Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Gun Control Laws - Where are we really? Where to go? (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Joe Bryant
- Start date
![[icon]](/data/avatars/m/5/5167.jpg?1660313464){kind=avatar}
[icon]
Insoxicated
That's shtick People have fun printing up guns with crazy colors. It should go without saying that the Color of the material has no impact in performance.
I see all sorts of crazy colors for "real" firearms as well.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
Then what you posted is not true, or you don't understand the multiple we are talking about depending on the method. Your quote was:
Yes, they will still try. But if a gun has a success rate of 83% and cutting/OD is less than 2% success rate - that is a huge difference. That quote is not true then. Depending on method, they won't "still kill themselves". To me, that statement indicates the person believes the effective rate is close enough to be negligible.
Feel free to clarify if you are saying something else.
Stealthycat
Footballguy
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
LINK
Nine out of ten people who attempt suicide and survive will not go on to die by suicide at a later date.
Approximately 7% (range: 5-11%) of attempters eventually died by suicide, approximately 23% reattempted nonfatally, and 70% had no further attempts.
I have been on record as saying that I think dr. assisted suicide should be a thing. We should be able to die with dignity, especially if we are talking terminal illness, etc.. Mostly I am talking elderly and terminally ill. But the very low rates of people that would die by suicide after a failed attempt, and who would not try again tells us that overall these are not people who ultimately want that and it is a bit of an impulse decision. Also this is a large % of the growing deaths among kids/teens.
BTW, these very stats have been linked and quoted multiple times.
Nine out of ten people who attempt suicide and survive will not go on to die by suicide at a later date.
Approximately 7% (range: 5-11%) of attempters eventually died by suicide, approximately 23% reattempted nonfatally, and 70% had no further attempts.
I have been on record as saying that I think dr. assisted suicide should be a thing. We should be able to die with dignity, especially if we are talking terminal illness, etc.. Mostly I am talking elderly and terminally ill. But the very low rates of people that would die by suicide after a failed attempt, and who would not try again tells us that overall these are not people who ultimately want that and it is a bit of an impulse decision. Also this is a large % of the growing deaths among kids/teens.
BTW, these very stats have been linked and quoted multiple times.
Nugget
Footballguy
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
I haven't researched places like Oregon and their regulations with it. My guess is a portion of that sign off from practitioners is being of sound mind to be able to request such a thing.
Stealthycat
Footballguy
me too but ... that comes from me being closely involved with a man dying of cancer
a troubled teenager is a different story
but people saying "my body my choice" for the last 30 years has a hard time saying people choosing to kill themselves shouldn't be allowed
FairWarning
Footballguy
The interesting cases are people with long-term illnesses, and cannot communicate. There could be a potential conflict of interest, especially if there is no next of kin around.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
I would think these are things that could be written into wills ahead of time if a state made them legal.
Again, I am for this being a choice, but not sure what the bar would be for what is allowed and what is not. I would certainly expect mental illnesses like depression wouldn't be, and it would and should be kept to untreatable and/or terminal cases.
Terminalxylem
Footballguy
These guys don’t want to understand. Ignoring suicide makes our excessive gun deaths look like less of a problem, and eliminates the area gun control legislation can make the biggest impact.
Terminalxylem
Footballguy
99% of people are goners, including the lion’s share of survivalist yahoos, if they lose access to food, water and power for an extended period.KarmaPolice said:
Fortunately, that is exceedingly unlikely. But you can always stock up on dehydrated rations, a water purifier, fire starter and generator if you’re really worried - none of those require special survival skills. I’d probably also choose a more hospitable environment to forage than the upper Midwest.
Terminalxylem
Footballguy
You’re more likely to die, period, if you have a gun in the home.
And no, most people who attempt suicide, but fail, don’t go on to later complete the act.
FairWarning
Footballguy
I have a never ending supply of fresh water. The upper Midwest would be the best at surviving. They know how to hunt,
Last edited by a moderator:
[icon]
Insoxicated
0.5% of the US population attempts suicide at least once at some point in thier lives.
A pretty small minority of those utilize firearms.
Well there's your challenge:
Find a way to keep firearms out of that sliver of the population while not infringing on the rights of the ~99.9%.
Boom!
Last edited by a moderator:
[icon]
Insoxicated
Football Jones
Footballguy
I bet you're more likely to die if you have a pool compared to those who don't. Guns don't have a mind of their own.
Again, these are low-level analogies (we all know potentially dangerous things in your home are hazardous).
Football Jones
Footballguy
BTW, did anyone look up what percentage of households with firearms have an unintentional death? I bet that one isn't in your handy stat book, LOL.
Gun control advocates love to hang their hat on suicides because it's all they have when discussing firearms in the house. Unfortunately (for anti-gunners), the intentional act of suicide is an extremely weak argument for gun control.
Gun control advocates love to hang their hat on suicides because it's all they have when discussing firearms in the house. Unfortunately (for anti-gunners), the intentional act of suicide is an extremely weak argument for gun control.
Last edited by a moderator:
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
Your fingers broken? You could also look up stats and link them as well. Of course the numbers are low.
HERE
. In the first decade of the 21st century, there were 691 annual unintentional firearm deaths (all ages); in contrast, in the second decade (2010-2019), there were 512 annual unintentional firearm deaths (all ages), a 35% decrease.
So something like .0001% of households?
Terminalxylem
Footballguy
It’s not hard - compare firearm suicide rates in states with the strictest vs. most lenient gun control. Standardize laws which lessen the risk of suicides.0.5% of the US population attempts suicide at least once at some point in thier lives.
A pretty small minority of those utilize firearms.
Well there's your challenge:
Find a way to keep firearms out of that sliver of the population while not infringing on the rights of the ~99.9%.
Boom!
Voila!
Remember these guys?
Terminalxylem
Footballguy
No thanks. I like my water unfrozen more than half the year.
Might be an interesting spin-off: if you could choose one state in a doomsday scenario, which would you pick?
FairWarning
Footballguy
Terminalxylem
Footballguy
I bet the rate of death by homicide, suicide or accident for adults is not statistically different in homes with pools versus those without. And the total number of pool drownings (mostly young kids) pales in comparison to the number of gun deaths.
ETA About 4000 total drowning deaths per year, and only a fraction of those occur among adults in pools.
Last edited by a moderator:
BladeRunner
Footballguy
I'm not.
Space heaters are an even bigger hazard and you'll be more likely to die in a fire if you have one of those.
Should we go on with these stupid analogies? It's dumb.
In general, you're more likely to die by X if you have X, where "X" can be ANYTHING. Even a ####### pencil.
Last edited by a moderator:
Terminalxylem
Footballguy
Ok, so if you could pick one state in which to live under primitive conditions (making your own shelter, finding food and water), you’d choose MI? Assume no power, businesses or neighbors to rob.
FairWarning
Footballguy
Well I hate winter and the SW would be a poor option. Idk if it would be my first choice, but it would be close to the top.
Terminalxylem
Footballguy
I’d pick somewhere warmer, but not swelteringly hot, where crops grow readily and hunting/fishing is accessible year round. HI would be great, but mid-Atlantic states and central CA would also do.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
2 things:
1. You are right if it just you in a padded room with and without a pencil, your odds of death increase with the pencil. What you are skipping over is that is not the point of these stats. The point is how much more likely you are to die if you are in a room with a pencil or a room with gun.
2. We do seem to hammer the crap out of the home side of this issue for whatever reason (probably the bickering about suicides). But, this is one part of the issue, and we are also concerned with gun violence in the street and increasing frequency and lethality of mass shootings and the fact that guns are now a top killer for teens/kids, etc. The other things people bring up in these silly analogies (what about the Drano and swimming pools and lawn darts!!!) aren't being used in the same way.
It monopolizes the conversation around here, but for most people it seems guns in the home are just one small part of the topic.
Stealthycat
Footballguy
gun control is about banning semi-auto rifles mostly
suicides don't use rifles
so what do you mean ?
[icon]
Insoxicated
Grade: F
Still impacting far far too many of the 99.9% of people who will not attempt suicide with a firearm.
Please try again, or it's off to remedial gun control classes for you.
timschochet
Footballguy
New rifle being marketed that can shoot through bullet proof vests:
https://news.yahoo.com/assault-rifle-being-sold-civilians-105625717.html
Swell.
https://news.yahoo.com/assault-rifle-being-sold-civilians-105625717.html
Swell.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
Well, how else are the citizens with guns supposed to take down bad guys with guns and body armor?
The Z Machine
Footballguy
Best to think about places with large pre-Columbian indigenous populations. HI had a decent population density, but the west coast of the US didn't have the same density. I would therefore say the Mississippi River valley in Southern IL or western TN.
Not too much snow, can hunt and fish and grow crops.
Football Jones
Footballguy
My fingers aren't broken, LOL, but I wouldn't even know where to look.
I just figured you stat guys would have it handy. Thanks.
BTW, yes, it's extremely low.
Last edited by a moderator:
Football Jones
Footballguy
That's not what I said. I said I bet you're more likely to die if you have a pool compared to homes without one. Meaning, all other factors being equal, I bet you're more likely to die.
No offense, but this is entry level stuff.
