Re: Am I the only one who heard the Chief in Newtown
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Switchblade</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"Gun control advocates argue that a federal assault weapons ban is necessary to curbing gun violence." -Gun Control Advocates, -un named-
The above statement is based on ignorance of raw data fact. It may be based on severely skewed data which would invalidate the claim on it's merit
FACT:
During Bill Clinton's term of office(HE PASSED THE ORIGINAL BAN) there were over 30 such mayhem incidents.
2010 year Firearm murders data, US only
FACT:
Handguns account for over 6000 of the firearm murders
FACT:
Rifles of all kinds accounted for 358 of all firearm murders
FACT:
Shotguns accounted for 373 of firearm murders
FACT:
Unknown firearms accounted for 2035 murders
FACT:
Other weapons to include knives, swords, edged weapons, 1704 murders
FACT:
Other weapons not edged account for 1772 murders
FACT:
Hands, Fists, Feet account for 745 murders
With the above raw data, there is no basis to ban any rifle of any type. This raw data is from crime numbers only, not skewed by lawful defense of self or others(these would be edge outlier numbers such as the Fists, other weapons, rifles, and shotguns.
Using this data, and data that is extremely close to it from both 2011 and 2012, there is still no basis of merit to ban any type of rifle or shotgun, magazine, or other firearm type that could be counted as an 'assault weapon'( These require a Title III tax stamp and background check to purchase due to the fact they fire either full automatic, or burst). Any other rifle or shotgun only fires semiautomatic and is therefore by the actual raw data, not worthy of any ban.
Now lets look at these raw date in perspective by total population percentage. 312.8 million with we will use the large 6000 handgun number to set a higher average here, that is close to .01 percent per 1000 people, or less than one person per 100,000.
Total Perspective of numbers:
More people are killed by Doctor's mistakes during surgery, drunk drivers, negligence at work, or vehicular negligence(I use negligence because nothing is accidental. Some form of negligence always contributes). I have tried very hard to find raw data that would support any form of gun control and have failed each and every time due to the monumentally low percentages per population. The real numbers just do not support any form of firearms legislation. Do yourself a favor and actually try to research this as I have. The results will be the same each time the raw data is used that does not come from skewed sources. This is the way I test all my own theories as well as my friends by playing the Devil's advocate and looking for extremely straight data that has not been biased.
BOTTOM LINE:
There is no basis for gun control over what we currently have. The facts do not support it, the incidents do not support it.
OPINION:
The issue we are having is a severe lack of control on behavior issues and security of our schools. The larger being insecure schools. If all schools were upgraded with points of entry that were controlled, Armed officers in place(911 from Sandy Creek stated Law Enforcement took minutes to get to the scene, not seconds which is required). By removing our schools, theaters, ball fields, and other places from the perspective target list, we take the advantage away from the mentally disturbed individual who wants to attack it. </div></div>
Just an FYI if it's just raw data, then not all are murders. It would be deaths caused by said method or means.
