Black Bart Loc: Indiana

No I don't think so Frank will not be able to comprehend any of it.
That is the way people like Frank are you can't tell them anything he already knows it all.

heyrob Loc: Western Washington

The next question is will he have the sense to stay out? Somehow I doubt it, I think he's a little off his rocker. ;-)

Lucian Loc: From Wales, living in Ohio

heyrob wrote:

"Oh yeah I forgot that guns cause suicide, just like my pencil causes misspelled words, and spoons made Rosie O'Donnell fat. Thanks for the reminder."


What the hell are you talking about???? Where did you read that I said guns cause suicide??? Get off your self built high horse and read the posts before coming back with stupid/accusatory comments like that.

If you go back and read I said the country has a higher than average rate of gun related suicides. If the person did not have the gun readily at hand in the first place studies have shown that they are less likely to go through with suicide, because it would be a more painful way to go. And yes there are some who will do it no matter what.

However, the fact is, if they have to saw through their arm with a knife or go through building something to hang themselves etc. they are more likely to think it over while trying to complete the task and then decide not to go through with it. The gun makes a hasty un-thought through decision a quick way to end it all.

It is a fact and regardless of what you feel is some funny quip to come back with, you can not change the facts. I suggest you exert more effort to taking photos and less effort trying to come back with your responses to everyone who happens to post a comment on here.

Everyone here is entitled to make a statement on what they feel or believe in, including you. None of us need to try any one up-man ship or knock someone down for believing in something. Try being more tolerant of others opinions.

heyrob Loc: Western Washington

Well let’s start with your quote "Switzerland issues a gun to every man above 18 because he becomes a soldier for the country, not just because they want to give out guns to people. Every 18 year old is conscripted and keeps a uniform and a rifle at home. Also I believe it has a high suicide rate caused by gunshot compared to other European countries." So we're talking about a country that issues a gun to every 18 year old male, and then you say that it also has a high suicide rate. Are we not to believe that you're making some correlation here?

Here's a verifiable fact for you, depending upon the data source, only 24% to 28% of suicides in Switzerland are committed with a firearm, that's half the rate of here in the US where 56% of suicides are committed with a gun. Since every 18 year old in this country does not have a gun, I find your assertion that the suicide rate there is higher because of the high rate of gun ownership questionable.

Furthermore, not only is there no correlation between gun ownership and increased crime and suicide rates, but the exact opposite is true, at least according to a Harvard study. (Pay particular attention to the third paragraph) http://theacru.org/acru/harvard_study_gun_control_is_counterproductive/

There are the verifiable facts, not mere conjecture, so maybe it is you who should climb down from that high horse. As for letting others express their opinions, I’ve never said others can’t express their opinion, but when they make blatant false assertions, then I am well within my right to counter the claims with the truth. If anything I have said here can be refuted, then by all means show me the data!

Lucian Loc: From Wales, living in Ohio

Heyrob ...

You have done it again...

You have rushed in to try and belittle someone and not bothered to read the person's post.

I have no idea why you are bringing the USA into this because if you had bothered to go back and read my post but this time absorb what you are reading, you would have seen that I stated that it was higher than OTHER EUROPEAN COUNTRIES.

No where did I mention anything about the USA, you decided to compare it to Switzerland. Therefore your argument has just been shot down and has no merit here. By the way, I am not on any high horse I am not the one who has been running down several poster on here, you are the one who has been doing that.

I stand by my previous post.

Gitzo Loc: Indiana

Patrick; You sir, are a classic example of why I support police officers; that was the best, the most knowledgeable response to a gun hating fool I've heard in a long time!
Thank You!

Jakebrake Loc: Broomfield, Colorado

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Gitzo Loc: Indiana

Old Malky; Would you consider explaining to me exactly how you know so much about WHAT the Japanese "realized" after Pearl Harbor ? I really appreciate your consideration for our armed forces and former servicemen during WW2, but I have to tell you, I think you're a little off about what you say the Japanese "realized"; I remember very clearly what the overall "attitude" of the Japanese military was immediately after Pearl Harbor, and for almost the entire duration of the war in the Pacific. After Pearl Harbor, there wasn't an individual in the entire Japanese armed forces that had the slightest at that point that they were going to defeat us.

