Page 1 of 10 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 141

Thread: 74 school shootings since sandy hook?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Oregon,Linn County
    Posts
    1,991

    74 school shootings since sandy hook?

    This is a little something I found that helps explain that 74 figure we keep hearing about as some of you are know doubt already aware and if not(speaking of our friends here that aren't to gun friendly)you need to do some homework on the subject and not just go"well I heard it on the news" or the POTUS said it so it must be true. Not every so called school shooting is a Sandy Hook or Columbine type shooting which is what the MSM wants you to think. So here is a little something.
    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...andy-hook-clo/


    National
    States
    Articles
    Truth-O-MeterTM
    Promises
    People
    PunditFact
    Contact Us

    The Truth-O-Meter Says:
    Everytown for Gun Safety
    There have been 74 "school shootings in America since Sandy Hook."

    Everytown for Gun Safety on Wednesday, June 11th, 2014 in an infographic that went viral
    Have there been 74 school shootings since Sandy Hook? A closer look at a tricky statistic
    Mostly False
    Share this story:

    A screenshot of the Everytown for Gun Safety webpage that listed 74 shootings since the killings in Newtown, Conn. The figure was widely shared on social media, but some found it misleading. We took a closer look.

    A candlelight vigil for Emilio Hoffman, the victim of a shooting at Reynolds High School in Troutdale, Ore., on June 10, 2014. Authorities said a teen gunman armed with a rifle shot and killed the 14-year-old student and injured a teacher.

    After an Oregon high school freshman armed with an assault rifle injured a teacher, killed a student and killed himself Tuesday, a striking statistic began circulating on the internet. It said that at least 74 school shootings had occurred since December 2012, when an assault on Sandy Hook Elementary School by Adam Lanza left 28 dead, including Lanza and his mother.

    The statistic came from Everytown for Gun Safety, an advocacy group founded by former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and gun-control advocate Shannon Watts. That comes out to more than one school shooting per week.

    Numerous media outlets reported the 74 school shootings figure, and the number spread widely in Facebook posts and through other forms of social media. Even President Barack Obama brought up the once-a-week line in an interview with Tumblr CEO David Karp.

    In the interview, Obama discussed his frustration with lawmakers’ inaction on gun control legislation, particularly in the wake of Sandy Hook. While it’s not clear that Obama was specifically referencing the statistic compiled by Everytown, his comment was in line with their math. "We’re the only developed country on Earth where this happens," he said,
    "and it happens now once a week."

    But as widely as the number spread, it also attracted criticism. Charles Johnson, who writes for the conservative Daily Caller, garnered attention for what he considered a debunking of the Everytown list.

    We decided to sift through the numbers ourselves.

    How Everytown counted 74 incidents

    To its credit, Everytown provided details on each of the 74 shootings, including the date, city and school location. The group also clearly laid out its methodology at the bottom of the list. These make it possible for the critics -- and us -- to look under the hood at its calculations.

    The main reason for the criticism of Everytown’s count is that its definition of "school shooting" is relatively broad. The group’s criteria goes beyond what many people would consider "school shootings" -- incidents in which a student or an intruder enters a school and fires at innocent students and staff. For many people, this is the first thing that comes to mind when they hear the phrase "school shooting" -- an incident such as Sandy Hook or, before it, the 1999 Columbine shooting in Colorado that left 15 dead, including the shooters.

    Here’s the methodology as explained by the group at the bottom of the list:

    Incidents were classified as school shootings when a firearm was discharged inside a school building or on school or campus grounds, as documented in publicly reported news accounts. This includes assaults, homicides, suicides, and accidental shootings. Incidents in which guns were brought into schools but not fired there, or were fired off school grounds after having been possessed in schools, were not included.... Incidents were identified through media reports, so this is likely an undercount of the true total.

    This definition allows for incidents that don’t typically call to mind the term "school shooting" -- for example, a case in which a man unaffiliated with Alogna High/Middle School in Iowa killed himself in the school’s parking lot in the middle of the night, or an early-morning armed robbery on a street that goes through the Marquette University campus in Wisconsin. Both count in Everytown’s tally.

