|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#141
|
|||
|
|||
Trek/Bontrager Wavecell Technology Helmets
On 8/7/2019 7:43 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
snip But it isn't a straw man argument. You bemoan the so called "mass shootings" and argue for stringent gun laws while at the same time accepting the facts that about 100 die daily on the Nation's roads. But than, I guess the road deaths are all accidents, just happenstance, one might say. While my keyboard is now covered with coffee as a result of having a mouthful of it while reading Frank, the undisputed king of straw man arguments, complain about straw man arguments, the reality is that there is no equivalency between road deaths and mass shootings. The road deaths are rarely intentional, even when the result of road rage, poor driver training, and poor infrastructure. |
Ads |
#142
|
|||
|
|||
Trek/Bontrager Wavecell Technology Helmets
On Wednesday, August 7, 2019 at 11:41:08 PM UTC-7, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 20:33:45 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie wrote: On Wednesday, August 7, 2019 at 7:43:50 PM UTC-7, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 21:20:16 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/7/2019 8:54 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 11:28:24 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: Your portrayal of me accepting bombs is far less accurate and WAY less witty than Jim Jeffries bit on gun nuts. But in an effort to seek agreement, here's what I propose: Let's make U.S. gun laws exactly as strict as U.S. bomb laws. Will that satisfy you? You mean that fertilizer and diesel fuel have strict laws to control them in the U.S. ? Amazing! I had not known that.. You're really not very knowledgeable on these issues, John. "Under federal explosives law, it is illegal to engage in the business of manufacturing explosives without a license; to improperly store explosives; to sell or distribute explosives to any person who does not hold an ATF license or permit." You may want to read this information: https://www.atf.gov/explosives Yes, I'm sure that you are correct, but the manufacture of an explosive from fertilizer and diesel fuel can be very much a home project. It is also, I discovered when working at a major copper mine in Irian Jaya a commonly used explosive in open pit mining and is mixed "on the spot" by the explosive guys. And, I might add, instructions for making fertilizer/diesel fuel bombs is all over the Internet. It is not, as they say, rocket science. Sure, you can make up any snide little saying that you wish. But do you really feel that it is more horrifying to shoot 22 people than to kill outright 160 people and injure another 600? No, and I didn't say that. Again, when someone sinks exclusively into straw man arguments, they must have no really logical argument remaining. But it isn't a straw man argument. You bemoan the so called "mass shootings" and argue for stringent gun laws while at the same time accepting the facts that about 100 die daily on the Nation's roads. But than, I guess the road deaths are all accidents, just happenstance, one might say. There is no equivalency between mass shootings and traffic accidents. Traffic accidents are an unfortunate consequence of an activity with high utility. Mass shootings are simply murder. You know that. Everybody knows that. -- Jay Beattie. I see. You are implying that if everyone actually complied with the traffic code that "accidents" would remain the same as today? -- Cheers, John B. I'm not implying anything. I am saying that a traffic ACCIDENT is an accident and in no way equivalent to an intentional mass shooting -- or intentional killing of any sort. Why even waste the bandwidth arguing about something so obvious? Can one intentionally kill with a car? Sure. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle-ramming_attack That, however, is not the method of choice for the 251 mass-shooters this year. https://tinyurl.com/yxlb7j4r -- Jay Beattie. |
#143
|
|||
|
|||
Trek/Bontrager Wavecell Technology Helmets
John B. Slocomb writes:
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 23:35:43 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/6/2019 10:02 PM, Radey Shouman wrote: AMuzi writes: On 8/6/2019 1:34 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/6/2019 2:09 PM, AMuzi wrote: On 8/6/2019 12:46 PM, Radey Shouman wrote: John B. Slocomb writes: On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 14:34:51 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/5/2019 12:23 PM, AMuzi wrote: On 8/5/2019 9:58 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/5/2019 4:07 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 00:13:04 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/4/2019 8:47 PM, John B. wrote: rOn Sun, 4 Aug 2019 11:06:33 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/4/2019 1:37 AM, John B. wrote: Well, of course. After all everybody knows that "guns kill" so logically if there no guns there would be no "killed". I don't know of anyone who seriously believes that. But to be more realistic: What are the gun laws in the country where you now live? And what's the gun murder rate per 100,000? What's the total murder rate per 100,000? IOW, how are your gun laws working out? The gun laws in Thailand are essentially that guns are banned... except in some cases. You can't legally carry a pistol in your pocket in Bangkok but no one will object to your having a shotgun over our shoulder in some remote jungle area where wildlife is a danger. Yes, nobody much objects to long guns in the woods here. But "can't legally carry a pistol in a pocket"? Some here would say that's akin to slicing off a man's ... um, masculinity. (And it's true that some men seem to confuse their guns with their genital organs.) As for gun deaths it would be rather misleading to quote them as the UNODC murder rate in Thailand is 3.24/100,000 and in the U.S. 5.30/100,000 so obviously whatever criteria you care to define murder rates in the U.S. will likely be