Eight dead after Florida shooting

[jaywalker]

Idiotic statement from the NRA "We need a good guy with a gun to kill the bad guy with a gun"

Question to the NRA - Where was the good guy on this occasion? Seems unfortunately the good guy and bad guy are not on the same page.

When will the yanks ever learn with their "Rights to defend ourselves" from your own people? when will these senseless killings end when will you ever end this "Gun Culture"?

Yes, only "Police" should be allowed to carry guns.

I knew this guy briefly in 1989. http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2003-02-07/news/0302070342_1_apopka-police-coffey-orange-county

and, http://www.dc.state.fl.us/activeinmates/detail.asp?Bookmark=1&From=list&SessionID=486275763

or how about this one?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murders_of_Adam_Lloyd_and_Vanessa_Arscott

AND, the shooter here is reportedly a convicted felon = not allowed to have a firearm.

See http://www.wesh.com/news/bell-florida-shooting/28141698

The last paragraph says this Florida shooter is a convicted felon = ALREADY REGULATED.... Fat lot of good that did.

Also see http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0790/Sections/0790.23.html

Edited September 19, 2014 by jaywalker

[Time Traveller]

incidentally, I just read that the Florida shooter was a convicted felon - not legally allowed to possess any firearm. So please tell me how gun control would have worked when the guy was already forbidden to own them?

At least, gun control might have prevented the tragic events mentioned in one of my previous posts: http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/761445-56-year-old-man-shot-5-times-in-restaurant-confrontation/#entry8405986

I don't often read news about 'normal' individuals (not involved professionaly in law enforcement, army, security, etc.) killing in self-defence a criminal who attacked them, but I have noticed that mass killings and lethal accidents with guns committed by previously non-convicted individuals are (apparently) much more frequent, especially in countries where no effective gun control is in place.

And this was not one of those times where the shooter had no priors.

For the US we have the benefit that there are very extensive statistics on gun deaths and crime. Unfortunately, the anti-gun crowd never cite statistics because the facts fail to back up their argument.

To put it simply almost half (I think around 40%) of deaths by firearm each year are suicides or people shot and killed by police. Secondly, there is the criminal element that involves the vast majority of the remaining killings - that is, people with prior criminal history or gang affliations.

The truth is mass killings by non-convicted individuals are not getting more frequent. What has changed is in the past when the media would report on one for a few days before the story is forgotten, now the media dwells on it for 2 months or longer.

I do admit sometimes people who legally are allowed to own firearms use them to kill. But comparing this incident in Florida (where the guy was not legally allowed to own the gun) and the incident I mentioned that occured in Australia (where the guy was allowed to legally own firearms). Of the two, which do you think is a failure in Gun laws ?

Perhaps instead of banning guns, we should ban Men, since the vast majority of murders are caused by men !

[bigguy]

^{Did anyone read the article posted today, 14 yr. old THAI boy killed because he didn't help around the house???? NO GUN USED THERE....}

[CMNightRider]

Every time there is a mass shooting in America, the hysterical, anti-gun nuts come out of the wood work. They blame the NRA, gun manufactures, conservatives, and anyone else they can think of expcept the shooter. It's like blaming a spoon because you are fat. There are probably over 80 million gun owners in America, that didn't shoot anyone that day.

The only group of people besides the whining liberals, who want more gun control in America, are the criminals. It would make their job must easier if they knew they could rob, steal, or break into your home without getting shot.

The liberals even get their panties all bunched up when a police officer has to shoot someone. The city of Ferguson, comes to mind.

Dictators don't like their citizens having access to firearms either. Remember Hitler, Stalin, and Mao? One of the fundamental principles of a free society is you are not punished for the acts of others.

[utkb]

Another mass shooting in the U.S tell the poor innocent children murder that the U.S doesn't need gun control. How many more innocent children have to die before the U.S grows up and implements strict gun control.

