Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Toddlers Kill More People in the USA (with guns) Than Terrorists Do

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 438 posts

Re: Toddlers Kill More People in the USA (with guns) Than Terrorists Do

#181

Post by arprocter »

agarden wrote: post #57
skippytheroo wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps if HIV was endlessly highlighted by government and the media as a major problem in Sweden your analogy might have made some sense. In my opinion your post exemplifies the antithesis of a decent argument or even legitimate criticism.

Okay, try this: far, far more people die in the US in car accidents than are shot. More people die because of DUIs than because of guns. Yet guns are endlessly highlighted as a major problem and the talk is constantly about making it harder to attain them and yet few people are ranting on about the dangers of automobile or licquor. Indeed, the original article dismisses drunk teenagers as a non-threat. Drunk teenager…

IIRC US road deaths and shooting deaths are about even (around 30k each), although the gun figure includes suicides

Re: Toddlers Kill More People in the USA (with guns) Than Terrorists Do

#182

Post by maxerickson »

LyndsySimon wrote: post #169
hnal943 wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...because the criminals are. And therein lies to fatal flaw of gun control - only people who are law abiding would comply with the new laws.

I don't believe that US criminals are more heavily-armed than those in other countries. In fact, the opposite is likely true. In the US most criminals who are armed have inexpensive, unreliable handguns. An armed criminal in the UK (while less common) would seem more likely to have something like a submachinegun or a machine pistol. If the penalty is severe and the gun is rare and expensive... why go through all that…

What about the criminals in the UK that do not obtain any firearm?

Someone carrying a cheap pistol is still more heavily armed than someone carrying brass knuckles.

I'm not going to go find the facts and figures, still, I'm pretty sure that the incidence of gun crime is higher in the US, pointing out that gun buying criminals in the UK probably buy nicer guns doesn't change that.

Re: Toddlers Kill More People in the USA (with guns) Than Terrorists Do

#183

Post by ZoeZoeBee »

lolc wrote: post #167
imgabe wrote: post #145

To play devil's advocate, which gun law would have prevented this person from getting shot by her toddler? As a gun rights advocate, she presumably has been around guns for a long time and should have been well versed in how to handle them safely. I doubt there's any training that could be mandated that would exceed the experience she already had. Short of banning guns entirely, which would require a constitutional a…

I think just having a culture shift away from the romantic idea that private guns deter crime and offer protection would bring down the amount of gun accidents considerably. Punishing people after something bad happens turns out to not work very well for prevention. Another romantic idea demolished by reality. Compare: Psychoactive substances: We just lock up anybody touching them. Guns: We lock up anybody abusing th…

Banning Guns may Decrease Gun Violence, But they do not have the effect of reducing Violent Crime In General. Case In point Australia After the Gun Ban Saw Violent Crimes increase, for a few years and after those the decline in Violence was less than the decline seen in most first world nations like the US. http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/violent%20crime.html

Ask yourself this question why do people advocating for gun control only talk about the decrease in gun violence and not violence/homicide in general. Why is a stabbing death not equal to a gun death?

Re: Toddlers Kill More People in the USA (with guns) Than Terrorists Do

#184

Post by harshalizee »

imgabe wrote: post #145

To play devil's advocate, which gun law would have prevented this person from getting shot by her toddler? As a gun rights advocate, she presumably has been around guns for a long time and should have been well versed in how to handle them safely. I doubt there's any training that could be mandated that would exceed the experience she already had. Short of banning guns entirely, which would require a constitutional a…

To your question, The one that out rightly bans guns would have definitely prevented this.

We can debate to no end about how she should have, could have, would have, etc taken preventive measures. But the fact of the matter is, accidents do and will happen. We should really take a look at how literally the rest of the world does it and take notes.

Re: Toddlers Kill More People in the USA (with guns) Than Terrorists Do

#185

Post by over »

developer2 wrote: post #173
LyndsySimon wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am quite pro-gun, and terrorism doesn't even register on the reasons why. I believe the same could be said of most everyone I know in that community. It's not about fear; it's primarily about a worldview that centers on individuality and distrust of government.

I've never understood this argument. The day you pull a gun on "government" is the day you will be killed on the spot, or sentenced to death row, or sent to life in prison with no chance of parole. You will be permanently removed from your comfortable life, and whomever takes that life away from you will face no penalty for doing so. So you own a handgun? The government will have assault rifles. Oh, you own an assaul…

> It doesn't matter what you own, the government will win every time. You are guaranteed to lose.

I think this isn't true if enough people decide to attack the government in concert, say 10% of the population, that's 30 million people. I'm not saying that will ever happen, but American police forces are already stretched to the limit and can be easily tied up.

But probably, knives would suffice for that purpose. Or just not showing up for work.

Re: Toddlers Kill More People in the USA (with guns) Than Terrorists Do

#186

Post by swah »

optimuspaul wrote: post #176
TallGuyShort wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> police are not routinely armed I'm a gun owner and this is the key point for me. No politician is in a position to tell me I don't need my semi-automatic pistol if every day I see a patrol car go by my house with 2 fully automatic AR-15s locked between the front seats and my local police department owns an armoured vehicle. If you really think you have a plan for getting rid of guns for bad guys as well as me, pro…

Huh, what's wrong with me then. I absolutely do not need a gun, ever. Nobody needs a gun. If you think you need a gun then you have serious problems. Let's talk about basic human needs. Food, water, Air, and to a lesser extent clothing and shelter. You don't need a gun for any of those things. Sure a gun can help with food, but guess what, you don't even need to eat meat, there are so many other sources of food. So n…

You also never need to defend yourself in this hypotetical situation.

Re: Toddlers Kill More People in the USA (with guns) Than Terrorists Do

#187

Post by talmand »

anexprogrammer wrote: post #121
Loque wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It appears everything was correctly enforced? He went through the appropriate channels - filled in the correct forms, and appeared sane at the time of application. I guess another question would be, why on earth would anyone need _any_ of those guns.

There was a lot of discussion at the time, and my recollection is he was already known to mental health services. The Sun et al had him painted as a rabid survivalist of course. Wiki seems to say it was retrospective diagnosis, so I'm not sure... I can understand wanting to collect, or at least try, different types, but who in the world needs an assault rifle?

Depends on what one is defining an "assault rifle". The most common definition used by the news media can be a semi-automatic hunting rifle with aftermarket parts on it. The term "assault rifle" is a dishonest attempt by certain people to influence a certain reaction in people.

Re: Toddlers Kill More People in the USA (with guns) Than Terrorists Do

#188

Post by alistairSH »

forgetsusername wrote: post #120
alistairSH wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, we should all be allowed to own bazookas and nukes and aircraft carriers? Because, if this is about securing the state (either against a tyrannical government, or a 3rd party), rifles and handguns aren't going to cut it. Or, are you limiting your interpretation to firearms in common use at the time of the Constitutional Convention? In which case, you can turn in your Glock and your AK. Point being, we already hav…

> So, we should all be allowed to own bazookas and nukes and aircraft carriers? Most of those are prohibitively expensive, but why not? Is your argument that somehow ordinary people will be more likely to use them indiscriminately? I mean, who is the US government, which owns bazookas and air craft carriers, but a collection of ordinary people who have done their share of indiscriminate usage of weaponry?

My argument was that the 2A isn't absolute, as the parent implied. There are restrictions placed on the ownership and use of firearms (see child comment about NFA items and the extra paperwork, fees, and licensing involved).

I'm not anti-gun, in the general sense. I am pro-gun control in a much as the current system allows too many irresponsible people to own guns for no good reason (Jamie Gilt being a prime example).

Re: Toddlers Kill More People in the USA (with guns) Than Terrorists Do

#189

Post by adwf »

kamjam wrote: post #88
adwf wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope, quite the opposite, gun deaths of all sorts are down substantially. Less than half what they used to be. And Dunblane wasn't a freak incident here's one from 1987: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungerford_massacre Here's some data. Very clear downward trends since 1997. http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compareyears/192/rate_of_a... http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compareyears/192/rate_of_g... Here's the Aust…

The reference to the Australia stats reminds me of the Jim Jefferies sketch on Gun Control. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rR9IaXH1M0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9UFyNy-rw4

Yeah that's an excellent sketch. I think he really does touch on an important point, the only good reason to have guns is because they're fun. Self defense is nonsense and protection from government is even more nonsense nowadays.

I'm actually fairly pro-gun (for the UK at least), I think we're quite restrictive on the type of guns allowed (eg. larger calibre rifles would be fun down a range). But at the same time I'm very pro gun-control; they should be licensed, inspected, restricted in type and how/where you're allowed to carry, etc.

Overall I'm happy with how it's worked out, I'd rather not have guns than have the problems of mass gun ownership.

Re: Toddlers Kill More People in the USA (with guns) Than Terrorists Do

#190

Post by talmand »

Retric wrote: post #132
mifdsfdrfes wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Washington DC has the lowest gun ownership per capita and yet the highest gun murder rates in America. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_Sta... Please explain the lack of correlation between gun murders and gun ownership. Even when controlling for density, there is still no correlation.

Bad stats, there is no actual nationwide tracking of gun ownership in the US making such numbers pure BS. Further, crime rates need to be adjusted for poverty or they become meaningless.

I agree on the tracking on gun ownership in the US, which is why I treat all such research with the same distrust. Whether they are pro or anti gun in nature.
Post reply on HN