higher than in Thailand. Ah. 3.24 vs. 5.30. But you don't think the differences in gun laws are a factor? I was pointing out that the table I saw was based on UNODC rates. But I'm not sure whether gun laws, specifically, are really a factor in Thai homicide rates. Certainly the news is full of knife, club, whatever, (even by hand), murders and illegal ownership of firearms is extremely common so I'm not sure what effect the rather strict gun laws in Thailand have on homicide rates. As an aside I might mention that the CDC homicide numbers in the U.S. seem to be all - homicides - 19,510, Firearms - 14,542 so about 75% of homicides in the U.S. age gun related. But! According to the Centers for Disease Control, using data available for analysis on September 5, 2018, there were a reported 70,652 deaths attributed to drug overdose in the US for the year ending December 2017. Some deaths were still under investigation. The CDC projects that the total for 2017 will be 72,222. It makes the 14,542 gun deaths seem a bit.... well one might say somewhat less than urgent :-) According to Statistia some 43% of U.S. households owned one or more guns in 2017. That is (I believe) some 126,220,000 households with guns and 14,000 gun deaths (not, I believe, including self inflected death) or a rate of 1 gun death per 9,015.7 households. And Auto Deaths? Some 37,133 deaths in 2017 - the same year as the 14,000 gun deaths. Or one traffic death per 3,399 families. But than, we all know that they are "traffic accidents", which seem to be acceptable and "GUN DEATHS!" which are horrifying. We just had two mass murders within about half a day, one in Texas, the next in Ohio. Does that happen a lot where you live? You seem to be "proving" my stated point that "guns kill", unless of course then guys in Texas were waving swords. You seem to be sidestepping my question. How often _does_ that happen where you live? Well, I gave you the figures, about 61% of the U.S. numbers. No, John, you didn't give me the numbers I asked for. Nice try at sidestepping, though. Here was my question: "We just had two mass murders within about half a day, one in Texas, the next in Ohio. Does that happen a lot where you live?" And I repeated: "How often _does_ that happen where you live?" I'm not surprised you have occasional killings using knives, clubs and hands, as you describe. But how many _mass_ killings? How many instances of a guy with a knife quickly slaying, say, 20 people who were shopping and injuring a couple dozen more? I don't know from Thailand but in Chicago it's all day every day: https://maggionews.com/ https://heyjackass.com/ I see very few reports of mass killings using knives. Well, of course not. these are modern times and modern man is too lazy to undertake "mass killings" with a butcher knife but in years gone my, when man kind was a bit more energetic... For example: In the year 390 when Roman Emperor Theodosius I sent troops to Thessalonica in order to quell some civil unrest. and 7,000 were killed. On May 20, 1645 Qing troops led by Prince Dodo of the Qing Dynasty killed as many as 80,000 people. Machetes were prominent during the Rwandan genocide much more recently. Machete murders were once big news. Now we have a term for that, "Tuesday": https://duckduckgo.com/?q=machete+mu...17&t=h_&ia=web https://duckduckgo.com/?q=machete+mu...8&t=h_&ia=news https://duckduckgo.com/?q=machete+mu...19&t=h_&ia=web Readers of delicate countenance should not click "images" on the search menu. Anyone know the annual count of U.S. machete killings? No idea but I'm sure each and every victim thought there was one too many. If we're doing this by numbers alone now, I'll watch for your impassioned pleas about medical ineptitude and hospital-acquired infection which kill more people than either car wrecks or ODs. Also, by numbers, US homicides have decreased markedly since the 90's. If total numbers are your thing then mass shootings should be of no particular interest. I challenge you to attend the next memorial service for these victims, carrying that on a sign. I can guarantee lots of attention. Would you do that? Why memorial services for those shot with guns and total ignore the several times as many killed on the roads? Or that die of hospital acquired diseases, or those killed by illegal narcotics, or, or, or? My point was a little finer -- why concentrate on those deliberately killed 20 at a time, when those killed in ones or twos are really a much bigger problem? Frank is constantly reminding us to rely on data, for example on the relative scarcity of car bike collisions from behind. That does not mean I will attend a memorial service for the next unfortunate killed in that way with a sign belittling "fear from the rear". |
#144
|
|||
|
|||
Trek/Bontrager Wavecell Technology Helmets
Ralph Barone writes:
Radey Shouman wrote: AMuzi writes: On 8/6/2019 1:34 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/6/2019 2:09 PM, AMuzi wrote: On 8/6/2019 12:46 PM, Radey Shouman wrote: John B. Slocomb writes: On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 14:34:51 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/5/2019 12:23 PM, AMuzi wrote: On 8/5/2019 9:58 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/5/2019 4:07 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 00:13:04 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/4/2019 8:47 PM, John B. wrote: rOn Sun, 4 Aug 2019 11:06:33 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/4/2019 1:37 AM, John B. wrote: Well, of course. After all everybody knows that "guns kill" so logically if there no guns there would be no "killed". I don't know of anyone who seriously believes that. But to be more realistic: What are the gun laws in the country where you now live? And what's the gun murder rate per 100,000? What's the total murder rate per 100,000? IOW, how are your gun laws working out? The gun laws in Thailand are essentially that guns are banned... except in some cases. You can't legally carry a pistol in your pocket in Bangkok but no one will object to your having a shotgun over our shoulder in some remote jungle area where wildlife is a danger. Yes, nobody much objects to long guns in the woods here. But "can't legally carry a pistol in a pocket"? Some here would say that's akin to slicing off a man's ... um, masculinity. (And it's true that some men seem to confuse their guns with their genital organs.) As for gun deaths it would be rather misleading to quote them as the UNODC murder rate in Thailand is 3.24/100,000 and in the U.S. 5.30/100,000 so obviously whatever criteria you care to define murder rates in the U.S. will likely be higher than in Thailand. Ah. 3.24 vs. 5.30. But you don't think the differences in gun laws are a factor? I was pointing out that the table I saw was based on UNODC rates. But I'm not sure whether gun laws, specifically, are really a factor in Thai homicide rates. Certainly the news is full of knife, club, whatever, (even by hand), murders and illegal ownership of firearms is extremely common so I'm not sure what effect the rather strict gun laws in Thailand have on homicide rates. As an aside I might mention that the CDC homicide numbers in the U.S. seem to be all - homicides - 19,510, Firearms - 14,542 so about 75% of homicides in the U.S. age gun related. But! According to the Centers for Disease Control, using data available for analysis on September 5, 2018, there were a reported 70,652 deaths attributed to drug overdose in the US for the year ending December 2017. Some deaths were still under investigation. The CDC projects that the total for 2017 will be 72,222. It makes the 14,542 gun deaths seem a bit.... well one might say somewhat less than urgent :-) According to Statistia some 43% of U.S. households owned one or more guns in 2017. That is (I believe) some 126,220,000 households with guns and 14,000 gun deaths (not, I believe, including self inflected death) or a rate of 1 gun death per 9,015.7 households. And Auto Deaths? Some 37,133 deaths in 2017 - the same year as the 14,000 gun deaths. Or one traffic death per 3,399 families. But than, we all know that they are "traffic accidents", which seem to be acceptable and "GUN DEATHS!" which are horrifying. We just had two mass murders within about half a day, one in Texas, the next in Ohio. Does that happen a lot where you live? You seem to be "proving" my stated point that "guns kill", unless of course then guys in Texas were waving swords. You seem to be sidestepping my question. How often _does_ that happen where you live? Well, I gave you the figures, about 61% of the U.S. numbers. No, John, you didn't give me the numbers I asked for. Nice try at sidestepping, though. Here was my question: "We just had two mass murders within about half a day, one in Texas, the next in Ohio. Does that happen a lot where you live?" And I repeated: "How often _does_ that happen where you live?" I'm not surprised you have occasional killings using knives, clubs and hands, as you describe. But how many _mass_ killings? How many instances of a guy with a knife quickly slaying, say, 20 people who were shopping and injuring a couple dozen more? I don't know from Thailand but in Chicago it's all day every day: https://maggionews.com/ https://heyjackass.com/ I see very few reports of mass killings using knives. Well, of course not. these are modern times and modern man is too lazy to undertake "mass killings" with a butcher knife but in years gone my, when man kind was a bit more energetic... For example: In the year 390 when Roman Emperor Theodosius I sent troops to Thessalonica in order to quell some civil unrest. and 7,000 were killed. On May 20, 1645 Qing troops led by Prince Dodo of the Qing Dynasty killed as many as 80,000 people. Machetes were prominent during the Rwandan genocide much more recently. Machete murders were once big news. Now we have a term for that, "Tuesday": https://duckduckgo.com/?q=machete+mu...17&t=h_&ia=web https://duckduckgo.com/?q=machete+mu...8&t=h_&ia=news https://duckduckgo.com/?q=machete+mu...19&t=h_&ia=web Readers of delicate countenance should not click "images" on the search menu. Anyone know the annual count of U.S. machete killings? No idea but I'm sure each and every victim thought there was one too many. If we're doing this by numbers alone now, I'll watch for your impassioned pleas about medical ineptitude and hospital-acquired infection which kill more people than either car wrecks or ODs. Also, by numbers, US homicides have decreased markedly since the 90's. If total numbers are your thing then mass shootings should be of no particular interest. And just to tie two current threads together, the guys who wrote Freakonomics made the assertion that the drop in murder (and crime rates in general) in the US was caused by the drop in unwanted children created by Roe vs Wade. Nice. Crime goes down, every mayor, police chief, legislator, and prison warden takes credit; nobody seems to really know. If crime goes up, naturally it's those bloodthirsty illegal aliens. Another theory is that phasing out leaded gasoline caused a rash of better decision making. |
#145
|
|||
|
|||
Trek/Bontrager Wavecell Technology Helmets
AMuzi writes:
On 8/7/2019 1:57 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/7/2019 1:20 PM, AMuzi wrote: On 8/7/2019 9:25 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/7/2019 1:08 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 23:28:25 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/6/2019 9:02 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote: rOn Tue, 6 Aug 2019 20:11:03 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/6/2019 7:43 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 14:34:04 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/6/2019 2:09 PM, AMuzi wrote: On 8/6/2019 12:46 PM, Radey Shouman wrote: John B. Slocomb writes: On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 14:34:51 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/5/2019 12:23 PM, AMuzi wrote: On 8/5/2019 9:58 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/5/2019 4:07 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 00:13:04 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/4/2019 