Remarks by the President on Common-Sense Gun Safety Reform

[MakeDigitalLove]

It's easier to train someone to be safe with a firearm than with a chain saw or a car.

The training being easy is irrelevant. That doesn't mean that the individual will be more responsible just because the training is easier. It is totally dependable on the person. And even then people in general are irresponsible, but again the comparison from guns to anything else doesn't matter because every other thing has a use that isn't injuring or killing a living thing.

 

[opinterph]

Do you agree that firearms are inherently dangerous?

No. Like most things, they are only dangerous in the hands of those who don't treat them with respect and proper training.

Do you regard humans as inherently dangerous?

 

[andysayshi]

It enables a lot more people to protect themselves and others. According to recent CDC figures, that occurs better than once a minute in the U.S.

Can you cite the source for this information. I've just scoured the CDC website and can't find any such info.

The most recent study I can find using CDC data is from June last year, and says quite the opposite. More guns mean more crime.

They found no evidence that states with more households with guns led to timid criminals. In fact, firearm assaults were 6.8 times more common in states with the most guns versus states with the least. Firearm robbery increased with every increase in gun ownership except in the very highest quintile of gun-owning states (the difference in that cluster was not statistically significant). Firearm homicide was 2.8 times more common in states with the most guns versus states with the least.

The researchers were able to test whether criminals were simply trading out other weapons for guns, at least in the case of homicide. They weren't. Overall homicide rates were just over 2 times higher in the most gun-owning states, meaning that gun ownership correlated with higher rates of all homicides, not just homicide with a gun. The results will be published in a forthcoming issue of the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.

http://www.livescience.com/51446-guns-do-not-deter-crime.html

 

[Kulindahr]

. And even then people in general are irresponsible, but again the comparison from guns to anything else doesn't matter because every other thing has a use that isn't injuring or killing a living thing.

Your comparison fails because everything -- including guns -- "has a use that isn't injuring or killing a living thing".

The training being easy is irrelevant.

No, the training isn't irrelevant. The more training required to use something safely, the more inherently dangerous it is.

 

[Kulindahr]

Do you regard humans as inherently dangerous?

Without training/education, yes -- not deliberately, but through failure to live up to the species' scientific name.

The biggest element in that education is learning to actually realize that other people are just as important s one's self. Without that recognition, any other training merely deals with symptoms.

 

[opinterph]

One of the primary reasons lawsuits against gun manufacturers and resellers were almost entirely unsuccessful (prior to PLCAA) is common knowledge among the general public that firearms are inherently dangerous.

There is no reason to search for an alternative safer design where the product's sole utility is to kill and maim. – MESKILL, Circuit Judge


McCarthy v. Olin Corporation

On December 7, 1993, Colin Ferguson boarded the Long Island Railroad's 5:33 p.m. commuter train departing from New York City and opened fire on the passengers. Six people, including Dennis McCarthy, were killed and nineteen others, including Kevin McCarthy and Maryanne Phillips, were wounded in the vicious attack. Ferguson was armed with a 9mm semiautomatic handgun, which was loaded with Winchester "Black Talon" bullets (Black Talons). The injuries to Dennis and Kevin McCarthy and Maryanne Phillips were enhanced by the ripping and tearing action of the Black Talons because, unfortunately, the bullets performed as designed.

The Black Talon is a hollowpoint bullet designed to bend upon impact into six ninety-degree angle razor-sharp petals or "talons" that increase the wounding power of the bullet by stretching, cutting and tearing tissue and bone as it travels through the victim. The Black Talon bullet was designed and manufactured by Olin Corporation (Olin) through its Winchester division and went on the market in 1992. Although the bullet was originally developed for law enforcement agencies, it was marketed and available to the general public. In November 1993, following public outcry, Olin pulled the Black Talon from the public market and restricted its sales to law enforcement personnel. Colin Ferguson allegedly purchased the ammunition in 1993, before it was withdrawn from the market.

Like the public pressure exerted on Olin back in 1993, we sometimes see how justice can take other forms.

At the time of the Sandy Hook massacre, a company named Cerberus owned a subsidiary named Freedom Group.

Freedom Group is the manufacturer of the .223 Bushmaster semi-automatic rifle that was used in the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School.

After Sandy Hook, CalSTRS (California State Teachers’ Retirement System) voted to divest its holdings in makers of guns that are illegal in California. That resulted in the quick liquidation of $3 million worth of shares in Sturm Ruger and Smith & Wesson.

The California Federation of Teachers [Union] demanded CalSTRS also divest its holdings in Cerberus – owner of Freedom Group (AKA Remington Group) – a $750 million investment. That “pressure” “encouraged” Cerberus to sell Freedom Group.

