Guns cost more lives than they save

Guns cost more lives than they save

There are 17 comments on the Salon.com story from Jan 26, 2011, titled Guns cost more lives than they save. In it, Salon.com reports that:

Law enforcement personnel work on the crime scene where U.S Representative Gabrielle Giffords was shot.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Salon.com.

“Constitutionist/ SAF”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#1 Jan 27, 2011
Gene Lyons wrote:
There's a word for people who cling to absurd beliefs against massive evidence. They're called cultists, and they're currently in charge.
Gene Lyons says my shotgun will be used to kill my son in our home. My handgun will kill innocent people if only a armed manic opens fire. He also says being murdered is better than killing a murderer.

Woodrow Wilson justfied sending U.S. troops to Europe by telling the public "it would be the war that would end all war." We've been waging war ever since he made that statement.

People like Gene Lyons will say anything to control people. He will tell any lie if he thinks it will achieve the desired result.

The sun makes us cold. Rain makes us dry. Heat freezes us. Cold air makes us warm all over. Hurry up, people, Gene Lyons wants us to remove our clothes to make us decent in front of our kids.

People like Gene Lyons is the reason war is the final arbiter, and the reason the Framers included a 2nd amendment.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#2 Jan 27, 2011
Number of murders in 2009: An estimated 15,241 persons were murdered nationwide in 2009, which is a 7.3 percent decrease from the 2008 estimate, a 9.0 percent decrease from the 2005 figure, and a
2.2 percent decrease from the 2000 estimate. Source: http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/offenses/vio...

So a 9% DECREASE from 2005-2009, yet firearm ownership during that same time has gone up over 40% nationally. How can that be? If guns are costing more lives than they are saving according to this article), shouldn't the murder rate be going through the freaking roof? Hmmmm.

“Constitutionist/ SAF”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#3 Jan 27, 2011
Armed Veteran wrote:
...So a 9% DECREASE from 2005-2009, yet firearm ownership during that same time has gone up over 40% nationally. How can that be?

If guns are costing more lives than they are saving according to this article), shouldn't the murder rate be going through the freaking roof? Hmmmm.
Well that's a good point, and right on target with the author too.

They like to blame the reduction on crime to police and antigun politicians.

Since: Jan 09

Neptune, NJ

#4 Jan 27, 2011
Anybody pulling a gun must shoot to kill without hesitation. The soldier reasoned that most Rice students simply weren't prepared to do that. Hence the likeliest outcome was that criminals would end up murdering them with their own guns.
I agree 100% with this statement. If you are not prepared to take a life to save your own, you have no business using a firearm to defend yourself as you probably will become a victim. A strung out crackhead is going to easily overpower someone who cannot bring themselves to fire their weapon.

I have had this argument with my elderly mother many times who says she would only use the gun to scare someone off or, at worst, shoot them to wound them. I pointed out that she might as well forget the gun because in either scenario she will probably lose. I have told her that I would shoot to stop the person, whatever that entails, and would be prepared to do so if I felt it necessary to draw a firearm on someone.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#5 Jan 27, 2011
Tory II wrote:
<quoted text>
Well that's a good point, and right on target with the author too.
They like to blame the reduction on crime to police and antigun politicians.
It's called sarcasm, Tory.

“Constitutionist/ SAF”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#6 Jan 27, 2011
Tory II wrote:
<quoted text>
Well that's a good point, and right on target with the author too.
They like to blame the reduction on crime to police and antigun politicians.
They like to CREDIT the reduction on crime to police and antigun politicians (something other than the truth, an armed society).
fooman

Los Angeles, CA

#7 Jan 27, 2011
Just a bunch of freedom hating hyperbole mixed with conjecture and outright BS. Typical libtard nonsense. Nothing to see here.

“Constitutionist/ SAF”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#8 Jan 27, 2011
Zzznorch wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree 100% with this statement. If you are not prepared to take a life to save your own, you have no business using a firearm to defend yourself as you probably will become a victim. A strung out crackhead is going to easily overpower someone who cannot bring themselves to fire their weapon.
I have had this argument with my elderly mother many times who says she would only use the gun to scare someone off or, at worst, shoot them to wound them. I pointed out that she might as well forget the gun because in either scenario she will probably lose. I have told her that I would shoot to stop the person, whatever that entails, and would be prepared to do so if I felt it necessary to draw a firearm on someone.
LOL.

John Dillinger added to his notoriety by escaping jail with the aid of a fake gun. Do you think he was prepared to use it, and why is it the jailers failed to try to kill him with it (afterall, he had no intention of using it.)
A Citizen

Wichita, KS

#9 Jan 27, 2011
My uncle was an atty. and former D.A. he said never pull a gun unless you are prepared to use it, never use it uless you mean to kill. If not one of two things will happen, you yourself will be killed or sued.

Since: Jan 09

Neptune, NJ

#10 Jan 27, 2011
Tory II wrote:
<quoted text>LOL.
John Dillinger added to his notoriety by escaping jail with the aid of a fake gun. Do you think he was prepared to use it, and why is it the jailers failed to try to kill him with it (afterall, he had no intention of using it.)
Dillinger was in a no win situation. Would it have made any difference if he was shot? For your average homeowner, if you are not prepared to shoot an intruder, what do you do if they decide they have nothing to lose and grab it? You are already of a mental attitude that you are not going to shoot. Hopefully you didn't bother to load it either.

“Constitutionist/ SAF”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#11 Jan 27, 2011
Zzznorch wrote:
<quoted text>
Dillinger was in a no win situation. Would it have made any difference if he was shot? For your average homeowner, if you are not prepared to shoot an intruder, what do you do if they decide they have nothing to lose and grab it? You are already of a mental attitude that you are not going to shoot. Hopefully you didn't bother to load it either.
You miss the point. We all want to have the fortitude to shoot if neccessary. Sometimes just the sight of a gun can make a perp run.
Seen It Before

United States

#12 Jan 27, 2011
Tory II wrote:
<quoted text>You miss the point. We all want to have the fortitude to shoot if neccessary. Sometimes just the sight of a gun can make a perp run.
Or sometimes the sound. I have used a pump shotgun to discourage idiots 3 times just by giving the universally known sound of "Cha Chunk CHUNK" as the slide worked. In all 3 cases the idiots decided that they had better places to be in a hurry. A friend of mine worked in Chicago many years ago as a carpet installer. He had 2 black kids creeping up to the van he was in while the other installer was getting something from a store. He took the knee slam carpet stretcher and pumped it like a shotgun. Those kids heard the sound and thought it was the real deal!! He said the last he saw of them they were running as fast as they could. In all instances the idiots involved decided that they did not want to risk seeing if there was a round or rounds to follow. No shots fired but the message was perfectly clear.

“Pompous pontificator”

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#13 Jan 27, 2011
Don't think guns don't save lives? You must be under a rock.

http://www.thearmedcitizen.com/

http://www.keepandbeararms.com/default.asp
Carcajou

Cumberland, MD

#14 Jan 28, 2011
Having a gun has saved my life twice in my 49 years. Gene Lyons is a nanny state idiot.
Seen It Before

United States

#15 Jan 28, 2011
Carcajou wrote:
Having a gun has saved my life twice in my 49 years. Gene Lyons is a nanny state idiot.
I would rather have a gun and not need it than need a gun and not have it. My guns are perfectly happy to repose in the places I have them. They cause no harm where they are. Just consider them insurance that WORKS...

“Constitutionist/ SAF”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#16 Jan 28, 2011
Today I left home and forgot to lock my backdoor ((door was left open (unlocked)). Fortunately, my cache is always secured.

“Liberals are Ruining America”

Since: May 11

District of Columbia

#17 Jun 17, 2011
As long as there are people there will be weapons. Guns are just one version of weapons, and happen to be the most used weapon. They are extremely useful and successful both as a weapon and peace maker. They are primarily used as a choice to serve and protect.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Rice University Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Study finds history of trauma among undocumente... Nov 10 tomin cali 1
News Undocumented Mexican immigrants living in the c... Nov 3 humanspirit 3
News Study: Mexican Illegal Immigrants Suffer Mental... Nov 1 spytheweb 2
News Psychiatrists say Trump is mentally ill Oct '17 humanspirit 266
News Overcoming barriers to recruiting blacks/Africa... Sep '17 AmericanCreed 1
News Lesbian Ex-Mayor Has Perfect Response To Ann Co... Sep '17 VP Mullah Elect P... 6
News Harvey tests political opposites in Texas' Abbo... Aug '17 INFIDEL 13
More from around the web