Reality Check: Liberal handgun ban

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ani_Ibi
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Here are the figures for accidental deaths of children in 1995 (the most recent breakdown I could find) from the National Saftey council:Children Accidental Death Rates (Ages 0-14)

**Motor-vehicle - ****3,059, ****Drowning - ****1,060, ****Fires, burns - ****833, ****Mechanical suffocation - ****459, ****Ingestion of food, object - ****213, ****Firearms - ****181 **

Source: Figures are for 1995. National Safety Council, Accident Facts: 1998 Edition, at 10, 11, 18

Although these are not from the same year the breakdown shows less deaths by firearms than the number of bicycle-related deaths quoted by Achatius. Most of those would most likely be included in the number for motor vehicles bacause the majority of children killed on bikes are hit by cars. This gives a much clearer perspective on the unlikely nature of gun-related accidents involving children.
 
Address to the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters

19 February 2005
Stephen Harper:
From the start of this minority government, I have said that I will cooperate with the government whenever the public interest is at stake. But on fundamental beliefs and principles, we will not budge.

The gun registry is one of these core beliefs. And we have always been very clear on this: we will repeal the universal gun registry.

Instead, we will work with the provinces on cost-effective gun control programs designed to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, while respecting the rights of law-abiding Canadians to own and use firearms responsibly.

We will:

• enforce mandatory minimum penalties [2 years in prison] for the illegal possession and criminal use of firearms;

• monitor strictly high-risk individuals;

• crack down on gun smuggling;

• enforce safe storage laws;

• promote firearms safety training and a licensing system for all those wishing to acquire and use firearms legally;

• put more law enforcement officers on our streets; and

• produce a real registry – a registry of convicted criminals prohibited by the courts from owning firearms.
Click to expand...
 
40.png
Achatius:
Of the figure that I gave, 214 were unintentional, 1,078 suicides, 1,990 homicides. These are all figures that could be seriously reduced if Guns came under much more rigorous control!
Click to expand...
Sorry but the undeniable track record of gun control laws shows that all of those numbers are at best not affected and more likely made worse by increased gun control.
 
40.png
2shelbys:
Sorry but the undeniable track record of gun control laws shows that all of those numbers are at best not affected and more likely made worse by increased gun control.
Click to expand...
Which track record is this? (not denying that it is true just need resource)
 
40.png
Achatius:
Which track record is this? (not denying that it is true just need resource)
Click to expand...
Just look back through this thread for the many quotes from and links to comparitive records on gun control laws.
 
40.png
wabrams:
Anybody can buy a bicycle, but a lot of people don’t pay attention to traffic laws and get hurt.

The same can be said about of lot of things, so whats’ your point?
Click to expand...
We have established that gun ownership poses a bigger threat to human life than bicycle riding. Also the other things are not guns so do not really hold a significant place in the argument, though I do see you are trying to relate this issue to others that endanger human life, one issue can be dealt with at a time 🙂
 
Here are some more numbers to consider:

In the United States during 1997, people committed 15,289 murders.
The perpetrators used a firearm in 10,369 (68%) of these instances.

In the United States during 1997, people committed roughly 7,927,000
violent crimes. The perpetrators used a firearm in 691,000 (8.7%)
of these instances.
1997 Uniform Crime Reports,Federal Bureau of Investigation. Table 2.11)
 
40.png
Libero:
But you see, your law states that most can legally own a gun, however not that many own them responsibly, whilst you do, and thus it is less likely there will be an accident, alot of people are not so careful.
Click to expand...
According to the government’s own stats, gun accidents have been steadily going down for the past decade showing that people are becoming more and more responsible.

Let’s follow the logic here. Ten years ago people were less responsible, but we let them own guns. Now people are becoming more responsible, so we should take guns away from them.

That doesn’t make any sense to me.
 
40.png
Achatius:
We have established that gun ownership poses a bigger threat to human life than bicycle riding. Also the other things are not guns so do not really hold a significant place in the argument, though I do see you are trying to relate this issue to others that endanger human life, one issue can be dealt with at a time 🙂
Click to expand...
It has yet to be established.
 
40.png
Achatius:
We have established that gun ownership poses a bigger threat to human life than bicycle riding. Also the other things are not guns so do not really hold a significant place in the argument, though I do see you are trying to relate this issue to others that endanger human life, one issue can be dealt with at a time 🙂
Click to expand...
Actually your own numbers show exactly the opposite to be true as far as children are concerned. And the fact that the number of adults who ride bicycles is miniscule renders that statement irrelevant in relation to the whole population.
 
40.png
Achatius:
We have established that gun ownership poses a bigger threat to human life than bicycle riding.
Click to expand...
We have also established that car ownership poses a 19 times greater threat to human life than gun ownership.
40.png
Achatius:
Also the other things are not guns so do not really hold a significant place in the argument
Click to expand...
Why not? Shouldn’t the more dangerous items be addressed first so that more lives can be saved faster?
 
Let’s sum up this whole debate thus far:

Anti-Gun Posters: We don’t like them no matter how much gun accidents have gone done, therefore they should be banned. Furthermore, several are from countries that don’t allow firearms; they don’t care that their crime rate went up after the ban.

Pro-gun Posters: have a state given and God given right to defend themselves. Statistics prove that legally owned firearms coupled with conceal/carry laws reduce crime. When handled properly, the chances for accidents from firearms are extremely slim. Through public campaigns, accidental deaths have dropped.
 
Back in the 90’s I found it especially humorous that the AMA decided to become very vocal on the anti-gun side but grew silent when people started to point out that the average American was 19 times more likely to die of medical malpractice than of a gunshot wound. Funny stuff.
 
40.png
wabrams:
Let’s sum up this whole debate thus far:

Anti-Gun Posters: We don’t like them no matter how much gun accidents have gone done, therefore they should be banned. Furthermore, several are from countries that don’t allow firearms; they don’t care that their crime rate went up after the ban.

Pro-gun Posters: have a state given and God given right to defend themselves. Statistics prove that legally owned firearms coupled with conceal/carry laws reduce crime. When handled properly, the chances for accidents from firearms are extremely slim. Through public campaigns, accidental deaths have dropped.
Click to expand...
That just about sums it up.
 
Well the debate isn’t getting very either way! But while there are good arguments for both sides, maybe a comprimise should be reached?
 
the flip side:
Anti-Gun Posters: Guns, like automobiles, or indeed any other consumer product with the potential to cause serious injury or death, should be regulated. Regulation should be appropriate for the community.

Pro-gun Posters: Shooting people is a God-given right, trumping all other considerations including the right of communities to determine appropriate legislation and regulation.
Click to expand...
 
40.png
Achatius:
Well the debate isn’t getting very either way! But while there are good arguments for both sides, maybe a comprimise should be reached?
Click to expand...
We have reached a comprimise. Your country is going in one direction and ours is going in the opposite one.
 
40.png
2shelbys:
Back in the 90’s I found it especially humorous that the AMA decided to become very vocal on the anti-gun side but grew silent when people started to point out that the average American was 19 times more likely to die of medical malpractice than of a gunshot wound. Funny stuff.
Click to expand...
I don’t have the time to go searching right now but I think that it was MUCH higher than 19 times.
 
I guess you are right. We shall have to agree to disagree on this issue.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top