    Clearly it is difficult to draw lines. The Everytown list did not include the recent and highly publicized shooting spree in Isla Vista, Calif. In that case, the shooter was a student at the University of California at Santa Barbara, and he targeted other students, including women living in a sorority house near the campus. Seven people died, but the shooting wasn’t technically on campus, so it didn’t make the list.

    Our Breakdown

    We reviewed news reports for all 74 shootings and did our best to sort them into five categories. Here’s our breakdown. (See individual shootings by category here, with clickable links to news reports on each shooting.)

    • Incidents such as Sandy Hook or Columbine in which the shooter intended to commit mass murder: 10 instances

    • Incidents related to criminal activity (such as drug dealing or robbery), or personal altercations: 39 instances

    • Incidents unconnected to members of school community and/or that took place outside school hours: 16 instances

    • Suicides: 6 instances

    • Accidental discharges: 3 instances

    In all, these 74 incidents resulted in 38 deaths and 53 injuries. The biggest death toll in one incident was a shooting spree that ended at Santa Monica College. Six people died, though not all of them took place on the campus.

    While the list includes a lot of gunfire, deaths and injuries, only about 14 percent were shootings that mirrored Columbine and Sandy Hook.

    In addition, almost half -- 35 -- occurred at a college or university rather than a K-12 school. This clashes with the imagery invoked by the line in the chart’s introduction, that "we should feel secure in sending our children to school — comforted by the knowledge that they’re safe."

    We asked James Fox, a criminology professor at Northeastern University, for some perspective. He pointed to the 2013 "Indicators of School Crime and Safety" report compiled by the Bureau of Justice Statistics. There were about 45 school-associated violent deaths (not just by guns) at elementary and secondary schools each year between the 1992 and 2010 school years, according to the report. The highest annual total was 63 deaths in 2006-07, while the lowest was 31 in 2010-11.

    In other words, Fox said, the number of gun deaths documented by Everytown over the past year and a half are not out of the ordinary. About 15 to 20 kids in grades K-12 are killed at school each year, along with a similar number of college students, he said.

    Is it misleading?

    The experts we consulted agreed that Everytown’s broad definition of "school shooting" could be misleading, encouraging them to assume that there have been 74 incidents similar to Columbine or Sandy Hook.

    While the Everytown definition is certainly one way of calculating it, there is such a range of motivations, degrees of planning and outcomes that it ceases to be an especially useful measurement, said Jay Corzine, a University of Central Florida sociology professor.

    Mark Safarik, president of Forensic Behavioral Services Inc. and a former member of the FBI Behavioral Analysis Unit, agreed that when the average person thinks of a school shooting, they think of a mass murder like Sandy Hook.

    "There is an ocean of difference between Sandy Hook, Virginia Tech and Columbine and a depressed student who (commits suicide) at school, or an accidental discharge," Safarik said. "To call them all school shootings may be true in a technical sense but is quite disingenuous on an emotional level, which is where they are trying to capture for their audience."

    Everytown has countered the media criticism by arguing that focusing too closely on Sandy Hook-like incidents unfairly diminishes the full extent of the dangers to students and staff posed by guns in or near schools.

    "The country's gun-violence epidemic has seeped into our children's schools, and that is a problem, regardless of the body count," said spokeswoman Erika Lamb. "Those lives count, too, even if the media is only focused on mass tragedies."

    Corzine prefers the designation used by the New York Police Department, among others -- "active shooter," which limits the list to incidents that occur during school hours, involving a firearm discharged with the intent to kill or injure others on school grounds or while in transit on a school vehicle.

    In addition, Fox said the statistic is misleading for another reason -- it focuses on short-term patterns, rather than long-term trends. Despite the media focus, Fox said, it’s worth noting that the number of school-related homicides has remained relatively flat for two decades, he said.

    "I don't mean to minimize the horror of these events or the pain and suffering of victims, but schools are safe, safer than other places that our children spend time," he said. "For some kids, school is even safer than their home."

    Corzine said he sees some value in Everytown’s calculations -- but also pitfalls.

