Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,471 Year: 3,728/9,624 Month: 599/974 Week: 212/276 Day: 52/34 Hour: 0/2


EvC Forum Side Orders Coffee House Gun Control Again

Summations Only

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Gun Control Again
Percy
Member
Posts: 22480
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 946 of 5179 (686097)
12-28-2012 9:28 PM
Reply to: Message 933 by crashfrog
12-28-2012 5:30 PM


Re: Statistical Blindness
crashfrog writes:
Similarly, the risk of dying in a situation where a gun might have saved your life is not evenly distributed across all Americans.
Yes, of course some areas of the country are more prone to violent crime than others. But this is a statistical argument, so you'll need some statistical information showing if there are regions where those dangers outweigh the dangers of gun ownership. But since a significant source of guns used in crimes is stolen guns, reducing the number of armed citizens should also reduce the number of armed criminals. Regions with higher risk of crime death will find that risk declining.
The ultimate irony is that gun purchases in response to fear of crime is that it increases your risk of gun death.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 933 by crashfrog, posted 12-28-2012 5:30 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 948 by Coyote, posted 12-28-2012 9:40 PM Percy has replied
 Message 968 by crashfrog, posted 12-29-2012 1:25 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9143
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 947 of 5179 (686098)
12-28-2012 9:30 PM
Reply to: Message 935 by crashfrog
12-28-2012 5:38 PM


Re: It burns
It's mentioned throughout,
Show me.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 935 by crashfrog, posted 12-28-2012 5:38 PM crashfrog has seen this message but not replied

Coyote
Member (Idle past 2128 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 948 of 5179 (686099)
12-28-2012 9:40 PM
Reply to: Message 946 by Percy
12-28-2012 9:28 PM


Re: Statistical Blindness
The ultimate irony is that gun purchases in response to fear of crime is that it increases your risk of gun death.
What we need is more dead criminals and fewer dead victims.
We can only do this by making the price of crime -- statistically -- much higher than it currently is.
Based on this, we need more trained and armed honest citizens, not fewer.
See the two posts I made previously in this thread, linking to very good articles on the subject. So far it looks like nobody has even bothered to read them.
Perhaps I should just quote them in their entirety here?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 946 by Percy, posted 12-28-2012 9:28 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 952 by Tangle, posted 12-29-2012 6:10 AM Coyote has not replied
 Message 958 by Percy, posted 12-29-2012 8:28 AM Coyote has not replied
 Message 961 by RAZD, posted 12-29-2012 11:32 AM Coyote has not replied
 Message 965 by NoNukes, posted 12-29-2012 1:16 PM Coyote has not replied
 Message 989 by onifre, posted 12-29-2012 7:24 PM Coyote has replied

kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3842 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 949 of 5179 (686100)
12-28-2012 9:40 PM
Reply to: Message 941 by Dr Adequate
12-28-2012 6:16 PM


Re: Another article
So in Britain, 60% of single mothers do work, whereas in America 40% of them don't?
...no, doc...
In Britain, 25% of the families are heaed by Single mothers.
But these are mostly single women who have been divorced, 60% of them.
Then, only half of the 25%, those single mothers, are on government subsidies.
By CNN's Jack Cafferty
More than 100 million people in the United States of America get welfare from the federal government. 100 million out of 325 million.
According to the Weekly Standard, Senate Republicans say that the federal government administers nearly "80 different overlapping federal means-tested welfare programs."
This figure of 100 million people does not include those who only receive Social Security or Medicare
The most popular welfare programs are food stamps and Medicaid, with the number of recipients in both these programs skyrocketing in the last decade. Food stamp recipients alone jumped from 17 million in 2000 to 45 million in 2011.
And these 100 million people on welfare include citizens and non-citizens.
Where is the U.S. headed if more than 100 million people get welfare? – Cafferty File - CNN.com Blogs
Contrasted to America, today, half the babies born are illegitimate, in spite we abort an equal number before birth.
These illegitimate babies are supported by Welfare.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 941 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-28-2012 6:16 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 950 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 12-28-2012 10:54 PM kofh2u has not replied
 Message 951 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-28-2012 11:36 PM kofh2u has not replied

DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3123 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 950 of 5179 (686102)
12-28-2012 10:54 PM
Reply to: Message 949 by kofh2u
12-28-2012 9:40 PM


Re: Another article
These illegitimate babies are supported by Welfare.
What does this have to do with gun control??
Do you or have you ever received the Earned Income Tax Credit or any other form of tax credit, unemployment, food stamps, WIC, Medicaid, school meal vouchers, disability, public housing, Pell Grant, cooperate welfare, etc. Just about every non-wealthy person has or continues to receives subsidies, tax cuts, and some form of 'welfare'. Stop being a hypocrite.

