Menu
Jump to content

What's with the ads?

BlsdMama

Abuse and school shootings. :(

Recommended Posts

I usually don’t step into these debates... but that was unnecessarily rude.

Totally agree. That comment, as well as, “I won’t quote you†- such unnecessary responses.

Edited by mytwomonkeys
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, the vast majority of bad things that happen to kids happen at home, and the majority of bad actors against kids are their own family members.

 

For every kid hurt in a school shooting, there are a number of kids helped by mandated reporters and just good people who notice that they need protection, help meeting basic needs, or just an objective ear.  A couple years ago, my kids' classmate (4th grade) told them she had been involved in a sex act with a family member, my kids told the teacher, and their teacher referred the situation to authorities who could protect the child.  This is just one incident I know of because my kids were involved; I understand from teacher friends that it is not uncommon at all.  These things aren't going to be on the news because (a) privacy and (b) they aren't sensational like school shootings.

 

Do we screw it up, sure - all of it at times.  We're human.  Perfect isn't coming in our lifetimes.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Maybe we all need to be homeschooling.  I'm serious.  Maybe we ALL need to keep our kids home, be heavily invested in their lives, know what they are doing, supervise them, keep them from being bullied, invest in their gifts, love them where they are, correct them when they're wrong. 

 

 

 

This is a truly scary thought. 

 

Also a little insulting to those of us who apparently don't love our kids as much as you love yours.

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess one thing that makes me enormously sad, beyond the fact that children are dying senselessly, is the fact that public schools NEED to take measures to protect children from gun violence in schools.

 

We live in a relatively safe time, in a relatively safe place, so I guess maybe I am privileged to be able to feel downright heartbroken to think about 5 and 6 year olds participating in lockdown drills at school. Every classroom in our local elementary school has a sign on the door with a list of the steps to take during a lockdown, and that saddens me, too.

 

It's our job as a society to keep kids safe. I don't want the schools to have to take extraordinary measures. I want kids to be able to feel safe at school. And I do feel like our local schools do a MUCH better job of tackling bullying and being inclusive than schools did when I was a kid.

 

I think blaming the schools is no better than blaming the parents. I can understand taking offense at outside interference into one's relationship with one's children, and fearing regulations that might criminalize non-harmful parenting choices (I am thinking, for instance, of cases of children being removed from their homes because parents photographed their cute little baby bums, or because they were familiar with technical terms for reproductive organs).

 

Anger is normal, fear is normal, but let's join hands, not point fingers. Let's look out for each other's kids. Let's not be guided by fear. No, no way should everyone be homeschooling. One must truly be a saint not to realize how horribly dangerous that could become.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol.  I am absolutely not gun savvy and never claimed to be.  The truth is, if someone is specifically hunting me down on a homeschool site, and and cross referencing all my posts with other random posts to figure out exactly where I am, to try to locate this specific gun....I am already in deep crap. Cause that's a lot of work for one gun...much more work than ramming a car into the window of a gun store and making off with hundreds of dollars worth of guns.  :D  Point taken.

 

BUT.....none of that is the point.  I mean, home invasions are SO RARE that needing a gun for protection shouldn't be necessary, right?  Kids are more at risk from the actual presence of the gun in the home than they are from a home invasion, statistically speaking, right?  Aren't my kids more at risk from having this gun here, than they are from someone hunting this gun down on a homeschool website, and coming to try to take it?

 

Generally speaking, your point in bold is probably accurate.  While researching the comment about the majority of youth gun-related deaths being gang-related (still looking for that one), I came across some other statistics.

 

We tend to think of mass shootings in terms of what happened at the schools or Vegas or the church in Texas. (By the way, shouldn't churches be a safe place? Metal detectors? Armed guards?) Mass shootings are defined as 4 or more victims. Between 2009 and 2016, there were 156 total mass shootings where 4 or more victims were killed by a gun (perp not counted).  54% of those shootings involved a partner or family member.  

 

5 Statistics That Explain the Link Between Domestic Violence and Mass Shootings

We could discuss the steep price American women pay for unbridled gun ownership in the U.S. 

 

American women are 16 times more likely to die from gun violence than women in other developed countries.

 

45% of America women murdered are killed by their intimate partners (not gun-specific).

 

However, 4.5 million American women report having been threatened by an intimate partner with a gun.

 

No, I am not convinced that having every American child homeschooled would be a safer option.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Generally speaking, your point in bold is probably accurate.  While researching the comment about the majority of youth gun-related deaths being gang-related (still looking for that one), I came across some other statistics.

