Off duty Fresno cop shot at and fired back

[GandD 5,966]

I love the ineffectual, ignored posts in this thread the most.

Tying a gun to the owner isn't impossible, and not a bad idea. Heck, James Bond just did it! Unfortunately, there is no way to ensure the rightful owner is a good guy or deserves a gun.

Remember how this nation began, and the part guns played since the beginning. We may not be as bad as Quetta, but guns are here to stay. No getting around that fact.

The point is not to solve everything. But solve little parts here and there. Newtown would not have happened if the gun only worked in the hands of the purchaser.

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

The point is not to solve everything. But solve little parts here and there. Newtown would not have happened if the gun only worked in the hands of the purchaser.

I'm with you, and believe you me, I would love to prevent ALL future shootings such as Newtown and Ft. Hood and Columbine, et. al. Unfortunately, I don't know how many such shootings were undertaken by a person who did not own the gun, so not sure such tuchnology would make much of a dent. The Ft. Hood shooting for example, the shooter had his own gun. I suspect most do.

The US is 104 (using rate per 100k of 4.7) out of 207 countries for intentional homicides in 2012. Not great, but far from the worst, as well. South Korea, where guns are verboten even by the police, is #132 out of 207. Why the similarity in rates? Why isn't the US closer to the top of the list, what with all the "loon gun owners" we have? I don't know.

(Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate countries sorted by rate)

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Sounds good - guns that cost 1000% more and have to 'think' before firing off a bullet.

Just don't wear gloves and be prepared for false positives.

[GandD 5,966]

Now you're just being a naysayer.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The US is 104 (using rate per 100k of 4.7) out of 207 countries for intentional homicides in 2012. Not great, but far from the worst, as well. South Korea, where guns are verboten even by the police, is #132 out of 207. Why the similarity in rates? Why isn't the US closer to the top of the list, what with all the "loon gun owners" we have? I don't know.

(Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate countries sorted by rate)

What similarity in rates are you talking about? The intentional homicide rate in South Korea (2.6) is just over half that of the US (4.7). Put differently, if the US had the intentional homicide rate of South Korea, we'd have a little over 8,000 victims a year versus the almost 15,000 we actually have. I'd say that if we had 7,000 fewer homicide victims a year, that would be tremendous progress. But hey, this is America, who gives a ####### about 7,000 extra lives wasted each year, right? 7,000 lives are not as important as having it set up so that any ####### can run around with a firearm.

Edited December 6, 2013 by Mr. Big Dog

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

What similarity in rates are you talking about? The intentional homicide rate in South Korea (2.6) is just over half that of the US (4.7). Put differently, if the US had the intentional homicide rate of South Korea, we'd have a little over 8,000 victims a year versus the almost 15,000 we actually have. I'd say that if we had 7,000 fewer homicide victims a year, that would be tremendous progress. But hey, this is America, who gives a ####### about 7,000 extra lives wasted each year, right? 7,000 lives are not as important as having it set up so that any ####### can run around with a firearm.

Your logic is amazing and astounding. You pick apart this post without giving any thought to the ramifications of the numbers, yet you refuse to respond to any of the questions I have asked you about your idol Obama. Not gonna waste my time trying to explain it to you, you'd never get it.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Your logic is amazing and astounding.

My logic and my facts are just fine. Yours are grossly off when you call a homicide rate of 2.6/100K similar to a homicide rate of 4.7/100K. The latter is not at all similar to the former - it's almost twice that of the former. That's a huge difference. In the real world, that is.

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

Great. You know that 4.7 is nearly twice 2.6. Now move up the chart and see the differences. Also, consider the per capita # of guns when you see those rates. The USA has about what... 400 million guns among the population? Almost 1 per person, at 89 per 100 people. South Korea has how many again? About 1 per 100 residents, if that.

Quite a difference guns make, eh? We have 200% the homicide rate (and much lower than I expected), but 8900% more guns.

[lostinblue 1,989]

In South Korea the country now has a 93% high-school graduation rate. The shame of being an unwed mother is unbearable. Family structure is in place. Compare this to the inner city . This culture will embrace unwed mothers (the main reason for poverty in America)In some schools 80 % of black males drop out of school by the 10th grade. Often are associated with a gang lifestyle after that. .....Blame the guns on the break down of the society. The black community has no willingness in fixing this madness .... The answer is to take away guns from law abiding people.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Great. You know that 4.7 is nearly twice 2.6. Now move up the chart and see the differences. Also, consider the per capita # of guns when you see those rates. The USA has about what... 400 million guns among the population? Almost 1 per person, at 89 per 100 people. South Korea has how many again? About 1 per 100 residents, if that.

Quite a difference guns make, eh? We have 200% the homicide rate (and much lower than I expected), but 8900% more guns.

So what? The difference is that there are far fewer homicides per capita in South Korea. That's the important take-away. And if there are 89 firearms per 100 people then we have nowhere near 400 million firearms out there. Why? Well, because we do not have a population of 450 million. Not even close. And yes, that's the population it would take to arrive at 400 million firearms at an ownership rate of .89. You should consider re-taking basic math. Or don't. Probably wouldn't make a dent anyways.

Edited December 6, 2013 by Mr. Big Dog

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

So what? The difference is that there are far fewer homicides per capita in South Korea. That's the important take-away. And if there are 89 firearms per 100 people then we have nowhere near 400 million firearms out there. Why? Well, because we do not have a population of 450 million. Not even close. And yes, that's the population it would take to arrive at 400 million firearms at an ownership rate of .89. You should consider re-taking basic math. Or don't. Probably wouldn't make a dent anyways.

Yes, I know. And we lost 104,000 people since January. Glad you can count. Too bad you can't grasp the concept that guns are NOT what make the crime rate high. Not that I really expected you to understand, but I tried.

I meant to say 300 million, but hit the 4. Then again, it doesn't really matter, you would still have quibbled over the figure. Just another tick ####### for you to pole vault over. It's actually 282,222,746.9 guns. Actually, make that 282,222,747.9 more, cuz I bought another one last week.

Edited December 6, 2013 by DavenRoxy

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

So what? The difference is that there are far fewer homicides per capita in South Korea. That's the important take-away. And if there are 89 firearms per 100 people then we have nowhere near 400 million firearms out there. Why? Well, because we do not have a population of 450 million. Not even close. And yes, that's the population it would take to arrive at 4010 million firearms at an ownership rate of .89. You should consider re-taking basic math. Or don't. Probably wouldn't make a dent anyways.

And yes, I saw your "4010 million" firearms, math whiz... nice attempt at disparaging my post and hiding your own mistake.