|
On October 13 2012 20:54 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2012 20:46 Scarecrow wrote:On October 13 2012 20:38 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:On October 13 2012 20:31 lost_artz wrote:On October 13 2012 20:13 jobebob wrote:On October 13 2012 18:47 pharmer. wrote:On October 13 2012 18:20 PH wrote:
This kind of thing makes me lean towards disallowing gun ownership. Accidents like this are just ridiculous. Beyond that, though...using deadly force to stop a potential burglar no questions asked? That's not a right we should have. That's just dumb. How do you know they are just going to steal from you? According to the 2009 census there was a grand total of 110 fatal burglaries out of close to 1,000,000 total residence burglaries. Meaning that you have a 0.01% chance, (yes thats one tenth of a percent) chance of death. Now take into account that in 2009, 554 americans died of "Accidental discharge of firearms". Meaning you are 5 times more likely to die by shooting yourself or a loved one than in a house burglary. Looking at the data I just do not see any justification that owning a gun makes you safe at all. http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0310.pdfhttp://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0321.pdfhttp://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr60/nvsr60_03.pdf (table 10) The only problem I see with those statistics is that it doesn't account for how many burglaries didn't occur because firearms were present. All you are siting is a statistic of how many fatalities there were. I would also like to point out that an accidental discharge of firearms doesn't always equate to someone thinking they're going to be robbed/kidnapped/killed/raped. There are many more situations that fall under the category of accidental discharges - Hunting accidents i.e. mistaking another hunter for game - hence why bright orange 'camo' is so popular, kids getting their hands on guns that were not locked up and shooting themselves or a friend, etc. So yes you are more likely to die from an accidental discharge but it also takes into account a lot more situations than having break into your home. Even winning one world war, Korean, Vietnam, Iran, Soviet regimes while possessing such "dangerous" weapons. What about civilized Europe? Worst comparison I've seen in a while. America lost in Vietnam, never invaded Iran and the USSR collapsed rather than there being any large scale conflict. On top of this just because you use guns in war doesn't mean they're a good idea in the home. The point I'm making is despite the claim that "America is dangerous", it's not been this way even after losing in Vietnam with all the upset army veterans, infiltration by USSR spies/operatives, Iran crisis. America still remains a world super power in spite of the presence of civilian ownership of firearms! The facts do not lie! Self-policing with regards to home invasion/personal safety scenarios works!
What on Earth do these things have to do with each other? You know there might have been liquid water on Mars too...
|
On October 13 2012 20:54 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2012 20:46 Scarecrow wrote:On October 13 2012 20:38 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:On October 13 2012 20:31 lost_artz wrote:On October 13 2012 20:13 jobebob wrote:On October 13 2012 18:47 pharmer. wrote:On October 13 2012 18:20 PH wrote:
This kind of thing makes me lean towards disallowing gun ownership. Accidents like this are just ridiculous. Beyond that, though...using deadly force to stop a potential burglar no questions asked? That's not a right we should have. That's just dumb. How do you know they are just going to steal from you? According to the 2009 census there was a grand total of 110 fatal burglaries out of close to 1,000,000 total residence burglaries. Meaning that you have a 0.01% chance, (yes thats one tenth of a percent) chance of death. Now take into account that in 2009, 554 americans died of "Accidental discharge of firearms". Meaning you are 5 times more likely to die by shooting yourself or a loved one than in a house burglary. Looking at the data I just do not see any justification that owning a gun makes you safe at all. http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0310.pdfhttp://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0321.pdfhttp://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr60/nvsr60_03.pdf (table 10) The only problem I see with those statistics is that it doesn't account for how many burglaries didn't occur because firearms were present. All you are siting is a statistic of how many fatalities there were. I would also like to point out that an accidental discharge of firearms doesn't always equate to someone thinking they're going to be robbed/kidnapped/killed/raped. There are many more situations that fall under the category of accidental discharges - Hunting accidents i.e. mistaking another hunter for game - hence why bright orange 'camo' is so popular, kids getting their hands on guns that were not locked up and shooting themselves or a friend, etc. So yes you are more likely to die from an accidental discharge but it also takes into account a lot more situations than having break into your home. Even winning one world war, Korean, Vietnam, Iran, Soviet regimes while possessing such "dangerous" weapons. What about civilized Europe? Worst comparison I've seen in a while. America lost in Vietnam, never invaded Iran and the USSR collapsed rather than there being any large scale conflict. On top of this just because you use guns in war doesn't mean they're a good idea in the home. The point I'm making is despite the claim that "America is dangerous", it's not been this way even after losing in Vietnam with all the upset army veterans, infiltration by USSR spies/operatives, Iran crisis. America still remains a world super power in spite of the presence of civilian ownership of firearms! The facts do not lie! Self-policing with regards to home invasion/personal safety scenarios works!