 

We tend to think of mass shootings in terms of what happened at the schools or Vegas or the church in Texas. (By the way, shouldn't churches be a safe place? Metal detectors? Armed guards?) Mass shootings are defined as 4 or more victims. Between 2009 and 2016, there were 156 total mass shootings where 4 or more victims were killed by a gun (perp not counted).  54% of those shootings involved a partner or family member.  

 

5 Statistics That Explain the Link Between Domestic Violence and Mass Shootings

We could discuss the steep price American women pay for unbridled gun ownership in the U.S. 

 

American women are 16 times more likely to die from gun violence than women in other developed countries.

 

45% of America women murdered are killed by their intimate partners (not gun-specific).

 

However, 4.5 million American women report having been threatened by an intimate partner with a gun.

 

No, I am not convinced that having every American child homeschooled would be a safer option.

And here again is where generalized statistics aren't helpful really.

 

4.5 million US women report having been threatened by an intimate partner with a gun.  Ok.  Well first, there are approx 150 million women in the US (I have seen as low as 127mil and as high as 168 million.  150 mil seems like a good round number.)  That's about 3%.  But then, does that 4.5 million include all women who have every been threatened by a partner EVER?  Because then I wonder what percentage of those women LEFT after being threatened.  I mean we all know that those involved in an ongoing domestic violence situation often find it hard to leave, but that doesn't mean that every single women who was ever once threatened in that manner was in an ongoing domestic violence situation at the time. 

 

So, given that approx. 97% of women in the US haven't been threatened by an intimate partner with a gun, and given that MILLIONS of men who own guns have NEVER EVER threatened another person in that manner, I would say that most women, especially those who are living in homes where there is NO history of domestic violence, are probably at a low risk as well.  For myself, the likelihood of my spouse ever threatening me with this gun is very incredibly small.  For a women living in a situation with domestic violence, who is part of that 3% who have been threatened, obviously the risk is much higher.  The generalized statistic does not apply equally to everyone. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This statement doesn't even make sense.

 

Public schools in other first world countries are primarily able to keep kids from shooting other kids at school because they exist in cultures with limited access to firearms.

 

This isn't an abuse issue. It isn't a mental health issue. It isn't a matter of irresponsible public schools that don't turn themselves into armed camps. It's a result of living in a society that values guns above human life. It's a result of a society that owns 101 guns per 100 people.  It's the result of a society that is so terrified of it's government and of our own neighbors that we must pack significant fire power to "protect" ourselves or our own, or so we tell ourselves. Do you want to discuss the numbers of people "protected" versus the numbers of protection guns used for domestic violence or suicide?

 

You are not really flabbergasted.

 

Lives are very cheap in this country. We tut-tut "tragic"  and "I'll pray for them," and head off to the gun show. When people really care, they do something. We don't really care. One more school shooting. One more mall shooting. One more concert or nightclub shooting. BFD.

I agree that this is a mental health issue, in regards to the shooting.  Do you really believe taking guns from law abiding citizens would lessen mortality- I don't.  People who want to kill will use hammers, knives, or rocks- should we get rid of kitchen knives as well?  In other countries kniving deaths are much higher than here for the obvious reason that, evil people are shock- evil people, whether they have guns or not.

 

Sadly, I do believe that we should keep armed to protect ourselves from the "government" and for "personal protection" (as we can see in this situation, we do need the ability to protect our children against the mentally ill/ just plain evil people in the world).  Our forefathers understood full and well that an armed society makes for a much more safe society overall.  I am a promoter of gun regulation (mentally ill/ violent felons should not legally be able to have guns), but I am thankful that my husband knows how to use a gun as we live in a very rough area.

 

Governments have killed more people than all of the deranged combined, so while I doubt it will happen anytime soon here in America, I still do believe our "rights" is what actually guarantees our "rights".

 

We don't say that homeschooling should be banned because a few people don't educate, or worse abuse their children.

 

We don't ban kitchen knives or hammers because people get killed by them.

 

We don't ban cars because evil people are using them to kill people.

 

Evil people burn down houses, but we don't ban lighters.

 

Why would we ban personal protection of good law abiding citizens because of people who are mentally ill or not law abiding?l

 

Brenda

ETA

P.S. Did you know that you are half as likely to be a victim of gun violence in America, than you are of knife violence in England.  It is an epidemic there, as people DON"T have anything to protect themselves from violent offenders.  

Edited by homemommy83
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The argument that guns are no more of a threat than knives is always hysterical to me. If that is the case, then why do people want guns for home protection? Don't they already have a kitchen knife? Obviously guns are deadlier. I 16-year-old is not going to be able to cause as much violence with a knife as he can with an AR 15. To say otherwise is Insanity.

  • Like 15

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This post reminds me of the aftermath of the Newtown shooting when someone posted they were glad they prevented their kids' being harmed by homeschooling them.  Meanwhile my then-6-year-olds were sitting at b&m school.

 

There is a lot going on in this world that schools can't prevent.  A school near me has had about 6 suicides since the start of the school year.  Sometimes school buses crash (or are hijacked) and kids are killed.

 

I still think that if you compared the incidents in school vs. out of school, statistically kids are safer at school.  A lot of bad stuff happens at home, on the roads, etc.  (Not saying homeschooling isn't safe, but I agree that logic is lacking in some of the posts here.)

  

 

Wait.  Really?  You really and truly believe our kids are safer out of our homes?  

 

 

That frightens me.  Not so much that you think it, but that if you think it then so are others.  That frightens me.  Please try to hear my tone here, I am not being rude or sarcastic, more shocked/scared by that comment.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a truly scary thought. 

 

Also a little insulting to those of us who apparently don't love our kids as much as you love yours.

 

 

Would you stop your kid from being bullied?

 

Would you seek help if they had emotional problems?  A counselor?

 

Would you step in, if need be, and get evals and get tutors?

 

 

I think these are very real questions that need to be discussed.

 

I have nieces and nephews who are both public and parochial schooled.  They love their schools.  Ask me if I want schools to be successful.  I do.  I absolutely do.  My oldest married a kiddo from a B&M school.  So did I.  So did my husband. ;)

We ALL want schools to be successful.  

 

And that is not at all what I meant and you know it.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, you probably should have stopped with your first post. Doubling down didn't make you look any better.

 

 

 

Obviously I'm not trying to win a popularity contest nor do I need to polish up how I look.

 

ETA: I am angry about this, there is no doubt.  But I want those with kiddos in B&M schools (of which I am one currently - I have two in) to also try, for just a moment, to see the similarities in this discussion.  As soon as I put the choice to put kiddos in B&M schools on the hot seat, there was a defensiveness that existed.

 

And yet, so many say to homeschoolers, "Wait.  Why can't you change the way you school, jump through more hoops, do X, do Y, do Z, if it will spare the lives of 13 children?"

 

The fact is this:  We're homeschooling under the laws.  We're obeying the rules.  The vast majority of us are not beating our children, neglecting their education, nor are we chaining them in their bedrooms."

The vast majority of B&M parents believe they are sending their (very loved) children to a safe school.

 

Both sets of parents feel they are making an informed, conscientious choice for the welfare of their own children.

 

And so you ask, essentially, BlsdMama, who are you to question the well-being of my B&M child and my choice to school them?

 

And I ask, who is anyone, the governor of a given state, the DHS, etc., to question the well-being of my homeschooled child and my choice to school them?

 

There are correlations here.  We are allowed to push homeschoolers up against a wall and make assumptions.  But, we don't do the same of our public school system.  We can blame guns, and while I believe in (some) gun rights, we kind of stop there.  

 

I'm a mom working for rights of kids with learning disabilites and I have to tell you - WAY more kids are suffering in the school system than you realize.  Far, far more.  It is a one-size fit system and SO many KNOW the changes that NEED to be made and won't.  I'm frustrated on 1,000 levels and yet, homeschoolers are being told we need law changes.  Yup, mad.

Edited by BlsdMama
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait. Really? You really and truly believe our kids are safer out of our homes?

Pretty sure she didn't statistically more kids are injured at home than at school.

 

That frightens me. Not so much that you think it, but that if you think it then so are others. That frightens me. Please try to hear my tone here, I am not being rude or sarcastic, more shocked/scared by that comment.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Wait. Really? You really and truly believe our kids are safer out of our homes?

Pretty sure she didn't statistically more kids are injured at home than at school.

 

That frightens me. Not so much that you think it, but that if you think it then so are others. That frightens me. Please try to hear my tone here, I am not being rude or sarcastic, more shocked/scared by that comment.

 

 

 

No, no she didn't.  I should have said that our kids are less safe being homeschooled and in the care of their parents.  I'm truly not attacking her for that comment.  It frightens me.  I'm trying to understand if that was off the cuff or if it was a real and thought provoked conclusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And here again is where generalized statistics aren't helpful really.

 

4.5 million US women report having been threatened by an intimate partner with a gun.  Ok.  Well first, there are approx 150 million women in the US (I have seen as low as 127mil and as high as 168 million.  150 mil seems like a good round number.)  That's about 3%.  But then, does that 4.5 million include all women who have every been threatened by a partner EVER?  Because then I wonder what percentage of those women LEFT after being threatened.  I mean we all know that those involved in an ongoing domestic violence situation often find it hard to leave, but that doesn't mean that every single women who was ever once threatened in that manner was in an ongoing domestic violence situation at the time. 

 

So, given that approx. 97% of women in the US haven't been threatened by an intimate partner with a gun, and given that MILLIONS of men who own guns have NEVER EVER threatened another person in that manner, I would say that most women, especially those who are living in homes where there is NO history of domestic violence, are probably at a low risk as well.  For myself, the likelihood of my spouse ever threatening me with this gun is very incredibly small.  For a women living in a situation with domestic violence, who is part of that 3% who have been threatened, obviously the risk is much higher.  The generalized statistic does not apply equally to everyone. 

 

So if I understand your "general statistics" comments, you are of the camp that considers the number of deaths by gun violence in the U.S. to be insignificant?  

 

Out of curiosity, what's a significant number?  How many people need to die before gun rights no longer outweigh their right to their own life?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if I understand your "general statistics" comments, you are of the camp that considers the number of deaths by gun violence in the U.S. to be insignificant?  

 

Out of curiosity, what's a significant number?  How many people need to die before gun rights no longer outweigh their right to their own life?

 

No, that's not my point.  My point is that in discussions that involve 300 million + people, statistics that cover the whole nation in a very general manner don't give us good enough information.  It doesn't mean that X number of deaths is insignificant.  It' means that alone isn't very useful information. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not think my words were a mistake, though I do think I should better explain.

 

I'm absolutely sick of kids getting hurt in safe places. On a personal note, something (not NEARLY this magnitude) happened in a nearby community, public place to a group of kids, and it makes me want to vomit.

 

I'm angry.

 

I *do* see the correlation here.

Correlation to what? Explain to me how your anger over two separate issues in anyway logically fits together. Or how your correlation leads to a causation that says somehow homeschooling is blameless. Because that is not in fact what you have here. You don’t have an argument or a correlation. You have disparate topics you’ve shoe-horned together as if one necessariyl follows into the other.

 

You’re against homeschool regulation? Fine, make that argument without hyperbole and non-sequiturs. Even better, make that argument without taking advantage of someone else’s tragedy and horrific loss.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The argument that guns are no more of a threat than knives is always hysterical to me. If that is the case, then why do people want guns for home protection? Don't they already have a kitchen knife? Obviously guns are deadlier. I 16-year-old is not going to be able to cause as much violence with a knife as he can with an AR 15. To say otherwise is Insanity.

I can personally attest that in many, many years of working in a job where I witnessed a high number of trauma patients brought to a hospital, I lost count of how many died from their gunshot wounds and never witness a single one who actually died from knife wounds, and one I will always remember was stabbed over 10 times and still lived, whike many were shot only once and still died.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait.  Really?  You really and truly believe our kids are safer out of our homes?  

 

 

That frightens me.  Not so much that you think it, but that if you think it then so are others.  That frightens me.  Please try to hear my tone here, I am not being rude or sarcastic, more shocked/scared by that comment.

 

I believe that SKL meant that statistically children are more likely to be harmed in their own home than at school. Statistics aside, do I think a child is more likely to be assaulted or to suffer from a serious accident at home than at school? Unfortunately, yes.  

 

Right now, in this country, we have roughly 15 million children who live below the poverty line - about 21% of all school-age children. How do you propose to homeschool them? My friend who is a first grade teacher routinely sends home class books that she has purchased with children who live in homes without books. I have counseled high school students who are on track to be the first in their family to go to college. One of my students didn't have any extra curricular activities because she watched her siblings after school while her mom worked an evening shift. For many kids, the meal provided by the school lunch program is the biggest one they will have all day - maybe the only one.

 

Many families in HCOL areas need two incomes to keep their households going, making homeschooling impractical.

 

Kelly, you've been on this board for a while. Do you remember the conversations on the chat board in 2009 and 2010 during the economic "recovery?"  Some of those are seared in my brain.  Americans have the idea that if you work hard, live right, life will go well.  If it doesn't you've done something wrong.  We had so many boardies who lost their jobs, their homes, their insurance, and their retirement or pensions through no fault of their own. It was heart-breaking. For me, it really brought it home why we need some forms of social safety nets.

 

When we as a society vote for policies that in the long-run increase the poverty gap, we vote for increased societal violence.

 

Again, as to everyone homeschooling, I've read this board for nine years and I remember the folks who had serious illnesses and lost a year of their kids' schooling. I remember the parents who want to know what the minimum education looks like so they can graduate their dd from high school as soon as possible, because she is only going to get married and have babies.  I remember the parents who decided science education wasn't necessary because they had no experience with the subject. Personally, I am a huge homeschooling advocate, but only when the circumstances are right for both parent and child.  My state requires that the parent notify the education district of the intent to homeschool each year and then to take a nationally-normed test four times in 12 years. The nationally-normed test Sailor Dude took was so easy that I could have not taught him a new thing for three years before he would no longer make the cut-off. I think Oregon could actually use a bit more oversight.  There are plenty of homeschooling parents along with some public and private schools that could benefit from more oversight.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

We don't ban kitchen knives or hammers because people get killed by them.

 

We don't ban cars because evil people are using them to kill people.

 

Evil people burn down houses, but we don't ban lighters.

 

 

 

 

 

Knives, cars, and lighters have a primary purpose which is useful and productive.  The primary purpose of a gun is to kill.  So if you want to compare guns to other objects, it would make more sense to compare them to bombs, anthrax, and sarin.  

 

 

 

 

ETA

P.S. Did you know that you are half as likely to be a victim of gun violence in America, than you are of knife violence in England.  It is an epidemic there, as people DON"T have anything to protect themselves from violent offenders.  

 

"Knife violence" including minor injuries, though, right?  I'd rather take my changes against an assailant with a knife than one with a gun any day.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you stop your kid from being bullied?

 

Would you seek help if they had emotional problems?  A counselor?

 

Would you step in, if need be, and get evals and get tutors?

 

 

I think these are very real questions that need to be discussed.

 

I have nieces and nephews who are both public and parochial schooled.  They love their schools.  Ask me if I want schools to be successful.  I do.  I absolutely do.  My oldest married a kiddo from a B&M school.  So did I.  So did my husband. ;)

We ALL want schools to be successful.  

 

And that is not at all what I meant and you know it.

 

 

 

I am really confused. I read your post in probably the same way SKL did.

 

My first response when I read your initial post was "Kelly's usually pretty on the ball. She truly thinks all kids would be safer and better off homeschooling????" Did I miss something in the translation?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Knives, cars, and lighters have a primary purpose which is useful and productive.  The primary purpose of a gun is to kill.  So if you want to compare guns to other objects, it would make more sense to compare them to bombs, anthrax, and sarin.  

Actually the PRIMARY purpose of guns is to PROTECT from unlawful people.  You bring up bombs and sarin gas, but as we see in GOVERNMENTS overseas- they are weapons to use against their own populace- which is the other reason we have the 2nd Amendment.

 

 

 

 

"Knife violence" including minor injuries, though, right?  I'd rather take my changes against an assailant with a knife than one with a gun any day.

A person who is trying to kill, will obviously go for major arteries or liver shots- I wouldn't want attacked that way either.  Guns or knives are equally lethal in a psycho, but intelligent persons hands.

Edited by homemommy83
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A person who is trying to kill, will obviously go for major arteries or liver shots- I wouldn't want attacked that way either.  Guns or knives are equally lethal in a psycho, but intelligent persons hands.

 

 

Equally lethal?  You can't tell me you honestly believe that the Las Vegas shooter could have killed 58 people with a knife before somebody brought him down.  

 

"Guns don't kill people" -- they just make it easy to kill a whole bunch of people in a short amount of time.

Edited by Greta
  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A person who is trying to kill, will obviously go for major arteries or liver shots- I wouldn't want attacked that way either.  Guns or knives are equally lethal in a psycho, but intelligent persons hands.

You can shoot someone from far away before they even see you. To stab someone you have to get in arm's reach and your victim will have a better chance to evade you. Remember the DC sniper? The Las Vegas massacre? Those people never saw their assailant, they were just shot out of the blue.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A person who is trying to kill, will obviously go for major arteries or liver shots- I wouldn't want attacked that way either.  Guns or knives are equally lethal in a psycho, but intelligent persons hands.

I'm sorry but this is a ridiculous statement. Yes knives can kill but it is way easier to kill someone with a gun. 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EQUALLY lethal?  B.S.  You can't tell me you honestly believe that the Las Vegas shooter could have killed 58 people with a knife before somebody brought him down.  

 

"Guns don't kill people" -- they just make it easy to kill a whole bunch of people in a short amount of time.

They may kill more people quicker from farther away, but overseas we see twenty people in mass stabbings as well. Our freedom of the right to carry prevents tens of thousands of stabbings here.

 

  My point is that evil people will still kill, especially if the think you are defenseless.  The unlawful will still have guns illegally, leaving everyone else defenseless. 

 

We call police because they have guns to protect us, but they make it after the home invasion not before.  Gangs are not law abiding, a dark gun market would immediately set up and we wouldn't be safe in our own homes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They may kill more people quicker from farther away, but overseas we see twenty people in mass stabbings as well. Our freedom of the right to carry prevents tens of thousands of stabbings here.

 

  My point is that evil people will still kill, especially if the think you are defenseless.  The unlawful will still have guns illegally, leaving everyone else defenseless. 

 

We call police because they have guns to protect us, but they make it after the home invasion not before.  Gangs are not law abiding, a dark gun market would immediately set up and we wouldn't be safe in our own homes.

 

How many people die in those mass stabbings?  What is their frequency in relation to our mass shootings?

 

Why don't the unlawful in Europe or Australia have as many guns as they do in the United States?

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They may kill more people quicker from farther away, but overseas we see twenty people in mass stabbings as well. Our freedom of the right to carry prevents tens of thousands of stabbings here.

 

  My point is that evil people will still kill, especially if the think you are defenseless.  The unlawful will still have guns illegally, leaving everyone else defenseless. 

 

We call police because they have guns to protect us, but they make it after the home invasion not before.  Gangs are not law abiding, a dark gun market would immediately set up and we wouldn't be safe in our own homes.

 

Not everybody in the world lives like this though. It is possible to live another way

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They may kill more people quicker from farther away, but overseas we see twenty people in mass stabbings as well. Our freedom of the right to carry prevents tens of thousands of stabbings here.

 

My point is that evil people will still kill, especially if the think you are defenseless. The unlawful will still have guns illegally, leaving everyone else defenseless.

 

We call police because they have guns to protect us, but they make it after the home invasion not before. Gangs are not law abiding, a dark gun market would immediately set up and we wouldn't be safe in our own homes.

I’m interested in where your statistic on tens of thousands of stabbing being prevented here due to the right to carry comes from. Do you mean actual stabbing that were stopped with a gun or theoretical stabbings that didn’t occur because the potential criminals were worried about being shot? And what is the time frame for the statistic? Edited by Frances
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that this is a mental health issue, in regards to the shooting. Do you really believe taking guns from law abiding citizens would lessen mortality- I don't. People who want to kill will use hammers, knives, or rocks- should we get rid of kitchen knives as well? In other countries kniving deaths are much higher than here for the obvious reason that, evil people are shock- evil people, whether they have guns or not.

 

 

 

Guns are exceptionally easy to kill with, whether homicide, suicide, or accident.

 

Many, many victims of those would be alive today if not for easy access to guns.

 

There is a decent probability that my husband would not be alive today if we had had a gun in the house at his lowest points in depression. We don't, and most other suicide methods require more forethought and/or effort than just grabbing a gun in an off moment and shooting.

 

I will never allow a firearm in this house.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14,000 hospital visits in just Britain (only a small portion of the UK) alone last year due to stabbings.  This was from the independent UK.
  London has 1000 a month as well- that is one city.

Europe does commercials for families to count their kitchen knives- I am not joking.

 

Almost the same amount of people die yearly from drunk drivers as gun violence (which is mostly gang warfare and won't change with legislation)

2014- 12,565 deaths in America due to guns 

2015- 10,265 deaths in America due to drunk drivers

 

We do make drunk driving illegal- obviously people still do it- should we ban alcohol again like during Prohibition because non law abiders do what they do illegally.  The exact same thing can be said for gun owners who are legally carrying/ protecting their families.

There is so much online for statistics, I just suck at linking- but the people here are educated and can search google-lol.

Brenda

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They may kill more people quicker from farther away, but overseas we see twenty people in mass stabbings as well. Our freedom of the right to carry prevents tens of thousands of stabbings here.

 

  My point is that evil people will still kill, especially if the think you are defenseless.  The unlawful will still have guns illegally, leaving everyone else defenseless. 

 

We call police because they have guns to protect us, but they make it after the home invasion not before.  Gangs are not law abiding, a dark gun market would immediately set up and we wouldn't be safe in our own homes.

You are contradicting yourself. If knives are just as dangerous as guns, then why would you need a gun for self defense? Why not just use a knife? Or a hammer. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guns are exceptionally easy to kill with, whether homicide, suicide, or accident.

 

Many, many victims of those would be alive today if not for easy access to guns.

 

There is a decent probability that my husband would not be alive today if we had had a gun in the house at his lowest points in depression. We don't, and most other suicide methods require more forethought and/or effort than just grabbing a gun in an off moment and shooting.

 

I will never allow a firearm in this house.

I think that is intelligent in your situation.  I am sorry for the mental issues going on with your husband, and I will pray for him. 

 

I definitely believe people should not have guns if they have mental health issues.  

 

In our neighborhood- if people didn't have protection they would be killed. Drugs are so bad in our town that we made national news for opioid addiction and the highest HIV epidemic in the country.  We had a home invasion down the street last year, and our best friends were car-jacked two years ago and his gun is what ended up saving his life.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fewer guns.

 

I am sure the answer is so much more complicated than that.  These things almost always are.  Surely you don't think this sort of thing is really as black and white and simple as that?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

In our neighborhood- if people didn't have protection they would be killed. Drugs are so bad in our town that we made national news for opioid addiction and the highest HIV epidemic in the country.  We had a home invasion down the street last year, and our best friends were car-jacked two years ago and his gun is what ended up saving his life.

 

WEll, according to you they could have just defended themselves with a hammer. Or a steak knife. Just as deadly as a gun. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are contradicting yourself. If knives are just as dangerous as guns, then why would you need a gun for self defense? Why not just use a knife? Or a hammer. 

I am not contracting anything- I am comparing one nations problems with the other.  Gun nations have guns issues, nations without guns have just as many problems- just with knives.  But here in America not having a gun would mean we would be fighting criminals who will have guns, with kitchen knives- who is winning that fight:( .  As long as mental illness/ evil people exist we will see people dying at their hands.  It is sad, but confiscation isn't the answer- it just opens the door to a different problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many people die in those mass stabbings?  What is their frequency in relation to our mass shootings?

 

Why don't the unlawful in Europe or Australia have as many guns as they do in the United States?

They weren't founded by militias who were all armed to get our freedom, they limited guns long before they got rid of them.  America would end up with millions of guns on a black market- there were never that many there to start with.

 

Without the guns- America wouldn't even be here (free from England that is).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14,000 hospital visits in just Britain (only a small portion of the UK) alone last year due to stabbings. This was from the independent UK.

London has 1000 a month as well- that is one city.

Europe does commercials for families to count their kitchen knives- I am not joking.

 

Almost the same amount of people die yearly from drunk drivers as gun violence (which is mostly gang warfare and won't change with legislation)

2014- 12,565 deaths in America due to guns

2015- 10,265 deaths in America due to drunk drivers

 

We do make drunk driving illegal- obviously people still do it- should we ban alcohol again like during Prohibition because non law abiders do what they do illegally. The exact same thing can be said for gun owners who are legally carrying/ protecting their families.

There is so much online for statistics, I just suck at linking- but the people here are educated and can search google-lol.

Brenda

But how many people die from the stabbings? What are the rates of death for violent crimes in the US vs the UK?

 

And if getting rid of guns means only the criminals will have them, why don’t those stabbing in the UK have guns to shoot with instead?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WEll, according to you they could have just defended themselves with a hammer. Or a steak knife. Just as deadly as a gun. 

Your logic is off- I said that if there WERE NO GUNS than evil people could use anything to kill- not that any object people use to kill is equal in power, but they are equal in that they can cause death in an UNARMED person.

 

Guns are more powerful- which is why our government, police, and my military husband use them for protection- it prevents death by other means to innocent people- as I showed earlier in reference to my friends being car- jacked- (he was selling his car, and they guy wanted to "test drive"- but intended to drive down the road- kill him- dump his body- and steal his car) his gun caused the guy to pull over and thus saved his life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting question, why do you think that is?

 

Scarcity.  Take a significant number of guns out of play and for the average criminal, the one likely to commit a home invasion, the cost becomes too great even on the black market. 

 

There is really no good reason for us to own half of the world's guns.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that is intelligent in your situation. I am sorry for the mental issues going on with your husband, and I will pray for him.

 

I definitely believe people should not have guns if they have mental health issues.

 

In our neighborhood- if people didn't have protection they would be killed. Drugs are so bad in our town that we made national news for opioid addiction and the highest HIV epidemic in the country. We had a home invasion down the street last year, and our best friends were car-jacked two years ago and his gun is what ended up saving his life.

While I certainly know there are some very bad areas in the US, I find it hard to believe there are areas where everyone who is not armed with a gun is going to be killed.
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not contracting anything- I am comparing one nations problems with the other.  Gun nations have guns issues, nations without guns have just as many problems- just with knives.  But here in America not having a gun would mean we would be fighting criminals who will have guns, with kitchen knives- who is winning that fight:( .  As long as mental illness/ evil people exist we will see people dying at their hands.  It is sad, but confiscation isn't the answer- it just opens the door to a different problem.