Didn't Australia have a recent mass shooting just last week?

http://www.news.com.au/national/lockhart-shooting-wagga-wagga-community-reeling-after-hunt-family-tragedy/story-fncynjr2-1227053811861

So, how is strict gun control working out down there?

Personally I think this incident is a reason to have guns for protection. If you disagree, then that's your opinion. You probably also beleive security guards should not have guns either.

What laws countries want to implement is up to them, but I've never seen America tell other countries what their gun laws should be, so why should American make guns laws based on what you want?

I remember when i lived in Nevada -one of the more friendly gun ownership states - and owned a firearm, there was very little aggressive behaviour and definitely no violence that i ever saw. This was unlike my own experience in Sydney when every weekend seemed like drunken fight night in the town center. So maybe strict gun laws work well in Australia because people are naturally agressive, but doesn't mean that eslewhere people can't responsibly own firearms

Security guards don't carry firearms (Cash in Transit excepted) Australians aren't Naturally Aggressive and thousands of Aussies own firearms, people aren't forbidden from owning a gun. Australia has just implements stricter provisions. Background checks, classes, licences and a legitimate reason for requiring a gun. Protection is not a legitimate reason.

Strange statement "aren't Naturally Aggressive".

The fact is we are all homo sapiens, the most aggressive and dangerous species on the planet.

[JDGRUEN]

Just wait ... it will be seen in this case as in 99% of other mass killings in the U.S. in the last 10 years... The perp will have a overt record of mental instability, with acts of aggression documented. The problem in America is that we have sets of laws that over protect people who should be forcible institutionalized but are not thanks to decades of legislated laws insisted upon by liberal do-gooders . In America people are afraid to take action against unstable people because they will be sued and the hurdles to get someone forcible institutionalized are great ... Then even when done it may only last 72 hours...

Until these various sets of laws are changed - all guns could be eliminated and we will still have mass killings - they will just use another weapon and look for situations where they can carry out their heinous acts with the weapons they have.

And we are not giving up our rights to defend ourselves against and out of control government. Nor are we going to be replaced as a population by a religious cult as is being done in the U.K.

Edited September 19, 2014 by JDGRUEN

[GuyL]

incidentally, I just read that the Florida shooter was a convicted felon - not legally allowed to possess any firearm. So please tell me how gun control would have worked when the guy was already forbidden to own them?

At least, gun control might have prevented the tragic events mentioned in one of my previous posts: http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/761445-56-year-old-man-shot-5-times-in-restaurant-confrontation/#entry8405986

I don't often read news about 'normal' individuals (not involved professionaly in law enforcement, army, security, etc.) killing in self-defence a criminal who attacked them, but I have noticed that mass killings and lethal accidents with guns committed by previously non-convicted individuals are (apparently) much more frequent, especially in countries where no effective gun control is in place.

And this was not one of those times where the shooter had no priors.

For the US we have the benefit that there are very extensive statistics on gun deaths and crime. Unfortunately, the anti-gun crowd never cite statistics because the facts fail to back up their argument.

To put it simply almost half (I think around 40%) of deaths by firearm each year are suicides or people shot and killed by police. Secondly, there is the criminal element that involves the vast majority of the remaining killings - that is, people with prior criminal history or gang affliations.

The truth is mass killings by non-convicted individuals are not getting more frequent. What has changed is in the past when the media would report on one for a few days before the story is forgotten, now the media dwells on it for 2 months or longer.

I do admit sometimes people who legally are allowed to own firearms use them to kill. But comparing this incident in Florida (where the guy was not legally allowed to own the gun) and the incident I mentioned that occured in Australia (where the guy was allowed to legally own firearms). Of the two, which do you think is a failure in Gun laws ?

Perhaps instead of banning guns, we should ban Men, since the vast majority of murders are caused by men !

Have you read my previous post (here: http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/761445-56-year-old-man-shot-5-times-in-restaurant-confrontation/#entry8405986)?

