Only in America..

"Cé hé sin" (michael-m-mouse) 02/20/2015 at 12:20 • Filed to: None

0

31

Could it happen anywhere else?

Woman meets sudden end

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies > Cé hé sin 02/20/2015 at 12:24

2

Who conceal carries a .22? Clearly this was (un)lucky shot, because that's about what it takes for a .22 to do stoppable damage.

Rainbow > Cé hé sin 02/20/2015 at 12:24

0

I don't understand why some people are advocating complete deregulation of guns. Obviously this lady wasn't even fit to be handling a Super Soaker.

And no, don't turn this into a debate. All I am saying is that we can all agree that guns are dangerous and stupid people shouldn't have them. Especially not people who hold them right in front of their heart with the safety off.

Brian, The Life of > Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies 02/20/2015 at 12:30

1

22s are actaully extra dangerous because the bullets don't go through-and-through; they tend to ricochet in and around where they hit and scramble shit. Particularly with a head hit.

Pilot of the Clown Shoe > Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies 02/20/2015 at 12:32

1

If I was going to carry a .22 (I'm not) it'd only be as a last ditch effort gun. A .22 would be a backup to a backup to a backup. I don't live in a world so dangerous that I feel a need to carry a real gun and 3 backups.

Remember kids, your pistol is there so you can fight your way back to the rifle that you never should have put down in the first place.

Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies > Brian, The Life of 02/20/2015 at 12:32

0

Yes, but as long as you don't hit bone, it won't do that. That's why it's recommended to carry at least a .380.

Luc - The Acadian Oppo > Cé hé sin 02/20/2015 at 12:35

0

Maybe it's just me but it seems more people die by guns accidents than there is people that lives are saved because they had a gun on them.

Maybe its because I'm canadian and never needed a gun for anything and never once been in a situation where I felt threatened that I wished I had protection.

I can't see having a gun making me feel safer by any standards.

$kaycog > Cé hé sin 02/20/2015 at 12:35

2

I know a gal who carries a pair of 38's.

Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies > Pilot of the Clown Shoe 02/20/2015 at 12:36

0

I plan on having at least a Glock 27 by the time I'm 21 to carry. If I still lived in Alabama, I already would.

Takuro Spirit > Cé hé sin 02/20/2015 at 12:39

0

If only someone had warned her...

Cé hé sin > $kaycog 02/20/2015 at 12:40

2

Pics, or it isn't so.

Cé hé sin > Luc - The Acadian Oppo 02/20/2015 at 12:43

1

Yup. I remember a case a few weeks ago when a woman was carrying a gun in her handbag in the supermarket for fear of whatever terrible danger could befall her between the frozen veg and the bread. She was right, as her little son took Mummy's gun out and shot her dead with it.

Party-vi > Cé hé sin 02/20/2015 at 12:48

1

Her breasts had the right to bear arms, and her bullet had the right to be fired. You tryin' to take away her freedoms!?!?

'MERICA!!!!

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > Luc - The Acadian Oppo 02/20/2015 at 12:49

2

Nope. Not even close. Crime preventive gun use dwarfs accident rates by a huge amount.

Luc - The Acadian Oppo > Cé hé sin 02/20/2015 at 12:49

2

I know it's fucking ridiculous. in Canada you are only in danger if you are involved with the wrong people(drug dealers,gangs,ect) if you mind your own business you don't need protection from anything(yes there are extreme cases but those are extremely EXTREMELY! rare). I feel much safer knowing that every wacko does NOT have a gun on them.

But Americans think they know everything and that more guns are always the answer.

WRXerFish - WRX-Wing pilot > $kaycog 02/20/2015 at 12:53

1

Hopefully the pair of .38s are double Ds

Luc - The Acadian Oppo > RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht 02/20/2015 at 12:54

0

are you talking like "I have a gun now get off my lawn everyday people" or law enforcement gun use? I'm ok with law enforcement having fire power but I don't like the idea of my 85 year old racist neighbor who lost his licence because he could no longer safely operate a motor vehicle but is still "able" to have a firearm. If you can't handle a car are you really fit to handle a gun?

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > Luc - The Acadian Oppo 02/20/2015 at 13:03

2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive…

I'm absolutely talking everyday people. If you will refer to the article, of the sources cited, all but the last concur that in excess of 60,000 crime preventive gun uses take place per yer. The last contests this by saying "oh, the study isn't possible to scale by population so we can only count results actually obtained by the survey in the total", which is, of course, utter horseshit. Even if the telescoping and self-reportage they contend were really a problem, the high-end estimates (the ridiculous ones) would demonstrate the true measure of error and tens of thousands of uses *can* be rationally stated. I think you're also drastically overstating the likelihood of your racist neighbor to commit a crime - particularly if weighed against statistical hundreds. "If it saves one life" is bullshit if it invokes the sacrifice of ten more - and the American law enforcement tradition has moved away from a preventative role in anything other than very big-ticket crime.

That the number of uses is that high should make one thing clear: America has a broad crime problem quite dissociated from any gun problem per se, and to dissemble with discussion of geometrically tiny accident rates is frivolous.

BigBlock440 > Luc - The Acadian Oppo 02/20/2015 at 13:19

0

You feel that way because there's no way to measure lives saved, nor is it generally reported.

BigBlock440 > Rainbow 02/20/2015 at 13:21

0

Many compact pistols don't even have safeties

$kaycog > Cé hé sin 02/20/2015 at 14:02

0

Whahaha!

BobintheMtns > RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht 02/20/2015 at 14:29

0

Hahaha... you're not even close. In 2010 there were 230 justifiable homicides involving private citizens, yet in the same year there were 606 unintentional shootings... Silly, silly gun-nuts, you guys will say anything to try to validate your toys.......

pip bip - choose Corrour > Cé hé sin 02/20/2015 at 20:25

0

Darwin Award nominee.

Cé hé sin > RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht 02/21/2015 at 06:07

0

Suicide tops both.

Cé hé sin > RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht 02/21/2015 at 06:11

0

If guns prevent all these crimes wouldn't places with freely available guns have a low crime rate?

Funktheduck > Rainbow 02/21/2015 at 07:58

0

It was a revolver. It's rare for a revolver to have a safety.

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > Cé hé sin 02/23/2015 at 09:17

0

That's very much the case in the US when broken down by cities with nearly identical demographics and differing gun legislation. Those cities that feature identical poverty rates, very similar ethnic makeup, wealth distribution, police forces, and many other factors have sharply different crime rate based on whether civilian gun ownership is legal. I think the cited example case is between Chicago and one of the cities in Texas, but I could be mistaken. At any rate, the most crime-ridden cities have two things in common - the near impossibility of a civilian carry permit and a gang presence - and if you believe that gangs have any issue whatsoever obtaining guns illegally I have (as they say) a bridge to sell you. Ask Mexico about that - though it's an article of faith among some that US guns are high in use down there, it's an utter falsehood - most come up the isthmus or come from police/military stores.

If you're leaning on the "other countries with "no" guns have a lower crime rate than the US" chestnut, a large part of that is attributable to differences in crime reporting. If in the US you have a homicide or other crime reported on incident and elsewhere on resolution in court, the comparison is nonsensical, but it's common to see that. There's also the risk of making comparisons with no demographic comparison - contrast crime rates in Sweden with Swedish populations in the US, and the differing gun availability is a non-starter. Refer also to Switzerland, with its militia requirements. One can point out that due to ammunition storage rules, the guns in Switzerland are far less often "live", but the simple fact of the matter is that Swiss affluence and cultural mores make gun crime unthinkable. One other thing often cited is Australia, in which some time after gun restrictions were put in place crime rates fell away. However, it's an entirely dishonest comparison, as this coincided with some policing changes IIRC and the total number of guns eliminated in the turn-ins is *fewer* than the total sales for just one model over the previous some years there. In other words, while Australia has succeeded in some margin of "gun control" in their cities, it is intellectually dishonest to claim anything but that anyone (particularly in rural and frontier areas) who wants a gun does not have one - there are simply too many unaccounted for. Thus, it's all down to city policing and enforcement of existing laws when tangent to a crime - something advocates of gun control programs in the US constantly fail to ensure. It is childishly easy to point out as well that the areas of highest gun ownership in the US experience on average a tiny fraction of the level of crime.