 

Well you said they were just as easy to kill with...so equal fight, right?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guns are exceptionally easy to kill with, whether homicide, suicide, or accident.

 

Many, many victims of those would be alive today if not for easy access to guns.

 

There is a decent probability that my husband would not be alive today if we had had a gun in the house at his lowest points in depression. We don't, and most other suicide methods require more forethought and/or effort than just grabbing a gun in an off moment and shooting.

 

I will never allow a firearm in this house.

 

One of the first things you are told when you have a family member with suicidal thoughts, is to remove whatever implements that might be a part of their suicide plan. So for instance, pills might be kept in a locked safe. And yes, the persona who is struggling can go to the store and obtain more, but many suicides are an impulse of the day or the moment. Removing guns or medications from the home of a potential suicide or knives and razors for those who self-harm can provide a much-needed buffer. Men often prefer guns and they tend to be more successful. Thankfully, in a horrible moment, my son only had access to a BB gun. Even then, if he had angled it a bit differently, we would have lost him. Yes, he had gun safety training. So did the 16 yo son of dear friends. He was an excellent shot.

 

Maize, I am truly sorry. It is a very difficult road to walk. :grouphug:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They weren't founded by militias who were all armed to get our freedom, they limited guns long before they got rid of them.  America would end up with millions of guns on a black market- there were never that many there to start with.

 

Without the guns- America wouldn't even be here (free from England that is).

 

I missed the wars for Canadian and Australian independence.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scarcity.  Take a significant number of guns out of play and for the average criminal, the one likely to commit a home invasion, the cost becomes too great even on the black market. 

 

There is really no good reason for us to own half of the world's guns.

 

Ok, so I will list some of my own reasons.

 

Australia is an island.  Which means people and things coming from elsewhere have to either fly or boat in.  A lot more difficult to get a gun in, vs straight up walking across the land.

Culture

Illegal drug trade.  Some tens of billions of dollars are generated through the illegal drug trade in the US.  Not coincidently, illegal drug trade leads to violence.  I also don't think it's coincidence that some of the most violent corrupted drug infected countries in the world happen to share a continent with the US...not Europe.

Racism.  No, not straight up white on black racisim.  Not institutionalized systemic oppression.  And no, I will not debate my definition here.  Because I am using the word to describe basic "fear of those not like me."  That is the sort of thing that is part of all of human nature.  The US happens to be more diverse than Europe or Australia.  Diversity isn't always peaceful. 

Scarcity a factor?  Sure.  But not the only one, by a long shot.

Edited by happysmileylady
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I missed the wars for Canadian and Australian independence.

I clearly talked of America, not other countries in reference to why we have gun rights as it was for our freedom from OPPRESSION of Britain. We actually have freedom due to having guns. The reason the Japanese didn't come here during ww2 was because they said that there would be a gun behind every blade of grass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I clearly talked of America, not other countries in reference to why we have gun rights as it was for our freedom from OPPRESSION of Britain. We actually have freedom due to having guns. The reason the Japanese didn't come here during ww2 was because they said that there would be a gun behind every blade of grass.

I never heard that before about Japan, but some quick googling shows the quote doesn’t hold up to fact checking.
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, so I will list some of my own reasons.

 

Australia is an island.  Which means people and things coming from elsewhere have to either fly or boat in.  A lot more difficult to get a gun in, vs straight up walking across the land.

Culture

Illegal drug trade.  Some tens of billions of dollars are generated through the illegal drug trade in the US.  Not coincidently, illegal drug trade leads to violence.  I also don't think it's coincidence that some of the most violent corrupted drug infected countries in the world happen to share a continent with the US...not Europe.

Racism.  No, not straight up white on black racisim.  Not institutionalized systemic oppression.  And no, I will not debate my definition here.  Because I am using the word to describe basic "fear of those not like me."  That is the sort of thing that is part of all of human nature.  The US happens to be more diverse than Europe or Australia.  Diversity isn't always peaceful. 

Scarcity a factor?  Sure.  But not the only one, by a long shot.

 

Europe isn't an island.  Europe and Australia both have issues with illegal drugs.  You also underestimate the diversity in both places.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I clearly talked of America, not other countries in reference to why we have gun rights as it was for our freedom from OPPRESSION of Britain. We actually have freedom due to having guns. The reason the Japanese didn't come here during ww2 was because they said that there would be a gun behind every blade of grass.

 

Japan was never in a position to even consider an invasion of the United States.

 

Are Canada and Australia not free?

Edited by ChocolateReign
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...