    On the one hand, "they are a valid indicator of the ease with which firearms enter the school environment in the United States compared to other highly developed nations." By the same token, though, "it is misleading to use the 74 school shootings in a context that explicitly or implicitly equates them with Sandy Hook."

    Our ruling

    A statistic calculated by Everytown for Gun Safety, and shared widely on social media, said that there have been 74 "school shootings in America since Sandy Hook."

    The group’s figure is accurate only if you use a broad definition of "school shooting" that includes such incidents as suicides, accidents and spillover from adjacent criminal activity. The figure has some value in quantifying the proximity of guns to school campuses, but the group makes a significant stretch by tying the statistic so closely to the mass shooting at Sandy Hook. By doing this, the group closely associates the statistic with planned mass shootings targeting students and school staff -- a category that, using a more strict definition, accounts for only 10 of the 74 incidents.

    The statement contains some element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression. We rate it Mostly False.
    About this statement:

    Published: Friday, June 13th, 2014 at 3:41 p.m.

    Subjects: Children, Education, Guns

    Sources:

    Everytown for Gun Safety, School Shootings in America Since Sandy Hook, June 10, 2014

    Policy Mic, "Obama just said what we were all thinking about school shootings," June 11, 2014

    CNN, "A Closer Look: How Many School Shootings Since Newtown?" June 11, 2014

    KATU 2, "Police: 15-year-old Reynolds HS shooter was armed with assault rifle," June 11, 2014

    Des Moines Register, "Update: Police identify man found dead on Algona school property," Nov. 1, 2013

    WISN 12, "19-year-old in custody after Marquette robbery, shooting," May 2, 2014

    Bureau of Justice Statistics, "Indicators of School Crime and Safety 2013," June 2014

    Boston Globe, "Back to School Fears," Jan. 2, 2013

    The Blaze, "‘Wow’: Journalist Attempts to ‘Debunk’ Anti-Gun Group’s List of ‘School Shootings in America Since Sandy Hook’ — Here’s What He Found," June 10, 2014

    CNN, "Mass killing all too familiar in scenic college town of Isla Vista," May 27, 2014

    Email interview, Northeastern University criminology professor James Fox, June 12, 2014

    Email interview, Jay Corzine, University of Central Florida sociology professor, June 12, 2014

    Email interview, Eugene O’Donnell, City University of New York criminal justice professor, June 12, 2014

    Email interview, Mark Safarik, president of Forensic Behavioral Services Inc. and former member of the FBI Behavioral Analysis Unit, June 12, 2014

    Email interview, Gary Kleck, Florida State University criminology professor, June 12, 2014

    Email interview, Everytown spokeswoman Erika Lamb, June 13, 2014

    Written by: Lauren Carroll, Molly O'Connor
    Researched by: Lauren Carroll, Molly O'Connor
    Edited by: Louis Jacobson
    How to contact us:

    We want to hear your suggestions and comments.

    For tips or comments on our Obameter and our GOP-Pledge-O-Meter promise databases, please e-mail the Obameter. If you are commenting on a specific promise, please include the wording of the promise.
    For comments about our Truth-O-Meter or Flip-O-Meter items, please e-mail the Truth-O-Meter. We’re especially interested in seeing any chain e-mails you receive that you would like us to check out. If you send us a comment, we'll assume you don't mind us publishing it unless you tell us otherwise.

    Browse The Truth-O-MeterTM:

    Barack Obama's file
    Pants-On-Fire rulings
    By our rulings
    By subject
    By person



    Politifact
    This will lead to the shootings considered school shootings, it didn't copy over.
    https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...uUSBNkf6bQ/pub
    Gun Control? "We'll Fight Them, Sir!, Until Hell Freezes Over, And Then We'll Fight Them On The Ice! Sir!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Valencia. Spain.
    Posts
    2,191
    LMFAO!!! Oh...so they were a different 'type' of killing so they don't count! Well that makes everything all right then!
    How to make yourself look a fool in one sentence....

