Okla. Woman Shoots, Kills Intruder:

[ready4ONE 5,400]

Yes.... a heated moment. Just as the above story illustrates. Luckily this young woman had the tools at hand to prevent these vermin from brutalizing her and her defensless child. Silly, eh? I guess her paranoia paid off.....

Anytime such a rare instance crops up such as this one in the OP it gets held up on this forum as "proof" guns make people "safer" yet such incidents are:

1) Rare

2) Single instances where a gun indeed harmed the right person involved

3) Proof of jack $h!t

[slim 1,525]

Anytime such a rare instance crops up such as this one in the OP it gets held up on this forum as "proof" guns make people "safer" yet such incidents are:

1) Rare

2) Single instances where a gun indeed harmed the right person involved

3) Proof of jack $h!t

Where's all the proof that guns make people less safe?

I've seen the CDC statistics and their numbers include homicides (which are intentional and can be carried out with a gun or without one) suicides (which are also intentional and can be carried out with a gun or without one) and accidents. If you compare/contrast accidents involving firearms and accidents involving, say, cars, stairs, swimming pools, etc., you'll see that guns are actually a lot safer than most other things we come in contact with in our daily lives. Where's the public outcry to ban swimming pools?

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Where's all the proof that guns make people less safe?

I've seen the CDC statistics and their numbers include homicides (which are intentional and can be carried out with a gun or without one) suicides (which are also intentional and can be carried out with a gun or without one) and accidents. If you compare/contrast accidents involving firearms and accidents involving, say, cars, stairs, swimming pools, etc., you'll see that guns are actually a lot safer than most other things we come in contact with in our daily lives. Where's the public outcry to ban swimming pools?

Not that I disagree with you, but it would not be accurate to compare raw numbers. For instance say for the age group 12-17 you have 14,000 drownings per year but only 2500 deaths by firearm, you cannot conclude that firearms are safer unless you factor in use.

It may be that 2/3 of children are exposed to a pool at least once a month where as only 1/10 are exposed to a firearm.

Edited January 6, 2012 by Sousuke

[slim 1,525]

Not that I disagree with you, but it would not be accurate to compare raw numbers. For instance say for the age group 12-17 you have 14,000 drownings per year but only 2500 deaths by firearm, you cannot conclude that firearms are safer unless you factor in use.

It may be that 2/3 of children are exposed to a pool at least once a month where as only 1/10 are exposed to a firearm.

So its not the gun (or pool) but the access?

I have to agree with you that it's very hard to drown when you don't have a pool and it's very hard to get shot if you or those around you don't have guns. Much in the same way it would be hard to die in an auto accident if you never went anywhere. But, the funny thing is there aren't people out there calling for swimming pools to be banned. Why is that?

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

So its not the gun (or pool) but the access?

I have to agree with you that it's very hard to drown when you don't have a pool and it's very hard to get shot if you or those around you don't have guns. Much in the same way it would be hard to die in an auto accident if you never went anywhere. But, the funny thing is there aren't people out there calling for swimming pools to be banned. Why is that?

Swimming pool regulations are however very strict.

[slim 1,525]

Swimming pool regulations are however very strict.

More strict than gun laws? Seriously?

Last I heard you don't even need a background check to buy a swimming pool!

[ScottnIzabela 25]

hahahahahahaha

More strict than gun laws? Seriously?

Last I heard you don't even need a background check to buy a swimming pool!

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

More strict than gun laws? Seriously?

Last I heard you don't even need a background check to buy a swimming pool!

In a way yes, you need a planning permit for a swimming pool in most jurisdictions and both the pool and property must meet safety requirements.

Edited January 6, 2012 by Sousuke

[slim 1,525]

In a way yes, you need a planning permit for a swimming pool in most jurisdictions and both the pool and property must meet safety requirements.

And that trumps a FBI background check how?

Lets keep in mind too it's illegal to discharge a firearm in many places.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

And that trumps a FBI background check how?

Lets keep in mind too it's illegal to discharge a firearm in many places.

Having done both I can tell you getting the permit is by far the most painful. It typically takes a month, requires inspections etc.

Edited January 6, 2012 by Sousuke

[slim 1,525]

Having done both I can tell you getting the permit is by far the most painful. It typically takes a month, requires inspections etc.

Please point me to where it says "your right to own a swimming pool shall not be infringed" because, believe it or not, I have an amendment in my constitution that says the government can't infringe upon my right to keep and bear arms. Yet, every single time I buy a gun through a FFL dealer, I have to fill out paperwork for a federal background check, wait at least three days, and then after all that, I have to still comply with local regulations.

To exercise my constitutionally protected rights concerning firearms I have to SUBMIT to federal laws before I even begin to SUBMIT to local regulations.

Do you have to do that with your swimming pool?

[ready4ONE 5,400]

Where's all the proof that guns make people less safe?

I've seen the CDC statistics and their numbers include homicides (which are intentional and can be carried out with a gun or without one) suicides (which are also intentional and can be carried out with a gun or without one) and accidents. If you compare/contrast accidents involving firearms and accidents involving, say, cars, stairs, swimming pools, etc., you'll see that guns are actually a lot safer than most other things we come in contact with in our daily lives. Where's the public outcry to ban swimming pools?

I realize you are thick as a brick on this topic. I concede your right to have a gun. I laugh at you and your fellow VJ gun nutters inability to recognize the illogic of guns being a potential hazard to yourselves and your loved ones. The very basis of your thinking guns make you safer is the rapidity with which they can cause harm, in your thinking to 'bad guys' but in reality to anyone including you and those you love. Consider this your duh moment of the day.

Having a pool also increases your risk, and certainly many choose that risk. Ditto driving a car. Those issues don't prove your point either because your logic is flawed.

Edited January 6, 2012 by ready4ONE

[slim 1,525]

I realize you are thick as a brick on this topic. I concede your right to have a gun. I laugh at you and your fellow VJ gun nutters inability to recognize the illogic of guns being a potential hazard to yourselves and your loved ones. The very basis of your thinking guns make you safer is the rapidity with which they can cause harm, in your thinking to 'bad guys' but in reality to anyone including you and those you love. Consider this your duh moment of the day.

Having a pool also increases your risk, and certainly many choose that risk. Ditto driving a car. Those issues don't prove your point either because your logic is flawed.

I have a clothes dryer in my basement and a stove in my kitchen. Do you think I'm more prone to have a house fire becuase of them? Or, am I maybe better able to dry my clothes and cook my food?

There were 369,500 house fires in 2010 yet I don't hear the public outcry to ban dryers, stoves... not even candles. Why? That stuff is 20 times more dangerous than guns!

Flawed logic should never be used to argue with a gun nut. If you do, you imply the constitution is flawed. Is that what you're doing?

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Please point me to where it says "your right to own a swimming pool shall not be infringed" because, believe it or not, I have an amendment in my constitution that says the government can't infringe upon my right to keep and bear arms. Yet, every single time I buy a gun through a FFL dealer, I have to fill out paperwork for a federal background check, wait at least three days, and then after all that, I have to still comply with local regulations.

To exercise my constitutionally protected rights concerning firearms I have to SUBMIT to federal laws before I even begin to SUBMIT to local regulations.

Do you have to do that with your swimming pool?

Unless the pool is on or bordering federal land, no you wouldn't. That being said, its still more difficult to get through the red tape for a swimming pool regardless if it is a protected right to have one or not (which it isn't).

Edited January 6, 2012 by Sousuke

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I have a clothes dryer in my basement and a stove in my kitchen. Do you think I'm more prone to have a house fire becuase of them? Or, am I maybe better able to dry my clothes and cook my food?

There were 369,500 house fires in 2010 yet I don't hear the public outcry to ban dryers, stoves... not even candles. Why? That stuff is 20 times more dangerous than guns!

It like is not 20 times more dangerous due to the number of ppl who have and use dryers and stoves on a regular basis in comparison to firearms.