Ex-Navy Seal Chris Kyle murdered at gun range

digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Ex-Navy Seal Chris Kyle murdered at gun range

www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57567323/ex-navy-seal-chris-kyle-murdered-in-texas/

Guess this should be interesting to see "why" the killer shot the two men.


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
How shocking. An armed and

How shocking. An armed and trained individual, who's gun didn't protect him.
Listen to rightwingers talk and you'd think he could have defended himself.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:How shocking.

Vastet wrote:
How shocking. An armed and trained individual, who's gun didn't protect him. Listen to rightwingers talk and you'd think he could have defended himself.

 

Nice strawman. No one has argued that being armed and even being well trained makes you immortal, it just gives you better odds. 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
I didn't make a strawman.

I didn't make a strawman. Unless you can prove no right winger ever claimed he needed a gun to protect himself against guns. Good luck with that literally impossible task. 5 minute google search would give you 5 million examples of the fact I'm right.

Nice strawman of your own, btw. I didn't say anything about immortality.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:I didn't make a

Vastet wrote:
I didn't make a strawman. Unless you can prove no right winger ever claimed he needed a gun to protect himself against guns. Good luck with that literally impossible task. 5 minute google search would give you 5 million examples of the fact I'm right. Nice strawman of your own, btw. I didn't say anything about immortality.

The argument that a gun will help protect you is remarkably different than the argument that a gun is a 100% guarantee of protection. The former argument is common, the latter is not one I have ever seen outside of sarcastic parodies and I would be quite amused if you could find even one example of it being made with any seriousness. 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Didn't help this guy in the

Didn't help this guy in the slightest. Argument fail.

Also, your strawman is still a strawman.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Didn't help

Vastet wrote:
Didn't help this guy in the slightest. Argument fail. Also, your strawman is still a strawman.

We don't even know whether or not he was armed at the time of the shooting. Regardless, are you saying his odds of surviving would have been the same unarmed as if he was armed? Your argument is the equivalent of pointing to an example of a person who dies in a car crash while wearing their seat belt and claiming that it is evidence seat belts don't protect you in a car crash so you shouldn't bother wearing them. 

No one has argued that a gun will protect you 100% of the time, as a Navy SEAL I am sure he "died" in training exercises dozens if not hundreds of times while armed to the teeth. That doesn't change the fact that being armed gives you a better chance. In this particular case he was probably taken completely by surprise since according to the article the man who allegedly shot him was a friend he went to the target range with regularly and presumably someone he trusted and did not consider a threat until he was shot. There is nothing you can do if someone you trust decides to blindside you and this incident bears no relation to the larger gun debate. 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 4127
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:In this

Beyond Saving wrote:
In this particular case he was probably taken completely by surprise since according to the article the man who allegedly shot him was a friend he went to the target range with regularly and presumably someone he trusted and did not consider a threat until he was shot. There is nothing you can do if someone you trust decides to blindside you and this incident bears no relation to the larger gun debate. 

  A few reports state that the two men were shot in the back.   I am not reporting this as irrefutably verified, though. Time will tell.

 

Remember that even the Sandy Hook news reporting was constantly updated and even contradicted itself regarding the number of shooters, whether it was Adam Lanza or his brother who was the shooter, whether the victims were killed with handguns or not, what if any weapons were found in the trunk of Lanza's car, etc.

Patrick is an edgy edgelord.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15752
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:How shocking.

Vastet wrote:
How shocking. An armed and trained individual, who's gun didn't protect him. Listen to rightwingers talk and you'd think he could have defended himself.

Thank you Vaset.

"The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun" NRA cocksucking money grubbing gun manufacturing industry salad tossing feltching  minion president.

 

How about stop handing guns out like they are candy?

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15752
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Vastet

Beyond Saving wrote:

Vastet wrote:
How shocking. An armed and trained individual, who's gun didn't protect him. Listen to rightwingers talk and you'd think he could have defended himself.

 

Nice strawman. No one has argued that being armed and even being well trained makes you immortal, it just gives you better odds. 

No it does not Bubble Boy. To give you an advantage, you have to be aware someone is coming after you.

The study's are consistent over time. You have much more odds of hurting or killing yourself or someone you know than defending yourself from a stranger.

 

But sure, If you KNOW, sure if you are trained it betters your odds. But people don't attack you(just like in war) and try to signal that they are about to attack.

Outside the issue of guns, omnivores SNEAK UP on their prey, just like this case even with a weapon no one could have seen it coming. Just like a shark sneaks up on a seal.

You just smoke Dirty Harry crap and think life is one big Animal House movie.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Well, reports appear to be

Well, reports appear to be that they were at the shooting range to help the "shooter" with PTSD. Apparently he did this with war veterans and might have been part of the therapy.

Still is strange how things transpired. Only the dead really know what happened, the sick guy isn't reliable.

 


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Beyond Saving

Brian37 wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

Vastet wrote:
How shocking. An armed and trained individual, who's gun didn't protect him. Listen to rightwingers talk and you'd think he could have defended himself.

 

Nice strawman. No one has argued that being armed and even being well trained makes you immortal, it just gives you better odds. 

No it does not Bubble Boy. To give you an advantage, you have to be aware someone is coming after you.

The study's are consistent over time. You have much more odds of hurting or killing yourself or someone you know than defending yourself from a stranger.

 

But sure, If you KNOW, sure if you are trained it betters your odds. But people don't attack you(just like in war) and try to signal that they are about to attack.

Outside the issue of guns, omnivores SNEAK UP on their prey, just like this case even with a weapon no one could have seen it coming. Just like a shark sneaks up on a seal.

You just smoke Dirty Harry crap and think life is one big Animal House movie.

 

If you read what I said, that is exactly what I argued. In this particular situation it was not able to save his life, that does not mean that being armed does not help protect you in any situation. (Although as I pointed out we do not know if he was in fact armed, he was at a shooting range but if the murder was preplanned I imagine the murderer waited until his gun was empty- making it into nothing but a club)

In fact, even when you are ambushed there is a lot that can go your way that could lead to you being able to fire back- they could miss, the first bullet might not kill you etc. If you got out of your bubble and actually familiarized yourself with guns you would know they are not magically deadly and simply being shot is hardly a guarantee of death. You would also realize that sometimes they help, and sometimes they can't (just like anything else in the world). You would also notice that banning things does not have a very good history of leading to that thing disappearing from use. Also, you would notice that guns are used everyday in this country by people protecting their property and lives.

 

http://www.ketv.com/news/local-news/Homeowner-fatally-shoots-intruder/-/9674510/18277828/-/qpjgbkz/-/index.html 

A man breaks into a home and abducts the wife (he was an aquaintence of hers). He is holding her and threatening her unless the husband agreed to fight him. The husband agreed to fight the thug, shooting him in the leg- when the man continued to threaten he got another one in the chest.

 

http://www.fox19.com/story/20299806/3-shot-in-during-attempted-robbery-in-lockland

A man is mugged by three men while getting out of his car. He hands over his wallet. They didn't leave right away so he handed over three bullets at high speed causing the robbers to run away in different directions. Now you might not know this, but muggers are rarely found. A friend of mine was mugged last year and the cops barely even tried to look, even when caught it is virtually impossible to convict because prove that the person the cops picked up are not simply someone who looks similar. However, cops are pretty good at finding people with extra holes in them. All three muggers were found in short order and charged with aggravated robbery and assault.

 

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20121210/NEWS010701/312100036/Police-Gas-station-clerks-shoot-kill-robber

This one happened at a gas station I used to live near and stop by every morning. Thug comes in the door and robs the clerk at gunpoint. The clerk did exactly as all the "experts" say and turned over all the cash in the register. As the thug is walking out the door the other employee comes out of the office (not knowing what is going on) and the thug spins around and fires a shot. Definitely the wrong thing to do, the clerk drew a handgun and double tapped the thug. Thanks to a slow response time by 911, the thug had the courtesy to die, saving us tax payers hundreds of thousands.

 

http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2012/12/22/police-say-1-dead-3-wounded-in-sac-home-invasion/

Three armed thugs break into a home at 3:30 in the morning. They start shooting at the homeowner who returns fire, wounding two of them and killing one.

 

http://www.wafb.com/Global/story.asp?S=4527526

In Louisiana a routine traffic stop turned violent as the thug attacked the police officer. Despite being shot once in the stomach the thug was on top of the officer beating him. An armed citizen who was just walking down the road pulls out his .45 (big pistol) and orders the thug to get off the officer. The thug ignores him (bad idea) and takes four shots to the torso. Once again our hero asks nicely for the thug to stop. The thug keeps pounding on the officer (really bad idea) and the hero shrugs and fires the fatal shot to the head. (not sure if he really shrugged, taking some literary license there)

 

http://www.ajc.com/news/news/local/mother-of-two-surprises-burglar-with-five-gunshots/nTnGR/ 

A thug breaks into a house using a crowbar (we should ban those along with ski masks). A mother takes her twin 9 year olds and hides in an upstairs closet. The thug made his way up to their hiding spot and ran into a mother protecting her children with a .38 revolver. She empties the revolver, five shots hitting the thug in the face and neck. (That is what happens when you shoot low, if you go for the head you have to hit the brain cavity, shots to the face are ugly but not lethal.)

The thug was laying on the floor and she threatened to shoot him again if he moved. (A bluff since she was out of bullets, but fortunately thugs are not good at counting, at least with five bullets in them) She took the children and ran to her neighbors where she called 911. Before the police could arrive the thug got into his car and started driving. He was found parked in a driveway a bit down the road. This particular pathetic example of humanity had been arrested SIX times since 2008 and had recently served a six month sentence for battery (I am sensing a pattern here).

 

http://www.fresnobee.com/2013/01/09/3127388/fresno-man-was-gunman-in-madera.html

Two thugs, one of whom was wanted for a home invasion where he bound an 82 year old woman, walked into a pharmacy and started shooting right away hitting a 68 year old woman in the leg. Her son returned fire hitting Bailey (the thug who apparently hates old women). The thugs ran away and Bailey was found laying in the street where he was taken to a public hospital. He died. Good thing too, according to the story he was a gang member with an "extensive" criminal history including convictions for child abuse, the world is a little bit better of a place without that scum. Unfortunately, the other man was not found. 

 

 http://www.cbs42.com/content/localnews/story/Bessemer-woman-shoots-armed-intruder-after/d9VjEpWxhkW5DxfX4HNLrQ.cspx

A 68 year old woman was minding her own business sleeping in her bed when some creep attacks her with a sawsall (we should ban those), an air gun and wearing a ski mask (ban those too). Grandma isn't a pushover, she fought back making enough noise to wake a family friend sleeping in another room. When the thug was distracted she got her .44 revolver and shot the creepy thug in the chest. He ran away and probably would have escaped police except he showed up at the hospital with an extra hole.

 

I could do this all day long just covering stories from the last couple of months. You will notice that all of these stories are in local papers and are rarely reported nationally. What the studies show is that since gun laws have been loosened and concealed carry is legalized is that crime of all types has gone down significantly, including gun crimes. Our murder rates are near all time lows since they started effectively tracking the murder rate. The facts also clearly illustrate that the majority of crime is committed by people who are repeat offenders and are often gang members. If you are serious about stopping crime, that is where you focus your energy.

 

BTW Brian, exactly what gun control policy that you have advocated would have prevented the murder of the ex Seal? Even if you go to the extreme of requiring that guns only be available for checkout at shooting ranges, it wouldn't have changed anything in this particular case. Sometimes, there simply isn't anything you can do to prevent a murder. People have been murdering since the beginning of mankind, long before the invention of the gun. Hence the phrase, "knife in the back" which is really what this particular example seems to be. Whether you murder someone with a gun, a knife or poison it is pretty easy to kill someone who trusts you and doesn't consider you a threat even when you have the murder weapon in your hand.  

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15752
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Brian37

Beyond Saving wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

Vastet wrote:
How shocking. An armed and trained individual, who's gun didn't protect him. Listen to rightwingers talk and you'd think he could have defended himself.

 

Nice strawman. No one has argued that being armed and even being well trained makes you immortal, it just gives you better odds. 

No it does not Bubble Boy. To give you an advantage, you have to be aware someone is coming after you.

The study's are consistent over time. You have much more odds of hurting or killing yourself or someone you know than defending yourself from a stranger.

 

But sure, If you KNOW, sure if you are trained it betters your odds. But people don't attack you(just like in war) and try to signal that they are about to attack.

Outside the issue of guns, omnivores SNEAK UP on their prey, just like this case even with a weapon no one could have seen it coming. Just like a shark sneaks up on a seal.

You just smoke Dirty Harry crap and think life is one big Animal House movie.

 

If you read what I said, that is exactly what I argued. In this particular situation it was not able to save his life, that does not mean that being armed does not help protect you in any situation. (Although as I pointed out we do not know if he was in fact armed, he was at a shooting range but if the murder was preplanned I imagine the murderer waited until his gun was empty- making it into nothing but a club)

In fact, even when you are ambushed there is a lot that can go your way that could lead to you being able to fire back- they could miss, the first bullet might not kill you etc. If you got out of your bubble and actually familiarized yourself with guns you would know they are not magically deadly and simply being shot is hardly a guarantee of death. You would also realize that sometimes they help, and sometimes they can't (just like anything else in the world). You would also notice that banning things does not have a very good history of leading to that thing disappearing from use. Also, you would notice that guns are used everyday in this country by people protecting their property and lives.

 

http://www.ketv.com/news/local-news/Homeowner-fatally-shoots-intruder/-/9674510/18277828/-/qpjgbkz/-/index.html 

A man breaks into a home and abducts the wife (he was an aquaintence of hers). He is holding her and threatening her unless the husband agreed to fight him. The husband agreed to fight the thug, shooting him in the leg- when the man continued to threaten he got another one in the chest.

 

http://www.fox19.com/story/20299806/3-shot-in-during-attempted-robbery-in-lockland

A man is mugged by three men while getting out of his car. He hands over his wallet. They didn't leave right away so he handed over three bullets at high speed causing the robbers to run away in different directions. Now you might not know this, but muggers are rarely found. A friend of mine was mugged last year and the cops barely even tried to look, even when caught it is virtually impossible to convict because prove that the person the cops picked up are not simply someone who looks similar. However, cops are pretty good at finding people with extra holes in them. All three muggers were found in short order and charged with aggravated robbery and assault.

 

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20121210/NEWS010701/312100036/Police-Gas-station-clerks-shoot-kill-robber

This one happened at a gas station I used to live near and stop by every morning. Thug comes in the door and robs the clerk at gunpoint. The clerk did exactly as all the "experts" say and turned over all the cash in the register. As the thug is walking out the door the other employee comes out of the office (not knowing what is going on) and the thug spins around and fires a shot. Definitely the wrong thing to do, the clerk drew a handgun and double tapped the thug. Thanks to a slow response time by 911, the thug had the courtesy to die, saving us tax payers hundreds of thousands.

 

http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2012/12/22/police-say-1-dead-3-wounded-in-sac-home-invasion/

Three armed thugs break into a home at 3:30 in the morning. They start shooting at the homeowner who returns fire, wounding two of them and killing one.

 

http://www.wafb.com/Global/story.asp?S=4527526

In Louisiana a routine traffic stop turned violent as the thug attacked the police officer. Despite being shot once in the stomach the thug was on top of the officer beating him. An armed citizen who was just walking down the road pulls out his .45 (big pistol) and orders the thug to get off the officer. The thug ignores him (bad idea) and takes four shots to the torso. Once again our hero asks nicely for the thug to stop. The thug keeps pounding on the officer (really bad idea) and the hero shrugs and fires the fatal shot to the head. (not sure if he really shrugged, taking some literary license there)

 

http://www.ajc.com/news/news/local/mother-of-two-surprises-burglar-with-five-gunshots/nTnGR/ 

A thug breaks into a house using a crowbar (we should ban those along with ski masks). A mother takes her twin 9 year olds and hides in an upstairs closet. The thug made his way up to their hiding spot and ran into a mother protecting her children with a .38 revolver. She empties the revolver, five shots hitting the thug in the face and neck. (That is what happens when you shoot low, if you go for the head you have to hit the brain cavity, shots to the face are ugly but not lethal.)

The thug was laying on the floor and she threatened to shoot him again if he moved. (A bluff since she was out of bullets, but fortunately thugs are not good at counting, at least with five bullets in them) She took the children and ran to her neighbors where she called 911. Before the police could arrive the thug got into his car and started driving. He was found parked in a driveway a bit down the road. This particular pathetic example of humanity had been arrested SIX times since 2008 and had recently served a six month sentence for battery (I am sensing a pattern here).

 

http://www.fresnobee.com/2013/01/09/3127388/fresno-man-was-gunman-in-madera.html

Two thugs, one of whom was wanted for a home invasion where he bound an 82 year old woman, walked into a pharmacy and started shooting right away hitting a 68 year old woman in the leg. Her son returned fire hitting Bailey (the thug who apparently hates old women). The thugs ran away and Bailey was found laying in the street where he was taken to a public hospital. He died. Good thing too, according to the story he was a gang member with an "extensive" criminal history including convictions for child abuse, the world is a little bit better of a place without that scum. Unfortunately, the other man was not found. 

 

 http://www.cbs42.com/content/localnews/story/Bessemer-woman-shoots-armed-intruder-after/d9VjEpWxhkW5DxfX4HNLrQ.cspx

A 68 year old woman was minding her own business sleeping in her bed when some creep attacks her with a sawsall (we should ban those), an air gun and wearing a ski mask (ban those too). Grandma isn't a pushover, she fought back making enough noise to wake a family friend sleeping in another room. When the thug was distracted she got her .44 revolver and shot the creepy thug in the chest. He ran away and probably would have escaped police except he showed up at the hospital with an extra hole.

 

I could do this all day long just covering stories from the last couple of months. You will notice that all of these stories are in local papers and are rarely reported nationally. What the studies show is that since gun laws have been loosened and concealed carry is legalized is that crime of all types has gone down significantly, including gun crimes. Our murder rates are near all time lows since they started effectively tracking the murder rate. The facts also clearly illustrate that the majority of crime is committed by people who are repeat offenders and are often gang members. If you are serious about stopping crime, that is where you focus your energy.

 

BTW Brian, exactly what gun control policy that you have advocated would have prevented the murder of the ex Seal? Even if you go to the extreme of requiring that guns only be available for checkout at shooting ranges, it wouldn't have changed anything in this particular case. Sometimes, there simply isn't anything you can do to prevent a murder. People have been murdering since the beginning of mankind, long before the invention of the gun. Hence the phrase, "knife in the back" which is really what this particular example seems to be. Whether you murder someone with a gun, a knife or poison it is pretty easy to kill someone who trusts you and doesn't consider you a threat even when you have the murder weapon in your hand.  

Those are the acception not the norm. We still have WAY TOO MANY GUNS ON OUR STREETS and WAY TOO MANY GUN DEATHS.

This is nothing but more of the same crap to excuse an industry to exploit fear to make a buck.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3359
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum wrote:Well,

digitalbeachbum wrote:

Well, reports appear to be that they were at the shooting range to help the "shooter" with PTSD. Apparently he did this with war veterans and might have been part of the therapy.

Still is strange how things transpired. Only the dead really know what happened, the sick guy isn't reliable.

 

I am a little bit curious about that myself.

Is it a common practice to use shooting on a range as treatment for PTSD ?

Not trying to turn this into a gun control issue.

What I was thinking about, was that my father (in those days they called it shell shock) had to undergo psychiatric treatment for a little while due to his time in the field. (He was in Nam from '68-69, which I understand was a bad time).

However, PTSD/shell shock, seemed to manifest in rather odd forms. For instance, car muffler backfires, crossing a field and subconsciously looking for trip wires, and things of that nature.

His problems mainly seemed to be depression and coping (something that he dealt with off and on all of his life).

BUT, it seemed that what little I knew, there were feelings of "Why did better men than me die ? Why did I survive ? etc."

Unfortunately, he turned pretty heavily to the Catholic Church to try and find meaning.

But, I am just wondering, what type of PTSD therapy is involved in getting vets to shoot guns ?

I am not a veteran, have never been in combat, so I do not know. Can shooting be a therapy for former combat veterans ?

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Those are the

Brian37 wrote:

Those are the acception not the norm. We still have WAY TOO MANY GUNS ON OUR STREETS and WAY TOO MANY GUN DEATHS.

This is nothing but more of the same crap to excuse an industry to exploit fear to make a buck.

Oh, so anecdotal evidence is great when it agrees with your point of view but can be dismissed out of hand when it doesn't? There is plenty of data that I have posted in several of these threads. The vast majority of guns used in crime are not obtained legally, people who get concealed carry permits are far less likely to commit any crime than the general population and there is no correlation between gun control and lower crime in the US. In fact, the areas with the highest levels of gun control tend to have the highest rates of gun violence. Do you have evidence otherwise?

Currently, the violent crime rate is the lowest it has been since 1962, the gun lobby has been winning, there are more guns on the street than ever, yet crime is really low. Explain that.  

Also note that only 1-2% of the population have concealed carry permits and even many with a permit do not carry all the time so for every story of someone saving themselves there are 100 where someone might have been able to do the same thing but didn't because they were unarmed. So obviously it is the exception because it is clearly the exception for a victim to be armed. Which is why most criminals that get shot get shot in a home invasion because a higher number of people have guns in their home. 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
harleysportster

harleysportster wrote:

digitalbeachbum wrote:

Well, reports appear to be that they were at the shooting range to help the "shooter" with PTSD. Apparently he did this with war veterans and might have been part of the therapy.

Still is strange how things transpired. Only the dead really know what happened, the sick guy isn't reliable.

 

I am a little bit curious about that myself.

Is it a common practice to use shooting on a range as treatment for PTSD ?

Not trying to turn this into a gun control issue.

What I was thinking about, was that my father (in those days they called it shell shock) had to undergo psychiatric treatment for a little while due to his time in the field. (He was in Nam from '68-69, which I understand was a bad time).

However, PTSD/shell shock, seemed to manifest in rather odd forms. For instance, car muffler backfires, crossing a field and subconsciously looking for trip wires, and things of that nature.

His problems mainly seemed to be depression and coping (something that he dealt with off and on all of his life).

BUT, it seemed that what little I knew, there were feelings of "Why did better men than me die ? Why did I survive ? etc."

Unfortunately, he turned pretty heavily to the Catholic Church to try and find meaning.

But, I am just wondering, what type of PTSD therapy is involved in getting vets to shoot guns ?

I am not a veteran, have never been in combat, so I do not know. Can shooting be a therapy for former combat veterans ?

I think it has more to do with just hanging around with other guys who have been in similar situations than the actual shooting. Target shooting is simply an activity that many ex-military guys like to do as a hobby, so it is a natural thing for them to do together.

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3359
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:I think

Beyond Saving wrote:

I think it has more to do with just hanging around with other guys who have been in similar situations than the actual shooting. Target shooting is simply an activity that many ex-military guys like to do as a hobby, so it is a natural thing for them to do together.

That makes sense.

 It would be much easier to discuss issues with guys that have been through combat/war than it would not be.

 For instance, if a combat veteran were to tell me they were having difficulties (something they probably would not do) what would I possibly be able to tell them ? That I understand ? How ? I haven't been in combat/war.

Although I DO wonder what type of training that psychiatrists/psychologists would be given to deal with people that have PTSD ?

I know that every psychiatrist/psychologist can not possibly be a combat/war veteran.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
 This whole "you are more

 This whole "you are more likely to hurt yourself" with a gun, let us play a game. List the following things that have caused emergency room visits for unintentional and non-fatal injuries from the most visits to the least in 2010. 

A. Firearms

B. Bicycles

C. Dogs

D. Household chemicals (cleaners, fertilizers, rat poison etc.)

 

Now order the next list by unintentional fatal injuries in the year 2010

A. Firearms

B. Bicycles

C. Dogs

D. Household chemicals

 

 

Now order these items as far as the best estimate of the number of them that exist in the US

A. Firearms

B. Bicycles

C. Dogs

D. Household chemicals

 

No googling! Good luck. 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3359
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote: This

Beyond Saving wrote:

 This whole "you are more likely to hurt yourself" with a gun, let us play a game. List the following things that have caused emergency room visits for unintentional and non-fatal injuries from the most visits to the least in 2010. 

A. Firearms

B. Bicycles

C. Dogs

D. Household chemicals (cleaners, fertilizers, rat poison etc.)

 

Now order the next list by unintentional fatal injuries in the year 2010

A. Firearms

B. Bicycles

C. Dogs

D. Household chemicals

 

 

Now order these items as far as the best estimate of the number of them that exist in the US

A. Firearms

B. Bicycles

C. Dogs

D. Household chemicals

 

No googling! Good luck. 

No googling ? I am fucked ! Smiling I wonder what I did for information when I was a kid in the 1980s ? I vaguely remember having to go to libraries and use this thing called a card catalogue, only to find some mouldy books that were filled with outdated information.

 

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
harleysportster wrote:I am a

harleysportster wrote:

I am a little bit curious about that myself.

Is it a common practice to use shooting on a range as treatment for PTSD ?

Not trying to turn this into a gun control issue.

What I was thinking about, was that my father (in those days they called it shell shock) had to undergo psychiatric treatment for a little while due to his time in the field. (He was in Nam from '68-69, which I understand was a bad time).

However, PTSD/shell shock, seemed to manifest in rather odd forms. For instance, car muffler backfires, crossing a field and subconsciously looking for trip wires, and things of that nature.

His problems mainly seemed to be depression and coping (something that he dealt with off and on all of his life).

BUT, it seemed that what little I knew, there were feelings of "Why did better men than me die ? Why did I survive ? etc."

Unfortunately, he turned pretty heavily to the Catholic Church to try and find meaning.

But, I am just wondering, what type of PTSD therapy is involved in getting vets to shoot guns ?

I am not a veteran, have never been in combat, so I do not know. Can shooting be a therapy for former combat veterans ?

It's a weird phenomenom where the body shuts down almost like a rape victim or molested child.

I don't want to get in to the medical side of it because I'm no expert but some of the successful treatment has been explained to me in this way.

The the mind stops working and you actually relive the experiences over and over again. It's like time has stopped. Your body goes one, but the mind is frozen with that experience.

They have a treatment where they have you focus on the experience. You verbally rate the experience as in 1=no pain, 10=can't stand it, the worst.

The therapist uses some device or technique such as a pencil or finger. The therapist then moves the finger (pointing up) around your head and back and forth from three positions. Front, left side ear, right side ear. They do this several times and have you focus on the experience. Then slowly reduce the distance they travel around your head, until they come to the center.

The victim holds their head still, only focusing the eyes on the finger. They never take the eye off the finger and they never stop focusing on the bad experience.

Eventually, over a long period of time, over many sessions, the brain is tricked in the fast forwarding from that frozen moment in time and it processes what happened.

In the "gun range" therapy, I'm assuming that the gun is similar to the device I mentioned. They attempt to bring the mind forward in time from the experience. I suspect using "live ammo" is not a good idea because the subject can have a flash back. I suspect this happened during their training.

 

 


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3359
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum wrote:It's a

digitalbeachbum wrote:

It's a weird phenomenom where the body shuts down almost like a rape victim or molested child.

I don't want to get in to the medical side of it because I'm no expert but some of the successful treatment has been explained to me in this way.

The the mind stops working and you actually relive the experiences over and over again. It's like time has stopped. Your body goes one, but the mind is frozen with that experience.

They have a treatment where they have you focus on the experience. You verbally rate the experience as in 1=no pain, 10=can't stand it, the worst.

The therapist uses some device or technique such as a pencil or finger. The therapist then moves the finger (pointing up) around your head and back and forth from three positions. Front, left side ear, right side ear. They do this several times and have you focus on the experience. Then slowly reduce the distance they travel around your head, until they come to the center.

The victim holds their head still, only focusing the eyes on the finger. They never take the eye off the finger and they never stop focusing on the bad experience.

Eventually, over a long period of time, over many sessions, the brain is tricked in the fast forwarding from that frozen moment in time and it processes what happened.

In the "gun range" therapy, I'm assuming that the gun is similar to the device I mentioned. They attempt to bring the mind forward in time from the experience. I suspect using "live ammo" is not a good idea because the subject can have a flash back. I suspect this happened during their training.

 

Very interesting. I don't believe that I have ever heard of that before.

I am not aware of any actual murder cases that were attributed to actual PTSD, but it does seem like a very likely possibility.

Of which I guess the plea of temporary insanity might apply, although that would probably take a professional evaluation to determine whether or not the individual was in "full leave of their senses" as the British put it at the time of the incident.

This could be the case here and there is a first time for everything.

I think I am correct that in the case of the dude that climbed the Texas tower was later found to have brain tumors, although whether or not that was a contributing factor to that mass murder would be relevant or not.

I DO remember reading about cases where brain tumors were attributed to people's spur of the moment suicides, but I don't  remember why.

 

 

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:We don't

Beyond Saving wrote:
We don't even know whether or not he was armed at the time of the shooting.

You're suggesting an unarmed gun nut? ROFL Tell me another one.

Beyond Saving wrote:
Regardless, are you saying his odds of surviving would have been the same unarmed as if he was armed?

He's dead isn't he? Didn't get a single shot off. A trained sniper. This is the ultimate proof you're deluding yourselves when you say your gun can protect you. It'll only do so if you see it coming. And even then there's a good chance it won't help. Or will kill some random passer-by.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
harleysportster wrote:Very

harleysportster wrote:

Very interesting. I don't believe that I have ever heard of that before.

I am not aware of any actual murder cases that were attributed to actual PTSD, but it does seem like a very likely possibility.

Of which I guess the plea of temporary insanity might apply, although that would probably take a professional evaluation to determine whether or not the individual was in "full leave of their senses" as the British put it at the time of the incident.

This could be the case here and there is a first time for everything.

I think I am correct that in the case of the dude that climbed the Texas tower was later found to have brain tumors, although whether or not that was a contributing factor to that mass murder would be relevant or not.

I DO remember reading about cases where brain tumors were attributed to people's spur of the moment suicides, but I don't  remember why.

Here ya go...

http://www.ptsd.va.gov/public/pages/treatment-ptsd.asp

The section I'm speaking of is the section on EMDR

 


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3928
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:How shocking.

Vastet wrote:
How shocking. An armed and trained individual, who's gun didn't protect him. Listen to rightwingers talk and you'd think he could have defended himself.

But he could only shoot 2 at a gun range, not 50 as in a movie theater.

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
He only tried to hit 2, and

He only tried to hit 2, and he got 'em both. Noone stopped him. The cops have him alive.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote: This

Beyond Saving wrote:

 This whole "you are more likely to hurt yourself" with a gun, let us play a game. List the following things that have caused emergency room visits for unintentional and non-fatal injuries from the most visits to the least in 2010. 

A. Firearms

B. Bicycles

C. Dogs

D. Household chemicals (cleaners, fertilizers, rat poison etc.)

 

B. Bicycles- 515,861 (167.08/100,000 people)

Bicycles are dangerous and lead our list in injuries, which really shouldn't be all that surprising for any of us who had bikes as kids. I know me and my brother made big jumps, attempted (and usually failed) to do tricks. That gravel road sure hurt and more than once I was picking rocks out of my skin. Never got sent to the emergency room, but many people do. Kids have especially high injury rates with almost half of bike injuries occurring to kids under age 14- 220,435 (360.03/100,000 people)

 

C. Dogs- 343,060 (110/100,000 people)  

That is right, those furry little creatures we love to love are second in the pack in sending us to the emergency room. The CDC estimates that over 4.5 million people are bitten every year, a little over 340 thousand are serious enough to warrant an emergency room. I love dogs, have always had them but they can be dangerous. The rate is particularly high for children with 126,061 (205.98/100,000) of those emergency room visits being children under the age of 14.

 

D. Household chemicals- 332,528 (107.7/100,000)

Accounting for nearly as many emergency room visits as dog bites and some years is ahead of dog bites comes poisoning from household chemicals. The most common item for poisoning children are cosmetics and personal care products, second for children and first for adults are cleaners. Note that the number of poisonings is actually much higher, but I did not include medication, alcohol or illegal drugs since the misuse of those is often intentional and it is virtually impossible to separate intentional abuse of them from unintentional.  

 

A. Firearms- 14,161 (4.59/100,000)

That is right, coming in dead last on the list is the terrifying and dreaded firearm. With a total that is about the size of the year to year variance of the other injuries, firearm injuries are very rare. It also holds the distinction of being the one thing on the list where children are less likely to be injured than the general population with 595 (0.97/100,000) of the injuries occurring to kids under 14. This is probably because people with firearms realize they are dangerous and do more to keep them out of their kids than they do bikes, dogs or household chemicals (hell we give bikes to our kids on purpose) The rate falls even lower for kids under 10 with only 72 (0.18/100,000). 

 

 

Beyond Saving wrote:

Now order the next list by unintentional fatal injuries in the year 2010

A. Firearms

B. Bicycles

C. Dogs

D. Household chemicals

 D. Household chemicals- 3,304 (1.07/100,000)

Leading our list for fatal household items is household chemicals. Too many people don't take the warnings on these items seriously and fail to take proper safety precautions like wearing a mask and making sure they are in a well ventilated area when using them. They are dangerous, make sure you follow the directions and keep them out of the hands of children. 

 

B. Bicycles- 793 (0.26/100,000)

While not accounting for nearly as many deaths as household chemicals, riding a bike can kill you and killed enough people in 2010 to make second on our list.

 

C. Firearms- 606 (0.20/100,000)

Third on our list is the dreaded scary firearm. That is right, the firearm is statistically about as likely to accidentally kill you as riding a bicycle and much less likely to injure you. It is deadlier in the sense that a higher percentage of injuries result in death, but injuries are much more rare. The result is that each account for about the same number of deaths. 

 

D. Dogs- 6 (negligible)

While our furry friends are likely to bite us, they usually don't mean to cause any significant damage. Most dog bites are a result of a dog that is surprised or scared and consists of a single bite that can usually be patched up with a few stitches. I enjoy working on rehabilitating "red zone" dogs that the local humane society and I really believe there is no dog that can't be saved. Most bites occur because the dog is scared or protecting something, not because they want to eat you. (Or they occur when you are wrestling with your dog and their teeth scrape you, I have a few scars on my hands that still remind me of the past dogs that gave them to me.)  

 

Beyond Saving wrote:

Now order these items as far as the best estimate of the number of them that exist in the US

A. Firearms

B. Bicycles

C. Dogs

D. Household chemicals

 

D. Household chemicals- hundreds of millions maybe billions

No doubt you have a dozen or more potentially poisonous chemicals in your house right now and so does everyone else. 

 

A. Firearms- 250-300+million

Firearms are common in the US with somewhere between 35-50% of households having at least one gun and some of us gun nuts have dozens. That makes it all the more impressive that they come in last for causing injuries and third for causing death.  

 

B. Bicycles- 100-150 million

There are less than half as many bicycles as guns and somewhere around 30% of the population reports riding a bike at least once a year. Yet despite fewer bicycle owners, bicycles account for way more injuries and slightly more deaths every year than the dreaded gun. 

 

C. Dogs- 78 million

There are 78 million owned dogs in the US and countless others sitting in the humane society looking for a good home. A gun and a good hunting dog really is one of the most enjoyable things in life. Brian and Digital might not like guns, but I guarantee if you take your dog hunting once he/she will love guns. It is a good combination because neither is likely to kill you.  

 

So what is the point? Yes, guns are dangerous and they have the potential to kill you, but it is absurd to go through life trying to avoid everything that might kill you and of the things that might kill you, guns are way down the list. The biggest reason is probably because gun owners are more aware of the danger and tend to take more precautions than we do with things like chemicals and bicycles.

Most firearm injuries are self inflicted and occur because someone is being an idiot. If you are responsible, take precautions and ensure that your gun is secured in a way that no one can access it without your permission the gun is not going to shoot you. We should be aware of the dangers and take appropriate safety precautions. When you ride your bike wear a helmet, when you clean your house wear a mask, when you approach a sleeping do make noise and when you handle a gun be mindful of where the barrel is pointed and keep your finger out of the trigger guard until you intend to shoot. If you have kids, take extra steps to make sure all of these items are only accessible and used under supervision. 

 

Now the final point that you are "more likely to shoot yourself than need it in a crime" let us look at some crime data. Let's review, with a gun there is a 4.59/100,000 chance of getting a nonfatal accidental injury and 0.20/100,000 chance of accidentally receiving a fatal injury for a total of 4.78/100,000.

In 2010 according to the UCR there were 1,246,248 violent crimes (403.6/100,000), so you are 87.93 times more likely to be a victim of a violent crime than you are to shoot yourself. Of those 158,903 (51.4/100,000) were muggings which is a common situation in which concealed carry holders use their weapons. So you are 11 times more likely to need your gun to protect you in a mugging than you are to shoot yourself. 63,634 (20.59/100,000) were home invasions, so you are 4.48 times more likely to wake up to someone breaking into your home than you are to shoot yourself. So the claim that you are "more likely to shoot yourself or some innocent" is demonstrably false and if you are making that claim you are either ignorant or a liar. 

Of course, the odds of you hurting yourself and the odds of you being a victim of a crime vary depending on the safety habits/measures you take and your location. I suggest the radical idea that people make those decisions themselves. If you have a gun you should know how to use it safely and remain conscious of good habits. It should also be up to a person to decide if they live in, travel through or frequent areas where their risk of being a victim of a crime are increased. How crazy is that? 

http://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/index.html

http://www.bikeleague.org/media/facts/#americans

http://www.bikesbelong.org/resources/stats-and-research/statistics/participation-statistics/

http://www.humanesociety.org/issues/pet_overpopulation/facts/pet_ownership_statistics.html

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/violent-crime

http://www.cdc.gov/homeandrecreationalsafety/dog-bites/biteprevention.html

http://www.poison.org/stats/#Poisonings:_The_National_Picture_

 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
People with bikes, dogs, and

People with bikes, dogs, and household chemicals I can handle with my bare hands. They don't concern me. A biker will be hurting a lot more than me if he hits me. I've killed 2 attacking dogs with my bare hands already (one when I was 12), a couple more won't bother me. And especially unconcerning are the chemicals. Mostly toddlers and suicides.
Guns not so much.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3359
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote: While

Beyond Saving wrote:

 

While our furry friends are likely to bite us, they usually don't mean to cause any significant damage. Most dog bites are a result of a dog that is surprised or scared and consists of a single bite that can usually be patched up with a few stitches. I enjoy working on rehabilitating "red zone" dogs that the local humane society and I really believe there is no dog that can't be saved.

As  a dog lover, I would agree.

An interesting an harmless trick when on the motorcycle that saves both dog and rider is one that some seasoned bikers taught me and it has worked everytime thus far.

If your going for a scoot, and you see an unleashed dog sprinting from a house, instantly gun throttle for a speed up then slow way down then speed up.

The shift in speed/slow down confuses dog and it stands still. 99% of them will sit down.

Then just continue riding. No animal in the street, no speed up confusion, and a host of other problems can be avoided.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:People with

Vastet wrote:
People with bikes, dogs, and household chemicals I can handle with my bare hands. They don't concern me. A biker will be hurting a lot more than me if he hits me. I've killed 2 attacking dogs with my bare hands already (one when I was 12), a couple more won't bother me. And especially unconcerning are the chemicals. Mostly toddlers and suicides. Guns not so much.

Good luck with that Arnold, although if you will note the whole point of it was unintentional injury, not intentional violence. I was arguing against the specific statement "you are more likely to hurt yourself with a gun than need it in self defense", so the question was which item are you more likely to hurt yourself with, or unintentionally hurt others.   

If you need your gun for self defense you are most likely going against someone who has a gun (probably illegal), knife, club or fists. Maybe you are a big fan of hand to hand combat but for myself, I am not in the physical shape I used to be in and don't care to risk it. Even when I was training every day and felt like I could hold my own in hand to hand against almost anyone, I preferred having tactical advantage. If you manage to incapacitate the other guy with your fists, you are most likely going to sustain injuries, I would rather send the other guy to the hospital (or morgue) without having to visit there myself, I prefer to see my nurses in the Halloween version of their uniform.

FYI, you are far more likely to be the victim of a violent crime in Canada with 1282/100,000 people in 2010 you are at three times more risk of having to use your Arnold protection method than in the US. Although to be fair that number isn't really apples to apples because for some reason you guys include "uttering threats" and "harassing phone calls" as violence which our FBI does not. So I found a nifty table and only included rape, assault, murder, kidnapping, abduction and attempted murder. Things we can all agree are clearly violent crimes where one may wish to defend themselves and also things that are included in the UCR in the US (I even subtracted assault on police officers since you only have to worry about that if you are a cop).

That brings us down to the number 867/100,000. Still twice as likely than in the US. So good luck beating the shit out of the bad guys with your bare hands. I am a pussy, I will just do my impression of Indiana Jones.  

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2011001/article/11523-eng.htm#a4

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2011001/article/11523/tbl/tbl04-eng.htm

 

   

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3928
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:He only tried

Vastet wrote:
He only tried to hit 2, and he got 'em both. Noone stopped him. The cops have him alive.

That only proves he did not want to commit suicide. You're not going to have a mass shooting at a gun range, police station, etc...

The Fort Hood shooter got away with 29 shootings on a military base because only the police were allowed to carry firearms on base and the shooter knew this fact.

Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote: Vastet wrote:He

EXC wrote:

Vastet wrote:
He only tried to hit 2, and he got 'em both. Noone stopped him. The cops have him alive.

That only proves he did not want to commit suicide. You're not going to have a mass shooting at a gun range, police station, etc...

The Fort Hood shooter got away with 29 shootings on a military base because only the police were allowed to carry firearms on base and the shooter knew this fact.

 

 


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:I was

Beyond Saving wrote:
I was arguing against the specific statement "you are more likely to hurt yourself with a gun than need it in self defense", so the question was which item are you more likely to hurt yourself with, or unintentionally hurt others.

Irrelevant. This isn't a discussion I'm taking part in. I have absolute evidence that being trained AND armed won't save your ass when someone decides it's time for you to die. You can dodge to household chemicals and strawman arguments I never made, but you already lost, and you can't mount a comeback.

FYI, every one of your so-called stats is false. Crime and justice cannot be compared between our countries because there are too many different laws that scew police statistics.
Besides, you're the ones who've commercialised slavery and have a new mass shooting incident every week. Claiming it's somehow safer in the US than Canada is hilarious. You aren't even a free country anymore.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:Vastet wrote:He

EXC wrote:

Vastet wrote:
He only tried to hit 2, and he got 'em both. Noone stopped him. The cops have him alive.

That only proves he did not want to commit suicide. You're not going to have a mass shooting at a gun range, police station, etc...

Bullshit.

EXC wrote:

The Fort Hood shooter got away with 29 shootings on a military base because only the police were allowed to carry firearms on base and the shooter knew this fact.

And if the shooter hadn't had access to a gun he couldn't have shot anyone. Argument fail.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15752
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote: This

Beyond Saving wrote:

 This whole "you are more likely to hurt yourself" with a gun, let us play a game. List the following things that have caused emergency room visits for unintentional and non-fatal injuries from the most visits to the least in 2010. 

A. Firearms

B. Bicycles

C. Dogs

D. Household chemicals (cleaners, fertilizers, rat poison etc.)

 

Now order the next list by unintentional fatal injuries in the year 2010

A. Firearms

B. Bicycles

C. Dogs

D. Household chemicals

 

 

Now order these items as far as the best estimate of the number of them that exist in the US

A. Firearms

B. Bicycles

C. Dogs

D. Household chemicals

 

No googling! Good luck. 

Fuck you seriously. Nice try repackaging the same old fucking bullshit.

"Other things harm people too"

NO SHIT SHERLOCK!

So that means we should use that as an excuse to do nothing?

Gun death IS an epidemic, and it is compounded by the manufactures who don't give one fuck about the amount of guns they sell, all they care about is profit.

You are still stuck in  wild west John Wayne utopia.

Gun death is an epidemic. Saying that there are other problems does not mean we should not address gun death.

Please take your Dirty Harry crap somewhere else.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Beyond Saving

Vastet wrote:
Beyond Saving wrote:
I was arguing against the specific statement "you are more likely to hurt yourself with a gun than need it in self defense", so the question was which item are you more likely to hurt yourself with, or unintentionally hurt others.
Irrelevant. This isn't a discussion I'm taking part in. I have absolute evidence that being trained AND armed won't save your ass when someone decides it's time for you to die.

Of course it is relevant. As I pointed out in my first response to you, no one has claimed that being armed and having training is an absolute guarantee of safety, it is simply an improvement of your odds. 

 

Vastet wrote:

You can dodge to household chemicals and strawman arguments I never made, but you already lost, and you can't mount a comeback. FYI, every one of your so-called stats is false. Crime and justice cannot be compared between our countries because there are too many different laws that scew police statistics. Besides, you're the ones who've commercialised slavery and have a new mass shooting incident every week. Claiming it's somehow safer in the US than Canada is hilarious. You aren't even a free country anymore.

Which is why I converted the stats using specific crimes to make them compatible. Bottom line is that you are more likely to be mugged in Canada than you are in the US. To deny that is to deny reality. 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Fuck you

Brian37 wrote:

Fuck you seriously. Nice try repackaging the same old fucking bullshit.

"Other things harm people too"

NO SHIT SHERLOCK!

So that means we should use that as an excuse to do nothing?

Gun death IS an epidemic, and it is compounded by the manufactures who don't give one fuck about the amount of guns they sell, all they care about is profit.

You are still stuck in  wild west John Wayne utopia.

Gun death is an epidemic. Saying that there are other problems does not mean we should not address gun death.

Please take your Dirty Harry crap somewhere else.

Why are guns an "epidemic" yet bicycle riding, dogs and pool ownership not? The number one killer of children in the US is swimming pools. Why are you not on the warpath against swimming pools but you are against guns? Sure, it is sad anytime some innocent dies from a gun. But in the real world, innocent people die from a thousand things every day and guns are not a significant part of those deaths. Banning everything that kills people would be absurd. 

And fuck you, I am not taking my stuff anywhere else. Address my arguments with facts or go fuck yourself, because they will be here for all eternity. 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
 By the way Brian, exactly

 By the way Brian, exactly what gun law that you support would have prevented this particular killing? Are you now supporting the complete ban of all firearms?

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


blacklight915
atheist
blacklight915's picture
Posts: 544
Joined: 2011-12-23
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:As I

Beyond Saving wrote:

As I pointed out in my first response to you, no one has claimed that being armed and having training is an absolute guarantee of safety, it is simply an improvement of your odds.

Well...in this very specific incident, I doubt it did anything to improve his odds; of course, it didn't do anything to hurt them, either...

 

Vastet wrote:

Besides, you're the ones who've commercialised slavery and have a new mass shooting incident every week. Claiming it's somehow safer in the US than Canada is hilarious. You aren't even a free country anymore.

I am not a country at all. Furthermore, individuals are, at most, only slightly responsible for the actions of those who govern the country they live in.

 


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
"Of course it is relevant.

"Of course it is relevant. As I pointed out in my first response to you, no one has claimed that being armed and having training is an absolute guarantee of safety, it is simply an improvement of your odds."

Except it isn't, because the chances are you'll shoot yourself or your kid will shoot someone before a criminal ever points a gun at you.
Also, your own stats prove that more people get mugged and killed per year in the US. Your per capita bs is just that: bs. We'd have to have 10x your crime rate to make the US safer. And its YOUR crime rate per capita which is higher when truly comparing statistics. Especialy involving guns and drugs and homicides.
Finally, in the U.S. approximately 1/3 of the population are slaves. You've so fucked up the idea of justice that not even the USSR or China or Nazi Germany can be said to have imprisoned as many of their own people.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
blacklight915 wrote:I am not

blacklight915 wrote:
I am not a country at all. Furthermore, individuals are, at most, only slightly responsible for the actions of those who govern the country they live in.

Yes you are, and yes they are fully responsible. You are a member of the ruling council of the strongest nation on Earth. Take some responsibility.
I know, Americans never do, and that's part of why the world hates you.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 4127
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote: ....and that's

Vastet wrote:
....and that's part of why the world hates you.

 

  Who cares what the rest of the world thinks ?  

Besides it's getting too crowded within our borders anyway. We should just carpet bomb the rest of the planet and take it over for ourselves.  We need more room.

Patrick is an edgy edgelord.


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
The world > America. Bring

The world > America. Bring it.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 4127
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:The world >

Vastet wrote:
The world > America. Bring it.

 

           You've got it backwards.  We don't bring it ...we send it.   

 

                                           

Patrick is an edgy edgelord.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 4127
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
              

                                     

Patrick is an edgy edgelord.


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
If you try conquering the

If you try conquering the world with THAT, you probably will. > >

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 4127
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote:Vastet

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

Vastet wrote:
The world > America. Bring it.

 

           You've got it backwards.  We don't bring it ...we send it.   

 

                                           

 

  Why did you delete my image of American superiority ?  You couldn't bear to gaze upon America's mean of asserting our will ?  No one can stop us.  We cannot be stopped.   Not even Canada could control us !

Patrick is an edgy edgelord.


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
I didn't delete anything.

I didn't delete anything. The sexy blonde with the rifle and the icon (whatever it represents) are still visible to me. Was there a 3rd image?

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote: Except it

Vastet wrote:
Except it isn't, because the chances are you'll shoot yourself or your kid will shoot someone before a criminal ever points a gun at you.

Except the stats say otherwise and by more than a little. The chances of you shooting yourself or someone else accidentally are less than 5/100,000 much lower than the chances of a criminal pointing a gun at you. You simply stating it doesn't make it reality and we have significant numbers of stats on these things because we track both hospital visits and crimes- unless you care to argue that there are a lot of people out there shooting themselves and not going to the hospital?  

 

Vastet wrote:

Also, your own stats prove that more people get mugged and killed per year in the US. Your per capita bs is just that: bs. We'd have to have 10x your crime rate to make the US safer.

Yes more people are victims of crime in the US- we have 10 times your population. How else would you calculate the odds of you personally being a victim of a crime other than comparing per capita rates? When comparing the relative safety of two activities that have a vastly different number of participants, per capita is the logical way to go. For example, far more people die every year falling down the stairs than from base jumping, does that mean that base jumping is safer than walking on stairs? Of course not, because billions of people walk up and down stairs every day while very few people go base jumping at all and those who do base jump rarely. Go take a basic probability course, you are embarrassing yourself. 

 

Vastet wrote:

And its YOUR crime rate per capita which is higher when truly comparing statistics. Especialy involving guns and drugs and homicides.

Evidence? I showed you my stats, show me yours. Our crime rate is higher involving guns, drugs (you have much more relaxed drug laws than we do) and homicides. Those are not the only crimes a person is likely to encounter. Homicide is the least likely crime in both of our countries- so is homicide the only crime we should worry about? And it is natural that we have more crimes committed with guns because we have more guns in our country, they are more accessible and so for a criminal a gun is a logical tool to use.  

 

Vastet wrote:

Finally, in the U.S. approximately 1/3 of the population are slaves. You've so fucked up the idea of justice that not even the USSR or China or Nazi Germany can be said to have imprisoned as many of their own people.

1/3? Lol, you really like making shit up don't you? But yes, our incarceration rate is really high mostly because of our fucked up drug laws and I agree that is a huge problem. I fail to see how it is at all relevant to the subject at hand though. 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 4127
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:I didn't delete

Vastet wrote:
I didn't delete anything. The sexy blonde with the rifle and the icon (whatever it represents) are still visible to me. Was there a 3rd image?

 

      Seriously?  I thought you were just messing with me.  Maybe the image ( it was a picture of an ICBM ) has some kind of anti-hot linking function ?   Never mind

Patrick is an edgy edgelord.


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote:Vastet

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

Vastet wrote:
I didn't delete anything. The sexy blonde with the rifle and the icon (whatever it represents) are still visible to me. Was there a 3rd image?

 

      Seriously?  I thought you were just messing with me.  Maybe the image ( it was a picture of an ICBM ) has some kind of anti-hot linking function ?   Never mind

Nah. I wouldn't use my privileges that way. I dunno what happened.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Except

Beyond Saving wrote:
Except the stats say otherwise and by more than a little. The chances of you shooting yourself or someone else accidentally are less than 5/100,000 much lower than the chances of a criminal pointing a gun at you. You simply stating it doesn't make it reality and we have significant numbers of stats on these things because we track both hospital visits and crimes- unless you care to argue that there are a lot of people out there shooting themselves and not going to the hospital?

I'd like your sources, because I doubt very much they are credible.

Beyond Saving wrote:
Yes more people are victims of crime in the US- we have 10 times your population. How else would you calculate the odds of you personally being a victim of a crime other than comparing per capita rates?

Frequency and locale are far better indicators of likelyhood of running into crime. Unless you really think I'm more likely to get shot in a 5k pop town than a 5k pop segment of Detroit. Embarassing = you.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.