---

There is a concept in products liability and tort law, that of the inherently dangerous instrumentality. Generally, an inherently dangerous instrumentality is an object, device, machine, etc. that creates a substantial risk of harm just by its mere existence or use, irrespective of whether it is or can be misused.

“Firearms are not inherently dangerous.” (GrafZeppelin127; February 2013)

… It's when you have to start believing completely unreasonable things like that, rather than acknowledge an indisputable fact that may undermine but doesn't defeat your position that you, at least in my view, lose the argument, because if your argument depends on things like that being true, then you have no case. And it's disheartening, too, because we can't have the honest, reasonable discussion we need to have when so many arguments depend on unreason.

 

[MakeDigitalLove]

Your comparison fails because everything -- including guns -- "has a use that isn't injuring or killing a living thing".





No, the training isn't irrelevant. The more training required to use something safely, the more inherently dangerous it is.

Are we really going to have to ask what other use does a gun carry? You always say that but never offer an explanation. If you keep repeating the same thing it doesn't make it true, it makes it psychotic.

Also I didn't say training is irrelevant, I said training being easier than something else is irrelevant.

 

[rareboy]

Your comparison fails because everything -- including guns -- "has a use that isn't injuring or killing a living thing".

What other use does a gun have?

 

[TX-Beau]

What other use does a gun have?

Penis enlargement and ego enhancement of course.

Want to erase those feelings that you're just an insignificant, tiny cocked, ignorant, fat, suburban loser man, buy an AK 47 and start screaming 2CND Amendment!!!!

POOF

You are instantly a Militia warrior Patriot COMMANDO!!!!!

 

[Kulindahr]

Can you cite the source for this information. I've just scoured the CDC website and can't find any such info.

The most recent study I can find using CDC data is from June last year, and says quite the opposite. More guns mean more crime.



http://www.livescience.com/51446-guns-do-not-deter-crime.html

I thought I had it bookmarked, but apparently not. Search in progress, two hours so far.

 

[MakeDigitalLove]

What other use does a gun have?

So of course this question gets ignored, yet again. Because we know that there is absolutely no other use for a gun.

 

[Benvolio]

So of course this question gets ignored, yet again. Because we know that there is absolutely no other use for a gun.

Target shooting, clay pidgeons. The feeling security from knowing that you have the means of self defense, if it is needed, and the possibility of intimidating an invader.

 

[Kulindahr]

So of course this question gets ignored, yet again.

Mostly it gets ignored now because people lie about it not having been answered, even when that answer is right in front of their eyes.

 

[Kulindahr]

I thought I had it bookmarked, but apparently not. Search in progress, two hours so far.

Frak -- too late, I figure out how to track it down: I did some paperwork at the DMV the day I read about the CDC figures; if I go to the DMV and find out what day that was, I can go through my internet history for that day. That would be a lot easier!

 

[opinterph]

I thought I had it bookmarked, but apparently not. Search in progress …

I think the links below may be what you’re looking for …

Defensive Gun Use (Part I) - The CDC Report on Gun Violence (Daily KOS; September 2013)

Estimates of the average frequency of defensive gun use vary. (There are 525,600 minutes in a non-leap year.)​

Full Report: Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence (Released: June 5, 2013)

 

[MakeDigitalLove]

Mostly it gets ignored now because people lie about it not having been answered, even when that answer is right in front of their eyes.

That is just a cop-out.

 

[Kulindahr]

I think the links below may be what you’re looking for …

Defensive Gun Use (Part I) - The CDC Report on Gun Violence (Daily KOS; September 2013)

Estimates of the average frequency of defensive gun use vary. (There are 525,600 minutes in a non-leap year.)​

Full Report: Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence (Released: June 5, 2013)

That's the one.

And I was all ready to carry out my brilliant plan!

 

[Kabluey]

Target shooting, clay pidgeons. The feeling security from knowing that you have the means of self defense, if it is needed, and the possibility of intimidating an invader.

There's nothing useful about target shooting or clay pigeons.
And feelings are only that.
There is no other usefulness.

 

[rareboy]

Target shooting, clay pidgeons. (sic) The feeling security from knowing that you have the means of self defense, if it is needed, and the possibility of intimidating an invader.

This is both stupid and telling at the same time.

Target shooting is just practise in order to hurt or kill a living creature.

Feelings of security because you can kill or wound a person directly supports the contention that the only use for a gun is to kill or wound a living creature.

 

[TX-Beau]

This is both stupid and telling at the same time.

Target shooting is just practise in order to hurt or kill a living creature.

Feelings of security because you can kill or wound a person directly supports the contention that the only use for a gun is to kill or wound a living creature.

I know, and this is one of the silliest arguments I've ever heard, your gun is useless for all the "purposes" described if it isn't inherently dangerous.