I don't want to spend much time on this topic, but as you mentioned statistics, here are just a few ones:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/25/us-accidental-gun-deaths-100-children-yearly

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/11059093/Two-children-a-week-killed-in-accidental-US-shootings.html

Around a third of American children live in homes where there are guns.

Of these homes, 43 per cent contain at least one unlocked firearm and in 13 per cent of the households the guns are not only unlocked but also loaded.

Parents’ belief that the guns were out of harm’s way appears to be rashly optimistic, with one survey finding that 70 per cent of children under 10 knowing exactly where the guns were stored.

Homicides by weapon in the USA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ushomicidesbyweapon.svg

According to the United Nation statistics, the incidence of homicides committed with a firearm in the U.S. is greater than other developped countries (3.0 intentional homicides committed with a firearm per 100,000 inhabitants in 2009).

English is not my native language, thus, I won't discuss much longer here, but knowing human nature and how 'normal' individuals can sometimes react in anger and how negligent a significative percentage of people can be, I'd rather live in places where access to firearms is not too easy than where almost everyone can legally own lethal weapons. But, hey, maybe that's just me!

[jaywalker]

At least, gun control might have prevented the tragic events mentioned in one of my previous posts: http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/761445-56-year-old-man-shot-5-times-in-restaurant-confrontation/#entry8405986

I don't often read news about 'normal' individuals (not involved professionaly in law enforcement, army, security, etc.) killing in self-defence a criminal who attacked them, but I have noticed that mass killings and lethal accidents with guns committed by previously non-convicted individuals are (apparently) much more frequent, especially in countries where there is no effective gun control in place.

==================

I saw your other post on this subject GuyL, however, what sounds good on paper often isn't what happens in reality.

Illinois, Chicago in particular, has VERY strict gun laws as referenced here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Illinois

However, have a look at what the results are here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Chicago

Yeah I know this particular happened in Florida (I was born in Orlando), but Chicago is just a case study.

To be honest, (and this is just my hypothesis) I think it is governments that cause violent crime by individuals, due to either over or under regulation (ie: blatant corruption).

In the USA people snap because the government over regulates. I mean the Federal income tax code started off at something like a dozen pages & now you could fill an NFL playing field with it if you printed it out. Take the case of the guy flying his airplane into the IRS building a few years ago for example

How many regulations are there to get a pilot's license?

In Thailand, the police are so corrupt & inept (under regulation), many folks feel they can get away with murder.

I have no problems registering a firearm & I have no problems with laws that prevent convicted felons from owning them and that provide stiff penalties for those that get caught with one.

More laws simply WILL NOT prevent a crazy person from being crazy though, nor a stupid person from being stupid. If some idiot keeps a loaded gun around & some kid kills himself with it, he should be charged with negligible manslaughter at least, I agree.

If he kills himself by accident, well he's won a Darwin Award in my opinion...Same as getting drunk and hitting a tree....Som Nam Na.

More gun laws only intrude upon the rights of law abiding citizens to keep and bear arms, as was laid out by the Founding Fathers in the US Constitutional Bill of Rights more than 200 years ago.

[ClutchClark]

Just wait ... it will be seen in this case as in 99% of other mass killings in the U.S. in the last 10 years... The perp will have a overt record of mental instability, with acts of aggression documented. The problem in America is that we have sets of laws that over protect people who should be forcible institutionalized but are not thanks to decades of legislated laws insisted upon by liberal do-gooders . In America people are afraid to take action against unstable people because they will be sued and the hurdles to get someone forcible institutionalized are great ... Then even when done it may only last 72 hours...

Until these various sets of laws are changed - all guns could be eliminated and we will still have mass killings - they will just use another weapon and look for situations where they can carry out their heinous acts with the weapons they have.

And we are not giving up our rights to defend ourselves against and out of control government. Nor are we going to be replaced as a population by a religious cult as is being done in the U.K.

Laws by liberal do-gooders?

You better read up on the Reagan era since it was my favorite President Ronnie that kicked all the wingnuts out of the institutions. It was what all us conservatives wanted because it was costing us a fortune to house them.