...wtf does having firearms at home or domestic firearm related deaths have to do with America being a super power? I'd rather live in almost any post-industrial western nation ahead of the US because my family and I would be safer in a society where guns aren't so easily accessible and prevalent.
|
On October 13 2012 21:18 Scarecrow wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2012 20:54 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:On October 13 2012 20:46 Scarecrow wrote:On October 13 2012 20:38 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:On October 13 2012 20:31 lost_artz wrote:On October 13 2012 20:13 jobebob wrote:On October 13 2012 18:47 pharmer. wrote:On October 13 2012 18:20 PH wrote:
This kind of thing makes me lean towards disallowing gun ownership. Accidents like this are just ridiculous. Beyond that, though...using deadly force to stop a potential burglar no questions asked? That's not a right we should have. That's just dumb. How do you know they are just going to steal from you? According to the 2009 census there was a grand total of 110 fatal burglaries out of close to 1,000,000 total residence burglaries. Meaning that you have a 0.01% chance, (yes thats one tenth of a percent) chance of death. Now take into account that in 2009, 554 americans died of "Accidental discharge of firearms". Meaning you are 5 times more likely to die by shooting yourself or a loved one than in a house burglary. Looking at the data I just do not see any justification that owning a gun makes you safe at all. http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0310.pdfhttp://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0321.pdfhttp://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr60/nvsr60_03.pdf (table 10) The only problem I see with those statistics is that it doesn't account for how many burglaries didn't occur because firearms were present. All you are siting is a statistic of how many fatalities there were. I would also like to point out that an accidental discharge of firearms doesn't always equate to someone thinking they're going to be robbed/kidnapped/killed/raped. There are many more situations that fall under the category of accidental discharges - Hunting accidents i.e. mistaking another hunter for game - hence why bright orange 'camo' is so popular, kids getting their hands on guns that were not locked up and shooting themselves or a friend, etc. So yes you are more likely to die from an accidental discharge but it also takes into account a lot more situations than having break into your home. Even winning one world war, Korean, Vietnam, Iran, Soviet regimes while possessing such "dangerous" weapons. What about civilized Europe? Worst comparison I've seen in a while. America lost in Vietnam, never invaded Iran and the USSR collapsed rather than there being any large scale conflict. On top of this just because you use guns in war doesn't mean they're a good idea in the home. The point I'm making is despite the claim that "America is dangerous", it's not been this way even after losing in Vietnam with all the upset army veterans, infiltration by USSR spies/operatives, Iran crisis. America still remains a world super power in spite of the presence of civilian ownership of firearms! The facts do not lie! Self-policing with regards to home invasion/personal safety scenarios works! ...wtf does having firearms at home or domestic firearm related deaths have to do with America being a super power? I'd rather live in almost any post-industrial western nation ahead of the US because my family and I would be safer in a society where guns aren't so easily accessible and prevalent.
It's called previous firearms experience and lowered policing costs. Most American soldiers have been around guns since infancy, know how to safely store, arm and use them compared to non-accustomed soldiers, which traditionally put such heavy penalties to unauthorized use that accidents and misuse are more frequent. Obviously since they are military related, we will never be able see such statistics to do comparisons.
Lowered policing costs, puts a huge burden of ensuring public safety from policemen to civilians that enables Glade county sheriffa sheriff of 147 employees can police a land area of 2,000 sq/km with 3,852 homes between them.