    (P.S. worshiping only has 1 p not 2.)
    --johnson--.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Oregon,Linn County
    Posts
    1,991
    Quote Originally Posted by Dani View Post
    LMFAO!!! Oh...so they were a different 'type' of killing so they don't count! Well that makes everything all right then!
    Did I say they don't count? I don't think I implied that. However what I'm implying IS that these 74 school shooting is to lead people into thinking OMG Columbine, Sandy Hook look at all those grade schools being shot up. So yeah they are different from those if you bothered reading any of the shootings that are listed as school shootings. My guess is you didn't.
    Yeah 74 school shootings conjures up quit an image for more gun control doesn't it?
    Gun Control? "We'll Fight Them, Sir!, Until Hell Freezes Over, And Then We'll Fight Them On The Ice! Sir!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Valencia. Spain.
    Posts
    2,191
    Quote Originally Posted by zsu2357 View Post
    Did I say they don't count? I don't think I implied that. However what I'm implying IS that these 74 school shooting is to lead people into thinking OMG Columbine, Sandy Hook look at all those grade schools being shot up. So yeah they are different from those if you bothered reading any of the shootings that are listed as school shootings. My guess is you didn't.
    Yeah 74 school shootings conjures up quit an image for more gun control doesn't it?
    A shooting is a shooting dude and to the people that are shot or their loved ones that are left to grieve, it doesn't matter a feck what sort of shooting it is. Your problem is easy access to guns in a society that is unhealthily obsessed with violence. Do something about it rather than consistently putting forward your pathetic excuses to try to justify the disease that your country suffers from. Your own signature and avatar tells us what you vote for. You have no interest whatsoever in trying to solve the problem if it means restrictions on your precious toys. Pathetic!
    How to make yourself look a fool in one sentence....

    (P.S. worshiping only has 1 p not 2.)
    --johnson--.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Oregon,Linn County
    Posts
    1,991
    Quote Originally Posted by Dani View Post
    A shooting is a shooting dude and to the people that are shot or their loved ones that are left to grieve, it doesn't matter a feck what sort of shooting it is. Your problem is easy access to guns in a society that is unhealthily obsessed with violence. Do something about it rather than consistently putting forward your pathetic excuses to try to justify the disease that your country suffers from. Your own signature and avatar tells us what you vote for. You have no interest whatsoever in trying to solve the problem if it means restrictions on your precious toys. Pathetic!
    "A shooting is a shooting dude"Yes it is and I never implied it wasn't, but what I was implying is how it is portrayed.That's like if a child drowns in a bath tub, was it on purpose? or was it an accident but regardless less give bath tubs a bad rap. If you take your cricket bat and swing it during a game or whatever you do with them and accidentally killed someone with it would that mean that since you guys/girls have an abundance of them they should be outlawed hell outlawed even if it was intentional? Take everyone's toys away?
    Well we like our"toys" and don't like them getting a bad rap because of the actions of a few a very few. But I digress here. Did you bother reading any of these so called school shootings I linked?
    Gun Control? "We'll Fight Them, Sir!, Until Hell Freezes Over, And Then We'll Fight Them On The Ice! Sir!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Valencia. Spain.
    Posts
    2,191
    Quote Originally Posted by zsu2357 View Post
    "A shooting is a shooting dude"Yes it is and I never implied it wasn't, but what I was implying is how it is portrayed.
    It doesn't matter how it's portrayed. The method of portrayal is irrelevant. The relevance is that a death occurs.

    That's like if a child drowns in a bath tub, was it on purpose? or was it an accident but regardless less give bath tubs a bad rap.
    No, what you do is try to make bath tubs as safe as you possible can and make sure that, if the baby is not able to look out for itself, it is supervised whilst its in the bathtub... but if you can't do those things and removing bath tubs is a viable option than you remover them.

    If you take your cricket bat and swing it during a game or whatever you do with them and accidentally killed someone with it would that mean that since you guys/girls have an abundance of them they should be outlawed hell outlawed even if it was intentional?
    1. As a spectator, you would not be allowed to take a cricket bat (read gun) to a game... because the right of other spectators to watch the game (live) safely comes before any 'right' that someone has to carry a cricket bat (gun) in public.