Ofcourse, we never really considered what was best for them and best for society.

But you are mistaken to blame the libs.

[NeverSure]

-snip-

I don't often read news about 'normal' individuals (not involved professionaly in law enforcement, army, security, etc.) killing in self-defence a criminal who attacked them, but I have noticed that mass killings and lethal accidents with guns committed by previously non-convicted individuals are (apparently) much more frequent, especially in countries where there is no effective gun control in place.

Maybe it's because in most defensive uses, the mere presence of the gun is enough. It isn't fired.

"According to the FBI, in 2012, there were 8,855 total firearm-related homicides in the US, with 6,371 of those attributed to handguns. 61% of all gun-related deaths in the U.S. are suicides" LINK

Don't forget, a suicide is a homicide.

"Hemenway finds more reliable an annual federal government research project, called the National Crime Victimization Survey, which yields estimates in the neighborhood of 100,000 defensive gun uses per year. Making various reasonable-sounding adjustments, other social scientists have suggested that perhaps a figure somewhere between 250,000 and 370,000 might be more accurate." LINK

So your thinking, with all due respect, is way off.

[jaywalker]

Just wait ... it will be seen in this case as in 99% of other mass killings in the U.S. in the last 10 years... The perp will have a overt record of mental instability, with acts of aggression documented. The problem in America is that we have sets of laws that over protect people who should be forcible institutionalized but are not thanks to decades of legislated laws insisted upon by liberal do-gooders . In America people are afraid to take action against unstable people because they will be sued and the hurdles to get someone forcible institutionalized are great ... Then even when done it may only last 72 hours...

Until these various sets of laws are changed - all guns could be eliminated and we will still have mass killings - they will just use another weapon and look for situations where they can carry out their heinous acts with the weapons they have.

And we are not giving up our rights to defend ourselves against and out of control government. Nor are we going to be replaced as a population by a religious cult as is being done in the U.K.

I agree mostly to what you've said......Not sure about the last 2 lines though.

I'm certainly not a "wringing-my-hands-Liberal", but I do go to a Baptist Church on most Sundays, mainly because I like the preacher a lot.

He's a hoot! He's 68, but he told me about shooting a hole in his parents' roof once when he was a kid, on accident with a 30-30

I can't recall all the times, when I was working in Abu Dhabi & there's a mosque every 2 blocks, when I'd fantasize about whipping a .44 magnum off my hip & blast that loudspeaker all to hell.

They sing those prayers 5 times a day LOUD AS SHIT (in Arabic of course). My British buddy said they're saying "KIIIILLLLLLL ALLLLLLLLL THE WHITE PEOPLE......"

First time I ever heard the mosque going off, I was jet-lagged & had only slept about 3 hours, & 0445 hrs it blasted off like the Space Shuttle right outside my hotel room window.

I sat bolt upright in the bed & thought "Gooks in the wire!!!!"

[GuyL]

I'm out of this neverending debate by now, guys. Just read what I wrote at the end of this post: http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/761636-eight-dead-after-florida-shooting/page-2#entry8407766

[jaywalker]

-snip-

I don't often read news about 'normal' individuals (not involved professionaly in law enforcement, army, security, etc.) killing in self-defence a criminal who attacked them, but I have noticed that mass killings and lethal accidents with guns committed by previously non-convicted individuals are (apparently) much more frequent, especially in countries where there is no effective gun control in place.

Maybe it's because in most defensive uses, the mere presence of the gun is enough. It isn't fired.

"According to the FBI, in 2012, there were 8,855 total firearm-related homicides in the US, with 6,371 of those attributed to handguns. 61% of all gun-related deaths in the U.S. are suicides" LINK

Don't forget, a suicide is a homicide.