I really don't think you, nor I or anyone else has the slightest clue what the military leaders of Japan were thinking, untill well after the battles at Iwo Jima, Tarawa, and Okinawa; I think it's possible that they were "beginning" to feel somewhat less optimistic about their chances of stopping OUR military from continuing on north and invading their homeland after we routed them at Okinawa, but I can flat out guarantee you, had it not been for our B-29's and our two A bombs, it would have been one hell of a fight, and the casualty on BOTH sides would have made Hiroshima and Nagasaki pale by comparison.

Gitzo Loc: Indiana

Lucian;
I had already read what you and Rob had both said on page 1, and after your outburst on page 2, I went back and re-read whaT BOTH of you said again, TWICE; I must tell you, I really think 90% of those reading your initial reply, would have taken it exactly as Rob apparently took it; I doubt that many would have managed to have answered it as effectively as Rob did though.

Wabbit Loc: Arizona Desert

Make that 99% Doc ..... and it could have been 100% if not for Lucian

heyrob Loc: Western Washington

I have read your post twice, and I never claimed that you brought up the USA, I did. I also have not attempted to belittle you, but if that's how you feel, maybe you need to reflect on why you take my comments that way.

If you open your eyes and your mind instead of your mouth for a moment, perhaps you might learn something. You brought up Switzerland's gun ownership and in the same paragraph their suicide rate. Comparing that rate to other European, countries is pointless since those other countries have stricter gun control laws than Switzerland so you can’t accurately compare countries with few to no guns with one that has many. Therefore you are comparing apples to oranges, while I compared apples to apples.

I pointed out that despite the higher per capita gun ownership in Switzerland (as a percentage) their suicide rate by firearm is half that of the US which, while having more firearms over all, it has fewer per capita. Proving that the conclusion in your original post was flawed. I have provided verifiable data, and links, something you have failed to do, you just keep dancing around the data and try to skew the point.

And please tell me where I have “been running down several poster on here”. I’ll admit to slamming Frank T for his out of line comment “I personally don't care of heyrob has a thousand guns but I do care about his demented grandfather having guns and that should be the common ground. I loved and worshiped my grandparents before they passed and still miss them, so if Frank T wants to open the season on slamming my family, well then he should be prepared to be slammed back. I just have more couth than to attack his family. I’ll go for the source of the childish comments, I’m going to slam him back directly, and I’ve been reading his mindless posts long enough to know who and what I’m dealing with. If you can’t take the heat, stay out of the kitchen junior.

Black Bart Loc: Indiana

Yep right on. :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

coldavo

Jakebrake's Grandpa seems to one of the usual NRA followers.
Have a look at the two tables at the end of the following article. Only a stupid person could not see the correlation between number of guns and number of deaths by guns. If the old chestnut of "it's only the insane people who do this" is correct then America has about 12 times the number of mad people than the average of all of the other G12 nations in the world. The "Land of the Free" has about 12 times the number of deaths per capita than the average of ALL "civilised" countries. Per Capita it has nearly 30 times the number of gun deaths of Australia and about 6 times that of Canada (which is close enough to the US to have caught some of the disease).
It is obvious to all but the NRA types that the number of guns is the problem.
If not please give an acceptable reason to deny the truths shown in the two tables.
coldavo