|
On October 13 2012 21:16 HunterX11 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2012 20:54 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:On October 13 2012 20:46 Scarecrow wrote:On October 13 2012 20:38 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:On October 13 2012 20:31 lost_artz wrote:On October 13 2012 20:13 jobebob wrote:On October 13 2012 18:47 pharmer. wrote:On October 13 2012 18:20 PH wrote:
This kind of thing makes me lean towards disallowing gun ownership. Accidents like this are just ridiculous. Beyond that, though...using deadly force to stop a potential burglar no questions asked? That's not a right we should have. That's just dumb. How do you know they are just going to steal from you? According to the 2009 census there was a grand total of 110 fatal burglaries out of close to 1,000,000 total residence burglaries. Meaning that you have a 0.01% chance, (yes thats one tenth of a percent) chance of death. Now take into account that in 2009, 554 americans died of "Accidental discharge of firearms". Meaning you are 5 times more likely to die by shooting yourself or a loved one than in a house burglary. Looking at the data I just do not see any justification that owning a gun makes you safe at all. http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0310.pdfhttp://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0321.pdfhttp://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr60/nvsr60_03.pdf (table 10) The only problem I see with those statistics is that it doesn't account for how many burglaries didn't occur because firearms were present. All you are siting is a statistic of how many fatalities there were. I would also like to point out that an accidental discharge of firearms doesn't always equate to someone thinking they're going to be robbed/kidnapped/killed/raped. There are many more situations that fall under the category of accidental discharges - Hunting accidents i.e. mistaking another hunter for game - hence why bright orange 'camo' is so popular, kids getting their hands on guns that were not locked up and shooting themselves or a friend, etc. So yes you are more likely to die from an accidental discharge but it also takes into account a lot more situations than having break into your home. Even winning one world war, Korean, Vietnam, Iran, Soviet regimes while possessing such "dangerous" weapons. What about civilized Europe? Worst comparison I've seen in a while. America lost in Vietnam, never invaded Iran and the USSR collapsed rather than there being any large scale conflict. On top of this just because you use guns in war doesn't mean they're a good idea in the home. The point I'm making is despite the claim that "America is dangerous", it's not been this way even after losing in Vietnam with all the upset army veterans, infiltration by USSR spies/operatives, Iran crisis. America still remains a world super power in spite of the presence of civilian ownership of firearms! The facts do not lie! Self-policing with regards to home invasion/personal safety scenarios works! What on Earth do these things have to do with each other? You know there might have been liquid water on Mars too...
It's called civilization stress, whenever a country faces defeat or uncertainty, it tends to fracture and split into splinter groups resulting in civil war and separatists movements.
|
On October 13 2012 19:52 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:
I'm sorry, but the son's death is on his own head.
Seriously. What happened to "Mom, Dad, I'm home!"
Back when my mother worked for an American organisation. They always always always drill that into their children. To call out when they enter the house.
This tragedy would have been avoided with proper upbringing.
This better be a fucking joke.
|
On October 13 2012 23:27 garlicface wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2012 19:52 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:
I'm sorry, but the son's death is on his own head.
Seriously. What happened to "Mom, Dad, I'm home!"
Back when my mother worked for an American organisation. They always always always drill that into their children. To call out when they enter the house.
This tragedy would have been avoided with proper upbringing. This better be a fucking joke.
No this makes sense. I always wondered what the function of saying hello to people serves, especially when you've already seen each other. It makes sense that you're not just saying "hello", you're actually saying "hello, please don't shoot me in the face".
|
On October 13 2012 19:52 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:
I'm sorry, but the son's death is on his own head.
Seriously. What happened to "Mom, Dad, I'm home!"
Back when my mother worked for an American organisation. They always always always drill that into their children. To call out when they enter the house.
This tragedy would have been avoided with proper upbringing.
lmfao... i think you watch too many bad sitcoms from america. i've been here since a teenager and i've never heard one person shout that like they do on television. on the other hand i've never heard of anyone shooting someone in their house without establishing an identity.
|
Gun control will never change in America. Constitutional right.
|
On October 13 2012 23:30 ddrddrddrddr wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2012 23:27 garlicface wrote:On October 13 2012 19:52 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:
I'm sorry, but the son's death is on his own head.
Seriously. What happened to "Mom, Dad, I'm home!"
Back when my mother worked for an American organisation. They always always always drill that into their children. To call out when they enter the house.
This tragedy would have been avoided with proper upbringing. This better be a fucking joke. No this makes sense. I always wondered what the function of saying hello to people serves, especially when you've already seen each other. It makes sense that you're not just saying "hello", you're actually saying "hello, please don't shoot me in the face".
Oh, yeah! Of course! Silly me, forgetting my upbringing.
|
On October 13 2012 23:39 Kernen wrote:
Gun control will never change in America. Constitutional right.
It should stay as it is. And this is coming from a very left wing guy.
|
On October 13 2012 20:05 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2012 20:01 lost_artz wrote:On October 13 2012 19:52 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:
I'm sorry, but the son's death is on his own head.
Seriously. What happened to "Mom, Dad, I'm home!"
Back when my mother worked for an American organisation. They always always always drill that into their children. To call out when they enter the house.
This tragedy would have been avoided with proper upbringing. A) It's late at night B) When we left his dad was asleep as stated in the story C) He's was 48 years old not a fucking kid D) Taking into account A-C he had no reason to announce himself. I'm trying to point out the life saving habit of announcing your presence when entering a house. Any house.
You are being silly. Having to announce your presence in your own house is unnecessary, because it is your house.
|
On October 13 2012 20:11 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2012 20:09 lost_artz wrote:On October 13 2012 20:05 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:On October 13 2012 20:01 lost_artz wrote:On October 13 2012 19:52 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:
I'm sorry, but the son's death is on his own head.
Seriously. What happened to "Mom, Dad, I'm home!"
Back when my mother worked for an American organisation. They always always always drill that into their children. To call out when they enter the house.
This tragedy would have been avoided with proper upbringing. A) It's late at night B) When we left his dad was asleep as stated in the story C) He's was 48 years old not a fucking kid D) Taking into account A-C he had no reason to announce himself. I'm trying to point out the life saving habit of announcing your presence when entering a house. Any house. Had the one other person there not been alseep and had it not been after 12am I could understand that. But his dad was asleep and it was after 12am. Jay Leno doesn't ever air until 11:30pm. No ones going to announce themselves at that time of the day especially when they know no one is awake to hear it. Bye announcing it they would probably wake said person up and piss off them for being woken up lol. In this example, it would be better yelled at than dead. :-/ Either way, I always call when I enter a home, any home, if my own.
If I lived with a person who yelled "HELLO I AM HOME DON'T SHOOT ME PLEASE" at 12am I'd fucking strangle him gun or no gun.
On October 13 2012 20:38 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2012 20:31 lost_artz wrote:On October 13 2012 20:13 jobebob wrote:On October 13 2012 18:47 pharmer. wrote:On October 13 2012 18:20 PH wrote:
This kind of thing makes me lean towards disallowing gun ownership. Accidents like this are just ridiculous. Beyond that, though...using deadly force to stop a potential burglar no questions asked? That's not a right we should have. That's just dumb. How do you know they are just going to steal from you? According to the 2009 census there was a grand total of 110 fatal burglaries out of close to 1,000,000 total residence burglaries. Meaning that you have a 0.01% chance, (yes thats one tenth of a percent) chance of death. Now take into account that in 2009, 554 americans died of "Accidental discharge of firearms". Meaning you are 5 times more likely to die by shooting yourself or a loved one than in a house burglary. Looking at the data I just do not see any justification that owning a gun makes you safe at all. http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0310.pdfhttp://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0321.pdfhttp://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr60/nvsr60_03.pdf (table 10) The only problem I see with those statistics is that it doesn't account for how many burglaries didn't occur because firearms were present. All you are siting is a statistic of how many fatalities there were. I would also like to point out that an accidental discharge of firearms doesn't always equate to someone thinking they're going to be robbed/kidnapped/killed/raped. There are many more situations that fall under the category of accidental discharges - Hunting accidents i.e. mistaking another hunter for game - hence why bright orange 'camo' is so popular, kids getting their hands on guns that were not locked up and shooting themselves or a friend, etc. So yes you are more likely to die from an accidental discharge but it also takes into account a lot more situations than having break into your home. Exactly, the percentage of firearms related death compared to total population of gun owners is just that! In fact, I'd say if your numbers became available, it's even a greater incentive for a civilian ownership of a gun. If American "louts" (by European standard) have been standing as a Nation since declaring independence with their "crazy" gun ownership, even winning one world war, Korean, Vietnam, Iran, Soviet regimes while possessing such "dangerous" weapons. What about civilized Europe?
Europeans have been winning wars since wars were invented. With and without gun regulations. Wars have nothing to do with having war equipment at home.
The whole point of not having guns laying around is that you have to have a lot more courage to actually take the step and kill someone. You don't just push a button and he's dead.
On October 13 2012 20:41 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2012 20:36 Chargelot wrote:On October 13 2012 20:11 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:On October 13 2012 20:09 lost_artz wrote:On October 13 2012 20:05 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:On October 13 2012 20:01 lost_artz wrote:On October 13 2012 19:52 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:
I'm sorry, but the son's death is on his own head.
Seriously. What happened to "Mom, Dad, I'm home!"
Back when my mother worked for an American organisation. They always always always drill that into their children. To call out when they enter the house.
This tragedy would have been avoided with proper upbringing. A) It's late at night B) When we left his dad was asleep as stated in the story C) He's was 48 years old not a fucking kid D) Taking into account A-C he had no reason to announce himself. I'm trying to point out the life saving habit of announcing your presence when entering a house. Any house. Had the one other person there not been alseep and had it not been after 12am I could understand that. But his dad was asleep and it was after 12am. Jay Leno doesn't ever air until 11:30pm. No ones going to announce themselves at that time of the day especially when they know no one is awake to hear it. Bye announcing it they would probably wake said person up and piss off them for being woken up lol. In this example, it would be better yelled at than dead. :-/ Either way, I always call when I enter a home, any home, if my own. .. If someone walks through a locked door without breaking it down, it's pretty likely they belong inside. I could understand your point if you had to smash a window to get inside, but he walked through a door. Sure, he could be the one criminal who is educated enough to pick a lock in short enough time to not be caught, but still so stupid he breaks into homes for his money, but logic dictates that when someone does not break into a 'secured' area, and they are in that area, they belong there. Checking the person's identity (ie turning the god damned lights on) is called for. Killing the person is not. But I suppose there is some merit to the idea of announcing yourself in a home where someone owns a gun. It's not nice to wake people up, but its not good to get killed either. It's bad on both sides of this one. When my country was developing, we actually had cases of burglars whose only method of break-in was to open the front door. That's it! If he was caught by the occupant, he'd pretend he got the wrong house.
Ever tried locks on your doors? It saves lives apparently, if you're of the opinion that you shoot everyone who takes a step on your property. Are you also of the opinion that the mail man is supposed to scream for his life at 5am, otherwise it's fine to blow is brains out? I mean he's on your property after all.
|
On October 13 2012 23:30 ddrddrddrddr wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2012 23:27 garlicface wrote:On October 13 2012 19:52 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:
I'm sorry, but the son's death is on his own head.
Seriously. What happened to "Mom, Dad, I'm home!"
Back when my mother worked for an American organisation. They always always always drill that into their children. To call out when they enter the house.
This tragedy would have been avoided with proper upbringing. This better be a fucking joke. No this makes sense. I always wondered what the function of saying hello to people serves, especially when you've already seen each other. It makes sense that you're not just saying "hello", you're actually saying "hello, please don't shoot me in the face".
This calls for a clarity revolution in social etiquette. In order not to miss this important but hidden queue, I propose that from now on we all say "please don't shoot me in the face" when greeting someone and skip the "hello" part entirely.
|
not gonna lie. police in this country are too quick on the trigger. it's a shitty way for him to learn his lesson, but i hope he now uses the opportunity to teach other cops about it.
|
wow....such a sad story 
|
You guys have to understand, Chicago right now is one of the worse places to be in the world. The drug king pins are fading out and a huge turf war for drugs is going on there right now. Someone coming into your home in the city, they are quick to kill you and take whatever they want. The former officer is aware of this after working homicide for years, he made the right decision to fire on the intruder without caution. It is a sad mistake that it was his son though.
|
How ironic i just had a 3 week long project about gun violence in america. Can't say i'm surprised but sad none the less. I think this is one of many cases of unintentional victims of bad gun behaviour dragging down a country.
Just watch bowling for columbine
|
On October 14 2012 00:44 SyntechiTV wrote:
You guys have to understand, Chicago right now is one of the worse places to be in the world. The drug king pins are fading out and a huge turf war for drugs is going on there right now. Someone coming into your home in the city, they are quick to kill you and take whatever they want. The former officer is aware of this after working homicide for years, he made the right decision to fire on the intruder without caution. It is a sad mistake that it was his son though.
How can it be the right decisions but be a sad mistake at the same time? Did he really have to go for the head shot? What ever happened to saying "Stick'em up"?
Like the other son, I am glad that the mother wasn't around for such a dreadful experience.
|
On October 14 2012 00:44 SyntechiTV wrote:
You guys have to understand, Chicago right now is one of the worse places to be in the world. The drug king pins are fading out and a huge turf war for drugs is going on there right now. Someone coming into your home in the city, they are quick to kill you and take whatever they want. The former officer is aware of this after working homicide for years, he made the right decision to fire on the intruder without caution. It is a sad mistake that it was his son though.
Yeah because intruders usually use a key to open your backdoor. Stop making up excuses. This was absolutely no situation in which the father should have shot.
|
Despite what most Americans seem to think.. you don't need guns in your homes.
edit
Also, couldn't this cop go to jail? Far as I'm concerned his reaction was excessive, which is a big no-no. Unless that's just in Canada?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