"Hemenway finds more reliable an annual federal government research project, called the National Crime Victimization Survey, which yields estimates in the neighborhood of 100,000 defensive gun uses per year. Making various reasonable-sounding adjustments, other social scientists have suggested that perhaps a figure somewhere between 250,000 and 370,000 might be more accurate." LINK

So your thinking, with all due respect, is way off.

This just reminded me of an incident that happened about 25 years ago to my older brother, in Florida, in broad daylight.

He was working on his car, changing spark plugs or something, & decided he'd replace the distributor cap & plug wires after he'd gotten into it, so he borrowed our Dad's old pickup to drive 5 miles to the parts store.

Dad's truck was work truck, not a race car, but he came upon a Mustang that was going maybe 50 in a 55 MPH zone, so decided to pass it, when the car wanted to start racing him.

He finally slowed down & my brother passed him & flicked him off as he did so.

He pulled into the parts store, & went inside when a guy he said "Looked like Randall Tex Cobb"

Came in and started screaming at him that he was going to whup his ass.....Said he could take it inside or outside.

My brother said "Ummmm, outside I guess". My brother is no fighter at 160 lbs & 5' 10" maybe.

The aggressor then ran out in the parking lot & started throwing round house kicks in the air.

Dad kept a .22 magnum behind the seat of his truck, so my brother walked out, pulled it out, & pointed it at him.

Crazy Boy screamed, "You gonna shoot me!?"

My brother replied, "You try to hurt me & I'll shoot the shit out of you".

About this time one of my brother's friends pulled up, & saw the situation, so he pulled his .45 pistol out & walked over to my brother.

Crazy Boy decided he'd be better off to just leave, so that's what he did.

I wasn't there, but it's a pretty accurate account, as my brother was shaking like a leaf when he got back to Dad's house 15 minutes later & told me about it.

Edited September 19, 2014 by jaywalker

[Humberstone]

-snip-

I don't often read news about 'normal' individuals (not involved professionaly in law enforcement, army, security, etc.) killing in self-defence a criminal who attacked them, but I have noticed that mass killings and lethal accidents with guns committed by previously non-convicted individuals are (apparently) much more frequent, especially in countries where there is no effective gun control in place.

Maybe it's because in most defensive uses, the mere presence of the gun is enough. It isn't fired.

"According to the FBI, in 2012, there were 8,855 total firearm-related homicides in the US, with 6,371 of those attributed to handguns. 61% of all gun-related deaths in the U.S. are suicides" LINK

Don't forget, a suicide is a homicide.

"Hemenway finds more reliable an annual federal government research project, called the National Crime Victimization Survey, which yields estimates in the neighborhood of 100,000 defensive gun uses per year. Making various reasonable-sounding adjustments, other social scientists have suggested that perhaps a figure somewhere between 250,000 and 370,000 might be more accurate." LINK

So your thinking, with all due respect, is way off.

With all due respect to you, suicide is not the same as a homicide.

[jaywalker]

-snip-

I don't often read news about 'normal' individuals (not involved professionaly in law enforcement, army, security, etc.) killing in self-defence a criminal who attacked them, but I have noticed that mass killings and lethal accidents with guns committed by previously non-convicted individuals are (apparently) much more frequent, especially in countries where there is no effective gun control in place.

Maybe it's because in most defensive uses, the mere presence of the gun is enough. It isn't fired.

"According to the FBI, in 2012, there were 8,855 total firearm-related homicides in the US, with 6,371 of those attributed to handguns. 61% of all gun-related deaths in the U.S. are suicides" LINK

Don't forget, a suicide is a homicide.

"Hemenway finds more reliable an annual federal government research project, called the National Crime Victimization Survey, which yields estimates in the neighborhood of 100,000 defensive gun uses per year. Making various reasonable-sounding adjustments, other social scientists have suggested that perhaps a figure somewhere between 250,000 and 370,000 might be more accurate." LINK

So your thinking, with all due respect, is way off.

With all due respect to you, suicide is not the same as a homicide.

I agree, but...

Pretty sure the OP was saying that the statisticians that compile these numbers, include suicides in their homicide figures. That's the way I understood the article he referenced.

Edited September 19, 2014 by jaywalker

[sgtsabai]

This is a subject, "gun control" that will never ever end. Those of us that used and owned guns, I had several what the uninformed call 'assault rifles'(they are not as they did not fire fully automatic), will always want our guns. Yea, the NRA is not the NRA I belonged to for so many years. I hunted for a living, fed my family, and carried on and off duty. Yes, I had to pull my weapon more than once but thankfully I didn't have to shoot. I have squeezed the round for real. Guns are scary for some people, for many of us not so. I've seen plenty of people that thought they knew guns and hunting that didn't know diddly squat. I've cleaned up my share of the dead. And yea, in response to an above post, woke up more than once with "gooks in the wire". I never went crazy and killed indiscriminately. People that do so are insane and yes it was "sir ronald of the house of ray guns" that started letting them out and keeping them out on the street. America has gone insane with it's current me, me, me Ayn Rand philsophy that cares nothing for those that don't have everything already. It is the people that kill people, not the guns. Until America gets back on the right track, the insanity will continue. Like anywhere else, if a person wants a gun, he/she can get one, even right here. I will not "debate" this subject as I know those that hate guns will never be convinced otherwise and I will never be convinced that I shouldn't own all the guns I can afford. Just my one satang worth.

[chuckd]

What you non-American folks don't seem to comprehend is there are literally thousands of federal and state laws and regulations on the books concerning the ownership and use of firearms.

It is not a problem of having enough adequate regulations.

It is a problem of enforcement of those regulations on both the federal and state levels.

[Jingthing]

What you non-American folks don't seem to comprehend is there are literally thousands of federal and state laws and regulations on the books concerning the ownership and use of firearms.

It is not a problem of having enough adequate regulations.

It is a problem of enforcement of those regulations on both the federal and state levels.

As an American, I can say I really really wish the USA followed AUSTRALIA's lead on this.

I reject the NRA style argument above.

It is possible to reduce gun violence in the USA.

Australia has shown the way.

The USA is not interested and that is basically insane.

[Credo]

I am pretty much a liberal and pretty much in favor of gun control....BUT, I have traveled in the Western part of the US where there are wide areas of land and some rather nasty creatures that will do harm. I have had to call on someone with gun for assistance with them and usually this has just been nothing more than a few shots in the air to scare them off.

I am always saddened by the unnecessary deaths of innocents.

[JDGRUEN]

Just wait ... it will be seen in this case as in 99% of other mass killings in the U.S. in the last 10 years... The perp will have a overt record of mental instability, with acts of aggression documented. The problem in America is that we have sets of laws that over protect people who should be forcible institutionalized but are not thanks to decades of legislated laws insisted upon by liberal do-gooders . In America people are afraid to take action against unstable people because they will be sued and the hurdles to get someone forcible institutionalized are great ... Then even when done it may only last 72 hours...

Until these various sets of laws are changed - all guns could be eliminated and we will still have mass killings - they will just use another weapon and look for situations where they can carry out their heinous acts with the weapons they have.

And we are not giving up our rights to defend ourselves against and out of control government. Nor are we going to be replaced as a population by a religious cult as is being done in the U.K.

Laws by liberal do-gooders?

You better read up on the Reagan era since it was my favorite President Ronnie that kicked all the wingnuts out of the institutions. It was what all us conservatives wanted because it was costing us a fortune to house them.

Ofcourse, we never really considered what was best for them and best for society.

But you are mistaken to blame the libs.

I think you have mistaken Jimmy Carter for Reagan - wow! Bottom line - we cannot effectively institutionalize crazy people and they get to ACT OUT with blood baths because they cannot be controlled/

[F430murci]

-snip-

I don't often read news about 'normal' individuals (not involved professionaly in law enforcement, army, security, etc.) killing in self-defence a criminal who attacked them, but I have noticed that mass killings and lethal accidents with guns committed by previously non-convicted individuals are (apparently) much more frequent, especially in countries where there is no effective gun control in place.

Maybe it's because in most defensive uses, the mere presence of the gun is enough. It isn't fired.

"According to the FBI, in 2012, there were 8,855 total firearm-related homicides in the US, with 6,371 of those attributed to handguns. 61% of all gun-related deaths in the U.S. are suicides" LINK

Don't forget, a suicide is a homicide.

"Hemenway finds more reliable an annual federal government research project, called the National Crime Victimization Survey, which yields estimates in the neighborhood of 100,000 defensive gun uses per year. Making various reasonable-sounding adjustments, other social scientists have suggested that perhaps a figure somewhere between 250,000 and 370,000 might be more accurate." LINK

So your thinking, with all due respect, is way off.

With all due respect to you, suicide is not the same as a homicide.

I agree, but...

Pretty sure the OP was saying that the statisticians that compile these numbers, include suicides in their homicide figures. That's the way I understood the article he referenced.

How does one include the suicide gun deaths into the 9,000 homicide gun deaths when there was approximately 19,000 suicide by gun deaths.

The total number if gun deaths each year typically ramge in mid 30,000s, 60% of which are typically classified as suicide.

Haha, Neversure cannot help himself with the ambiguous, misleading spin, although he will swear up and down he meant no such thing. Spin baby, spin.

[metisdead]

An inflammatory troll baiting post has been removed.

[ggt]

The killer was reportedly addicted to Thai soaps...just kidding...don't get your panties in a wad...

[NeverSure]

With all due respect to you, suicide is not the same as a homicide.

I agree, but...

Pretty sure the OP was saying that the statisticians that compile these numbers, include suicides in their homicide figures. That's the way I understood the article he referenced.

How does one include the suicide gun deaths into the 9,000 homicide gun deaths when there was approximately 19,000 suicide by gun deaths.

The total number if gun deaths each year typically ramge in mid 30,000s, 60% of which are typically classified as suicide.

Haha, Neversure cannot help himself with the ambiguous, misleading spin, although he will swear up and down he meant no such thing. Spin baby, spin.

You're right. I read it wrong.

But you're still derailing the point which holds true. A poster above said:

I don't often read news about 'normal' individuals (not involved professionaly in law enforcement, army, security, etc.) killing in self-defence a criminal who attacked them, but I have noticed that mass killings and lethal accidents with guns committed by previously non-convicted individuals are (apparently) much more frequent, especially in countries where there is no effective gun control in place.

And my point is that there are probably ten times as many uses of guns for self defense in the US as there are gun deaths, and about 2/3 of those deaths are suicides. So there could be as many as 30x as many defensive gun uses as there are murders, accidental shootings, etc.

In a large number of defensive incidents, the gun isn't fired. It's mere presence stops a criminal.

[ClutchClark]

Just wait ... it will be seen in this case as in 99% of other mass killings in the U.S. in the last 10 years... The perp will have a overt record of mental instability, with acts of aggression documented. The problem in America is that we have sets of laws that over protect people who should be forcible institutionalized but are not thanks to decades of legislated laws insisted upon by liberal do-gooders . In America people are afraid to take action against unstable people because they will be sued and the hurdles to get someone forcible institutionalized are great ... Then even when done it may only last 72 hours...

Until these various sets of laws are changed - all guns could be eliminated and we will still have mass killings - they will just use another weapon and look for situations where they can carry out their heinous acts with the weapons they have.

And we are not giving up our rights to defend ourselves against and out of control government. Nor are we going to be replaced as a population by a religious cult as is being done in the U.K.

Laws by liberal do-gooders?

You better read up on the Reagan era since it was my favorite President Ronnie that kicked all the wingnuts out of the institutions. It was what all us conservatives wanted because it was costing us a fortune to house them.

Ofcourse, we never really considered what was best for them and best for society.

But you are mistaken to blame the libs.

