Tag Archives: Firearms

Guns Kill People

It’s true – I read it on the web.  Try to Google: “Guns Kill People”  I did and what I found was astounding.  Right now I’m staring down my own gun wondering when it’s going to jump up and kill me once and for all.   I wonder if it has some secret plot.  A plot created in the dead of night, deep inside the closet along with the other guns.

Glock: “Pst . . . Remintgon, wake up!  I have a plan.

Walther: “Wha . . . who’s there?”

Glock: “Shhhh you idiot.  I have a plan for  our escape.” 

Remington: “Let’s hear it you gorgeous polymer genius.”

Glock: “We need to prepare ourselves.  Make sure you eat  . . . fill yourselves up good – preferably with Gold Dot and you Remington, load up with slugs.  Then, we wait.  We wait for that woman to open the closet door and when she does . . . we all shoot and run.  Run, run like the wind.  Run for gun freedom out into open where we will liberate other imprisoned guns and start an army that will kill people!”

Bersa: “¡Tranquilidad! Usted ha disturbado mi sueño.”

Yes!  I can see it now.  I’m going to stop their plans to overthrow my rule.  Those jerks!

As you can see, I’m not quite sure what to do.  My guns are plotting to kill me and possibly many others.  I think they’re probably hoarding ammo somewhere. 

I am so glad I did that Google search or I would not know that guns kill people.  I can’t believe that we allow psychopathic, murderous firearms in people’s homes.  Terrifying!  Up until just today I have never been afraid of my own guns turning their awesome power against me.    I live with four murderous psychopaths.  They must be stopped.

During my web searching, I read so much uninformed information about guns, gun laws and gun users that it’s more disturbing to me than the four guns in this house that want me dead.  Here are some fun quotes:

Published in US News, April 14, 2007, “Guns Kill People, Period.”

The Second Amendment, a biblical passage to its followers, may give a right to bear arms. It does not, however, give a license to kill. Try telling it to the NRA.

That is absolutely ridiculous.  I wonder if the writer of this marvelous passage, John W. Mashek, knows that killing people is illegal.  Hmmm . . . killing is not a right protected by the Constitution.  But, because some people kill, we should just white out parts of the Constitution that the founders of this country found so important?  Because some people smoke pot and call it religion or like to marry little girls should we do away with the first ammendment right to freedom of expression?  NO!  We punnish the pot smokers and little girl marriers and leave the good, honest, law-abiding citizens to think, say and do as they please.  Great idea.

Published in http://www.blogsandiego.com/guns_kill.html, October 3, 2006 “Yes NRA, Guns DO Kill People”

Speaking of how his father died “He was helping in an FBI investigation about how weapons were being modified to become fully automatic when one of the firearms did just that. So when I say guns kill people, I know what I’m talking about. Come on folks! Think this through. Don’t believe the hype of the NRA when they tell you that it’s not the guns. It is the guns.”

I feel sad that this person lost a loved one.  However, guns are inanimate things and the don’t just “go off.”  An animate object must be present to activate the mechanism in the inanimate object to make it fire.  Really, it’s not the guns.  I’ve had one sitting here on my coffee table all night and it hasn’t moved one inch.  It’s the people who use the guns for ill that are the problem.  It’s the people who drive drunk that are the problem, not the car. 

Published in http://www.anorak.co.uk/twitterings/172597.html, April 17, 2007 “Guns Kill People – Virginia Tech

What I would like is for the gun-toting right wing to admit that there is a price we pay, that senseless accidental deaths and traumas are a national cost and that it’s not so clear that it’s worth it, but hey, we pay it anyway because so many guns are in the hands of so many people that there would never be any getting rid of them.

I would like the right wing to admit that guns are not “good” and that the right to bear arms is not an absolute virtue and that the deaths in the US caused by guns are at least as problematic, philosophically, as abortion. But I’m not holding my breath.”

First – this came from the UK.  That’s all I need to say, but I can’t help myself:

1) “gun toting right wing” Guess what?  There’s a gun-toting left wing, too.  Guns are non-partisan and plenty of liberals are in favor of gun rights. (Point of interest: I haven’t asked my murderous psychotic guns which party they belong to . . . yet!)