tl;dr: Places with freely available *legal* guns often *do* have a low crime rate - I'd go so far as to say usually. Places with high rates of crime *might* be possible to limit crime in with a complete sweep (a la Australia in their coastal cities), but efforts to reduce illegal ownership based on standing law do not exist - so I'm left advocating the ability of a shopkeeper in the bad part of town to be able to defend himself, because trusting in the US state to actually protect him based even on the enforcement of current laws let alone a wholesale ban is a fool's errand.

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > BobintheMtns 02/23/2015 at 09:19

0

Defensive use of a gun in the vast majority of cases does not end in a lethality, only a tiny fraction of the time. The most common result is flight, followed by injury. Try again, fuckstick.

Cé hé sin > RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht 02/23/2015 at 11:31

0

Meantime, I'm just glad to live somewhere the police aren't routinely armed.

BobintheMtns > RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht 02/23/2015 at 14:47

0

Any stats on that you can post, or are you just talking out your ass again???

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > BobintheMtns 02/23/2015 at 15:07

0

Because anyone who actually has a gun is just itching to shoot to kill, am I right? And criminals are so hasty to actually press on in the face of suicidal danger, I know. Most human beings don't actually have an intent to kill another unless absolutely necessary - which may be hard for you to grasp, but bear with me. The federal crime victimization survey I mentioned in my other replies, though very limited in scope and survey-limited to only include a small number of a small number surveyed (those who felt they'd been victims of a crime), counted about eight times the number you cite as defensive uses, even after other screening. So, at least that many incidents of defensive use occurred - and criticism of that as a small number not worthy of consequence has been engaged in while accepting it as valid *by the people on your side*. You should rightly be shocked that in so many instances (230) someone actually got shot to death in circumstances requiring inquiry, a number equal to half the accidental fatalities - which by your logic should be much higher. If the victimization survey is even close to accurate when scaled to the general population, even if you assume 3/4 of respondents were lying outright, you still end up with tens of thousands. Even *one* thousand would be a significant difference.

Further, your attempt to dismiss me with the term "toy" is an imputation of childishness and could not possibly be more backward. It is childish in the extreme to argue in bad faith as you have done - (most defensive uses naturally ending in *death* is a prima facie ludicrous straw man), and the mark of an adult to be able to contemplate issues of the power of life and death over others and the destruction of life if one is wrong in a moment's decision, not to be a ninnyhammer running screaming from the room because "danger danger evil object" (figuratively - I wouldn't want you to tu quoque accuse me of using a straw man! Oh, the indignity!).

Since you have no interest in arguing honestly or doing any thinking of your own on this topic, any further reply from you will be dismissed with prejudice.

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > BobintheMtns 02/23/2015 at 15:18

0

I should also note: think back to virtually any convenience store attempted robbery BOLO you've ever seen on the news. How often does an armed response result in both shots fired and shots on target? The reason you see the BOLO in the first place is, get this, because someone *attempted* a crime. Was not shot, did not complete the crime, rarely even fired on. Now imagine how many areas and instances in which there wasn't even a police report filed, due to lack of hard evidence like a camera? Now imagine how many attempted muggings and the like take place *not* at a store or business, in which filing a report is largely a waste of time because only a poor description is available? And you think every situation is Bernie Goetz writ large? Hysterical. Available stats are poor, but the least controversial are *in the victimization study*.