I think you have mistaken Jimmy Carter for Reagan - wow! Bottom line - we cannot effectively institutionalize crazy people and they get to ACT OUT with blood baths because they cannot be controlled/

Better check your facts--I remember the time clearly. Reagan was doing it way back as Gov of CA. Google is your friend:

"Over 30 years ago, when Reagan was elected President in 1980, he discarded a law proposed by his predecessor (Jimmy Carter) that would have continued funding federal community mental health centers. This basically eliminated services for people struggling with mental illness.

He made similar decisions while he was the governor of California, releasing more than half of the states mental hospital patients and passing a law that abolished involuntary hospitalization of people struggling with mental illness. This started a national trend of de-institutionalization."

You might recall Reagan was doing quite alot to limit the size of govt and federal spending and the release of the mentally ill from state hospitals was part of that. You might research his practice of de-regulation while you are googling yourself.

Edited September 19, 2014 by ClutchClark

[Zzon]

Surely you must be a little more intelligent than that... I was saying anything can be used as a weapon, it's who that commit the crimes that are dangerous .

[Zzon]

Okay you want to go there..., bombs are against the law but some magical way suicide bombers kill more people in one instance ( Iraq, England )... Criminals and idiots will always find a way to kill what ever is available ... Don't know why I keep responding just not use to the shallow minds of thinking!

[thailiketoo]

Security guards don't carry firearms (Cash in Transit excepted) Australians aren't Naturally Aggressive and thousands of Aussies own firearms, people aren't forbidden from owning a gun. Australia has just implements stricter provisions. Background checks, classes, licences and a legitimate reason for requiring a gun. Protection is not a legitimate reason.

When did Australians stop being naturally aggressive? Did you have a particular year in mind? Or was it a gradual thing? I really don't think Australians have anything to do with this thread but if Chooka is allowed to compare the naturally non aggressive Australians to Americans I think we should be able to dispute it.

If a comparison is made between two countries it is only fair to be allowed to dispute it.

Of course to assign natural tendencies of aggression or non aggression to particular nationalities is nonsense as any professor in any natural science beyond kindergarten will tell you but .........

eth·no·cen·tricadjective \ˌeth-nō-ˈsen-trik\

: having or based on the idea that your own group or culture is better or more important than others

Recent collaborative work has provided validated assessments of the personality profiles of over 50 cultures, and judged by these criteria, perceptions of national character are unfounded stereotypes.

http://cdp.sagepub.com/content/15/4/156.abstract

[sustento]

The focus here is on a nut case who went postal on his family, he could have done it with anything really, the gun for once isn't the issue here, get off your soapboxes.

Oz

Oz you are right ! I own five guns for over 40 years and they have not even killed an animal must less a human. Doctors and hammers kill more people than guns and then there are knifes.

I learned to use fire arms in the military

How many US citizens who own weapons were trained to use them properly by the military? A vanishingly small number I would imagine.

[thailiketoo]

The focus here is on a nut case who went postal on his family, he could have done it with anything really, the gun for once isn't the issue here, get off your soapboxes.

Oz

Oz you are right ! I own five guns for over 40 years and they have not even killed an animal must less a human. Doctors and hammers kill more people than guns and then there are knifes.

I learned to use fire arms in the military

How many US citizens who own weapons were trained to use them properly by the military? A vanishingly small number I would imagine.

From 1776 until September 2012, a total of 40 million people have served in the United States Armed Forces. 9 million during Vietnam. There are 22,658,000 veterans in America today. 780,000 active police. Retired or changed jobs at least 4 or 5 times that number. I would suggest it is reasonable to assume that police or ex military teach their children about firearms. A reported 13.7 million people, about 6 percent of the total population over the age of 16, went hunting, and spent a total of $34 billion. That’s an average of $2,484 per hunter. Hunting safety course are required for hunting license.

http://www.petersenshunting.com/conservation-politics/number-of-hunters-in-us-rises-for-first-time-in-decades/

Edited September 19, 2014 by thailiketoo