    2. If you managed to smuggle one in and started swinging it around your head you would be removed...because the right of other spectators to watch the game (live) safely comes before any 'right' that someone has to swing a cricket bat (gun) around his head..

    Thus, the safety of the majority is not jeopardised by those that do not have enough intelligence to be in control of themselves or any cricket bat (gun) they may be carrying. Your country should try it with guns as all other countries in the developed world have done. Go look up the results.

    ...oh and; In order to kill someone with a cricket bat you would need to repeatedly batter them about the head with it...then it isn't an accident. So your argument for banning cricket bats is as lame as your argument for banning knives...but to indulge you in your idiocy regarding cricket bats, I am sure that if some 10,000 of our citizens were being killed every year by being beaten around the head by cricket bats then the government would take measures to make sure that cricket bats were not easily accessible to the general public. There is the difference between your country and the rest of the developed world - your country nor your citizens are not prepared to make that effort.

    Take everyone's toys away?
    Yes, that is exactly what you do, just as you take away the toys of a child that will not play with them responsibly. If you had a son and he repeatedly beat your daughter (or anyone else) with a stick, would you not take the stick off him and try, as much as is reasonably possible, to make sure that he can't get hold of another - or would you argue that your son has the right to have a stick and let him keep it, knowing full well that the beatings continue? That's a rhetorical question by the way. I know that in your case you would chose the latter. As I said, your avatar and your signature gives us all the information we need to categorise you.

    Well we like our"toys" and don't like them getting a bad rap because of the actions of a few a very few.
    Considering the amount of drivers on the road, very, very few of them drive through stop lights yet we have laws that affect ALL of us, preventing us from driving through red stop lights. Perhaps we should remove driving through stop lights from the list of motoring offences because the majority of us don't do it huh?
    Shall we should remove the laws against murder - because the majority don't murder?
    Shall we remove the laws against drink driving because most people are responsible and don't drink and drive?

    You will find that most of the laws against what we are allowed to do are there, not because everyone used to do the things that are now prohibited by the law but because very, very few people did them. Laws are there to protect EVERYONE and they apply to EVERYONE. The fact that the majority didn't, don't and never would do the things that the particular law now prohibits is totally irrelevant.

    I'm a motorcyclist and I have been fully trained to ride bikes at high speed and when I was younger, I did (and am still qualified to) teach high-speed pursuit riding to police officers. I am certificated as being skilled enough to teach others who are required to ride fast on the public roads (police riders and motorcycle paramedics). I have never had a bike accident in almost 50 years of riding and training and consider myself a highly responsible and indeed, skilled rider - yet, during recreational riding, I am subject to the speed limits just like anyone else is. That is the way it must be I'm afraid. Laws must apply to EVERYONE, even those that wouldn't do the things prohibited by the law any. We can't make laws that only apply to those that are likely to do want we find unacceptable.

    But I digress here. Did you bother reading any of these so called school shootings I linked?
    Of course I did. That's why I said that the articles were irrelevant. Death by gun is death by gun and the circumstances are irrelevant. It makes no difference whether the victim is shot by a robber or whether he is shot accidentally...he is still dead. It matters not whether one school shooting differs somewhat from another school shooting - children still die.
    Last edited by Dani; 06-17-2014 at 01:27 AM.
    How to make yourself look a fool in one sentence....

    (P.S. worshiping only has 1 p not 2.)
    --johnson--.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Oregon,Linn County
    Posts
    1,991
    Originally Posted by Dani
    Of course I did. That's why I said that the articles were irrelevant. Death by gun is death by gun and the circumstances are irrelevant. It makes no difference whether the victim is shot by a robber or whether he is shot accidentally...he is still dead. It matters not whether one school shooting differs somewhat from another school shooting - children still die
    What is your definition of a school shooting? You say the articles are not relevant and the "circumstances are irrelevant". I am referring to the so called 74 school shootings since Sandy Hook. In reference to the "74" they are very relevant when you got the anti gun politicians yelling for more gun restrictions. Did you only read the first 10? Those are school shootings. What about the others that lead you to believe in obama's statement that school shootings happen weekly? When sometimes it shots fired well after school or an adult that is shot, and sometimes by suicide?
    I am NOT saying kids don't get shot I am saying it's not as often as they would like you to think it is.
    Gun Control? "We'll Fight Them, Sir!, Until Hell Freezes Over, And Then We'll Fight Them On The Ice! Sir!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Valencia. Spain.
    Posts
    2,191
    Quote Originally Posted by zsu2357 View Post
    What is your definition of a school shooting? You say the articles are not relevant and the "circumstances are irrelevant". I am referring to the so called 74 school shootings since Sandy Hook.
    Whether there have been 74 or 54 is not relevant. The problem is that you have them AT ALL!