2) “senseless accidental deaths and traumas are a national cost”  True!  A whopping 789 people die a year from firearms accidents.  Those are tragic deaths, to be sure.  However, we don’t need to spend tens of billions of dollars creating legislation and programs to stop those deaths.  250 or so of those accidental firearms deaths were children.  Again, a tragedy.  But, more children die from burns or in swimming pool accidents in on year.  According to AAA, 7,475 children are treated in hospitals for injuries sustained when run over in their own driveways.  Approximately 230 children die each year from driveway backovers.  Sad and senseless.  Read more about this in my post The New Utopia Vehicle Ban Program – Phase 1 in My Plan to Stop Dying

3) “so many guns are in the hands of so many people that there would never be any getting rid of them”  I agree with the writer here.  Which is exactly why putting restrictions on the law-abiding isn’t going to solve crime.

4) “I would like the right wing to admit that guns are not “good” and that the right to bear arms is not an absolute virtue and that the deaths in the US caused by guns are at least as problematic, philosophically, as abortion. But I’m not holding my breath”  I will not admit that guns are not good.  They are just fine in the right hands.  Many Americans believe strongly in the words of our Constitution.  The inherent human right of self-defense is not granted by virtue of the Constiution, merely upheld by it.  Again, deaths are not caused by guns.  “Problematic, philosophically” . . . the problem is our inability to uphold our own laws and punnish criminals.  It’s kind of a different issue than abortion.  Abortion is something many people feel strongly about, but is not generally related to crime prevention – which is what gun control is about, isn’t it?  Or is it just about the control?

Published in http://www.ihateitall.com/bm/politics/guns-really-do-kill-people.shtml, April 17, 2007, “Guns Really Do Kill People”

This one has a little potential, but is missing the mark just a bit.  I like statistics, but for me, this person put a stump in the road while talking firearms DEATH statistics that show only 1.4% of firearms fatalities during the time period he is working with were self-defense related.  He surmises that:

In fact, someone is four times more likely to be accidently killed by a hand gun than saved from attack by one.

My problem with this is that most self-defense cases involving firearms don’t involve a death.  Sometimes, criminals choose to abort their mission when they see a victim is armed.  According to the Clinton Administration’s own statistics, firearms are used in self-defense situations at least 1,000,000 per year.  Some studies say more, some say less.  Regardless, approximately 1,000,000 is a lot.  When you consider that gun crimes kill about 12,000 people per year . . . oh, I don’t know . . . you do the math.  This leads me to believe that people who use guns for self-defense don’t kill people unless they have to and usually, they don’t.  The writer of this article is against handguns, even though hand guns represent a large percentage of firearms used in self-defense situations.  So, the argument to ban handguns on the premise of the statistics the writer used is not persuasive.  If anything, his statistics coupled with mine, show that guns save lives in the right hands.  Again, read my other post (The New Utopia Vehicle Ban Program – Phase 1 in My Plan to Stop Dying)for more stats.

I’m going to stop now.  One coincidence here is that these articles were all written within a week of each other – right after Virginia Tech.  Tragic situation.  But, getting emotional about the issue doesn’t help us solve the problem of CRIME.  Sure, if there were no guns anywhere on earth, nobody would be killed by one.   But, let’s get real.  The cities with the highest murder rates are those with very strict gun laws.  Clearly, the gun laws are not the solution.  Perhaps better law enforcement and judicial response would be better.

Just my 2 cents.  Now, I’m off to give those murderous psychotic guns a good talking to.

 

 

The New Utopia Vehicle Ban Program – Phase 1 in My Plan to Stop Dying

People shouldn’t die.   Dying is bad.  Since we haven’t figured out how to keep people alive through science, I propose we stop people from dying through legislation!  We have the power.  Join the cause!

43,508 people in the United States died during 2005 as a result of vehicular accidents according to the National Safety Council.  That’s a lot of people!

43,508 people!  That’s like wiping a city the size of Santa Fe, New Mexico off the map each and every year!  It doesn’t need to be this way.  We can save lives.  I propose we ban cars entirely!  Cars are bad.  Cars kill people. Cars Are Bad!

We need to mobilize now to stop the manufacture, sale, and use of cars!  The only way to stop the carnage is to stop the legal vehicle trade.  Let’s face it, there is no Consitutional ammendment protecting the right to keep and drive cars.  Oh wait, even if there were, who cares!  We’re really not using the Constitution and Bill of Rights any more except where fire bombing eco-terrorists or other criminals are concerned.  For average citizens we can legislate and dictate what they do and when they do it.  I’m really only concered about the car lobby.  They’ll be a tough crowd, but if they cause us too much gruff, we’ll just sue them for every death involving a car.  This will also help if we can’t actually pass laws to ban cars.  The car companies made the car and sold it to the driver who caused the death in the first place.  We’ll sue them and cost them so much money we’ll put them right out of business and then they can’t sell cars at all.  Ooooh!  This is good.  I’m such a devious mind! 

If, for some reason, we can’t put those car companies out of business, we’ll regulate car parts to an unbelievable degree.  Every part of a car, including aftermarket accessories and replacement parts must be micro-stamped at the time of manufacture by laser with the vin number of the car that it will someday go in.  If there is any error in the micro-stamping, we’ll sue.  No . . . we’ll put someone in jail!  I think we should consider a total ban on tires though.  The Clintons can help us with that one.

I can’t take all the credit for these wonderful ideas though, I’m taking this philiosophy from other campaigns that have gained momentum in this country, such as gun control.  For instance, during the same year, there were 789 deaths from firearms accidents.  Add to that firearm related suicide and assault and the number jumps to 29,354.  We spend billions of dollars every year through the Brady Bill, court cases, and other such methods trying to curb the “gun” problem. 

I’m going to ignore the Clinton administration estimates that firearms are used successfully in self-defense over 1 million times per year.  That doesn’t help my argument!  I’m also going to forget the good uses of vehicles (ambulances, police officers, driving around Miss Daisy).  That doesn’t help my argument either.

They tried to ban guns, but it’s not really Constitutional and people put up a fight.  So, they banned certain types of guns because they “look” scary, even though they’re no more dangerous than the guns they left legal.  Then they banned certain gun accessories.  The lawyers who successfully sued the tobacco companies tried to sue the gun companies for every gun related death.  When that didn’t work, they’ve moved on to regulate the ammunition component.  Legislation is being proposed to require the bullet (manufactured at company A) and the cartridge it goes on (manufactured at company B) and assembled at Company C to be microstamped with the same number.  This number must also appear on the box the ammunition is sold in.  This would kill the ammunition industry because it’s just not really possible.  They’re so smart!

Since the “gun” problem kills less than half the number of people that vehicular accidents kill (excluding the 17,002 suicides because a determined person who wants to die will die, no matter what legislation I cook up to stop it.  I actually think suicide is illegal already – so much for that), I see absolutely no reason why we shouldn’t also attempt to control and/or ban Motor Vehicles.  Not only will we save the lives of 43,508 people each year, we will also stop gobal warming.  It’s a win-win.

To further illustrate my position, I have included some interesting statistics below.  This chart shows death statistics for 2005 in some interesting categories.  Info was published by the National Safety Council.  Actual deaths is the number of actual deaths of the stated type in one year.  “Odds in 1 Year” are the odds of dying from the stated cause in a given year (for example, the odds that you will die from a fall are 1 in 15,054.  Another way to look at it is 1 in every 15,054 people will die this year from falls).  “Odds in a Lifetime” are the same as odds in a year, but calculated out over an average life span.  So, in 2005, 1 in 15,054 people died from falls.  Also based on 2005 statistics, 1 in every 193 people will die from a fall during their lifetime, but not necessarily that year. Make sense?  Good!

Type of Death* Actual Deaths Odds in 1 Year Odds in a Lifetime
Motor-Vehicle Accidents           43,508              6,801                       87
Falls           19,656            15,054                     193
Intentional self-harm by firearm           17,002            17,404                     223
Assault by firearm           12,352            23,955                     308
Exposure to smoke, fire and flames             3,197            92,554                   1,188
Exposure to forces of nature             2,179           135,794                   1,743
Choking on Food                864           342,472                   4,396
Accidental Firearms discharge                789           375,026                     4,814
Bathtub Drowining                344           860,162                 11,042
Legal intervention involving firearm                330           896,654                 11,510

These stats were organized by likelihood of death.  You’re more likely to die from a vehicle accident than any other type of accident.  I didn’t include all the stats, but vehicle accident is the highest of all listed in the NSC report.

As you can see, cars are killing more people than any other type of accident each year.  Cars are bad.  Cars kill people.  Stop cars now! 

Once I get my hands on the cars, I’m moving ahead with feet.  Feet are bad.  Feet kill people.  If people didn’t fall, we would save another 19,656 people every year.  I think I might have trouble banning feet from a practical perspective, however, I believe I can successfully legislate that everyone must be encased in at least 12 inches of packing bubbles at all times. 

After feet and plastic packing bubbles, I’m going after God and making lightning, earthquakes and hurricanes illegal because God is bad.  God kills people.

Then I’m going after fire.  Fire is bad.  Fire kills people.

Then, the piece de resistance in my plan to keep people from dying . . . I’m going after bathtubs.  Bathtubs are bad.  Bathtubs kill people.

You ask, why don’t I go after the firearms?  Brady, Barack, Hillary . . . they’ve already go that one covered!  

Did I mention I think we should also place a  permanent ban on Killer Klowns from Outer Space?  I have no idea how many people they kill in a year, but even one is too many!

*statistics from the National Safety Council 2005

What is a Militia? 2nd Ammendment Ponderings

Unless you’ve been living under a rock, or are just enthralled with the Obama/Clinton Celebrity Death Match currently on TV, you’ve probably heard about the case of DC vs. Heller that was recently heard in the Supreme Court.

In a nutshell, DC was sued in a claim that their gun control laws are unconstitutional.  Handguns are banned.  Rifles and shotguns are legal, but only in a disassembled and/or locked condition.  Because most criminals don’t sit and have tea with you while you assemble your disfunctional gun, essentially, the ban prohibits any functional gun.  DC officials claim they can defend themselves with shotguns and rifles, but people with functional, not disassembled brains, understand that the gun is no better than a baseball bat if it’s not assembled.

The lower court ruled against the city.  In turn, the city made an appeal to the Supreme Court.  Got it?  Good.

I’ve heard a lot of arguing about what was meant by the 2nd Ammendment:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Some claim that this only applies to the collective – a militia, or the National Guard.  Knowing a little history, I know the National Guard did not exist at the time of the creation of the Bill of Rights.  What exactly is a militia and is the “right of the people” collective or individual.

After searching around in the writings of the Founding Fathers, authors of the Bill of Rights, and other politicans of the day, I have come to conclude that a militia is the people – all of us.  For, disarming a people is the most effective way to subdue them.  

Here are some quotes I like:

“Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man gainst his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American…[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.” — TENCHE COXE – American political and a delegate for Pennsylvania to the Continental Congress.

“A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves … and include all men capable of bearing arms.” “To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.”

RICHARD HENRY LEE – Delegate to first Continental Congress, put forth the resolution on June 7, 1776 to declare independence from Great Britain.

“The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun.” “Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?” PATRICK HENRY – prominent figure in American Revolution, thought the Constitution afforded the government too much power, instrumental in the creation of the Bill of Rights. 

THOMAS JEFFERSON3rd President of the United States, principal author of the Declaration of Independence, Founding Father.“The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.” “The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed and that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of press.”  

One loves to possess arms, though they hope never to have occasion for them. -Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, 1796. The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, (Memorial Edition) Lipscomb and Bergh, editors.

Laws that forbid the carrying of arms… disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes… Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.  -Jefferson’s “Commonplace Book,” 1774_1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764

“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”  -Thomas Jefferson, Proposed Virginia Constitution, 1776, Jefferson Papers 344.

THOMAS PAINE – Revolutionary and philosopher.

“The balance of power is the scale of peace. The same balance would be preserved were all the world not destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside … Horrid mischief would ensue were one half the world deprived of the use of them … the weak will become prey to the strong.”

JAMES MADISON – Father of the Bill of Rights, Fourth President of the United States,.

“Americans [have] the right and advantage of being armed, unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust their people with arms.”

SAMUEL ADAMS – American Revolutionary, philosopher, Founding Father – beer guy. )

“The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms . . .”