Abortions vs. Guns

[Metsfanmax]

I swear that liberals are just as bad at understanding science as conservatives. The liberals just do it wrong on slightly less important issues.

Can you offer at least a bit of scientific evidence to back up your oath?

https://newrepublic.com/article/121283/ ... sed-libera

Here's something that argues that liberals are just as likely to be biased about scientific results as conservatives.

Though that's not really what I argued. I am talking about understand the scientific method. I say that based on my own experience talking to people, and because I have no good reason to suspect that understanding of the scientific process itself should have a partisan bent.

[Symmetry]

I swear that liberals are just as bad at understanding science as conservatives. The liberals just do it wrong on slightly less important issues.

Can you offer at least a bit of scientific evidence to back up your oath?

https://newrepublic.com/article/121283/ ... sed-libera

I stand corrected. Thanks for the info.

[Symmetry]

One of the strangest numbers I hear is how there are so may more guns in the United States than there are people. This is a strange number, and I'll tell you why. Consider the number of gold clubs owned in the United States. Why every golfer has a dozen or so of them and that doesn't count the ones they bought ages ago and no longer use. I don't think anyone keeps this stat. (Try to google this and you get confused with the term "club" also means an establishment.) The fact is that a golfer has a number of clubs for a purpose, each club does a slightly different thing. He just can't distribute his golf clubs to 11 other players and play a game of golf.

This is the same is true for guns. Let's take a typical "hunter" for example. He has one rifle for deer in the country, one shotgun for deer in suburbia, another for bear, another for trap shooting, and that doesn't count the number of weapons he just has for "collector's items" which he probably never uses at all. This is completely different from the use of guns for self protection as one generally only needs one weapon to protect oneself.

Urn, are deer quite the problem in suburbia that a typical hunter needs a ton of guns to protect his or her SUV?

[KoolBak]

He may travel to hunt...like me

Additionally, I have back up guns for all my primary guns in case one fails on the hunt. 400 miles from home and all the hassle and expense of going is a baaaaad time for a mechanical failure...

[thegreekdog]

Group 1 supports the unrestricted freedom to bear arms. Group 1 also supports making abortion illegal.
Group 2 supports the restriction of firearms, up to and including making guns illegal. Group 2 also supports making abortion legal (in any capacity up to and including immediately before birth).

Yup, first thing I thought about is how few people probably belong to either group, as stated.

Just want to add, it's also proven that increasing the amount of firearms carried in public is also proven to preserve life. If everyone was carrying for all the right reasons, the mere possibility of a mass shooting taking place would be reduced by 99%. Stay at home parents, practicing Christianity, living a healthy lifestyle, respecting life, and homeschooling also have been proven to preserve life. Also proven to preserve human life.... never leaving your house.

It's the human nature that needs to be addressed more than anything. Mankind has virtually unlimited potential to commit evil. Same goes for demonstrating tremendous good.

I'm pretty sure the statement "it's also proven that increasing the amount of firearms carried in public is also proven to preserve life" is not actually true and has not actually been proven. I think there are situations where a gun owner stops a crime because he or she has a gun. I don't know how easy (or hard) it would be to statistically figure that out. For example, there are plenty of people in Philadelphia who own guns; that has not stopped violent crimes being committed with guns in Philadelphia. In fact, I suspect more murders happen because of the proliferation of guns in the city. Obviously, I have no statistics.

What did you think of the NYTimes front page editorial on guns?

I thought it was irrelevant; a waste of time and effort. Time and effort should have been spent asking why the NRA cares about waiting periods for guns ("The government wants you to be less safe because Republicans and the NRA want to support gun manufacturers.")

[thegreekdog]

One of the strangest numbers I hear is how there are so may more guns in the United States than there are people. This is a strange number, and I'll tell you why. Consider the number of gold clubs owned in the United States. Why every golfer has a dozen or so of them and that doesn't count the ones they bought ages ago and no longer use. I don't think anyone keeps this stat. (Try to google this and you get confused with the term "club" also means an establishment.) The fact is that a golfer has a number of clubs for a purpose, each club does a slightly different thing. He just can't distribute his golf clubs to 11 other players and play a game of golf.

This is the same is true for guns. Let's take a typical "hunter" for example. He has one rifle for deer in the country, one shotgun for deer in suburbia, another for bear, another for trap shooting, and that doesn't count the number of weapons he just has for "collector's items" which he probably never uses at all. This is completely different from the use of guns for self protection as one generally only needs one weapon to protect oneself.

Urn, are deer quite the problem in suburbia that a typical hunter needs a ton of guns to protect his or her SUV?

You'd be surprised at the havoc deer cause, especially in Pennsylvania. I'm not joking.

[tzor]

Urn, are deer quite the problem in suburbia that a typical hunter needs a ton of guns to protect his or her SUV?

You'd be surprised at the havoc deer cause, especially in Pennsylvania. I'm not joking.

Let's put some meat on those bones, FARMERS’ ESTIMATES OF ECONOMIC DAMAGE FROM WHITE-TAILED DEER IN NEW YORK STATE

Statewide, about one-quarter of responding farmers indicated they had little or no deer damage (less than $100) in 2002. Just over half of respondents (56.7%) estimated damage of $1,000 or less. However, 13.7% of respondents estimated damage in excess of $5,000, and 6.8% estimated damage in excess of $10,000, ranging as high as $500,000. The mean amount of farmer-estimated deer damage statewide for respondents was $4,113.

Regionally, mean estimated damage per farm was highest in Southeast New York, almost 2.5 times higher than the statewide mean. Long Island and West regions had the next highest mean damage. Mean reported damage was lightest in the Northeast and East regions, but even there, mean reported damage exceeded $1,400 and $1,600, respectively. Mean estimated deer damage per acre of crops was much higher on Long Island ($111) than elsewhere—5 times the statewide average (Table 1). Mean estimated damage in Southeastern New York was $68, or about 3 times the statewide average.

Long Island is a place, especially on the north fork in the east where deer is very common. I have a family living in my own neighborhood, living in those small areas of forest between the properties as well as various back years of the neighborhoods. With deer, comes deer ticks and with deer ticks comes LYME DISEASE.

Efforts to reduce the population last year failed

[PLAYER57832]

That's the argument that proves people are missing the point. If you are living a Christ-centered life, you have no need for guns or abortions.

Not actually true.

In the case of guns, set aside the use of guns for hunting and sports (yes, this does bear repeating because too many people forget it, but I recognize your specific point was other), your accepting Christ does not ensure decent treatment from others. You can argue that, having Christ, you have no need to fear death. This is true, but not everyone things being Christian means you have to, automatically take a bullet from an insane person or that you are prohibited from defending yourself and your family/bystanders from evil people.

Abortion is a more complicated issue, but the fact is that accepting Christ in no way shape or form means that we all have health or that our children do. We are told that Christ will give us strength, but what that means varies a great deal. As above, I am going to set aside post-miscarriage abortions (yep, that IS the term used for that operation. Again, this is important to understand when reading statistics, discussing the issues.
Also as above, while some people feel that being Christian means a woman must sacrifice herself for even the most tenuous potential of humanity, most agree that there are (actually many) cases where the survival of the child is very, very unlikely or not even possible and see no reason to require the mother to die. I can get into actual examples if you wish, but I am talking about facts, not fiction or opinion. (that is, the number of life-threatening pregnancies and that the term abortion refers to any end of pregnancy is a fact, whether that matters/warrants an abortion is opinion)

Beyond that, though, there is a large grey area. I consider a "grey area" to be a case where you or I might make one decision, but others might pray, consult clergy and doctors and decide otherwise. Key in that is that even if we think many situations are "the same", anyone dealing with pregnancies comes to realize that each is truly individual. When it comes to serious birth defects and such, again, they are all individual. That is part of why neither you nor I have the right to intercede in these faithful decisions, even when those involved are Christian. Right to discuss, listen (MOSTLY listen), but not step in an claim we know "what is right". We don't.

[PLAYER57832]

Urn, are deer quite the problem in suburbia that a typical hunter needs a ton of guns to protect his or her SUV?

You'd be surprised at the havoc deer cause, especially in Pennsylvania. I'm not joking.

Also in New York. We get at least 2-3 accidents in our rural county (near the Allegheny) every season because of deer -- and I mean reportable accidents, not the many of smaller incidents that never get reported (I am actually sure there are stats on that because its important for insurance costs, but not going to do the lookup).


And, biologically, regulated hunting even within town is sometimes the easiest and even safest way to reduce the population. Truly, I mean this.. Allegheny county and up in Buffalo are examples. They use hunters who are quite skilled shots, who use specific types of ammo, etc. I am not actually advocating for that, because it is a biologic management issue and I am not current on the topic. However, I can say that it has been used pretty recently. (just a few years ago).


Right now, in western PA, the population is probably too low (debatably), but that is another issue, due to poor management, not hunters per se.

ALSO, from the outset, greekdog's point about golfers is quite true. Between my husband and son, we have close to 20 different guns, and my husband has repeatedly told me that he "needs" every one.

[Symmetry]

One of the strangest numbers I hear is how there are so may more guns in the United States than there are people. This is a strange number, and I'll tell you why. Consider the number of gold clubs owned in the United States. Why every golfer has a dozen or so of them and that doesn't count the ones they bought ages ago and no longer use. I don't think anyone keeps this stat. (Try to google this and you get confused with the term "club" also means an establishment.) The fact is that a golfer has a number of clubs for a purpose, each club does a slightly different thing. He just can't distribute his golf clubs to 11 other players and play a game of golf.

This is the same is true for guns. Let's take a typical "hunter" for example. He has one rifle for deer in the country, one shotgun for deer in suburbia, another for bear, another for trap shooting, and that doesn't count the number of weapons he just has for "collector's items" which he probably never uses at all. This is completely different from the use of guns for self protection as one generally only needs one weapon to protect oneself.

Urn, are deer quite the problem in suburbia that a typical hunter needs a ton of guns to protect his or her SUV?

You'd be surprised at the havoc deer cause, especially in Pennsylvania. I'm not joking.

Probably not, I've lived in upstate NY. I just question if they're really a problem that requires a small arsenal.

[KoolBak]

Duk...missed your question earlier re: breakins / staying home 24/7.

We lock up our guns that arent being used; I, for example, have 2 commercial 7' safes that weigh over 3000 lbs each. Good luck perp.

When I am home, I have 6 loaded weapons between my house and shop. When I am away, they go in the safe. Lastly, most of us live in relatively crime free areas, luckily. Dad and brother have each been broken into once in the last 40 years; they live in the boonies. I have never had a problem in the 25 years I have had this home in West Linn...leave my keys in my truck, leave my front door unlocked....lucky to be able to live here and all my signs around that indicate what will happen to perps help

Also helps that I am here damn near 24/7.

We don't have hunting accidents or target shooting accidents.

[Symmetry]

Duk...missed your question earlier re: breakins / staying home 24/7.

We lock up our guns that arent being used; I, for example, have 2 commercial 7' safes that weigh over 3000 lbs each. Good luck perp.

When I am home, I have 6 loaded weapons between my house and shop. When I am away, they go in the safe. Lastly, most of us live in relatively crime free areas, luckily. Dad and brother have each been broken into once in the last 40 years; they live in the boonies. I have never had a problem in the 25 years I have had this home in West Linn...leave my keys in my truck, leave my front door unlocked....lucky to be able to live here and all my signs around that indicate what will happen to perps help

Also helps that I am here damn near 24/7.

We don't have hunting accidents or target shooting accidents.

Is this your area?

http://portlandtribune.com/pt/9-news/276299-152288-hunter-from-gresham-killed-by-father-near-meacham-

[KoolBak]

Nope...neither are the areas those pilgrims were from. I, personally, would NEVER hunt in the deep woods with all those idiots out there...stupid stupid stupid.

And on the gun issue....couple more shootings ;o)

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/20/concealed-permit-holder-stops-attempted-mass-shooting-in-chicago/

[Symmetry]

Nope...neither are the areas those pilgrims were from. I, personally, would NEVER hunt in the deep woods with all those idiots out there...stupid stupid stupid.

Good policy. You should keep your guns unloaded though

[KoolBak]

Really? Love unsolicited advice

Define "loaded /unloaded" for me for a single action, semi automatic pistol, if you would.

[Symmetry]

Really? Love unsolicited advice

Define "loaded /unloaded" for me for a single action, semi automatic pistol, if you would.

Keep the bullets somewhere seperate from the gun.

[KoolBak]

Then what good is it as a home defense weapon?

I'll manage my life, you manage yours

ps - You will be happy to know that 90% of my guns / ammo are securely stored in massive, unmovable safes ;o)

[KoolBak]

Sylly Symmy

[Symmetry]

Then what good is it as a home defense weapon?

I'll manage my life, you manage yours

ps - You will be happy to know that 90% of my guns / ammo are securely stored in massive, unmovable safes ;o)

It makes it less likely that you'll die a violent death

[KoolBak]

I disagree. It makes it LESS likely.

[Symmetry]

I disagree. It makes it LESS likely.

Here's my evidence,

http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2015/10/the_link_between_gun_deaths_an.html

Can you back up your point?

[KoolBak]

lol...I'm not suicidal? And I am responsible and well trained, as are my children and anyone I introduce to weapons? Proven track record?

You're lumping me in with the unwashed masses my friend. Look at rider-at-fault motorcycle deaths...any dumbass can ride (any non-felon dumbass can buy a gun). Those with experience and smarts are much safer. Been riding for 40+ years with no probs

More questions?

[thegreekdog]

There was a North Carolina study (I don't have it, but someone around these here CC parts might have it) that showed that some large percentage of gun deaths in North Carolina were committed by people with felonies on their records (i.e. they were not legally able to purchase guns). I always thought that kind of thing was relevant to discussion and not discussed enough - when gun control does not achieve the intended effect, is more and similar gun control going to be effective?

[mrswdk]

There was a North Carolina study (I don't have it, but someone around these here CC parts might have it) that showed that some large percentage of gun deaths in North Carolina were committed by people with felonies on their records (i.e. they were not legally able to purchase guns). I always thought that kind of thing was relevant to discussion and not discussed enough - when gun control does not achieve the intended effect, is more and similar gun control going to be effective?

I mean isn't the main problem in the States that even if New York state enacts really tough gun laws, traffickers can just get a load of guns from somewhere else and ship them into New York without any difficulty?

http://www.silive.com/news/index.ssf/20 ... mes_c.html

Kinda like how moving factories out of Beijing didn't really help solve Beijing's air pollution, because all that happened was the factories moved to neighboring provinces and then pollution from them just blew across to Beijing all the same.

For a proper trial you'd have to enact the same gun control laws in every single state and then see what effect that has.

[PLAYER57832]

There was a North Carolina study (I don't have it, but someone around these here CC parts might have it) that showed that some large percentage of gun deaths in North Carolina were committed by people with felonies on their records (i.e. they were not legally able to purchase guns). I always thought that kind of thing was relevant to discussion and not discussed enough - when gun control does not achieve the intended effect, is more and similar gun control going to be effective?

Actually, the truth is that we don't have much reliable data on guns. The best data we have is from polls and the like. Attempts to collect data have been thwarted by the NRA -friendly legislators. This may change soon, as several of the harder line folks in congress are starting to see that having good data benefits everyone. There is still a question over what will be called "good" data, but it may be an improvement.

Anyway, yes, I remember seeing that study posted, but it was at least months, if not a year or two ago. Not going to even try and dig it up at this point here.