    In reference to the "74" they are very relevant when you got the anti gun politicians yelling for more gun restrictions. Did you only read the first 10? Those are school shootings. What about the others that lead you to believe in obama's statement that school shootings happen weekly? When sometimes it shots fired well after school or an adult that is shot, and sometimes by suicide?
    Oiy vey!!! You just don't get it do you. You carry on masturbating over your guns pal. Clearly, trying to think logically and with reason is a waste of time and effort. Perhaps when one of the children killed belongs to you, you might get it!


    I am NOT saying kids don't get shot I am saying it's not as often as they would like you to think it is.
    ...and just how 'often' is acceptable to you. The fact that your children are being shot at all whilst at school should be cause for concern...yet to you, it clearly isn't. You are more concerned with keeping your toys than you are concerned with the number of children shot at school. How many children have been shot at school in say, the last 5 years in your country? Please do tell.
    How to make yourself look a fool in one sentence....

    (P.S. worshiping only has 1 p not 2.)
    --johnson--.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by zsu2357 View Post
    What is your definition of a school shooting? You say the articles are not relevant and the "circumstances are irrelevant". I am referring to the so called 74 school shootings since Sandy Hook. In reference to the "74" they are very relevant when you got the anti gun politicians yelling for more gun restrictions. Did you only read the first 10? Those are school shootings. What about the others that lead you to believe in obama's statement that school shootings happen weekly? When sometimes it shots fired well after school or an adult that is shot, and sometimes by suicide?
    I am NOT saying kids don't get shot I am saying it's not as often as they would like you to think it is.
    Are you trying to imply there is some acceptable number of school shootings? I should like to hear this 'magic number'. Is it a total number of schools where shootings occurred or a death toll? Face it, the problem is serious. I'm not trying to imply that our gun laws need changing; I don't think that's the case.IMO the problem lies more with enforcement than with the letter of the law. But minimizing the problem amounts to standing in the way of that enforcement.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Valencia. Spain.
    Posts
    2,191
    Quote Originally Posted by Imnotreallyhere View Post
    Are you trying to imply there is some acceptable number of school shootings? I should like to hear this 'magic number'. Is it a total number of schools where shootings occurred or a death toll? Face it, the problem is serious. I'm not trying to imply that our gun laws need changing; I don't think that's the case.IMO the problem lies more with enforcement than with the letter of the law. But minimizing the problem amounts to standing in the way of that enforcement.
    In zsu's world, the rights of gun owners to play with their toys is more important than the right to life.
    How to make yourself look a fool in one sentence....

    (P.S. worshiping only has 1 p not 2.)
    --johnson--.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,575
    Quote Originally Posted by Dani View Post
    A shooting is a shooting dude and to the people that are shot or their loved ones that are left to grieve, it doesn't matter a feck what sort of shooting it is. Your problem is easy access to guns in a society that is unhealthily obsessed with violence. Do something about it rather than consistently putting forward your pathetic excuses to try to justify the disease that your country suffers from.
    We have had this discussion multiple times before Dani. Nothing is being done in the legislature because nothing can be done to prevent school shootings. It is already illegal to possess firearms on school property but that prohibition amounts to nothing.