8:47 PM, John B. wrote: rOn Sun, 4 Aug 2019 11:06:33 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/4/2019 1:37 AM, John B. wrote: Well, of course. After all everybody knows that "guns kill" so logically if there no guns there would be no "killed". I don't know of anyone who seriously believes that. But to be more realistic: What are the gun laws in the country where you now live? And what's the gun murder rate per 100,000? What's the total murder rate per 100,000? IOW, how are your gun laws working out? The gun laws in Thailand are essentially that guns are banned... except in some cases. You can't legally carry a pistol in your pocket in Bangkok but no one will object to your having a shotgun over our shoulder in some remote jungle area where wildlife is a danger. Yes, nobody much objects to long guns in the woods here. But "can't legally carry a pistol in a pocket"? Some here would say that's akin to slicing off a man's ... um, masculinity. (And it's true that some men seem to confuse their guns with their genital organs.) As for gun deaths it would be rather misleading to quote them as the UNODC murder rate in Thailand is 3.24/100,000 and in the U.S. 5.30/100,000 so obviously whatever criteria you care to define murder rates in the U.S. will likely be higher than in Thailand. Ah. 3.24 vs. 5.30. But you don't think the differences in gun laws are a factor? I was pointing out that the table I saw was based on UNODC rates. But I'm not sure whether gun laws, specifically, are really a factor in Thai homicide rates. Certainly the news is full of knife, club, whatever, (even by hand), murders and illegal ownership of firearms is extremely common so I'm not sure what effect the rather strict gun laws in Thailand have on homicide rates. As an aside I might mention that the CDC homicide numbers in the U.S. seem to be all - homicides - 19,510, Firearms - 14,542 so about 75% of homicides in the U.S. age gun related. But! According to the Centers for Disease Control, using data available for analysis on September 5, 2018, there were a reported 70,652 deaths attributed to drug overdose in the US for the year ending December 2017. Some deaths were still under investigation. The CDC projects that the total for 2017 will be 72,222. It makes the 14,542 gun deaths seem a bit.... well one might say somewhat less than urgent :-) According to Statistia some 43% of U.S. households owned one or more guns in 2017. That is (I believe) some 126,220,000 households with guns and 14,000 gun deaths (not, I believe, including self inflected death) or a rate of 1 gun death per 9,015.7 households. And Auto Deaths? Some 37,133 deaths in 2017 - the same year as the 14,000 gun deaths. Or one traffic death per 3,399 families. But than, we all know that they are "traffic accidents", which seem to be acceptable and "GUN DEATHS!" which are horrifying. We just had two mass murders within about half a day, one in Texas, the next in Ohio. Does that happen a lot where you live? You seem to be "proving" my stated point that "guns kill", unless of course then guys in Texas were waving swords. You seem to be sidestepping my question. How often _does_ that happen where you live? Well, I gave you the figures, about 61% of the U.S. numbers. No, John, you didn't give me the numbers I asked for. Nice try at sidestepping, though. Here was my question: "We just had two mass murders within about half a day, one in Texas, the next in Ohio. Does that happen a lot where you live?" And I repeated: "How often _does_ that happen where you live?" I'm not surprised you have occasional killings using knives, clubs and hands, as you describe. But how many _mass_ killings? How many instances of a guy with a knife quickly slaying, say, 20 people who were shopping and injuring a couple dozen more? I don't know from Thailand but in Chicago it's all day every day: https://maggionews.com/ https://heyjackass.com/ I see very few reports of mass killings using knives. Well, of course not. these are modern times and modern man is too lazy to undertake "mass killings" with a butcher knife but in years gone my, when man kind was a bit more energetic... For example: In the year 390 when Roman Emperor Theodosius I sent troops to Thessalonica in order to quell some civil unrest. and 7,000 were killed. On May 20, 1645 Qing troops led by Prince Dodo of the Qing Dynasty killed as many as 80,000 people. Machetes were prominent during the Rwandan genocide much more recently. Machete murders were once big news. Now we have a term for that, "Tuesday": https://duckduckgo.com/?q=machete+mu...17&t=h_&ia=web https://duckduckgo.com/?q=machete+mu...8&t=h_&ia=news https://duckduckgo.com/?q=machete+mu...19&t=h_&ia=web Readers of delicate countenance should not click "images" on the search menu. Anyone know the annual count of U.S. machete killings? A nice end run around the facts. Rather a "Tom" effort. Geez, nobody will answer a question any more! But what facts do you think I'm avoiding? It seems to be a fact that guns are used in far, far more murders than knives or machetes. (Feel free to correct me if you do find that machete number.) What other facts are you using? Certainly, and I believe that I made that point in another post. Yes, in the U.S. guns are used in many more homicides that machetes. Thank you. Maybe you'll stop the machete talk now? But, as I pointed out, the actual number of deaths in firearm homicides is far lower than in auto crashes or even illegal drug deaths, so I ask again, is it the number of deaths that upsets you? Or is it the fact the deaths are carried out with those horrible firearms and concerns you. From your comments to date it certainly appears that it is the firearms that concerns you, or at least I don't see your posts descrying the carnage on the highways or even due to illegal use of drugs. Which, again as I commented on, are far, far greater then firearm deaths. I just posted a reply to Andrew that attempted to explain people's attitudes toward deaths from various causes. Read it. But as I said, death by murder has always raised outrage. That's part of human