"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World

This message is a reply to:
 Message 949 by kofh2u, posted 12-28-2012 9:40 PM kofh2u has not replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 306 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 951 of 5179 (686103)
12-28-2012 11:36 PM
Reply to: Message 949 by kofh2u
12-28-2012 9:40 PM


Re: Another article
...no, doc...
In Britain, 25% of the families are heaed by Single mothers.
But these are mostly single women who have been divorced, 60% of them.
Then, only half of the 25%, those single mothers, are on government subsidies.
By CNN's Jack Cafferty
More than 100 million people in the United States of America get welfare from the federal government. 100 million out of 325 million.
According to the Weekly Standard, Senate Republicans say that the federal government administers nearly "80 different overlapping federal means-tested welfare programs."
This figure of 100 million people does not include those who only receive Social Security or Medicare
The most popular welfare programs are food stamps and Medicaid, with the number of recipients in both these programs skyrocketing in the last decade. Food stamp recipients alone jumped from 17 million in 2000 to 45 million in 2011.
And these 100 million people on welfare include citizens and non-citizens.
Page not found – Cafferty File - CNN.com Blogs
Contrasted to America, today, half the babies born are illegitimate, in spite we abort an equal number before birth.
These illegitimate babies are supported by Welfare.
Well, this appears not to be actually true.
Also, if you're going to count Medicaid, then almost every British citizen is "on welfare", since the UK has a non-stupid healthcare system.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 949 by kofh2u, posted 12-28-2012 9:40 PM kofh2u has not replied

Tangle
Member
Posts: 9504
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.8


(1)
Message 952 of 5179 (686116)
12-29-2012 6:10 AM
Reply to: Message 948 by Coyote
12-28-2012 9:40 PM


Re: Statistical Blindness
Coyote writes:
See the two posts I made previously in this thread, linking to very good articles on the subject. So far it looks like nobody has even bothered to read them.
I read your last one. It concentrates on murder rates which really isn't the point. Murder rates are falling across the developed world - actually, crime rates are generally. in the UK general crime rates have been falling for the last 16 years. Most put this reduction down to economic growth and expect it to rise again if the recession gets harder.
The massacres get the headlines but there's a much greater problem with suicides and accidents.
Personally, it seems to me that it's the psychological effect of normalising gun ownership and the repeated headlining of massacres does more damage than the guns themselves - it has a long term effect on the way Americans feel about their safety and their society. Talk of arming teachers and equiping kids with kevlar backpacks is an anathema to me and the idea that the solution is more guns is barking mad.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 948 by Coyote, posted 12-28-2012 9:40 PM Coyote has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 953 by Larni, posted 12-29-2012 7:45 AM Tangle has not replied
 Message 954 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 12-29-2012 7:52 AM Tangle has not replied
 Message 969 by crashfrog, posted 12-29-2012 1:34 PM Tangle has replied

Larni
Member
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


(1)
Message 953 of 5179 (686117)
12-29-2012 7:45 AM
Reply to: Message 952 by Tangle
12-29-2012 6:10 AM


Re: Statistical Blindness
Personally, it seems to me that it's the psychological effect of normalising gun ownership and the repeated headlining of massacres does more damage than the guns themselves
I agree.
By far the best way to get people to act in a specific way is use social pressure. If you want people to not take drugs (for example) show young people other young people not taking drugs.
American's seem inculcated into the norm of owning or carrying guns. Over here in the UK if I knew someone was carrying a gun I would inform the police.
But not because it was against the law but because carrying a gun is aberrant behaviour (in the UK). You would have to be mentally disturbed to carry one on the street.
It's not socially acceptable here.
In the States the reverse seems to be true. It's actually socially encouraged. That's madness.

The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53
The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286
Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134

This message is a reply to:
 Message 952 by Tangle, posted 12-29-2012 6:10 AM Tangle has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 962 by roxrkool, posted 12-29-2012 11:44 AM Larni has not replied

DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3123 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


(1)
Message 954 of 5179 (686118)
12-29-2012 7:52 AM
Reply to: Message 952 by Tangle
12-29-2012 6:10 AM


Re: Statistical Blindness
Talk of arming teachers and equiping kids with kevlar backpacks is an anathema to me and the idea that the solution is more guns is barking mad.
Could not agree with you more. I am not a big Michael Moore fan but I think he hits the nail on the head here:
'3 Reasons America Is Falling Apart -- And How We Can Save Ourselves' - Michael Moore writes:
After watching the deranged, delusional National Rifle Association press conference on Friday, it was clear that the Mayan prophecy had come true. Except the only world that was ending was the NRA's. Their bullying power to set gun policy in this country is over. The nation is repulsed by the massacre in Connecticut, and the signs are everywhere: a basketball coach at a post-game press conference; the Republican Joe Scarborough; a pawn shop owner in Florida; a gun buy-back program in New Jersey; a singing contest show on TV, and the conservative gun-owning judge who sentenced Jared Loughner.
So here's my little bit of holiday cheer for you:
These gun massacres aren't going to end any time soon.
I'm sorry to say this. But deep down we both know it's true. That doesn't mean we shouldn't keep pushing forward -- after all, the momentum is on our side. I know all of us -- including me -- would love to see the president and Congress enact stronger gun laws. We need a ban on automatic AND semiautomatic weapons and magazine clips that hold more than 7 bullets. We need better background checks and more mental health services. We need to regulate the ammo, too.
But, friends, I would like to propose that while all of the above will certainly reduce gun deaths (ask Mayor Bloomberg -- it is virtually impossible to buy a handgun in New York City and the result is the number of murders per year has gone from 2,200 to under 400), it won't really bring about an end to these mass slayings and it will not address the core problem we have. Connecticut had one of the strongest gun laws in the country. That did nothing to prevent the murders of 20 small children on December 14th.
In fact, let's be clear about Newtown: the killer had no criminal record so he would never have shown up on a background check. All of the guns he used were legally purchased. None fit the legal description of an "assault" weapon. The killer seemed to have mental problems and his mother had him seek help, but that was worthless. As for security measures, the Sandy Hook school was locked down and buttoned up BEFORE the killer showed up that morning. Drills had been held for just such an incident. A lot of good that did.
And here's the dirty little fact none of us liberals want to discuss: The killer only ceased his slaughter when he saw that cops were swarming onto the school grounds -- i.e, the men with the guns. When he saw the guns a-coming, he stopped the bloodshed and killed himself. Guns on police officers prevented another 20 or 40 or 100 deaths from happening. Guns sometimes work. (Then again, there was an armed deputy sheriff at Columbine High School the day of that massacre and he couldn't/didn't stop it.)
I am sorry to offer this reality check on our much-needed march toward a bunch of well-intended, necessary -- but ultimately, mostly cosmetic-- changes to our gun laws. The sad facts are these: Other countries that have guns (like Canada, which has 7 million guns -- mostly hunting guns -- in their 12 million households) have a low murder rate. Kids in Japan watch the same violent movies and kids in Australia play the same violent video games (Grand Theft Auto was created by a British company; the UK had 58 gun murders last year in a nation of 63 million people). They simply don't kill each other at the rate that we do. Why is that? THAT is the question we should be exploring while we are banning and restricting guns: Who are we?
We are a country whose leaders officially sanction and carry out acts of violence as a means to often an immoral end. We invade countries who didn't attack us. We're currently using drones in a half-dozen countries, often killing civilians.
This probably shouldn't come as a surprise to us as we are a nation founded on genocide and built on the backs of slaves. We slaughtered 600,000 of each other in a civil war. We "tamed the Wild West with a six-shooter," and we rape and beat and kill our women without mercy and at a staggering rate: every three hours a women is murdered in the USA (half the time by an ex or a current); every three minutes a woman is raped in the USA; and every 15 seconds a woman is beaten in the USA.
We belong to an illustrious group of nations that still have the death penalty (North Korea, Saudi Arabia, China, Iran). We think nothing of letting tens of thousands of our own citizens die each year because they are uninsured and thus don't see a doctor until it's too late.
Why do we do this? One theory is simply "because we can." There is a level of arrogance in the otherwise friendly American spirit, conning ourselves into believing there's something exceptional about us that separates us from all those "other" countries (there are indeed many good things about us; the same could also be said of Belgium, New Zealand, France, Germany, etc.). We think we're #1 in everything when the truth is our students are 17th in science and 25th in math, and we're 35th in life expectancy. We believe we have the greatest democracy but we have the lowest voting turnout of any western democracy. We're biggest and the bestest at everything and we demand and take what we want.
And sometimes we have to be violent m*****f*****s to get it. But if one of us goes off-message and shows the utterly psychotic nature and brutal results of violence in a Newtown or an Aurora or a Virginia Tech, then we get all "sad" and "our hearts go out to the families" and presidents promise to take "meaningful action." Well, maybe this president means it this time. He'd better. An angry mob of millions is not going to let this drop.
While we are discussing and demanding what to do, may I respectfully ask that we stop and take a look at what I believe are the three extenuating factors that may answer the question of why we Americans have more violence than most anyone else:
1. POVERTY. If there's one thing that separates us from the rest of the developed world, it's this. 50 million of our people live in poverty. One in five Americans goes hungry at some point during the year. The majority of those who aren't poor are living from paycheck to paycheck. There's no doubt this creates more crime. Middle class jobs prevent crime and violence. (If you don't believe that, ask yourself this: If your neighbor has a job and is making $50,000/year, what are the chances he's going to break into your home, shoot you and take your TV? Nil.)
2. FEAR/RACISM. We're an awfully fearful country considering that, unlike most nations, we've never been invaded. (No, 1812 wasn't an invasion. We started it.) Why on earth would we need 300 million guns in our homes? I get why the Russians might be a little spooked (over 20 million of them died in World War II). But what's our excuse? Worried that the Indians from the casino may go on the warpath? Concerned that the Canadians seem to be amassing too many Tim Horton's donut shops on both sides of the border?
No. It's because too many white people are afraid of black people. Period. The vast majority of the guns in the U.S. are sold to white people who live in the suburbs or the country. When we fantasize about being mugged or home invaded, what's the image of the perpetrator in our heads? Is it the freckled-face kid from down the street -- or is it someone who is, if not black, at least poor?
I think it would be worth it to a) do our best to eradicate poverty and re-create the middle class we used to have, and b) stop promoting the image of the black man as the boogeyman out to hurt you. Calm down, white people, and put away your guns.
3. THE "ME" SOCIETY. I think it's the every-man-for-himself ethos of this country that has put us in this mess and I believe it's been our undoing. Pull yourself up by your bootstraps! You're not my problem! This is mine!
Clearly, we are no longer our brother's and sister's keeper. You get sick and can't afford the operation? Not my problem. The bank has foreclosed on your home? Not my problem. Can't afford to go to college? Not my problem.
And yet, it all sooner or later becomes our problem, doesn't it? Take away too many safety nets and everyone starts to feel the impact. Do you want to live in that kind of society, one where you will then have a legitimate reason to be in fear? I don't.
I'm not saying it's perfect anywhere else, but I have noticed, in my travels, that other civilized countries see a national benefit to taking care of each other. Free medical care, free or low-cost college, mental health help. And I wonder -- why can't we do that? I think it's because in many other countries people see each other not as separate and alone but rather together, on the path of life, with each person existing as an integral part of the whole. And you help them when they're in need, not punish them because they've had some misfortune or bad break. I have to believe one of the reasons gun murders in other countries are so rare is because there's less of the lone wolf mentality amongst their citizens. Most are raised with a sense of connection, if not outright solidarity. And that makes it harder to kill one another.
Well, there's some food for thought as we head home for the holidays. Don't forget to say hi to your conservative brother-in-law for me. Even he will tell you that, if you can't nail a deer in three shots -- and claim you need a clip of 30 rounds -- you're not a hunter my friend, and you have no business owning a gun.

"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World

This message is a reply to:
 Message 952 by Tangle, posted 12-29-2012 6:10 AM Tangle has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 955 of 5179 (686119)
12-29-2012 7:55 AM
Reply to: Message 747 by Coyote
12-22-2012 6:08 PM


Re: An opinion on gun control -- Coyote's link
I have been trying for what must be more than half an hour to get the blog post to load that Coyote linked to. Apparently too big for my computer. I can't even copy it without getting all the graphics along with it.
Would somebody please email it to me as an attachment, just the post itself, so I can open it in Word. Thanks.
Or if there is some other solution, like posting it all here, that would be fine too.
http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/...-opinion-on-gun-control
wallsong2003@yahoo.com
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 747 by Coyote, posted 12-22-2012 6:08 PM Coyote has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 956 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 12-29-2012 8:06 AM Faith has replied
 Message 970 by crashfrog, posted 12-29-2012 1:38 PM Faith has not replied

DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3123 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 956 of 5179 (686120)
12-29-2012 8:06 AM
Reply to: Message 955 by Faith
12-29-2012 7:55 AM


Re: An opinion on gun control -- Coyote's link
Faith,
Just emailed it to you. Let me know if you didn't get it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 955 by Faith, posted 12-29-2012 7:55 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 957 by Faith, posted 12-29-2012 8:11 AM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 957 of 5179 (686121)
12-29-2012 8:11 AM
Reply to: Message 956 by DevilsAdvocate
12-29-2012 8:06 AM


Re: An opinion on gun control -- Coyote's link
Thank you, I got it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 956 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 12-29-2012 8:06 AM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22480
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.8


(4)
Message 958 of 5179 (686122)
12-29-2012 8:28 AM
Reply to: Message 948 by Coyote
12-28-2012 9:40 PM


Re: Statistical Blindness
Coyote writes:
Based on this, we need more trained and armed honest citizens, not fewer.
Since gun ownership increases the risk of gun death, your solution will increase gun deaths across the country.
What we need is more dead criminals and fewer dead victims.
Most gun deaths are not caused during the commission of a criminal act. Most people are killed by someone already known to them. Around 15% or 20% of people are killed by strangers, another 30 or 35% are killed by people of unknown relationship, and the rest are killed by intimate partners, household members, friends, neighbors, acquaintances and co-workers.
See the two posts I made previously in this thread, linking to very good articles on the subject. So far it looks like nobody has even bothered to read them.
Perhaps I should just quote them in their entirety here?
Please, no. The excerpt you previously posted left out the very necessary chart:
We've seen charts similar to this before, but because your version includes countries with incredibly high murder rates like Honduras (91.6) and El Salvador (69.2), the murder rates of countries like the US and Switzerland get flattened toward the bottom and no comparison can be made. Here's a more useful chart plotting gun deaths for western style countries, provided by Dr Adequate in Message 663:
Switzerland comes up a lot in these discussions because it has a high gun ownership rate but a low murder rate. But Dr Adequate's chart plots gun deaths instead of murders, and Switzerland's gun death rate is consistent with its gun ownership rate.
There's no escape from the fact that guns are inherently dangerous. Were people more reliable and less volatile this might not be a problem, but they're not, and so increasing proximity to a gun brings higher risk of gun death.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 948 by Coyote, posted 12-28-2012 9:40 PM Coyote has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 971 by crashfrog, posted 12-29-2012 1:44 PM Percy has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 959 of 5179 (686123)
12-29-2012 8:40 AM
Reply to: Message 927 by Percy
12-28-2012 4:49 PM


Re: Statistical Blindness
What I was trying to get at that you dismissed as the usual problem with analogies, is that when you take guns away from the good guys the situation changes and can drastically change, so you can't reasonably compare the various fears you mentioned. Just because the statistics seem to favor an unarmed citizenry in places that have gun bans, and this is questionable, nevertheless the people are now much more vulnerable to both crime and the kinds of tyranny gun rights are meant to protect us from. And it's naive to think it can't happen to us now.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 927 by Percy, posted 12-28-2012 4:49 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Coyote
Member (Idle past 2128 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 960 of 5179 (686128)
12-29-2012 10:30 AM


California gun sales jump; gun injuries, deaths fall
California gun sales jump; gun injuries, deaths fall
By Phillip Reese
Gun deaths and injuries have dropped sharply in California, even as the number of guns sold in the state has risen, according to new state data.
Dealers sold 600,000 guns in California last year, up from 350,000 in 2002, according to records of sale tallied by the California Attorney General's office.
During that same period, the number of California hospitalizations due to gun injuries declined from about 4,000 annually to 2,800, a roughly 25 percent drop, according to hospital records collected by the California Department of Public Health.
Firearm-related deaths fell from about 3,200 annually to about 2,800, an 11 percent drop, state health figures show.
Most of the drop in firearm-related injuries and deaths can be explained by a well-documented, nationwide drop in violent crime.
The number of California injuries and deaths attributed to accidental discharge of firearms also has fallen. The number of suicide deaths involving firearms has remained roughly constant.
More...
http://www.sacbee.com/.../california-gun-sales-increase.html

Replies to this message:
 Message 972 by Panda, posted 12-29-2012 1:53 PM Coyote has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024