http://scienceblogs.com/thepumphandle/2012/07/23/gun-violence-is-a-u-spublic-health-problem/
The Pump Handle
Gun violence is a U.S. public health
problem
Posted by Celeste Monforton, DrPH, MPH of George Washington University
School of Public Health & Health Services on July 23, 2012
(42)
Share on emailMore »
A night out for the midnight premiere of the summer blockbuster “Batman: The Dark Knight
Rises” turned deadly. Twelve people are dead and at least 59 were wounded. The victims will
be mourned, the suspect studied, and the incident relegated to our criminal justice system. In
my circle, however, we see gun violence a public health problem. It affects people, it causes
death, injury and disability, and it can be addressed with environmental, legal, and behavioral
interventions. A classic paper examining violence in a public health frame was published in a
1993 issue of the journal Health Affairs. J.A. Mercy and colleagues described the methods
and models used in public health, including our heavy emphasis on interdisciplinary
leadership. More recently, David Hemenway, PhD, a professor of health policy at Harvard
School of Public Health published Private Guns, Public Health in which he makes the
compelling case that gun violence can be prevented, just like we’ve tackled other public
health challenges.
Gun violence is uniquely an American problem compared to other industrialized countries.
The rate of gun-related deaths per 100,000 individuals in Australia, Canada and the United
Kingdom is 0.1, 0.5, and 0.03, respectively. In the U.S., the overall rate is 2.98. And that
overall rate doesn’t tell the full story. In some cities, the rates are five to ten times that
number. The fatality rate in Los Angeles is 9.2, in Miami it’s 23.7 and in my hometown of
Detroit, Michigan the rate is a staggering 35.9 deaths per 100,000 residents. According to
data assembled by the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (NCIJP), about 85
people in the U.S. are killed everyday in firearm-related incidents. The most recent available
NCIJP data (2007) identified more than 31,000 firearm-related deaths in the U.S., including
17,000 from suicide and 13,000 from homicide/police involvement.
The number of deaths are striking enough, but even more so when compared to the firearmrelated
fatality rates in other countries. I used data from the University of Sydney School of
Public Health’s gun policy program to create the following table. It shows gun-related fatality
rates for the Group of Twelve countries. The U.S. is a striking outlier on both the rate of
homicides by guns and rate of unintentional gun fatalities.
If a cohort made up of 13 advanced industrialized countries that cooperate on monetary
policy doesn’t seem like the proper group to draw comparisons, look at Table 2. It compares
the gun-related fatality rates among the top-ten countries ranked by number of college
graduates.
If you have a better comparison group, use the University of Sydney School of Public
Health’s gun facts by country to make your own comparisons. I bet the results won’t make
you swell with pride.
Beginning in the 1970′s, the American Public Health Association (APHA) has adopted
numerous policy statements to support educational and legislative initiatives to address the
factors that contribute to firearm-related injury and death. The most recent statement adopted
in 2009 describes the need for youth violence prevention efforts, and complements APHA’s
opposition to civilian access to assault weapons. The Association also has a policy statement
on the books concerning handgun-injury prevention and one adopted in 2001 supporting
curricula in firearm-related violence prevention.
Some of the smartest individuals who can help us understand and articulate the link between
gun violence and public health are Matthew Miller, MD, MPH, ScD and, as mentioned
above, David Hemenway, PhD. Both are with the Harvard Injury Control Research Center
and are also members of APHA’s Injury Control and Emergency Health Services Section.
Here’s what they said in the wake of the deadly gun violence in Aurora, Colorado:
“The US has more guns in civilian hands than any other developed country and more firearm
related death as a result: more frequent massacres like the horrific shooting in Colorado, and
day after day, more accidental firearm deaths, more domestic homicides, more homicides in
the streets, and more firearm suicides. …Other countries have much more sensible gun
control policies than does the US and, ironically, more people in the US favor sensible
firearm control legislation than has been enacted. The toll of firearm death is not, however,
inevitable. Indeed, we know that rates of suicide and homicide are lower, all else equal, in
areas of the US where there are fewer privately owned guns and where more sensible gun
control is the norm. Violence is a public health problem, and firearm violence is recognized
as a uniquely American public health problem (at least in comparison to other high income
countries). Most scientific studies on firearms now come from the public health community.”
In the 72 hours since the shootings in Aurora, I’ve heard quite a few political commentators
say that with the November election looming, most Members of Congress will keep their lips
sealed with conversations about gun control. They also predict that neither Mr. Obama nor
Mr. Romney will speak on the campaign trail about gun-control policies. Should either
candidate or leaders on Capitol Hill decide gun violence in the U.S. deserves national
attention, they’d do the country a service by inviting public health experts to sit at the head of
the table.

mtclicker Loc: Montana

It is about time someone stand up to this way of thinking.

Skellum0

Your history is very one sided. Totalitarian countries banning guns is a completely different scenario to gun control being introduced through a democracy. In every democracy with effective gun control citizens are much safer as murder rates and gun deaths both come down significantly.

Switzerland does have high gun ownership, it also has some of the tightest gun control in the Western World which is the real reason gun crime is so low. Do your research.