father was mortified! Still, it was true. Guns don't kill people....people kill people.

moto-d · 12-29-2011, 02:34 PM

Actually, here are the violent crime rates for all 50 states as of two years ago:
http://www.census.gov/compendia/stat...es/12s0308.pdf

Here is an abstract of the states with the strictest gun laws as of 2010:
http://www.csmonitor.com/CSM-Photo-G...(photo)/259371

loggerhead · 05:26 PM

To all the naysayers...

Follow this link regarding Kennesaw, Ga. where it is illegal "NOT" to own a gun, and the positive outcome this law has had on this community, especially when compared to
neighboring communities.

http://www.rense.com/general9/gunlaw.htm

andrewb70 · 12-29-2011, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moto-d

Actually, here are the violent crime rates for all 50 states as of two years ago:
http://www.census.gov/compendia/stat...es/12s0308.pdf

Here is an abstract of the states with the strictest gun laws as of 2010:
http://www.csmonitor.com/CSM-Photo-G...(photo)/259371

The one place that immediately jumps out is the number one "gun free" zone in America: The federal Washington D.C. Highest violent and property crime in the nation. Hmmm...

Andrew

moto-d · 12-29-2011, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewb70

The one place that immediately jumps out is the number one "gun free" zone in America: The federal Washington D.C. Highest violent and property crime in the nation. Hmmm...

Andrew

Saw that. For those who appreciate irony, it doesn't get much better. They pretty much lead in EVERY category -- but you can lawfully keep guns in your home and your business, and in your car if it's unloaded.