    Thus, the safety of the majority is not jeopardised by those that do not have enough intelligence to be in control of themselves or any cricket bat (gun) they may be carrying. Your country should try it with guns as all other countries in the developed world have done. Go look up the results.
    We have had the discussion regarding the actions of the nation of Australia multiple times before. The united states is not adopting the approach of the nation of Australia because it would amount to nothing. Even if the results had by the nation of Australia are factual in nature and not subject to political bias on the part of those reporting the results, the only way such success came about is due to Australia being an island nation. There is no land bridge connection to any other country meaning there are no unsecured borders to content with. The united states is connected to one large continent holding multiple countries. Canada, North America, Mexico, Central America, South America, etc. The results of the nation of Australia cannot be duplicated due to a geographical disadvantage. It would prove no different than the failed attempts of the district of columbia or the city of Chicago.

    It doesn't matter how it's portrayed. The method of portrayal is irrelevant. The relevance is that a death occurs.
    Then you are stating that the break down and categorization of the annual homicide figures is of no relevance due to the fact that homicides are the bottom line?

    ...oh and; In order to kill someone with a cricket bat you would need to repeatedly batter them about the head with it
    Your statement is factually incorrect. There is no exact science to determine the exact number of blows to the head that would be necessary to end the life of another because all individuals are physically different. There are those who can be killed from even minimal force due to bleeding disorders they possess just as there are those who can withstand significant degrees of physical punishment.

    So your argument for banning cricket bats is as lame as your argument for banning knives...but to indulge you in your idiocy regarding cricket bats, I am sure that if some 10,000 of our citizens were being killed every year by being beaten around the head by cricket bats then the government would take measures to make sure that cricket bats were not easily accessible to the general public. There is the difference between your country and the rest of the developed world - your country nor your citizens are not prepared to make that effort.
    And if such an approach was attempted then individuals would begin bludgeoning each other to death with lengths of pipe and tool handles from the hardware store. And there would be no legal way to restrict such implements regardless of how many may be killed.

    Yes, that is exactly what you do, just as you take away the toys of a child that will not play with them responsibly.
    Who will not play with them responsibly. That does not mean you punish everyone for the actions of the ones who misbehave.

    If you had a son and he repeatedly beat your daughter (or anyone else) with a stick, would you not take the stick off him and try, as much as is reasonably possible, to make sure that he can't get hold of another - or would you argue that your son has the right to have a stick and let him keep it, knowing full well that the beatings continue?
    If the above hypothetical situation applied to you would you also seek to take away the toys of your daughter? Would you seek to cut down all of the trees in your neighborhood to prevent the acquisition of anymore sticks from occurring?

    Considering the amount of drivers on the road, very, very few of them drive through stop lights yet we have laws that affect ALL of us, preventing us from driving through red stop lights. Perhaps we should remove driving through stop lights from the list of motoring offences because the majority of us don't do it huh?
    Laws concerning vehicular matters on the open road ways are different because of their public nature. There is no way to violate traffic signals without them being noticed by others. There is little investigation necessary for prosecutorial purposes.

    The same cannot be said regarding firearms. Short of police officers conducting complete interior examinations there is no way of determining if a vehicle is transporting firearms in an illegal manner. There is no way of telling which buildings hold a significant number of firearms that the state has declared illegal.

    Laws are there to protect EVERYONE and they apply to EVERYONE.
    Then perhaps you are able to provide an answer as to what recourse there is for people who laws do not protect and instead harm. What answer do you have to present then?

    Laws must apply to EVERYONE, even those that wouldn't do the things prohibited by the law any. We can't make laws that only apply to those that are likely to do want we find unacceptable.
    Pray tell why not? Why are we as a society incapable of implementing firearm-related laws that drastically increase the punishment faced by those that would use an illegally-possessed firearm to inflict harm on another? Why are we as a society incapable of implementing laws that would reclassify the possession of illegally-acquired firearms and drug paraphernalia to a degree that results in a life sentence without the possibility of parole?

    Instead why must society pass laws to seek broad spectrum prohibition of firearms possession in general?

    Of course I did. That's why I said that the articles were irrelevant. Death by gun is death by gun and the circumstances are irrelevant. It makes no difference whether the victim is shot by a robber or whether he is shot accidentally...he is still dead. It matters not whether one school shooting differs somewhat from another school shooting - children still die.
    There is a significant difference between incidents like Newtown and a drug deal going bad after school hours outside of the primary buildings.