Last edited by a moderator:
Many places I've been to in California had pre-Columbian settlements. In Yosemite, an Indian Village is being created. The Miwoks lived there in harmony with nature for perhaps 4,000 years. The Ohlones lived in the SF Bay region for over 10,000 years. That was a great place for hunting, fishing, mussel collecting, gathering acorns, seeds of native grasses. The weather is never too hot or cold.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
This is entry level stuff, but you guys keep posting as though the stats don't affect you or include you for some reason. You are part of the numbers, but if seems to be the part that is safe and brings the numbers down.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
Just Google phrases. "Unintentional gun death rates" , stuff like that.
What I assumed is that you knew it was super low, and just wanted one of us "anti-gunners" to post it and admit the numbers are low.
FairWarning
Footballguy
We don’t know, but if he takes the precautions, his odds are much better than the general odds. Stats are nice for a base, but we need context also. Only he knows his situation.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
Of course, and I've never said otherwise. Stats are a data point. They are all gun owners, but the stats for someone using a safe 100% of the time and no kids is way different than someone with a loaded gun under their pillow with kids in the house. Doesn't mean the stats are ####, which imo is largely the tone taken with a few posters, it means we look at them as a tool and a guide overall how trends are going.
If all gun owners were like icon, the numbers would be a lot lower, if they all left bags if guns in the living room, they would be way higher. The goal should be getting as many as possible in that first category
Eta: and I've told him a few times I think he is taking the stats personally or something.
Last edited by a moderator:
Football Jones
Footballguy
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to predict it was going to be low, but it's nice to know it's not even a drop in the bucket.Just Google phrases. "Unintentional gun death rates" , stuff like that.
What I assumed is that you knew it was super low, and just wanted one of us "anti-gunners" to post it and admit the numbers are low.
It's extremely low for a reason.
Last edited by a moderator:
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
Yes, because there are 100s of millions of people and households. Just about anything we are concerned with would be a low number when we talk % of households or % of population. Probably why a lot of things do rates like X/100k people. Even something way more common like car accidents deaths would be something like .04% of households experienced one. Still probably too high, since many accidents would involve multiple deaths from the same family.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
Long story short, if the rise of frequency and lethality of mass shootings don't concern you or the fact that gun deaths are now at the top of the list for what kills teens and kids, just say that. If that's cost of living in the US, just say that.
If that is not the case, let's continue to talk about how to combat those trends. But we have to at least talk about and accept stats to do that, don't we?
That said, after all this bickering and posting I think at the end of the day a lot of this is on gun owners. We see what happens when us non gun owning limousine libs talk about regulations. ( ) what we really need is more vocal people like icon or Philo advocating for the same things. (Which we largely seem to agree on)
If that is not the case, let's continue to talk about how to combat those trends. But we have to at least talk about and accept stats to do that, don't we?
That said, after all this bickering and posting I think at the end of the day a lot of this is on gun owners. We see what happens when us non gun owning limousine libs talk about regulations. (
) what we really need is more vocal people like icon or Philo advocating for the same things. (Which we largely seem to agree on)
Football Jones
Footballguy
I'm really busy right now, but it would be interesting to find out how often CC permit holders shoot the wrong person...stuff like that. We're continuously told in here how dangerous untrained civilians are, but what are the stats?
I just saw a report saying CC permit holders are less likely than police officers to commit crime. And I'm thinking it doesn't take a rocket scientist to determine they're WAY less likely to commit crime than the general public.
I found this with my first google...https://winteryknight.com/2016/08/12/concealed-carry-permit-holders-commit-fewer-crimes-than-police-officers/
I just saw a report saying CC permit holders are less likely than police officers to commit crime. And I'm thinking it doesn't take a rocket scientist to determine they're WAY less likely to commit crime than the general public.
I found this with my first google...https://winteryknight.com/2016/08/12/concealed-carry-permit-holders-commit-fewer-crimes-than-police-officers/
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
I want to be perfectly clear on my stance. I am not saying the bolded. Yet again, I am sure it's a small, but not 0, number.
All I am saying is that there are cases of things like fish saw, or similar bone headed moves. There is an element of CCing where you are not just protecting yourself, but you are stepping in and stopping other crimes. Based on those two things I would like a federal bar to clear for a CCP that requires a decent level of training - safety and marksmanship/proficiency to be able to get the license.
Terminalxylem
Footballguy
I hate to break it to you, but gun control will impact gun owners. Thankfully, the founding fathers realized our rights were not limitless, and even included “well regulated” in the text of 2A.
Terminalxylem
Footballguy
Yeah, HI has the pesky Pacific to keep out the riff-raff. But once you’re here, it’s a pretty idyllic place to set up a survivalist camp.The Z Machine said:
the rover
Footballguy
Terminalxylem
Footballguy
I bet you’re far more likely to die as a firearm than pool owner. And more likely to kill others with your gun(s).Football Jones said:
But none of that is germane to discussing reasonable gun control, so carry on.
Similar threads