nature. Deal with it. I see. is not the fact that people are killed that is important but rather the method that caused their death. Killing someone with a ton and a half automobile is "perfectly normal" ... That's a deliberate and dishonest fabrication. Nobody has said that but you. If you have to sink to such a tactic, your position is lost. Did you peruse the links I post regularly to the Chicago homicide count? Death in the street by firearm is all day every day and yet no outcry, no change. https://maggionews.com/ http://heyjackass.com/ Just keeping the tally engages several websites full time. For Chicago, that's like Elizabeth Warren's #1 fan Mr Betts in Dayton Ohio every week (except with more wounded). But hey nothing to see here, move along. I also mentioned in years past that Chicago has some of the most restrictive draconian weapons ordinances in a State with highly restrictive statutes, so much so that The US Supreme Court slapped them down [Otis McDonald, plaintiff] and yet they defied the Court for years after. If merely writing laws could change behavior... https://www.alibris.com/Three-Feloni...228?matches=23 The obvious problem with city-wide firearm laws is that cities stopped being surrounded with gated walls very long ago. When surrounding areas (like Indiana in this case) have a Wild West philosophy (anyone who can breathe can practice open carry) there's not much way of reducing the number of guns a few miles away. And I know your recurring claim that laws don't change anything. I'm sorry, but it's false. Laws are imperfect and enforcement can never be 100%. Some laws are ineffective and some are just mistakes. But that doesn't justify the alternative, which is total anarchy, no laws at all. The prohibition against hand grenades and other bombs works pretty well. So do the restrictions on machine guns. Very few own mortars or flame throwers. We should be able to apply reasonable restrictions to guns. Let the pretend soldier boys play with virtual military arms in computer games. That should be enough to satisfy their fantasies. It works in most countries. Well, when you're not busy look at the situation in Mexico regarding firearms, regulation and actual incidence. If you think USAians (a notoriously defiant bunch overall) will comply any differently than with the heroin ban, think again. For the interested reader, States and localities with more restrictive firearms regulation experience greater firearm mayhem. Naturally so, since firearm violence causes gun laws. Juarez, Mexico, which lies just across the border from El Paso, has a horrific problem with violence. It's sad, I used to go there fairly often as a youth, but would be afraid to now. In Mexico it's close to impossible for a civilian without connections to legally own a firearm, and civilian possesion of a anything using "military" ammunition, meaning a caliber used by a military anywhere in the world, or of the ammunition itself, is strictly prohibited. |
#146
|
|||
|
|||
Trek/Bontrager Wavecell Technology Helmets
On 8/8/2019 4:54 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 06:43:41 -0000 (UTC), news18 wrote: On Thu, 08 Aug 2019 08:45:13 +0700, John B. Slocomb wrote: Actually I have few complaints of much more stringent gun laws that any that you have stipulated so far. I am merely trying to point out to a very opinionated and generally ignorant of the subject individual that over simplistic laws are not very effective. GovCo says that the Australian Laws have prevent any further mass shootings since the Port Arthur event. The result has been to require people wishing to use firearms to have a valid reason undertake some firm are education courses. Now, we tend to have mtor vehciles as the weapon for mass events. But from your posts, I wonder if there are _any_ gun laws you would not consider "ludicrase" [sic]. I asked about the gun laws where you now live. You seemed give data indicating they work. Is it hell on earth living under those laws? Should we adopt them in the U.S.? Or are there others that you would propose? Well, to apply Thai Gun laws to the U.S. would require the removal of the 2nd amendment to the Constitution, probably a largely impossible action. Not So. The emphais would just need to shift towards "well regulated" and requirements for identity checks and and basic firearm safety performance could be enforced. But doesn't the U.S. have a well regulated militia. I had assumed that was what the National Guard was/is. I think that they even send them overseas these days. And if someone wants to play soldier, they should join the National Guard, an _actual_ well regulated militia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...National_Guard According to that site, they have about 450,000 members. But in the U.S. there are close to 400 million privately owned guns. I have no problem with guns used for hunting, but it's a sure bet that those are the minority of that 400 million. That means hundreds of firepower fetishers for every actual militia member. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#147
|
|||
|
|||
Trek/Bontrager Wavecell Technology Helmets
On 8/8/2019 2:17 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 22:22:54 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/7/2019 9:57 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 14:57:33 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: The prohibition against hand grenades and other bombs works pretty well. So do the restrictions on machine guns. Very few own mortars or flame throwers. We should be able to apply reasonable restrictions to guns. Let the pretend soldier boys play with virtual military arms in computer games. That should be enough to satisfy their fantasies. It works in most countries. Perhaps in the U.S. where apparently the citizens are too complacent to make their own bombs but here, in a less well developed country, we just has a rash of some 6 bombs that exploded (and 1 "dud") in Bangkok in the past few days. All "home made" bombs. In the South home made bombs are so common that they have recently banned metal LPG tanks (a common container used in home bomb making). As you know, I'm interested in data. How many bomb deaths per year? It is hard to say as I can't find any statistics. That _should_ make you realize that the problem is relatively tiny! IOW, bomb control works pretty well. But I did find a Times report dated August 2016 that stated that the bombings had "ground on for more than a decade and killed more than 5,000 people". https://time.com/4449653/thailand-bombing-what-to-know/ So maybe 500 per year? Less than one bomb fatality per 100,000 population during an insurgency, i.e. a low-level attempt at war. The U.S. more than triples that rate using guns, with no need for any insurgency. The report stated: On Thursday, a bomb exploded in a market in the southern province of Trang, killing one person and injuring six. Later, on Thursday night, two bombs exploded 20 minutes apart in the resort city of Hua Hin, killing one Thai woman and injuring at least 20, including ten foreign nationals. Hours later, on Friday morning two more blasts killed another person and injured four more according to Thai authorities. Thai media reports that the woman killed was a street food vendor. Also on Friday morning, another two bombs exploded in Surat Thani outside police stations, killing one and injuring several others, according to local media. Two bombs also exploded in Phuket around 8 a.m. local time in front of a hotel and a police booth in the tourist area of Patong, injuring one person, reports local media. About 200 kilometers north in Phang Nga province, two bombs went off in Khao Lak and another in Khuek Khak around 9 a.m. local time. Hours earlier, over 80 shops were gutted by a fire in the Takua Pa market frequented by tourists. Those accounts total four deaths. Thailand's population is roughly the same as those of California plus Texas. If someone wrote an article about a total of four Californians plus Texans getting killed by guns, nobody would publish it. Too ordinary, too boring. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#148
|
|||
|
|||
Trek/Bontrager Wavecell Technology Helmets
On 8/8/2019 2:38 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 22:41:51 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/7/2019 9:45 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 11:41:48 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/7/2019 2:31 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote: ... how else do you measure any sort of speed of fireing in order to make a rule? Hmm. Wow, that IS difficult. Because there's no possible way any government official could take a sample firearm to a shooting range, fill it and/or its magazine with its maximum round capacity, start a stopwatch and see how many rounds could be fired in a minute. That would be so darned complex! Ah, O.K. So it is what is usually called "effective rate of fire" or the number of rounds that can be fired in a specific length of time. You've got it. See, it wasn't so hard. But I used to shoot with a State Police Sergeant who used to shoot the Practical Police Course (PPC) now called something different and he could, with a S&W 6 shot revolver, fire 5 rounds, reload and fire 5 more in 10 seconds or less. The 5 rounds was simply because 10 rounds was one target's worth. If you extend that a little and disregard the need for aimed shots one could probably easily fire 12 rounds in 10 seconds, or less, or about 72 rounds in one minute. So is a firearm that can be fired 72 rounds a minute all right? Since you're asking my opinion, I'd say no, it's not all right. Perhaps in the hands of a law enforcement officer or an enlisted man. But I'd say hunters or those who fancy themselves home defenders have no need for that. Why _would_ you realistically need that? But Frank, this is a standard S&W revolver, just like the ones that have been manufactured for what? a Hundred and sixty years? And now you say that they should be banned? Why not? Limiting that speed to say, five or ten rounds in a minute would be no inconvenience to any hunter or target shooter. In my view, the most likely reasons firing more rounds in one minutes would be a) to kill people in a crowd, or b) to pretend to kill people in a crowd. We don't need either of those. But Frank, the standard "bulls eye" match consists of Slow fire - 10 rounds in 10 minutes, Timed Fire - 5 rounds in 20 seconds and Rapid fire - 5 rounds in 10 seconds. Thank you, John. As my favorite seven year old could explain, that could be done by a firearm that shoots no more than ten rounds in one minute. (In case we couldn't _bear_ to change those rules to help reduce gun mayhem.) But Frank that is a record, fired with a standard S&W revolver. Are we to ban all revolvers? My idea would be: You can keep your revolver if it's fitted with a speed limiting device. How in God's World will you fit a timing device to as rudimentary mechanism as a revolver. I'm going to assume that's a joke. Ah well, I guess we can throw away all the revolvers made since the 1800's. If you love to look at it, put it in a locked case. If you love to fondle it, modify it so it can't shoot. You'll be all right. Really! The [2nd] amendment is clearly worded and is rather exact for the period in which it was written. You are simply arguing that "things have changed" since 1791 and so we ought to chuck out the Bill or Rights? Or do you mean simply the parts that you don't agree with? You are the "things have changed" phrase on its head here! For 200 years, the Supreme Courts held that the phrase "A well regulated militia" was a critical part of the 2nd amendment - that the right to bear arms was related to or contingent on militia membership. Only in 2008 did so-called "conservative" justices overturn that logic. It was the complete opposite of "originalist" judicial philosophy that so many conservatives espouse. Nonetheless, in today's column George Will - who, in case you forget, is an intelligent conservative writer - notes that the Heller decision "permits many measures regulating certain kinds of weapons and ammunition magazines." I'd say among those are 100 round magazines, extended rapid fire, and other quasi-military features that have no practical civilian use. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#149
|
|||
|
|||
Trek/Bontrager Wavecell Technology Helmets
On 8/8/2019 10:17 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
My point was a little finer -- why concentrate on those deliberately killed 20 at a time, when those killed in ones or twos are really a much bigger problem? You're complaining about elementary human nature. One murder is regrettable and raises outrage. 20+ murders at once naturally incites much more outrage. The situation is closely paralleled whenever there's a traffic crash that kills many, a landslide that kills many, etc. If a semi truck rammed a school bus and killed 29 kids, you'd be ill advised to show up saying "It's OK, kids get killed in cars all the time." It would be far more productive to say "Let's look into measures to reduce _all_ motoring deaths." Frank is constantly reminding us to rely on data, for example on the relative scarcity of car bike collisions from behind. That does not mean I will attend a memorial service for the next unfortunate killed in that way with a sign belittling "fear from the rear". But it does appear that you're belittling almost 30 people killed in just a few hours. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#150
|
|||
|
|||
Trek/Bontrager Wavecell Technology Helmets
On 8/7/2019 9:22 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/7/2019 9:57 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 14:57:33 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/7/2019 1:20 PM, AMuzi wrote: On 8/7/2019 9:25 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/7/2019 1:08 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 23:28:25 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/6/2019 9:02 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote: rOn Tue, 6 Aug 2019 20:11:03 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/6/2019 7:43 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 14:34:04 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/6/2019 2:09 PM, AMuzi wrote: On 8/6/2019 12:46 PM, Radey Shouman wrote: John B. Slocomb writes: On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 14:34:51 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/5/2019 12:23 PM, AMuzi wrote: On 8/5/2019 9:58 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/5/2019 4:07 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 00:13:04 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/4/2019 8:47 PM, John B. wrote: rOn Sun, 4 Aug 2019 11:06:33 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/4/2019 1:37 AM, John B. wrote: Well, of course. After all everybody knows that "guns kill" so logically if there no guns there would be no "killed". I don't know of anyone who seriously believes that. But to be more realistic: What are the gun laws in the country where you now live? And what's the gun murder rate per 100,000? What's the total murder rate per 100,000? IOW, how are your gun laws working out? The gun laws in Thailand are essentially that guns are banned... except in some cases. You can't legally carry a pistol in your pocket in Bangkok but no one will object to your having a shotgun over our shoulder in some remote jungle area where wildlife is a danger. Yes, nobody much objects to long guns in the woods here. But "can't legally carry a pistol in a pocket"? Some here would say that's akin to slicing off a man's ... um, masculinity. (And it's true that some men seem to confuse their guns with their genital organs.) As for gun deaths it would be rather misleading to quote them as the UNODC murder rate in Thailand is 3.24/100,000 and in the U.S. 5.30/100,000 so obviously whatever criteria you care to define murder rates in the U.S. will likely be higher than in Thailand. Ah. 3.24 vs. 5.30. But you don't think the differences in gun laws are a factor? I was pointing out that the table I saw was based on UNODC rates. But I'm not sure whether gun laws, specifically, are really a factor in Thai homicide rates. Certainly the news is full of knife, club, whatever, (even by hand), murders and illegal ownership of firearms is extremely common so I'm not sure what effect the rather strict gun laws in Thailand have on homicide rates. As an aside I might mention that the CDC homicide numbers in the U.S. seem to be all - homicides - 19,510, Firearms - 14,542 so about 75% of homicides in the U.S. age gun related. But! According to the Centers for Disease Control, using data available for analysis on September 5, 2018, there were a reported 70,652 deaths attributed to drug overdose in the US for the year ending December 2017. Some deaths were still under investigation. The CDC projects that the total for 2017 will be 72,222. It makes the 14,542 gun deaths seem a bit.... well one might say somewhat less than urgent :-) According to Statistia some 43% of U.S. households owned one or more guns in 2017. That is (I believe) some 126,220,000 households with guns and 14,000 gun deaths (not, I believe, including self inflected death) or a rate of 1 gun death per 9,015.7 households. And Auto Deaths? Some 37,133 deaths in 2017 - the same year as the 14,000 gun deaths. Or one traffic death per 3,399 families. But than, we all know that they are "traffic accidents", which seem to be acceptable and "GUN DEATHS!" which are horrifying. We just had two mass murders within about half a day, one in Texas, the next in Ohio. Does that happen a lot where you live? You seem to be "proving" my stated point that "guns kill", unless of course then guys in Texas were waving swords. You seem to be sidestepping my question. How often _does_ that happen where you live? Well, I gave you the figures, about 61% of the U.S. numbers. No, John, you didn't give me the numbers I asked for. Nice try at sidestepping, though. Here was my question: "We just had two mass murders within about half a day, one in Texas, the next in Ohio. Does that happen a lot where you live?" And I repeated: "How often _does_ that happen where you live?" I'm not surprised you have occasional killings using knives, clubs and hands, as you describe. But how many _mass_ killings? How many instances of a guy with a knife quickly slaying, say, 20 people who were shopping and injuring a couple dozen more? I don't know from Thailand but in Chicago it's all day every day: https://maggionews.com/ https://heyjackass.com/ I see very few reports of mass killings using knives. Well, of course not. these are modern times and modern man is too lazy to undertake "mass killings" with a butcher knife but in years gone my, when man kind was a bit more energetic... For example: In the year 390 when Roman Emperor Theodosius I sent troops to Thessalonica in order to quell some civil unrest. and 7,000 were killed. On May 20, 1645 Qing troops led by Prince Dodo of the Qing Dynasty killed as many as 80,000 people. Machetes were prominent during the Rwandan genocide much more recently. Machete murders were once big news. Now we have a term for that, "Tuesday": https://duckduckgo.com/?q=machete+mu...17&t=h_&ia=web https://duckduckgo.com/?q=machete+mu...8&t=h_&ia=news https://duckduckgo.com/?q=machete+mu...19&t=h_&ia=web Readers of delicate countenance should not click "images" on the search menu. Anyone know the annual count of U.S. machete killings? A nice end run around the facts. Rather a "Tom" effort. Geez, nobody will answer a question any more! But what facts do you think I'm avoiding? It seems to be a fact that guns are used in far, far more murders than knives or machetes. (Feel free to correct me if you do find that machete number.) What other facts are you using? Certainly, and I believe that I made that point in another post. Yes, in the U.S. guns are used in many more homicides that machetes. Thank you. Maybe you'll stop the machete talk now? But, as I pointed out, the actual number of deaths in firearm homicides is far lower than in auto crashes or even illegal drug deaths, so I ask again, is it the number of deaths that upsets you? Or is it the fact the deaths are carried out with those horrible firearms and concerns you.  From your comments to date it certainly appears that it is the firearms that concerns you, or at least I don't see your posts descrying the carnage on the highways or even due to illegal use of drugs. Which, again as I commented on, are far, far greater then firearm deaths. I just posted a reply to Andrew that attempted to explain people's attitudes toward deaths from various causes. Read it. But as I said, death by murder has always raised outrage. That's part of human nature. Deal with it. I see. is not the fact that people are killed that is important but rather the method that caused their death. Killing someone with a ton and a half automobile is "perfectly normal" ... That's a deliberate and dishonest fabrication. Nobody has said that but you. If you have to sink to such a tactic, your position is lost. Did you peruse the links I post regularly to the Chicago homicide count? Death in the street by firearm is all day every day and yet no outcry, no change. https://maggionews.com/ http://heyjackass.com/ Just keeping the tally engages several websites full time. For Chicago, that's like Elizabeth Warren's #1 fan Mr Betts in Dayton Ohio every week (except with more wounded). But hey nothing to see here, move along. I also mentioned in years past that Chicago has some of the most restrictive draconian weapons ordinances in a State with highly restrictive statutes, so much so that The US Supreme Court slapped them down [Otis McDonald, plaintiff] and yet they defied the Court for years after. If merely writing laws could change behavior... https://www.alibris.com/Three-Feloni...228?matches=23 The obvious problem with city-wide firearm laws is that cities stopped being surrounded with gated walls very long ago. When surrounding areas (like Indiana in this case) have a Wild West philosophy (anyone who can breathe can practice open carry) there's not much way of reducing the number of guns a few miles away. And I know your recurring claim that laws don't change anything. I'm sorry, but it's false. Laws are imperfect and enforcement can never be 100%. Some laws are ineffective and some are just mistakes. But that doesn't justify the alternative, which is total anarchy, no laws at all. The prohibition against hand grenades and other bombs works pretty well. So do the restrictions on machine guns. Very few own mortars or flame throwers. We should be able to apply reasonable restrictions to guns. Let the pretend soldier boys play with virtual military arms in computer games. That should be enough to satisfy their fantasies. It works in most countries. Perhaps in the U.S. where apparently the citizens are too complacent to make their own bombs but here, in a less well developed country, we just has a rash of some 6 bombs that exploded (and 1 "dud") in Bangkok in the past few days. All "home made" bombs. In the South home made bombs are so common that they have recently banned metal LPG tanks (a common container used in home bomb making). As you know, I'm interested in data. How many bomb deaths per year? Don't know from Thailand but Sweden has really super duper anti-hand grenade laws. Oh, and they even had an amnesty program to turn in spare grenades which was not successful: https://quillette.com/2019/06/11/its...nal-emergency/ Grenades are more interesting and romantic but their firearm murders are also up by a magnitude. Time to rephrase those statutes as it obviously reflects poor grammar in the text of the laws which can solve any problem when artfully crafted. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Trek X01/Bontrager Race wheels | GrandTheftVelo | Techniques | 7 | August 16th 08 12:48 AM |
Trek Fuel superior technology | LIBERATOR | Mountain Biking | 1 | September 1st 06 09:58 PM |
FS: Trek/Bontrager carbon fork | Charles Stickle | Marketplace | 0 | October 3rd 05 12:22 AM |
Stock Trek Tires (Bontrager) | Badger_South | General | 5 | June 2nd 04 07:24 PM |
The secret of Trek's OCLV technology . . . | Stan Shankman | Techniques | 21 | May 12th 04 02:50 PM |