    Whether there have been 74 or 54 is not relevant. The problem is that you have them AT ALL!
    How many firearm-related homicides still occur in the nation of Australia?

    Are you now saying that if even one homicide-related incident occurs at all it is too much to be tolerated?

    ...and just how 'often' is acceptable to you. The fact that your children are being shot at all whilst at school should be cause for concern...yet to you, it clearly isn't. You are more concerned with keeping your toys than you are concerned with the number of children shot at school.
    According to the FBI the number of homicides in all categories for the united states is at the lowest recorded level in more than two decades. Fewer people are being murdered in the united states than have been in a significantly long time despite the greatly increased number of firearms in general private circulation. We have had this discussion before.

    How many children have been shot at school in say, the last 5 years in your country? Please do tell.
    Fewer than the number of people murdered in the course of a year in the city of Chicago.

    In zsu's world, the rights of gun owners to play with their toys is more important than the right to life.
    And for those who would be murdered by abusive spouses? What of their right to life? You have already declared that it is simply tough luck for them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Imnotreallyhere View Post
    Are you trying to imply there is some acceptable number of school shootings? I should like to hear this 'magic number'. Is it a total number of schools where shootings occurred or a death toll? Face it, the problem is serious. I'm not trying to imply that our gun laws need changing; I don't think that's the case.IMO the problem lies more with enforcement than with the letter of the law. But minimizing the problem amounts to standing in the way of that enforcement.
    Seeking to expand the definition of what qualifies as a school shooting to include incidents that happen only in proximity to a designated school property is intellectual dishonesty. It is no different than claiming domestic violence includes name calling.
    If one cannot have an argument without resorting to hyperbole, name calling and emotional rhetoric, then they have lost the argument from their first post.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Oregon,Linn County
    Posts
    1,991
    Quote Originally Posted by Dani View Post
    In zsu's world, the rights of gun owners to play with their toys is more important than the right to life.
    "In zsu's world" We respect guns in Dani' world you are afraid of guns so you demonize them.No one "In zsu's world" go's on a shooting spree(I use that because you understand it)because we are a law-biding people not the few nut jobs you hear about. Which is why "In zsu's world" we will use our guns to save lives. Yeah I know it sounds odd to you, but then you are a little odd.
    '
    Gun Control? "We'll Fight Them, Sir!, Until Hell Freezes Over, And Then We'll Fight Them On The Ice! Sir!

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Oregon,Linn County
    Posts
    1,991
    Quote Originally Posted by Imnotreallyhere View Post
    Are you trying to imply there is some acceptable number of school shootings? I should like to hear this 'magic number'. Is it a total number of schools where shootings occurred or a death toll? Face it, the problem is serious. I'm not trying to imply that our gun laws need changing; I don't think that's the case.IMO the problem lies more with enforcement than with the letter of the law. But minimizing the problem amounts to standing in the way of that enforcement.
    All I am implying is we all heard obama' speech about 74 school shootings since Sandy Hook but what he didn't say is most of them weren't walking down the hall unloading magazines into childrens classrooms or even close.
    Did you read these? https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...uUSBNkf6bQ/pub these are the "74" don't take this wrong but don't feed on Dani says. No not a magic number, just not an inflated number to push an agenda.
    Gun Control? "We'll Fight Them, Sir!, Until Hell Freezes Over, And Then We'll Fight Them On The Ice! Sir!

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    9
    Dani, do you want your nation to ban its military because history has proven pretty much every government around the world has blatantly abused their military might and murdered way more people in one war than private citizens with guns in the U.S. have murdered others in 50 years?

    Let's see how truly dedicated you are to saving peoples' lives around the world.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Valencia. Spain.
    Posts
    2,191
    Quote Originally Posted by zsu2357 View Post
    Which is why "In zsu's world" we will use our guns to save lives.
    '
    LOL! So what is going wrong. You have been given the evidence that shows that owning a gun is likely to increase your chances of being shot.
    How to make yourself look a fool in one sentence....

    (P.S. worshiping only has 1 p not 2.)
    --johnson--.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •