Skip to main content

While politicians argue about gun violence:

So, carry on ...

Originally posted to Barbara Morrill on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 12:42 PM PST.

Also republished by Shut Down the NRA, Repeal or Amend the Second Amendment (RASA), and Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  The deadliest war the U.S. has ever had (4+ / 0-)

    The deadliest war the U.S. has ever had is the war we waged against ourselves. - as quoted in the link.
       

    •  The war waged against us by the gun industry (4+ / 0-)

      That should be: The deadliest war the US has ever had is the war waged against us by the gun industry to preserve their own profits.

      "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

      by Hugh Jim Bissell on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 01:19:13 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Staggering numbers of black on black crime in (0+ / 0-)

        Chicago of late are so frustrating.  Profits keep rolling into the gunmakers' coffers (and their investors on Wall Street) while young black brothers shoot each other on the sidewalks.  It's insanity.

        Dont Mourn, Organize !#konisurrender

        by cks175 on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 05:39:59 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  The 2nd deadliest the U.S. war has ever waged.... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a2nite, Mayfly

      The most deadly war the U.S. has ever waged was also against ourselves, the Civil War. Over 500,00 Americans died at the hands of fellow Americans battling for the "right" to own fellow human beings as slaves.

      "An individual has not started living until he can rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity" Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr..

      by mindara on Sat Feb 09, 2013 at 03:43:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, when you provide casualties for both sides (0+ / 0-)

        you are going to have a pretty big body count.

        Fiscal conservative: a Republican ready to spend $5 to save a dime--especially if that dime is helping a non-donor.

        by Mayfly on Sat Feb 09, 2013 at 05:11:57 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Good thing they included suicides. (3+ / 0-)

    The numbers would be more than cut in 1/2 (based on the last few years of firearm related deaths that I've looked into).

    Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

    by KVoimakas on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 12:50:17 PM PST

    •  From politifact: (2+ / 0-)
      We should note that these figures refer to all gun-fire related deaths -- not just homicides, but also suicides and accidental deaths. In 2011, about one-quarter of firearm-related deaths were homicides, according to FBI and CDC data. Using total firearm-related deaths makes the case against guns more dramatic than just using homicides alone.

      Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

      by KVoimakas on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 12:51:11 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

        •  If they're going to make it sound like homicides (2+ / 0-)

          use the homicide numbers. How do you think that would've played?

          Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

          by KVoimakas on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 01:14:26 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Explain "make it sound like homicides." (8+ / 0-)

            Help me understand.

            How is using the phrase "domestic gun incidents" going to "make it sound like homicides."

            If anyone is trying to cloud the argument here, it is you.

          •  Suicides are homicides. Accidents are homicides. (6+ / 0-)

            You're just making distinctions without a difference in order to make a smaller number.    

            Not that it works: even the smallest number that you can work up by deciding that various types of homicides are acceptable is pretty horrendous.  Isn't it.

            That's not even "gun control". It's more like "massacre control".

            by Inland on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 01:34:31 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  A suicide is NOT a homicide. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              VetGrl, DSPS owl

              A homicide is "an act of a human killing another human."

              "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, and I am not sure about the universe." -- Albert Einstein

              by Neuroptimalian on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 05:36:17 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  The distinction does matter. (0+ / 0-)

              The dead are just as dead, to be sure, but there are those who insist on suicide as a right.

              Not sure that, absent a very limited set of circumstances, that many argue for homicide as a right.

              The ready availability of firearms probably does increase the number of successful suicides.  Hard to be certain because there is so much at play culturally WRT suicides, but there is one very big difference I can think of:

              If somebody is trying to murder you with a weapon other than a gun, you are often in a much better position to fight back or run away.

              In the case of a suicide, "victim" and perpetrator are the same person -- fighting back or runniny away is not an issue.

              LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

              by dinotrac on Sat Feb 09, 2013 at 04:42:30 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  More guns = More successful suicides (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                frazer, tb mare

                Harvard Study

                The preponderance of current evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for youth suicide in the United States.  The evidence that gun availability increases the suicide rates of adults is credible, but is currently less compelling.
                After controlling for poverty and urbanization, for every age group, across the United States, people in states with many guns have elevated rates of suicide, particularly firearm suicide.
                States with higher levels of household gun ownership had higher rates of firearm suicide and overall suicide.  This relationship held for both genders and all age groups.  It remained true after accounting for poverty, urbanization and unemployment.  There was no association between gun prevalence and non-firearm suicide.
                Changes in the levels of household firearm gun ownership was significantly associated with changes in both firearm suicide and overall suicide, for men, women and children, even after controlling for region, unemployment, alcohol consumption and poverty. There was no relationship between changes in gun ownership and changes in non-firearm suicide.
                We analyzed data on suicide and suicide attempts for states in the Northeast.  Even after controlling for rates of attempted suicide, states with more guns had higher rates of suicide.
                We analyzed the relationship of gun availability and suicide among differing age groups across the 9 US regions. After controlling for divorce, education, unemployment, poverty and urbanization, the statistically significant relationship holds for 15 to 24 year olds and 45 to 84 year olds, but not for 25 to 44 year olds.
                Levels of gun ownership are highly correlated with suicide rates across all age groups, even after controlling for lifetime major depression and serious suicidal thoughts
                Gun owning households do not have more mental health problems than non-gun owning households; differences in mental health do not explain why gun owners and their families are at higher risk for completed suicide than non-gun owning families.
                Respondents with firearms in the home were no more likely to report suicidal thoughts, plans or attempts, but if they had a suicidal plan, it was much more likely to involve firearms.  The higher rates of suicide among gun owners and their families cannot be explained by higher rates of suicidal behavior, but can be explained by easy access to a gun.
                Across the Northeast, case fatality rates ranged from over 90% for firearms to under 5% for drug overdoses, cutting and piercing (the most common methods of attempted suicide).  Hospital workers rarely see the type of suicide (firearm suicide) that is most likely to end in death.
                This summary of the scientific literature on suicide in the United States emphasizes the importance of levels of household firearm ownership in explaining different rates of suicide over time and across states, households and genders.
                The vast majority of suicide attempts in the US are by less-lethal means such as drug overdose, cutting, etc. which have about a 5% success rate. Firearms have a 90% success rate. The less-lethal ones are more often a call for help.

                There has never been a protracted war from which a country has benefited. The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting. - Sun Tzu

                by OHeyeO on Sat Feb 09, 2013 at 06:03:32 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  The less-lethal ones are more often a call for (0+ / 0-)

                  help.

                  That seems like an admission that the difference between firearms attempts and others is more than the choice of weapons.

                  One interesting question:

                  Firearms with a 90% success rate are a "one-and-done".

                  Others are a "try, try, again".

                  How many people keep on trying?

                  In the absence of firearms, what percentage of "other" attempts would succeed?

                  LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

                  by dinotrac on Sat Feb 09, 2013 at 07:47:26 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  So, you think it's better... (0+ / 0-)

                    ...someone is successful once rather than unsuccessful two or three times?

                    There has never been a protracted war from which a country has benefited. The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting. - Sun Tzu

                    by OHeyeO on Sun Feb 10, 2013 at 08:05:18 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  What about teens and early-20s? (0+ / 0-)

                    Do you think it's better they have easier access to a 90% successful suicide method? A lot of teens and those in the 20-22 age range run through temporary emotional turmoil as they lose the innocence of youth, figure out who they are and how to deal with the difficulties of adulthood.

                    Your comment seems to indicate the "one and done" is better than to be unsuccessful with the chance what is causing the suicidal thoughts can be overcome.

                    There has never been a protracted war from which a country has benefited. The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting. - Sun Tzu

                    by OHeyeO on Sun Feb 10, 2013 at 08:15:45 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

            •  Suicides aren't accidents, though accidental (0+ / 0-)

              homicides do include ooopsies with one's own gun.

              "I'll press your flesh, you dimwitted sumbitch! " -Pappy O'Daniel

              by jakewaters on Sat Feb 09, 2013 at 06:01:45 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  Okay, let's do that (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            rudewarrior, Bisbonian

            So, looks like the Killed in Wars is about 1.1M , and the total Gun Deaths = 1.4M.

            Cut it in half, that's 1.1M Killed in War, 700K Gun Homicides

            Of course, the 1.1M includes the Civil War, which was around .6M killed. Of this, I might add, .3M were Union soldiers killed in domestic gun homicides by criminals committing treason.

            I could then say that we have 1M domestic gun homicides and .5M war dead, a 2:1 ratio.  Or, excluding the Civil War altogether - which it shouldn't be because it was domestic gun homicides - we have 700K gun homicides and 500K dead from all other wars.

            Again, any way you cut it, that a nation suffers this many gun deaths from its own hand is awful.

            Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence. Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear. ~William E. Gladstone, 1866

            by absdoggy on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 01:34:33 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Suicide is a war against yourself (0+ / 0-)

            So you think suicide is OK by not including it?

            There has never been a protracted war from which a country has benefited. The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting. - Sun Tzu

            by OHeyeO on Sat Feb 09, 2013 at 05:12:02 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  He isgnoring the fact that many deaths in wars are (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Roadbed Guy

          suicides and friendly fire or simple accidents. Must maintain the right to kill as many as possible as quickly as possible if necessary. Obfuscate and mislead by removing suicides. How many have died in Afghanistan and Iraq or upon returning home.

          Fear is the Mind Killer...

          by boophus on Sat Feb 09, 2013 at 05:01:56 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  How many of those suicides were vets? (10+ / 0-)

      Currently, suicide is a greater threat to our active duty military personnel than terrorists, Iraqis, Somali pirates, and Afghanis.

      While gun enthusiasts would like Americans to dis-count or disregard the gunshot deaths that happen due to suicide because facing those deaths makes guns and the gun industry look bad, the fact remains every gunshot death, even those due to suicide, kills a living American, and degrades the quality of our American way of life.  

      "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

      by Hugh Jim Bissell on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 01:16:28 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I support your right to kill yourself. (0+ / 0-)

        What do you propose to commit people from killing themselves?

        Seriously.

        Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

        by KVoimakas on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 01:21:06 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I support your right to live (5+ / 0-)

          If a method to kill yourself is not at hand you have to do it later. Meantime things change.

        •  Damnit. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Mildly Unsuccessful Lurker

          What do you propose to stop people from killing themselves?

          Originally had propose to stop people from committing suicide with a firearm and then went back and it's all gobblygook now.

          Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

          by KVoimakas on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 01:28:27 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Repeal the 2nd amendment and ban guns (5+ / 0-)

            It won't stop all suicides, but per the Harvard Injury Control Research Center:

            Using survey data on rates of household gun ownership, we examined the association between gun availability and suicide across states, 1999-2001.  States with higher levels of household gun ownership had higher rates of firearm suicide and overall suicide.  This relationship held for both genders and all age groups.  It remained true after accounting for poverty, urbanization and unemployment.  There was no association between gun prevalence and non-firearm suicide.  
            This and other studies provide evidence that eliminating guns would reduce overall suicides given the key factor that there was no association between gun prevalence and non-firearm suicide.

            Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence. Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear. ~William E. Gladstone, 1866

            by absdoggy on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 01:44:37 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Do you think that's a realistic option? nt (4+ / 0-)

              Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

              by KVoimakas on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 01:47:46 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  No, but that's not what you asked :) (5+ / 0-)

                You asked for a plan to stop people from killing themselves.  Based on the studies and evidence, I gave you one that would at least reduce the numbers, if not eliminate it.

                Repealing the 2nd amendment, banning semi-automatic guns, etc. isn't politically feasible.

                But in the end, I do believe that doing so would drastically reduce the overall homicide and suicide rate.

                It's somewhat of a conundrum, really.  To me, guns can be compared to fast food. Can fast food be part of a healthy diet? Yes, if eaten responsibly. There are many people who enjoy the occasional Big Mac without a harmful effect to themselves or others.  It ain't the Big Mac's fault that John Doe is 50 pounds overweight, it's other factors, one of which is the glorification of fast food in the media and advertising, the proliferation of fast food making it easy and cheap to get.

                But, I would be willing to bet that banning fast food would help reduce obesity, heart disease, etc.  We would be better off for it.  But it's never going to happen.

                Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence. Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear. ~William E. Gladstone, 1866

                by absdoggy on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 02:04:48 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I might add this too (4+ / 0-)

                  We ban felons from purchasing or possessing guns, and we have an age limit on such as well. To varying degrees, background checks might also screen out the mentally ill if warranted.  In other words, there are people who shouldn't have access to guns.  

                  The same is true for fast food.  Of course there are no bans or age limits, but certain people should not have access to fast food. Be it a physical condition, or a predisposition to addiction / inability to make good food choices, ignorance of the effects of fast food, etc., it would be good to ban certain people from fast food. But, the methods we have are ineffectual.  The proliferation of fast food is so great, it's very hard if not impossible to keep people from it.

                  So it is with guns - the means we have to keep guns out of the hands are ineffectual, and I don't really think that enhanced background checks, banning semi-automatics or any of the other measures that are being contemplated will keep guns out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them.

                  In the end, a ban is the only solution, but it's not a politically possible one.

                  Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence. Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear. ~William E. Gladstone, 1866

                  by absdoggy on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 02:17:39 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Just like Prohibition (0+ / 0-)

                    Guns, booze, pot, hard drugs, fast food, all the same.  

                    The wisdom of my forebears ... Two wise people will never agree. Man begins in dust and ends in dust — meanwhile it's good to drink some vodka. A man studies until he's seventy and dies a fool.

                    by Not A Bot on Sat Feb 09, 2013 at 07:02:19 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

            •  Anyone who is determined to commit suicide ... (0+ / 0-)

              need only visit their local pharmacy and purchase a large bottle of pills of some kind.  Advil will do.  A garage/car full of carbon monoxide will work just as well.  (Just ask my brother about the latter.  Nevermind, he's not around to answer questions anymore.)  Why people choose guns to commit suicide has always been a mystery to me.

              "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, and I am not sure about the universe." -- Albert Einstein

              by Neuroptimalian on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 05:41:54 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  That's the strange thing about suicides. They can (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                BeninSC

                be headed off by making things a little less convenient.  In the UK they had problems with suicide via bottles of tylenol.  So they repackaged it into blister paks instead of bottles.   In Washington, DC I live near two very high bridges: Ellington Bridge and Taft Bridge.  Jumpers always chose Ellington Bridge, so the authorities built a high fence on it (and no fence on the other bridge).  And such suicides went down, even though people could have walked 2 minutes to the nearly identical Taft Bridge.  So the point is, if you could wave a magic wand and eliminate suicide via gun, it is quite possible that most of those people would not attempt suicide by some other method.

              •   a lot of suicidal people aren't determined (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                BeninSC

                which is why the rate goes down when guns aren't available.  Gun suicide is quick, immediate.

                Car/garage full of CO takes a long time, as do pills.

                Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence. Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear. ~William E. Gladstone, 1866

                by absdoggy on Fri Feb 08, 2013 at 06:30:53 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

            •  Can you repeal a right? (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Not A Bot

              I've always been under the impression that the bill of rights was not a list granting rights to the people, but a list reminding the govt. of the rights that the people already had and not to infringe upon them.

              Rights are NOT granted by the government. The government is granted powers by the governed.

        •  Do you support the right to suicide in ALL cases? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          crankypatriot

          What if a person is temporarily insane--eg, just found out a partner has been unfaithful, lost your job, lost a loved one? What if a person has been struggling with a mental illness, like major depressive disorder or bipolar disorder? Should people be allowed to shoot themselves in order to avoid legal problems? Should people be allowed to buy guns and use them to kill themselves in the heat of temporary emotional distress like this (and, followup: if you're allowing them to buy a gun in any of these situations, how on earth do you prevent them from using it for other purposes)?

          It's stunningly callous to treat self-inflicted gun deaths--real, actual preventable deaths--as anything less than deaths by gun violence.

          "In an individual, selfishness uglifies the soul; for the human species, selfishness is extinction." -Cloud Atlas, by David Mitchell

          by rigcath on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 02:13:18 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Not all cases. (2+ / 0-)

            People not yet 18.
            People not mentally competent.

            Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

            by KVoimakas on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 02:16:20 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  So should gun suicides in those cases (0+ / 0-)

              be counted in statistics like the ones mentioned in the chart?

              "In an individual, selfishness uglifies the soul; for the human species, selfishness is extinction." -Cloud Atlas, by David Mitchell

              by rigcath on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 02:22:18 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I would treat them as death by accident and (0+ / 0-)

                include them.

                Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

                by KVoimakas on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 02:23:23 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  So you think suicides should be included. (0+ / 0-)

                  Glad we settled that.

                  "In an individual, selfishness uglifies the soul; for the human species, selfishness is extinction." -Cloud Atlas, by David Mitchell

                  by rigcath on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 02:27:52 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I don't include them ... (0+ / 0-)

                    because there are many alternatives to accomplishing suicide.  Removing guns from the possibilities will not lower the numbers in the slightest.

                    "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, and I am not sure about the universe." -- Albert Einstein

                    by Neuroptimalian on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 05:44:20 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Well, you're incorrect about that. (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      BeninSC

                      From a recent study on gun violence across seven states:

                      Of all suicide attempts, suicide by firearm accounted for only 5%, while poisoning/cutting/piercing accounted for 85%. However, the fatality rate for attempts varies wildly. Overall, 13% of all attempts were successful, while 91% of gun attempts were successful and only 3% of the poisoning/cutting/piercing attempts were fatal. Suffocation/hanging (6% of all attempts) was successful 80% of the time.
                      People use guns to kill themselves because it's by far the easiest, most effective method. The next-most lethal method is 11% less successful (and takes significantly more effort). We should be trying to reduce the number of suicides, not just fatalistically giving up and saying, "oh well, suicidal people are just going to do everything they can to kill themselves, so we shouldn't even try to prevent it."

                      "In an individual, selfishness uglifies the soul; for the human species, selfishness is extinction." -Cloud Atlas, by David Mitchell

                      by rigcath on Fri Feb 08, 2013 at 07:24:57 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  See my previous comment re: Harvard Study (0+ / 0-)

                      There has never been a protracted war from which a country has benefited. The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting. - Sun Tzu

                      by OHeyeO on Sat Feb 09, 2013 at 06:08:36 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  I think certain suicides should be included. (0+ / 0-)

                    Correct.

                    Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

                    by KVoimakas on Fri Feb 08, 2013 at 06:21:35 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Suicidal thinking (and, I daresay the act itself) (0+ / 0-)

                      is a symptom of an underlying mental illness. Any reasonable person would consider someone who's depressed enough to be seriously considering suicide as incapable of making such a decision rationally--or, to use your phrase, "mentally incompetent."

                      "In an individual, selfishness uglifies the soul; for the human species, selfishness is extinction." -Cloud Atlas, by David Mitchell

                      by rigcath on Fri Feb 08, 2013 at 07:00:56 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  I would disagree. nt (0+ / 0-)

                        Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

                        by KVoimakas on Fri Feb 08, 2013 at 07:02:23 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  That is absolutely not true. Most people contemp- (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        OHeyeO, jakewaters

                        lating suicide are very rational but they are in a state of deep despair. That does not render them mentally incompetent or mentally ill. And many suicides committed with guns are impulsive. If the gun were not there, often times that impulse passes. Suicides are NOT accidental deaths. It is by definition self-homicide. Medical examiner's have five manner's of death to choose from based on their findings at autopsy: Natural, Accident, Suicide, Homicide or Undetermined

                        You don't get to arbitrarily decide to pass your holier than thou judgement on which death's related to gun violence count and which one's aren't worth even trying to prevent.

                        "An individual has not started living until he can rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity" Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr..

                        by mindara on Sat Feb 09, 2013 at 04:20:54 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

            •  So only people who are mentally competent should (0+ / 0-)

              be able to kill them selves?  There's some transcendent  logic.

              But thanks for your kind thoughts about the kids.

              "I'll press your flesh, you dimwitted sumbitch! " -Pappy O'Daniel

              by jakewaters on Sat Feb 09, 2013 at 05:56:28 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  70,000+ gun injuries every year (3+ / 0-)

          Put aside the issue of the large number of Americans killed by guns every year because gun enthusiasts want to dis-count suicides.

          Every year, 70,000+ Americans are injured by gunfire.  

          Only a tiny percentage of those are intentionally self-inflicted injuries.

          I support the right of Americans to go about unaided by wheel-chairs and colostomy bags.

          "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

          by Hugh Jim Bissell on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 02:13:28 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  How to reduce suicides... (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          rigcath, Miggles, DSPS owl

          Interestingly enough, if you reduce access to the quick and easy way to kill oneself, you reduce the incidence of suicide.  That is why they put high fences on tall bridges.

          So, to reduce gun suicides, reduce the easy availability of guns.

          "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

          by Hugh Jim Bissell on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 02:15:37 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Anything less generic than that? nt (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Mildly Unsuccessful Lurker

            Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

            by KVoimakas on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 02:17:04 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  An equally important fix... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              BeninSC

              We should end a system of government that allows the wealthy and corporate interests to buy the law-makers and the laws they want.

              If the gun industry was not able to buy law-makers that serve the interests of the gun industry over and beyond the interest of all Americans,  we could have a more sane gun policy in the country and by extension, fewer gun deahts, fewer gun suicides, and fewer gun injuries.

              I support the right of your vote to count exactly as much as the vote of a wealthy person or corporation.

              "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

              by Hugh Jim Bissell on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 03:01:55 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  The gun industry can't print its own money (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                KVoimakas

                The gun industry has a lot of money because Americans like guns.

                •  The gun industry has a lot of money... (0+ / 0-)

                  ...because it foments fear. Marketing works. Americans are safer than they have ever been in our 216 year history and gun ownership is lower than ever. The gun industry markets to both anti-government people/groups and fearful law-abiding individuals, while keeping politicians under their thumb to keep gun-running to criminals difficult to trace. That's as good as printing your own money in my book.

                  There has never been a protracted war from which a country has benefited. The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting. - Sun Tzu

                  by OHeyeO on Sat Feb 09, 2013 at 06:18:59 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

          •  A large bottle of pills is FAR easier to obtain .. (0+ / 0-)

            than a gun is.  (Far cheaper, too.)  No background check involved, no hurdles to clear, no waiting period, etc.  Same for suicide by carbon monoxide via vehicle exhaust.  

            "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, and I am not sure about the universe." -- Albert Einstein

            by Neuroptimalian on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 05:47:33 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  You are correct (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Inland, BeninSC

              You are correct: a large bottle of deadly pills is never any farther away than the closest super-market.

              BUT...guns are the method of choice, used in over half of all successful suicides.  Why?  Because a gun is quick, easy, and reliably lethal.  That combo of features is not available with any other method.

              Now if you take away all the guns, does that mean you stop half of suicides.  I'm guessing not.  I'm guessing that some of those people who would have killed themselves using a gun, are bound and determined to kill themselves and will try some other method, and some of those will succeed in killing themselves.

              And I'm also guessing that some of those people who would have killed themselves using a gun, would have to think about it harder if guns are not around.  These people might get cold feet, or decide the effort is too much, or something.  Some of these will not kill themselves, or not succeed using another method.

              So, I'm guessing that if guns are not around, there would be some reduction in the total number of suicides.  

              But, this is a guess, because of course there has never been a time when guns are not around.

              "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

              by Hugh Jim Bissell on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 06:42:25 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  except for the prescription, of course (0+ / 0-)

              for household cleaning products you would be correct.

              "I'll press your flesh, you dimwitted sumbitch! " -Pappy O'Daniel

              by jakewaters on Sat Feb 09, 2013 at 05:52:24 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  If I'd owned a gun all my life, I have no doubt (0+ / 0-)

          I'd be dead right now. And now I'm glad I'm not. Once a gun enters the equation, there's no more changing your mind, no getting better, you're just dead.

      •  22 vets a day commit suicide, I guess we're all (0+ / 0-)

        supposed to be so happy that some had guns to do it with. Holy fuck, suicides vs homicides, they're because of the immediate availability that made every one of them possible- really fucking matter? They're all due to guns, simple as that.

        Be the kind of person your dog thinks you are.

        by teabaggerssuckbalz on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 06:45:47 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  So "only" 700,000 deaths since 1960 (6+ / 0-)

      because we've decided that killing yourself with a gun doesnt count?  

      You'll never know how callous you are when you reach low to minimize gun deaths. Have someone whose opinion you trust read them and let you know.

      That's not even "gun control". It's more like "massacre control".

      by Inland on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 01:22:09 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  That's a short ass list...nt (0+ / 0-)

        Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

        by KVoimakas on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 01:35:40 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  You should make use of it. (5+ / 0-)

          I suspect a list of one person would probably be enough to let you know that it's not us, it's you.

          That's not even "gun control". It's more like "massacre control".

          by Inland on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 01:39:00 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  They haven't so far. nt (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Mildly Unsuccessful Lurker

            Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

            by KVoimakas on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 01:42:59 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  You should show them your posts and ask. (3+ / 0-)

              "Does this make it seem like I don't care how many people are killed with guns?" is one way to put it, but "What do you think?" will probably do it.

              Of course, if you already know that you don't care, well, then the problem isn't seeming callous, it's that you're a heavily armed individual who doesn't value human life.  Hey, look at that, back to the subject.

              That's not even "gun control". It's more like "massacre control".

              by Inland on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 01:49:07 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Again, they haven't said anything. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Mildly Unsuccessful Lurker

                If I didn't value human life, why would I be a Democrat and support 99% of what this site stands for?

                Weird...

                Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

                by KVoimakas on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 01:51:48 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Something's sure not right. (3+ / 0-)

                  Nobody who values human life starts out by dismissing the suicides and, having the number of "real" homicides numbering over 700,000 from 1960, never manages to work up a "that's a damn shame" in between all the bloggy back and forth.

                  I mean, come on, KV.  Are guns so important that you can't just say something remotely humane in response?  

                  That's not even "gun control". It's more like "massacre control".

                  by Inland on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 02:00:33 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  No one believes me anyway. (4+ / 0-)

                    Why bother typing it? Of course I'm angry at the loss of life. I've pointed this out many a time. I don't believe gun control (in the banning sense; and others) is going to be fruitful and have suggested other ways to cut back on all violent crime and even some firearm related stuff.

                    That doesn't matter though.

                    I'm a sociopath. Psychopath. Inhuman. At least, that's what I'm told. So no matter what I say, it doesn't matter.

                    Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

                    by KVoimakas on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 02:03:12 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  But you didn't say it. (4+ / 0-)

                      It never occured to you.  What occurred to you was, minimizing the number by saying that half were suicides. What didn't occur to you was, halving the number still leaves an enormous number of dead people.  So what you cared about was negating or minimizing the talking point, not the dead people.  

                      At least, that's what it looks like to people who read your posts.  If you disagree, go ask someone you trust.  But don't tell me that you're the victim of being misread.  You're being read pretty closely.

                      That's not even "gun control". It's more like "massacre control".

                      by Inland on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 02:08:12 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  I gave up. (3+ / 0-)

                        I'll freely admit that. It happened before CT. Here's an example.

                        Paraphrased from some of the comments: Sorry, because you don't march to our fife, your condolences are meaningless. If you truly cared, you wouldn't hold the positon you do.

                        Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

                        by KVoimakas on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 02:15:25 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Again. Here's what you did here: (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Bisbonian

                          There's a huge number, and your first and last thought is trying to make it smaller, and nothing about the still huge number we're left with.

                          Where's the part where you're acknowledging the huge number of dead non suicides by gun?  You've skipped it again, to talk about how someone was mean to you on the internet.  

                          What are we supposed to think is important to you?  

                          That's not even "gun control". It's more like "massacre control".

                          by Inland on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 03:25:32 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Where's the part in this thread? (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            FrankRose

                            I take it you didn't fully read my comment. Why would I even bother to express those sentiments if they'd just be brushed aside away.

                            I think taking SJ's advice might be a good idea. Because I'm sliding more and more towards saying "fuck it" and just letting it all go.

                            And no, for those of you assholes out there (not pointed at you Inland) who would read something into that, that isn't a threat or some bullshit.

                            Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

                            by KVoimakas on Fri Feb 08, 2013 at 06:27:26 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  (((facepalm))). (0+ / 0-)

                            You're pretending like you're required to do some sort of ritual condolences.  You're not.  

                            It's just pointing out that, when someone puts up 1.4 Million gun deaths from 1960, your first and last reaction was to discount one half as suicides.  So seven hundred thousand are discounted as suicides and........the other seven hundred thousand aren't worthy of notice at all.    

                            You don't seem to realize that your function as a human being isn't just to knock the number down to the smallest you can, but to be suitably impressed with the enormous number that's left.  

                            That's not even "gun control". It's more like "massacre control".

                            by Inland on Fri Feb 08, 2013 at 09:26:30 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  My function in this thread was to point out (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            FrankRose

                            what I thought was a misleading statistic. You'll notice how I thought it was domestic VIOLENCE at first, not domestic in the sense of foreign/domestic.

                            I've made my suggestions elsewhere with regards to knocking that number lower each year (which seems to be happening anyway, without further gun control).

                            Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

                            by KVoimakas on Fri Feb 08, 2013 at 09:35:33 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I know. That's what's so icky. (0+ / 0-)

                            You see your job as minimizing the number posted.  Most humans would think 700,000 to be big enough for its own reaction. You never did.  

                            Are we done? Because as I stated above, you need someone else to tell you the truth about how incredibly callous your posts are.  

                            That's not even "gun control". It's more like "massacre control".

                            by Inland on Fri Feb 08, 2013 at 10:34:40 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Except the people who read this and know me (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            FrankRose

                            didn't say such a thing.

                            Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

                            by KVoimakas on Fri Feb 08, 2013 at 11:21:38 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                    •  Then you need to take a break (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      KVoimakas

                      Seriously. Because your posts are making you sound like a very callous person, even though you aren't. Yeah, some people on this site hate you and will call you those things no matter what you say, so what? There are quite a few people who hate me too. I'm pretty sure I can go tit for tat with you on some of the vile shit people have sad about me.

                      Look, I disagree with pretty much every view you hold on the gun issue, that doesn't mean I don't want to hear your alternative solutions to reduce violence. Anything that reduces violence is something people here should support.

                      But that isn't what you are doing. You are making callous, one-sentence quips that make you seam like you don't give a fuck about loss of life or human suffering. You are pretty much going down the same road that Kestrel did. So sincere advice-take a break.

                      You must work-we must all work-to make a world that is worthy of its children -Pablo Casals Please support TREE Climbers for victims of child sexual abuse and exploitation.

                      by SwedishJewfish on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 07:24:50 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

            •  Inland is right, KV. (5+ / 0-)

              Seriously - you are splitting hairs. Nothing you are saying matters a particle within the larger point illustrated by the graph, which is, A Shit-ton Of Americans Are Killed By Guns In This Country. If you take issue with that point, then we're done talking.

              Oh, and while you're at it, you might as well take Barb to task for not breaking the deaths down by "Legally owned/Illegal" weapons, and then, for good measure, by how many rounds each weapon held, which were handguns and which long guns, which were accidental and which intentional. Oh, and how many gun users and how many victims were male and female. Also - how many of the war casualties were caused by hostile action, versus accidental?

              I mean, as long as we're being rigorous and all.

              Seriously, comments like your first one in this thread make you look almost LaPierre-ish: "Good thing they included suicides"??

              "Good thing"??? Really?

              Politics is about the improvement of people's lives. - Paul Wellstone

              by occams hatchet on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 03:45:24 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  Thanks KV, this really gives me a more complete (0+ / 0-)

          perspective of your point of view.  Now I don't need to read any of your comments ever again.

          "We refuse to fight in a war started by men who refused to fight in a war." -freewayblogger

          by Bisbonian on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 06:04:20 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Believe me, Bisbonian, you'd be better off not, in (0+ / 0-)

            the years since he brought that NRA tripe here in the form of RKBA, not one fucking word or opinion has changed, not one. It is Wayne's World II, or III or whatever the latest drivel is but the drivel remains the same.
             

            Be the kind of person your dog thinks you are.

            by teabaggerssuckbalz on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 06:57:53 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Yep, not one... (0+ / 0-)

              We've not grown the group or brought more people to DK because we advertise elsewhere (like Facebook or the LGC).

              Yep.

              Nothing.

              Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

              by KVoimakas on Fri Feb 08, 2013 at 07:02:59 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  It may not be soon, and it sure isn't going to be (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                a2nite

                easy but one day people are going to wake up and want a saner world. The old meme about "if you outlaw guns only outlaws will have guns" obviously will become a self fulfilling prophesy, even you have said you won't give yours up should they get banned. That to me shows that this is beyond a mere exercise in rights but an obsession with no bounds whatsoever.
                   I'm not against guns entirely, I was a real live gun nut myself once upon a time but now the world is full of real live gun nuts and it needs taken back down a peg or two. More guns is definitely not the solution to the insanity going on.
                   We're never going to agree on any of this and that's fine, I don't sweat the small shit.

                Be the kind of person your dog thinks you are.

                by teabaggerssuckbalz on Fri Feb 08, 2013 at 05:23:39 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  And if someone wrote a law (0+ / 0-)

                  infringing upon my freedom FROM religion and said I'd need to choose one, I'd give the same response. No thanks.

                  There are of course bounds; I stay within them now. The point is when you narrow them ridiculously, I wouldn't.

                  Just like I wouldn't with OTHER items (see religious example above).

                  Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

                  by KVoimakas on Sat Feb 09, 2013 at 06:33:32 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

      •  Maybe a more accurate comparison would be (0+ / 0-)

        How many military deaths from 1960 vs how many deaths by domestic guns since 1960. Don't even have to count the suicides. Since many military people commit suicide by gun there is crossover.

        So the argument comes down to "I want to own whatever I want and carry it wherever I want" vs " I have a right not to be shot in the back shopping for salad fixings or sitting in a church or theater or school or bus or car or park or .... I also have a right to not be shot by somone who gets angry that they can't have thier way"  

        To some a few thousand here or there is nothing as long as they can kill whoever whenever they feel like it. They will justify it because it is not real people dying or spending thier lives disabled and dependent on the largess of the public to foot the bill for the gun lovers damages.

        Fear is the Mind Killer...

        by boophus on Sat Feb 09, 2013 at 05:16:27 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  re: suicides, etc (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Glen The Plumber

      As far as I'm concerned, I think it's fair to object to the inclusion of suicides. (As long as the other victims from a combined murder-suicide event are counted, anyway.) Suicide strikes me as morally ambiguous in comparison to homicide, which is not ambigious at all.

      So, if we take the 50% figure at face value, let's call it 1.1M deaths in wars, all-time; vs. ~700K homicides, since 1960.

      Which brings me to the simple & obvious point that if we use the same time frame for the war category as we do for the homicide category, we have a war death figure of (very roughly) ~65,000 or so.

      Which seems entirely fair to me, and would make for an even more compelling graph. After all, Vietnam + Afg/Iraq by themselves account for 27 years of warfare.

      •  Morally ambiguous? Seriously? So you get to (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jakewaters

        inject your personal moral judgement into deciding which deaths related to gun violence count and which ones don't. When guns have more value to you than the loss of a human life that should be sign to you that maybe there's something not quite right about your priorities.

        "An individual has not started living until he can rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity" Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr..

        by mindara on Sat Feb 09, 2013 at 04:43:01 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Good point (0+ / 0-)

        in the last week of January at least 22 murder suicides occurred taking the lives of more than 40 people.  Most were husband on wife, but some were husband on wife and kids.
        My brother killed himself and his wife in 2004 leaving 11 children including a Down Syndrome daughter.  There were way more than two victims in that equation.  If my brother had not had a gun in his pocket, his moment of rage would have passed harmlessly.  You'll never convince me that the easy availability of guns does not contribute to these horrendous numbers.

        Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please -- Mark Twain

        by OnePingOnly on Sat Feb 09, 2013 at 08:36:52 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Many deaths from war are also suicides. (0+ / 0-)

      Guns kill people in all kinds of ways.

    •  Good thing they included ALL deaths in war (0+ / 0-)

      not just those caused by guns:

      "Where possible, we’ve used the broadest definition of "death" -- that is, all war-related deaths, not just those that occurred in combat. ... Here’s a summary of deaths by major conflict"

      Let that sink.

    •  A death by gun is a death (0+ / 0-)

      By gun. You are just as dead be it  homicide or suicide.

      And if guns were less prevalent in homes or so easy to get then maybe even the suicide rate goes down.

      Why is it that, as a culture, we are more comfortable seeing two men holding guns than holding hands?

      by jsfox on Sat Feb 09, 2013 at 04:15:34 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  You appear to agree with Joseph Stalin... (0+ / 0-)

      One death is a tragedy; one million is a statistic.

      Be of good comfort, Master Ridley, and play the man; we shall this day light such a candle by God's grace in England as shall never be put out.

      by Bollox Ref on Sat Feb 09, 2013 at 04:16:19 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  that leaves a LOT of homicides (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      richardak

      why doesn't that bother you?

      if guns don't kill people but people do, then why are you not campaigning to have guns kept out of people's hands?  Why do American people kill so many people - as compared with other countries who have high levels of gun ownership. Why doesn't that bother you?

      don't give me second amendment talk - let's hear from you on the ethics of it.....there are a lot of dead people.....

    •  More like a 2/3. There are 2 suicides for every (0+ / 0-)

      homicide.

      LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

      by dinotrac on Sat Feb 09, 2013 at 04:38:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  American Military vs. NRA on Soldier Suicide (0+ / 0-)

      I'm glad suicide is becoming to be included more and more in the discussion about gun violence.  I suspect that access to and familiarity with firearms accounts for the fact that men are more "successful" at ending their own lives than women (pure speculation).

      The Army recently had a low-profile run-in with the NRA over the repeal of a policy that was usually interpreted to mean that leaders weren't permitted to ask at-risk Soldiers about their (unsupervised) access to firearms at home or elsewhere.  The NRA eventually caved, but I wonder if the episode wasn't just another example of the NRA gradually, steadily marginalizing itself among what should be (it would seem) an otherwise sympathetic body of policy makers.

  •  This morning on NPR... (7+ / 0-)

    One of the headline stories was about Joe Biden's calling attention to "the sixteen hundred people he says have been killed by guns since Newtown."  (NPR's emphasis.)

    As if it wasn't a verifiable fact.  As if it were a he said/she said thing.

    As if you weren't a fucking douchebag propagandist instead of a journalist.

    -----
    Tom Smith Online
    I want a leader who shoots for the moon. The last time we had one, we got to the moon.

    by filkertom on Thu Feb 07, 2013 at 12:51:16 PM PST

  •  The Polifact article says "since 1968", not 1960! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jakewaters

    Just sayin' - while there's been a whole lot of discussion about the percentage of suicides, and what that might mean, no one else - including the OP - has picked up on the fact that all the 1.4 million domestic gun-related deaths have taken place in nearly a decade's shorter time-frame than the dkos story says!

    •  Anything to deflect attention from the specifics (0+ / 0-)

      of the topic being discussed. Typical. The time frame is inconsequential, the comparison in the graph was number of deaths from all American wars combined vs. number of deaths related to domestic violence since 1960...

      The total numbers being compared don't change whether it's a typo in the dkos graph shown in this diary or it's a typo in the text of the Politifact article.

      So what point is that you're trying to make?

      "An individual has not started living until he can rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity" Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr..

      by mindara on Sat Feb 09, 2013 at 04:53:45 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  It only matters to you (0+ / 0-)

    Nothing to do with statistics. If you have to defend yourself, then you want the maximum force possible.

    Every day's another chance to stick it to the man. - dls

    by The Raven on Sat Feb 09, 2013 at 03:46:55 PM PST

  •  They died for our freedom... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite

    all the murders, accidental shootings and suicides, all monuments to the glory of the precious 2nd amendment. Makes you proud doesn't it?

    The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. -- John Kenneth Galbraith

    by richardak on Sat Feb 09, 2013 at 03:47:17 PM PST

  •  why isn't a NATIONAL gun buy-back being (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    salamanderempress

    considered, like the one the aussies did after their last gun massacre?  the govt could fix a set-price for each gun.

  •  War deaths = ALL types, not just gun related (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jakewaters

    "We found a comprehensive study of war-related deaths published by the Congressional Research Service on Feb. 26, 2010, and we supplemented that with data for deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan using the website icasualties.org. Where possible, we’ve used the broadest definition of "death" -- that is, all war-related deaths, not just those that occurred in combat."

    http://www.politifact.com/...

    So we aren't even comparing non-war gun deaths to war gun deaths. It's ALL deaths in war to all gun deaths since 1968.

    Unbelievable.

  •  If your chart is good (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jakewaters, Roadbed Guy

    a lot more wars are needed to make the US appear sane.

  •  I wish there were only 700K or 1.2M cases of (0+ / 0-)

    Domestic violence since 1968 or even since 1960.

    Don't know what kind of rock one must live under to miss the big picture there.

    "I'll press your flesh, you dimwitted sumbitch! " -Pappy O'Daniel

    by jakewaters on Sat Feb 09, 2013 at 04:34:48 PM PST

  •  I'm eagerly waiting a diary comparing (0+ / 0-)

    how many deaths the alcohol and/or tobacco industries have caused compared to wars.

    Roughly calculating, the outrage is going to have to be dialed up 5 to 20 fold, respectively . . ..

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site