quote:

Originally posted by bluefish:
It would be much more informative if you adjusted for population differences.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by bluefish:
It would be much more informative if you adjusted for population differences.

as the rate is per 100k, it's inherently adjusted - cut 1/2 of those off for suicides, and then 2/3 of the remainder for blue inner city/gang related violence

quote:

The most common attempted methods of suicide differ from the most common methods of completion; up to 85% of attempts are via drug overdose in the developed world

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

The most common attempted methods of suicide differ from the most common methods of completion; up to 85% of attempts are via drug overdose in the developed world

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

The most common attempted methods of suicide differ from the most common methods of completion; up to 85% of attempts are via drug overdose in the developed world

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide

quote:

Originally posted by TomP:
So "Death with Dignity" is woke, if it's done with a syringe and the doctor is paid, but if it's the homemade kind with a 38, it's a "Gun Death".
Not to approve of it, someone has to go with a mop and a bucket to clean up afterwards. Not nice at all...none of them are.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by TomP:
So "Death with Dignity" is woke, if it's done with a syringe and the doctor is paid, but if it's the homemade kind with a 38, it's a "Gun Death".
Not to approve of it, someone has to go with a mop and a bucket to clean up afterwards. Not nice at all...none of them are.

i am 100% behind death with dignity - idk if it's woke or not, but it should always be an option -

but to answer Sarge's question, most other countries use overdose vs a gun - and the facts prove it

of course it would actually kill him to state "thanks for the data, i learned something from your post" he'd choke to death on it

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:
And how many intentional mass overdoses do they have in elementary schools?

Are their kids having to do drills?

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by TomP:
So "Death with Dignity" is woke, if it's done with a syringe and the doctor is paid, but if it's the homemade kind with a 38, it's a "Gun Death".
Not to approve of it, someone has to go with a mop and a bucket to clean up afterwards. Not nice at all...none of them are.

i am 100% behind death with dignity - idk if it's woke or not, but it should always be an option -

but to answer Sarge's question, most other countries use overdose vs a gun - and the facts prove it

of course it would actually kill him to state "thanks for the data, i learned something from your post" he'd choke to death on it

let me change the subject, again, rather than have the honesty to acknowledge that my assumption was wrong

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by TomP:
So "Death with Dignity" is woke, if it's done with a syringe and the doctor is paid, but if it's the homemade kind with a 38, it's a "Gun Death".
Not to approve of it, someone has to go with a mop and a bucket to clean up afterwards. Not nice at all...none of them are.

i am 100% behind death with dignity - idk if it's woke or not, but it should always be an option -

but to answer Sarge's question, most other countries use overdose vs a gun - and the facts prove it

of course it would actually kill him to state "thanks for the data, i learned something from your post" he'd choke to death on it

let me change the subject, again, rather than have the honesty to acknowledge that my assumption was wrong

I fixed it for you, sarge ... you could ack that your assumption was dead wrong, but i would expect you to choke to death on saying "i was wrong" ..

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Leeper:
You can think or say what you like but the high murder rate in the US, gun related or not, is certainly due to more than just the presence of a lot of guns. After all, the US has always had a lot of guns. there has been a societal shift which has contributed greatly to making violence, especially deadly violence, a viable choice for conflict resolution. The thing is, while violence is often an intrinsic part of criminal behaviour, it seems t be mostly in the US that mass murder for it's own sake is a thing. The whole issue depresses the hell out of me, because I have grandchildren who are going to have to deal with this world we have created.
I truly do not believe that the restriction on any particular firearm will make any difference in the tendency to commit murder. It will only affect the means.
Regarding suicide: Suicide happens when the prospect of death is more attractive than is the prospect of living. It will be more effective to eliminate whatever it is that makes living so difficult for some than it is to control one of the potential tools. Regards, Bill.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Leeper:
Interesting graph. What do you suppose caused that big spike in 1999, another in 2006 and yet another in 2012? Then there is the drop to zero in 2002. How did the Republicans screw that up?
Of course, we don't want to forget that many "mass shootings" are the result of gang warfare. Being gangs might be a factor. Regards, Bill

quote:

Originally posted by nute:
I don't now about the latest one but it seems many mass shootings in the US are related to mental issues.

It would appear there are two ways to address that -
1) Increase accessibility of mental healthcare and decouple it from "ability to pay"
2) Institute a gun licensing system which includes a check of the applicants mental health history

As an outsider I don't understand the US resistance to some sort of "permit to own" a firearm. It would seem a sensible way of preventing those with a criminal record or mental health problem from owning a firearm.

One of the fundamental differences^^^between Americans and Europeans displayed in real-time.

It would require a reset for those who own to register, after which no permit = jail.

At the end of the day it's your country and your problem. If it was here id struggle to accept that a couple of mass shootings/day is a price worth paying for the status quo.

quote:

Originally posted by nute:

As an outsider I don't understand the US resistance to some sort of "permit to own" a firearm. It would seem a sensible way of preventing those with a criminal record or mental health problem from owning a firearm.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
You are probably correct Mike.

If I had ever witnessed any compromise between Right and Left being anything other than pulling the plug on leak in a damn…I would go along. But instead…the domino effect of decreasing liberty ALWAYS emerges — time and time again. The Patriot Act is a good example.

These days I have decided it is just time to make stand. From my studies…I believe it is a fundamental right envisioned by our Founders and it is a hill I am willing to die on.

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
You are probably correct Mike.

If I had ever witnessed any compromise between Right and Left being anything other than pulling the plug on leak in a damn…I would go along. But instead…the domino effect of decreasing liberty ALWAYS emerges — time and time again. The Patriot Act is a good example.

These days I have decided it is just time to make stand. From my studies…I believe it is a fundamental right envisioned by our Founders and it is a hill I am willing to die on.

What do your "studies" tell you the "well-regulated militia" part of the 2nd Amendment refers to?

quote:

Originally posted by Schrodinger:
Actually, pretty good responses from both sides.

Lane, your definition of a well regulated militia is flawed. If they meant the general population, why even include the terms “well regulated militia?”

No flaw at all. They intended for (and never gave thought the they would not want to) the citizenry keep fully prepared and organized in casual military fashion by their own accord.

But, it doesn’t really matter, as the courts seemed to have found that it’s an individuals right.

A the writer who said that this hold thing is nothing but an academic argument is probably correct. There are so many of these AR type of rifles out there, they can never be limited.

What, we as Americans, are going to have to live with is this continued terrorism of mass killings. Its just a further manifestation of a deteriorating society, culture and country.

The long and the short of it is that this country is going down the drain.

quote:

What, we as Americans, are going to have to live with is this continued terrorism of mass killings. Its just a further manifestation of a deteriorating society, culture and country.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
You are probably correct Mike.

If I had ever witnessed any compromise between Right and Left being anything other than pulling the plug on leak in a damn…I would go along. But instead…the domino effect of decreasing liberty ALWAYS emerges — time and time again. The Patriot Act is a good example.

These days I have decided it is just time to make stand. From my studies…I believe it is a fundamental right envisioned by our Founders and it is a hill I am willing to die on.

What do your "studies" tell you the "well-regulated militia" part of the 2nd Amendment refers to?

Regulate - (one of the definitions of which I believe the Founders intended) - set according to an external standard.

Militia - a military force that is raised from the civil population

A “well-regulated militia” would be, according to my studies of what the Founders intended, a general population of citizenry armed with weaponry similar to the external standard they might encounter.

quote:

Originally posted by wymple:
We've had something over 500 mass shootings this year requiring 3 or more dead. Requiring 4 or more is on this chart. Some definitions require only 3, I'm told. That would change the chart numbers considerably. 500 mass shootings would mean at least 1500 fatalities, not the peak on this chart of 100. Mass shootings have skyrocketed since the ban expired, but that may not have had a lot to do with the increase. It's a piece of the puzzle. And the puzzle has a lot of pieces.

quote:

Originally posted by TomP:

quote:

Originally posted by wymple:
We've had something over 500 mass shootings this year requiring 3 or more dead. Requiring 4 or more is on this chart. Some definitions require only 3, I'm told. That would change the chart numbers considerably. 500 mass shootings would mean at least 1500 fatalities, not the peak on this chart of 100. Mass shootings have skyrocketed since the ban expired, but that may not have had a lot to do with the increase. It's a piece of the puzzle. And the puzzle has a lot of pieces.

Since the push to ban magazines starts at 10 rounds, why not make the chart start at 10 casualties?

20…JB Weld puts 2 end to end nicely.

But, I guess we could outlaw JB Weld while we are at it.

As is, it's part of an argument for banning repeating firearms with capacities over four rounds.

Any doubters out there who believe this will stop at 10 round magazines?

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
You are probably correct Mike.

If I had ever witnessed any compromise between Right and Left being anything other than pulling the plug on leak in a damn…I would go along. But instead…the domino effect of decreasing liberty ALWAYS emerges — time and time again. The Patriot Act is a good example.

These days I have decided it is just time to make stand. From my studies…I believe it is a fundamental right envisioned by our Founders and it is a hill I am willing to die on.

What do your "studies" tell you the "well-regulated militia" part of the 2nd Amendment refers to?

quote:

Originally posted by nute:
I don't now about the latest one but it seems many mass shootings in the US are related to mental issues.

It would appear there are two ways to address that -
1) Increase accessibility of mental healthcare and decouple it from "ability to pay"
2) Institute a gun licensing system which includes a check of the applicants mental health history

As an outsider I don't understand the US resistance to some sort of "permit to own" a firearm. It would seem a sensible way of preventing those with a criminal record or mental health problem from owning a firearm.

It would require a reset for those who own to register, after which no permit = jail.

At the end of the day it's your country and your problem. If it was here id struggle to accept that a couple of mass shootings/day is a price worth paying for the status quo.

quote:

Originally posted by ANTELOPEDUNDEE:

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
You are probably correct Mike.

If I had ever witnessed any compromise between Right and Left being anything other than pulling the plug on leak in a damn…I would go along. But instead…the domino effect of decreasing liberty ALWAYS emerges — time and time again. The Patriot Act is a good example.

These days I have decided it is just time to make stand. From my studies…I believe it is a fundamental right envisioned by our Founders and it is a hill I am willing to die on.

What do your "studies" tell you the "well-regulated militia" part of the 2nd Amendment refers to?

A militia that's organized, trained and properly equipped; kind of like the difference between a current college football team and a pick up game involving students who wanted to and were able to play. One thing people often overlook is that back then your weapon was kept in the home so as not to have the enemy take take them from a central armory.
Well regulated as shit to do with laws or rules.

quote:

Originally posted by ANTELOPEDUNDEE:

quote:

Originally posted by nute:
I don't now about the latest one but it seems many mass shootings in the US are related to mental issues.

It would appear there are two ways to address that -
1) Increase accessibility of mental healthcare and decouple it from "ability to pay"
2) Institute a gun licensing system which includes a check of the applicants mental health history

As an outsider I don't understand the US resistance to some sort of "permit to own" a firearm. It would seem a sensible way of preventing those with a criminal record or mental health problem from owning a firearm.

It would require a reset for those who own to register, after which no permit = jail.

At the end of the day it's your country and your problem. If it was here id struggle to accept that a couple of mass shootings/day is a price worth paying for the status quo.

Most if not all off the larger mass shootings involved someone for which red flags were thrown yet they slipped through the cracks or the warnings were ignored. As Matt Dillon would say, "I can't run him out of town if he hasn't done anything."

I'd be more open to licensing, registration if it afforded me the same privileges as licensing, registering a vehicle does. Unlike my vehicle I'm extremely limited to where I can use my firearms.

quote:

Originally posted by Huvius:

quote:

Originally posted by ANTELOPEDUNDEE:

quote:

Originally posted by nute:
I don't now about the latest one but it seems many mass shootings in the US are related to mental issues.

It would appear there are two ways to address that -
1) Increase accessibility of mental healthcare and decouple it from "ability to pay"
2) Institute a gun licensing system which includes a check of the applicants mental health history

As an outsider I don't understand the US resistance to some sort of "permit to own" a firearm. It would seem a sensible way of preventing those with a criminal record or mental health problem from owning a firearm.

It would require a reset for those who own to register, after which no permit = jail.

At the end of the day it's your country and your problem. If it was here id struggle to accept that a couple of mass shootings/day is a price worth paying for the status quo.

Most if not all off the larger mass shootings involved someone for which red flags were thrown yet they slipped through the cracks or the warnings were ignored. As Matt Dillon would say, "I can't run him out of town if he hasn't done anything."

I'd be more open to licensing, registration if it afforded me the same privileges as licensing, registering a vehicle does. Unlike my vehicle I'm extremely limited to where I can use my firearms.

We already have a background check process but that doesn't seem all that effective when mental health comes into play. Not hard to simply lie on the form - just ask Hunter...

I do find it quite interesting that the 3.6 gun deaths per 100K citizens generates such outrage but the 32.4 opioid deaths per 100K hardly gets any notice anymore.
Is it really the prevention of deaths and protection of our young citizens?
Sure doesn't look like it...